asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that inconvenience was caused to passengers to the Isle of Man during the Easter holidays owing to the inadequate arrangements; and whether the Railway Executive Committee will take steps to regulate the traffic more efficiently during the Whitsuntide holidays?

The Railway Executive Committee inform me that the railway companies concerned have been asked to do everything that is in their power to meet the convenience of passengers to the Isle of Man at Whitsuntide.

Will that cover the guaranteeing of accommodation on the steamer?

No; it could not cover the guaranteeing of accommodation on the steamer.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that during the Easter holidays the Manchester to Blackpool and Southport traffic was regulated by a method of booking in advance, whilst traffic from Manchester to North Wales was in a state of confusion; and whether the Railway Executive Committee can take any steps to regulate the North Wales traffic during the Whitsuntide holidays?

I am aware of the arrangements referred to, and I have communicated with the London and North-Western Railway Company on the matter. I will write to the hon. and gallant Gentleman on receipt of their reply.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to the inconvenience experienced by the workers and the public in general by the absence of interchangeable tickets on the Great Northern and the Belfast and County Down Railways between Belfast and Newcastle, county Down, and between Newcastle and Castle wellan, as is permissible on the Great Northern and Midland Railways; and will the Railway Executive Committee take steps to put this matter right in the interest of the public?

My attention had not previously been called to this matter. I am communicating with the Irish Railway Executive Committee in regard to it, and will let the hon. Gentleman know the result.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the present serious shortage of railway trucks, and of the fact that such shortage results in the holding up of ships, the blocking of the ports, the unemployment of labour, and delay in carrying through all schemes of reconstruction, what steps are being taken to increase without delay the available supply of railway trucks?

The Board of Trade and the Railway Executive Committee are fully alive to the importance of doing everything possible to increase the supply of railway trucks, and the railway companies are building wagons as fast as they can, and have placed various orders with outside manufacturers and at Woolwich.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in one dock alone 200 men were discharged, and on Saturday 300, for want of trucks?

I did not know the precise facts to which the hon. Member refers, but I know the truck position is extremely serious.

asked the President of the Board of Trade (l) if he is aware that 35,000,000 tons which used to be carried coastwise are now carried on the railways; and, seeing that 35,000,000 tons at five tons for each truck equals 7,000,000 truck loads, and that, at fifty railway trucks to a train, 7,000,000 truck loads equal 140,000 trains of 50 trucks each, and 140,000 trains in the year equals 400 trains a day, what steps he is prepared to take to avoid the resulting congestion of traffic; and (2) what was the tonnage of vessels arriving and departing with cargoes coast-wise at each of the undermentioned ports in each of the years 1914, 1915, 1916, 1917, and 1918, namely: London, Liverpool, Manchester, Hull, Bristol, and Southampton; what, if any, increases have been made since 1914 in the railway rates on goods carried between ports where goods can be carried in the coasting vessels; if the rates have not been advanced, by whom is the extra cost of carraige paid; and, in the presence of the existing shortage of railway trucks throughout the country, will he take into immediate consideration the necessity for the railways refusing to carry between ports all goods which can be carried in coasting vessels?

I am aware that a considerable amount of traffic, which before the War would have been carried by sea, has been conveyed by rail owing to shipping difficulties, but I cannot give figures showing the extent of the traffic which has thus been diverted. I am, however, sending the hon. Gentleman figures showing the tonnage of vessels arriving and departing with cargoes coastwise at the ports referred to by him.

No general increase in railway rates for the carriage of goods by merchandise train has been made since 1914, and if such goods have been carried at a loss the loss has been borne by the State. The question of an increase in railway rates will, undoubtedly, require consideration, but I do not think that it would be feasible to refuse to carry by rail all goods which might possibly be carried coastwise.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the great distress in the East Coast ports caused by unemployment of men previously employed in this coastwise trade; and will he consider some prohibition of goods which can be carried by sea along the coast being carried by truck at all

The object of the Department has been to get rid of these pro- hibitions as far as possible. I am not at all sure in my own mind that the great difficulty which certainly exists in the East Coast ports is so much caused by lack of coastwise traffic as by the general paralysis of traffic in ports on the Continent, outside the blockade area, which affect the East Coast ports.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the railway workshops of the railway companies under the control of the Railway Executive Committee have now resumed their normal conditions; if he can make any approximate statement as to the number of new engines and carriages already supplied by them this year; and what further quantity is expected during the present year?

I am making inquiry into this matter and will inform the hon. Gentleman of the result. Repair of existing stock is, however, of more immediate importance than the provision of new stock, and it is upon repair that the energies of the workshops are being primarily concentrated.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the overcrowding which exists on all forms of London traffic, he can make any arrangements by which traffic authorities or companies in London can obtain special priority for the supply of all new rolling stock they have on order and any materials they require for urgent and necessary repairs, so as to increase the supply of railway engines and carriages, tramcars, and motor omnibuses for London services?

The grant of priority is not now necessary to enable transport authorities to obtain supplies of rolling stock and material on order, but I am in sympathy with the hon. Gentleman's desire, and should be happy to give any assistance in my power to any specific case of difficulty that might be brought to my notice.

If the railway and tube companies in London make application to the right hon. Gentleman's Department asking that orders for rolling stock shall be specially marked for priority, will the Department consider whether that shall be done?

There is no power to give priority. As control is relaxed these powers which the Government has exercised during the War diminish. All the Department can do is to help if there is any difficulty in getting raw material.

asked the President of the Board of Trade by what enactment he exercises power to restrict imports of articles of prime necessity into Great Britain?

My right hon. Friend appears to be under some misapprehension. No articles of prime necessity are administratively restricted in import. Such restrictions on imports as are maintained are exercised under Proclamations issued under Section 43 of the Customs Consolidation Act, 1676. These Proclamations give power to the Board of Trade to issue licences for import.

Is not this a very ancient weapon? Ought not Parliament to have been consulted before the Board of Trade brought it out for use in this matter?

That question might perhaps have been raised when it was brought out. It is now also very ancient history that it is brought out.

Is it not a fact that we generally thought these prohibitions of imports were made under the Defence of the Realm Act?

I really have no knowledge what the right hon. Gentleman thought the facts were as to what was done under this Act.

asked on what principle or for what reason a refund is sometimes made to railway season-ticket holders of ordinary fares which they have had to pay through being unable to produce their season tickets; and whether the Railway Executive Committee will arrange that such refunds shall be made generally in all proper cases subject to deduction of a small fine to cover the expense?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the answers which I gave him last week on this matter. In these I thought I had made it plain that the reason for not establishing elaborate machinery to deal with such refunds was the expense involved. If as an act of courtesy some railway companies do their best to meet the cases of individual passengers who for the first time or exceptionally fail to produce their season ticket, that is no reason to establish machinery to deal with the case of every individual who is too careless or too inconsiderate to do his best to diminish the difficulties with which the railway staffs have to cope in their efforts to meet the legitimate conveniences of the public.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the feeling in the country, and will he consult the advisers of the Government as to whether it is not making the Government unnecessarily unpopular and causing them to get the reputation of not trading honestly?

I do not think there is anything I can usefully add to what I said a week ago to-day, when this question was last under consideration. All that is required to avoid any trouble is for gentlemen who have season tickets to carry them.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the White Paper showing the actual cost of working the railways during the period of Government control, he is able to allay the anxiety of holders of railway stock caused by the published result of such control and the prospect of the nationalisation of their property by any assurance that the rights of the stockholder will be fully preserved during the further period of Government control, and their property, if not taken from them by the State, returned to them at the end of such period on terms that will permit of their being able to carry on their business with a reasonable chance of success?

For the period during which the present Government control continues the basis of compensation now obtaining will remain. I am afraid I cannot make any statement to cover the last part of my hon. and gallant Friend's question.

Will the right hon. Gentleman instruct the Railway Executive Committee to issue half-yearly or quarterly a report of the working of the-railways to the shareholders?

I will consider and look into the suggestion of my hon. Friend and see if it is possible.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether, in the event of nationalisation being decided upon as a policy the Government have considered the basis upon which such scheme will be carried out?

I am not aware that any announcement has been made in this House that nationalisation has been decided upon. Naturally at the time that such a decision is arrived at the basis of such scheme will be announced also.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the loss of trade caused by the necessity of applying for licences to export fruit from this country, he can see his way to cancel the order requiring exporters to obtain licences?

The following varieties of fresh fruit may be exported without restriction of any kind: Pears, peaches, apricots, grapes, grape-fruit, nectarines, imported (South African) plums, green figs, and pineapples. Dried fruit and all other varieties of fresh fruit are retained on the export-prohibited list, and can only be exported under licence because the supplies are insufficient to meet home demand.

Is there any prospect of these restrictions being reversed in the immediate future?

It depends entirely upon the supplies that become available in this country. The entire reason for keeping restrictions on export is in order that we may have fruit in reasonable quantities for the people of this country.

asked the Food Controller whether frozen meat purchased by His Majesty's Government in South America for Army supplies is now in Government possession in surplus quantity owing to the demobilisation of the Forces; whether such meat is being placed in the hands of the Ministry of Food for sale for civilian consumption; whether the operations of British firms in distributing Australasian and other imported meat have been curtailed during the past three years owing to Army demands on supplies and the shortage of freight for transporting Australasian meat to this country; whether these British firms are willing and efficient to undertake the distribution of any surplus South American Army meat; and whether the Ministry of Food propose to hand a considerable portion of this meat, which is the absolute property of the British Government, to foreign and foreign-controlled firms associated with the American Meat Trust for distribution on Government account?

The answer to the first four parts of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the last part, it has been decided that the surplus South American meat in question shall be distributed equally between the British firms which have suffered through the curtailment of Australasian supplies, and the agents originally appointed by the South American vendors of the meat.

asked the Food Controller whether his attention has been called to the rise in the wholesale price of tea at the Mincing Lane auctions of last week; and if he will state the amount of the advance and the approximate profit to the Ministry of Food accruing therefrom?

I am aware that the price of tea sold by public auction during the week in question was in excess of the average price at which tea was distributed under the ballot, the average price realised being at the rate of approximately Is. 2½d. per lb., as against an average selling price of Is. 1d. per lb. under the ballot. So far as can at present be ascertained, the approximate profit on these sales was £34,000.

asked the Food Controller if he will state what steps, if any, are being taken to stop the rise in the wholesale price of tea; and whether he can give any assurance that consumers of tea will obtain their tea supplies at a reduction of 2d. per pound on and after 2nd June next, the date upon which the duty on British-grown tea is reduced by 2d. per pound?

The Ministry of Food are taking steps to stop the rise in the wholesale price of tea by releasing larger quantities to the wholesale dealers. Dur- ing June at least 30,000,000 lbs. of tea will be put up for sale at public auction; and, in addition, ballots will be held for a further 25,000,000 lbs. if applications for that quantity are received from licensees under the ballot. As the normal four-weekly consumption of tea is approximately 25,000,000 lbs., a reduction in wholesale prices may be expected as the result of the releases to which I have just referred. I may say that the announcement of the quantities to be released during June has already had the effect of reducing wholesale prices for all except the finest grades. I am unable to give the assurance for which the hon. and gallant Member asks in the last part of the question. In any event, considerable quantities of tea on which the present duty of Is. per lb. has been paid will be on sale for some time after 2nd June.

What regulations will be made so that this reduction in the price of wholesale tea cannot be pocketed by middlemen?

Are those concerns which have a large number of multiple shops included in wholesale dealers?

I will make inquiry.

asked the Food Controller whether instructions have been given by the Ministry of Food to the Tea Brokers' Association of London to place only a limited quantity of tea belonging to the Ministry of Food upon the Mincing Lane market for disposal to the trade; and whether he objects to the Ministry of Food disposing of their surplus stocks of tea by private treaty; and, if so, will be state his objections?

After consultation with all sections of the trade, the Food Controller issued instructions to the Tea Brokers' Association that, on the resumption of public sales of tea on 5th May, only a limited quantity should be put up in public auction during the first week, in order that buyers might have an opportunity of establishing a basis of valuations and owing to the fact that the slowness of the bidding in the first sales would prevent brokers from dealing with large quantities of tea. I may add, however, that during last week the amount of tea offered in public sale exceeded a normal week's consumption, and that larger quantities will from now onwards be put up week by week to meet the demand as it arises. It is the policy of the Food Controller to give every recognised market buyer of tea an equal opportunity of securing a proportion of the available supplies, either through public sales or through the ballot. It is not proposed to sell tea privately to individual firms, a course of action which would necessitate the establishment of an organisation of considerable size if all individual firms were to be accorded the opportunity of effecting private sales through the Ministry,

asked the Secretary of State for India how much war expenditure has been incurred by the Indian Empire, and how much has been contributed by the Indian Princes and others individually in India?

Including a contribution of £100,000,000 towards the war outlay of His Majesty's Government, the war expenditure of the Government of India up to the 31st March, 1919, may be taken at about £127,800,000. A further contribution has been proposed by the Government of India, and is at present under consideration. Indian Princes and others have contributed in cash sums amounting to £2,100,000, in addition to placing at the disposal of the Government of India considerable further sums for the purchase of horses, motor cars and vans, motor ambulances, comforts for the troops, etc.

asked when the views of the local Governments in India on the subject of the proposed Montagu-Chelms-ford reform scheme are to be published?

The Papers will be formally presented this week, and should be available in a very few days' time.

asked the Secretary for India whether his attention has been drawn to the commendation bestowed by the Viceroy on the work of the Central Publicity Board in India now being closed; and whether, considering the good work performed by that board in spreading the truth in India during the War, arrangements can be made for its continuance although the War has now ceased?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The Central Publicity Board was formed to give the people of India correct information as to the War; and now that peace is in sight its functions are at an end.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Munitions whether the Government had at the large factory at Newport a quantity of wood which is now being cut up for chocolate boxes; whether this is being sold at the price of £2 6s. 2d. per thousand sets for all sizes up to 4-lb. boxes, whether Messrs. Lovells, of Newport, bought up £10,000 worth; and if he will state why timber is being sold at such a price and why methods are not adopted for securing a fair market value for these war assets?

The Disposal Board has a quantity of waste timber which is being converted into caseboards so as to secure the fullest market value. Case-boards of very small dimensions have been sold to Messrs. Lovells for £2 8s. 6d. per thousand sets, but for average sizes the price is at the rate of £4 7s. 5d. per thousand. The price obtained for the largest sets was £6 15s. per thousand. The total value of the contract is £6,256. 5s. The price obtained shows a satisfactory profit after paying all charges

asked the Prime Minister whether His Majesty's Government has received, and has refused, the request of the Persian Government to lay its claim before the Peace Conference; and, if so, on what ground this opposition was based?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative and the second part, therefore, does not arise. The position is as follows. The Persian Government sent an Envoy to Paris who sought admission to the Peace Conference. The acceptance or refusal of his application was a point to be settled by the Peace Conference itself and, so far, the Persian Envoy has not been admitted, though Persia has been invited to accede to the Covenant of the League of Nations.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will consider granting the House of Commons an early opportunity of discussing the League of Nations portion of the Peace Treaty?

No, Sir, the Government are not prepared to adopt this suggestion.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether there will be an opportunity before the Recess of discussing the Peace terms?

As I have already pointed out, that must depend upon what happens. The date given to the Germans to reply is the 22nd of this month. The position may be changed thereafter. I cannot say now.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say, if he can, whether he will provide an opportunity before the Whitsuntide Recess?

I am not inclined to say more than I have already said. Everyone knows the importance of this, and most certainly no question of time will prevent our having a discussion if we think it desirable in the public interest.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will consider the discussion of the League of Nations portion of the terms separately from the rest of the Peace Treaty?

I do not see that there would be any advantage in that. It was put into the peace terms, but the whole must, I think, be discussed together.

asked the Prime Minister whether the indemnity in respect of the losses to merchant shipping due to enemy action in contravention of international law includes compensation for the cargoes destroyed and adequate compensation for the losses inflicted upon shipowners owing to the destruction of the earning powers of their ships; whether a full statement of claim relating to losses to British merchant shipping by unlawful enemy action has been prepared; and whether such statement, setting forth the number and value of ships destroyed, the value of cargoes carried by such ships, and the estimated loss of the earning power of such ships, respectively, from the date of destruction to the 11th November, 1918, can be presented to the House?

Such a statement as is suggested in the question has been prepared, but all such statements of the Allied Governments are subject to examination and no details of them can be given.

asked the Prime Minister, in view of the serious loss of British ships, numbering 2,217 vessels, representing 7,733,212 tonnage, as against American loss of 80 vessels, representing only 341,512 tonnage, what steps he is prepared to take to claim a share of the enemy shipping, in proportion to the losses sustained by us, of the vessels detained in American waters?

As I have already stated it is not possible for me to discuss the division amongst themselves of the claims which the Allies have presented to Germany.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the maritime fleet of America has increased twenty-eight times during the period of the War?

I can assure my hon. Friend that we fully realise the importance of this, but the House, I hope, will trust the special delegates to do what they can to protect British interests.

Would not this be a convenient opportunity for President Wilson to prove the sincerity of his idealism by making no claim for these ships, and by giving them up to those who have borne the burden and brunt of the War?

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that the Allies' peace terms have been handed to the German delegates at Paris, and have been communicated by them to the German Government and Parliament, His Majesty's Government will now submit these terms in full to this House, in order that Members and the British public may have the same opportunity of considering them, before discussion and Debate, as is now afforded to the enemy?

As I stated in answer to a question last week, this sub- ject was discussed by the Prime Minister with the heads of the Governments of the United States, France, and Italy, and it was decided not to publish the terms in-full. I am sure that the House will recognise that the same course must be taken in this as is adopted in the other Parliaments of the Allies, and will be satisfied in. the meantime with the very full and, I think, accurate summary which has been; already published.

Seeing that the enemy Parliament is discussing this question, is it not reasonable that at least we should have the financial clauses that relate to reparation?

I quite admit there is a great deal of force in the suggestion of my hon. Friend, and, as I mentioned to the House last week, I raised it myself with the Prime Minister. In consequence we had a very full discussion, and I am sure the House will recognise that we must accept the decision of those who have considered the matter.

Can the right hon. Gentleman not see the distinction between allowing the House to have the terms without giving them the opportunity for Debate? Why cannot we see the terms, even if we do not press for the opportunity of discussion?

Really, my answer dealt precisely with that. As I said, I thought myself the suggestion was so reasonable that I specially raised it with the Prime Minister. We discussed it at some length with the heads of the Allied Governments. They had reasons which I cannot put before the House for thinking that undesirable, and I am sure the House will be ready to leave the discussion of these matters to their recognised representatives.

Is it not a fact that the Germans themselves know the terms of the Treaty? If they know them, why-should not we know them?

That is really the same question, but, as a matter of fact, I doubt whether the full terms have been published even in Germany.

Is it not possible that the full terms will be given by the Berlin Government to the National Assembly before this House knows them? What advantage will there be in that?

I have said that the subject was discussed. Reasons were brought forward at that discussion. I cannot give them to the House, but, of course, this is only for the time being. As I said in answer to another question, after the 22nd the subject will be reconsidered by the heads of the different Governments.

asked the Prime Minister if under the terms of the Peace Treaty with Germany compensation in full is to be paid for all actual damage done to property by aircraft; if, under these circumstances, the Government will reconsider the whole question of the Government anti-aircraft insurance scheme and the premiums paid there under, and the profit that has accrued to the Government; and if, when the German compensation is paid, the whole of the premiums paid, less expenses, will be available for return to those who paid them?

As regards the first part of the question I would refer my hon. Friend to Section VIII. of the Official Summary of the Peace Treaty which was published on 3rd May. The reply to the last two parts of the question is in the negative.

If damages are received from Germany in compensation for those aircraft raids will there be a distribution among the people who have suffered or will there be a return to them of premiums?

No, Sir. If I may judge by my own feelings as a citizen who had the privilege of paying a premium for Government insurance, I was very well satisfied with the bargain that the Government made, and I see no reason why I should now have my premium back after having escaped damage or having received compensation.

Would it not make insurance impossible if in cases where there did not happen to be any loss you returned the premiums?

asked if the owners of properties which were damaged by air raids will be able to recover from the German indemnity money the full cost of the reinstatement of their property after giving credit for such reduced sums as they may have received from aircraft insurance or the Government in part compensation for such damages?

I do not think that my hon. Friend's suggestion is practicable.

asked the Prime Minister whether a day can now be allocated, without prejudice to the Allied interests, for the discussion of the Peace terms by Members of this House?

No, Sir. In the opinion, not only of His Majesty's Government but of Allied Governments, such a discussion would be harmful.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give the House an assurance that the peace terms will make provision for the payment of the whole of the British war debt, when and if the enemy countries are in a position to do so?

I am sure if my hon. and gallant Friend has read the summary, which in this respect is perfectly complete, he will have seen that it says exactly what is being done in that matter.

The summary makes no provision.

May I ask whether it is to be understood that the whole of the cost of the War is to be borne by Germany and those who have fought with her?

I can only suggest to my hon. Friend that he should read the summary of the Treaty, where it is given in full.

Can the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that at some future date we shall have an opportunity of discussing these peace terms?

I have already stated long ago that before the Treaty is ratified the assent of Parliament will be obtained. That is all that can be done.

asked the Postmaster-General if he is aware that letters sent from the Army of Occupation from Northern Syria to Alexandria take about twenty-one days to reach their destination; that these letters go the whole way by sea, and that the journey from Alexandria to Messina takes thirty-six hours; and if he can do anything to improve the delivery of these letters?

I regret that I have no information on the subject raised by the hon. Baronet. I will, however, make inquiries and acquaint him with the result.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will state why officers in the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve were asked to volunteer for the Army of Occupation, under General Routine Order No. 330; why they were then told they could not withdraw their names under Order No. 302, and yet in Order No. 364 they are told they cannot volunteer for service in the Army of Occupation; and therefore, in view of this fact, will he explain why officers in the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve are not allowed to volunteer for the Army of Occupation?

A letter was written to my hon. Friend on Friday last giving him a full reply on this matter in connection with a previous question which he put down on the 1st May last.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware of the dissatisfaction and disappointment which prevails amongst officers and men who, having left the Army, are desirous, of training for professions at the delay in deciding upon their applications for maintenance grants and college fees; whether, in some instances, applications made as far back as in January last are not yet disposed of, the result being that the applicants have lost a college term; and whether he can assure the House that there will be no further delay in this matter?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. The Board of Education has so far, by means of special emergency procedure, made only interim Grants under the scheme pending decisions as to final arrangements, which have to be made in consultation with the Treasury and other Departments; 1,203 recommendations have been accepted under this procedure. I hope to be able to issue the definitive Regulations very shortly.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether Red Cross nurses who have served with the forces in the field during the progress of hostilities are a definite part of the military organisation; what schemes are contemplated to provide nurses with pensions, gratuities, or allowances following upon their war services; and, if no such scheme is at present in operation, whether immediate steps will be taken to deal with Red Cross nurses who have rendered such services to our fighting forces in the field to adequately recognise the claim which they have established upon the gratitude of the country?

Red Cross nurses who have served with the British forces in the field, in units recognised by the War Office, are entitled to the same pensions, gratuities, or allowances for disability from the Ministry of Pensions as if they belonged to the Army Nursing Services. No question of pensions for service arises; but war gratuities for service are paid to auxiliary nursing personnel employed in Army hospitals and drawing pay from Army funds.

asked the Minister of Labour if he will state the amount paid to date in respect of the out-of-work donation and the amounts paid to each of the following areas: London and South-Eastern, South Midland and Eastern, South-Western, West Midland, Yorkshire and East Midland, North-Western, Northern, Wales, and Ireland?

The total amount of out-of-work donations paid to the 9th May, 1919, which is the latest date for which information is available, was approximately £21,420,000. I am having the figures for which the hon. Member asks circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT:

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Shipping Controller if he will state the terms upon which the national shipyards at Chepstow were offered to the Federation of Engineering and Shipbuilding Trades of the United Kingdom?

As the full terms are somewhat lengthy I will, with the permission of the House, publish them in the Official Report. I will also take the opportunity of referring to them during the Debate this afternoon.