asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what further approaches he has made to the Soviet, Chinese and North Korean authorities, with a view to establishing regular communication with British prisoners of war in Communist hands in the Far East and securing for them normal rights and privileges.

The position remains as stated in the first part of my reply to the hon. Member for Maldon (Mr. Driberg) on 26th May. The Soviet and Chinese authorities decline to intervene in matters which they say fall within the province of the North Koreans. The only liaison with the North Korean authorities is by way of the armistice negotiators.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that the denial to our prisoners of all normal facilities is causing widespread concern in this country?

Yes, I am aware of that, and the only good news which I can give to my hon. Friend is that I think there has been some improvement in the delivery of letters lately. I think rather more letters have been getting through.

Have the Government received any offer from the Government of India to act as intermediary, and, if not, would the Government consider approaching the Government of India so to act? Thirdly, is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that when this House last debated Korea there was some concern in many quarters that no mention was made of the previous offer by the Government of India to act?

This Question deals with communications with British prisoners of war. I have no reason to believe that mediation by any neutral power would be of the slightest value. For example, we have the International Red Cross, and in this regard they have so far been quite useless.

Has the right hon. and learned Gentleman any information which indicates that relatives of any of our men who are prisoners of war in Korea are receiving letters from the men?

I am afraid I have not that information with now, but I will try to let the right hon. Gentleman know.

Could the Minister of State say whether the Dean of Canterbury had any time off from picking up bugs with chopsticks to inquire into the position of British prisoners of war?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will take steps to procure from the Dean of Canterbury the evidence of the use of germ warfare in Korea which is in his possession, with a view to the matter being discussed in this House.

I have no power to oblige the Dean of Canterbury to produce the evidence of which he has spoken.

However, from what has appeared in the newspapers today, it is clear that the very reverend gentleman has no valid evidence at all; our view that these charges are baseless has been emphatically confirmed.

As my right hon. and learned Friend's answer indicates, as I rather thought it would, that there is not the slightest shred of credible substance in the evidence which was given by the Dean, will my right hon. and learned Friend not agree that in this unholy outburst the Dean inflicted three slashing wounds on the British public, first of all, by gratuitously presenting the Communist propagandists all over the world with further vile material; second, by sewing seeds of doubt and misapprehension in the minds of our less knowledgeable folk; and third, by filling the hearts of the vast majority of people with very burning indignation that a high dignatory of the Church should be able to bear false and treacherous witness and still be permitted to remain in Holy Orders?

The hon. Gentleman must not make a speech on this.

I was asking a question, Sir.

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend that this sort of propaganda could be very dangerous. I think in this instance it has not been dangerous.

rose—

Order. Mr. Wyatt.

Is it not a fact that most people regard the Red Dean as a very good joke and not worth bothering about?

On a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory fact that it appears that no one will rid us of this turbulent priest, I give notice that I shall raise this matter again at the earliest opportunity.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what instructions were given to our delegates at the Security Council of the United Nations Organisation on the question of germ warfare.

I would refer the hon. Member to the published records of the statements made by the United Kingdom delegate in the Security Council discussion which are, of course, available in the Library of this House. These statements were based on his instructions.

Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman not agree, in view of the Communist allegation about germ warfare—[An HON. MEMBER: "And the Dean's."]—that it would be a good thing to give instructions to our delegates to the United Nations to press for the complete abolition of bacteriological warfare research in this country and in America? [HON. MEMBERS: "And Russia."] Well, bring in Russia, too. In view of the fact that America is spending 17 million dollars on bacteriological warfare research, and we have a bacteriological warfare station at Porton in this country—[Interruption.] Hon. Gentlemen opposite do not like to hear this bit—will not the Minister ask our delegates at the United Nations to press the International Red Cross to call for the shutting up of all these bacteriological warfare stations in every country?

I think the first step to take in regard to this matter of germ warfare is to have an impartial investigation into those allegations that have been made about Korea, and then we can consider the next step.

Would it not be a good idea if the hon. Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes) were to start by abolishing the bees in his own bonnet?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the Russian veto on the proposed impartial investigation into the allegation that the United Nations forces in Korea have conducted germ warfare, he will instruct the British representative on the Security Council to propose that the matter be referred to the General Assembly under Article 10 of the Charter.

Her Majesty's Government have noted with profound regret the action recently taken by the Soviet delegate on the Security Council in vetoing a proposal by the United States delegate that the International Red Cross should be allowed to conduct an impartial investigation into these allegations, which we believe to be baseless. Her Majesty's Government see no reason why the matter should be allowed to rest there, and they will associate themselves fully with any further action which it may prove possible to take to bring about an impartial investigation into these charges.

Will the Government bear in mind that these allegations of germ warfare affect the good name and moral authority of the United Nations as a whole, and in view of the fact that the General Assembly is the parliament of the United Nations, will he not give an assurance that so far as Her Majesty's Government are concerned they will do everything possible to get it before the General Assembly?

I agree entirely with the first part of the supplementary question. The only point is that the Assembly does not meet until some date late in October, and we should much rather have the matter cleared up before then.

In order that we may see the full facts of the matter before us, will the right hon. and learned Gentleman confirm that the reason for the Russian veto was that the Council had previously refused to grant any representation at all at the inquiry to the principal accusers, namely, North Korea and China; and is it not very difficult to regard, or to expect other people to regard, an investigation as impartial which denies a hearing to the principal accusers or the principal witnesses?

I do not agree at all that that was the substance of the Soviet veto. That explanation was put forward as a pretext, but I am perfectly certain that the fact of the matter is that they are not willing to have these charges investigated.

May I ask the right hon. and learned Gentleman to answer the suggestion contained in the first part of my hon. Friend's supplementary? Surely, in the event of an impartial inquiry, evidence would be heard from the North Koreans as well as from the Chinese.

Of course evidence would be heard from all parties in an impartial inquiry.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement on the present constitutional position in Korea.

Yes, Sir. On 4th July the South Korean National Assembly passed, by 163 votes to nil, with three abstentions, a compromise Constitutional Amendment Bill with the following provisions, among others: a bicameral National Assembly to be elected by popular vote; the President and Vice-President to be elected by direct and secret popular vote for a term of four years; the Prime Minister to be appointed by the President with the consent of the Assembly; the Cabinet to be appointed by the President on the Prime Minister's recommendation, and to be confirmed by a simple majority vote of the National Assembly. I understand that these amendments will come into force at once and that the direct election of the President by popular vote will be held by 14th July.

Is it not a case that these amendments were made under the duress of Mr. Syngman Rhee, and in those circumstances do Her Majesty's Government propose to continue to recognise Syngman Rhee's Government as the properly elected constitutional Government of South Korea?

I think these proposals represent a fair compromise between the parties, but what we should like to see is that they should be followed up by the removal of martial law and the holding of the trials before civil courts.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he can now make a statement indicating the legal basis of the screening of the North Korean and Chinese prisoners of war.

No legal basis is required for the screening of prisoners of war. By Article 17 of the 1949 Geneva Convention every prisoner of war "is bound to give only his surname, first names and rank, date of birth, and army, regimental, personal or serial number, or failing this, equivalent information." This, however, only specifies what a prisoner of war is bound to give. It constitutes no limitation on what he may give voluntarily.

There is nothing in the Convention to prevent questions on other matters being addressed to prisoners. The sole effect of the Convention is that if a prisoner refuses to answer questions on other matters, the captor must accept this and not try to extract further information.

From the inquiries which I made in Korea, I am satisfied that no attempt was made to extract from prisoners of war information which they were not willing to give.

While I am very glad to have got that answer out of the right hon. and learned Gentleman at last, could he explain why he has been so silent and evasive in this matter in the past, and particularly why on 25th June he referred me back to an answer of 23rd June which contained no reference whatever to this subject?

asked the Prime Minister what will be the precise nature of the duties assigned to the British Deputy Chief of Staff appointed to General Mark Clark's staff; and what will be his means of communication with Her Majesty's Government.

I hope to make a statement on this subject before Parliament rises.

Can the Prime Minister say whether this officer, if he thinks that some military action which is contemplated might have serious political implications, will be able to communicate his views to Her Majesty's Government before such action takes place?

I am afraid the hon. Gentleman did not hear me. Let me read my answer again. "I hope to make a statement on this subject before Parliament rises."

But in preparation for this statement can the right hon. Gentleman say whether it is intended that this officer will replace Air Vice-Marshal Bouchier the present liaison officer?

All that might be relevant to the statement which I hope to make. Whether it is relevant or not, I am not sure.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Egyptian Government is now allowing British tankers, bound for Haifa, to pass through the Suez Canal.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is in a position to make a statement on the refusal of the Egyptian Government to permit British tankers to carry oil for Haifa through the Suez Canal.

So far as I am aware, the situation in this respect has not changed since the reply given by my right hon. Friend to the hon. Members for Darwen (Mr. Fletcher-Cooke) and Leicester, North-West (Mr. Janner) on 30th January.

What action are the Government taking to safeguard our rights in this matter?

This matter, as my hon. Friend knows well, is not the only problem with which we have to deal in the Middle East, nor, indeed, the only problem with which we have to deal in our relations with Egypt. I would ask the House not to press for immediate action in this particular case. We shall certainly continue to do our best to ensure that international law and British interests are upheld.

Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that international law is being broken here? It is a very serious matter in so far as we are concerned. Will he not do something to press the matter a little in view of the fact that it has been before the House for such a considerable time?

The Security Council, as the hon. Gentleman knows, passed a resolution asking the Egyptian Government to honour their obligations under the 1888 Convention. So far no action has been taken in this matter, but I would ask the hon. Gentleman to believe that Her Majesty's Government will do everything possible to get a solution of this problem. It is complicated by other issues, and we do not wish to press it above certain other problems that are outstanding between ourselves and the Egyptian Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware of the delay in the transfer of money from Egypt to this country standing to the credit of British subjects who lost their employment in that country; and whether he will make representations to the Egyptian Government for these transfers to be expedited in view of the hardship to those concerned.

I am aware that there have been delays in some cases. Her Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires in Alexandria has already been instructed to give any help that may be needed to expedite the consent of the Egyptian Government to these transfers. He has within the last few days made further representations to the new Egyptian Prime Minister on this matter.

In cases where all the Egyptian tax requirements have been satisfied, can my hon. Friend say how long he anticipates it will take the Egyptians to allow this money which has been accumulated over the years by the hard work and thrift of these unfortunate people to be transferred to this country?

As I have already told my hon. and gallant Friend, we have made continued representations to the Egyptian Government to expedite a settlement in cases where all the other formalities have been cleared up.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that these people have been really very badly treated, and is it not possible for his Department to do something about it pending a settlement with the Egyptian Government?

We have offered all help—

Except cash.

—in any legal costs where action before a court may be required, and we have offered help with the Egyptian authorities. We are aware of the very grievous nature of the hardship in certain of these cases. Of course, if any application were made to Her Majesty's Government for financial assistance, that would certainly be considered.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement on the action he has taken in regard to the recent forced deportations in Hungary which are in contravention of the Human Rights Clauses of the Hungarian Peace Treaty.

Between 21st May and 20th July, 1951, at least 24,000 people were deported from Budapest. No further deportations seem to have taken place until June of this year, when several hundred families were moved from towns in North-Eastern and Western Hungary. Deportations from towns in various parts still continue.

Information concerning these deportations is being included in the evidence of breaches of the Human Rights Clauses of the Hungarian Peace Treaty which Her Majesty's Government will be submitting shortly to the United Nations in accordance with the General Assembly's Resolution of November, 1950.

While appreciating that this matter is being brought before the United Nations, may I ask the Minister whether in the meantime we are consulting with the other signatories and are making separate representations to the Hungarian Government to show how public opinion feels in this matter?

I think the best way of approaching this problem is first to submit the evidence to the United Nations in accordance with the request made by us in the Assembly in November, 1950. The next step will rest with the United Nations, but Her Majesty's Government have every intention of seeing that the fullest publicity is given, and, if possible, that every step is taken to mitigate these horrible actions.

Can the Minister state in general to where these deportations are taking place?

They are being moved, in the main, from strategic areas to other areas—

In Hungary?

Yes—where these populations will not interfere with the strategic plans of the Soviet Union.

Will my hon. Friend consider the possibility of issuing a White Paper or something in the near future describing the numerous violations by the Hungarians, the Bulgarians and the Yugoslavs of the Peace Treaty so that the British public may be kept informed?

I will consider issuing a White Paper when this evidence about all the breaches concerning the Human Rights Clauses of the Peace Treaty has been assembled and submitted to the United Nations.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been called to the fact that the strength of the Hungarian army has been increased from four infantry divisions in 1949 to 20 divisions, including three armoured and two air force divisions; and whether he will request Her Majesty's Ambassador at Budapest to draw the attention of the Hungarian Government to Section 1, Article 12, of the Treaty of Peace with Hungary signed in Paris on 10th February, 1947, and to lodge a protest.

I am aware that the military forces in Hungary greatly exceed the limits prescribed in the Peace Treaty. I do not, however, consider that the proposal made in the second part of my hon. Friend's Question would produce any useful result.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the increased military preparations on the frontier and the laying out of vast airfields under Russian engineers is causing very serious apprehension in Yugoslavia?

Yes, Sir, I am certainly aware of that, but I do not consider it would serve any useful purpose to protest to the Hungarians about this. As my hon. Friend probably knows, the procedure laid down in the Treaty for dealing with disputes in connection with the execution of the Treaty requires, in the first place, joint action by the British, United States and Soviet Missions in Budapest. So far, the Soviets have, of course, declined to associate themselves with any protest or action by Her Majesty's Government.

In connection with Hungarian soldiers, where are all the musical comedies in which they can perform?

asked the Minister of Food in view of the discrepancy between the increased production of home-produced eggs and the official egg allocation, what progress has been made in the special investigation by his officials into this problem.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Coventry. South (Miss Burton) on 2nd July.

That answer is not good enough. Does not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman appreciate that the black market in eggs has risen to tremendous proportions with the change of Government, and that it is the general opinion that even large poultry keepers are breaking the law? Is he not aware that people are looking to him to take action to bring some of these culprits to book and not to de-control eggs, which may mean that people get less eggs than before?

The answer to which I referred said that I was looking into this question at the moment. With regard to the question of the black market having increased since this Government came in, all I can say is that the allocation of eggs is practically the same this year as it was last year.

It is not.

The allocation per ration book is just what it was last year, having been slightly above it at the beginning of the year. The figure was 62, which is practically the same as last year. As my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary said, until we have developed a new scheme it is either a question of de-control or increased inspection.

The Minister in his own words said that there were as many eggs given out this year as there were last year, but is it not a fact that in the aggregate the number is many millions more, and therefore they are going to the black market?

The hon. Gentleman is wrong. Egg production is less this year than it was last year.

asked the Minister of Food the price paid by his Department for shell eggs to producers in the United Kingdom, Denmark, Poland and Eire, respectively.

The current price to home producers for first-quality eggs is 4s. 6d. per dozen. It would be contrary to practice to disclose the prices my Department is paying to over-seas suppliers.

asked the Minister of Food the present weekly capacity of bacon factories in terms of the intake of pigs per week; and what was the average number of pigs per week offered to the bacon factories in the months of April, May and June this year.

During April, May and June bacon factories have killed about 91,250 pigs per week and have used about 71,500 of these for bacon production. This is about the maximum weekly curing capacity at present for pigs slaughtered at the factory. In addition the factories can cure a quantity of imported frozen sides.

Do not the facts which my right hon. and gallant Friend has just given clearly show that if there is to be that increase in pig production for which he hopes there should be at least another factory in the country to handle the increase, and would he say what steps he contemplates taking to encourage the building of such a factory?

We are taking every possible step under the limitations of capital expenditure, and, as my hon. Friend probably knows, we have decided on one at least, provided we can get the capital facilities.

asked the Minister of Food whether he is aware of the vital need for building another sugar beet factory in the south of England in order to maintain the present level of sugar beet production in this country; and what steps he is taking to encourage the building of another such factory.

It is more economic, given the present limitations on capital investment, to increase the capacity of existing factories. This is being done under the present reconstruction programme.

Is my right hon. and gallant Friend quite sure that the increase in the production of existing factories will simplify the immensely complicated transport problems which now exist, and will anything be done towards cutting down the cost of transport of sugar beet to the factories?

We will do anything to cut down cost because it adds to the ultimate price, but the sugar beet grown in the southern counties is about 5 per cent., and we are, in fact, engaged now in reconstruction so as to get greater sugar extraction from the existing acreage.

asked the Minister of Food whether, in view of the loss incurred by pig keepers unable to dispose of their pigs due to foot-and-mouth restrictions, he will consider raising the optimum weight at which the maximum price is payable for the duration of the outbreak.

We are continuing in force until further notice an interim price schedule which is more favourable in the case of heavy pigs than that agreed with the National Farmers' Unions at the last Price Review.

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman not aware that far too many of the pigs at present being marketed are too heavy and too fat, at least when they are required for pork?

I agree that is one of the troubles and is the reason for the new schedules, but there is also the hardship involved when farmers, through no fault of their own, are compelled to keep pigs back, and it is with a view to meeting these rather special circumstances that this present schedule is being kept in force.

Are we to understand that these increased prices are only for specified areas where there has been an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease, or for the whole country?

I should like notice of that question.

asked the Minister of Food what level of food subsidies would be needed now to keep the cost of food where it was in April, 1949, when the subsidy ceiling was fixed at £410 million.

If the prices of the main subsidised foods were reduced to the levels ruling at 1st April, 1949, I estimate that food subsidies of something over £800 million a year would be required. I cannot make a more precise estimate owing to changes in ration levels and in the range of subsidised food.

Do I understand that the price of food passed on to the consumer between that date and the end of last year is something in the region of £400 million, which is considerably in excess of the reduction for which this Government is held responsible?

The actual figure is nearer £475 million.

Can the right hon. and gallant Gentleman tell the House what was the extent of the increase in prices for imported food between the two dates referred to in the question?

I have not that figure separately. There is a definite proportion which I have not in my mind at the moment, and that is the nearest answer that I can give to the question.

Can the right hon. and gallant Gentleman say when the free private enterprise traders are to be sent out to bring us in some cheaper food?

As soon as we can get more stability.

asked the Minister of Food the total amount of the food subsidies for the financial year 1951–52.

About £415 million on the latest estimates.

asked the Minister of Food how much meat has been condemned in London as unfit for human consumption in the past two weeks; and how this compares with the corresponding figure for last year.

During the fortnight ended 5th July a total of about 42 tons of meat and offal was condemned. In the corresponding two weeks last year less than half a ton was condemned.

Does not this show the necessity for more cold storage and freezing accommodation?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman. He will, however, appreciate that that is a very large capital commitment. The existing cold storage is being used to the utmost capacity and, as he knows, this was not unknown before the war.

Would it not be better to spend money on cold stores and their equipment rather than waste all this meat?

I agree entirely. But this is quite exceptional. Of this 42 tons, 35 tons occurred in the very hot week ending 5th July, and when the weather broke on the Wednesday night we had practically no loss at all.

Can the right hon. and gallant Gentleman say what has happened to the 35 tons of meat?

I am perfectly certain that the hon. and gallant Gentleman did not get it in his rations.

asked the Minister of Food whether, as a further measure to control profits arising from the slaughter of horses, he will reimpose maximum retail prices for horsemeat.

Price control was ended in March, 1950, on the recommendation of the Rosebery Committee, mainly because it was so difficult to enforce.

Is the Minister aware that there has been an enormous and quite unjustifiable increase in the amount of horsemeat during recent months, and that if it is not checked it will soon be almost worth while to send Derby winners straight to the knacker's yard? Is it not time that this control was reimposed?

asked the Minister of Food what import restrictions he has placed on the import of tomatoes; and to what extent prices have been increased because of his action.

I am sending the hon. Member a copy of a joint announcement by my Department and the Agricultural Departments issued on 19th January last giving details of the restrictions on imports of tomatoes during 1952. It is not possible to estimate what prices would have been without these restrictions.

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that, since these restrictions were imposed, in Glasgow market housewives have had to pay much more, particularly for tomatoes, and will he bear in mind that housewives are bearing a very great burden just now?

The fact is that this particular commodity is subject to violent fluctuations in price according to the output. The price in the first two weeks in July was 4s. 6d. per 12 lb. less than it was last year, and also less than it was the year before. That is because we had a very hot spell and tomatoes came forward at a very great rate, and prices dropped enormously.

asked the Minister of Food the number of items of foods increased in price, which he has not yet announced including any others consequential to the increases in price of the items already raised.

The list of subsidised foods, the prices of which have been or are to be increased, was given by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer when opening his Budget. I have no further consequential increases to announce.

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that there was a further list issued, which appeared in HANSARD of 11th June, relating to 27 further items which had been increased in price, and can he say what are the consequential increases on these 27 items?

The only point about the consequential increases is that which I announced the other day in respect of meat and manufactured meat.

Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman admit that an increase of 33 per cent. in the case of flour is bound to have consequential increases on bread, cakes, cookies, buns and so on?

asked the Minister of Food what regulations he has made regarding what may be used as ingredients in sausages.

The principal change which I introduced by the Meat Products (No. 2) Order, 1952, was to abolish the provision for reckoning skimmed milk powder and vegetable fats as part of the minimum meat content.

Does the right hon. and gallant Gentleman realise that that very negative procedure in regard to the component parts of the sausage leaves the door wide open—[Laughter]—leaves the sausage skin open to be filled in, as I am told by my constituents, with breast of lamb which is 1s. 2d. per lb. and bread which is 4½d. per lb.? Yet the housewife is charged 2s. 9½d. Cannot the right hon. and gallant Gentleman take steps to control the component parts of the humble sausage?

I do not think anybody in my position has ever been able to control the components of the sausage. It is well known to be one of the most difficult and mysterious things in our daily life. The object of this Order was to improve the sausage, and I think it is doing so.

asked the Minister of Food why the new price schedule for confectionery was precipitately withdrawn; and if he is aware of the confusion and uncertainty this action imposed on confectioners.

I have neither issued nor withdrawn a price schedule. I recently decided to defer for the time being an increase in confectionery prices to consumers pending further information about the future level of production.

Can the right hon. and gallant Gentleman say when he is likely to come to a conclusion about the matter?

I shall have to look into the matter. I cannot come to a conclusion until I am satisfied about the figures.

asked the Minister of Food whether he is now able to make a statement about the next increase in the meat ration.

Yes, Sir. The meat ration will be increased from 1s. 7d. to 1s. 9d. on 20th July.

While thanking my right hon. and gallant Friend for that encouraging reply, may I ask him whether he has any further ration increases to announce?

The House will know that I have already made an announcement about tea, which is to go up by ½ oz. on 15th July. I have already announced to the House that later in the year the butter ration will have to come down by 1 oz.; that will take place in August, but I am glad to say that I shall be able at the same time to increase the margarine by an equivalent amount.

Can the right hon. and gallant Gentleman say what ration increase this would represent at the old price?

If we bring it down to one common level, the 1s. 9d. now is equal to 1s. 5½d. at the old price, which represents an increase of 3½d. upon the is. 2d. ration this time last year.

What is the comparison with the ration this time last year?

I have just explained that the ration is a little more than it was last year in quantity.

Can the right hon. and gallant Gentleman tell us exactly what the quantitative increase is?

I cannot work it out now, but I have brought the figure down to the same denomination as last year, and when I say that it is 3½d. up it is that much more meat.

asked the Minister of Food what estimate he has made of the additional foreign exchange involved in making sweet coupons for July, August and September valid for 1 lb. of sugar per month instead of sweets, to meet the urgent need of those wishing to make jam.

About 7 million dollars. My hon. Friend will recollect that arrangements have already been made for a bonus of 1 lb. this month.

In view of the great advantages not only to those who want to make more jam but also to the growers who are somewhat anxious about the disposal of a very heavy fruit crop, cannot my right hon. and gallant Friend take some emergency action to obtain more sugar even if it has to be done at the expense of such things as films and tobacco later in the year?

I would, of course, do anything I could to improve the position, but my hon. Friend will appreciate that the question which he has raised goes far beyond my Department. It is a far wider subject altogether.

Will my right hon. and gallant Friend consult his right hon. Friends to see whether the suggestion is practicable?

My hon. Friend's suggestion is not at all an easy one. It would he extremely difficult because we should have to provide stocks not only to meet the sweet ration but also to meet the needs of those who wish to exchange their rations for sugar, and that would inevitably lead to a large expenditure. However, I am anxious to do anything I can to assist in this difficult matter.

asked the Minister of Food how many tons of plums will have been imported from abroad during the months of July and August.

Imports of plums are arranged by private trade and I am unable to estimate the quantities likely to be imported. On balance of payments grounds, a quota of £170,000 has been announced for imports for the period 1st June to 31st December, 1952, as compared with imports of £617,000 in the same period last year.

Is the Minister aware that this answer will be welcomed by the growers as well as the consumers, by the growers because they have such a large crop of which to dispose, and by the consumers because they will be in a position to take advantage of the large crop as this gives it a better chance of being picked?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence what proposals have been received from the United States Government for the offshore purchase of British defence equipment.

Orders in this country by the United States Government for defence equipment have already been placed to the value of over £20 million. Discussions are still proceeding and it is expected that further substantial orders will be placed.

In considering offers of this nature, will the hon. Gentleman draw the attention of his right hon. Friends to the danger of interfering with the long-term developments of our markets in engineering products?

The object of the American off-shore purchases is to build up a potential in Europe for armaments production, and it is of advantage to this country that these orders should be placed.

Is the hon. Gentleman certain that if these orders are very greatly extended they will not interfere with deliveries of British engineering products and possibly cause us to lose many markets which are at present being built up abroad with very great difficulty?

I do not think there is any danger of that kind in the current discussions.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence whether he can now make a statement about increases in the retired pay of retired officers of Her Majesty's Forces.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave yesterday to my hon. Friend the Member for Devizes (Mr. Hollis).

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence whether he will set up an inquiry to hear evidence from those retired officers of the Services who, by reason of their retirement date, were excluded from the pension and retired pay increases which have been granted to officers with a later retiring date.

No, Sir.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this is an extremely unsatisfactory state of affairs and that these unfortunate officers are almost the only section of the community which has had no increase of any kind whatever? Many of them have fought in two wars and a great number of them are receiving less pension than they did 20 years ago. The principle of increased pensions has been recognised in other Departments, and my hon. Friend really must do something about it now.

I very well realise that many of these officers are suffering considerable privation, but the late Government drew this line—a line had to be drawn somewhere—and my hon. and learned Friend will be aware that under the Pensions (Increase) Bill a number of these officers will benefit.

My hon. Friend is surely aware that only those now getting under £10 a week will benefit and that those getting more than £10 a week will get no advantage from the Pensions (Increase) Bill? Will my hon. Friend realise that the fact that the last Government did this is no excuse for his maintaining it now?

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that when this was discussed by the late Government it was understood that it would be considered along with increased pensions for other retired persons? Now the Government have brought in a scheme of that kind is it not possible to associate these people with it?

As the right hon. Gentleman knows, quite a number of these officers will be assisted by the increase that will be made under the Prerogative Instruments parallel with the Pensions (Increase) Bill when it becomes an Act. At the moment I can say nothing more. My noble Friend is receiving a Parliamentary delegation on the subject on the 21st of this month.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will make a statement on constitutional reform in Hong Kong since May, 1946; what measures of local government have been introduced; and wht proposals have been made for the election of members to the Legislative Council.

A recent development has been the re-introduction of the election of two members to the urban council. The Governor of Hong Kong has just arrived in this country and I shall be discussing constitutional questions with him during his leave.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that in view of the happenings in the Far East today, this is not a very good advertisement for Britain's shop window of democracy in that part of the world, and does he not think it is time that it was a little better illuminated?

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will make a statement on the Hong Kong Fish Marketing Board, indicating what proportion of the fishermen own their boats and what proportion have mortgages through debt; and what plans have been considered for the organising of co-operative retail shops for the selling of the fish and a co-operative wholesale department for the export of the fish.

I am consulting the Governor on the subject and will communicate with the hon. Member as soon as I have received the reply, when he may care to put down another Question.

I did hope that the right hon. Gentleman would have given me an answer to the supplementary which I put to him on the previous Question. In regard to my second Question, could the Minister tell me when the letter was sent seeking this information?

I have not got the date here, but the general information on this is readily available in annual reports. The hon. Gentleman asked me to get him certain statistics, and I am very willing to get them, but they are not readily available.

The impression is that this scheme about which—

The hon. Gentleman must not say what his impression is.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this scheme, about which we boasted a great deal, is falling to pieces because of the lack of Government action? Will he look into that aspect of it?

I have already said I am getting the hon. Gentleman the statistics, I cannot answer general questions.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what facilities were given to the Chinese Cultural Delegation on their visit to India at the invitation of the Indian Government when they passed through Hong Kong; and if he is aware that, on their return to China, the delegates were denied access to their friends in Hong Kong.

The usual facilities were given to this delegation when it passed through Hong Kong, both on the outward and return journeys. There was no time limit on the delegates' stay, and they were not denied access to their friends in the Colony.

I must ask the Minister to inquire into this a little more closely because my information, which is authentic, is that this delegation, on its return from India, was refused time to visit friends in Hong Kong. Would the Minister inquire more closely into it?