asked the Minister of Overseas Development whether she will endeavour, in suitable cases, to arrange short training courses for voluntary service overseas personnel soon after their arrival in the countries to which they have been posted.

Such courses are a matter for the voluntary bodies, which fully appreciate their value. Some courses have been held and others arranged, and the number is likely to increase.

Will the hon. Gentleman agree that although a short course for a week in this country before departure is certainly indispensable, it should, if possible, be supplemented by a further week on arrival in the country concerned, in order that these persons may learn about local problems and conditions? Will the hon. Gentleman, or his right hon. Friend if she is sympathetic to this point of view, consider asking at any rate the larger Commonwealth countries whether they would be prepared to undertake this work?

My Answer referred to courses in the recipient countries. This is in addition to those which are held in this country.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what is her present estimate of the number of graduate volunteers who will be going to serve overseas during the year 1965–66.

About 900 graduate and qualified volunteers.

Can the hon. Gentleman give the House any reasons for this rather disappointing shortfall of volunteers from his right hon. Friend's estimates, and even from the more realistic estimate of my right hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham (Mr. R. Carr) last year?

In the latter part of the summer there was an unusual number of withdrawals by people who had already volunteered. No doubt there was a variety of reasons for those withdrawals which are not easy to trace. As to whether this figure is disappointing, I point out to the hon. Gentleman that the figure for last year was 507 and that therefore the voluntary societies have done a magnificent job during the course of this year in stepping it up by over 300.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development how many visits to schools and higher education institutions have been undertaken so far this year by her Department's officials to acquaint graduates and school-leavers with the opportunities for service overseas, both in professional and volunteer capacities.

Eighty-two, Sir. These visits were concerned with professional service. In addition, meetings have been held with voluntary associations which have access to audiences in schools and higher educational institutions to supply them with information and literature about professional service overseas.

Does the hon. Gentleman remember that last July he expressed agreement with one of his hon. Friend's anxiety for dynamism in this matter? Is he satisfied that dynamism has come about since then, because the 900, which is 300 short of the graduate volunteers the Government were prepared to finance, is disappointing? Is sufficient being done through the schools and universities?

The hon. Gentleman's supplementary question seems to relate more to volunteers than to professional opportunities to which my Answer referred. I think that the Answer I have given and the figures in relation to volunteers show a considerable improvement, and I think this justifies the phrases that I used during the debate last time.

Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that this matter has gained added importance since last year's Ottawa Conference on Commonwealth co-operation, with important new schemes like the study and serve scheme? In view of those new initiatives, would the hon. Gentleman ensure that these matters re ally are brought to the notice of as many higher educational institutions as possible as well as schools?

Officials from our Department are constantly engaged in this work, and I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that we put the utmost effort into this matter.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development whether it is her intention to provide a further British contribution to the International Development Association when the present funds of the Association have been fully committed.

Yes, Sir, when the current replenishment phase ends in 1968.

I am very glad to hear that. Will the British contribution be on a multilateral or a bilateral basis? Can the right hon. Lady tell us at this stage whether it is likely to be a larger or a lesser sum than the original contribution, and whether it is likely to be a larger or a lesser proportion of the whole?

By definition this is a multilateral organisation, so any contribution to it must be multilateral. With regard to the size of our contribution, this is a matter which we shall have to consider partly in the light of what contributions are made by other countries and partly in the light of other claims on our resources.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development, what increase or decrease there was in the staff of the Department under her control in the period 16th October, 1964 to 15th October, 1965; and what increase or decrease she anticipates in the period up to 15th April, 1966.

Staff increased by 432 during the year in question. A further increase of up to 90 is expected by April, 1966.

Could the right hon. Lady say how she justifies this very considerable increase at a time when actual disbursements of aid are not increasing, nor are likely to increase much? Could she also tell the House whether the establishment of her Department could stand a cut of 10 per cent. or more?

I justify this increase easily in view of the fact that functions have been transferred to me from other Departments and corresponding reduction made in the staffs of those Departments. It is also justified in the light of the highly increased efficiency of the management of our aid as a result of the setting up of the new Ministry.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development, what contribution Great Britain will make to Pakistan's third Five Year Plan.

I am not in a position to announce what aid Britain will offer during Pakistan's third Five Year Plan. This plan covers the years 1965 to 1970, but I understand the Pakistan Government are now reappraising it. As a first instalment, the British Government announced on 23rd September the offer of a loan of £4 million for non-project aid to assist the Pakistan development programme during the first year of the plan.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for her information about the first instalment, may I ask her for an assurance that there will be no question of Her Majesty's Government cutting off aid to Pakistan in view of the efforts now being made for a cease-fire and a friendly settlement in Kashmir?

I can give that assurance.

asked the Minister for Overseas Development what contribution Great Britain will make to India's fourth Five Year Plan.

I have nothing to add to the reply I gave my hon. Friend on 23rd February. The Government of India are still considering the final shape and size of the fourth Five Year Plan which is to cover the years 1966–71.

Can my right hon. Friend say if there is any possibility of a substantial part of any British aid being in the form of interest-free loans to India?

Yes, India qualifies for interest-free loans. This has been of great help to her.

Will the right hon. Lady agree that India's first requirement is assistance to overcome the famine in that country? Can she say what Britain is doing to help India in this respect?

We have already this year given £15 million worth of non-project aid to India, which is of very great economic assistance to her, and in her annual plan which she has drawn up for the coming year India is placing, I am glad to say, a greatly increased emphasis on the development of agriculture, which we welcome.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what discussions she had with the Kenya Ministerial delegation on the effects of the drought in Kenya this year; and if she will make a statement.

None, Sir. This matter was not raised by the Kenya Ministerial delegation during the recent talks.

Does the right hon. Lady fully appreciate that the drought in Kenya this year will probably prove to have been the most serious in living memory and that the eventual effect on Kenya's economy must be very serious? When considering financial plans for next year is there any chance that the right hon. Lady might do something about this at a later date?

My Department is responsible for development aid and not for emergency or famine relief, which is a matter for the Commonwealth Relations Office. The Kenya Government did not raise the subject of famine specifically in the context of the talks we have recently had but, as the House will be aware, during those talks we were able to agree a substantial continuing aid to Kenya on the agricultural side.

Is it not true that there is at the moment a definite famine in Kenya, and that people, particularly children, are facing starvation? Whichever Department is concerned, cannot something be done?

Of course, we are aware of this and we deplore it, and I understand that the Kenya Government have asked that R.A.F. aircraft stationed at Nairobi should be available if required for famine relief operations, but I must repeat that this is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development whether she will increase the present grant to the Government of Kenya for the purchase of small European mixed farms.

No, Sir.

If, subsequently, political pressure in Kenya built up to cause the need to accelerate the acquisition of such farms, would the right hon. Lady be prepared in due time to reconsider the matter with her Government colleagues?

The Question refers specifically to the grant. I should point out that the aid which I have just negotiated with the Kenya Government is in the form of interest-free loans. We estimate that the fact that the money is interest-free makes it equivalent to a grant of 50 per cent., as compared with the former grant of 33⅓ per cent. As for the future, I have undertaken to review the position at the end of the four years for which we have currently negotiated aid.

I understand, of course, having tried, the difficulty of getting money from the Treasury and I appreciate the interest-free aspect, but would the Minister agree that, from the Kenya point of view, this is a somewhat disappointing settlement and that there could be real danger to race relations in Kenya if progress were too slow? Further, would the right hon. Lady bear in mind that a lot of this compensation money comes back to the United Kingdom in the end?

It is a question of balancing the different needs of Kenya, and it would be quite wrong to devote all aid to the transfer of European farms when, as the hon. Gentleman says, the money comes back here. I want to see that the money is invested in Kenya in agricultural development—land consolidation and general development, as well as just in land transfer. That is what we had very much in mind in negotiating our recent agreement with the Kenya Government, which provides for the continuing transfer of the European mixed farms at a rate of 100,000 acres a year, which we are satisfied, in the light of the Stamp Commission's Report, is sufficient to contain any political unrest whilst leaving some money for other development.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development if she will make a statement about the continuation of the scheme for purchasing small European mixed farms in Kenya and the continuation of the scheme for buying out compassionate cases.

I have nothing to add to the Answer which my hon. Friend gave on 23rd November.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that her recent decision to cut by four-fifths the resettlement grant to Kenya will mean that it will take some 13 years for those who wish to sell their farms to do so? Is she also aware that the Kenya National Farmers' Union delegation has described this action as a complete betrayal and has said that it is not wholly surprised at Rhodesia's action, in view of the failure of Her Majesty's Government to act honestly towards her subjects in Kenya?

Of course I am aware of the statement, but I think that the fears expressed have been exaggerated and I am confident that the reception of our proposals inside Kenya will be much better than the impression given by the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development whether she is aware that British Farmers in Kenya who have been accepted as compassionate cases are being offered sums that are out of line with the present value of their farms; and what action she is taking to secure that these cases are treated justly and compassionately.

I understand that some of the offers of purchase by the Kenya Government which are based on the future profitability of the farms have disappointed the owners. On the other hand, in one or two cases the offers have been higher than they expected. The offers are made, of course, on a willing buyer/willing seller basis. However, the Kenya Government have been willing to discuss the offers with a number of applicants at their request.

Will the right hon. Lady make plain whether she accepts responsibility for the administration of this compassionate-case money? Is she aware that a farmer suffering from cancer was offered for his farm 45 per cent. of the price at which it had been valued by the Central Land Board? How can she justify that on grounds of compassion or justice?

The applications are made through our High Commission in Nairobi. On the other hand, it is quite clear that the offers made by the Kenya Government must, as in private transactions, be based on the Government's estimate of the return to be secured in order that they can repay the cost of the loan. Therefore, their estimate of the future profitability of the land must be one of the factors that are taken into account.

Can the right hon Friend say whether she is reviewing the method of valuation in these cases?

The present method of valuation is based on that approved for the O1 Kalou scheme in August, 1964, but the valuation system in farm compassionate cases is being reviewed by the joint working party of valuers which is to meet in Kenya shortly.

Will the Minister confirm that over and above the £18 million loan announced a week ago, money will be made available by Her Majesty's Government to meet all those compassionate cases that fit in with the existing criteria?

Yes, Sir. As I made clear in my statement which I had placed in the Library of the House, we are dealing with compassionate cases outside the £18 million worth of aid that we are giving to the Kenya Government.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development, in view of the interest in the statistics on economic aid published as Appendix B of the White Paper on Overseas Development, showing the nature and size of British aid to developing countries, and their importance in planning future policy, if she will arrange for the regular publication of detailed and up-to-date figures.

Yes, Sir. I am arranging for a full statistical digest to be published annually. The next issue, which will be available early in 1966, will show the position up to the end of 1965 of both financial aid and technical assistance.

Would my right hon. Friend agree that the publication of these valuable statistics is complete justification for the establishment of the statistical department in the Ministry of Overseas Development and will she, in the years ahead, see that money for overseas aid to these territories is given to Ministries other than the Ministry of Defence?

I am not quite sure whether I understand the implications of the last part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question, but, on the first part, I think that the whole House will agree that the very detailed statistical tables given in the White Paper which I introduced in the House in August have given a more comprehensive picture of what is actually happening than we have ever had before and that this is an important basis for decision on policy. That is why we decided to issue annual statistics in a far more comprehensive form than has ever been given to the House before.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what grants or loans she has made to India, Pakistan and Kashmir over the past eight months, and what further aid she is contemplating.

Since March this year, two loans together amounting to £15 million have been made to India. No loans to Pakistan were made in this period. There is no separate British aid programme to Kashmir. A further loan of £4 million to India and a loan for a similar sum to Pakistan are expected to be signed shortly.

Will the Minister try to find some way to assist Kashmir, which is a depressed police State, and rather a blot on the escutcheon of the British Commonwealth of Nations?

That, of course, is not a matter for my Department.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what steps she is taking to enable India and Pakistan to avert the famine which they both face as a result of their recent hostilities.

I believe that the hon. and gallant Member is mistaken in thinking the shortages of food grains reported to be likely in India would be to any significant extent due to the recent hostilities. I have seen no reports of any likelihood of shortages in Pakistan. Neither Government has sought any special assistance from us on this account, but I should naturally be very ready to consider requests that a greater proportion of the technical or capital assistance we give should be devoted to schemes of agricultural improvement.

Does the right hon. Lady realise that the general opinion is that as a result of the bad monsoon and the war between India and Pakistan, there will be a very severe famine in India during the coming winter, and will she give her very earnest attention to trying to prevent such a catastrophe?

We are all deeply concerned about the food situation and, as I have said, I am glad to know that India's annual plan for 1966–67 puts greater emphasis on agriculture.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development whether she will introduce arrangements to provide Government guarantees, up to an appropriate level and subject to suitable safeguards, in respect of direct investments by British industry in developing territories.

I am, of course, studying all possibilities of helping the developing countries, but the hon. Member will realise that in our present balance of payments position we must consider carefully the implications of measures to increase private investment overseas.

Does it remain the policy of Her Majesty's Government that private investment in developing countries should play a significant part in the development of those countries? Will the right hon. Lady recognise that some guarantee against the political risks involved in such investment could well make a valuable contribution?

I agree that private investment has an important role to play in the economies of developing countries. How important varies from country to country and the degree of development reached. It is simply a matter of priorities and I consider the overriding priority is to provide aid which will give the infrastructure economic and political stability.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what grants or loans are now being paid for the use of University College, Salisbury, Rhodesia.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what special steps she is taking to ensure that British financial aid continues to be made available to the University College of Rhodesia in Salisbury.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development if she will continue to honour the commitment entered into by Her Majesty's Government to provide financial aid to the multiracial university college of Rhodesia and Nyasaland.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what is the policy of Her Majesty's Government with regard to the financing of the University College in Salisbury, Rhodesia.

The financial assistance from Her Majesty's Government towards the recurrent costs of the college is at the rate of £250,000 per year for three years; we have now reached the second year of this arrangement. Since the University College is providing higher education for students of all races and operates under Royal Charter, Her Majesty's Government have decided to continue their assistance to the college so long as Her Majesty's Government are satisfied that conditions continue to exist under which the college is able to discharge this function.

I thank the right hon. Lady for that reply. Does she consider the present situation concerning the university as satisfactory?

I think we would all agree that the staff of the university as at present constituted is dedicated to the multi-racial principle.

Order. I understood that the right hon. Lady was answering with this Question Questions Nos. 25, 26 and 30.

I apologise. I was answering those other Questions together with this Question.

May I congratulate the right hon. Lady on the decisions taken? Is it not a fact that this House, however else divided on the question of Rhodesia, is wholly united from Left to Right in believing that the whole key to the situation lies in education? In doing what she said she would do, will she do everything possible beyond that to aid educational opportunity for the people?

Certainly we shall continue to aid the university, which is the only form of educational aid at present under discussion for Rhodesia.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that academic freedom is currently being denied to this university college by the censoring of university publications and even internal documents? Should not the provision of aid be conditional on the restoration of academic freedom?

I have said that we shall watch the position very closely and if it becomes clear to Her Majesty's Government that the multi-racial function of the university is being undermined, we shall reconsider the allocation of aid.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that the decision she has just announced will give great satisfaction to all of us who look upon this multi-racial university as an oasis of decency and sanity at present? Will she bear in mind that we consider that the work it is doing is now more important than it has ever been?

I would certainly agree with the last part of that question. I can only hope that the university will be allowed to continue to be the oasis to which the hon. Member referred.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what studies her Department has commissioned of the relative value to less-developed countries of governmental aid and private investment.

I have not commissioned any studies exactly addressed to the question posed by the hon. Member, since I believe that Government aid and private investment are complementary and not competitive.

While not accepting the line of argument advanced by the right hon. Lady, may I ask if she would agree that it would be more useful if she made representation to the Chancellor of the Exchequer to get an increase in the capital available for British private investment overseas?

I refer the hon. Member to the Chancellor's own references to this matter in the House when he said that he would continue to watch the position in regard to private investment in developing countries.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development if she will state the annual British contributions to each of the international organisations for the disbursement of multilateral aid since the inception of each institution.

With permission, I will circulate this information in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Could the right hon. Lady say if this includes, for example, drawings from the International Bank on subscriptions from local banks? What rate of increase does she envisage in view of the emphasis in the White Paper on multilateral aid rather than bilateral aid?

The figures include reference to the World Bank. Perhaps the hon. Member will study the details.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what is the estimated administrative cost of her Department in 1965–66; and what percentage increase this represents over the administrative cost of the Department of Technical Co-operation in the latest convenient year.

The estimated administrative cost for 1965–66 is £2,347,000. This is an 81 per cent. increase over the corresponding actual cost of the Department of Technical Co-operation for 1963–64, the last full financial year of its existence; the Ministry, of course, has a much wider field of activity than the Department.

Does this increase, which presumably is largely due to an increase in staff which the right hon. Lady justified when answering my hon. Friend the Member for Woking (Mr. Onslow) by saying that there have been increases in efficiency in disbursement of aid, mean that she can give some examples of those increases?

I am afraid that I would need more time than Mr. Speaker would allow to me to answer that question in detail. The White Paper presented to the House last summer gives a full range of the examples which the hon. Member wants. Part of the increase is, of course, due to increases in salaries and costs generally.

While accepting that this 81 per cent. increase is in part justified by the wider responsibilities which the right hon. Lady's Ministry has, may I ask if it is not the case that her staff has increased by 500 and the staff of Departments from which functions have been transferred has been reduced by only 50?

No. The number of reductions of staff of other Departments, which has already been given to the House, is much higher. If the hon. Member cares to approach the Ministers concerned he will find that the latest figures are much higher than that. I would point out to him that the Third Report of the Estimates Committee for 1964–65 contained the comment that the size of the Department was not large compared with that of the Department of Technical Co-operation with its smaller responsibilities.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what proportion of bilateral aid is currently tied to United Kingdom goods and services; and what is the estimated figure for exports that this tied aid will generate in the current financial year.

Some 42 per cent. of our official bilateral financial aid disbursed in 1964 was wholly tied, and another 16 per cent. partly tied. A significant part of disbursements under Technical Assistance, pensions and compensation, will also have been spent in the United Kingdom.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that that is an encouraging reply in so far as the proportion she has just given indicates that quite a large amount of foreign aid must generate British exports? Will she bring her Answer to the attention of the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs and persuade him to give a much fairer crack of the whip to aid under the National Plan than he has done?

It is true that aid, not only by this country but by other countries, does generate development and, therefore, develops exports. No doubt my right hon. Friend will have noticed that.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the importance of not tying too high a proportion of aid in view of the need for developing countries to pay for aid from local costs? Will she also bear in mind the need to keep open the door to future genuine internationalisation of development aid to poorer countries?

I entirely agree that it is important to pay attention to the local cost elements. We always make reasonable allowance in our aid for local cost elements—more generous than other countries. That is why our aid is so effective.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what new arrangements she has made for joint study, with other countries, of the economic needs of the Leeward and Windward Islands.

The United States Government, the Canadian Government, and Her Majesty's Government have agreed jointly to sponsor an economic survey of Barbados and islands belonging to the Leeward and Windward Groups. The purpose of the study will be to formulate plans for the achievement of economic viability by the territories concerned and to suggest priorities for the next five years. I hope that the survey will begin in January; it will probably take about four months.

Does my hon. Friend realise the pleasure that this announcement will give to those of us who have campaigned for this sort of consortium for a long time? Does he share our hope, which is possibly a little more important, that the joint study will carry the moral obligation to help with providing funds when studies are complete?

I know my hon. Friend's continuing interest in this question, and I am glad that he welcomes the setting up of this mission. The survey will help the donors in the planning of their aid, and I therefore think that the hope expressed in the second part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question will be realised.

Will the Minister in considering this matter bear in mind the many places of great historical significance in these islands, some of which are now rather in ruins, which are tourist attractions for the citizens of North America, who now come both by air and boat for their holidays? This would bring employment and money to the islands.

I feel sure that these are considerations which will be in the minds of the members of the mission.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what proportion of the British national income was supplied in aid, both private and official, in 1964; and what proportion is planned for 1970.

Official aid and private investment in developing countries amounted to 1·1 per cent. of our gross national product in 1964. As regards the second part of the Question, I would refer the hon. Member to my reply to him of 16th November.

Will the right hon. Lady confirm that the National Plan does in fact mean that the proportion of our gross national product that goes in aid will be smaller in 1970 than it is today? Will not she give the figure for 1970, which clearly must have been assumed for the National Plan? It is no justification to argue that because there is to be a review of aid before 1970 therefore the figure ought not to be given, because every figure is to be reviewed.

I have no doubt that the hon. Member hopes that our Government will do what his Government did, when after the crisis which they engendered in 1961 they cut back aid and reduced the percentage alarmingly. On the contrary, the hon. Gentleman knows that we have increased aid and we hope to be able to continue to do so, and that is why we have promised under the National Plan to keep the whole situation under review as our balance of payments position improves.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what proportion of the current aid programme is estimated to place an additional burden upon the United Kingdom balance of payments.

It is difficult to give a precise answer, since this depends on the state of our economy and on the assumptions made about alternative uses of the resources involved, but the range of answers which might be given would all be below 50 per cent.

While I appreciate that there must be room for argument about this proportion, whether it is 50 per cent. or whether, as Mr. Krassowski of the Overseas Development Institute argues, it is somewhat nearer nought, is it not misleading for the National Plan to suggest, as it does, that all overseas aid is a net loss so far as the balance of payments is concerned?

I do not accept that the National Plan does imply that. It is a fact, though, that this form of expenditure contains an element of difficulty for the balance of payments, however one may assess the size of that element. This is one of the difficulties we have to face.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development whether she will make a statement about the establishment of a development division in the Caribbean.

The British Development Division in the Caribbean will be situated in Barbados. Mr. W. L. Bell, formerly a Permanent Secretary in the service of the Government of Uganda, has been appointed Head of the Division and will start work in my Ministry at the beginning of January. I hope that, with the appointment of other members of the staff, the Division will become operational in the spring of next year.

Once again may I offer congratulations to my right hon. and hon. Friends on the speed they are putting on in the Caribbean? Will this body co-ordinate plans from the Leeward and Windward Islands for submission to the International Development Association in an effort to get some money out of that body? What will be the relationship of this body to the joint international consortium which was mentioned in the Answer to Question No. 20?

As to the function of this Development Division, I refer my hon. Friend to the Answer he received on 1st June, from which he will see that this Division will have satisfactory relationships with the two bodies referred to.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what is the total amount of British aid to Kenya, including the amount promised by the four-year farm project.

The estimated total disbursement of financial aid to Kenya during the four-year period beginning in April, 1966, is £29 million, including the £18 million for land purchase and other development recently announced, and £11 million from existing commitments. This sum does not include technical assistance, or whatever may be made available for the purchase of farms on compassionate grounds.

Can my right hon. Friend confirm that in the past the money allocated to these purposes has not always been fully spent within the period for which it was allocated? Can she assure us that the money she now promises will be fully spent in the four years ahead?

Yes, Sir. It is true that disbursements have not always matched commitments. In fact, they have lagged far behind and that is why we have an £11 million carry-over. In our negotiations with the Kenya Government I stressed to them that the offer which I was making was for sums to be disbursed and not committed on paper. It is the policy of my Ministry to secure actual disbursements and not merely paper commitments.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development whether she will take steps to assist the development of private businesses in under-developed countries by promoting an organisation similar to the American International Executive Service Corps, particulars of which have been sent to her.

No, Sir.

Is the Minister aware that this organisation has been very useful to a number of under-developed countries? Would not he give some further consideration to making funds available also for this type of person?

I accept the usefulness of the American scheme, but I would point out to the right hon. Gentleman that there is no age limit in the volunteer schemes at present existing and encouraged in this country and there is a full opportunity for the type of executives to whom the right hon. Gentleman referred to volunteer through existing machinery.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will now make a statement on the siting of the fast breeder reactor.

asked the Minister of Technology if he is yet able to state the location for the proposed fast breeder reactor.

I have nothing to add to the reply which I gave the hon. Member for Dumfries (Mr. Monro) on 23rd November.

Can my right hon. Friend say when he will be in a position to make a statement on this project? In view of the very serious blow being given to the Scottish economy by pit closures and the announcement yesterday on hydro-electric development, does my right hon. Friend recognise that it is vitally important on social, economic and political grounds that a decision should be taken in favour of siting this reactor in the Scottish Highlands?

My hon. Friend must appreciate that I am well aware of the complicated nature of the problems affecting the Scottish economy at present. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland answered the question about the hydro-electric schemes yesterday. I am not able to give a date, but we are dealing with this matter as expeditiously as we can and I hope to be in a position soon to put the facts before the House.

Is the right hon. Gentleman cognisant of the communications which I have had with the Atomic Energy Authority on this subject and will he bear in mind the desirability of siting the reactor on Rettie airfield, Banff?

I am aware that discussions have taken place, but it is not possible for me to say where it will be sited. I have already answered that I am not yet in a position to do so.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that all the technical requirements are met by the atomic energy establishment at Dounreay and that the decision to be taken will be wholly a political and economic one when he eventually takes it?

I know that that is not the position, other than to say that Dounreay fulfils the qualifications in the same way as many other sites do where claims are being made for the siting of the reactor, but we are not yet in a position to say where or when it will be sited.

asked the Minister of Technology what plans he has for giving assistance to the British computer industry.

The Government's initial programme for assisting the development of the computer industry was announced on 1st March. Since then the National Research Development Corporation has announced that it will be making substantial investments in development projects with computer firms. My Department has placed research and development contracts with the industry and with research organisations totalling £187,000. Contracts for about a further £300,000 are under consideration.

Would the right hon. Gentleman use his influence to see that Government agencies and nationalised industries buy British computers instead of American?

I have been using that influence to the best of my ability for some time, but one has to recognise that it is influence that one tries to use and not a directive.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that at a European conference in London recently to study the question of the computer industry it was generally agreed that it was unlikely that there was a sufficient basis in Britain alone to make a viable British computer industry? Will my right hon. Friend consider this question along with other European countries?

This is quite a way from the original Question. We are giving the closest attention to joint efforts in this field, but we in Government circles feel that we can make a viable British computer industry.

asked the Prime Minister what steps he will take to accord with the representations he received from Members of Parliament on 2nd August asking for drastic cuts in arms expenditure much earlier than were proposed by Her Majesty's Government in the summer.

asked the Prime Minister what action he is taking to secure a speedy and large reduction in arms expenditure.

My colleagues and I are vigorously pursuing the Defence Review, Sir.

Will the Prime Minister agree that the moves so far do not meet the Parliamentary Labour Party resolution of that date? [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] Will my right hon. Friend reduce the British forces in Germany, costing us £190 million a year, which are not needed and when the German Government are cutting their arms by £80 million a year?

The review is not yet completed and we cannot yet announce what action will have to be taken to relate commitments to the available resources both in real and monetary terms.

Would the Prime Minister not accept that the very heavy strain on the economy which this level of armaments expenditure represents is proving a burden to the achievement of the Government's social programme and is intensifying our balance of payments difficulties? Will my right hon. Friend look again at the expenditure of £500 million a year on overseas bases to see whether this can be justified, either in terms of its burden on our domestic economy or by a realistic assessment of our peace-keeping operations?

I have made it clear a number of times that we are looking at both the foreign exchange component in this expenditure and the general burden on our resources, but we are not yet in a position to announce what our answer to this will be. As far as costs are concerned, I am glad to tell my hon. Friend that the total expenditure this year on defence is not more than two-thirds, and may be a little less, of the programme which all the arguments were about in 1951.

While reinforcing the plea that the defence burden of about £2,000 million a year should be reduced as far as possible and as quickly as possible, may I ask the Prime Minister whether at the same time he will bear in mind the necessity of our remaining capable of meeting our obligations to our Commonwealth partners, not least the Republic of Zambia?

That perhaps may come up on another Question, but so far as the wider issue is concerned we are very much alive to the need of meeting our obligations to our Commonwealth partners and to our allies. It is a question of cutting commitments to a point we can fulfil, and the commitments are highly competitive with one another.

asked the Prime Minister what consultations with other Governments have taken place on the question of an embargo on oil shipments to Southern Rhodesia.

asked the Prime Minister what steps Her Majesty's Government will take to implement the United Nations Security Council Resolution calling for an oil embargo to be included in economic sanctions against the Smith régime in Southern Rhodesia.

I have, as yet, nothing to add to the statement I made in the House on 23rd November.

Does the Prime Minister recall that the Foreign Secretary on 22nd November emphasised the need for speedy counsel in this direction? Will he now reiterate Her Majesty's Government's support of, e United Nations Resolution of 20th November and will he give us some idea of the time-scale which he has in mind to implement an oil embargo, which would be extremely effective in bringing Mr. Smith to book?

On 23rd November I ma de a very full statement about this and I made it clear that in our study of this and other problems arising out of the United Nations Resolution we could not hope to settle this kind of problem on a unilateral basis. It would be ineffective in terms of what my hon. Friend has in mind and, in fact, could inflict more damage than good, but we are pursuing this vigorously on a multilateral basis.

asked the Prime Minister what further consideration he has given to the abolition of censorship of stage and television productions.

The Government are considering how best the law relating to censorship of stage plays might be reviewed.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is disquiet in some circles not only about the activities of some busybodies but also about Government interference in certain programmes——

Hear, hear.

Order. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will not wait for his applause but will get on with his supplementary question.

Is the Prime Minister aware that there is alarm not only about the activities of some busybodies but also about Government interference in programmes, particularly in relation to the programme "The War Game"?

The Government have not interfered in any way with stage plays or with any of these programmes. As regards rumours about "The War Game", the Government have not interfered at all.

Is the Prime Minister aware that, during the week in which a constituent of mine, a courageous prison officer, was killed in the execution of his duty, and before his funeral, the B.B.C. chose to put on in the programme "B.B.C. 3", an item sneering at prison officers in general and accusing them of taking part in bribery? Will the right hon. Gentleman say what protection he is able to offer to such public servants?

I was not aware of that particular programme. It has always been ruled, by all parties, that we do not interfere in programmes of the B.B.C. or the other television authorities. The particular tragedy to which the hon. Gentleman refers is one about which all of us would feel sympathy, but I do not think that it arises on this Question.

Will the Prime Minister see that any correspondence between the broadcasting authorities and the Home Office in relation to the programme "The War Game" is published?

I am fully aware of all the circumstances in this matter, and I have been into it very fully. The Government have informed the B.B.C. that we have no observations to make on whether it should be shown or not.

I recognise the complexities involved in this question, but is my right hon. Friend aware that portions of television programmes are giving affront to many of our people? Will he, in virtue of his prominent position, express his disapproval of some of the obscenities which are being broadcast?

Whatever our private feelings—some of us have seen some of these programmes—I do not think that it is right for Ministers to express officially disapproval or approval of individual programmes. There is proper machinery for handling these matters. But this Question relates to the whole problem of censorship, mainly, as I understood it, in relation to stage plays, which all of us recognise as a problem. We are considering how that problem should be dealt with.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement about the circumstances in which the Government decided not to employ Lord Beeching's services for the study of transport co-ordination carried out earlier this year.

asked the Prime Minister why he decided not to employ Lord Beeching to carry out a study of transport co-ordination.

It has already been explained. I was very anxious that Dr. Beeching, as he then was, should do this study. But he had, in his evidence to the Geddes Committee, taken a strong pro-railway and anti-road line, and the Government considered that, unless he had attached to him assessors who could represent all points of view, there would be strong ground for criticism in this House and elsewhere. Unfortunately, Lord Beeching insisted on a one-man inquiry without assessors.

But did not the Prime Minister, in the first place, get Lord Beeching to agree to do this study single-handed and afterwards impose conditions on him which caused him to withdraw? Is not this what his right hon. Friend the Minister of Technology meant by "sacking" him?

No, Sir. The statement made by my right hon. Friend made quite clear the circumstances in which that interchange occurred last week. [Laughter.] If hon. Members opposite are interested in this important question rather than their usual vendetta against my right hon. Friend, certainly the Government were very anxious that Lord Beeching, with his high qualifications, should do it, but I can just imagine the howl there would have been from hon. Members opposite, particularly those sensitive to road haulage interests, if Lord Beeching, after years of taking the rail point of view and after the evidence submitted last year, had gone into this inquiry alone without assessors representing the point of view of road haulage.

Is not the Prime Minister aware that he appeared to have changed the terms of reference after he first asked Lord Beeching to undertake this survey, and it further appeared that this was as a result of pressure from the Minister of Technology? Is not this a clear example of the undesirability of having a Cabinet Minister remaining a member of the union?

It is about time the hon. Gentleman grew up and faced the facts which this serious problem presents. There was widespread criticism in the Press and elsewhere of the evidence from British Railways to the Geddes Committee, although many people felt that it was reasonable in the emphasis which it placed on the pro-railway side. There would certainly have been the most inordinate howl from road haulage interests—nothing to do with the Minister of Technology—and, I should have thought, from some hon. Members opposite unless one could have been sure that Lord Beeching had access to the views of all concerned. This was why the proposition was put to him. As regards his going back to I.C.I., this, of course, was arranged a long time ago. He was due to go back to I.C.I., but we asked him whether he would stay longer to do this inquiry.

The right hon. Gentleman has stressed that this is an important question. Can he say when his right hon. Friend proposes to provide an answer to it?

If the point of the right hon. Gentleman's question is to ask when we shall make a statement on transport co-ordination, we are very hard at work on this, but—[Laughter.] All we got in the previous 13 years was disco-ordination. I was not aware that any right hon. Gentlemen opposite thought that anything had been done to coordinate the transport services in those years. They carried out a pretty effective wrecking action in 1954.

asked the Prime Minister whether the public speech of the Postmaster-General at Aberdeen on 14th October on the future of the Post Office represents the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

Yes, Sir.

Is the Prime Minister aware that in that speech the Postmaster-General referred to the handicap he felt in having to answer on every detail of Post Office work in the House of Commons? Is it his intention to relieve his right hon. Friend of those responsibilities?

My right hon. Friend did not say that accountability to Parliament should not continue. He said that it created special difficulties for the Post Office, which is the only publicly-owned industry subject to detailed Parliamentary control. In fact, the words which he used were used previously by a very distinguished Conservative Postmaster-General.

asked the Prime Minister what restrictions have been placed by Her Majesty's Government on British citizens visiting Southern Rhodesia.

The travel allowance for. United Kingdom residents visiting Rhodesia is restricted to £250. The previous concession whereby a United Kingdom citizen could take shotguns and cartridges to Rhodesia without a licence has been withdrawn. There are, t present, no other restrictions.

Will not the Prime Minister agree that it is still a good thing for private citizens to visit Rhodesia, whether wishing to see relations there, wanting to go on holiday or wanting to go there for business?

I think that the arguments are very finely balanced. One of the things I have referred to in the House is the possibility of whether we should at the right moment have a Parliamentary delegation. I think that it would be very healthy indeed if we were able to have some contact with a number of shades of opinion in Rhodesia, including some of those which most need encouragement but are not getting all that much.