asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection by how much she expects the profits of the corporate sector to rise as a result of the changes she proposes in the Price Code.

The Government are retaining controls over prices and profits, as I stated to the House on 30th June. Profit recovery depends on the pace of the upturn, and it is, therefore, impossible to make any accurate estimate. But in the market conditions expected, the proposed Price Code changes on their own could make a difference of around and rather below £1 billion.

By how much does this fall short of what industry itself thinks is necessary?

There has never been a clear statement of exactly what industry believes to be necessary, but I think it is widely recognised that in many fields the market is at least as great a constraint upon the code as what the industries can obtain.

Can my right hon. Friend give any estimate of the number of new jobs which she expects to flow from the measures she recently announced?

That is difficult to do, but we asked those negotiating with us, and in particular the CBI, for individual cases which indicated where the Price Code had inhibited jobs or led to redundancies. We have a number of cases of that kind.

As last year, according to a statement by, I think, the Prime Minister, profits were running at about 2 per cent. of capital employed, is this increase in prices likely to increase profits on capital employed to as much as 3 per cent.?

Again it is difficult to estimate, but the most recent estimates for all forms of industry were of the order of a 2 per cent. real rate of return after allowing for depreciation. For industry, however, and specifically manufacturing industry, the figure was rather better at around 3 per cent. It is clear that the changes made in the code will lead to some improvement in that position, but I do not pretend that what has been a long deterioration in the rate of return will be wholly reversed by the changes in the Price Code.

Did not the Price Commission's report reveal that the larger companies are now operating at 58 per cent. of their profit levels? Is it not clear, as the right hon. Lady has indeed admitted, that the Price Code is irrelevant in a recession? Would it not have been better to do away with it altogether?

No, it would not, for two reasons. First, the position of each individual firm is very different, and there are areas where the market is not operating the constraint to which I referred. That constraint is certainly used at the retail end. Secondly, the code tends to bite more as business picks up. We are entering a year in which business is expected to pick up, and it would have been most unwise to get rid of price controls of this nature completely.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what the percentage increase was in the Retail Price Index over the past six months exclusive of seasonal foods; and what the increase was in each of the previous six-monthly periods.

The increase between 11th November 1975 and 18th May 1976 in the Retail Price Index, excluding seasonal foods, was 6·7 per cent. Percentage increases for the periods November 1974 to May 1975 and May 1975 to November 1975 were 16·6 and 7·2 respectively.

While this shows a favourable trend, it is very disappointing considering that this is the key to the Government's strategy in controlling inflation. To what factors does the Minister attribute this rather disappointing set of figures?

There were certain changes in the Budget which affected the situation. Also, one must consider the overall position, and in the last nine months the rate of inflation has been almost halved.

Will the Minister confirm that over the past six months, exclusive of seasonal food, there has been no appreciable drop in the rate of inflation and that, in fact, in the last month there has been an increase? This is not at all a healthy sign for the rest of the year. Can the hon. Gentleman say precisely by what amount the Budget changes influenced those figures?

The hon. Lady chooses whichever set of figures appears to suit her best, and she varies them from Question Time to Question Time. She is not, I hope, denying the month-by-month improvement which has occurred during the past nine months or that the rate of inflation has nearly halved during that period. The percentage change in the all-items index for May was only 1·1 per cent.

May I press the Minister to say how much of the increase was due to budgetary measures?

If the hon. Gentleman will put down a Question on that point, I shall consider it.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is the latest monthly rise in the Retail Price Index; and whether she will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection by how much the Retail Price Index has risen since February 1974.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is the latest rise in the Retail Price Index; and if she will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is her latest estimate or the rate of price inflation.

The monthly increase in the Retail Price Index to May 1976 was 1·1 per cent., and this brought the overall 12-month figure down to 15·4 per cent. Since February 1974, the index has risen by 52·6 per cent.

In view of the Government's admission that the proposed relaxation of the Price Code will lead to an accelerated rise in the Retail Price Index, does my right hon. Friend agree that a considerable strain will be placed on the wages agreement? Does she agree that workers with restricted wages will, quite rightly, want stricter price control, and will tend to view inadequate price controls, such as are in the White Paper, as a capitulation to capitalism?

With respect, my hon. Friend is wrong. In their forecasts of retail price indexing the Government allowed for some relaxation of the Price Code. They did so because unless we recover investment in the private and public sectors the country will have no long-term future. We believed—the trade unions agreed—that there should be some concessions, provided that they could clearly be seen as linked to new machinery, new investment and jobs.

I accept the excellent advice that the right hon. Lady read out in reply to an earlier Question—namely, that no Government can set a Price Code aside while maintaining wage restraint. Is she aware that if she continues on the lines of her statement of last week, which was a breach of that policy, there will be every justification for the unions returning to free collective bargaining?

It will not do for the hon. Member for the Western Isles (Mr. Stewart) to talk in that unreasonable way. The effect of the relaxation of the Price Code is about 1 per cent. of the Retail Price Index. One of the cases we have before us, among others, relates to a major investment in Scotland, which is now going ahead. The hon. Gentleman must be more direct than he is now being.

Will the right hon. Lady tell the House of any other major industrial country whose Retail Price Index has risen anywhere near as much as ours, and which industrial country has a price control policy similar to that operated in this country? Since the Public Expenditure White Paper is worked out on the basis that inflation will be in single figures by the end of the year, will the Secretary of State say when we may expect a revised Public Expenditure White Paper?

The hon. Gentleman has put a great many supplementary questions, which I shall seek to answer as best I can. At a quick glance, the answer to the first part of his supplementary question is Italy and Ireland, if we take the OECD countries. There are indications that the level of inflation has picked up in other countries, but if the hon. Gentleman would like a full list he should table an appropriate Question. He will know that the revised Price Code is now before the House and that there is a consultation period until the middle of July.

Will the right hon. Lady comment on the fact that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has once again had to revise his target for bringing down inflation, that it is now about six months behindhand and that inflation will not fall to much less than 12 per cent. by the end of this year and 7 per cent. by the end of next year? Does she not realise that, on the basis of the Chancellor's own forecasts, since this Government came to power inflation will have risen to a figure of 72 per cent. by the end of next year? Is this not a reflection of the fact that the Government are refusing to cut spending and borrowing adequately and soon enough?

The hon. Lady makes a great many criticisms. I would not like to be as dogmatic as she is about the figures. She should examine what I said at the last Question Time on this subject a month ago. If she turns up the Hansard for that date, she will see that I volunteered a full statement of what depreciation of the pound would mean in terms of a slippage in the target for single-figure inflation by the end of the year. I made that position clear to the House at the earliest possible moment. Nobody can be more precise than that. Nobody knows exactly what will happen to the pound. I have been pleased to see that in the last few days it has clearly stabilised.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what further action she is taking to test public opinion on metrication.

The Metrication Board, on behalf of the Government, has commissioned regular surveys to ascertain people's attitude to metrication since 1972. My Department has also regularly sought the views of consumer representatives, and the great preponderance of opinion has been in favour of metrication with adequate consumer safeguards.

Is it not astonishing that over the years there has been so little effort to consult the public on an issue that affects everyone? As there is no prospect of weights and measures legislation making much progress during the rest of this Session, will the Minister agree to have wider consultations on the details of the timing of the enforced change to metric measures?

I have consulted as far as I can and I am willing to continue to do so. I hope that the House will assist the Weights and Measures, &c. Bill which is now in the other place. The Bill on its own makes no changes but it provides powers to phase out imperial quantities after due consultation.

Is it not the case that any informal or straw poll would show that the majority of the public are opposed to metrication? Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that they are opposed to it for the very good reason of their experience with decimalisation, which proved to be a massive attack by the commercial world on the consumer to his detriment? Will the Minister consider postponing the legislation until the next decade?

Opinion varies. About 49 per cent. of the people agree that calculations will be easier under metrication, 71 per cent. believe that they will be given all the information in good time, and 85 per cent. accept that it is bound to happen and, therefore, we might as well learn to use it. The Scottish Consumer Council is wholly in favour of the Bill which is in the other place, with amendments. I see the phasing into metrication as being used with priority to protect consumers and to eliminate confusion.

Does my hon. Friend realise that, while metrication might be beneficial in the long run, there are fears among consumers that the same might happen as happened with decimalisation? That was a good thing in principle but it was abused at the expense of the consumer. Will the Government take measures to ensure that when metrication is introduced it will not be used by commercial interests to exploit the consumer?

It is not appropriate to reopen the debates about decimalisation. We shall take all the powers that are necessary to protect the consumer. Metrication can have advantageous effects. Cornflakes are an example with which metrication has led to a reduction in unit price.

Is it possible to estimate the cost of conversion to metrication? Is there any truth in the estimate that it will cost between £130 million and £150 million?

It is not possible to give an accurate measure of cost. One has to balance it against the cost of not going metric—for example, the cost of having to re-educate children. Another example is the cost of converting petrol pumps to the imperial scale because they are manufactured to the metric scale.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether she is satisfied that the form of application for a licence for credit trading does not contain unnecessary questions.

The Consumer Credit Act 1974 places on the Director General of Fair Trading the duty of administering the licensing system, and the questions in the application form are a matter for him.

Will the Minister take into account that small businesses are being suffocated by questionnaires and forms? Is he aware that the application form for a licence for credit trading has 21 difficult questions? Does he know of the curious one in which the applicant is asked to answer whether he has received from a conciliation committee of the Race Relations Board a written notification in which the opinion is expressed that the applicant has committed an act against that legislation—

Order. I was tolerant, but the hon. Gentleman was quoting from a document. During Question Time he should not give information but receive it.

I apologise, Mr. Speaker, but I am anxious that the Minister should receive the information. Can he explain why on earth an opinion from the Race Relations Board should have a bearing upon the issuing of a licence for credit trading instead of such matters as the Employment Protection Act or Customs and Excise regulations and passport regulations?

I have said that these questions are not my responsibility. The questions to commercial traders require answers of "Yes" or "No". I hope that that is not too much of an imposition on the people whom the hon. Gentleman represents. As regards discrimination, while it is right to ask about the colour of a man's money it is wrong to discriminate against a man on the ground of the colour of his skin. It is relevant to take into consideration whether a person has discriminated on grounds of sex or race.

Will my hon. Friend take compulsory powers to make small traders, in quoting interest rates for loans, state the real interest rate?

I hope that Regulations relating to the true rate of interest will be published towards the end of the year.

Is the Minister aware that the licensing provisions under the Act are now operating in a ridiculously bureaucratic way and drawing in people such as newsagents who were never intended to be affected? Will he undertake to review the matter urgently with a view to amending the legislation? Is he aware that, if he does not do that, the next Conservative Government will?

It is a little unusual for the hon. Lady to promise to amend, in another Conservative Administration, legislation which was basically drafted by the last Conservative Administration—

indicated dissent.

—but consistency is not the hon. Lady's strong point. Of course, one wants to see legislation working in a way which is understandable and acceptable to the whole population. If there is found to be a need for an administrative change, I shall look at it. I thought that the legislation had the support of both sides of the House and that it was agreed that there was a need to regulate credit in this way.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if she will estimate the amount of investment that will be generated by the changes she proposes in the Price Code.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if she will make a statement about price control and investment in the manufacturing industries.

The Price Code changes will allow firms an investment relief of 35 per cent. on factories, warehouses, plant and equipment, commercial vehicles and shop buildings. The relief does not extend to property companies or to investment overseas, and Price Commission monitoring will ensure this. The amount of investment generated cannot be directly estimated, but in the period December 1974 to February 1976, at a rate of 20 per cent., investment relief due against Category I and II firms' investment years amounted to £380 million, benefiting planned investment expenditure of £1,955 million.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the House will be very pleased to hear those figures quoted as an indication of what industry will now be able to do? Can she give an estimate of what investment would be generated by the complete abolition of price controls? Would not that work in the longer-term interest of the consumer?

As I explained in my statement last week, my view is that the complete abolition of price control would lead to the complete abolition of pay restraint, which would not create an atmosphere of confidence for industry.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the changes which she has announced in the Price Code amount to the imposition of an investment levy on all prices? If that is the case, does she not also agree that the imposition of such a levy can be morally justified only if the levy itself will contribute towards a reduction in unemployment? Will she therefore tell the House that within these changes the Government are prepared to introduce further measures which will ensure that the levy is used for stockbuilding or retooling which will provide more jobs?

No, Sir. As I have said to my hon. Friend before, in my view the monitoring will ensure that both investment and depreciation will take place and that there will be no increase in prices based on them unless they do. It is not proper to refer to this as a levy. We are relaxing a code which would otherwise forbid any price increase in the light of the cost of investment. The rate of return has fallen from about 10 per cent. in 1965 to about 2 per cent. today across the whole front of industry. I hope my hon. Friend will accept that that is not a rate of return which is likely to encourage firms to invest.

While I acknowledge my interest in these matters, may I ask the Secretary of State to what extent she expects the new Price Code to be able to change the disparity which has grown up between the price which can be charged in this country and the price that can be charged for similar goods manufactured in other member countries of the EEC? Does she expect the gap, which has caused considerable embarrassment, to be closed to any extent by these changes?

Exports as such are not within the control and never have been. I think that the right hon. Gentleman is referring to components which pass into exports. He will see in the consultative document that a direct relief has been given for exports and the share of overheads of exports as against domestic production, which will deal with the problem he has raised. However, the right hon. Gentleman may like to raise it again in the debate later this week, if he has the opportunity.

The hon. Member for Lewes (Mr. Rathbone) suggested the abolition of the Price Code. Can my right hon. Friend give the House any idea of the magnitude of price rises and inflation that would ensue if she abolished the code?

My view is that the CBI's assumption that there would be very little effect if we abolished the code is not right, and that it is based on a short period in which all of us in the Western world have been passing through a recession. I believe that if it were abolished as we pass into a period of recovery we should see a substantial increase in prices.

Would not any effect on the RPI be minimal compared with the impact of the extent to which the pound will continue to fall if the profitability of British industry is not restored? Is it not the case that the right hon. Lady's miserable proposals will go no way to restore the return on capital and the alarming figures she quoted as the decline since the 1960s?

The hon. Gentleman is perhaps rather less wise than some areas of the Press. I should like to quote one phrase used by the Investors Chronicle in its last issue.

"No Government could set the Price Code aside while asking the unions to accept their second, consecutive cut in pay rises and living standards".

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether she is yet in a position to give her views on the interim report of the National Consumer Council on fuel prices and low income consumers.

The Government are considering this report together with the reports from my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Energy and the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries.

Why do the Government always allow the electricity and gas industries another bite at the cherry in this matter? They made their views known to the National Consumer Council, the Select Committee to which my hon. Friend has referred and to the committee of my hon. Friend the Member for Widnes (Mr. Oakes). Those views are well known and were evaluated. The Government are now apparently to take them into account yet again. Why?

My hon. Friend is being too pessimistic if he thinks that those industries will have a complete second bite at the cherry. The Government recognise the importance of reaching decisions on those reports, especially so far as they affect people in the coming winter.

Has the Minister had discussions with departmental colleagues to see whether it is possible to introduce thermal insulation grants for people most in need? Would not that be no more expensive than providing supplementary benefits and meeting fuel bills for those who cannot heat their all-electrically-heated houses, and save energy at the same time?

There is no reason why the hon. Gentleman's suggestion about insulation should not be taken into account, but I do not think that it would deal with everybody's problems in facing high fuel charges. For instance, there are those who are locked into all-electric heating and who do not control it, often in municipal accommodation. We must look at the whole range of measures discussed in the three reports.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether she has any plans to control commodity speculation.

The Bank of England has the primary responsibility for supervision of the London commodity markets, and since the present Government took office the arrangements for this supervision have been reviewed and improved.

Does the Minister recall that his right hon. Friend said during the February 1974 General Election campaign that commodity speculation could and should be controlled? Does he know whether she still adheres to that view? If so, what is she doing to implement it?

As I have just told the hon. Gentleman, the arrangements for supervision of the markets in London by the bank have been improved and strengthened. More information is now available to permit interventions by the market associations if there is undue speculation which has a distorting effect.

Is it not possible, in view of the further information apparently available, to know exactly who is making money out of the commodity markets? It cannot be a large number of people who are exploiting them. We should know who they are.

That is among the information that the market associations hope to improve and supply to the bank.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what plans she has to extend the Price Check Scheme in the field of sports and entertainments.

The coverage of the scheme was agreed in negotiation and did include certain items in this field. Although the scheme cannot be widened at this stage, it provided for retailers to add items of their own choice, and I have been encouraged to find them doing so on a substantial scale.

While my hon. Friend will probably agree—

rose—

that there is nothing we can do about the nauseating exploitation of charity sports and entertainments by ticket touts and others, does he agree that there is a case for the Government approaching those who have unilaterally increased prices drastically over the past year or two for normal sports and entertainments—I think particularly of the major football clubs—and asking them what justification they have for such unilateral increases?

If my hon. Friend will send me details of the increases he has in mind, I shall look into them.

Order. If an hon. Gentleman remains on his feet, I am sorely tempted not to call him. Mr. Gwilym Roberts.

I thank you, Mr. Speaker. Does not my hon. Friend agree that ticket touting creates a serious problem and that the hard-earned money of ordinary working people is finding itself into the pockets of "spivs"? Will he consider the need to use powers to make sure that tickets for entertainments and sports can be legally sold only at their face value?

Illegal touting of the kind my hon. Friend describes must be a matter for the police.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection how much has been spent so far in connection with the Price Check Scheme.

I would refer the hon. Member to the replies I gave to the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Mr. Wainwright) on 8th March 1976 and to the hon. Member for Pudsey (Mr. Shaw) on 29th March 1976.

Is the Minister aware that those figures will have altered by now? Is he further aware that any expenditure at all on what amounts to a purely cosmetic exercise is unwarranted? Now that further public expenditure cuts are to be announced, will the Minister and the Secretary of State offer to abolish the Price Check Scheme to save public expenditure?

I am aware that there has been an increase in administrative expenditure amounting to £8,500 since the introduction of the scheme. That is so insignificant a sum that it is hardly worth including in a fresh answer.

Will my hon. Friend comment on the retail price mark-ups operated by the British Shoe Corporation and comment on their relationship to the Price Code?

That matter is being considered by my Department. My hon. Friend will be aware that the British Shoe Corporation brought the Price Check Scheme into play on virtually all its production, save special markings. I emphasise that the point he has made is being considered.

What is the Minister planning to do to counteract the widespread cynicism and disillusionment of housewives about this farcical scheme?

The hon. Gentleman wholly misrepresents the reaction of housewives, who have recognised the value of the price stability in regard to 47 groups of items covered by the scheme. It is particularly encouraging that 30 groups of items have seen no increase in price since the scheme was introduced, or increases of only up to ½ per cent. Very few items indeed have had to be withdrawn because of unavoidable cost increases. This has been of most important assistance to housewives in helping to bridge the gap while the full impact of the wage restraint policy agreed last summer is beginning to be reflected in the prices in the shops.

What is the Government's view of the British Gas Corporation's request to be allowed to exceed reference levels in the Price Code to build up reserves? How will this affect the corporation's involvement in the Price Check Scheme?

I understand that there will be no requirement for the British Gas Corporation to withdraw from the scheme before it ends.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if she will make a statement on recent developments in counter-inflation policy.

My proposals for changes in the Price Code are set out in full in the White Paper, Cmnd. 6450, which I laid before the House on 30th June, and I would refer hon. Members to my statement on that day.

Can the Secretary of State explain precisely how the huge reported increase in Post Office telecommunications profits fits into last year's prices policy or this year's? Does she agree that if it had happened in the private sector there would have been a major outcry among her hon. Friends and demand for price reductions? What will she do about it?

It is a matter for the Price Commission, as with any private or public company which exceeds its reference margins. In some cases the Commission insists on a roll-back, and in other cases on the stabilisation of prices over a period until the position is restored. Both practices have been followed in the private sector. It remains for the Commission, not me, to decide which approach it wants to take.

My right hon. Friend referred several times this afternoon to a 2 per cent. return on capital employed in private industry. Does that estimate take into account the transfer pricing practices of multinational companies?

It is a general figure that is based upon the profits of all companies after allowing for depreciation at the real rate of inflation. If my hon. Friend wants specific information about multinational companies, I must ask him to put down a separate Question. The figure covers all companies.

When the right hon. Lady says that pay restraint must be matched by price control, has she forgotten that for a whole year prices were strictly controlled while wages were allowed to let rip? What prospects does industry have of recovering from the damage that was being inflicted upon it?

The position under the Price Code, as I think the hon. Gentleman knows, bearing in mind that he is one of the people in the House who is an expert in these matters, is that certain retrospective costs can be brought forward if they are unable to be recovered at the time. There are limitations upon that. I repeat that the major limitation arises from the market itself, as is evidenced from the fact that profits are running well below reference margins. It is not reference margins that are imposing the ceiling in this type of case.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Government's leading priority should be to ensure a smooth return to free collective wage bargaining? Does she agree that the best way for the Government to achieve their objective of a reduction in price inflation is to ensure the continuation of price control, so that when we are in phase three we can freely bargain wages against fixed-price ceilings?

My hon. Friend will recall in this context a remark by Jack Jones and other trade union leaders about the need for a controlled re-entry from the present wages policy. I think that the same is true about prices. I envisage that in the relatively near future we shall start discussions with both sides of industry on what kind of price control the consumer shall enjoy.

Surely the right hon. Lady must admit that all private industry is affected directly and indirectly by the prices charged by nationalised industries. If the profits and prices of nationalised industry are to be allowed to soar, how can she expect private industry to keep down its prices?

I am sure the hon. Gentleman is aware that the major reason for the increase in nationalisation prices over the past couple of years, apart from commodity price increases, was the need to set aside the large subsidies made to nationalised industry by the pricing policy of the Conservative Administration. We are now returning to a philosphy of effective commercial prices. There has been considerable reportage on this matter today. I think the hon. Gentleman will recognise, in fairness, that that was one of the most important factors behind the increases in nationalised industry prices from which the private sector also suffered last year.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Pro- tection what consultations she has had, and with whom, concerning the relationship between changes in the Price Code and the next stage of the Government's incomes policy; and if she will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether she will make a statement on her discussions with the CBI and TUC about the Price Code.

Since April I have had numerous talks with the TUC, the CBI, the Retail Consortium and other organisations over the next stage of the attack on inflation. I wrote to them on 30th June to invite comments on the consultative document on a new Price Code.

Will the right hon. Lady elaborate on the results of her discussions on the subject of the phasing out of food subsidies, which is her declared policy, because those subsidies have now reached the authorised level of £1,700 million and they do not seem to be fully reflected in the social contract for 1976–77? Does this not make clear that she will now press for a continuance of food subsidies at their present level?

The hon. Gentleman almost takes my breath away, because his Question about the Price Code has no direct relationship to food subsidies. This was not part of our consultations. The present position is that in the current year food subsidies will run at about £400 million. A statement about the rate of run-down was given many weeks ago in the PESC statement on the current financial year. The hon. Gentleman can obtain all the information he wants from that document.

Will my right hon. Friend give special consideration to assisting the co-operative movement by including shops within the provisions for investment relief, since some 200,000 building construction workers are out of work? Is not this a way of helping the situation in regard to the other side of the coin?

Yes. I am happy to tell my hon. Friend, whose concern about the co-operative movement is well known, that we have included shops in the investment relief. This will benefit retailers, such as Co-ops, who own their own shops.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that both the Retail Consortium and the CBI have said that her proposals will fall a long way short of what they believe necessary to achieve profitability in the private sector? If she does not intend to abolish the Price Code, will she use the month of consultation time to make some realistic proposals in restoring profitability to the private sector?

The Retail Consortium has been kind enough to say that my proposals help, so far as they go. I am not so sure about the position of the CBI. In terms of marks given to me by the President of the CBI, he appears to have been a rather hard marker. The CBI's comments bear no relationship to what was said in the informed Press, including The Times, Financial Times, the Investors Chronicle and The Guardian. The hon. Gentleman could well ask whether the CBI position is other than a bargaining one.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether she is satisfied with the operation of the Price Code.

I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave the hon. Member for Braintree (Mr. Newton) earlier today.

While thanking the Secretary of State for that full and charitable response, might I ask, in relation to the consultative document which she has published, whether she is satisfied that the number of firms coming within the Price Code will be reduced? It would appear that, having allowed for inflation to take its toll, even more companies are within the scope of the code than previously. Would the right hon. Lady care to comment?

The hon. Gentleman is right in the sense that prior to the amendments to the code many more firms were within the pre-notification controls than previously. For that reason we have suggested an uprating in the categories to two times over for manufacturing firms and 1·5 times for distribution firms to bring back the amount of prenotification to roughly where it was when the code was first introduced.

As I understand that the objective is to ensure increased investment, and as I understand well that in the capitalist system, unless one allows higher prices, one does not get the investment—(Interruption.]—it is time we started to control investment—what plans do the Government have for directing and ensuring that investment is made where it is needed and is not left to chance and hope?

My hon. Friend will recognise that part of what he has said, particularly about fiscal considerations, is necessarily a question for other Ministers. But may I say again as loudly and clearly as I can that I am absolutely satisfied that with its present monitoring system the Price Code ensures that, if there are any increases in price related to investment, that investment will take place in exactly the areas about which I have told the House on more than one occasion.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what pre-tax income is equivalent to the annual saving in expenditure as a result of food subsidies for a family with two children under 11 years, having a total income, unearned, of £10,000 per annum.

Assuming implementation of the conditional and unconditional proposals in the Budget, the equivalent pre-tax income for 1976–77 would be £113.

Does the Minister agree that that is a rather unhappy contrast with the value to the average pensioner of about £22? Will he direct the energies of his Department to stop this wasteful and unselective subsidy and direct the Government's mind to the better value to be obtained from help such as the Child Benefit Scheme?

The hon. Gentleman does not present very clearly the benefit of the food subsidy programme. For what it is worth, the individual to whom he has drawn attention would have, on the basis of his average share of taxation, to be paying £130 income tax to get the benefit of £34 in food subsidies. That illustrates one of the advantages of the food subsidy programme—namely, its redistributive nature.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that the Opposition's arguments against food subsidies are bogus? Will he confirm that a man earning £10,000 and with two children—a family of four —is not getting more out of food subsidies than a pensioner when the pensioner is benefiting from the subsidies without paying any tax? The person getting £10,000 pays tax for himself, for his family and for the pensioner.

The proportion of benefit to pensioners is substantially greater than that obtained by the untypical family that the hon. Member for Hove (Mr. Sainsbury) has mentioned.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what action she proposes to take, in the light of the report published this month by Regional Surveys, in order to reduce the costs of living in Scotland to more equitable levels.

The Government's counter-inflation policies for the year ahead are clearly set out in the White Paper published last week. The benefit will be felt in Scotland as in all parts of the country.

Does the Minister accept that the Scottish housewife will find it difficult to take much satisfaction out of that answer? Does he realise that in Scotland, as shown by the survey, the cost of living was 10 per cent. higher than the United Kingdom average and 14 per cent. higher than in the South-East of England but that Scotland does not have the benefit of the higher standard of living found in the South-East? Does he realise that these higher prices have been endemic in Scotland for years? The time has come for this Government to do something about it. No Government have done very much about it so far.

The hon. Gentleman does no service to the people of Scotland by seeking to distort the position by suggesting that regional prices are significant in the way he describes. He should know that there are vast differences in prices within Scotland. There are local differences between, for example, his constituency and the constituency of his hon. Friend the Member for Western Isles (Mr. Stewart). These are the real problems we face in Scotland and the problems that the Government are tackling.

Will my hon. Friend ensure that the fullest information is given for every region in the country? Is it not time that there was a counter-offensive to the nonsense we constantly hear from the Scottish nationalists which suggests that the Scottish people are the only ones who suffer from problems in this country? Is my hon. Friend aware that in areas such as Merseyside the conditions of life and employment are as bad as anywhere else in the country? But we do not raise the nonsensical cry of "UDI for Merseyside".

I have a great deal of sympathy with what my hon. Friend has said. I underline what I have already said. My Department commissioned a report by the Price Commission on the difference in prices in outlying areas. The report showed that the variations within Scotland were substantial. I draw attention to what the Scotsman stated on 8th June about food prices. It said that price variations within regions could be greater than between regions.

As someone who wants to keep Britain united, may I ask the hon. Gentleman to tell me how I can justify to my constituents the fact that the British Gas Corporation charges more for gas in Scotland than in the rest of the country?

The whole question of the pricing of gas is for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection how many persons are now employed by her Department; and what is the latest estimate of the annual cost of her Department and the public bodies, boards and committees appointed by her.

My Department, including the Metrication Board, currently employs 382 staff. Estimated net costs in 1976–77 of running my Department and the associated bodies to which my right hon. Friend makes appointments total £13·9 million.

Is the Minister aware that many people now think that the whole Department is an expensive washout? Does he think that many housewives would notice, or even care, if the Department disappeared tomorrow? Since the Chancellor is looking for cuts, will not the Minister and his colleagues volunteer to disband the Department?

I do not accept any of the hon. Gentleman's comments. I believe that, if what he suggests were to take place, a great many housewives would lose their protection, and indeed a great many other people would be unprotected if our activities were to cease. I refer to areas such as consumer safety, credit protection, possible changes in the law on estate agents, trade descriptions and so on. I believe that the public obtain good value for their money from my Department.

When considering value for money obtained by his Department, will the Minister agree that competition is the best form of assistance to housewives? If his Department would confine its activities to supervising the monopoly nationalised sector, would not his Department's costs be considerably reduced?

The Price Commission probably saves more money in restraining prices in a month than my Department costs in a year. Secondly, I must emphasise that my Department is not unconcerned with the practices and prices of public corporations as well as of industry.

Is the Minister aware that the consumer protection Order which the Government are about to bring in and which was mercifully not moved in another place on Friday will have the effect of causing hire-purchase companies to think carefully and probably to withdraw the facilities which they currently offer to the public over a wide range of goods? Will he have a long, hard look at this and listen to the representations of the Finance Houses Association before bringing in the Order, which, quite unintentionally, could have a severe effect upon the buying public?

I shall have a look at the Order, but I must tell the hon. Gentle- man that his interventions in this House would be rather more credible if he occasionally spoke up for the consumers' side of these matters as well as for the traders.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if she will refer to the Director General of Fair Trading the failure of minicab operators to display price lists for journeys.

While I have received no recent indications of public concern about this practice, I should, of course, be willing to look into it further on receiving any representations from consumers.

Can my hon. Friend tell me whether he is satisfied with a situation in which users of mini-cab services have no guidance as to the fares they are likely to be charged? Is he aware that this is the only commercial activity in which consumers have no protection from profiteering? Is he further aware that the only people who would resent the display of price lists in minicabs are those operators who at the moment seek to abuse the system and overcharge their customers?

I agree with my hon. Friend. The practice of not displaying information or price lists is unsatisfactory. Unfortunately, under the prices legislation the power to require a display of prices covers only goods and not services. I would be happy to receive any representations on this matter from my hon. Friend or members of the public.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that some hire cars use meters, thus further increasing the public confussion between what is a licensed taxi and what is a hire car? Will he bring the attention of his Department again to the recommendations of the Stamp Report, which came out a long time ago?

If I recollect correctly, the Maxwell Stamp Report was made to the Home Office and not to my Department. The question of the definition of a taxi cab, a mini-cab and a hire car is not primarily for me.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection how many representations she has received this year on alleged imperfections in package tours abroad; and what action she proposes to take in the consumer's interest.

A total of six complaints about package tours abroad have been received in my Department this year. In each case the complainant was referred to his local trading standards authority so that it might investigate whether there had been an offence against the Trade Descriptions Act 1968. However, the majority of such complaints are likely to be directed not to my Department but to other bodies such as local authorities, the Association of British Travel Agents, the Civil Aviation Authority and the Department of Trade.

In view of all those other bodies who are responsible rather than the Minister, may I direct the hon. Gentleman's attention, without being in the least alarmist, to reports about which he must have heard concerning possible holiday over-booking this year, most particularly affecting the Greek islands? While I pay tribute to the great efforts of the travel trade, may I ask whether the hon. Gentleman thinks it would be helpful if he were to see some of the Greek Tourist Office representatives in London to discover whether the incidents of last year can be prevented this year?

I hope the hon. Member will accept that it would be unwise to comment on something of which I have not yet had notice. If he would like to give me information on these matters about which he is concerned, I shall have a look at them.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection when she will prescribe a range of minimum quantities for the sale of wine.

We have taken action to prescribe quantities for wine sold in carafes. The position for bottled wine is more complex, but we shall be intro- ducing legislation to provide that most bottled table wines will have to bear an indication of contents and be put up in a range of prescribed sizes by 31st August 1977.

Is my hon. Friend aware that I am interested to hear that? Is he further aware that there is an immense variation in the quantity, quality and price of carafe wine and wine served in glasses with meals in restaurants? Does he agree that there is urgent need for the enforcement of a proper standard that is fair to the consumer?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. That is why we are proceeding with all possible expedition.

While we all realise that the Minister is answering this Question because of the drubbing his hon. Friend the Minister of State received in the House the other night, may I ask him to tell his hon. Friend, who is sitting one away from him, that on this matter and on the important subject which I raised a few moments ago of hire purchase Orders it is the consumer and not the manufacturer or supplier of services about whom we are concerned? Is he aware that it does not make sense for the Government on the one hand to introduce legislation which confuses the consumer by saying that wine must be served only in glasses and carafes of certain sizes and on the other hand to introduce Orders which restrict hire-purchase facilities to consumers?

I have studied with great care the hon. Gentleman's contribution to our debate on the Sale of Wine Order. All I can say is that I think he does no service to the trade which he represents in this House by seeking to abuse or misrepresent the position of the Government. It is with a full consciousness of the importance of serving consumer interest that we have brought forward these proposals.

May I ask the Minister to withdraw that wholly offensive remark? I am an unpaid member of the National Council of the British Hotels, Restaurants and Caterers Association. Will the Minister withdraw that offensive comment?

I am not clear what I have to withdraw. The hon. Gentleman made clear in the debate what his financial connection with the industry was, as well as what his representative role was in this House. It is common knowledge, and there is nothing for me to withdraw.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it not a fact that Members of Parliament represent constituencies and not other interests?

It is not for me to explain what other people may say. If there were any implication that the hon. Member is not acting solely as an hon. Member, it would be wrong. I gather that the Minister's explanation was that he did not mean there to be any such implication.