asked the Minister of Aviation what prospects he has in mind for the provision of additional civil aerodromes in the Tees-side area to promote the establishment of new industries in the North East.

The provision of aerodromes to meet the needs of Tees-side is a matter for the local authorities to consider in the first instance.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that the provision of increased facilities on Tees-side is vital to the establishment of future industries in the North-East? When these local authorities meet early in January, will he do all in his power to assist, even though it may be only for helicopter development?

If the local authorities apply to my right hon. Friend for assistance, he will, of course, consider it in relation to the criteria laid down in the White Paper.

As the local authorities are getting together on this, will the hon. Gentleman meet a deputation of local authorities and local Members concerned to discuss whether we can have a better arrangement for the use of Middleton St. George aerodrome, and, if necessary, use his authority with the Secretary of State for Air for this purpose?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend will be very willing to meet deputations from the local authorities to discuss the matter, but, in so far as it concerns the Secretary of State for Air, I think that the question would have to be addressed to him.

asked the Minister of Aviation what representations he has received from residents' associations and other interested parties regarding the decision to permit jet aircraft an extended use of London Airport during the night hours; and what replies he has made.

A number of residents' associations, local authorities and other organisations have made representations against the regular use of Heathrow by jet aircraft at night. In reply my right hon. Friend has explained the benefits that these night flights bring to the country as a whole and the steps taken to reduce the annoyance caused to those living near the airport.

But does the hon. Gentleman know that when we met the right hon. Gentleman in conference he indicated to us that there would be no jet flights at night except those which were delayed in their ordinary course? Is he aware that this is an appalling and utterly intolerable grievance to the people who live on the edge of the airport? Is he aware that the medical officer of Slough has said that the health of the people in those areas will be deeply affected by the disturbance at night? When is the hon. Gentleman going to think of residents in this country rather than the jet lines serving America and other territories?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that my right hon. Friend does most carefully consider the interests of residents in this country as well as those of travellers abroad. I am not sure of the date at which the meeting to which the hon. Gentleman referred took place, but, if it was of recent date, I cannot believe that my right hon. Friend said that there would be no jet flights at night.

It was before the agreement.

Yes, Sir, and since then jet aircraft have been allowed to operate under restricted conditions at night.

That is what we are protesting about.

Such operations are still more limited in winter. As regards the medical suffering, we are advised by the medical authorities that there is no danger to health, although we entirely agree that it is a most serious annoyance.

In view of this utterly unsatisfactory reply, I beg to give notice that I will raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.

asked the Minister of Aviation if he will now agree to the purchase of three helicopters for British European Airways in order to allow an inter-city helicopter service to be operated.

I favour the purchase of the three American Vertol 107 helicopters to allow an inter-city helicopter service to be operated in co-operation with SABENA. I am, however, discussing the terms proposed for this arrangement and B.E.A.'s future plans in relation to it before giving final approval to the purchase.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make it quite clear that the use of American helicopters, even with British engines, is an interim measure only until we have sufficiently adequate machines ourselves to take their place? Will he also say that we have to act quickly on this if we are to have an inter-city service both between cities in this country and on the short Continental routes?

It is just those kinds of points which I am discussing.

asked the Minister of Aviation what action he is taking to avert the actual and imminent redundancy in the aircraft industry by placing suitable Government orders for civil and military aircraft.

asked the Minister of Aviation whether he is aware of increasing concern about future employment in the aircraft manufacturing industry; and whether he is now in a position to make a full statement about future Government orders.

Government spending on aircraft production is running at this moment at a rate of well over £200 million a year. With this pressure of demand any redundancy must be regarded as a natural consequence of reorganisation and rationalisation within the industry. As to future work, I have already reaffirmed the pledges to the aircraft industry announced by my predecessor and am in urgent consultation with the relevant Government Departments on the complex problems involved.

Has the Minister any target in mind for the future shape of this industry? If it means any reduction, will he see that adequate planning takes place in order to avoid any undue hardship?

I have ideas, which I am discussing with the industry and with my colleagues, but the point here is that the present pressure of demand is very high indeed. It is to the future that we ought to look, and to what kind of shape this industry may have, not today, but in three, four or ten years' time.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say what views he has on the total labour force likely to be engaged in the industry in three or four years' time, as he has been indicating?

I would rather not. I have heard so many forecasts of labour positions falsified in this House that I would rather not add to them.

On a point of order. I have certainly not heard the Minister answer Question No. 19 or say that it has been dealt with with another Question.

The hon. Member is unfortunate. He entered the Chamber while the Question with which Question No. 19 was dealt was being answered. I called the hon. Member for Gloucester (Mr. Diamond), amongst other reasons, to give the hon. Member time.

I am very grateful to you for that explanation, Mr. Speaker. I think the whole House will agree that the answer which was given seemed to have no relevance to my Question.

asked the Minister of Aviation when he was informed of the proposed closure of the de Havilland factory at Christchurch which was engaged in manufacturing the Sea Vixen airplane to Government order; and what consultations he had with the Minister of Labour and President of the Board of Trade regarding this closure, which has resulted from the ending of Government contracts.

The company has for some time made it clear publicly that it would have difficulty in maintaining employment at certain of its factories, including Christchurch. It told my Department and its workpeople as soon as its final decision was taken on 24th November. My Department has been in close touch with the Ministry of Labour and the Board of Trade throughout.

Why did not my right hon. Friend make it a condition precedent to the withdrawal of the contract for the Sea Vixens that a new industry should first have been introduced to take over the factory?

I do not think that it would be possible to treat the aircraft industry as a unique instance in this case and to say that there could never be a rationalisation or reorganisation of the industry until another factory or another industry had been introduced. I agree, on the other hand, that one should keep in the closest contact with the Ministry of Labour and the Board of Trade to see that a smooth transition takes place.

Has my right hon. Friend heard of any other industry in the area which might be able to absorb this redundancy, if it occurs?

I am informed that the effect of the redundancy is not likely to be great. I believe that there is a later Question about alternative industry in this area.

asked the Minister of Aviation what steps he is taking to ensure that, where aircraft factories are to close down as a result of the Government's policy of reorganisation, before workers are declared redundant alternative work is found or the factories are relet to other employers.

My Department is in constant touch with the Ministry of Labour and the Board of Trade on these matters. I am advised that the closure of the factories recently announced is unlikely to result in any serious or persistent unemployment.

If the right hon. Gentleman repeats his statement that he is in constant touch, and if he has known for eighteen months that these amalgamations were likely to result in redundancy, can he be more explicit and say what action he took before the present time—he keeps on referring to "the present time"—and on what authority, or according to what information, he believes that the 4,000 men who are to be thrown out of work in Gloucester are likely to find other work before redundancy occurs?

I am informed that there are other vacancies in the area. We must get this matter into perspective. Employment in the aircraft industry at the moment is rising and not falling. The fact that in a reorganisation some factories are closed while work is concentrated at others is not a disaster for the industry; it may be just plain common sense.

I recognise that it may not be a disaster for the industry, but is it not a disaster for the people concerned, in the constituencies? The Minister has made it clear that the industry is working with £200 million of Government money. In view of that fact, have not the Government an obligation, as well as the capacity, to see that the work is directed to places where it is socially necessary?

I would not agree that this is an area in which there is such a vast degree of unemployment that it is necessary to direct industry to it.

asked the Minister of Aviation what change of Government policy he has recently communicated to the directors of the Hawker-Siddeley Group, or to the directors of the Whitworth-Gloucester Aviation Company, as a result of which Government orders for aircraft will no longer be sufficient to keep that company's factories at both Coventry and Gloucester fully engaged.

None, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I am not entirely astonished at his reply? Is he nevertheless aware that whereas the company issued a statement a mere three months ago saying that when this amalgamation took place it would strengthen the Gloucester Aviation Company and the tenure of employment by its employees, the firm's latest statement is to the effect that as a result of Government policy there is no longer sufficient work for the Gloucester factories?

We must be quite plain about this. There has been no change in Government policy as announced by my predecessor in respect of the nature of Government support and so forth. The hon. Member would do well to distinguish between the present very heavy load of work on Government orders—the millions of pounds that are still being spent in the industry and the orders which are still there—and the quite separate question of decisions on future projects, to which I attach considerable importance.

Will the Minister bear in mind that this help is extremely patchy, and that, whereas in some areas there is redundancy, in other areas similar firms making similar aircraft are asking for labour?

I think that is so. It is a commercial decision for Hawkers to see how best it can distribute the load of work within this newly re-organised industry. There would be no point in the House approving a re-organisation of this kind unless something of that nature happened.

asked the Minister of Aviation what steps he is taking to maintain air services to Aberdeen and the north of Scotland.

asked the Minister of Aviation what action he is taking to ensure the maintenance of air services in the north of Scotland.

asked the Minister of Aviation if he will make a statement on the future of air services in the north of Scotland.

asked the Minister of Aviation if the services being run by British European Airways north of Edinburgh and Glasgow are to be subject to contraction.

asked the Minister of Aviation whether he will make a statement on the future development of air services in Scotland north of Edinburgh and Glasgow.

These services are being maintained by B.E.A. and I am not aware of any proposals affecting their future which at present call for action on my part.

May I take that answer as meaning that there will be no diminution in the services which have hitherto existed? Will there be any extension of those services in the near future?

These are both matters for the air operators.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that it is essential to the development of this rather neglected area that we should maintain and extend these services for the future well-being of the area?

I am sure that my hon. Friend's remarks will be noted by B.E.A. and other operators. The Government cannot undertake to subsidise air services, but they make a considerable contribution to the maintenance of the northern Scottish airports.

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that any large reduction in these services will be very serious for the whole area? Will he look into two points? First, is he aware that it is a common complaint that one cannot get bookings on these services in the summer? Secondly, would it not be possible by a slight alteration, perhaps, in his own Ministry's regulations, to make these services rather more economical, bearing in mind the type of area they serve?

I should be very glad to consider any suggestions hon. Members may make for more economical services, but the responsibility for the conduct of the services remains with the operators.

Does the hon. Member think that it is any use asking B.E.A. to keep these matters in mind if, at the same time, large sections of remunerative routes are taken away from B.E.A.? How can it be expected to run the unremunerative routes while facing encroachments in the case of the remunerative ones?

B.E.A. has been running these unremunerative services for a long time, and the encroachments to which the right hon. Member has referred do not entail any diminution in the future, as the Licensing Board has put forward in its arguments.

asked the Minister of Aviation whether he will take steps to ensure that organisers of inclusive air tours include in their tour programmes the name of the airport to which passengers are to be flown.

This is a matter for the Air Transport Licensing Board which, I understand, is already considering the point.

asked the Minister of Aviation when the proposed census of air traffic over Great Britain and the surrounding waters will take place; and if he will make a statement.

From today until midnight on 10th December. I will, with the permission of the House, circulate an account of the objects and methods of the census in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Can the right hon. Member say how long it will be before the results of the census are known? Secondly, when they are known will they be published?

I should like to consider both those questions—but if there is some useful information which I can give to the House on this subject I shall be very happy to do so.

asked the Minister of Aviation what steps he is taking or proposes to take about the nuisance to residents near London Airport caused by the discharge of burnt paraffin fumes.

Much of the nuisance arises from aircraft running at low power in or near the north terminal. When the north terminal is closed next year conditions should be much better. The airlines have built sound barriers in the maintenance areas and more are being built. These help to deflect fumes from residential areas.

Apart from the position of the aircraft, is it proposed by the Parliamentary Secretary that there should be other remedies? Will he bear in mind that many of my constituents not only have their nights spoilt by noise but now have their days and nights spoilt by obnoxious smells? Would he give an assurance that the matter is being seriously considered?

Yes, Sir. The matter is being considered seriously and research into the problem is being carried out now by two aircraft firms, Rolls-Royce and Bristol-Siddeley, and by the National Gas Turbine Establishment, But I cannot hold out strong hopes of an early solution.

asked the Minister of Aviation if, when he negotiates with foreign Government in respect of the air traffic rights necessary to implement the licences granted by the Air Transport Licensing Board to independent operators to enable them to fly to foreign destinations, he will ensure that those rights are not granted at the expense of traffic rights at present granted to British European Airways on those routes.

In all my negotiations with foreign Governments my concern is to obtain the best possible deal for all British air transport operations.

Unless the Minister is prepared to give an affirmatory answer to my Question, is not it clear that he is contemplating the direct transfer of traffic rights from B.E.A. to another British-owned firm, and what possible gain to the country can there be in that?

I think that a rather narrow interpretation of the Air Transport Licensing legislation.

asked the Minister of Aviation whether he is aware that a pilot employed by Tradair Ltd. was offered the alternative of demotion or resignation as a consequence of his cancellation of a flight from Pisa to Perpignan at 16.30 hours on 6th October, 1961, and of two other incidents in which the operator considered that he should have flown at a time when the pilot thought for safety reasons that he should not; whether he is satisfied that his safety regulations are adequate to ensure that a pilot should not be penalised for caution; and what action he proposes to take for the safety of the travelling public.

I understand that a writ in an action for libel has been issued in this case and, in the circumstances, the House may feel that it should be regarded as sub judice. In- vestigations have, however, shown nothing requiring action on safety grounds. My Director of Aviation Safety has adequate powers in connection with the operator's certificate if action were necessary.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Surely this is one of the most extraordinary statements that we have ever heard; that when Parliament entrusts both regulations and investigations as to safety to a Minister of the Crown the safety of the flying public can be suspended by the issue of a writ in a libel action. I have never heard of such a proposition.

My view about it is this. I have only read in the newspapers that a writ has been issued against the writer of the letter to the right hon. Gentleman for damages for defamation. I heard what the Minister said, and my view is that in those circumstances it would be right that the House should not expect any answer to this Question, down to the end of the matters relating to the pilot, that is, down to a colon or a semi-colon. I think that the Minister gave some answer with regard to the rest of the Question, but that is my view as to the extent covered by the sub judice rule.

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. In a civil action a writ for libel may be issued and no further step taken for many months. Even though it be prosecuted with vigour, the action may not be heard for twelve months and the House has no knowledge of issues being raised which may be substantially different from the question which affects the House. My right hon. Friend is seeking to ask a Question which involves the safety of transport by charter plane, and the whole question—which is obviously one of deep concern to the House at the moment—of whether charter planes are subject to regulations as to the transport of passengers which makes pilots have to take unnecessary risks. If we cannot quote an example, if everyone referring to the point is regarded as raising a point which is sub judice because of a civil action, the House will be deprived of the whole of its control over the matter.

I can assure the hon. Member that I have considered all the factors which he has just mentioned before giving my Ruling. But I have no authority from the House to dispense with the application of our rule. I have considered what I have said, and I abide by it.

Further to that point of order. Are not there two different questions arising here? One is the grievance which Tradair Ltd. may have with Wing Commander James. That is sub judice. But there is the authority and duty of the Minister to hold inquiries with regard to safety. Those inquiries which are the concern of the general public are a matter between the Minister and Tradair Ltd. and the Minister and the House. That, in my submission, is an entirely different matter, and we certainly should be in a position to press or to require the Minister to carry out an inquiry into safety regardless of any writ which may be issued in a quarrel between Tradair Ltd. and my right hon. Friend's correspondent.

I do not think that the hon. and learned Gentleman has appreciated what I said. I think that the issue of a writ in this case, and I say so, makes it inadvisable for the House to discuss matters relating to this pilot which clearly arise in the case in the ordinary way. I did not say anything about the rest of the Question regarding safety and matters of that kind.

Further to that point of order. It is within your recollection, Mr. Speaker, that this matter was the subject of a debate a week ago and on that occasion certain damaging statements were made by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dundee, West (Mr. Strachey) which are now the subject of legal questions—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]. Presumably this matter, as you rightly ruled, is sub judice. On the other question, the question of safety operations, for which the Minister has an undoubted responsibility through his Director of Aircraft Safety, the right hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that a straightforward answer was given in another place and has been repeated here.

There was no resemblance to a point of order in the latter part of the hon. Gentleman's question. With regard to the first part, it was a mis-statement of my Ruling.

Addressing myself to the latter part of my Question to the Minister. Is the right hon. Gentleman really satisfied that safety regulations have worked effectively for the protection of the travelling public? In the circumstances which arose on 6th October, in which one unfortunate pilot and 34 lives—

Order. Whether he agrees with it or not, I must ask the right hon. Gentleman to follow my Ruling, which is that we ought not to discuss those incidents.

With respect, Mr. Speaker, surely you are not suggesting that we cannot discuss any incidents of the safety of the public flying in chartered aircraft because one charter company has brought a libel action, or is about to do so, against one individual? Surely, though you may have said that it would be inadvisable, it is not improper or impossible for the House to raise these matters which we think prima facie and absolutely indispensable to the safety to the travelling public? May I not ask the Minister, therefore, whether he is satisfied that these regulations in reference to these two incidents, in which one flight was cancelled and one was not cancelled to Perpignan on 6th October last, do not amount to a prima facie case for an inquiry, which is what we are pressing for—a public inquiry into this incident?

I imagine that inevitably in this action, if it be tried, among the issues which would have to be tried out are what was the nature of that incident and what, if any, connection did it have with whatever happened to the pilot, and so on and so forth. I cannot see how our rule regarding sub judice can be applied in such a way as to avoid that consequence. That is my difficulty.

All I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman is this. Is not it in the interests both of Tradair Ltd. and of British aviation as a whole that the incident which has undoubtedly shaken public confidence to the extent that this one has should be investigated publicly as to its safety aspect, and has not the right hon. Gentleman authority to order that investigation?

I am concerned not so much with Tradair Ltd. or even with civil aviation. I am concerned with the interests of the public. I have said, therefore, in answer to the latter part of the Question that investigations have satisfied me that there is no action which I am required to take on safety grounds.

On a point of order. Mr. Speaker, is not the sub judice aspect of this case a most unusual one, in the sense that it would probably not have arisen had not my right hon. Friend the Member for Dundee, West (Mr. Strachey) raised the issue in the House last week? One can quite appreciate that, if independent legal proceedings are going on outside the House, we ought not to discuss such a matter in a prejudicial way, but in this case it would seem that a discussion in the House has lead to the institution of legal proceedings, because of the reading of a letter protected by privilege here but not outside. Is it not undesirable that the House should be prevented from following up something which has been raised in the House?

It may be undesirable or desirable; I do not know. What brings the rule into operation is the issue of the writ in respect of the letter. I cannot get out of that.

asked the Minister of Aviation whether he will give a general direction to British European Airways to cease to operate uneconomic routes.

These are matters best left to the judgment of the Corporation.

Now that the Corporation is losing a lot of its remunerative traffic to private companies, is it going to be expected to carry on these more uneconomic routes and thereby lay itself open to the criticism that it is a nationalised industry which is losing money?

These are interesting matters, but as I have never directed the Corporation to operate uneconomic routes, I do not see why I should direct it not to operate them.

In view of the controversy over these routes, will my right hon. Friend consider allowing some independent operators to take over some of the uneconomic routes in Scotland and at the same time allow them to take on rather more lucrative services, thus giving a better service to the public?

In the first instance this would be a matter for an application to the Air Transport Licensing Board.

My right hon. Friend will recall that B.E.A. took over from private enterprise which was doing quite well on the Inverness routes, and it therefore has a very serious obligatio to keep these services going and to extend them.

I am not stopping the Corporation.

Is not this Question at the moment sub judice by the Minister? Is it not a fact that an appeal has been lodged and the Minister in a quasi-judicial capacity is having to sit and arbitrate on these matters under the practice introduced by his predecessor? Is it not particularly undersirable that he should be expressing these views at the moment?

The hon. Gentleman is quite right to issue that warning to the House. I think that my quasi-judicial position should be respected in this matter.

asked the Minister of Aviation if he will now provide suitable financial assistance to British European Airways in respect of unremunerative services for the Highlands and Islands of Scotland.

asked the Minister of Aviation if he will now introduce legislation to finance from Government sources the losses necessarily incurred by British European Airways in providing air services on the domestic routes, in accordance with the recommendation of the Report of the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries of Session 1958–59.

No, Sir. In the absence of any proposal on this matter from B.E.A. I would regard the question as hypothetical.

Is the Minister aware that both the Chief Executive, Mr. Milward, and Lord Douglas of Kirtle-side have stated in the Press that, if the independent operators are allowed to have these routes, B.E.A. will be obliged to seek financial assistance from the Government? Is he further aware that the estimate that I have is that a loss of about £6 million was incurred by B.E.A. in operating these routes over the last 16 years? The Select Committee on Nationalised Industries recommended—I want to know if the Minister will persuade his Government colleagues to accept this recommendation—that the best way of financing uneconomic routes placed by obligation on nationalised Corporations is by an outright direct Government grant.

Many things appear in the public Press, but I have enough money to find where requests have been made for it without putting it in where no request has come forward.

When the Minister reviews the applications and the licences, will he bear in mind that one of the things which makes it possible for B.E.A. to operate these uneconomic routes is the profit it makes after building up the trunk internal routes, and that it is very unfair to take the advantage from the Corporation but maintain the obligation on it to operate uneconomic lines?

I will take note of the right hon. Gentleman's view.

asked the Minister of Aviation whether, in view of the change in the prospects of world civil aviation since the passing of the Civil Aviation Licensing Act, 1960, he will introduce amending legislation prohibiting the Air Transport Licensing Board from granting licences to applicants for permission to operate on routes already covered by British European Airways and British Overseas Airways Corporation.

No, Sir.

Is the Minister aware that the recent decision by the Board is stated by the Board to be on the assumption that competition must sooner or later become a feature of the routes over which British aviation operates? Is he further aware that under the terms of the Act the Board is not entitled to make this assumption? Nor was this argument ever advanced by the Minister of Aviation during the passage of the Bill through the House. Is not the Board's recent verdict based entirely on an unwarranted premise?

The Civil Aviation Licensing Act, 1960, is only just beginning to come into operation in conditions of certain controversy on all sides. I think that we should allow it to operate a little before we start to amend it.

Will the Minister be good enough to answer my question about the basis on which the Board made its recent decision and which it stated to be the basis, which has nothing to do with the Act or anything that the Minister said during the passage of the Bill through the House?

The hon Gentleman's Question asks me whether I will introduce amending legislation. The answer is, "No, Sir".

asked the Minister of Aviation whether, in order to reduce the financial losses which British European Airways will have to bear as a result of the diversion of its traffic to private operators, he will relieve the Corporation of the payment of all fees normally chargeable in the airports under his control.

No, Sir.

In view of the Government's recent decision to give every nationalised industry a target profit figure, can he tell us how he proposes to deal with the very substantial losses which are bound to accrue to B.E.A. as a result of the recent decisions of the Licensing Board? What alternative means has he in mind?

Even if I were satisfied, which I am not, that a sharing of the future expansion of traffic would or could be said to involve B.E.A. in a loss, on which I do not want to express a view because it might be the subject of an appeal or be used in argument in an appeal, I am satisfied that doing away with landing fees would be a wholly inappropriate way of dealing with it.

Has the Minister any alternative suggestions, in view of the certainty that some substantial losses will accrue?

As I have sought to show, I regard the whole question as hypothetical.

asked the Minister of Aviation what appeal has been made by British European Airways against the decision of the Air Transport Licensing Board to grant licences to private companies to operate services on routes now being profitably operated by British European Airways.

asked the Minister of Aviation (1) what appeal has been received from British European Airways against the decision of the Air Transport Licensing Board to grant a licence to British United Airways to operate a service between Great Britain and Paris;

None. Sir.

As it is understood that an appeal is coming along, will the Minister bear in mind the possible disastrous effects on B.E.A. of the granting of these new licences to other companies?

I have not received an appeal, and even if I had it would be quite inappropriate for me to express a view about it.

asked the Minister of Aviation when he expects work to be completed on the buildings of Turn-house Airport, Edinburgh.

February, 1962.

Is my hon. Friend aware that these buildings were to be ready under specification at the end of last July, that it was said in the House on 24th July that they would be substantially finished by the end of August, but that at the moment the Customs, arrival and departure bays are not ready? Is not this an example of considerable mismanagement somewhere?

The main reasons for the delay have been the late delivery of materials and the shortage of skilled labour in the neighbourhood. We have been doing all we can to expedite the completion of the work as soon as possible, and I cannot do more.

asked the Minister of Aviation what plans he has for providing better facilities for passengers arriving by car at Turnhouse Airport, Edinburgh.

Improvements carried out this year at Turnhouse Airport which have doubled the space available for car parking are sufficient to meet the estimated requirement for, at least, the next eighteen months.

Is my hon. Friend aware that at many airports facilities are such that passengers can be put down first and cars proceed afterwards to the parking bays, whereas at Turnhouse Airport congestion is caused by tickets having to be obtained for the parking area before passengers are set down? Can he not arrange for this airport to be brought into line with others?

Different airports certainly have different facilities, but the parking arrangements at this airport are regarded as adequate for the foreseeable traffic.

asked the Minister of Aviation (1) to what extent, when he came to the conclusion that British Overseas Airways Corporation had sufficient aircraft commitments to absorb all traffic increases for the next five or six years on all the routes they are operating, he took into account the fact that the growth in the capacity ton miles flown by the Corporation was from 245 millions in 1954–55 to 667 millions in 1960–61; and what capacity ton miles he expects the British Overseas Airways Corporation to by flying in 1965–66.

In reaching my decision, I took account of all the evidence provided by the parties both at the Board hearing and at the hearing of the appeal before the Commissioner, which covers all matters to which the hon. Member refers and many others also. In reply to the latter part of Question No. 34, the hon. Member's figure for 1954–55 should be 205 millions capacity ton miles and the comparable figure for 1965–66 is expected to be of the order of 1,250 million.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the figures were taken from the B.O.A.C. accounts and that if they are wrong then B.O.A.C.'s figures are incorrect and not mine? On the second point, my right hon. Friend has assessed that the growth over the next five years will be comparable with that of the last five years. As my right hon. Friend said earlier in answer to a question that the sharing of expansion should bring no loss to B.O.A.C., then why, in view of the enormous expansion he has said is likely by 1965, has he not allowed Cunard-Eagle to take at least its share of the Atlantic traffic expansion?

I am not criticising my hon. Friend; I am only trying to give the best figures available. As to the details of the appeal, I have already set out the reasons fully, the House debated it for a full day and it is, of course, impossible to deal with it by way of question and answer.

Will the right hon. Gentleman not let the direct interests of the hon. Gentleman behind him cloud the clear judgment which he showed on the Cunard case when he comes to the applications now before him?

I do not allow anything to cloud my views.

When the right hon. Gentleman came to that decision, was it a decision for the time being or for all time with regard to that particular route?

It was a decision on that particular appeal and on that appeal only.

asked the Minister of Health whether he will take power to provide local health authorities with statutory powers to enable them to contribute towards the capital cost of doctors' group practice centres.

No, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it may be medically desirable to establish group practices in order to cover the widest areas and that the capital required for property or buildings is far beyond the capabilities of an ordinary G.P. or a group of G.P.s to provide? Will he take another look into the case about which I have been corresponding with the Staffordshire local health authority?

There are available powers both for the Group Practice Loans Committee to make loans and for the local authorites to build centres including practice premises. I am aware of the particular problem to which the hon. Gentleman refers. I believe that it can be solved without legislation, and a suggestion has been made to the local authority.

Can the right hon. Gentleman confirm that the group practice loans schemes cover loans for property for these purposes?

Yes.

asked the Minister of Health whether birth control pills can be prescribed under the National Health Service.

Yes, Sir.

Can my right hon. Friend confirm or deny that these pills can cost up to 17s. a month if prescribed? In view of this, will the Minister not lay down and publish very careful instructions as to when they may be used, since the prescribing of these pills could cost a lot of money if not controlled on medical grounds?

It is not for me to indicate to doctors what they should decide, for medical reasons, to prescribe for their patients.

Is it left to the doctor to decide whether these pills shall be prescribed both for married and single women?

It is always for the individual doctor to decide in each case what are the medical requirements.

asked the Minister of Health whether he has now revised the estimates of the number of medical students required to be trained in the next 10 years; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Health if he has completed his review of the data and calculations which underlie the estimates in the Willink Committee's Report; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Health what steps he is taking to meet the increasing shortage of doctors, especially in registrar grades and below and in general practice; and if he will consider the establishment of additional undergraduate teaching hospitals.

I would refer the hon. Members to my reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Wythenshawe (Mrs. Hill), on 29th November.

While being grateful for small mercies, did the right hon. Gentleman read the article in the Lancet of September, 1960, in which two prominent medical statisticians stated that between 1955 and 1960 we were 1,400 doctors short and that between 1960 and 1965—at the present rate—we shall be 1,500 short? Is he not aware that 10 per cent. of Willink is a very poor effort, and will he do two things; firstly, publish the evidence by which they arrived at this new figure, and, secondly, have urgent consultations with the University Grants Committee concerning the setting up of new medical schools?

That question regarding the University Grants Committee is not for me but for the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The problem here was to revise the data and assumptions on which the Willink Committee Report—which the hon. Member will remember was accepted by the profession as well as the Government—was based. The result of that is what I gave in the reply to my hon. Friend last week.

Is the Minister aware of the serious miscalculation of the Willink Committee? Will he be more precise and say what led it to recommend that there should be a 10 per cent. reduction in the number of medical students? The present shortage of doctors is due to that recommendation, and I submit that, because of the seriousness of this, it is surprising that the Government could have been so easily misled. I support the claim of my hon. Friend the Member for Bishop Auckland (Mr. Boyden) and urge the Minister to rectify the position and to have more medical schools built.

Any present shortage of doctors cannot be due to the Willink Committee's recommendations, since students who entered since those recommendations would not yet have qualified, and, in fact, nothing like the full reduction recommended by the Willink Committee has been made. The question concerning medical schools is not for me but for the University Grants Committee.

Surely the Minister appreciates that merely to restore a cut that should never have been made in the first place is hopelessly inadequate to meet the present emergency. Will he press the medical schools to take in students up to the maximum capacity, and will he discuss with the Chancellor of the Exchequer the problem of establishing at least two or three additional medical schools?

The question of the number of students to be taken into medical schools is not one for me, as the hon. Gentleman will appreciate. The hon. Gentleman will have seen from my reply last week that my conclusions and those of the Secretary of State for Scotland have been drawn to the attention of the University Grants Committee through the Chief Secretary to the Treasury.

asked the Minister of Health whether he will introduce legislation to prevent unregistered medical practitioners carrying on cosmetic operations for such purposes as remodelling busts, straightening and shortening noses, removal of pouches under the eyes, and correcting obtruding ears, in view of the disfigurement and danger to health which may result from this class of operation.

No, Sir.

Is the Minister aware that there are in existence beauty bureaux sending out advertisements publicly inviting people to have all these operations performed upon them, that the operations are performed by quacks and people who have never had any medical qualifications whatever, and there is ample evidence that they cause serious harm? Does the Minister not consider it a very unsatisfactory position that, whereas a person cannot obtain spectacles except from a registered optician, or dental treatment except from a registered dentist, it is possible for anyone with impunity to wield a surgeon's scalpel with very serious results?

I have no evidence of harmful effects from the kind of treatment the hon. Member has mentioned, but if he will let me have the evidence to which he has referred I shall look into it.

Could I get my bust re-modelled under the National Health Service?

If there were considered to be clinical grounds for doing so.

asked the Minister of Health (1) how many controlled clinical experiments in the interests of medical research have been carried out on mentally subnormal children in the last 12 months; and

A measles vaccine was given to a group of patients at the Fountain Hospital and Queen Mary's Hospital, Carshalton, before an anticipated outbreak of measles. There were no ill effects apart from the reactions of modified measles. Otherwise, I am not aware of any controlled clinical experiments apart from those connected with research into subnormality.

Will my right hon. Friend not agree that if these experiments are to be carried out at all, and in a number of cases there have been very undesirable side effects such as high fever, preferably they should be carried out on volunteers rather than on mentally defective children?

The parents had been asked and gave consent in writing. Subnormal children are particularly liable to measles and, therefore, this test was particularly relevant to subnormal children.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I have discussed this matter with the senior medical officer of this hospital and he has assured me that there were no bad side effects and the only thing suffered was a slight rise in temperature and a very slight measles rash?

That coincides with my information.

asked the Minister of Health on what date he expects it will be possible to procure the antibiotics Tetracycline, Chlortetracycline, Oxy-tetracycline and Chloramphenicol for National Health Service prescriptions at the same price as is now being paid by his Department when purchasing these drugs for the hospital service.

I would hope that the terms of supply to the general pharmaceutical services will be influenced by the price to the hospital service; but there are a number of differences which make direct comparison impossible.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that during the debate on the Public Accounts Committee Reports last Thursday—which he was courteous enough to attend—views were expressed from all quarters of the House that drugs purchased by the National Health Service should be at the lowest obtainable price? Is he aware that his action on 2nd October was warmly welcomed and allowed hospitals to buy drugs sometimes at one-third of the price charged by American subsidiaries in this country but that his dispensation relates only to 15 per cent. of the drugs used in this country? Will he bear in mind that by allowing chemists to purchase at the same price he would save £2 million or £3 million in the drug bill and smash the very unpleasant monopoly racket among American subsidiaries of drug firms in this country?

I believe that the steps which the Government took were both wise and necessary, but I must point out that drugs have always been supplied to the hospital service on more favourable terms than generally for obvious reasons. That is the reason why I cannot give the comparison which is asked for in this Question.

If the Minister's hopes are not realised, would it not be possible for him to vary his contract with the chemists so as to require them to purchase these four drugs through him for the purpose of dispensing National Health Service prescriptions?

I would have to consider whether I have statutory powers for that, but I shall certainly watch continuously and closely the effect of the current procedure.

asked the Minister of Health if he will seek powers to provide a small car for married couples instead of two powered tricycles in cases where both husband and wife are eligible for, or have already been provided with, such tricycles by his Department.

No, Sir.

Is it not the case that there must be very few married couples indeed who each have an individual powered tricycle? Would not the cost of replacing them by a small car be very small? Is it not quite absurd to see two people setting out on a journey together each on a separate tricycle when they might go in a small car with no greater loss to public funds?

There are, in fact, a number of married couples who each qualify for a tricycle, but the provision of cars has been traditionally part of the preferential treatment for war pensioners, and I am afraid that my right hon. Friend cannot make any exceptions.

Is the hon. Lady aware that the idea that only war disabled persons should receive these cars is thoroughly out-of-date and does not commend itself to people who have as good a right as many ex-Service men?

I am afraid I do not argee with the hon. Member. I think there is still a general feeling that war pensioners deserve preferential treatment.

In view of the questions which have been put to my hon. Friend, could she say how much this proposal would cost?

It would be cheaper to supply a car than two tricycles, but what I think my hon. Friends forget in looking at this picture—I realise the sympathy it commands—is that if there were only one car for two people there would be a lesser degree of mobility for the two disabled persons.

asked the Minister of Health if he will take steps to arrange for the gradual replacement of power-propelled tricycles provided for National Health Service patients by two-seater cars as supplied to the war-disabled; and what would be the aggregate cost.

No, Sir. The latest estimate of cost was given in a reply by my right hon. and learned Friend, the Member for Hertfordshire, East (Sir D. Walker-Smith) on 2nd May, 1960.

Is the hon. Lady not aware that the Minister's predecessor expressed a wish that this extension of provision should be made at some time? Is she aware that the provision of the single-seater tricycles frequently leads to domestic difficulties, particularly in the case of seriously disabled mothers with children, whom they can never take out? Will she indicate whether this proposal has any priority in her Department?

I have nothing to add to what was said in the debate we held last year.

Could the hon. Lady explain a little further one of the previous answers she gave? I understood her to say at one point that the difficulty was that cars were reserved for war pensioners but at another point she seemed to be saying that it was better to have two tricycles than one car. Why, then, penalise the war pensioners?

I answered that in reply to a previous question.

asked the Minister of Health when the plans of the new wards W.2 and W.3 of Boundary Park Hospital, Oldham, were submitted to his department; when they were approved; and what was the capital cost involved.

Regional hospital boards are not required to submit plans of minor works; the cost of work on these wards was £14,000 and £17,500, respectively.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary consult her right hon. Friend about this matter? Will she point out to him that he is usually courteous to the hon. Member for Oldham, West, that the hon. Member for Oldham, West asked questions about the continued disuse of these wards at the end of the last Session and that apparently com- munications, directives or advice, are at the moment being submitted to the local hospitals board about the continued disuse of these wards, and would the right hon. Gentleman be so kind as to keep the hon. Member for Oldham, West informed?

My right hon. Friend promised the hon. Gentleman in a reply to a previous Question that he would write to him. My right hon. Friend kept that promise and wrote to the hon. Gentleman on 4th August telling him that a visiting team was going to this hospital. That has taken place. My right hon. Friend has just received the comments of the hospital management committee and the regional board on the team's report, and I have no doubt that when he is able my right hon. Friend will communicate again with the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Minister of Health how many part-time nurses are now employed in the hospital service; what percentage they form of the nursing staff; and what further measures he proposes to take to increase the nursing strength of the hospital service.

There were 45,445 at 31st March, 1961, estimated to represent in whole-time equivalents about 16 per cent. of the total. My right hon. Friend has recently given guidance to hospitals about increasing their numbers.

Will the Minister take greater efforts to communicate to the hospitals the very good schemes that are going on in some hospitals concerning the employment of part-time staff? Did he read the article in the Nursing Mirror last August in which two or three excellent schemes were described, and will he bring those to the notice of hospitals which do not have such schemes?

We endeavour to make known all the schemes which have brought results in other areas. I am chairman of the Nurses' and Midwives' Consultative Committee. Views from all over the country are exchanged and my Department has produced a memorandum containing many of the points of general helpfulness concerning the recruiting of part-time nurses.

asked the Minister of Health what steps he is taking to build up the recruiting drive for nurses, especially in the Sheffield region.

Recruitment is primarily the responsibility of the employing authorities. Those in the Sheffield region are making intensive efforts, which my right hon. Friend supports by providing material and giving widespread publicity to nursing as a career.

Although the Parliamentary Secretary says there is widespread support and publicity in this matter, that is not enough. We are not getting the nurses. There is not sufficient inducement to people to come into this noble profession. Although the standard of living of nurses is much greater than when I first remember them, it ought to be much better. Is the Parliamentary Secretary and her right hon. Friend aware of the amount of suffering which is imposed on people treated as out-patients because beds are empty through the insufficiency of nursing staff?

The latest available figures for the recruitment of nurses up to March this year—the latest date for which we have them—show that they are at the highest level, both nationally and in Sheffield.

But still they are not enough.

asked the Minister of Health whether he will now make a statement on the escape of John Slater and Brian Smith from Broadmoor Institution on 25th October, 1961.

These patients escaped on the evening of 25th October and were retaken next morning. An immediate inquiry was held and instructions have been given for additional security measures including certain structural alterations and increased search of patients after seeing visitors.

While I am obliged to my right hon. Friend, may I ask him if he can tell the House whether the implement used by one of the patients who escaped has subsequently been found? Secondly, does he not consider that the searching of patients after they have received visitors is a very elementary precaution which ought to have been brought in long ago?

As far as I am aware the implement has not been found, and it is not established that it was in fact brought in by a visitor, but it has hitherto been the practice to search those under maximum security arrangements at Broadmoor after seeing visitors. That is what is to be extended.