asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs how many British troops, naval ratings or merchant seamen arrested by the Russian authorities during the war are still in prison.

To the best of our knowledge, none, Sir.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what facilities are being given by his Department to a party of hon. Members who are to visit Yugoslavia at the end of December.

Those normally afforded to British Members of Parliament travelling abroad.

Would the Under-Secretary make it quite plain that these hon. Members are travelling to Yugoslavia in their unofficial capacities as ordinary Members of Parliament and not as an official delegation.

I do not think that there is any need to make any statement. I think that the position is quite clear.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what are the official rations allowed to the Palestinian Arab refugees.

The United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees is at present providing a ration of 1,650 calories a day for 940,000 Arab refugees.

Are these rations sufficient to maintain these people in health, or only to prevent them from dying?

The rations are undoubtedly scarcely adequate, but I understand that the deathrate is no worse there than it is for Arab communities in that part of the world. At present their health is remarkably satisfactory on the whole.

Is the Minister satisfied that the present conditions of these Arab refugees, in camps in the desert, will not lead to increased mortality during the hardships of winter, and that steps have been taken to prevent this?

I am afraid that the risk always exists. I can only say that His Majesty's Government have done everything they possibly can to make a real contribution to solving this problem.

In view of the fact that the Under-Secretary said that the total number of rations to be issued is more than 900,000, are we to understand that the number of refugees is increasing?

No, Sir. There is a later Question on that point.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what is the expenditure up to date on railways and ports serving the groundnut areas in Tanganyika; and what proportion of this has been or will be paid for by the East African Railways and Harbours Administration.

The figure for expenditure to date on the new port and railway in the Southern Province is not available. The estimated cost is £4,650,000. The figure for the general improvements to the Central Line Railway and the port of Dar-es-Salaam is £ 2½ million. The answer to the second part of the Question is that the whole capital cost of these works will ultimately be met by the East African Railways and Harbour Administration.

Is the Under-Secretary aware that, according to "The Times" Nairobi correspondent, the East African Railways and Harbours Adminstration are hurt by the claim of the Minister of Food the other day that among the achievements of the Overseas Food Corporation was the making of these ports and harbours?

I think there is some misunderstanding here. The Overseas Food Corporation are acting as agents of the Administration to supervise construction, and eventually it is intended that their expenses shall be refunded to them by the harbour and railway board, so they are in fact expending a considerable amount of money.

Is it a fact that the O.F.C. have in return to guarantee a minimum amount of traffic every year, and, if so, can the hon. Gentleman tell us the minimum amount?

I am not quite sure whether the right hon. Gentleman is alluding to the Central Line or the Southern Line. Perhaps he will put the question down.

Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied that in the Mikidani Harbour scheme big capital expenditure is justified before the 20,000 acre pilot scheme has shown any results at all?

The hon. Gentleman knows that it is not only the groundnut scheme which will be served by this port and that it is in fact essential to have a good port in the southern area in order to develop the whole of that region of Tanganyika.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies for what reason the Governor of Jamaica has prohibited local newspapers from publishing a second edition daily even though the total allocation of newsprint is not thereby exceeded, especially in view of the fact that Government announcements are normally made at 5 p.m.

My right hon. Friend has no information on this point which, as a matter of internal administration, is one for the Jamaica Executive Council under the Island's constitution.

Does the hon. Gentleman support an order under which there is a clear differentiation between one newspaper and another which prevents a certain newspaper from publishing a late edition at all?

These matters of detail are for the Jamaica Government. We cannot interfere in every detail of what they are doing.

Will the hon. Gentleman look at the matter again? When I was in Jamaica six months ago there was some local feeling that the Governor was using his official position against these newspapers because he had a personal grudge against them.

I cannot possibly accept any such suggestion.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how many Arabs of Aden are attending the Gordon Memorial College at Khartoum; and how many scholarships or grants have been given by the Government of Aden for this purpose.

Two from the Protectorate, none from the Colony. No scholarships or grants have been given by the Government of the Colony.

Can my hon. Friend say if any of the students come to this country to complete their education, and, if so, what number?

I doubt if any of the students who have been at the Gordon Memorial College do, but perhaps my hon. Friend will let me have notice of that question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies (1) how many cocoa trees in the Gold Coast were cut out in the latest 12 months for which figures are now available; and how many trees contracted the swollen shoot disease during the same period;

(2) how many cocoa trees in the Gold Coast it is now estimated will be cut out in the next 12 months; and how many will become affected by the swollen shoot disease in the same period.

The number of trees cut out in the 12 months ended 30th September, 1949, was slightly over 3,300,000. It was estimated that during the first five months of that period about 4 million trees had become infected. It is not possible to foretell how many trees will be infected during the next 12 months, nor can an estimate be given at present of the number of diseased trees which are likely to be cut out during that period. Preparations are, however, now being made for a greatly intensified campaign against the disease as soon as the current harvest is over.

Is it true to say that the number of trees which are to be cut out during the next year will not be as' great as the number of trees which will be diseased, and can the hon. Gentleman tell the House what active steps His Majesty's Government are taking in order to prevent this very serious decline in the tree population out there?

It is possible that what the hon. Gentleman says in the first part of his supplementary question is true because the object of the campaign is to cut belts in order to prevent the disease spreading into new areas. It may be that in certain parts the disease will gain more rapidly than the number of trees cut out. As to the second part of the supplementary question, it is proposed, subject to the approval of the Legislative Council, to introduce compulsion in areas where the majority of the farmers are in favour of cutting out.

When my hon. Friend speaks of an intensified campaign, it is obvious that it will be more intense than the campaign up to now. Does he mean that it now involves the active co-operation of the native authorities and large numbers of Africans who were previously hostile to the campaign?

I do not remember using the word in that sense, but it means that there is an increasing participation by Africans in the cutting out campaign, and therefore it means that the minority can have compulsion applied to them.

Have specimens of these trees been submitted to the School of Tropical Medicine in connection with the University of London in Keppell Street?

I do not know. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put a question down.

As it must be over 12 months since first these cuttings took place, has there been any appreciable improvement in the places where the heaviest cutting out took place in coping with this disease?

Of course, nothing at all remains in those places where they are cut out. The campaign has not gone as rapidly as we had hoped. We had to get the support of the farmers and I think we have now got the support of the majority.

In view of the considerable opposition with which the policy has met from farmers in the Gold Coast, can the hon. Gentleman hold out any hope that there will be large areas in which the majority of farmers will support the policy?

Yes, I think that may well be so.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what are the provisions of the new Immigration Bill recently introduced into the Legislative Council of Northern Rhodesia.

As this Bill contains 18 Clauses I will send a copy to the hon. Member. It has so far only received its First Reading before the Northern Rhodesia Legislative Council.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if, in view of the unfortunate tension and apprehension existing among the Ewe people he will give an undertaking that action on the proposals in the Coursey Report will not prejudice future negotiations with the French Government respecting the possible unification of Ewe peoples and self-government for Togoland.

My right hon. Friend has asked the Governor to consult the accredited representatives of the people of that territory and to let him have their considered views and the Governor's own recommendations. Until that has been done he prefers to reserve judgment entirely and not to give an undertaking of any kind.

Then do I take it that the Coursey Report does not prejudice the possible development that I have mentioned in the Question?

The Coursey Report said this was a matter of considerable difficulty and delicacy, or words to that effect, and the whole question is being examined, as I have said.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies (1) why the United Kingdom representative at the United Nations General Assembly, on 15th November last, voted against a resolution, which was passed by 49 votes to 1, endorsing the Trusteeship Committee's recommendations asking that the indigenous inhabitants of Trust Territories be given a greater participation in the economic life of the territories and reaffirming the principle that the interests of those inhabitants must be paramount in all economic plans or policies in the territories;

(2) why the United Kingdom representative at the United Nations General Assembly, on 15th November last, voted against a resolution, which was passed by 52 votes to 1, endorsing the abolition of child marriages, corporal punishment and discriminatory laws and practices in Trust Territories.

As the answer is long, I will, with permission, make a statement in reply at the end of Questions.

The, recommendations of the Trusteeship Council, which this Resolution endorsed, were not limited to the suggestion mentioned in my hon. Friend's Question, and were not all such as His Majesty's Government could accept without qualification. The Trusteeship Council recommendations contained references to the Cameroons Development Corporation and the Gold Coast Cocoa Marketing Board, the implications of which His Majesty's Government considered objectionable. The Resolution also expressed concern at the lack of budgetary autonomy in certain Trust Territories which is neither practicable nor desirable in our West African Trust Territories.

Our representative in the Fourth Committee made it clear, however, that it is our policy to give the indigenous inhabitants the greatest possible share in controlling the development of their territories.

We are as anxious as anyone to see the speediest possible disappearance of the practice of child marriage in our Trust Territories. This practice is rapidly disappearing, but it is unrealistic to suppose that such traces as still exist of age long customs and practices can be abolished by legislation.

As regards corporal punishment, the Resolution demands "immediate abolition." This subject for some years has received much study both from our Advisory Committee and the Secretary of State and the offences for which this form of punishment may be awarded in our territories are already being progressively reduced. Our aim is its total abolition as rapidly as circumstances permit.

As regards the examination of discriminatory laws and practices in Trust Territories, two years ago my right hon. Friend called for a survey of this nature in respect of all our dependent territories. The survey is still in progress, but it should be borne in mind that much legislation which can be classed as discriminatory, is designed and works in favour of the indigenous inhabitants.

The United Kingdom representative explained our position to the General Assembly on these lines.

Is my hon. Friend aware that while the explanation he has now given will go some way towards allaying the concern that the full announcement of this vote in the United Nations Press release caused to many people in this country, there is a necessity for reaffirming that the policy of the Government is as in the terms put down in the Question? Also, will he use his influence with the Lord President of the Council for a Debate on the whole subject of the United Nations Trusteeship Committee as soon as possible?

Is not our delegation at the United Nations getting itself into an impossible position by seeming to oppose principles with which in fact the Government agree; and will not my hon. Friend do everything possible to allay the mischief which has been caused by some of the votes which have been recently cast by this country, almost alone, against progressive principles.

Do I understand that having voted against these resolutions the Government do not intend to implement them?

The resolutions to which objection was taken were, generally speaking, on specific points, and we do not accept those recommendations.

Is not it very undesirable that arising out of those votes we should have references made to inferior peoples in the United Nations voting against Britain, and the impression created that the United Nations is all right so long as it keeps to the job for which it is supposed to be founded—attacking the Soviet Union?

Is it not the case that there are quite a lot of discriminatory laws and practices in some countries which are misusing the machinery of the United Nations to stir up trouble in British Colonies?

Will my hon. Friend agree that these Questions and answers and the votes under discussion show the hideous reality behind all the fine talk about colonial emancipation?

Our record is second to none and better than most.

Is there any particulars in which His Majesty's Government have not completely fulfilled the provisions of the trusteeship articles of the Charter, and will the Government resist any attempt to impose obligations which are outside the Charter altogether?

That is our view; that is what we are doing.

Can my hon. Friend explain how it is that this country which has the finest record in colonial affairs of any country for the last 30 years, nevertheless, always seems to be appearing at the United Nations as voting against progressive motions.

Because the recommendations put up are often entirely unrealistic.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that the first answer he gave indicates that the Government stand by the policy of the paramountey of the interests of the native people.

I set it out quite clearly. Our policy is:

"to give the indigenous inhabitants the greatest possible share in controlling the development of their territories."

Can the Government get somebody to represent this country at the United Nations who can make it clear that the colonial policy of this country is as advanced as anything proposed by these peoples at the United Nations? At the moment we are suffering from the disability of being misrepresented right, left and centre by our own representatives.

On that point, although I think we all agree that the representative from the Colonial Office on this Committee put up a very good show, would not it have been wise, in view of its importance, for the Secretary of State for the Colonies to have undertaken the work himself?

May I say that we were very fortunate in having the advocacy of the Minister of State from the Foreign Office, who made a magnificent speech on this question in the General Assembly. Furthermore, last year the case was presented by a colonial, Mr. Grantley Adams, who made a great impression, and I do not agree that our case has gone by default at all.

Is it not in fact playing into the hands of those people who are trying to stir up trouble in the Colonies to cast our vote at the United Nations in a way which goes contrary to the magnificent record of everything that this administration is doing in progressive colonial administration?

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the fact that the procedure laid down in the Charter has not been followed by the United Nations, he proposes to continue to transmit to the Secretary-General information on non-self-governing territories under Article 73 (e) of the Charter.

Yes, Sir. We have accepted this obligation under the Charter and shall continue to discharge it; this does not of course mean that we in any sense acquiesce in the use to which the information is being put, which goes far beyond the provisions of the Charter.

Can the hon. Gentleman say definitely if the United Nations does not fulfil its part of the Charter, can we be expected to go on taking this lying down for ever? Will the hon. Gentleman consult other Colonial Powers in order to reach some more satisfactory modus vivendi in this matter?

The hon. Gentleman has raised a large question. I have given the answer which I think is satisfactory in the circumstances.

Could I ask the hon. Gentleman whether there is any intention that a statement shall be made by the Minister of State on his return, and that an opportunity shall be given to the House to debate this extremely important matter which embraces no party political issues and gives great concern to hon. Members in all quarters?

The right hon. Gentleman will recollect that my right hon. Friend, in answer to a Question from the hon. Member for Mid-Bedford (Mr. Lennox-Boyd), promised a full statement on this matter in the form of either a White Paper or a Colonial Paper. The other question which the right hon. Gentleman has raised is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of recent decisions by the United Nations Assembly, he proposes to continue to send a representative to the special committee set up by the General Assembly of the United Nations, outside the Charter, to examine information on non-self-governing territories transmitted to the Secretary-General.

My right hon. Friend is not yet in a position to make a statement on this matter.

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that, unlike the transmission of information, this at any rate is quite outside the Charter?

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of recent decisions of the United Nations Assembly, he will give an assurance that there will be no transfer of British responsibility for trust territories and other non-self-governing territories to organs of the United Nations.

I can certainly give such an assurance.

asked the. Prime Minister if he is prepared to recommend that a Royal Commission be set up to investigate the problem of Colonial government, with a view to considering the advisability of establishing Colonial representation in the House of Commons from each of the Colonies.

have been asked to reply. No, Sir.

Whilst thanking my right hon. Friend for that most explicit reply, may I ask him, as he is not prepared to set up a Royal Commission, whether he does not think the time has now arrived when this Parliament should reorganise its attitude to the system of Colonial Government in an industrial, twentieth-century world? Does he not believe that this would demonstrate to the Colonies that we really want to feel them at one with this House of Commons?

I do not disagree with the excellent sentiment behind the question of my hon. Friend. The reason why we did not think this course was wise is that there are round about 50 Colonies and Dependencies which all have individualities and whose constitutions vary very much. It was thought that it was better to go on handling them in regard to their individual circumstances, encouraging development towards self-government, and so on, rather than set up a Royal Commission which we thought would get into great difficulties in view of the large variety of Colonial Territories.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this policy has been carried out by France for a great many years, and is there any justifiable reason why this country should lag behind France in this respect?

Different countries have different ways. My own impression is that although France has representation of its Colonial Empire in the Chamber, I doubt if there is the same degree of development of self-government which our Colonies possess.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the French experience is not altogether a happy one in this respect?

Is it not a fact that there are 65 million people in the Colonies as against 50 million here, and that if they were all given votes and representation in Parliament in proportion to numbers, they would swamp this House? Is my right hon. Friend also aware that it would completely confuse the politics of this country, and that the Colonies themselves want self-government in their own countries and do not desire to share it with us?

Those points coming at this time will. I am sure, be kept in mind by all of us.

Whilst agreeing that the suggestion in the Question is not practicable, will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that a regime analogous to the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man. or even formal incorporation in the United Kingdom, might be the most satisfactory solution for the small territories such as the fortress Colonies?

This Question merely asks that some kind of committee be set up to investigate the problem, and I want to ask my right hon. Friend if he does not think it a little impolitic to give a bald "No" to a suspended question like this which might be misinterpreted in the Colonies?

asked the Lord President of the Council the rates of wages and the average weekly earnings of those in each trade employed in the buildings and sites of the 1951 Exhibition; and what is the incentive bonus in each case.

If we are to get this exhibition open in 1951 those responsible for the preparations must be allowed to get on with the job, and I cannot ask them to undertake the work involved in producing the detailed analysis for which the hon. and gallant Member is asking.

While accepting that from the right hon. Gentleman, may I ask him if he is aware of the fact that the authorities principally concerned—namely, the contractors and building people—are very anxious indeed, because they feel that unless a greater incentive is given to the workers, this thing will not be done in time?

I am very glad the contractors are anxious—I want them to be. The more anxious they are, the more likely they are to finish the job in time.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that it is very important that the workers should have an incentive on the lines of that given already elsewhere—£100,000 without Income Tax—on condition that they take no part in building the next Festival of Britain?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a very large number of the individuals concerned who want an incentive, do not agree with his views on incentives which he expressed over the weekend?