asked the Minister of Local Government and Planning to what extent he has taken over from the Minister of Health responsibility for questions arising from the unofficial circular of 19th January last to the clerks of local authorities authorising them to pay on application fares and subsistence allowances for any person summoned to Buckingham Palace for an investiture, and for two of his friends, and to recover the amount from the Treasury; and whether, in view of the need for economy, he will stop these payments except on evidence of need.

I shall be responsible from 31st March next, but I shall not depart from the precedent laid down 10 years ago of making contributions to the expenses of persons whom His Majesty has been graciously pleased to honour.

Was not that a war-time precedent, and are not the people who receive these honours usually able and willing to pay their own expenses? Is this not a quite unnecessary extravagance?

No, Sir, in my opinion it is not an unnecessary extravagance. It is a small expense, which can be well afforded to persons who have received these marks of distinction.

asked the Minister of Local Government and Planning what action is being taken by His Majesty's Government to deal comprehensively with the problem of altering local government boundaries and of creating new county boroughs.

I would refer the hon. Member to my replies to the hon. and gallant Members for Wembley, North (Wing Commander Bullus), and Norfolk, Central (Brigadier Medlicott), on 1st February last, and to the hon. Member for Cheadle (Mr. Shepherd) on 6th February.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that the present situation is unsatisfactory because the Government are opposing private legislation on the ground that they are going to deal with the whole thing comprehensively themselves? It would be quite all right if the Government did anything, but as they have not dealt with the matter themselves, why should they not let local authorities look after their own business?

I made observations on this subject in the Sheffield Extension Bill debate, when I said:

"On the cold view of political realities there seems no prospect of a major Measure of local government reform passing through this House of Commons."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 14th March. 1951; Vol. 485, c. 1649.]

Is it not exactly the position that the Government are opposing local legislation and are not tackling the problem themselves?

No, Sir.

asked the Minister of Local Government and Planning whether it is still the policy of His Majesty's Government to oppose private legislation promoted by non-county boroughs who seek powers to become county boroughs.

I will consider any such proposal on its merits and on its demerits, particularly as regards the counties which would be affected.

Does not the same objection arise here as on my previous Question? Is it not the policy of the present Government to oppose private legislation which seeks to achieve county borough status? Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that in my constituency of Hove, the ratepayers are carrying a disproportionate burden at this moment, and are having also to carry the major burden of the County of Sussex on their shoulders?

If they got county borough status, the rest of the county would have to carry a disproportionate burden on its shoulders.

asked the Minister of Local Government and Planning what representations he has received from the West Hartlepool County Borough Council about the alleged unfair operation of the River Boards Act, 1948; and whether he proposes to take any action on the lines proposed.

The council has protested against the charges falling on their ratepayers under this Act. But this matter was fully discussed when the Bill was going through Parliament, and I regret that I can hold no hope of amending legislation.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the authority are called upon to pay £3,300 by way of precept this year and that they claim that they have no advantage whatever from this Act. Will he have another look at the matter?

It is no good my doing so. The only object of having another look at it would be to introduce amending legislation, but that is obviously not in the programme. I have great sympathy with the ratepayers of Hartlepool, but I think it will be found that they get some advantage.

asked the Minister of Local Government and Planning if he will grant additional building licences to bomb-damaged cities in order to speed up their building programmes and bring these cities in line with other cities that suffered no war damage.

In blitzed cities, I must keep a balance between new housing and the rebuilding of banks, offices and shops in the central areas.

Does the Minister realise that his predecessor on 30th November said he was willing to consider any applications for additional licences for private building in bomb-damaged cities?

I said before that I will consider any applications where it can be shown that the total allocation can be beaten by the authority concerned. If any authority can show that they can do better than the allocation given, I am always prepared to consider it by putting it on to their total and taking it away from those who cannot do it.

Is the Minister aware that we have a large number of unemployed in Portsmouth, and we could do with that extra building if the Minister would give us the licences?

I say to the hon. and gallant Gentleman, as I have said to other hon. Gentlemen who have approached me on this matter, that if they can produce the evidence that more can be done, I shall very sympathetically consider it,

asked the Minister of Local Government and Planning why he has decided that no houses in Redington Road, Hampstead, shall be converted for occupation by more than one family.

I have made no such decision. I shall consider any proposal for conversion on its merits.

In view of the number of large houses in this road that have been empty for years, before an application for consent to convert is rejected will my right hon. Friend make his voice heard to encourage the authority concerned to end this snobbish and indefensible ban on conversion in this particular road?

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the aspect of this matter which has aroused most indignation in Hampstead is the refusal of the London County Council to give permission for one of these large houses to be used as a nursing home for old people, on the ground that in their view the road must be kept exclusive to local citizens, who object to ambulances and patients?

I would not believe all that story, but I am prepared to consider each case on its merits. As I told the hon. Gentleman on 13th March, I am in favour of the conversion of dwelling-houses into flats in certain instances.

asked the Minister of Local Government and Planning how many applications for licences to erect houses for farm workers, which have the backing of the agricultural executive committee, are awaiting issue by the rural district councils in Berkshire; and if he will allow licences outside the normal quota to be given to meet these cases.

I have no information regarding the first part of the Question. As to the second part, I will consider on merits any case submitted by a local authority for altering the present ratio in their area.

If the Minister has no information, would it not be a good thing for him to get it so as to ensure that the policy of giving priority to agricultural workers' houses will be put into effect?

It is not for me to get it. If the local authorities like to inform me or approach me, I am always available. This information is in the hands of the local authorities.

Is the Minister aware that in view of the approaching call-up of young men there will be a great labour shortage in the countryside? Is he further aware that to replace that shortage it is necessary that we should get some more cottages in rural areas for the agricultural workers who would replace those called up?

asked the Minister of Local Government and Planning if he will allow the rural district councils of Norfolk additional licences beyond the normal quota so as to permit the erection of houses for farm workers.

As I have already stated, I am willing to consider on merits any case submitted by a local authority for altering the present ratio in their area.

Can the right hon. Gentleman make this new principle as flexible as possible? In other words, will he see that there is not merely an automatic rule, but the application of intelligence?

There has never been an automatic rule. I am trying to make this as widely known as possible by answering questions on the subject, in this House, and by stating outside what I have said here.

asked the Minister of Local Government and Planning when publication may be expected of revised model building bylaws.

I am setting up a committee to advise me on this subject, and have invited local authority associations and professional bodies to submit names.

asked the Minister of Local Government and Planning how many applications have been received from local authorities by his Department to alter the existing ratio between houses built by the council and those built under private licence; and on how many occasions he has given his approval for this to be done.

Seventy-five, of which five have been approved.

Would the right hon. Gentleman say on what principles he approves or otherwise of applications? Is he aware that the regional officers do not encourage, and in fact discourage, local authorities from submitting applications of this kind?

I am not sure, on the last part of the supplementary question, whether that is so. I have said several times since I have occupied my present office that I am quite willing, on case shown, to increase the ratio. There is no abstract principle in the matter. It is just a question of what representations local authorities make.

Is the Minister aware that in the areas of the Orpington District Council and the Dartford Rural District Council builders tell me that they have men and materials to build several hundred houses in a year, but that they are not allowed to do so?

I do not think that can be true, but if the hon. Gentleman will give some hard evidence, I will look into the matter.

Will the right hon. Gentleman grant the licences?

Let me see the evidence.

asked the Minister of Local Government and Planning how many Nissen type huts in camps under his control are being used as dwelling-houses; and how many were being so used when he took over these camps.

About 37,000 huts in the total, but I cannot say how many of these are Nissens.

Is the Minister satisfied that the elimination of these camps is proceeding fast enough to keep pace with the deterioration?

I am trying to encourage that as far as possible. It is obviously most undesirable that these camps should continue indefinitely.

asked the Minister of Local Government and Planning how far in assessing future housing demands his Department is able to calculate the life of a Nissen type hut; and what the basis of his calculation is.

The effective life of a Nissen hut depends on how it is treated. No one figure would give a true picture.

asked the Minister of Local Government and Planning whether he will agree to the use of the premises in Regent Street, Lancaster, lately vacated by the district nurses, as a home for the elderly people of the Lancaster area, under the provision of the Ministers of Health and National Insurance as set out in the National Assistance Act, 1947.

As an appeal by the Lancashire County Council against a decision by the Lancaster City Council is now before me, the hon. Member will appreciate that I cannot comment on it at this stage.

asked the Minister of Local Government and Planning whether, in view of the decision of local authorities to charge additional rent for council houses in which more than one family are accommodated or in which the tenant takes any lodgers, he will consider taking the necessary steps to extend this principle to rent-restricted accommodation providing that adequate safeguards exist against overcrowding and against exploitation of the tenant by the landlord.

This would require legislation for which time is not available.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that there is a very good case for this amending legislation, in view of the deterioration to privately-owned dwellings over the last few years?

The suggestion of raising rents or permitting the raising of rents over the vast area covered by the Rent Restriction Acts is a major operation upon which I am not prepared to embark.

This proposal is not for a review of the whole problem of rent restriction but for amending one aspect of it, with a view to assisting housing throughout the country?

asked the Minister of Local Government and Planning if he will take steps to speed up the award of grants for building work to be carried out on farmhouses in Kent, as at the moment there is a considerable delay between the date of the application and the final decision.

I assume the hon. Member is referring to improvement grants for farmhouses. If he will let me have particulars of any cases of alleged delay, I will look into them.

asked the Minister of Local Government and Planning whether he is aware that tenants of long standing in hotels, boarding houses and apartment houses in London are being given notice to vacate their rooms so that they may be let at inflated rents to visitors to the Festival; and whether he will introduce legislation to deal with this matter.

I can hold out no hope of such legislation.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in various areas in London there is a real feeling that this is a scandal which is growing as the weeks go by? Is he aware that I know several cases of people who are quite elderly and have lived in the houses for a considerable number of years—in one case 18 years—and that they are being kicked out at a week's notice to make room for Festival visitors at a rent four times the original rent?

My hon. Friend will appreciate that the form of his Question is such that legislation would be required. The plain truth is that such legislation cannot be introduced now owing to the pressure on the timetable, even if a case could be made out for it.

Can my right hon. Friend hold out any hope that the rent tribunals will be able to do anything in these matters?

I have looked into that, but I am afraid that under the present law it is not possible. I would add that we want to make some revenue out of the visitors to the Festival.

asked the Minister of Local Government and Planning how many applications he has received from local planning authorities for an extension of time for the submission of their development plan under Section 5 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1947.

Five.

Are all applications automatically granted?

Nothing is automatic. Intelligence is always used.

Has the exercise of the Ministerial intelligence resulted in some of these applications being granted?

Yes, Sir

asked the Minister of Local Government and Planning if he can yet make a statement following his inquiries into the serious position that has developed for gipsies in finding places where they and their caravans can be accommodated without breaking the law.

My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary tells me that in most counties there is no serious problem. In a few places land occupied by gipsies is required for other purposes, but the gipsies should generally be able to find alternative sites.

Is my right hon. Friend not aware that the Romany race is persecuted and hounded between local authorities and the police? [HON. MEMBERS: "Harried."] Yes, harried or persecuted. The bylaw which permits them to be driven from a district, even when they have lived there for 20 or more years, takes no thought of whether another resting place can be obtained, and the position gets more serious week by week. Can my right hon. Friend do anything about it?

Obviously there are two sides to this subject. The local authorities only want to put the land to the best and most effective use, and I do not want to intervene unduly in the activities of local authorities in this matter.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to bear in mind that some of the gipsies who have been moved can only be put on ground very close to permanent dwellings and that this has caused considerable offence to the occupants of those houses? Can he give an assurance that if fresh places can be found, they will be on land under the control of the county agricultural executive committees rather than of anybody else?

I did say that I thought there were two sides to this matter, and the last supplementary question may illustrate that. I am not anxious to harry the local authorities unduly.

Is the Minister satisfied that the general position is not unnecessarily complicated by concurrent legislation on town planning and public-health? Will he look into the matter?

In order to give chapter and verse for this diabolically cruel system practised by so-called Christian people, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Minister of Works if he is aware of the disadvantages associated with the building-lessor scheme; and if it is his intention to bring this to an end.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Accrington (Mr. H. Hynd) on 19th February.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give the information for which I asked—whether he proposes to cease these operations?

If the hon. Member will study the reply, he will see that no more building-lessor schemes have been authorised. They were introduced in the first place to release as quickly as possible other requisitioned premises.

asked the Minister of Works the total amount which the Government has committed itself to pay since the end of the war to owners of new buildings erected for occupation by Government Departments; and whether this amount is included in the figures published in the Economic Survey.

On the 48 buildings to which my Department is already committed, the liability to charge on public funds amounts to a total annual rental of just over £1 million and a capital expenditure of about £750,000 on occupational fittings. Other capital expenditure is the responsibility of the lessors and not a commitment on public funds, although an estimate of the amount is included in the figures for capital investment on Government building published in the Economic Surveys.

asked the Minister of Works how many square feet of floor space in privately-owned premises are now under requisition for Government office use; and how many square feet of floor space are under construction for such use.

My Department held 6,348,000 square feet of accommodation on requisition for office purposes at the end of 1950. Approximately 3,157,000 square feet of office accommodation is under construction by my Department or by private developers for lease to my Department.

Can the Minister say what sort of premises there is no hope of de-requisitioning? Is it hotels, houses or what?

A little bit of both.

asked the Minister of Works whether the licences he granted in 1950 amounting to £4,394,000 for building offices to be let to the Government have been reviewed in relation to the defence programme and civilian housing.

As I informed the hon. and gallant Member in my reply to his Question on 30th January last. I consider it would be unreasonable to cancel licences once they have been granted and the developer has made his arrangements, save in the most exceptional circumstances. I understand that all this work-has in fact been started.

Is my right hon. Friend completely satisfied that the substantial building programme which he has so generously authorised will have no adverse effect on what I hope he will agree is the urgent need of civilian building and the defence programme?

I am surprised at my hon. and gallant Friend. He is constantly complaining to me that I am mean about it. I cannot be both mean and generous at the same moment.

asked the Minister of Works how much extra accommodation he has been requested to supply for Government Departments in London during the past three months; which Departments have made such requests; and how many additional personnel are involved in each request.

During the past three months I have been asked to' supply about 59,500 square feet of office accommodation and about 416,000 square feet of storage and special accommodation for Government Departments in London. It does not follow from that fact that requests have been made that extra accommodation will be provided. Some demands are met by concentration of staffs in existing accommodation. These figures must not be taken to represent the full demands of the re-armament programme. I will, with permission, circulate details in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

In view of the urgent need for economy in the expenditure of Government Departments, does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that we should be talking in terms of reduction, rather than having to face these enormous demands for extra personnel as well as for extra accommodation?

I am responsible only for my own Department and I provide accommodation for others on demand. I can only assure the hon. Gentleman that I am very conscious of the need for economy.

I hope the right hon. Gentleman will be able to impress that on his colleagues.

asked the Minister of Works why it is the policy of his Department to offer houses, of which it has to dispose, to sell and not to let.

All property, other than for the public service, is held by my Ministry for disposal only. The Ministry is not a housing authority and when it has houses for disposal, it tries to sell them outright to the local authority.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that his Department is rather more expeditious in negotiations in future, because it causes considerable annoyance to would-be tenants when houses remain empty for years?

Yes, Sir. certainly.

asked the Minister of Works what sum was paid in respect of the sale of intoxicating liquors at 2, Park Street, in lieu of payment of monopoly value; and by whom, and to whom, this sum has been paid.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Heywood and Royton (Mr. Sutcliffe) on 20th February. The amount is not yet finally determined.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what steps are being taken to determine this amount in view of the fact that he has been conducting sales, as he told the House a little while ago, for several months already?

There is really nothing to worry about. The sum of £400 has been paid on deposit and we are in consultation with the Board of Customs and Excise on the matter.

asked the Minister of Works when premises at 17–21, Claremont Road, Surbiton, were first taken over by the Ministry of National Insurance; for what purpose; what was the value of the work done to these premises on behalf of the Ministry of National Insurance; what is the rent now paid; and for what purpose they are now used.

These premises were taken over by my Ministry on 12th November, 1947, and adapted at a cost of £2,169 for the use of the Ministry of National Insurance as a local office. It is not the practice to disclose rents paid for premises by the Ministry. The premises were derequisitioned on 18th January, 1951.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how long the Ministry of National Insurance were in occupation?

I think about two years, but I am not quite sure.

Can my right hon. Friend tell us whether, when he derequisitions this sort of property, he gives the local authority the first chance of purchasing it?

I do not know, Sir.

asked the Minister of Works, as he is not prosecuting the Yorkshire Electricity Board, who have overspent their building allowance by £39,000, if he will in future treat all other firms or individuals who transgress in the same way with the same leniency.

As explained in the reply given by my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General to a Question on this subject yesterday, I am not responsible for the application of the Defence Regulation to an electricity authority. Furthermore, it is not for me to decide whether or not proceedings should be taken. As regards work which is licensed under the Regulation, I take full account of the particular circumstances in which an apparent breach of the Regulation has occurred when considering whether I should report the case to the Director of Public Prosecutions.

Did not the Minister himself say in this House that he was not going to prosecute in this instance, and, in the circumstances, will he treat private people in the same way?

It is really quite impossible for me to make any further comment. As my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General explained yesterday, the matter is under examination, and it would be improper for me to comment on any remark that I may have made previously.

asked the Minister of Works what advice he has tendered to the Minister of Fuel and Power upon the question of the prosecution of the Yorkshire Electricity Board and its officials and others arising out of an admitted contravention by the Board of the building regulations, Defence Regulation 56A, to an amount of at least £42,000; upon what facts that advice was based; what inquiries he caused to be made; and what reports he called for.

In view of the inquiries which my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General has instituted, as indicated in his reply to a Question on this subject yesterday, I think the hon. Member will agree that it would be inappropriate for me to discuss these matters by way of Question and answer at present. I must not, however, be taken as accepting any of the allegations or implications in the Question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on two occasions in the House the Minister of Fuel and Power has said that his right hon. Friend had advised him that no proceedings should be taken——

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy-Speaker. Is it desirable that Questions of this character should be put in connection with this case in view of the statement made yesterday?

If they are in order from the point of view of the Table. I am afraid that I have no option but to accept them.

The Minister of Fuel and Power has stated that he looks upon the right hon. Gentleman as expert in these matters. Upon what evidence does the right hon. Gentleman work in giving expert information?

I suspect that my right hon. Friend is being misquoted, but, anyway, it is quite impossible for me to explain in detail what happened without prejudicing what is now under consideration. The matter is quite simple and perfectly clear, and the truth will out in the end.

If there is no prosecution in this case, would the Minister assure the House that there will be no prosecution in the case of the Ilkley War Memorial being completed without a licence?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman is not correct. The Attorney-General stated yesterday that immediately following the Adjournment debate he had asked the Director of Public Prosecutions to institute inquiries. Whether a prosecution follows or not depends entirely upon what the Director of Public Prosecutions finds.

asked the Minister of Works whether the negotiations for the de-requisition of the Hotel St. George, Harrogate, are now finished.

No, Sir. As I stated in my reply of 27th February to the hon. Member, de-requisitioning is dependent on negotiations for alternative premises, which are proceeding satisfactorily.

Could not the right hon. Gentleman do something to hurry this matter, which has been going on since 23rd November? Does not he realise the difficulties caused to local authorities who are conducting negotiations with sundry Government Departments?

The matter really is receiving attention, and I hope that the derequisitioning will take place by the end of the year. I cannot say more than that.

That is a hopeless proposition to make. Will the Minister consider receiving a deputation so that he can be fully informed of all the repercussions as a result of his lack of speed in the matter?

I think I know the case. Before I receive a deputation, perhaps it would be a good thing if I had another look at it.

asked the Minister of Works the total number of people employed by him outside the British Isles; and what was the cost to the Exchequer in the years 1939 and 1949, respectively.

The number of staff employed abroad is 115, of whom 72 are locally engaged. The cost of staff overseas in 1939 was £8,500. compared with £120,000 in 1949.

Will the Minister say to what he attributes the increase?

Yes, Sir; to a vast increase of work. The amount undertaken in 1949 was over £2 million. A great deal of war damage had to be repaired. I have informed the House that in the past 12 months I have reduced the overseas staff by 28 people and salaries by £15,400.

asked the Minister of Works if he will arrange to have the principal London statues for which he is responsible cleaned for the Festival of Britain.

Most statues in the care of my Department are cleaned at intervals of about three months; the exceptions are Nelson and the Duke of York which, being at the top of high columns, are cleaned about once in 25 years. I do not consider that there is any need for special cleaning for the Festival of Britain.

Will the Minister arrange to have Nelson's Column cleaned, and, if necessary, floodlit so that visitors arriving for the Festival of Britain will realise that Britain once ruled the waves?

I think I am right in saying that it is already floodlit. I can only repeat that I do not think it is necessary to alter the programme which we already have for statue cleaning.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make the beautiful statue of William III in St. James's Square the object of his special solicitude in order that the numerous visitors from Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States may see it to its best advantage?

I will go and have a look and see what it looks like.

asked the Minister of Works how many units of electricity were consumed during the months of January and February in the Government offices known as Charles House, Kensington.

One hundred and seventy-seven thousand four hundred and fifty-seven, Sir.

Is the Minister aware that even people who work in the building itself think that too many lights are used in it? Is he aware that at 5.30 p.m. yesterday, although the building was empty, nearly all the lights were still on?

It is always a problem. I can only say that I am not satisfied and that representations have been made to the Departments concerned.

asked the Minister of Works on how many occasions have building regulations been contravened in the past four years by private individuals, local authorities, private companies, nationalised boards and Government Departments, respectively; and in how many cases were prosecutions instituted.

In the four years 1947–50 my Department and local authorities investigated 19,489 cases of alleged contravention of Defence Regulation 56A. Records do not show the type of concern involved in the alleged contraventions where no proceedings were instituted, and the information could not be obtained without an undue amount of research. Proceedings were instituted in 1,189 cases involving 1,523 private individuals, 507 private companies and two boards of nationalised industries.

asked the Minister of Works in view of the fact that Leagues of Youth and other organisations in the Crook area, County Durham, are at pre sent unable to find suitable meeting places and that there are vacant Nissen huts belonging to his Department which will soon become useless unless they are disposed of, if he will now arrange for the sale of these huts.

I assume that my hon. Friend refers to huts at the former Miners' Hostel, Crook, part of which, after it had been occupied by squatters, was- taken over by the local authority as a temporary housing estate. Last week the local authority asked my Department to dispose of a number of huts which have become vacant and these will be sold in competition. Any interested bodies will then have the opportunity to bid.

Is the Minister aware that his reply will give great satisfaction to the young people in the Crook area, because they have been wanting these huts and have been dissatisfied about the waste of public money in this connection? Can the Minister state when this is likely to take place?

No. As I explained to my hon. Friend in my answer. I was only asked to tackle the job a week ago and we are, as usual, acting with great expedition.

asked the Minister of Works why Faversham town hall has been scheduled as an ancient monument.

Faversham Market Hall is an interesting early 18th century building and the Ancient Monuments Board for England advised me that it was a monument the preservation of which was of national importance.

Is the Minister aware that this is a comparatively modern building. having been started in 1814?

That is not my information. My information is that it is 18th century, and that would be some time before 1800.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the town hall is a better prospect than the hon. Member?

asked the Minister of Works whether he is aware that large numbers of visitors on Saturdays pass through the Churchill arch without noticing that it is the Churchill arch; and if he will arrange to display, on days when the Palace of Westminster is open to the public, a suitable notice saying, "Churchill Arch."

There are many points and objects of interest to visitors passing through the Palace of Westminster, and I see no reason to draw special attention to the arch in question in the manner suggested.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that this arch is unique in the world? Is he also aware that the custodian on duty reports that on any Saturday scores of visitors, having walked into the Chamber through the arch and out again through the arch, proceed to ask the custodian where the arch is? Does that not indicate the need for some notice drawing attention to it?

I do not think so. Of course, I am in the hands of the House in this matter and if the House wishes it, something will be done. I should have thought it was a dangerous precedent to set. We shall have labels all over the place unless we are careful.

Is not my right hon. Friend aware that it is not necessary for the hon. Member for Gravesend (Sir R. Acland) to create any publicity for the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Woodford (Mr. Churchill)?

asked the Minister of Works how many members of his staff were compelled to work between 2.13 a.m. and 5.41 a.m. on 9th March, 1951, in consequence of the House of Commons being in session during those hours; how long was each of these persons on duty from the commencement of his duties on 8th March, 1951, to the cessation of his duties on 9th March, 1951; and what was the additional cost entailed in this respect and in respect of additional lighting.

Sixteen men were on duty, four for 17½ hours each; nine for 18 hours; one for 21¼ hours and two for 23½ hours. The additional cost was £92, of which £54 was for wages and £38 for lighting. I am looking further into the arrangements for long Sittings.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether he will consult with his colleagues who are responsible for other people who are employed in this House at those times when there is an admitted pure waste? Will he tell the House whether he can at some time or other give us a total of the men employed, the amount of money wasted, and how much it has cost both for lighting and for accommodation here in those hours?

If my hon. Friend studies my answer, I think he will be able to make that arithmetical calculation for himself, but perhaps these Sittings will not be so frequent in the future.

Is it not the case that the Government are wasting millions in many other directions, and is it not absurd, therefore, to try to curtail free discussion in this way?

asked the Minister of Works what is the total cost per hour to his Department caused by Sittings of the House after 10.30 p.m.; and if he will specify the items which make up that total cost.

The total hourly cost is £10 before midnight, and £12 10s. after midnight. Of this £4 7s. up to midnight, and £6 15s. 8d. after midnight, is for wages; £4 10s. for electricity; 5s. for gas and, it is estimated, £1 for fuel.

Can the Minister say whether these working hours and other arrangements are fixed by trade union agreement, and if so, to what union does the staff belong?

This is all by arrangement and, as I said on the previous Question, I am looking into the problems connected with the late hours. However, the staff are perfectly happy with the arrangements and there have been no complaints.

No!

But do they belong to a union?

I could not say.

Does the charge of five shillings for gas include the unnecessary gas evaporated by the other side?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is today's nominal value, including accrued interest, of a National Savings Certificate purchased in August, 1945, for 15s.: and what is its real purchasing power allowing for the subsequent drop in the internal purchasing power of the £.

17s. 9½d. and 13s. 9d. respectively.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think this is grossly unfair to the thrifty wage earner who has been supporting the National Savings movement, and could he not evolve some fairer method of paying back these people for the patriotism they have shown under more than one Government?

If the hon. Gentleman is merely saying that prices have risen in the last five years, or in the last 15 years, I might agree with him. If he is suggesting that the person who has invested in National Savings is worse off, then it depends on what he might have done with the money. If he had spent it on drink, there might be a difference of opinion. If, on the other hand, he had put it in a stocking, he would have been better off to have bought Savings Certificates.

Can my right hon. Friend say how this fall in value compares with the fall in value of other national currencies during the same period?

The rise in prices here has been less than elsewhere.

This is a very serious matter. Does the Chancellor think it really fair that a thrifty section of the country should be paid back about 15s. in the pound? Can he not do something about it?

He cannot be said to be worse off.

Of course he is worse off.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the internal purchasing power of the £ on 1st March, 1951, as compared with 20s. on 1stAugust, 1945.

Information in respect of the dates in the Question is not available but it was about 15s. 6d. in February, 1951, as compared with 20s. over 1945 as a whole.

Does the Chancellor agree with the "Economist" editorial at the week-end, that this year we are likely to see a catastrophic fall in the internal purchasing power of the pound?

That question does not arise.

Is not the short answer to all these questions that the philosophy of Socialism has ruined our national credit?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what steps he proposes to take, in view of the approach of the tourist season, to simplify the purchase of goods in shops by visitors from abroad.

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Govan (Mr. Browne) on 13th February.

What has happened to the schemes, thought out by the Dollar Exports Board and by trade and other organisations of that kind for simplifying the purchase of goods in shops by foreigners visiting this country? Have these schemes been forgotten or are they still being considered?

This matter is still under consideration and I hope to be able to make a statement in two or three week's time.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that coach and wagon drivers and others in Morecambe have, during the past two months, been re-coded under Pay-As-You-Earn with an additional assessment of £25 for tips; and under which of his regulations this has been done.

Yes, Sir. The Regulation is No. 7 (1) (b) of the Income Tax (Employments) Regulations, 1950 (S.I. 1950, No. 453).

Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate how very much this practice is resented, and can he justify a flat rate which obviously must be unjust to many if it is just to any?

I am afraid I cannot agree that enforcing the law for Income Tax on individuals is necessarily unfair.

How can a flat rate apply to many different emoluments, amounts and circumstances?

It is open to the individuals concerned to appeal against the assessments.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer on what basis the Gas Council is assessed for Income Tax and Super Tax; how much is due to the Treasury for the first year's working; and if he will make a statement.

I cannot disclose information about the affairs of particular taxpayers, but the hon. Member is no doubt aware that the Gas Council is liable for Income Tax on exactly the same basis as a privately-owned concern carrying on the same activities.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the pay of Z Class reservists during their 15 days' training this summer is to be included in the recipient's Income Tax return to be completed after 5th April, 1952; and when tax will be payable on this income.

This pay should be included in the recipient's return of income for the year 1951–52. In the case of reservists whose civilian pay is subject to deduction of tax under P.A.Y.E., the tax on training pay will normally be collected during the year 1953–54.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is desirable to avoid this long timelag in taxing this small amount of pay which will be received by the Z Class reservists during their 15 days' training? When we reach the Finance Bill will he consider exempting this pay from Income Tax altogether?

How does the Chancellor justify his attitude of meanness over a matter of a small amount like this with profligate expenditure on the Festival of Britain?

This income is subject to tax according to the law.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether agreement to the extra-statutory concessions given in the 93rd Report of the Commissioners of His Majesty's Inland Revenue for the year ended 31st March, 1950, was obtained from all the Local Commissioners of Income Taxe.

No, Sir.