asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Civil Aviation how many aircraft British Overseas Airways Corporation have surplus to requirements.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Civil Aviation if, in view of his consent being required before disposal of the Hermes aircraft by British Overseas Air ways Corporation, for what reason five aircraft of this design have been offered for sale by the Corporation: and if he will make a statement.

The Corporation has four Tudor IV aircraft surplus to requirements, and will probably have some Hermes aircraft surplus in the near future; the exact number will depend upon future commitments, which are not yet clear. It is obviously better that surplus aircraft should be put to work rather than stored.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary explain why there is a surplus of aircraft, particularly the Hermes, because a lot of taxpayers' money is being spent? Can we have an assurance that the Minister will look into this matter, and can we be informed what the position really is? Can we also have, an assurance that the surplus Hermes aircraft will not be used in order to oust private operators?

I do not think there is any question of the latter fear being realised. As regards the reason for the surplus the fact of the matter is that these Hermes aircraft were delivered late, and it was necessary, as the hon. and gallant Gentleman will realise, to provide some Argonauts in order to keep the Corporation going until the Hermes were delivered.

Can my hon. Friend say what further number of Hermes may perhaps be disposed of, in addition to the five suggested, and what is likely to be the loss involved? Could he also say what is the reason for this? Is it due to the Corporation not clearly stating their requirements, or is it due to the fact that the Hermes were delivered late or failed to come up to the necessary standard of the specifications?

The reason is that the aircraft were delivered late. There will be no loss, and I have not mentioned a figure of five.

Can the Minister give an assurance that, in any charter operations on which the surplus Hermes aircraft will be involved, they will charge the full rate and not cut the price in order to get work for these aircraft?

No cut prices are charged in the Corporation's charter services.

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that it is very important at this time, when a lot of trooping may have to be done, to have as many aircraft as possible, and will he see that B.O.A.C. do not endeavour to undercut private operators?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Civil Aviation if he will arrange for the discontinuance of the use of loud-speaking equipment in the public enclosure at London Airport in view of the disturbance caused to local residents.

Arrangements have now been made to reduce the volume of sound so that residents will not be disturbed.

Can the Minister explain what he means by reducing the volume of sound? Can he also give an undertaking that there will be no repetition of the nonsense whereby members of the public are called to the microphone and asked to announce through a loudspeaker what they would do if they were given £500 and a month's holiday in which to spend it?

When I am talking of reducing the volume of sound, I mean making less noise.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Civil Aviation (1) whether he will enter into consultation with the principal local authorities in the industrial areas of the Midlands with a view to formulating preliminary plans for helicopter landing sites and the outline plan for a network of helicopter services to link London, Manchester and Liverpool with the principal Midlands industrial towns; and whether he will make a statement:

(2) whether he is aware that aggregate helicopter hours flown per 1,000 heads of population, in Great Britain, are only a small fraction of those flown in the United States of America, calculated on the same basis; and, in view of the highly developed state of the aircraft industry in Great Britain, what steps are being taken to develop in this country short-distance helicopter services similar to those now operating in the United States of America.

I have no information about the number of helicopter hours flown per thousand heads of population in the United States, but the figure for Great Britain is not so insignificant as the hon. Member would imply. Moreover, the greater part of helicopter flying in this country is devoted to experimental passenger carriage, while regular helicopter flying in America has been primarily concerned with mail carriage.

The equipment now available for passenger carriage is not suitable for operation between city centres, and plans for the operation of inter-city networks must be based upon suitable twin-engined helicopters still under development. My noble Friend has, however, made known to interested local authorities and other bodies our present views on design and layout requirements of helicopter stations, and he has also publicly impressed on local authorities the advisability of reserving sites for helicopter stations against future requirements.

While thanking the hon. Gentleman for the comprehensive nature of his reply, may I ask him if he will bear in mind that, inevitably, there will be a two or three years' delay in the local authorities making arrangements for landing sites for helicopters; and could not that delay be made concurrent with the delay in the development of the twin-engined helicopter, so that we shall have a reasonable assurance of an inter-city service, say, by 1954 or 1955?

Yes, Sir. The idea of putting out information is precisely to make preparations concurrent with the development of a suitable helicopter.

Is my hon. Friend including in his consultations with local authorities the London County Council and the Metropolitan boroughs that may be concerned, because these discussions with these authorities will be quite useless unless provision is made for a helicopter landing site somewhere in central London?

Yes, Sir; the needs of London have not been overlooked.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Civil Aviation to what extent seats have been filled during the first six weeks' operation of the Birmingham to London helicopter service; what has been the degree of punctuality of the flights; whether any technical or operational hitches have developed; and whether, in view of the results to date, he is now prepared to make plans to extend the service to include a network of other Midlands' towns in the industrial areas.

During the first six weeks of the experimental service between Birmingham and London airports, 294 of the 425 available seats were filled. Eighty-seven percent, of services were punctual. There was a technical and operational hitch on 27th June. The extension of the Birmingham type of service to the outskirts of other provincial cities would be a costly experiment which could not be justified either on economic ground or as part of the helicopter development programme in preparation for the commercial stage.

Does the hon. Gentleman consider that the loading of this service during the first six weeks and the number of vacant seats he indicated were due, in large measure, to the fact that the landing sites are so far removed from the city centre? Is it not possible to make an early rearrangement in order to get these sites nearer to the centre of the cities?

Yes, Sir, but the immediate reason for this service is, of course, to get some benefit from the experiment from a technical point of view, and, secondly, of course, to join up Birmingham with the international services at the London Airport. Therefore, I would not altogether agree that what the hon. Gentleman says is justified. I would agree, however, that it is necessary to get the sites as near to the centre of the city as possible.

Does my hon. Friend know whether any negotiations over landing sites in the centre of the city are going on in Birmingham? I understand that they are.

The Birmingham Corporation have a very live committee who are going into this matter.

Does the hon. Gentleman remember the occasion when a helicopter force-landed and turned over, and will he take every precaution to see that that does not happen again because my hon. Friend is a frequent traveller on this service?

I was, in fact, answering the Question, which asked how many technical or operational hitches had developed, and the answer was one.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Civil Aviation what he estimates to be the additional cost to K.L.M. and to the passengers of the diversion of the Constellation which arrived at Prestwick on 17th June and was sent by his officials to Amsterdam; and why an alternative diversion, which would have prevented inconvenience to travellers from abroad visiting this country was not used.

If by my hon. Friend's reference to a Constellation on 17th June he means a D.C.4 on 24th June, the answer is that these are matters for K.L.M., on which we have no information.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that it would, perhaps, have been preferable to have granted full facilities for this aircraft to land here first and then to have argued, if need be, with the K.LM. airline afterwards so as not to create unnecessary misunderstanding and ill-will in the minds of visitors to this country?

No, Sir. As I stated before, it would have been preferable if these operators had asked for permission, which would have been granted.

As it appears that this aircraft did not land, may I ask my hon. Friend whether his attention has been drawn to the report in the "Aeroplane" of 6th July which purports to describe in detail the conversations between the passengers and the airport officials and the complaints they made? Will my hon. Friend confirm that this report is a work of fiction from beginning to end?

Certainly, Sir. It seems to me to be typical of the information on which some of the criticisms of my Department are made.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the professor in charge of this party is reported as saying—by the time he arrived in Scotland he did not realise he was there—that he did not intend to spend one penny more in England than was absolutely necessary? Does not this sort of treatment do harm to the tourist industry?

That is the sort of conversation to which my hon. Friend referred, but as the hon. Gentleman has already protested that these people were not allowed to land, I do not know how it took place.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Civil Aviation whether he is aware that his Department relaxed the normal requirements in respect of the qualifications of pilots employed on air services operated under associate agreements by a Government-owned charter company while similar relaxations had been refused to private charter firms; and what steps he will take to treat all firms alike.

No, Sir. The relaxation to which the hon. Member refers applies to the pilots of all companies operating internal services under associate agreements and no discrimination is involved.

Can the Minister say whether the fact that this relaxation applies to all companies operating internally was known at the time to the people who had asked for a similar relaxation a few weeks before?

No, Sir. I think it was unfortunate that this relaxation was not made to the charter association; I think it was a pity not to make it to them. The fact of the matter was that we took the advice tendered by hon. Members opposite in this particular case to cut red tape, and that was done to allow this one aircraft to operate. Five days later the general announcement was made.

As the hon. Gentleman says it was unfortunate that this relaxation was not allowed, has he taken steps to see that it will not happen again?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Civil Aviation whether, following the report of inquiry into the British European Airways Dakota accident at Mill Hill on 17th October, 1950, he proposes to take any action with regard to the recommendation previously made by the Air Registration Board in favour of rearward facing seats.

At my noble Friend's request, studies, which include consideration of both economic and engineering aspects of the problem of installing aft facing seats in existing and projected aircraft types, are being undertaken by the Ministry of Supply.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Civil Aviation what was the reason for the acceptance of a low standard of instrument flying in the first officer of the British European Airways Dakota G-AGIW when it crashed on 17th October last; and why he was not required to hold a valid licence; and what consideration he has given to the present all-up weight of 28,000 lb. for a Dakota from the safety point of view.

There was no question of acceptance of a low standard of instrument flying. This pilot held a current instrument rating. All pilots are required to hold a valid licence. The permitted maximum operating weight of the Dakota was arrived at after all the factors involved were considered and on the recommendation of the Air Safety Board. My noble Friend sees no sufficient reason for altering the present figure.

Is it not a fact that the report of the inquiry indicates that the second pilot, who was sitting in the chief pilot's seat for this flight in blind flying conditions, had failed the recent B.E.A. test for blind flying proficiency? Was he not also found by this inquiry not to be in possession of a valid flying licence?

Yes, Sir, it is a fact that he did not have a valid pilot's licence—it had expired a day or two previously—but the delay was a matter of administration rather than one of the technical qualifications of the pilot.

With regard to the instrument rating, this pilot did hold a current instrument rating. I have been criticised by about six different people from the benches opposite for the high standard required for instrument rating, and, therefore, I am not prepared to accept the suggestion that the pilot had a low standard of instrument flying.

Does not the hon. Gentleman's reply seem to be somewhat at variance with his first reply, and as his Department have incurred some rather scathing criticism as a result of the inquiry, will he take care to see that this Corporation which competes with foreign lines does not allow such laxity to occur again?

Will the Minister say when hon. Members on this side of the House queried the high standard to which he referred? I say it never happened. Will he also say what his noble Friend is going to do with British European Airways? Is he going to call up the manager and talk to him about it?

With regard to the first part of the hon. and gallant Gentleman's supplementary, I do not think it is proper to refer to private conversations. However, I do remember arguing the whole of one lunch time with the hon. and gallant Gentleman on this particular point. If we go through HANSARD it will be seen that I have been questioned on a number of occasions about the standard required for instrument rating.

Would the hon. Gentleman not agree that on one occasion when we were discussing civil aviation in this House it was hon. Members on this side who said that they certainly thought the standard of foreign pilots ought to be brought up to that of British pilots?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he is aware that the Peking Government recovers Chinese taxes from Chinese residents in British territories on income arising in these territories; and if he will take steps to ensure that such residents are relieved of the burden of double taxation.

No, Sir, I am not aware that this is the case, and the second part of the Question therefore does not arise.

May I ask my right hon. Friend if it is not a fact that a meeting of the Chinese in Singapore was held on this very matter, and could he say what resolution was adopted at that meeting?

:. I could not give my hon. Friend an answer without notice being given of that Question.

When the right hon. Gentleman says that he is not aware if this is the case, does he mean that he has informed himself and is aware that it is not the case, or is he not?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs for how long Mr. Burgess, as a Foreign Office official, acted as private secretary to the former Minister of State; and in what circumstances he was appointed to and left this post.

Mr. Burgess was appointed to the office of the Minister of State on 31st December, 1946. He was transferred to the Far Eastern Department on 1st November, 1948. The transfer took place in the normal course of routine and was intended to give Mr. Burgess experience in a political department. Mr. Burgess was granted a certificate in Branch B of the Foreign Service on 1st October, 1947, and was appointed to be an officer in that branch with effect from 1st January, 1947.

Is it not a fact, therefore, that the first start of promotion in the career of Mr. Burgess in the Foreign Office was initiated by the Secretary of State for Scotland who was then Minister of State? While recognising completely that the Secretary of State for Scotland had no sympathy with Mr. Burgess's political views, is it not amazing that personal influence should lead to a man who was a notorious Communist being promoted in this way?

It is no good hon. Members opposite trying to make party points out of this. Mr. Burgess was first recruited to the Foreign Office well before the time of the Labour Government. It is perfectly true that this transfer, which took place in the ordinary course of business, took place under a Labour Government. At that time there was nothing adverse, as far as we were aware, against Mr. Burgess. It really is too silly to try and make party politics out of this.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs upon what date Mr. Maclean was appointed head of the American Section of the Foreign Office; and upon what date Mr. Burgess was appointed to the private office of the Minister of State.

On 6th November, 1950, and 31st December, 1946, respectively.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to answer now the question he has so far refused to answer? Does he accept responsibility for these appointments, and if he does accept responsibility will he now say he will conduct an inquiry as to how these very inappropriate appointments for these very important positions came to be made?

Arising out of these disappearances all appropriate inquiries have been made. The hon. Member asked whether I accept personal responsibility for these appointments. As I was not Foreign Secretary at the time, obviously I cannot. That is the answer I think.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether His Majesty's Government accept responsibility for these appointments or not?

That is another matter. Some Member of the Government and the Government as a whole must accept collective responsibility for appointments, but it is a different thing to ask me to accept personal responsibility. [ Interruption. ] I really wish hon. Members would listen to the proceedings instead of being so noisy. The hon. Member asked me whether I accepted responsibility for this action. As I was not Secretary of State at the time, I cannot accept personal responsibility.

While recognising the need for vigilance in these matters on the part of my right hon. Friend, can he give an assurance that inside the Foreign Office he is keeping just as watchful an eye on that section of the Foreign Office—that tiny minority—closely associated with endeavours to put Franco over to the British people in 1936 and 1937?

As the right hon. Gentleman declines himself to accept responsibility, while stating that His Majesty's Government do, will he indicate to the House which Minister from the Government Front Bench will accept responsibility and will deal with my hon. Friend's Question?

It is perfectly clear. I cannot understand the confusion about this. It is perfectly clear that the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs must answer Questions on the matter, and I will answer them. But I was asked whether I would accept responsibility for what happened on these dates. I cannot do that.

I apologise to the right hon. Gentleman for making a mistake in thinking that he answered for His Majesty's Government.

That remark is typical of the hon. Gentleman.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise that his persistent evasions in this matter turn suspicion from the men concerned to the Ministers responsible?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether in the public interest, he will cause to be published the text of the lectures on Communism, recently delivered at Oxford to certain of the Foreign Office staff.

No, Sir. The primary object of these lectures, some of which are based on confidential information, is the instruction of members of the Foreign Service: and I do not consider that their publication would be in the public interest.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman recall the fact that his right hon. Friend the Minister of State said last week in the House that he had no doubt that many hon. Members would benefit from seeing copies of these lectures—a statement with which we could not agree more? In view of that statement, would he reconsider his own statement and let us all see what was said?

I do not think that is necessarily in conflict with what I have said. If the hon. and gallant Member is anxious for proper political education about Communism, I will see if I can fix it up with Transport House.

Would my right hon. Friend inform the House about those lectures which were given by speakers at a summer school yesterday when a Conservative speaker said, "Drop the atom bomb on Moscow"?

In view of the fact that the right hon. Gentleman wishes to instruct hon. Members in Communism, and in view of the fact that Socialism is the basis and the hot-bed of Communism, is it not perfectly clear that he himself would be an admirable instructor?

The hon. and gallant Member is quite wrong. It is extreme Right Wing reaction that is the breeding ground of Communism.

Does my right hon. Friend not agree that the only alternative to Communism is Socialism and democracy? What steps is he taking to teach that to the officials of the Foreign Office?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what further consideration he has been able to give to the representations made to him by a number of Ukrainian nationalist organisations with a view to regular broadcasts in the British Broadcasting Corporation's overseas service being transmitted in the Ukrainian language.

Careful consideration has been given to the question of introducing Ukrainian-language broadcasts into the British Broadcasting Corporation's overseas services. Such action would necessitate the dropping of some other foreign language service and the diversion of effort and resources which would not be desirable in view of the poor results likely to be obtained.

Has not my right hon. Friend received a very considerable number of representations from Ukrainians in this country and in Europe and across the Atlantic stressing the fact that our point of view would be very much better appreciated by some 30 million potential allies in the Ukraine if regular broadcasts were made? Would he give further consideration to this matter?

We have had some representations, but we have still got to make up our minds as to what is the best thing to do. Most Ukrainians understand Russian, and if we were to give this concession to my hon. Friend it would mean we would have to sacrifice something else. On balance, that would be a disadvantage.

What does the right hon. Gentleman mean by saying "in view of the poor results" which would be obtained from these broadcasts in view of the fact that the "Voice of America" obtains extremely excellent results? Is not the real answer the fact that the Government do not want to spend any more money in this field but would rather spend it on home advertising?

I do not know what evidence leads the hon. Member to the confident conclusion that the "Voice of America" obtains excellent results. Our information is that Russian jamming would limit the result of these broadcasts.

Is it not a fact that there is no evidence that 30 million Ukrainians are really disaffected with the Soviet régime?

I think my hon. Friend is right.

Is not the condition under which political refuge is granted in this country that the political refugees refrain from political activities, and certainly from any political activities that might endanger our relations with another power? In those circumstances, what kind of activity do these nationalist organisations carry on?

I am not sure. I think that is a question for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department.

As the right hon. Gentleman is seeking refuge in the fact that the Russians would jam these broadcasts, can he say why we broadcast to Russia at all?

I am not seeking refuge. My business is to give the House such information as I think is reliable.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what proposals are being considered for the further relief of distress and economic rehabilitation in Korea as soon as a cease-fire agreement has been reached.

Responsibility for relief work is expected to remain with the Civil Assistance Command of the Unified Command until the military situation permits the United Nations Korean Reconstruction Agency to operate. In the meantime, the latter is making plans to go into operation as soon as circumstances permit.

Why cannot that be put into operation immediately the cease-fire exists? Surely the need is so great that the earlier we can start on this task of rehabilitation the better.

I do not disagree with my hon. Friend, but the cease-fire is not yet firmly established. I assure him that when it is we shall certainly reconsider the situation.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what instructions have been given to His Majesty's delegate at the United Nations with reference to the conference at Kaesong.

None, Sir.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give the House to understand exactly in what manner we do have some influence upon the policy upon which these truce talks depend, and in particular may I ask him whether in relation to any terms in respect of which it might be appropriate His Majesty's Government will press for a system of international supervision and inspection?

The answer is that there are consultations between the Powers concerned at Washington. The answer I gave to the hon. Gentleman's Question is perfectly accurate, but he can take it from me that there are reasonably effective consultations at Washington between the Powers concerned.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it is important that the policy animating these talks should be explained to Parliament and to the public, because after all it is the public who have to endure the sacrifices in a war and they should know the basis upon which the policy of the Government in this matter is determined?

We are, of course, accountable to Parliament in the matter, but there are a considerable number of Powers involved, and I feel in a difficulty in accepting direct responsibility for what is actually done. Questions can be put to me on the subject.

Can my right hon. Friend say why there is no British representative in the conference at Kaesong?

I should imagine that there are a considerable number of Powers involved in the United Nations Forces, and it might mean that we should have to face difficulties with a considerable number of other Powers. But the matter is really taken care of in the international inter-party discussions that take place at Washington on the matter.

On a point of order. This Question was originally put down by me to the Minister of Defence. Since it was obviously addressed to him personally, I consider it was inappropriate that it should have been transferred to another Minister. I propose, with your permission, Mr. Speaker, to raise this matter at the end of Questions. Meanwhile, I have no interest in asking this Question, which has been entirely altered in its meaning and purpose.

At the end of Questions:

Mr. Speaker, I wish to raise a question of procedure, of which I have given you notice, and of which I have also given notice to the right hon. Gentleman the Minister of Defence. It concerns Question No. 17 on the Order Paper which I declined to ask, for the reasons I explained earlier today to the House.

Last Wednesday I asked a Question of the Minister of Defence regarding the inclusion of Greece and Turkey in the system of Western Defence. After I received his initial reply, I asked him two supplementary questions, and a supplementary question of a similar character was also asked by my right hon. Friend the Member for Warwick and Leamington (Mr. Eden). We asked him whether he was not aware of the apprehensions and anxieties which existed in Turkey at the exclusion of that country from the system of Western Defence. To all three questions the Minister of Defence replied that he was not aware of any apprehensions in Turkey on this score. Considering that this was a matter of public knowledge, I thought it right to put down on the Order Paper a Question to the right hon. Gentleman, which read as follows:

I do not, of course, for a moment dispute the right of Ministers to transfer a Question to a colleague if they consider it to be appropriate, but I do submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that that right should not be used in order to alter the sense and meaning of the Question, as it has in this case. To sum up, I ask for your Ruling, as to whether it is in order for a Minister to transfer a Question to another Minister in such a way as to alter its meaning.

I am quite powerless in the matter. This is a matter which is arranged by the Departments concerned, and the Question is transferred if they think another Department is the right one to give the answer. It is nothing to do with me. I can only assume it was thought that it was right that the Foreign Office should answer this Question and not the Ministry of Defence. As to whether one can insist on an answer from a Minister when it is perhaps not his direct responsibility, I should have thought not. Anyhow, I can give no Ruling on the matter.

You say you cannot give a Ruling, Mr. Speaker. Nevertheless, I wish to thank you for the explanation which you have given to the House. However, I would like to point out that this Question was accepted by the Table. I assume that the Question was therefore in order. It being in order, it should be possible for an hon. Member of this House to receive a reply. Whether he receives it from one Minister or another is immaterial. As I have said, I do not for a moment dispute the right of a Minister to transfer a Question to another Minister.

If in this particular case it was thought desirable to transfer the Question from the Minister of Defence to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, then I submit that the wording of the Question should have been altered on the Order Paper to read:

If I may say so, with respect, I quite follow what the right hon. Gentleman is getting at. Indeed, I quite follow whom he is getting at, and that is all right. It happens to be somebody else this time; it might have been me. There is no shadow of doubt in my own mind, if I might respectfully submit this to you, Sir, that this Question in itself is a proper Question for the Foreign Office and not for the Ministry of Defence. It is a matter with which we have to deal. True, certain matters did arise on supplementary questions last week; but that often happens.

I respectfully submit to you, Sir, that this is a Question which is properly put to the Foreign Office. The right hon. Member will, no doubt, make the best of his case in the course of supplementary questions. If I am permitted to make a statement I am quite willing, if the House would like it, and if the right hon. Gentleman would like it. I am perfectly willing to make a statement which, in substance, answers the Question, thereby giving the right hon. Gentleman his opportunity.

Purely from the point of view of procedure, might I ask you, Mr. Speaker, whether there are not a great many precedents for a Question like this being put down to the Minister of Defence, to whom it was addressed, and when it is reached on the Order Paper the Minister of Defence could perfectly well say, "I think it would be better that this matter should be answered by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary," who may be on the bench beside him. I am sure I have very often seen that flexible and convenient procedure adopted in this House.

That might have been one way out of it, but in that case, of course, it would have been Question No. 46 or No. 47. As it is, it was Question No. 17. Very often Questions are put to the Prime Minister and some other Minister says, "I have been asked to reply." That is one way. As far as I and the Table are concerned, we have no control over these matters, and I cannot give a Ruling one way or the other. The Table passes a Question as being in order, then it disappears from our ken, and if one Minister chooses to transfer it to the right Ministry because it has been put down to the wrong Ministry, we have nothing, and can have nothing, to say to that.

It seems to me that if that position is accepted it is going to lead us into very great difficulty. It is quite frequent for an hon. Member to ask a Minister, for example, whether his speech at Blackpool or somewhere else, reflects the policy of His Majesty's Government. If the Question were then to be transferred to another Minister, that other Minister would say, "I never made such a speech." When it is a personal Question addressed to a Minister regarding his own personal state of knowledge or conduct, I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, it is inappropriate and improper for that Question to be transferred to another Minister.

I am certainly not prepared to take the mantle of responsibility on my shoulders and to say that this Minister shall answer this Question and that Minister shall answer that Question. I have not the knowledge to do that, and it cannot be my responsibility.

How has a Minister the right to put on the Order Paper a Question which the right hon. Member did not put down, by transferring this Question to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs as a result of which the meaning of the pronoun "his" was altered? The right hon. Gentleman did not mean to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention was being drawn to something; he meant to ask whether the Minister of Defence's attention had been drawn to something. The effect of your statement, Mr. Speaker, is that a Minister is allowed to put on the Order Paper in the name of the right hon. Gentleman a Question that the right hon. Gentleman never asked.

By what authority can a Minister alter our Order Paper? Surely we are the masters and not the Ministers. A Minister can only have a Question transferred if he has the assent of the hon. Member who asked it. We are the masters and not the Government.

During the last year I have put down many Questions to the Minister of Defence, and a number of these Questions have been "ducked" by him and passed on to someone else on the grounds that he had no money in his Ministry to deal with the particular circumstances. We granted him last week or the week before a lot of money, and may we now expect him to take the responsibility we normally expect a Minister to take?

I understand that the Foreign Secretary has a statement to make on this matter which is of general interest, and he has asked me whether I would now be willing to receive a reply from him to my Question.

On a point of order. The right hon. Gentleman declined to put his Question. If we are going to keep within the Rules of this House, may I ask you, Sir, whether it is appropriate now to answer a Question which the right hon. Gentleman has withdrawn?

That was the responsibility of the Minister. The Minister can always choose to answer a Question which has not been reached or asked on the Order Paper. That has nothing to do with me.

Surely that is confined to a Question that is on the Order Paper. When an hon. Member has withdrawn his Question it is no longer on the Order Paper, and I respectfully submit that there is nothing for the Minister to answer.

Further to that point of order, and to cut this unhappy situation short, which is so simple, may I presently get up in my place and ask permission to make a statement to the House?

I think that would be a very good course to adopt.

With your permission, Mr. Speaker, and that of the House, I desire to make the following statement: I am not aware of any such statement having been made within the last fortnight. If the right hon. Member is referring to statements made less recently, I may say that I have been well aware of the anxieties expressed by our Turkish friends on the subject of their association with Western defence plans, and have the greatest sympathy with them. I have kept the Turkish Government, and the Greek Government, also, informed of our attitude, and I have reason to believe they are at present both fully satisfied on this score.

The House will recall that on 30th May I stated that we were determined to find a solution of Turkey's defence needs which would bring greater strength and security both to Turkey and the West; that we did not exclude the possibility of full North Atlantic Treaty membership; but that we wished to examine the matter carefully and make sure this was the right solution. I explained subsequently that our attitude to Greece was similar. As regards Turkey, the main difficulty has been to reconcile her desire to join the North Atlantic Treaty with her position in relation to the general defence of the Middle East.

His Majesty's Government have now examined the matter fully, and they have come to the conclusion that Turkish and Greek membership of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation is in fact the best solution. At the same time, they are most anxious that Turkey shall play her appropriate part in the defence of the Middle East. The Turkish Government share this view, and I hope that arrangements will soon be made to associate her fully with plans for the safety of that important part of the world.

In regard to the inclusion of Turkey and Greece in the North Atlantic Treaty, however, I must stress that I am only stating the point of view of His Majesty's Government. There are many countries whose opinions have to be taken into account, and I am not in a position to say how soon a general agreement will have been reached. We are naturally doing our best to achieve agreement on the lines which I have indicated.

While welcoming the Foreign Secretary's statement which will be received, I am sure, with satisfaction in Greece and in Turkey, and while noting in his statement that he has been aware for some time of the anxiety which existed in Turkey on this matter, may I ask the Minister of Defence who is sitting beside him—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]—or the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, how it is that the Minister of Defence was totally unaware of this anxiety only last week?

I do not remember fully the exact context in which this exchange took place, but I think that a misunderstanding probably arose from this circumstance: that my right hon. Friend knew that things were well on the way, but in fact had not arrived, which would be satisfactory to the Turkish Government; the right hon. Gentleman did not, and that is probably the cause of the misunderstanding.

Will my right hon. Friend see that this matter is discussed at a very early date with the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation in view of the anxiety that has been expressed hitherto and up to now in Turkish public opinion?

We will do our best in that matter.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how many special constables have enlisted in Malaya for guarding the mines and estates; and what steps are being taken to provide them with a cadre of their own officers and non-commissioned officers.

At present about 25,100 special constables including 321 sergeants and 1,796 corporals are employed in guarding mines and estates. It has recently been decided to provide these special constables with their own officers by appointing at least one police lieutenant for each 100 constables with suitable provision for supervision by gazetted officers.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not agree that the training of these men has been extremely sketchy and that the morale at the present time is dangerously low? Would he really get a move on, after two years, to see that sufficient officers and N.C.O.'s are supplied to raise the whole level of operations and training?

The recruitment of police officers of this standing and experience has been and still is one of our biggest difficulties. We are making every effort here and in Commonwealth countries to recruit these as quickly as we can.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he is aware that the Singapore Trades Union Congress has, in order to ensure a fair distribution of food, made representations to the Government of Singapore for the establishment of a system of rationing and price control on the island; and what action he is taking in response to these representations.

At a recent meeting, the provisional committee of the Singapore Trade Union Congress decided to set up a committee to investigate local living conditions, with a view to making representations to the Government. No representations have yet been made.

Is the Minister not aware that the best way to combat Communism in Malaya is to distribute equitably the food available at a reasonable price? Is he aware that although rice is rationed it can be obtained in any quantity on the black market at three times the normal price?

I think that is one of the problems this committee is investigating, and when we receive its report it will receive our consideration.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what steps are being taken to arrest the growing unemployment in the Jamaican cigar industry.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he is aware of the mounting unemployment in the Jamaican cigar industry; and what action he is taking to check this.

I understand that in 1950 the industry employed 1,750 in the factories and 4,000 in the field. This year the factories are employing 1,630. Unless the manufacturers succeed in placing substantial orders during the next six weeks, the number employed in the field will fall.

As I indicated during the debate on 11th July, I am deeply concerned about unemployment in the West Indies generally, and am anxious to find a solution to the matter.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that employment in the industry has fallen by two-thirds since 1947 mainly as a result of the crippling duties on imported cigars? Can he tell the House what stand he has taken, if any, on behalf of Jamaica against the proposal to re-import foreign cigars in this country without giving the Empire product a preferential market?

I presume the hon. Gentleman is referring to discussions which are taking place in regard to Cuba. He had better await the statement on those discussions which will be made at some time.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the unemployment figures are actually worse than the figures he gave, because compared with 1947 they show a fall of 8,000 in the numbers employed, and is it the view of the right hon. Gentleman that this is in large part due to the drop in preference from 25 per cent, to 4 per cent.?

No. I think there are a number of factors. It is true, as the hon. Gentleman said, that as regards the employment figures 1947 was a peak year. That was exceptional, as he knows.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Jamaica has few secondary industries, but that in this industry many women are employed, which is unusual in a Colonial Territory? Therefore, will my right hon. Friend give an assurance that he will give consideration to this very important factor in the island's economy.

I fully appreciate its importance and the need not only of Jamaica but of all these islands for secondary industries.

As the Treasury is collecting much less revenue from cigars since the price went up so much, are we to conclude that it is class prejudice against cigars which keeps the price up and that that is considered more important than developing markets for our Colonies?

There is no class prejudice at all.

With a view to setting a good example in this matter, would my right hon. Friend consult with the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition to ensure that in future he smokes only Jamaican cigars?

Could not the right hon. Gentleman answer part of my supplementary when I asked him what stand he took with his colleagues against the proposal to re-introduce Cuban cigars into this country?

It is my duty, which I seek to do, to impress upon all my colleagues the importance of the interests of the peoples in the Colonial Territories.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies (1) whether His Majesty's Government accept the recommendations of the Lepper Report of 1949 on oil prospecting in Barbados; and what advice thereon was tendered to the Government of the Island;

(2) why the British United Oil Company was offered only 22 per cent, of the drill-able area of Barbados after they had carried out extensive prospecting and survey; and why a foreign company, which had done none of the preliminary work, was offered the working of the rest of the island.

My predecessor informed the Barbados Government that he agreed with the recommendations in the Lepper Report, including the recommendation that, in view of their past operations, the British Union Oil Company should be granted a prospecting licence over the whole of the Island.

The Barbados Government decided, however, that it was not in the best interests of the territory to grant a monopoly to the British Union Oil Company and offered them prospecting rights over 55 per cent, of the Island, with the first choice of area. The remainder of the Island was offered to an American company. The British Union Oil Company refused the offer and broke off negotiations, but the American company, after securing some modification of the terms, took up rights over 50 per cent, of the Island. The remaining 50 per cent, has not yet been allocated.

In view of the fact that the right hon. Gentleman or his predecessor—I forget which it was—stated in March this year that the British United Oil Company had been promised the sole prospecting rights, and that the Colonial Secretary in Barbados agreed with the Lepper Report and said he would implement it unless ordered to do otherwise by the right hon. Gentleman, how can the right hon. Gentleman expect this Corporation to negotiate when it is perfectly clear that the previous decisions constituted a breaking of a promise on the part of the Government of Barbados and the right hon. Gentleman's Department?

The Barbados Government have considered this recommendation and the decision I have stated today is their decision. I regret that the company broke off negotiations: I think it was a mistake.

Is it still open to the company to tender for the other half of the island? If it is, would it not be a good thing if they did so?

As I have said, I regret that the company broke off negotiations and I think it was a mistake. On the other point, I prefer not to answer now; perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put that question down.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is quite impossible to negotiate with people who do not keep their word and that it is, therefore, no good going on with negotiations?

It is not a case of a broken promise. This was the recommendation of a committee appointed by the Barbados Government and it is for them to decide whether they will accept its recommendations.

But the right hon. Gentleman has power to direct the Barbados Government, and he knows it quite well.

Could the right hon. Gentleman say what are the nature of the modifications which the American company insisted upon and whether those modifications would have made the arrangements acceptable to the British company?

The hon. Gentleman had better put that question down.

In view of the very unsatisfactory nature of the right hon. Gentleman's reply, I beg to give notice that I will endeavour to raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he has completed his consideration of the counterproposals for the revision of the present constitution in British Honduras; and whether he proposes to accept any of these proposals.

I have received certain counter proposals to the recommendations of the local commission on constitutional reform, but I am not in a position to reach any conclusions on them until the commission's report has been discussed by the Legislative Council.

Can the Secretary of State say when that is likely to be?

I hope in the very near future.

Do these proposals or counter-proposals leave any power in the hands of His Majesty's Government to deal with the question of immigration into British Honduras, in view of the fact that some of us who have examined this subject believe that both in the case of this Colony and of British Guiana there may be opportunities of settling some of the unfortunate European refugees now in D.P. camps? Do they give any power to the right hon. Gentleman to deal with the matter?

These recommendations are before the Governor now. I am awaiting a report by the Governor on the proposals which he will make to me after the discussion in the Legislative Council. I would prefer not to say more until that has happened, because that is the way we deal with such matters in these days.

I hope the right hon. Gentleman will take into consideration the point I made—which is certainly not a party political point—because there is some importance in it.

I will take note of it.

Does the right hon. Gentleman propose to receive the leader of the People's United Party and other representatives of British Honduras, who are in this country at the present time, in case they wish to discuss this matter?

That is another question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what will be taught in the technical institute to be opened in British Guiana later this year; what will be the size of the staff; and how many pupils will be able to attend.

As the reply is rather detailed I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the reply: The latest information available is that there will be classes in trade technology for cabinet making, carpentry and joinery, fitting, welding, blacksmithing, motor mechanics, electricians, plumbing and pipe fitting, concrete and bricklaying, machine shop; and classes, for technical students in mathematics, English, science, technical drawing, elementary building construction, machine drawing and mechanical design, electrical theory, mechanics. There will be nine full time and several part time teachers. Over 600 boys will be under instruction for varying periods during each week.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what functions are performed by the two Government trade schools in British Guiana; what is the size of the staff; and how many pupils attend each of them.

I am obtaining the information requested and will write to the hon. Member when I have it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if a decision has been reached about the future use of the land in the Gambia cleared by the Colonial Development Corporation for the purposes of the poultry project now abandoned.

Yes, Sir. As my right hon. Friend informed the House on 9th May, the Colonial Development Corporation set up a working party to consider the possible future use of the land.

The working party recommended the establishment of a farm of about 400 acres on part of the land, to test, over a five year period, the possibility of growing a variety of crops, including cotton and flue-cured tobacco. The farm would be administered by the Director of Agriculture of the Government of the Gambia in consultation with the Corporation, and the cost of operating the farm, which would be limited to an average of £10,000 per annum, would be shared between the Corporation and the Gambia Government.

In addition, the Corporation would second a farm manager and contribute a further £1,250 per annum towards his salary and expenses. These recommendations have been accepted by the Corporation and the Government of the Gambia, and detailed arrangements are now under discussion. The future use of the rest of the land will depend on the outcome of these experiments.

While I think we shall all accept this as a reasonable sounding arrangement between the Government of the Gambia and the Colonial Development Corporation could the Minister tell us what he proposes to do with the balance of 9,000-odd acres which were cleared by the Corporation? He spoke of the 400 acres; could he tell us about the 9,000?

I said that the future use of the rest of the land will depend upon consideration given in the light of experiments on this farm.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that this is a typical example of a major error followed by a minor triumph?

In view of the very tragic financial difficulties that these schemes got into, due to the fact that the Government took without question the advice of private enterprise experts, will my right hon. Friend make certain that any recommendations that are made are vetted by those people in the area who know something about what the land can do?

This decision was taken by the Corporation on the advice of those whose services they enlisted.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House, after this decision has been made, what will be the total sum to be written off as a result of this sorry example of Socialist ineptitude?

On private enterprise advice.

If I understand correctly that this experiment on 400 acres is to take some five years, does that mean that for five years the rest of the 9,000-odd acres are to be left to go to bush?

No. What I said was that the use of the other 9,000 acres would be considered whilst the experiment was proceeding.

Arising out of the hon. Lady's supplementary question, was not this decision reached almost entirely on the recommendations of Lord Trefgarne, and is there anything about Lord Trefgarne savouring of private enterprise, except his achievement of a peerage?

This decision was made by the Corporation.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what further steps are being taken to secure closer cooperation between the Colonial Development Corporation and the local populations of the various territories in which it operates.

The member of the headquarters staff appointed to secure closer co-operation between the Colonial Development Corporation and the local people has recently visited the British West African territories and will in due course visit all areas in which the Corporation has interests. In West Africa he has held exploratory meetings with local people with a view to putting into effect the policy outlined in paragraph 4 of the 1951 Report.

Have any specific steps been taken towards appointing one of these committees in the West Indies? If that has been done, what are the names of the committee that has been appointed?

No, Sir. What the Corporation has done is indicated in its Report which we discussed in the House the other day. It has appointed a member of the headquarters staff to visit these territories where the Corporation has got interests and. in conjunction with the local people, to begin to make arrangements for the setting up of committees of this kind.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House the name of the gentleman who is responsible for these committees?

Mr. Cyril Dumpleton, a first-class officer for this job.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will make a statement concerning the decision to dispense with the services of some of the officers of the Overseas Food Corporation; what is meant by normal redundancy terms; and what were the rates of compensation paid out of public funds.

I would invite the hon. Member's attention to the reply which my hon. Friend gave to the hon. Member for Newbury (Mr. Hurd) on 27th June.

"Normal redundancy terms" are those granted to the Overseas Food Corporation's redundant East African staff, namely, six months' salary or four months' salary plus the earned leave due to them, whichever is the greater.

That is the rate of compensation paid from the Corporation's funds which will be paid to the two officers referred to in my reply of the 27th June.

May I ask the Secretary of State whether these officers were discharged; if so, for what reason; did they resign voluntarily, or were they compelled to resign; and if so, for what reason?

These officers have become redundant because of the changed nature of the scheme now being operated.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is now in a position to make any further statement about the position of Colonial students at 1, Hans Crescent.

The British Council inform me that the Hans Crescent residence was partly closed for cleaning and staff holidays as previously arranged on 15th July. Of the 167 students who were in residence 75 have moved out into lodgings or have gone on holidays. The remaining 92 are occupying their rooms without other services. Of these 47 are staying by arrangement with the Council and 45 without permission.

It is proposed to reopen the hostel with its full service on 1st August. The Council hope that these 45 students will avail themselves of the Council's assistance in finding alternative accommodation within the next few days so as to allow other students to come into residence.

I have authorised the Council to acquire temporary accommodation for about 60 more students at Moray Lodge at Campden Hill to help accommodate new arrivals during September and October.

Will the Minister say whether really vigorous action will be taken in the coming months to increase the total hostel accommodation for students quite considerably?

I am considering what further provision can be made for hostel accommodation. I ask hon. Members in every part of the House, whenever they get an opportunity, to encourage these students to understand that if satisfactory private accommodation can be secured—and the council is trying to secure it—then great advantage is to be gained by their living with families.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will attend the meeting of the Economic Committee of the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations from 23rd July at Geneva so as to represent the views of colonial peoples when the committee discusses the United Nations report on measures for the economic development of under-developed countries; and in what way he proposes to be represented.

I shall not be able to attend myself, but the United Kingdom delegation will include an officer of my Department.