asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what information he now has regarding the effect of economic sanctions on Southern Rhodesia.

On 27th April I described some of the effects of sanctions on the Rhodesian economy. Recent evidence, including some significant admissions by the régime itself, amply justifies the claims I then made about the effectiveness of our policy which we are resolved to maintain until Rhodesia returns to constitutional government. We have succeeded in obtaining overwhelming international support for our economic sanctions against Rhodesia and have now denied to the illegal régime access to nearly all Rhodesia's normal export markets outside South Africa.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that his assessment that the sanctions would lead to a swift collapse have proved completely wrong? As Rhodesian tobacco is reported to be selling strongly in Dutch and German markets, and now that we are looking forward to the restoration of normal relations, is it not appropriate to reconsider the sanctions, particularly as they are destroying goodwill to British trade in Rhodesia?

No, Sir. The information which the hon. Member has conveyed to me about the effectiveness of sanctions does not coincide with my judgment.

Will the Secretary of State confirm that there is no truth in the rumours that Her Majesty's Government either will lift or are considering lifting sanctions at any stage during the talks? Secondly, will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that he is looking into alleged breaches by British firms which have been brought to his attention?

The answer is "Yes" to both questions.

Is my right hon. Friend now in a position to say how long he thinks it will be before sanctions have brought down the régime, which is what we on this side would welcome?

I cannot estimate the date, but I hope pretty soon.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how much the sanctions have cost us to date and what has been their effect on the British economy? If he is not in a position to answer off-the-cuff, will he consider issuing a detailed statement?

It is most disappointing that we get from the right hon. Gentleman questions of that kind which can only cause difficulties—[HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"]—difficulties which I inherited as a result of the right hon. Gentleman's policy.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he will make a statement on the relations between Her Majesty's Government and Rhodesia with special reference to the effectiveness of the restriction on imports to Rhodesia and his present and future plans in this respect.

Oil is the only commodity the import of which into Rhodesia has been restricted. As regards the effectiveness of this restriction, I would refer my hon. and learned Friend to the Prime Minister's speech in the debate on the Address on 21st April. The advisability of imposing further restrictions on imports to Rhodesia is always under review and, should the circumstances so demand, further action to this end will be taken.

With regard to the first phrase of my Question, will my right hon. Friend take great care that, whatever negotiations take place, the British rule of law will be maintained so as to give equality of opportunity to all the citizens there regardless of colour?

I hope that the British standard of the rule of law will always be maintained.

Is it not clear that the right hon. Gentleman's estimate of the effect of the sanctions has been proved wholly wrong on more than two occasions? Would he not agree that it is equally clear that vital supplies are getting through to Rhodesia?

No, Sir. I still think that my judgment is far superior to that of the hon. Gentleman's.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he is aware that public representatives throughout the country are being subjected to propaganda in support of the illegal régime in Rhodesia by Rhodesians an. South Africans; and if he will take steps to stop these activities.

I naturally deplore the propaganda which has been circulated on this subject, but the British Government do not believe in suppressing freedom of speech and expression in this country. The good sense and understanding of the British people ensures that extravagant propaganda of this kind makes very little impact.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that at least she could negate these activities by in turn advising civic leaders, especially those in Scotland, of the effective steps which this Government are taking in an attempt to end the rebel régime in Rhodesia?

I think my hon. Friend will agree that of all people the people of Scotland are the least susceptible to this kind of propaganda, but the facts speak for themselves, and indeed it is very valuable to have Questions from hon. Members on both sides of the House which enable us to draw attention to the intensity with which we are pursuing the sanctions policy.

While appreciating that this propaganda cannot and should not be stopped, may I ask the hon. Lady to give publicity to the fact that air letters received by individuals in this country, apparently typewritten from individuals in Rhodesia, are often printed, stereotyped letters issued by the Rhodesian régime?

Yes, indeed, this is so. The alternative would be to impose censorship, and this obviously we would not be prepared to do; but it is true that many of these are unacceptable to, and undesired by, the people who receive them.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what progress has been made in the discussions with Rhodesian officials; and if he will now make non-discrimination in land allocation a precondition of any advance towards legal independence.

When announcing the start of the informal talks which are now continuing between officials in Salisbury, the Prime Minister made it clear that no final settlement could be accepted which did not satisfy the six principles; these principles, of course, include the need for progress towards ending racial discrimination.

Would my right hon. Friend please consider the possibility of abrogating or insisting on the abrogation of these Land Apportionment Acts before any agreement is reached with the rebellious régime? Under these Acts, the white Rhodesians, who are only 8 per cent of the population, have reserved for themselves 50 per cent. of the land. I am sure that he realises that this causes great resentment among the real Rhodesians.

What I said in answer to the original Question covers the supplementary question.

Order. Some hon. Members are drifting back into the practice of asking long supplementaries.

While welcoming some of the right hon. Gentleman's Answer, would he agree that the initiative towards Land Apportionment Acts came not from the white settlers but from the United Kingdom Government itself when the Labour Party was in office?

However the Acts came about, they cause racial discrimination, and I should like some day to see racial discrimination removed altogether.

In considering the changes in the Land Apportionment Acts, would the right hon. Gentleman keep in mind the difficulties which would face African traders if they had to confront European competition?

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations whether he will now ensure that exports of antibiotics and other drugs, the lack of which is still causing suffering to sick of all races in Rhodesia, is not held up by sanctions; and whether he will make a statement.

Licences are freely issued in response to applications for the export of manufactured drugs and medicines to Rhodesia. Normal Exchange Control requirements apply and these require prepayment in a convertible currency other than sterling. There is no reason that there should be any hold-up in the supply of these commodities to Rhodesia.

Since there is a hold-up, can the hon. Lady say where the hold-up lies and whose is the responsibility.

No, I cannot, because there are no difficulties from the point of view of this country.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what action he has taken on the claims of Major H. Bell, a former officer in the Rhodesian Army, for a refund of travelling expenses to the United Kingdom and loss of personal chattels which directly resulted from his refusal to support the illegal régime in Rhodesia.

Arrangements are in hand for refunds to Major Bell in respect of his own and his wife's sea passages and certain other travelling expenses between Rhodesia and Britain. I regret that it is not possible for Her Majesty's Government to accept responsibility in regard to claims which officers may wish to submit for loss of personal chattels.

Does the hon. Lady make a distinction between compensation for losses incurred by loyal British subjects and losses incurred by foreign-owned pipelines? If not, can she or her right hon. Friend give an assurance that no compensation has been paid to the owners of the pipeline which runs from Beira and which suffered a certain loss of its earnings?

I think that that is rather a different Question.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what compensation he intends to offer for loss of office to those Rhodesian officers who lost their jobs as a result of their remaining loyal to the Crown at the unilateral declaration of independence and who have not been offered re-employment by Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom.

None, Sir. As indicated in my right hon. Friend's reply to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Wellingborough (Mr. Harry Howarth) on 22nd December, provision already exists for assistance to such officers in other forms.

Is the hon. Lady aware that it was stated in a letter from her Ministry that Major Bell was considered by Her Majesty's Government as still serving the constitutional Government of Rhodesia? If that is so, does she not think that Major Bell should either still be on full pay or receive some compensation from the Government?

My right hon. Friend described on 22nd December the very considerable assistance which the Government was prepared to give such officers. This includes the guaranteeing of salaries for six months and assistance in finding alternative employment. The hon. Gentleman has another Question down for Written Answer this afternoon and he may find further amplification there.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations whether he will make a statement about the constitutional talks now taking place in Salisbury.

The contents of these talks are confidential, but I would ask the hon. Member to await the Answer which is to be given this afternoon by the Prime Minister to the hon. Member for Haltemprice (Mr. Wall).

While I naturally do not want to press the right hon. Gentleman in any way which would be prejudicial to the eventual outcome, would he acknowledge that the public in both Britain and Rhodesia are naturally anxious to know whether there is any prospect of the preliminary talks developing into constitutional negotiations? Can he, therefore, give any idea at all as to the progress made so far?

I would ask the hon. Gentleman to await the Answer which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister will be giving. Supplementary questions thereafter would perhaps be more appropriate.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what information he has regarding the operation of transport undertakings managed jointly by Southern Rhodesia and Zambia.

With permission, I propose to circulate a full reply in the OFFICIAL REPORT. But I shall be glad to answer now any specific point which the hon. Gentleman has in mind.

While I am grateful to the hon. Lady for her reply, may I ask whether she can give an assurance that the Government will not encourage the Zambian Government to indulge in any policies which could lead to a crippling of this joint venture after normal relations have been restored?

This is a matter of considerable difficulty for the Zambian Government. We regard it as a matter entirely for the Zambian Government itself to decide.

The two public transport undertakings operated jointly by Rhodesia and Zambia are Rhodesia Railways and, with Malawi, Central African Airways.

Rhodesia Railways has been operating at a loss and their position has been further aggravated by an acute shortage of cash in the Rhodesia section. The Zambian Exchange Control Authorities have refused to permit transfers of cash from Zambia to Rhodesia. Rhodesia Railways some weeks ago announced a new system of payments under which Zambian freight, carried over the Rhodesian section of the railway, would have to be paid for in advance. The Zambian Government obtained an injunction in the High Court of Zambia restraining Rhodesia Railways from enforcing its new charges. The Zambian Exchange Control Authorities issued instructions having the same effect. The illegal Board of the Reserve Bank of Rhodesia then issued contrary directions, under exchange control regulations introduced in Rhodesia since I.D.I., and sought an injunction in the High Court of Southern Rhodesia restraining Rhodesia Railways from disobeying these directions. The legal Board of the Reserve Bank of Rhodesia, under Sir Sydney Caine, took steps to dispute both the competence of the illegal Board and the validity of the regulations under which they were purporting to act. On 13th June, however, the action brought by the Reserve Bank of Rhodesia was discontinued on the basis that the Railways would be subject to an order having the same effect issued by the Minister of Transport in the illegal régime in Rhodesia, under which freight from Zambia, through Rhodesia, may be impounded unless payment arrangements acceptable to the Rhodesian régime have been made. The Zambian Government, on 10th June, introduced Government regulations which will empower an Administrator of Railways, appointed by the President, to control the movement of locomotives, rolling stock and railway equipment from Zambia to Rhodesia.

It is understood that no copper is at present being railed from Zambia through Rhodesia and that some 8,000 tons of copper are at present held up on the Rhodesian section of Rhodesia Railways. Coal from Wankie is believed to be moving normally. The position regarding other imports from Rhodesia to Zambia is obscure.

The operations of Central African Airways have been curtailed as the result of the refusal of the East African Government to permit any C.A.A. aircraft registered in Salisbury to Operate in their territories.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what stage arrangements have reached regarding the future of the India Office Library.

The Commonwealth Relations Office announced last November that Britain, India and Pakistan had agreed to submit the question of the legal ownership of the India Office building and its contents as at August 1947, which, of course, includes the Library, to a tribunal of three judges chosen from the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. It was stated that the choice of the judges and their terms of reference were the subject of confidential correspondence between the Governments concerned. This correspondence is still continuing.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that scholars throughout the world are extremely anxious about the India Office Library? Has he considered the possibility of setting up an international trust, or a Commonwealth trust, to administer its future with both India and Pakistan having places on the board? Is my right hon. Friend further aware that money for this would rapidly be available from many trusts and foundations?

I am sure my hon. Friend would agree that consideration of this matter must await the result of the tribunal, but I agree that nobody would wish to see this international institution in any way diminished in value.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that it would be a tragedy were the Library to be split up?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what is Her Majesty's Government's policy towards the preferential trading arrangements which have been, or are being, negotiated by members of the Commonwealth with the European Economic Community, in so far as the interests of this country and the Commonwealth are concerned.

Her Majesty's Government would naturally welcome arrangements which improved the terms on which developing Commonwealth countries could sell their products in the European Economic Community, provided that these Commonwealth countries were not required to give the Community, in return, trade concessions which were denied to Britain and other third countries.

Will my hon. Friend comment on the fact that Nigeria, in respect of certain products, is getting preferential treatment over and above that given to this country?

That is not quite so. Details of the proposed agreement between Nigeria and the E.E.C. have not yet been published, and it is not possible to say at this stage what effect that agreement will have on the trade of Britain or other Commonwealth countries.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what are the present activities of the Commonwealth Consultative Space Research Committee; and if he will make a statement.

The Commonwealth Consultative Space Research Committee is a private body with headquarters at the Royal Society, who provide the Secretariat. I understand that it is a consultative body, which aims to further Commonwealth co-operation in the field of space research, and has usually met when an international scientific meeting brings together Commonwealth representatives in this field.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what progress has been made by the Commonwealth Secretariat in implementing the recommendations of the Agreed Memorandum in the economic field.

The activities expected of the Secretariat were laid down by Commonwealth Prime Ministers collectively in their Agreed Memorandum of June, 1965. The Secretariat is now regularly servicing Commonwealth meetings and is carrying out its tasks in the other fields of activity laid down in the Agreed Memorandum. In the economic field the Secretariat has serviced two trade officials' meetings, the first in November and December and the second during May. It is currently servicing the meeting of Trade Ministers. The Agreed Memorandum envisaged that Commonwealth Governments would consider an annual report on the work of the Secretariat and the Secretary-General will no doubt so report after the completion of the first year of the Secretariat's work.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether there has been any progress with the imaginative proposal mentioned in the Agreed Memorandum which dates from the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference of 1964, that there should be collaborative individual projects for Commonwealth countries in which various other Commonwealth countries and not merely the United Kingdom may play a part?

Yes, it is the intention that all Commonwealth countries, collectively and bilaterally, should do as much as they can together to further Commonwealth interests.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he will make a statement concerning his recent discussions with representatives from the Republic of Ghana.

Her Majesty's Government and other Western creditor Governments took part in a meeting with representatives of the Republic of Ghana on 1st and 2nd June. The meeting was of an exploratory nature and representatives of the creditors Governments undertook to report to their Governments that, in view of the grave economic situation confronting Ghana, the Ghana Government considered a temporary suspension of the service of the medium term debt to he essential. The creditor countries noted Ghana's assurance of her intention to pay her debts in full as soon as possible. Her Majesty's Government undertook to call a further meeting in due course.

Now that Ghana has a sensible and sane Government, would Her Majesty's Government do all they can to help Ghana over her present and, we hope, temporary financial difficulties?

Matters concerning aid are, of course, for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Overseas Development. However, the hon. Gentleman may be aware of the announcement made last week, stating:

"The British Government have agreed that approximately £3·4 million undrawn balance of the £5 million loan offered to Ghana in 1962 for the Volta Dam project should be applied to electricity distribution schemes connected with the Volta project. The detailed arrangements will be discussed shortly between the two Governments."

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he will make a statement on the visit to Zambia of the Minister of State for Commonwealth Relations.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations whether he will make a statement about the recent visit of the Minister of State far Commonwealth Relations to Zambia.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations whether he will make a statement about the recent developments in AngloZambian relations.

The Minister of State visited Zambia in order to discuss with the Zambian Government the measures necessary to intensify sanctions against the illegal régime in Rhodesia and at the same time to maintain the Zambian economy in the circumstances resulting from the Rhodesia rebellion. Ways and means of maintaining copper exports from Zambia in the event of normal routes through Rhodesia being denied were fully covered in these discussions.

Will my right hon. Friend please ensure that she returns if necessary to make sure that we sustain the economy of Zambia even more in the process of imposing sanctions against the rebel régime?

It is intended that my hon. Friend should return at an early date.

Is it not the case that grave hardships are being inflicted on the people of Zambia by the sanctions imposed against the Rhodesian régime? [An HON. MEMBER: "The rebel régime."] The Rhodesian régime. Will the Minister realise that it is desirable, for the sake of Zambia, to bring this situation to an end as early as possible, and will the right hon. Gentleman also realise that people in this country want to help Zambia, but at the same time will be glad if the hate propaganda from Zambia ceases?

The desire of the Zambian Government and our own Government, and indeed of most people in this country, is to bring down the illegal régime in Rhodesia, and it is with this end in view that both Zambia and ourselves are prepared to make some sacrifices to bring that result about.

In view of the fact that about £10 million worth of Zambian copper has been illegally detained by the Rhodesian régime, and in view of the court proceedings yesterday, will the right hon. Gentleman consider the possibility of a case stated to that court upholding or challenging the legality of the actions of the Rhodesian railways which have presumed to act on the illegal instructions of the Rhodesian régime?

We are considering the result of yesterday's decision in Rhodesia, and we will take account of that in due course.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he will make a statement on the circumstances of the failure of the Zambian Government officially to welcome the Minister of State at the Lusaka Airport on her recent goodwill mission.

I was officially welcomed at Lusaka Airport by representatives of the Zambian Government.

Would the hon. Lady say what grade the civil servant was who met her? Was she not surprised at this act of gross discourtesy to her? Was any representation made by her Minister to the Government on this point.

The hon. Gentleman is under some misapprehension about normal protocol in these cases. When Commonwealth Ministers arrive in any country, it is only sometimes that they are met by a Minister. When a Commonwealth Minister arrives here it is only sometimes that he is met by a Minister. I had very friendly discussions during the week and was seen off by two Ministers. [Laughter.] I make this point because the hon. Gentleman appears to attach an importance to it, which I do not. However, I am sure that he will be gratified to know that this was so.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what representations he has received from the Republic of Ireland Government in respect of the closing of the Northern Ireland frontier with the Republic of Ireland on 16th-17th April; and what reply he has sent.

None, Sir.

May I ask my hon. Friend why the frontier was closed, and was not this a rather foolish thing to do, considering the improvement in relations between the north and south in Ireland.

The measure taken by the Northern Ireland Government was necessary in their view for security reasons. I think it should be realised that the preservation of law and order in Northern Ireland is the responsibility of the Northern Ireland Government, and that it would not be proper for me to comment on their actions.

Is the hon. Lady aware that the frontier was not closed, that in fact only one train did not run, and that the Minister for External Affairs in Eire said that if the same sort of circumstances prevailed at the same time he might well have taken the same action.

I have read the proceedings in the Dail, and I can substantiate what the hon. Gentleman has said.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what further steps he plans to ameliorate tax and import and export relations directed to increasing the flow of trade between Great Britain and Eire and Northern Ireland. respectively.

I have nothing to add to the reply my right hon. Friend gave to an identical Question on 22nd February.

Does my hon. Friend realise that that Answer does not carry the matter very much further, and does she realise that the economy of these two islands is greatly helped by free trade between both sections of the adjoining island and of this island?

Yes, indeed, and our aim and that of the Government of the Irish Republic has been to remove as far as possible all the artificial obstacles to trade between the two countries. If my hon. and learned Friend has any specific suggestions that might assist in this objective, we would be very glad to hear from him.

Is the hon. Lady thinking of giving any further subsidy to Eire agriculture.

This would not be a matter for me.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what requests have been received from the Government of Malaysia for financial assistance; and if he will make a statement.

We have received requests from the Government of Malaysia for aid for their economic development and also for the expansion of the Malaysian Armed Forces. The question of economic aid is one for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Overseas Development, but he has assured the Malaysian Government that our development aid will continue at about the same level this year as last—about £5 million. On defence aid about £2 million remains available from the 1963–65 grant of £14·5 million. We are also continuing to provide personnel on secondment and training facilities worth about £1·5 million in the current financial year.

Has the hon. Lady any evidence to suggest that the Malaysians are remotely satisfied with the sum of money which the Minister has mentioned? Does she not realise that they are likely to ask this country for very much larger sums if we are pulling out of this area?

I think that the Malaysians understand very clearly that our present economic difficulties have precluded our making any further grants for defence equipment. On development aid, we have every reason to suppose that they completely understand our position.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations whether he is aware that the development of Australia will require large numbers of immigrants and quantities of capital, which the people of Australia would rather obtain from the United Kingdom than from elsewhere; and what steps Her Majesty's Government are taking to facilitate this.

I am aware that Australia is anxious to attract immigrants and capital from Britain. The flow of migrants to Australia has increased in recent years. It was about 77,000 in 1964 and some 90,000 in 1965. We have no plans to stimulate a further increase. As regards capital, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer explained in his Budget speech why it has become necessary for the time being to slow down the flow of investment to developed countries in the sterling area, which includes Australia.

Although the first part of that Answer is more or less satisfactory, will the hon. Lady bear in mind that tremendous economic expansion is taking place in Australia, in which the Australians would like us to play a part? Would she use all her endeavours to see that we resume our part as soon as possible.

Indeed, but I think that the right hon. and learned Gentleman is fully aware of the difficulties which stand at the moment in the way of doing this.

Would the hon. Lady agree to acknowledge that her Government's attitude is still one of somewhat hostile neutrality towards emigration to Australia? Does the Overseas Migration Board still exist? If so, how many times a year does it meet, and does it ever make any policy recommendations to her right hon. Friend.

The hon. Gentleman will find that a statement is to be made later today covering some of what he has said.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what damage has been done to British property in Nigeria during the recent riots; and whether any British citizen was hurt.

There have been no reports of damage to British property in the north of Nigeria during recent riots apart from incidental damage to filling stations owned by the British Petroleum and Shell Companies and to some cars and personal property of individuals. No British subject suffered any injury.

Would the bight hon. Gentleman agree that it is a major British interest that Nigeria should remain united and that law and order should prevail there?

Yes, Sir, Her Majesty's Government, of course, attach great importance to the stability and progress of all Nigeria as a sister country of the Commonwealth and would strongly deprecate any development tending to obstruct the efforts of the Nigerian Government in maintaining cohesion in that country.

asked the Minister of Power to what extent supplies of solid fuel, particularly house coal and boiler fuels, will be adequate to meet demands next winter.

This is a matter which I keep under close review with the National Coal Board. The present seamen's strike could affect the position, but it is as yet too early to say to what extent.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the currently accelerating manpower fall-away, now reaching about 1,000 a week, is likely to have disastrous consequences for next winter? Would he not, therefore, agree that if this contracting industry is unable to meet even its established markets the crisis which we will face next winter will be one of very great proportions indeed?

The hon. Gentleman does not help the position by talking about a disastrous situation. The fall-away in the manpower of the coal mining industry is considerably more than we would like to see, but it does not produce evidence of a disastrous situation next winter. There are a number of factors which we must consider at present, but there is no evidence as yet to suggest that there will be a disastrous situation in this sphere next winter.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in the first eight weeks of the current year, 1966–67, output in the coal mining industry fell by 1½ million tons compared with last year's figures, that the manpower decline has been accelerating, that productivity is only 3 per cent. up, that his complacency is unjustified and that he should, therefore, review the proposed pit closures.

My hon. Friend should remember that this must be kept in proportion. There is an intention to reduce the total manpower within the coal mining industry. The run-down of manpower in the industry is faster than one would wish to see at this time. However, we must remember that there is this desire to contract the industry and I hope that I shall be in a position to say something more on the prospects for next winter before the House rises for the Summer Recess. It would be stupid and very much against public interest for people to go around talking about disaster in terms of coal supplies next winter.

Has the right hon. Gentleman observed that the output in the last coal year, which ended on 31st March, was the lowest in our history, at 186 million tons, and that, pro rata with the first eight weeks of the new coal year, output is down to 170 million tons, which is far, far below the level of industrial and domestic demand combined? Would he, therefore, cast out complacency in this matter?

There is no question of complacency at all. This whole question of fuel supplies generally, not just coal, is a very real and crucial one. A great deal of work is taking place in my Ministry now in an effort to work out the best way of, for example, taking account of the new supplies of North Sea gas, which represent a contribution in terms of coal equivalent. I am merely saying that there is no evidence to justify statements to the effect that there will be a disastrous position next winter.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the Minister's reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Minister of Power what was the operating pithead cost per ton of saleable coal produced, for the eight divisions, respectively, of the National Coal Board, in 1965–66 or the nearest available year.

The latest annual figures are published in Table 2 of the Board's Annual Accounts of 1964–65.

In view of what the Minister has said about his policy towards economic pits, will he arrange that those pits which are economic will be able to sell their coal at that economic price, particularly coal from the Yorkshire coal fields and with special reference to the export of such coal from Immingham and Hull?

We have already accepted the policy, with a certain amount of disagreement, that there should be differential coal prices in this country. On the other hand, one has to accept that we cannot have too great differences between coal prices in various parts of the country.

On this matter of economic pits, is my right hon. Friend aware that we could make any pit economic in this country if we raised the price of coal?

One has to take into account cost rather than price in this, and also the social effects. The fact is, as everyone accepts, that there are pits in this country which can provide us with the coal we need and with a coal mining industry which is viable in the interests of the country. There cannot be a future for the coal mining industry on the basis of trying to average up the prices of economic pits to cover those which are. uneconomic.

Will the Minister carry, on with that policy and continue to ignore the advice which he receives from his right hon. and hon. Friends?

The right hon. Gentleman is being even less helpful than usual.

asked the Minister of Power what plans he has to introduce legislation to give greater powers of diversification to the National Coal Board.

The board's existing powers are already wide, but I am considering the need for extending them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the National Coal Board has been investing public money in the building supplies industry, including an American-controlled firm? Under what powers can the board do this, and when did Parliament give approval to this creeping nationalisation?

If the suggestion is that the board is acting illegally, the hon. Gentleman should raise the point. If the suggestion is merely that the board is using its initiative within the confines of its remit, I should have thought that this was wholly admirable.

asked the Minister of Power what is the total of new generating capacity planned for the next 10 years; and what proportion of this will be coal fired.

The Central Electricity Generating Board plans to commission 27,000 megawatts in England and Wales in the next five years, of which nearly 70 per cent. will be coal fired. Its provisional estimate for the following five years is 25,000 megawatts, but plans for the period are not settled and the proportion of coal fired plant is a matter yet to be decided.

While I admit that the Minister has some difficult problems to solve here, does he not think that it would be wise to look at this matter with a view to reducing the proportion of power stations or new capacity which is wholly dependent on coal firing, particularly in view of the fact that his answers to supplementary questions on the previous Ouestion lend weight to this suggestion?

The Central Electricity Generating Board's plant programme for the next five years is already committed. The size of the programme for the second five years will depend on the trend of electricity demand. In the Ministry of Power we are now looking at the whole question of fuel supplies in terms of producing various interactions of different types of fuel to find out the future picture. However, any suggestion that the British coal mining industry is withering away is absolute nonsense and does very real damage to the interests of this country.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the C.E.G.B. is already expressing misgivings about the assurances that have been given that it will get sufficient suitable coal for burning in coal-fired power stations? If such misgivings are being expressed now, what is the position likely to be in 1970? Does my right hon. Friend have plans for the conversion of stations to alternative fuel burning in the present generation?

There is no reason to suppose that the C.E.G.B. will not be able to obtain the coal it requires. No representations to the contrary have been made to me.

asked the Minister of Power if he will introduce legislation, after due inquiry into ways and means, to provide for a greater degree of State interest and control in the oil industry on the lines already being followed in the mixed economies of other West European countries.

I have no plans for such legislation.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that there is not very much hope of getting a balanced fuel and power policy in this country until the whole question of control of the oil industry is looked into? Will he make a new start in his Ministry and look at some of the experience of Western Europe generally in this matter?

It is true that some European countries, particularly France and Spain, exercise more control over their oil companies than we do in this country. However, others, including Germany and the Netherlands, have policies similar to our own. I am not making any pronouncement on what the long-term policy should be, but merely saying that we are at the moment reviewing the whole question of fuel and power policy in the light of new developments; but there are no policies at the moment which give rise to the sort of legislation mentioned by my hon. Friend in his Question.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the British oil refining industry is capable of very substantial economies of scale and that at present refineries with a throughput as small as 2 million to 3 million tons are being constructed in Britain? Will he consult the President of the Board of Trade with a view to the I.D.C. procedures being used to prevent the construction of oil refineries with a smaller throughput of 2 million and 3 million tons per annum.

The hon. Gentleman's question about I.D.C. procedures is, of course, a matter for my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade. It is a fact that United Kingdom refinery output did not cover inland demand of bunkers last year, but this should be put right as planned capacity comes on stream.

asked the Minister of Power what advice has been tendered to him by his Energy Advisory Council on the accelerated running down of the coal industry and the finds of North Sea natural gas.

The Energy Advisory Council met last week to take stock of these and other developments. The proceedings of the Council are confidential, but I shall take account of the opinions expressed in my review of fuel policy.

Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that he is likely to get the right sort of objective advice from the Energy Advisory Council since it is mainly made up of the chairmen of the nationalised industries? Is it not a fact that they are likely to be fairly well divided among themselves?

It is true that there is certainly no totalitarian unanimity of opinion among them. On the other hand, the purpose of an advisory committee is to advise. This Council does produce information which will be of very great value to us in the formulation of our fuel policy. We will take our own decisions, but the advice which the Council has tendered is important and will be taken into account.

While my right hon. Friend is resisting any exaggerated analysis, would he not agree that, in view of the larger number of people leaving the pits, it is now time for him to halt the accelerated pit closure programme?

With respect to my hon. Friend, the problem is rather more complicated. It is not only a question of how many people leave the pits but of which pits they leave. I believe that there is a very real future for a coal mining industry based on economic pits. [Interruption.] I make this point seriously. The big problem to be faced here is how we can maintain a viable coal mining industry, not on the basis of social or sentimental reasons but because the economy of this country needs a coal mining industry of a certain size.

asked the Minister of Power what arrangements he has made to re-examine the effect of the proposed Selective Employment Tax on the retail distribution of fuel.

My right hon. Friend is currently considering representations from the Chamber of Coal Traders about the effect of the tax on their trade.

Has my hon. Friend had any estimate made of the possible amount per ton increase in the price of coal, and will he consider making representations that all publicly-owned coal distribution should be free of the tax?

I understand my hon. Friend has a Question about the cost of the tax to the retail coal trade down for answer on 21st June.

Is the hon. Gentleman the only person left who cannot see that it is bound to put up the cost of living?

The purpose of the Selective Employment Tax is a matter for the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

asked the Minister of Power what research and development projects he has initiated to improve the efficiency of power stations as users of natural gas for electricity generation.

None, Sir. The technology is already known, but the electricity supply authorities have work in hand on particular aspects.

Has not the recent boom in natural gas indicated the enormous urgency of developing some sort of research programme, particularly in the light of the possible rundown of coal supplies?

At the risk of becoming tedious, I must make the point again. It is an important matter. All the evidence is that there is a future in this country for a large coal mining industry as the biggest supplier of primary fuel and probably the biggest coal mining industry in Europe. When talking of rundown, this is a very relative thing. As regards research and development in this particular field, the technology is already well known.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development if he will make available one day's arms expenditure, £5,750,000, to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation in order to combat illiteracy in the world.

No, Sir. I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply my hon. Friend gave to my right hon. Friend the Member for Derby, South (Mr. Philip Noel-Baker) on 19th May.

But is it not a fact that our total contribution to U.N.E.S.C.O. for all purposes is only £570,000 a year, precisely one-tenth of one day's arms expenditure? Surely, if a poor country such as Iran can help in this way, Britain can at least do the same?

My hon. Friend should remember that, in addition to the contribution we are making to U.N.E.S.C.O.'s World Experimental Literacy Programme, we have also offered to collaborate with a developing country of the Commonwealth in a literacy project. We have to preserve a sense of proportion about these things, realising that our bilateral contribution to educational development, if we include the work of the British Council on educational development, will this year be somewhere between £16 million and £17 million, which is about three days' arms expenditure.

Order. I hope that we can get back to short questions and short answers.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will appoint a Minister of Armaments to supervise the sale of arms abroad.

No, Sir.

But will not the Prime Minister agree that undiverted attention should be given to this matter to make certain that, directly or indirectly, arms do not reach countries with interests at variance with our own?

The noble Lord's objective is right, but I draw a sharp distinction between the private traffic in arms, which has had some dangerous consequences in recent years, and the duties of the newly appointed arms salesman whose job is to see that, within already agreed programmes, for example, between allies within N.A.T.O., British products have a fair crack of the whip instead of the excessively pushed American arms sales which have been driving us out of markets we ought to have.

asked the Prime Minister if he will now introduce legislation to repeal the Life Peerages Act, 1958.

No, Sir.

Does not my right hon. Friend think that this party has gone on long enough? Does he think that we are within miles of achieving the objectives when the Act was introduced, and, if he thinks that we are, how can he possibly justify the appointment in the last list but one of so many political "dead-beats" and election rejects?

I do not think that it is either the practice or constitutional to discuss in the House individual recommendations to Her Majesty. I should have thought that recent lists have abundantly justified the Act and have shown that it can be used, with some degree of imagination, with usefulness to both Houses.

asked the Prime Minister if he will now make a statement on his proposals for the setting up of new specialist committees of the House.

No, Sir, but discussions with the Opposition have now begun and I will make a statement when they have been completed.

When were discussions with the Opposition actually begun? Will the Prime Minister agree that, as the House finds its difficult to give enough time to debate matters like foreign affairs and defence, he ought to consider setting up specialist committees on these two important subjects?

I do not want to anticipate what might come out of these discussions. There was considerable delay between the Gracious Speech and our being in a position to talk to the Opposition, and then, of course, we had the Recess. We have now started talks, but I do not want to say what is likely to come out of them, particularly as regards specialist committees of this kind.

The Prime Minister will recognise that the House will be pleased that the meeting we had with him half an hour ago has enabled him to give this interim reply. We now look forward to the detailed proposals which will come from him as a result of our fruitful discussion.

I am sure that they will be very fruitful discussions. I have twice taken responsibility for the delay between the Gracious Speech—with the Recess—and commencement of talks. We could have made an approach during the Recess but for the, I am sure, very valuable visit of the right hon. Gentleman to America.

asked the Prime Minister if he will now make a statement on the discussions with officials of Mr. Smith's Government.

The informal talks with officials of the illegal régime are continuing and I have, as yet, no statement to make.

I am much more concerned about the results of these talks than about the timing, but can the Prime Minister say whether he expects to be able to make a statement on the conclusion of the talks before the long Recess?

No, Sir. As the hon. Gentleman says, the important matter is the right conclusion and one which is acceptable to the House as being fully in accordance with the six principles and the other conditions which have been laid down. I think that I should probably be wrong in trying to forecast the time. We want to get the right result more than, perhaps, a quick result.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May we know how it is possible for this Question with its reference to "Mr. Smith's Government" to have got past the Table Office?

That is something I shall have to look into.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that many of us on this side of the House regard these negotiations with grave concern and we think that no good can possibly come out of having anything to do with this treacherous régime?

In my opening Answer, I did not use the word "Government", of course; I used the term "illegal régime". In our view, these talks, which are talks, not negotiations, as my hon. Friend calls them——

What is the difference?

They are talks to discover whether there is a basis for negotiations. They are talks to see whether there is a basis for negotiation, on what terms, and with whom.

We have always urged that these talks should be carried on on a confidential basis and, naturally, we wish them well; but I think that the House would like to feel that, before it rises for the Summer Recess, it might be possible for the Prime Minister at least to give some indication of how the talks are proceeding.

I think that the whole House would like to feel that, before that time, we shall have an outcome and a satisfactory outcome; but this cannot be guaranteed. I do not want to prejudice them, but I think that the House would be entitled to a statement either on the outcome or to say why it is not possible to reach an outcome by that time.

Will my right hon. Friend go a little further than that? While all of us on this side of the House at least are extremely gratified to hear of his insistence, so strongly made, on the six principles, will my right hon. Friend give an undertaking that, before these unofficial talks are made official in any way, there will be a chance for the House to debate the whole proposition which the Government propose to make in the official talks themselves?

The statement that I made about the six principles I have made on every occasion when we have discussed the matter. I made it clear at the beginning when these talks began. Certainly, before there were any question of moving from informal and exploratory talks to anything which might be negotiations, by which time we should know with whom they would be, there would be a statement in the House. Whether it would then be debatable is, of course, a matter for discussion through the usual channels and announcement by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House.

As a contribution to the success of these talks, which I am sure we all desire, will the Prime Minister consider urging his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations to moderate the language in which he habitually refers to the elected régime in Rhodesia?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman is quite wrong. This is not an elected régime. It is an illegal régime. It was an elected Government; it was the legal Government. It committed an illegal act and was dismissed on the authority of Her Majesty the Queen. I should have thought that hon. Members opposite would at least have understood the constitutional position involved.

asked the Prime Minister what action he will take, following his meetings with representatives of ship owners and seamen, to mitigate the effects of the seamen's strike upon the British economy.

As the Answer is rather long, I shall, with permission, give it after Questions.

asked the Prime Minister which Ministers are responsible for carrying out the policies of Her Majesty's Government regarding the Atlantic Nuclear Force.

Decisions concerning the nuclear organisation of the Atlantic Alliance are a matter for the Government as a whole. Responsibility for carrying out this policy rests primarily with my right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Foreign Affairs and Defence as appropriate.

Before the Prime Minister hands over responsibility for this particular item in his bag of tricks, can he give a simple answer to a simple question? Is it still the intention of Her Majesty's Government to achieve early allied agreement on the Allied Nuclear Force?

The simple answer to the hon. Gentleman is, "Yes, Sir." But he will also understand[HON. MEMBERS: "Ah:"]—the simple answer is "Yes, Sir." He will also understand that in the last two or three meetings of N.A.T.O. we have had other and more urgent matters to deal with.

asked the Prime Minister what representations he has received from the Prime Minister of Australia about the Government's foreign and defence policies in the Far East in the 1970s; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Prime Minister what undertakings have been given to the Australian Government about British defence contributions east of Suez; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Prime Minister what assurances have been given to the Government of Australia about the intention of Her Majesty's Government to continue to maintain a military presence in the Far East and Southern Asia.

Communications between the Prime Minister of Australia and myself are confidential.

Does the Prime Minister recall the public declaration of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence in Canberra in February explaining the defence decisions and stating that we intended to maintain all our commitments and to remain in the military sense a world Power, not only between 1970 and 1980, but also to some extent between 1980 and 1990? Does this public declaration, a copy of which is in the Library, represent British policy?

Yes, I am aware of the statement of my right hon. Friend. It represents our position, but I have no doubt that my hon. Friend the Member for Woolwich, East (Mr. Mayhew), who has suddenly started to show very great interest in these matters—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—our whole policy on defence was stated in the White Paper of 1965 as well as the White Paper of 1966—will have a chance in the next few days of hearing further about these matters and so, I hope, in due course will the House.

Is the Prime Minister aware that if that statement represents Government policy, as he has categorically assured us it does, it means that the Government are committed to a major role in the Far East for an indefinite period so long as the people there want us to remain? Will he make sure that this is not contradicted by statements made by leading Ministers in any other context, because it is clear that this Government announcement will cause grave disquiet among many people in this country?

I will certainly ensure that any announcements—and if I catch my right hon. Friend's eye, I may be making statements in the context referred to by the right hon. Gentleman—are not inconsistent with the policies which we have announced. What the right hon. Gentleman and many who have approached this problem have not seen, because it has been so much oversimplified with slogans about east of Suez, is that if we are to play a part in world peacekeeping for the United Nations, we must have a role there. The argument will be about the extent of our commitments in terms of bases and the number of troops and other services which we keep abroad. The important thing if we are to exercise a peacekeeping role is above all the ability to get there, and this means having some presence there.

Is it not possible that one reason for the anxiety shown by the Australian Government is that the British Government have changed their mind on so many aspects of foreign policy and defence in recent months that they may have given the impression to their friends of infirmity of purpose?

I do not think that that impression has been given to anybody apart from hon. Members opposite who have been trying to believe this for about twelve months. Our position not only in the Far East but also in the Middle East has been well understood by our friends in Australia and New Zealand throughout this period. We had the Defence Review and decisions were taken and were discussed with our Commonwealth partners and our allies and were fully understood by them.

Will my right hon. Friend tell me how on earth we carry out a genuine world role in a distant ocean without a carrier force?

This matter has been debated in the House of Commons for some three days. I should have thought that my hon. and learned Friend knew the answer to that. There will be an opportunity for going into these subjects a little more fully in the near future.

Is it not clear that the present action of the Government in making one set of statements to Governments east of Suez and exactly contradictory sets of statements on foreign policy in party meetings upstairs is undermining the faith of the world in British foreign policy everywhere and, when allied to the breaches of faith over the surcharge, over Aden and now over E.L.D.O., means that there is no longer respect for the Government of this country?

The right hon. Gentleman should be careful not to confuse Parliamentary Labour Party meetings with the 1922 Committee. Whether the leaks from the 1922 Committee are as inaccurate as those from our party meetings I am not in a position to say, but there has been no question of saying different things to our allies in public or private from what has been said at party meetings or anywhere else.

Is the Prime Minister repudiating the verbatim account of the party meeting by his hon. Friend the Member for Bosworth (Mr. Wyatt) in the Daily Mirror?

Yes, Sir.

Can my right hon. Friend give an assurance that the implementation of this policy east of Suez will in no way jeopardise the targets set out in the National Plan?