asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is the latest monthly increase in the retail price index.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is the latest figure for the rise in the retail price index.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection by how much the retail index has risen since February 1974.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is the year-on-year increase in the retail price index.

The retail price index for December showed an increase of 1·3 per cent. over the previous month and an increase of 15·1 per cent. compared with the same month a year earlier. The index has risen by 65·2 per cent. since February 1974.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that is a pretty appalling story? If prices since Christmas have been escalating at an enormous rate, with some items going up 3p or 4p when one would expect ½p, does not the right hon. Gentleman think that that will affect the next pay negotiations now going on with the Government and put pressure on the negotiations?

I am not sure what the hon. Gentleman means by "going up by 3p or 4p when one would expect ½p". What has happened over the past few months is that the depreciation in the sterling rate has worked its way through to domestic prices. Now that sterling has stabilised I believe that the position will improve, and I am sure that the trade unions will be wise enough to understand that in any wage agreement.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is intolerable that the Government should restrict wages while allowing prices to escalate? We have now reached the ridiculous stage at which the Government stand idly by while pirates are allowed to charge housewives up to 15p a pound for potatoes, and ticket touts are charging football fans the extortionate sum of £55 for a couple of tickets for the Scotland-England international.

That is something of a multiple question, and I want to give a multiple answer. My hon. Friend used the wrong verb when he talked about the Government controlling wages. Wages are limited by agreement between the Government and the TUC and are a product of the TUC's understanding that that is in the best interests of the nation as a whole.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that trade unions and wage increases cannot cause inflation? Will he tell us what measures the Government propose to announce—since the Government alone can cause inflation—to reduce the present rate of inflation?

That is a primitive view of the economy, which I think is totally disregarded in all sophisticated quarters. Most of the hon. Gentleman's colleagues, particularly those who were in Government in 1970–74 and invented the Price Code, would regard that as a simplistic view of how the economy should be run.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that one significant factor in the continuing rise of the RPI is the rise of between 30 per cent. and 60 per cent. in gross profit margins? Has the time not come to institute an inquiry into the relationship between gross profit margins, prices and investment, and could my right hon. Friend start by having an inquiry into gross profit margins in the brewery industry in particular?

My hon. Friend had better put down a Question about the brewery industry. As regards the general position, a great deal of exaggerated comment has been made about the effect of increased profit margins on the retail price index. I am sure my hon. Friend will agree that what we ought to consider is not the extent of profits but their use. Profits ploughed back into new investment to create new jobs is something that both my hon. Friend and I want to encourage.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that, in spite of the nice-sounding formula about a social contract, wages have been severely restricted, and that if the Government do not give some guarantee about price restrictions the game will be up for the next round?

It is a matter not of a nice-sounding formula but of a sensibly applied policy, which all the evidence confirms. It is also a policy that is necessary for the continued improvement in the economy. The TUC understands that, and it also understands that our ability to act on prices, though limited, is a policy that we shall operate to the full.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this Government's record on prices has nothing to do with success, complacency or sophistication? Has the right hon. Gentleman any idea what the cumulative effect of four years of double-figure inflation—which is what we shall have had by the end of this year—is likely to be on those who see their life savings wiped out and on those who have a day-to-day struggle to make ends meet and are fighting a losing battle? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that whatever happens to prices by the end of this year they will have been higher for longer under this Government than ever before?

We are all moved by the hon. Lady's identification with the working classes. The important point to which she has to direct her attention is the overall success of our economic efforts. I do not believe that there is any sensible commentator who does not believe that the improvement in the economy that we expect for the rest of this year will not include an improvement in the prices position, and I am sure that ordinary people understand that.

rose—

Order. The hon. Member for Lewes (Mr. Rathbone) puts me in some difficulty. He did not hear the answer to his Question. I shall call him, since his Question is being answered as one of a group.

I am grateful to you, Mr. Speaker. I have only just received a message that my Question was to be grouped, otherwise I would have been here in time. I have only just arrived. May I ask the Secretary of State whether, in the light of the points that my hon. Friend the Member for Gloucester (Mrs. Oppenheim) has made, he still stands by his statement that Socialism is an expensive business or whether he sees some reduction in the expense as part of his long-term plan for Britain?

That is a supplementary question that I am asked at almost every Question Time. I always confirm that I do believe that. The example I give is that it is more expensive to clear the slums than it is to leave people living in hovels. All of those things to which my party is committed require a high level of public expenditure. One of the reasons why I want to see the economy permanently stable is so that we can afford the sort of public expenditure that improves the quality of life.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if he will now abolish the Price Commission.

No, Sir.

Can the right hon. Gentleman explain how it is that in the four years that the Price Commission has been in existence inflation due to increasing prices, has, on average, been running at a rate about five times higher than in the 1,500 years since the Romans occupied this country? Surely it would be better to go back to the old system.

When the then Prime Minister, whom the hon. Gentleman supported from time to time, created the Price Commission I do not believe that he promised that it would hold down the rate of inflation. The right hon. Gentleman promised that the Commission would do a number of worthwhile jobs—something I assume in which the hon. Gentleman believes, since on 15th November he urged me to make an additional reference to the Price Commission.

Rather than abolish the Price Commission, will my right hon. Friend refer to it the increase in beer prices? Is he aware that my constituents cannot understand that beer prices should be rising while the breweries' profits, over comparative half years, are in many cases as much as 40 per cent. up? Will my right hon. Friend give this matter urgent consideration?

I am conscious of the great and widespread public concern about beer prices and profits. My colleagues and I are considering this matter and I hope that we shall be able to give good news to the House in the not-too-distant future.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection when he expects the next report of the Price Commission to be published.

In approximately three months' time.

Did the right hon. Gentleman notice the remark of the Chairman of the Price Commission in introducing the Commission's last report, when he forecast that inflation would rise to 19 per cent. in the spring? Does he agree that that figure compares adversely with that of 15 per cent, which is the only figure that he and the Chancellor have mentioned in connection with 1977? Why are the Government being so evasive about price rises immediately before us?

There is some dispute over what the Chairman of the Price Commission said. If he did mention a 19 per cent. increase he reached that figure as a result of extrapolating the six months to the end of November and the six months following that. That is a wholly unreasonable statistical exercise to enter into, and therefore invalidates the 19 per cent. figure.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that a number of companies use the Price Code as an excuse to push up their prosperity as far as permissible within the code and then hide behind decisions that the Price Commission makes subsequently? Reverting to an earlier question, will he take it from me, that a number of the brewing companies —Whitbread's, for example, which made a £26 million profit in the last half year—play this game all the time?

I do not want to make specific comments on specific companies—

Why not?

—because if we referred specific companies to the Price Commission we would be doing so to obtain information. We should not make a judgment about them before obtaining the information. I agree that there are many shortcomings in the Price Code, particularly now that it has been running for four or five years and has long-distant historical base rates. I hope that in the summer we shall be able to improve it in a number of ways.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that on the whole, the pattern of prices reflects costs? Dealing with costs, will he take note that according to an answer published by the right hon. Gentleman's Department the Commission is estimated to cost public funds £6·6 million in the current financial year? Does he agree that one has to add to that figure the cost of administration within industry, which is considerable? Does the right hon. Gentleman think that the consumer and the taxpayer deserve some reduction in these costs?

I am sure that all of these things were taken into account by the Conservative Government when they set up the Price Code. I agree that it is, at least theoretically, possible to have a more effective price control system which costs rather less bureaucratically. A number of us are trying to discover ways in which that can be achieved.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether he will visit Merseyside to investigate price rises in that area.

I visited Merseyside on 21st January to open two consumer advice centres.

Is it correct that on that occasion the right hon. Gentleman made a speech dealing with the Common Market and food prices? What action are the Government taking to halt the totally unnecessary rise in the prices of certain food, such as butter, which is going up from 45p per pound to 72p per pound this year, not because of a rise in world prices but because of the common agricultural system? Is it not scandalous that that system should have to be tolerated by the British people?

The negotiation of the next price round within the Common Market is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture. Those specific questions must be addressed to him. I feel sure that the hon. Gentleman knows that my right hon. Friend has been most robust about the Government's position in the next round. I am sure that he will stick to that firmly.

I noticed on television that when my right hon. Friend visited Merseyside he met a deputation from the building workers, who were complaining about rising prices and the high level of unemployment in the area. Will my right hon. Friend say what answer he gave to those building workers?

There was some dispute about where the deputation was from. Certainly the leaflets that the men gave me bore the imprint not of the building workers but of the Communist Party. What I said to them was that all of us had the deepest vested interest in building a permanently prosperous economy, and that that applied most of all to the people who feared unemployment and who were unemployed. That was the ony legitimate message that I could give them.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what powers are available to his Department to stop goods, manufactured overseas, from being distributed nationally and internationally under United Kingdom trade marks or labels.

The Trade Descriptions Act 1972 prohibits the supply of imported goods bearing any United Kingdom name or mark, unless accompanied by a conspicuous indication of the country of manufacture, and the Trade Descriptions Act 1968 prohibits the importation and supply of goods bearing a false indication of origin.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the apparent ease with which overseas manufacturing interessts can obtain and use British labels to distribute imports presents a new and sinister threat to the British economy, which could threaten the jobs of thousands of British workers if the loophole is not quickly blocked by the Government?

I can understand my hon. Friend's concern about certain constituency matters. The question of the takeover of firms in this country by Foreign enterprises is primarily a matter for the Secretary of State for Industry.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is the total amount granted by his Department to local consumer protection departments in respect of local consumer advice centres and price information collection schemes since January 1976.

To date £531,422 has been paid towards consumer advice centres and £187,435 towards price surveys.

In the light of those figures and bearing in mind the local rates that have to be paid on local advice centres, may I ask the Minister when he intends to provide some protection for the consumer against the cost of consumer protection? Instead of providing these expensive staffs, will he harness the multitude of voluntary workers who have a dedicated interest in price checking, as well as great expertise and experience in watching prices?

I am surprised that the Liberal Party should take such a line on the provision of consumer advice, because this is a matter of considerable and growing importance to a large number of people. It is particularly important at a time of inflation. The Government have every intention of continuing to support this most worthwhile scheme.

Has my hon. Friend given any instructions to such consumer advice centres about the information that they may provide to consumers concerning the extent to which they benefit in terms of food prices as a result of the subsidy given to this country by the Common Market?

If my hon. Friend is asking what is the value to the consumer of the green pound at present, I can tell him that it is worth six to seven percentage points on the food index.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what the average price of the standard loaf was in the three weeks starting on 4th January 1977; and what the average price was in December.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether he will make a statement on bread prices.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection when he next expects to meet the Federation of Master Bakers.

In January the average price of a large white sliced loaf was about 20½p, against 19½p in December. However, in some supermarkets prices did not rise by the 1p permitted at the beginning of January. In others prices were temporarily forced up by the action of some deliverymen. I am glad to say that this action has now ended. During recent discussions on prices I have met representatives of all interested parties, including both the Federation of Bakers and the National Association of Master Bakers, but I have no immediate plans for further meetings.

Now that the Mad Hattersley's tea party is over, the consumer is entitled to ask who is better off. Is it the consumer, who was led to believe that there would be substantial reductions in the price of a standard loaf, of up to about 8p? Is it the shopkeeper, whose supplies of bread were disrupted? Or is it the unions, who believed, at least in part, that their members' jobs were in jeopardy? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that this piece of intervention has caused nothing but shambles and chaos from start to finish?

No, Sir.The hon. Gentleman calls it intervention. It was a singularly strange sort of intervention, as I was pulling out of Government intervention in the industry. It worked in the end exactly as I had hoped. The hon. Gentleman is wrong in almost all his suppositions, not least that the unions were against what I did. Only one objected. The Transport and General Workers Union and the General and Municipal Workers Union both supported it. As a result of their support and what has come about, the only claim that I ever made will now be realised. In some shops the price of the standard loaf will be lower than it would otherwise have been. The newspapers over the past five days have demonstrated that very clearly.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that housewives are now thoroughly confused by his posture on bread prices? The right hon. Gentleman speaks of reductions. Increases in fuel and flour costs and the removal of the subsidies must mean that prices will rise. Will the right hon. Gentleman now tell the housewives what will happen to bread prices over the forthcoming months?

What I have said almost ad nauseam for six weeks is that, as a result of the policy which the House has discussed, and which came into operation on 4th January, the price of bread will be lower in some shops than it would otherwise have been. That is the result of the operation of competitive forces. What I hope the hon. Gentleman will realise, although some newspapers even today do not, is that if one allows competitive forces to work one cannot say at what level they will eventually settle down. This must be the result of competition.

As my right hon. Friend obviously tried to adopt a certain part of Tory policy in this matter, and it has not been successful, does he agree that the lesson is never to adopt it again?

I do not believe that competition is a Tory instrument. It was our right hon. Friend the previous Prime Minister who introduced the Monopolies and Restrictive Practices (Inquiry and Control) Act 1948, the great protection of competition in this country. I have an interesting quotation from Lenin about competition, which I shall gladly send to my hon. Friend. I believe that my duty is to provide whatever instruments I can—competition or intervention—to bring prices down whenever that is possible.

If the right hon. Gentleman's negotiations were a success, as he has claimed, why did he wait six weeks before entering into them. When he knew that any increase in discount would immediately be offset by an application to the Price Commission for higher prices, why did he enter into that rather shady public relations operation, which backfired on its originator and certainly confused consumers?

I do not think that it was on me that speeches about bread prices backfired. If the Daily Mail of 13th January last year is to be believed, there were calls from the Tory Party for the hon. Lady's resignation. But that is neither here nor there. I allowed the forces of the market to operate. That must mean that the industry—bakers, retailers and consumers—determines the price in the end. The hon. Lady constantly called in an intemperate way for intervention by me. If I had done as she asked, I believe that the dispute would have continued. A week ago it settled down in the way that I had said it would.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether he has yet received further reports from trading standards officers throughout the country on the display of prices in pertol station forecourts; and if he now intends to seek powers under the Prices Act 1974 to improve price display.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if he will now introduce legislation for improved petrol price display.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if he is satisfied with the working of the voluntary agreement on petrol price display.

I have received a number of reports indicating a poor level of compliance with the voluntary agreement on petrol price display. Most of them, however, relate to a period last year when the agreement had only recently been settled. On my behalf the Office of Fair Trading has therefore asked local authority associations to help with a national survey this month. In the meantime my officials are preparing a draft order under the Prices Act 1974 with the same objectives as the voluntary agreement. Unless the survey demonstrates that the voluntary agreement has worked, I shall immediately begin statutory consultations on the draft order.

Is the Minister aware that we welcome the Secretary of State's belief in competition? The reason for my question is to see that competition is fair. Why must the hon. Gentleman wait so long before acting?

The reason is that, having reached a voluntary agreement with the oil companies and the petrol retailers, I think that it would be a breach of faith not to give that agreement a chance to work. I shall not disguise the fact that I am disappointed with its working so far. If it does not work properly very soon, we shall have a statutory price display order.

Does my hon. Friend realise that his feelings on this matter will be shared by the vast majority of motorists, who are disturbed by the gross variation between one petrol filling station and another? Does he realise that a survey in mid-Glamorgan showed a variation from 73p to 86p for four-star petrol, and that motorists cannot see the price until they are in the forecourt having their cars filled? Will my hon. Friend examine the matter quickly and act urgently, because there is a great deal of feeling about it?

I shall certainly act urgently on price display. Price variation is a function of competition, which is benefiting the motorist. I want to see that competition working more effectively, not less.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what representations have been made to him by the British Electrical and Allied Manufacturers' Association Limited about the unsatisfactory nature of the Electrical Equipment (Safety) Regulations 1975; and if he will make a statement.

I am aware that the association is critical of the regulations because they do not provide that compliance with standards shall be accepted as satisfying the prescribed requirements. The Consumer Protection Act 1961, under which the regulations were made, does not enable this to be done. But I am considering, in the light of the many comments received in response to the consultative document on consumer safety issued by my Department last February, whether to seek powers to include such provisions in regulations.

Is the Minister aware that one of the major complaints of the industry is that the regulations are obscure and very difficult to interpret? Furthermore, the industry believes that they place it in a very difficult position in international trading. Therefore, will the hon. Gentleman have further consultations with the industry to see whether the regulations need amending in any way?

I am aware of the representations made by the association, although they have not included me. I do not agree that the regulations are obscure. What my Department did was to issue administrative guidance listing standards which in its view offered the degree of safety required by the regulations. In this way we have conferred a kind of non-statutory, deemed-to-satisfy status on the listed standards. I would be willing to listen to the association's representations.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that citizens will not be required shortly to change all their plugs and sockets in line with international proposals? It has been estimated that it would cost Birmingham City Council £18 million if it had to change all the plugs and sockets in all its council houses and flats. That is just one example.

I can confirm that that will not happen shortly. I am not sure that it will happen at all.

Will the Minister ensure that in future a greater attempt is made to base any new regulations on already accepted standards or to revise those standards with the agreement of all concerned in the industry before imposing regulations, to allow time for manufacturers to adjust their production?

I am fully aware of the difficulty of manufacturers. The lead times given by the regulations took account of their difficulties. But I do not have statutory authority now to make regulations by reference directly to standards. We are consulting about the possibility of this happening in the future.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if he is satisfied with consumer representation on the British Standards Institution's Consumer Standards Advisory Committee.

Representation on the British Standards Institution's Consumer Standards Advisory Committee is a matter for the institution, in accordance with its charter and byelaws.

Is the Electrical Association for Women, which has always been represented on this committee, to be represented on the new body? If not, why not? Why does it appear as though the committee is to be made up of Government-dominated and sponsored bodies? Is that in the interests of the consumer?

I do not think that the premise in the second part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question is correct. The first part of the supplementary question is a matter for the British Standards Institution and not for me.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if he will make a statement on his latest plans for renegotiating the Price Code.

I am considering what form prices policy should take after the powers to enforce the Price Code expire on 31st July. I hope soon to be in a position to give details.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that it is not his intention, in any proposed agency that he may set up, to give wide discretionary powers that may lead to delay in manufacturing plans?

The hon. Gentleman must await my announcement rather than ask questions based on hypotheses like that.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in its latest report the Price Commission refers to the fact that it is unable to comment on the question of profit margins? Will he, in any further discussions, ensure that the Commission is able to state precisely where it stands on such matters?

I shall examine what my hon. Friend has said, but I find it difficult to comment now, since our price control policy is so concerned with margins that I do not understand how his supplementary question relates to the report or to what we have been doing.

Is not the Chancellor of the Exchequer attempting to halt inflation by monetary control? If that is the Government's policy, will the Secretary of State confirm that there is no need for either wage or price control now?

My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer was explicit, when he spoke on 31st January, in saying that an element of monetary control was an essential feature in overall economic policy, but I do not think that any sensible person believes that that alone can put the economy right.

In addition to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner), is my right hon. Friend aware that the Price Commission, in its latest report, also says that the calculation of profits for price control purposes is now highly artificial and bears little resemblance to profits as calculated on accepted accounting principles? Will my right hon. Friend comment on that aspect and on what use fictitious profits are?

As I understand the point made by the Price Commission, it was suggesting that the Sandilands Report and what it reveals perhaps sometimes demonstrate that companies are not making as much profit as a superficial reading of their accounts would suggest. But the substance of my hon. Friend's supplementary question is in a sense right, in that one of the things wrong with the Price Code is that it attempts to create a view of profits when perhaps a different view could be of more use. Perhaps we should be more sophisticated about their level, the reasons for them, and what they are used for.

Before any renegotiation of the Price Code, will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that in only nine cases has it been necessary for the Price Commission to act against manufacturers in support of the code and that following the voluntary principle in negotiating the next phase is the only way to proceed?

That point could be argued both ways. One could say that only on a few occasions did the Price Commission choose to act. One could say, alternatively, that only on a few occasions did the Price Code allow it to act. We have to strike a balance between the two concepts, so that the Price Commission, or what follows it, can act when action is necessary. I am afraid that I cannot give the criteria for that today.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is his estimate of relief given under the Price Code for investment in the past 12 months.

In the 12 months to November 1976, the Price Commission dealt with claims worth more than £700 million and covering investment expenditure worth about £2,000 million. However, the constraints of the market will have reduced the extent to which claims for investment relief are taken up. Not all of the £700 million will therefore have been reflected in higher prices.

Does my hon. Friend accept, bearing in mind that category 1 companies have probably paid next to nothing in corporation tax last year and this year, that his figures show that little has gone into investment and new jobs by way of relief under the Price Code? Has not the time come when trade unions and others who suffer as a result of loss of jobs should have a say in how the margins and investment relief are used, so that jobs are created? Should not the task be given to the Manpower Services Commission rather than the Price Commission?

The relief can be claimed only on proof that investment is being made, and the Price Commission monitors this very carefully in order to ensure that the investment has occurred. If it has not, reductions in prices can be required.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is his consumer protection policy towards goods and services supplied by nationalised industries or organs of central Government.

My Department set up the National Consumer Council to represent all consumers, including those of all public sector goods and services. In addition, I am currently examining ways in which the consumer may be most effectively represented by the nationalised industry consumer councils.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that reply. Does he agree that goods and services, such as whooping-cough vaccines, supplied or made available through the National Health Service should be subject to the same laws of consumer protection as are goods and services provided to the public by commercial organisations?

I think that the answer is that they are subject to the same laws, but normal medicines supplied through the National Health Service are not supplied under contract, and liability against a manufacturer lies in tort. It is a difference of supply rather than of law.

Rather than having separate consumer committees for the gas, coal, electricity and oil industries, why not bring them together and have an energy consumers' consultative committee, whereby consumers can look at the energy supply as a whole and make comparisons between the different industries?

There might be something useful in consumers being able to look generally at energy problems, but if one brought all these organisations into a single body I think that it would diminish the effect of consumer representation in the regions. I think that there is enough work to do in looking at each industry.

Where there is a contract between a manufacturer of whooping-cough vaccine and the National Health Service, and the NHS is, under its auspices, supplying the general public, contrary to what the hon. Gentleman has told me, is there not a contract of supply between the two parties?

I hope that the hon. Gentleman will accept this. I think that I would be unwise, at Question Time, to try to give a legal opinion about liability. If the hon. Gentleman writes to me to discuss the matter further, I am only too willing to do so.

Can my hon. Friend think of any publicly-owned industry in the last year which has accepted any recommendation made by a consumer council?

Yes. There have been a good many cases.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection when he will make a statement about further progress in metrication.

As I said in reply to the hon. Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton) on 20th January, I hope to make a report to Parliament on the subject of metrication before Easter.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Does not he agree, however, that it is rather a negative one? Is there any programme for phasing out imperial measures? What steps is he taking to protect the consumer from having to shoulder the whole burden of the cost of this transformation?

I am sorry that my reply was somewhat negative. I undertook, on Second Reading of the Weights and Measures Bill, to have as much consultation as possible and to link the process of metrication as closely as possible to consumer protection. That process is going on, and I hope before Easter to publish in tentative form the results of the consultations so that I can be guided by the House and by opinion outside as to the pace of metrication.

As the hon. Gentleman has now had some experience of conversion to metrication, can he estimate how much it will cost the nation?

It has not been possible in any country to estimate the total cost of going metric, but I believe that in the long term there is a benefit and not a cost.

When we went decimal, many peeple were done out of a lot of money. Can my hon. Friend give an assurance that the same thing will not happen when going metric?

I do not want to reflect on decimalisation, but I can give an assurance that I shall monitor very closely any changes to metric quantities to ensure both the maximum degree of consumer protection and that during the change metrication does not fall into disrepute.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what steps are being taken to reduce the toll of accidents in the home.

My Department promotes home safety publicity, makes regulations when necessary relating to the safety of consumer goods, undertakes relevant research, and participates in the preparation of safety standards. In addition, we are carrying out a comprehensive review of existing consumer safety legislation and have set up the national home accident surveillance system based on data from 20 hospitals.

I spoke of the measures that have been taken. Does my hon. Friend agree that a large proportion of accidents happen in the home, especially among elderly people? Will he consider introducing an imaginative campaign, perhaps on television, directed at this sector?

It is true that between 6,000 and 7,000 people die in accidents in the home each year. My Department already provides films for television, tapes for radio and other forms of information to try to prevent these accidents. One of the purposes of the accident surveillance system is to determine those circumstances in which accidents are most likely to happen and then, by legislative change or educative material, to reduce the incidence of these tragedies.

Before the Minister introduces legislation to prevent accidents of one sort or another—[Interruption.] With a question I might smother the rubbish that is coming from some. Before the hon. Gentleman introduces legislation to prevent accidents, will he consider the cost per accident that such legislation imposes? Does he agree that we are getting into a state in which we are attempting to control all human behaviour against all possibilities by legislation that imposes impossible costs and bounds on ordinary activity in trade, commerce and domestic life?

If between 6,000 and 7,000 people a year die in accidents in the home, it is worth while using a bit of law and a bit of expense to try to prevent those fatalities. I have never pretended that we can regulate human behaviour by law. It is sometimes a matter of persuasion and sometimes a matter of education It is by a combination of those approaches that we hope to prevent this sort of accident.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will list his engagements for 7th February.

Apart from my duties in this House, I have meetings today with ministerial colleagues and others; in addition, I am being interviewed on television this evening.

As the Chancellor's only important duty would appear to be to answer Questions in the House, will he tell us whether it was his idea to sell the Government's 20 per cent. stake in BP as part of the IMF contract? Will he confirm that it is still the Government's intention to go ahead with that agreement? If it is not, does he intend to resign?

The hon. Gentleman must know that this is a place where we discuss not ideas of the Government but decisions of the Government. This was a collective decision of the Government and it remains their intention to go ahead with the sale.

Does my right hon. Friend know of the recent reports that have been circulating to the effect that the Secretary of State for Energy is now talking in terms—privately, perhaps—of not selling off the 20 per cent. stake in BP? As we are supposed to be moving into a much rosier economic situation—that is what we are told—does my right hon. Friend agree with what the Secretary of State for Energy is privately suggesting?

Obviously my hon. Friend has a closer relation with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy and his private confidences on this matter than I have. My right hon. Friend has not discussed this with me. It would be foolish to treat this as some fundamental plank of the covenant—namely, whether we should sell it off. Although this was announced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer as our intention, it is not completely irrevocable. It is a matter that can be considered and discussed. The question would be better directed to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Will the right hon. Gentleman find time today to talk to the shop stewards and other employees of the Small Heath and Wolverhampton works of the Norton motor cycle factory and explain to them whether he will come in on his charger to provide funds and expertise to rescue them from the damage imposed on them by the support given to the experiment at the co-operative at Meriden?

I do not undertake to maintain the close, continuous and intimate contact with grass-roots shop steward activity that the hon. Gentleman evinces by his question. I am not sure where it is and whether those concerned wish to see me. If they do wish to see me—and without any question, like any other citizen, they have their channel for doing so—I suspect that it will not be the hon. Gentleman who will be the agency for bringing that about.

I understand that, like myself, my right hon. Friend will be addressing tomorrow's International Bankers Conference. I do not know why I am addressing the conference. I shall be defending and supporting the Labour Party's policy of public ownership of the three major clearing banks and the seven major insurance companies. Will my right hon. Friend indicate whether he will be giving me support on that matter in his speech?

I am as reluctant to anticipate tomorrow's speech to the bankers as the Chancellor of the Exchequer is reluctant to anticipate his Budget Statement. It is reassuring to me, as well as enjoyable, to find myself in such reputable company as that of my hon. Friend. I must tell him, however, that he is unlikely to find any enthusiasm evinced by me on the subject of nationalising the banks that would be regarded as being closely in harmony with the views that have been expressed by the National Executive. In all my speeches I shall do my best to maintain collective responsibility for defending Government policy on this and all other issues.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker—

Does the hon. Gentleman mind waiting until after Questions? That will not be long now.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Will you explain to me what protection I have against the vulgar ignorance of the Chancellor of the Duchy, who imputed that representations would not be put to him through me? Two Wolverhampton shop stewards, who are my constituents, rang me up about this matter.

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker, I hope that the hon. Gentleman did not imagine that I was saying that representations could not in any circumstances come through him. I said that if they wanted to see me, probably they would find a more direct and convenient agency than himself.

I attempt to represent my constituents—[Interruption.]

Order. Everyone knows that we all represent everyone in our constituencies.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster when he last met the Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund.

I have not had the pleasure of meeting Dr. Witteveen since he took up his present appointment.

Has the Chancellor of the Duchy received any communication on the ideas of Dr. Witteveen about the share of the nation's resources taken by public expenditure in this country? Is he aware that, whatever his knowledge of the views of the Managing Director of the IMF, we on the Opposition Benches warmly welcome the Government's new commitment to reduce the share of the nation's resources taken by public expenditure?

It is good to have the hon. Gentleman's welcome for almost any action taken by the Government. I shall not scrutinise too closely whether his welcome and what the Government are doing have that relationship with each other that might be even more comforting. The hon. Gentleman must be aware that the Government's policy on expenditure and all other matters has, so far as is relevant, been firmly approved by the International Monetary Fund and Dr. Witteveen.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the recent riots and bloodshed in Egypt following increased food prices followed a visit by representatives of the IMF? Is he aware that it is considered that the increase in food prices was a direct consequence of the Fund's visit? Will my right hon. Friend he cautious in his association with such dangerous people?

I have noted the conjunction of circumstances to which my hon. Friend draws the attention of the House. It may well have an interesting significance for each and every one of us to ponder. I can only say that there has been no evidence of similar incidents in this country after the visit of the Fund. The Fund is composed only of human beings. It has not descended from the heavens with authority to determine with total wisdom every issue that every Government have to decide. At the end of the day the British Government must take full responsibility for their own decisions and must judge them to be the right ones. I hope that that will always be so.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how many official visits he has made to the Duchy of Lancaster since the became Chancellor.

Like other Chancellors, I have to carry out the large part of my Duchy responsibilities from London. However, I visited the Yorkshire estates of the Duchy, in my capacity as Chancellor, in 1975. I of course regularly make other visits to the Duchy.

Before my right hon. Friend's next visit to the Duchy, may we look forward to an announcement that the Government will assist the Meriden Co-operative to buy the NVT marketing system? In view of the success of the Meriden Co-operative not just in saving jobs but in extending industrial democracy and in increasing production compared with when it was a private enterprise, will the Government encourage other industrial co-operatives through agencies such as the National Enterprise Board and the Scottish and Welsh Development Agencies?

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry is and has been continuously in charge of the Meriden operation. My own appearance on that scene was at his express invitation, personally, and within the policy purposes laid down by him. Therefore, if any statement is to be made on the subject, it must be made, rightly, by my right hon. Friend and, who knows, at some time in the not-too-distant future he may catch Mr. Speaker's eye on the subject.

As the Chancellor of the Duchy deals primarily with financial matters, does he agree with the statement by the Governor of the Bank of England that the amount of foreign aid to be repaid by Britain between now and 1985 is about £20 billion?

It would be unfair for me to enter into any mathematical disputation on this subject, given the limited time at our disposal. However, I am very happy to discuss it with the hon. Gentleman. I might point out to him that the Governor's statement cannot necessarily be taken to be comprehensive in its direct implications. There are glosses, shades and analyses which could usefully be made on that statement.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster when, in his capacity as economic adviser to Her Majesty's Government, he proposes to meet with President Carter's economic advisers.

I had the pleasure of meeting Vice-President Mondale and some of President Carter's leading economic advisers during their recent visit to the United Kingdom.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware from those talks—I am sure that he is—of the close linkage in the free enterprise American economy between low interest rates and a low inflation rate? Is he concerned that once the benefits of North Sea oil start gushing into the Treasury, the restraints on domestic credit expansion imposed by the IMF will be lifted and that his Government will once again indulge in the inflationary antics of the past two years?

I am not certain that I accept that the pipeline from the North Sea has as its terminal Her Majesty's Treasury, but I am aware that it is of the greatest importance, if we are to get interest rates down—as we must, and it is the Government's policy to bring it about—that we bring inflation under much firmer control. We are determined to do this, and I think that the Government's policy shows great promise—though, admittedly, it requires a great amount of patience—of getting to that goal.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that President Carter fought on a Democrat ticket to increase public expenditure, to reduce unemployment and to cut back on defence expenditure? These are the policies which many Labour Back Benchers have been advocating to this Government. Will my right hon. Friend get together with the President's economic advisers to try to get the world out of the international recession that we see at present?

Without claiming that the Democratic Party is affiliated to the Labour Party, I agree that the policies of the victorious Democrat President appear to be much more related to those of the Labour Party than to those of the Tory Party. The broad ideas that my hon. Friend has expressed are very much in my mind and, I am glad to say, are firmly in the minds of the American President, the Vice-President and all the leading advisers whom I have met.

When the right hon. Gentleman meets the American economic advisers, will he be able to persuade them that he is as experienced in repaying the huge debts with which he has lumbered us as he has been in incurring them?

The hon. Gentleman shows a vulgar ignorance in suggesting that I incurred the debt or that it will fall to me to repay the debt—

The right hon. Gentleman was the Government's adviser.

The hon. Gentleman seems anxious to imply by his question that there is some dubiety about whether the British Government, whatever their political complexion at the time, will honour the debts that they have incurred. It should be borne in mind that this country has never defaulted on its obligations and debts, and in my judgment there is not the slightest possibility of their ever doing so.

In view of the fact that my right hon. Friend seemed to indicate that the American Government were in line with the thinking of the Labour Party, will he adopt the views of the present American Administration about developing a public works programme, for which many of us have been asking for some time, as one of the ways of bringing down unemployment?

I hope that my hon. Friend will bear in mind that he overstates the identity of the American President's views with those of the British Cabinet. He seems to be overstating even more the identity of circumstances that prevail and the situation generally that prevails in the United States with those in our own country. There is no special reason to initiate public works in Britain to parallel those in the Unted States. I was claiming that the broad outlook indicated by my hon. Friend in his previous supplementary question was very much my own outlook and very much the outlook of the President and all his senior advisers.

When the right hon. Gentleman next sees American officials, or even the United States President, will he put right the impression that he gave on his last visit to Washington, when he told the Americans that, in his view, unless the IMF loan was granted the Labour Government would fall and that no other Government could get on with the trade unions? Will he make it clear that this was a totally false and erroneous impression and that he had no right to give it?

I think that the House would be wise not to treat the right hon. Gentleman's slightly paranoid hallucinations as if they were a totaly accurate account of what I said. Unfortunately, they bear little relation to what I said. Again, they represent a kind of vulgar demagogic assumption that is not based on reality. If the right hon. Gentleman really believes that negotiations at a high international level are conducted on that naive basis, he had better reflect a little longer on the matter.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the right hon. Member for Lowestoft (Mr. Prior), in another capacity as consultant to Trust House Forte Hotels, is attempting to stop trade unionists from becoming members of the T & GWU? How does my right hon. Friend view the right hon. Gentleman's challenge to him on this matter, when he is being paid very highly to prevent people becoming members of a trade union?

I follow the activities of the right hon. Member for Lowestoft (Mr. Prior) with as little closeness as he appears to have been following mine. Therefore, I am unable to express any view on my hon. Friend's question. I make it clear, however, that in my indignant rebuttal of the posture attributed to me in the United States I was not challenging the implication that the right hon. Gentleman and his right hon. and hon. Friend's would not be able to run this country with any satisfaction to the ordinary people of the country.

Is the right hon. Gentleman saying that he believes that the average person in this country is satisfied with a record of 1·5 million people unemployed and a state of affairs in which, in the three years of this Government, the standard of living has been eroded?

Oddly enough, if the right hon. Gentleman had listened to me he would have realised that I was not expressing any opinion or estimate about what ordinary people thought of us; I was saying what I thought they thought of him and his colleagues.