asked the Minister of Agrirculture, Fisheries and Food whether he has plans to ensure that in the current year there will be an adequate supply of potatoes for the consumer.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is satisfied that in the current year there will be adequate supplies of potatoes for the consumer.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is satisfied with the current potato acreage.

I am happy to say that 1976 crop plantings by registered producers in Great Britain are estimated at 195,000 hectares —or 482,000 acres—and thus have met the target area. Had growing conditions been normal, this area would have been sufficient to provide ample supplies of potatoes. However, although the crop was planted in ideal growing conditions, the hot, dry weather has affected growth in the main producing areas. It is too early yet to make a firm assessment of the overall supply position for the season, but we shall keep the situation under constant review.

Will the Minister accept that the steps which he has already taken with regard to imports and exports will be generally quite well accepted throughout the country, but will he recognise none the less that the poor yields in Northern Europe will cause tremendous demands on third countries and hence have the effect of forcing up prices? Second, will he recognise that the guaranteed price of £42 per ton which was set in March this year is likely to be inadequate to tempt growers into a full uptake of the acreage quota next year, and will he take steps accordingly now?

I understand the hon. Gentleman's concern about the position elsewhere. He will recall that at the time of grave shortage in this country last year we were helped to some extent by imports from overseas, including some from areas in which the supply was then not satisfactory. However, as the hon. Gentleman acknowledges, we are keeping on the present controls, banning the export of potatoes and lifting the ban on imports until the position can be reviewed. As regards the price settled following the annual review, I think that the fact that we have the acreage which we wanted is some indication of the confidence which the price levels have given.

Will my hon. Friend keep closely in mind that potatoes are twice as important in the budgets of pensioners as they are in the budget of the general population, and that people in the low-income groups depend very much upon potatoes for their vitamin C intake? Further, will he take it that we on this side will at no stage hold him or his Department responsible for the weather, and we shall resist attempts which undoubtedly will be made by the Opposition to do just that? Finally, is it not a fact that the prices being paid to farmers were considerably uprated this year in order to meet their demands last year?

I appreciate my hon. Friend's concern, especially regarding the price of potatoes in the past year and its effect on pensioners. We pointed out at that time that there were alternatives, and I recall saying that many of us would benefit from not eating too many potatoes. However, I recognise that pensioners have found that the cost of potatoes has borne rather heavily upon them. As regards the general position, some people may be inclined to think that we ought to plant many more potatoes. Perhaps I should say, in response to my hon. Friend's Question No. 24, that plantings by the registered producers in Great Britain are estimated to be 15,000 hectares greater than they were last year, and it is interesting to note that the downward trend in plantings in recent years has now been reversed.

Is my lion. Friend discussing with the Indian Government and their export agencies the possibility of further imports into this country from India? Is he particularly discussing with them the question of quality and the condition in which those potatoes arrive in this country?

I agree with my hon. Friend about the importance of getting potatoes from alternative sources. He will recall that in the last year we have been looking for potato supplies from many places around the world. However, we must be quite sure that our plant health regulations are complied with. Plant health restrictions are very important to us. I do not wish to risk trouble for our home crop, which in recent years has been very important.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he is taking to safeguard the coherence and unity of the United Kingdom agricultural research pattern in the event of devolution to Scotland and Wales.

The White Paper of last November stated that the main aspects of agriculture would be reserved. Agricultural research will continue to be co-ordinated on a United Kingdom basis.

Is the Scottish National Farmers' Union quite happy with the position?

Yes. I understand that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland has discussed this whole area with the Scottish NFU and that it is reasonably satisfied.

Will the hon. Gentleman say something about the proposed public expenditure cut so far as it effects research and development in agriculture? Does he agree that that research is absolutely fundamental to the continuing progress and success of the agriculture industry?

I agree that agricultural research and development has a vital rôle to play in the future productivity of our industry. We are making every effort to see that the containment of expansion which has regrettably had to take place will be achieved in a way that minimises the disadvantage to the industry.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will report progress on consideration of the Poultry Meat (Hygiene) Regulations.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Renfrewshire, West (Mr. Buchan) on 4th August. The Regulations were laid before the House yesterday.

Will the Minister accept that the changes on New York-dressed poultry will be welcomed with relief as going most of the way towards saving most of that industry? Is he aware that local authorities still face considerable difficulties over recruitment and training if they are to have establishments by January of next year? Will he therefore ensure the maximum flexibility in phasing in the scheme so that there will be minimum burdens on local authorities next year? Finally, will he say whether the costs of training will be met in part by the industry, or will there be a Government grant?

I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman's early remarks. I can also reassure him with regard to the question of flexibility. This is something that is being phased in gradually. We must remember that in the first instance it may be only the plants exporting to the Community which have an inspection service, and it will not be mandatory on any home market producers until August 1979. We are still considering the question of Government grants towards training.

Is the Minister aware that there is considerable relief that the trade in New York-dressed poultry can, after all, continue? The only regret here and in the industry is that the industry has been kept in a state of anxiety for so long. Will the Minister confirm that no cost, including that for the training of inspectors, will fall on local authorities, and will he also say that there will be a proper role for environmental health officers in this new scheme as well as for veterinary surgeons?

Yes, I can confirm that absolutely no cost will fall on local authorities and ratepayers. I also confirm that there will be a rôle for environmental health officers. That is specifically written into the Regulations. I think the right hon. Gentleman will recognise that it was always the case that we would be making some concessions on New York-dressed poultry. Indeed, some of them were negotiated by us a very long time ago in Brussels. But I recognise that it is the further concession for dry-plucked poultry which is particularly important and has been welcomed by the industry and the right hon. Gentleman.

Will my hon. Friend accept the congratulations of those of us on the Government side of the House on having found a rational solution to this problem in the interests of small producers and consumers who prefer New York-dressed poultry? Will he give some assurance that this will be a permanent and not merely an interim solution?

The concession with regard to dry plucked is without time limit. I think that my hon. Friend, with his knowledge of EEC matters, will recognise that it is inevitable that the whole question of the directive will be reviewed in due course by the Community. But there is no time limit on the dry plucked.

How many officials will be required to implement this scheme?

When the hon. Gentleman refers to officials, I think he refers to poultry meat inspectors and veterinary surgeons. When the scheme is in full operation in August 1979, we estimate that in total there will be a demand for about 100 veterinary surgeon equivalents. I say "equivalents" because some authorities will use one only part-time while others will take one on full-time. There will be between 600 and 650 poultry meat inspectors. However, we should remember that this is not a net addition, because in practice some of the more advanced and progressive firms are already employing people privately. What it will mean is that, instead of their doing it, it will be done officially by proper local authority inspectors.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what will be the additional capital cost required to modify poultry processing plants so that they conform to the Poultry Hygiene Regulations.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Banbury (Mr. Marten) on 22nd March.

I admire the hon. Gentleman's dexterity in getting a Question planted yesterday about these Regulations. Will he assure the House that the period proposed for compliance—namely, until 15th August 1977—is adequate, bearing in mind the structural requirements of pigmeat producers? Will he also say what will be the cost of implementing these requirements and the percentage that will be borne by the consumer in the form of higher prices?

When the hon. Gentleman refers to pigmeat producers, I take him to be referring to poultry meat producers—

I was asking about the structural requirements for poultry—

Order.

The structural requirements, as the hon. Gentleman said, should be met by August 1977, but it is our intention to be flexible. We recognise that we are not giving producers a lot of time. The hon. Gentleman will welcome the announcement made yesterday of aid under the Industry Act to assist in bringing premises up to proper hygienic standards.

As the Government are making expenditure cuts, is this not a classic example of where they should not spend money?

No, I could not disagree more with the hon. Gentleman. The British housewife is entitled to protection, and we are woefully behind Norway, Denmark and the United States in this area. We really must have proper hygienic standards. This is something we should have done a long time ago.

To what extent will it be possible to take advantage of FEOGA grants towards the capital cost referred to in the Question?

Because of the structural modifications to be made, the requirements will be eligible for assistance under the Industry Act. Therefore, the producers will be able to apply for a FEOGA grant under the special projects scheme. I am hopeful that some producers will make successful applications.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what further steps he has taken to publicise British laws on the importation of animals in the continental Channel ports.

Through our embassies and consulates, and with the co-operation of the appropriate continental authorities, we have arranged for extensive publicity at continental ports, marinas, etc., warning travellers to Britain of our anti-rabies import controls and advising them to leave their pets behind.

I welcome my hon. Friend's statement, but would it not be worth while sending a member of his Department to inspect what has been done at these various ports and to see whether the notices are appropriately displayed? Would it not also be worth while for my hon. Friend to contact his opposite numbers on the Continent to see whether it would be possible to arrange for customs officers at Channel ports and elsewhere, on an informal basis, to warn all travellers to Britain with pets?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I know of his deep interest in these matters. We have already sent a Ministry veterinary officer, who has made an extensive tour of the Dutch, Belgian and French coasts. We are getting very good co-operation indeed from the Governments of those countries on the Continent, and particularly from France. I mention France, of course, because of its proximity. We are making some progress in this matter, though there are no grounds for complacency.

What is the cost of the publicity that the Government are placing in continental ports?

I should need advance notice of that question. However, in addition to leaflets, we have made a number of television films in the appropriate languages and these have been shown by continental television stations.

Will my hon. Friend say whether the extreme dangers of rabies have been emphasised? He may not realise that when thinking of bringing their dogs here many people abroad may say to themselves "My little Fido could not get rabies", without knowing that the dog might have taken a bone that had been left by a dog with rabies. Can a massive programme of warning be undertaken?

We launched a massive publicity exercise. There is no doubt that this was reflected in a great deal of recent Press publicity and in the higher fines that magistrates have been imposing—and, indeed, it has been reflected in the increased parliamentary interest in the matter. We take this matter very seriously indeed.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what further representations he intends to make to the EEC on the question of a 50-mile British-only fishing zone.

The future of the common fisheries policy is one of the most urgent and important issues in the Community, and the Government will continue to press for arrangements which meet the needs of our fishing industry.

That is a bit general. After three years of membership of the Common Market, in which those who are our enemies inside Europe have bled British workers white, does not my right hon. Friend consider it high time that the Common Market was told in no uncertain terms that it is time we were able to get at least this 50-mile fishing zone? Would my right hon. Friend also care to comment on the suggestion which has now been raised that the 200-mile zone that is being discussed will not be only a fishing zone and that there are those inside the Common Market who have their greedy eyes on North Sea oil and will interpret the fishing zone as an economic zone?

I think that that was a very general question as well. I cannot accept this. I agree that it is important that we push forward with negotiations. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs has been conducting negotiations. Indeed, the Minister of State has already announced a broad policy to the House.

Does the Minister realise that the biggest problem facing the fishing industry is over-fishing by foreign boats? Will he tell the House the arrangements that are to be made to patrol and police the 50-mile limit—if that is the limit we get—and who will be in charge of the patrolling of the 200-mile economic zone?

These matters are under discussion and negotiation. I cannot reveal the Government's negotiating stance at this stage. Conservation and policing are important matters, and I agree with the hon. Gentleman that they will have to be studied.

My right hon. Friend will be aware that a Bill to extend fishing limits to 200 miles has been introduced in the Faroese Parliament. The Faroes are part of the EEC. Why are the Faroese able to take that unilateral action when we are unable to do so? What discussions has my right hon. Friend had with the Faroese and the Danes about the effect upon the British fishing industry, and on the Scottish industry in particular, of this proposal to push out to 200 miles?

I am aware of that. My hon. Friend must know about the Council decision from the Community on the 200-mile limit, and we are ready to take action on this.

Will the right hon. Gentleman assure us that he will come back from the negotiations with a minimum of a 12-mile limit available only for British fishermen off the South Coast? Otherwise those men will be on the dole.

I do not conduct negotiations in Europe. That is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary. He represents an important fishing constituency and is anxious to see that our interests are protected. I note carefully what the hon. Gentleman said.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is satisfied with the state of the pig sector.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is satisfied that the returns earned by pig producers are sufficient to pay for the costs of production.

Pig producers have enjoyed a sustained period of firm prices with good profits and the national herd has been expanding. Prices fell sharply during the hot weather but are now showing signs of recovery. There is every prospect that they should improve during the rest of the year.

Will the Minister confirm that since the publication of the Government's White Paper "Food from Our Own Resources" the United Kingdom production of pigmeat has fallen? Does he agree that action is required? Why will he not seek to give the pig sector a selective devaluation of the green pound or an adjustment of MCA payments?

Price falls are normal at this time of year and they were more pronounced in June and July because of the hot weather. The Meat and Livestock Commission forecasts a return to firm price levels by the end of the year. In April last the census results showed an increase in the United Kingdom pig-breeding herd of about 4 per cent. compared with April 1975. Within these totals the number of gilts in pig increased over the same period by 37 per cent., from 97,000 to 133,000 head. It is estimated that the size of the herd may increase by a further 6 per cent. by the end of the year. This shows the market confidence. Indeed, a recent NFU memorandum published in July warned the industry about over-confidence in the pig sector.

May I ask for replies to be as reasonably short as supplementary questions?

Will my hon. Friend accept that the pig industry has suffered considerably at the hands of the Danish industry because of the subsidy that the Danish industry receives? Can anything be done to give our pig producers some advantage in this market?

My right hon. Friend has met representatives of the pigmeat processing industry, and various suggestions are being pursued. I repeat that I think a case may be made for a more neutral method of calculating MCA payments in this sector. I note what my hon. Friend said about Denmark.

Is the Minister aware that the British Pig Producers Federation and the NFU have produced records which show that the pig industry is making a loss? Will he secure an adjustment of the MCA payments to ensure that our industry is placed on a similar footing to the Dutch and Danish industries which are undermining our industry?

I accept what the hon. Gentleman said, but I have explained the problems caused by a change in value of the green pound. My right hon. Friend has made four changes in the value of the green pound over the last two years. That shows that we are sensitive to this problem. Difficulties arise in taking action on the pigmeat sector alone. My right hon. Friend will be pursuing these matters in Brussels and elsewhere in the near future.

Will my hon. Friend have regard to the large increase in the cost of feeding stuff for pigs, particularly of soya-bean meal, and bear it in mind in his review of the bottom price?

I can give that assurance.

Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that the pig breeders and processors are easily the hardest hit by the misaligned green pound? Does he not regard it as a serious matter that home producers take a much smaller share of the home market than formerly? Should not the aim of Government policy be to increase the share of the home market enjoyed by home producers?

We are pursuing the policy laid down in our White Paper. As I have said on many occasions, we bear in mind the adjustment of the green pound as and when required. I assure the right hon. Gentleman that we are sensitive to the problems of the industry, which at present are having a far greater effect on processors than on producers. All these points are being taken into account.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the present discrepancy between the green pound and the£ sterling.

The gap between the two rates is 21 per cent., giving a calculated monetary compensatory amount percentage of 19·5 for the current week.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think that the difference between United Kingdom and EEC prices is getting a little too wide? Does he not feel that the time is coming when our own farmers and producers should not be put at such a disadvantage against their continental competitors?

That point has been put to me many times, and I have considered the matter very carefully. I have made changes, and the Community has been pressing me to make further changes. We shall examine the matter.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the British people have been making considerable sacrifices under the illusion that wages are the sole source of inflation? Does he agree that any further devaluation of the green pound would lead to increases in the cost of living, and that we should resist any further alteration in favour of the farming community so that at least we can obtain some benefit from this crazy organisation called the EEC and the common agricultural policy?

My hon. Friend knows that I try to represent the food industry and the consumer. I would remind my hon. Friend that I am not only Minister of Agriculture but also have responsibilities in regard to fisheries and food. I recognise that I have responsibilities to see that prices are not excessive, but I must strike a fair balance. I have already said that I shall carefully examine the matter, and it may well be discussed at future Council meetings.

Will the Minister appreciate that among the British workers mentioned by the hon. Member for Keighley (Mr. Cryer) the hardest worker is the farm worker? Is it not unfair for them to have to pay out in one currency and to receive back a currency worth only three-quarters of it when prices are arranged on a basis of parity? Will he pursue a policy to ensure that there is a regular review of the value of the green pound?

I do not accept that there needs to be an automatic arrangement. This topic is discussed at most Council meetings and will inevitably come up at the next meeting.

Does the Minister agree that by allowing this misalignment to be as wide he has made it more difficult to bring the matter into parity? Does he agree that by the end of next year we shall be close to parity, so that British producers will be able to do business on fair competitive terms with their European partners? Will he not soon make adjustments to bring the green pound closer to parity?

I note what the right hon. Gentleman says, and I have made several moves in that direction. I must point out that no similar move was made by a Conservative Government.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he intends to make a statement on the future organisation of the cane sugar refining industry.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he intends to make a statement on the future of the cane sugar refining industry.

I would refer my hon. Friends to the reply which I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Scotland Exchange (Mr. Parry) yesterday.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many people will be relieved that no redundancies will occur until at least after next March? In view, however, of the fact that sugar beet production is sure to be down this year on last year because of the 30 per cent. reduction, and since additional cane supplies are expected to rise by over 1·2 million tons, does not my right hon. Friend agree that if we cannot obtain a permanent increase we should at least seek a short-term increase in terms of the EEC allotment, which would have the effect of reducing unemployment following the rationalisation plans shortly to be announced?

It is too early yet to forecast the state of our own sugar beet crop, and I appreciate that there are weather problems. The results from the samples taken by the British Sugar Corporation will not be known until later in the month and, therefore, one cannot be specific. The subject of supplies from elsewhere is not an easy matter. Nevertheless we signed the Lomé Convention, and supplies are guaranteed from our traditional suppliers into our market. We are carefully watching the situation.

The House will know that yesterday the Minister referred to the takeover of Manbre and Garton, and two matters of substantial interest now arise. After such a merger, it is true to say that 57 per cent. of sweeteners in the industry will be in single hands. Therefore, will the right hon. Gentleman refer the matter to the Monopolies Commission, and will he consider what proposals should be put forward for the re-employment of workers and say whether these proposals are likely to be delayed?

We are well aware of the problem of unemployment. I have received representations from the trade unions, many of whose members I have met. The Government are anxious to protect the workers as far as we can. It would be wrong for me to comment on the merger, but discussions are now taking place. There is a dispute between the two firms, and they have made representations to me. I have seen both sides, but it would be wrong for me to speculate about the outcome.

I should like to thank you, Mr. Speaker, for calling me. You have a generous and forgiving nature. Is my right hon. Friend aware that no Minister has been more accessible to hon. Members interested in these matters than he has? Will he confirm that yesterday's statement confers six months' job security on workers? Will he try to make an interim statement as early as possible and allow time for a debate on his recent statement?

I made my statement in reply to a Written Question. It was a long statement which I thought would assist hon. Members. We are in close contact with employers and employees, and when necessary I shall inform the House of the situation.

In his answer yesterday the Minister referred to unification and rationalisation. Does that imply that there can be other grounds? If so, what are they? Secondly, on the current bid, will he expand on what he said? Is he referring to the organisation of the industry following a successful bid? When will he make a further statement?

I cannot say when I shall make a statement. I shall do so as soon as possible. I must judge what will be in the interests of those concerned. I have no other proposals to make. We must see how the matter goes.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many men and how many women are employed in his Department.

On 1st July 1976 the numbers of men and women employed full-time in my Department were 9,218 and 5,808 respectively. Additionally, 91 men and 784 women were employed part-time.

Do men and women employed in the Department have a right to retire at the same age? If so, is this not a right that should be extended to all workers in agriculture, bearing in mind that so many agricultural manual workers suffer from back ailments but still have to work until they are 65 years of age?

My hon. and learned Friend seeks to raise a wide question. I am satisfied that the recruiting of staff is fair and consistent. There is no question of discrimination between the sexes.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is satisfied, from recent contact with local authorities about contingency plans in the event of an outbreak of rabies, that they have taken sufficient account of his detailed guidance.

Although the guidelines were issued as recently as 17th June, the reports reaching me indicate that local authorities are actively engaged in preparing their detailed contingency plans to suit local circumstances.

In view of the serious situation in regard to rabies, does my hon. Friend believe that in view of the cuts in local expenditure these matters can safely be left to local authorities? Does he not agree that it would be a much better idea if the Minister of Agriculture were to raise at Cabinet level the question of co-ordinating the subject of rabies and the control of stray dogs, because at present these matters fall within the discretion of four separate Departments? Does he not agree that this situation cannot be allowed to continue?

I am happy to inform my hon. Friend that the Government take a very close interest in this subject. If there were to be a rabies outbreak, the Minister of Agriculture would have overall control. On the subject of stray dogs, I do not think that there is any alternative to leaving the responsibility in the hands of local authorities.

Are the Government sure that precautions are as alert at the less likely ports, such as Grangemouth and Leith, as they are at Channel ports?

We make every effort to see that all ports are on the alert. Customs officers have been well briefed on this important issue. There is no doubt about the high level of public awareness on this subject throughout the country. There is great determination to keep rabies out.

Does my hon. Friend accept that although the Government are taking a great interest in this matter many vets are of the opinion that they are not taking the proper action? Does he further accept that the advice he is receiving from specialist advisers is not necessarily the advice which he would receive from vets, who are terrified of an outbreak of rabies and are certain that if it should occur the Government will be in serious difficulties?

I cannot accept that many vets are unhappy about our policy, although I dare say that my hon. Friend may have met one or two of them. The British Veterinary Association, the Royal College of Surgeons and the World Health Organisation are all supporting our policy in this respect.

Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied that his Department and the medical authorities are working sufficiently closely together? There are two sides to this matter—stopping the disease and catching the animals, and curing the patients. It is important that sufficient notification should be given to the medical profession.

I am satisfied on all counts. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the Government internally have devoted a great deal of attention to this question recently.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what progress has been made in the last month in restructuring the CAP.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what proposals he has for reform of the CAP.

I would refer the hon. Members to the reply given to the right hon. Member for Cambridgeshire (Mr. Pym) on 23rd July. I shall continue to seek improvements in the milk sector and for other commodities.

It is clear that the Common Market is increasingly putting up the price of food to the British people. Therefore, can the right hon. Gentleman confirm his previous estimate that if the green pound were revalued properly it would put up the price of food by 5 or 6 per cent.? If that is so, does it not make it more urgent that the common agricultural policy should be restructured in the interests of the British housewife?

I have sought and achieved improvements in certain directions. The beef premium system is to be discussed by the Council and there could well be a Community scheme based on the principles which we advocate. I also want the efficient farm to be one of the criteria when we have discussions on price, and there must be price restraint. However, the price of some commodities in Europe is below the world price. The hon. Gentleman should not be too critical.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Socialist Group in the European Parliament has been working very hard to produce a new agricultural policy and that it is now about to be published? The amended version is due largely to the activities of Labour Members. Will my right hon. Friend ensure that when it is published it will be given wide publicity?

Certainly. I know that my hon. Friends who are Members of the European Parliament have been working hard. Naturally, I shall look carefully at their proposals. I congratulate them on taking the initiative in this direction.

Since we joined the Community, has the difference in value between the green pound and the £ sterling ever been greater than it is today?

I answered a previous Question on that matter. If I were to answer again, I should simply be repeating what I said earlier.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he has considered plans for the nationalisation of the fishing industry.

No, Sir.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take it from me as a Grimsbarian that I am delighted with that answer? Is he aware, however, that the fishing industry faces acute problems? What plans have the Government in mind to ease them?

I accept what the hon. Gentleman says. I made a major state- ment on this matter after the settlement with Iceland. We are still having discussions with the employers and the trade unions in the industry. I shall be meeting their representatives tomorrow.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the fishing industry could do worse under nationalisation than it is doing under private ownership? Hypocritical and misleading statements have been put out by the British Trawlers Federation about the Government's present negotiating position regarding an exclusive fishing zone. What we need in the fishing industry is proper labour relations and decasualisation.

I accept that we need proper labour relations, and decasualisation is one of the matters I am discussing with the unions concerned.

When will the Minister make a statement in public that he is absolutely opposed to nationalisation of the land as well as to nationalisation of the fishing industry?

I have already made a statement that I have no proposals to nationalise land. The right hon. Gentleman knows that.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will pay an official visit to Leicestershire.

I have at present no plans to do so.

When my right hon. Friend visits Leicestershire, will he take the opportunity to denounce all those irresponsible fringe groups and individuals who seek to make political capital out of racial disharmony? Will he pay special attention to the Fascist National Front, so many of whose top national leaders are not only former members of the Nazi and Fascist Parties but have criminal records of violence, as well as to all other extremists who seek to interfere with the peace and basic prosperity of Leicester and other cities like it?

I know that my hon. and learned Friend, among others, is leading a campaign in Leicester to ensure that racial harmony shall prevail. I am glad to learn that there has been little disturbance there. The Government —and I hope that this is the case on a much wider basis—are totally opposed to the National Front, which seeks to stimulate and inflame intolerance between the races and basks in the publicity which arises from a general state of disorder. I assure my hon. and learned Friend that on all occasions we shall seek to warn the public and to lead them as far away as we can from the direction in which the National Front would take them.

Is the Prime Minister disturbed by today's news that the former Chief Constable of Leicestershire, Sir Robert Mark, has announced his impending resignation as Metropolitan Police Commissioner because of his strong feelings about the Police Bill? Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that it is something of a national tragedy that arguably the greatest police chief since Peel should feel obliged to resign because the Government are determined to spend £1 million of taxpayers' money on making it easier to complain against the police?

I have a very high admiration for Sir Robert Mark. In my earlier manifestation as Home Secretary I had some responsibility for his advancement. I have always valued his opinions on many matters. But the Police Bill has been discussed and decided by the House and, however eminent may be Sir Robert Mark, whose advance retirement by three months or whatever it is will be a matter of regret, the House decides these matters. I have always taken the view that the police have a right to special protection because of the ease with which complaints can be made against them, but I do not believe that when the legislation is in operation they will find that their position has been weakened.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is incumbent on all parliamentarians to give the strongest possible lead in improving race relations in this country? Would it not be of the greatest assistance if the Leader of the Opposition were to make such a statement?

Naturally, I leave that to the Leader of the Opposition, but I have no reason to believe that she would disagree with what I have said this afternoon.

If the Prime Minister will not go to Leicestershire, will he consider going to Staffordshire and telling parents there how much he believes in their right to choose their children's education? Will he also tell them that the independent schools are in no danger as long as he holds high office?

I do not think that I shall be discussing Staffordshire when I visit Leicestershire.

asked the Prime Minister if he is satisfied with the cooperation between Ministers in relation to the effect of the Government's review of public expenditure.

Yes.

Since the Chancellor of the Exchequer has given his estimate of unemployment for the end of 1979 as 3 per cent.—

Come on, Uriah!

—will the Prime Minister say whether the Secretary of State for Employment has given his estimate of the peak figure of unemployment and when it is likely to be reached, and will he then tell us what those figures are?

If the hon. Gentleman wishes to question my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment, no doubt he will table the necessary Question.

On the general question of Government co-ordination, although the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection has reaffirmed that nationalised industries that make excessive profits can be forced to reduce their prices, the Secretary of State for Industry has indicated that there is no case for the Post Office reducing its prices although it made twice the budgeted profit last year. Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is a case for the Post Office paying attention to the Early-Day Motion, signed by at least 80 Labour Members, calling upon the Post Office to reduce some of its prices to the consumer?

I have been into this matter. There was an adventitious profit made by the Post Office, and in normal circumstances there would be a case for reducing prices. On the other hand, that would pull against another aspect of Government policy, which is to reduce the public sector borrowing requirement. The Post Office will now be more able to finance its needs, especially for telecommunications, out of these profits. Balancing the two together, it seemed to us as a Government that it was better for the Post Office to keep these profits and to finance itself in this way than to add to our borrowing requirement.

Does the Prime Minister consider it realistic of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to talk about another four years of wage restraint when, at the same time, the Government intend to spend more than ever before on such matters as the nationalisation of industry and land? What form does the right hon. Gentleman imagine that the wage restraint will take when the announcement by the Chancellor of the Exchequer amounts to a refinancing of our existing public expenditure rather than a realistic cut?

Part of the cuts were refinancing from the private sector. I should have thought that the hon. Gentleman would welcome that in his professional capacity. There is no reason why we should not seek to make this transfer from public borrowing to private savings in this sense.

Will my right hon. Friend do his best to ensure that his natural optimism is not always shadowed by the natural and perpetual misery of Opposition Members who decry all that we are trying to do?

I am not much influenced by Question Time in the House of Commons, I must say. I have now, after four months, come to see the game that the Opposition play.

Sometimes the Opposition just try to find out the facts, I am afraid not very successfully. Earlier, the Prime Minister referred to certain economic forecasts. Since one of the most important of them is the maximum number of unemployed—and he must have informed himself about that—will he tell the House what he expects to be the maximum number of unemployed during next year?

My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer said that he expected unemployment to begin to come down by the end of the year. I cannot improve on that forecast. In any event, I have come without the figures. The original Question asked me whether I was satisfied with the co-ordination between Ministers—

One of them is concerned with unemployment.

Sometimes the hon. Gentleman is not nearly as nice as he sounds. We must monitor progress on this matter quarter by quarter, but my hope and expectation is that the Chancellor's figure will prove right and that the figure will start to move down towards the end of the year.

But the Chancellor of the Exchequer did not give any figures. He refused to give figures when cross-examined by both sides of the House. I should have thought that the Prime Minister would automatically have informed himself about one of the main figures, which is the maximum number of unemployed expected during the next year. Is the right hon. Gentleman saying that he has not done so?

Yes, I am saying that. I find that these forecasts often cancel each other out. However, as the right hon. Lady has raised the matter, I shall look into what lain Macleod said when he was Minister of Labour—some hon. Members were not here at the time —about publishing forecasts on unemployment, and perhaps later we can return to the question whether forecasts should be published. If the right hon. Lady is still not satisfied, she or someone else can table Questions to the Chancellor of the Exchequer.