asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can announce any further allocations under the 1936 programme?

As the hon. Member is no doubt aware, the allocation of the following contracts has recently been announced in the Press:

• His Majesty's Ship "Illustrious" to Vickers-Armstrongs, Ltd., Barrow.
• His Majesty's Ship "Victorious" to Vickers-Armstrongs, Ltd., Walker-on-Tyne, with machinery by Walls-end Slipway & Engineering Co., Ltd.
• His Majesty's Ship "Lassoo" (Tender to Anti-Submarine School) to J. I. Thornycroft & Co., Ltd., Southampton.
• His Majesty's Ship "Widgeon" to Yarrow & Co., Ltd., Scotstoun.

The contract for the Fishery Protection trawler "Mastiff" will be placed with Henry Robb, Ltd., of Leith, with machinery by the North Eastern Marine Engineering Co., Ltd. The orders for the remaining vessels of the 1936 programme are likely to be placed in the next few weeks, but I cannot make any further announcement at present.

In view of the announcement in the Press about the types of vessels at present being built, when may we expect a statement of the characteristics of the new types of cruiser?

I will let the right hon. Gentleman know.

With regard to the allocation of repairs and renovations, can the Noble Lord say whether the South Wales repair ports will be taken into consideration for the work?

As the hon. and gallant Gentleman knows, the greater part of this repair work—practically all of it—is done in His Majesty's dockyards.

Yes, Sir, but, having regard to the special position of South Wales, is it not possible for the Admiralty to give some proportion of the work to these ports?

The position has to be borne in mind that we must try to keep the dockyards fully employed, when there is repair work to be done, and that they are particularly skilled in work of this kind.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been called to the recent agreement between the shipbuilding employers' federation and the shipyards trade unions in respect of an advance in wages of 6s. for a week of 47 hours, with equivalent increases for piece workers; and whether this increase will be reflected by any further improvement in the wage rates paid in Admiralty dockyards?

I understand that increases of 4s. a week in time wages and of 8 per cent. in piece rates are about to be made in two instalments in the shipbuilding industry. The board will consider whether in consequence any change in wage rates in Admiralty establishments is called for.

Are not the wages paid in Admiralty dockyards superior to those paid in other yards; and does not my Noble Friend think that, in view of the importance of the work in the Naval yards, it is desirable that the Admiralty should lead rather than follow the practice of other yards?

Do I understand, from the hon. and gallant Gentleman's supplementary question, that he means to say that higher wages are paid in the Government dockyards? If so, may I point out to him that it is not true by a long way?

Is not this question of wages now being dealt with by the trade unions on the Shipbuilding Trades Joint Council for the Admiralty?

I think that all these questions are under discussion at the moment. It is true, however, that the wages paid by the Admiralty are higher.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty the number of requests received to date under the new reviews of service conditions, the commands, and the number from each command; the commands, if any, from which the reviews are outstanding; and when the Admiralty expect to be able to announce the first and last instalment of replies?

The requests from all commands have now been received at the Admiralty, and total over 4,000. I am unable to give the exact total or the exact number from each command, as different systems of compilation have been used on various stations. I am not at present able to say when the Admiralty expect o issue either the first or the final instalment of their decisions; but I can assure the right hon. Member that it will be as soon as possible.

Can the Noble Lord give any date on which a further question might be put down?

I hope that the first main batch, at any rate, will be dealt with during the next few weeks.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he will give particulars of any acts of sabotage, suspected or otherwise, that have occurred in any dockyards carrying out Admiralty work during the previous 12 months; and whether he can state the cost of making good the damage caused?

Five cases of damage or attempted damage to His Majesty's ships in all dockyards carrying out Admiralty work have been reported since 1st January, 1936. Sabotage was suspected in three of these cases. I am glad to say that the cost of making good the damage was not great, but it will be obvious that this is no measure of the seriousness of the consequences which might have resulted.

Can the Noble Lord say whether there is any knowledge as to who committed these acts, and whether any prosecutions have taken place?

No; I do not think any prosecutions have taken place.

Does not the Parliamentary Secretary consider that, in view of the revelations yesterday as to the expenditure on the Secret Service, the results obtained up to date from the sums expended in preventing sabotage are practically negligible?

Luckily, very little damage has occurred so far, but, if we had not been able to discover the damage in time, great loss might have been effected. I consider it very likely that it is owing to the knowledge that there is a very effective security service in the dockyards that there has been as little trouble as there has been.

Would it not be better to improve the whole system of supervision of work that is being done, rather than encourage a system of spying?

There are some forms of under-hand work that can only be discouraged and found out by special methods.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the improved financial position of the country and the ever-increasing expenses married naval officers at home and abroad have to incur for food, accommodation, pay of servants, etc., he will confer with the Chancellor of the Exchequer to see if married allowance can now be granted to naval officers and the necessary sum be taken in the forthcoming Estimates to make this provision on the same lines as married allowance is granted to Army and Air Force officers?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for North Cumberland (Mr. W. Roberts) on 20th May last, and to which I have nothing to add at present. I can, however, assure my hon. and gallant Friend that this question is kept constantly under review.

I hope that something will be done.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty what is the approximate number of aircraft now under the control of the British, Japanese, American, and Italian navies, respectively?

The figure for the Royal Navy is 204 aircraft. I understand that the figure for the Japanese Navy is 245 embarked, and 216 shore-based, aircraft; for the American Navy, 475 embarked, and 184 shore-based; for the Italian Navy, 60 embarked, plus a certain number of shore-based reconnaissance aircraft. The Japanese, American and Italian Navies differ from the Royal Navy in that they have control of flying boats and shore-based naval aircraft, whereas the Royal Navy has under its control only the embarked aircraft, the number of which I have already given.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what decision has been reached with regard to enabling any African chiefs to attend the Coronation ceremonies; and what is the reason for the decision taken?

This question is at the present time under consideration, and I am not in a position to make any statement at the moment. I should add that several Africans will in any case be attending the Coronation as official representatives of the Colonies in which they reside.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the investigating committee into mui-tsai in Hong Kong and elsewhere has yet reported; and, if so, when its report will be published?

The Commission has just signed its report—I understand last Saturday. The report has now been sent to the printers, and I propose that it shall be published here and in Hong Kong and Malaya on 1st March.

While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for his reply, may I hope that the evidence, or at any rate such portions of it as are not confidential, will be published?

I am making arrangements for all the evidence, other than the evidence which witnesses asked should be treated as confidential, to be made available to people who wish to have copies of it, but not for its publication in the report, because that report is already likely to run to 350 closely-printed pages.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what steps it is proposed to take to give effect to the recommendations of Sir Alan Pim that, in view of the serious increase of soil erosion in Kenya Colony, a careful investigation should first be undertaken as to the best methods of reconditioning the land.

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave on 2nd December to a similar question by the hon. Member for Wentworth (Mr. Paling). An extensive campaign is being conducted by the Department of Agriculture, with the active co-operation of other Departments concerned, such as the Forest, Veterinary, and Public Works Departments, and with the assistance of numerous unofficials. Demonstrations are given of methods of terracing, and re-afforestation is carried out where possible. The hon. Member will realise that the problem, which varies in form, needs to be attacked in different ways in different areas.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air whether it is proposed to give effect to the rider of the jury at the inquest on the victims of the Dutch air-liner crash on 9th December last, recommending that an officially appointed authority at an airport, and not individual pilots, should decide if any aircraft should take off during periods of low visibility?

No, Sir. It is not proposed to interfere with the present well-established practice by which the commander of an aircraft is solely responsible for its movements, subject to the instructions of the company in whose service he is. At all principal airports there are available to him the advice of the aerodrome officer regarding the local traffic situation at the time, and weather reports and forecasts supplied by the Meteorological office of the Air Ministry. A licensed pilot is qualified to assume responsibility for the safety of the passengers and of the aircraft placed in his charge. To delegate any part of the responsibility to other persons would not, I think, be in the interests of the public.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air whether he is aware of the decision of His Majesty's Government in the Commonwealth of Australia to manufacture American aircraft and engines in Australia under licence; and whether English aircraft manufacturing companies were given an opportunity of tendering in this connection?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air whether his attention has been drawn to the purchase by the Australian Government of 20 aeroplanes from America; whether this was done after consultation with his Department; and what steps he has taken to ensure the co-ordination and standardisation in the event of the use of these aeroplanes and those produced in Great Britain or elsewhere for the Royal Air Force?

The Commonwealth Government consulted His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom with regard to the projected factory early last year and since that time close contact has been maintained. Negotiations have proceeded on the basis that the types of Service aircraft to be produced in the factory would be of British design, and this is accepted by the Commonwealth Government as a general policy. They have, however, informed His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom that they have found themselves compelled to place an initial order with the factory for 40 training aircraft of American type. An assurance has been given that this is purely a temporary measure which in no way affects the permanent policy mentioned above. Representations were made that an aircraft of British design should be selected from the outset, and the decision of the Commonwealth Government has been received with very great regret.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air, whether, seeing that the firm of Boulton Paul Aircraft, Limited, Pendeford, Wolverhampton, are engaged in contracts for the Air Ministry, he will say, in relation to the present trade dispute at these works, whether the conditions under the fair-wage clause in acceptance of contracts is being enforced?

The contracts with this company embody the fair-wages clause, and no complaint of non-compliance with it has reached the Air Ministry.

Has the right hon. Baronet made inquiries as to the cause of the dispute?

I was asked a question about the Fair Wages Clause. If a complaint is made that the Fair Wages Clause is being infringed, we examine the case to see whether that is so. I believe in this instance the demand is that the piece rates should never result in men getting less than 25 per cent. over the district rate; therefore the infringement of the Fair Wages Clause does not come into it.

asked the Minister of Labour the cause of the trade dispute at the Boulton Paul Aircraft Limited, works, Pendeford, Wolverhampton; and whether his Department have taken steps to bring about a settlement through the trade union representatives?

I understand that this stoppage of work took place without the authority of the union of which the work-people are members. Arrangements have been made for a conference between the employers' association and the trade union as soon as work is resumed, and in these circumstances there is no action that my right hon. Friend can usefully take.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air by what date it will be possible to obtain British machines suitable for use on the British night air mail service to Scandinavia; and whether, in view of the desirability of British air routes being operated solely by British aircraft, he will give special assistance to the remedying of this matter?

It is difficult to say by what date British machines will be available which would be suitable for use on the night mail service to Scandinavia. It is important that the service should be maintained and as the hon. Member is aware, the company has been authorised to employ foreign aircraft for the purpose. In reply to the second part of the question, I would repeat the assurance which I gave to the hon. Member for Duddeston (Mr. Simmonds) on 26th November, 1936, that the whole question is being carefully reviewed and that plans are under consideration which will, it is hoped, render possible the early production of new British civil types.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air the length of time which during the War elapsed between the first local warning of the approach of aircraft to London and to Sheffield, respectively; and what these times are likely to be in the event of war?

Based on typical examples of aeroplane attacks by day and by night, the time elapsing between first warning and actual attack in the London area was about 45 minutes. In the attacks made by airships the warning period was considerably longer. Sheffield was not attacked by aeroplanes. It was bombed once by an airship, and on this occasion a preliminary warning was given about three and a-half hours before the bombs fell. Since the War the speed of aircraft has much increased, but I think it would be undesirable in the public interest to speculate on the amount of warning which would be feasible under modern defence conditions.

How will the public know whether there has been a warning or not?

There will, of course, be an organisation for this object.

How would the ordinary individual person know what the warning was?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air whether the licence to manufacture the balloons required for the barrage defence of London against aerial attack has yet been acquired by His Majesty's Government?

The balloons ordered for this purpose are in course of manufacture; no question of licence was involved.

What other towns besides London are scheduled for barrage?

I should require notice of that question.

Why was no question of licence involved when it was said that the licences for these things were to be delivered by the New Year?

I do not know to what statement the hon. Baronet is referring. No licence is needed for the balloons which are in course of manufacture in this country.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether any scheme of insurance against air raids has been prepared or is in contemplation; and, if so, how soon it can be made public?

I cannot add to the answer which I gave on 25th January to the hon. Member for North Tottenham (Mr. R. C. Morrison).

My question does not refer to what outside authorities are doing, but whether the Board of Trade is taking any action in the matter at all?

On the 25th of this month, that is Monday of this week, an answer was given dealing with the particular question of insurance against air raids, to a question identical with that which the hon. Member has, asked to-day. I would refer him to that reply, to which I can add nothing.

I have that question before me now, and it does not give any answer at all.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air what is the outcome of the joint inquiry of the Services into the question of butter versus margarine now going on for almost a year?

This question is being considered with the War Office in conjunction with other proposals affecting conditions of service, and it is not possible to announce any decision at the present moment.

Can the right hon. Baronet tell me the explanation of this lengthy, mysterious and very reprehensible delay?

It does not rest alone with the Air Ministry.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air whether his attention has been directed to the strategic position of the Speke aerodrome, Liverpool, with up-to-date electrical service, water supply, abundance of skilled labour, etc.; and is he prepared to consider the position for Government requirements?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air whether, in considering the suitability of Maidenhead as a site for the new aircraft factory, he has also had under consideration the advantages of the Liverpool Speke estate with its unlimited acreage, abundant water and electrical supply, and road, railway, and air services?

I would refer my hon. Friends to the statement made by the Prime Minister yesterday, which explained the reasons for the original selection of the site of White Waltham. As stated by the Prime Minister, immediate steps are being taken to find a suitable site in Lancashire, and the aerodrome at Speke is being considered in this connection. My hon. Friends will appreciate that until this investigation has been completed, it will not be possible for me to make any further statement. An announcement on the site selected will be made at the earliest possible date.

Am I to understand that, in regard to the question of a strategic point in Liverpool, this aerodrome has not been taken into consideration, and that with all the possibilities and facilities and unemployment there is in Liverpool we cannot have an up-to-date place brought within the cognisance of the Government?

I do not know why the hon. Member should assume that. I said Liverpool was actually being considered at present?

Would it be possible for a deputation composed of all parties to interview the Minister and put before him details of the situation?

I do not think that will be necessary as we have people there now.

In view of the confusion yesterday, should not something authoritative be brought before the Ministry in regard to the possibilities of Liverpool?

There is no confusion.

In selecting these sites, does the right hon. Gentleman consult other Departments, like the Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of Health, so that we shall not be led into another mistake like the last one?

Is it not a fact that the right hon. Baronet has all these considerations before him?

Yes, certainly.

asked the Prime Minister (1) whether, in view of the fact that the claims of the Special Areas for the establishment of factories have been ignored in connection with the proposed aircraft factory at White Waltham, he will take whatever steps are possible to ensure that before any plans of this description are entered into by a Government Department the Minister or Ministers responsible for the Special Areas will be consulted;

(2) whether his attention has been called to Section 5 of the report of the Commissioner for South Wales, issued in July, 1934, in which he specially called the attention of the Government to the suitability of that area for Government factories, especially aircraft factories, owing to its strategic value, the suitability of sites, and the availability of labour; and, in view of that recommendation, will the Government reconsider the proposal of establishing an aircraft factory in White Waltham and construct it in South Wales?

The reasons for the original selection of this site and of the decision to substitute a different site in Lancashire were fully explained in my reply yesterday to the hon. Member for Chester-le-Street (Mr. Lawson). It is the policy of the Government to establish new factories in the Special and Depressed Areas so far as practical considerations permit.

Will the right hon. Gentleman reply to the latter part of question 45, as to whether the Minister or Ministers responsible for the Special Areas are consulted before any works of this kind are located outside the Special Areas?

The whole Government are consulted in these matters in regard to sites, and the Lancashire site was chosen after very careful examination. In the consideration of any site, the question which the hon. Member has put is always borne in mind.

May I ask the Prime Minister whether the question of the new site is now definitely closed, and whether suitable sites in other Special Areas will not be considered, seeing that in South Wales, the percentage of the unemployed is double that of Lancashire, and ought not South Wales to have some consideration in connection with the work?

As to the first part of the hon. Member's question, I cannot re-open this matter with regard to this particular factory, as it is now closed. With regard to the latter part of what he said, I would ask the hon. Member to await the Debate which will take place by and by on the special legislation for these areas in which he is particularly interested, and I hope that it may be possible to make a clear statement as to how far the defence programme may be forwarded by work done in these areas.

Will the right hon. Gentleman, as head of the Government, call for a report into the number of vacant sites occupied by munition works during the Great War and now awaiting use and occupation, lying in vicinities where there are enormous numbers of people unemployed? I refer particularly to the Burry Port munition site in a place where 70 per cent. of the people are unemployed. That site is vacant and awaiting to be used, and why does not the right hon. Gentleman take into consideration the use of such sites.

I have nothing to add to what I have said.

asked the Secretary of State for War the considerations that entered into his decision to establish the munition factory at Chorley, Lancashire; and whether he took into account, before deciding on its location, the distress prevailing in the coal areas in and around Wigan?

Apart from purely technical considerations, the main requirements which had to be borne in mind when deciding the location of the filling factory now being erected at Chorley, Lancashire, were low vulnerability from air attack, good transport facilities for the heavy stores handled which require siding connections with a main line railway and good road access, satisfactory labour supply in emergency, and a level site not in proximity to a highly populated district. The area required was about 900 acres for the factory and 200 acres for the neighbouring magazines. In this, as in other cases, full weight was given to the importance of bringing new work into depressed areas, and the situation in the various districts in Lancashire was fully in mind. The Chorley site was selected, however, as being the only one in Lancashire which fulfilled all the necessary conditions.

Is the hon. and gallant Member aware that all these requirements are to be found in those districts where distress is the greatest, that is, in the coal fields?

I cannot add anything to the answer I have given.

Is the hon. and gallant Member aware that in Chorley they have a low percentage of unemployment but that in Leyland, the adjoining town, there is practically none, while seven miles away the unemployed population is as much as 30,000 or 40,000?

The hon. Member apparently does not appreciate the fact that we are not putting up a munition factory, but a filling factory, where the work is of such a character that it entails certain peculiar considerations which have to be borne in mind.

May I ask whether the information received guarantees that there will be the population required for a filling factory in this area, because it is a slightly populated area, and public feeling is absolutely against a filling factory being placed there?

I have no reason to suppose that the information received is incorrect or that there will be any difficulty.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware that the London Passenger Transport Board is objecting to passengers, to be conveyed by road from Lancashire for the Coronation celebrations, being taken round London in the same vehicles and suggesting that those passengers be compelled to use London-owned vehicles for this latter purpose; and whether, in view of the inconvenience which would be thus caused, he can issue instructions that this objection shall not prevail?

Such applications under Statute go to the Metropolitan Traffic Commissioner.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it ridiculous that omnibuses from another district should not be allowed to be used in London, and will he bear in mind that, if London is able to prevent these buses being used within its boundary, it is possible for Lancashire people to prevent buses from London coming into our county?

I am not called upon to say what I think is ridiculous. All I can say is that I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman.

In view of the possibility of the accommodation of London Passenger Transport being taxed to its utmost limits, could not further consideration be given not only to coaches from Lancashire but from all over the country being used by their owners in the area of London?

Of course, the Traffic Commissioners will take what the hon. Gentleman has said into account before giving their decision. We have also to bear in mind the question of congestion.

Will my right hon. Friend see that buses coming from Plymouth or Torquay have at least as good a chance as those of the London Passenger Transport Board? Why should this arbitrary board prohibit people using their cars or buses from other districts on this occasion?

My hon. Friend and I share the desire that the West Country should have what is due to it.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will introduce legislation to enable compensation to be paid in respect of persons killed or injured by untraced cars?

I will bear my hon. Friend's suggestion in mind in the light of any recommendations made by the committee appointed by my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade and now reviewing the law relating to insurance against third party risks.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when that committee will report?

I do not know.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will reconsider his decision to withhold publication weekly of road deaths and injuries while giving a new monthly analysis, so as to allay any existing public fears that reduced publicity is an encouragement to reckless road users?

I do not accept these premises.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many persons during 1936 were killed and how many injured by cars that failed to stop after the accident; how many of such cars were traced; and how many untraced?

I regret that the information asked for is not available.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he has yet received a report from the Transport Advisory Council on the co-ordination of the means of transport; and when he will be in a position to make a statement on the Government's national transport policy?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave to a question on a similar subject by the hon. Member for Rotherhithe (Mr. Benjamin Smith) on 17th June last.

asked the Minister of Transport how many lengths of road have been the subject of public inquiries under Section 1 of the 1934 Act; and how many of them have been de-restricted?

302 lengths of road have been the subject of public inquiries under this Section. Of these, 184 have been or are being freed from restriction.

Is it the purpose of the Minister to continue this policy of de-restriction in face of the wishes of all the large municipalities in the matter?

If Parliament entrusts me with a duty, however invidious it may be, I must discharge it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman try to maintain confidence, if he really wants to reduce accidents?

Yes, Sir.

The right hon. Gentleman is not doing it yet.

asked the Minister of Transport whether his attention has been drawn to the new sodium lighting system which is in operation at one end of the new East Lancashire Road, Manchester to Liverpool; and, if he is satisfied it is a good one, will he consider having the whole length of the road completed with it?

Yes, Sir. I have received a favourable report on the lighting in operation on the western end of the Liverpool-East Lancashire Road within the City of Liverpool. The lighting of the remainder of this road is a matter for the lighting authorities concerned.

What is the right hon. Gentleman doing in the matter? Is he aware of the anxiety of the people, and that he has given many promises about his desire to have it done if he got the chance? Now that he has the chance, what does he intend to do?

I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman should put a question in that form. I am not to have any chance until April next.

After April next, what then?

The hon. Member must put down a question.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how the cost of the maintenance of this sodium lighting compares with the cost of the mercury vapour?

I should only be too happy to give that information or any other, if my hon. Friend would put down a question.

asked the Minister of Transport whether, in view of the evidence given on behalf of the railway companies when objecting to the renewal of A and B licences that it was the intention of His Majesty's Government to use the provisions of the Road and Rail Traffic Act, 1933, in order to reduce the number of such vehicles on the roads, he will make a statement on the matter to explain the attitude of his Department and their intentions in future?

No such statement by me would be proper in a matter which has been determined by Parliament itself.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman for some assurance that the railway representatives have not had the definite Government authority to make the statement that they made, and further, is it not possible for the Government to make a declaration of their intention in future? Do they mean to use this Act in the way which has been stated in the courts?

I have not seen the actual statement, but if it were made, it was made upon the authority of the railway companies, and not upon the authority of the Government. It is the duty of the licensing authority to listen to all objections.

Is the Minister aware of the fact that under the Road Transport Regulations the small haulier is definitely being squeezed out in favour of the large combines?

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will make representations to the Railway Rates Tribunal for the purpose of seeing whether some concession in the way of cheaper travelling facilities than those now operating can be granted to young persons working in the area of the county of London?

I have no power to make such representations, but Parliament has authorised the local authorities to apply to the Railway Rates Tribunal for modifications of the fares charged in the London Passenger Transport area or the conditions applicable to such fares.

What was the result of the representations of the Minister of Labour on the communications made to him on this subject?

I cannot say.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will ascertain from the standing joint committee of the London and North-Eastern Railway Company and the London Passenger Transport Board whether any progress has been made with the proposal for the electrification of the Liverpool Street to Enfield line; and whether a definite scheme has been or is being prepared?

Yes, Sir, and I will communicate the reply to the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Minister of Transport what is the standard strength of light required for each vehicle to have to comply with the Regulations?

I would direct the hon. Member's attention to Section I of the Road Transport Lighting Act, 1927, and I will send him a copy of the Regulations made thereunder.

asked the Minister for the Co-ordination of Defence whether His Majesty's Government have yet reached a decision as to the advisability of increasing the stocks of grain stored in the United Kingdom?

His Majesty's Government are fully aware of the advantages of storing foodstuffs for defence purposes, as well as of the difficulties with which any such measures are attended. Information as to any decisions reached by the Government will be given whenever this is practicable. I am, however, clear that it would not be in the public interest to make any statement for the time being.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Health, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether he can now state what decision has been taken as regards the removal or otherwise of the old Governor's house on the Calton site, Edinburgh, in connection with the scheme for new Government offices?

I have been asked to reply. A final decision on this question will not be taken until the new Government offices are approaching completion.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether he has considered the resolution from the City of Sheffield Education Committee with reference to the growing percentage of education expenditure which has to be met from local rates and the need for revision of the present scale of Board of Education grants; and what steps he proposes to take in the matter?

My right hon. Friend has considered the resolution referred to by the hon. Member. The question of a revision of the grant formula was also laid before him by a recent deputation from the Association of Education Committees. On that occasion he made it plain that he was not prepared to entertain such a revision until further experience had been gained of the working of the Government's proposals for educational reform.

Does the Parliamentary Secretary agree that, in fact, the percentage of expenditure to be met is increasing the contributions of the local authority, and how long does he expect them to go on meeting this increased charge?

I think that the right hon. Gentleman is correct in his statement, but we must have more experience, in view of the fact that the grants in respect of elementary school buildings and transport charges were increased only a year ago.

Is my hon. Friend perfectly satisfied that there are no items of expenditure put forward by this Committee which are unnecessary, and is he satisfied the Committee is practising every possible economy, and, if he is not so satisfied, will he cause an inquiry to be made?

I must have notice of that question.

Is it not a fact that the percentage of grant made by the Board of Education is not fixed upon that, but upon the actual scale of the grants, and is it not a matter for review of the scale of grants?

It is based on a number of factors.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps are being taken to put into effect the reports of the Steering Gear Committee?

As a result of discussion with the classification societies and the shipowners, the latter have agreed to carry out substantially the recommendations of the Steering Gear Committee and the classification societies to make the alterations to their rules necessary to ensure general compliance with them.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary say when that arrangement will come into force?

It will come into force very much quicker than if it were necessary to introduce legislation. The result of the answer I have given is that the matter can now be dealt with by regulations, and the drafting of these regulations will be proceeded with at once.

Can the hon. Member give any date at all?

I think that question had better be put down.

asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs the number of cattle owned in Swaziland in 1929 and 1936, respectively, by the three companies, Ranches, Limited, the Barr Ranch, and the Central Mining and David Forbes Ranch; and whether he has any proposals to make for the assistance of the livestock industry of Swaziland?

I am not in possession of the figures asked for in the first part of the question. With regard to the second part, the position of the cattle industry in Swaziland was examined a few years ago by the Pim Commission, and in accordance with its recommendation assistance has since been given from the Colonial Development Fund towards a scheme for the improvement of native owned cattle in the territory. It was pointed out in the report that such a scheme should also help the European industry by improving the quality of store cattle available.

May I ask whether the most effective way to help the cattle industry would not be to secure the raising of the wage embargo imposed by the Union Government, and also whether he is satisfied that the embargo was imposed for purely economic and not for political reasons?

I answered a question on that point yesterday, and perhaps the hon. Member will be good enough to look at the answer.