asked the Minister of Food (1) by what means it is intended, now that arrangements for advertising in the local papers have been cancelled by his Department, to give adequate information of changes in the ration system and of dates for changing of ration books to the inhabitants of the county borough of Oldham;

(2) whether he is aware of the great difficulty which has been occasioned in Oldham by the failure of a large number of people to change their ration documents at the end of the current rationing period: and what steps he proposes to take.

With permission, I will answer Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.

I am not prepared to give permission, and I do not think the House should give permission for both Questions to be answered together. They raise important points, and I am sure that this is merely an attempt to limit the total number of supplementary questions that can be asked.

The number of supplementary questions permitted rests with the Chair. If the hon. Member insists, he will probably get the same answer repeated twice.

Advertisements about the distribution of new ration books appeared in over 1,000 local newspapers. The Oldham newspaper was not used for the reason already explained to the hon. Member in reply to his letter. Posters were liberally displayed and few people in Oldham have still to get their new ration books.

Is the Minister failing to tell the House what that reason is because he is ashamed of it? Is it not a fact that an attempt was made, by the use of dictatorial and monopolistic powers, to force down the normal rates charged by this well-known and old-established Liberal newspaper? Is it not a fact that both the Chadderton and Oldham food committees have unanimously protested against the chaos caused by the lack of information? Is it not a fact that 39,000 ration books remained un-issued—[HON. MEMBERS: "Speech."] I am trying to put one supplementary question relating to two Questions. Is it not a fact that 39,000 ration books remained un-issued until a few days ago, and then the Ministry had to use local cinemas and poster advertising and spend twice as much money to put things right?

I am glad that the hon. Member has asked that supplementary question to give me an opportunity to clear up what is apparently a complete misapprehension. The reason why we did not advertise in this particular paper, the "Oldham Press," was that out of more than 1,000 newspapers in which we wished to advertise the ration book issue all except five accepted the lower rate, and only five papers, of which four were in Oldham, refused to accept the lower rate. It would have cost the country another £15,000. We did it by poster, and the result is that the percentage of people who have drawn their ration books is exactly the same as in the rest of the country.

Is the Minister aware that his Department has apparently not yet found out that the rates that were asked were for four papers, not for one—for circulation in four papers? Was this matter referred to any of the appropriate tribunals, or did the Minister use his monopolistic powers to try to force these papers to agree to the lower rates?

Every paper in the country except five accepted the display rate of 10s., as against the 18s. demanded by these other papers.

Can the Minister explain whether, when this dispute arose, any attempt was made to get any form of mediation, or were the newspapers told that they had to accept the rate according to the Ministry of Food's wishes? Is there not a danger of this kind of confusion and difficulty among the public occurring if any other newspaper in any other area refuses to accept the dictate of the Ministry of Food?

There is no question of dictating terms at all. Out of 1,030 newspapers in Britain only five refused the rates which the others accepted. It is surely obvious that every opportunity to accept the rates was given to those papers. The reason why posters were used was that there had been similar trouble last year.

asked the Minister of Food if he will outline the arrangements he is making to hold in cold store part of the heavy supplies of home-killed meat marketed in the early autumn.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave on 30th April to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for South Angus (Captain Duncan).

Is the Minister aware that the weeks are passing and the autumn is approaching? Cannot the Minister tell us at least in outline the plans he has in mind for spreading the very heavy peak production of home-killed meat in the autumn so that consumers get a more level and even ration of meat throughout the year?

Space has been earmarked to freeze and store a certain amount of meat in the country. My hon. Friend will realise that this country is not equipped to do this on a large scale and never has been, but every effort is being made, with the amount of space available, to store. Furthermore, an inducement is given to the home producer to hold back cattle in the autumn flush.

Is my right hon. and gallant Friend in consultation with those who have cold storage facilities, who might very well be able to help him?

I have been for a long time in very close touch with them, but my hon. Friend must realise that not only do we have to do this freezing, but we also have to store what meat comes into the country.

asked the Minister of Food the amount of white fish which was unsaleable at Hull and Grimsby during the week commencing Monday, 28th April; and what plans the White Fish Authority have to deal with this problem.

Some 2,000 tons of edible fish and 100 tons of condemned fish. I understand that the White Fish Authority have not yet formulated any plans for dealing with surplus landings.

Is my right hon. and gallant Friend aware that this situation is brought about mainly through the excessive foreign landings, and, while this fish is acceptable, will he bear in mind that foreign white fish is very welcome in the winter when we require it even more than we do now? Can he say when the White Fish Authority are going to tackle this problem in a business-like way?

This situation was due to very heavy landings, including foreign fish, and, in addition, a great deal of the fish landed was not of a sufficiently good quality, with the result that it had to be sent to the fish factories. As regards the White Fish Authority, they are considering the problem, as I said in a previous Question, in connection with freezing the surplus.

Would the Minister try to press the white fish authorities much more? I think there is a great sense of disappointment on both sides of the House that this admirable instrument is not getting on with the job as quickly as one would have expected, and that a little pressure from the right hon. and gallant Gentleman might help.

I will certainly look at that. As regards freezing, the quality of the fish landed that day was unsuitable for deep freezing.

asked the Minister of Food whether he is aware that more than 276,000 stone of fish which did not reach wholesale minimum prices at Hull and Grimsby was left unsold during the week ended 3rd May; and if he will take steps to see that such wastage is avoided in future.

This fish, much of which was of poor quality, was sent to fish meal factories for processing into animal feedingstuffs. I do not regard this as wastage.

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that the fish merchants in that area said that if the wholesale minimum price for 10 stone of cod had been 30s. instead of 40s. this wastage would not have occurred? Will he look into the high prices?

I do not know that it is fair to say that, because the minimum price of this particular fish is £2 a kit, whereas the actual cost of catching is nearly £2 15s. or £3. Therefore, the price is below the cost of catching.

May I ask why, when distributive costs are raised in this House, the party opposite always refuse to do anything about the matter?

Perhaps the hon. Lady will also answer a question and say why she only refers to prices when they are high and not when they go down.

asked the Minister of Food what quantity of cattle cake is stored on his behalf on the premises of Messrs. Hindle Brothers, Cornholme, Todmorden; how long it has been there; how long he expects it to remain; and what storage charge is being paid.

Cattle cake has been stored on my behalf on these premises since September, 1951, and the present stock amounts to 1,800 tons. It should be cleared by the end of June. The storage charge paid is 5⅓d. per ton per week.

Can the right hon. and gallant Gentleman give an assurance that these offensive conditions will quickly end? Has he seen the photographs taken at the time of my own inspection of these premises, and does not he agree that the conditions under which this cattle cake is stored and the offence to which it gives rise to neighbouring citizens is a matter for which his Ministry must take responsibility and bring to an end? Finally, can the right hon. Gentleman say by what authority a notice board appears on these premises which says:

"Ministry property. Trespassers will be prosecuted"?

As regards the last point, I should have to look into it. With regard to the photographs, I can assure the hon. Gentleman that they are extremely good ones of the site he mentions. The actual position is that all these sites were used because of congestion at the ports last September. As far as Lancashire is concerned, I think every single site has been cleared, and I hope that all these sites will soon be cleared also. I have given an undertaking, which I will repeat, that cattle cake will not again be stored anywhere near residential property.

How can my right hon. and gallant Friend reconcile what he has just said with the answer he gave me on 7th April, when he said that practically all the dumps in the area had been cleared away by the beginning of that month?

I was then referring only to Lancashire and the sites near Liverpool.

asked the Minister of Food whether he is aware of the stench and fly nuisance coming from cattle cake stored on his behalf, much of it until recently in the open, on the premises of Messrs. Hindle Brothers, Cornholme; whether he will remove offensive and rotting material from this residential neighbourhood without delay; and if he will give an estimate of how much of this cake is still fit for cattle consumption, and of the value of the quantity lost through being stored in the open.

Removal of spilt material which may rot is the contractor's responsibility. I understand, however, that the site has now been cleaned and treated with insecticide and should give no further cause for complaint. Rather less than 1 per cent. of the cake now housed in a brick built store on the site may prove to be unfit for cattle consumption. Oil cake worth about £250 was lost in open storage.

asked the Minister of Food if he can yet state whether eggs will be taken off the ration for any period in the near future.

This is now unlikely.

Will the Minister say why it is unlikely, and why up to now there has been no rationing of a very large quantity of eggs which have been on sale? Will he make an investigation and find out what has happened to the eggs which were on sale and which were not on ration?

I am not certain what the hon. Member has in mind. [HON. MEMBERS: "Eggs."] A very short answer to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question is that the eggs were not there.

That is not so.

I must be allowed to answer the question. The number of eggs this year are not anything like what they were when off the ration. Eggs sold off the ration now are not Grade A.

asked the Minister of Food whether he will postpone the rises in food prices, resulting from reductions in subsidies, until the increased retirement pensions and family allowances come into force.

I would refer the hon. Member to what I said in the course of my reply to the hon. Member for Jarrow (Mr. Fernyhough) and to the hon. Member for Fife, West (Mr. Hamilton) on 31st March.

As the Government have repeatedly stated that the rises in food prices and the increase in social benefits are intended by the Government to balance one another, why cannot the right hon. and gallant Gentleman take this step to ensure that they do so entirely? As there is no administrative difficulty, what is the reason for not doing so?

It is not right to say that there is no administrative difficulty. The right hon. Gentleman must know that there is such difficulty. What I did say in reply to the point was that we were making every effort to get them as near to each other as possible.

In view of the desire of everyone to get some stability, will not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman have a word with his right hon. Friend the Chancellor to see if he can persuade him to delay these increases, because it is deliberately provocative to increase the price of food when the Chancellor is discussing very important matters with the trade unions.

I am sure the hon. Gentleman appreciates that at any rate this Government have tried to alleviate the hardship by compensatory allowances in other directions.

Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman also consider the difficulties of those old people who find it impossible to get even their meagre rations until the increase comes along?

I think I said in a previous Question that I would make every effort to see what could be done.

asked the Minister of Food which items of food have ceased being imported since 1st November, 1951.

None, Sir.

asked the Minister of Food if he is aware that the recent cuts in the allocation of sugar, fats and dried fruits to bakeries have reduced supplies below the lowest level imposed during the war; and what hope he can give of an improvement in the near future.

The overriding need to redress our balance of payments has brought these allocations to a much lower level than we like to see, though they are not all below the lowest wartime level. I will be able to raise these allocations only when we can afford to buy more of these materials.

Is not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware of the public statements made recently by leaders of the trade that when the cuts come into force—and it will not be long now—there will be less biscuits and cakes than during the war? Does the Minister really think he is playing fair with the housewives who expected a very much better performance than this?

I am surprised to hear what the hon. Gentleman says about the housewife and the better performance after the last six years.

Did not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman's party promise the housewives a better deal, and are they not to get it?

We certainly promised it to them, and we will give it to them.

When?

asked the Minister of Food the annual tonnage of cheese allocated to domestic consumers under the one-ounce ration; and the annual tonnage allocated to catering establishments.

One hundred and five thousand tons, including 26,000 to provide the priority allowance of 12 oz., and 10,000 tons respectively.

Is the Minister aware that there is not now sufficient even for mousetraps in this country?

asked the Minister of Food how many licences were issued for slaughtering backyard pigs in 1949 and how many licences in 1951; and what was the increase or decrease, expressed per cent., of such licences comparing 1951 with 1949.

721,862 in 1949 and 366,157 in 1951, a drop of about 49 per cent.

Can my right hon. and gallant Friend say why it is that, whereas the pig population as a whole has increased by 50 per cent. between 1949 and 1951, the number of slaughterings of backyard pigs has declined by 50 per cent.? Why is it that successive Ministers of Food discriminate against the backyard pig and will not give him his just position?

As a matter of fact the greatest part of the increased pig population comes from the small man, and the only explanation I can offer is that the increase in the cost of pigs has been very substantial in the last few years; the increased cost of feedingstuffs has been about £15 a ton.

Would my right hon. Friend look at the backyard pig again? Surely it represents a very important potential increase in the supply of meat if only one pig per family can be raised?

asked the Minister of Food whether he will state the bacon consumption per head of human population of the United Kingdom in 1939 compared with the current ration, both expressed weekly; what part of the current bacon ration is attributable to increases in the pig population during the last two years; and what figure of pig population in the United Kingdom it will be necessary to reach in order to de-ration bacon.

Including bacon used by manufacturers, canteens and caterers, the pre-war consumption per head weekly was 6.4 ounces compared with 5.7 ounces now. Of this nine-tenths of an ounce is attributable to increased home production since March, 1950. Bacon factories are now working to capacity and increased numbers of pigs reared in the United Kingdom will increase our fresh meat supplies.

Is the limitation, therefore, upon further increases in the pig population the capacity of bacon factories, or is the sky the limit still with the increasing pig population? What is the restricting factor, if any?

There is no limit, and we have a long way to go yet to get back to pre-war consumption of pork

Have we enough bacon factories to deal with it?

Bacon factories are working pretty near to capacity, but there are arrangements in hand in some cases to increase that capacity.

Since the right hon. and gallant Gentleman frequently tries to ride off shortages of food by reference to alleged failure on the part of his predecessor, would he on this occasion at least announce to the country that the existence of pork in this country in large quantities is due to the decisions and arrangements made by the previous Government?

asked the Minister of Food, in view of the serious delays which foot-and-mouth disease restrictions have imposed in Kent on sending pigs for slaughter to London where many have to go, of the proximity of the eastern part of the county to the Continent which makes it specially susceptible to foot-and-mouth outbreaks, and of the rapidly expanding pig population for which existing slaughterhouse facilities are inadequate, if he will reconsider the proposals for the construction of a slaughterhouse at Ashford.

I fully appreciate all the considerations in this matter, but the limitation on new building works prevents approval being given for the building of a new slaughterhouse at Ashford. We are, however, building nine new slaughterhouses in districts where additional slaughtering capacity is most urgently needed, and one at Canterbury is expected to be completed by the autumn.

Can my right hon. and gallant Friend give any idea when they will be ready? Is he aware of the considerable inconvenience and delay experienced now as a result of foot-and-mouth outbreak restrictions and the fact that a very large number of pig producers are being seriously held up in the delivery of pigs as potential bacon and pork to the factories?

I have every sympathy with the people who are being held up because of foot-and-mouth disease, but I am sure my hon. Friend will appreciate that it would not be possible to have arrangements to meet all contingencies that might arise. I hope, however, that this new slaughterhouse will be ready by the end of October.

asked the Minister of Food the weekly capacity of Lenham, Kent, bacon factory for slaughtering and curing pigs, respectively.

I do not think it would be appropriate for me to give information of this kind which relates to a privately owned factory.

asked the Minister of Food whether he will state the aggregate value of fruit imports from areas outside the British Commonwealth during 1951 the estimated aggregate for 1952 after inclusion of the import cuts; and how the difference is to be made good.

Imports from outside the Commonwealth were £36.6 million in 1951. I cannot forecast the corresponding figure for 1952. since most citrus fruits may still be imported under open general licence. I hope that supplies from home production and from sterling sources will help to make good the loss from import cuts.

Is my right hon. and gallant Friend in a position to assure the home growers that if they increase their crop of fruit this year and next year they will not be penalised later on by the flooding of the English market with imported and largely tasteless fruit? Can he give any long-term assurance?

I have already given an assurance on another Question I was asked.

asked the Minister et Food whether, in his proposed consultations to devise a new system of sugar allocation between food-manufacturing firms, he will consult those firms outside the Food Manufacturers' Federation who have suffered especially severely as the result of the import cuts of last November.

It is not practicable for me to approach individual firms not represented by trade associations, but I shall certainly take into account any views which they express.

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that whereas firms inside the Food Manufacturers' Federation have had a cut of some 5 per cent. in their allocation, some firms outside the Federation have had a cut of 100 per cent.? Is he aware that they are being driven out of business? Does he not think that makes it all the more urgent that he confers with firms outside the Federation to try and make these new allocations on a fair basis as quickly as possible?

Obviously it is much easier to deal with associations than with individual firms but, as I said, I am always prepared to receive any representations from individual firms.

Does the Minister not think that it adds to the grievance of some of these firms that they are denied entry into the Food Manufacturers' Federation and are denied any allocation figure since the import cuts were imposed last November and they are being driven out of business? Is it the case that apparently the right hon. and gallant Gentleman did not consult them in November and is not consulting them when making his new plans, although he has received letters of protest from them?

asked the Minister of Food whether he is aware of the hardship caused to catering licence holders who keep hotels and boarding houses in that they are only allowed a weekly ration of 8 oz. of sugar per weekly guest instead of the 10 oz. available to the ordinary domestic consumer; and whether he will raise the ration to the caterer so that those people taking holidays away from home are not penalised.

Allocations to caterers are based on the meals and hot drinks they serve and not on weekly quantities per guest. I am afraid that in present circumstances an increase in sugar allowances to caterers could only be afforded at the expense of other consumers including the ordinary householder.

Is the Minister aware that the present position causes dissatisfaction both to the caterer and to the holiday maker? Could he reconsider the matter as soon as possible?

I shall do so as soon as supplies make it possible.

asked the Minister of Food the amount of butter imported during 1952 to the latest available date; and the amount of butter imported during the corresponding period in 1951.

Sixty-five thousand tons during the quarter ended 31st March, 1952, compared with 94,000 tons during the first quarter of 1951.

Does the right hon. and gallant Gentleman agree that this would mean a very serious supply situation, when over the years we have been accustomed to regard 4 oz. as the mimimum ration until the recent cut? Can he give the House any assurance that the position will improve during the year?

I am afraid I cannot. It was an exceptional year for Denmark last year, as the hon. Member knows. He also knows what has been happening in Australia. [HON. MEMBERS: "Alibis."] It is not a question of alibis in connection with Australia. Australia has had a very severe drought and its exports are very small indeed.

asked the Minister of Food why he incurred an expenditure of £23,500 for 184 tons of paper required for the extra six pages of coupons in the new ration books.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Lewis), on 12th May.

Is the Minister aware that that answer does not reveal how many of the new ration books were printed before 25th October? Could not many tons of paper and thousands of pounds have been saved if the Government had really believed in the larger, better, cheaper supplies of food they were promising at that time?

I can only repeat what I said before—that the arrangements for this book were put in hand a year ago.

asked the Minister of Food the estimated subsidy on animal feedingstuffs for 1952–3.

About £30 million.

asked the Minister of Food whether he can now make a statement as to the proposed higher fruit content of jam.

No, Sir. I have not yet received the Food Standards Committee's final recommendations.

Does that answer mean the Minister does not propose to make a statement about jam tomorrow? Will he give an assurance that at the earliest possible moment he will do his best to ensure, for the sake of British fruit-growers and consumers, that there is more fruit and less mucilage in jam pots?

asked the Minister of Food how many un-uniformed officials are employed by his Department as inspectors, enforcement officers or in any other capacity which allows them to enter private premises for investigation without a specific warrant; and how many were employed in a similar capacity 12 months ago.

None of my officers is entitled to enter private premises without a specific warrant.

Is my right hon. and gallant Friend aware that reports frequently appear in the Press to the effect that such officials are entering private premises alleging that they are employees of his Department, and will he make clear that any person doing that without proper authority is liable to prosecution?

Anybody doing that without authority is definitely exceeding instructions.

Is my right hon. and gallant Friend aware that proceedings have been brought by his Department against persons whose premises have been entered in these circumstances, merely on suspicion, and will he look into the question whereby officers of his Department are allowed to enter premises, both private and business, if they suspect that the law is being infringed, without any necessity of having to procure a warrant?

The officials have specific authority to enter food establishments, of course, but not private premises.

Will the Minister see that his officials take vigorous steps to prevent black marketing?

asked the Minister of Food whether, in view of the improvement in the last six weeks in the production of pork, he will increase the proportion of meat in sausages.

There is still an unsatisfied demand for pork for the ration and for other manufacturing purposes, but I will keep in mind my hon. Friend's suggestion.

Will my right hon. and gallant Friend go a little further and say that it is his firm intention to introduce a good, succulent pre-war sausage containing at least 75 per cent. pork?

Certainly.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence how many British Service personnel are serving sentences in military prisons in connection with offences committed during the 1939–45 War.

Fifteen soldiers and three airmen are at present serving sentences in the Military Prison at Shepton Mallet. Eighteen soldiers, three airmen and one Royal Marine are serving sentences at the Military Corrective Establishment, Colchester. In all these cases the offence was desertion during the 1939–45 war.

In addition to these men who are serving sentences in military prisons there are a number of men convicted of crimes during the war serving sentences in civil prisons, and in view of the leniency which has been extended to thousands of Nazi criminals, will not the hon. Gentleman now have these cases reviewed and see whether we can have charity beginning at home?

There are 12 Service personnel still serving sentences in civil prisons as a result of offences in the 1939–45 War. The offences were murder and collaboration with the enemy. As the hon. Gentleman knows, all sentences are reviewed at intervals of not more than six months, and clemency is frequently shown. There has been no general amnesty; nor, in fact, has there been one for Germans.

The hon. Gentleman says that a number of these men have been sentenced for collaboration with the enemy; those are cases to which I am specifically referring. Since the Government themselves are now most anxious to co-operate with the Germans, does not the hon. Gentleman think that these men merely anticipated present policy, and, in view of that, might they not be given their immediate release?

I do not think the hon. Gentleman would really wish to condone treachery during war-time.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence to what extent helicopters are used by our Forces in the Middle East; and how many are available for such purposes.

No helicopters are being used by our Forces in the Middle East and none are available at present without diverting them from more urgent tasks.

Is this not a deplorable situation which is mainly due to Socialist planning in the last Government? Does my hon. Friend recall that two weeks ago the greatest difficulty was experienced in rescuing an airman who was only 25 miles in the desert? Will not my hon. Friend try to divert at least two helicopters to the Middle East for rescue purposes in an emergency?

It needs more than that to rescue the Tories.

As I told my hon. and gallant Friend the other day, we are taking what steps we can to increase the supply of helicopters. As he knows, the really urgent need for helicopters at the moment is for rescuing wounded in Malaya. I do not think it would be right to divert them from that theatre.

Is it not a fact that these helicopters have been developed by private firms? Since these private firms are so slow in developing them, could we not see what assistance could be given by State planning?

It is not possible to produce helicopters unless they are ordered.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence why a retired officer has been appointed Chief of Staff to the Minister of Defence.

On account of his special qualifications for the post.

Without in any way disparaging this officer who had a very distinguished service, will my hon. Friend bear in mind that the present C.I.G.S., Field Marshal Slim, the present C.-in-C. Middle East Land Forces, General Robertson, and the present C.-in-C. designate of the U.K. Land Forces are all retired officers re-employed, and it is very discouraging for senior serving officers if, when a particularly attractive appointment comes up, the policy is to dig out of civil life a retired officer? Will my hon. Friend convey those views to his right hon. Friend?

There are a number of precedents for employing retired officers, but in this case, as my hon. Friend will appreciate, the job of Chief Staff Officer at the Ministry of Defence is not necessarily an Army job. It has been filled by a Marine officer and a Royal Air Force officer, and it does not go against the establishment of Lieutenants-General at the War Office.

While not in any way seeking to disparage the qualifications of General Jacob, may I ask whether the hon. Gentleman is aware that the previous holder of this post, General McLean, had very high qualifications and gave the utmost satisfaction to all concerned? Never at any time was an adverse word said about his activities. Seriously, is this not a case of the Prime Minister selecting one of his own friends?

I would not seek to disparage the qualifications of General McLean, which are very high, but this appointment was considered by a great many people as well as by the Prime Minister, and General Jacob had the highest qualifications.

If the matter was considered by a great many people who decided that General McLean, with all his qualifications, should be replaced by General Sir Ian Jacob, who had been retired for many years, could we be informed who these people were and whether a single one of them was associated either with the Chiefs of Staff Committee or with any of the Forces? [HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."] Can the hon. Gentleman answer the question? Is it not a very serious matter when a high ranking Army officer who gives general satisfaction is replaced? What is the cause of it? Ought we not to know?

A good many high ranking officers have been replaced.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence in view of the indiscriminate suffering caused by the napalm jellied petrol bomb, if he will make a statement on the policy of Her Majesty's Government on the use of this weapon by British troops.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence what information he has as to the military value of the napalm bomb; and how far its use has been successfully restricted to military targets.

On the general question of Government policy, I would refer hon. Members to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary on 12th May.

The napalm bomb is a tactical weapon which can be directed accurately at a limited target. It has been used in Korea principally against enemy storage and supply areas, and also against tanks, transport and troop concentrations.

Is the Minister aware that I did not receive a reply from the Foreign Secretary but only the usual prefabricated burst of righteous indignation which he produces when he is in difficulties? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the napalm bomb has been used indiscriminately on villages, burning up women and children and everything within a radius of two miles, and is it not true to say that we are burning people alive and calling it collective security?

I think the hon. Gentleman is misinformed. A lot of these reports in the Press are greatly exaggerated. The point about the napalm bomb is that it is normally dropped from a height of less than 100 feet. It is wholly ineffective if dropped from a great height, and it is not effective against towns and villages. It is a tactical weapon. It may well be true that civilians have been killed by it, but that is not the intention, and it is, in fact, a more discriminatory weapon than ordinary high explosive.

But are not these so-called misleading Press reports based on official communiqués from the military authorities? Is the hon. Gentleman asking us to believe that the military communiqués are not to be relied upon?

The military communiqués have never said that the napalm bomb is used indiscriminately. If the hon. Gentleman is referring to the raid last week, this took place on a storage dump six miles from the nearest village.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that while it is admitted that any weapon must cause considerable suffering, his statement that this bomb is used on tactical targets will give a certain amount of relief? Will he try to ensure that, as far as lies in our power, this policy will be continued and that it is made as widely known as possible, because there has been a widespread belief that the bomb was broadcast and that considerable unnecessary suffering was caused to civilians?

As the House is aware, the napalm bomb has not been used by United Kingdom Forces in Korea.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence whether, in the review of war pensions, he will consider the case of officers of the 1914 War whose pensions have not been revised in conformity with the increased cost of living.

As my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer informed my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Portsmouth, West (Brigadier Clarke), on 8th April, long service pensioners of H.M. Forces, including retired officers, come within the scope of the consideration now being given to the case of public service pensioners generally. I am not, however, in a position to make any statement at present.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will arrange for a record to be prepared and published of the agricultural and scientific lessons derived from the large-scale land clearing and cropping operations undertaken by the Overseas Food Corporation in Tanganyika and the Colonial Development Corporation in the Gambia, so that reliable information may be available when similar projects come to be considered in the future.

The Overseas Food Corporation has already published information about its operations in Tanganyika in its annual reports, particularly in Chapters 2 and 3 of the Report for 1948–49. They have the matter raised by my hon. Friend's Question very much in mind and their future reports will contain further information and relevant statistics which should be of value. I do not think that there are any general lessons to be learned from the Gambia Scheme, other than the importance of adequate preliminary investigations.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been drawn to the support which the Communist bandits in Malaya are receiving from bases in Siam; and what steps he is taking to stop this.

Malayan terrorists have from time to time established camps in Siam and Siamese police forces in the course of normal activities against criminal elements have destroyed a number of these camps, including recently one of particular importance. This problem can only be solved by making still closer the existing collaboration between the Siamese and Malayan police forces. The friendly co-operation received from the Siam police in the past is much appreciated, and I am confident that it will be still more effective in the future.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies the quantity and value of all commodities, goods, chattels, &c., removed by Japanese occupying forces in Malaya.

I am awaiting reports from the Malayan Governments and will write to my hon. Friend when they have reached me.

In view of the fact that a great many claims—including those of a number of people who were killed and whose families are now very badly off—are affected by this matter, will the right hon. Gentleman urge that this reply be received as soon as possible?

I will do my best.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will make a statement on the collective punishment imposed on the village of Sungie Pelak.

In the last 11 months there have been 32 terrorist attacks near Sungie Pelak, and it recently became clear that people inside the village were supplying food to the terrorists.

The measures taken in this situation were not primarily punitive, but were intended to help the security forces in dealing with the bandit gangs. These measures include the removal of all surplus rice, the reduction of the ration by 40 per cent. for a fortnight to absorb any household stocks and the strict control of future sales.

There is a house curfew at night and a perimeter curfew from 2 p.m. to 10 p.m. was imposed for seven days. A new perimeter fence is to be built to prevent food or other supplies being passed to terrorists, and to afford greater security to the inhabitants of this village.

Would the right hon. Gentleman say how long it is proposed that these restrictions should continue?

If the hon. Gentleman will study my answer, I think he will see that I have replied to that question. The reduction in the ration by 40 per cent. is for a fortnight, and the perimeter curfew as from 2 p.m. to 10 p.m. is for seven days.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether, when such action is taken, proper steps are also taken to safeguard the rations of the children, who obviously would not take part in supplying food to the terrorists?

The general situation with regard to the supplies of rice is very carefully watched and the effect of reducing stocks makes such precautions very necessary; but I have no instances where there has been any serious case of malnutrition.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the strong action which has been taken by General Templer has given great satisfaction to many people in Malaya and the rest of the world?

With regard to the curfew, will the right hon. Gentleman see whether something can be done to relieve the imposition on young children? Did he read the report in a recent issue of the "Observer," and will he try in future to make arrangements that at least small children should not be confined for 22 hours in the atmosphere that prevails there?

I think the hon. Member is confusing the perimeter curfew with house curfew. The perimeter curfew does not impose any hardship on children.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies who is now responsible for putting over to the native population in Malaya the British aims and ultimate political objectives, of countering hostile propaganda and generally conducting political warfare in that theatre.

This is in the main the responsibility of a special Emergency Information Service working under the Director of Operations.

Would not the Minister agree that the question of propaganda and the publicity of these peace aims is a highly specialised operation? Would it not be advisable to have someone skilled in the necessary techniques in control of these operations?

I am generally in sympathy with what the hon. Gentleman is saying. All these services are in the course of re-organisation, but I am sorry to say that that has not yet been completed. It is not very easy to find the right people, but the whole of this matter is now under urgent re-organisation.

In view of the very great work done by Mr. Hugh Carlton Greene, who was seconded by the B.B.C. for this kind of work, will not the right hon. Gentleman make further approaches on the same level in order to continue the very good work which has been done?

I think I can give a general assent to this proposition.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what steps he is taking to expedite the shipping facilities for 1,500 women and children from Malta who wish to join their husbands in Australia.

Under the present Constitution, responsibility for promoting emigation rests with Maltese Ministers and I have no initiative in the matter. I have, however, just received a request from them for assistance from Her Majesty's Government in connection with emigration generally, and this is now under consideration.

Will my right hon. Friend see if it is not possible in some way to assist in this very urgent problem, in view of the importance of helping emigrants from Malta and the discouraging effects of these long separations?

That is just the question at which I am now looking.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has now received the report of Mr. Justice Upjohn with regard to the questions at issue between Lord Trefgarne and other directors of the Colonial Development Corporation; and whether he proposes to publish this report.

Mr. Justice Upjohn's report has been submitted to the Lord Chancellor, and the Lord Chancellor and I are now considering the various problems which would arise if it were to be published.

In view of the fact that the accusations were all made publicly, would not it be wise for the findings to have the same publicity?

I shall endeavour to publish this report; but in the meanwhile I must look into the legal implications, because this was not a body set up under statute and there are, therefore, certain matters concerning the law of libel which will have to be investigated before I give any reply.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can now state the divergence of view between the United States Government and Her Majesty's Government on the naval command in the Mediterranean.

There is as yet no divergence of view between Governments. Discussions are proceeding between the respective military staffs; and I do not think it would be helpful now to disclose publicly the differences of principle that have arisen, since they may yet be composed. I may say, however, that the point at issue as this stage concerns the chain of command, and not the nationality of the commander. That, no doubt, is a matter we shall come to later.

If there is no divergence of view among the Governments concerned, could the right hon. Gentleman say what is the agreement among the Governments? Has he seen the report attributed to Admiral Fechteler which appeared in the United States Press and elsewhere, to the effect that this is a matter that is to be ultimately settled by the N.A.T.O. countries? Might I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the command of the Eastern Mediterranean, in particular, is a matter for N.A.T.O.?

I do not think I should add to the statement which I have made. At the present time the conversations are on a staff level, but it may well be that agreement will be reached. On the other hand, agreement may not be reached. The question of the nationality of the commander is quite separate from these staff discussions.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his recent gesture to me seemed to indicate that I was on that side of the House and not on this? Will he be good enough to say what is the view of Her Majesty's Government in relation to this matter? Is there any reason this House should not be informed what Her Majesty's Government think about the naval command of the Mediterranean?

Yes. The reason is that the discussions are now proceeding on a staff level, which may end the whole matter. If not, the Governments will be drawn in, and other decisions will have to be taken.

Is not this an indication of the right hon. Gentleman's uneasy conscience in this matter?

On the contrary, my conscience is absolutely easy. I do not feel in any danger of selling the pass, considering that the largest pass was sold by the right hon. Gentleman.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that he stated quite categorically in this House in the course of debate, or at any rate in the course of Question and answer, that he thought the Americans had the right to assume the naval command in the Mediterranean, in spite of this being a traditionally British area?

That is a very inadequate representation of the views which I expressed at great length and which I have here fully on this subject.

Read them.

No, thank you very much. I should be delighted to refer the right hon. Gentleman to HANSARD: I wonder his curiosity has not already led him to investigate. The situation now is different from what it was a year ago. Very important decisions were taken by the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues which we must take into consideration in dealing with future circumstances.

Does not the Prime Minister think it is really sinking below the level of events to talk about the military arrangements in terms of selling the pass? May I ask him whether he does not think it is highly undesirable that these Admirals should go about making statements on matters which concern staff conversations? Would it not be far better to reserve the statements to be made by Governments in due course?

I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman realises that he is passing a very strict, direct, pointed and severe censure upon the former Minister of Defence, who quite gratuitously the other day, on these grave matters, introduced such a disgusting expression as "selling the pass" and tried, with conspicuous ill success, to fasten it on to me.

asked the Prime Minister what negotiations he has had with the Government of Northern Ireland on the subject of their Bill giving pensions to all persons who have held any Ministerial office for at least three years and are over 50 years of age; and if he will make a statement.

This is the first time I have seen the hon. Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone (Mr. Healy) in his place. I hope he will never feel affected by any cry, "Strangers withdraw "

This is a matter for the Government of Northern Ireland, and I have no statement to make upon it.

Arising out of the right hon. Gentleman's reply, is he not aware that the Imperial contribution to this Government, which is the residue of the Northern Ireland Government's Consolidated Fund, will not be lessened by this new charge? Is he aware that nearly one-half of the Government of Northern Ireland Party are already Ministers? Should not the right hon. Gentleman know the facts about this, since he went to Belfast as an Irish Home Ruler himself, and we had to rescue him from the untender mercies of the Tory Party?

The conception of a separate Parliament in Northern Ireland would have little meaning if it could not even decide on the details of the remuneration of its own Ministers.

asked the Prime Minister over which Departmental Ministers the Paymaster-General exercises supervisory functions.

The only supervisory functions affecting other Departments performed by the Paymaster-General are those in regard to atomic energy, of which I informed the House in my reply to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Vauxhall (Mr. G. R. Strauss) on 24th March.

As this is a matter of supervision, can the Prime Minister say whether, on the matters supervised, the Parliamentary responsibility in this case is borne by the overlord or the underling? Can he also tell us why the Minister of Supply is singled out for this particular humiliation?

These distinctions between the overlord and the underlord come very ill from one who was a Member of a Government which had practically as many noble Lords in the Administration as we have. The Leader of the Opposition boasted that he kept it all very secret, but if we are looking for overlords we should not have very far to search.

Is the Prime Minister aware that we on this side of the House will resist to the utmost any diminution in the status, dignity and responsibilities of the present Minister of Supply?

I am very much obliged to the hon. and gallant Gentleman for this assurance. I did use one word which was wrong just now. [HON. MEMBERS: "Only one?"] I should have said "underling."

Can the Prime Minister tell us how many noble Lords there are in the present Cabinet and how many there were in the last?

I looked up the statistics a little while ago, but I have not got them at my fingers' end.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what percentage of the children of school age in Nigeria, are being educated; and, of this figure, what percentage are at technical secondary or trade schools.

Until the next population census takes place, probably in 1952–53, the total number of children of school age in Nigeria can only be estimated at about five-and-a-half million. Of these, about 1,000,000—that is, 18 per cent.—were receiving education in 1950–1. Of this number, about 22,200 —just over 2 per cent.—were at secondary grammar schools and 848—.085 per cent. —at technical and trade schools.

Do not these figures show that African education is far too academic? Have we not turned out in the past too many lawyers and politicians —worthy people—when we want far more doctors, engineers and technicians, and even humble fitters? Will the right hon. Gentleman pay special attention to this Colony which, with a population of 30 million, is not only the largest but in my view one of the most important of our Colonial Territories?

If the hon. Gentleman's question means that we ought to encourage people to take degrees in other subjects rather than in law and subjects which are directly concerned with politics, then I should assent.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what progress has been made during the past two years in extending educational facilities in Borneo; how many are now receiving primary, secondary and higher education; and how many students from Borneo are now receiving university education overseas.

The primary and secondary school population in North Borneo, Sarawak and Brunei has increased from some 56,500 and 1,600 in 1949 to some 65,400 and 3,200, respectively, in 1951. There are no facilities for higher education, but 23 students are receiving university education overseas. Teachers' training colleges are now established in both Sarawak and North Borneo.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether this increase is proportionate to the increase in population? What steps are being taken to increase the facilities for primary education as well as secondary education there?

I do not think the increase is proportionate to the increase in population. We are taking steps to increase the proportion.

Is anything being done to set up a university college for these Colonies?

At the present moment the plans are confined to teachers' training colleges.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the oil companies are playing their part in providing technical education facilities in Sarawak?