asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he will expunge from the official vocabulary of his Department the phrase, "detrimental to the visual amentities of the locality", and inform planning authorities of his action.

I will certainly instruct my Department to avoid this phrase wherever it can.

While I welcome that reply, may I ask my right hon. Friend if he does not think it inconceivable that anyone who gets into the habit of using such horrid language as this could possibly exercise the kind of standards of taste required? Does he not think that he and his colleagues should do something at an early date to check this tide of literary sludge which is creeping out all over the language from Whitehall?

The trouble is that to use plain English and to say that what is proposed is downright ugly or in shocking taste may be painful, if not actionable. To be blunt but yet not rude is skilled work, but we do our best.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what progress has been made in giving help to local authorities designed to improve the pre sent conditions of gypsies and other travellers; and with what other Government Departments he has discussed or proposes to discuss the matter so as to ensure the most effective form of cooperation.

This is essentially a local problem. I would refer the hon. Member to the circular of 8th February, which asks the local authorities concerned to take constructive action over the problems of gypsies and other travellers.

In thanking the Minister for the very forthright circular, may I ask if he believes that in England and Wales—which are easily the two most backward countries in Europe over the question of gypsies—the circular will do the job? Since he asked the county councils to take a survey of those who need sites, can he say whether there is any evidence that they are doing so? If not, does he contemplate something stronger?

It is difficult to make comparisons with other countries, but I think that the social and welfare services we offer compare favourably. The real need is for sites. There are welcome signs that the local authorities are aware of their responsibilities. The Rural District Councils Association has just passed a resolution saying that the provision of sites is the most appropriate way of dealing with the problem. I think that the circular will have an effect.

Will the hon. Gentleman say how many local authorities have used their powers under the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act? I understand that last week he could not give the information. Why not? It would assist in considering the problem properly.

We would not get the information because the local authorities provide sites without reference to us.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs whether he has received an application for planning permission to build an oil refinery at Bohuns Hall Farm, near Tollesbury, Essex.

No, Sir.

Will my hon. Friend give an undertaking that such a radical change in land use in this area cannot take place without reference to his Department?

Such a proposal would constitute a substantial departure from the development plan. If, therefore, the local authority were minded to grant permission, it would have to refer the matter to my right hon. Friend.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what action he will take concerning the grant of planning permission for the extension of Richmond Hill Hotel, in view of the fact that the application for this permission was supported by a certificate containing a material error concerning the ownership of the land in question.

My right hon. Friend has considered the circumstances of this case, but has come to the conclusion that no action on his part is called for.

Apart from the many unsatisfactory features of this case, are the Parliamentary Secretary and the Minister aware of the general principle involved? An applicant, from an incorrect statement of facts, can get planning permission which would never have been granted had the true facts been known, and the permission may be very valuable. If permissions granted on incorrect statements are to remain valid, is not that an encouragement to carelessness by applicants and may not it even be an encouragement to dishonesty?

It is certainly true that an error in a certificate does not invalidate a planning permission—or so I am advised. If there is a wilful distortion in the certificate, there are powers to prosecute. If planning permission, having been given, is found to have been given wrongly it can be revoked. In this case my right hon. Friend is satisfied that the borough council acted properly.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in 1947 this area was designated as a residential zone? At that time there was one more hotel than there is now, yet the Minister goes on saying that we must accept the use of this area for what he says it is—an area where hotels are predominant. How does he reconcile that?

I do not think that I can now go into the merits of a particular application. The point at issue here is that the applicant made an error originally on the certificate which he attached to his application.

Are the Government satisfied with the legal position, that permission can remain valid when based on an error of fact? I know that if it is a deliberate distortion a prosecution can follow, but the only result is a fine which may be small compared with the profitability of the permission which has been incorrectly obtained.

I think it quite normal to allow errors of fact of this kind which take place not to invalidate the actions either of individuals or of public bodies.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what consideration he has given to the building of a new town outside the congested area of south-east England to house Government Departments not directly engaged in the day-to-day work of Parliament.

Excluding the Post Office, about one-third of the civil servants in London area work in local offices and therefore cannot be moved away. As regards headquarters staff, a substantial proportion is already working outside London and further moves are planned. My right hon. Friend will certainly see what might be done in any further New Towns, bearing in mind the need to provide reasonable diversification of employment.

Would not it greatly ease congestion in London if some of the prestige value of a London office address were transferred to a new administrative centre by moving out some of the 50,000 civil servants not engaged in day-to-day Government work, and thus releasing for other uses part of the 11½ million square feet of office accommodation which they occupy? For the life of me, I cannot see how the Minister expects private firms to move out unless he is prepared to give a lead.

I do not think that we should like to see all civil servants moved into a new administrative centre. That would provide a totally unbalanced community—I use the expression "unbalanced" in no derogatory sense. I am advised, surprising as it may seem, that there would not be enough to constitute a new centre. It is Government policy to disperse from London wherever possible, and 24,000 headquarters staffs have been moved out of London. There are proposals affecting a good number of others.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what instructions he has issued to county councils and, in particular, to the Salop County Council as to the manner in which they should conduct the review of their county districts; what recommendations or directions he has given in that respect; and whether he will publish such directions for general guidance in a White Paper.

My right hon. Friend has given no instructions to Shropshire or to any other county council, but he intends in due course to give some general guidance on this subject in a circular to local authorities.

I thank the Minister for that reply. Is he aware that there is fear in local government circles that amalgamations are to be promoted on a much larger scale than has hitherto been contemplated—in fact, to such an extent that the local element in local government will largely be lost? Will he give an undertaking that his policy will not provide for such a course?

These reviews are, of course, in their early stages in any county. No county council will be allowed to act arbitrarily in the matter. There are plenty of opportunities for representations. Almost certainly there will have to be amalgamations of some small local government units.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he is aware that many owners and owner occupiers of leasehold property, the leases of which in some caes expire in the next one to ten years, are being pressed by their ground landlords to buy the freehold at an excessively high price and that this is causing both anxiety and hardship; and if he will introduce legislation to protect such owners and owner occupiers from unreasonable demands on the part of the ground landlords.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if, in view of the continuing demand by landlords for exorbitant terms from tenants on the renewal of leases, if he will introduce legislation to ensure security of tenure for leasehold property owners on the expiration of their leases.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs whether he is aware that ground landlords in South Wales continue to charge large premiums before renewing leases; and whether he will now take steps to prevent this happening.

I have asked representatives of the professional bodies concerned with land and property to let me have information about the practice of landlords, especially in South Wales, in relation to renewals of long leases and sales of the freehold. I prefer to make no statement until I receive their reports which I hope to do this month. It is often assumed that the terms asked for renewal of a lease are exorbitant when in fact they only represent fair value. People should take professional advice before they jump to conclusions. Meanwhile the Landlord and Tenant Act, 1954, provides security.

Does not the Minister realise that that Answer is very little more helpful, and quite as unsympathetic, as the Answer which I received when I last raised the matter? Of what has the right hon. Gentleman to be ashamed that he dare not face these shameless men who are exploiting this situation—these "get-rich-quick boys"? How can the Minister believe in a property-owning democracy while at the same time allowing hundreds of thousands of people to be treated in the way in which they are being treated today?

I prefer to await the facts before I reach a conclusion, and I am awaiting such facts.

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the people who are involved in this kind of thing will not get much satisfaction from his Answer? Is he aware that only recently these people have made the necessary approach to the landlord with a view to purchase but without success and that they are very worried about it? Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that something should be done to stop this kind of thing before it becomes a complete racket?

When I have received the report I shall be in a position to reach a conclusion.

Is the Minister aware that the people of Wales will welcome the fact that evidence is being collected? Is he further aware that we are surprised that he has not already had this evidence? We appreciate that he regards the problem as one of particular hardship in South Wales. But does not the Minister realise that there is a sense of urgency in this matter? While we appreciate that he wishes to collect the facts, may we ask for an assurance that he will make an early statement on Government policy with regard to revising the leasehold laws?

I hope to receive the report—although I cannot be certain—within the next few days. When I have received it I shall, of course, make a statement of the attitude of the Government in the light of such facts.

In considering the information which he is collecting, will my right hon. Friend not only take account of the expiring of these leases and the problems which will ensue but also of the existence in some areas of large numbers of leases of less than forty years upon which it is almost impossible to raise money on mortgage and which therefore tend to create another problem which may be distinguished from that resulting from expiring leases?

Yes, Sir.

We welcome what the Minister has said about hardship. Would the right hon. Gentleman be willing to take into consideration in this matter that there is almost a universal demand in South Wales that leaseholders should be free to purchase the freehold of their property? Will he also take this into account before making a statement of policy and, if he is willing, introduce legislation?

I know that that is one of the demands put forward and it must be taken into account.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs is he aware that many owner-occupiers of leasehold property, the leases of which in some cases have only a few years to run, are being asked by their ground landlords to carry out costly repairs to the property, much of which is below 1962 standards, and that this is causing anxiety and hardship in many cases: and if he will introduce legislation to protect such owner-occupiers from unreasonable demands on the part of the ground landlords.

The Leasehold Property (Repairs) Act, 1938, in conjunction with Section 16 of the Landlord and Tenant Act, 1954, gives the leaseholder adequate protection.

If that be so, can the right hon. Gentleman tell me how it is that the Government take no steps to prevent landlords from issuing instructions to tenants to improve the standard of property which is already substandard? Does not he think that it would be a waste of the materials and resources of the nation to compel tenants, as some landlords would like to do, to repair property which has long outlived its usefulness?

As I explained to the hon. Gentleman in a letter, in this limited matter to which I am referring there is substantial protection for the leaseholder. For example, there is no power to require him to undertake such repairs. The landlord can sue for damages, but he can succeed only in certain circumstances—if the lease is within three years of termination, or, for example, if there is a proved diminution in the value on reversion. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that in this matter the law provides adequate protection.

But is the Minister aware that the 1954 Act also takes away the property and gives it to the ground landlord when the lease runs out. It is no protection for the owner of the property to be told that he can stay there when the lease runs out if he pays the full economic rent. This is regarded as a major injustice by those who bought their own homes.

I am answering the Question in relation to repairs. The hon. Gentleman is, not unnaturally, returning to the earlier Question.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs why the long-distance paths along the Northumberland and Yorkshire coasts are not yet completed.

The power to formulate proposals for long-distance routes is vested in the National Parks Commission. The Commission has not yet submitted for approval proposals for the creation of these two routes, but I understand that it hopes to do so for the Yorkshire coast path before long.

I am thankful for small mercies, but does not the hon. Gentleman agree with what is said in the Twelfth Report of the National Parks Commission, that in general there is inordinate delay in the designation of these paths? Why does not he take powers under Sections 27 and 28 of the relevant Act to give power to county councils to do these things, which could accelerate the whole business very much?

We are not dealing with the designation of parks but the designation of routes. It is a matter for the Parks Commission. The business is somewhat protracted, but the Commission is making good progress in regard to the Yorkshire coast path.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what improvement there has been in the condition of the River Trent at Burton-on-Trent in the last two years: and if he will make a statement.

As I stated in reply to a Question by my hon. Friend on 27th February, the Trent River Board has reported some improvement in the state of the river at Burton. Much work is being done to improve sewage effluents, both in the Tame Valley and elsewhere in the Upper Trent basin, and one of the major polluting effluents in the Potteries, spent gas liquor from the Etruria gas works, will shortly cease to be discharged to the river.

I welcome the statement about improvement of the Trent at Burton, but is not my hon. Friend aware that the River Trent there is still a very foul and filthy river and that the River Tame flows into the Trent a very short distance upriver from Burton? While it is pleasing to know that important sewerage improvement works are in hand and that the long-term prospect is reasonably good, will my hon. Friend, in view of the magnitude of the problem at Burton-on-Trent, take steps to see that Burton-on-Trent is represented on the Trent River Board?

There is no doubt that the Tame is heavily polluted. This is why so much importance attaches to the very considerable amount of works now being carried out. Representation on the river board is governed by the 1948 Act, based largely on the contributions which are made to the finances of the board. Representation is kept under review, and I will bear in mind the point my hon. Friend makes.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what was the source and extent of the oil pollution in the River Trent at or near Burton-on-Trent which resulted in the death of nine swans at Burton-on-Trent during the week commencing 11th February, 1962.

No precise information is available. The Trent River Board knows nothing at first hand about the incident and has been unable to trace any particular discharge of oil to which it could be attributed.

Although the death of nine swans on a river is not an epoch-making event, it is still a serious matter because it pinpoints the national problem of oil pollution of British waters. What powers has a river board to prosecute offenders if, or when, they are caught? Would not a few such prosecutions have a salutary effect?

A river board may prosecute if it can catch its offender. I have no doubt that such prosecutions would be salutary in appropriate circumstances, but it is a matter for the river board.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs how many houses and buildings have been included in his list of buildings of special architectural or historic interest in the County of Rutland.

Five hundred and twenty-one.

Is not this a very good score for my little and ancient county, and will my hon. Friend call the attention of his right hon. Friend to it and make sure that he has as high regard for the independence of the County of Rutland as he has for the preservation of its ancient buildings? What puzzles us, however, is that there are so many houses in the County of Rutland which are more ancient than some of those which are scheduled, and one wonders why some of the older houses have not been scheduled as well.

To the 521 one can add 401 which are on the supplementary list of buildings which may be old but are still of considerable historic and architectural interest. On the first part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question, I am sure that my right hon. Friend will not regard Rutland as simply a conurbation of ancient and historic buildings.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what steps he has taken to resolve the difficulties that have arisen regarding the siting of a new oil refinery near Pwllcrochan, Pembrokeshire.

I have discussed the difficulties with my colleagues and the consequential talks now taking place between the company and other interested parties are aimed at resolving them.

Am I to understand from that Answer that the Government have decided in principle that this is a desirable development, subject, of course, to proper details being worked out and proper financial arrangements, or are they still considering the principle?

It is clearly a most desirable development. In view of the discussions, I am anxious not to go beyond that now.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs, in view of the concern of the National Parks Commission at the proliferation of aerial masts in areas of great natural beauty, what steps he is taking to ensure that whenever possible the masts are shared.

Inter-Departmental machinery already exists to ensure that the feasibility of sharing aerial masts is considered before they are erected.

What representations has the National Parks Commission made to the hon. Gentleman's Department about this matter? Is he taking more notice of them than he is taking of recommendation No. 8 in regard to county councils and footpaths?

There were representations made, of course, in the Twelfth Report of the National Parks Commission. The Commissioners drew attention to their concern about the matter. We are endeavouring to meet their representations, but there are very great technical difficulties in marrying up installations of this kind.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what estimate he has made of the additional rate bur den on outer Essex should the reorganisation of local government in Greater London be decided upon.

As explained in the recent White Paper on London Government, reliable estimates are impossible at the present time.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Essex County Council estimates that the increase in the rate burden for outer Essex will be approximately 3s.? Can he assure me that if this happens adequate compensation other than of a temporary nature will be given to outer Essex by the Government to prevent an unfair burden being placed on all ratepayers?

I assure my hon. Friend that, until much more is known about the transfer of buildings and staff, until the outer boundary is fixed and until the results of revaluation are known, no one will be able to make an estimate of the burden involved.

Will my right hon. Friend have regard to the special impact that rate increases will have on those who have borne the brunt of inflation? Would he envisage a reform of the rating system so that rates may be abated for individaul ratepayers on the basis of their Income Tax coding?

That is another and much larger question.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs when he will announce his decision on the Oxford roads inquiry.

Shortly.

May we take it from that Answer that the Minister and his eight Oxonian colleagues in the Cabinet still have very grave doubts about the desirability of a road through the Meadows? The longer that horrible prospect is delayed, the more satisfied we shall be.

The decision will be given shortly.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the increased domestic rate demands which many local government authorities are required to make; and if he will make a statement about the future of local government financial structure.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs to what extent rateable values of house property will be increased next year when the new valuation lists come into effect.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what review is at present being undertaken concerning the problems of local government finances.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what estimate he has made of the average increase in the rates payable by tenants of domestic properties as a result of the impending re-rating proposals.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he is aware that the continued effect of the transitional and rate deficiency grants under the existing Statute together with the burden of high interest rates have caused an increase in the rate levied by local authorities; and, in order to alleviate this burden, if he will take steps to review the block grant system.

There are two aspects.

Increases in pay and other expenses necessitate increases in the general grant. In a few days I hope to lay an interim order to authorise agreed increased payments before the financial year ends. A further order later will include these increases and others as well and bring them all before the House in one document.

Concern has been expressed at the possible increase in the share of rate burden borne by householders at the revaluation in 1963. I am empowered to make a derating order if necessary, and I have naturally been studying the position with care. I must first make an order for a new scale of deductions from gross to rateable value to take account of current costs of repair. With account taken of these altered scales and of the increased rate-deficiency grants which will result from the revaluation, there is on the draft figures for the country as a whole no likely increase at all in the householders' share of the rates, and consequently no case for a general order. The position in the several county and county borough areas of course varies to some degree. When the study and consultation is complete, I hope to lay a White Paper with detailed figures.

On a point of order. May I ask whether my Question No. 70 was included in the list, and, if not, why not?

I did not hear it included. I cannot answer the hon. Gentleman's question as to why it was not included.

Will the Minister tell the House whether he has made an estimate of the percentage responsibility of the industrial rate burden which domestic ratepayers will have to bear? In view of the financial difficulties which local government finds itself in, is he prepared to take steps other than those which he has stated? Most of us here and in the country appreciate the good services which we are getting as ratepayers. This has nothing to do with the principle of the services which we receive. What is the Minister prepared to do about the matter?

I have made clear to the House in a preliminary report that as a result of revaluation, and bearing in mind the changed allowance for repairs and the rate deficiency grant, householders as a whole all over the country will not sustain an increased proportion of the rate burden. With regard to the figures concerning the other groups and the breakdown area by area, I ask the House to await the detailed study which is now proceeding and which I will report to the House in full in due course.

Does the Minister realise that Llanelly is facing very great industrial difficulties? There are now 1,000 more unemployed than there were a year ago. For the reasons set out in Question No. 64, householders in Llanelly are faced with a rate increase of 5s. 2d. in the £. The rate is to rise from 26s. to 31s. 2d. This is in a town in which a large proportion of the people are owner-occupiers and are unemployed. What does he propose to do in the meantime to assist towns affected in this way?

The rate deficiency grant is the arrangement approved by Parliament for helping in appropriate circumstances those areas where the rateable value per head of the population is below the average for the country as a whole.

Although the right hon. Gentleman tried, not unsuccessfully, to wrap up in a vast mass of verbiage the fact that he has not answered my Question, is it not obvious by now that the domestic ratepayer is in for a very hefty smack in the eye in 1963, whatever the right hon. Gentleman may say? The fact that the ratepayer is in for a smack in the eye—[Interruption.]

Order. This exchange of noises delays the House.

Is it not clear that the fact the ratepayer is in for a smack in the eye, as I have suggested, will lead to a very considerable extension of the derating powers to which the Minister attaches so much importance?

I will not compete with the hon. Gentleman in verbiage, but I informed the House—I hope in simple and clear terms—what the first findings are from the valuation by the Inland Revenue. Contrary to expectation, the percentage of the total rate burden borne by householders over the country as a whole will not rise. That is the extent to which I am making a statement today.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the statement which—

On a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.

Mr. Driberg. Question No. 26.

On a point of order. I was half-way through my supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, when I was interrupted by a point of order. Would it be in order for me to complete my supplementary question?

I am afraid that I cannot accept so accurate a computation at the beginning of sounds projected at me. In the circumstances, I think that the hon. Member for St. Helens (Mr. Spriggs) was starting his point of order first.

Further to that point of order. It has frequently been held that giving notice of an intention to raise a matter on the Adjournment is not, strictly speaking, a point of order at all, though no doubt it is a convenient way of announcing the intention. As in this case the notice was given in the middle of a supplementary question being asked by the hon. Member for City of Chester (Mr. Temple), would it not be fair, Mr. Speaker, to allow the hon. Member to ask his question?

I must act on the impression I get, which will not always be strictly accurate, of what happens first. In this case I thought that the beginning of the notice, although it began with the words, "On a point of order", happened first and I shall have to abide by that, even if I was wrong.

Further to that point of order. Am I mistaken, Mr. Speaker, in believing that you called the hon. Member for the City of Chester (Mr. Temple) and that he had started his supplementary question?

This only goes back to the same point. Whether my calling the hon. Member for the City of Chester (Mr. Temple) happened before or after the hon. Member for St. Helens (Mr. Spriggs) making his appropriate noises, I simply have to exercise my best judgment.

Further to that point of order. The Minister answered a number of Questions together. He asked the permission of the House to do so. Hon. Members whose Questions are amongst that bunch will have no opportunity of asking supplementary questions. In these circumstances, would you not think it desirable to allow them to do so now?

This point does not arise, because each of the hon. Members who had Questions down and are present asked a supplementary question.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he is aware that the future of the Coal Exchange is to be considered further on 8th March by the Court of Common Council of the City of London; if, in view of the historic and architectural importance of this building, he will make further representations to the Court of Common Council with a view to securing its preservation; and if he will publish in HANSARD a summary of the various proposals for preserving it submitted to him, with his reasons for rejecting them.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what action he intends to take to ensure that the Coal Exchange building will be preserved.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs whether he will make representations to the Court of Common Council regarding the preservation of the Coal Exchange, as a building of historic and architectural importance.

The Corporation of London deferred demolition of the Coal Exchange at our request so that three schemes which were submitted for retaining it could be examined. In view of the objection to all three schemes my right hon. Friend has released the City Corporation from its undertaking to postpone demolition. He does not propose to take any further action.

I will, with permission, circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a summary of the schemes and the objections to them.

Before circulating that, will the hon. Gentleman be good enough to correct an error in one of the objections? In the letter sent to us it was stated that Lord Mottistone's scheme, though practicable, would greatly alter the appearance of the Coal Exchange. The hon. Member will see, if he looks at it again, that this is quite inaccurate. Will he also be good enough to ask the City what the hurry is, since the new road will not be completed for ten years? Therefore, why rush the demolition of this historic building?

On the question of rush, I understand that the roadworks may reach the Coal Exchange in 1964. As to the practicability of the schemes, they may well be practicable, but they are either very costly or they raise highway or other objections. Practicability has not been the sole test.

Has the Parliamentary Secretary noted, with reference to Lord Mottistone's scheme, that the total expenditure was in the region of only £125,000? A voluntary organisation—the Victorian Society—has declared its intention of campaigning for money in order to raise a very appreciable part of this sum. Is it now too late to prevent one of the twelve most important buildings in Britain being destroyed?

I think it is putting the matter very high to call the Coal Exchange one of the twelve most important buildings in Britain. This is not the view, at any rate, of the Holford Committee. It is true that the cost would be about £125,000. Another difficulty is that I am advised that it would be hard to find a suitable use for this new structure.

Will my hon. Friend think again about this? Is he aware that this is a building of great architectural importance which has played a significant part in the economic life of the City? Must we always sacrifice our heritage to expediency?

Everyone has been very disappointed that it has not been possible to find a scheme to which strong objection was not taken. Both the City Corporation and the London County Council expressed objections to all these proposals.

If this relatively small cost is really an obstacle, would the hon. Gentleman consider asking the City Fathers to release some of their enormous resources lying idle in the Bridge House Estates fund? They have nearly £2 million there doing nothing.

I do not think that I can be answerable for how the City Corporation spends its money. The House will receive some guidance from the summary which I propose to circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware that the hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland was returned to Parliament as an Independent, that he is not eligible to serve on a Standing Committee because he is not a member of the Conservative Party and that he is therefore unable to perform the public duties for which he was returned to Parliament by his constituents; and if he will move to amend the practice and procedure of the House in this regard.

The Committee of Selection, which is responsible for naming Members to serve on Standing Committees, is required by Standing Order No. 58 to have regard to the qualifications of those Members nominated and to the composition of the House. I am afraid that, as the House is at present composed, hon. Members who sit as Independents are less likely to be nominated, having regard to the composition of the House, than Members of one of the major parties.

Is it not apparent that the Prime Minister is not aware of a letter I have received, and which I hold in my hand, from the Chairman of the Selection Committee, wherein he says:

"… I recognise your personal qualifications to sit on any Committee dealing with the subject of a Sea Fishing Industry, the fact that you"—

and the hon. Member for Banff (Sir W. Duthie) too—

"have not been eligible on this Committee is not because I have been thwarted by the Whips; it is because you are unfortunately no longer Members of the Conservative Party."

Oh.

Is not the reply I have received to the Question entirely at variance with the constitution and traditions of the House? [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] Standing Order 58 qualifies me. That is acknowledged by the Chairman of the Selection Committee. My constituency has more fishing ports than any other in Great Britain and more salmon rivers. I am, therefore, qualified on that count. Will not the Prime Minister look at this matter again?

It is not, of course, a matter for me; except, naturally, that I will try to consult with the Leader of the House—and, no doubt, with the Opposition—if there is any question of altering the Standing Orders. As I understand the Standing Orders, it is the case—whether they are or are not unfair—that hon. Members of the major parties have a far greater likelihood of being selected by the Committee which has this duty under the Standing Orders.

My right hon. Friend the Leader of the House said, in answering Questions on this subject on 8th February, that if the relevant Standing Order was thought to be unfair he would be glad to have discussions about it at the proper time. I should have thought that this was perhaps a matter for the Select Committee on Procedure which lays down the Standing Orders under which the Committee of Selection has to operate.

Is not the Prime Minister aware that on successive occasions attempts have been made to get the Leader of the House to deal with this matter? Is he not also aware that the hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Sir D. Robertson) has a far greater knowledge of this industry than, I would say, any other hon. Member? Further, is he aware that this is a question of the minority rights of hon. Members? Will the right hon. Gentleman give an undertaking to have a closer look at this matter to ensure that justice is done?

It is not a matter for me; it is a matter for the House as a whole. It is quite clear that, as it works now, the major parties are represented and the Selection Committee, which is representative of all parties, does its work in that way. I am sure that the Selection Committee has done its work as it thought fit, in accordance with the Standing Orders. Whether the Standing Orders should be altered is a matter for the House itself.

In view of the fact that the Prime Minister has said that this is a matter for the House as a whole, will he understand that there are some hon. Members, on both sides, who are profoundly disturbed by this decision and who hope that it can be reversed?

As I have said, this is not a matter for me. I do not think it would be right to criticise the Selection Committee, which does its duty as it thinks right in accordance with the Standing Orders. If the matter should be changed, then the Standing Orders must be changed.

We are grateful to the Prime Minister for saying that he will look at this question. Is he sure that the Standing Order needs amendment? The Standing Order cannot have intended that no Independent in this House could sit on a Committee, whatever qualifications he had, in view of the balance of the parties. The Standing Order specifically speaks of qualifications, and the hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Sir D. Robertson) has high qualifications in this matter. Will the right hon. Gentleman look at this matter afresh, regardless of any amendment to the Standing Order?

I will consider that with the Leader of the House, but I think it should be recognised that the Committee which serves the House does its duty as it thinks right in accordance with the Standing Orders. It would be much more improper for me to try to interfere with the work of the Selection Committee. But I will, with the Leader of the House, and perhaps with the Leader of the Opposition, consider whether this matter might be referred to the Select Committee on Procedure so that there is a procedure which gives some method of dealing with Independent hon. Members, for wherever they may sit.

The Prime Minister referred to the Select Committee on Procedure. Is there a Select Committee on Procedure in existence? Does the right hon. Gentleman have it in mind to appoint such a Committee? Perhaps he will consider the idea of the appointment of a standing Committee to consider points of procedure as they arise.

It has not yet been set up in this Session, although it is a Sessional Committee. I would consider a consultation on this subject informally or, if it was thought fit, to set up this Committee again in order to deal with questions of this kind.

rose—

I would remind hon. Members that we are dealing with only one Question.

On a point of order. Is it not wrong for the Prime Minister to mislead the House by saying that some change is required when all that matters is that the Select Committee on Procedure should relate the size of the Committee to the interests of the people concerned?

I do not think that that can raise any point of order for me.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on his talks with Sir Edgar Whitehead on the situation in Southern Rhodesia.

Sir Edgar Whitehead paid a visit to this country recently. While he was here I had the pleasure of meeting him again and we had a confidential talk.

Is the Prime Minister aware that his Answer is not sufficient in view of the desperately dangerous position which is now developing in Rhodesia? What reply did the Prime Minister give to Sir Edgar Whitehead's request that Southern Rhodesia should become independent on the basis of an undemocratic constitution in the event of the Federation breaking up? Further, what reply did he give to Sir Edgar Whitehead's request, as revealed in The Times today, that the Copperbelt should be linked with Southern Rhodesia so that the Southern Rhodesians should have access to that wealth? Did he reject that?

If Ministers coming from Commonwealth or other countries for discussions with Ministers here felt that their confidential discussions were to be published, the discussions might as well be held in public.

In view of the fact that we all hope—hon. Members on both sides of the House—that elections will shortly be held in Northern Rhodesia, can the Prime Minister assure the House that he told Sir Edgar Whitehead that he would not support any proposal to separate from Northern Rhodesia all those areas on which its economic survival depends?

I am not prepared to discuss anything I said in the confidential discussions I had with Sir Edgar Whitehead.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will arrange for Colonel John Glenn to be officially invited to visit this country.

I would refer the right hon. and learned Gentleman to the Answer I gave to the hon. Member for Dunfermline Burghs (Dr. A. Thompson) on 1st March.

In the event of Colonel Glenn accepting the Prime Minister's invitation, would the right hon. Gentleman consider the desirability of arranging for Colonel Glenn to address both Houses of Parliament?

President Kennedy has sent me a message saying that he is most grateful for the invitation and promising an early reply. Of course, we ail hope that it will be possible for Colonel Glenn to visit this country, but we have to take account—and no doubt they must take account—of the demand on him concerning his duties as a United States officer. He would be very much welcomed here. With regard to the precise form of that welcome, perhaps we might leave that matter for further discussion.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the continued increase in unemployment in Scotland, and especially considering the prospects facing the Scottish mining industry, he will now undertake to have an urgent meeting with the Scottish Trades Union Congress to discuss these problems.

No, Sir. The Scottish Trades Union Congress has recently written to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and sent me a copy of the letter. It gives its views on the measures called for by the present economic situation. These are being examined.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a very great deal of concern about the future of the Scottish economy in general and the mining industry in particular? Is he aware that the letter which I received from him this morning about the particular pit in my constituency—Rothes Colliery—reeks of complacency, if not sheer ignorance of the mining industry in Fife, and Scotland generally? In the circumstances, does he not think that it would be a good idea for him to meet the T.U.C. leaders personally in the same way as he met the industrial leaders a few weeks ago?

It would be best for me to leave this matter to be taken up by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, in whose conduct on this I have complete confidence, and see how this develops.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on his discussions with Sir Roy Welensky, with regard to the future of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland; and what intimation he gave to the Federal Prime Minister regarding Great Britain's retention of the full ultimate responsibility to make any constitutional amendments required in the constitutions of the Federation, and its constituent parts, including Southern Rhodesia, in the interests of all races.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on his recent official talks with Sir Roy Welensky.

During Sir Roy Welensky's recent visit to this country, I and several of my colleagues had discussions with him on a number of matters. These conversations were confidential.

Would the Prime Minister answer the second part of Question No. 5? In view of the fact that Sir Roy has made it clear that he would not regard Britain as having the final responsibility in deciding the Constitution for the Federation, did the Prime Minister discuss with Sir Roy the statement made by Mr. Greenfield, one of the Federal Ministers, that it may be necessary for unconstitutional actions to be taken by the Federal authorities?

All sorts of things are said by all sorts of people. The facts of the legal constitutional situation were set out by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations on 22nd February, when he said:

"… Parliament does not possess the power to deprive itself of the right to legislate for any British territory which is not fully independent. On the other hand, there are other established conventions for legislating for self-governing dependencies."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 22nd February, 1962; Vol. 654, c. 636.]

In view of the widespread reports of plots to deprive Her Majesty's Government of their constitutional authority in territories of the Federation, can the Prime Minister at least assure the House that he told Sir Roy that he would take the gravest possible view of any attempt at unilateral action to deprive Her Majesty's Government of the responsibility for the welfare of the inhabitants in these territories?

I am not prepared to disclose what I did or did not say to Sir Roy Welensky. What I have set out is the constitutional position, and I should have thought that hon. Members would wish to see if we could find a way round these difficulties, rather than add to the tension.

Will the Prime Minister at least tell the House—and surely the House is entitled to know—what he said to Welensky about his threat to use force?

No, Sir. Perhaps I might repeat that when Ministers from the Commonwealth, or indeed from foreign countries, come here to discuss matters with Ministers, the whole basis of the discussions is that they shall not be publicly disclosed except in any agreed communiqué.