asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how the grant payments made for water supply and sewerage schemes in Berkshire in 1954 compare with those in 1951.

In 1951 £44,700 was paid in grant for water supply schemes and £5,625 for sewerage schemes. In 1954 the figures were £24,800 for water and £73,575 for sewerage.

Can the Minister assure us that it is the Government's intention to press on with this good performance so that all the Berkshire villages can in the next few years look forward to new and better sanitation?

I hope as more urgent water schemes are completed it will be possible to do more and more for the more urgent village sewerage schemes. That is what we are trying to do.

Do the figures for 1954 include water supply and sewerage for the new town of Bracknell?

I think that is a separate question.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how many claims have been established for the purposes of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1954; the total value of the claims; and the total area represented by the claim holdings.

Compensation under the Town and Country Planning Act, 1954, is based upon claims established under the 1947 Act. These had to be submitted before July, 1949. In respect of England and Wales there were some 415,000 of such established claims representing a total development value of about £350 million. Information about the area to which they relate is, I am afraid, not available.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for such information as he has given us, but would it not be desirable to know the area covered? As compensation will not be paid except in respect of these claims, surely it is desirable to know what area of the country is covered by the possibility of compensation?

I do not know what instructions were given to the Central Land Board by the Labour Government but they did not, in fact, ask for particulars of acreage in relation to claims.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what limit he has decided to impose on the size of electric signs on the South Bank of the River Thames.

No hard-and-fast standards are applied.

Is the Minister aware that the Lambeth Borough Council has been trying to impose a limit of 3 ft. on the size of the lettering on signs, and that in every case where an aggrieved advertiser has appealed against that the Minister has decided against the council? Has he any idea to what limit these signs can go—or is the sky the limit? Does he know that an application is pending for a sign with letters 13½ ft. high?

Having, like the hon. and gallant Member, once been a Member for Lambeth, I can assure him that I have no prejudice against it.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will circularise local authorities recommending that in the case of particularly distressing cases of mothers suffering from mental and nervous breakdown promoted by overcrowding they should establish joint committees with adjacent authorities in order to deal with these cases according to their urgent medical need and not according to their residence.

I have great sympathy with those suffering from the evils of overcrowding and I am taking active steps to help local authorities in the large cities in tackling the problem of urban congestion.

That is a general reply to a quite specific question dealing with a small but very distressing type of housing case. Would not the Minister, therefore, consider the proposal, which is implicit in my Question, that where there is an unusual chronic case which may lead to the mental breakdown of the person involved, he should recommend that the borough concerned should get in touch with neighbouring boroughs to see whether they have accommodation for that particular kind of case?

I have as much sympathy as has the hon. Member in connection with this problem, but I think that local authorities can be relied upon to cooperate with one another to relieve cases of special hardship, and I must be a little careful not to overload them with advice.

Does not the Minister sometimes make recommendations to local authorities?

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how many new houses have been built in England and Wales from October, 1951, until the latest available date.

Between October, 1951, and March, 1955, 903,563 have been completed in England and Wales.

While thanking my right hon. Friend and congratulating him and his predecessor on this magnificent performance, may I ask whether he has the figures available for the whole of Great Britain for the same period?

I have not the precise figures but I can tell my hon. and gallant Friend that since this Government have been in office well over a million houses have been completed in Great Britain.

May I take it that the figure given by the Minister refers not to houses which were commenced after October, 1951, but to those completed after that date, many of which—and perhaps he can tell me how many—were begun before that date?

Of course it includes houses which were started before October, 1951, but the position at the end of March, 1955, is that the carry-over is considerably greater than that which we inherited from the Labour Party.

Could this Question by any chance have been associated with the coming Election?

I suspected that the supplementary question by the right hon. Member for Battersea, North (Mr. Jay) had some connection with it.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government approximately how many local authorities have made available for purchase houses owned by them; and how many have been sold.

Up to the end of March, 3,387 council houses have been sold by 288 local authorities in England and Wales.

Should I be correct in assuming that the anticipation on the part of some authorities was that a much larger percentage of tenants would apply for the purchase of their houses?

I am afraid I cannot say what their assumptions were.

Does not the Minister agree, in view of the hullabaloo made about this when the Government introduced its proposal to sell these houses, that these figures show what an enormous flop it has been?

If I remember, much of the hullabaloo was made by the hon. Member.

Having regard to the fact that in the Tory Party's Campaign Guide for 1955—the new encyclopaedia—page 190, it is stated that brick production has risen by only 7 per cent; and having regard to the fact that the right hon. Gentleman takes such pride in his house building achievements since 1951, can the Minister tell us what the Tory Government have neglected to build? If housing production has risen by so much while brick production has risen by only 7 per cent., what have the Government failed to build which they should have built?

I cannot see the connection between the hon. Member's supplementary question and the Question on the Order Paper, but in view of it I think I am entitled to say that I regard it as inconceivable that any party with such a record should fail to be returned at the next General Election.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that the figures relating to the unemployment of men and women, respectively, in the City of Aberdeen show that they were greater in February, this year than at 31st; December, 1953, or 31st December, 1954; if he will make a statement indicating the cause of this rise; what the figures are in each trade to the latest convenient date; and what steps he is taking to reduce this unemployment.

Yes, Sir. There was the usual seasonal increase after December in Aberdeen as elsewhere in the country, and it is now giving place to the usual improvement. I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a table of the numbers unemployed in each of the main industries in Aberdeen for the months of February, April and December of 1953 and 1954, and February and April of this year, from which the hon. and learned Member will see that the February, 1955, figure is lower than the corresponding figures for 1954 and 1953.

May I congratulate the Minister on giving a factual rather than a propagandist answer—unlike his predecessor—to this Question, and may I ask how much of the diminution in employment in Aberdeen is due to the restrictions which this Government placed on raw materials for the industries in Aberdeen?

That is another question. I think the hon. and learned Member had better look at the vast table of figures which I have got for him.

Is the Minister aware that this cannot be fobbed off as a seasonal increase? Is he aware that the monthly average unemployment in Scotland over the last three years has been about 4,500 more than in the last three years of the Labour Government?

I did not fob it off as a seasonal increase, but every hon. Member knows that unemployment is higher in the winter than in the summer.

asked the Minister of Labour the total cost of the Factory Inspectorate for the last available year and the cost in 1938.

The expenditure by the Ministry of Labour and National Service on the salaries, travelling costs, etc., of the Factory Inspectorate for the financial year commencing 1st April, 1954, was £727,400. Comparable expenditure by the Home Office for the year commencing 1st April, 1938, was £217,169. Additional costs were incurred by other Government Departments as allied services in respect of premises, stationery, etc., but the figures are not available.

Would the hon. Member accept the view that, despite the significant rise in the cost since 1938, which probably has only kept pace with the rise in the cost of living, there is a good deal of evidence that the Inspectorate needs to be strengthened both numerically and in status if it is to do all the work which is required of it?

As for strengthening the Inspectorate numerically, as I think the hon. Members knows, it is now very nearly up to strength. I am entirely in agreement with him about raising its status.

What is the size of the establishment today and how many inspectors are required to bring it up to its establishment?

All I can say without notice is that the Inspectorate is only a few under establishment at the present moment. We hope to bring it up to its full establishment.

Could my hon. Friend estimate what would be the cost of the non-factory inspectorate which would be required for the implementation of the Gowers Report?

Not, I am afraid, without notice.

asked the Minister of Labour to what causes he attributes the increase in the accident rate in the building industry by 50 per cent. between 1948 and 1953 in spite of the introduction of his Regulations in 1948; and how he proposes to lower the rate at which men are injured in this industry.

The apparent increase in the accident rate at building operations can be attributed, in part at least, to the efforts constantly being made by the Factory Inspectorate to secure a better understanding by employers of their obligation to report accidents in accordance with the provisions of the Factories Act. Fatal accidents, which are reported almost without exception, have not increased.

The accident rate will be reduced by better observance of the safety Regulations on the part of employers and workers, and the Factory Inspectorate will continue to give close attention to ensuring that these obligations are understood and complied with. The Chief Inspector is now carrying out a special investigation of accidents on certain building operations to see whether any further action can usefully be taken.

While thanking the Parliamentary Secretary for his comprehensive reply, may I ask him whether, in view of the fact that these Regulations are perhaps the most advanced which we have for any industry, the fact that there has been an apparently significant increase in the accident rate suggests that there is again and again a breach of the Regulations? Will he change his mind about safety committees, and have their existence enforced by statutory methods rather than leave their existence entirely to voluntary creation?

No, Sir. The problem in the building industry, as we see it, is one of getting the existing Regulations properly carried out, and that is a matter for my inspectors.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that both the frequency and severity rates of accidents have increased, and that those in the building trade attribute a measure of that increase to the fact that there is a greater degree of sub-contracting work done now, so that the main contractor has not a responsibility for plant and equipment, while many of the sub-contractors are working on a shoe string with equipment?

I should not like to accept that as the main cause by any means.

Can the Minister take steps to bring the existence of these Regulations to the knowledge of those concerned in the building industry, because there has been evidence in recent cases of ignorance of their terms and conditions? Wider publicity for the Regulations might make some contribution to a solution of this problem. Further, if in recent years there have been prosecutions for non-compliance with the building Regulations, what has been the result of them? There is disturbing evidence of widespread failure to comply with the Regulations and it is important to know what action has been taken.

I certainly cannot reply to the second part of that supplementary question without notice. As far as the first part is concerned, the Chief Inspector is now carrying out a special investigation to see what steps we can take to make the Regulations more widely known.

asked the Minister of Labour the numbers of unemployed workers in the furniture industry at the latest convenient dates in the United Kingdom and in the Tottenham-Edmonton area, respectively.

At 14th March, the latest date for which figures for the United Kingdom are available, there were 2,111 persons, whose last employment was in the furniture and upholstery industry, registered as wholly unemployed, and 3,113 registered as temporarily stopped, at the employment exchanges. On 18th April, the corresponding figures for the area covered by the Tottenham, Wood Green and Leyton Employment Exchanges were 127 wholly unemployed and 447 temporarily stopped.

Is the Minister aware that the figures of unemployment in the furniture industry are rising? Is he now discussing with his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade some relaxation of the hire-purchase control Regulations, in accordance with the request made by both sides of the furniture industry?

The position is that employment in the furniture industry is better than it was at this time last year. I quite agree that the temporarily-stopped position is worse, although not very much worse. We must wait and see how the position develops over the next few weeks.

Does the Parliamentary Secretary attribute the rise in unemployment in the furniture industry to the recent restrictions imposed on hire purchase?

It is very difficult to say. Temporary unemployment is not unusual at this time of the year in the furniture industry.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is satisfied that Sutherland County Council is acting in accordance with Section 48 of the Housing (Scotland) Act, 1950, in view of the circumstances outlined in a letter of 2nd February addressed to the Joint Under-Secretary of State by the hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland.

Under this Section, it is primarily for the county council itself to determine when it should inspect its district and submit proposals for putting an end to overcrowding. Having regard to the good housing progress being made in the county, I would not feel justified in interfering in the matter.

Is it not the case that my letter dated 2nd February still remains unanswered in regard to the very serious overcrowding of a family consisting of a man, wife and two children, who are living in two very small rooms? Is my right hon. Friend satisfied, as the county council apparently has no intention of allocating this family a house, that it is not his duty to do so?

I think my hon. Friend is well aware that Parliament handed over this duty to the local authorities, in connection with the allocation of new houses. According to my hon. Friend's letter to the Joint Under-Secretary of State on 2nd February, he admits that a house was offered, although it was some little way away, no doubt, and that it was refused. I have asked the county council for its observations.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the terms on which agreement has been reached between him and Glasgow Corporation in regard to the new town at Cumbernauld; and what plans he has in view to deal generally with Glasgow's overspill.

The corporation has agreed to pay the statutory rate contribution for 10 years in respect of each house at Cumbernauld let to a tenant nominated by the corporation. The corporation understands that I will ask it to make an additional payment in respect of such houses, if it is found that it has to make such additional payments to secure the provision of houses for its nominees in other areas. The exact amount of such additional payments at Cumbernauld would be negotiated later, but would not exceed one-third of the deficit on the undertaking. As regards further measures for dealing with Glasgow overspill, I have suggested a conference with the Corporation of Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Planning Advisory Committee, to be followed later by discussions with the local authorities concerned.

May I direct the right hon. Gentleman's attention to that part of the memorandum on this subject, which he kindly sent me, in which he points out that

"… the Cumbernauld project will not of itself be sufficient to provide an adequate number of houses to meet Glasgow's needs which can no longer be satisfied within the limits of the city itself."

The right hon. Gentleman further points out that

"… special legislation may be necessary to assist the promotion of arrangements between Glasgow and the receiving authorities for dealing with the problem."

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] I am quoting from the memorandum. May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in his reference to special legislation, he means to apply the New Towns Act to the overspill generally, as he is doing in the case of Cumbernauld?

I do not want to go into details at this stage, because delicate negotiations are going on, but the hon. Member can take it that legislation on the lines of the Town Development Act which is applicable to England and Wales may be necessary to deal with this very serious and pressing problem.

Would the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that it would be a tragedy if this new town became a mere dormitory for Glasgow and had no industry or economic basis for its own life? If there is to be a new town, will the right hon. Gentleman keep in mind the necessity of providing for the transfer of derelict factories from the overspill area?

The right hon. Gentleman is well aware that in the new town of East Kilbride we have been very successful in the matter to which he has referred. Cumbernauld is in the Development Area and is entitled to the facilities available under the Distribution of Industry Act.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will consider setting up an annexe to Golspie Secondary School in Lairg and Rogart schools, each with one resident teacher, supported by visiting specialists from Golspie, Dornoch, or Helmsdale, thus saving a number of pupils having to travel to and from Golspie each day, or to live there in a hostel or other lodgings, and avoiding the absenteeism, with loss of education, which is liable to happen at present.

This is primarily a matter for the Sutherland education authority, which, I understand, has called for a report on the existing arrangements for the provision of senior secondary education throughout the county. I shall be prepared to consider sympathetically any proposals it may make after consideration of the report.

Will the Secretary of State bear in mind that there is widespread discontent among the parents, who naturally want their children educated at home, as other people do, and who object to journeys of up to four hours a day by children going and coming between school and home?

According to my information, there is dissatisfaction in a certain quarter but, with the exception of that quarter, to which no doubt my hon. Friend refers, the general body of parents have not complained about the arrangements. Of course, I will consider any suggestions for improvement.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will now ask the Technical Committee representing the Corporation of Glasgow, the British Transport Commission and the Scottish Home Department to consider and report how best the danger of accidents can be effectively removed from known sites on the Forth and Clyde Canal, including the Glasgow branch.

The Technical Committee referred to was appointed to consider the particular problem of the Monkland Canal and it concluded that the only effective way of removing the danger of accidents was to fill in the waterway. This cannot, of course, be done where the use of a canal has not been discontinued. While, therefore, I sympathise with the hon. Member's anxieties, I do not think that any purpose would be served by setting up a further technical committee at this stage, more particularly as recommendations about the future of the Forth and Clyde Canal are made in the Report of the Board of Survey of Canals and Inland Waterways recently submitted to the British Transport Commission.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise that, as a result of the recommendations of the previous Report and the work carried out on the Monkland Canal, accidents were reduced? Does he realise that what is required is a committee to make suggestions of a similar temporary character in order to cut down the high death rate among children?

I sympathise with the hon. Member but, as I am sure he will readily admit, it is a very different matter where a canal is in use, because we cannot fill in such a canal. We all know the great attraction that a canal and any water has for children, but we cannot fill in the Forth and Clyde Canal. The British Transport Commission has received a Report on this matter. I will consider the hon. Member's suggestion but at present I am not satisfied that any useful purpose would be served.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland to make a statement regarding the remuneration of dentists and dental mechanics in Scotland.

The scale of fees for dentists in general practice under the National Health Service is common to dental practitioners in Scotland and in England and Wales. Regulations have been laid before Parliament cancelling, with effect from 1st May, 1955, the 10 per cent. reduction to which the 1949 scale has been subject since 1950. These dentists are required by the National Health Service Regulations to pay then-mechanics at rates not less favourable than those approved by the National Joint Council for the Craft of Dental Technicians.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether the scale of remuneration for dental mechanics is proving sufficient to attract into this employment the necessary number of workers?

I am afraid that I could not answer that question without notice, because that is not a matter with which I have to deal. They are paid at rates negotiated on the Whitley Council scales, which range from £380 to £670.

asked the Minister of Works if he is aware of the inadequate size and poor condition of the sports pavilion in Regent's Park, which provides only eight dressing-rooms for the 400 cricketers who play in the park at weekends; and if he will take steps to rebuild and enlarge it at an early date.

The pavilion will be enlarged and improved but I cannot hold out prospects of an early start on the work.

Does that mean that the right hon. Gentleman accepts financial responsibility for this work, and can he give some idea when work can be commenced on this pavilion, because the present arrangements are totally inadequate? Is it not a fact that the right hon. Gentleman's Department accepts fees from the users of the pavilion?

I am not sure about the fees. This is war damage and therefore we accept responsibility; but it is a big job costing £30,000, and it has to take its turn.

asked the Minister of Works how many agents of the American Federal Bureau of Investigation are employed in British atomic establishments; and on what duties they are engaged.

None, Sir.

Whilst welcoming the Minister's assurance that these arrangements are not being pursued, may I ask whether he can confirm that the United States Government have no longer any doubts about the adequacy of our security arrangements which prevent the fullest exchange of information between the United States Government and this country?

As the hon. and gallant Member knows, the Atomic Energy Authority denied 10 days ago that there was any truth in the story. There is no truth in it. We have, of course, discussed questions of procedure with regard to security, and, as far as I know, the Americans are quite satisfied.

asked the Secretary of State for War the number of men who enlisted on Regular engagements of three years with the Colours and four years with the Reserve during the period 1st November, 1951, to 31st March, 1952; the number of such men transferred to the Army Reserve during the period 1st November, 1954, to 31st March, 1955; and the number still serving with the Colours.

Figures of prolongations in the form requested will, as stated, be available during the month of May.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he gave the House an assurance that the figures would be available in May and that I put this Question on the Order Paper many weeks ago? Is it the fact that the right hon. Gentleman is now concealing the information because it will reveal that his three-year policy has completely failed?

I say again, as I have stated before, that the figures will be available during the month of May, as promised.

Is it not true to say that the number of men who are reengaging is declining, and can the right hon. Gentleman give the cause of that?

I think that the right hon. Gentleman would do well to await the figures.

Surely the right hon. Gentleman has been long enough in his office to have the figures in his head.

If the right hon. Gentleman had followed what the figures are about, he would realise that a special statistical research, which I am having carried out in order to make this matter abundantly clear, is necessary to arrive at them.

Is it not a fact that the estimate of 33⅓ per cent. prolongations will not be realised by half, that the right hon. Gentleman is perfectly well aware of that fact, and that he is grossly deceiving the House?

Order. The hon. Member should not say that another hon. or right hon. Member is grossly deceiving the House. It is out of order.

I gladly withdraw, Mr. Speaker, and substitute that the right hon. Gentleman is fully aware of the information but chooses not to tell the House about it.

I utterly and bitterly resent that. The hon. Member knows perfectly well that I have not received this information, and he knows perfectly well that he is not making a statement worthy of himself when he says that 33⅓ per cent. was a forecast. It was never a forecast. I have denied it time after time. It is an optimum.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we are delighted to see this new spirit, and that we hope it may do him some good in the Election?

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he has received the Report of the court of inquiry into the barn fire in Austria in which a number of British soldiers lost their lives; and whether he will make known its findings.

The proceedings of the court arrived yesterday and I have not yet had the opportunity to study them fully. It is, however, plain that there was not sufficient evidence to determine the actual cause of the fire. There is no evidence to show that any member of the 1st Battalion, Middlesex Regiment, was directly to blame.

Immediately it was known that men were trapped in the barn most courageous efforts were made to rescue them. I should like particularly to pay tribute to the gallant action of the late Second-Lieutenant Heming and Private Simpson, who went back into the room occupied by No. 7 Platoon in order to waken the men who were sleeping there. I would also like to express appreciation of the work carried out by the United States Forces and the aid given by Austrian civilians and gendarmerie.

In view of the many stories in the Press and the very considerable anxiety caused to parents by rumours, would the Secretary of State, when he has an opportunity fully to examine the Report, consider making it public?

When I have studied the Report I shall be only too pleased to make a statement giving a summary of it. The Report is one of a court of inquiry and is therefore privileged, but I will certainly give a summary of the facts.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he has examined the mess rules of the Officers' Mess, 2nd Basic Training Battalion, Royal Army Ordnance Corps, a copy of which has been sent to him; and if he will make a statement, with particular reference to sheet 3, paragraph 10, in which rules for dress on dining-in nights and regimental guest nights, contrary to Queen's Regulations, are stated to be in accordance with the direction of a War Office letter.

I have examined the mess rules, of which the hon. Gentleman sent me a copy. Paragraph 10 is not in accordance with Army Council Instructions and I have given orders that it shall be amended. As I would have said in reply to a previous Question, which in fact was not asked, I am specially drawing the attention of all commanding officers to the existing rules.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he has now verified the dates on which Mr. P. J. R. Breslin sold his Service dress, notified senior officers in his battalion that he had done so, and attended dinner in mess on regimental guest nights wearing battledress; and if he will make a statement.

Yes, Sir. I have gone into this question most carefully. On the first occasion when this happened, the commanding officer knew that Mr. Breslin had Service dress and asked the company commander to ensure that he wore it on future occasions. I am informed that the company commander did not speak to Mr. Breslin nor did he inform the commanding officer that Mr. Breslin had sold his Service dress. The commanding officer was, therefore, unaware of what had happened, and when Mr. Breslin appeared for a second time in battledress the commanding officer assumed that his instructions, sent through the company commander, had been ignored.

Was the commanding officer in order in the first instance in sending such a message instructing this officer to wear Service dress?

He was perfectly in order in asking the company commander to find out why Mr. Breslin had not worn his Service dress which he believed him to have—[HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"] That is perfectly in order, because he thought he had the dress but had purposely not worn it. As I pointed out, where the commanding officer was wrong was in the drawing up of the mess rules.

In order to clear up any misunderstanding, can the right hon. Gentleman say whether Service dress is paid for by the officer and, therefore, he is entitled to dispose of it as he pleases.

He was perfectly entitled to dispose of it as he pleased. That has never been in question.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he has now held a full inquiry into the conduct of the Deputy Assistant Chaplain General, Salisbury Plain District, in regard to the Reverend J. P. Stevenson, in accordance with paragraph 4 of the Report from the Committee of Privileges; and if he will made a statement.

I have inquired fully into this case and I am satisfied that when the Deputy Assistant Chaplain General, Salisbury Plain District, was informed that one of his subordinates had communicated with a Member of Parliament on a matter of which he was not previously aware, it was quite in order that he should interview this officer. I am also satisfied that the Deputy Assistant Chaplain General tried only to persuade Mr. Stevenson to make factual corrections to the information contained in the letter.

As regards the right of soldiers to communicate with Members of Parliament, I can only repeat the assurance which I gave the hon. Member at Question time last Tuesday.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether, in the holding of this inquiry, any statements were taken from Mr. Stevenson as well as other chaplains and officers concerned?

I have a great deal of information as a result of this inquiry and if there are any particular details which the hon. Gentleman wants perhaps he would let me know, but I am satisfied, as I have stated, that there was really no intention by the Deputy Assistant Chaplain General of interferring with the rights of Mr. Stevenson.

With all respect, while that is satisfactory as far as it goes, does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that the dissolution of Parliament is very near, and may I take it he does not wish to leave any impression at all that Mr. Stevenson was wrong in this matter? If there was a genuine misunderstanding perhaps he would say so, but will he completely clear and exonerate Mr. Stevenson of any improper conduct?

Yes, Sir, I would not for a moment deny that Mr. Stevenson was acting in accordance with what he believed to be his duty.

asked the Secretary of State for War what steps he is taking to make sure that all political broadcasts during the General Election are given in full on overseas services broadcasts wherever the British Army is employed overseas.

The complete series of political broadcasts which is to be given between 7th and 21st May will be relayed by all stations of the Forces Broadcasting Service at the best listening times. Wide publicity is being given to these arrangements.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether this happened at previous Elections or is this the first time?

I should not like to say without notice, but to the best of my knowledge it happened at the last Election.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the men are compelled to listen to these broadcasts?

Listening to these matters is entirely voluntary.

Would the right hon. Gentleman say whether the speech last night by the President of the Board of Trade, financed by the Government Hospitality Fund, which was put out as the main item in the B.B.C. news this morning, with heavy political implications, will also be relayed to these Service men?

I could not answer that question without notice.

Will the right hon. Gentleman arrange for the comments of the troops to be broadcast, too?

I will try to send the right hon. Gentleman a confidential summary afterwards.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will now consider what action within the terms of General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs should be taken to prevent the disposal here of surplus French wheat carrying an export bounty, particularly during the harvest period when it is difficult for our wheat growers to find a ready market for their grain.

As my hon. Friend is aware, the system of guarantees operated under the Agriculture Act, 1947, affords a protection to farmers in this country. We shall continue to watch the effects on the home market of imports of subsidised wheat.

Will my right hon. Friend make it quite clear that the fact of these subsidised exports from France will be taken into account when the Government are considering anti-dumping legislation?

As we have announced, we shall be seeking the necessary legislative powers in connection with anti-dumping and countervailing duties. We will, of course, consider if there is a case for such an imposition in matters of this sort.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say who benefits the most by the import of this dumped wheat?

We get the wheat, and I understand it is wanted.

Who benefits financially?

That is another question.

Is it not contrary to the spirit of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade that there should be export bounties, and cannot the Government take strong action to make their views known?

We have taken strong action in the recent discussion on G.A.T.T., much stronger than was taken by our predecessors. As a result, it has been agreed that when the revised G.A.T.T. comes into force export subsidies on primary products will be banned if they are applied so as to obtain more than an equitable share of the world export trade. That is a great improvement on the G.A.T.T. left to us.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when he expects to be able to make a statement on the question of the right of free entry into this country of goods manufactured in the Colonies, particularly those Colonies where prevailing wage rates are very much lower than in the Unitied Kingdom.

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister will be referring to this matter in the course of a statement which, with the permission of the House, he will be making after Questions today on problems at present confronting the cotton textile industry.

While looking forward with some eagerness to that statement, and while expressing the hope that it will cover the situation of the gloving industry, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he is aware that during the 15 months that have elapsed since I first raised this problem of the plight of this industry competition has become increasingly severe and that, for instance, the fabric gloves imported in March of this year amount to 48,000 dozen as opposed to 4,000 dozen in the corresponding month last year? Is he also aware that this industry is really looking for action on the part of the Government and is further hoping that when this action is taken the vocabulary of the Board of Trade will be slightly wider than "bearing things in mind" and "having nothing to add"?

This question refers not to gloves but to the right of free entry of goods manufactured in the Colonies. I appreciate what my hon. Friend is saying, and I am aware that no one has been more active than he has in pressing this matter forcibly and consistently on the Government.

Would it not be a better remedy to increase the wages of the low-paid workers in our Colonies?

asked the President of the Board of Trade what progress has been made towards an Anglo-Roumanian trade agreement; and if he will make a statement on the negotiations so far completed with the Roumanian trade delegation that has been in London for the past few weeks.

These negotiations cover both finance and trade, and I would prefer to wait until the negotiations are completed before I make any statement.

These negotiations have been going on since about Christmas time. Can my right hon. Friend say when he expects them to be completed?

No, Sir. These are rather difficult negotiations, and, while I am as anxious as my hon. Friend that they should be completed, it would not be proper for me to" say anything more while they are going on.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that, owing to the further deterioration in the knitted glove industry in Leicester and elsewhere, a considerable number of workers have now been laid off, and that the position of the industry as a whole is jeopardised; and whether he will now take steps to assist it.

I have nothing to add to the answer I gave to the hon. Member on 5th April.

Has the right hon. Gentleman made any inquiries at all which have shown him that the answer he gave was entirely incorrect and that, in fact, 30 per cent. of the employees have been laid off and have gone into other industries? Will he also make some attempt to find out what the correct position is, and say what he can do to help this industry?

I have made further inquiries since I gave the answer to the hon. Gentleman and I find that the information which I gave to him then was entirely correct. I am still informed that there is no unemployment in the glove industry. It is quite true that some have been transferred to other industries, where they are working on full time.

Will the right hon. Gentleman refer to Mr. Kenniwell, who is a director of the National Hosiery Manufacturers' Federation and has given the unemployment figure—those laid off—as 30 per cent. of the industry's labour force?

As I have told the hon. Gentleman, so far as I am aware nobody is unemployed in the industry.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what he estimates will be the change in the number of persons paying Income Tax in 1955–56, compared with 1954–55, allowing both for increasing wages and salaries, and for the tax remissions in this year's Budget.

About 16½ million people—counting husband and wife as one—paid tax in 1954–55. Recent wage increases and increased employment would have brought this figure up to about 17½ million, or about 19½ million, counting married women separately, in 1955–56. The Budget proposals will take nearly 2½ million individual taxpayers out of taxation, or about 2 million people, counting husband and wife as one. The number left paying tax in 1955–56 will, therefore, be about 15½ million, counting husband and wife as one, or about 17 million, counting married women separately.

Does this mean that the figure of nearly 2½ million given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his Budget speech for those exempted from Income Tax is not really firm but is a hypothetical figure for those who would be exempted if there were no further increases in wages and salaries during the coming year?