Skip to main content

Oral Answers To Questions

Volume 646: debated on Tuesday 24 October 1961

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.

Gibraltar

Relations With Spain

1.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what improvements have taken place in the relations between Spain and Gibraltar during the past four months.

On a point of order. I have given private notice of a question about a ship lost in the North Sea. It is a matter of some importance, Mr. Speaker, and I am at a loss to know why you have not called me.

I am at a loss to know what the hon. and learned Member thinks that he is doing. If a Private Notice Question is not allowed by the Chair it is not thereafter to be mentioned.

I have at present nothing to add to my right hon. Friend the Lord Privy Seal's replies of 28th June, to the hon. Member for Goole (Mr. Jeger).

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that it makes it that much more difficult to be friendly with Spain when she continues this petty attitude in her economic, social and cultural relations with Gibraltar? In congratulating the right hon. Gentleman on his appointment and wishing him well in his vitally important job, may I ask him to bear in mind that it was expected that his predecessor would visit Gibraltar towards the end of the year, and that the Gibraltarians very much hope that the right hon. Gentleman, in his new office, will be able to visit them very soon?

I agree about the difficulties that arise from these restrictions. I know that my predecessor was sorry that, in the event, he could not visit Gibraltar. I hope to do so myself as soon as I can.

African Territories

Wild Life Preservation

7.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what steps he is now taking to help safeguard wild life in those parts of Africa for which he is responsible.

The Governments of the East and Central African Territories are all committed to policies of wild life preservation by way of laws and expenditure on enforcement and conservation. Her Majesty's Government give every encouragement to the individual Governments in these efforts and make scientific advice and training available to them through the Nature Conservancy and through the Nature Conservancy's membership of various international bodies.

I am sure that my hon. Friend will agree that what is wanted now is a follow-up to the Arusha Conference. We very much welcome the splendid "Arusha Manifesto" issued by Mr. Nyerere, in which he pledged his Government to do everything possible to preserve Tanganyika's natural heritage. He also called for the co-operation of other nations. We welcome, too, the prompt launching of the World Wild Life Fund by The Prince of The Netherlands and its British Appeal, headed by H.R.H. Prince Philip. Four our part we will continue to do all we can to support the Governments in our territories in their efforts to honour their commitments and educate public opinion.

Kenya

African Democratic Union (Regionalisation Proposals)

10.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will make a statement about the proposals he has received from the leaders of the Kenya African Democratic Union for regionalisation in Kenya according to tribal groupings.

Will my right hon. Friend recognise the strength of tribal feeling in Kenya, and also remember that a somewhat similar solution has been proposed in the recent Uganda constitutional conference? Will he give those recommendations very serious consideration?

Jomo Kenyatta

13.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will amend the Kenyan Constitution to allow Jomo Kenyatta to stand for election to the Legislative Council.

3.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies when it is now proposed to remove the restrictions which prevent Jomo Kenyatta from eligibility for membership of the Kenya Legislative Council.

I intend to discuss this matter with the Governor during the next few days.

The Colonial Secretary must be aware that that is a totally inadequate Answer. Is not it clearly a ludicrous situation when the one man who might become a national African political leader is excluded from playing any part in politics except from behind the scenes? Does the Colonial Office never learn from experience?

I certainly hope myself to learn from experience, but in the first instance I want to consult the Governor on this and other important matters in Kenya, for which purpose he is arriving in London today to discuss things with me.

Malta

Electoral System

11.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what steps he is taking to revise the Maltese electoral register and to abolish the voting certificate system.

21.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies (1) if, as recommended in the Blood Report, he has investigated the alleged abuse of voting certificates in Malta; what have been the results of his investigation; and what alterations he intends to make in the law as a result;

(2) to what extent he intends reforming the electoral laws of Malta with particular reference to proxy and postal votes, numbered electoral lists, and the abolition of a free choice of polling stations.

As recommended in the Blood Report, the alleged abuse of voting certificates in Malta has been most carefully examined by the Government of Malta. I am satisfied from the Report that the allegations of abuse have been greatly exaggerated. A new electoral register is being prepared and certain administrative changes are being made to reduce still further the possibility of abuse, including restricting use of each voting certificate to a single polling station. No changes are contemplated in respect of proxy and postal voting. I believe that the consideration of further changes in the electoral system should properly be left to the new Maltese legislature.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that the present electoral register—the one introduced this summer—is still on the lines of that which was issued in 1921? Would not it be a good thing to bring it fully into line with the British system, with compulsory registration?

The Questions deal with abuses. I have said that we have made certain administrative changes which should reduce the danger of abuses, but I shall be happy to consider any suggestions from hon. Members.

28.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will give details of the representations received from the Maltese political parties concerning the number of electoral divisions and number of seats in the new Parliament; and if he has yet decided on the number of electoral districts.

The number of electoral divisions and seats in the new Maltese Legislative Assembly were discussed with the Maltese political parties in confidential correspondence. As for the second part of the Question, I would refer the hon. Member to the Malta (Electoral Provisions) Order in Council, 1961, which provides for a Legislative Assembly of fifty.

Is the Colonial Secretary aware that this will mean there will be one Member of Parliament per 3,000 electors? Is he further aware that even with a legislative assembly of forty, the Blood Report called attention to the difficulties of finding enough Members of the right calibre? Does not the increase in the size of the Assembly add to the problem of finding the necessary Members of Parliament?

I shall certainly study what the hon. Member says, but I have explained the position under the existing Order, which was made after pretty full consultation.

Constitution

19.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what are his intentions with regard to the future constitutional status of Malta.

23.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he is now in a position to announce the date of publication of the new Constitution for Malta and if he will give an assurance that no action will be taken to implement it until the House has had an opportunity to discuss it.

25.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies when the new Constitution for Malta will be ready for publication.

I hope to submit a new Constitution for Malta, based on the recommendations of the Malta Constitutional Commission, 1960, to the Queen, in Council today for the signification of Her Majesty's pleasure.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Bearing in mind that Sir Hilary Blood suggested that Malta should henceforth be the State of Malta and not the Colony of Malta, will my right hon. Friend tell me whether he intends to carry out that suggestion? If so, will he do it by Act of Parliament rather than Order in Council, because that is more permanent?

I must ask my hon. Friend to await the publication of the new Constitution which will become available in a very short time.

May I ask whether there will be plenty of time given between the publication of the Constitution for Malta and the elections in order to give the people good time to study the matter and to know for what they are voting?

I am not certain what "plenty of time" means in this context. I think that the time we have in mind should be quite adequate.

Dockyard Development (Contracts)

20.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will give an assurance that contracts for the development of the dockyard in Malta will be placed before the Maltese elections are held.

I cannot give the assurance for which my hon. Friend asks about the timing of the placing of contracts which is in the hands of the company concerned.

Bearing in mind that the dockyard is the very backbone of Maltese economy, does not my right hon. Friend agree that if there were an election before these contracts were placed there would be no feeling of security among the Maltese people? Is it not desirable to make certain that the elections are not held until that development programme starts?

I do not think the two things will clash, but, as I say, we cannot dictate to the company the timing of its activities. In placing the contracts, it is limited to a list of approved contractors and we must leave the matter in its hands.

Legislative Assembly (Official Report)

26.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if, in view of the inadequate reporting and publishing of proceedings in the previous legislatures of Malta, he will clearly state in the new Constitution precise rules governing the preparation and publication of the Official Report.

While it is appropriate to provide in a Constitution for the keeping of official records, I think that detailed regulations covering reporting and publication would be more appropriately dealt with in rules made by the Maltese Legislative Assembly.

May I thank my right hon. Friend for that Answer and express the hope that adequate opportunities will be given and that also there will be adequate legal advice?

Northern Rhodesia

Constitution

12.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what consultations he has had with parties affected by the proposed Northern Rhodesian Constitution since the Recess; and whether he will make a statement.

18.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will announce the details of the Constitution he now proposes for Northern Rhodesia.

I dealt with this matter on the occasion of the debate on African Affairs on 19th October. As I indicated then, there will be an opportunity for the parties concerned to make representations to me when the Governor has advised me that violence and disorder have ceased.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that if he reverted to the principles in the February White Paper and dropped the 400 qualification for the national seats and abolished the Asian seat, it would still be possible to get the support of the African national parties and the multi-racial Liberal Party? May we have an assurance that when Sir Roy Welensky visits this country in the immediate future the Minister will not be bludgeoned into retreat as was his predecessor?

I do not accept the premise in the latter part of that supplementary question at all. I propose to examine all the representations on this subject from every responsible quarter and to do my best to come to a right conclusion.

Does the Colonial Secretary accept the principle of the Monckton Commission's recommendation, namely, that the will of the majority must be reflected, or does he wish by some trickery to try to keep power in the hands of the 3 per cent. European minority? Does the right hon. Gentleman know that if he does that he will forfeit the confidence of Mr. Kaunda, the only man who can do in terms of racial friendliness for Northern Rhodesia what Mr. Julius Nyerere did for Tanganyika?

I am grateful to the hon. Member for his advice which I will take into account with other representations.

Is not the hon. Member who asked the Question most unfair to Sir Roy Welensky? Was not he given to understand that a compromise final solution had been reached on the Northern Rhodesia Constitution and is not it unreasonable to reopen the matter? How many final decisions are there to be?

Is not the hon. Member being unfair to the Colonial Secretary? Was not the fact that Sir Roy Welensky's party boycotted the February talks—

Order. This is a tiresome form at Question Time. The Minister was asked a supplementary question and should be allowed to answer if he wishes.

Can my right hon. Friend make clear to the House—I confess that I am not entirely clear—whether the disturbances in Northern Rhodesia have now completely ceased and if so, whether he sees an opportunity to reconsider the June proposals; whether talks are to take place to that end and, if so, between whom?

No, Sir, the disturbances have not entirely ceased. However, the situation is much better. I am waiting for the Governor to inform me when, in his opinion, violence and disorder have ceased. As soon as that information reaches me, I will invite the various political parties to submit representations to me on the various questions on which a divergence of view still exists.

Secretary Of State (Visit)

17.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies when he intends to visit Northern Rhodesia.

I naturally wish to visit Northern Rhodesia, but I do not think it would be helpful to do so before the Governor has informed me that law and order has been fully restored and the political parties have had an opportunity of making their further representations on the proposed constitution.

Is the Colonial Secretary aware that there are many of us who would agree with the comment of the Commonwealth Correspondent of the Guardian this morning, namely, that it would be useful for the Colonial Secretary to visit Northern Rhodesia in November? Is he aware that it would be better for him to see for himself and to learn from his own experience rather than to rely on culling impressions from a few self-selected individuals who happen to come here?

Naturally, I believe in seeing what one can for oneself. But to think that on a short visit one can learn more than the people who have lived there for years seems to me a form of unwisdom.

Colonial Territories

Immigration Into United Kingdom

14.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what colonial Governments he is consulting about restricting immigration into the United Kingdom.

I am in consultation with the Governments of all territories for which I am responsible.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when these discussions are likely to come to what I hope will be a reasonable solution in respect of a problem which has been made immeasurably more difficult as a result of many years of dithering indecision on the part of this Government? Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that vague threats without positive action merely inflate the number of immigrants who want to get here before the doors are closed? Is he aware that the time has surely come for some definite indication of the Government's intentions?

That is why we are continuing with these consultations which we shall conclude as quickly as we can.

Is not the Colonial Secretary aware that any attempt to control immigration from the Commonwealth, at the very moment when the Government are seeking to open the doors to the free movement of labour into this country from Europe under the Treaty of Rome, would deal a final blow at the survival of the Commonwealth?

Can the Colonial Secretary tell us what form these consultations are taking and with whom exactly he is consulting? Is he actually asking Ministers to come here to talk over this matter round the table or is this being done only at official levels?

This is being done by the normal methods of communication with the colonial Governments concerned.

Political Freedom

16.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what steps he proposes to take to increase the political freedom of British Colonies which he considers too small for complete independence.

This is a problem that I intend to study closely, but I cannot make any statement as yet.

I appreciate the difficulties which the Colonial Secretary may have in considering this particular problem. May I ask whether he will consider that the smallness of a country does not derogate from its passionate interest in political freedom? Will he see that as much political freedom as possible is given to a country irrespective of its size?

The impression which I have formed so far is that it is difficult to generalise. There are so many differences between the different countries. That is why I want plenty of time to study the problem.

Would the Colonial Secretary make a special point of studying the Seychelles, where we have a very loyal people for whom self-government is unlikely in view of the size of the island but for whom a great deal ought to be done by this House?

Gambia

Doctors And Teachers

15.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what increases in the number of doctors and teachers employed in the public services in the Gambia he proposes to make before that country becomes independent.

I am not in a position to make the hypothetical forecasts requested by the hon. Member. In the near future, however, the Gambia Government propose to increase the yearly output of trained teachers from 30 to 50. Any precise estimate regarding doctors is not practicable, but a post of Assistant Director of Medical Services is being created and undoubtedly further increases will be necessary.

is not that a quite deplorable Answer? After so many years of British rule in the Gambia is not it deplorable that there are so few Gambians with adequate secondary education to fulfil the needs of their own country? Should not the Minister at this stage do what he can, financially and by action, to improve the situation?

Jamaica

Migration To United Kingdom

27.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what reply he has sent to the telegram sent by the Premier of Jamaica protesting at proposals to curb migration to Britain and alleging that they will be interpreted as a failure to face up to the problem of colour.

I have informed the Premier that I have received his message to which I am giving the fullest consideration.

Is this all that this distinguished statesman is to get from the Colonial Secretary? Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that the Government's threats on these matters are being interpreted in the West Indies as nothing more than colour prejudice? Could there not be some immediate reassurance to the peoples of Jamaica and the West Indies on that issue alone? Secondly, does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that, owing to the poverty and unemployment which we left behind in Jamaica, migration from that country is a safety valve which, if closed, might lead to social chaos there? Do not all these things mean that a very quick, very authoritative and sympathetic reply should be sent from this country?

If the Government have proposals to make on this matter, no doubt they will be fully debated when the time comes. In the meanwhile, I cannot tell the Premier more than that I have received his message and that I am considering it.

Why should the Conservative Party Conference be given more details about this than anyone else? That is what so many of us object to most strenuously.

Scotland

Miss Pat Arrowsmith

29.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what action he has taken with regard to the forcible feeding of Miss Pat Arrowsmith on hunger-strike in Gateside Prison; and whether he will make a statement.

34.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the case of Miss Pat Arrowsmith, on the reasons why it was considered necessary to feed her forcibly, and on the methods used in feeding her.

Miss Arrowsmith refused, after breakfast on 6th October, to take further meals, in protest against the sewing by other women prisoners of canvas bags which could be used as sandbags. To maintain her health the medical officer decided that artificial feeding was necessary, and this was undertaken on a total of four occasions on 11th, 12th and 13th October. Miss Arrowsmith made no physical resistance. She took a light meal on the afternoon of 16th October and, under medical supervision, she has been taking food regularly since.

Is the Secretary of State aware that there is considerable deep concern about this case? In view of that, and the fact that many people think that Miss Arrowsmith has already suffered enough, will he intervene to secure her immediate release?

I have no power to interfere with the decisions of the court and cannot answer for the court of appeal. I have considered the question of recommending the use of the Prerogative, but I do not consider that in the circumstances it would be right for me to do so.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this forcible feeding was carried out by means of a rubber tube in Miss Arrowsmith's mouth and it was done before there was any sign that she was suffering as a result of her hunger strike? Is he aware that there are still in this country suffragettes who recall with horror experience of this kind in prison? Is it not time that he took a definite line to stop this?

The hon. Member is making an imputation on the good faith of the medical officer who gave the decision that this was necessary. The decision was taken in the interests of Miss Arrowsmith's health by the medical officer after she had been five days without food. It was purely a medical decision. It is quite wrong to cast reflections on the decision of the medical officer.

Will the right hon. Gentleman explain the difference between forcible and artificial feeding, which was in the communication to the Press?

Artificial feeding is carried out by means of a tube, as the hon. Member suggested, and forcible feeding has always been used in my understanding to describe the situation in which the individual concerned resists. There was no resistance on the part of Miss Arrowsmith.

Does the right hon. Gentleman tell us that he has no power to mitigate a sentence? I take it from his attitude that he has such power. Does not he think that, assuming Miss Arrowsmith did something which she ought not to have done, her act has invoked sufficient punishment already? Would he reconsider this matter and use the powers he has got?

If the hon. Member will look at my original supplementary answer he will see exactly what I said. Of course I have power to recommend the use of the Prerogative, but I considered the position and decided that I could not do so in this case.

Is the Secretary of State aware that those of us who visited Gateside Prison while Miss Arrow-smith was on hunger strike—and I was one who carried out such a visit—came away with the clear impression that, so far as the Secretary of State was concerned, this system of forcible feeding could continue until the end of her sentence? Is he further aware that there is a clear indication that, if the Scottish Office cared enough about the affront to the public conscience of Britain, this matter could have been cleared up before?

The hon. Lady should not say that kind of thing. The strictest procedure was followed. I have no power to interfere with decisions of the courts except in the circumstances I have described. Artificial feeding was done on medical grounds. I do not understand what the hon. Lady means by saying that it could have gone on until the end of her sentence. If the medical officer advised us that it was necessary, of course it would, but at the moment it is not necessary.

Apart from the question of forcible feeding or artificial feeding, whatever me might call it, was not the sentence a vicious one?

That is a different question altogether. All we are dealing with here is a matter of the feeding of this lady in prison.

36.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will now release Miss Pat Arrowsmith from Greenock prison.

Will the Minister at least end the solitary confinement which Miss Arrowsmith is suffering at the moment and give her an assurance that she will not lose the normal one month's remission of this savage three months' sentence? Secondly, what does he suppose history will think of men who jailed a fine and courageous woman for demonstrating in a non-violent way—

That appears to be out of order as being a criticism, accompanied by epithets, of the sentence, in respect of which there is no Ministerial responsibility.

It is not a criticism. Am I not entitled to suggest that the sentence is vicious, harsh and severe?

No, not to this Minister. He is not responsible for the sentence. That is the point.

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. The Secretary of State told the House earlier that he had the right to seek the Royal Prerogative.

I think that the hon. Member is not following me. It is a perfectly fair point. If the hon. Gentleman wants to criticise the sentence he must take other steps, because the Minister is not responsible for the sentence. The Minister may have powers relating to the Prerogative, but criticising the sentence is not inviting him, in the form of the question the hon. Member put, to exercise the Prerogative in any way.

Further to that point of order. On many occasions at Question Time I have heard hon. Members ask Ministers if they agreed that sen- tences for many offences were far too light. Ministers have on frequent occasions agreed that sentences were far too light. The Home Secretary has said many times that in respect of certain offences he would be very pleased if the courts could impose higher sentences. Mr. Speaker, I cannot understand why it is in order to ask the Home Secretary in respect of one type of offence to urge the courts to increase the sentences but it is out of order to ask the Secretary of State for Scotland in respect of other sentences to seek a reduction of the sentences.

I can understand circumstances in which a discussion of the penalty for a given class of offence might be in order. What is not in order, as I understand it, because there is no Ministerial responsibility, is to invite the Minister to criticise a sentence in a specific case. That is quite distinct from asking him to exercise the Prerogative. I would not say that I have not heard questions of that kind, either in the Chair or without, but if it happened when I was in the Chair I was negligent in not stopping it.

Further to that point of order. Your Ruling, Mr. Speaker, is that it could possibly be in order if it was not a specific case. My supplementary question which was ruled out of order was directed to the whole range of fines and sentences and not to any one specific case. Is not that rather a contradiction?

I took the hon. Member's question as being related to the people involved, or alleged to have been involved, and dealt with in respect of this one incident, this one demonstration.

Further to that point of order. Do I understand that there is something out of order in asking the appropriate Minister to advise the Crown to exercise the Prerogative of mercy in a particular case?

If that is not out of order and one may press a Minister to use that power in a specific case, it can only be because those who wish to press him in this way consider that the sentence is excessive. As long as that suggestion is made without imputing wrong motives to the judges who imposed it. is there anything wrong with it?

There is. I would have to look at the exact text, but the form of the question which first aroused my attention invited the Minister to express a view adverse to the sentence of the court. It is that which I conceive to be wrong, because he is not responsible for it.

The hon. Gentleman asked a supplementary question which I think is proper and which I was on the point of answering. He asked whether I would consider remitting the sentence. I have carefully considered the circumstances of Miss Arrowsmith's case in the light of my power to recommend the exercise of the Prerogative. I have reached the conclusion that there are no grounds for action on my part.

Apart from the fact that I think that that is very wrong, may I ask the Secretary of State to reply to the previous supplementary question, which was whether he intends to keep Miss Arrowsmith in solitary confinement?

Miss Arrowsmith must be subject to the normal prison rules, and I cannot go behind them.

In view of the severity of the sentence and the obvious personal prejudice of the sheriff in this instance—

Order. The hon. Member cannot say that. He must take other steps if he wants to raise that point.

With your permission, Mr. Speaker, I now ask if the Secretary of State is prepared to have an inquiry to see if the person sitting on the bench on this occasion—

Order. No; it requires other procedure. The hon. Member cannot do that in a question.

On a point of order. What procedure can I adopt, Mr. Speaker, to bring clearly to the House—

I think that we ought not to pursue it. Perhaps I can help the hon. Member in this way. If he wants to criticise the conduct or qualifications of some person in a judicial position in that way, he must put down a Motion for the purpose. It cannot be done at Question Time.

Mentally Handicapped Persons, Aberdeen (Occupational Centre)

30.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he received the letter, dated 6th October, 1961, from Aberdeen Trades Council concerning his decision regarding the establishment of an occupational centre for mentally handicapped persons at West Bank, Aberdeen; what reply he has sent to the letter; and if he will state his reason for preventing the establishment of that centre there.

The letter was received on 9th October and I am sending the hon. and learned Member a copy of my reply. Following a public inquiry it seemed to me that it would be unwise, without more cogent evidence that no more suitable site could be found, to authorise the use of this site for the purpost in the face of objections by local residents.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that he is opposing the selection by the local authority, which knows the facts better than he does, and that he is frustrating a much-needed and useful public service? Has he any constructive alternative to suggest so that the needs of the nation may be reasonably met?

I agree that an establishment of this kind is badly needed. What I do not accept is that I am frustrating the intentions of the local authority when I pay regard to a statutory procedure which involved a public inquiry and was the subject of a report. I am bound to weigh very carefully the recommendations made to me by my reporter. As the hon. and learned Member doubtless knows, I have asked the corporation to make a further survey.

Works Of Art (Reproduction)

32.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland on how many occasions during the last twelve months permission has been granted to advertising interests to reproduce works of art in the possession of the National Galleries of Scotland.

I understand that such permission was granted on four occasions during the twelve months from 1st October, 1960, to 30th September, 1961.

Can the Minister give an assurance that the price will not be marked down? He will remember the ridiculous case in which an affluent petroleum company paid a derisory sum for reproducing a Scottish work of art. Will he make certain that when people want to reproduce these works of art for commercial purposes, they pay through the nose for it?

There was formerly a standard fee, but I am advised that the trustees have decided that when the reproductions are for advertisements the fee shall be by arrangement in each case, with the amount of the standard fee as the minimum.

Remand Centres

33.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what action he has taken to provide remand centres as laid down in the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act, 1949.

It is proposed to erect a fully equipped remand centre on a site which is being acquired at Larbert. In the meantime, a new building now under construction at Polmont Borstal Institution will be used to provide remand centre accommodation. It should be in operation by next summer.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of a case of a boy which I sent to him from my constituency who, on first offence and before trial, was remanded to Barlinnie Prison for a period of fourteen days? Does he not think that this casts a stigma which is very difficult to eradicate and interferes with the work of probation officers in trying to rehabilitate youngsters of this age? Does not his reply show lack of concern for the worry which has been expressed by sheriffs, probation officers and children's courts over a very long period? It is twelve years since the Act was passed, and nothing has been done.

I agree that it is desirable to keep young persons out of Barlinnie. Of course they are carefully segregated. It has not been possible to do simultaneously everything we should like to do and it has been considered right to give priority to work with borstal and detention centres.

Is the Minister satisfied that he has fulfilled the provisions of the 1949 Act by what he has told us about this extra building at Larbert? Ought he not to have done better? Ought not remand centres to have been provided all over Scotland—remand centres which might be properly supervised, instead of having young people treated as they are at present.

It has not been possible to do everything simultaneously that we should like to do. We had to give priority to what we thought would do the most valuable work to help young people.

Will the Secretary of State look at this situation again? I understand that there is accommodation in a remand home. If he has not the remand centres ready yet, can he not use some of that accommodation where these boys who are considered unruly may be segregated in a remand home, instead of being sent to Barlinnie Prison?

I will certainly examine what the hon. Member said, because I should like to think carefully over the detail of it.

Holy Loch Demonstrators (Prosecutions)

35.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give details of the sentences and fines imposed at Dunoon Sheriff Court for offences in the recent anti-Polaris demonstrations at the Holy Loch.

39.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will indicate the range of fines and sentences imposed at Dunoon Sheriff Court arising out of the disturbances in that area on 16th September, 1961.

Three hundred and twenty-one persons have been dealt with by the court, and the cases against 29 others are still to be heard. Of the 321, one person was sentenced to three months imprisonment; 12 were fined £15, 193 were fined £10, and 99 were fined amounts varying between £7 and El; 13 persons were admonished and 3 were granted absolute discharges.

Is the Secretary of State aware that these sentences contrast markedly with those which were imposed in other instances and that many people who thoroughly disapprove of civil disobedience as a means of political protest nevertheless feel that there is real injustice here which it is the duty of the Secretary of State to remedy?

As the hon. Lady appreciates, it is for the criminal court to decide, after taking into account any maximum penalty prescribed by Statute and all the relevant circumstances in respect of both the offence and the offender, what penalty to impose on a person convicted before it. Any person aggrieved by the sentence imposed on him has a right of appeal to a higher court. I cannot comment on what happened in this case.

Does not the Secretary of State think that he should indicate that these fines and sentences were excessive? Will he not leave his brief for a minute or two? Is he aware that these fines are live to ten times, and in some cases fifteen times, greater than those imposed in similar instances?

Order. The Secretary of State is not responsible for the sentence and the hon. Member's supplementary question in that form is out of order.

On a point of order. May I direct your attention, Mr. Speaker, to the fact that I asked whether the right hon. Gentleman would indicate whether he thought that the penalties were excesive? I did not ask him to alter anything or to do anything.

Inviting the Minister to express a view as to whether the sentences were excessive would be out of order, because there is no Ministerial responsibility for the sentences awarded. I am sure that the hon. Member follows that point.

Would the Secretary of State on reflection agree that these fines and sentences were excessive and would he advise people not to use the big stick?

Order. That is the same point. I can understand another way in which the question could be asked which would not offend, but in that form it does offend.

Can my right hon. Friend give any indication of the cost which the demonstration has been to the local authority in extra police pay?

I have not the exact figure here but my impression is that it is about £4,000.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many people think that these cases should not have been taken to the sheriff's court but to a lower court, in which case they would have been dealt with in a manner befitting the crime which had been committed, the penalties would have been very much lower and, incidentally, the fines would have gone towards Argyllshire County Council to help pay its costs?

In how many of these cases were there appeals and with what results?

In the case of those offenders who pleaded guilty when charged, I understand that there were no appeals, but at present two appeals are outstanding from among those who pleaded not guilty.

Without associating myself with the more pejorative adjectives which some of my hon. Friends have used, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman agrees that these judicial officers, like other human beings, may sometimes act in the heat of the moment and do things which later they regret? Has not the right hon. Gentleman reserve power, in the advice which he may tender to the Crown about the Prerogative of mercy, to put right a situation which in the opinion of most ordinary people is rapidly becoming idiotic?

The next Question deals more specifically with this point and I think that we ought to wait for it.

In view of the great harm which these demonstrators do in encouraging the Russians to think that we have no backbone, does not my right hon. Friend think that they got off very lightly indeed?

Gypsies And Tinkers

31.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what study was made of the Report of the Departmental Committee on Vagrancy in Scotland in 1934 with regard to the particular problems of gypsies and tinkers; what decisions were taken, as a result of the investigation, that have been of benefit to these types of travellers; and what is the present position with regard to gypsies in Scotland.

This Report, received in 1936, dealt primarily with classes of vagrants other than gypsies and tinkers, and its recommendations have largely been overtaken by post-war developments of the social services. While local difficulties occasionally arise in relation to tinker families, usually in the northern counties, there is no general problem in Scotland at the present time.

Is the Minister aware that people concerned with the gypsy problem would like to congratulate the Scots on the humane way in which they have tried to deal with this problem, which is in marked contrast to the disgraceful conditions in this country which make a mockery of the claim of both sides of the House about the brotherhood of man, which seems to apply in other countries but not on our own doorstep?

I was so astonished about anything polite being said about anything which we do in Scotland that I found it difficult to answer. Far be it from me to make any comment on what happens south of the Border.

Questions To The Prime Minister

I have a word to say to the House about Questions to the Prime Minister. When on 18th July I announced new arrangements for dealing with Questions to the Prime Minister, I told the House that the Prime Minister was willing to try the experiment of answering his Questions on Tuesdays and Thursdays at 3.15 p.m.

I am told that this arrangement has worked for the general convenience of the House and that in these circumstances the Prime Minister is willing that it should be continued. I am also told that it has been further agreed that it would be reasonable to implement the rest of the relevant recommendation of the Select Committee on Procedure, namely, that Questions to the Prime Minister should be limited to Tuesdays and Thursdays. I therefore propose that we should continue the arrangement with this limitation.

On a point of order. I ask that that recommendation should not be implemented for this Tuesday, because there are still about thirty Questions on the Order Paper from Scottish Members. As there has been an unconscionable waste of time on two Questions, may I ask you, Mr. Speaker, to postpone the implementation of the recommendation for this Tuesday until the next occasion and let us get on with the Scottish Questions?

As far as I follow, I think that if it were implemented now it would aid the hon. Member as much as anything possibly could.

Mr. Speaker, you will appreciate that Scottish Members have legitimate complaints about the fact that we are limited to Tuesday, that we seldom get the Secretary of State answering Questions, and that if we do, as today, we are robbed of a very valuable quarter of an hour. I wonder if consideration can be given, if not to making any change in this decision, to making it possible for Scottish Members to be able to question the Secretary of State on some day other than Tuesday.

I am not at present making any change with regard to that, but I realise the difficulty and I am sure that what the hon. Gentleman has said will be borne in mind.

Shipbuilding And Shipping (Minister's Statement)

Q1.

asked the Prime Minister whether the statement by the Minister of Transport during his visit to the Scandinavian countries, about Government policy concerning subsidies to help the shipbuilding industry and shipping, represents the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

If the Prime Minister agrees with his right hon. Friend, who said while he was in Scandinavia that the Government's policy was opposed to subsidy, why did they concede a subsidy to the Cunard Line? Now that that matter is in abeyance, if not finally settled, do we understand from the Prime Minister that it is the intention of the Government to consider the possibility of financial assistance to the shipbuilding and shipping industries?

What my right hon. Friend said was that he felt that competition between Governments in subsidies would not be in the long-term interests of this country. It is perfectly true that the Atlantic passenger trade is in a rather special position, because there are only two competing ships, both of them built by subsidy and operated by subsidy. Broadly speaking, I think we all agree that it would be better for all companies if subsidy was not in general used.

Will the Prime Minister reply to the final part of my supplementary question? Will the Government consider, in lieu of the Cunard arrange- ment to assist the shipbuilding and shipping industries?

There is always the question of credit facilities which we have done our best to improve, and we will certainly do our best to see if any further improvement can be made.

Katanga

Q2.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement regarding the communications he has sent the Prime Minister of India on the United Nations action in Katanga.

I am in regular consultation with Commonwealth Prime Ministers over major international issues. It is our custom not to divulge the contents of confidential exchanges.

Is the Prime Minister aware that we are still no wiser, either from his Answer or from his speech, as to how to eliminate rumours getting abroad that this Government have been engaged in sabotaging the United Nations action in the Congo? Is this another illustration of the right hon. Gentleman's highly personalised views on the Press?

No, Sir. I think that this matter was dealt with at some length in the debate.

Ghana (Her Majesty The Queen)

Q3.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will arrange to accompany Her Majesty the Queen on her visit to Ghana.

No, Sir. In accordance with established practice, the Queen is not accompanied by any British Minister when visiting a Commonwealth country.

Since the Prime Minister will not do his plain and obvious duty, which is to advise the Queen, on political and security grounds, not to go to Ghana, ought he not at least to go himself? Does he not realise that by sending the Queen alone in these circumstances, he is putting her in a humiliating position by making it appear that she condones the disgraceful state of affairs in Ghana because she is not able to say anything publicly to the contrary? If he went himself, he could make a speech embroidering the "wind of change" theme, showing how much he disapproves of what is going on in Ghana today.

I have nothing to add to what my right hon. Friend the Commonwealth Secretary said in the course of the debate on 19th October.

Is the Prime Minister aware that there will be wide support for the Queen's visiting Ghana; and that we believe that Her Majesty's visit can only do good?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is very considerable anxiety about the Queen's visit to Ghana, and would he not consider sending a "troika" instead, composed of Mr. Richard Dimbleby, the hon. Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro) and the right hon. Member for Belper (Mr. G. Brown)?

I think that the House recognises that this is a grave matter; and that considerable responsibility lies upon the Government to advise Her Majesty. If I may say so, I do not think that was one of the hon. Member's happiest efforts.

Q6.

asked the Prime Minister if he will consult with the President of Ghana as to the advisability of postponing the visit to Ghana, as Head of the Commonwealth, of Her Majesty the Queen.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations in the course of the debate on African affairs on 19th October.

What steps is my right hon. Friend taking to ensure that the purpose of this visit to the people of Ghana is not misconstrued as implying approval or, at least, condonation of the present practices of the President of Ghana, which are in such flagrant contradiction to everything for which the Commonwealth purports to stand?

As I said, this is a matter that has to be weighed, and I think that my right hon. Friend stated the views of the Government and, I think, of a large part of the House. What concerns us is Her Majesty's security. That is a quite separate problem, and one that we have to watch from day to day.

Berlin

Q4.

asked the Prime Minister when he received from Aberdeen Trades Council the resolution concerning the action taken by Her Majesty's Government to reach agreement with the other nations interested in the problems relating to the status and future of Berlin; what reply he has sent to the resolution; and what steps he has taken, and proposes to take, to solve the outstanding problems.

Does the Prime Minister agree with his colleagues behind him that this is a laughing matter? Does he realise that his handling of this very serious Berlin problem has been marked by abject failure, and will he try to do something better?

What I try to do is to answer the Questions that the hon. and learned Gentleman addresses to me.

Common Market (Negotiations)

Q5.

asked the Prime Minister if he will define the Ministerial group charged with the oversight of the Common Market negotiations.

No, Sir; the procedure by which the Cabinet discharges its collective responsibility is a matter for the Cabinet itself.

Will the Prime Minister bear in mind that when he announced that his right hon. Friend the Home Secretary was to be placed in charge of this vague and indeterminate group, at least the public is entitled to know what the Home Secretary, on his promotion, is being put in charge of? Can we not have some further details? If not, the right hon. Gentleman should not have mentioned it in the official statement.

It is contrary to practice to give any further information, for instance, as to the composition or terms of reference of any committee of Ministers.

Do we understand, from the announcement of the Home Secretary's responsibility, that the Home Secretary has a specific responsibility to the House in answering Questions about the Common Market?

No, Sir. I think that such Questions can be addressed to me, or to any Minister who is specially in charge of any particular aspect of them.

As regards matters of British agriculture, they would be to the Minister of Agriculture. If they were Questions on the Commonwealth, they would be to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations.

Commonwealth Migration

Q8.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will hold direct consultations with the other Commonwealth Prime Ministers before announcing proposals for limiting Commonwealth migration to this country.

It will always be our aim to consult with our partners in the Commonwealth on issues which affect their interests.

But when so many Prime Ministers in the Commonwealth think that this whole matter goes right to the root of the conception of the British Commonwealth, would it not be a very grave matter indeed to announce a unilateral decision by Great Britain without actually having had proper consultations with the Prime Ministers themselves beforehand? Secondly, would it not, in any case, be a very good idea to have such consultations, so that if the burden of migration has to be shared, it can be shared among all the Commonwealth countries after friendly consultation round the table?

As I say, we do always have very full consultation. This is a matter, of course, on which each Commonwealth country makes its own arrangements, but perhaps it would really be better to wait, in the event of any such question being a matter of debate.

Will the Prime Minister say by which Minister consultations are being conducted with the Government of Eire about restricting the emigration of subjects of that country to this country? Who is in charge of that particular discussion or negotiation?

Any question that affects Eire is, by tradition, dealt with through the Commonwealth Office.

In view of the angry statements that have come from the Commonwealth since the Home Secretary's speech at the Conservative Party Conference, can the Prime Minister say whether there was consultation with the Commonwealth Prime Ministers before that important statement of policy was made?

I think that we had much better wait until the whole matter is debated.

Overseas Transport (Subsidies)

Q9.

asked the Prime Minister if he will instruct the Ministers of Transport and Aviation to consider jointly in which sphere of overseas transport a subsidy from public funds would be most advantageously applied and to report to him accordingly.

No, Sir. I expect overseas transport services generally to operate without subsidies.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Cunard Line has just declared that it proposes to make a complete reassessment of the organisation necessary to run the North Atlantic services? Does he not realise that this will involve the role to be played by aviation and the role to be played by aids of some sort or other; and must ultimately cover a wider area than the North Atlantic? Does he not think, therefore, that, in the national interest, the Government, through the appropriate Ministers, should also seek to make a similar reassessment?

The hon. Gentleman knows that very wide issues are very difficult to deal with by means of Question and Answer. As I said in my Answer, in regard to overseas transport services generally we would hope, broadly speaking, that they would be able to operate without a subsidy.

I am sorry, Mr. Speaker, that I have raised an issue to which the right hon. Gentleman has obviously not given much thought. Could I ask him whether he would consider the matter again and whether, if I put down a Question in the new Session, he would have a fuller Answer for me?

If the hon. Gentleman puts down a Question, of course 1 always take special care to study what he says, and would do my best and answer it.

Would my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister bear in mind that other countries subsidise their shipping and air transport; and that while it is very desirable that this country, in common with some other countries, should not subsidise, it is in the national interest that we should face the facts, and realise that if some countries are prepared to subsidise, we should be prepared to subsidise, so that our shipping may be on an equal footing with that of some other countries?

It is true that certain Governments do subsidise. The great question of policy is how far it benefits us as a country to enter into this form of competition. We have been fairly successful in export subsidies generally in getting a code, and I would rather that we should try to work to get it generally understood that subsidy was not for air or shipping transport.