§ 8. Mr. J. H. Osbornasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is satisfied with the adequacy of official figures about stock accumulation by manufacturing industry and the distributive trades; what was the change during 1964; and how this compares with the changes in 1969 and to date this year.
§ 13. Mr. Blakerasked the President of the Board of Trade what recent examination he has made of the need for adequate official figures about stock accumulation by the distributive trades; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. MasonI believe that the statistics give a reasonable indication of the movements in stockbuilding by the distributive trades which is an appreciable and variable component of total demand. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Technology 1408 is responsible for statistics of stocks held by manufacturing industry.
§ Mr. OsbornIs the Minister aware that he contradicted himself on 25th February? In col. 1180 of the OFFICIAL REPORT he said that distributive trade stocks increased in the first three quarters, and in col. 1181 he said that they had decreased. There is a good deal of confusion, although apparently the stocks rose in the last quarter. Can he state what the position is now and what the trend is for 1970?
§ Mr. MasonThe hon. Gentleman should not pull me up too sharply. He should check whether it is volume or value, or 1963 prices or post-devaluation prices. There can be a lot of confusion, as I recognise. Stocks held by the distributive trades are high by past standards in relation to economic activity. The relation of the stocks to the gross domestic product increased sharply during 1968 to a peak in the first quarter of 1969. Although it has fallen since, it remains higher than the average in most earlier years, including 1964.
§ Mr. BlakerThe right hon. Gentleman will be aware from our correspondence that I believe that the replies which he gave on 25th February were, to say the least, misleading. However that may be, should he not use consistent language? If his publications refer to "value at constant 1963 prices", should he not use that expression in answering questions in the House instead of talking about volume?
§ Mr. MasonIt is very difficult to change a practice which has been in being for a long time, especially when one has to go through the official stocks figures, as the hon. Gentleman has done. But the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Mr. J. H. Osborn) has a Question down for Written Answer this afternoon. The reply is lengthy, and all the figures will be in it.
§ Mr. BarnettWould my right hon. Friend consider setting up an inquiry to consider why we have held, and do hold, in this country a higher ratio of stocks to the gross domestic product than most of our industrial competitors in the world? This is very much more important than the points which hon. Members 1409 opposite are trying to make so much of.
§ Mr. MasonI do not think that an inquiry is necessary. If my hon. Friend tables a Question or raises the matter in an Adjournment debate, we can give him adequate information.
§ Mr. RidleyThe Minister's reply to the Question was most misleading. May I press him on the fact that the ratio of stocks to the gross domestic product in this country is very much higher than that of our competitors? Is he content with this situation? If not, what does he intend to do about it?
§ Mr. MasonI do not see any reason to do anything about it at the moment. It is high in relation to economic activity in the country; but that is not necessarily a bad thing. It depends how high the percentage is.