asked the Secretary of State for War what steps he is taking to relinquish immediately the gun site at Middlesbrough, particulars of which have already been sent to him, required urgently as part of an industrial development area of that town.

The question of an alternative site is now being discussed by the Middlesbrough Corporation and the regional planning officer of the Ministry of Town and Country Planning. Until an alternative site is found and approved, I am not prepared to relinquish the present site which is owned by my Department.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this matter has been before his Department since last July and that no satisfaction has been obtained by the local authority who require this land for industrial purposes? Is he further aware that this is not an isolated example in his Department, and will he see that this sort of obstruction is removed and that the dead hand of bureaucracy is not allowed to obstruct in this manner?

I do not know what type of obstruction my hon. Friend refers to We own the land, certainly, and I think we had better leave it to the Ministry of Town and Country Planning to assist us in this matter.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that the Government have spent large sums of money in these areas, and that inaction in his Department is holding up development in this area in Middlesbrough which is set aside for industrial development? Is my right hon. Friend also aware that another Department is lounging in luxury in a maternity home, so that the proper people cannot get into this home? Will my right hon. Friend set a good example and get rid of these people without any further delay? There is no excuse whatever.

All I can say is, the War Office are not lounging in luxury on this particular site.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that employment in Middlesbrough in the future will be affected by this decision of his Department, and can he not hasten the relinquishment of this site?

I will do all I can to help.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he has now had an opportunity of conferring with his Service and Colonial colleagues on the maintenance of a colour bar against men seeking regular engagement in the Army; and if he will now make a statement.

I am in consultation with my colleagues in the Service Departments and at the Colonial Office, but I am not in a position to make a statement at present

Can my right hon. Friend say when he expects to be able to make a statement?

I would not like to say at the moment, but negotiations are going on very satisfactorily.

asked the Secretary of State for War why, in view of the fact that soldiers sentenced during the war for offences constantly have their cases reviewed and the sentences often remitted, Mr. M. Waxman, 20, Sillwood Road, Brighton, who is 41 years of age. is now being called up on an enlistment order dated 14th March, 1941, which he failed to obey, although he served from 1942 to 1944 with credit in the Merchant Navy; whether that service will be taken into consideration; and if the man will be immediately released to carry on his present job.

Mr. Waxman failed to report on 27th March, 1941, after having had an enlistment notice served on him. His whereabouts were recently discovered and he was ordered to report on 21st November to the General Service Corps Depot. The question of what disciplinary action should be taken in his case is now under consideration. The fact that during his period of absence he served in the Merchant Navy will be taken into account in determining his final date of release.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is no proof whatever that this man received his calling-up papers? He says he never did. In view of the fact that he has done excellent service, which nobody denies, and today is doing a job which is of no use to anybody, is this really not just "red tape" or victimisation? The man, who is 41 years of age, could do a lot of good work, but at present he is of no use to anybody.

I admit that he did good service while he served in the Merchant Navy, but the fact remains that he avoided his military service, and I think he ought to do his share along with many others who did their-share during the war.

He has done about three years' service.

asked the Secretary of State for War why the additional pension of 5d. per day payable to ex-Regular soldiers on attaining 55 years of age has been refused to Mr. R. A. Clout, 1, Upper Roedale Cottages, Brighton, late Royal Sussex Regiment, in view of the fact that his birth certificate, which has been forwarded to the Record Office, shows that he was born on 15th August, 1891.

As has already been explained to the hon. and learned Member, when Mr. Clout originally enlisted in September, 1910, he declared his age to be 18 years I month. The general rule is that the age originally declared by a recruit is accepted for Army purposes, in- cluding pension, and Mr. Clout will therefore not qualify for the additional pension until August, 1947.

Is the right hon. Gentleman really defending the position, that this ex-soldier is to be deprived of the 3s. a week to which his age entitles him, on account of a mistake made by someone in his attestation nearly 40 years ago, when he was 17 years of age?

I do not accept the statement that a mistake was made. Quite often recruits on enlistment declare an age which satisfies them, and during their service often have an advantage thereby

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will review the case of Arthur Davis, who was sentenced to death on 16th December. 1944, but whose sentence was later commuted to penal servitude for life.

I am giving careful consideration to this case, and am awaiting a special report.

Is the Minister aware that those of us who have examined the evidence over the past months are pretty certain that there has been a serious miscarriage of justice in the circumstances, and will he reconsider the matter?

This case presents rather sad features, but I would certainly not accept what my hon. Friend says.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that 14573189 Gunner M. Essex, who has been sentenced to 164 days' detention, was under close arrest for 64 days prior to sentence; and, in view of the loss of pay and privilege suffered by the soldier during this period, if he is prepared to review the sentence.

The sentence will be reviewed shortly and I will inform my hon. Friend of the result.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the number of cases of soldiers being kept for a considerable time in detention before they are brought to trial seems to be increasing, despite the end of the war and will he look into it with a view to speeding this business up?

I thought my hon. Friend was referring to a specific case, and I have given him a specific answer.

asked the Secretary of State for War if consideration will be given to Army personnel of demobilisation group 50 completing the remainder of their service in the United Kingdom.

It is already difficult for us to meet our inescapable commitments abroad, and the bulk of trained men in the later age and service groups are already serving overseas. Men of group 50 are not due to start release until possibly some date in June, to bring them home early would increase further the gaps in our overseas establishment which cannot be filled.

In view of the very long delay in the demobilisation of these men, will the right hon. Gentleman consider trying to get men home even one or two months earlier, to enable them to make the necessary arrangements for their entry back into civilian life?

I can assure the hon. and gallant Member that demobilisation is a constant preoccupation in my mind. But I cannot add anything to the answer I have given to his Question.

asked the Secretary of State for War if men who volunteered for service in the R.N. or R.A.F., and were afterwards compulsorily transferred to the Army, will be released with the R.N. or R.A.F. groups to which they originally belonged.

No, Sir. I would refer the hon. Member to the replies given by my predecessor on 23rd October, 1945, to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Chelmsford (Wing-Commander Millington) and on 17th December, 1945, to the hon. Member for Newbury (Mr. Hurd).

Is my right hon. Friend aware that nothing produces a greater sense of grievance than unequal treatment between man and man; and when two men have joined the Forces at the same time why should not they be released at the same time, when the circumstances are as stated in the Question?

I do not think that purpose would be met entirely in the way the hon. Gentleman suggested.

Will the Minister not look at this matter again in the light of what I have said?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, so far as the Navy is concerned, large numbers of ratings were transferred to the Army during the last eight weeks of hostilities, many of whom had three, and in some cases four, years' service behind them; and will he look at it again in view of the obvious unfairness?

This matter has been looked at before, but I will certainly give it another look to refresh my memory.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that Appendix A to Part I Orders, M.E.L.F., dated r8th November, 1946, included guarantees by General Miles Dempsey, Commander-in-Chief, M.E.L.F., that by 31st December. 1947, every man in the Army with more than three years' service would be released, that by 31st December, 1948, every man called up before 1st January, 1947, would be released, and that the balance of rate of release would be 17,200 per month from January to March, 1947, and 25,800 per month from April to June, 1947; and whether these undertakings were given with his knowledge and sanction.

I have not seen the document referred to, but I am aware that a misstatement was made. The fault lay in a passage in a telegram, which was sent by my Department to all commands, which was misleading, and, in fact, misled the Middle East Command. A correction, unfortunately, arrived only after the Commander-in-Chief had issued a statement based upon the misleading telegram A fresh statement has now been made. I must express my regret for this mistake, but the facts governing release are as stated by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister in this House on 26th November, and in a broadcast the same evening.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this statement was made in order to relieve the anxiety of men in this command, and that it did, in fact, create far greater confusion and dismay than existed before? What steps will he take to prevent a recurrence of such a happening in the future?

I have already taken as careful steps as I can take to prevent mistakes like this occurring again. All I can say is that I most deeply regret that it happened.

Did the right hon. Gentleman see the telegram before it went off? If not, will he make sure that when announcements are going to be made to the troops he will check them before the things go out?

I am afraid I did see the telegram, but I did not recognise the mistake. It was recognised only in the Middle East Command. All the other commands got it aright. It was not an absolute mistake; it was a partial mistake.

A near miss.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it has always been the custom, when a Government Department has made a mistake in that way, that the people concerned have always had the advantage of the mistake?

I should like to agree to that assertion, but it would mean that something like 100,000 men would have to be released out of their turn.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make arrangements for any announcements about the speeding up of demobilisation to be made by the Government, and not by serving officers? It only adds to the confusion.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will now give the date on which the men previously stationed in Greece, in release Groups 42 and 43, due to be released before 18th November, were in fact released; and what explanation there is for the delay in providing shipping to bring these men from Greece earlier.

I regret that I am unable to give the exact dates of release of men stationed in Greece in Groups 42 and 43. Men in Group 42 sailed, however, from Greece on 16th October, and were obviously in plenty of time for release by 18th November. Men in Group 43 were due to sail on 9th/10th November, but owing to a breakdown of shipping then-departure was delayed until 13th November. In spite of this unforeseen occurrence, the release of none of these men should have been delayed more than four days.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on 5th November I raised this question with him, about a ship coming out of Piraeus without these men, and that he explained that these men had until 18th November before they were due for release? Is he aware that they were not, in fact, released for several days after 18th November?.

I think I said no more than four days after their release date.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that, despite repeated assurances of impending improvement, troops serving in East Africa Command are still not being repatriated in time to receive disembarkation leave before demobilisation; and what steps he is taking to meet this grievance.

No assurances have been given that men overseas who are due for release would be returned in time to receive disembarkation leave before release. As I stated last week in reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Clitheroe (Mr. Randall) the situation is as described by my predecessor in a reply on 16th October, 1945, of which I am sending my hon. Friend a copy.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the retarded rates of release for 1947, he will ensure that the lower limit of groups eligible for United Kingdom leave from the Middle East and India is proportionately lowered

As and when the War Office announces details regarding retarded dates of release, overseas commands concerned automatically take action to ensure that if necessary, groups previously ineligible become eligible again.

asked the Secretary of State for War on what date it is expected that Group 46 men now in Singapore will embark for home.

Actual sailing dates of men embarking overseas for release are a matter for the command concerned, but I have no reason to think that men in Singapore will not arrive in time to be released in the period allotted to their groups. Group 46 is due to be released in this country between 23rd December and the end of January.

asked the Secretary of State for War (1) if he is aware of the complaints and unrest in the 800 Special Intelligence Company, Singapore, particulars of which have been sent to him; and what action he proposes to take;

(2) if he is aware of the complaints and unrest in the 19th Air Formation Signals, Elein Camp, Singapore, of which particulars have been sent to him; and what action he proposes to take.

I am not aware of any special complaints or unrest in these units, although I am well aware of the feeling of disappointment about release, and of the uncomfortable conditions of service in the Far East. I would refer the hon. Member to the full statement on release made on 26th November by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, which has been widely publicised.

In view of the fact that these two cases are typical, will the right hon. Gentleman try to persuade the Prime Minister to hold inter-departmental conferences so that all the Departments concerned can go into the chaotic state of administration in Singapore, and try to send out some really responsible administrator?

I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's suggestion that there are chaotic conditions in Singapore.

Will the right hon. Gentleman circulate the statement of the Prime Minister in some dozens to all Members of Parliament, because we are getting day to day inquiries about the matter?

I should have thought the hon. and gallant Gentleman, with his long knowledge of the House, would have known where to obtain copies of the statement. It is in the Vote Office

Would the Minister bear in mind that the supplementary questions put by my right hon. Friend the Member for Warwick and Leamington (Mr. Eden), which are half the story, are not included in that statement, so we have to get a copy of HANSARD and go over the whole thing again?

asked the Secretary of State for War on what grounds orders have been issued for the drafting of soldiers of B.A.O.R. to the Hartz Mountains for cutting timber for use in the British housing programme.

Timber is urgently needed for building houses in this country. Cut timber has been accumulating in German forests for lack of men and transport to move it away. In so far as they can be spared from their primary military tasks, troops are therefore helping to move this timber and to cut more. It has been explained to them that they are thereby helping to provide houses for civilians in this country, an object with which I understand they have some sympathy.

Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate, that while it is true that the soldiers have much sympathy with the object of building houses in this country, they feel it is quite wrong that demobilisation should perhaps be delayed by reason of this work being done; and would it not be possible to achieve a compromise whereby the Army provides the necessary transport and German civilians provide the necessary labour, on a proper remunerative basis?

I think the hon. Gentleman has a somewhat vivid imagination. This does not delay demobilisation in Germany.

But the men think it does.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is so much timber lying at Hamburg that there is insufficient shipping to bring it over to this country? What is the point of using British troops to cut timber if we cannot get it away?

Most of the troops that are at the moment engaged on this task are engaged in clearing the timber to this country.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the suggestion of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Hertford (Mr. Walker-Smith) is quite impracticable, owing to the great shortage of labour in Germany?

Why not use the prisoners?

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that, under the proposed scheme for Army administration, there will be no fewer than 13 area Army records and pay offices in England and only one such office in Scotland; and whether, in these circumstances, he will reconsider his decision to close down the Army records and pay offices in Edinburgh.

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the written reply I gave yesterday to the hon. Member for South Edinburgh (Sir W. Darling), of which I am sending him a copy.

Arising out of that reply, at which I have already had an opportunity of looking, will the Minister expedite a decision in this matter, as there is a great deal of dissatisfaction about it in Scotland?

Yes, Sir. We are doing our best. As I said in my reply yesterday, we are now searching for available sites.

Will my right hon. Friend look at the possibilities of the use of No. 1 Camp at Duddingston, which both the colonel in charge of records and the men consider suitable for this purpose?

I will certainly look at that.

asked the Secretary of State for War on what grounds a decision has been made to remove qualified psychologists and psychiatrists from officer selection boards, in view of the fact that these experts devised the successful techniques now in use.

The function of the Service psychiatrist is to advise the executive authorities when matters of mental health and adjustment are in question. It is open to the presidents of officer selection boards to consult the Service psychiatrists, or specialists in other branches of the medical profession, if they find reason to do so. Psychiatrists and psychologists are both consulted in the formulation of the technique adopted by officer selection boards.

Have psychologists and psychiatrists been dropped, or have they not been dropped? The answer does not make that point clear.

They have not been dropped, but they are not now necessarily members of these selection boards.

Does the right hon. Gentleman know that the presence of psychologists and psychiatrists on these boards during the war won the confidence of the serving men, and did, in point of fact, increase the number of other ranks who applied for commissions? Will he look into this matter again, so that confidence is not undermined?

No, Sir. As long as the services of psychiatrists are made available, if necessary, that is all, I think, my hon. Friend can ask for. I may tell him that there was a good deal of objection to these psychiatrists among the men.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that all other ranks did not share the view of the hon. Member, and that some of them referred to the psychiatrists as "trick cyclists"?

Was that on the part of senior officers or other ranks?

I am well aware of that, but I think we ought to get this question in its correct perspective. Psychiatrists were of great value in many cases.

asked the Lord President of the Council when it is intended to publish the Report of the Ministerial Committee's Expert Committee on the work of psychologists and psychiatrists in the Services; and if he is aware that publication is now urgently necessary in view of an Army Council decision to remove psychologists and psychiatrists from officer selection boards.

It is intended to publish the report as soon as possible. With regard to the second part of the Question, I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply just given by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War to Question No. 21.

Will my right hon. Friend define what "as soon as possible" means? Does he really anticipate being able to publish this report during the course of the next few weeks or the next few months?

I do not think it is wise for me to define "as soon as possible" in this particular instance.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will make a further statement on extending the scheme to provide free priority passages to next of kin to visit serving men on the danger list who are stationed outside Europe.

There are a number of practical difficulties in extending this scheme beyond Europe, but I am hopeful that we may overcome them. The matter is under active consideration, and I will make a further statement as soon as that consideration is completed.

May I express the hope that that consideration will soon be made, in view of the fact that, at present, there is no difficulty in getting priority passages if people can pay for them; that serving men are posted all over the world, irrespective of the financial needs of their families; and that these priority passages are purely on a money basis?

I share my hon. Friend's hope.

asked the Secretary of State for War when he proposes to rehabilitate Bellahouston Park, Glasgow, and make it available for public use.

I expect that the whole of Bellahouston Park, Glasgow, will become redundant to my Department's requirements during the first half of 1947. It is not the normal practice for the Department to carry out physical rehabilitation, but to pay monetary compensation under Section 2 (1) ( b ) of the Compensation Defence Act, 1939.

asked the Secretary of State for War what factors are taken into consideration in determining Class C releases other than compassionate circumstances.

Only compassionate factors are taken into account in deciding whether a soldier should have compassionate release. In the case, however, of men applying for release on "one man business" grounds, their age and service groups are taken into account in deciding whether the release should be temporary or indefinite.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that cases of an extremely compassionate nature, admitted by his Department to be so, are being rejected because the soldier is too young, or has too short a period of service? How can he possibly justify this as the basis for judging compassionate leave?

I really think my hon Friend is under a misapprehension. They are not extremely compassionate cases to which he referred, if the only compassionate ground is that of a one-man business.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will reconsider the instruction that candidates who apply for commissions under Group II of the Army Council Instruction must be recommended by their commanding officer, brigadier, major-general and army commander, in view of the fact that suitable men volunteering are vetoed by the commanding officer alone, as in the case of Major Morrison of the R.A.

The seniority envisaged for officers accepted in Group II can only be justified if the officers are outstanding. The system of recommendation of Group II candidates by commanding officers and higher commanders is a reasonable one and I do not think that any officer of the required standard will fail to be recommended. In the case of Major Morrison it was not his commanding officer who rejected his application.

Is the Minister aware that this man was outstanding, and was recommended by the other three, but the Fuehrer of the Army said "No," and that was the end of it, and evidently the Minister accepts it too?

I do not know how far the term "the Fuehrer of the Army" could be interpreted, but I should have thought that if it could be, I should have been considered to be the Fuehrer of the Army.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many wives of B.A.O.R. Servicemen have already returned to this country.

Just over 3,200 Army families have gone out to B.A.O.R. Of these, 18 families have returned and 12 more applied to return up to 4th December. These figures include 27 returning after short visits or because the husband has been posted to another Command and one where the husband has died.

Is the Minister fully assured of the complete wisdom of this scheme at the present time?

I am completely assured.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many of the officers promoted to the rank of lieutenant-general and major-general, respectively, as announced in the Gazette of 3rd December last, commenced their service career in the ranks.

None of the four, Sir, but the proportion may rise somewhat in future years.

Will my right hon. Friend say when we may expect a really concrete sign that the principle of equal opportunities for all in His Majesty's Armed Forces of the Crown will begin to operate?

My hon. Friend will know that it is the policy of the War Office to commission officers almost entirely from the ranks, but it will take some time, I am afraid, before we can expect generals coming from the ranks.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many Polish troops in this country are undergoing military training and for what purpose; and whether pre-O.C.T.U. training now being provided for Polish troops at a camp in Yorkshire is devised for training officers for the Polish Resettlement Corps or for the British or Polish armies.

No military training is provided for Poles in this country. Pre-O.C.T.U. training used to be carried out by the unit now stationed at the camp referred to but it is now used merely as a holding unit, although its title has not been changed.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many British troops. are employed in this country in camps provided for Polish troops and the Polish Resettlement Corps; whether these men are required to carry out orders given to them by Polish officers and non-commissioned officers; and if he will release them from these duties and so speed up demobilisation.

A total of 33b officers and 715 other ranks are employed on advisory or administrative duties in camps for Polish troops and the Polish Resettlement Corps. In view of the nature of their duties they are not required to carry out orders given by Polish officers and non-commissioned officers.

The majority are older men who have recently accepted short service commissions and engagements specifically for extra-regimental employment such as this. They are therefore not due for early release and even if they could be employed on other duties their numbers are so small that their transfer would not materially affect the rate of release. Moreover their removal would cause a breakdown in the entire scheme of Polish resettlement.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the importance of preserving Dartmoor ponies will be taken into account in connection with his Department's plans for Dartmoor.

Yes, Sir, specific precautions are taken to preserve the Dartmoor ponies.

Will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that no action has been taken which will in any way interfere with the famous and unique breed of ponies?

We are certainly doing all we can to see that they do not become extinct, at any rate through the Army's activities.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the decision is likely to be taken to evacuate the whole of Dartmoor?

That, I should have thought, was an entirely different question.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will now consider relaxing the regulations which prevent Regular officers who held commissions prior to 1939 from exercising the right to retire, which was a condition of their original engagement.

Retirement is now already allowed in certain cases and the ban on retirement is being progressively lifted. At present regular substantive lieutenant-colonels and majors may retire or resign on reaching the age limit of their corps as laid down in the Army Pay Warrant. Individual compassionate cases are treated on their merits.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give further consideration to this matter, because there are many younger officers who want to make their way in life and who do not know when they will get out, and who are not being released?

I should have thought that the younger officers would still have a good time to serve in their military careers.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many German merchant seamen are still detained as prisoners of war in this country; and how many of them were brought from Canada to this country in June, 1946, and promised immediate repatriation.

1,852 German merchant seamen are at present held in this country, including 373 who were brought from Canada in June. 1,100 are being repatriated in December and the rest in January and February No promise of immediate repatriation was made to the men brought from Canada.

Is my right hon Friend aware that some of these men are really aliens and not Germans at all, and if I give him particulars will he give me an assurance that the prisoner of war who communicated with me will not be punished for doing so, as has happened before?

I think my hon. Friend can be assured that we are not too hard on prisoners of war in general, whether they write to my hon. Friend or not.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will make arrangements so that camp money saved by prisoners of war may be changed into sterling and handed over to the Save Europe Now Committee, and the proceeds used for the purpose of sending clothing and voluntarily saved food to the friends and relations of the prisoners of war.

Prisoners of war can assist their families in Germany by remitting part of their credit balances: they do not require sterling for this purpose. With regard to sending parcels of clothing and food, arrangements have been made with the Save Europe Now organisation, whereby prisoners may send a parcel as a Christmas gift to their relatives or friends in the British controlled zone of Germany, containing articles of their own property, or such as are available for purchase in camp canteens, but it would not be desirable or practicable for prisoners to give their own rations for this purpose

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, to my knowledge, in several camps quite considerable sums have been collected for this purpose; and will he explain to the House why it is impossible to permit the prisoners to exchange their camp money for sterling in order to send it to one of the relief societies? Is it the Treasury?

No, Sir. I should have thought that the prisoners could send all the money they want to direct to relatives or friends.

They cannot.

The whole purpose of this organisation is to enable people in Germany to get some benefit by such efforts.

I know, but is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that they are forced to change their money at the wrong rate of exchange when they do this; and why cannot he come to an arrangement with his right hon. Friend the Chancellor, so that these people who are completely at our mercy have a square deal? May I have an answer?

I think my hon. Friend exaggerates a little. These prisoners, as he will see from an answer I shall give to a later Question, are being dealt with as fairly as we possibly can deal with them.

asked the Secretary of State for War if extra rations for Christmas will be given to German prisoners of war in this country.

I regret this is not possible.

Does the right hon. Gentleman presume to deny to our defeated enemies the compassion which we all need for ourselves?

asked the Secretary of State for War whether, in the light of representations since made to him, he will reconsider his recent decision in regard to the suggestion of the hon Member for Bedford that German prisoners of war should, where invited to do so. be allowed to enter British homes on Christmas day.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will now allow German prisoners of war at present in camps in this country to accept invitations during the Christmas period to visit homes of those living near the camps.

asked the Secretary of State for War what relaxation is being made this Christmas time in the rules relating to fraternisation with prisoners of war in this country.

Arrangements are being made to allow well-conducted prisoners of war to take unescorted walks within a radius of five miles of their camp or billet until lighting-up time, to converse with members of the public, and, subject to permission from their commandant, to accept invitations to private houses within the five mile radius.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is most gratifying to find that he has so well caught, in advance, the spirit of Christmas?

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if we are to understand that these arrangements apply only to Christmas? Or are they to be continued after Christmas, and is this a new arrangement, a step towards the end of non-fraternisation?

It deals not only with Christmas time, but after Christmas. I think those hon. Gentlemen who have a sense of proportion will admit that this is a considerable advance.

As there are many cases of farmers who have had prisoners of war who have worked well for them and who are outside the five mile limit, will that limit be relaxed in those cases?

That is just why I have come to this decision; many prisoners billeted on farms have had these facilities for some time.

asked the Secretary of State for War in what circumstances four German prisoners of war, working at Bicester, were arrested at Witney, attempting to sell motor-car tyres to a civilian.

The Germans were arrested by the civil police. The investigations to which I referred in my reply to the hon. Member last week are not yet complete.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the dumps at Bicester Central Ordnance Depot are said to be practically unguarded, and that many of the trucks which are now driven by Germans go through and the Germans help themselves, as in this case?

I should not like to think that Germans are helping themselves at our Ordnance Depot at Bicester, but in regard to the first part of the supplementary question, that is just one of our difficulties at the present moment—to provide adequate manpower for the Army.

Another reason for sending them home.

asked the Prime Minister what stage has been reached in the discussions for the standardisation of British air, land, naval weapons and munitions to fixed U.S. sizes and patterns that were initiated by him, in pursuance of views expressed by the Canadian Prime Minister at the Empire Conference last April through the Anglo-American Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee; and whether any measures are in contemplation for the standardisation of training manuals, exchange of officers and joint use of naval and air bases by the U.S.A. and the British Commonwealth and Empire.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply made yesterday by my right hon. Friend the Lord President of the Council to the hon. Member for Mile End (Mr. Piratin), and to the remarks I made in my speech in the Debate on the Address on 18th November. The principles there outlined are those which govern the policy of the Government in these matters. The only point I would add is that the statement in the first half of the Question as to the views expressed by the Canadian Prime Minister in April is without foundation.

In view of the failure of the Prime Minister to answer the last part of the Question, either on 18th November or through the Leader of the House yesterday, would my right hon. Friend, in view of the rising disquiet on both sides of the Atlantic as to the present situation take a further opportunity of making a full statement on the nature and extent of the Anglo-American military conversations?

I do not think there is any apprehension, except that I gather the Questions asked by the hon. Member are apt to cause apprehension in some quarters. I thought that my statement on the Address dealt very fully with the whole question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that had standardisation been achieved in 1940 our enemies might have been discomfited?

The hon. Member is not asking for information. That is surely a purely hypothetical question.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell the House with what pleasure he would welcome any indication that other foreign Powers are prepared to be as internationally minded as America?

If the hon. Member had followed what I said in the Debate on the Address, he would have seen that I would welcome it.

Would the Prime Minister, now that he is able to answer the question himself, as was not the case yesterday, give the House a categorical answer to the question as to whether Field-Marshal Montgomery, when he was in the United States during the summer, did not discuss questions of standardisation on a much wider basis than that of our necessary Forces in Germany?

That does not seem to me connected with the Question on the Order Paper.

In view of our 20 years Treaty with Russia, can the Prime Minister say whether we are having parallel conversations with that country?

We should welcome any such conversations with Russia, but we have not been very successful in getting any from that side

Could the right hon. Gentleman say what possible advantage could accrue from an arbitrary refusal to standardise to any but the potential enemies of this country?

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that 688,876 cases of food totalling 16,914 tons have been sent for distribution to this country from other parts of the Commonwealth and Empire, in addition to large quantities of meat, he will take this opportunity of publicly thanking the donor countries who have given such practical expression of their good will towards the people of this country.

My right hon. Friend the Minister of Food has written personally to thank many who have organised the sending of gifts of food, and for each consignment a letter of thanks is sent by his Department. In addition, many thousands of recipients have written individual letters of thanks, which, I feel sure, provide the most effective expression of our appreciation of the great generosity shown to us by our friends and kinsmen overseas. I welcome, on behalf of the Government, and of this House, the opportunity of adding my own sincere thanks.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in placing on record thanks to the donors of gifts, he will also give thanks for the generous contributions made by the Dominions to guarantee the normal rations we enjoyed throughout the war?

In agreeing with my hon Friend, I would point out that that has already been done; no doubt he will have heard it on several occasions

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what contribution in dollars he expects to make for the fulfilment of British responsibilities under the proposed arrangements to feed the British and U.S. zones of occupation in Germany.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what proportion of the estimated sum of £125,000,000, for the reconstruction of Germany and of the current annual expenditure of £80,000,000, it is estimated will be spent in dollars or other hard currencies in each of the years 1947, 1948 and 1949.

I cannot say yet. Much will depend on Article 8 of the Agreement.

Will my right hon. Friend assure the House that whatever our dollar expenditure is under the Agreement in Germany, no dollars will be diverted from the purposes of industrial re-equipment at home?

Yes, Sir, I can give that assurance.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimated saving to the British taxpayer will result, in 1947, from the proposed fusion of the British and U.S. zones of occupation in Germany?

I cannot say yet, but the prospect of some saving to the British taxpayer is one of the strongest reasons for the fusion of zones.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will give an assurance that, should it be necessary to reduce planned British imports from the U.S.A. during 1947 as a result of the agreement to finance imports into the British and U.S. zones of Germany, the necessary cuts will be made in films and not in foodstuffs.

This is a hypothetical position, which may never arise. If it does, we shall take account of all relevant considerations.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that concern has been caused by apparently inspired Press statements which have suggested that it may be necessary to cut British food imports next year, and will he remember that British housewives would rather have their weekly can of pork from Chicago than a weekly can of dope from Hollywood?

Would the right hon. Gentleman also bear in mind that we cannot eat films?

Have not films become the opiate of the people under the present Administration?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether in view of the anxiey caused to holders of Government guaranteed securities due to the treatment of L.P.T.B. 3 per cent. Guaranteed Stock, he will give an assurance that the terms of issue will be observed in the case of all other Government guaranteed securities.

The guarantee would be implemented if default were to take place on this or any other Government guaranteed security.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise the far-reaching nature of the repercussions of this particular decision, and does he realise the effect it might have on money raised under Section 2 of the Borrowing (Control and Guarantees) Act?

I have not noticed any particular repercussions of great magnitude in Stock Exchange quotations.

Will not the Chancellor of the Exchequer agree that the Treasury guaranteed these stockholders 3 per cent. on their money until 1967, which they are not going to get, and therefore, in their view, there has been a repudiation of that guarantee?

I hope that reasons to show they are wrong will be given when the Transport Bill is debated.

They will get too much anyhow.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what are the revised exchange arrangements for British tourists to Switzerland which he has agreed with the Swiss Government; and when will they come into operation.

The Swiss Government have recently informed me that the extent of British tourist expenditure was causing them some embarrassment, and that they wished to exercise some control over it. I saw no reason to object to their proposals, especially in view of the increasing facilities for spending holidays in other countries. I will, with permission, circulate details in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how long these onerous restrictions are likely to be continued?

Indefinitely, I should think, or at any rate long enough for hon. Members to explore the possibilities of the French Alps the Italian Alps,. the Carpathians, the Pyrenees and the Highlands of Scotland.

Is it not important also to allow them to see something of Russia?

I am sure that the hon. Member could put in a request for that.

Following are the details:

As from 18th December, a special Swiss certificate will be required for the allocation of funds for tourists and for their conversion into Swiss francs. These certificates will be issued by the Swiss Tourist Traffic Federation, at an office to be opened in London, by reference to the total amount of Swiss francs allotted for this purpose. Tourists will be required to apply for their certificates either direct, or through their travel agents. Under the new arrangements, tourists will no longer be able to obtain in Switzerland the full countervalue of their credit document in cash. They will receive vouchers enabling them to pay for their hotel and travelling expenses in Switzerland, and a reasonable amount in cash. The normal procedure for obtaining the necessary visa-; remains unchanged, and the present arrangements with banks and tourist agencies in this country are not affected! It is not intended to impose similar limitations on Swiss visitors arriving in this country.