asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what recent representations he has received in connection with the existing rights and protection of house purchasers when buying property.

A limited number of representations have been made on the aspect which I understand is of most interest to my hon. Friend—namely, that building society surveys should be brought to the attention of the prospective purchaser.

Is the Minister aware that a number of people purchasing properties each year find themselves in considerable financial difficulty when they buy a property without having had a survey done previously? What progress is being made in the discussions with the Building Societies Association about combining valuations and structural surveys to overcome this difficulty?

It is always best if the purchaser obtains a survey, and the Director General of Fair Trading is discussing with the building societies the possibility of joint valuation inspections and structural surveys for both the building society and the purchaser.

On the other side of building society transactions, is the Minister satisfied with the protection extended through legislation to building society investors? In the light of the Grays Building Society situation, is the Minister satisfied that it is right to rely on the munificence of the building societies? Is this not a case where consumer protection also should be considered?

That is not a question directly for me, but I should have thought that the building societies acted pretty admirably over the question of investors in the Grays Building Society.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if he has any further plans to extend the practice of unit pricing of consumer goods.

Present plans for unit pricing, that is, price per pound, are confined to coverage of foodstuffs which are generally weighed out in front of the customer or sold in random weight prepackages. This coverage will be completed by our programme for further orders on fish, processed meat products, poultry and pre-packed fruit and vegetables.

Now that we have reached the point of compulsory unit pricing on some scale, what plans has the Minister for undertaking research among housewives to see how useful they find the existing arrangements before he seeks to extend them still further?

All the organisations representing consumers—the National Federation of Consumer Groups, the Consumers Association and the National Consumer Council—have expressed strong support for the Government's programme on unit pricing. There is no evidence that consumers do not welcome it, or that they do not welcome the approach that we have made to consult them fully as we go along.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection how many staff within his Department hold banking or insurance qualifications.

As far as I know, none of the Department's staff is a member of the Institute of Bankers, the Chartered Insurance Institute, the Institute of Actuaries or the Faculty of Actuaries.

In view of the disaster area represented by the Minister's tinkering with bread prices, will he keep as far away as possible from banking and insurance in order to enable free enterprise to continue to do such a good job?

The expertise of the Price Commission in banking is well known, and the report of the Price Commission, following the inquiry into bank charges, is expected to be published tomorrow.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if he will state the actual price of a standard loaf at 3rd April in each of the years 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1977 and 1978 and the effect on the price to the consumer of Common Market levies on imported wheat.

The average retail price of a 28 oz. standard loaf in mid-April in each of the years 1973 to 1977 was 10·4, 13·9, 15·6, 17·2 and 20·5 pence respectively. In mid-March 1978—the latest date for which information is available—the average price was 24·1 pence and the maximum price allowed by the Bread Prices Order was 26·5 pence. It is impossible to give a precise figure for the effect of the levy on imported wheat, but the direct effects of the levy are estimated to contribute up to 1p to the costs of the standard loaf.

Will the Secretary of State agree that the levy is the equivalent of a tax on bread? Is he aware that we seem to be drifting back to the lunatic days of the corn laws? Is it not time that his Department held a rigorous investigation into the prices of flour and bread?

The price of flour and the general operation of milling in this country justify some sort of investigation, but whether this is the right moment for it is a different matter. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh".] I hope that we shall have some questions on that subject as the afternoon goes on. As for the levy, when we entered the EEC we accepted the levy system as part of our obligations. I do not seek to justify what is happening over wheat levies, and our policy is to try to reduce them whenever possible.

As so many investigations have been made by the right hon. Gentleman's Department into the situation over Spillers and bread supply generally, why did he and his Department not realise that what has recently occurred was on its way months ago?

The Minister of Agriculture and my Department both realised that there was far too much capacity in the baking industry which sooner or later had to be reduced. In the Spillers case the reduction arose in a manner that was wholly intolerable. We must now ensure that the bread industry continues to improve in general efficiency and we must make sure that such catastrophes do not happen a second time.

Will my right hon. Friend agree that the figures he has given confirm the fact that the effect of the levies on the price of bread over the years in question is minimal compared to the increases in prices consequential on world price increases?

My hon. Friend is right. I often say in reply to questions about price increases resulting from our membership of the EEC that they are minimal compared with other factors. But the point to be borne in mind is that they are minimal but in some cases unnecessary. When they are unnecessary, no matter how small they are, I think that we should argue against them.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say how many more thousand jobs need to be lost and how many more companies need to be driven out of production as a direct result of losses exacerbated by his controls before he will concede that not only are his policies damaging to industry but that they will lead to fewer jobs, less competition and in the end higher prices?

I have told the hon. Lady in one month out of three in the last 18 months that the only alteration I have made in the control of bread prices is to relax the control which was applied by the Conservative Government under prices orders. I should have thought that even the hon. Lady, allowing for her well-known command of logic and reason, would accept that one could not say that price control was responsible for the disastrous and unfortunate unemployment in the baking industry when the controlled maximum price is almost 3p higher than the average price at which bread is sold.

In view of the highly unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible opportunity.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection when the results of his Department's survey of skateboard accidents will be available for publication.

The survey of skateboard accidents began in February of this year and will take six months. Results will be available for publication in the autumn.

I am grateful for the Minister's reply. Will he do all he can to expedite the production of the report in the light of his accepting my point of view that the report is demanded even more quickly, if possible, because the general population is concerned about the number of accidents to skateboarders, and also to members of the public, particularly elderly or infirm people, as a result of collisions?

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's welcome for the survey. We shall make a provisional analysis before the end of the six-month survey and as soon as we have enough information which will produce meaningful results.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection when he last met the representatives of the National Transport Users' Consultative Committee.

I met the representatives of the Central Transport Consultative Committee on 7th December 1977.

During those meetings, was the Minister concerned that in the proposals in the Government's White Paper on nationalised industries there would be yet another tier of consultation for transport users? This now makes three such tiers. Is he satisfied that, quite apart from the National Consumer Council, the consumer is obtaining some benefits from these additional tiers of consultation?

I am not sure what tier the hon. Gentleman has in mind, but, if he is referring to the proposal that we should appoint a national committee, he will appreciate, if he has studied the White Paper, that that amounts simply to a change of name. There is already in existence a Central Transport Consultative Committee, which is a national body.

Does the Minister agree that the Transport Users' Consultative Committee should have the right to consider applications for rail fare increases?

As set out in the White Paper, the Government propose that the prices and tariffs of the British Railways Board should be subject to scrutiny by the Central Transport Consultative Committee and that opportunities should be available to consumers to make representations through that body.

In the scrutiny of such rail fares, will the council have the ability to scrutinise European legislation in view of the possibility of the age for half fares for children being reduced from 14 years to 12 years, which is very much against the interests of the whole community?

This essentially is a body concerned with national transport charges, but, in so far as European legislation may impinge on national policy, it would be within its general remit to consider the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if he will make a statement on the most recent inflation forecasts for the United Kingdom made by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

In its latest survey of the United Kingdom economy, published in March, the OECD forecasts that our inflation rate will be even lower than it had forecast previously.

The right hon. Gentleman well knows that the OECD predicts accelerating prices in the second half of the year, and that that body and the Chancellor of the Exchequer have made it plain that the whole Budget strategy, which is a high risk strategy, depends on increased industrial production. Will he acknowledge that industrial production is stagnant, that the March balance of trade figures were disastrous, and that it is politically misleading to talk about 7 per cent. inflation or single figure inflation while not giving sufficent attention to the fact that those are matters from which doubtless the Government will escape by having a General Election before the result of their mismanagement comes home to the British people?

I am sorry to spoil the hon. Gentleman's prepared supplementary, but I do not think that the evidence of the OECD survey supports what he says. The evidence of the OECD survey, particularly that part of it which is my concern, confirms the contention which has been advanced by the Government for the last 18 months, namely, that we would remain in single figure inflation throughout 1978 and that that good result would persist into 1979. Once again, I invite the Conservative Party to rejoice with me in the fact that we have made that success.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that quite apart from the evidence in the OECD report, the last time the Tories were in government they left us with an enormous problem which they tried to solve by printing money? It is much more important that he should take that into account and resist any measures that might come from the Government on those lines, but he should continue his present work in co-operation with the TUC in carrying out the successful fight against inflation.

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's remarks. There are two important points that flow from them. The first is the necessity, if we are to bring the inflation rate down to a lower figure than 7 per cent.—and certainly that is necessary—of the co-operation of the trade union movement in the next pay round. The second matter relates to comparative inflation rates. The Opposition have spent the last four years comparing various inflation periods. I wish that they would start comparing the last year of their Administration with the present year of ours. Such a comparison would be very illuminating.

What has been the total inflation figure since the Government came into office three-and-a-half years ago? Has it been over 50 per cent?

The figure is a good deal more than 50 per cent., and it is the subject of a later Question. Again, let me urge the hon. Gentleman to make his comparison on the basis of realistic periods, not the period of a General Election but the period when there was a 400 per cent. increase in oil prices, which occurred during his party's administration. It coincided with the beginning of a massive printing of money, and the inflation which was disastrous for this country and which is now under control began some time in the summer of 1973.

I understand that the City is concerned because it thinks that the Budget was far too generous and there has been a crisis. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] The Opposition say "Hear, hear" to that. Against that, the Opposition demand that the income tax cuts should have been greater. In those circumstances, the amount of give-away in the Budget would have been very much more than it was last Tuesday. Will my right hon. Friend try to elucidate the Conservatives' policy? Do they really believe that last week's Budget gave away too much?

My right hon. Friend must not tempt me to answer questions which are more appropriate for answer by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. But he and I will take common ground in the fact that the great achievement of the last two years, including the progress that we have made on inflation, is attributable to the efforts of the British people. The British people, when they appreciate the Conservative Party's attitude, will be sorry to see that the Conservative Party is looking to failure rather than to success and not saying that at least we have got inflation under control.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether he will give the total number of complaints received by citizens' advice bureaux, consumer advice centres, the Office of Fair Trading and the Price Commission against the nationalised industries over the last year.

Of the four bodies named, only the Price Commission compiles statistics in a way that allows complaints against nationalised industries to be separately calculated. The Price Commission received a total of 429 written complaints about the Post Office, British Rail, and the electricity and gas industries in the year up to 31st March 1978.

Does the Minister agree that it is a pity that we do not have the other figures and that the conduct of the nationalised industries on price increases is appalling? Will he remind nationalised industries that their job is to think of consumers first? That is their prime need. Will he at the same time urgently look at the prices charged by the Thames Valley Water Authority, which have increased by 30 per cent. or 40 per cent. this year? This is affecting old people in particular.

Price increases by the nationalised industries are subject to surveillance by the Price Commission in the same way as with any other enterprise. Indeed, there will be considerable periods during which prices will be frozen in some of those industries. As I understand it, as a fellow payer of water charges to the Thames Water Authority, what has caused the increase is a shifting of the sewerage and drainage charges from the local authority to the water authority.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that much of the cost has resulted from the actions of the previous Tory Government in reorganising the water authorities, the local government services and so on? Will he take into account that in Derbyshire nobody can complain to the consumer advice centres because the Tories, who are now in control, have closed them all down, though they did not cost the ratepayers a single penny piece, and all these problems have to be brought to Parliament by me?

I think it is the general opinion that the Conservative reorganisation of local government cost a lot of extra money. It is up to the Tory Party to explain now.

Will the Minister add to the number of complaints received by the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux one from me—on the refusal of its Press officer, Miss Murray, a member of the NUJ, to give information to a member of the Institute of Journalists? Will he consider withholding from the association the Department's £1 million grant until he receives an assurance that its publicly paid officials will give precedence to the public interest and not to personal prejudices?

This is a question that is much better raised by prior notice, in fairness to the people involved.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if he is satisfied with the current procedure for grant-aiding the National Consumer Council and if he will make a statement.

I am quite satisfied with the way in which my Department grant-aids the National Consumer Council. The hon. Member may remember that the Consumer Council, set up and disbanded by successive Conservative Governments, was similarly financed by grant-in-aid.

Can the Minister point to a practical service rendered to the consumer by the National Consumer Council which is not duplicated by one or other of the 14 other consumer bodies which receive £17 million a year in grant aid, to say nothing of the £29 million a year spent by local authorities on the subject?

Yes, I can give three examples: reports on the representation of consumers of the nationalised industries; reports on paying for fuel; and a current investigation into repair and maintenance of council houses. But there are many others.

Does not the number of bodies required to represent consumer protection show the necessity to defend ordinary citizens against the rapacious private enterprise that tries to con them out of their money at every opportunity?

I do not take that view of private enterprise, but the consumer should be able to have a representative body speaking at national level which matches the power and the voice of the CBI, the trade unions and many other national, commercial and working class organisations.

In view of that statement, will the Minister say whether he consulted the National Consumer Council on the Spillers closures, and, if not, why not?

No, I did not.

Why not?

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether he is satisfied with the pricing policies of petrol companies in respect of prices paid for petrol in peripheral rural areas by consumers; and if he will make a statement.

We continue to keep a careful watch on petrol prices, but there is no evidence that distributors in rural areas are making excessive profits. The Monopolies and Mergers Commission is currently studying certain aspects of the wholesale supply of petrol and is due to report by July of this year.

Is the Minister aware that in the South-West there is the highest percentage of car-owning families of any region in the United Kingdom, yet in an area such as South-East Cornwall average earnings are 14 per cent. below the national average? Will he acknowledge that this paradoxical situation results from the need to possess cars for essential journeys? Is it not another example of the Government hitting rural, peripheral regions?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman would at least acknowledge that if the Government introduced a maximum price that operated throughout the country it would probably not have the effect of reducing prices in the area that he represents because the price margins of those selling petrol in those areas are, according to the reports that we have had prepared, quite small. However, it would have the effect of increasing prices in other parts of the country. If that is the hon. Gentleman's policy, perhaps he will make it plain.

Will my hon. Friend say whether he knows what is going on in rural areas? The consumer organisations are set up in Labour-controlled area, usually in the towns and cities. The niggardly Conservatives will not spend any money on providing people with this kind of service, so we do not know what is going on. The Labour Party is also concerned about the decline in the post offices as well as about petrol prices. Will he give more grant aid or see what we can do to make up this deficit from the Conservative shire counties?

It is perfectly fair to draw attention to the double standards of the Opposition on this matter. The Conservative Party complains about high prices in its areas but does nothing to support the fact-finding inquiries that we have put in hand. We have had two fact-finding inquiries—one conducted by the Price Commission into motor fuel retailers' margins, and an inter-departmental inquiry. They have proved the point that I earlier emphasised, that distributors in the rural areas are not making excessive profits. However, we await the report of the Monopolies and Mergers Commission with interest.

Will the Minister bear in mind that it is not only prices that are hurting rural areas but the refusal of some companies to supply small garages? This, coupled with various Government measures over the years, is clobbering the rural areas. Will the hon. Gentleman do something about it?

The hon. Gentleman would greatly help this important debate if he would make more specific accusations against particular companies or particular Government policies. General charges make no contribution whatever.

I can give my hon. Friend a specific instance. If he drives his car from the Midlands to North Wales, he will find that the price of petrol varies by as much as 8p a gallon. He cannot possibly justify that.

I am aware of the substantial variations in the price of petrol, particularly, on motorways, which are being considered by the Price Committee at the moment. As for prices in Wales, we have recently received a specific report by the Government-appointed Welsh Consumer Council.

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

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether he will give the increase in the retail price index since February 1974.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if he will make a statement on the latest retail price index.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what are the latest figures available for the rate of inflation.

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

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what has been the annual rate of inflation based on the statistics of the period November 1977 to March 1978; what was the comparable figure for the period November 1973 to March 1974; and what estimate he has made for the trend to the end of 1978.

The retail price index rose by 0·6 per cent. in March. This brings the annual rate of increase down to 9·1 per cent. The increase since February 1974 has been 88·6 per cent. Between November 1977 and March 1978 inflation ran at an annual equivalent of 7·4 per cent. Between November 1973 and March 1974 the annual equivalent was 16·3 per cent. The Government's official forecast published in April is for a further improvement in the inflation rate.

I shall call first those hon. Members whose Questions are being answered.

Notwithstanding the reply which he gave earlier to my hon. Friend the Member for Leominster (Mr. Temple-Morris), does the right hon. Gentleman accept that the rate of inflation will increase later this year, and, if so, by what amount?

I do not. I am always sceptical about a question which begins "Notwithstanding the reply to" another question. My answer is the same as the answer that I gave to the hon. Member for Leominster (Mr. Temple-Morris). We will continue with single-figure inflation this year. We need to build on the 7 per cent. figure and improve it. That is dependent upon having a moderate level of wage settlements next year, and I believe that we will achieve that.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the record he has just described to us is far worse than that of our international competitors over the same period? Is he aware that the current rate is also far worse? How can he be so complacent about a 9 per cent. inflation rate, which would have been unthinkable 10 years ago?

The current rate is not far worse, as the hon. Gentleman described it. We are down to the OECD average. When we achieve the 7 per cent. figure, as we surely shall, we shall be in a situation superior to that of our industrial competitors. But there are two differences between them and us. First, as a trading nation we felt the increase in oil prices particularly badly. Secondly, between 1972 and 1973 we had Government-induced inflation which they did not have to face.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that as the retail price index decreases Tory frustration increases? Long may this go on. But what we are talking about is the battle against inflation—and my right hon. Friend is not making a bad contribution—not so much for any Labour Government out for the future of Britain.

It is the jogging that does it.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Molloy). I am sorry that there cannot be a common acceptance in the House that inflation is now under control and will increasingly be reduced to an acceptable figure, because I believe that we shall be able to make all sorts of progress in a variety of economic fields when we can convince the people of the United Kingdom that inflation is under control. It is not in the interests of this country's future economic welfare for people to pretend that inflation might get out of hand again. It will not, and I believe that we should be unanimous in basing our policies on the certainty that inflation is now beaten.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the one most important figure is the rate at which inflation is falling, and that in terms of that statistic we are doing far better than almost all our industrial competitors? Will my right hon. Friend repeat what he said before, because it needs to be heard not only by the House but by the Press and the country generally, that the statistical forecasts agree that the rate of inflation will fall to around 7 per cent. and remain at that level for the foreseeable future?

I am very happy to repeat that, but I think that my hon. Friend and I will both agree that, while we shall be in the fortunate position of passing some of our competitors as we go down while they are going up, we nevertheless want to continue to build on last year's success. We need an inflation rate lower than 7 per cent., and the Government are committed to achieving that improved level.

Will my right hon. Friend continue the good work he has been doing in spite of the carping criticism from the Tory Party? But will he take note that the public are afraid of big business? The milling and bread-making business has now gone into three big firms. [HON. MEMBERS: "Two."] There is a great worry about their power. Will my right hon. Friend also say something about the big brewery companies? The public think that those companies can make an increase in the price of beer when it suits them. But when those companies cannot put 1p on the beer, they put it on the rent of the tenant, and the tenant landlord is now being pushed out of business.

I think that I had better wait to make my main comment on the price of beer until the Price Commission has produced its report on the brewery it chose to investigate. That report cannot be so long away. However, my hon. Friend is absolutely right, that one of the things bedevilling the brewing industry is the degree of vertical monopoly between the brewers and the public houses they own and control. I do not believe that that control works in the interests of either the landlords or their customers.

Will my right hon. Friend concede that the comparison that I asked for in Question No. 30—of the rate of inflation between November 1977 and March 1978 and the November 1973 to March 1974 inflation—is a very fair one? Will he make sure that the Daily Mail, the Daily Express, The Daily Telegraph and all the other Tory newspapers print these figures in big black letters tomorrow?

It is almost inconceivable that any of those papers would publish these figures, because of the simple arithmetical fact that during the last year of the Tory Government inflation was running at rather more than twice the rate at which it is running now. That does not seem to me the sort of news the Daily Express or the other newspapers publish.

I wonder whether the Secretary of State can put me right on this point. Is not the housewife more interested in the price going up in pence rather than percentages? Are not percentages "phoney", because a single percentage point now—[Interreuption]—Labour Members cannot take it—is equal to double figures back on the old 100 value? As long as prices go up, so long will percentages go down, even if the rise in cost in pence remains the same.

If when inflation in this country was running at almost 20 per cent. and I was saying that that was a disastrously high figure which should be reduced the hon. Gentleman had said "These percentages do not mean anything", I would take a great deal more notice of him when he criticises percentage comparisons when we have got inflation under control.

Is the Secretary of State aware that claims about conquering inflation from any Government who have presided over an 88 per cent. increase in inflation mean absolutely nothing? Is he further aware—if he is not, he should be—that nearly 200 items that figure regularly in family expenditure have already doubled in price since the Government came to power? That is why the people of this country are not faintly impressed by his claims of overcoming inflation, which they consider to be an insult to their intelligence, particularly as reliable and informed commentators—that is, unlike the Chancellor of the Exchequer—are now forecasting that inflation will rise later this year?

The hon. Lady continues to misquote other forecasts and other surveys, none of which predicts an inflation course fundamentally different from the one I have suggested. She has no excuse for going on making these errors. I have offered her the services of the statisticians in my Department to explain the surveys to her and she has not accepted that invitation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his reply would be a great deal more impressive if it were not for the fact that the people who are predicting rising inflation have got more forecasts right than either he or the Chancellor have?

Has my right hon. Friend noticed that when prices and immigration are going down the Tories immediately say that we are fiddling the figures? Does he agree that he has achieved a great deal, notwithstanding the burdens placed upon this country and its prices by our membership of the Common Market? Does he also agree that to maintain competition and employment the National Enterprise Board has a role to play, particularly in such areas as bread-making and brewing?

My hon. Friend tempts me, as did a Conservative Member a moment ago, to answer questions which are outside my sphere, but in his case I shall fall for the temptation. I believe that the National Enterprise Board must have an increasing role, and that that role must be to fulfil some of the functions that private enterprise in this country has signally failed to fulfil during the past 30 years.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what will be the effect of recent movements in the trade weighted index of sterling on the retail price index in the United Kingdom; and on what exchange rate his present projections for the rate of inflation are based.

Roughly speaking, each 1 per cent. fall in the exchange rate eventually adds about ¼ per cent. to the retail price index within 12 months. The Government's short-term economic forecasts were published on 11th April. Questions about their construction are for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that informative reply. Is not a further devaluation in the value of sterling bound to have a severe and direct impact on the retail price index? In the past two months sterling has declined by around 5 per cent., but the Government are projecting a rate of inflation for this time next year of, I believe, around 8 per cent. Does not this imply a stable or even rising rate of exchange for sterling?

No, Sir, I do not think it does. The hon. Gentleman is simply arithmetically right to say that the less sterling buys abroad the greater the likelihood of price increases in the United Kingdom. Certainly during the financial year 1978–79 we shall not have the beneficial effects of the sterling rise that we had towards Christmas 1977.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that the trade weighted average has dropped more dramatically since we entered the Common Market than in the period before entry when those calculations were first used? Will he also accept that there are examples of astronomic price rises where the wage element features hardly at all? For example, wages have not played a part in the recent dramatic increase in house prices in the private sector which are now influencing the price index.

I agree with my hon. Friend that wage increases are not the only cause of inflation, but I think that he would join me in saying that wage restraint over the last three years has been the major cure for inflation, and it is the trade unions' sacrifice and effort which has brought us to this happy position.

If, as I hope, the right hon. Gentleman is correct in his forecast that the United Kingdom rate of inflation is likely to fall below the OECD average, is not the likely and hoped for consequence that the exchange rate of sterling might appreciate, with beneficial consequences for the economy?

Questions about the desirability or likelihood of appreciation or depreciation of the sterling rate should be addressed to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I shall confine myself to the simple arithmetical assertion that a 4 per cent. depreciation has a 1 per cent. effect on the RPI and therefore, in my narrow departmental capacity, I look forward to appreciation, whenever it is reasonable and possible, as a contribution to combating inflation.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if, following the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Civil Liability, he will now introduce legislation to establish the principle of liability of manufacturers to consumers for defective products.

I am currently studying those parts of the Royal Commission report that relate to product liability. However, this is only one of several initiatives on the subject, all of which are being considered in detail.

Can we not have legislation on this matter, whatever else has to be studied, which brings it in line with the Strasbourg Convention and pins strict liability in cases of injury to the consumer on the manufacturer of the product and the components involved in it?

There are great attractions in the principle of product liability and putting the manufacturer and the distributor on much the same footing as present obligations put on the retailer. However, this is something which must be done on a Continent-wide basis. It would be a most unreasonable burden on British industry if it were done only in this country. I shall certainly press on with my consultations.

Before taking any steps in this direction, will the Minister consider that one of the most defective products in this country comes from the plant bakery of the newly created monopoly of Allied and Rank Hovis McDougall bakers? Will he therefore try to persuade the Secretary of State once again to refer the price of bread to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission, which he has refused to do so far?

My right hon. Friend will have noted the hon. Gentleman's comments.

Is my hon. Friend aware that it has taken the Royal Commission five years to recommend some obvious principles? Does he agree that one of the most obvious and desirable is the principle of strict liability, and can he assure us that the Government will work at least five times as fast as the Commission and, in any case, faster than the jogging pace that we have come to expect from his Department?

I shall certainly press on with consultations and negotiations with our partners in Europe on this matter, but it must be done on an EEC-wide basis. I hope that progress will not be long delayed.

On another aspect of the Pearson Commission's recommendations, will the Minister, with his responsibility for prices, play down the expectation that State introduction of some accident benefit for motor accident victims will lead automatically to a sizeable reduction in motor insurance premiums?

That is not a matter for me.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what representations he has received from the Ever Ready Company (Great Britain) Ltd. concerning the recent report of the Price Commission on dry—primary—batteries.

I received written representations from the chairman of the Ever Ready group and from the chairman of Ever Ready (Great Britain) Ltd., the company investigated. I also met representatives of the company to discuss the report before reaching my decision to implement the Price Commission's recommendations.

What prospect is there for efficient companies when a report such as this shows that the company is efficient, does not abuse its market position and is competitive, yet the Commission still dictates that the return on capital shall be circumscribed?

There is every prospect for a company that fulfils all those criteria and is, at the same time, anxious to innovate and invest in new technologies of the industry. If this company comes into that category, it has only to apply to me for a change in the order as it stands. As I told the chairman, I have no doubt that it will get one.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that, while he may have received few representations since the report was published, he received quite a lot of representations before the Price Commission considered the subject because large numbers of people believe that batteries are grossly expensive?

This is the basic question, and perhaps the hon. Member for Gloucester (Mrs. Oppenheim) will tell us her answer. The Commission provided the opportunity to keep down the price of batteries in transistor radios, hearing aids and household appliances. I took that opportunity. However, I do not know whether the Opposition agree that I should have done that. If not, no doubt they will pray against the order. If they think that I am right, I hope that they will say so.

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

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection when he will next 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.

Will my right hon. Friend ask the Price Commission to investigate the wide variation in the price of a basic food, such as bread? Is he aware that it costs some people as much as 26p to buy a loaf which costs only 18p elsewhere? Is it not about time that the Government stepped in to stop big business monopolies such as the Spillers French group, which not only subjects its workers to shabby treatment but exploits housewives by charging extortionate prices for supplying bread to certain shops, especially in small towns and rural areas?

There is a special problem in small towns and rural areas, but what is done by these groups should be kept in perspective. To a large degree, competition in baking has kept and will continue to keep prices down. As I told the House half an hour ago, the average price of a standard loaf is still appreciably lower than the maximum price set by law, and while competition keeps the price below the statutory price it is not doing a bad job.

When the right hon. Gentleman next meets the chairman of the Price Commission, will he draw to his attention the recent devastating statement by the Governor of the Bank of England on the damaging effects of price and profit control on investment and employment? As the cost of living has more than doubled since the Commission was established, is it not clear that, far from reducing prices, the most that the Commission has achieved is a reduction in the number of jobs and more people out of work?

I shall continue to attempt to explain to the Opposition that there have been two Price Commissions. The first was invented and implemented by the Conservative Government and operated a general level of price control, which, I always agreed, had potentially dangerous consequences. This Government abolished that Commission and had a more selective policy which cannot, by definition, have the sort of problems to which the hon. Gentleman referred. If his question was an admission of guilt, I accept it gladly.

When the right hon. Gentleman next meets the chairman of the Price Commission, will he suggest that when the chairman and his colleagues call before them well-known organisations and industries they should treat them a little less like potential criminals under suspicion and a little more like worthwhile industrialists who are trying to do a good job?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will break the rule of a lifetime and, instead of making general complaints, give specific examples. I shall. I have before me a letter from the Weetabix Company Ltd. congratulating the Price Commission on its methods of operating and its techniques. I propose to put the letter in the Library as a result of today's Questions.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Arising out of a supplementary question on Question No. 16, the Minister of State indicated that he had no responsibility for the effect of a Government Commission on the price of motor insurance. May I seek your guidance as to which Minister has such responsibility?

Points of order are better raised at the end of Question Time.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I wish to pursue the point I raised earlier. I wish to remain within the rules of order. Will you please confirm that it was in order for me to ask the Minister of State, Department of Prices and Consumer Protection for a reply to a question which referred to the effect on the price of a commodity of a report of a Government-appointed Commission? Will you confirm that he was the right Minister at whom such a question should have been directed and that he was wrong in implying that the Department of Trade's responsibility for the overal supervision of insurance and insurance companies meant that it was the Department to which my question should have been directed?

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. It is well understood that the Department of Trade has answered Questions about the level and control of insurance premiums for the last four years.

In any case, I was about to say that the Ministers' replies are not my responsibility.