asked the Minister for Trade what progress he has made towards implementation of the recommendations of the Insolvency Law Review Committee.

The Government have accepted the general principles underlying the committee's report. Accordingly, urgent consideration is being given to the programme of legislation which would be needed to provide a modern body of insolvency law. However, translation of the recommendations into legislation will be a time-consuming task and I cannot say when that will be completed.

I am grateful for that reply. Will my hon. Friend continue to impress upon his right hon. and noble Friend the Secretary of State for Trade the urgent need for insolvency law reform? When will a White Paper or a Bill be published?

I cannot yet answer the second part of my hon. Friend's question, but I can assure him that we are mindful of the urgency of this matter and we think that something should be done as soon as possible.

When will the Minister act on his own words and prevent directors winding up a company one day and setting up another one the next day, however improperly they may have acted, thus bilking their debtors and the public and bringing the entire system into the type of disrepute that the Minister, above all, would wish to avoid?

I share the hon. and learned Gentleman's views on this matter. I think that it is an abuse of the present position when people are able to do that. The difficulty is to find a way of curbing it without at the same time curbing genuine, honest traders. I am mindful of this point, but I am also mindful of the need to examine the qualifications of people who set themselves up as liquidators.

I thank my hon. Friend for that sympathetic reply. Does he accept that, while I agree entirely that no one should be milked by bankrupts setting up immediately after be mg declared bankrupt, nevertheless great hardship can arise among those who wish to rehabilitate themselves and make a living for their company. I am glad that my hon. Friend is taking this matter seriously.

I understand and share my hon. Friend's point of view.

The Minister will recall the recommendation of the Cork committee on the appointment of an administrator in cases of insolvency. Would not that be a useful interim measure which the Government could carry into effect if they decided not to hold an early election arid needed legislation with which to carry on?

The appointment of an administrator was one of the important recommendations of the Cork report. It is an attractive recommendation, but I think that it is important to consult properly on the implications before we start making announcements.

It is not good enough to bottle up the recommendations of the Cork committee. It gave five years' consideration to this important matter, including a year spent inside the Department of Trade. For the Minister simply to say that the matter is complicated is not good enough. Will he at least publish a Green Paper in the present Session of Parliament, or in the next, to ensure that we can start to make progress on a matter which most people recognise as long overdue for legislation?

I do not agree with every word that the hon. Gentleman has said, but I share his sense of urgency and we shall try to produce a statement as soon as we can.

asked the Minister for Trade if he will make a statement on the overall balance of trade for the motor vehicle industry, including the component sector.

The crude trade deficit for the motor industry in 1982 was £1,278 million. This figures includes a crude trade surplus of £506 million on trade in components.

I thank the hon. and learned Gentleman for that information. Is he not concerned about the fact that the deficit on the complete unit side used to be far more than compensated for by a surplus on the component side and the component surplus is now in danger of diminishing? Does he accept that legislation will be necessary in this country, as has already been introduced in other countries, to ensure that we do not degenerate into an assembly-only motor industry—the assembly of other people's imported cars using other countries' components?

The statistics show that the export figures for motor vehicles and the value of exports remain constant. There was, however, a short upsurge in imports last year. I do not think that the House would expect me to legislate against decisions of our fellow countrymen. As the hon. Gentleman may possibly be contemplating a return to midland politics, I shall give him a piece of good news. Contrasting the past three months with the previous three months, engineering exports have increased by 8·5 per cent. There is great vitality in that sector.

Would it not help our trade in motor car components if the manufacturers of every type of car advertised for sale in the United Kingdom had to give, among other information, the proportion of the United Kingdom value added content of their cars?

I suspect that that would impose an intolerable burden on motor car retailers. I suspect also that it would be difficult to determine precise amounts. I recognise my hon. Friend's concern, but I am not certain that he has offered a practical solution.

Does the Minister appreciate that the British public, who are being invited to buy German-made Fords and Vauxhalls, are under the impression that they are buying British? Will he take steps to ensure that the vehicle identification number on foreign-made cars is displayed conspicuously and that purchasers are informed of what it means?

It may be patronising, but I always try to educate our compatriots in what they are buying. The right hon. and learned Gentleman will appreciate that there are European regulations of which account must be taken before the solution that he has suggested can be adopted.

asked the Minister for Trade what were the levels of United Kingdom imports and exports for the hosiery and synthetic and non-synthetic knitwear industries for the last three months for which records are available.

In the period December 1982 to February 1983 United Kingdom imports of hosiery and knitwear were valued at £130 million cif and exports at £70 million fob.

Does the hon. and learned Gentleman not recognise the disastrous state of this and other traditional industries in places such as Leicester, where unemployment is at a fearful level? Does he not regard the trumpeted allegations of an upturn as a pre-election fraud that is being perpetrated against the background of a growing army of unemployed?

I recognise that the hon. and learned Gentleman is a stout champion of his constituency interests, but his rhetoric does not accord with the facts. Employment in the industry has been reasonably stable over the past couple of years.

There is 50 per cent. unemployment.

Will my hon. and learned Friend consider carefully the proposed takeover of Thomas Tilling by BTR, the effect of which could be the exporting of a great many textile jobs as a result of BTR utilising manufacturing capacity overseas? In the light of this, will he reconsider the possibility of referring the matter to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission?

I take note of what my hon. Friend has said. I remind the House that the new multi-fibre arrangement has recently been negotiated, which will provide a considerable measure of protection for the United Kingdom textile industry. It will enable it to plan ahead with security over the next couple of years.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the totally unsatisfactory answer to that question, I give notice that I shall seek to raise the issue on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

asked the Minister for Trade when he expects to receive the accounts of British Airways for the financial year 1982–83.

I expect to receive British Airways' audited accounts for 1982–83 in the second half of June.

Does the Minister accept that a capital reconstruction, or the writing-off, of British Airways' debts is an essential prerequisite to fulfilling his personal ambition of selling off British Airways to the private sector?

Selling off British Airways is a personal ambition of mine that is shared by the entire Government. It is our wish to sell off British Airways as soon as possible. The Government have not made up their mind about a capital reconstruction.

I welcome the substantial progress that has been made by British Airways towards financial success. However, will my hon. Friend ensure the maximum effort by his Department to stop the stupid actions that are now being pursued by lawyers in the United States to put the blame for the unfortunate demise of Laker Airways on British Airways and British Caledonian?

I am glad to hear my hon. Friend praise the splendid performance of British Airways in the past year. That is something that I look forward to hearing from Opposition Members. I hope that they will pay tribute to the amazing turnround from loss into profit. I am glad to be able to tell my hon. Friend that a high-powered delegation from the Department of Trade will start negotiating in Washington tomorrow on the very matter to which he referred.

Is the Minister aware that the Opposition need no lessons in supporting nationalised industries? Indeed, we are pleased to see nationalised industries prosper. It is a pity that the Government seem determined to sell off nationalised industries once they appear to be making a profit for the taxpayer. Is it not the case that the consultants—Price Waterhouse—told the Government that if British Airways were sold off, 75 per cent. of its debts would have to be written off—

Order. Question 14 asks exactly what the hon. Gentleman is asking and he cannot anticipate the answer to that question.

Will the Minister come clean and tell the public that it is his and the Government's intention to use up to £800 million of taxpayers' money to write off British Airways' debts and to sell off the airline after an election—and not before—to the private sector? Why does he not have the courage to tell the electorate that that is his intention?

I have already made clear the Government's attitude to a reconstruction in answering my hon. Friend the Member of Hastings (Mr. Warren). However, I am delighted, and surprised, to hear, at last, the Opposition congratulating British Airways on its splendid turnround from loss into profit.

I do not ask my hon. Friend to prevail upon British Airways to buy certain aeroplanes, but will he draw its attention to the fact that the Government may or may not be involved in the partial funding of the A320 Airbus, and that for British Airways to purchase other aeroplanes from America without considering the A320, when it comes to fruition, would not go down terribly well among many of my right hon. and hon. Friends who care about other involvements of the industry?

I am sure that the chairman of British Airways will take note of what my hon. Friend has said. However, it is not the Government's policy to force British Airways into making purchases into which it does not wish to enter. I remind the House that the Boeing 757 with Rolls-Royce engines has a higher British content than the current Airbuses.

asked the Minister for Trade why he has not renewed the normal annual grant to the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux.

The Government grant that goes to NACAB increased rapidly under this Government. Since 1979 it has increased from £1·85 million to £6·04 milliom this year. That is a sign of the support that the Government give the organisation. With these figures in mind, I thought it advisable to examine the distribution of these large sums of taxpayers' money. NACAB was without a director from April 1982 to February 1983, and it seemed wise to let the new director settle in and to review the allocation of money after six months. I stress that NACAB is funded in full for the first six months of this year—that is to September—so its work can be maintained. I have given assurances that the funding for the second half of the year will be continued should the review take longer than I hope.

Does the Minister still not accept that the damaging allegations, apparently made by someone in his Department, that appeared in The Sunday Times will not be corrected by an inquiry into the very different issue of saving money? Does he further recognise that a half-hour Adjournment debate is no substitute for a proper debate on the subject in Government time? Does he not appreciate that those who have to budget on behalf of NACAB are entitled to know whether they will have the funds to enable them to continue their activity before the bills arise for payment? Does he recognise that budgeting on a hand-to-mouth basis is an impossible way of proceeding for NACAB?

I can understand the right hon. and learned Gentleman's anxieties. I made it clear in my statement last week, and again during last Friday's Adjournment debate, that am not responsible for what individual journalists put in their articles. My Department did not confirm what appeared in the article in The Sunday Times and no contact was made with me. The two main points in the article—first, that I have cut NACAB's funds and, secondly, that I am influenced by another person in another area of activity—are totally incorrect.

Are not the real matters the distribution of these funds, the exact way in which they are distributed and whether large sums of money should be spent on training or for a new headquarters? Surely those are matters at which my hon. Friend has a right to look to ensure that the funds are used in the best interests. Is he aware that if he intends to do that he will have the support of the whole House?

I hope that in this matter I have the support of the whole House. It would be improper for me not to wish to see how these funds are distributed and the basis on which the allocation is made. I share my hon. Friend's views on that. It is important that if people do not want to damage this marvellous movement — [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] I have said so a number of times. If they do not want to damage it they should differentiate carefully between the funding of the citizens advice bureaux generally, which is done by local government, and the quality of work that they do, and the funding of the national association, a professional servicing body, which is funded by the Government.

Is not the whole affair yet another disgraceful but unsuccessfull attempt to smear the CAB and Joan Ruddock and is it not similar to the attack made by his colleague the Secretary of State for Defence at the weekend? Mrs. Ruddock is a scrupulous worker for CAB who would not dream of committing the misdemeanours alleged. As this is, in my view, a libellous statement, should not the Minister resign?

I do not accept what the hon. Gentleman says. If there is any question of smears and slurs, it seems that they have been directed much more at me and the Government.

While joining my hon. Friend in paying tribute to the work that the CAB does locally throughout the country, through thousands of volunteers, may I ask him to confirm that the review will be truly independent and will report at an early date?

I urge other hon. Members to follow the line that my hon. Friend has just put forward. It is vital that these matters are kept in perspective. As the Minister responsible for funding NACAB, I have agreed with it the need for a review, and that is now being progressed as rapidly as possible, and I stress "rapidly".

asked the Minister for Trade whether he has any plans for the reorganisation of the regional tourist boards.

The regional tourist boards are voluntary, not statutory, bodies, but I have been considering their role and receiving evidence from and about them in my review of tourism, the conclusions of which I hope to announce to the House shortly.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there is widespread support among all political parties in Wales for the work of the Wales Tourist Board and that whatever may be the arguments for rationalisation in this sphere—and there are strong arguments—it would be extremely unpopular throughout Wales were the work of that board to be swept away?

It is certainly true that there are considerable areas where rationalisation would be welcome in the whole of the tourist structure. The Wales board is largely a matter for the Secretary of State for Wales.

Would it not be a good thing, and in accordance with Government thinking, if the other tourist boards were also voluntary, not statutory?

That is as may be, but it would require primary legislation.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the tourist information centres at some of our ports and airports are of the utmost importance? In his review of these matters, will he do his utmost to ensure that those information centres continue?

My hon. Friend has been a strong fighter for tourist information centres in his area. He may like to know that there are now about 500 such centres throughout the country — a very strong network indeed. A distinction must be drawn between tourist information centres funded by local authorities and those funded by the English Tourist Board. It is those that have recently been called into question.

There are many beautiful areas that are never seen by overseas visitors. Will the Minister do more financially to encourage tourist boards to give more information to visitors to ensure that they go outside London and see our beautiful country? Will he take note that the Yorkshire tourist board is a very good board?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman about the Yorkshire board and I hope that all the regional tourist boards will take note of his wise words.

Does the Minister intend to increase or decrease, Government assistance to tourist boards?

The hon. Gentleman will have to wait for an answer to that question.

asked the Minister for Trade what responses he has received to his statement in March on the Government's policy towards merchant shipping.

The General Council of British Shipping, National Union of Seamen, Merchant Navy and Airline Officers Association, Mercantile Marine Services Association and Radio and Electronic Officers Union have responded, and I have received 19 other letters, some of them duplicates.

Is the Minister aware that few ministerial statements in this Parliament have been so roundly and universally condemned as his statement of 18 March about the British shipping industry? Was not his statement simply a political smokescreen for the complete absence of any new Government initiatives to halt what is a disastrous decline in our shipping industry? When will the Minister face the damage that is being done to British shipping and take some specific and urgent action to help the industry? Or is it simply to be allowed to sink?

The hon. Gentleman asks when I will take some action. He cannot have been following matters closely if he does not know that in the past few weeks alone I have taken getting on for a couple of dozen measures to reduce the burden currently on the British Merchant Navy. The answers to which I referred in my statement — falling back on subsidy and feeble protectionism — cannot be the answer to the British Merchant Navy, which must make itself more competitive vis-a-vis other merchant navies.

Is the Minister aware that while many people question the astronomic sums that are being spent on the alleged defence of the United Kingdom, for a country calling itself a maritime nation to have reduced its merchant marine by 50 per cent. within six years and to propose to cut the Coastguard is regarded as lunatic?

The right hon. Gentleman is totally wrong if he thinks that we intend to reduce the effectiveness of the Coastguard. That is not true. The Merchant Navy's role in time of war is kept under constant review by my Department and by my right hon. and hon. Friends at the Ministry of Defence.

Is the Minister aware that all sensible observers of the shipping industry agree with his refreshing and robust action in support of the industry? Does he agree that subsidies and protectionism are no lasting solution to the problems of the industry? Would it not be better for the owners and unions to get together and effectively appraise the markets that are available and get into some of those territories, which is where they should be?

I could not have expressed it better myself. The sooner the shipping industry realises that the only way to halt and reverse the decline of the Merchant Navy—which can be done—is to make our Merchant Navy more competitive and to analyse those world markets where it can succeed, the better.

Has the Minister received a letter from the Merchant Navy and Airline Officers Association repudiating the allegation that he made in the recent Adjournment debate on shipping to the effect that it and other trade unions had agreed to a reduction in safety standards—as announced by him in regulations on 18 March—and will he take this opportunity to withdraw that statement which he made to the House of Commons and which was false?

I wrote to the National Union of Seamen and the Merchant Navy and Airline Officers Association on 2 March. The National Union of Seamen replied on 14 March, and I made my announcement on 18 March. The Merchant Navy and Airline Officers Association did not reply until 24 March. It does not agree with what I am doing, but that does not mean that I am not right. I believe that I am.

asked the Minister for Trade what assessment he has made of the level of manning and other costs on United Kingdom merchant shipping compared with those of other European merchant fleets.

My assessment, based on a representative sample, as I have already told the House, is that the greatest variation of cost between United Kingdom and other European merchant fleets arises from the cost of crewing. Manning is of course an important determinant of crew costs, as are rates of pay, frequencies of crew change, and length of paid leave.

Will the Minister confirm The Times report of 30 March, which outlined a list of issues which the Minister has asked his officials to consider? If the hon. Gentleman's purpose is much more wide-ranging than manning, and if he acknowledges the failure of his laissez-faire approach to shipping policy, will he now ensure that a detailed inquiry is conducted impartially, jointly with all sides of industry, with terms of reference that enable the inquiry also to consider the problem of low wage flags of convenience and to carry out a detailed comparison of financial and non-financial Government support to merchant shipping in other countries—measures which the Government have resolutely refused to bring forward, while the merchant shipping industry is collapsing?

I cannot be expected to keep in my head every word that The Times printed on this subject on 30 March. However, as far as I remember, it said that I was going to do a proper analysis of the British Merchant Navy compared with our best European competitors. That is what I shall do.

That is a curious way for the Minister to announce to the House that he has concluded that there is 25 per cent. overmanning and that he will conduct an inquiry into it. Will he assure the House that he will make sure that his inspectors do not continue to reduce crews on small vessels while the inquiry is under way? Will he assure us that the Rayner inquiry that recommended the cutbacks in the numbers of coastguards will be rejected by him and that he will reject the idea of charging people for being rescued?

That was an interestingly varied question. The Rayner review was placed in the Library of the House of Commons. I hope to come to some conclusions on the Rayner review by about the end of June. As I have told the House several times, I have taken a representative sample comparing our crew levels with those of our European competitors. I am sorry to have to tell the House that in too many cases British vessels—some 25 per cent. and more—are overmanned in comparison with our best European competitors. The Merchant Navy cannot continue that overmanning if it is to be competitive.

asked the Minister for Trade what initiatives he intends to take further to reduce the differentials in tariffs between the United Kingdom and Spain in view of their inhibiting effect on British manufacturing exports.

Spain's recent decision to open reduced-duty quotas for certain cars, and her commitment to introduce VAT before the end of next year, will significantly improve access for British exports. The current negotiations for Spain's accession to the European Community offer the best means of obtaining further improvements.

Notwithstanding that reply, Spain's accession is still some way off and the present arrangements manifestly benefit Spain, to the grave disadvantage of British manufacturing in the car industry, particularly in the west midlands. To accelerate Spain's acceptance of greater equality of tariff arrangements, can my hon. and learned Friend actively pursue the question whether there should be a restriction on the number of cars coming into this country until Spain agrees to similar tariff levels?

My hon. Friend would get the problem into a little more perspective if he realised that our visible trade with Spain has been roughly balanced over the past few years. In January and February of this year there was a surplus on visible trade. However, I believe that the agreement that has been negotiated between the Community and Spain will offer significant further opportunities to British motor cars. I am sure that British Leyland has two world beaters that will sell effectively on the Spanish market.

Does the hon. and learned Gentleman not appreciate that the tariff disparity is not confined to the motor vehicle industry? British-made footwear exported to Spain faces a tariff of 32 per cent., against a tariff of 4·8 per cent. the other way. Does he appreciate that even the much heralded concessions in relation to motor vehicles apply to a mere 15,000 cars over a 12-month period for the whole of the EC? Does he not appreciate that the British car industry cannot wait for a fair deal until Spain ultimately joins the Community?

If the right hon. and learned Gentleman had studied the problem closely, he would realise that British Leyland has not had a developed retail dealer network in Spain for the past six or seven years, so it will be a year or two before it can take advantage even of the concessions that have been extracted from Spain.

Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that in the west midlands many people are becoming increasingly angered by the diplomatic ditherings through the EC on this issue and that many others are becoming painfully aware that, were this country not a member of the EC, the matter could be negotiated unilaterally?

I am unaware of what diplomatic ditherings my hon. Friend refers to. If he had been in the Chamber earlier he would have recognised that export engineering orders are up and that the output of Jaguar is up. My hon. Friend's gloom is not justified.

Does the Minister accept that there is real concern about the matter in the car and car components industries? Will he bear in mind what his hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhpampton, South-West (Mr. Budgen) said about the dithering on this matter? Will he also consider the proposal of by his hon. Friend the Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Mr. Shepherd) that, until the matter is settled, there should be some restriction on the import of cars from Spain?

The hon. Gentleman seems unaware that imports of Spanish cars have been dropping at the rate of 10,000 a year over the past three years.

asked the Minister for Trade when next he plans to meet the chairman of British Airways to discuss the finances of the airline.

My right hon. and noble Friend and I are in frequent contact with the chairman of British Airways on a wide range of matters, including the airline's finances.

How much taxpayers' money has gone into British Airways in the past two financial years?

I cannot say precisely without notice how much taxpayers' money has gone into British Airways over the past two years. However, as the House well knows, the point is not the precise injection of taxpayers' money, but the Government's underwriting in the past of British Airways' lunatic bills, which currently have put British Airways' debt at over £1 billion, to the detriment of the private sector.

Is it not becoming increasingly clear that, by any standard, the position of British Airways has immeasurably improved over that of a year ago, and that whether one looks at it from the point of view of reduced staff, increased productivity or the greater preparedness of British people to patronise British Airways, we are well on the way to changing a massive deficit of £500 million into a substantial profit in the financial year just ended?

Yes, Sir. That deserves the applause of hon. Members on both sides of the House. Having turned in a loss last year of £544 million, British Airways is about to turn in a happy profit this year. It reflects the greatest credit on the chairman of British Airways, Sir John King, and all the staff at all levels that they have managed to put the airline right. I should be a little more pleased if I thought that Opposition Members were a wee bit cheerier about that almost miraculous turnround.

In an uncharacteristic attempt to lower the temperature, may I ask the Minister to assure the chairman, when he discusses with him the future of British Airways, that there is all-party support in the House for the proposition that the United States' claim to impose its anti-trust legislation on an extra-territorial basis is an indefensible usurpation, contrary to international law, and will be resisted whichever Government are in power in the United Kingdom?

I shall respond in a low-key way. I am deeply grateful for the support of the right hon. and learned Gentleman in what he has just said. I remind the House that my officials begin in Washington tomorrow to point out to the United States that we already have an agreement, Bermuda 2, under which these matters should be settled.

asked the Minister for Trade if he has any plans to meet the chairman of the British Airports Authority to discuss the financial performance of the authority.

I meet the chairman of the British Airports Authority regularly to discuss many matters concerning the authority, including its financial performance.

When the Minister next meets the chairman, will he discuss with him the story in The Sunday Times of 10 April about the Government's intention to sell off the British Airports Authority and will he seek to justify that decision in view of the authority's consistent profitability?

I am glad to pay tribute to the authority's consistent profitability since 1966. I certainly undertake to discuss with the chairman the whole question of privatisation of the authority and I shall gladly listen with the closest interest to what he has to say.

Are not the authority's finances sufficiently robust for one to say that it is reasonable that it should finance the costs of the daily transcripts of the current airports inquiry, much as the CEGB does for the Sizewell inquiry?

I shall look into what my hon. Friend has said.

asked the Minister for Trade how many official trade missions visited the Philippines in 1981 and 1982.

In 1981 there were four trade missions assisted by the BOTB under its outward mission scheme, and in 1982 there were two such missions.

In promoting trade with the Philippines, do the Government take account of the disreputable nature of the regime and the gross abuse of human rights there?

If this country's exports and trade were restricted to countries that had not been criticised by Amnesty International— a body for which I have the profoundest respect—the prospects for exports, and thus for jobs, especially in Sheffield, would be bleak indeed.

As the countries of south-east Asia are among the fastest growing in the world, does my hon. and learned Friend agree that if we in Europe wish our economies to recover one of the soundest bases for that would be an increase in exports to that part of the world?

My hon. Friend has identified one of the best and fastest growing British export markets. The hon. Member for Sheffield, Heeley (Mr. Hooley) may be encouraged to know that Davy McKee, a company well represented in his constituency, now has a letter of intent to manufacture a steel plant in Iligan. I hope that he and the House will take comfort from that achievement.

asked the Minister for Trade if he will make a statement on current trade with Zimbabwe.

British exports fob to Zimbabwe in 1982 amounted to £95 million, and imports from Zimbabwe cif amounted to £63 million. The expansion of trade between our countries since Zimbabwe's independence has been very encouraging. I hope that these trends will continue, in spite of very strong international competition.

Will my hon. and learned Friend do what he can to continue free enterprise trade links with Zimbabwe, nothwithstanding the dreadful and disastrous moves towards a one-party Marxist state there?

I reassure my hon. Friend and the House that the United Kingdom is now the largest donor of bilateral aid to Zimbabwe, that there is a full range of BOTB support for British exports to that country, and that I believe that £200 million worth of projects with that country involving United Kingdom companies are now in the pipeline.

asked the Minister for Trade if he will now make a statement on the reorganisation of tourism services being studied by his Department.

I hope to do so shortly.

Will my hon. Friend be introducing proposals for consultation, or for implementation? If the latter, may we have a debate? In the light of what he said to my hon. Friend the Member for Flint, West (Sir A. Meyer) earlier, can he assure me that his discussions with the Welsh Office and the Scottish Office have taken on board the importance of keeping the Wales Tourist Board and the Scottish Tourist Board in line with the negotiations that he has been conducting?

As for whether the proposals that I announce will be for discussion or for implementation, some will be one thing and others another, but mainly they will be for implemetation. I should very much welcome a debate in the House. My right hon. Friend the Leader of the House has been listening attentively to all that has been said. If a debate can be arranged, I shall be delighted. I am in close touch with my right hon. and hon. Friends at the Scottish Office and the Welsh Office and I am sure that they will support everything that I propose.

Far from merely maintaining the present position of the Scottish Tourist Board, will the Minister consider giving it greater autonomy in Scotland and abroad so as to bring more tourists to Scotland, especially as he has cut and run to a seat that will depend very much on tourism in the future?

Keeping the temperature of the debate as low as possible, following the advice of the right hon. and learned Member for Warley, West (Mr. Archer), I am acutely aware of the wish of the Scottish Tourist Board to have more powers to promote its area. That desire is not confined to Scotland, but extends to Wales and to London. I hope to announce my conclusions on all these matters before too long.

asked the Minister for Trade what representations he has received about companies in liquidation and the problems facing unsecured creditors; and if he will make a statement.

My Department has received and continues to receive many representations about companies in liquidation and the claims of unsecured creditors. These particularly seek a strengthening of the laws governing payments in advance and directors' conduct, and a restriction on the ease with which directors can set up another company without regard to the debts outstanding from an earlier liquidation. These matters were among those considered by the Insolvency Law Review Committee to which I referred in my answer earlier today to my hon. Friend the Member for Beaconsfield (Mr. Smith).

Does the Minister accept that urgent action is needed in view of the thousands of tragedies that have occurred in terms of home improvements not carried out, holidays lost and so on? Will he at least consider the matter to which he referred, which is the ability of directors who are in debt to set up other companies at will?

I accept entirely what the hon. Gentleman says about this. As he knows from my answers earlier today and on previous occasions, I share his concern. I think he will also accept, however, that the recommendations of the Cork committee are extremely complex and form an interrelated and integrated package. I am considering whether some matters can be pulled out of the package for advance legislation, but it is extremely difficult.

Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the most worrying aspects of this is the problem of people making payments to small businesses which claim to be able to carry out home improvements but which then go bust, and the directors simply move to the next town to repeat the same fiasco? Does my hon. Friend agree that the losers are, first, those interested in the future of small businesses, and, secondly, the unfortunate consumers, who are repreatedly taken for a ride?

I share my hon. Friend's concern. It is an absolute disgrace that small people who cannot carry debts of this kind are unwittingly led into these situations by unscrupulous traders who repeat the same process time and again. I should be glad to hear of any instances that hon. Members come across, as I wish to do something about this.

Does the Minister agree with the Cork committee view that the scales are weighted far too heavily in favour of preferential creditors and debenture holders, especially those with floating charges? Does he endorse the recommendation that at least 10 per cent. of a company's funds should be made available for unsecured creditors?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, we are considering both those matters. Discussions are currently taking place and I hope fairly soon to be able to bring proposals before the House. I ask the House to be patient, however, as it is a very complicated matter.

asked the Minister for Trade when the Government intend to bring forward further proposals for origin marking.

I shall make an announcement as soon as possible.

Is my hon. Friend aware—I am sure that he is—that a great number of loyal, patriotic people are very keen to buy British goods, not only because they are the best but because they are British, but that they sometimes find it difficult to identify such goods? The whole country will be delighted when he comes forward with proposals. Will he do so as soon as possible, especially in relation to imported motor cars, as many people buying Fords or Vauxhalls would like to know whether they are produced here or imported?

Every customer has a right to know when buying any commodity the quality of the product and its safety and from where it has come. I share my hon. Friend's views. We have obligations within the Community, which we share with other members of the Community, but I am looking at the present origin marking regulations, which were brought in only at the beginning of last year, to see whether we can improve them. At the same time, as I have said previously, we are also looking at whether more can be done about the safety of goods.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what has been the total expenditure of his Department in the Falkland Islands over the most recent conveniently available period.

In the last financial year, approximately £10·5 million was disbursed from aid Votes and a further £2·24 million was paid out under the Falkland Islands war damage compensation scheme.

Overall, £2·75 million has been spent per soul—per Falkland Islander. Does it not demean both them and us when such difficulties are placed in the way of the Argentine bereaved going to the islands? What is the difficulty about cameras? Did not the Minister have cameras when he went? Did not she have a cavalcade of cameras when she went—

Who is "she"?

Does not this embarrassing refusal just make more bloodshed, in the form of a bee-sting attack, more likely?

The hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that his question has nothing to do with overseas development.

May I first warmly welcome the increase in overseas development expenditure in the Falkland Islands? Can my right hon. Friend say whether he has a programme for increasing overseas development expenditure in the other dependencies of Great Britain?

We are very conscious of our responsibilities towards our other dependencies, including Gibraltar and the Turks and Caicos Islands. We bear in mind constantly the need to look after them. The record shows that we look after them very well.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he expects to meet the leaders of British voluntary aid agencies to discuss the level of central funding of the agencies.

I have, of course, had contacts with the leaders of a number of voluntary agencies; and I expect to have further meetings at which funding will no doubt be discussed.

When the right hon. Gentleman has his next meeting, does he expect to be in a position to outline any possibility of increasing Government aid to the agencies for such schemes as the pound for pound scheme aimed at assisting the poorest of the poor nations, which I understand to be the basis of the Government's approach to these matters?

I should like to have the possibility of increasing support for the pound for pound scheme, but I do not think that that is possible in the current year. Overall, our total assistance to the voluntary sector has gone up by 14 per cent. since last year and by 56 per cent. since 1979.

Having accepted what the Minsiter said about modest increases, may I ask him to undertake wherever possible to provide at least some additional hope to the leaders of those charitable institutions which do this wonderful job in overseas aid? Is it not true that the Third world's development problem is getting worse rather than better and that meagre increases on what was a meagre starting point are insufficient?

I am very committed to the importance of the voluntary sector. I might add that in the volunteer programme there has been an 18 per cent. increase on last year's provision and an 81 per cent. increase since 1978–79.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he is satisfied with current methods of planning the levels of aid to developing countries.

Yes.

I welcome that helpful reply. Does the Minister take into account when considering the planning of aid to developing countries such as Uganda the way in which they treat British citizens? For example, when the Minister considers, as I hope very much he will, the continuation and increase of aid to Uganda, will he take every opportunity to press the Ugandan Government to be generous in compensating those who were deprived of their property in Uganda by the Amin Government, including very many of my constituents, and to reconsider the need to extend the time for applications for such compensation?

Compensation is really a matter for the Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Woking (Mr. Onslow). However, there is no doubt that any help that we can give to strengthen the Ugandan economy will make it easier for the Ugandan Government to meet compensation claims.

Is the Minister prepared to look again at the proposed contribution to IDA 7? Does he recognise the importance of Britain giving a strong lead in expanding that fund? Will he bear in mind the discounted cost of an increased contribution over 10 years? Does he recognise the considerable trade benefits accruing to the United Kingdom if that fund is extended?

We recognise the great importance of IDA. We also recognise that British commercial interests get a very good return from money spent on IDA. The size of IDA 7 has not yet been settled, but obviously we shall be thinking about it carefully.

In considering that extra planning, is my right hon. Friend prepared to give even greater publicity to the splendid work that we already do in the way of overseas aid?

I am grateful for what my hon. Friend said about our aid programme. I hope that both he and I will seize every opportunity to make the country realise that we do extremely well in this important area.

In view of the grossly disproportionate amount of British aid to the Falkland Islands, would not it be better if such sums came off the defence budget, since that is what basically it is all about?

The hon. Gentleman has it wrong. The sums that I talked about are the development programme and the rehabilitation programme, both of which are administered by my Department. The spending in the Falkland Islands on development is justified in its own terms and is important for the confidence of the islanders.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement concerning the current aid programmes to India and Pakistan.

We are continuing to support substantial aid programmes in both countries. Provisional amounts provided in the financial year 1982–83 were £105 million for India and 13·7 million for Pakistan, all on grant terms, without interest or repayment. In India we support a wide variety of projects, ranging from power stations and fertiliser plants to local cost projects in housing and health, aimed at the poorest people. In Pakistan we are now concentrating on the poorest provinces of Baluchistan and the North-West Frontier bordering Afghanistan, and we are also assisting relief to Afghan refugees.

I welcome the Minister's reply, which was most interesting and informative. Will he say whether the Government have any proposals to extend this help to rural communities by way of assistance to agriculture and irrigation and also to deal with malaria problems in the territories concerned?

We regard both health and agricultural development matters as of great importance. Our aid programme contributes substantially to both.

Can my right hon. Friend say how much of the aid granted by British taxpayers to India was used in the making of the film "Gandhi"?

I am not aware that any money from the aid programme went towards the making of the film "Gandhi", but, if I am wrong, I shall write to my hon. Friend.

Bearing in mind the figures given by the Minister earlier for aid to the Falkland Islands and aid to India, does he think that he might perhaps publish the amount of aid per person in India as against the amount per person in the Falkland Islands and also take into account the amount of aid per person in terms of the average standard of living in each country?

I am quite prepared to accept that the amount of aid per person in the Falkland Islands is substantially higher than the amount of aid per person in India. The Falkland Islands are a direct dependency of ours. Under the United Nations Charter we have a special responsibility towards them. It is a responsibility which, with very few exceptions, the whole country endorses.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what further consideration has been given to Her Majesty's Government's policy towards the proposals contained in the Brandt Commission's report, "Common Crisis".

As the hon. Member will know, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State announced to the House on 18 April that he was arranging to publish a White Paper setting out in more detail the Government's position on the issues raised in the Brandt memorandum.

Although the Government have been a little more forthcoming on the second Brandt report than they were on the first, does the Minister not realise that this country should play a greater part in solving the problems facing the 800 million living in great poverty and on the border of starvation? Should we therefore not devote more of our resources to helping the people in these areas by increasing our overseas aid?

The Government have been extremely forthcoming about the second Brandt report "Common Crisis". We had a whole day's debate, which went on until midnight last week, and the response of my right hon. Friend and myself to it was positive.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the things that both the first and second Brandt reports have emphasised is the importance to developing countries of private sector investment and trade flows? Will he ensure that, in the consultations within the Government about the second Brandt report, consideration is given to ensuring that these countries have as reasonable access as possible to private capital flows to allow such trade to continue?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right.