asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty when he expects to complete the run-down of the Reserve Fleet at 'West Hartlepool; and if he will make a statement.

The run-down of the Reserve Ships Sub-Division at West Hartlepool is being carried out in accordance with the Admiralty's policy of reducing overheads by concentrating reserve ships in fewer ports. We have now reluctantly decided to withdraw the remaining ships from West Hartlepool in the course of 1962.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for keeping the Reserve Fleet in my constituency for as long as he has, but is he aware that we have the highest unemployment in the North-East? I hope that he and his colleagues will do all they can for the re-employment of those who are left high and dry next year.

I am aware of the unemployment problems of West Hartlepool and I have been in touch with my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade and with the Ministry of Labour about them. It is not Admiralty men but contractors' men who will be redundant, but we must face the fact that this concentration of the Reserve Fleet will save us some £70,000 a year.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty (1) what was the highest number of anti-sub marine vessels in commission at one time during the war of 1939–45;

(2) what is the number of anti-submarine vessels in commission at the present time.

The greatest number of vessels employed in a predominantly anti-submarine rôle in the last war was 916. The number of predominantly anti-submarine vessels in commission at the present time is 100.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the contrast between the two sets of figures he has given is alarming, particularly as the potential submarine threat today is at least as great as at the height of the last war? Can he undertake to see that the most earnest consideration is given to this problem when the Naval Estimates are being considered?

We are giving very high priority to our research and development of anti-submarine devices. We must remember that in any major conflict we are unlikely to be fighting this battle alone and will be fighting it with our N.A.T.O. and other allies.

What steps is the hon. Gentleman taking to increase the number of these vessels, and how is he to distribute the orders for the new vessels which he expects to have built? In particular, is he sending any orders to Aberdeen where there is increasing unemployment in the shipyards? Will he see that some orders are sent to Aberdeen?

I am afraid that the many claims on the Admiralty Votes for nuclear and amphibious warfare weapons and carriers mean that the numbers are unlikely to be increased. We are trying to increase the capability of each ship now at sea by the effort we are putting into research and development. To date, with competitive tendering, the Aberdeen shipyards have not been successful in winning any orders.

Will my hon. Friend clear up three points? Is it correct that the Soviet and United States fleets between them now have about twenty-five nuclear submarines in commission? Would he agree that this type of ship possibly represents the most formidable and versatile ship of war which the world has ever seen? Thirdly, is it a fact that the Royal Navy, assuming normal conditions of Atlantic weather, does not have a single anti-submarine vessel capable of catching and killing this type of submarine?

I would not want to quarrel with the estimates of my hon. and gallant Friend in the first part of his supplementary question, although I have no figures about the Russian nuclear submarine fleet. It is true that these are formidable weapons, but my hon. and gallant Friend should not underestimate the capability of our antisubmarine forces and their high degree of operational readiness through considerable exercise in this rôle. As we showed in our list in the White Paper accompanying the Estimates last year, we are giving tremendous priority to this phase of naval warfare.

Surely the hon. Gentleman does not suggest that any of these anti-submarine ships has the slightest chance against an atomic submarine. What is the point of going on expanding capacity against an obsolete weapon, which will not be used, in order to protect ships going to ports which cannot be defended?

The hon. and learned Gentleman is not right in all his assumptions, but the Board of Admiralty recognises the formidable threat which these new nuclear submarines represent, and that is why we have laid down two nuclear submarines already, and I hope that in due course we will lay down more.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty why it is necessary for widows to apply for pensions, when the Admiralty is already in possession of all the facts on receipt of the death certificate; and what steps his Department will take to reduce delays.

Unfortunately the Admiralty has to ask for other evidence, in addition to the death certificate, in order to establish the widow's eligibility for an award. There is sometimes delay in forwarding this evidence, which constitutes the application to the Admiralty for pension.

A further application for issue of pension has to be made to the Paymaster-General's office. I am consulting my right hon. Friend to see if there is any way in which that procedure can be simplified.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty if he will give the total cost and details of the expenditure incurred in connection with the Polaris submarine base at Holy Loch from its establishment up to the end of November, 1961.

The expenditure incurred on facilities and services is estimated at £356,000. This sum includes £205,000 capital costs, the principal items being moorings and improvements to piers and the buildings. The remaining £151,000 is for running costs—the largest items being tugs, water boats and additional personnel. The United Kingdom will be repaid most of these costs.

Is the Minister aware of the statement last week that the Polaris submarines are now going to cover a greater number of targets in Eastern Europe for the purpose of destroying them? Is he aware that this means a greater possibility of retaliation, against which we have no defence? Does not he think that it is time we revised this agreement with the United States of America?

I think that the more effective the Western deterrent is, the less likely we are to have a nuclear war.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty when he expects the keel of the assault ship ordered to be built by Harland and Wolff to be laid.

Messrs. Harland and Wolff are now working out the programme for building this ship. The date when the keel will be laid will be announced as soon as possible.

Is my hon. Friend aware that over 8,000 men have been laid off by Messrs. Harland and Wolff in the last six months and that others are under the threat of redundancy, and that the sooner the keel is laid the greater the relief will be to those in the black trades who are under the threat of redundancy at the moment?

I am aware of these facts, and that is why I was particularly delighted that Messrs. Harland and Wolff won this contract.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what are the number of Admiralty civilians employed in the Belfast area.

On 1st October, 1961, the number was 1,199.

This will give some pleasure in Northern Ireland, but is my hon. Friend aware that, in view of the very difficult situation facing our shipbuilding yards, it is important that the work of these men should be maintained and if possible increased?

We are increasing the activities at the Royal Naval Aircraft Yard at Sydenham so that the numbers there, which make up the greater part of that total, are likely to increase rather than decrease over the next few years.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty how many artificer apprentices had been recruited into the Royal Navy in 1961.

Four hundred and ninety-four artificer apprentices, about 45 per cent. of whom are grammar school boys, have been recruited this year. This number exceeds the annual target of 480.

May I congratulate the Admiralty on that recruiting, and ask my hon. Friend whether he expects to be able to keep it up in future years? May I also ask what is the total number of artificer apprentices under training in the Navy at the moment, and what their career prospects are?

We have in all 1,803 artificer apprentices under training in the Navy. I think that we shall keep up this rate of recruiting which is extremely encouraging at the moment. As regards career prospects. about four-fifths of the artificers now serving are chiefs or the equivalent, and, as regards those who have a desire to become commissioned, about fifty of these artificers are commissioned every year, so that career prospects are excellent and recruiting has been going extremely well.

In view of the higher standard of education of these artificers, may I ask whether there is any intention to shorten the apprenticeship course?

No, Sir. There is no intention of doing that at the moment. This is a five-year course. They start with one year at H.M.S. "Fisgard", then have three years in various specialist establishments, and a final year with the Fleet. We have not found that we can shorten the course because we are demanding ever-higher standards. I would say that these important men are now getting something over £1,000 a year by the time they reach the status of chief, and therefore it is not surprising that good boys are coming forward, and we are making them into a fine national contribution even if they decide at a later stage to leave the Navy.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that 23237377 Sergeant Atkinson of the Military Provost Staff Corps, who was charged on five counts of making false accusations at a court martial in Malta on the 5th and 7th January, 1961, was subject, as a result, to considerable financial outlay; and, in view of the fact that he was acquitted by the court martial on all charges, if he will consider paying compensation to cover the costs of his defence.

Yes, Sir. Arrangements have been made to refund to Sergeant Atkinson the costs of his defence at the court martial.

I very much appreciate the right hon. Gentleman's reply, but will he look further into this case? Is he satisfied that Sergeant Atkinson has not been subjected to a certain amount of provocation and victimisation over the past twelve months? Will he have another look at this case to see exactly what has happened?

I have looked into this case very carefully, and so has my hon. Friend. I can tell the hon. Gentleman that in so far as his character is affected—I mean the character of the sergeant and not the character of the hon. Gentleman—all records relating to this incident have been expunged from his documents. He should, therefore, have nothing to fear on that score.

Will this be a general principle, that where people are acquitted by courts martial the War Office will hold itself responsible for the costs incurred by a man found innocent? It is certainly a principle which we should welcome.

I think that that is hypothetical. Each case would have to be considered on its merits. It is sufficient to say that this is a case which satisfied that criterion.

Have not they been judged by a court martial?

asked the Secretary of State for War (1) for how long he has now been considering the project of the Vigilant anti-tank weapon; and when a decision may be expected;

(2) when he expects the Vigilant weapon to be in service with troops.

Trials of Vigilant and the assessments of other light anti-tank missiles began in November last year. I have now decided to adopt Vigilant for the British Army. It will be in service in 1963.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I was a little surprised to read the substance of that reply in the Press after I had put down the Questions? Secondly, does he consider that the rather long time which elapses before the adoption of a weapon which is generally agreed as being necessary is harmful to the Service, to the equipment concerned, and occasionally to export possibilities to other countries?

I think that the more sophisticated the weapons become the longer must be the period between the time when we think they are necessary and the fruition of our plans. I saw the report to which my hon. Friend referred. It did not come from official sources. As my hon. Friend already had a Question on the Order Paper, I thought it right that my Answer to him should contain the first official confirmation of this order.

I am very much obliged to my right hon. Friend.

asked the Secretary of State for War in what circumstances, and for what purposes, military aircraft were using Yately Common in Hampshire on 26th October last.

An official demonstration was held by the Household Brigade on 27th October, to explain to officers of the Brigade the importance of flying within the Army and to encourage them to learn to fly. There were lectures and films in the morning, and in the afternoon a flying demonstration was given on Blackbushe airfield.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that permission to use this common for flying purposes has been refused by the local authority and is the subject of appeal to the Minister? In those circumstances, does he think it right for the War Office to be allowed to flout the general law?

I think it fair to say that the organisers of the demonstration were not aware of this controversy of the time, but I understand that Air Vice-Marshal Bennett is entitled to give permission for the use of his ground for flying provided that this does not extend to more than twenty-eight days in the year.

asked the Secretary of State for War what are the regulations relating to granting of compassionate leave for active Service men abroad in the event of the death of their parents or other near relatives.

Compassionate leave with travel at public expense may be granted to officers and other ranks on the imminent death or dangerous illness of a spouse, child, parent or other recorded next of kin. For those serving outside the United Kingdom and North-West Europe, compassionate leave is not normally granted on the death of such relatives unless there are special circumstances which make the soldier's presence at home necessary.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on 30th October his Under-Secretary said that compassionate leave would be granted only in order to make funeral arrangements or if there were other exceptional circumstances? Is it not possible for the Service Departments to take a slightly more humane and compassionate view of these questions? Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that, however many dependants there may be, a soldier whose father, mother or wife dies while he is abroad should be allowed to come home to attend the funeral and be with his family at this time? Will not he look into this matter again, to see whether it is possible to take a more humane view?

I understand the views of the hon. Member. I can only say that each case which comes to my attention, or to the attention of my Department, is considered on its merits. The rules to which I have referred have been enforced for many years, under the Administrations of both parties, and I cannot hold out any hope that I can relax the general rules, which I believe to be flexible enough for us to be able to administer them in a humane way.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is quite clearly stated that the only two cases in which a Service man serving abroad can return are to make funeral arrangements or if there are exceptional circumstances? Is he further aware that, in the case to which I have referred, the fact that there was another brother and sister meant, in the view of the War Office, that there were no exceptional circumstances? Surely the rule is far too rigid.

As I have said, each case is considered on its merits. By and large, in stations outside the United Kingdom or in B.A.O.R.—which is regarded as a United Kingdom station—these are the general rules which have pertained for a very long time. I can give the hon. Member an undertaking that I will have another look at the matter, but I do not want to hold out any hope that there will be a change in the general rules, which I believe are right.

Should not the right hon. Gentleman at least look again at the position in B.A.O.R.? It may he quite difficult for men to get home from there at their own expense.

The B.A.O.R. arrangements are the same as for home stations, and are different from those in respect of which the hon. Member for Devon, North (Mr. Thorpe) put down his Question. When the hon. Gentleman reads my answer he will see that there is a difference between home stations and overseas stations. I have given an undertaking to look into the point referred to in the hon. Member's question, and if the hon. Member for Barking (Mr. Driberg) has another Question to ask me perhaps he will put it down.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the answer, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for War by what authority a spokesman for the Army Southern Command made a public statement, communicated to the Press, that there would be no Parliamentary inquiry into the disturbances caused by the military in the early hours of Sunday, 3rd December, on Portsdown Hill, about which the hon. Member for Gosport and Fareham has written to him; and if he will instruct his officers not to make statements which impinge on the authority of Parliament.

No such statement was made. The spokesman was asked to make a statement about this incident. Before doing so he quite properly ascertained that no letter or notice of a Question had been received from any hon. Member. He told the newspaper that no Parliamentary inquiry had been received. He did not say that there would be none.

I am relieved to hear that, but does my right hon. Friend know that the statement reached the public in an extremely large-scale way, in the local newspapers, on the basis that there will be no Parliamentary inquiry into the Portsdown Hill "war"? This was stated by a War Office spokesman. Does not my right hon. Friend feel that it would be wise if his spokesmen did not make statements which might be wrongly interpreted?

As I have told my hon. Friend, our spokesman did not make that statement. What he said may have been garbled before it reached the Press. The answer is that there has been a Parliamentary inquiry.

asked the Secretary of State for War to what extent he intends to increase the numbers of British ground troops in the British Army of the Rhine in 1962.

Apart from the formation of the reserve division in the United Kingdom, which is now in hand, it is unlikely that we shall be able to increase our contribution to N.A.T.O.'s land forces in 1962, except in an emergency.

In introducing the Army Reserve Bill, was it not the intention of the right hon. entleman to fill up the large number of gaps in B.A.O.R.? Was not the impression created in the House and in the country—and certainly in the Press—that he intended to send to B.O.A.R. another 10,000 or 15,000 men?

If the right hon. Gentleman will read the words I used in the Second Reading debate he will see that I made it quite clear that Clause 1 does not add anything to B.A.O.R. What it does is to enable us to maintain the strength of B.A.O.R. throughout the course of next year, roughly at the same strength as it is at the moment.

Does that mean that the Secretary of State, with the approval of the Minister of Defence, will resist the pressure of Mr. McNamara and the United States Army authorities to increase the number of men for N.A.T.O.?

That question should be put down to my right non. Friend the Minister of Defence.

Is the Secretary of State really telling us that he is satisfied to leave B.A.O.R. in the state of undermanned impotence which it demonstrated itself to be in in the "Spear-point" exercises?

It would be very much more undermanned if the hon. and learned Gentleman and his colleagues did not let us get through the Army Reserve Bill.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will state the rates of pay for National Service men who are retained for six months; and whether the Service grants for families will be increased correspondingly.

National Service men who are retained for six months will receive the same rates of pay and marriage allowance as Regular soldiers on a six-year engagement.

But is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are many other emoluments—for example, efficiency pay and additional pay because of association with certain technical grades? Does not that mean that the men who are retained for a further six months will be entitled to these additional emoluments? Will it not mean some increase in the National Service grant?

The right hon. Gentleman asks whether this will mean an increase in the National Service grant. That grant will vary, as it always does, with the requirements, and according to basic pay. I could not give a categorical answer showing how each soldier will be affected by the National Service grant, or by the increased emoluments; I can only give a general answer. If the right hon. Gentleman wishes to ask a specific question I shall gladly either write to him or answer a direct Question if he puts it down.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will now make regulations raising the age of soldiers in respect of whom commanding officers should inform the next of kin when they are missing.

I am examining this question.

I appreciate the Minister's Answer, but will he bear in mind that parents of soldiers aged 18, 19 and 20, particularly if they are serving overseas, feel that the military authorities are the guardians of their sons, and feel great distress when they are not informed for four or five months?

I wholly recognise what the hon. Member says. That is why I am examining the matter. But the case which he has in mind was a very exceptional one. It is very easy for us, sitting here, to condemn the decisions of the man on the spot. I am convinced that the regulations as they are cover the sort of point that the hon. Member has in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for Air the purpose of the red light, for which he is responsible, which is situated on top of The Wrekin.

The purpose is to warn aircraft at night and in periods of bad visibility of this isolated high ground.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the week before last the light remained permanently at red, and could not be distinguished from a bonfire or anything else? I cannot see what purpose it could have served.

I can assure my hon. Friend that the object of the light is to prevent accidents, and that there is no symbolic significance about it.

Can the Minister tell us whether there is any connection between this red light and the decision of the Coal Board to buy a new aircraft?

That is strictly a question for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Fuel and Power.

asked the Secretary of State for Air what was the estimated cost of the special precautions taken by Her Majesty's forces, and any ancillary forces, to cope with the nuclear disarmament demonstrations at Brize Norton, Ruislip and Wethersfield air bases, respectively, on Saturday, 9th December.

About £18,000, the greater part being for precautions at Wethersfield.

Many hon. Members would like to congratulate my right hon. Friend upon the steps that he took to protect these operational airfields. Does he agree that the great thing is to keep expenditure down to a minimum? Further, does he agree that one way of doing this might be to use fewer airmen—who had to have their weekend passes cancelled—but to station behind the perimeter, to avoid a breach in it, a deterrent in the shape of a few fire hoses?

We were anxious to make sure that nobody got hurt, and in this we succeeded. I am sure the House will agree that it is wrong that a few irresponsible young people should put this burden on the taxpayers' shoulders and—what is in many ways worse—spoil the weekend arrangements of several thousand young airmen and policemen.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that although the charge on the taxpayers is no doubt very regrettable, these young people are not irresponsible, even if the right hon. Gentleman thinks that they are mistaken? Far from being irresponsible, they are actuated by a deep and conscientious conviction, and feel utterly frustrated in making any other kind of protest. Was not it a perfectly peaceful and orderly demonstration? Would any harm have been done if it had been allowed to continue undisturbed?

Had the intention of the demonstrators been fulfilled by their walking on to the airfields considerable harm might have been done to them, among others.

Can the Minister tell the House how many of the ancillary forces which he mobilised at the various places mentioned in the Question were not used at all?

I am glad to say that a great many of those mustered for the occasion did not have to be used. Our object was to ensure that nobody got hurt and that there were no regrettable incidents, which could easily have happened.

asked the Secretary of State for Air to what extent fluctuations in the Merchant Navy scales of salaries for officers apply to the Ocean Weather Service, and why he has failed to operate the agreement on parity of pay and leave as between the two services reached on 29th August, 1960.

Changes in the Merchant Navy scales of pay and leave do not automatically apply to officers of the Ocean Weather Service and so there has been no failure to operate an agreement.

We do, however, take Merchant Navy scales into account.

Following upon the National Maritime Board's agreement of 29th August, 1960, we adjusted the pay of our officers.

We did not on that occasion alter leave scales, but these are now under review in the light of a more recent agreement by the National Maritime Board.

The right hon. Gentleman is telling me that what I say is correct, that there was an agreement reached on 29th August, 1960, to try to establish parity between these two services. Is he aware that yesterday we had a succession of statements from hon. Members opposite pointing out that intimations of increased dividends had been made before the pay pause and they had to be paid after the pay pause because those concerned felt in honour bound to do so? The right hon. Gentleman has made a promise with regard to parity. Is he not equally bound by the same code of honour in view of the fact that the job of these men is much more arduous and dangerous than that of the average shareholder?

I think that the hon. Gentleman may have misunderstood me.

No, I did not.

We are not bound by any agreement concerning the National Maritime Board's scales. We take its scales into account, but, of course, the promotion structure and various other aspects of the ocean weather ships are different from those of the Merchant Navy.

In view of that further reply from the right hon. Gentleman, will he tell me why he has partially recognised the agreement by giving an interim award to the weather ship officers in order to try to bring them a little nearer to the pay of the Merchant Navy services?

I was trying to explain to the hon. Gentleman that we do take the Merchant Navy scales into account, but that we are not bound by any agreement to follow them exactly, either in pay or leave.

asked the Secretary of State for Air how long it will be before married officers stationed at El Adem and now waiting to get quarters will get them.

In general we expect officers now on the waiting list to move into married quarters or hirings by October next year.

While we welcome a limit to the period of compulsory separation of serving officers from their wives, may I ask whether he agrees that the Royal Air Force has been at El Adem for about fifteen years, and that this lack of married quarters must be detrimental to recuiting? Can my right hon. Friend say what percentage of serving officers who are married are denied married quarters at El Adem?

I think that I am right in saying that there are only eight officers on the waiting list at present who have not got hirings or married quarters. I speak subject to correction, but I think that is the correct figure.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some hon. Members are not only concerned about officers' married quarters but about non-commissioned officers as well, and that some hon. Members have received correspondence from non-commissioned officers who wish their wives to join them? Can he tell us whether the officers and noncommissioned officers are put on an equal basis, or do the N.C.O.s have to go further down the queue?

I think that I can express the situation fairly clearly when, I say that our present plan caters for eleven officers' quarters and ninety airmen's quarters.

asked the Secretary of State for Air why the Meteorological Office were unable to forecast the sudden lifting of fog between 8 p.m. and 9 p.m. on 15th December in the outskirts of London; and why forecasts of fog remaining dense till the morning of 16th December were given to the public in the early evening of 15th December, to the inconvenience of the public.

There was some indication during 15th December that fog, which had been forecast and had formed, might thin near London that evening.

There was, however, insufficient evidence to allow this optimistic view to be published and in fact the fog remained dense in areas north-west of London during the night.

This being so, it was consistent to forecast the fog continuing the next morning although in the event this proved to have been over-cautious.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I listened to the broadcasts carefully throughout the day, that at 6.45 p.m. I was told by WEA 2211 that the dense fog would remain until eight the next morning, and on that I altered my arrangements? Is he further aware that at Twickenham at 8.30 that evening a fresh breeze was blowing through the constituency? That wind blew the fog away, but the Meteorological Office made no mention of this wind of change, to the great inconvenience of the public.

Hindsight enables many of us to see more clearly.

May we infer from that exchange that a new candidate has been adopted for Twickenham?

Whatever may be the circumstances of this case, there is something wrong with this service. Is my right hon. Friend aware that there was an occasion in the summer when there was a wind of gale force blowing in the channel and that, between 12 and 24 hours after it started, the service knew nothing about it? I think that either something went wrong in London or that the percolation of the news from the Channel area was faulty.

We cannot go back over the year.

If the right hon. Gentleman is to make himself responsible for answering questions of this sort and I put down a Question asking him whether on Saturday afternoon I can safely go to a football match because the weather will be fine, will he answer it?

That is an hypothesis.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland which local authorities or other organisations he has consulted and intends to consult, before deciding the respective toll charges for the Forth Road Bridge.

When the schedule of proposed toll charges is submitted to me by the Forth Road Bridge Joint Board, it will be published. All interested parties will have an opportunity to submit representations. If there are any objections which are not withdrawn, there is provision for the holding of a public inquiry.

Is the Secretary of State aware that many local authorities and many people in the east of Scotland are completely opposed to the principle of toll charges, and that many people in the east of Scotland, particularly in Fife, are very alarmed and disturbed at suggestions that the toll charges may equate the present ferry charges? Will he give an undertaking that these charges, if he must impose them, will be of a purely nominal character?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that the principle of tolls was accepted in all the original arrangements and he will not expect me to go back on the discussion at that time. If he will read carefully what I said in my original Answer, he will see that the position is that there may be a public inquiry, and, therefore, I cannot commit myself in advance in these circumstances.

Is the Secretary of State aware that many authorities were prepared at that time to discuss the question of toll charges because of the pressure that had been put upon them to get the Forth Road Bridge started? Now that the bridge is nearing completion—I notice that the Secretary of State is giving an indication of horror, but the fact is that he sometimes brings pressure to bear on local authorities when he is consulting them. That is the reason why many accepted the indications of his office at that time—

We have to stick to questions, and questions which do not constitute an argument.

May I finish my supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, by asking whether the Secretary of State would not reconsider his position this afternoon and give an undertaking that the charges will be clearly of a nominal character and not in line with the present ferry charges?

I cannot add to what I have already said.

Can the Minister add a wee bit? Can he indicate that the charges will not be permanent but that there will be a time in the not-too-distant future when they will be eliminated?

I am afraid that I cannot add even that wee bit.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware that where theatres are demolished there is no effective planning control within existing legislation to prevent change of use on the cleared site; and if he will introduce legislation giving further statutory powers to local authorities to control such developments.

Planning permission must be obtained for any material change in the use of land, whether or not there are buildings standing on it. Although land which has been in use as the site of a theatre can be used for certain kindred purposes without further permission for the change of use, the plans of any new building involved would have to be approved.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the local authorities do not understand the position to be as he has outlined it? Is he aware of the diminishing number of theatres in Scotland, particularly in Glasgow, which is causing concern to theatre lovers, to amateur dramatic societies and operatic societies? If the right hon. Gentleman is not prepared himself to introduce such legislation, will he make facilities available to those of use who wish to pursue the matter?

The hon. Member has leapt a large number of stiles in the course of a short supplementary question and I should like to study carefully what he has said. But I think that I have given the answer to the Question on the Order Paper.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the proposed reconstruction of a very important site in Union Street, Aberdeen, which is now the site of the music hall? Will he see that the planning authority in Aberdeen has ample power to consider not only the utilities but also the aesthetics of this very important site?

Until a short time ago I was not aware of the project to which the hon. and learned Gentleman has referred. But I think that the planning authority probably knows full well what powers it has.

What does the right hon. Gentleman mean by "certain kindred purposes"? Is he aware that some theatres are now used as warehouses in England—and, I suppose, in Scotland also? Is he aware that when a London theatre is demolished the L.C.C. usually insists that a new theatre shall be incorporated in any block of offices or whatever is to be built on the site? Could not the same example be followed in Scotland?

The hon. Member has asked what are "certain kindred purposes". These are defined in an Order made in 1950 which specified certain uses to be regarded as kindred to a theatre, including cinemas, music-halls, dance-halls, skating rinks, swimming baths, Turkish or other vapour or foam baths, gymnasia or buildings for indoor games.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he is taking to enable uncertificated teachers in Scotland to become fully-qualified teachers.

Any uncertificated teacher may apply for a grant under the Special Recruitment Scheme to enable him to acquire the qualifications necessary for recognition as a certificated teacher. An uncertificated teacher who already has qualifications, training or experience which might justify his certification in Scotland may apply to the Scottish Council for the Training of Teachers, who will recommend whether he can be recognised forthwith or requires further training. In appropriate cases the normal course of training may be shortened.

Is the Secretary of State aware that these arrangements have proved quite inadequate? Will he put more energy and urgency into having consultations with universities and colleges of education about vacation courses and evening courses to enable all the untrained teachers who have the capacity to become trained teachers? Will he also try to rid Scottish schools of those teachers who are untrained and have no capacity to become trained teachers?

The hon. Member has gone very wide of the Question. I am not aware that the arrangements have proved unsatisfactory. There are 220 students, who have been uncertificated teachers, at present receiving training under the scheme.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland which Scottish Minister and other members of the Scottish Education Department are to be members of the United Kingdom delegation to the Commonwealth Education Conference in Delhi in January, 1962.

Her Majesty's Senior Chief Inspector of Schools will be a member of the United Kingdom delegation, which will not include a Scottish Minister.

Is the Secretary of State aware that that is a very unsatisfactory Answer? Is he not going to fight for more adequate Scottish representation on a very important delegation to a very important conference? Is he aware that the Scottish tradition of education is world-famous and that the Scottish contribution to Commonwealth education is very great? Will he look at this matter again and consult the Minister of Education?

For a variety of reasons it was not practicable to include a Scottish Minister in the delegation. But I am satisfied that Scotland's contribution to the conference will still be a valuable one.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will take steps to control land prices in Scotland, in view of the adverse effects which such prices have on the cost of 'building houses.

No Sir. I consider that land prices in Scotland generally are reasonable and the best way of keeping them so is to ensure that enough land is zoned for building in the right places.

Is the Minister aware of the recently announced enormously increased prices, particularly in Edinburgh, and no doubt there will be others announced shortly in other cities? Does not he agree that this is bound to jeopardise future house-building at prices which people can pay, and can he say whether there is any connection between this development and the newly acquired interests in Scotland of Messrs Clore, Cotten and Macmillan?

The hon. Member must appreciate that one cannot argue from an isolated instance. There have been one or two oases reported recently, but the information I have given is correct.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say how many times land prices have to be multiplied before they become unreasonable?

That is an entirely hypothetical question.

Will not the right hon. Gentleman become seized of the idea that land prices are going very high? Is he aware that if he intends to achieve success with his housing measures in redeveloped town centres and other places where sites are in private hands, he will have to exercise more control, or the local authorities will be impeded in redeveloping those areas?

The hon. Member will be aware that once the area of comprehensive development has been approved, compensation for acquisition excludes any extra value created by the redevelopment proposals. I think that that is what he has in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he is taking to ensure that the escalation of property values now taking place in Glasgow will not prejudice the redevelopment plan which he has approved for the city.

I have had no representations that there have been undue rises in property values in Glasgow which might hinder redevelopment.

Will the Secretary of State acquaint himself more closely with what is going on in Glasgow? Does not he realise that at the weekend we were given quite a number of examples of extremely sharp rises in the value of property in the centre of Glasgow, and that the reason for the gambling is the redevelopment plan envisaged for the city? Is he telling us that in fact he has frozen, or will he consider freezing, property values at the point in time when he approved the redevelopment plan for Glasgow?

No, Sir, I will not say that in answer to the supplementary question put by the hon. Gentleman. I find it difficult to follow what he wants, but I think that I covered the point in my answers to Question No. 31. I am not convinced that, so far, values have risen unreasonably, but we shall watch the position and see how things go.

If the right hon. Gentleman is not convinced that values have risen very sharply indeed, is he aware that not far from where I live one-sixth of an acre of land was purchased by an oil distributing company for £14,000—that is, £84,000 per acre? Is not that a sharp rise in land prices?

I was not aware of the price about which the hon. Gentleman spoke.

Mr. Wingfield Digby.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Surely—

No.

May I have your guidance, Mr. Speaker, about putting this point? In his second reply the right hon. Gentleman said that he was not aware of any sharp increase in property values in Glasgow. I have given him one, which is one of many. Will he now act on the information which I have given to him?

The hon. Gentleman rose to a point of order. Will he be good enough to indicate what is his point of order?

I changed it to seek your guidance, Mr. Speaker, which is more valuable than any point of order.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he has yet received the Report of the Working Party of the Economic Commission for Europe, on which a United Kingdom representative served, on the Construction of Road Vehicles, with regard to an international standard for safety harness; and whether he will now make a statement.

Draft rules for the approval of safety harness have been prepared by Sweden, West Germany, and the United Kingdom. These were considered at the October meeting of the Working Party and are now being revised in the light of its comments. The Committee reviewing the interim British Standard will be made aware of these developments at its next meeting.

Will my right hon. Friend do all he can to reach an early decision in this matter, in view of the very great expense at the present moment of installing the various devices of safety harness because there is no standardisation?

Yes, Sir, I will.

asked the Minister of Transport when he expects to be in a position to make a further statement about the proposed Channel Tunnel or Bridge.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will give details of the machinery which has been set up for the examination of the Channel Tunnel project and whether he will give an assurance that basic principles will be dealt with in the first place, so that an early decision thereon can be given.

As I explained on 22nd November, a joint official study of both the proposals now before the British and French Governments is being undertaken. All relevant aspects of those proposals will need to be examined and I cannot say when this work will be completed. I am confident, however, that, under the arrangements which have been agreed, early attention will be given to the basic questions on which the Governments' eventual decision must depend.

Will my right hon. Friend hear in mind the great importance of getting an early decision in view of the material difference a bridge or tunnel will make to our competitive power when we get into the Common Market?

Yes, Sir. But the proposal for a Channel bridge was received only in October, 1961, so there is a great deal of work to be done on it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that many of us, and large numbers of people outside, believe that large-scale capital expenditure of this kind should not be undertaken until the urgent needs of our own people have been dealt with?

We propose to study the problem. It raises technical, financial and economic questions, as well as international considerations. The hon. Gentleman's point will certainly be borne in mind.

Does my right hon. Friend appreciate that development at Folkestone is being held up pending decision on a tunnel?

That is why we will try to get on as quickly as we can, but we must examine the problem thoroughly.

Will the Minister arrange for an exhibition in the House of Commons in the New Year of the excellent models prepared by the B.T.C. for a two-way tunnel on the principle of a moving stream of traffic?

I should like to consider that, but it would be very difficult if as Minister I had an exhibition of a tunnel and not of a bridge. Otherwise I should be in great difficulty and I know that the hon. Member would not like that.

asked the Minister of Transport how many accidents in England and Wales in 1960 involved pedestrians attempting to use a pedestrian crossing; and if he will experiment with the use of double white lines at the approach to pedestrian crossings.

During 1960, 1,285 people were killed or seriously injured at the 10,000 uncontrolled pedestrian crossings in Great Britain. For the reasons given in the reply to the hon. Member on 22nd November, I do not consider that an experiment with double white lines on the approach to pedestrian crossings would be more effective than the present restrictions in preventing accidents. I am considering what else could be done to improve safety on crossings.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that it is quite probable that a large number of these deaths and serious injuries were caused as a result of vehicles overtaking on the approaches to pedestrian crossings? Is he also aware that four road safety committees which I have consulted are in agreement that it would be a good idea to carry out such an experiment, and that the Droitwich Borough Council would be quite happy to have the experiment taking place in the town? Will he reconsider this matter?

I think that my hon. Friend's assumption has not been proved by the available statistics, because in 1958 the Road Research Laboratory examined the reports of 216 accidents and found that 18 per cent., and only 18 per cent., were due to overtaking. I agree that this was not a very big sample, but, so far, the evidence does not show that most accidents are caused by overtaking. But I have asked the Laboratory to look at this again, and pending its advice I do not think that I can add to what I have said already.

asked the Minister of Transport when it is proposed to make a start on the scheme for a second carriageway on the Newcastle-Tynemouth coast road.

The Newcastle City Council has been told that I am prepared to consider an application for grant in the current financial year for the improvement of the section of the Coast Road within the city. Until that application has been received and considered and the necessary land acquired I cannot say when physical work will begin.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that work was expected to start last October on this road? According to information I have been given, all the plans are with the Ministry, however, and until it has approved the designs, no work can begin. Does not my right hon. Friend also agree that this is one of the worst roads in the country for accidents and that the sooner something is done to improve it, the better?

I agree. But I cannot do anything until the application has been received. Once it has been received, I will move as fast as I can.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he is yet in a position to announce the composition of the independent committee which is to review traffic signs.

asked the Minister of Transport what his plans are for a review of road traffic signs.

I am glad to say that Sir Walter Worboys has agreed to become chairman of this Committee which, as I announced on 2nd August, the Secretary of State for Scotland and I are setting up to review traffic signs. I am making good progress in appointing the other members, and hope to announce their names within the next few weeks.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it would be a good thing if traffic signs were the same all over the country instead of varying from town to town and county to county?

I certainly do agree. The object of the Committee will be to get standard signs which are consistent and are the same all over the country, because a motorist on the North-East Coast should see the same signs when he goes to the South-West. The signs should also be legible. At present, too many of them, in my view, are not. I hope that we shall also see aesthetics taken into account in the designs.

Will my right hon. Friend also consider standardisation with the Continent?

That will be taken into account. The motorway signs are excellent and I hope that the same signs will be seen on all roads.

Can we have some really short-sighted people on the Committee, so that the signs will be easily read?

I will bear my hon. Friend's application in mind.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us what purpose he expects the Committee to serve? Why does not he call in his divisional road engineers? They could give him all the necessary information about road signs and he could make up his own mind instead of depending on a committee.

Divisional road engineers will be giving evidence to the Committee.

asked the Minister of Transport what are the results of the consultations he is having with the London Transport Board with a view to the reopening of the Tube service from New Cross to Hammersmith.

I am having no consultations with London Transport on this subject. Such a suggestion would be entirely one of management for London Transport to consider.

Will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider this? Is he aware that this line served a very useful purpose in enabling people from south-east London to travel to west London before the war? It was closed at the outbreak of war and there seems no reason why it should not be reopened. Would not this make a valuable contribution towards getting people off the roads?

It is not a question of my looking at this again. This is a matter for the London Transport Executive. It tells me that the direct line from New Cross to Hammersmith, via St. Mary's Junction, was closed in 1936 due to the need to route the direct trains through to the Barking line, where traffic was steadily increasing, and that there is no spare capacity to permit the running of through trains to New Cross. I have no doubt that the London Transport Executive will see this exchange of views and will take note of the hon. Member's Question.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will give a general direction to the British Transport Commission to obtain from local authorities in the areas served by uneconomic branch lines estimates of future building developments in those areas before proposals to close those lines are made.

No, Sir. I understand that, before submitting closure proposals, the Commission takes full account of any known prospective developments in the area. All proposals to close railway branch lines are referred to the appropriate 'Transport Users' Consultative Committee, and local authorities thus have opportunities to draw attention to future developments when closures are being considered.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is not enough to give the Transport Users' Consultative Committee this information or the chance to present its point of view? Is it not an integral part of planning that the transport system should be further developed in areas where building development is taking place, as is happening, for instance, on the Blackburn-Hellifield line, which the Transport Commission is proposing to close, although it affects an area of future development? Will the right hon. Gentleman give a general direction that future development must be borne in mind by the Commission before it makes closure proposals?

I thought that the hon. Lady would have that line in mind and I asked the Commission for information, knowing how keen she is about it. I understand that the Commission considers future developments before submitting proposals for the withdrawal of its services, and that such development was taken into account in this case.

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied about the power and the part which consultative committees can play in matters of this kind? Whilst the interests of the travelling public they are intended to represent are concerned, wider interests are also involved in the closing of these services. Is not too much being made of these committees in regard to that aspect?

That may be so. We have proposals before the House in Committee upstairs about this matter, but so far we have reached, after five meetings of the Standing Committee, only Clause 1. When we do come to the Clause dealing with these Committees, no doubt we will examine the matter carefully.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will seek to hold discussions with the shipping industry and British industrialists concerning the need for, and the estimated cost of, a trans-Britain seaway from the area of The Wash to the Mersey.

No, Sir. So far as I am aware, neither the shipping industry nor British industrialists have shown any interest in the construction of such a seaway.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that he is one of the more go-ahead Ministers in the Government? Will he consider the fact that industries are concentrated in this area and that great experimentation is going on with hovercraft? Is it not time that he looked at this problem, for this proposal would mean that our industries would be in direct communication with industries in Europe and the United States through a trans-Britain seaway?

No interest has been shown in this proposal. I have looked at its merits and I am not satisfied that it should go ahead.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I am not satisfied, and I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise this matter on the adjournment at the earliest opportunity.