asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster when he next plans to meet the Trades Union Congress to discuss the future of the textile and clothing industries.

I have no plans to do so at present, but my hon. Friend the Minister for Trade has agreed to a request for a meeting with members of the TUC economic committee and textiles, clothing and footwear committee in connection with the GTT multilateral trade negotiations.

Given the strategic importance of the British textile industry and the fact that it recently reported a trading deficit—[HON. MEMBERS: "Reading."]

Order. The hon. Gentleman is a new Member. We do not read our questions in the Chamber.

I shall repeat my question. Given the strategic importance of the British textile industry and the fact that it recently reported a trading deficit of £2·5 billion, what proposals does the Minister have for improving the position of the industry?

First, I agree with the hon. Gentleman about the importance of the industry. I am glad to say that the performance and position of the industry are steadily improving. There has been a welcome increase in investment and productivity. That must the basis of its long-term survival and recovery, so that it can maintain its contribution to the British economy, We have also negotiated a new multi-fibre arrangement that will help to protect the industry against unfair competition.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend accept that the textile and clothing industries not only make a major contribution to the economy but are substantial employers? Will he pay tribute to the number of people who work in the industry, who have always been responsible and have not indulged in irresponsible industrial relations? Will he seek to ensure that the British Government will guarantee fair competition for this valuable sector of the British economy, and that if we guarantee access to our market for goods from overseas, those countries that supply us will reciprocate?

I come from a Department in which I was particularly well informed about the contribution that the industry makes to employment, and also about the contribution that good industrial relations in the industry have made to its performance. I therefore endorse what my hon. Friend has said about that.

The Minister will know that the United Kingdom jute industry is now wholly located in the Tayside region in Scotland, and that a thousand jobs depend on it. He will also know that last January I led a delegation of employers and trade unionists to lobby Ministers and put proposals to them for safeguarding that industry. When can the jute industry expect a response to those proposals?

I recognise the importance of jute in Dundee because of my recent visit to the city, when I spoke on behalf of the hon. Gentleman's unsuccessful opponent——

Come again.

Order.

There will be more visits to Scotland.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend also pay tribute to the changes of attitude in the industry in the past few years—its willingness to adapt, innovate and bring in new technology, which, like the very good industrial relations, has also been responsible for the industry's improving position?

Yes, indeed. When I followed these matters in the late 1970s, I met many textile interests. I find now that there has been a considerable change in the industry's approach to the future. Nowadays it is a modern, forward-looking industry which has adapted to high technology and is becoming far more competitive, producing good quality products and improving its efficiency. That is how we must continue.

asked the Chancellor for the Duchy of Lancaster what representations he has received on the future of the sub post office network.

Since the election we have received one inquiry on this topic from an hon. Member on behalf of a constituent. Nevertheless, we are well aware that there is widespread interest in the sub post office network and we are in no doubt about the importance and value of sub post offices and the high regard in which they are held.

Bearing in mind the importance of the sub post office network to rural communities such as my own in Cornwall, will the Minister assure my constituents who are doubtless worried by the flotation of ideas about privatisation of post office services, that sub post offices will continue to be agents for the payment of benefits and pensions, and also car licence fees, and thus remain economically viable?

Yes. I reiterate our commitment. In providing its services the Post Office has a statutory duty to have regard to economy, efficiency and the social needs of the United Kingdom. We have consistently stated our commitment to the maintenance of a network of sub post offices adequate to enable the Post Office to fulfil its statutory duties. That commitment stands and will be taken fully into account and respected in discussions affecting the Post Office.

I welcome my hon. Friend's comments about the invaluable service provided by sub post offices to individual communities. Does he accept, however, that in areas such as south-east Dorset, where there is considerable population growth, there is both a demand for more sub post offices and an understandable feeling among those currently running sub post offices that their revenue may be threatened? In conjunction with the Post Office, will my hon. Friend consider the possibility of increasing the duties that sub post offices may carry out so as to increase their earnings, and especially the possibility of increasing the number that may deal with vehicle licensing?

Yes. I am pleased to respond to my hon. Friend's question. Very much on the agenda is our commitment to seek an early opportunity to extend the powers of the Post Office to enable it to offer a wider range of services in post offices. If those new services are successful, they will help to enhance the viability of the whole network. I am sure that the whole House will welcome that.

May I press the Minister a little further on his earlier reply with regard to the statutory duties of the Post Office? Does he accept that the case for sub post offices goes further than that, as they help to sustain shops and other services in rural areas which could be hard hit if sub post offices were disbanded? Will he therefore increase the range of services and thus the throughput of sub post offices so as to sustain the general wellbeing of rural areas?

The hon. Gentleman is entirely right. We all recognise that sub post offices have a social and community function and a cohesive influence especially in rural areas. As I have said, we hope to be helpful in that regard and to allow them to purvey more services over their counters.

I very much welcome my hon. Friend's replies. Does he recognise, however, that some smaller village sub post offices are going through a particularly difficult time and that the Post Office is resisting requests from many of them to deal with vehicle excise licences? Will my hon. Friend seek a meeting with the chairman of the Post Office on this important point and press that more sub post offices be allowed to provide that valuable facility?

We shall bear my hon. Friend's comments about vehicle licensing seriously in mind. I should make it absolutely clear that there is no rural closure programme, although there have been cases in rural areas where the postmaster has retired or resigned and the sub post office has been forced to close because no suitable replacement could be found. However, I will take up the point that my hon. Friend has raised.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what export credit rating is given to Nicaragua by his Department.

The Export Credits Guarantee Department cover for Nicaragua was withdrawn in March 1979 because of the economic problems caused by the civil war and the acute shortage of foreign exchange which followed.

Is the Minister now prepared to reconsider implementing an export credit guarantee for trade with Nicaragua? Does he not realise that there is a great potential for exports, particularly for agricultural and forestry equipment, to Nicaragua? Does he also accept that by refusing to give export credit guarantee cover to trade with Nicaragua the British Government are in effect taking part in the economic blockade of Nicaragua imposed on that country by the United States Government?

Whether to extend credit is entirely a commercial decision for the Export Credits Guarantee Department. The present external debt of Nicaragua is $1·3 billion. Negotiations for rescheduling even part of that broke down as the Nicaraguan Government, unlike the Labour Government in 1976, refused to submit to IMF scrutiny.

Does my hon. Friend accept that taxpayers of this country support his attitude and that they do not want to pump their money into the drain that is Nicaragua?

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's support. Naturally, we hope that in the fullness of time Nicaragua and other South American countries which do not go along with IMF requirements will come into line. There is trade potential. However, we could not enter into that trade while it would be imprudent and profligate to do so.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster when he next intends to meet the Confederation of British Industry to discuss the trade deficit in manufactured goods.

My colleagues and I meet the CBI from time to time. I have no plans for a special meeting on this subject.

Will the Minister call an urgent meeting with the CBI to say what the Government intend to do about our manufacturing industry before there is none left, bearing in mind that when the Tories were elected in 1979 there was a surplus of £5 billion in the trade in manufactured goods, which was turned into a deficit of £8 billion this year? Does the Minister believe that the shipyard workers, the miners and all those who have been thrown out of work in the manufacturing industries should be employed selling ice cream cornets or something like that? Is it not about time that the Government took seriously the situation in manufacturing industry in the northern region, where there was a fall in investment in manufacturing industry between 1979 and 1984 of more than 42 per cent.? Why will he not take the matter seriously?

I am delighted by the fact that manufacturing output has risen so sharply since the bottom of the recession. It has risen by 16 per cent. Manufacturing investment is up by 20 per cent. and we are holding our share of world trade in manufactured goods. The CBI forecast for the immediate outlook for manufacturing exports and manufacturing industry is the most optimistic that we have seen for years. I do not believe that the particular figure of the deficit in trade of manufactured goods referred to by the hon. Gentleman is particularly significant. It is one of many economic indicators. It is seized upon by the Opposition only because it is one of the few non-encouraging figures that they can find among a plethora of other signs which show that the whole British economy, including British manufacturing industry, is doing very well indeed.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that the CBI, the TUC' and all parts of industry are concerned about the risks from United States protectionism especially the diversion of trade in the textile industry? Will he use every possible opportunity to make clear to Members of Congress that as a result of such diversion of trade we would be bound to take action in the GATT round with our European Community partners, and that no one would benefit from any trade war that ensued?

We have made it quite clear that the British Government believe that the current trade legislation before Congress would inevitably lead to European retaliation if it was enacted. We are very concerned about the whole question and we trust that the Americans will not take improper action against our exports to that country.

What is the current balance of trade deficit in manufactured goods with the Common Market? Is it running at last year's annual rate of £10 billion? What will the Minister do to remedy that massive balance of trade deficit? When does he think that manufacturing industry output will reach the 1979 level?

We are not currently in balance of payments problems. I know that Labour spokesmen, most noticeably the right hon. Member for Birmingham, Sparkbrook (Mr. Hattersely), were forcasting a balance of trade crisis later this year on the basis of National Institute of Economic and Social Research forecasts which came out towards the end of last year. The national institute has now revised those figures. It is clear that we do not have any particular problem with the balance of trade. It is also clear that our manufacturing industry is going through a substantial and continued improvement, and the outlook has never been so encouraging since the early 1970s.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend turn his mind particularly to the problem of Japan? I support what he said about not looking purely at manufactured goods, but does he see the relationship between manufactured goods and investment and the problem that we currently face, and what can he tell us about current Government thinking about trying to get inward investment into Japan on behalf of British companies?

The most important thing is to persuade the Japanese to continue to open up their markets both to our manufactured goods and to our services. The Government have been devoting considerable efforts to that in recent months, and must continue to do so. We are achieving some success in opening up markets to goods, in getting places on the Tokyo stock exchange and in ensuring that English companies are entitled to a fair crack of the whip when new investment in, for instance, telecommunications comes along in Japan. However, we are looking for a substantial further improvement, as I am sure are all the rest of Japan's trading partners.

Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman not realise how appalling it is for a Minister of the Crown to describe the turnaround from a £5 billion surplus to a £8 billion deficit in the balance of trade in manufactured goods as not particularly significant? Is he aware that, as North sea oil inevitably declines in volume, and, no doubt, in value, Britain will be left hopelessly vulnerable to balance of payments problems in the future unless we build a strong manufacturing industry?

What matters most of all is the state of our manufacturing industry, which, as I have said, is increasing output and investment and has extremely good prospects for the immediate future in world trade. I do not accept that it is right, when we look at the whole range of economic indicators, to place excess weight on any one of them. At present, the economy has a good rate of growth, low inflation and improving productivity. It is a strong economy, and a quite disproportionate emphasis is being put on that one feature. Many wealthy countries go into deficit on manufactured trade from time to time, and, taken in isolation, that deficit does not justify the weight placed on it by the Opposition. I understood their doing so in the pre-election period, hut I am surprised that it is being sustained post-election.

As British and European manufacturing industry have many opportunities to build up an increasing share of free and fair trade throughout the world, does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that they should not, in contrast, seek the excuse of accusing far eastern countries of unfair trading and constantly send complaints to the EEC Commission, as witness the latest anti-dumping complaint that the Commission is launching on compact disc laser readers?

This country, more than most countries, has an interest in a liberal trade regime, with free trade between countries. Our response to free trade if we are in difficulties should be to improve the competitiveness and keep down the unit costs of our products, and improve their quality. Obviously, however, on some occasions unfair trading practices arise and our interests are exposed to dumping. That includes selling below cost and other improper trading practices. It is only right that the British Government should act promptly, and expect the European Commission to do so, when our industries are exposed to that kind of unfair competition.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how much more will be spent in 1987–88 on his inner-city programmes in the north.

Inner-city task forces aim to ensure a more efficient allocation and better targeting of the considerable resources already being spent in inner cities under central Government programmes.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman readily acknowledge that the main problem of the north is that it is work hungry—in fact, work starved? Will he acknowledge that the amount of money that he has mentioned today is no more than a flea bite in comparison with the kind of help that is necessary? Will he admit that what is needed is an allocation of real resource that will provide real work in real jobs doing real community refurbishment?

What I have mentioned today is what the hon. Gentleman asked me about, that is, one feature of the Government's programmes to help the north and establish the basis for a strong and competitive economy there. The hon. Gentleman's constituency is within the borders of the new urban development corporation. The Government's Cleveland initiative is spending a great deal of money on cleaning up derelict land in Stockton. There are enterprise zones in the north-east of England and a substantial amount of regional grants go there. We are looking to new education and housing policies to help improve the living conditions and the preparation for work of the people who live there. All of that, together with the Government's economic policies and the creation of strong competitive industries in the north, will be the solution to the problems.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that central to the task of regenerating the inner cities of the north is the need to lift the political blight of high rates and municipal Socialili? Will he accept that the Cleveland task force and the Tesside urban development corporation are practical, non-political initiatives supported by everybody on Teesside except a few bigots in the Labour party?

I agree with my hon. Friend's propositions. In fact, there is a high degree of support in the north for many of the things that the Government have done. The Government have responded by putting money into the Northern Development Company, which is a locally-generated intitiative of potentially great value. I agree with my hon. Friend that changing the system of business rates will be a great advantage to industry in the north and I look forward to the new arrangements for the non-domestic rate, which will be of great advantage to existing and new industry in my hon. Friend's part of the world.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman explain why Bradford has been left off all the lists, excluded from the partnerships and missed out of all the initiatives? Will he give a clear assurance that Bradford is not being punished or penalised because its citizens elected a Labour council? Will he do his best to persuade the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry to accept a request that I made this week for him to meet a deputation from Bradford and to visit the city so that we can discuss with the Government what they will do to help us overcome the social and economic problems that we have there?

Whenever one of my right hon. or hon. Friends or I announce an initiative in a particular town or city, we tend to find that we are being denounced by the Labour Member of Parliament for that town because what we are doing is inadequte, and then we are denounced by Labour Members in other cities or towns who want us to set up the same sort of arrangements in their constituencies. I would be happy to consider the unexpected request from the hon. Gentleman that we look at the possibility of a task force or further assistance for Bradford. We have given considerable support to all the efforts that Bradford has made to promote tourism in the city as a major source of employment. We will certainly give every other assistance to the people in Bradford who want to improve the commercial base of the city.

May I emphasise the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Darlington (Mr. Fallon) that the trouble in the north-east of England is endemic Socialism from municipalised power over many years? That was exemplified by the recent decision of Cleveland county council to spend £250 million of its pensioners' money on a speculative newspaper which everybody knew was bound to fail. The leader of the council justified that by saying that there was always a sum of money available for speculative ventures. However, it never has any money available to help entrepreneurs set up businesses.

Those responsible for pension funds should use those funds for the benefit of the pensioners and exercise their judgment on solely commercial grounds to look after the interests of the pensioners and their future. That is not a matter for me. However, I accept that we have to get more people in the north-east to look at ways in which more private industry might be encouraged. We have to create a climate that will attract more inward investment and new job opportunities. We still have some municipal Socialism, less in the north-east sometimes than elsewhere, which tends to work in the opposite direction.

How can the right hon. and learned Gentleman claim that there are more resources for the regions and the inner cities when, as a result of cuts in rate support grant and regional aid, less is being spent on those areas this year? Will he tell the House and the people of the north and the inner cities how the process of urban regeneration will be assisted by a 59 per cent. cut in regional development grants this year and the biggest ever cut in regional aid—£300 billion taken out of the budget — making a total of £3 billion of cuts since the Government came to power?

The Government allocate rate support grant according to the respective needs of authorities and according to the levels which authorities need to spend on running their services in an economic and efficient way. The rate support grant system involves a substantial shift of resources from the south to the north. I do not believe that simply increasing rate support grant to allow high-spending councils to continue to waste money is a very significant contribution to inner city revival. Regional development grants have been reformed to make them more useful and to concentrate the resources available on the creation of jobs and on those areas where, otherwise, investment might not take place. Simply going back to spending huge sums of money on the old development grants would be wasting resources that could be better used elsewhere.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that one of the major problems in rejuvenating northern cities has been the long-standing drift of industry to London and to the south-east and that there is real concern in the northern cities that the Channel tunnel will intensify the magnet effect of the south? Will he do his level best to ensure that a major freight terminal is established, preferably around Leeds or Bradford, with freeport status so that industry is held in the north and it can be proven that they can get access from Leeds to Lyon direct?

One of the major advantages of the Channel tunnel for the economy of all parts of the United Kingdom will be the prospect of a direct rail link through to the European terminals. The Channel tunnel is as attractive to the north as it is to the south. The prospect of through travel from Leeds, Manchester or further north, all the way through to Milan is one of the brighter features of the whole scheme.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what five sectors of the manufacturing industries have suffered the worst deterioration in balance of trade since 1979.

The worst deterioration in the balance of trade between 1979 and 1986 has been suffered by the following industries: motor vehicles; miscellaneous electronic equipment; pulp; paper and board; motor vehicle parts, and cotton and silk.

Will the Minister accept that his answer rather than the nonsensical answers that we have had from Ministers on the Government Front Bench earlier this afternoon puts in true perspective exactly what is happening to Britain's manufacturing industries? Will he accept that the nation has prospered in the past through our manufacturing industries and that, if we are to have jobs and employment in the future, we have to get those industries right, and that the Government must take action and not continue to accept the position in the way that they indicated earlier this afternoon?

That sort of perspective is what one gets if one looks through the wrong end of a telescope. The extraordinary backward-looking attitude of the Labour party is reflected by the fact that it always asks for the worst five sectors. Had it asked for the five best, it would have found that there was a £7·9 billion improvement and a net improvement of £2·1 billion.

Would my hon. Friend like to remind some Opposition hon. Members who do not have very long memories that manufacturing output in 1979 was lower than in 1974 and that between 1974 and 1979 the ratio of manufactured imports to exports worsened threefold?

That is correct, and it is continuing to improve as is borne out by every forecast except those that are now admittedly somewhat muted by the right hon. Member for Birmingham, Sparkbrook (Mr. Hattersley).

Will the Minister tell us when manufacturing output will reach the 1979 level? Will he also tell us what talks have taken place with the manufacturers of motor vehicles for the development of power trains in this country? Would he agree that an expansion of power trains is not only high technology but would provide employment and help to reduce the deficit?

It is not possible, and it would not be prudent, to make forecasts of the level of manufacturing exports for any given year. All the forecasts—these are from bodies other than the Government—are uniformly optimistic.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the actions of Opposition Members on this matter are absolutely fatuous? If we were in deficit on services and invisibles they would be up in arms about that, but if every country had a Government who thought they should be in balance in every aspect of their trade the whole of world trade would be brought to a grinding halt, to the impoverishment of everybody.

That is true. As I have said, the surplus in the five best sectors greatly exceeds the deficit——

Tell us what the figures are?

The figures can be circulated—[Hon. Members: "Answer the question."]—I have replied to it. The figures can appear in the Official Report by the morning.

How can the Minister reconcile the confidence that he and his colleagues have in British manufacturing industry with the fact that investment in manufacturing industry has declined by one fifth since 1979? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that Britain is the only member of the OECD in which plant and machinery is depreciating faster than investment in it, that our investment in civil research and development is lower than that of any other member of the OECD, and that we are training only half the number of apprentices that were receiving training in 1979? If from time to time wealthy countries go into deficit on manufactured trade, will the hon. Gentleman tell us when this trend will come to an end and when the underlying strength of our economy will be reflected in a manufactured trade surplus?

If there is a surplus in every other sector of our trading account, why is the hon. Gentleman so obsessed about one sector in which we are in deficit but which is improving?

Would it not be sensible if we stopped lumping together all manufacturing industry for the purpose of these figures? Is it not true that the majority of our manufacturers are doing extremely well and that, but for the automotive trade deficit, which during the first quarter of this year was almost £900 million, we would he in surplus? As any car purchaser knows, if only we produced a car at the right price of the right quality on time we would not have a problem with that sector of manufacturing industry.

It is true that the manufacturing deficit in consumer goods is to a large extent the result of a series of individual choices. These choices are made on the basis of quality, price and delivery. To give an example of a sort that Opposition Members seem always to reject, all our oil exports to the European Community are absorbed by the entirety of German automotive exports to Britain.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what assessment he has made of the future prospects for the knitwear industry.

The Government recognise the importance of the knitwear industry. As in the case of textiles and clothing as a whole, there has been significant new investment and a sharp rise in productivity in recent years.

Given the loss of over 100,000 jobs in these industries over the past five years and our deficit of over £1 billion with our EEC competitors, despite us having one of the lowest unit labour costs within the EEC, why is investment inadequate, why are there so many redundancies, and why is Mackinnons in my constituency the subject of closure?

The hon. Gentleman will know that the action that the Government are taking in respect of Mackinnons is a matter for my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland. I understand that the Scottish Industry Department has offered substantial financial support to parties who are interested in acquiring the company. The hon. Gentleman has received a reply from my hon. Friend the Member for Galloway and Upper Nithsdale (Mr. Lang), the Minister of State, Scottish Office, who has dealt with the matter at some length.

May I first congratulate my hon. Friend on his elevation, which has given a great deal of pleasure to many of my right hon. and hon. Friends and myself and, indeed, to Members on both sides of the House? We hope that he will remain on the Government Front Bench for many years to come.

I am extremely grateful to my hon. Friend for his kind remarks. We shall see whether they are deserved as I continue to stand at the Government Dispatch Box. The Government are taking the American Bill extremely seriously and view it as a dangerous threat to United Kingdom exports and businesses. When my right hon. Friend the former Secretary of State for Trade and Industry went to the United States recently he made it clear to the United States Administration and Members of Congress how strongly we felt about the measure. We shall continue to take a firm view of it.

Is the Minister aware that the textile industry in Britain has been in long-term decline and has suffered from a wage-cutting strategy, a cut in investment and a cut in training, and that if we do not intervene it will decline further and die? Intervention is required to get investment, decent training and decent wage levels. Do the Government have any plans to make such an intervention?

The hon. Lady's point has been answered this afternoon and on previous occasions. The industry is successful, having undergone some difficult times, as I well know from my own part of the world. Although we obviously take a continuing interest in matters affecting the textile industry, the hon. Lady's points will need to be considered.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he has any plans to encourage trading initiatives in outer city housing estates.

The inner-cities initiative is already piloting projects encouraging trading in housing estates, and we are looking at the particular contribution community businesses in general might make to tackling urban problems.

I am most grateful for my hon. Friend's reply. Does he agree that there is a danger that the inner-city initiative could be decided purely by geography? There is as much deprivation and as much need for the sort of initiatives that we are talking about in some outer city housing estates—many of which I represent in the city of Bristol—as there is in inner city areas. Will he seek to encourage such initiatives where they are needed, rather than base them purely on geographical terms?

I am aware of the problems of outer city areas such as those in my hon. Friend's constituency and the interest that he takes in such matters. The lessons that we learn from the inner city initiatives will be put to good use in due course in areas such as his.

Is the Minister aware that there is a great mystery about the Government's policy on cities? He knows that city action teams and task forces have had only puny funding, hardly any of which seems to have been spent, and have had hardly any effect. Is there anything new in the Government's approach to cities? If there is, will he tell us what it is? Does he accept that, if there is to be something new and effective, it will mean more resources? Can he give us any assurance that resources will be made available?

The hon. Gentleman has asked a number of questions. The point about the inner cities initiative is that it is an experiment to investigate whether the various initiatives that have been taken in the eight pilot areas, and now the further eight pilot areas, can come up with ways of focusing resources, money, community action and a variety of other things on areas of deprivation which need such assistance. The £14 million to which he referred, and which was the subject of an earlier question to my right hon. and learned Friend, is by way of a pump-priming operation, because resources are already available in a number of Government schemes, adding up to hundreds of millions of pounds.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what representations he has received regarding trade between the United Kingdom and Saudi Arabia.

None. Provisional figures for January to April 1987 show a satisfactory increase in United Kingdom exports to the market.

Will the Minister take this opportunity to congratulate Yardleys of Basildon on winning substantial new orders for its products in Saudi? Will he and his colleagues tackle the French about imposing trade barriers in the form of complicated labelling requirements on aerosol sprays and the like?

I am certainly glad to congratulate Yardleys on winning further orders. Indeed, total cosmetic exports to Saudi Arabia total over £39 million. At present there are difficulties relating to labelling and the definition of standards in that market. I hope that Yardleys will take up the matter with officials in my Department, who will try to help the company to overcome the difficulties.

When Shorts of Belfast exported Blowpipe missiles to Saudi Arabia, did the end user certificates reveal how many of those Blowpipe missiles found their way to Afghanistan?

The disclosure of end user certificates is something that is not—[Interruption.] It has been the practice of Governments not to make public information relating to end user certificates — [HON. MEMBERS: "Reading."] I am reading from my own answer, which was in the Official Report yesterday in reply to a question by the hon. Member for Monklands, West (Mr. Clarke).

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he is satisfied that individual liberties are sufficiently protected in the provisions governing national debt registers held by commercial credit agencies.

Yes, Sir. The Consumer Credit Act 1974 gives an individual the right to see any file held on him or her by a credit reference agency and to correct any false or misleading information.

Why did the Department resist the opportunity that I gave them in my private Member's Bill last Session to give people unfettered access to information held manually by credit reference agencies? Why did the Government indicate, through the Home Office, that they would not be willing to include the Department within the scope of that Bill, which is now an Act?

The hon. Gentleman will understand that I have been at the Department of Trade and Industry for only three weeks, and that I am certainly not able to answer for the Home Office.

During the next three weeks, will the Minister be kind enough to follow up the question asked by the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Mr. Kirkwood)? The personal access provisions of the Data Protection Act come into force in November. It is wrong that access is given only to automatically processed data and not to data held by traditional or other means. Will the hon. Gentleman be good enough to undertake to look into that matter while he remains with the Department?

The hon. and learned Gentleman is energetic and ingenious, and I really cannot believe that he is not capable of pursuing the matter in his own way with the Ministers responsible.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what is the latest available figure for bankruptcies among small businesses.

The provisional estimate of the number of bankruptcies in England and Wales for the first five months of 1987 is 2,940. Almost all of these related to insolvent individuals and we estimate that between 70 and 75 per cent. were unincorporated businesses.

Does the Minister realise that many have severe doubts about the accuracy and comprehensiveness of those figures—particularly the National Federation of Self-Employed and Small Businesses, which believes that the Government need much better figures to judge bankruptcies and the reasons for them, and that that could be done without increasing the burden on small businesses? Will the Minister take steps to improve those figures to ensure that the start-ups of today are not the bankruptcies of tomorrow?

I prefer my figures to other people's. However, I am happy to examine what the National Federation of Self-Employed and Small Businesses says about the figures and to consider suggestions for improving them. My figures show a fall in the number of bankruptcies. In addition, any bankruptcy figures have to be set against the very encouraging increases in the number of new businesses and in the number of self-employed people.

Does not the whingeing of the hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Ashdown) demonstrate the reason why the Liberals did so badly at the general election? The electorate is pleased that we have a very large number of new small businesses setting up and relatively few bankruptcies. The public are realistic enough to recognise that there will always be some bankruptcies, which is quite healthy in a free economy.

Last year's VAT registration figures show a net growth of 20,000 new businesses, and there has been a growth in the number of new businesses every year since 1979. I agree that it was rather off-beat of the hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Ashdown) to ask a question about bankruptcies, but that is rather typical of the Liberal party's approach.

Will the Minister confirm that when the poll tax is introduced there is to be a revaluation of business property, which will result in a tremendous increase in the rates on those premises? [Interruption.] No, business premises. In many instances the revaluation will increase the rates, and that will lead to further bankruptcies.

Like my hon. Friends, I am intrigued by the wide-ranging nature of questions to the Department of Trade and Industry. However, because of my interest I pay close attention to what is being proposed for business rates. We are, indeed, due for a revaluation of business rates, which is essential to bring the valuations up to date. However, I assure the hon. Gentleman that his constituents' interests are very much served by the proposals. The updating of valuations and the transfer to new national non-domestic rates will be of great advantage to large parts of northern England and its industry.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what calculations are made of the value of the additionality when considering applications for aid and trade support.

The aid and trade provision is used to counter the tied aid credit practices of other Governments. Offers are made where aid is appropriate as an element in securing the business for the United Kingdom, and in making such calculations due regard is paid to a number of factors, notably the maintenance of employment in the United Kingdom and the likelihood of follow-on orders.

I thank my hon. Friend for pointing out the wide benefits that flow from the aid and trade provision. Has he seen that same point elaborated by Hawker Siddeley's paper "Harvest for Britain" on the scattered diesel programme for Indonesia? Is it not a fact that countries such as France, Japan and Germany have increased their aid and trade provision, or its equivalent, to four to 12 times ours to secure those same wide benefits? If my hon. Friend agrees with me, will his Department push to increase our aid and trade provision programme, so that this country can also enjoy those wide benefits, such as jobs and prosperity?

I very much agree with the thrust of my hon. Friend's comments. I saw the Hawker Siddeley report and thought it extremely valuable. Since 1978 there has been some £460 million of ATP, which has secured 121 projects worth more than £2 billion. Part of the reason for the difference between our provision and that of some of our competitors is the different standards of assessing project merit applied by the designating bodies in those countries. I have no doubt that my hon. Friend either has seen or will shortly read the report of the Select Committee on Foreign Affairs on this subject.

On the question of the recent report of the Select Committee on Foreign Affairs on bilateral aid, will my hon. Friend take account of the recommendation that the ATP should be separately funded, so that we can at least try to equal the efforts made by our competitors and, therefore, allow British businesses to compete on fair tents with their overseas competitors?

I do not know whether by separate funding my hon. Friend means separating the ATP from the bilateral aid programme under which the developmental value of projects is one of the primary considerations. We will respond in due course to the Select Committee. We are very much aware of the feeling of the whole House on this subject.

asked the Chencellor of the Duchy of Lancaster when he next plans to meet the chairman of British Telecom to discuss consumer interests.

My right hon. and noble Friend met the chairman of British Telecom last week. Consumer interests were amongst the matters discussed. My right hon. and learned Friend also expects to meet the chairman soon.

Will the Minister tell the chairman that the results of the consumer survey and the report of the official monitoring body demonstrate that British Telecom's privileged monopoly position is allowing it to treat its consumers appallingly badly? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, during my time as a Member of Parliament, I have never heard so many complaints about the telephone service and that in my consitutency the public telephone call box service is on the verge of collapse because it is not adequately maintained, the money is not emptied from the boxes and the service is disgraceful?

This Government's legislation has beefed up consumers' rights to make representations through the Director General of Telecommunications. It is for the director general, if he finds abuse of that monopoly position, to request a change in licence conditions. I should have thought that that would be welcomed by both sides of the House. It would be unwise for me to comment at the moment on the survey. It will go to Oftel's director general. I understand that the survey was carried out between 6 and 10 March when BT was still affected by the aftermath of the National Communications Union strike action.

Are not people forgetting the problems faced by consumers, both individual and business, before BT was privatised? Was it not common for consumers to wait 26 weeks for any particular piece of equipment before privatisation and liberalisation?

Yes, there were immense difficulties pre-privatisation, especially for business users. Our programme of liberalisation of the supply of peripheral equipment to those users had a great effect. It is interesting to note that, by comparison with one of our major competitors, Germany, the cost of our business lines per business user is now significantly better than that for German business men. We should welcome the fact that alternative network provisions for business users are now being completed through the network supplied by Mercury.

When the Minister next meets the chairman of British Telecom, will he raise with him the subject of blind and disabled persons and demand guarantees that they will not be charged for directory inquiry services? Will he then make that statement public?

BT's licence allows it to charge for directory inquiries. However, BT must provide services to blind and disabled persons free of charge or with reasonable compensation. We bore this matter very much in mind when framing the original legislation and enshrining the rights of the hard of hearing.

Does my hon. Friend understand that the OFTEL organisation does not seem to many people to be doing a vigorous enough job in defending the interests of consumers against the monopoly that currently exists? Will my hon. Friend consider two areas of concern? The first is the apparent discrimination against Mercury customers, and the other is the discrimination against small independent engineers who wish to fit all sorts of extension devices to customers' equipment, but are unable to do so because of British Telecom's stranglehold on the master switches, which is apparently defended at the moment by OFTEL. That is a totally unacceptable situation.

The Director General must publish an annual report and it is on that basis that we make judgments on his efficacy. My hon. Friend has raised two serious matters. When we next meet the Director General of OFTEL, with whom we have periodic meetings, I shall ensure that those two items are on the agenda.

Is it not a fact that, despite what the Government say and all the gimmickry, the telephone system is now worse than it was? [Interruption.] At lunch time I had to telephone on three occasions and had difficulty in getting the number that I wanted. Everybody to whom I speak says that that is happening and that telephones are giving small tinkles and rings at times when nobody is ringing. Why will the Government not admit that something is wrong, because only when they admit that something is wrong will they try to set it right?

Waiting lists for telephones numbered 200,000 prior to privatisation. That is now almost eliminated. On the question of business use, I can recall from vivid personal experience that if one wished to get a modem from the old BT network one had to put one's name down and was privileged to receive it within five or six months. We do not say that all is universally well with BT. We say that it should be held to account and where it abuses its monopoly position we have given the DG OFTEL powers to request variations on licence conditions, which, in my view is an effective sanction.

Does my hon. Friend agree that any supplier or company as large as BT, with still a dominant market share, will attract a good deal of criticism, because that is what people are like and what happens? However, as my hon. Friends have said, it would be unwise not to recognise that there has been a huge improvement throughout the service and a massive investment programme in British Telecom of thousands of millions of pounds, which has benefited large and small firms up and down the country and which, to a large extent, has been responsible for creating many new jobs, which we all welcome.

My hon. Friend is exactly right. There has been a massive investment programme. Since 1983 an additional 2 million exchange lines have been installed. Our consumer and business expectations are increasing and that is exactly right. However, through the regulatory and other mechanisms, we must ensure that BT delivers according to customer preferences.

Instead of quoting the odd selective statistic, why does the Minister not force British Telecom to publish the comprehensive consumer figures that it used to publish when it was in public ownership? Will he now admit that British Telecom has become a sick private joke? Its enormous profits come solely from the fact that it uses its monopoly power to milk the domestic consumer, and it has shown itself to be completely incapable of operating a public telephone kiosk system. Does the Minister condone the latest abuse of its monopoly power—the imposition of blackmail premium charges on those of its customers who have the temerity to want their telephones repaired in a reasonable time?

The right hon. Gentleman's comments had more to do with his dogmatic antipathy towards privatisation than with the facts. During the past three years controlled telephone prices have declined in real terms by just over 8 per cent., thanks to the RPI minus three formula. I do not recall that happening when British Telecom was in public ownership. Last November's changes resulted in an average reduction of 0·3 per cent. For the average domestic consumer OFTEL estimates an increase of 1·9 per cent., which is still a fall in real terms. The right hon. Gentleman went right over the top. In empowering the regulators to call for precisely the sort of information that he defined, we gave them the teeth to keep the public better informed.