asked the Minister of Health what new instructions he has given to his representatives on the Health Service Whitley Councils in the light of Government policy on wages and salaries in the public service; and what limitations he has imposed on the right of arbitration in cases of disagreement between the two sides.

I have informed both sides of the Whitley Councils that the same principles will be applied to the functioning of the Health Service machinery for determining pay as are being applied in the Civil Service.

Since the Minister of Health already has the right to reject any agreement within the Whitley Council with which he disagrees, why does he refuse to permit the Whitley Councils, management and staff sides, to negotiate operative dates of agreements?

It seems to me right that the same principle should be applied in all parts of the Government service.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his unilateral action has gone further to destroy the confidence of National Health Service staffs in their negotiating machinery? Is he further aware that his action has had a serious effect on morale within the Service and on recruitment, particularly to those grades where there are serious staff shortages?

I am not aware of that, but I shall be seeing representatives of the Whitley Councils later this week and, naturally, I shall listen carefully to what they have to say.

asked the Minister of Health what amounts of cod liver oil, vitamins A and D tablets, and orange juice were distributed by the Health Department of the County of Middlesex for the eight weeks starting 4th July, 1960, and for a similar period starting 3rd July, 1961, respectively; and what was the percentage of decrease in each welfare food.

I will, with permission, circulate the figures in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is the hon. Lady aware that in the Willesden area there has been a decrease of 65 per cent. in this period and that the number of cod liver oil items fell from 2,745 to only 900 and of orange juice from 2,100 to fewer than 700? Will the Ministry reconsider this disincentive with a view to reversing its policy?

I am aware that the published figures will show that there has been a reduction in consumption, but it is probably a little premature to come to any conclusions. There was a considerably increased intake in May when mothers knew that the charges were to be altered.

asked the Minister of Health when he received the claim of the dispensing chemists for professional fees and increased remuneration; what reply he has made; and what steps he is taking to ensure the dispensing of prescriptions in the event of the chemists giving notice to terminate their contracts and withdraw from the National Health Service.

On 8th June. I am sending the hon. Member a copy of my replies sent on 22nd September and 20th October after full discussions with the chemists. The last part of the Question is hypothetical.

It may be hypothetical, but it may be very important in the fairly near future. May we know what steps the Minister is prepared to take? Is he aware that we recognise his reply to the chemists as being in line with the recommendations of the Public Accounts Committee, and that we also say that it would have been quite impossible in any circumstances to grant the chemists an increase in remuneration at a time when wage and salary earners in he Health Service were subject to the wage freeze?

It would be difficult in any circumstances to grant a claim which involved an increase in profits of that order, but I must decline to answer the hon. Member's hypothetical question.

I am sure my right hon. Friend will recognise that this cut in the chemists' remuneration is coming at a time when the number of prescriptions will already be reduced because of the 2s. charge. Can he tell the House how much he expects the saving effected by this cut to be?

It is between £1½ million and £2 million per annum, but I should point out that the calculation of chemists' profits which is involved takes account of the known effect so far of the increased prescription charges.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that large numbers of chemists are still profoundly dissatisfied with his answer to their claim which he mentioned in his original reply?

asked the Minister of Health what action he has taken following the Third Report of the Committee of Public Accounts relating to chemists' remuneration.

I have arranged for a differential system of remuneration to be introduced next week and have invited the chemists to co-operate in a simpler inquiry into their current costs. I am considering the recommendation as to differential prices in the drug tariff.

Can the Minister tell us whether the principles upon which the chemists are making a claim were investigated in full by the Committee of Public Accounts, which has reported, and whether any new principles are involved in this claim as compared with those which the Committee fully investigated before making its recommendation.

The claim made by the Chemists Contractors' Committee did not involve a differential system such as was recommended by the Public Accounts Committee, and such as I am now bringing into effect.

asked the Minister of Health what was the total number of live births in the area within the control of the Lichfield, Tamworth and Sutton Coldfield Hospital Management Committee for the last accounting period; and how this figure is likely to be adjusted in the light of planned overspill population which has arrived since that accounting period, and which is likely to arrive within the next five years.

In 1960 there were 2,885 live births to mothers resident in the area served mainly by this committee. No useful estimate can be made of the corresponding figures during the next five years, but the number of maternity beds will be increased substantially.

Is the Minister satisfied that regional hospital boards in general, and the Birmingham Regional Hospital Board in particular, are provided with adequate statistical information as to the population effects of the overspill transfer?

Regional hospital boards have obtained such information and used it as part of the data for consideration in submitting their ten-year plans to my right hon. Friend, and I believe that the Birmingham Regional Hospital Board has done the same thing.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is satisfied that the present organisation of midwives under the National Health Service Act, 1946, Part 3 is operating smoothly in rural areas; and whether he will investigate the suggestion that there should be ambulance midwives in rural areas, in the light of the excessive time spent by midwives on long ambulance journeys to distant hospitals which detracts from the time which should be spent on local cases.

In general, yes. A midwife should very rarely need to accompany patients by ambulance. If the hon. Member has a specific problem in mind, I will gladly consider it.

I will be happy to provide the Minister with the details of a case. Apart from that, as it is the general principle which appears to be involved, will she consider seeking the advice and guidance of the professional organisations concerned?

If by the "general principle" the hon. Gentleman means the principle that a trained midwife should accompany each ambulance, I think it would be an uneconomic use of trained woman-power. In fact, it has been tried by some of the local authorities who are responsible for providing the ambulance service and has been discontinued for that reason; all ambulance personnel are trained in first-aid.

asked the Minister of Health when he intends to destroy the census forms of the 1961 Census.

These forms will be required for some years at least, to complete the census reports.

Cannot my right hon. Friend be a little more definite than that? Is he not aware that there are personal questions on this form about which women in particular have a certain amount of anxiety and considerable fear? They think that these details get into the wrong hands, perhaps by inadvertence.

The confidentiality of these forms is absolute and is not prejudiced by their retention for this purpose.

Can the Minister say approximately when he expects the census to be published? Secondly, would it be possible, without awaiting publication of the full report, for individual questions to be put to him, dealing, for example, with the number of houses without baths?

I do not think that the latter question would be for me, but if the hon. Gentleman puts the first question down I will see that he has an answer to it.

asked the Minister of Health which of the recommendations of the Franks Committee relating to the National Health Service Tribunal he intends to implement.

Effect was given to general recommendations affecting the Tribunal by the Tribunals and Inquiries Act, 1958. Of the specific recommendations, the Government's decision not to accept No. 56 was announced on 12th November, 1957, and I have invited the views of the Council on Tribunals on No. 57.

Does the Minister agree that the basic principle that justice should not only be done but should be seen to be done applies in this case? Would not it be fairer, and in the public interest, if appeals were transferred from the Ministry to a tribunal and the hearings made public?

I am ready to receive and consider the Council's views on this, for which I have asked.

asked the Minister of Health what instructions, or guidance, he proposes to give to executive councils to deal with applications made by non-British residents or visitors to the United Kingdom who wish to use the Supplementary Ophthalmic Service, the Dental Service, or the services of a general practitioner who is on the executive councils' list.

I have this matter under consideration.

Is the Minister aware that his speech at the Conservative Party conference in which he yielded to these mean-spirited delegates to throw over the Good Samaritan content of the National Health Service is utterly rejected by hon. Members on this side of the House'? Will he at the earliest possible date lay before the House his proposals on this matter so that we can examine them?

I have not yielded to anybody on this. The National Health Service is for the people of this country, and the practical question is to ensure that it is used by them.

As the Minister told the conference that visitors to this country have no right to the medical services of the National Health Service, what was the authority on which the past practice of granting these facilities rested?

There is no right in a visitor, not being a person of England and Wales, to use the National Health Service; but, since the inception of the Service, it has been the custom to give emergency treatment, commonly called Good Samaritan treatment, even to visitors.

Can the Minister say exactly what he means when he says that the National Health Service is for the people of this country and only for the people of this country? What about the reciprocal agreements with other countries, where we try to meet our obligations, as do the other countries, under those agreements? Is the Minister not in favour of them?

Reciprocal agreements give no right to a person to come to this country for the purpose of obtaining treatment.

That is not what it says in the Question.

asked the Minister of Health what action he is taking to obtain fuller information about production costs, profits margins and sales promotion costs of pharmaceutical manu- facturers in the light of the Third Report from the Committee of Public Accounts.

The industry has been asked for further information on sales promotion costs, and inquiries into costs and profits of a number of firms are being made under the revised voluntary price regulation scheme.

I thank the Minister for this further action. He is aware that there is still considerable public concern. Will he, in particular, look at the recommendations of the Committee of Public Accounts that he should require more information about the costs and accounts of the British subsidiaries of American firms, particularly these adjustments that previously have been made on unverified information?

Of course I have studied the Committee's recommendation. I think that the most useful line of exploration is in the negotiations under the voluntary price regulation scheme.

asked the Minister of Health what provision he makes under the National Health Act for the supply of special aids for deaf children who are unable to use the standard aid supplied through the National Health Service.

If a deaf child's needs are not met by any of the Medresco aids, the aid required may be provided through the school health service.

Is the Minister aware that these provisions do not seem to cover all children? I have sent her the details of a case which has recently arisen. Will she therefore look at these provisions again and consider particularly the case of the child the details of which I have sent her?

It should be possible to meet all but a very few cases through the Medresco service. I have only just received the hon. Gentleman's letter, and I will look at the case he has in mind.

Can the Minister say what the delay is in providing the Medresco Service? Is it rather serious in respect of children?

I cannot answer that without notice, but, as I have had no complaints from hon. Members, I assume that the service is functioning satisfactorily.

Is the Minister aware that a case arose recently in my constituency of a child below school age who could not be fitted with the National Health Service deaf aid—the Medresco deaf aid—and had to have a special deaf aid? The cost of this had to be met by the local authority out of its rate funds. Is not this contrary to the spirit of the National Health Service? Will the Minister look at this problem again? It affects only a very few people, but it is of great importance.

If the hon. Gentleman sends me details of a particular case, I will certainly look at it.

asked the Minister of Health if he will make a statement on the steps he has taken to obtain cheaper drugs from abroad.

Contracts have now been placed in accordance with my reply of 17th May to my hon. Friend the Member for Dover (Mr. Arbuthnot) for the supply of five drugs for the hospital service. I estimate the total saving, before payment of royalties, at about Li million in a full year.

That reply is satisfactory as far as it goes, but does not the Minister know that the drug bill is running at the rate of about £14 million a year? As further savings could be made in this very important respect by bringing down the price of many of these drugs which are at present being overcharged, has he met with the friendly co-operation of those of his hon. Friends who are directors of drug companies, whose prices are a little higher than they need be?

I know that my hon. Friends and I believe that the whole House supports me in my desire to get drugs for the National Health Service on the best terms that I can.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, in spite of the criticism of the hon. Gentleman, there will be general support for his determination to ensure that the National Health Service does not pay more than world prices for the drugs it buys?

indicated assent.

I appreciate that the Minister cannot be as forthcoming as he might be as he is about to be sued by one of the drug manufacturing companies, but will he say whether so far he is satisfied with the outcome of this experiment?

I have told the House that it has been found possible to place these contracts, and there is no question about the quality of the articles which are being obtained at advantageous prices. In due course royalties will either be negotiated or adjudicated.

asked the Minister of Health what is the difference in fee charged under the National Health Service for medical certification for cremation and for burial; why this difference exists; and if he will take steps to establish uniformity in the medical fees charged.

No such fees are charged under the National Health Service.

Do we understand that the charge for cremation is the same as for ordinary burial?

No, Sir. A practitioner is required to provide a certificate to enable relatives to register the death. That is available free of charge in the case of ordinary burial. In the case of cremation, however, two certificates are required in respect of which no scale of fees is laid down under the Cremation Acts. It therefore follows that this is a private arrangement between relatives and practitioners.

Is not the hon. Lady aware that many people would prefer to have the bodies of their friends and relatives cremated, for hygienic reasons, and yet we charge them extra for seeking to help in maintaining healthy conditions? Will not she look into this matter again?

It is not for me to look into it. The Cremation Acts are the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary.

But does not the hon. Lady know that there is a great difference in the amount of fee charged by the second doctor? There is an understanding that it should be about two guineas, but in some districts it may be as high as six guineas. Will not the hon. Lady look into this side of the problem and consider whether the Ministry should not make a recommendation as to the fee charged by the second doctor?

This is a private matter for the relatives to settle with the general practitioners, although I understand that the British Medical Association gives some guidance.

asked the Minister of Health what was the average amount per person spent within the National Health Service on health in Great Britain for the last three years to a convenient date.

Including local health services and central administration, the figures to the nearest shilling are £15 13s. in the financial year 1958–59, £16 15s. in 1959–60 and £18 10s. in 1960–61.

Is the Minister aware that that figure of £18 compares with a figure of £56 per head in the United States of America, and that if we wish to have parity with the United States we shall need to spend another £325 million a year on the National Health Service? In view of the fact that in the year we lost 282½ million days in production because of ill-health, will the Minister not consider spending more on the National Health Service, especially on things other than the hospital service, to that end?

I do not think that international comparisons of this sort are much of an indication of the amount of service which is being given per head in the respective countries.

asked the Minister of Health if he has yet given consideration to the Report on Private Nursing Homes sent to him on behalf of the National Corporation for the Care of Old People; and what action he contemplates taking to deal with the present situation.

Yes, Sir: and the problems of registering authorities have recently been discussed with the local authority associations.

In view of the very disturbing report, and the fact that when the Minister answered my Question on 5th December, 1960, he said:

"I am at present considering suggestions for strengthening the powers of the registration authorities."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 5th December, 1960; Vol. 631, c. 853.]

I regard this as an important matter. That is why I have been discussing it with the local authority associations.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is satisfied that there is now a vaccine which is an effective prophylactic against rabies; and whether he is reducing the present six months' quarantine required for dogs and cats entering this country.

My right hon. Friend is advised that the two vaccines available for humans give a high degree of protection though neither can be guaranteed completely effective. The second part of the Question is for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.

Can my hon. Friend hold out any hope of the period being reduced, because six months is a very long time?

It is not for my Department.

Would not my hon. Friend make representations to her right hon. Friend about a special type of case—guide dogs for the blind?

Animals have nothing to do with this Minister.

I thought it appropriate to ask the Minister of Health, because the care of the blind comes under the Ministry of Health.

I thought that this Question was not about blind dogs but about dogs in peril of rabies which are leading blind people. It is the other way round.

With great respect, Mr. Speaker, I think that the welfare of the blind comes under the responsibility of the Ministry of Health, and I should have thought—

Order. The hon. Baronet's question began by inviting Minister A to make representations to Minister B, which did not seem to be a profitable line within the rules of order.

asked the Minister of Health if he will state the cost of advertising staff vacancies in the National Health Service for the most recent period of 12 months for which figures are available.

I regret that this information is not available.

Is it unreasonable to ask the Minister just how much money—since the figure appears to be running into tens of thousands of pounds—is spent on advertising for staff who are not normally obtainable for the Health Service, because of the Minister's miserly policy?

The figures are not kept separately—

Why not?

—and it would take an undue amount of time to obtain the figures centrally, but the short answer to the hon. Gentleman's question is that generally we have asked hospital management committees to keep advertising costs as low as possible.

In view of the large amount probably involved and the Minister's totally unsatisfactory reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise this matter at the earliest opportunity on the Motion for the Adjournment.

asked the Minister of Health in view of his Department's responsibility for the health of the people of this country, what information he has received from the Minister of Science regarding the danger to health inherent in the gradual fall-out of radioactive Strontium 90 and radio iodine over this country as a result of the twenty nuclear and thermo-nuclear tests of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics; and what information he has received regarding the extent to which this would be aggravated by an addition of a 50-megaton nuclear test.

I would ask the hon. Member to await a statement which will be made tomorrow.

Why wait until tomorrow? Is not the Minister himself responsible for the health of the people of these islands? Surely, he must have been the first person to have been consulted? Has he nothing to say about the plans which he has in mind for protecting the health of young children particularly, who are bound to be affected if radioactive Strontium 90 is falling in large degree? Is not the Minister consulting his right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture to see to what extent the consumption of milk and other foods which may become contaminated will be curtailed?

The statement which will be made tomorrow will be on behalf of the whole Government.

Referring to the Minister's last reply, may I ask him whether it is intended that the statement to be made tomorrow shall be made by a senior Minister on behalf of the whole Government? The right hon. Gentleman will be aware of a suggestion this morning that it will be made by the Parliamentary Secretary for Science. In view of the fact that it affects a number of Departments, we consider it should be made by a senior Minister of the Government. In view of the statement coming from Sweden that the 50-megaton weapon has already been let off, will he bear in mind that this is of tremendous importance now? Will he represent to the Leader of the House that we would wish the statement to be made by a senior Minister tomorrow before the House rises?

The question by whom the statement is to be made is not for me.

May I ask the Minister, since he is currently answering the Question and since the Leader of the House is not here, whether he will represent to the Leader of the House, which I think is the proper form in which to put it, our desire that the statement to be made tomorrow should be made by a senior Minister?

The right hon. Gentleman's remarks are now on the record.

asked the Minister of Health what advice he has given or proposes to give to hospital authorities with regard to the placing of certain hospital services, such as catering and the cleaning of wards, in the hands of outside contractors; and what his policy is on this matter.

Experiments are being made in the use of outside contractors. Pending the outcome no general policy has been recommended to hospital authorities.

Would not the Minister agree that in principle it is desirable that these services should be kept within the control of the hospital authorities themselves? Are they not driven to these expedients only because they are unable to pay competitive wages and salaries to these grades of staff?

Each service must be looked at on its merits. The guiding consideration must be economy and efficiency in the broadest sense, but I am not prejudiced in either direction and I shall certainly look at the outcome of these experiments carefully.

asked the Minister of Health if he will now make a statement on the ten-year hospital building programme.

asked the Minister of Health what is the estimated total cost of proposals drawn up by regional hospital boards for their ten-year hospital development plans; and how much of this is in respect of the Birmingham Regional Hospital Board.

I have nothing at present to add to my reply of 3rd July to the hon. Members for St. Pancras, North (Mr. K. Robinson) and Gateshead, West (Mr. Randall).

Is the Minister not aware that on this side of the House there is some suspicion that he and the Government may be soft-pedalling in this matter? Can he give some evidence that he is not by quoting figures of the additional staff he is employing in his Ministry to get on with the schemes, and also of steps taken by regional hospital boards to increase their staffs to cope with them?

The suspicion is ill-founded. It is a big job, and it must be done properly, even if it will have to be subsequently and continuously revised. I hope to present the results as early as is consistent with that work.

Is not the Minister aware that the suspicion that he is trying to conceal information from the House is well-founded? Is he aware that the total amount of money to be spent on the building of hospital wards is freely appearing in the Press, and yet the Minister cannot even give me that figure? How much longer must we wait before the House and the country can assess the total additional cost to the National Health Service, now that these regional boards have done their work.

While I am still working with regional hospital boards on the contents of the ten-year plan, it would be misleading and wrong to give the individual figure for which the hon. Member asked. I am sorry to have to ask the House to be a little more patient in this matter, but it is important that this work should be done properly, and presented as a whole.

If the Minister cannot answer the question, how could the Prime Minister tell the Brighton conference that £500 million would be spent on the hospital programme over ten years?

I do not think that that is a new piece of information. It has been available for about twelve months and is a broad indication of the total sum likely to be available in the decade.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware of the acute shortage of nursing staff at Storthes Hall Hospital, Huddersfield; and whether he will now permit the management committee to run a free bus service to bring in staff from Barnsley.

I know the difficulties. My right hon. Friend has not been asked to sanction a bus service from Barnsley. The Leeds and Sheffield Regional Hospital Boards are considering how to reduce the number of patients at this hospital.

Even if the committee succeeds in reducing them substantially, is the Minister aware that that hospital will still be short of staff? Is she aware that it has a bus of its own —it is not a question of the lack of outside transport—which could be used for this purpose, and if and when permission is sought will the hon. Lady bear that fact in mind?

I know that there is already a private bus service for other members of the staff from other villages. If the Regional Hospital Board is not successful in recruiting additional staff we should be prepared to consider the operation of another bus—but on the same terms, namely, that the people who use it should pay for this service, up to a maximum of Is. There cannot be a free service.

Is the hon. Lady aware that the service must be free if it is to attract people from Barnsley and elsewhere? Is not she aware that private concerns are already bringing in girls from these areas by way of a free service, and that the hospital could not compete with them if it had to charge?

I cannot hold out any hope of sanctioning a free service, because of the effect it would have on other members of the staff who have to pay their own transport costs, and it would be a question of drawing labour from other areas by the regional hospital board.

On a point of order. That reply is not satisfactory, and I beg to give notice that I shall raise the question on the adjournment.

asked the Minister of Health if he will make a statement following the consideration he has given to the report of the South Western Regional Hospital Board on the reclassification of Ronald Derek Sowle.

asked the Minister of Health whether he has now received a report from the South Western Regional Hospital Board following their inquiry into the reclassification of Ronald Derek Sowle.

I will circulate the conclusions of the Board of Inquiry in the OFFICIAL REPORT. I am placing copies of the Report in the Library.

In view of the fact that a very unfavourable impression was given by the remarks of Mr. Justice Stevenson, could the Minister say whether the report will indicate that there was every good reason why Sowle, because of his previous good conduct, should be given his liberty? Could he also tell us why there should be any doubt, because should he be a menace either to himself or anyone else there are powers under the Mental Health Act under which he could be compulsorily detained?

No doubt, hon. Members will study the full conclusions, as set out in the OFFICIAL REPORT, but perhaps I might quote one sentence from them:

"Our investigation shows, and it is our opinion, that there was no foreseeable risk that Sowle would be likely to be a source of danger to anyone."

asked the Minister of Health if he will state the numbers of children now awaiting treatment for the removal of tonsils and adenoids in West Bromwich.

574, on 30th September.

Can the hon. Lady say why she is able to give this information, in view of the fact that the West Bromwich and District Hospital Management Committee stated that it was not in a position to do so and flatly refused to give it to the education committee, because it stated that it had not got it?

I have obtained the information from the regional hospital board, and it concerns not only the West Bromwich Hospital but the Hallam Hospital, too.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there are people all over the country waiting for tonsils operations, and that this is causing a great deal of time to be wasted? Is she also aware that one of my constituents has been waiting six months, is still waiting and has been told that it cannot be done until December or even after Christmas? Will she look into the question of the long waiting list and see whether something can be done to improve the present appalling situation?

If my hon. Friend will put a Question down about a particular area I will obtain the information. In general, the position is that urgent cases are dealt with without any delay.

Is it not assuming the proportions of a national scandal that if any of these 574 children or their parents are prepared to pay they could have their tonsils taken out next day? What is the Minister doing about it?

I have just said to the House that any urgent case is dealt with immediately. In the area with which the hon. Member is concerned, the regional hospital board and the hospital management committee are consulting to see what can be done to provide increased sessions to reduce the waiting list.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that the Dental Hospital, Bristol, suffers from a shortage of technicians owing to lack of finance, and that in consequence there are prolonged delays in the treatment of patients; and what action he is taking in this matter.

I have no reason to disagree with the board's decision to give high priority to other developments.

Can my right hon. Friend hold out any hope in this world at all for a patient in this hospital who had teeth out in January and is still without replacements?

I am looking at the par-particular case which my hon. Friend sent to me, but the general position is that the board of governors has not given an increase of staff in this respect priority over other matters.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether he is aware that there is no law which ensures the punishment of persons who have exported animals under such conditions that they can be eaten in transport by maggots and suffer other forms of ill-treatment; and if he will seek international agreement to remedy the position.

The 1911 Protection of Animals Act provides certain safeguards in so far as British nationals and British ships are concerned. In the international field, the Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe last month adopted a recommendation advocating the drafting of a Convention on the International Transit of Animals. Her Majesty's Government are now considering their attitude to this recommendation.

While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for his reply, may I ask him whether, in view of the horrible conditions in which tortoises reached a port in this country some time ago, and in view of the fact that over 1,000 of the 2,000 were either dying or dead, he would expedite the bringing into effect of a convention, and will the Government see to it that they will ratify a convention of that nature?

I agree with the hon. Member about the distressing nature of the incident to which he has referred, and, of course, Her Majesty's Government would welcome any way in which we can improve these matters. The difficulty, and it is very difficult in certain cases, is to get a universal standard for enforcing regulations. This is one of the problems we have to consider in relation to this convention.

asked the Lord Privy Seal what progress has been made in the negotiations on the proposed entry of the United Kingdom into the Common Market and if he will make a statement.

asked the Lord Privy Seal if he will make a statement on the negotiations following the application by Britain to join the European Economic Community on the basis of the Treaty of Rome.

I have nothing to add to what I told the House on 17th of October in the foreign affairs debate.

As the right hon. Gentleman has told us that he is contemplating further negotiations, will he take into account the fact—because it is an established fact—that the Rome Treaty does not provide in any provision either for the withdrawal of any Government associated with E.E.C. or the denunciation of the Rome Treaty; and that in the event of an amendment being moved to the Rome Treaty it requires unanimous approval? In those circumstances, does he still propose to go on with these negotiations?

It was agreed at the meeting in Paris on 10th October that negotiations would be resumed in Brussels on 8th November. I am aware of the fact that the right hon. Gentleman has mentioned, and of course we intend to proceed.

Is the Minister aware that there is dismay in Commonwealth countries that they are being kept in the dark about these negotiations? As the Treaty of Rome is not to be amended and, particularly, as the question of Commonwealth trade is to be covered by protocols which are to be negotiated, may I ask the Minister specifically whether Commonwealth countries will be invited to participate in those negotiations before the agreements are reached?

We are keeping in the closest touch with Commonwealth countries about these negotiations. As I think was revealed during the debate, I saw the High Commissioners in London directly I returned from Paris after the preliminary talks. Even before that, I saw the Commonwealth Ambassadors in Paris and talked to them very fully about what had occurred.

Would my right hon. Friend, who I know shares the desire of the whole House for clarity in this matter, confirm that the stage at which negotiations have so far reached is, in substance, this: that the Government have indicated a willingness to accept—subject only to the possible addition of protocols—all the 240 articles of the Treaty of Rome, including those involving the secession of sovereignty; a common external tariff which would operate against, among others, our Commonwealth partners, and the political aims expressed and implicit in the Bonn Declaration of 18th July? For the information of hon. Members, would he cause a copy of the Bonn Declaration to be printed in the OFFICIAL REPORT?

A summary of the statement I made in Paris has been circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT and is quite clear and explicit. My right hon. and learned Friend said, "subject only to protocols." Of course, the protocols are of the greatest possible importance and they will embody the results of the negotiation on the three specific measures which we have discussed before in the House and on which we require safeguards in these negotiations. I will consider the point raised by my right hon. and learned Friend concerning the declaration at Bonn.

Will the Lord Privy Seal say specifically whether the Government have communicated to the Commonwealth Governments the detailed proposals which Ministers are now making to European Governments in these negotiations and which so far have been entirely withheld from this House?

We have not communicated to the Commonwealth Government a verbatim account of my speech at the beginning of the confidential negotiations. What we have communicated to them is a full summary.

Is the Lord Privy Seal aware that the Government's continued refusal to communicate details of these proposals either to this House or to the Commonwealth does not inspire any confidence in the intentions of the Government?

I must dispute this question. The right hon. Gentleman the Deputy Leader of the Opposition kindly said in his speech winding up the foreign affairs debate that he understood, be- cause of the nature of what might be in my preliminary speech in the confidential negotiations, that this could not be made public, and that is the situation. So far as the Commonwealth is concerned, as I said, we have, both in writing and in oral discussion between myself and the High Commissioners, given them the fullest possible consultation in this matter. The right hon. Gentleman will realise that a very large number of other Governments are involved in these negotiations and affected in various ways, and each of them has to be dealt with separately.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that what he is saying is that there will be two versions of the truth, one for Europe and one for the Commonwealth? This just is not good enough as these words are going to make a mockery of Commonwealth consultations. What we really want is a full expression from the Government to the Commonwealth High Commissioners of the exact nature and full content of the words he used in Paris.

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely unjustified in the malicious accusation he has just made.

Do not lose your temper.

The last thing I am likely to do is lose my temper. I completely reject the accusation he has made. There has been the fullest consultation with the Commonwealth, and we shall maintain it.

rose—

No. We must get on to genocide and the next Question.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether he has yet decided to accede to the Convention on Genocide; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Lord Privy Seal how many, and which, nations have acceded to the Convention on Genocide up to date; and what steps he has taken, and with what result, to promote the accession of Britain to that Convention.

Sixty-five countries have ratified or acceded to the Genocide Convention to date. I will, with permission, circulate the list in the OFFICIAL REPORT. We are at this moment giving very active consideration to the question of whether we can become a party to this Convention and the House will be informed as soon as a decision is reached.

Is not the Minister aware that this matter has been hanging fire for a very considerable time? A number of members of the Commonwealth, amongst many others, have agreed to the Convention and we are lagging very far behind. Is the Minister also aware that there are cases which cannot be dealt with in any other way than by this Convention? Is he aware, for example, that should one of the officers who come over here leading German troops happen to have been guilty of this crime we have no power at all to deal with him? Will he please do something quickly about it?

In a speech in reply to the hon. Member on 5th June, I explained some of the difficulties with regard to this matter and gave an undertaking that the Government were pursuing it urgently. There are considerable difficulties, but I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we are determined to come to a definite conclusion as soon as possible.

Has the Minister realised that considerable damage has been done to sections of the population by the long delay in this matter on the part of the Government, and what does he propose to do to compensate those people?

I do not accept that that has happened. It has not made any material difference whatever with regard to this country. There are certain obligations which we have, and which we mean to safeguard. One is the right to give political asylum, which I should have thought all hon. Members would support.

If the Minister finds it difficult for the Government to make up their mind about the advantages and disadvantages of genocide, how does he think that they will make up their mind about the Common Market?

The Government have not as much difficulty in making up their mind as hon. Members opposite.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make clear to the House what are the difficulties of the Government? This Convention was agreed on long ago. He has told us already that a great many countries have acceded to it. What is it that causes the Government to have doubts and hesitations or causes delay? Is it the difficulty of reconciling the signing of the Convention on Genocide with a nuclear defence strategy? Is that the difficulty?

No, it certainly is not. The problem relates largely to Article 7 of the Convention which, as I indicated in a previous answer, impinges on the right to give political asylum. There is also the fact that genocide is very broadly described in the Convention, and it would mean making large amendments in our criminal law in order to take account of it.

asked the Lord Privy Seal if he will make a statement on the present position in the Berlin crisis.

I have nothing to add to the remarks made by my right honourable Friend the Prime Minister, my noble Friend the Foreign Secretary and myself in the debates in both Houses of Parliament last week.

Precisely, because the right hon. Gentleman has nothing to add to his speech and that of his right hon. Friend during the debate on foreign affairs last week, when they explicitly maintained their rigid attitude on the Berlin problem, I wish to ask whether he is aware that I have received a letter from President Kennedy this morning—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."]—it is signed by the President—in which he says, apropos the Berlin affair:

"So far as Berlin is concerned we are committed to no rigid formula and are prepared to—

Order. Even from such an eminent person quotations are not permissible during Question Time.

As President Kennedy has made this declaration that the American Administration adopt no rigid formula in this connection and are prepared to make a reasonable approach, would the right hon. Gentleman on behalf of Her Majesty's Government make a similar declaration?

During the debate last week Her Majesty's Ministers did not maintain a rigid approach—

indicated dissent.

No, with great respect to the right hon. Member, what we maintained was that at this time when discussions had been going on and we were looking forward to a continuation of the probe of the Soviet intentions, it was not possible for Ministers to express views to the House on particular proposals raised by hon. Members. That was the attitude of the Government, not rigidity in the negotiations, and in that we are in agreement with the President. I hope the right hon. Member will allow us to have the opportunity of seeing the President's letter.

asked the Lord Privy Seal on what date the United Nations requested permission for Ethiopian jet fighters to overfly and refuel in British East Africa; and on what date permission was granted.

The request was received in London early in the evening of Saturday, 16th September. Permission was granted early on the morning of 18th September.

Is the Lord Privy Seal aware that there was a delay of 36 hours in the granting of what must have been an extremely urgent request in view of the fact that the activities of these Fouga fighters over Katanga were impeding the operations of the United Nations Force and were possibly leading to their failure? Surely this is an extremely urgent matter? Are not the Government guilty of not complying with the United Nations Charter provision that they should give every assistance in their power to carrying out the decision of the Security Council?

No, I do not consider that there was any delay. The Government had to consider the nature of the request and the actual nature changed three times during this period. In any case, the aircraft themselves were not able to leave their source until six days later, 24th September.

asked the Lord Privy Seal what protests he has received from the Government of South Vietnam about violations of the Geneva Agreement by the Communist authorities of North Vietnam; and what proposals he is making.

My noble Friend, as Co-Chairman of the Geneva Conference 1954, has received a Note dated 17th August from the Foreign Minister of the Republic of Vietnam, drawing attention to the innumerable violations of the Geneva Agreement by the Communist authorities of North Vietnam and the threat to peace arising from the policy of subversion and aggression directed by those authorities against South Vietnam. Copies of this document are being placed in the Library of the House. My noble Friend sent a copy to the Soviet Government, and he is about to draw the attention of the Soviet Co-Chairman to this serious situation and to the views of the South Vietnamese Government.

Can my right hon. Friend confirm that since the cease-fire in 1954 the North Vietnamese Army has increased from seven to twenty divisions and, not only has there been very large subversion in South Vietnam but they have violated the frontier on more than one occasion? Will he recommend his noble Friend to bring to the attention of the International Supervisory Control Commission these violations of the ceasefire agreement?

There has been a very large increase in the numbers of the forces, as my hon. Friend has mentioned, and a very large number of violations, which have been specified in this Note. I shall certainly consider the point he has raised.

Will the right hon. Gentleman endeavour to see that on both sides the Geneva Agreement is kept? Is it not a fact that the International Commission has also brought a series of charges against American intervention, and recently did not the Americans indicate that they intend to give considerable additional military support to South Vietnam?

We are anxious that the Geneva Agreements should be kept by both sides, but I cannot accept the latter part of the hon. Member's question.

asked the Lord Privy Seal by whom Her Majesty's Government was represented at the recent celebration of the 25th anniversary of the coming to power of the present Spanish Head of State; and what part the representative took in the celebration.

The Minister at Her Majesty's Embassy in Madrid, who was at the time acting as Chargé d'Affaires, attended the ceremonies at Burgos along with the rest of the Diplomatic Corps.

Is it not very regrettable that at a time when opposition is mounting in all classes and in all parts of the country against a brutal, corrupt and oppressive regime in Spain, the British Government—unlike some of our allies—should be officially represented at what was a celebration of the overthrow of Spanish democracy?

When we are in diplomatic relations with a country it is normal for our representative to attend functions of this kind, whether we approve of the official history of the functions or not. That occurs with Governments both of the Right and the Left.

Whatever the circumstances today, is it not a fact that the coming into power of the present Spanish Head of State saved Spain from Communism, and is not that a matter for congratulation?