asked the Minister of Aviation Supply when he expects to receive the report of the external accountants on Rolls-Royce.

asked the Minister of Aviation Supply if he will make a further statement on the Government loan to Rolls-Royce.

I expect to receive the accountant's report in the early part of next year. There is nothing to add at present to my previous statements about the additional launching aid which will be given to Rolls-Royce to enable it to complete development of the RB211–22 engine.—[Vol. 806, c. 398–407; Vol. 807, c. 149–58.]

Will it, perhaps understandably, be confidential?

Yes. I do not anticipate for one moment that it will be appropriate to publish the report to which the hon. Gentleman refers.

What will the Minister do if as a result of the accountant's report it is shown that more than the £42 million is required? Would the right hon. Gentleman come to the House and ask for a further increase in the loan?

I would do what anyone else would do: consider the matter as it arises and not jump fences before reaching them.

Is there any precedent for the Government refusing to publish accountants' reports on matters which involve the investment of large sums of public funds? How are we to judge whether the further investment in Rolls-Royce is indeed justified if we are debarred from close scrutiny of the professional accountant's report?

The accountant's report will go into far greater detail than the question to which my hon. Friend refers. When it is available I shall consider what information from it is appropriate to be disclosed in relation to this problem.

Will the Minister confirm that, whatever the accountant's report discloses, the amount which he has already informed this House that the Government will invest will still be invested?

Yes. I think that that is a glimpse of the obvious.

Order. I understand that the amplification has been restored. Hon. Members will still do well to speak up.

asked the Minister of Aviation Supply whether he will publish the Industrial Reorganisation Corporation's Report on Rolls-Royce.

The report is a confidential document which it would be quite improper to publish.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that before the last debate on Rolls-Royce that company, despite receiving £89 million of the taxpayers' money, circulated absolutely no information to hon. Members about its affairs? Will he make sure that in future companies in receipt of huge sums of public money are forced to make the facts and figures available to this House?

This is a most important aspect and one which I am considering very closely in relation to the terms of the contract that will govern the launching aid which I mentioned in my statement.

Will not the right hon. Gentleman admit that his policy has not saved Rolls-Royce but has merely propped it up a little? Would he agree that the substitution of civil servants, able though they are—nevertheless derided by some of his hon. Friends—is no substitute for the I.R.C., particularly at this critical stage of relationships with Rolls-Royce?

I remind the hon. Gentleman of what I have said previously—that the I.R.C. was not designed primarily for this sort of exercise and that it had considerable defects because of its inability to carry out this type of investigation. If the hon. Gentleman will refer to what his right hon. Friend the Member for Bristol, South-East (Mr. Benn) said during the discussion of the Industrial Expansion Bill, he will see these words:

"Schemes under the Bill, just like work done by the I.R.C, would be of such a nature that the tightest security would be necessary on commercial and financial grounds."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 1st Feb., 1968; Vol. 757, c. 1582.]

This is something which I entirely support and intend to adhere to.

asked the Minister for Aviation Supply what representations he has received from Scottish aviation industry interests about the need for an early announcement of the Government's policy on the BAC311 project.

Both the management and the union side of the industry in Scotland made representations. These were given full weight in the Government's consideration of the claims for launching aid for the BAC311.

I am sure that the Minister appreciates that that Question was tabled before the announcement was made in the House.

We cannot hear.

I will speak just as loudly as the hon. Gentleman normally does.

Will the Minister confirm that his decision will have an effect on job opportunities in the Scottish aviation industry? Will he tell us what steps the Government took to take into account the effect on employment in development areas in general before the decision was made?

Yes. I should make it clear to the hon. Gentleman that the decision was taken basically on the merits of the proposal. The question of employment in development areas comes secondary. It cannot be the primary question.

Concerning job opportunities, I do not think that the major employer in the aviation industry in Scotland, Rolls-Royce, will be affected. It is possible that the Scottish aviation industry will lose opportunities as a result. But, looking a little further ahead, we are reasonably hopeful that sub-contracts coming from other projects will help to make up some of the slack.

asked the Minister for Aviation Supply if he will make a further statement on the Government's policy with regard to the A300B European Airbus and the BAC311.

asked the Minister of Aviation Supply, in view of the concern amongst staff at the British Aircraft Corporation, Weybridge, factory over future employment prospects, whether he will make an early statement on the Government's policy to the BAC311 project.

asked the Minister of Aviation Supply if he will now make a statement on the BAC311 and the European Airbus.

asked the Minister of Aviation Supply if he will now announce the Government's intentions with regard to approaches made by the European Airbus Consortium concerning Great Britain once again entering that consortium, and the terms upon which the Government's decision has been based.

I cannot add to the statement I made in the House on 2nd December.—[Vol. 807, c. 1286–94.]

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider publishing a detailed account of the financial considerations which brought about his decision? Will he also consider whether it is possible to modify the contractual arrangements with Lockheed about the Tristar, bearing in mind that the Government are in the odd position of subsidising the American aircraft industry?

I have given consideration to the matter raised in the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. I believe that publication of any considerable detail is bound to be harmful overall, but I have offered to discuss the matter with the hon. Gentleman.

On the second part of the question, I made it clear, I think on 2nd December, that I had studied this contract and that I saw no prospect whatever of being able to renegotiate it to give the more favourable terms which the hon. Gentleman has in mind.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that hon. Members on these benches think that there should continue to be a healthy aircraft industry? Is he aware that many of my constituents who work at Weybridge are concerned about their future in the late and mid-'seventies? As my hon. Friend the Member for Esher (Mr. Mather) made clear, they are very dependent on the future of the Concorde project. In the light of all this, will my right hon. Friend consider backing a project for a short take-off plane which B.A.C. is considering?

It is too early to give any indication on those lines. No doubt the B.A.C., as other airframe companies, will have proposals, and when they are proposals I shall look at them on their merits.

What is the likely redundancy in the B.A.C. due to not going on with the BAC311?

As I said a few moments ago, it is too early to make any assessment of that sort.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the short takeoff and vertical take-off concepts are probably the key to the future of the medium-haul industry in this country? Is he not taking this rather lightly in the answers that he has given?

I am not taking it lightly. This has been of great personal interest over a number of years. What is abundantly clear is that there is a great deal of other research that has to be done on the infrastructure side, and it would be unwise to encourage anybody to believe that this is likely to appear in the immediate future.

asked the Minister of Aviation Supply what consideration he has given to the question of Government support for the long-range version of the European airbus, the A300 B7.

Our decision not to participate in the A300B project extended to the B7 as well as the basic version.

Could my right hon. Friend at least give some hope that in the event of B.E.A. wanting this aircraft, and in return for a firm commitment from the German and French Governments to assist Rolls-Royce with another mark of aircraft engine which would be suitable for this aircraft, and perhaps for a stretched version of the Lockheed Tristar, the Government would consider giving a measure of support to this project?

My hon. Friend is raising hypothetical possibilities. The conclusion that we came to—and I see no signs of any of the facts on which that conclusion was based being altered—was simply that there was not a sufficiently large market for the A-300 B7 with Rolls-Royce engines to justify the very high costs of development.

asked the Minister of Aviation Supply if he intends to maintain a British airframe industry.

The expenditure by my Department in the British aircraft industry probably gives the most appropriate measure of the support that the industry is receiving from the Government. In the current year my Votes make provision for spending £335 million with the British aircraft industry; £247 million of this will be on defence supply contracts, and £88 million on civil projects, including Concorde.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that reply will do very little to mollify those in the industry who are very disturbed about their position, particularly after the announcements of last week, and that far from the industry being regarded as one of those science-based industries that were going to aid Britains entry into the Common Market, it appears that the Government are prepared to scrap it to get in and to produce co-operation within Europe, to the detriment of the British airframe industry?

That is a quite erroneous impression. As far as I know, no Government have ever undertaken to maintain the British aircraft industry at any level irrespective of their judgment on the projects. On the matter of European cooperation, I have made it clear on several occasions that this was not a deciding factor although, looking to the future, we believe, as did our predecessors, that this is becoming a "must" in relation to all the European countries.

Does my right hon. Friend agree, first, that it is essential to maintain an airframe industry in this country, and, second, that our contribution to the M.R.C.A. is of vital importance not only to this country but to the future of European co-operation?

I agree with both those propositions.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what trends in employment in the industry he anticipates? I know the difficulties in judging the precise consequences of the decision about the BAC311, but the right hon. Gentleman must have some idea of what the likely movement of employment will be.

No, Sir. With respect to the hon. Gentleman, I think that it is too early to make that sort of assessment.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether it is his opinion that if he had announced support for the BAC311 he would have had to face another censure Motion, as he did when he announced support for Rolls-Royce?

That is always a probability.

asked the Minister of Aviation Supply if he will make a further statement on the Concorde.

I have nothing to add to the reply I gave to the hon. Member on Wednesday, 18th November.—[Vol. 806, c. 1212–15.]

Has the Minister considered the furore that is going on in the United States about the further financing of its supersonic transport? Has he considered the effect of this upon the options for Concorde, more than half of which are by American airlines and which, in the event of the United States supersonic transport not going forward is bound to result in a curtailing of licensing and other arrangements for such aircraft for the United States, and what has the right hon. Gentleman to say about this?

I have considered those developments, but I have equally considered the strong speech of President Nixon, which shows a determination to persuade Congress, if he possibly can, to overrule its present decision.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that a viable British airframe industry is very much dependent on the Concorde project? Can he assure us that that will be borne in mind, as well as the commercial prospects and obligations to our partner?

Those are important aspects, but I am sure that my hon. Friend would not wish us to proceed if, as I trust will not be the case, and as I do not believe will be the case, it turned out that Concorde was not in demand by the airlines.

What contact is the right hon. Gentleman maintaining with the American Government about Concorde? Will he make it crystal clear at the highest level in Washington that if the American Congress were to pass legislation which would make it impossible for Concorde to operate even subsonically in the United States, this would create a major crisis of confidence between the two countries?

I have already made that clear on a previous occasion, and it will be very much in our minds.

asked the Minister of Aviation Supply if, in view of the fact that the cost of international co-operation in building Concorde has proved to be three times as large as estimated, he will disclose the details of the use to which Government moneys have been put in this project and the degree of inaccuracy in other related estimates.

If the hon. Gentleman could specify a little more clearly what he has in mind in the latter part of his Question, I will try to let him have an answer.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the managing director of B.A.C. has declared that the cost of Concorde being an international project has involved the company in three times the cost in which it would have been involved if it had been a national project? Will the right hon. Gentleman now tell me just what is the X factor which one can use as a multiplicate? In other words, will he give the figure which must be multiplied by three to ascertain the proportion of the cost attributable to this being an international project?

I think the hon. Gentleman is better verbally than he is as a draftsman, if I may say so. I remind him that estimates of the extra cost of co-operation are purely matters of judgment and in many cases, of fairly wide speculation. It is virtually impossible to identify the extra cost beyond a quite narrow band of costs. In so far as it has been possible to identify these costs, we think that they add about 10 per Cent. to the total cost. However, I believe that there is probably truth in the suggestion that it is more than that, though it is quite impossible to identify it.

asked the Minister of Aviation Supply what estimate he has made of the repayment to the Government from likely sales of the Concorde aircraft; and if he will make a statement.

The proportion of development expenditure recovered will depend on sales, and I would prefer not to speculate about this at the present stage.

Implicit in that reply is the fact that the true net cost is not known to the Minister. Is that not totally out of line with his philosophy of not allowing open-ended commitments? In those circumstances, does not the Minister owe it to the House to tell us what it is if he has made the estimate for which the Question asks?

The proportion of development cost to be recovered depends on sales, whatever the net cost is. What I said was, therefore, perfectly correct, and the hon. Gentleman is arguing from a false premise.

As sales are so vital to any project, what is my right hon. Friend doing to encourage sales throughout the Commonwealth, and particularly in Australia, New Zealand and India?

I have indicated previously how extremely difficult it is for firms to mount a major sales operation until they are in a position to give firm indications of the aircraft specification and operating characteristics. We hope that this stage will be reached quite early in the new year.

The right hon. Gentleman explained the other day that he could not say what the selling cost would be until he had discussed the matter with his French counterpart. Is it not possible now for him to say what the unit cost of production of the aircraft will be, excluding the development cost, on certain alternative assumptions about sales?

That is another question. As for the selling price, I have indicated that this is a matter which I shall be discussing next week with M. Mondon.

asked the Minister of Aviation Supply what consideration is now being given to the planning of a stretched version of the Concorde.

I think at this stage we must concentrate on making a success of the present design.

While I naturally agree with my right hon. Friend about that, may I ask him, in view of the noises that are coming out of the American Congress and the effect of the BAC311 cancellation on B.A.C., whether he agrees that the Government should now be pressing to get some thinking going on a stretched version of the Concorde as a measure of confidence in the success of this project?

I do not entirely follow my hon. Friend's argument. I think that if the American decision is adhered to, there may be a much longer life for the standard version, with a postponement of any need to stretch it.

asked the Minister for Aviation Supply what further developments are being undertaken to improve on the performance of the Harrier vertical-take-off aircraft.

During the next two years the Pegasus engines at present installed in the R.A.F.'s Harriers will be replaced by more powerful versions. We are also studying the feasibility of a further up-rating of the engine, but no decision has been made to proceed beyond this study.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that there is a large requirement by the United States Navy for the Harrier if its payload and range are increased? Will he give the maximum priority to the development of the proposed Rolls-Royce Pegasus engine, because that would probably achieve that result?

Yes, Sir. We are aware of those facts.

Can my right hon. Friend say what anti-pollutant arguments the United States Government are putting up about the Harrier, in view of the fact that they have just purchased it for their own use?

I am not immediately aware of those arguments, but I shall look into them and write to my hon. Friend.

asked the Minister of Aviation Supply to what extent he estimates the proposed closure of the Chandos Road factory of Rotax Limited and the redundancy of the staff there recently will affect the supply of aircraft as planned and foreseen by his Department.

The company is cooperating closely with my Department in order to prevent any adverse effect on our aircraft programmes.

Has the redundancy of 700 men, most of them my constituents, anything to do with the cancellation of the BAC311? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that all the electrical systems have been done in my constituency, and that these men, who form a very good team, won the Queen's Award less than a year ago? Can the hon. Gentleman do something to keep this factory in being?

The short answer is "No". The firm found itself short of both civil and military orders and, as the hon. Gentleman knows better than I do, it is concentrating its activities on other factories.

asked the Minister of Aviation Supply what has been the total cost to the Exchequer of funding the development of all versions of the BAC111; how much has been earned in exports by these aircraft; and what have been the levies per sale imposed by his Department.

Total launching aid is £18·75 million. Export earnings are about £200 million, and import savings about £100 million so far. The levies per sale are a matter of commercial confidence.

Is my hon. Friend aware how clearly these figures demonstrate how essential it is that products like aircraft, which are of a high added value—

Reading.

Order. In view of the lack of light, the hon. Gentleman cannot possibly be reading. [Laughter.]

Is my hon. Friend aware how clearly these figures demonstrate how products of a high added value like civil airliners are essential to our economy and prosperity?

I entirely agree that high added value products are very desirable and helpful to the economy. However, because one project—for example, the BAC111—is successful, it does not follow that every other civil aviation project will be equally successful or should be equally backed.

asked the Minister of Aviation Supply if he can make a statement on the progress of the studies by his Department of the proposals submitteed by the British aircraft industry for vertical take-off and landing and short take-off and landing transports.

asked the Minister of Aviation Supply when his Department plans to complete the evaluation of the rival vertical/short take-off and landing designs submitted to it, with a view to a decision on the launching aid to be provided for a truly vertical/short take-off and landing civil jet airliner.

These studies are well advanced. We hope to be in a position to make a statement in the early part of next year.

Does my hon. Friend appreciate that after the disappointing decisions last week on both airbus ventures, his statement is very welcome indeed, because the civil aircraft design teams in this country now face complete dissolution?

I do not agree with my hon. Friend's latter point. However, there is certainly reason to be concerned about the design team at Weybridge, though none of the others is affected by this decision. I remind my hon. Friend, as my right hon. Friend said earlier, that we have quite a long way to go on infrastructure before it will be possible to be clear of the exact parameters that will be needed for either VTOL or STOL.

Is my hon. Friend aware that while he may disclaim heredity in aircraft success, the Weybridge design team, certainly since the war, has been more successful than any other? Will he take this into consideration when it makes VTOL and STOL submissions to his Ministry?

I agree with my hon. Friend about the merit of design teams. I suggest that all British design teams are better, though it could be that the Weybridge design team is somewhat better than the others.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what proportion of local authorities have appointed special officers in connection with the Housing Act 1969.

Local authority arrangements for the administration of improvement grants vary, but my right hon. Friend will issue further guidance on this subject in the light of experience we have been accumulating.

Is my hon. Friend satisfied with the progress of improvements? Is there not a considerable shortfall at present? Where special officers have been appointed, is my hon. Friend satisfied that they have a knowledge of building techniques?

The appointment of a special officer can be exceedingly helpful. On the general question, improvement grants are now running at about 90 per cent. higher than in 1969. The campaign for improvement grants is going very well.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he expects to make a statement on public expenditure on the prevention of pollution.

Expenditure for this purpose has been growing at an increasing rate and is expected to continue to grow. The Annual White Paper on Public Expenditure is expected to be published in January.

Has the expenditure by local authorities on the prevention of pollution during the coming financial year been taken into account in the negotiations for the rate support grant?

Yes, and I can only say again to the hon. Gentleman that if he will await the annual White Paper on public expenditure more will be made clear to him then.

Is the Minister aware, in the area of political darkness on the benches opposite, that many local authorities feel let down in their battle to prevent atmospheric pollution by the fact that they have been obliged to abandon smoke control areas? Will he consider giving financial reimbursement to local authorities involved in additional expenditure as a result?

I find it strange that, coming from that side of the House, there should be any suggestion that the shortage of smokeless fuel, which we all very much regret, should be laid at the door of this Administration. On the contrary, my right hon. Friend has taken considerable steps to mitigate the damage. I recognise the question which the hon. Gentleman asks. If he will put it down separately, I shall answer it. But I will not take from him any castigations on this subject.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he expects to complete his consultations on the reorganisation of local government; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he now expects to publish his proposals for the reform of local government.

My right hon. Friend will make a statement as soon as possible.

Will the consultations include not only the local authority associations, which are of one mind with the Government, at the moment, but also organisations such as the National Association of Local Government Officers and the National Union of Teachers, whose members' careers will be affected by this and who may be considered in the future as possible candidates in local elections?

My right hon. Friend and I will welcome consultations with anyone interested in this subject. It is intended to publish a White Paper in the New Year and to follow that with consultations, as I say, with anyone interested in the subject.

Will my hon. Friend make it clear that it will be a two-tier system throughout the country and that he is not prepared to accept representations to any opposite effect at this stage?

I would ask by hon. Friend to await the full statement in the White Paper.

Can the Minister assure us that in any reorganisation proposals the Government will not depart from the principle laid down by the previous Administration of appointing a staffing commission to look after the interests of local government officers who may well be affected by the proposals?

Certainly. Any proposals for reorganisation will take into account the position of the present staffs of local authorities.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the growing concern in parts of Lancashire and Cheshire at the original proposals for a metropolitan authority based on Manchester? Can he assure us that the existence of the S.E.L.N.E.C. Passenger Transport Authority will not be taken as a precedent for future local government areas?

The existence of that passenger transport authority goes rather wide of the Question on the Order Paper. I ask my hon. Friend to put down a separate Question on that.

Can the hon. Gentleman say what is the purpose of these consultations when he and his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State have already made it perfectly clear that they believe in a two-tier county/county district system? Have not they made up their minds on the fundamentals before even beginning the consultations?

There have ben many consultations on this subject up to the present. The White Paper will set out fairly firmly the Government's views about reorganisation. But there will be many months of discussion following that statement of the Government's policy. At least we shall be laying down what we think. It will then be open to discussion.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he expects crash barriers to be erected along that stretch of the M6 which passes through the Cannock parliamentary constituency.

During the financial year 1972–73.

I thank my hon. Friend for that enlightening answer.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he has received from local authorities in the South-West of Scotland about the need to maintain the Stranraer-Euston boat train; what replies he has given; and if he will state the Government's policy towards continuing grant aid to this service beyond the summer of 1971.

None, in recent months, Sir. The Government's policy in respect of grants to all non-paying passenger railway services is under review.

Is the Minister aware that in a recent economic study of the South-West of Scotland this service was identified as being extremely important? Is he further aware of the deep feelings among all political parties and all responsible bodies in the South-West of Scotland that the retention of this boat train is essential in the long term if that area is to remain economically viable?

The hon. Gentleman will have heard me say that no representations from local authorities have been received on this matter in recent months. I hear what he says now. British Rail has said that it does not wish to operate the service as a commercial one, but it is at the moment considering whether to issue a closure notice. No decision has been made, and the Government are reviewing their own policy.

Is my hon. Friend aware that at a former T.U.C.C. hearing a condition was laid down by the Minister of Transport that this train should continue to run? Does my hon. Friend intend to honour that condition?

The running of the train is a matter for British Rail. It has not so far decided whether to seek closure procedures, and the Government are reviewing their own grant aid policy.

I understand that the Government are reviewing their unremunerative grants policy and have been doing so for a long time. Is not the Minister aware that on a great number of lines the grants will expire on 31st December? Will the hon. Gentleman make sure that we have a statement before the House rises next week on what will happen about the existing grants which expire on 31st December? We do not want a decision during the recess.

My right hon. Friend can only make such a statement when he has received all the necessary information from British Rail. Some of that information is still awaited. As soon as it is available, my right hon. Friend will make a statement.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there is considerable traffic between Larne and Stranraer and that the closure of the line will mean great hardship to Northern Ireland?

All these considerations will be taken into account before my right hon. Friend makes his statement.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what advice he has given to local authorities on the provision by them of so-called higher rented accommodation in the London area, in view of his inquiry into the matter in South Islington.

I assume that the hon. Member is referring to the conversion schemes in Bachelor Street and Barnsbury Street, Islington. Arrangements have been made to ensure that the Department is consulted about any improvement or conversion schemes where the cost is likely to exceed the appropriate London maxima before the local authority or housing association is committed.

Does the Minister understand that if present trends continue Inner London will become an area where it is impossible for people on average earnings to afford to live? Will he agree that the policy of the G.L.C. in this respect exacerbates that trend, and will he use his influence to reverse the policy now being pursued?

The problems of Inner London are exceedingly worrying, although I do not accept all that the hon. Gentleman says about the policies of the G.L.C. But it is a bit thick for us to be criticised when the party opposite was in power for six years.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will introduce legislation to increase the penalties for harassment of tenants.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply my right hon. Friend gave to the hon. Member for St. Pancras, North (Mr. Stallard) on 25th November.—[Vol. 807, c. 127–8].

Has the hon. Gentleman noticed the very low level of fines imposed in the courts for this offence, which are out of line with both the gravity of the offence and the profits to be made from it? Will not he introduce legislation to increase the penalties for this very serious social offence?

The hon. Gentleman will not expect me to comment on what penalties the courts actually impose. That is a matter for the courts. As he knows, my right hon. Friend has asked the Francis Committee to consider carefully penalties for this offence. We are awaiting its report, which we expect to receive quickly.

But would the hon. Gentleman recognise that it is necessary not only to consider penalties for the offence but also to consider extending the scope of the offence itself, since a great deal of harassment is going on, particularly in the urban areas like London, which is not caught by the present law as it should be?

The Francis Committee has been set up to review the whole working of the Act, and we are waiting its report.

Would the hon. Gentleman pass on to the Francis Committee the Greve Report on homeless families in London, which is reliably described as showing that the level of harassment has increased in recent years?

My right hon. Friend has already instructed a copy of the Greve Report to be sent to the Francis Committee.

Would the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that a great deal of this harassment arises indirectly, but to the knowledge of local authorities, as a result of their actions, that some local authorities are imposing purchase orders on properties, requiring that they be sold with vacant possession, which results in harassment of the tenants concerned by the prospective sellers? Would he remember the need to pursue local authorities on this matter to stop this kind of conduct?

I should like to examine what the hon. Gentleman says. I will ensure that the Francis Committee notes all the suggestions made at Question Time today.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he is satisfied that the contract for old people's flats at Shamrock Road, Ridge-way Road and Cotleigh Crescent were awarded to the Public Works Department in Sheffield, as a result of a competitive tender against outside contractors; and if he will make a statement.

Sheffield Corporation has asked whether these schemes may be awarded as continuations contracts based on schemes won in competition by the P.W.D. I will consider this when full details are available. I am keeping under very close review the operation of circular 57/69 which deals with the award of housing contracts to D.L.Os.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many ratepayers are concerned that they are not obtaining value for money when work is sub-contracted to the public works department? What can he do to ensure that his Ministry helps this situation?

I can assure my hon. Friend that in every case where direct labour organisations ask for this work to be won as continuation schemes I myself now consider the details very carefully. If there is any evidence that ratepayers are not getting value for money, I shall have no hesitation in turning them down.

Before he decides, I hope that the hon. Gentleman will study the record of the public works department in Sheffield, including the internationally-acclaimed Park Hill flats scheme in my constituency, and will not allow the vendetta against the public works department conducted by his hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Mr. J. H. Osborn) to persuade him, as it persuaded his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science, to cancel the contract, with great detriment to the education of students in the Sheffield Polytechnic recently?

I certainly accept not a single word of what the right hon. Gentleman says about the "vendetta" of my hon. Friend. I will examine this proposal, when it comes to me, on its merits.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what studies his department has made of the effect of a monorail system on commuter traffic in large cities.

Various rapid transit systems, including those using the monorail principle, have been examined as part of the Manchester Rapid Transit Study completed in 1967. A medium-capacity monorail system is now being carefully looked at.

Would my hon. Friend not agree that one of the problems in a transport system for a town like London is that, whereas there are authorities responsible for a system of transport like buses or trains, it is no one's specific responsibility to investigate new modes of transport? Would he look into this?

My hon. Friend has put his finger on the problem of needing to look at all forms of transport together. My Department, in co-operation with some 50 cities, is doing precisely that at the moment, particularly in Birmingham and Newcastle, where we are paying no less than 50 per cent. of the cost.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will now take steps to give compensation to all those whose properties are injuriously affected by new public development.

We shall decide what steps to take when we have completed the comprehensive review we have in hand of the compensation code.

Will the hon. Gentleman introduce compensation as quickly as possible for those who surfer financial loss because of the proximity of new roads such as the B road being built in North Staffordshire? Is he aware that there is growing concern about this problem?

I am very anxious to put our proposals before the House as quickly as possible. It is a complex subject and there are large financial issues involved, but we will do our best to put it before the House at an early date.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will institute an investigation on the social, medical and other problems arising out of multi-storey flat occupation.

The Department's Housing Research and Development Group is conducting continuing research into residents' reactions to different types of flats and houses.

But would the hon. Gentleman not accept that that is an entirely unsatisfactory reply when one realises that social, medical and psychiatric opinion today is very concerned not only with the present problems arising out of multi-storey flat occupation but about future problems? Would he not also accept as evidence of this that I alone—other hon. Members must have a similar story to tell—receive 20 applications each month for transfers from these properties?

I hope that the hon. Member does not think that it is an unsatisfactory reply. I believe that more research is needed into this problem, although I certainly accept the conclusion that families with small children are certainly better housed not in this type of building. But it would be wrong for the House to imagine that all the problems listed in the report are found exclusively in high flats; they are often found in other places as well.

Would my hon. Friend not agree that it is the lack of play areas in the vicinity of these multistorey blocks that is one of the greatest social needs, and could he direct local authorities to give more assistance to voluntary play group associations which are trying to help with this crying need?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right about that. My right hon. Friend hopes to publish a design bulletin next year giving advice on provision of this very sort of facility.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the number of new housing starts in the current year planned by the London Borough of Brent.

The council has started 176 dwellings since 1st January, 1970.

How many starts have actually been made? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that last year 1,976 starts were planned and only 24 achieved? In view of the fact that the council are selling off sites left, right and centre, would he do something about this appalling housing problem in my constituency?

The hon. Gentleman knows that my right hon. Friend is very concerned about the whole question of housing in London, and that he is already engaged in discussions with all the London boroughs about this very important problem. Certainly, he will bear in mind what the hon. Member says.

Can the hon. Gentleman give some idea of the results of those discussions, bearing in mind that they are largely a repetition of very thorough investigation undertaken before this Administration came into power? Is he aware that the authority in question, like many others, has been sharply cutting down on its house construction programme, despite the very serious housing problem? It has reduced by 4,000 on its original building programme during its period of office.

To answer the hon. Gentleman's factual question, officers of my Department are to meet officials of the council on 14th December and we shall await the report of that meeting with great interest.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he intends to maintain the 85 per cent. grant to local authorities for the clearance of derelict sites.

Grant at 85 per cent. is payable in the development areas, and this will be maintained, as my right hon. Friend told the hon. Member in answer to a Question on 25th November.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that that is a very satisfactory answer as far as it goes but is there not still a vast amount of work to be done in this field? What active steps are the Government taking positively to encourage local authorities to get on with the job?

Under the present rate of grant, schemes for reclamation are being approved at an increasing rate. I think that local authorities concerned have this well in mind and the programme which they have in hand is not disappointing.

As the Prime Minister himself has said that fresh steps are to be taken to increase the total amount of dereliction clearing, why does not the Minister announce an increase to 100 per cent. grant, in these special cases?

The programme is increasing, as my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said. Local authorities receive assistance other than the 85 per cent. grant. The development areas are getting about 95 per cent. assistance from the Exchequer through the rate support grant.

asked the Lord President of the Council if he will ensure that Ministerial statements about Her Majesty's Government's attitudes to proposals for economic, monetary or political union within the European Economic Community are made first to the House of Commons.

Yes, Sir. Statements to the House will continue to be made after each Ministerial meeting.

Is not the Lord President of the Council aware of the grave disquiet among members of all parties about the statements being made in Europe by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to the effect that the Government are in favour of political unity with Western Europe—a vitally important topic which has never been discussed in the Chamber? If the Lord President cannot restrain the misplaced and somewhat boyish enthusiasm of the Chancellor of the Duchy, will he undertake to arrange an early debate in the House on this very important subject?

The hon. Gentleman will appreciate that my right hon. Friend is, as I have previously promised, making a statement tomorrow. No doubt the hon. Gentleman will wish to put those comments to my right hon. Friend then.

asked the Lord President of the Council if he will move to set up a Select Committee to examine British policy in the Indian Ocean islands.

No, Sir.

As cat and mouse semantics at Prime Minister's Question Time are a mutually unsatisfactory way of discovering the truth about the Government's plans for Indian Ocean bases, is there not a serious case for a Select Committee on Defence, which has been urged by some of the Lord President's hon. Friends and, indeed, for crisp ad hoc subcommittees which could clear up mysteries about Indian Ocean bases?

Whilst not accepting that there is any mystery in this case, I have made perfectly clear the basis on which I think that the House would be wise to proceed as regards Select Committees. That is the basis on which we are proceeding. I think that it is right to proceed on that basis at this stage.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the fact that there is considerable anxiety on the score of world wildlife preservation in any Indian Ocean proposal.

I am sure that is something I ought to know about but do not.

asked the Lord President of the Council if he will move to amend the Standing Orders to provide that the House should meet for Prayers at 2.20 p.m. in order to allow a longer period for Questions, as recommended by the Select Committee on Procedure in its Second Report of last Session on Question Time.

As I have already indicated, my advice to the House is that we should wait a little longer, say until early after Christmas, before considering this and any other changes in Question Time procedures.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is considerable dissatisfaction at the way Question Time is going at present and that many hon. Members are not able to get Oral Answers to Questions? Will he now open conversations through the usual channels and unusual channels to see which of the recommendations of the Select Committee on Procedure would command majority support?

Yes, certainly I will. I will go somewhat further than that. I will certainly consider the possibility after Christmas of giving the House an opportunity to decide which of the various methods hon. Members would themselves prefer.

Will the Lord President bear in mind the fact that the difficulty of getting answers to Questions is nothing to do with the time we have? It is due to the fact that Ministers either cannot or will not give us the answers.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind also that, as a result of the creation of the two very large Departments, the Environment and Trade and Industry, it is almost certain that we are now getting less time on what used to be the constituents of those Departments than we formerly did?

I would enjoy a discussion with the right hon. Gentleman on the relative merits of the answers to Questions given by various Governments, but I do not think that now is the moment for that. On the right hon. Gentleman's more important and second point, this is something that we should certainly consider. After all, everyone recognises that the new Departments are a development which in all their different aspects must be carefully considered. Question Time is one of these, and we will look at this.

While the present temporary—we hope—situation persists, will my right hon. Friend consider actually extending the period for Prayers, since it is obviously now more conducive to meditation than altercation?

I do not really quite understand, so I think I had better not try to answer.

asked the Lord President of the Council if he will consider the establishment of a bookshop within the precincts of the Palace of Westminster.

A proposal is, at present, before the Services Committee for the establishment of a stall for the sale of Bills and other parliamentary papers to visitors to the Strangers' Gallery.

If my hon. Friend has a more general bookshop in mind, I am sure the Committee will have noted his suggestion.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for knowing more about this Question than he did about the previous one that I addressed to him. Will he bear in mind that with more than 2,000 people living and working in this building who will have increasingly little opportunity to get outside, a bookshop is almost certainly as civilised an adjunct to living as a barbers' shop or a branch of Thomas Cook? Will my right hon. Friend recommend this favourably?

Without wishing to be drawn into the various comparisons or the merits of what my hon. Friend says, I am sure that the Services Committee in its considerations will take careful note of what my hon. Friend has said.

asked the Lord President of the Council whether the review body he is setting up to investigate pensions increases for retired public servants will be asked to examine the pensions of retired public servants who were formerly Members of Parliament; and whether he will request this review body to investigate the possibility of granting Members of Parliament the same conditions for pension rights as civil servants.

I announced to the House on 4th December the intention of the Government to refer the whole question of emoluments, allowances, expenses and pensions of Members of the House to one of the Review Bodies announced on 2nd November by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment. I think this is the more appropriate course.

I thank the Lord President for that helpful reply. Will he deal with the last point raised in the Question; namely, tying Members' pensions to Civil Service pensions, which would then automatically take this matter out of the arena of any review or constant investigation?

I think that the best course at this time is to say that of course this would naturally be one of the things which the Review Body could perfectly well consider. [Interruption.] Equally, I think that there are, as my hon. Friend the Member for Tynemouth (Dame Irene Ward) seems to be indicating from behind me, several views on this point. Therefore, I believe that it will be right for the Review Body to consider all the circumstances very carefully.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that I do not wish to be tied to any civil servant?

I would never have imagined that my right hon. Friend would wish to be tied to a civil servant or anybody else.

asked the Lord President of the Council whether he is aware that although Members of Parliament have had no salary increases since October, 1964, Peers have had their expenses allowances increased to £6 10s. per day; and whether, to assist Members who have to pay increased hotel and board and lodging allowance when attending to their parliamentary duties, he will move for the same allowances as are paid to Peers to be paid to Members of the House of Commons.

It would be inappropriate to extend to Members of this House the system of expenses allowance which applies to Members of the House of Lords under very different circumstances.

I rather thought that the non-democratically elected body would get preference over the democratically elected body, although I pay tribute to some of the noble Peers who have voluntarily agreed to postpone their 14 per cent. increase on top of the 37 per cent. which they received in the last two and a half years.

However, is the Minister aware that hon. Members representing country or out-of-London constituencies and who have to live away from their homes must obviously have found that things have become vastly different over the last six years generally, and in the last six months in particular when the £ has depreciated by 6·6 per cent.?

I do not wish to follow the hon. Gentleman into his comparisons with another place. I agreed to refer all these matters to a Review Body. I believe that that is the right place for these matters to be considered. I believe that the House as a whole thinks that it is the right place. That is why I did it. I hope that we shall now proceed on that basis. I realise that this means delaying some other matters, but I think that the House accepts this position.

Does the Leader of the House agree that the expenses incurred because a person is a Member of Parliament should be allowed to him or her?