asked the Secre of State for Air whether there are any restrictions on wives of airmen joining their husbands who are based at Malta.

Apart from the normal rules there are no restrictions on wives of airmen joining their husbands in Malta at public expense.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I am very happy to have that reply? I had heard that it was otherwise.

asked the Secretary of State for Air when he anticipates the Belfast aircraft will come into service.

As my right hon. Friend the Minister for Aviation told the House on 21st December last, the Belfast is due to come into service in 1964.

Does the Minister still think, in view of the time that it has taken to get this aircraft into service and the fact that originally it was to some extent intended to be a commercial proposition as well and also in view of the other prototypes which are now emerging, that it is still likely to be anything other than obsolete when it comes into service?

No, Sir. We do not think that it will be obsolete at all. We think that it will fulfil the task allotted to it.

Is it not clear that there are not sufficient freighters for Her Majesty's Forces and that when this plane comes into effect there will be the need for a great many more? Will my right hon. Friend consult his right hon. Friend the Minister of Aviation about placing more orders for this plane?

I see my hon. Friend's point, but he will realise that the number of planes which we order is related to staff plans and other considerations and that it is not just a number drawn out of a hat. We think that this is the number we need. It may be that subsequent events will show that we need more. If so, I have no doubt that we shall take the right course, but, at the moment, it is the number that we need.

If this aircraft is to have some commercial potentialities as well, surely the number of ten is rather small to be of real value?

It is not for me to discuss the commercial potentialities of the aircraft. The military requirement is for ten.

asked the Secretary of State for Air what improvements have now been made for the transport of troops and equipment by air in the Middle East.

There have been no recent changes in the composition of the theatre transport force based in Middle East Command.

Even with the British Forces in the Middle East so thin on the ground, is it not becoming increasingly obvious that the Government's ability to transport them has been woefully inadequate? With the situation in the Middle East becoming increasingly unpleasant, this is a highly dangerous situation, and does not the right hon. Gentleman think that he should do something to improve that situation?

As I cannot accept either of the assumptions in the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, I am sure that he will not expect me to accept his conclusion.

asked the Secretary of State for Air what would be the approximate cost to the Exchequer if facilities for accommodation and travelling expenses were granted to enable wives to join their husbands who are officers of the Royal Air Force stationed abroad, and whose ages range between 21 years and 25 years.

Seventy thousand pounds a year.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider that this amount is rather small in comparison with the total cost of conveying officers abroad? In view of that fact, will he not now consider accepting the principle of equal travelling and accommodation allowances for equal responsibility?

No, Sir, I am afraid not. The consideration in our view has never been a financial one. As the hon. Gentleman points out, the sums at stake are relatively small. We take the view that in the early years of an officer's service it is better for him to be unmarried, and we do not therefore want to give an incentive to early marriage.

But does not the Minister realise that young men today are getting married earlier, that they have the responsibility of married life and that they would be far happier than they are at the present time if their families were transported abroad with them?

We have very carefully considered all the considerations at issue here, and, while I see the hon. Gentleman's point, I am afraid that we have reached a different conclusion.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give further serious consideration to this? Hon. Members on both sides have indicated that they are disturbed at this brutal separation of newly married officers from their wives. Under present conditions they are left with a thoroughly harsh choice between celibacy and impoverishment.

I see the hon. Gentleman's point, but we have looked at this carefully and we came to a different view.

asked the Secretary of State for Air if he will consider the introduction of a flat rate of education allowances for assisting officers, airmen and airwomen in the education of their children when serving abroad or liable to frequent changes of station in the United Kingdom, instead of the present system of maximum allowances of £150, £175, and £200 a year for the first, second and third and subsequent children at boarding schools, and only £50 a year for children attending day schools.

No, Sir. Education allowances are intended to help Service parents to meet the extra cost of ensuring continuity of education for their children. A flat rate would not take account of the difference in the cost of boarding and day schools.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is a private decision of parents whether they send their children to a private school, either a boarding or a day school? How can the right hon. Gentleman defend this kind of discrimination against parents who choose to send their children to day schools and in favour of parents who choose to send them to boarding schools? Surely this is a private decision which they ought to finance themselves?

It is not altogether a private decision. Discrimination is sometimes not of human origin. There are quite a number of families who have no relatives or guardians with whom they can leave their children, and for them a boarding school is the only choice.

How can the right hon. Gentleman defend a flat rate of £50 for the parents who have their children at day school with no distinction between the first, second, third and subsequent children, while there is this discrimination for parents who send their children to boarding school?

The problem which arises with a day school is that to an existing household is added an individual, or it may be more than one individual. The allowance given in respect of that child is intended as a contribution to the upkeep of the child at home. In boarding schools it is very difficult to discriminate or differentiate between the educational and maintenance costs. The maintenance cost plus the education cost collectively becomes rather high, and the added burden to the individual family is considerably greater.

Does not this amount to a direct subsidy from the Air Ministry to private fee-accepting schools?

No, Sir. I do not think that it does.

asked the Secretary of State for Air why the Valiant bombers proceeded to dispersal airfields in the recent exercise Mayflight before taking off on a simulated operational mission.

One of the objects of the exercise was to practise the dispersal arrangements.

Are we to understand that the strategic nuclear deterrent of this country, or at least most of it, which has cost an enormous amount of money, depends largely on receiving sufficient notice to proceed to its dispersal airfields before proceeding on operational missions?

No, Sir. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will realise that there are many different situations in which the strategic force could be called on to operate. Some of these would allow for dispersal, and it is therefore important to have good dispersal arrangements. The exercise was an attempt to test every feature of the strategic force, including its dispersal capability.

asked the Secretary of State for Air what facilities the Transport Force now has for moving armoured cars by air.

The Beverley can carry all types of armoured car at present in service with the Army.

As the armoured car is a particularly valuable weapon for dealing with the brush war type of campaign, will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that Beverleys are available in sufficient quantities in all the possible theatres where they might be (used?

This is one of our primary preoccupations all the time.

asked the Secretary of State for Air what assistance was given by his Department to certain hon. Members to enable them to accept an invitation to visit the Lockheed aircraft factory in the United States of America.

None, Sir.

If as reported in the Press, a public relations organisation has stated that it obtained Parliamentary authority, does the right hon. Gentleman's Answer mean that so far as the Air Ministry is concerned that is incorrect? Does the right hon. Gentleman know what is meant by obtaining Parliamentary authority, other than from the Air Ministry?

Order. The Minister cannot be asked to explain a statement by a public relations agency for which he is not responsible.

What I want to know from the Minister is whether consent was given or authority obtained before hon. Members were invited to go to the United States to inspect the Lockheed aircraft factory?

As I said, the Air Ministry had nothing to do with this and I am, therefore, not in a position to say whether anybody else gave authority. No authority was given either by me or to me by the House.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. If you prefer it, I can raise this matter at the end of Questions, but it seems to me that we are entitled to ask about the movements of hon. Members. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"] That is what I intend to do whether hon. Gentlemen like it or not, even if there is resentment when we inquire into their movements, particularly When the movements are unofficial in character but in some respects related to their Parliamentary duties. Are we not entitled to do that?

I do not know what is the point of order. The point of order in my mind was merely that in accordance with the rules and practice of the House an hon. Member cannot ask a Minister to comment by way of denial or otherwise on statements for which there is no Ministerial responsibility. I was not objecting to the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary question after he re-framed it. I only stopped the right hon. Gentleman from asking his question in its original form. That was all.

May I thank my right hon. Friend for the authority he gave me to visit Middleton St. George and to fly in a Javelin aircraft?