asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is the estimated cost of the Price Commission from August 1977 to March 1978; and what is the estimated cost in a full year.

The Financial and Explanatory Memorandum to the Price Commission Bill forecast the annual cost of administering the Price Commission as approximately £5 million at 1977–78 Estimate prices. To this should be added approximately £2 million for services provided by other Government Departments. The cost between 1st August 1977 and 31st March 1978 is expected to be a proportional amount, namely, about £4⅔ million.

To what extent as a result of the change from administering the old Price Code to administering the new investigations under the 1977 Act has it been necessary to employ outside firms of management consultants? Does the Secretary of State expect that this will have a material effect on the cost in subsequent years?

The question about management consultancies is for the Price Commission rather than for me. I can, however, assure the hon. Gentleman on the overall cost, which is my proper concern. Allowing for inflation, the overall cost will not be more than in previous years, and I hope that it will be less. Already there has been a reduction in staff which ought to move it in that direction.

Will the Secretary of State tell the House what consideration he has given to amalgamating the Price Commission with the Monopolies and Mergers Commission? Does he really think that an expenditure of £7 million a year is justified in terms of return to the consumer?

I have no doubt that it is, and as from time to time there is an announcement that the price of, say, sugar has been made less than it would otherwise have been, and as those figures and examples multiply, hon. Members opposite who disagree with me ought to say whether they are opposed to that as well as to the costs of administering such a scheme. As regards the amalgamation of the institutions, I think I should answer that question when it arises in a few minutes' time.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that consumers will note the antagonism of Conservative Members to the Price Commission? Is he aware that there is a continuing view on this side of the House that regulations and monitoring of the kind that he has so effectively brought into activity following the changes through the Price Commission Bill are most welcome to us?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for what he says about the success to date of the new Price Commission, and, like him, I should like to see some worthwhile comments from the Opposition about its work. I should like to hear whether they approve of the investigations and possible price freezes or reductions which the Price Commission now envisages and of the inquiries and examinations which I have asked the Commission to investigate. The Opposition had better tell us once and for all whether they believe in what the Price Commission is doing.

The Secretary of State will agree that the Question is about the cost of the Price Commission. Will he now say whether the additional £2 million which has been added since the Price Commission Bill was passed includes all the external services required, or is the annual figure to be greater than that?

No, the £2 million has not been included since the Price Commission Bill was passed. The hon. Gentleman should not be fooled by the "Ohs" and "Ahs" of the hon. Member for Gloucester (Mrs. Oppenheim). He must have seen her in action long enough not to take any notice of them. The £2 million has always been there as part of the Government services provided by us to an outside agency, and similar figures appear for other agencies doing similar work.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what has been the average monthly increase in the retail price index since March 1974; and how this figure compares with the average monthly increase in the retail price index between July 1970 and February 1974.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what were the monthly, six- monthly and annual rates of increase in the retail price index at the latest available date.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is the latest year-on-year rate of inflation.

The average monthly increase in the retail price index since March 1974 has been 1·4 per cent., and between July 1970 and February 1974 it was 0·7 per cent. Up to October 1977 the index increased by 14·1 per cent. over the previous 12 months, by 3·4 per cent., over the previous six months and by 0·4 per cent. over the previous month.

Since the two periods of roughly three and three-quarter years cover the period of the Conservative Government and the Labour Government, does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the record of the present Government is disgraceful? How does he justify price increases under the Labour Government of almost twice the rate that they were under the Conservative Government when the Reuter commodity price index rose by 157 per cent. when the Conservatives were in office and by only 4 per cent. since the present Government came to power?

It was clear from the Order Paper, even before we heard that supplementary question, that the new tactic is to compare the two price increase periods and imply that inflation began only on the day of the 1974 General Election. Unfortunately for the Opposition, the facts do not support that case. Let me give the Opposition one simple statistical fact. During the last six months of the Conservative Government, who left office in 1974, price increases were 8·4 per cent. During the most recent six months of the present Government, price increases have been 3·4 per cent. Inflation began with the Barber printing boom, not with the General Election.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Opposition will continue both to select the figures that do their cause the most good and to ignore the truth? Is it not a fact that the Government are now on target for the planned reduction in inflation, that the last six-monthly and monthly figures in particular are most encouraging, and that this should have a suitable effect on wage bargaining throughout the coming six months?

I hope that it will have that effect. If we have a moderate pay round, as I believe will be the case, the improved inflation situation, which will certainly go on into 1978, will last even longer. I am sorry that the Opposition regret that the situation has improved so quickly. I hope that they will rejoice with me at the new improvement. We now have a lower inflation rate than the OECD average, which is what we have wanted for a long time but have not had for very many years.

Will the Secretary of State confirm that, if pay increases continue at their present levels, it is unlikely that inflation will be in single figures at the end of next year?

No; I think that that is wholly wrong. If wage increases continue at present levels and thereby earnings are held down in the way that they have been—to the 10 per cent. ceiling, more or less—since August, I think that inflation will continue on the downward path. I see no reason to change the estimates that I have made regularly for the last year, all of which have proved right up to now. I hope that the final estimate for single-figure inflation throughout 1978 will have the same degree of accuracy.

Will not the Minister agree that the increase in earnings is likely to be much nearer 15 per cent. or 16 per cent. than the 10 per cent. guideline? If that is so, how does he anticipate keeping inflation within single figures?

There is absolutely no evidence for that. Neither the TUC nor the CBI believes it to be so. A number of Conservatives, some of whom are in the Shadow Cabinet and some of whom would like to be, insist that earnings will rise to that level, but there is absolutely no statistical evidence for saying that.

Although my right hon. Friend says, quite rightly, that there has been a considerable improvement in the inflation rate, will he maintain his efforts within the Government to ensure that this continues to improve? Also, have the Government had any indication from the Opposition that there is any satisfaction among them now that the figures are improving as such great play was made by them when the figures were much worse?

My hon. Friend will have seen here this afternoon not so much satisfaction as despair, and I regard it as both pathetic and deplorable that, when something is happening which is obviously for the benefit of the British people as a whole, the Opposition should be treating it in a wholly party political fashion.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman being somewhat less than frank? Is it not a fact that the Chairman of the TUC acknowledged last Thursday that the increase in earnings was running at about 17 per cent., which, according to the Chancellor's own reckon ing, means at least fast-rising inflation in the second part of next year? Does the Minister repudiate the Chancellor's statement and that of the Chairman of the TUC? If not, how can he reconcile that with the forecast that he has just given?

I will have to ask the hon. Lady to give me the reference to what was said by the Chairman of the TUC. If he said that earnings increases were running at 17 per cent., I have to say—despite the admiration and, I hope, friendship that I have for him—that he was wrong, because that is not the figure. Before I say that to him, I shall need the hon. Lady to produce the kind of substantiation which comes rarely from her.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The right hon. Gentleman is insinuating that he has in the past asked me for substantiation which he has not received. The fact is that in the past I have had to ask him for substantiation and he has had to apologise to me.

That will be recorded.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what discussion he has had with Greater Manchester Council about its consumer advice centres.

My right hon. Friend met members of Greater Manchester Council during his visit to two of the council's consumer advice centres on 30th September this year. I am certainly ready to meet members of the council to discuss the work of these centres and my Departments' grant assistance to them, should they feel this would be helpful.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that the Tory-controlled Greater Manchester Council is considering closing its consumer advice centres? Will he also confirm that this would mean no saving for its ratepayers and, indeed, would be a considerable loss to the people who now receive good service from these centres? Will he confirm, further, that if the district councils wish to take over this consumer protection function they will be able to do so?

I have no official confirmation that Manchester proposes to do this, but if the council decided to close the centres I would regard that as a matter for very great regret. I confirm that it would not save the ratepayers of Manchester one penny, and it would deprive them of a valuable service. If district councils want to take over centres, I hope that counties will not stand in their way, and the districts can then receive the 100 per cent. Government grant.

Will the Minister also confirm that it is the right of local authorities themselves to decide how money should be spent and that, if the Greater Manchester Council decides that this money is not being spent correctly, it is perfectly entitled to close these consumer centres?

Yes, the council is quite within its rights in closing them down, but it is not saving its own money; it it simply cutting off a grant from the central Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what are his policies with regard to the proposals contained in the National Consumer Council's report "Consumers and the Nationalised Industries "(August 1976); and if he will make a statement.

Since the Government received the NCC Report "Consumers and the Nationalised Industries" last year, we have engaged in extensive consultations. The Government intend to publish their response as soon as possible in a White Paper on the nationalised industries, which will also reply to the report of the National Economic Development Office.

Will the Minister be kind enough to make representations to the Chairman of the Price Commission asking him to receive representations on behalf of rail users in respect of price increases which are to be effective from 8th January 1978 but on which the results of an investigation will not be received until February?

It is not necessary for me to make such representations to the Chairman of the Price Commission, who will no doubt receive representations from those who are interested in the matter which the Commission has under investigation as regards British Rail.

When will the White Paper on the nationalised industries be published?

As soon as possible.

As one of the Ministers responsible for consumer protection, will the hon. Gentleman say what action he is taking to ensure that further consideration is given towards allowing essential and inescapable commuter expenditure to be set off against personal income tax? Is he opposing the attitude of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to this matter?

It would be sensible to wait for the conclusion of the Price Commission's investigation of the proposed increase. One will then be able to consider where to take the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is his latest estimate of the probable trend of retail prices over the next 12 months.

The Government's forecast of the annual increase in retail prices was published on 26th October. It was of 13½ per cent. for the final quarter of 1977 and 6½ per cent. in the final quarter of 1978. I expect the rate of inflation to fall to single figures in the first half of 1978. But a continued reduction in the inflation rate is dependent upon the general level of wage settlements remaining within the Government's guidelines.

I was aware of those figures. Is the Secretary of State saying that on the 1978 year-on-year figures the rate of inflation will be less than 10 per cent. by the end of the year? If he does, is he prepared to take a wager with me that it will be above 10 per cent. by 31st December 1978. I wager him a dinner!

I am not sure that I am prepared to take a dinner wager until I hear with whom I shall have to have it. But my answer to the first question is "Yes". That is what I am saying. I believe that a single-figure inflation rate will be achieved in the spring of this year and will be maintained throughout 1978.

As the right hon Gentleman referred to the Barber printing boom as the cause of the rise in inflation from 1973 onwards, is he quite sure that there has not been a printing boomlet in the last few months?

Yes, I am. I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman agrees with me about the responsibility for inflation beginning during that period, and that he applauds, as I do, the fact that we have applied considerable monetary restraints over the last year and a half. That certainly makes a contribution towards the improvement in the inflation prospects, but it is not the whole story.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if he will refer the activities of the Performing Right Society Limited to the Monopolies Commission.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if he will refer to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission the practices of the Performing Right Society Limited.

The Director General of Fair Trading tells me that, in the light of complaints he has received, he is considering the possibility of a monopoly reference of certain activities of the Performing Right Society Limited.

Does the Minister agree that it is clear that this organisation is a monopoly within the terms of the existing legislation? In particular, will he consider whether a reference should not be made, in the light of what he has just said, bearing in mind the monopsonistic practices of this organisation—that is, that it is discriminating against certain people whose interests it says it is serving?

I agree that in the two main services it performs it is a monopoly. As to the other allegations, I think that the Director General would want to look carefully at the evidence and listen to the view of parties on both sides of the argument before making his final decision.

My hon. Friend will be aware that, in order to get matters on to the Order Paper, we sometimes have to put them in a way which does not really express what we want to express. However, is he aware that it is not so much the society's monopolistic position, which may be necessary, which is in question but the practices of the administration of the society which need looking into? Will my hon. Friend give an assurance that this matter will be investigated closely?

I cannot give assurances as to what will be investigated by the Monopolies and Mergers Commission, because no decision to refer has been made. However, I shall draw these exchanges to the attention of the Director General for inclusion in the consideration that he has now given to the complaints that have been sent to his office.

In this connection, I wish to draw the attention of the House to the declaration that I have made in the Register of Members' Interests. Is it not the case that the Government are still pledged to introduce public lending right, and how does the practical exercise of performing right differ from public lending right?

I should like to think about that question.

Is my hon. Friend aware that one of the problems here is that people who try to change the system that operates in this society are having difficulties inasmuch as those who run the show gather large numbers of proxy votes in order to keep other people from having a voice on the board, just as with the Amateur Athletics Association?

I believe that the society does exhibit some characteristics of a self-perpetuating oligarchy, and that is one of the matters into which the Director General is looking.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what has been the percentage increase in food prices since February 1974, and how many of the eight other EEC countries have registered a greater increase during the same period.

By October, the retail food index had increased by 90·6 per cent. since February 1974. According to the best information at our disposal, over the period food prices in one other EEC country increased faster than in the United Kingdom.

I appreciate that the right hon. Gentleman dislikes comparisons with other EEC countries and with the years of Conservative Government, but is he not aware that he is beginning to sound like the cantankerous old gentleman who, when asked how his wife was, said "Compared to what?" What would the right hon. Gentleman like us to ask Questions about—the rate of inflation in Uruguay?

I was very pleased to make the comparison between the most recent six months and the last six months of Conservative Government. To prove to the hon. Gentleman that I am not cantankerous, I shall now make a comparison between OECD inflation and British inflation. For the last six months prices increases have run at 4·6 per cent. in the OECD and at 3·4 per cent. in the United Kingdom. I hope, therefore, that we can all rejoice in that.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, in making comparisons with other EEC countries, one has to take into account the effect of the common agricultural policy and the fact that we have now harmonised our prices with the high prices that were prevailing in the other EEC countries because they had already harmonised their prices?

There is no doubt that harmonisation has had a slight effect on the increase of food prices in the United Kingdom. I would not want to overstate the matter, and I have always tried to put the EEC food price increase effect into proportion. However, my hon. Friend is absolutely right. That has been one of the causes.

As we are about to end the transition period and, as a result, the intervention price of beef will increase by 4 per cent., wheat by 7 per cent., cheese by 6 per cent. and butter by 12·5 per cent., could the right hon. Gentleman somehow work it that the common agricultural policy is referred to the Price Commission?

That is something which will not be approved by Opposition Members, who do not think that the Price Commission ought to exist. None the less, I think that the hon. Gentleman makes a serious point. There are problems with the last stage of harmonisation. It is up to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to perform as he did last year on price fixing and make sure that the best deal possible is done for the British consumer.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if he is satisfied with the price structure in the sale of petrol whereby motorists in rural areas, where car travel is a necessity, pay considerably higher prices per gallon for petrol than those in urban areas, where private cars are not a prerequisite of everyday life.

The Government are monitoring this problem carefully. A report published by the Price Commission in 1975 set out reasons for variations in petrol prices, and further information was provided in 1976 by an interdepartmental inquiry. The Monopolies and Mergers Commission is currently studying certain aspects of the wholesale supply of petrol and is to report by 2nd February 1978.

I welcome the Minister's indication that there may be progress in this matter. However, is he aware that there was a difference of 7p per gallon this weekend between my constituency and London in the price of four-star petrol? Given the differences in income, with average family incomes in Gwynedd up to 30 per cent. lower than the average for the United Kingdom, does not the Minister feel that this is an urgent matter that needs attention as quickly as possible?

I accept what the hon. Gentleman says about the differences, and he knows the reasons for them. They are in part that there is very much more competition in the urban centres, where there are many more—[HON. MEMBERS: "Ah."] I wonder whether Opposition Members who say "Ah" approve of this competition, because the Government do and are taking measures to strengthen the competition through the operation of the Price Commission, to which the Opposition have consistently taken exception.

Is the Minister aware that there is now a glut of crude oil supplies throughout the world? In spite of the glut of crude oil and conventional economic wisdom which tells us that in such circumstances the price of oil should fall and the price of all hydrocarbon products should fall, this is not happening. Will my hon. Friend attempt to give an explanation?

I think that I should require to give too lengthy an answer if I were to engage in a debate with my hon. Friend about that. He knows that the prices of particular petrol companies, which have to be notified to the Price Commission in advance, are subject to rigorous scrutiny by the Price Commission under the new Act.

Scrutiny is not control.

While welcoming the Minister's recent statement about cash discounts on the retail sales of petrol, may I ask him to explain to the House why it is not possible simply to introduce regulations stating that garages will sell petrol at a particular price per gallon and outlaw the practice of selling at X pence per gallon less Y pence discount?

Yes, I will. For reasons that will have been obvious to a number of hon. Members, it would be anti-competitive so to do. It would not give the consumer any benefit. To set a maximum price, or, for that matter, a minimum price, is anti-competitive. That is what the hon. Gentleman is recommending. It would be wholly wrong. The Opposition must make up their minds where they stand on the issue of compe tition. The Government are anxious to ensure that there is effective competition to hold down prices.

On the railways?

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what has been the increase in prices since February 1974.

83·4 per cent., Sir.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who in October 1974 said that the rate of inflation was 8·4 per cent.? If he does, is it not a terrible indictment of this Government that prices have risen so dramatically since then?

The hon. Gentleman is in the unfortunate position of being the last in the queue to make this point today. Therefore, he must have the unenviable rôle of hearing the figures again.

Will my right hon. Friend acknowledge that the Prime Minister is now determined that a 10 per cent. limit shall be applied to all earnings increases during the current period? Can he, therefore, give the House some assurance that he is equally determined that the 10 per cent. limit and the 12-month rule will also apply to price increases, so that justice will be seen to be done?

Not simply the Prime Minister, but the Cabinet in its entirety is anxious to preserve a 10 per cent. ceiling on earnings.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the fair comparison to make is between two periods of equal Government, one Conservative and one Labour? Is he also aware that the proposals now being made by the statutory body concerned with increases in pay in the hotel industry—which are likely to have severe repercussions—cannot, on ministerial authority, be reconciled with the Government's guidelines? What will the right hon. Gentleman do about that?

As regards the comparison, the hon. Gentleman must know, and will, in his normal fair way, admit, that comparisons of two essentially arbitrary periods are intellectually indefensible. For instance, between October 1973 and January 1974 there was a 400 per cent. increase in oil prices, which had a slight effect on inflation thereafter. I think that the Opposition ought to start taking that into account.

Will my right hon. Friend accept that it is difficult for a fireman or, indeed for any other worker who is involved in a dispute with the Government, to accept that it is right and proper for the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection to suggest that price increases are being examined when all he means is that those with responsibility for the matter are standing about a mile away from it, with their hands in their pockets, watching prices rise? Therefore, will he do something more than that and introduce a price freeze, as is suggested in Question No. 28?

The answer to Question No. 28, if I might anticipate it, will be "No". The message to the firemen ought to be that they, like the rest of the British population, have the strongest vested interest in keeping inflation down to manageable figures. That is basically achieved by having an earnings ceiling that does not exceed 10 per cent. We ask for that not because we think that next year ought to be a period of continuing sacrifice but because a 10 per cent. earnings ceiling is the best way to preserve standards of living in 1978, and it is our duty to go on saying so.

Is the Secretary of State aware that, although a four, five or even six months' improvement in the rate of price increases is to be warmly welcomed, it does not make up for nearly four years of the worst inflation that we have known, since this Government came to power? As it is widely acknowledged that inflation in the second half of next year will be rising sharply again, the Secretary of State's unequivocal statement will be carefully noted. If he is not right, it will be regarded as a short-term con trick for electoral purposes.

The hon. Lady says that it is widely acknowledged that inflation will rise next year. I know from a recent visit to Cirencester that that view is widely reported in the local papers in her area as a result of speeches that she makes in Gloucester and its environs, but I do not know any authority on these matters which holds that opinion. If the hon. Lady looks at the National Institute's figures published last week, she will not find much support for her theories there, and there are many other examples.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether he is satisfied with the operation of the criteria for efficiency under Section 2 of the Price Commission Act.

Yes, Sir.

Why are investigations being concentrated on successful and efficient companies in the private sector instead of, for example, on British Leyland and the British Steel Corporation?

A number of investigations are under way in the public sector at present, including the proposed price increases of the British Railways Board, the Central Electricity Generating Board, the Electricity Council and the South-West Electricity Board. The Price Commission, in choosing its first candidates for investigation, has succeeded in demonstrating even-handedness as between the public and private sectors.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection when he will next meet the Chairman of the Price Commission.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection when he next expects to meet the Chairman of the Price Commission.

The Chairman of the Price Commission and I meet frequently. No firm date has been set for our next meeting.

In view of the implication in the Department's recent release, will the right hon. Gentleman, when he next meets the chairman, suggest to him the merging of the Price Commission and the Office of Fair Trading? If the right hon. Gentleman has that in mind, can he give us some form of time scale for it?

For almost a year I have been saying that I favour the amalgamation of the powers of the Monopolies and Mergers Commission and those of the Price Commission. The Office of Fair Trading is, I think, a slightly different issue. There may be a case for amalgamating that too. But the Conservative Government, who set it up, believed that the Office of Fair Trading ought to act as prosecutor in such matters, if I may speak metaphorically and loosely, and that the Monopolies Commission ought to act as a court. The two things therefore had to be divided. When we consider the amalgamation of price and competition institutions, I think we shall have to bear that fact in mind.

Will my right hon. Friend tell the Chairman of the Price Commission that many low-paid workers such as firemen and farm workers are beginning to get a bit fed up with being treated as the scapegoats in the fight against inflation? As prices are being allowed to soar while wages are held back, is it not about time that the Price Commission immediately imposed a rigid 12-month rule and a rigid percentage limit on price increases in the same way as limits are imposed on wage increases?

The responsibility for not applying what my hon. Friend calls a rigid 12-month rule on price increases is not the Price Commission's; it is mine. The reason why I could not recommend that to my colleagues in the Cabinet or support it is that to apply such a policy arbitrarily, universally and invariably would put some companies out of business and would cause an unemployment problem even greater than the one we have at the moment. But, notwithstanding that, I share my hon. Friend's view that we must have as big a time scale as possible between one price increase and another. I think that in some ways we are making progress. For instance, the major brewers have not increased a single price for five months. That is almost an all-time record.

When the Secretary of State next meets the Chairman of the Price Commission, will he ask him to take into account the fact that the British Rail price increases have already been deferred one week, and will he ask him to suggest that those price increases should be deferred until the investigation is completed in view of the representations which have been received from transport users?

The Price Commission, if I understand the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question aright, cannot freeze the price of British Rail tickets while it investigates, because British Rail is subject to what is called the safeguards provision. The safeguards provision resulted from a combination of pressures from the Opposition parties and the CBI, and the blame had better be directed to them.

When my right hon. Friend next meets the Chairman of the Price Commission, will he ask him to hasten the Commission's report on footwear retail prices as it is quite clear that the margins charged by the multiple footwear retailers are little short of extortionate?

I think I can say without prejudicing the issue that, without underwriting every sentence in his question, I share my hon. Friend's concern about the position in footwear retailing. Had I not had that concern, I should not have referred the issue to the Price Corn-mission. We are now only some weeks away from the end of the statutory period when that report has to be produced. Like my hon. Friend, I look forward to seeing what it concludes, and I promise him that if its conclusions warrant it we shall take speedy action.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if he will give the percentage price increase per year for frozen chips, the year 1974 being based at 100, together with the corresponding rates for the percentage increase of the price of potatoes.

The information is not available in the precise form requested, but I will circulate in the Official Report the data that are to hand.

I thank my right hon. Friend for passing on the Question. My hon. Friend will recall that the Secretary of State said on 25th July this year that the new Price Commission Act would empower him to deal with the rising prices of potatoes and, of course, of frozen chips. Is he not aware that the profit margin is still 60 per cent. or more, that the Press and the public know that great profits are being made out of frozen chips, that his Department has done nothing since 25th July, and that if he wants to take more meaningful action he must take further steps to reduce the price of frozen chips to the retailer?

There has in fact been a substantial reduction—about 20 per cent.—in the average price of frozen chips between the second and third quarters of this year. The processors,

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if he has received any representa

As fish and chip shops in my constituency are still doing good business, and as in a previous answer the Minister expressed his great enthusiasm for competition, will the hon. Gentleman take this opportunity to admit to the House that nothing epitomises the spirit of free enterprise more than the fish and chip shop? Will he give an equally loud and clear welcome to that too?

I share the view that it is highly desirable that the price of fish and chips should be as low as is consistent with maintaining production and profit. The problem, as I have explained, was that the price of potatoes rose very steeply during 1976—four times that in the base year of 1974—but the price of frozen chips in the same period did not rise by anything like as much and, therefore, the fall from that peak has been slightly less.

Will the Minister say what discussions are being conducted between his Department and the appropriate trade bodies about the price of all kinds of chips, and when he expects to make a statement on the outcome of these discussions?

We have had discussions with the processors and with representatives of the trade. The question of profit margins, raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Dearne Valley (Mr. Wainwright), is for the Price Commission, which monitors the net profit margins of these companies under the provisions of the Price Commission Act.

No, Sir, but if the hon. Member has any information about this reprehensible practice I shall be very willing to consider it.

I echo the Minister's condemnation of any attempt to sell under false pretences. Nevertheless, will he not agree that the practice could be made much more acceptable if those engaged upon it were to wear some sort of identification so that members of the public who were approached were not under the misapprehension that they were answering questions in a genuine research inquiry?

I do not think that we have any powers to hang labels around attractive girls with clip-boards in the street. [An HON. MEMBER: "Why not?"] It would be best to bring a complete end to what is a deceitful practice and an abuse of trust.

Will the Minister do us the great service of explaining what clipboard selling is, so that we might be appropriately scandalised?

It is the practice of pretending to be a market researcher in order to obtain people's names and addresses, later to sell them insurance or a savings plan.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what effect import levies on wheat have had upon the price of bread.

I refer the hon. Member to the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Southampton, Test (Mr. Gould) on 29th November 1977.

Does the Minister accept that import levies on, for example, wheat from Canada are now just over £33 per ton, which means that wheat from Canada cannot come into this country at less than £90 per ton? This represents a tax of no less than 58 per cent. Holding the office that he does, how does the Minister defend a tax as high as that?

As the hon. Member is aware, levies are an integral part of the EEC's system of agricultural support. But he will also have observed that the Prime Minister made the Government's view clear in a letter to the General Secretary of the Labour Party. Under the policy which has been announced, we intend to continue to argue for the reduction of EEC support levels in real terms. We believe that much more account of world price levels should be taken within the EEC. That will, of course, lead to some reduction in the burden of levies.

By how much has the price of bread gone up since the Secretary of State said that it would go down, at the time of the discount scheme?

That is a misrepresentation of what my right hon. Friend said. At the time of the discount scheme changes, my right hon. Friend said that the price of bread would remain lower than it would otherwise have been. In fact, the price of bread has risen very slightly, in some cases by not much more than ½p, since that date.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether he will make a statement on the Price Commission's decision to investigate the pricing policy of those industries operating low profit safeguard levels.

Under the provision of the Price Commission Act, approved by the House in July, the selection of cases for investigation is a matter for the Price Commission.

Is not the fact that so many of the companies investigated have been successful in negotiating interim price increases an indication that the public expect little significant relief as a result of the activities of the Price Commission, and that prices remain a symptom of inflation and not its cause?

I do not see how any objective and informed person can draw that conclusion. The Price Commission has chosen, in its wisdom, to investigate areas where investigation seemed appropriate and consistent with Section 2 of the Act. I have no doubt that the combination of those investigations and the other sort of pressure that the Price Commission is already exerting—the very small number of price applications we have had during the last four months is largely attributable to the new powers of the Price Commission—will have a significant effect on the rate of inflation and, perhaps more importantly, will do a great deal to attack some of the monopolies and semi-monopolies in the United Kingdom economy.

Is it not the case that if the safeguards did not exist the Opposition would be the first to complain?

There is no doubt that, during the long night when we were kept up by the Opposition's hope that the Price Commission Bill could be defeated, the major concession for which they asked was, in one sense, an intensification of the safeguard provisions. It is less than consistent to complain that the provisions are too strong when they are implemented yet too weak when they are actually operated.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if he will make a statement on the Price Commission investigation into British Railways prices.

British Rail notified the Price Commission on 7th October of its proposal to increase passenger fares and certain miscellaneous charges. The Commission considered the proposed increase and informed my right hon. Friend on 3rd November that it intended to investigate. The Commission will complete its investigation and report to my right hon. Friend within four months of the date of the original notification.

Is the Minister satisfied that the investigation will be of sufficient depth? For instance, will the Commission look into the very serious underlying problems of British Rail, such as over-manning? If it does, how can it possibly complete the investigation within the time limit?

One can judge the effectiveness of the Price Commission's examination only when it has been completed.

Does my hon. Friend realise that the Opposition are simply trying to check up on the amount of subsidy that is required for our railways? Will he at some time in the future give the subsidy figures for the German and other railways to ensure a good railway system?

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport will answer questions about the level of subsidy. However, I can state that the Government's policy is that the subsidy should remain at the current level of £350 million per annum, though that figure will be reduced by £20 million by 1981.

Will the Minister confirm that the Price Commission will look into the question of discrimination against commuters in the South-East? Furthermore, can he say why there should be any faith in the effectiveness of the Price Commission when such discrimination has gone for year after year without any intervention from anybody?

Opposition Members who attack the Price Commission even before the report has been produced do no credit to their cause or to themselves.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what general principles he observes in asking the Office of Fair Trading to undertake inquiries into trade practices.

I have made no such requests to the Office of Fair Trading.

Would the Minister of State confirm that statements of ministerial disapproval about particular trade practices do not necessarily have any basis in law?

The statements have no basis in law but are a useful basis for considering legislation, particularly when such practices are dishonest, unfair, deceitful and confusing.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether he will outline his reasons for directing the Price Commission to carry out a sectoral examination of the road haulage industry.

The criteria to which I must have regard in making a direction are set out in Section 2 of the Price Commission Act. In the case of this examination, I had particular regard to the industry's cost and price structure and to the likelihood that increased freight charges would ultimately affect a wider range of prices.

I thank the Minister for that reply, but will he indicate whether, in fact he intends, to refer each industry to the Price Commission for an investigation into its prices and structure? Furthermore, is he aware that the road haulage industry is one of the most competitive? Does he really feel that the reasons that he has given are good grounds for the recommendation which he has made?

I feel that they are good grounds. That is why I made the recommendation. We must await the outcome of the inquiry to see whether my judgment or that of the hon. Gentleman is correct.

Is it not nonsense that the profitable part of the transport industry—road haulage—is run entirely by private enterprise, with the profits going to private operators, whereas railway haulage has to be subsidised? Should it not be the policy of Her Majesty's Government, when they have won the next General Election, to nationalise the lot?

There is a publicly-owned sector of the road haulage industry—the National Freight Corporation. However, it is a very small proportion, and my hon. Friend is right in the basic thrust of his point. The effects that that has on keeping the industry competitive will again be revealed in the Price Commission's inquiry. Both my right hon. Friend and I will want to draw some conclusions from that report when it is published.

Does the right hon. Gentleman still support his party's proposals fully to nationalise the road haulage industry?

I do not want to say anything that prejudices my response to the report when it comes out, but I think that the hon. Gentleman will find some interesting grounds for speculation about the efficiency and, indeed, the competitiveness of that industry when the report is published.