asked the Minister of Supply when he proposes that the London Metal Market shall re-open.

No decision has yet been taken about the re-opening of the London Metal Exchange.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say when he expects to be able to come to a decision, and, meanwhile, will he say what is holding him back from coming to a decision?

What is holding it back is mainly the acute shortage of the metals dealt with on the London Metal Exchange. I cannot say when I shall be able to make any definite announcement about it.

asked the Minister of Supply whether he is aware of the shortage of bicycle chains which exists in all cycle stores in Heston and Isle-worth and surrounding districts; that such shortage is causing hardship and inconvenience to workers using bicycles to travel to and from work; and what action he proposes to take to ensure more equitable distribution.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to the hon. Member for the Isle of Wight (Sir P. Macdonald) on 25th March last.

Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that the shortage is not due to the fact that manufacturers are using all available cycle accessories in order to recondition surplus Army cycles which are later sold at exorbitant prices on the hire purchase system, and will he look further into this matter?

I do not know anything about that aspect of the problem—that may be a factor—but the main reason for the shortage is the enormously increased demand and the shortage of certain basic materials.

Will my right hon. Friend look into the aspect which I have brought to his notice?

asked the Minister of Supply if he has given consideration to a letter from the hon. Member for Bolton relating to a scheme for selling British-produced television receivers in the world markets, based upon a proposal to provide selected countries with a complete television transmission system without charge, on condition that orders are placed with this country for a substantial number of receivers: and if he will make a statement.

The manufacturers are fully aware of the advantages to be gained by offering transmitting equipment on favourable terms. The Departments concerned and the Television Advisory Committee are doing all they can to help them in the export drive, but it would obviously be undesirable for me to make public the terms on which manufacturers are prepared to conduct their business.

Will the Minister say it he has received any information to indicate that the trade is in negotiation with foreign countries regarding the sale of television apparatus?

Yes, Sir. I understand that certain negotiations are proceeding.

asked the Minister of Supply if he is aware that there is a shortage of electrodes which is slowing down work on important contracts in Tees-side; and what action he is taking to remedy this position.

There is a general shortage of welding electrodes, particularly in the heavier gauges. Measures are being taken to expand the output of the high grade steels needed for the production of 'electrode wire and to supplement this temporarily by special electric furnace production. I hope that as a result increased supplies of electrodes will become available.

In view of the serious hold up in these contracts and the fact that many men are being stood off work at present, can the right hon. Gentleman say when he expects this result to come about?

There is a substantial in-cease of production now as compared with the last quarter of last year—something like 30 per cent. or even a little more—and we hope that the production of these electrodes will continue to increase.

asked the Minister of Supply whether he is aware of the difficulties experienced by machine manufacturers in obtaining supplies of mild steel plate; and if he has been able to list for their guidance sources of supply alternative to those usually employed by such manufacturers.

There is a general shortage of mild steel plate, but all available capacity for the production of plate is at present being fully used. Capacity is being expanded, but additional supplies will not be available for some time.

Can the Minister confirm that inquirers at the Ministry of Works have been told that any potential sources of supply are notified to the manufacturers, and if any new sources are known to the Minister, will he enable the Ministry of Works to obtain supplies for building purposes?

I am not aware of any alternative sources.

Will the Minister follow through the process of production of these plates and find the bottlenecks? There are certain bottlenecks which he, could remedy if he looked into it.

I do not think that is so. It is a real shortage of capacity. If the hon. Member can give me any information which will help, I shall welcome it.

asked the Minister of Works whether he will make a statement on the quantity of building bricks and timber available in Great Britain.

With my hon. Friend's permission I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT the latest figures of the stocks of bricks and of softwood and hardwood.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the repeated statements made in the Press about the abundance of bricks and timber in the country? If that is true, would my right hon. Friend take into consideration the recommendation for expanding the building programme?

The housing programme is to come under review in the immediate future. So far as timber is concerned, I doubt very much whether there is much in excess of the needs of the annual programme. As far as bricks are concerned, there is an accumulation of bricks at the present moment, and certain restrictions on the use of bricks have been removed.

Why is the Minister proposing to publish these figures in the OFFICIAL REPORT? Surely it cannot be a very long answer to a perfectly straightforward question?

In order that the figures may be precise and detailed.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say, without going into great detail, how these figures compare with a similar position last year?

Will those figures include the quantity of building material held by the Lancashire Cricket Club on their Old Trafford ground, where they have had materials and voluntary labour for a considerable time, but cannot get a permit from the right hon. Gentleman's Department?

These are stocks in hand, and have not been allocated.

asked the Minister of Works what is the total estimated cost of the repairs and alterations being carried out at Clarence House with a view to its occupation by their Royal Highnesses the Princess Elizabeth and the Duke of Edinburgh; how many operatives are involved; and over what period.

The alterations to and modernisation of Clarence House are estimated to cost£50,000. The number of building operatives will average about 55 and it is hoped to complete the work within the year.

While emphasising that any criticism is directed towards the Minister, and in no sense towards their Royal Highnesses, may I ask the Minister two questions? First, in view of the strict economy which has been enjoined on all of us, is it right that at this time this large amount of money should be spent? Secondly, at a time when hundreds of thousands are desperately in need of homes, is it right that labour and materials should be spent on this object?

Accommodation has to be provided for their Royal Highnesses. What was available was a very dilapidated place and much work had to be done to modernise it. A great amount of the expenditure involved is for the provision of central heating, domestic hot water installations, wiring for electricity, none of which existed in the premises when they were taken over. I am of the opinion that the expenditure is warranted in view of the use to which it will be put.

Could the right hon. Gentleman say how this amount compares with the cost of repairs and alterations carried out to the mansions acquired by the Coal Board?

Is the Minister aware that there are thousands of newly married couples in London who have to live with their mothers-in-law? Would it not be a popular thing for him to recommend their Royal Highnesses to remove from Clarence House to Buckingham Palace, leaving it to be adapted for other newly married couples?

Those questions are presenting arguments and are not asking for information.

asked the Minister of Works why, in view of the fact that the adjoining business premises cannot get licences to repair their shops in Rosendale Road, Dulwich, licences are granted to the Socialist Party to instal offices in the same road; and whether he will state the amount of money authorised for expenditure.

No licences have been issued to the local Labour Party either by my Ministry or by the local authority, to instal offices in Rosendale Road, Dulwich.

Can the Minister give an assurance that no licence will be granted in preference to the ordinary shops in Rosendale Road?

The granting of licences by my Department will be according to the need in each case.

You are learning.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs why his Department promised on 19th November, 1947, and on 3rd January, 1948, that as soon as a decision was made about Lieut.-Colonel Cus, the solicitors concerned and the Senior Burgess for Cambridge University respectively should be informed, and yet his Department did not communicate the decision, which was made before 10th February, till 6th March.

I regret that this delay should have occurred; but, as my right hon. Friend the Minister of State explained in writing to the hon. Member, it was due partly to pressure of work in the Foreign Office but also to my right hon. Friend's wish to provide the most complete available data about Yugoslays accused of collaboration. Although the decision about Cus was communicated to the British authorities in Austria on 10th February, the hon. Member will appreciate that His Majesty's Government must clearly avoid informing others of a decision in such a matter before the person affected has learnt of it.

May I ask how administrative pressure can possibly account for the fact that a letter informing me of this was dictated and dated many days before it was sent?

As I recall, my right hon. Friend was dissatisfied with the last paragraph of this letter. I understand, therefore, that the second page was retyped, but not the first, and that accounts for the date being somewhat earlier.

Was the Foreign Office aware, when it finally sent this letter, that the interval by then was quite long enough to make it impossible for anything to be done from here to save this man, or to affect the Yugoslav Government's treatment of him? Was the Foreign Office aware that it allowed five or six weeks to elapse before this letter was sent out?

I have explained that there are two causes of delay. I am explaining it rather than answering it. The first cause was that we had to give notice to the man of our decision before informing others of our decision, and that accounted for part of the delay. The second was an administrative delay which I have explained, and for which my right hon. Friend has apologised.

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

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs how much longer His Majesty's Government intend to maintain international undertakings' obliging them to surrender to the Yugoslav authorities Yugoslays against whom there is a prima facie case of collaboration to the satisfaction of British legal opinion.

His Majesty's Government expect shortly to conclude the examination of the cases made out by the Yugoslav Government against such Yugoslays as are held at present under detention. When this work has been completed, His Majesty's Government will consider the further action to which they may be committed by their international undertakings.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what information he has about the treatment of Yugoslays surrendered to the Tito regime; and in particular, what has happened to Lieutenant-Colonel Cus.

The Yugoslav Government have informed His Majesty's Ambassador that there are no reasons calling upon them to furnish any information about Yugoslays surrendered for trial. As regards Lieutenant-Colonel Cus, the Yugoslav Government have stated that he is in detention and will be brought to public trial as soon as the prosecution's case is completed.

Is it not a fact that several of these Yugoslays have escaped from British detention?

Yes, Sir, I can confirm that. I regret to announce that a number of Yugoslays from the Munster Lager Camp whom we had decided must be handed back to the Yugoslav authorities, did escape recently.

Is the hon. Gentleman's right hon. Friend satisfied that these people get a fair trial on their return to Yugoslavia?

I have already answered many Questions on this subject. Our attitude is that the factor of the nature of the trial they will receive when they return to Yugoslavia is a factor which clearly influences us in taking special care that a prima facie case exists against them, before agreeing to their return.

In these circumstances, and the circumstances which the right hon. Gentleman knows surround trials in Yugoslavia today, will evidence be required on something more than a charge of collaboration—a charge of breach of the recognised rules of warfare?

Our obligations are plainly stated in this matter, and the definition is plainly given. As I said, these factors are taken into consideration with very special care when we decide whether a prima facie case exists.

Will the right hon. Gentleman have regard to the fact that when we entered those obligations the situation was very different and the confidence we had in our Allies was on a much higher rate of gradation?

May I ask two supplementary questions? First, when the hon. Gentleman tells us that special care is taken about prima facie evidence, does he mean to suggest that there is a certain sliding scale of what is prima facie evidence, and what is not? Is it, according to His Majesty's Government, confidence in the judicial methods of the other party, because that apparently is what he said? Secondly, does his original answer mean, for that is apparently what he said, that His Majesty's Government know nothing of what happened to any of these Yugoslays handed over, except that they did know that Lieut.-Colonel Cus—[HON. MEMBERS "Speech."] Mr. Speaker will keep me in Order, not hon. Members opposite.

In reply to the first part of that question, I do not accept the implication about a sliding scale, but what I say is that consideration of the nature of the justice they will receive on their return to Yugoslavia does lead us to take altogether special care in deciding whether a prima facie case exists against them, and I cannot go beyond that. In reply to the second part of the question we have not received information about those whom we have recently sent back to Yugoslavia, but in respect of cases dealt with immediately after the war, we have no evidence that such persons have been either ill treated, or given sentences out of proportion to their apparent guilt.

In view of some of the supplementary questions, can my hon. Friend say what is the nature of the charges which are brought against these men and what is the kind of prima facie evidence he demands? Is it really a question of breaches of the rules of war, or rather a question of treason against Yugoslavia itself, such as we ourselves have always claimed the right to punish?

The phrase is "wilful and active collaboration." I think I can associate myself with the last part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question.

To what extent can the House rest assured that this investigation into prima facie evidence of guilt is the equivalent of a genuine and just trial, such as they cannot receive in Yugoslavia?

Why not?

May I have an answer to that question? What is the nature—

Order.

I think Mr. Speaker will keep me in Order. I want to know whether the investigations of prima facie guilt is in effect a fair trial? I have asked the hon. Gentleman a fair question.

I can say that I am satisfied, and my right hen. Friend is satisfied, that in all these matters British standards of justice are applied.

Can we be assured that fighting against Communist dictatorship is not regarded as collaboration with Germany? May I have an answer?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any further information concerning the circumstances in which Lieutenant J. E. Burke was killed by a Yugoslav sentry on the Loibl Pass; whether the body has been recovered from the Yugoslav authorities and the release of Mrs. Burke and Mr. Marler yet obtained.

Yes, Sir. Mrs. Burke and Second-Lieutenant Marler were released on 29th April. A joint Anglo-Yugoslav court of inquiry into the incident was held yesterday. Lieutenant Burke's body was returned to the British authorities immediately after the end of the inquiry. The court found that the British party had crossed into Yugoslav territory when they were arrested by a Yugoslav sentry. While they were being led to the Yugoslav headquarters a struggle took place between Lieutenant Burke and one of the Yugoslav sentries, during which Lieutenant Burke was shot. The cause and details of the struggle could not be determined to the satisfaction of both elements of the court.

In view of the fact that, except at the actual control post, the frontier is entirely ill-defined, does the hon. Gentleman think there is any justification for the shooting of a British officer even if he does happen to be 150 yards on the wrong side of the frontier?

I think that possibly the question of blame centres much more around the actual struggle which took place between Lieutenant Burke and the sentry, and not around the fact that they were over the frontier or not. Since the facts are not agreed on the first point. I do not think I can comment.

Was Lieutenant Burke armed? If not, does it not indicate that unusual action was taken. May I ask my hon. Friend how long Mrs. Burke was detained, and why, and what action His Majesty's Government are taking to show that the killing, and the detention, of British subjects are very grave matters indeed?

I appreciate, of course, the last part of the supplementary question, but I cannot accept the implications of the question where they reflect criticism on the Yugoslav Government in this matter. The facts of the struggle are the essential question and the facts are not agreed and are not known. On the subject of the detention of Mrs. Burke, we have no complaint to make against the Yugoslav authorities. Mrs. Burke was and is in a state of collapse and did not attend the trial owing to medical advice.

Arising out of that reply, could we have a definite answer—I am afraid I did not catch what was said—whether Lieutenant Burke was armed or unarmed?

I should need notice.

Will the hon. Gentleman be able to make a statement, at any rate by tomorrow or as soon as possible—I hope by tomorrow—of what action His Majesty's Government intend to take in view of the circumstances now revealed and the disagreement of the court of inquiry?

Both that question and the question whether Lieutenant Burke was armed will, of course, appear in the full report which we are getting from Vienna. As I explained, this inquiry took place yesterday and, for that reason, we are not fully informed of all the details. When we have the full report I am sure that my right hon. Friend will consider whether any further steps are necessary.

Would the Foreign Secretary be prepared to make a statement after Questions tomorrow if full information is then available?

Will the evidence given before the court of inquiry be published as well as the report?

We shall consider that when we have the report.

asked the Minister of Food whether, having regard to the substantial stocks of marmalade available in this country and the adequate supplies of both sugar and oranges for future manufacture, he will consider taking imported canned marmalade off points altogether.

No, Sir. While my right hon Friend has reduced the points value, this marmalade, which is mostly grapefruit, must be retained on the points ration to ensure fair distribution.

How much longer are we to go on with these unnecessary scarcities, which are really created to a large extent by the Government? Is not the hon. Lady aware that, in the case of sweets which was raised here, her Department had to give way at the end? I was right then and I am right now.

I think that probably the hon. Gentleman does not know that we have reduced the points value of this marmalade from 12 to six points for 2 lb. and that since then stocks have been reduced appreciably.

Why not take it oh altogether?

asked the Minister of Food what were the conditions which led to Mr. H. Bird, a farmer, of Rise, near Hornsea, receiving a cheque for£32 from his Department's Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Division for feeding his own turnips to his own stock; and, in view of the fact that his Department offered Mr. Bird£6 10s. a ton, what was the loss to the taxpayer on the transaction, particulars of which have been sent to him.

This payment was in respect of the disposal of the emergency reserve of swedes about which I gave the hon. Member information in my reply on 15th March. Mr. Bird elected to buy back the swedes he had agreed to sell to my Department earlier in the winter. The total cost to the taxpayer of this transaction was£35 7s. 6d.

Is not this another example of the folly of bureaucratic control from Whitehall?

asked the Minister of Food if he is aware that farmers in Somerset are unable to dispose of stocks of potatoes; and whether he will arrange for these supplies to be sent to areas in short supply.

All markets are at present well supplied with potatoes. As my hon. Friend will know, the restrictions on sales to consumers have now been removed and I do not anticipate that farmers will have any difficulty in disposing of their remaining stocks before the new crop arrives on the market.

Are there any substantial outstanding contracts for imports of old potatoes and are the new potatoes now being imported entirely in the hands of private importers?

Many of the old contracts expire in a week or two. I should require further notice of the second part of the supplementary question, but I believe that all are in the hands of private importers.

It any producers have any difficulties, would the hon. Lady make the same arrangements and pay them for eating the potatoes themselves?

is the hon. Lady aware that exactly the same situation exists in Scotland and that, in fact, potatoes are having to be fed to animals? Is not this indicative of the complete breakdown of the potato rationing scheme?

Certainly not. I would remind the hon. and gallant Gentleman that farmers had every opportunity to let us have their potatoes. We were prepared to pay for any we could take from them from November to the end of March. In January and February, when there was a shortage, we pressed farmers to load, but many of them thought that perhaps it was worth while to wait a little.

How could a farmer lift his potatoes when the clamps were all frosted?

asked the Minister of Food what is the maximum price allowed to be charged for the selling retail of horseflesh for human consumption; whether this horesflesh is over and above the meat ration; and whether he can give any figures of the amount sold or licensed to be sold to catering establishments and private individuals during the past 12 months.

The maximum retail price is 1s. per lb. for all the main cuts. Horseflesh is not included in the meat ration. I am unable to provide the other information requested because we do not control the distribution of horseflesh.

Is the hon. Lady aware that shops which now sell food for animals are finding it difficult to get enough horseflesh because of the increased supply being sold to catering establishments of less good types of horseflesh?

I invite the hon. Member to give me information. We grant a licence to those catering establishments and we have only given one—to the Belgian Club.

Is the hon. Lady aware that my information comes in a reply from her Department?

That is quite wrong. The hon. Gentleman should not make those remarks in such a frivolous manner. I think we were dealing with the case of a man who had a wholesale licence and sold horsemeat for some dogs. The wholesale licence was certainly given by us but that man did not at the same time sell meat for human consumption.

asked the Minister of Food what representations he has received from members of homing societies about the allocation of pigeon food for pigeon breeders, when the existing scheme comes to an end and when he will be able to announce details of the new scheme.

Full discussions have taken place with representatives of the homing unions who have now agreed the new scheme in principle. It will start in September next when the existing scheme ends. Full details will be announced in good time.

Will the hon. Lady gay whether the homing unions in fact comprise the Scottish component of the national pigeon fanciers? If not, will she make provision also for the Scottish fanciers?

We are quite prepared to make the same provision for the Scottish breeders.

And for Northern Ireland?

And for Northern Ireland.

Will my hon. Friend say whether the tick beans which are now bought in the black market by these bird fanciers will be brought into the scheme, or whether they will continue to get that food where they can through the black market.

If my hon. Friend will tell me where anyone is dealing in the black market I shall be prepared to take action.

asked the Minister of Food what was the total quantity of meat, excluding offal, used for human consumption in the United Kingdom during the last month for which particulars are available; how much of this was required to meet the basic domestic ration; and how much was used for manufacturing.

During February, 1948, 119,200 tons of meat (excluding offal but including 1, 100 tons of canned corned meat) were issued for human consumption in the United Kingdom. Of this amount it is estimated that 85,300 tons were required for the basic domestic ration and 14,400 tons for manufacturing.

Does that include horse meat for human consumption?

Had the hon. Gentleman been listening instead of talking to his neighbour he would have known from the previous Question on the subject which I answered that it is an offence to supply, in the ration, horse meat for human consumption.

asked the Minister of Food whether in view of the large stocks of jam which are available in every retailer's shop throughout the country, and the deterioration which is taking place, he will consider removing jam from the ration and putting it on points, or both removing it from the ration and points and allowing the public to purchase last season's jams.

I would refer' the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Leigh (Mr. Boardman) on 26th April. Stocks of jam in retailers' shops are in sound condition.

Is not the hon. Lady aware that large stocks of jam are deteriorating every day, and is it not a fact that the Government are in a sticky mess over this matter? It is a case of jam yesterday, jam tomorrow, but never jam today.

There is no evidence that any jam is deteriorating in this country.

I will give the hon. Lady evidence immediately after Question Time.

If I send the hon. Lady a pot of jam bought in a shop and covered with mould, will she either alter her opinion or eat the jam?

I am afraid that I cannot accept rationed goods as a gift.

asked the Minister of Food how the Government propose to utilise the large stocks of fruit pulp, 1946–47, which are still available in this country for jam making; and whether, in view of the deterioration which is taking place he will consider allowing these to be manufactured and sold to the public off the ration.

Most fruit pulp is held by jam manufacturers to meet their future needs. I have not heard of any deterioration, but in any case I am afraid that our sugar position would prevent my right hon. Friend adopting the hon. Member's suggestion.

Can the hon. Lady tell me what has happened to the 1946 fruit pulp which still remains unused in this country, and which again is deteriorating? How much more food is the Ministry of Food going to waste? It is muddle, muddle, muddle.

The fruit pulp which is now in stock is to be used for jam.

In view of the fact that the Ministry of Food is deteriorating every day, I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Minister of Agriculture if he is now able to give his approval of the proposed flood prevention scheme submitted by the Great Ouse Catchment Board; what will be the cost of the scheme; and what percentage of the cost will be borne by the public.

My Department has received in outline from the Great Ouse Catchment Board proposals for a major scheme of works estimated to cost some£6¼million. These proposals, and the rate of grant that should be offered, are being closely and carefully considered, but I am not yet able to make a statement.

Could the right hon. Gentleman say whether his Ministry have approved the effect of this scheme, apart from the financial side; and could he also give an assurance that he has impressed upon the Treasury the need for this scheme in the light of increased food production at home?

I do not think that the Treasury need to be impressed about this scheme, once the details are approved.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether it is the policy of his Department that agricultural executive committees shall execute cultivation and threshing work in competition with, or supplementary to, regular contractors; and whether early steps will be taken to reduce the equipment and establishment of agricultural executive committees, with a view to the complete cessation of these activities.

Cultivation and threshing work undertaken by agricultural executive committees is intended only to supplement the work of farmers themselves and of agricultural contractors. I shall be only too glad to see committees reduce their activities in this field as and when they can: but the extent and the timing in any district must depend largely on whether contractors are able to give farmers, and especially the smaller farmers, the help they still need.

Will the Minister kindly keep this matter constantly under review, because there is an impression abroad that the cost of these services are fantastic, owing to the heavy overheads, and: that private contractors are now, in most cases, quite ready to undertake the whole, of the work?

On the contrary, Sir. Unfortunately we find the tendency is for the number of contractors to be reduced.

asked the Minister of Agricultural what arrangements have been made to enable employees of county agricultural executive committees to attend Territorial camps and courses this year; what has been the cause of the long delays that have occurred before the decision has been taken in this matter; and how this arrangement accords with the advice tendered by the National Joint Advisory Council, appointed by the Minister of labour, at their meeting on 23rd April.

The arrange vents are those applicable to all other civil servants and accord with the recommendations of the National Joint Advisory Council. I am sorry there has been some delay in notifying details of the arrangements to the staff, but there has been some delay in dealing with individual applications for camp leave, all of which have, so far as I know, been granted.

asked the Minister of Agriculture how it came about that 16 of the fires in the Forestry Commission woods in 1946–47 owed their origin to Forestry Commission Employees; what disciplinary action was taken; and what was the extent of the damage caused.

Five of the outbreaks were caused by burning herbage or smoking contrary to instructions, seven were due to fires getting out of control during burning operations, and four were started by faulty equipment or chimneys. Of the employees responsible, lour were dismissed, four were reprimanded, one paid for the damage he had caused, and in seven cases where no enegligence occurred disciplinary action was not taken. Forty-one acres of plantations were burnt with a loss of£650; damage to buildings was valued at£140, and£85 was spent in extinguishing the fires.

Would the right lion. Gentleman say whether these 41 acres have been replanted since?

I could not say without notice.

asked the Minister of Agriculture the number of farms of no acres or over in 1938 and 1947, respectively.