asked the Secretary of State for Trade when next he expects to meet the chairman of the British Airports Authority.

The chairman and I meet regularly.

Now that the aviation security charge is to be doubled next April, and landing fees at Heathrow are to be increased by 40 per cent., what contribution are airports making to the Government's campaign for cheaper air travel?

I think that my hon. Friend must accept two factors: first that there is no justification for airports being a burden on the taxpayer, and therefore the passenger must pay the cost of the airports; second, that the extremely sharp increase in the levy this year is necessary because the levy that was set by the previous Government for the current year was totally and completely inadequate—

To deal with inflation.

To deal, as the hon. Member for Feltham and Heston (Mr. Kerr) says, with the inflation which was caused by his Government's surrender to the wage demands of last winter.

If, on the ground of inflation, the Minister is justifying an increase of 40 per cent. in respect of a London airport, how does he justify a proposed increase of 400 per cent. in respect of the two airports in my constituency?

Again, the right hon. Gentleman must realise that even though the Government accept that in the Scottish Highlands there is a social service element in the operation of the airfields, the loss cannot go on increasing indefinitely. There must, therefore, be increases to meet the deficits that are being incurred.

When my hon. Friend next meets the chairman, will he underline to him the deep concern that is being felt by many of the residents who live around Heathrow airport, particularly in the Richmond area, at the great increase in aircraft noise? Will he ask him to ensure that he will not apply for a fifth terminal to follow the possible fourth terminal which might be announced this afternoon?

My hon. Friend is right to express the concern of his constituents about aircraft noise around Heathrow although I believe, not least with the agreement of the European Community on the banning of all noisy jet aircraft, that the noise will diminish.

Can part of the £20 million made annually by the British Airports Authority on duty-free whisky sales be used to provide double glazing for people who live under the noise shadow at Heathrow and other airports?

Since the Authority pays the cost of such double glazing, the profits on duty-free liquor do, in part, provide that double glazing.

Preliminary to my right hon. Friend's statement later in the day, can my hon. Friend say how long it is since his Department received the Glidewell report on the fourth terminal at Heathrow? Will that document be published and, if so, when?

I advise my right hon. and learned Friend to await the statement that my right hon. Friend will make later this afternoon.

I hope that we shall not be as long on other questions as we were on that one.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade when he now expects to make a statement on the third London airport.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will consider a regional alternative to providing a third London airport.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade when he expects to make a further statement on the third London airport.

I shall be making a statement on airports policy later this afternoon.

rose—

Order. If the hon. Members concerned will wait I shall see that they, but not those who rise now, are called when the statement is made.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what sort of defensive measures against the effects of subsidized freight rates offered by merchant fleets within the Soviet bloc are being considered.

We have power to control the number of calls made at United Kingdom ports by such ships, and the cargoes that they carry. We can also control rates and impose charges. The position is kept under regular review. But unilateral United Kingdom action would not be fully effective and we would prefer to act in concert with other countries, notably within the EEC.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Can he give an assurance that in trade deals with the Soviet Union, which involve our supplying the Russians with the technology that they badly need, he will consider trading off gains that the Russians need for international gains on the shipping front?

I take note of my hon. Friend's remarks. On the whole, we have quite good relationships with the Soviet Union on shipping matters, especially technical matters. We are constantly trying to find ways of living with the Russians in relation to the pricing of freighting on both their ships and ours.

Does the Minister accept that there is some inconsistency in the attitude towards alleged Russian unfair competition and the attitude towards American companies which are charged more by British shipping companies to bring their products to Britain and therefore legislation is passed to protect British companies?

There is no inconsistency. The two matters are not related in the way that the hon. Gentleman suggests. It is right that we should have legislation to protect the legitimate rights of British companies and British residents to act within the law in the United Kingdom without their being prosecuted for it in the United States. It is right that we should also protect our shipping industry against non-commercial organisations that may dump capacity on the market.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what is the present rate of inflation.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what are the present three-monthly, six-monthly and yearly increases in the inflation rate.

The retail prices index has increased by 2·9 per cent., 10·1 per cent. and 17·4 per cent. over the last three, six and 12 months, respectively.

When does the Minister expect inflation to reach 20 per cent.?

I recall that the right hon. Member for Lanarkshire, North (Mr. Smith) predicted that inflation would reach that level by the end of this year. There is no sign that it has yet done so. It is the Government's overriding priority, through their economic policies, to overcome inflation. We are resolutely tackling the daunting and deep-seated problems that we inherited. The problems will not be overcome in a matter of months, or without recourse to severe remedies, but it is only by resolving the problems that we can hope to restore the long-term price stability yearned for by the people of this country. Our task would be a good deal easier if, instead of carping criticism from the Opposition, we received some constructive support for our policies.

Does the Minister recall that during the last general election campaign she posed as the housewive's friend, and on several occasions made statements saying that she would reduce the rate of inflation? In view of the utterly disastrous figures that she has announced now, will she forthwith resign and apologise to the British people for misleading them?

I made no specific statement. The only poseur at the last election was the previous Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection, who said that there was no sign that inflation would be taking off again. With respect to the hon. Gentleman, his Government had five years to show what their counter-inflation policies could achieve. What they did achieve was a 110 per cent. increase in prices. The present Government have no intention of repeating policies which produce such disastrous results.

Does my hon. Friend agree that if we were to annualise the past three months' inflation figures they would produce an annual inflation rate of 12·6 per cent.?

My hon. Friend is roughly correct. The high inflation that we are facing today is a direct consequence of five years during which the Labour Government failed to face the economic realities that confronted them, squandered precious time and resources for political gain and, finally, left the country to pick up the huge bills that must now be paid. That is the reality underlying the unacceptably high rates of inflation that will be with us for some time to come.

Is the Minister aware that this country has the highest rate of inflation of any industrialised country? As a result of last month's figures we moved straight to the top of the league. Does the right hon. Lady recognise that over five of the past six months of her Government we have seen, on a six-monthly basis, inflation in double figures, which must lead to 20 per cent. on a 12-month basis, and there are a whole series of charges still in the pipeline, for example, rents, mortgages, and transport charges, still to find their way into the retail price index? Does the right hon. Lady recognise that that is an appalling indictment of a Government who have deliberately increased the rate of inflation by the VAT increases in the last Budget?

What I recognise is that we inherited accelerating inflation, accelerating raw material costs, accelerating pay settlements, an acceleration in the money supply and a deterioration in the balance of payments. Those are the ingredients that have contributed to the present high levels of inflation and will, as the right hon. Gentleman said, take some time to work through. Meanwhile, we are tackling the underlying causes of these ills, and that is the only way to effect a cure. That is what we intend to do.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what representations he has received about the prices at which Japanese and East European passenger and commercial vehicles are landed in the United Kingdom.

I have received no representations about prices of Japanese vehicles. Nor have I yet been given any firm evidence that vehicles from Eastern Europe are being sold here at below the cost of production and distribution; but discussions are continuing at official level between my Department and representatives of the motor industry.

The representations are on the way to my hon. Friend. Can he give an assurance that they will be considered seriously, and that action will be expeditious if the case is substantiated?

The Department has an anti-dumping unit that is available to help industries which believe that they have a case and wish to have help in making it. We shall act on any information that my hon. Friend cares to make available.

Has my hon. Friend's Department made any study of the practicality or possible consequences of a tariff policy, or do his civil servants think that the subject is so heretical that they may jeopardise their career prospects by getting anywhere near it?

I remind my hon. Friend that we have today signed the MTNs that have been renegotiated in the Tokyo round. The Government, along with the Governments of all developed countries, have committed themselves to a policy of reducing tariff barriers and getting rid of non-tariff barriers. We believe that that is the way forward.

As restrictions have been imposed on Japanese car imports, is it not illogical not to do the same on EEC car imports? It is from these countries that the majority of imports come.

It would be against our Treaty obligations to impose the restrictions suggested by the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what representations he has received from the Scottish Knitwear Council on the subject of misleading labelling of textiles by foreign manufacturers, and if he will make a statement.

The Scottish Knitwear Council wrote to me on Friday seeking an amendment to the Trade Descriptions Act 1972. This matter is now under consideration by my Department.

If the Minister were to buy a sweater marked "Pringle", would he not think that it came from Hawick, but if he were to look closely at the label and found that there was a tiny "s" in front of the name, making it "Springle" would-he not discover that it came from Taiwan? Is there not a need for labelling legislation, and should it not be a requirement in mail order catalogues to list the country of origin?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, it is a condition of the Trade Descriptions Act that the name or mark must be accompanied by a conspicuous indication of the country of manufacture. My view is that what the hon. Gentleman describes does not fit in with the Trade Descriptions Act and is not a conspicuous indication. I suggest that he advises the manufacturers to report the matter to the trading standards authority in their area which is responsible for enforcing the law.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will seek to repeal the Hairdressers (Registration) Act 1964.

No, Sir.

Will my hon. Friend look urgently into the affairs of the Hairdressing Council? Is he aware of the proposal to replace it by a body quite outside the terms of the 1964 Act? Is not this, coming on top of the police inquiries into the financial affairs of the Hairdressing Council, yet another indication of gross irregularity in the conduct of the council's affairs, and would it not be far more sensible to allocate responsibility for training and registration to either the joint training council or the National Hairdressers' Federation?

As my hon. Friend knows, the Act was introduced as a Private Member's Bill. Under the terms of the Act, my Department has no power to intervene in the running of the council. I shall consider all the other points that my hon. Friend has raised and write to him.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what representations he has received about price increases which call for the use of his present statutory powers to restrain or control prices.

I naturally receive a number of different types of representation about prices. As I have made clear on numerous occasions, the powers which exist were seldom used by the previous Government except in the context of EEC subsidies. They are at present being used in connection with the EEC subsidy on butter.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that many people, including those in consumer organisations and the trade union movement, are now utterly desperate, feeling that the Government have thrown away all powers to control prices at any stage of crisis, as at this moment? Does the right hon. Lady realise that many people are facing the bitterest and worst Christmas they have known, with the prices of bread, of eggs and ofbeer—all working-class mass-consumption commodities—going through the roof, so that ordinary people are on the point of starvation for the first time in many years?

Naturally, I sympathise with people who are having to tackle a high rate of inflation, but the Labour Government's approach to tackling inflation was to introduce a successsion of policies designed, through price control and the Price Commission Act, temporarily to disguise inflation and deceive consumers for the sake of short-term political benefit. Not only were such policies expensive and time-wasting failures but they were cruel, since they misled consumers about the true rate of inflation, which they have to face in the end. The present Government have no intention of resuscitating such disreputable policies.

Will the right hon. Lady insist on her civil servants putting a hit of truth into her replies? Will she accept that it was her Government who doubled VAT—one of the most inflationary things to happen since the election—and that mortgage interest rate going up to 15 per cent. and minimum lending rate at 17 per cent., are calculated further to increase the rate of inflation? Will the Government accept responsibility for this?

The hon. Gentleman should not blame my civil servants for my replies, for which I claim authorship. In fact, we have not doubled VAT, but the Labour Government doubled prices, and the short-term manipulations of prices upon which they embarked served only to delay the increases which have to come through in the end. The factors which the hon. Gentleman has mentioned are just some of the factors, but by no means the main ones, in the increase in inflation which the country is having to face today and will have to face for some time to come.

Does the right hon. Lady recall removing the restriction on the price of bread almost as soon as she got into office? Can she explain why the price of bread has now risen by another 2½p for a standard loaf? Will she, as Minister, start looking forward instead of backward, and answer the question? Will she tell us whether we shall reach an inflation rate of 20 per cent.?

First, we are looking forward to our economic policies restoring long-term price stability, which this country has not known for years. The reason why bread prices have increased during this period is that bread producers' costs have risen as a result of raw material prices rising.

Will the Minister realise that people are more worried about the price of bread on earth than about the price of pie in the sky, because they expect that if the Government's policies are pursued over the next four years as they have been over the past six months the price of pie in the sky will be prohibitive?

Naturally, I am aware of those concerns. That is why it is the overriding purpose of this Government, through their economic policies, to overcome inflation which, among other things, affects the price of bread.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade in which countries there remain non-tariff barriers which impede the import of Scotch whisky; and what steps he is taking to have these barriers removed.

There are non-tariff barriers against the import of Scotch whisky in many developing and some developed countries. The implementation of the agreements reached in the multilateral trade negotiations should result in a major reduction in barriers in North America, and proceedings are being undertaken in the European Court against a number of alleged discriminatory practices in EEC countries.

I am obliged to my hon. Friend for that reply. Is he aware that the structure of the liquor tax as distinct from the import tariff on whisky and the structure of tax on liquor generally in Japan is such that a relatively small increase in the trade price or a relatively small change in the exchange rate may mean that a commodity such as Scotch whisky falls into a far higher bracket and is penalised? Is my hon. Friend satisfied with the negotiations that have taken place on this matter between the EEC and the Japanese Government, bearing in mind that this problem impinges particularly on Scotch whisky, which is an important part of our export trade to Japan?

As part of the multilateral trade negotiations the Japanese have agreed to a number of cuts in their tariffs, which will help whisky, but through the EEC we are pressing them to relax further controls, because—I agree with my hon. Friend—the Japanese are discriminating, and will be even after the cuts, against an important British export.

What would be the Government's advice to a meeting taking place in Glasgow today among the trade unions concerned about the bulk export of Scotch whisky to Japan? Have the Government any thoughts on this matter?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, the EDC on Scotch whisky considered this matter and came to the conclusion that it would be against the interests of the industry to prohibit the export of bulk whisky, and the Government have taken that advice.

Will the Minister recognise that his Government are extremely lax, as their predecessors were, in defending the interests of the Scotch whisky industry, in view of the contribution to the home Exchequer and the important part which the export of Scotch whisky plays in our balance of payments? Will the hon. Gentleman at least press upon the Canadian Government the need to get their provincial liquor boards to take a fairer attitude to whisky?

I am pleased to be able to tell the right hon. Gentleman that I did that when I was in Ottawa two weeks ago. I pressed not only on the Federal Government but on representatives of the two provincial Governments whom I saw that their present practices were unfair, and I urged them to implement their commitment under the multilateral trade negotiations.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he intends to seek powers to enable him to direct foreign airlines to use particular airports in the United Kingdom.

No, Sir. Such powers are already available under the Air Navigation Order 1976, should the need arise.

But as the failure to use them is entirely due to the retaliation that such use would bring on this country, and as the absence of the use of those powers has resulted in the failure of successive Governments to do anything about any major transfer of airlines from Heathrow to Gatwick, does not my hon. Friend think that the creation of a new third airport in the South-East will mean no more than the creation of an airport used by non-scheduled and charter services? Is it not a cheaper and easier answer to ban these services from Heathrow and Gatwick?

As my hon. Friend knows, whole-plane charters are already banned from Heathrow. I believe that airlines will find, if congestion is unbearable at Heathrow as it reaches its eventual capacity, that they will have no choice but to go either to Gatwick or to any other facility that we may make available.

Does my hon. Friend agree that while there is scope for increasing international traffic at both Heathrow and Gatwick, if it is to be encouraged at Gatwick the number of charter flights from there is clearly far too high? Will he therefore look into this matter again with a view to seeing whether charter holiday flights in particular could proceed from other regional airports just as well as from Gatwick?

I hope that there will be many more holiday charter flights from regional airports to cope with the demands from the regions. However, Gatwick is operating well under capacity. It could take a great deal more traffic.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade whether he will make a statement about the recent meeting of the EEC Council of Ministers.

I refer my hon. Friend to the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Lord Privy Seal on 21 November.

How far has the EEC Council of Ministers take into account the effects of current and pending increases in world oil prices on world trade, and the consequential detrimental effects on the economies of EEC countries?

As my hon. Friend knows, that subject was discussed at the European Council. It is a matter that has been causing the Heads of Governments of the developed countries great concern, especially the Governments of OECD countries. As he also knows, and as my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State could tell him in more detail, we are playing our part in trying to ensure that the West uses wisely the available supplies of oil.

At the EEC Ministers' Conference, was the evidence discussed that was provided by ITV about farmers driving droves of cattle across the border of one country into another—sometimes several times over with the same herd of cattle—and each farmer drawing the grant allowed under the EEC farming policy on each occasion?

I do not wish to be unhelpful to the hon. Gentleman, but that issue was not discussed at the Council meeting that I attended. If he refers the matter to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, I am sure that he will receive a reply.

Harking back to the knitwear problem, has there been any discussion at the EEC Council of the effects on Europe as a whole of imports from the Far East, often under false labelling conditions, bearing in mind that the German knitwear industry has almost ceased to exist? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Italians seem to have resisted infiltration, in a way that we have found impossible in Scotland and in the North of England?

Textiles and the problems of the textile industry are discussed at every meeting of the Council. That has certainly been so at the meetings that I have attended. However, the problem to which the hon. Gentleman referred has not been discussed.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade how many tons of coal have been imported into the United Kingdom during each of the last five years; how many tons have been contracted for the present year and1980–81; and what was the kind of coal and the price per ton in each case.

With permission, I will circulate the information in the Official Report.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in spite of the fact that we are a trading nation the importation of coal will do great harm to the future of the mining industry? When will the Government wake up? Many imports inflict great harm on our traditional industries. They import unemployment.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he is satisfied with the current level of the British export trade.

No, Sir. The volume of our exports has recovered well in the second half of this year, but I believe that there is room for further improvement.

Does the hon. Gentleman accept that the major problem facing our exporters is the heavy overvaluation of the £ sterling, which is hitting exports and subsidising a flood of imports that are eliminating jobs in this country? The result is that we are now perilously close to becoming a net importer of manufactured goods. As no conceivable increase in productivity can overcome the over-valuation barrier, will the hon. Gentleman hold talks with the Chancellor of the Exchequer and make urgent representations for an The Government seem to do nothing about it. They merely sit back and smile.

I think that the hon. Gentleman is overstating his case. Imports are a relatively small proportion of our consumption. We export a small part of our coal. We need imports to get the proper mix.

The short answer to the hon. Gentleman's misguided question is "No, Sir".

Does my hon. Friend agree that it is a mistake to blame the so-called over-valued pound? Does he further agree that we are lacking competitive prices? The price of exports is only one element. Does my hon. Friend agree that delivery dates and after-sales service are equally important?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. In my discussions with manufacturers I find that they, too, accept that there is scope, by improved design, improved quality, better productivity, better delivery dates and better after-sales service, to counter some of the problems—I admit that there are some—that are caused by the harder currency.

I am sorry to come back to a further question about knitwear, but the industry is in a critical state. Will a study be made of the various difficulties that are faced by British knitwear exporters in the markets of our EEC partners?

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his persistence and on the way in which he supports an important industry. I shall take his comments into account.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what was the total value of exports to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the total value of imports from that country for the last 12 months for which figures are available.

For the period November 1978 to October 1979 the total value of our exports to the Soviet Union was £433 million. Our imports from that country for the same period were £842 million.

I recognise that the proportion of 2: 1 has been consistent over the years. I recognise also that 30 per cent. of our imports consist of oil and 40 per cent. of diamonds. Will my hon. Friend give an assurance that there will be a greater resolve by the Government to balance the trade between the two countries, even if that means giving an assurance that we shall refuse to take any oil imports from the USSR after we become oil sufficient?

Most of the items that we import from the Soviet Union are those that we need; for example, raw materials for which there are, perhaps, no other sources of supply. A substantial part of the trade is in diamonds and furs, which are subsequently re-exported. I want to see our exports to the Soviet Union increased. There is scope for that. I do not believe that the way forward is to restrict the importation of items that we need.

Will my hon. Friend tell the House how much of the credit that was negotiated by the Labour Government for Russia is still outstanding? Will it continue for long? Would it not be much more useful to extend credit—perhaps on not quite such favourable terms—to British Commonwealth and Third world nations to encourage them to buy from Britain?

About £400 million of that line of credit is still available. The agreement ends in about two months' time. I prefer not to comment on the third part of my hon. Friend's question. Britain needs to trade wherever it can. Our trade with other countries implies neither approval nor disapproval of their politics.

At this festive time, may I ask my hon. Friend whether we need Russian Christmas cards?

I congratulate my hon. Friend on bringing the problem to the notice of the House and ensuring that the House retains its interest in it. I, like him, was staggered by the increased number of Russian imports in that trade. As I said in reply to an earlier question, if the industry feels that there is an antidumping case to be made—I know that it does—my Department is available to help with advice about processing that case.

Does acceptance of trade with the Soviet Union give it any credibility in the eyes of the Government?

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman understands his question, but I do not.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what was the outcome of the survey that the Minister for Consumer Affairs instigated with the National Union of Townswomen's Guilds and the Women's Institutes on origin marking.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what progress his Department has made in its review of the need for cutlery to be marked with its country of origin.

I am considering the interesting results of the origin marking surveys carried out for me by the National Union of Townswomen's Guilds and by the National Consumer Council as part of my review of policy in this area. Cutlery was among the items included in these surveys. I shall make a statement to the House announcing my intentions in due course. The Women's Institutes were not involved in this exercise.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that if origin marking is undertaken it should be for consumer protection rather than for trade protection?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. Origin marking has attracted a considerable amount of interest and attention in recent years. I considered it desirable to have two independent surveys reflecting a broad range of views to help me in reaching my decision. The main purpose of those surveys was to discover not just whether consumers wanted to see the country of origin displayed on the goods they purchased but whether they needed this information to exercise their choice in an informed manner. I think that both surveys point to that conclusion.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that there are many consumers in this country who want to buy British and would like to see "Made in Sheffield" displayed more prominently on more products available for purchase?

Yes, I am aware of that. I am equally aware, as a result of the surveys that have been carried out, that buy-British is not the only motive that prompts consumers to want origin marking. They sometimes want to know the country of origin in order not to exercise that choice.

Why was the Minister so selective in the people whom she asked to give her information? As she carefully ignored at least three other major women's organisations which complained to her, will she please, when looking at the problem of country of origin marking, ensure that EEC countries must also mark their goods?

I am not aware that any other women's organisations made approaches to me on this matter before I referred it to the National Union of Townswomen's Guilds and the National Consumer Council. In fact, I sought the opinions of more people on this matter than any Government have ever done before, as I considered it an important problem.

As many people think that they are buying British cars, although they are buying cars which look like British cars but are made in foreign manufacturing plants, will my right hon. Friend consider introducing a system under which, if British manufacturers bring in vehicles from their overseas plants, such vehicles are marked with a plate showing the country of origin?

I propose to enter into more detailed discussion than has hitherto been possible on the whole question of origin marking.

Is it true that suits are being imported from Romania into Germany, where they are then relabeled and imported into this country outside the scope of the import restrictions?

I understand that that is not correct. There is a similar question down for answer on the Order Paper later.

Has the right hon. Lady considered the problem of cutlery blanks coming in from the Far East, being plated in Sheffield and sold to the British public, creating the impression that they are British-produced? Will she make a definition order under the Trade Descriptions Act to ensure that there are foreign origin markings on this type of item?

I gave particular consideration to that problem. The question of silver plating of cutlery blanks made elsewhere will not be excluded from any further action that I propose to take in this matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will raise at the next meeting of the European Council of Trade Ministers the problems caused for the carpet manufacturing industry by the cheap fuel policy for synthetic fibre production operated by the United States Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will press for effective action arising from the Council of Minister's decision on 20 November relating to United States textile imports into the United Kingdom before the next meeting of the Council of Ministers.

My right hon. Friend and I have been pressing hard for urgent action on this problem, and the Foreign Affairs Council on 18 December will receive a report on the Commission's consultations with the United States about EEC imports of synthetic textiles, including the carpet sector.

When the Minister attends the Council will he bear in mind the explosive nature of the increase in imports of United States carpets this year and the heavy redundancies in the carpet manufacturing industry in the United Kingdom, especially in West Yorkshire, as well as the poor prognosis for the industry in 1980? Will he bear in mind that when British manufacturers want to buy this cheap fibre, which is available in the United States because of the two-tier policy of the United States Government, somehow they do not find it easy to obtain it? Is not the result that American carpets have an enormous price advantage, which is grossly unfair? Will the Minister consider raising the tariff on United States carpets of this kind, or banning them altogether?

Order. That question was unreasonably long.

As my right hon. Friend and I recognise the important nature of this serious problem, we have been leading the campaign within the EEC to get action taken. It was as a result of pressure from us that the article 23 consultations were started. We shall continue the pressure to make sure that the industry receives the help that we believe it needs.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the situation in the textile industry in North-East Lancashire is so serious, with mills closing down and others threatened with closure, that unless he takes effective and courageous action immediately the situation will deteriorate still further?

The most important words that my hon. Friend used were "effective action". We wish to see effective action taken as quickly as possible. That is why we have been keeping up the pressure within the Council of Ministers.

Is the Minister aware that imports from the United States are not merely of carpets, and that they affect not merely the carpet industry but the whole textile industry? Will he take action to help the Lancashire industry in this respect.

We are aware that synthetic fibres—not just tufted carpets but the whole range of products—are affected by the unfairness of the American dual pricing system for energy, and that has been the subject of the discussions and the pressure.

Does the Minister realise that if OPEC puts up the price of oil still further the dual energy pricing system in the United States that he mentioned will add a greater burden to the problems of the carpet and textile industries? Is not the problem much more urgent than perhaps he suggests in his answer?

I regard this as an extremely urgent problem. It is one for which we have had to fight very hard within the Council of Ministers. More and more members are beginning to see the rightness of our case.

Is my hon. Friend aware that, because of the system operated by the United States Government, American tufted carpets can be imported into Britain at prices which, in many cases, are lower than those at which British manufacturers can produce them? Is he also aware that, because of the extremely efficient distribution system in this country, our market is wide open? Will he take urgent action to bring about joint action to resolve this serious problem?

I hope that what I said in answer to earlier questions demonstrates that we agree with my hon. Friend's diagnosis of the problem. I hope that we have his support in the action that we are taking.

Is the Minister aware that this problem is reaching a catastrophic level, and that the likelihood is that the Council of Ministers will dilly-dally over this for several months? Is he aware that during the GATT multilateral trade negotiations the Council of Ministers, at the insistence of the previous Government, undertook to take the appropriate measures under GATT without delay? That was said on 3 April this year. Will the Minister undertake that his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State—who has so far not answered any questions today on this or any other matter—will make a statement to the House, after the Council of Ministers meeting, on what the Council of Ministers decides? May I further urge the Government to give urgent consideration to imposing interim protection? As I read Council regulation 926/79, is it not open to the British Government, operating within the terms of the European Community, to take interim action to stop the flood of imports from the United States, which the Opposition call on the Government to do urgently?

If I may say so, I had not noticed the right hon. Member for Lanarkshire, North (Mr. Smith) leaping to his feet this afternoon. That was his first question. The Government recognise the urgency of the problem and are determined to take effective action. Tub thumping of the kind the right hon. Gentleman favours will not help. We believe that we are making progress. We do not expect months to pass without action. We expect to see action taken quickly. We shall press the matter and report back to the House on the Council of Ministers meeting.

Does my hon. Friend realise that the carpet factories in Lancashire and Yorkshire and the Axminster factories, which set the trend in certain types of carpet in this country, are being undercut by unfair competition? Will he consider the practice of the Americans who, in dealing with dumping, always seem to be able to act much faster than ourselves? Will he look at the reasons why they do that? Does he realise that we want effective action, of course, but that we want it quickly?

One of the reasons why it is not perhaps as easy for us as it is for the Americans is that the Commission has the ultimate authority, and we have to act within the Commission. We have to take the rest of our partners with us. Unilateral action is likely to be ineffective and not deal with the problem. The essence of this is to get effective action taken. We believe that effective action is best taken on a Community-wide basis.

Does the Minister agree that the question is not about the urgency of the problem, on which the House is agreed, but about the urgency of action? Does he further agree that if action is not taken urgently there will be no textile and carpet industries left to protect?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he is satisfied that manufacturers' guarantees are worthwhile for consumers.

Yes, Sir. These guarantees can confer worthwhile additional rights on consumers. At the same time, they cannot deprive consumers of their rights under the sale of goods and unfair contract terms legislation.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Is she aware that some guarantees contain restrictive clauses which have no validity in law and yet gravely mislead consumers? Will she take action to deal with this problem?

Yes, I am concerned that some guarantees might mislead consumers about their normal legal rights, although it is an offence to do so. I welcome the new guide for manufacturers published by the Director General of Fair Trading and I hope that manufacturers will increasingly give worthwhile guarantees in simple terms which people can understand.

Instead of issuing advice or guidance from the Director General of Fair Trading, would it not be better to enforce the rules so that manufacturers stop including in guarantees exclusion clauses which they well know are void under the Supply of Goods (Implied Terms) Act 1973?

As the hon. and learned Gentleman will know, these exclusion clauses are also an offence under more recent legislation. As far as my knowledge runs, those provisions are being enforced to the full.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that one of the most important guarantees is often a trademark? When cheap cutlery comes from the Far East to Sheffield, the implication of the trademark is that it is made in Sheffield, whereas most of it is made in South Korea. Will she do something to stop that kind of so-called guarantee?

I have already dealt with that matter in an earlier question, and I have announced the intentions that I propose to pursue.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what action he intends to take on the Consumer Protection Advisory Committee report on value added tax inclusive pricing.

I intend as soon as possible to lay before Parliament a draft order dealing with the use of VAT-inclusive pricing. This will give effect to the proposals of the Director General of Fair Trading as modified by the Consumer Protection Advisory Committee.

Does the Minister think that the implementation of the recommendations of the report will help the fight against inflation, or give rise to further inflation?

My purpose in introducing these regulations is to prevent confusion on the part of the consumer. In general, it is my intention that the regulations will require that either VAT-inclusive prices are displayed or prices showing clearly the amount of VAT.

Will the order be laid under the Fair Trading Act 1973 or under the Prices Act 1974?

I am reviewing this matter. I hope that it will be possible to lay the order under the Fair Trading Act. If that is not possible, I shall use whatever other powers are available to me.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will take steps if petrol is sold in metric quantities to ensure that consumers are able to make a meaningful price comparison between imperial and metric quantities.

I propose to vary the existing provisions of the Petrol Prices (Display) Order 1978 so that where petrol is sold by the litre the equivalent price per gallon must also be clearly indicated. Consultations with the trade and with motoring interests will be opened shortly.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that assurance. May I ask her to assure the House that confusion for the consumer, which might be caused in the future, will be kept to a minimum not only in this respect but in all areas where imperial and metric measures overlap?

I am concerned on two counts. The first is that there should be fair competition. The second is that the motorist should be in no doubt about the value that he is getting for his money, whether garages are selling in imperial or in metric quantities. This is true of all other areas in which the problem arises.

Will my right hon. Friend have a word with the Post Office to see whether it will continue to quote parcel prices in pounds and ounces as well as in kilograms?

My hon. Friend will not be surprised to learn that I have already had such words with the Post Office. There is no statutory requirement for it not to do so.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will make a statement on the progress of negotiations on the multi-fibre arrangement.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade whether he will make a statement on the renewal of the multi-fibre arrangement.

As I have made clear in previous statements, the Government recognise that there will be a need for a continuing orderly marketing arrangement in textiles after the present MFA has expired.

Surely the Minister is aware that continuing discussions are of no help to the Lancashire textile industry. Is he aware that one reason why that industry is being crippled is that countries which have agreed to limit their exports have already exceeded their quotas? Will he take firm and immediate action to help the Lancashire textile industry?

The hon. and learned Gentleman knows that the MFA was negotiated by his own Government. We have taken action on a number of occasions to strengthen that agreement. We have negotiated new agreements with Cyprus and Malta. We have instituted a safeguard action against Turkey. We have used the so-called basket extractor mechanism 11 times. We monitor the agreement extremely carefully. I think that the hon. and learned Gentleman is making much too sweeping a condemnation of it.

Will my hon. Friend consider initiating negotiations for the 1982 agreement? These things take a long time to get going. Could not he begin it on New Year's Day?

I note what my hon. and learned Friend says. Preliminary discussions have started, and obviously they will gain momentum, but the agreement still has over two years to run. We recognise the importance of what he says.

Is the Minister aware that many people in the textile industry have been very depressed ever since he wound up the debate on the textile industry, as they fear that they are being allowed to die a slow death? Whereas the steel industry has had its throat cut by the Government, the textile industry is being allowed to bleed to death slowly and there is no will on the Government Benches to save it.

May I say to the hon. Gentleman: good question, wrong Minister. I opened the debate; I did not close it. Perhaps he should address his Question to the Minister who closed it. The multi-fibre arrangement covers 28 countries. We have agreements with eight other countries. We have a huge range of quotas and they are monitored extremely carefully. The hon. Gentleman does not help the industry by spreading the rumour—and giving substance to it—that there is no help or protection available. There is a massive machinery of protection, and it is being used.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the representations made this afternoon on behalf of the Lancashire textile industry call for a review of the operation of the MFA, and that this view is very much shared by certain countries exporting to this country which have also suffered as a result of the MFA?

I agree with my hon. Friend.

Will the Minister take the opportunity today, which he did not take when he opened the debate on the textile industry, to make it clear that the Government are committed to a renewal of the multi-fibre arrangement? All that we have had from the Minister are words about an orderly marketing arrangement. I remind him that the previous Government committed themselves, and that the Council of Ministers has committed itself. So long as the Government shilly-shally we shall not get the new MFA and our partners will not believe that we mean business.

The right hon. Gentleman may have forgotten what the MFA is. It is an orderly marketing arrangement, and I have already said that there will be a successor to it. I do not know what the right hon. Gentleman's problem is.