asked the Minister of Works what advances have been made in this country during the last two months towards the development of the uses of atomic energy for peaceful purposes.

Research into the peaceful uses of atomic energy is a continuous process in which very rapid advances are not to be expected. Normal progress has been made during the last two months.

Is the Minister aware that the Question I asked was very generalised, and was similar to a Question which I asked last year, to which I received an equally generalised answer? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that authoritative leaders in the British shipbuilding industry are awaiting facilities to install atomic energy in trawlers and other ships? Surely the Minister can be a little more specific about this very important matter?

The Answer I have given accurately represents the position, as no doubt the previous Answer did. If the hon. and learned Gentleman will put down a Question about ships, I will do my best to answer it.

asked the Minister of Works what decision has been reached in the consideration given to the proposal to move the statue of Mrs. Emmeline Pankhurst to another site; and what objections he has received to the moving of the statue.

asked the Minister of Works when it is proposed to move the sculptured group, Burghers of Calais, so that the public may view it more easily; and what consideration he has given to the desirability of also moving the statue of Mrs. Pankhurst to a better point of vantage.

asked the Minister of Works if he has reached a decision on the new site of Mrs. Pankhurst's statue.

There has been general agreement for a long time that the Burghers of Calais are badly sited. A new design has been prepared for Victoria Tower Gardens. This has been approved by the Royal Fine Art Commission. It is proposed to move the Burghers of Calais to a more central situation and put them on a lower plinth. The central shrubbery will be removed and the statue of Mrs. Pankhurst placed in a new setting further south in the gardens. I consider that this is a better setting for the statue. Some opposition has been expressed by women's organisations to the statue being moved. I have discussed the scheme with the Suffragette Fellowship and done my best to remove their apprehensions. A model and drawings illustrating the scheme are in the Library.

I hope work can start in the autumn.

While wishing to avoid stirring up any unnecessary anger in the Press, may I ask the Minister if it is not a fact that the new site for the statue is much more prominent than the old one? Although it is further away from the building, should not the women who pay homage to Mrs. Pankhurst be pleased that it can now be seen more advantageously by the public?

That is my opinion. I went round the site with the Suffragette Fellowship, and I do not think they really disagreed that the site proposed was a better one, though there was a sort of metaphysical objection in that it is 40 or 50 yards further away from the House of Commons. I think that women, having won their battle so decisively, can now afford to be generous.

Would it be fair to say that, if the statue of Mrs. Pankhurst remains where it is today, after the removal of the Burghers of Calais to a more central position it would tend to overshadow it, and is it not desirable, for that reason alone, to provide a better place for it? Secondly, may we have an assurance that this work, so long promised, will be carried out this year?

The hon. Gentleman is perfectly right. If we do anything about the Burghers of Calais, we must also do something about the statue of Mrs. Pankhurst, or the whole thing is thrown out of proportion. I have money in this year's Estimates for redesigning the Victoria Tower Gardens, and this work will go ahead.

As part of the uneasiness among women's organisations is lest the statue of Mrs. Pankhurst be moved yet again, may I ask for an assurance that this is the final resting place for her statue?

I cannot bind succeeding Governments, but I have given the most categorical assurance to the Suffragette Fellowship that there is no intention of any kind of moving the statue again.

Is the Minister aware that only two days ago I had an objection from the women mentioned by the right hon. Gentleman, and that they are still dissatisfied? They do not like the idea of this noble lady being pushed around because of the Burghers of Calais, and they wish to have a definite assurance that there will be no more pushing around of Mrs. Pankhurst.

I have given that assurance in as categorical terms as are open to me to give.

asked the Minister of Works the approximate megawatt output of the six additional atomic reactors.

Between 150 and 200 megawatts.

asked the Minister of Works the reasons which led the Atomic Energy Authority to make a substantial change in its nuclear power programme, compared to that presented to the House in Command Paper No. 9389 in February; and why the six additional stations will come into operation before those contemplated in the original programme.

The six nuclear reactors do not form part of the civil programme, described in the Command Paper, which is to be carried out by the electricity authorities. They are being built in order to provide additional fissile material for military purposes as well as electricity. They are, therefore, being erected by the Atomic Energy Authority. They will come into operation before any of the stations in the civil programme, because they are exact replicas, rather than improved versions, of the two reactors now under construction at Calder Hall.

Nevertheless, is it not rather surprising that shortly after the Atomic Energy Authority issued a large civil programme—which was announced to the House a few months ago—another programme is announced which will make a further substantial contribution to the supply of electricity in this country? It seems rather strange that in the original statement the Authority made no mention of this very big further development, which was announced so shortly afterwards.

The statement made in the White Paper concerned power stations put up by the electricity authorities for civil use. These reactors are to produce both fissile material and electricity.

asked the Minister of Works what steps the Atomic Energy Authority proposes to take with the purpose of ensuring that Britain plays its rightful part in the development of nuclear power throughout the world, in view of the financial and technical assistance promised by President Eisenhower to all countries who seek United States aid.

I would refer the right hon. Gentleman to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to the right hon. and learned Member for Rowley Regis and Tipton (Mr. A. Henderson) on 22nd June, to which I have at present nothing to add.

But that does not deal with the point that these promises made by President Eisenhower to provide half the cost of nuclear research stations to any country that desires them, with an enormous amount of technical aid, while no doubt exceedingly generous and to be welcomed, do, in fact, mean that a substantial subsidy will be given to industry in the United States in the export of all machinery and all matters connected with atomic development. Therefore, unless this country does something similar, or co-operates with other countries in the same way, it will be left very far behind. Can the Minister say whether the Authority is urgently considering, and are there any plans in mind to deal with, this very important matter?

What President Eisenhower has done is to make certain proposals which are to be submitted to Congress in the United States. Nothing has positively happened yet. This matter is very much in our minds, and we have offered fissile material to other countries. We have also trained atomic scientists from other countries, and have offered aid in the erection of atomic reactors in other countries, but it will be appreciated that our resources are not so great as those of the United States.

asked the Minister of Works if he is aware that the huts on the derequisitioned Royal Air Force site No. 1, South-west Portion, Ludford, Lincolnshire, have been dismantled, but the foundations have been left in a bad condition and covered with concrete and rubble; and if he will give his Nottingham office instructions to clear the land completely in readiness for cultivation.

The site to which I believe my hon. Friend refers has not yet been derequisitioned and the arrangements for releasing it, including the payment of compensation, are still being discussed with the owner. The normal arrangements do not provide for the removal of foundations and but bases but for the payment of compensation under the Compensation (Defence) Act, 1939.

May I ask my right hon. Friend if he is aware that this derequisitioning is being dealt with by his Nottingham office under rather rigid rules? Is it possible for him to give his regional offices more power to deal with matters like this more expeditiously?

If there has been any undue delay I shall be very grateful if my hon. Friend will consult me about it, and I will see what can be done.

asked the Minister of Works what steps he is taking to preserve ancient barrows and earthworks.

Ancient barrows and earthworks of national importance are listed under the Ancient Monuments Acts and owners and occupiers are notified. I have now arranged for owners and occupiers to be reminded periodically of their obligations. I am also strengthening the Ministry's system of county correspondents, and inviting local archaeological societies to assist by reporting any threat or damage to a listed monument.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that that is a very satisfactory answer, but in view of the numerous cases of destruction of which one reads, will he press on with the good work?

Is my right hon. Friend aware that these barrows and earthworks are absolutely irreplaceable, and that the main result of all the precautions taken is that nothing is heard of an earthwork until it has been damaged? Will he take greater steps to see that damage is prevented rather than notified afterwards?

The Ancient Monuments Board has again brought this problem to attention. I am adopting its recommendations, except that I am still considering whether it is right to label all monuments.

asked the Minister of Works how often inspections are made to properties under the control of his Department, such as the hostel at Dean Road, Ferryhill, County Durham; and what proportion of the premises at this hostel are in use.

Properties under the control of my Department are frequently inspected. The hostel at Ferryhill, which is used for storage, has been inspected three times by my officers since 15th March. Stocks are being run down with a view to the early release of the property.

Is the Minister aware that this hostel cost a great deal of money to build? Does he think that its present use is satisfactory, and when such premises become vacant are applications from factory owners and others to rent them taken into consideration, in order to bring other forms of industry to the area?

That is rather a different Question, and is not one for me to answer.

asked the Minister of Works whether he will raise the speed limit in St. James's Park and on Constitution Hill from 20 to 30 miles per hour.

Yes, Sir. I propose to lay an amending Regulation under the Parks Regulation Acts to raise the speed limit to 30 m.p.h. on Constitution Hill and in St. James's Park, which includes The Mall, Birdcage Walk and the Horse Guards Approach Road.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply, but would he consider extending the Regulation also to Hyde Park where, at the present moment, motorists consistently break the law under the watching eyes of the policemen?

There is a certain distinction between the two. The roads that I have mentioned are really ordinary traffic arteries whereas the roads in Hyde Park are in the park itself. I do not think that raising the speed limit in Hyde Park would do very much to speed up traffic, because the limiting factor to the flow of traffic is the entrances and exits, and not the speed along the roads. If one has a 20 m.p.h. speed limit motorists will go at just under 30 m.p.h., but if the limit is 30 m.p.h. they are apt to go just under forty.

asked the Minister of Works what action has been taken to improve the acoustics of the Chamber of the House of Commons.

Certain of the loudspeakers were adjusted during the Whitsun Recess, and the operating company which maintains the amplification system is making a detailed examination of it. We hope to effect an improvement during the Summer Recess.

Is my hon. Friend aware that I moved a little further from the Gangway and so heard every word of his reply, but is he aware that the acoustics are still not very good for those at this end of the Chamber? Would he bear in mind the old Chinese proverb, "Words of the greatest celestial wisdom do not take root in the mind unless they are heard"?

That is not always so, of course. We are hoping to get the report from the operating company before the long Recess.

asked the Minister of Works if he will make the necessary structural alterations to exclude from Westminster Hall the smell of cooking.

My right hon. Friend is having certain alterations made in the staff canteen adjoining the Hall, and I hope that these will do away with the trouble.

Is my hon. Friend aware that his answer will give great satisfaction to those who love the Hall and object to it being abused by the smell of cooking?

Has there been any occasion in the history of Westminster Hall on which cooking has not taken place?

asked the Minister of Works when he will place a plate in Westminster Hall to mark the spot of the lying in state of Her late Majesty Queen Mary.

A plaque is being designed and I hope it will be in position by the end of the year.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Works, as representing the Lord President of the Council, what progress has been made in the experiments at the Stevenage research station into the reaction of fish to various types of detergent washing powders.

There is no doubt that detergent washing powders can poison fish. Experiments are continuing to find out whether they are toxic at very low concentrations and under the conditions likely to be present in British rivers.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary say whether any of the detergents are favourable to the fish?

So far as I know, none of the detergents is favourable to the fish. I think this is a case where we cannot please everyone; the housewives like the detergents when they are strong but the fish dislike them.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Works, as representing the Lord President of the Council, if he will give a full report on the research up to the latest date on air pollution.

A great deal of research is being done on the problems of air pollution. It includes measuring the amount and content of pollution; methods of preventing it; and studies of its effect on health, especially in relation to respiratory diseases. Among the Departments principally concerned are the Fuel Research Station and other establishments of the D.S.I.R., the Medical Research Council, the Ministry of Fuel and Power and the nationalised fuel and power industries.

The results are described in reports of the Fuel, Chemistry and Building Research Boards of the D.S.I.R. and in many scientific and technical journals.

I have other Questions dealing with this subject but they have been transferred to other Ministers. While I am not complaining of that, may I ask if there are regular Departmental meetings with a view to pooling ideas and experience in regard to air pollution in order to get co-ordinated action?

As the hon. Member knows, the Gracious Speech foreshadowed legislation on this subject. That necessarily implies that consultation is going on.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will make a statement to the House, or publish a report, on the fire in an Austrian barn on 11th March, 1955, in which British National Service men lost their lives.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the statement I made on 14th June in reply to a similar Question by the hon. Member for Edmonton (Mr. Albu).

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the statements which he has made so far deal chiefly with the causes of the fire, and that these are not of such great interest to the relatives of the people concerned? What is required is a public statement which corrects to some extent some of the earlier rather unfortunate Press reports and pays tribute publicly to the bravery of some of the people who took part in the rescues and also of those who died.

I should like to take this opportunity of paying tribute to the behaviour of those who helped and particularly of all who died while attempting rescue work. I have had very detailed correspondence with various of the parents, but if my hon. Friend has in mind a statement which would be a source of satisfaction to the parents, I will certainly consider it, if he gets in touch with me.

asked the Secretary of State for War (1) why the inquiry into the death of 23126898 Royston Love, of the Royal Army Ordnance Corps, was held in secret; and why the father was not informed that the inquiry was taking place;

(2) why the father of 23126898 Royston Love, of the Royal Army Ordnance Corps, was not invited to attend the inquiry into the death of his son;

(3) why the father of 23126898 Royston Love, of the Royal Army Ordnance Corps, was not informed of the result of the inquiry into the death of his son.

As my hon. Friend explained in his letter of 14th June to the hon. Member, no court of inquiry was held following the death of Private Love. This was because it is not the practice to hold a court of inquiry when death is shown to be due to known natural causes and is confirmed by post-mortem examination, as was the case on this occasion. A special investigation was made at my request in the light of the hon. Member's reports to me. The results of the investigation made were notified to the hon. Member in the usual way and not direct to Mr. Love.

If no inquiry was held, why should Colonel Hughes have made a statement to a prominent newspaper that one had been held, and thereby cause a great deal of anxiety? Secondly, having regard to the evidence which has been supplied by the father of Private Love concerning either the criminal negligence or gross incompetence of the medical officer, does the Minister not now think that in these circumstances he ought to hold a real inquiry into the death of this young man?

I have seen the hon. Member's letters and I have seen what Mr. Love said, from which I have not been able to find any particular new piece of evidence. If, however, the hon. Member or Mr. Love likes to inform me of any particular thing, I will certainly have it gone into.

Is the Minister not aware that, according to the statement of Mr. Love, who saw the boy on the 20th of the month, the now deceased son reported that he had himself seen the medical officer on 20th April, but that according to the replies I have received from the right hon. Gentleman he says that he had not seen him until the 21st, that even on the 21st he accused the boy of malingering, and that it was the sergeant major who gave the boy authorisation to go to bed, which led to his ultimate decease? In the circumstances, I am positive that, having regard to the anxiety that is felt in Bristol, it would be advisable to have a complete inquiry into this matter.

We have had a very close investigation into this case. I am satisfied that the question of malingering was not gone into. The unfortunate thing was that the boy had a hernia in exactly the same area as his suspected appendicitis, and the subsequent diagnosis was quickly made. If the hon. Member has any particular aspect that he would like me to go into further, however, I do not want to cover anything up and am quite prepared to reopen the case and go into it further, if he wishes.

asked the Secretary of State for War why he has cancelled sixty-nine Territorial camps and ninety-eight Army Emergency Reserve camps; and what plans he has to give alternative training to the men involved.

We decided that the practical difficulties of rearranging dates at short notice made it undesirable both from the point of view of industry and the men concerned.

While I appreciate the difficulties, does it not show a complete lack of initiative that the Territorial Army should be treated in this manner? Is it not also rather parodoxical that the Army Emergency Reserve, when going to camp, should be defeated on the first occasion that there is an emergency?

No; I do not think that that is a fair deduction. The strike was in progress and it was up to the Army to reduce traffic and travelling to a minimum. Therefore—rightly, I think—we cancelled the camps during the rail strike. To rearrange them would have meant a completely new set of dates. All private arrangements would have been upset and industry also would have had to face new and sudden arrangements. I do not think that in the circumstances we would have been right to rearrange camp dates at short notice, when we would have had the added complications of duplication in other camp areas.

asked the Secretary of State for War (1) if he will make a statement about the recent occurrence at Cwm Silyn, Caernarvonshire, in which two boys were killed and two others gravely injured by the explosion of War Office material which had not been cleared when the ground was evacuated as a training ground;

(2) if he is aware that, as a result of the fatal accident at Cwm Silyn, there is widespread anxiety in Caernarvonshire as to whether this area, and others, formerly used for battle training, have been fully cleared of explosive material; and if he will give an assurance that steps are now being taken to effect complete clearance.

During the last war about 6 million acres of land were used for training with live ammunition, and before this land was released steps were taken to clear it of mortar bombs, grenades and other explosives. The area to which the hon. Member refers was searched before it was released in 1946. I deeply regret that despite these steps this tragic accident occurred, and I should like to take this opportunity of expressing my sympathy with the parents. I have arranged for the high ground in the vicinity of the accident and the agricultural land within the old training area to be searched again.

Is the Secretary of State aware that there is considerable feeling in Caernarvon, and, I believe, elsewhere, that his Department has not been as efficient as it should have been in properly clearing these areas of unexploded missiles before permitting public access? What we all in Caernarvonshire now hope is that this dreadful accident will at least be the means of preventing anything of this sort happening to any other child in any other part of the country.

I appreciate that feeling, but I am sure the hon. Member will realise that to be completely certain of 6 million acres, when there may be an odd mortar bomb under a gorse bush, is a very difficult problem. We have done our best, and it is a very major manpower commitment. Our only alternative would be to close these areas to the public, and up to date we have found that we should not have been justified in doing that. I assure the hon. Member, however, that wherever anything like this happens, we shall carry out a much more intensive search. That will be done.

While appreciating what the right hon. Gentleman says, may I ask him to look into this point? It is sugested that it was not one bomb that was responsible for this accident, but rather a pile of bombs, in which case the search cannot have been a very efficient or close one.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will examine the constitution and functions of the Territorial Army and Air Force Associations, in the light of present developments with a view to their reform or abolition.

This is one of the matters which has recently been reviewed by a Committee which I set up under the Chairmanship of the Under-Secretary of State to examine the administration of the Territorial Army. Its Report will be published shortly.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many officers and other ranks have now been withdrawn from the Canal Zone to this country.

About 17,000 since the Heads of Agreement were signed in July last year.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many senior officers will be available for other duties as a result of the reorganisation of Anti-Aircraft Command; and how many will become redundant.

Forty-three officers of the rank of colonel or above become available for other duties. Thirty have been found employment elsewhere, and thirteen are being retired on grounds of age. None are redundant.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say a little more about the thirty officers whom he has placed in other appointments? One would have imagined that the senior ranks were full in all the other establishments of the Army?

A great many of the thirty have been found jobs in what is called E.R.E.—Extra-Regimental Employment—on such things as courses and the like. I am glad to say that, owing to the officer situation, we have not "axed" people—and it always would be our policy not to do so—before their careers are ended.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is now in a position to state how many volunteers, mostly of the Territorial Army, have been enabled, through arrangements which he has made, to continue their services in other branches or arms arising out of the reorganisation of Anti-Aircraft Command; and how many have expressed a desire to resign.

We shall not have any worth-while figures until August.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will issue instructions to Army drivers that wide and slow-moving vehicles and those drawing trailers should make a temporary halt at lay-byes to enable following vehicles to clear.

I am going into this suggestion, which I think might be helpful.

Could not more of these very large loads be sent by rail and not by road?

asked the Secretary of State for War the number of girls under 20 years of age who were recruited to the Women's Royal Army Corps in 1953 and 1954, respectively; the number who were discharged in each of those years before completing their service; and the number who were reported absent without leave for a month or more in each of those years.

Figures for the first eight months of 1953 are not available. Four hundred and seventy-two girls under twenty years of age were recruited in the last four months of 1953 and the number recruited during the whole of 1954 was 1,564. Sixty-two of the girls enlisted during the last four months of 1953 were discharged before completing their service and 395 of those enlisted in 1954. Of the 2,036 girls enlisted in these two periods, thirteen have been absent for one month or more during their service.

asked the Secretary of State for War what steps are taken by his Department to look after the moral well-being of young girls recruited to the Women's Royal Army Corps; and what steps are taken to notify parents when anxiety is aroused concerning their moral conduct.

Recreational activities and amenities, such as organised games, libraries, television, unit concerts and choirs, etc., are available in all units. Padres' hours and education classes are regularly held. Weekly request hours are held by unit commanders and regimental officers are available for interviews as and when required.

Contact with parents is encouraged by means of Parent Days and correspondence.

Can the Minister assure the House that if there are signs of trouble developing the parents are kept informed?

Yes, Sir. The hon. Member will understand that we have a problem here; perhaps I can discuss it with the hon. Member.

asked the Secretary of State for War why he refuses to tell parents the whereabouts of their daughters who are serving in the Women's Royal Army Corps even when these people are under 21 years of age.

When a parent writes to the War Office for information we invariably notify the girl's commanding officer, who will do everything she can to persuade her to get in touch with her parents. The commanding officer herself would do everything possible to bring parents and daughter together.

Does the Minister not think that he is taking a lot upon himself by denying a mother the right to know where her daughter is when she is under the age of 21? Does he not think that even the War Office has no right to offend against these family obligations and relationships, and that he is asking for trouble by refusing to give details of this sort?

It is not quite as simple as that. The hon. Member must appreciate that there are girls who join up to get away from a bad home. If we make a statutory undertaking that in all cases we must put the parents in touch with the girl we may be acting against the interests of the individual concerned. What we do is to use our common sense. Where we find that there are good parents and their influence is good, we do not stand in the way of the girls getting in touch with them.

How does the Minister decide what is a good home and what is a bad home? Is he saying that the Secretary of State for War knows better than parents what is good for girls under 21?

I am saying nothing of the sort. What I am saying is that the commanding officer of the girl's unit will get in touch with the girl and find out her background and problems. If she says she has a bad home and joined the W.R.A.C. because she does not want to see her parents, we do not step in and put her in touch with her parents.

In view of the apparent embarrassment of the right hon. Gentleman, would it help him if the Prime Minister appointed a lady as one of his Under-Secretaries?

Speak up for us.

asked the Secretary of State for War why compensation for internal repairs carried out by the War Department tenants of Landwick Cottages, Great Wakering, following the flood disaster of 1953, has not yet been paid by the War Department, notwithstanding that funds for this purpose were advanced by the Lord Mayor's National Flood and Tempest Distress Fund on 6th October, 1954.

We are arranging for this compensation to be paid. I regret that there has been delay.

Whilst thanking my right hon. Friend for that answer, and noting that payment has been effected only since the Question appeared on the Order Paper, may I ask if he is aware that, not only have my constituents not been paid the compensation to which they are entitled for work carried out over a year ago, but that the distribution committee of the Lord Mayor's Fund has been unable to get a satisfactory answer from the War Department for months past? In view of this dilatoriness, will my right hon. Friend look into the matter?

I did look into that matter. Although I apologise for the delay, I should add that there were claims which should have been made which did not come in. Perhaps we should have written and asked for the claims, but we did not.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that the problem of educating the children of those serving in the Army both at home and abroad is becoming a matter of increasing concern and often of heavy expense to the parents; and what proposals he has to deal with this problem.

My Service colleagues and I, the Minister of Defence and the Minister of Education, are very well aware of the difficulties and importance of this problem. I cannot say more at present.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this problem is causing great anxiety to many serving officers and men in the Regular Forces, and is playing a great part in their deciding whether or not to continue in the Army as a career? Will he also bear in mind the effect on the future recruitment of men who wish to make the Army a career? Cannot he persuade his colleagues to look at the matter sympathetically and provide special facilities for educational services?

I am in very strong sympathy with what my hon. Friend has said.

Will the right hon. Gentleman deal with this matter in a little less abrupt manner than he appeared to deal with it in his Answer when he said that he had nothing more to say about it although he is investigating it? Can he give any idea of what he is going to do, because this affects the whole of recruiting for the Army?

The right hon. Member has been Secretary of State for War and, if he uses his imagination, he will realise why I cannot say anything more at the moment.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will now withdraw the restriction on the consolidated hire-purchase agreement in the furniture industry.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps he is taking to reduce the unemployment and short-time working in the furniture-making industry; and whether he has yet come to any conclusions on the recommendations made to him by both sides of the industry.

I have nothing to add to the reply given last Thursday by my right hon. Friend to similar Questions on this subject.

Does the hon. Gentleman realise that this restriction is having a great effect on the industry? Can he say whether or not representations made by the industry in regard to this matter are being considered?

I can give the hon. Member that assurance. My right hon. Friend met a deputation from both sides of the industry within the last three weeks and is giving the matter careful consideration.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind the association between carpets and furniture?

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that hon. Members who represent constituencies which have furniture factories in them find that many of their constituents are either unemployed or under-employed and on short time and that unions and manufacturers claim that that is because of the restriction? Will he do something quickly about this problem?

My right hon. Friend is bearing that in mind, but I am sure the House will remember that the latest figures, to the end of April, show that, compared with last year, there are more people employed in the furniture industry.

Nevertheless, in view of the serious situation in the industry, the amount of short time and some degree of unemployment which exists, can the hon. Gentleman tell us when the President of the Board of Trade is likely to make an announcement on this subject?

Perhaps the right hon. Member will put that Question on the Order Paper.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the experience of unemployment and short time is not common to all furniture manufacturing areas, and that in some areas there is no unemployment or short time? Nevertheless, will he look at the problem with sympathy, because it affects a large part of the furniture trade?

Will the hon. Gentleman try to give a slightly more helpful answer because of the great concern of many people in the country and many hon. Members whose constituents are in difficulty? Can he give some idea when the President of the Board of Trade is likely to make up his mind on this subject?

My right hon. Friend is considering all the representations made to him. I draw the attention of the House to the fact that, compared with last year, there are more people now employed in the furniture industry.

Could the hon. Gentleman come to my constituency in Walthamstow and have a talk with employees and employers there to find what is the condition of the furniture trade?

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the position of the textile industry, including the silk and rayon sections.

On the general question I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the comprehensive statement made by the Prime Minister in the House on 3rd May and to the Answers given by my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade on 13th and 23rd June.

I will, with permission, circulate the latest available figures of rayon and silk production and deliveries, imports and exports in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is my hon. Friend aware that a number of people in Macclesfield are working on short time and that this is mainly due to the dumping of Italian and Japanese silk and rayon? Will he say what steps are being taken to put that right?

I understood that some of these matters were being considered by the Silk and Rayon Users Association, which has not made any positive application to us. Imports from Japan, of

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the monopolistic tendencies in the retail furniture trade, he will refer it to the Monopolies Commission.

course, are strictly controlled under quota arrangements of the Anglo-Japanese Agreement.

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that what he calls "the comprehensive statement made by the Prime Minister" has so far proved completely incomprehensible to the industry, and the Answers by the President of the Board of Trade last week have done nothing but increase the gloom and despondency in Lancashire? Does he not think the time has come when the Government ought to bring their mind to bear—if they have a mind—on the position of the textile industry and to decide what long-term policy they are to recommend?

As the House knows, the statement of the Prime Minister was a comprehensive statement—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]—interpreted as such by the industry. I do not think I need add anything to my Answer.

Following are the figures:

It is not clear that the statutory conditions which must be satisfied before a reference can be made to the Monopolies Commission prevail in the retail furniture trade. But in any event, my right hon. Friend has already announced a full programme of work for the Commission and he does not intend to make any further references at present.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is a strong feeling in the industry that over one-third of the retail trade is in the hands of a single firm, and can he say in what way the statutory conditions for reference to the Commission can be fulfilled? Does the hon. Gentleman realise that it is also felt that the ownership by one firm of such a large part of the retail trade has a very considerable effect, on the manufacturing side of the industry, in preventing a continuance of regular employment during the year?

A reference to the Commission can be made only if it appears that at least one-third of the goods are supplied by one firm or a group of interconnected firms. I shall be pleased to receive any information which the hon. Member may provide to show that these conditions obtain in the retail sale of furniture.

The hon. Gentleman has said that the President of the Board of Trade does not propose to make any more references to the Monopolies Commission at present, whatever happens. Are we to understand that whatever the circumstances and whatever dramatic facts or conditions may arise, the Monopolies Commission is now to be inhibited from making any further inquiries or receiving any further references?

No, Sir. If the hon. Gentleman can give us any information to show that these conditions prevail, it will be most carefully considered.

——

Four Privy Councillors!

Is it not an extraordinary fact for a Minister to state that it is not clear to him whether the statutory conditions are satisfied or not, and that he has to ask my hon. Friend to provide information? Should not the President of the Board of Trade get the necessary information from the industry and establish whether my hon. Friend's statement is a statement of fact?

The answer is that it does not appear at present to the Board that the conditions do, in fact, prevail. If the right hon. Gentleman can supply evidence, it will be considered.

——

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. It will not have escaped your attention in the last two days that as several Privy Councillors on the Opposition side of the House now sit on the back benches and a large number of non-Privy Councillors have been elected to the Front Bench, the result is that approximately four times the number of supplementary questions come from the other side as are allowed on this side of the House. What can be done to protect the rights of the minority of private Members on this side of the House?

That is not a point of order.

Does my hon. Friend think that the internal pains from which right hon. and hon. Members opposite seem to be suffering with regard to monopolies are due to sour—oh, very sour—grapes?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the prevalence of common price and level tendering, he will set up a Departmental committee to inquire into the changes in the law needed to bring these widespread practices to an end.

No, Sir. As already announced by my right hon. Friend, we are asking the Monopolies Commission to inquire into the general effect of these practices on the public interest.

Am I to understand from that reply that the President of the Board of Trade is perfectly satisfied that he has powers to deal with these things?

Yes, we feel that the Monopolies Commission has great experience in these matters, and we can see no reason to think that a Departmental committee could do the job any better.

If we are to rely on the Report of the Monopolies Commission and await it before any action is taken, can the hon. Gentleman give an approximate estimate of the period of time that will elapse before that Report may be expected?

I could not give that estimate at the moment.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what were the instructions given to the United Kingdom delegate at the meeting held in May of this year of the United Nations Economic and Social Council, in relation to the Report on Restrictive Business Practices.

To abstain from the discussion.

Do I take it that the President of the Board of Trade has no views on international monopolies and cartels, and that the only action that he is prepared to take to deal with these menaces in international business is action that he is forced to take by the pressure that we put upon him?

No, Sir. The hon. Member does not do himself or the Question justice. The conference was on 16th May, and, in deference to the doubt felt at that time in certain quarters as to which party would be elected to form Her Majesty's Government, we thought it right to abstain from the discussion.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will remove or reduce the United Kingdom tariff on the importation of rayon staple fibre.

My right hon. Friend is not prepared to recommend arbitrary removal of or reduction in any rates of protective duty, but, as he informed the hon. Member last week, there are procedures whereby interests concerned can apply for the lowering of protective tariffs.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is not a question of improper removal? Is he further aware that Messrs. Courtaulds have a monopoly in the manufacture of rayon staple fibre in this country and that this year they had an increased profit of £3½ million? Does the right hon. Gentleman think that there is any possible defence for this company having a high protection of 37½ per cent. duty when he gives no protection to the cotton trade against its chief competitors?

The point is that there are procedures whereby the interests concerned can apply for the lowering of pro- tective tariffs. In fact, no application for the reduction or removal of this duty has been received.

Will the right hon. Gentleman stop stonewalling?

asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) how many new factories were completed in Wales in 1954; and how many are likely to be completed during 1955;

(2) how many new factories were completed in the United Kingdom in 1954; and how many are likely to be completed during 1955.

According to the latest information, seventy-seven new industrial buildings and extensions of more than 5,000 sq. ft. were completed in Wales in 1954, and 1,652 in Great Britain. I cannot forecast what numbers will be completed during 1955.

If my hon. Friend cannot answer the second part of the Question, can he at least say how the figures for the first quarter of this year compare with those of the similar period of last year?

The number of industrial buildings approved in Wales for the first quarter of this year was substantially greater than that for the same quarter of 1954.

Will the hon. Gentleman tell us the figures of factories built in Wales outside the Development Areas in 1954?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman would put down a Question about that.

Do not the figures which the hon. Gentleman has just given indicate that the Government have abandoned the Development Area policy? Are they not the worst figures for Wales in the last 10 years?

No, that is not so.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many new factories were completed, in Durham, for 1954; how many are in course of construction, and in which areas of the county; and the prospects for new factories in 1956.

According to the latest information available to the Board of Trade, forty-five new industrial buildings and extensions of more than 5,000 sq. ft. were completed, and forty-eight are under construction. Sixteen of these were in South Tyneside, six in Wearside, fourteen in the rest of the coalfield area, ten in Teesside and the Hartlepools, and two in the Darlington-Barnard Castle area. I cannot say what the numbers will be in 1956.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in 1945 some 68 per cent. of new industry came into that Development Area, which was then a depressed area, and that in 1954 only 16 per cent. came into that area, and that that is causing concern to local authorities which are setting up their development boards? At the same time there is a drift of population away from there into and around Greater London.

I think the hon. Gentleman raises a wider question than the Question on the Paper.

Can the hon. Gentleman say how these figures compare with those of Development Areas in the rest of the country?

I think it would be better for the hon. Member to put down a separate Question about that.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that 800 cotton workers in Accrington and Church are now working short time; and what progress is being made with plans to help the cotton industry to overcome its present difficulties.

I am aware that there is some short-time working in this area. My right hon. Friend has invited the Cotton Board to discuss with him some of the problems in the various export markets. He has taken every opportunity to urge on the United States Government the importance of ending the present uncertainty as to their future raw cotton policy.

Is the Minister aware that it is not a question of the Government of the United States but a question of India more than anything else, and what is he doing about that?

I am told that the short-time working in the hon. Gentleman's constituency is mainly in fine cottons and other cloths which are not affected by imports. I think if he will inquire into that he will find that the main trouble is, possibly, exports and doubt about the future of the price of raw cotton, which is very important.

Could my right hon. Friend name any date by which the answer to this very important question of fixing by the Americans of the price of raw cotton is likely to be known?

No. I wish I could, but I am afraid I am not able to do that.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not realise that the supplementary answer which he gave to my hon. Friend just now, pointing out that the trouble in the Lancashire cotton industry is not exclusively due to the Indian question, reinforces the demand that is being repeatedly made by all sides of the industry and from all quarters of the House that the Government should as soon as possible consider what their long-term policy is to be?

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many of the factories are in commission, as such, on the Aycliffe Trading Estate; and how many building sites for new factories are available on the estate.

There are fifty-six tenant firms on the Aycliffe Trading Estate occupying 1,280,000 sq. ft. of factory space for manufacturing purposes. There is ample land available on the estate for any expansion likely to be required.

asked the Prime Minister what steps he has taken during the last two months for securing talks at top level between the Governments of Britain, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and China, with a view to limiting the arms race and promoting agreements for international peace.

The hon. and learned Member will be aware of the steps which have been taken to secure talks at the highest level between the Governments of the United Kingdom, the United States of America, France and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, which are due to take place at Geneva on 18th July. There is no question, at the present time, of seeking a further conference different in composition and overlapping in scope with the conference due to take place at Geneva.

Is it not a fact that everything so far done about the summit talks since the Government took over Labour policy in this matter has been of an inchoate and nebulous character? Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that I am asking him about two specific matters—the arms race and international peace? Has he nothing to say about them?

If the hon. and learned Gentleman, in the course of his studies, had been good enough to read the proposal of the Allied Powers for this meeting, he would have read that the agenda at Geneva does not exclude any topic from discussion. It is hardly for the Prime Minister of this country to lay down for all the other countries exactly what should be discussed.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement on the agreement of the four Foreign Ministers that any subject which is contributory to the cause of world tension may be raised at the forthcoming Geneva Conference.

No formal agreement on this matter has been reached by the four Foreign Ministers, but it is clear from the terms of the invitation which the Governments of the United Kingdom, the United States of America and France addressed to the Soviet Government on 10th May that, so far as they are concerned, any subject may be raised.