asked the Minister of Labour the date on which the men suffering a disability employed at Remploy Limited, Alfreton, received an increase in wages by reason of the increase in the cost of living, or, alternatively, for any other reason.

Under an agreement between Remploy Limited, and the trade unions concerned, signed on 17th December, 1953, severely disabled workers employed at all Remploy factories, including the Alfreton factory, received an increase in wages as from 1st September, 1953.

Does not the Parliamentary Secretary realise that rates fixed in 1953 are wholly inadequate in February, 1955; and, having regard to the relationship of the Ministry to this employment, will some steps be taken to see that an adequate increase is given?

I can tell the hon. and learned Gentleman that negotiations are going on now between Remploy Ltd. and the trade unions concerned. Therefore, I do not think I ought to comment on them.

Is it not a fact that these negotiations have been going on for approximately six months, and that no conclusion has been reached, because it is necessary to contact the Ministry?

No, Sir;I do not think they have been going on as long as that.

asked the Minister of Labour the number of disabled persons employed by Remploy in each of the past three years; and what effect the proposed dismissal of 70 key workers is likely to have upon Remploy's capacity to maintain its existing disabled person employment level.

The reply to the first part of the Question is that the average numbers of severely disabled workers employed by Remploy for the years ended March, 1952, March, 1953, March, 1954, and from April to December, 1954, were 5,830, 6,002, 6,314 and 6,537 respectively.

As to the second part of the Question, I do not accept the hon. Member's suggestion that 70 key workers have been dismissed. I can, however, assure him that recent reductions of staff are designed to enhance the capacity to employ disabled persons.

In what way will these reductions, even if there were not 70, enhance the employment capacity of Remploy?

As has been announced by the Chairman of Remploy, some fit men were used on general training and supervising duties which it is now hoped can be undertaken by the disabled men themselves.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will reconsider the present policy of Remploy in refusing to re-engage severely disabled persons who, because of their disability, have had to leave Remploy for a temporary period.

I understand that the present policy of Remploy is not to terminate the services of a severely disabled person until he has been away sick for six months. He is then informed that when he is fit for work again he will be given favourable consideration for re-employment.

Will the Minister consider the case of men who leave Remploy to seek work in non-sheltered employment, cannot maintain their activities, wish to go back to Remploy, and are refused?

That is a good point, and I know the case which the hon. Gentleman has in mind. I will do what I can in that particular case. Once a man leaves Remploy and goes to full employment, he is to some extent out of the field. [Hon. Members: "Why?"] If he comes back, we shall always try to do our best.

On whose advice has the hon. Gentleman changed his policy of keeping people in the employ of Remploy, in view of the promise that was given in the early stages of the development of the Remploy factories?

There has been no change at all in the policy of Remploy. Men who go off sick will always be reengaged if that is at all possible.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will consult with other Government Departments to ensure that wherever possible continuous orders are placed with Remploy Limited.

All Government contracting Departments are required to give Remploy, and other organisations employing severely disabled persons, some preference in the allocation of orders. There is frequent consultation between my officers and those of Government Departments concerned, who are fully conscious of the range of goods manufactured by Remploy and endeavour to place as many orders as possible with it.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary see whether more cannot be done in this direction? One of the heavy overheads of Remploy is the sales organisation. If it could cut down that organisation and rely more upon Government contracts, it would obviously assist Remploy.

asked the Minister of Labour what machinery is provided for joint consultation by Remploy Limited.

I understand that in each Remploy factory there is a joint consultative committee consisting of representatives of managerial, supervisory, and production grades, which meet monthly.

Again, will the Parliamentary Secretary look at this matter? If he can improve this consultative machinery it will assist Remploy in the job which it is trying to do.

I shall look at it, but the difficulty is that this matter lies entirely within the managerial responsibility of Remploy.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary look at the question of setting up consultative machinery on a national basis, so that those employed in the Remploy factories may have an opportunity of consulting their fellow-workers elsewhere, and perhaps concerting an agreed policy in a better atmosphere?

I will examine that suggestion.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that difficulty in meeting delivery dates is a major obstacle to the expansion of business in some departments of Remploy Limited; and what consideration was given to this factor in his Department's recent decision not to expand the number of trainees.

Difficulties in meeting delivery dates occur principally in jobs specially ordered rather than in repetitive work on long runs of steady production. In the former class of work Remploy is inevitably at a disadvantage as compared with ordinary firms, because of the longer time it takes to teach severely disabled workers a new job. These inherent difficulties are fully recognised in planning Remploy's work and labour force.

I appreciate that the Minister fully understands the difficulties of Remploy, but is it not a fact that on the special orders to which he refers Remploy can very often do long runs, and if it is unable to continue recruitment and training, and has to sell commercially, it is very likely to be handicapped? Will he regard this as a major point about which hon. Members in all parts of the House are concerned?

I certainly will.

asked the Minister of Labour the value of government and of local authority contracts with Remploy in 1954 as compared with 1950.

The value of orders received by Remploy Ltd., from Government Departments in 1950–51 was £522,864, and from local authorities £23,749. The figures for 1953–54 were £817,343 for Government contracts and approximately £45,000 for local authorities.

Can my right hon. Friend not do more to encourage local authorities to give more help to the severely disabled?

I think the figures show that perhaps local authorities might do more. I will do what I can, and I hope hon. Members will do anything they can in their own constituencies.

asked the Minister of Labour what changes are suggested with regard to the Burnley Remploy factory; how far the policy of economising will lead to the factory not being used to its full capacity; and how many of the disabled persons now employed there are to be discharged.

No change is intended with regard to the Burnley Remploy factory, except that the numbers may possibly decrease slightly in the next few months owing to non-replacement of wastage; no severely disabled persons now employed there will be discharged on grounds of redundancy.

Does the Minister realise how much that reply will be appreciated in Burnley?

Will the Minister please define the term which has frequently been used, and which he has again used in his reply—the term "severely disabled"? What does it mean?

Certainly. We classify disabled persons in two classes. We classify the more lightly disabled under Section 1, and the severely disabled, who are not fit for normal employment in ordinary industry, we classify under Section 2. Both are employed by Remploy, but Remploy primarily exists to employ the severely disabled.

asked the Minister of Labour how his Department's present plans for dealing with the Remploy Scheme will affect numbers employed at the Remploy factory in Plymouth.

It is expected that the numbers at the Remploy factory in Plymouth may decrease slightly owing to non-replacement of wastage.

Does the Minister realise that there is great pressure on the employment exchange at Plymouth to get an increase and that this is a very severe problem there? Cannot he make some better plans?

I will keep the matter under review. I hope that the present phase in Remploy generally is only a temporary phase.

asked the Minister of Labour how many notified vacancies exist in the Principality of Wales and in the County of Glamorgan, respectively; and the numbers a year ago.

The numbers of vacancies notified to employment exchanges and youth employment offices, and remaining unfilled at 9th February, 1955, were 9,784 in Wales and 4,788 in Glamorganshire. The corresponding figures for 10th February, 1954, were 6,799 and 3,223 respectively.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that this is a very healthy position, in view of the fact that there seems to be a large number of vacancies which cannot easily be filled out of the normal supply of fit people? Will my hon. Friend give special attention to the possibility of filling as large a number as possible of these posts with those who are partially disabled?

Yes, I certainly will. I am giving the House figures on that point later.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that these conditions do not exist in North Wales, because in my constituency more than 9 per cent. of the insured population are out of work? What steps is his Department taking to relieve unemployment?

If the hon. Gentleman will put that Question down, I shall be only too pleased to give him an answer.

asked the Minister of Labour how many notified vacancies exist in the Borough of Barry; and what was the number a year ago.

One hundred and eighty at 9th February, 1955, compared with 139 at 10th February, 1954.

In connection with vacancies in Barry, my hon. Friend will probably recall that he has particulars of two or three disabled men which I have sent to him. Will he please pay particular attention to them?

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will set up an advisory committee representing employers, trade unions, medical and other bodies involved in the care and employment of the severely disabled to advise him on matters affecting Remploy Limited and the employment of disabled persons generally.

The National Advisory Council on the Employment of the Disabled, which is constituted, under the Disabled Persons (Employment) Act, 1944, on the same lines as those suggested by the hon. Member, can and does advise on these matters. A committee of this Council is specially concerned with the provision of sheltered employment by Remploy Limited, local authorities, and voluntary organisations.

Will not the Parliamentary Secretary look at this matter again? Does he not think that the Committee which inquired into the N.C.B. did a good job? In view of the inherent difficulties facing Remploy, and in view of the many Questions which have been put about it, does not the hon. Gentleman think that such a committee of investigation could do a useful job of work?

The hon. Gentleman probably knows that the Organisation and Methods Division of the Treasury is carrying out an investigation now, at Remploy's request. We should not burden Remploy with too many investigations.

Is not this much more a question of the day-to-day running of the various enterprises of Remploy? Could my hon. Friend give his mind to devising some means so that the most efficient standards of production can be attained to enable the products to find a place in competitive markets, and to provide permanent employment for those who need it?

Yes, I will certainly do so.

Will the hon. Gentleman take note that no one in this House wants to prevent Remploy doing a useful job of work, but that there is great apprehension in all parts of the House as to its efficiency? Will he consult his right hon. and learned Friend to see whether it is possible to have an outside committee of investigation, similar to the Fleck Committee, to which my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland, North (Mr. Willey) referred, and which reported on the National Coard Board, in order to produce efficiency in the administration?

I appreciate what the right hon. Gentleman has said. I will certainly consult my right hon. and learned Friend. We are all interested in trying to get Remploy as efficient as we can.

asked the Minister of Labour the latest total of severely disabled people who are unemployed, and the corresponding total for a year earlier.

The number of severely disabled people registered as unemployed on 17th January, 1955, was 4,575 as compared with 5,592 on 18th January, 1954.

Does that mean that the field from which Remploy draws its recruits has gone down in the last year or two?

I am glad to say that over recent years the field has decreased. For example, in 1949 there were no fewer than 11,500 people registered as unemployed. It is very gratifying to all of us that the number has fallen.

Does it not also suggest that many of the gravely disabled persons have died in the meantime?

That is possible, but I might add that it also shows the work done by Remploy in getting nearly 200 men last year out of Remploy and back into full-time fit employment.

asked the Minister of Labour what steps he is taking to study and limit radiation hazards in the health of workers exposed to ionising radiations; and whether he will consult the Minister of Fuel and Power about the occupational health problem that may arise as a result of the programme of nuclear power development.

The precautions taken at factories to protect workers from ionising radiations are carefully watched by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Factories, which is notified by the Atomic Energy Authority of all consignments of radio-isotopes supplied by it to factories. The Chief Inspector has also issued an advisory booklet on precautions in the use of ionising radiations in industry.

I am at present considering, in consultation with the Chief Inspector, whether in addition to the general requirements of the Factories Acts, more detailed Special Regulations would be desirable for factories using ionising radiations. In all such matters I have the benefit of the expert advice of a Radiological Advisory Panel, of the statutory Advisory Committee appointed under the Radioactive Substances Act, 1948, and of the Atomic Energy Authority itself.

As regards the projected atomic power stations, I am in consultation with the Minister of Fuel and Power regarding the measures that will be necessary for the protection of the health of the workers.

While thanking the hon. Gentleman for that important reply, may I ask him if the booklet can be made available in the Library to Members of the House? May I also ask if his Department and the Ministry of Fuel and Power will make sure that this time the Ministry of Fuel and Power does not make the mistake which was made 40 years ago in the mining industry, when we believed that dust was almost harmless, while today we are reaping the ghastly harvest of pneumoconiosis as a result of it; and will he keep alive this research into the health of workers exposed to ionising radiations?

I will have a copy of the booklet put in the Library, and I am very much obliged to the hon. Gentleman for raising this matter. We will do our best to get this very difficult technical matter put right.

asked the Minister of Labour what change has been effected in his policy for retaining members of his permanent staff beyond 60 years of age.

There has been no recent change in this policy.

Can the hon. Gentleman explain the situation that has arisen in Carlisle, where the manager, at the age of 62, has been retired when fit and able and there is work for him to do? Does not it appear that the Minister is not practising what he preaches to other employers?

The hon. Gentleman was good enough to tell me about that case, and I do not deny that there are other cases of this kind. If I give some figures to the House, I think that Members will understand the position. The total staff of my Ministry in January, 1947, was 41,492. Its staff today—in this month—is 23,178. In other words, it is now lower than it was before the war. One cannot make that terrific contraction without causing redundancies, but that does not conflict at all with our policy of employing people as long as there are jobs for them to do.

asked the Minister of Labour the percentage shortage of workers in London Docks; and what steps are being taken to recruit more workers.

The average daily labour shortage in London Docks during the first three weeks in February was approximately 0·7 per cent. of the number of workers on the Port Register. I understand that the London Dock Labour Board has already recruited 41 new workers and instructed a further 155 to report for duty as soon as they are able to do so.

Is my hon. Friend aware that a constituent of mine recently received some goods which took only 28 days to come from Hong Kong by sea but took a further 22 days to go from London Docks to Clerkenwell—only five miles? Can that be explained by a shortage of labour, or is there another reason?

I could not answer that question without notice.

asked the Minister of Labour what representations he has received recently concerning an inquiry into the Dock Labour Scheme; and what action he proposes to take thereon.

Representations were made to my right hon. and learned Friend in November last by the National Association of Port Employers suggesting that the time had arrived when there should be an investigation into the operation of the Dock Labour Scheme. In accordance with the undertaking given by Lord Munster in another place on 16th November, the National Association of Port Employers and the various interested trade unions have recently been invited to discuss with my officers the desirability of instituting an inquiry into the workings of the National Dock Labour Scheme.

asked the Minister of Labour how many visits were made by Her Majesty's Inspectors of Factories to copper refineries in Prescot, Lancashire, for the purpose of inspecting the effects of cadmium fumes on the health of the workers, from 1946, to November 1952, and since the latter date, respectively.

Detailed records are not available prior to 1949. Between 1949 and 1952, seven visits were made by Her Majesty's Inspectors of Factories to the copper refinery in Prescot. Between 1953 and the present date, visits have numbered 17.

Is it not a fact that the hon. Member's Department did nothing at all about countering the effects of cadmium poisoning, which has killed quite a number of my constituents, until this matter was raised at the end of 1953?

No, that is not so at all. We have been watching this matter for a considerable time. I do not accept the right hon. Gentleman's figures about the number of people who have been killed because, as I said last week, we have not had reported to us any deaths from cadmium poisoning.

asked the Minister of Labour what machinery exists for ensuring that the deaths through cadmium poisoning of workers employed at copper refineries are reported to his Department; and whether he is satisfied that the machinery results in the notification of all such deaths.

Any death resulting from acute cadmium poisoning at premises under the Factories Acts would be notifiable as an accident in accordance with those Acts, and satisfactory machinery exists for such notification. The question of ill effects from long-continued exposure to small amounts of cadmium is being carefully studied in the light of the recent report prepared by a member of the staff of the Medical Research Council and other available evidence, both positive and negative.

Is the hon. Member not aware that the reason some of these deaths were not reported to his Department was that this disease is not generally known about in this country? Is he aware that I have obtained no fewer than six death certificates from registrars showing cadmium poisoning to be the cause of death, and that these have not been notified to his Department? Is he further aware—he who denies that these deaths have been taking place because of cadmium poisoning—that a post-mortem which was carried out on the body of a constituent of mine showed that it was heavily filled with cadmium as a result of employment at this factory?

I should be obliged if the right hon. Gentleman would let me have that evidence. I will undertake that it will be considered when we look into the report.

Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that all this evidence was handed to his right hon. and learned Friend in December, 1953, when I asked him to institute the inquiry which is now being held? Is he aware that the very day on which I saw his right hon. and learned Friend, another of my constituents collapsed at work as a result of cadmium poisoning, and died a week later?

That is not within my immediate knowledge, but the point is that we have now had Dr. Bonnell's report. We have had it for only about a fortnight, but we are giving it most urgent attention, and I hope that we shall be able to make some progress.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many men have been recruited to the police force during the 12 months ended 31st December, 1954; how many police officers have left during the same period before reaching retirement age other than for reasons of ill-health; and by what number the present strength of the total police force falls below establishment.

During 1954, 4,790 men joined police forces in England and Wales. Two thousand three hundred and twenty-one left before qualifying for an ordinary retirement pension, but I cannot say how many of these retired for reasons of ill-health. On 31st January last, these police forces were 8,832 men short of the authorisedmale establishment of 72,844.

Would my right hon. and gallant Friend agree that the figures which he has given about the shortage and the number below establishment reveals an unsatisfactory state of affairs? As service in the police force calls for high standards of health, intelligence, and integrity, does he think that the present pay and conditions of the service discourage new recruits?

Certain proposals relating to the terms of duty and so forth of the police are at present being considered by the Police Council. As for the first part of the supplementary question, this shortage is, of course, a very serious and difficult problem, particularly in the Metropolis, but it is worthy of note that the intake of 4,790 men in 1954 compares with an average intake before the war of 3,000.

Will the Minister tell us whether any inquiries in the police forces which lose men before they have served their full time reveal a reason as to why those men are leaving? Is any record kept so that we could assess whether there is some special reason throughout the country for men leaving the force before they draw their pensions so that, if there is, it can be considered and rectified?

I think there is information on that point, and I will look into what the hon. Lady has said. There are, of course, all sorts of contributory factors. The standard required today is very high and it is gratifying that, with that high standard, the intake is higher than before the war.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why no adequate street guide is given to constables in the Metropolitan Police area.

All recruits are supplied with a copy of the best available London street guide of pocket size.

Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman consult some of the officers who spend a very unprofitable time in the street defending his fiat as to whether that is so, and whether they have street guides? Is he aware that nearly every Metropolitan Police officer has to buy a guide himself? Does he not think that is a scandal?

I was not aware of that. I thought that every Metropolitan police constable, apart from special constables, did have a copy of the best London street guide. So far as I am concerned, there is no need for me to ask, as I do know my way home.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he is proposing to take, in view of the increasing number of instances of hooliganism in London.

The number of persons arrested in the Metropolitan police district for offences classifiable as hooliganism—for example, assaults, malicious damage, or insulting words or behaviour—has increased from 3,184 in 1949 to 4,985 in 1954, but the Commissioner of Police tells me that, in his view, the greater number of arrests is due in the main to the particular attention which the police have been giving to this problem, rather than to any appreciable increase in rowdyism. The Commissioner of Police tells me that, in his opinion, the steps at present being taken are adequate to deal with the problem.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what further consideration he has given to the practice by which a juvenile charged with an offence was held in remand by the police for seven days without the opportunity of seeing a magistrate before being charged at Chelsea Juvenile Court on 7th April, 1954; and what steps he proposes to take to prevent any similar cases arising in the future.

This boy, who was not bailed, remained in the remand home until the next sitting of the appropriate juvenile court. Such cases are infrequent, but I am examining the possibility of arranging for the sitting of a special London juvenile court when they occur.

Can the Home Secretary assure us that in the meantime, until these arrangements come into operation, it will at least be found possible to bring in a juvenile magistrate on these cases, so that the boy concerned can see a magistrate within 24 hours? Adults are not treated in this way, and it does not seem fair or reasonable that juveniles need be, even if the magistrate's court does not sit for another week.

The maximum period which can elapse is seven days, which, I think, is too long. That is why we are trying to arrange for the sitting of a special juvenile court when necessary. The vast majority of juveniles arrested are, of course, bailed. I will, however, deal with this matter as soon as I possibly can.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that, in accordance with regulations issued by the Metropolitan Police, taxicabs in the London area may only display the words "For Hire" on taxi vehicles; and whether he will give instructions to ensure that, in view of the fact that it is a shorter word and more readily understood by all people, the word "Taxi" may alternatively be used.

I understand that the sign "Taxi" was superseded because of complaints that it did not show whether the cab was free or engaged. The present sign, which has been compulsory since 1st January, 1951, does so, and I do not think any useful purpose would be served by the addition of the word "Taxi."

Is my right hon. and gallant Friend not aware that a taxi indicates that it is free at night by having the words "For Hire" illuminated and the flag in the vertical position? Therefore, the question of whether "Taxi" or "For Hire" is displayed makes no difference. Is not the word "Taxi" commonly used in all towns except London?

I would only say in reply that, as far as I know, there is no other vehicle for hire on the streets of London apart from the taxi.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has compiled a list of common wild birds under Section 2 (4) (c) of the Protection of Birds Act, 1954.

I have this matter under urgent consideration in consultation with my Advisory Committee, but the list is not yet ready for publication.

Does my right hon. and gallant Friend realise that these lists will have to be circulated to local authorities, at any rate within the next month? Will he urge a speedy decision?

Yes, most certainly. I can promise my hon. Friend that the lists will be published very soon.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he now has an announcement to make regarding passports for day trips by steamer to the Continent.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is now in a position to reply to the representations made by the deputation from Brighton and other South Coast towns concerning the abolition of passport requirements for day trips across the Channel.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is now able to make a statement about passport-free day trips to France from Eastbourne and other South Coast resorts.

As I explained to the members of the deputation introduced by my hon. Friend the Member for the Pavilion Division of Brighton (Mr. Teeling), the difficulties in the way of authorising the resumption of no-passport excursions are serious, since the passport remains the only effective instrument of control for immigration and security purposes, and I could not contemplate authorising the running of such excursions on the basis of the pre-war system which was entirely inadequate for present conditions.

As at present advised, I could not agree to the introduction of any new arrangements at those ports which are not approved for the purposes of the Aliens Order, but I propose to arrange for officers of my Department to discuss with representatives of the shipping companies the possibility of introducing, in the approved ports, alternative arrangements on the lines proposed by the deputation which I received. In the light of these discussions I shall, in consultation with my colleagues, give urgent consideration to the proposals.

Will my right hon. and gallant Friend say whether it is possible for new arrangements to be made for this season, for next year, or when they can be made?

We are still discussing very important details and I cannot say yet when any change will be possible. My aim is that if it can be done it shall be done this year.

Is the Home Secretary aware that we appreciate the efforts which he has been making to try to re-establish the pre-war arrangement for day trips to the Continent? Is he aware that in those places where security arrangements were available it is a fact that the services which have been provided for upwards of 55 years by Messrs. P. & A. Campbell, Ltd., do not now possess security arrangements? Unless some sort of alternative may be come to, the company will have wholly to withdraw the services. Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman consider the possibilities—[Hon. Members: "Speech."] This is an important matter; I make no apology for the length of this supplementary question. May I ask the right hon. and gallant Gentleman if he will give consideration to the possible use of the security ports for the return voyage—that is, that the services may start from one port and return through the other?

As I said, my officers will be discussing the matter with the shipping companies very soon. There are difficulties about applying a control only at the entry port. Often the departure port is also very important.

Can my right hon. and gallant Friend let us know how soon we are likely to hear the announcement, as for places like Brighton, Eastbourne, and Hastings, plans for the whole of the summer season have to be made in the very immediate future?

I will certainly do everything I can as soon as possible. I know how important it is to get the matter decided quickly, as the season will soon be starting.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will send a circular to all justices' clerks drawing attention to the desirability of sending to the editors of local newspapers circulating in the area of their courts a postal notification, giving the date, time, and place of each ordinary and special court, including juvenile courts.

I have no information in my possession to suggest that there is need for action on the lines suggested, but if the hon. Member will let me have particulars of any difficulty which has come to his notice, I shall be glad to look into it.

Whilst thanking the Home Secretary for that answer, may I ask him to bear in mind that my Question expresses the unanimous view of the provincial Press, which feels that it is absolutely essential that there should be no possibility of a secret court anywhere in this country? Would the right hon. and gallant Gentleman be prepared to receive a deputation on the subject?

I am prepared to receive any suggestions from the hon. Member. I hardly think it necessary to have a deputation, as I have no information that so far as the rest of the country is concerned the arrangements are not very well known locally. Since the passing of the 1952 Act it has not been necessary for public notice of sittings to be given.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department his present policy with regard to the rehabilitation in civil employment of discharged prisoners; and what steps are taken by his Department to supplement the activities of the Discharged Prisoners' Aid Society in this matter.

My policy is to seek every means to secure the rehabilitation of discharged prisoners in civil employment. Prisoners are invited to make use of the employment exchanges of the Ministry of Labour and National Service, which make special efforts on behalf of all prisoners who wish to use their services. These efforts are supplemented by those of the Central After-Care Association, the National Association of Discharged Prisoners' Aid Societies, and the local discharged prisoners' aid societies. The procedure followed is set out in the Report of the Committee on Discharged Prisoners' Aid Societies presented to Parliament in June, 1953.

In order to assist the societies in their work, I have already implemented five of the seven recommendations of this Committee, and, as I informed the House on 3rd February, I propose this year to start implementing the remaining two. I also attach importance to the scheme for giving suitable prisoners vocational training in skilled trades, which leads many of them to obtain the certificates of the City and Guilds of London Institute.

Whilst appreciating that answer, may I ask if the Home Secretary realises that the present method of assisting ex-prisoners to rehabilitate themselves is totally inadequate? There have been several cases of ex-prisoners who, on release, have come out of prison with only a few pence, with no prospects of employment, with every prejudice against them and obviously with no stamps on their employment card. In the interests of deterring ex-prisoners from returning to a life of crime, will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman see that the whole system is reviewed?

I have never pretended, nor have my predecessors pretended, that the system is perfect, but it is improving. Some of the recommendations I have put into effect should do a great deal to assist, particularly that in regard to the option of the governor to pay the fare to the ex-prisoner's destination. Implementation of the last two, I hope, will be started this year.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how far his statistics show that the system of preventive detention is acting as a deterrent to crime or in the rehabilitation of criminals.

The effect of a particular type of sentence can be judged statistically only by the number of re-convictions. By 31st December, 1954, 211 men and 10 women had been released from sentences of preventive detention imposed under the Criminal Justice Act, 1948: of these, 97 men and one woman had been reconvicted of further offences by that date. This experience is too limited for any considered assessment to be based upon it.

I appreciate the last part of that answer, but is the Home Secretary aware that sentences of 10 years' preventive detention have been passed on old offenders for crimes which consisted of the theft of a few shillings, and that there can be no possibility of rehabilitation in such sentences? Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman consider making some differentiation, as regards both sentence and treatment, between these miserable wretches and the hardened criminals who commit crimes of violence?

The question of sentence is, of course, outside my jurisdiction altogether. As far as preventive detention is concerned, it must be remembered, when considering the number of those who go back to prison, that these are to a large extent habitual criminals, that the fact that about 1,200 habitual criminals are kept out of harm's way is a good thing and that 40 per cent. of them so far have not gone back at all.

Will the Home Secretary investigate the large number of men serving sentences of preventive detention in Parkhurst, on the Isle of Wight, when I think he will find that the bitterness that these long-term preventive detention sentences create, with no hope whatever of there being full remission of sentence, cannot possibly help the rehabilitation of these men?

That matter has, of course, as the hon. Member knows, always been kept under close review, and I shall continue to keep it under close review.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will reconsider his decision to prevent Mr. Pietro Devoti from living in this country with his wife, in view of the fact that she is a British subject resident in the United Kingdom.

No, Sir. As the hon. Member is aware, immigration to the United Kingdom is necessarily restricted, and in the absence of special circumstances I should not feel justified in allowing a foreigner to settle here solely because of his marriage to a British woman of foreign parentage, who has returned to her parents' country to marry and who has herself spent over half her life in her husband's country.

Is the Home Secretary aware that this is not the only case, and that other British-born women who live here are in a similar position? Where are the high moral standards that we talked about in the case of the Russian wives? Does this principle apply only to British wives and not to British men wanting to bring their foreign wives here? Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that the woman in question has four children in this country, and expects another shortly?

There is no analogy whatever between this case and the Russian wives: they were prevented from coming to join their husbands. This woman has not been prevented from joining her husband.