asked the Attorney-General what are the results of the discussions being conducted between the Secretary of State for the Home Department and the Lord Chancellor relating to the operation of the law empowering imprisonment for non-payment of commercial debts; and if he will make a statement.

It is the intention of my noble Friend the Lord Chancellor that there should be a comprehensive review of the methods of enforcing orders made by the High Court and the county courts as soon as possible. Other commitments make the undertaking of such a review difficult at the present time, but my noble Friend proposes to do so as soon as he can.

May I thank my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General for that reply and ask that in the review he will bear in mind the continual growth of debt-buying companies which at the moment are exploiting the coercive powers of the court so that they can, having bought debts at a cheap price, make large profits at the expense of the taxpayer who pays to keep these men in prison and who pays to keep their families outside on National Assistance while the debtors are in prison?

Evidence to support allegations of that kind would, no doubt, be considered in the review.

Can the right hon. and learned Gentleman give any estimate as to when this review is likely to be embarked upon? Secondly, can he explain whether Questions about the law reform activities of the Lord Chancellor ought to be addressed to him or to the Minister without Portfolio? It is difficult to know which one is responsible for Questions in the House.

The answer to the first part of the right hon. and learned Gentleman's supplementary is "As soon as possible". The answer to the second part is that on this occasion I am answering for my noble Friend.

Can the right hon. and learned Gentleman say, whether, in fact, there is such a thing as imprisonment for debt?

Technically it has been deemed that imprisonment is by way of punishment for contempt of court, but it is an interesting academic question.