asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how many bases we now have in the Falkland Island Dependencies permanently manned; and what plans the Government have for the further exploration, survey and development of this territory during the next open season.

There are at present four permanently manned British posts in the Dependencies, in addition to South Georgia, which is permanently inhabited and administered territory. Plans for the coming season will involve an increased scale of activity in these territories, but I cannot give details at this stage.

Can the Minister say what administrative organisation exists in these Dependencies, and is he satisfied that it is adequate to maintain British rule in that area?

Yes, Sir.

How many stations are manned by the Chileans and Argentinos who are trespassers there?

That question had better be asked of my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary or the Chilean Government.

Do I understand that the right hon. Gentleman does not know who is in British Colonial Territories for which he is responsible?

Answer!

How does the Minister of State reconcile his remark that he is satisfied with the administration there with his comment that he does not know how many foreigners are in the territory?

The Question asks not about the number of foreigners but about the number of bases we have in the Dependencies.

May I say, Mr. Speaker, that my Question asks also about what developments are taking place?

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the fact that the strength of the individual groups of Chilean and Argentinian personnel at present in illegal occupation of British territory in the Falkland Islands Dependencies in no case exceeds 12 men, and in most cases is smaller, he will take early administrative measures for the apprehension and removal of these persons as undesirable aliens.

No, Sir. The attitude of His Majesty's Government on this matter is set out in the reply given to the hon. Member by my right hon. Friend the Minister of State on 23rd April.

But does the right hon. Gentleman really mean to say that the local authorities are just neglecting their ordinary constitutional duties? Is he not facing up to that problem at all?

My right hon. Friend said on 23rd April that it was the view of His Majesty's Government that the dispute should be settled through the International Court, and that remains our attitude.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he would convey to his colleagues that possible weakness in this case may have led to more dangerous and arrogant presumptions elsewhere?

Is the Minister aware that his predecessor informed me on 10th March. 1948, that there were one policeman and one or two Customs officers available to enforce the immigration regulations of the Dependencies, and that these immigration regulations were available to deal with small bands of people? Could he say why nothing has been done since then?

Answer!

I have nothing to add. The position has been made perfectly clear on a number of occasions.

Can the Minister say how long this situation is to be allowed to continue and, furthermore, what action he will take if other countries follow the precedent which has apparently been allowed to be established by those two countries, Argentina and Chile?

That is hypothetical and not a question I can answer.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what steps he is taking to make known to the peoples of the Colonial Empire the generous help which is being given by the United States of America under the Economic Co-operation Administration.

My right hon. Friend knows of no case where a Colonial Government in receipt of E.C.A. assistance has not gladly given publicity to this fact. I would also refer the hon. Member to paragraphs 462 to 465 of the Report which my right hon. Friend recently presented to Parliament (Command 8243).

Do the Government propose to put any sort of plaque on this project so that we may know what generous help we have had from the United States and what a wonderful example this is of international co-operation in developing backward areas?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we are very fully aware of that and are exceedingly grateful for all the help we have had from the United States.

While we are thanking the American Government for the help that they have given to this country, will my right hon. Friend take care not to lose sight of the help that this country has given to the Colonial Empire, particularly since His Majesty's present Government came into power?

I have no doubt that the American Government will consider that one of the best forms of thanking them is that there should be some self help, and that is what we have in this connection.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what progress has been made in providing accommodation for colonial peoples other than, students in London and provincial cities; and what is the estimated present monthly number of entrants of colonial workers into this country.

On arrival in this country migrants who lack accommodation and funds are looked after by the L.C.C. in London and the local authorities in the provinces. No special accommodation is provided for colonial migrants. No statistics are available of the numbers of migrant colonial workers, but it is estimated that over 1,000 a year are arriving to seek work.

Is the Minister aware that this problem is becoming increasingly acute and grave in many parts of the country, and that it is spreading to some of the southern suburbs? In the circumstances, does he not think that it is time that special inquiries were made to see what can be done both to control the influx of young men and to provide them with decent accommodation?

We are concerned to see that proper accommodation is provided and that these people do get adequate protection. I think the present system is providing them with a reasonable amount of accommodation.

Is my right hon. Friend aware how hard put the L.C.C. are to find accommodation for these people, who arrive sometimes in large numbers with wives and families without any notice at all and have to be accommodated?

Yes, Sir, I am aware of it.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in connection with this problem a difficult situation has arisen in Brixton and that the Lambeth Borough Council are going to make representations to him which I hope he will receive with sympathetic and favourable consideration?

Will the right hon. Gentleman travel a little beyond Brixton to Croydon, where a large number of these people are accommodated in the International Language Club?

It seems that I shall do a lot of travelling.

Is the Minister aware that the colonial peoples to whom reference is made come here as wayfarers or stowaways and often have no work to go to at all?

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what progress has been made in respect of the abolition of corporal punishment as a sanction imposed by courts in the Colonies.

Since my right hon. Friend's reply to my hon. Friend's Question on this subject on 31st January three Colonial Governments have appointed committees to consider the question of corporal punishment, while a fourth intends to take similar action.

Do I understand that in these cases corporal punishment has been abolished altogether except for attack on warders in prison?

No, Sir. All that has happened is that committees have been set up to inquire into the matter.

How long is it likely to be before the committees issue their reports and the Government can take some action?

In view of the increasing crime in Colonies where corporal punishment has been abolished, will the Minister say what deterrent steps are to be taken in place of corporal punishment?

I do not intend to get involved in the efficacy or otherwise of corporal punishment in reply to a question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how many students have availed themselves of the facilities which exist for providing financial assistance in the case of illness or other misfortune; and on what basis students become eligible for this assistance.

Expenses of illness and convalescence can normally be met without undue difficulty through the National Health Scheme. Thirteen students have, however, been helped to the extent of £147 while in hospital or undergoing convalescence or suffering from some other misfortune. Any student is eligible for such assistance in special emergencies where no other source of help is available.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether he means by "any students" those who come over privately as well as those who come over sponsored by colonial governments?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what steps he is taking to secure the maximum contribution from the Colonial Territories of raw materials in scarce supply.

Colonial Governments are fully aware of the raw materials situation, and, where necessary, His Majesty's Government are willing to help them to secure additional finance, capital equipment or labour required for increased production. Production is also encouraged by the offer of long term contracts by U.K. Government purchasing agencies where that appears desirable.

Did the Colonial Office make strong representations at the Torquay Conference in favour of Imperial Preference, which enriches both the Colonies and the Mother country?

That seems to me to be quite another question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will make a statement about the military manpower contribution of the Colonial Empire to the collective defences of the democracies.

I can add nothing to the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War and myself in the debate on 16th March last. Colonial Territories make a substantial contribution in manpower towards collective defence by their assumption of responsibility for their own internal security. Forces maintained for that purpose are capable of expansion in war, and of mutual reinforcement in emergencies.

Has the right hon. Gentleman ever seen the K.A.Rs. or, for example, the Basutoland contingent on the job in a war, and does he realise how valuable these men are, how they enjoy military service, and how much we need them?

Certainly I am fully aware of their value.

Has my right hon. Friend taken any further steps with regard to providing facilities for ex-R.A.F. personnel in Jamaica to re-join?

That is another Question which I cannot answer without notice.

Is not the Minister aware that in the statement to which he refers that was made by his right hon. Friend it was promised that much more attention would be paid to this matter and that a more comprehensive report on the possibilities of colonial manpower for the common defence of the Empire would be given? Has he any further statement to make other than the one he has now made?

No, Sir. It has been stated that my right hon. Friend is undertaking a detailed examination of the possibility of making extended use of African troops.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he has considered the representations from the Deputy Chairman of the Town Council of Vieux-Fort, St. Lucia, forwarded to him by the hon. Member for Maldon, concerning the destitution and unemployment caused by the collapse of the sugar industry in that district; what compensation, rent or other payment was received on account of the former United States base, whose presence led to this collapse; and what steps are being taken to provide money, work and other help for those in want.

Yes, Sir. I am aware of the present difficulties of the people of Vieux-Fort. I cannot say, without reference to the Governor, what was the total amount of compensation paid to owners of land on account of the United States base. This base brought considerable prosperity to the area; and, as its activity decreased, substantial sums were provided both by the local government and under the Colonial Development and Welfare Act for resettlement schemes. Further measures are plainly needed to help this area, but they must await the report of the team of experts who have recently visited the island to investigate means of expanding agricultural production I am asking the Governor to speed things up.

When my right hon. Friend says that further help is plainly needed but that we must await the report of the experts, may I ask him what is being done about the urgent plight of the people concerned? Is any form of relief being provided?

No, Sir, there is no form of unemployment relief there; but I must say that the people there had rather unexpected prosperity during the time that the Americans base was there.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Opposition have also received a communication from this island and are deeply anxious for its welfare? Pending inquiries, would it not be very unfortunate if the impression got about that the United States, in some sinister way, are responsible for the present destitution?

I should like to make it clear that they are not.

In view of the reports reaching us about the unsatisfactory conditions on St. Lucia, could the right hon. Gentleman say when the affairs of the island last came before him? If they have not done so for some time, will he have them looked into?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that they come before me and my right hon. Friend on very frequent occasions.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies why the Government of Trinidad has not yet provided for the registration of co-operatives.

Provision already exists in Trinidad for the registration of agricultural co-operative societies and agricultural credit societies. I understand that the Government of Trinidad hopes to introduce shortly comprehensive legislation providing for the registration of all forms of co-operatives.

Is my right hon. Friend making it clear that the Governor proposes to reform the existing law?

The Governor himself cannot alter the law, but it is in fact intended to introduce comprehensive legislation.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies why there are not yet any registered co-operatives in Barbados; and what is being done to promote the setting up of co-operatives, particularly consumers' co-operatives to supply farmers.

Legislation providing for the registration of co-operative societies has been enacted but has not yet been brought into force. My right hon. Friend is asking the Governor for a report on the position.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies why the licence of the Malay daily newspaper, "Melayu Raga," which is supported by Malay peasants, was withdrawn and the paper closed down in January; who were the proprietors; and what evidence there is against the newspaper.

The licence was withdrawn because of the systematic publication by the "Melayu Raya" of material concerning the Hertogh case of a nature likely to foster religious and racial antagonism. Repeated warnings to the newspaper had had no effect. The managing director of the "Melayu Raya" Press is Mr. Harun bin Mohamed Amin.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how many men called up for military service in Malaya are, owing to residence or other disqualification, regarded as aliens; and if he will encourage these persons by giving them an assurance of full Federation citizenship after completing such service.

I regret that the information requested in the first part of the Question is not available. The call up is for police and the civilian service, not military service. The assurance suggested cannot be given at the present time.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that some of these men have preferred to go to China rather than fight for a government which refuses to grant them full citizenship? Will he take steps to see that they are promised this recognition?

All I am saying is that we cannot give special consideration to them over and above other people who may have joined the Home Guard and the Civil Defence Services.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what price, in English currency, is charged for Siamese rice sold on the ration in Hong Kong and Malaya; and what is the weekly ration of rice in Hong Kong, Singapore and the Federation of Malaya.

My right hon. Friend is obtaining the information in reply to the first part of the Question from the three governments and will send it to my hon. Friend as soon as it is received. The weekly rice ration is: Hong Kong, 67¼ ounces; Singapore, 79 ounces; Federation of Malaya, 77¾ ounces.

In view of the fact that rice can be bought on the black market in any quantity, will not the Minister endeavour to increase the ration of rice in Malaya and Singapore?

That is a matter for the Malayan Government.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how many chiefs have recently been de-stooled in the Gold Coast; and how this number compares with the previous comparable period.

My right hon. Friend has asked the Gold Coast Government to provide this information and will write to the hon. Member when it has been received.

Can the Minister tell the House whether the word "de-stooled" has any official significance? Is it the process recently followed by three ex-Ministers?

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies why the ceremonial celebration of Empire Day in the Gold Coast was not held this year.

The hon. Member is misinformed. Empire Day was in fact celebrated in the Gold Coast, as a public holiday and the officer administering the Government broadcast a message which was transmitted or read to all schools. It was, however, decided to discontinue the parades of school children which have taken place in previous years.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not agree that there is a substantial difference between the ceremonial celebration of Empire Day and the type of celebration which was in fact carried out?

I am satisfied that the Gold Coast Government hold the view, which has already been stated publicly by Mr. Nkrumah, that they intend to remain in the Commonwealth. That being so, they would naturally celebrate Empire Day in a fit and proper way as members of the Commonwealth.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty (1) what information he has about the origin of the ammunition that exploded at the Royal Naval Ordnance Depot, Bedenham, Gosport, on board the naval ammunition ship "Bedenham," at Gibraltar, and on board the ammunition ship "Indian Enterprise" in the Indian Ocean, respectively; and what progress has been made towards the joint and several solutions of these crimes of sabotage;

(2) what have been the findings of the inquiry into the ammunition explosion at the Bedenham Ordnance Depot in Portsmouth Harbour last summer.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether he has now any further statement to make on the circumstances of the explosion which took place on board of ammunition ship "Bedenham" at Gibraltar.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether an inquiry into the causes of the explosion which occurred in the ammunition ship "Bedenham" on 27th April has now been held; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if he is yet in a position to make a statement on the causes of the explosion in Gibraltar.

The explosions at Gosport and at Gibraltar originated in naval depth charges which were filled at the Royal Ordnance Factory, Glascoed. There were no naval depth charges on board the s.s. "Indian Enterprise" and the naval ammunition on board this vessel was supplied from various naval armament depots.

Statements were made concerning the Gosport explosion by the Prime Minister on 24th July, and subsequently made by me on 19th September, 18th October and 25th October; no further evidence has yet come to light concerning this explosion.

The conclusions which the Admiralty have reached following the naval Board of Inquiry which considered the explosion at Gibraltar on 27th April, are that a fire arose from a mild explosion in a depth charge whilst the depth charge was being man-handled into position: it is not certain whether the explosion occurred in the depth charge which was being handled at that moment or in one adjacent to it. The fire developed with extreme rapidity, leading to a general conflagration and major explosion. Whilst it has not yet been possible to determine the cause of the initial fire and explosion, there is no evidence to suggest that sabotage was the cause. Technical investigations into the explosive fillings are proceeding.

The assumption that the explosion in the S.S. "Indian Enterprise" was due to sabotage is not justified by the evidence at present available.

Is it or is it not the opinion of the Admiralty that the explosion in the shipyard at Bedenham and the explosion in the ammunition ship "Bedenham" were initiated on almost identical lines and that if it was sabotage in one case it was likely also to be sabotage in the other?

The opinion of the Admiralty has been explained in the statements which have been made from time to time.

Can my hon. Friend give an explicit assurance that the trouble connected with the ship did not arise while it was being loaded at Bullpoint, Plymouth?

From the evidence which we have before us at the moment there is no suggestion of sabotage at Bullpoint.

Are we to understand that the explosions were caused by the same lot number of depth charges? Have the rest of the lot number been withdrawn from service?

I am afraid that I cannot give specific information with regard to the lot number, but that type of depth charge has now been taken out of service while the examination is proceeding.

If the hon. Member denies that any of the occurrences were due to sabotage, can he explain why it is that we seem to have so many more of them than we had before the war?

The reason why this case is considered not to be due to sabotage is because of the evidence which the Board of Inquiry has considered and the conclusions which have been reached.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty when it is proposed holding an inquiry into the loss of His Majesty's Submarine "Affray"; and what form that inquiry will take.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether the recent discovery of H.M.S. "Affray" has thrown any light on the reason for the disaster; and if he will make a further statement.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if he has any further information in regard to H.M. Submarine "Affray."

I would refer the hon. and gallant Members to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Hereford (Mr. J. P. L. Thomas) on 18th June.

Does it not appear from the meagre evidence which is available that the design of the Snort apparatus is under some doubt? Should it not be a cardinal feature of this instrument that it should break off when under undue stress at some point which will not lead to the scuppering of the ship? Will the hon. Gentleman say whether investigations to this end in other submarines in the Service are being made?

Everything is in doubt for the moment, the Snort apparatus not more so than anything else. I think it would be quite possible to advance alternative reasons for the gash which has been found in the Snort apparatus and I should not like to come to a conclusion about it until the Naval Board of Inquiry has examined further evidence.

May I take the opportunity on this first occasion of expressing the gratitude and admiration of myself and of other hon. Members for the determination and bravery with which the search has been carried out? [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."]

I should like to ask the hon. Gentleman three questions which I hope will not be considered sub judice. First, in a submarine such as this, in the event of damage to the Snort apparatus of a kind which makes it admit water instead of air, can the right hon. Gentleman say how many seconds would elapse before the diesels had drawn out so much of the submarine's air as to reduce the pressure until the men lost consciousness? Does not this occur in 10 to 15 seconds?

Secondly, is it likely that, once it had begun to lose buoyancy, the submarine could have gone into a long uncontrolled glide which could have taken it so very far from the area where it was originally expected to appear? Thirdly, can the hon. Gentleman say whether or not the submarine's radar mast was extended?

The whole of the searching forces will be glad to hear what the hon. and gallant Gentleman said with the assent of the House. I think that the finding of the submarine was a most remarkable feat considering the conditions in which the search had to be conducted.

The answer to his first supplementary question is that the air would certainly not be exhausted within such a short period of time that it would be impossible to switch off the motors. There is a great deal of technical evidence about this into which I do not wish to go. His second and third supplementary questions are matters of judgment rather than of fact, and it would be advisable to postpone theorising about them until we have heard what the Board of Inquiry has to say.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if he will make a statement about the salvage of the submarine "Affray."

Not yet, Sir. When diving is resumed on 25th June, the main purpose will be to find out more about the condition of the submarine in order to determine, if possible, the cause of the disaster. The question of salvage which would require a major effort extending over many months, will be determined later.

As the question of whether to salvage the vessel will depend upon an opinion as to the technical difficulty and upon the cost, will the hon. Gentleman assure us that the Admiralty would regard almost any technical difficulty and almost any cost as worth while to elucidate this mystery?

Let us take the matter a step at a time. The first thing, which we have not yet exhausted by any means, is to find out the cause. If we can do so as the vessel now lies, so much the better.

Apart from these extremely important moral and scientific issues, what is the actual cost of a submarine of this type?

In round figures, I would say £1 million.

So that a certain amount of expense would be justified merely from that point of view of endeavouring to recover it?

The right hon. Gentleman will know better than I that a number of things have to be weighed against that. The effort that would have to be put into a job of salving a submarine from this depth would divert training, and a number of other efforts which would be involved are also factors to be borne in mind. No decision has been reached yet, but I think one is at least entitled to put these facts into the balance if we are to consider the bare arithmetic of the matter.

If the "Affray" were salvaged, apart from all other considerations, it could very quickly be made ready for service again, and that, as the hon. Gentleman said, would replace a vessel which would otherwise cost £1 million. I should have thought myself that it was a little more than £1 million.

That may well be so—I have not looked it up. I fully agree with the right hon. Gentleman, but all these things have to be taken into account. I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will agree that when the decision is made, it will not have been made except on the basis of what is best for the Service as a whole.

I am not so sure. Would it not be a great feather in the cap of the Admiralty if they achieved the great process of salving this vessel?

Yes, it would be something that had never before been done in tidal waters of this sort in the history of submarine salvage. I am all for getting feathers in one's cap, but we have to make a realistic appreciation of these matters, and that is what the Admiralty will do.

Will the Admiralty expedite their decision in order that the salvage work, if it is decided upon, shall be taken as far as possible before the weather breaks up for the winter?

The first advice, I gather, is that there is very little prospect indeed that we would be able to raise the submarine before the autumn storms.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if he is aware that yard craft engineers in Chatham dockyard are working many hours in excess of the 55 hours which comprise a normal working week; and if he will institute a system of overtime payment for each hour in excess of 55 worked each week.

Discussions have been proceeding for several months past with the representative organisations concerned about the basis for calculating overtime payments for yard craft officers. These negotiations have proved difficult; but they will be concluded as soon as possible and arrears due under the settlement will, of course, be paid.

While welcoming that statement from the hon. Gentleman, may I ask him to take steps to ensure that these negotiations are hurried as much as possible, because there is considerable dissatisfaction about this matter in the yard at the moment?

We are trying to do all that we possibly can, but unfortunately the organisations which are representing the men do not agree among themselves.

Does not the hon. Gentleman realise that it is generally regarded as most inefficient practice to ask men to continue to work these very long hours?

These "very long hours" were 66 hours a week when I took office. Now these men are paid for 55 hours even if they do not complete the 55 hours.

Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that in some cases these men are now working 85 hours a week?

There might be a few such cases, but these men are glad to be paid overtime for the hours over 55 hours a week. Previously, they were paid overtime only after 66 hours a week.

I asked if it did not mean inefficiency for these men to work such long hours. Would it not be better for them to work shorter hours?

I do not know if the right hon. Gentleman understands the duty of yard craft engineers. In many cases these men are undertaking duties in connection with the yard craft service which mean that they spend a long time standing about, for which period they are paid.

Has the hon. Gentle-man read one of the Reports of the Select Committee on Expenditure during the war which showed how undesirable it was to have men working long hours?

I have certainly given attention to that Report, and that is the reason why the hours of employment of the men have been reduced since I have been in office.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty on what grounds he has refused to make an ex-gratia payment of compensation to the widow of a retired farmer, Mrs. Lindsay, Stonehaven, whose husband was killed by a naval aircraft in November, 1944.

I understand that Mrs. Lindsay did not qualify for compensation from the Ministry of Pensions under the Personal Injuries (Civilians) Scheme. I regret that I cannot single out Mrs. Lindsay for more favourable treatment than others similarly ineligible under the Scheme.

Is it not true to say that this unfortunate widow would have been entitled to compensation had this accident occurred before the war, after the war, or during the war, if her husband had not retired, but that since he had retired and the accident occurred during the war she is debarred from receiving compensation? If that is the case, would not the hon. Gentleman agree that there is a strong moral obligation upon the Admiralty to be generous in this case?

That succinct summary of the situation is absolutely correct, but the Act was placed upon the Statute Book by the House and I can only assume that the House had good reason for knowing why it adopted this practice in 1941.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if he will consider distributing any unclaimed naval prize money to naval personnel who were taken prisoner prior to completing the necessary time at sea to qualify for prize money.

No, Sir. I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to my reply to his Question on 25th October last.

Does the Parliamentary Secretary recollect that a small number of naval personnel in submarines were taken prisoner during the early days of the war and are not entitled to any Atlantic Star or gratuity and that this is an excellent opportunity to give them some of the money which everybody agrees is due to them?

I recollect it well, but the hon. and gallant Gentleman knows that it would need a new Act. This matter was considered when the last Act leading to the Royal Proclamation was before the House.

Is there any undistributed prize money?

Yes, Sir, about £600,000 or £700,000.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty what decision he has now reached regarding the payment of bounties or gratuities to ratings who extended their service immediately prior to 1st September, 1950.

I am afraid that there are serious difficulties in the way of reopening this question and that no decision has been reached.

Does not the Minister realise that his reply will cause great disappointment at Portsmouth and other naval ports?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if workers in His Majesty's Dockyards will now be able to qualify for established posts up to the age of 65 years.

No, Sir. The current agreement made by the Joint Coordinating Committee for Government Industrial Establishments provides that men may not be nominated for establishment after their sixtieth birthday.

Does the Minister realise that this is not in accordance with the Government's plan to keep men in employment? Should not the Admiralty, as a Government Department, set an example in allowing people to serve up to the age of 65, which is what they are encouraging private employers to do?

This has nothing to do with the Government's plan for keeping people in employment. Being on the establishment means that a man will get a pension when he leaves the Service rather than a gratuity as a result of the number of years service which he has given to the Admiralty. Established and non-established men can still work until the age of 65 if they so desire. I should like to point out that the age limit in this case has been raised to 60 from 50 since 1945.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty what is the cost of a uniform for an officer of the Sea Cadet Corps; and for how many years are such uniforms assumed to continue satisfactory and suitable for use.

About £38, towards which the officer receives a cash grant of £27. In addition, some other items of uniform are issued from Service stocks free of charge. The life of a uniform varies with the care an officer takes of it and the duties he performs.

Is the Minister aware that there are something like 500 Sea Cadet Corps officers who have been in the Service from six to nine years, whose uniforms are worn out and who are entitled to an allowance of only about £3 in 1952? How does he expect them to preserve a decent appearance and to inspire the young cadets?

I do not think that these terms are at all easy. The hon. Member should note that the allowance of £3 a year is tax free. I do not think that a Sea Cadet officer would wear out his uniform, unless his girth increases, to such an extent that would take him much beyond the normal period of replacement.

Is Purchase Tax included in the cost of the uniform?

Yes, I believe it is.

Will the Sea Cadet Corps be brought within the scope of the inquiry promised yesterday between the Treasury and the Service Departments relating to the whole question of uniform allowances?

If it is not included, I will try to work it so that it is.

Does not the Minister know that some of these men have been in the Service for nine years, and does he expect that a uniform that has been continually used for that length of time would be properly satisfactory for these officers? The Minister knows, as does everybody else, that this position is very unsatisfactory. Cannot he do anything to correct it?

I have worn my uniform at this Box for 10 years, and nobody has commented adversely on it.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty what opportunities are open to National Service men and others to obtain short service commissions in the Navy as pilots and observers.

National Service men can at present apply to train in their National Service time for flying appointments in the Navy as pilots or observers. The Admiralty are now introducing a new scheme, which will become operative immediately, whereby these National Service men win be able to volunteer during their training to transfer to a short service engagement which would extend their full-time service to four years. On transfer they will receive Regular rates of pay. All time after transfer, subject to their having been awarded their "wings," will count for gratuity at the rate of £175 per annum. We hope that there will be a good response to this new scheme from all young men to whom the unique opportunity of service at sea and in the air appeals.

At the end of their four-year engagement, these officers may volunteer for another four years, all of which will count for gratuity at the same rate. During this period they may be considered for permanent commissions in the Navy.

I should emphasise, of course, that this scheme is in addition to the existing arrangements whereby men between the ages of 17 years 4 months and 24 years may apply for a short service commission of eight years at Regular rates of pay with a gratuity on completion of £1,500. There will be similar opportunities for permanent commissions for these officers. These engagements carry varying periods of reserve liability, up to seven years.

The shortage of aircrew is a most serious problem. In addition to permanent officers who specialise in flying, we shall now have two short service schemes—the new four-year scheme for National Service men, with the option to extend it to eight years: and the existing eight year scheme for all young men between the ages of 17 years 4 months and 24.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for his statement, may I ask whether it is possible to give to people who are to be called up and who wish to enter for pilot and observer duties, priority in the call-up so that they can get into the Navy?

Yes, Sir. Any National Service man who wants to enter the Navy and expresses a desire to fly is, subject to other conditions, automatically accepted. The pinch comes on those National Service men who do not wish to fly but who want to serve their National Service time in the Navy.

Will the new scheme permit the beginning of flying training at an extremely early stage of a man's call-up, or will he have to do a certain amount of divisional and other work before he can get into the air?

After 10 weeks' initial training he can carry on with his flying training.

While recognising the very great need for these pilots and airmen, may I ask whether the Parliamentary Secretary's answer means that there is any extension of commissions for National Service men on a general basis other than in the air branch?

No. My answer deals solely with the air branch.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary ensure that his statement is fully appreciated by cadet corps and other sources of naval recruitment?

indicated assent.

Will the hon. Gentleman say whether an opportunity is now to be available to naval National Service men similar to the opportunities available to National Service men in the Royal Air Force, and are the rewards equally advantageous?

I understand that the scheme is very closely allied to that which has just been started in the Royal Air Force.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty the total annual charge on public funds in respect of the pay of naval chaplains.

One hundred and fifty thousand pounds.

asked the Minister of Defence what countries have manufactured the arms and equipment recently captured by British troops from the Chinese and North Korean armies.

While we have plenty of information about the different types of equipment used by the Chinese Communist and North Korean forces which has now fallen into our hands, I do not think it would be in the public interest to publish details. Much of the equipment was originally captured by the Chinese Communist forces from the Chinese Nationalist forces or from the United Nations forces themselves. The equipment is of miscellaneous origin and includes items of Japanese, Russian, American and German manufacture.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that the public are very interested, just as much as he is, in the sources of manufacture of this equipment, and that to enable them to come to some opinion, possibly in support of the right hon. Gentleman, they are entitled to be told the sources?

It is a matter of importance in the first instance that we should study this matter before we disclose details to the public.

Is not by far the largest proportion of these arms of American origin?

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House how much postwar Russian equipment is involved?

No, Sir.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what consideration of public interest is involved in refusing to give these names?

In our view it is not desirable to publish details of equipment which might enable the enemy to learn as much as we know about it.

Surely the enemy, whatever their limitations of knowledge, must know what their equipment was?

There is no reason why they should know what we know about it.