asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what it is anticipated will be the proportion of the total weight of rating which will be borne by the occupiers of houses on the one hand, and shops and offices on the other hand, when the full effects of the forthcoming valuations can be fully measured.

I would not care to try to forecast the results of the new valuation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are already indications that one of the results of revaluation may be to place an unduly large burden of rating upon owners of shop and office property? Will he reassure the House that it is his intention to try to hold the balance as fairly as possible between that kind of property and private houses?

I have already made some fairly full statements on the subject to which I have nothing to add.

Has the right hon. Gentleman at least made sure that industry pays its proper quota towards these burdens?

I think that point arises in a later Question on the Order Paper.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will now state what action he proposes to take to implement his undertaking to maintain the rating of the northern and southern outfall sewers.

My right hon. Friend is not yet in a position to make a statement.

Does the Minister still abide by the assurance that he gave in Committee that the local authorities concerned will not lose in any way by whatever action he eventually takes?

My right hon. Friend gave that assurance, and we have been exploring the position with officials of the London County Council.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he is aware of the shortage of water supplies in the village of Arley in the Meriden rural district in the county of Warwick; and what steps are being taken to provide a sufficient supply of piped water at adequate pressure, and to renew the pipes where these are incapable of containing the flow.

The National Coal Board, which is at present responsible for supplying water to the village, and Nuneaton Corporation, who will become responsible in the future, has recently improved pressures by increasing supplies in local reservoirs, and certain mains have already been replaced. A major scheme is being carried out which will enable the corporation in some two years' time still further to increase supplies to the village.

Is the Minister aware of the urgency of this situation at Arley? Is he aware not only that inconvenience is caused to housewives but that agricultural and production and trading interests will suffer? Is he aware also that the Nuneaton Co-operative Society has to carry water to Arley over a distance of five miles in churns?

We are aware of that. The reservoir which was opened last month should give immediate assistance, but the scheme which will be completed in two years time should, I think, provide the final answer.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will request all local authorities to make a survey of private streets and roads in their areas so as to ensure that action is taken to have them repaired where they are found to be in a dangerous condition.

No, Sir. I think this is a matter which should be left to the discretion of the local authorities.

Is not the Minister aware of the appalling condition of many private roads, owing to negligence over a long period of time, especially in the county district of North Staffordshire? Would he not urge local authorities to pay more attention to this matter and to use all the powers they have to require these roads to be made up, especially when they have, in fact, become public highways?

I believe that local authorities are well aware of their responsibility in this matter, and I cannot feel that there is any advice I can usefully give to them on this subject.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what consultations he had with adjacent local authorities prior to his appointment of Mr. J. R. Colville to the Board of Bracknell Development Corporation.

In accordance with the normal practice, I consulted the Berkshire County Council, the London County Council, the Easthampstead Rural District Council, and the Bracknell Parish Council.

If these consultations did, in fact, take place, was it not merely misleading on the part of the Minister, in a letter to the local authorities concerned, to recommend Mr. Colville on the grounds of his intimate knowledge of, and residence in, the Bracknell area, whereas those alleged qualifications are absolutely fictitious?

I really think that the gentleman appointed to the Board has every suitable qualification for an appointment of this kind. He was Private Secretary to two Prime Ministers—including the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition. He was also Private Secretary to Her Majesty the Queen before her accession, and has held important positions in the Foreign Office. I think that an appointment of this kind should not be questioned in this way: it is quite frivolous.

Can my right hon. Friend explain what the connection is between Brixton and Bracknell and why he failed to consult Brixton Borough Council?

On a point of order. In view of the attack which has been made upon me, may I very respectfully point out to you, Mr. Speaker, that I happen to be a resident of Binfield, which is in the area of one of the local authorities concerned?

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he is aware of the local indignation at his decision to permit the erection of a block of flats in Fitzroy Park, Highgate, for foreign diplomatic personnel, despite the opposition of St. Pancras Borough Council; and if he will reconsider the matter in view of this opposition.

I am afraid I have nothing to add to the full information which I have already sent to the hon. Member.

Is the Minister aware that this decision will seriously damage the amenities in a rural area within five miles of this House? Can he say why, when the L.C.C. were dissuaded from developing this area for houses, he has permitted this foreign embassy to embark on this development?

I have already done what I could to protect this area—and I have had a certain amount of criticism from the party opposite for doing so. Among other things, in the London Development Plan I reduced the permitted density from 70 to 30 persons per acre. This building fully complies with the reduced density prescribed in that plan.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will take powers to secure the preservation of theatres where this is in the public interest.

So far as London is concerned, I modified the County of London Plan in such a way so as to ensure that only in very special circumstances would planning permission be given for converting a theatre to office use or for replacing it by an office building. The policy of the London County Council under the Plan is to ensure the continued use of theatres as such, unless for economic or other reasons this becomes clearly impracticable.

I thank the Minister for that satisfactory reply on this occasion. May I ask him whether the fears, which have been repeated, about the future of the St. James's theatre are groundless?

To be quite frank, that slipped through the net before we got on to this point.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what steps, in view of the increase in the burden of rates which is likely to fall on the occupiers of shops and offices when the new valuation lists come into force in 1956, he will take to minimise the loss which local authorities suffer from the derating of industrial premises, the consequence of which is to throw an added burden on to the occupiers of other premises including, in particular, occupiers of shops and offices.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will now repeal Section 68 of the Local Government Act, 1929, in so far as it relates to derating.

This is the Question to which I referred the hon. Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, East (Mr. Blenkinsop) earlier.

I have nothing to add to the statement I made on this subject on 30th June last, of which I am sending copies to the hon. Members.

In view of the fact that certain local authorities have been receiving no compensation for loss resulting from derating, and as the occupiers of shops and offices are likely to be adversely affected by the new assessments, and are particularly concerned about this matter, can the Minister give any assurance that, pending the abolition of derating, grants will be made to local authorities to compensate them for the loss which they will suffer from derating?

As I explained to the House on an earlier occasion, the Government have decided to undertake a full review of local government finances as a whole as part of the problem of local government reorganisation and reform. I have given this assurance before and I will repeat it now. All aspects of local government finance will come within the purview of this examination, including, of course, the question of the derating of industry. Pending the outcome of that review, I should not like to prejudge the issue.

Are we to understand that the Minister's forthcoming statement will omit this urgent piece of unfairness—unfairness both to house occupants and to shop occupants? I refer to the statement that he told us he would quite likely make about rating.

I am not aware of this statement that I am going to make.

May I remind the right hon. Gentleman—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]—who seems to have an uncommonly short memory, that that was in reply to Question No 7?

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will make a statement on his discussions with the local authorities associations on the reform of local government.

I am not yet in a position to make any further statement.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government the duties and terms of reference of Sir Humfrey Gale's appointment in his Department.

I have appointed Sir Humfrey Gale to advise and assist me in securing speedier progress in the promotion of schemes under the Town Development Act for relieving the congestion of population in the large cities. Sir Humfrey Gale will be available to assist in negotiations between the local authorities of the cities concerned and the authorities of the "receiving" districts.

While welcoming this very necessary appointment, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that a great deal of the Town Development Act depends upon adequate subsidies for the smaller local authorities in the receiving areas? Without going any further than the statement which was made earlier regarding housing subsidies, will the Minister give an assurance that nothing will be done in the future to prejudice the position of the smaller local authorities in those receiving areas?

I am very happy to give that assurance.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government to make a statement upon discussions in which he has recently taken part in Oxford on the city's traffic problem.

Earlier this month I went to Oxford to discuss with representatives of the city council the Oxford road problem, which has given rise to so much controversy. The views of various sections of opinion in the town and in the University were explained to me by deputations from the bodies principally concerned. The representatives of the city council who took part with me in these meetings will shortly be submitting their recommendations to the council as a whole in the light of our discussions.

Can the Minister give an assurance that he is aware that this matter is of wider concern that that which affects people who are resident for the time being in the university and in the city, and is he aware that he will not be forgiven if he permits a roadway to be constructed across Christchurch Meadows?

It is because I felt that this was of wider concern that I have devoted a great deal of time and trouble to this problem.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will now make a statement on his policy in the case of commercially-operated cemeteries which revert to the Crown on liquidation of the companies concerned, with particular reference to the Nottingham General Cemetery.

I am advised that, whereas this cemetery has become vested in the Crown, the Commissioners for Crown Lands have no liability for managing it, unless they take possession; and this they have no desire to do.

In the circumstances, it would seem appropriate that the Nottingham City Council should assume control of the cemetery. Should the council decide to do so, I would be prepared to make a contribution towards its expenditure.

While thanking my right hon. Friend very much for the first answer on this Question which has not been entirely negative, may I ask him to bear in mind that for the last three months, since the liquidator was able to disclaim, no one has been in charge of the cemetery, it has been neglected, and there has been no manager and no access except unofficially? Does my right hon. Friend realise that this is causing great distress to many people in Nottingham whose relatives are buried there? As the Government have now accepted a limited form of ownership, could my right hon. Friend treat as a matter of urgency the acceptance of some of these obligations?

That was not what I said in my reply. What I wished to indicate was that in the Government's view it is undoubtedly in the best interests of the inhabitants that the city council should take over the cemetery. I hope that the indication which I have given that the Commissioners of Crown Lands have no desire to take possession will lead the city council to the conclusion that it would be in the best interests of all concerned for the council to take over.

Does the Minister visualise the City of Nottingham taking over the cemetery and continuing to run it as a cemetery or taking it over to prevent it from being left derelict and becoming a public nuisance? What does the right hon. Gentleman mean by "taking it over"? [Laughter.] If the council is to take it over, does the right hon. Gentleman recognise the tremendous expense involved in this matter?

I do not think that this is a laughing matter. It is a situation which has caused very much grief to the relatives of those who are buried there. I hope we may arrive at some decent and practical solution to this problem. What I have in mind is that the council should take it over, naturally as a cemetery and not for any other purpose.

Will the internees of the cemetery be made sleeping partners in this venture?

Will the Minister consider promoting some legislation to deal with this question of cemeteries which, as in this case, do not seem to belong to anybody and for which nobody at the moment has any responsibility? When he does so, will he bear in mind that they can be a very heavy financial burden on local authorities?

Fortunately, cases like this occur very rarely, but I agree that the position under the law is not wholly satisfactory. Nevertheless I do not want Nottingham City Council to wait for a new Act of Parliament before it takes what I believe is the proper action in this case.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he is aware of the traffic congestion caused in the Strand, Kingsway, Charing Cross Road area by the existence of the Covent Garden Market; and whether he will use his town-planning powers to cause the present site to be vacated, and a new market to be opened at King's Cross or elsewhere.

I am well aware of the traffic congestion in the vicinity of Covent Garden Market. This and other wholesale markets perform important functions in the national economy, which are now being reviewed by the Runciman Committee on Horticultural Marketing. We must obviously wait for the Committee's Report before deciding what action, if any, should be taken.

Is the Minister aware that this is a special area in which the conditions in regard to planning, marketing and traffic are almost chaotic? Would he consider calling a conference of the parties especially interested both to examine the difficulties and to look at the great opportunities which this area holds?

I think that we can all agree about the difficulties, but there are a great many differing views about how to get over them.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government why he has not acceded to the appeal of Mrs. Legh, Adlington Hall, Macclesfield, against the decision of the Macclesfield Rural Council to refuse planning permission to build a dwelling-house in London Road, Macclesfield; and whether he will make a statement.

My right hon. Friend is sending my hon. and gallant Friend a copy of the letter addressed to the parties on 14th February last, which sets out the reasons for my decision.

Will the hon. Gentleman say if there is any connection between the refusal to grant this licence and the granting of a licence to build a petrol station which has been erected nearby quite recently?

The decision on the petrol station was the local authority's and not my right hon. Friend's. All I can say is that this main road could be the right place for a garage and the wrong place for a dwelling-house.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what steps he proposes to take to ease the financial burdens of local authorities on their housing accounts arising from the increasing of the rates of interest to five per cent. by the Public Works Loan Board.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he is now in a position to state the Government's policy in respect of the housing subsidies.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will make a statement on his discussions with the Association of Municipal Corporations on the subject of housing subsidies.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government (1) whether he is aware of the increased burdens of local authorities due to increased loan charges; and whether Her Majesty's Government will grant larger housing subsidies to help meet this burden;

(2) whether he is aware that the financial burdens of the necessary action for an adequate slum clearance programme under the provisions of the Housing (Repairs and Rents) Act are wholly beyond the available resources of county boroughs in northern industrial areas; and what action he is prepared to take.

I would ask hon. Members to await the statement which I shall be making on this subject later this week.

In considering the making of that statement, will the Minister take into account the fact that the raising of the interest rate to 5 per cent. inevitably means a very substantial increase in rates? As the Blue Book on income and expenditure in this country shows that there are 17 million workers whose incomes are less than £10 a week, does the right hon. Gentleman not think that the policy of the Government, whatever it may be ultimately, should consider the interests of those for whom the houses are built?

I should be glad of any assistance from the hon. Gentleman in drafting my statement.

Does my right hon. Friend appreciate that he will have the support, not only of the House, but of the country, in any action he takes to overcome the existing anomalies?

When he makes a statement will the Minister also bear in mind that many local authorities, such as my own in West Ham, lost over one-third of the houses in the blitz? People were blitzed out on three, four or five occasions, and the only way by which local authorities can rebuild, and so rehouse the people, particularly in blitzed areas, is by an adequate system of subsidies.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he is aware of the difficulty experienced by the Easington Rural District Council in providing sufficient accommodation for the growing mining population in its area; and what account is taken, in granting permits to build houses, of the effect on coal production if housing accommodation is available for miners who wish to leave adjoining districts, where pits are being worked out, to migrate to more productive areas.

I understand that the Easington Rural District Council has been allocated as many houses as it can reasonably expect to build. However, if there are any special difficulties, I should be glad if the right hon. Gentleman would send me particulars.

Have I not been frequently in touch with the right hon. Gentleman's Department about the shortage of houses in this area? Is he aware that if this council were granted permission to build more houses it would absorb the available capacity? Does not the shortage of houses in this flourishing mining area call for full production, and will not the right hon. Gentleman look at this matter again?

I do not think that the right hon. Gentleman is in such close touch with the housing position of the Rural District Council of Easington as, perhaps, he should be. Apparently he is not aware that as a result of representations which he was good enough to make to my Department an increase in the allocation of the number of houses to the rural district council has been granted.

Is the Minister aware that I am so well acquainted with the matter that I know that when we applied, not very long ago, to his Department for an allocation of 100 houses only 50 were granted, and that I even had great difficulty in persuading him to agree to four agricultural cottages being built. In view of the attack which he has made on me, does he know that every day—or almost every day—I receive communications from people in the area about the shortage of houses?

Having regard to circumstances before the war, which I recollect, I am surprised that the right hon. Gentleman, of all hon. Members in this House, should describe the gentle words I used as an attack. According to my information, the council is likely to build about 150 houses this year, which is appreciably above the average which it has completed in the last few years.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government to make a statement on the progress of slum clearance.

All but thirty-two of the 1,466 local authorities in England and Wales have now submitted to me their proposals for slum clearance. I propose shortly to lay a White Paper showing each authority's estimate of the number of unfit houses in its area and their programmes of work over the next five years.

Can my right hon. Friend give an assurance that there will be no slackening in the pace of this work?

On the contrary, I want to speed it up.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government the number and total values of grants made under the Housing Repairs and Rents Act to private property owners in respect of improvements to old houses and to local authorities in respect of slum properties, respectively.

Up to 31st August last 39,000 improvement grants had been made to the owners of private houses, 29,000 of these since the passing of the Housing Act, 1954. Figures are not yet available for the amount of grant paid, since some claims from local authorities for the Exchequer portion of the grant are still outstanding.

Local authorities have indicated that they intend to patch about 90,000 houses during the next five years. The City of Birmingham has been informed that approximately 25,000 houses will be accepted for patching grant. No claims for grant have yet been made.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government (1) whether he will give an approximate figure of the number of houses in England and Wales, to the latest convenient date, whose demolition has been postponed by local authorities under the powers conferred upon them by Section 2 (1) of the Housing Repairs and Rents Act, 1954;

(2) whether he will give an approximate figure of the number of houses in England and Wales, to the latest convenient date, which local authorities have purchased in lieu of making demolition orders under Section 3 of the Housing Repairs and Rents Act, 1954.

The information asked for is not at present available. Details of the number of unfit houses to be retained in temporary use by local authorities will, however, be published as early as possible next year in a revised form of the Quarterly Housing Return.

As this information is not presently available, may I ask whether it is possible for the Minister to say whether the powers conferred by these Sections are being effectively exercised by local authorities? Has any impression been formed one way or another?

I should not like to generalise on that question without notice.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he is aware that the obligation placed on certain local authorities, who purchase land for housing, to repay to the Central Land Board moneys expended by the Board in extinguishing claims for loss of development value, plus commuted interest retrospective to July, 1948, irrespective of the date of acquisition by the local authority, adds unduly and unfairly to the cost of housing and to rents; and if he will reconsider the matter.

The answer to both parts of the Question is "No, Sir." This land was bought at existing use value. Now that local authorities no longer have to pay a development charge to the Central Land Board, it is only fair that they should meet these payments which are part of the cost of acquiring the land.

Is the Minister aware that this decision bears extremely hardly on many London boroughs? Is he further aware that in the Borough of Finsbury the extra money that has had to be paid for land after the flats have been built amounts to £900 a flat, which is 16s. a week? Does the Minister not agree that that is both inflationary and has forced up the cost of living? If he agrees that it is fair to the landlord, will he not be fair to the local authorities, and try to give them some special assistance in special cases?

It is not possible to legislate separately for individual authorities, but authorities who pay high prices for the land they buy benefit under the expensive sites scale.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he is aware that although the owner of a requisitioned house who accepts the licensee as tenant receives compensation for loss of right to vacant possession, he can also obtain vacant possession within five years if the local authority rehouses the tenant; and if he will take steps to remove the possibility of such a misuse of public moneys.

I think it most unlikely that there will be many cases of this kind.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his answer means that if local authorities are not to be parties to this double payment of public funds they must keep the tenant in the requisitioned house for four years or more? Many of these houses are very sub-standard, and it means that the tenants are being deprived of the chance, to which they are entitled, of a decent flat through the waiting list. This is grossly unfair and is a gross misuse of public funds. Will not the Minister look at this matter again?

There was plenty of opportunity to discuss all this when we debated at great length the provisions of the Requisitioned Houses and Housing (Amendment) Act, but I really believe that this is largely a hypothetical problem and I would prefer to wait until it arises. All I would say now is that I feel confident that local authorities, in deciding which owners to approach with this offer of compensation, will have regard to the question whether the accommodation in which a tenant is living is of a suitable kind and is likely to provide him with a permanent home.

Will the Minister look at particular cases? He says that he does not think they are likely to arise, but if they do arise will he look at them and do something about them?

They have not arisen yet.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he is aware that large numbers of two- and three-roomed flats, in requisitioned houses, which have become empty, cannot be relet by the local authority, because the owners withhold consent; that this accentuates the grave housing shortage in certain Metropolitan boroughs; and if he will, by regulation or otherwise, amend the Requisitioned Houses Act, so that local authorities can continue in effective control of such dwellings until 1960.

The hon. Member is under a misapprehension. The power to permit local authorities to retain control of requisitioned dwellings which become vacant is already provided in Section 3 of the Act, and the exercise of this power does not require the owner's consent.

Is the Minister aware that the Question is directed at dwellings which are let in several tenancies? If one tenancy becomes vacant it can be relet only with the consent of the owner. If he withholds consent, it cannot be relet. Will the Minister look into the matter, because a large number of these dwellings are empty and cannot be relet or used by the local authorities, particularly in connection with slum clearance?

This point was very thoroughly discussed, and I think there was general agreement on it on all sides of the House during the debate on the Requisitioned Houses Act. The hon. Member is referring, I think, not to flats but to individual rooms or groups of rooms which are not self-contained dwellings. It was agreed on all sides of the House, I think, that it was not fair to require an owner to receive back odd rooms in a house when what he wanted was to get back the complete dwelling in order to live in it himself or relet it as a dwelling. We did not wish to perpetuate this arrangement whereby people are living in sub-standard conditions in odd rooms dotted here and there about a house.

asked the Minister of Labour how far the decline in manpower in the basic industries evident in 1954 has been arrested; and what steps are being taken by his Department to maintain adequate manpower in these industries.

In the first eight months of 1955 the total number employed in the basic industries increased by 72,000. This was largely a seasonal increase but it is 17,000 more than in the corresponding months in 1954. In coal mining, however, the number in employment declined by 6,000 in the first nine months of the year. To meet the situation in coal mining my Department in conjunction with the National Coal Board is conducting a widespread publicity campaign designed to encourage recruitment to and discourage wastage from the industry. Agriculture will benefit in future from the new National Service deferment arrangements, and in general special attention is given as necessary by the employment exchanges to filling vacancies in the basic industries.

Is the Ministry of Labour making any effort to consult the Ministry of Housing and Local Government as to the extent to which an increase in recruiting in the mining industry might be brought about by better housing and more housing in the mining areas?

That is a very good point which we have very much in mind.

Would the Minister be prepared to tell the House quite soon what the results have been?

I could not give the information without notice.

asked the Minister of Labour how many official strikes and how many unofficial strikes now in operation have been reported to his Department; and in which industries.

The number of stoppages of work due to industrial disputes known by my Department to be in existence a week ago is forty-six, many of which are minor disputes involving few workpeople. The industries in which they are occurring are as follows:—

Can my hon. Friend say whether any of these strikes are of long duration?

Not without notice. I do not think there are any prolonged stoppages among this group.

asked the Minister of Labour the number of disabled persons who are now in employment and the percentage that is unemployed.

In September, 1955, there were 825,359 persons registered as disabled, of whom 36,198 were unemployed. By no means all disabled persons in employment are registered and I cannot, therefore, give the full information asked for by my hon. Friend.

asked the Minister of Labour in how many, and in which, industries the principle of working to rule is at present in operation.

I regret that this information is not available.

The phrase "working to rule" is not sufficiently precise, as indicating any particular method of operating working rules, to allow of information regarding instances being systematically collected.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he has yet appointed the members of the Standing Industrial Health Advisory Committee; and whom he has appointed.

Yes, Sir. The first meeting of the Committee was held on 18th March last and there have been three subsequent meetings. With permission, I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a statement showing the composition of the Committee.

Could the hon. Gentleman at least say whether there is any representation from medical officers of health or those with wide experience of this work on the local authority side?

There is a very wide representation on this Committee, and I am circulating a list of its members in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Minister of Labour, in view of the fact that Malcolm Harris has now been found unfit for service in the Armed Forces, by a specially requested medical examination, what action he has taken in respect to those members of the previous medical board who decided otherwise, resulting in his being instructed to report to the Royal Air Force on 11th July last whilst he was suffering pain and inconvenience from a spinal injury necessitating treatment three times a week at Gravesend Hospital and the wearing at all time of a special corset with steel supports.

I am satisfied that the members of the medical board which first examined this man acted perfectly correctly in referring him to a consultant, on whose report grading was determined.

Why does the Parliamentary Secretary continue to evade the question? Is it not a fact that the man was wearing a corset with steel supports? Is it not a fact that this was not recorded and that this man was to have gone into the Air Force whereas now, having been seen, he is not to undertake any service whatever? Why does he defend an obvious blunder?

In this case the hon. Member is not quite on the right point. Whether this man was wearing a corset or not, the medical board did what was right in his interests, there being some doubt as to his medical fitness, and referred him to a consultant. His grading was decided on the consultant's report.

On a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory answer, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland in respect of how many houses in Scotland repairs increases have been made in terms of Part II of the Housing (Repairs and Rents) (Scotland) Act, 1954; in how many cases certificates of disrepair have been issued; and in how many of these cases they have been withdrawn subsequently or revoked upon appeal.

According to the current valuation rolls, repairs increases are payable in respect of 14,417 houses.

As the answer to the second part of the Question involves a table of figures I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) what proposals have been made for the temporary repair of old houses with the aid of Exchequer subsidies in terms of Part I of the Housing (Repairs and Rents) (Scotland) Act, 1954;

(2) what proposals he has received from local authorities for the demolition of unfit houses and the rehousing of the dispossessed during the next three years, as required under Part I of the Housing (Repairs and Rents) (Scotland) Act, 1954.

At the 19th October, 147 local authorities had submitted statements showing that 166,000 houses in their districts are unfit. They consider that of this number 42,000 can be rendered fit by the carrying out of work by the owners. During the next three years these authorities themselves propose to demolish 25,000 houses and to retain 450 in clearance areas temporarily in occupation pending demolition. They estimate that 26,000 new houses may be required for rehousing purposes.

Proposals have yet to be received from eighty-three local authorities, including some of the largest.

Has my right hon. Friend been able to form any estimate of the time within which all slum property in Scotland could be cleared?

I am afraid I cannot give my hon. Friend any definite view. In many areas I hope it will be within ten years, but in others it will take longer.

Is the right hon. Gentleman proposing to report to the House whether this Act is really being effective or not, as there are many statements to the effect that certain parts of the Act are proving quite ineffective? Has he any information on the subject?

It is being effective up to a point, but it is fairly early yet. I hope that the Act will become more effective in the course of time.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware that the United Nations International Law Commission has approved ten articles dealing with and entitled, "Freedom of Fishing"; and if he will make a comprehensive statement indicating how this will affect the fishing grounds customarily used by Scottish fishermen.

The International Law Commission has drafted certain Articles relating to fisheries on the high seas. These have been submitted to Governments for comment before the Commission prepares its final Report for submission to the General Assembly of the United Nations. The fishing industry will be consulted before Her Majesty's Government make their comments to the Commission. The Articles are, therefore, at a preliminary stage and any statement would be premature.

In view of the importance of this matter to the fishing industry of Scotland—involving thousands of families—will the Secretary of State issue a more comprehensive statement on the subject so that the fishermen may know where they stand—or where they sail?

I have said that we shall consult representatives of the industry before any conclusions are reached.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is aware of the failure of the Herring Industry Board to secure a market for the catch; the hardship caused by the Board's prohibiting fishing at times of abundance; and if he will take steps to overcome these difficulties and to make the Board financially independent of Government subsidies.

The Herring Industry Board normally guarantees a market for all the catch by buying surplus herring for reduction to oil and meal. It would, however, be uneconomic to provide enough processing factories to deal with exceptionally heavy catches and at times, therefore, it is necessary to restrict fishing. The Board is, with Government aid, providing oil and meal factories at the principal herring ports in the expectation that it may be able to handle all but the most abnormal surpluses of herring without a Government subsidy. It is also considering proposals to assist private firms to handle more herring.

Is it not a complete failure to use this very fine food, herring, not for human consumption, but instead for reduction to oil at a price of 1¼d. a 1b. to the fishermen, which cannot pay fishermen in any part of Europe and which has to be subsidised by the Exchequer? Would it not be better to freeze the surpluses, as has been done in the horticultural industry with such success?

Quick-freezing plants are expensive and only in times of glut would they be required. I am very anxious to see the normal consumption continue and, in cases where the catches are heavy, reduction to oil and meal seems to be the best outlet.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received from local authorities in Scotland seeking an increase in the number and an improvement in the pay and conditions of service of health visitors for the elderly sick; and what steps he now plans to take to improve the numbers, pay and conditions of such health visitors.

I have not received any such representations. Matters relating to pay and conditions of service are for the Whitley Council; while means of securing an increase in recruitment are under consideration by the working party on the work, recruitment, and training of health visitors, whose Report is expected shortly.

Is the Secretary of State aware that this is not only a matter for the Whitley Council, but also a matter for him inasmuch as health visitors have to pass more examinations and get less pay than hospital nurses; and that it is up to him to do something about it?

I am equally anxious not to do anything which would interfere with the supply of hospital nurses, who are also in short supply.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the cost of Fishery Research Ship "Explorer"; when she will be ready for sea; and what her programme of work will be in the near future.

I expect the ship to cost about £313,000 and to be ready for sea at the end of January next. She will be employed mainly in the nearer waters in her first year but will make occasional trips to the Faröes and waters further off. Her duties will include the collection of information about stocks of fish and sea conditions and she will carry out fishing experiments with trawls and other kinds of gear.

asked the Prime Minister to make a statement on the international conference on the peaceful uses of atomic energy, held recently at Geneva.

I am glad to inform the House that reports from all sources confirm the considerable success achieved by this Conference. Much information of importance to the development of the peaceful uses of atomic energy was made available and discussed, and all countries should benefit from the exchanges that took place.

The United Kingdom made a notable contribution, both to the Conference itself and to the exhibitions which were held at the time.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the cost of the Report, which is a reduced amount, is £39 at present? Will he take steps to see that hon. Members are able to obtain copies at a lower price, or free, so that they can consider the very important matters discussed in the Report?

Does the hon. Member say that he wishes to see the Report?

I think that would be useful to hon. Members.

I will gladly look into that.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware of the limitations on the freedom of speech of Members of Parliament, and others, that is being imposed by the directive of the Postmaster-General preventing discussion on the British Broadcasting Corporation of Bills that have been laid before the House of Commons and which have not yet been debated in the House; and whether he will now withdraw the ban.

asked the Prime Minister if he will remove the 14-day ban on radio discussion.

The directions recently issued by the Postmaster-General do not impose any new restrictions upon broadcast discussions but they do require confromity to a practice which has been followed by agreement between the British Broadcasting Corporation and the major political parties for some years. The rule was originated by the B.B.C. and in its present form dates back to 1948. The Government continue to believe that the principle embodied in this rule is in the best interests of Parliament for many reasons, some of which my predecessor in office gave the House in February of this year. I understand that the right hon. Gentlemen on the opposite Front Bench also continue to share this view, and I, on behalf of the Government, believe that the existing practice should continue.

Whilst thanking the right hon. Gentleman for that answer, may I ask him whether or not this practice also applies to newspapers, or whether hon. Members are to take into regard newspapers when they are discussing Bills?

If hon. Members will take my advice, it would be strongly not to regard newspapers when they are discussing what they are going to say in this House.

Does the Prime Minister think that a practice—however old—which is made by some hole-and-corner agreement between the party machines, which limits free speech and is quite clearly unworkable, really adds to the prestige of Parliament?

The curious thing about this is that it has worked fairly reasonably well. It is like many of our practices which seem to other people unworkable, but they do in fact rumble along after a reasonably fair fashion. If hon. Members want to take an opportunity to discuss the matter on some occasion, I personally have no objection at all, but my advice to the House would be, let us see how this thing works out and not get too much perturbed by some of this rather unnecessarily frenzied agitation outside.

Leaving aside the merits of the question, about which, obviously, there is a conflict of opinion—I do not express any view about it—does the right hon. Gentleman not agree that when he speaks about this agreement having been reached as a result of discussion between the major political parties, that is not entirely accurate, and that the agreement was reached as between the right hon. Member for Woodford (Sir W. Churchill) and himself and the present Leader of the Opposition and Deputy-Leader of the Opposition, without consultation with Members of parties on either side? Does he not agree that, as this is a matter which concerns back benchers, there ought to be free discussion in the House and a free vote of the House upon this matter?

To the best of my recollection, it is quite likely that I was with my right hon. Friend the Member for Woodford (Sir W. Churchill) at the meeting with the present Leader of the Opposition and some other representative which took place in 1948. We were not then the Government in power, but we were kindly invited by the Government, very properly, to attend the meeting. At this stage of affairs I certainly would not start telling the Government of that day who should have represented them at that meeting.

I am sure that hon. Members really desire to get the facts. I ask the right hon. Gentleman again: inasmuch as he admits that he and his right hon. Friend the Member for Woodford consulted some people on this side of the House, did he at the same time consult the Members of his own party?

We have our constitutional methods, which the right hon. Gentleman may like or dislike. All I have to deal with is the complaint by the right hon. Gentleman that the Government of the day, which was not a Conservative Government, proceeded on the basis of inviting the then Opposition to send certain representatives. The Opposition did so, and I think they were reasonably good representatives. What I will not be drawn into is an expression of view as to whether the Government representatives were well chosen.

In view of the fact that this matter involves a much wider question—the question of free speech and the right of people to express their views at any time—will the Prime Minister assist in having this matter fully debated in the House?

I simply cannot see how this affects the real rights of free speech in this country. Watching some European countries, I have seen free speech disappear, perhaps, because Parliaments did not take enough care of their own liberties and their protection. Perhaps the question can be discussed through the usual channels, but I hope that the Government will not be told that they have promised time for debate; that is a matter for discussion.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will move to appoint a Select Committee to investigate the circumstances of the disappearance of Burgess and Maclean in particular, and the efficiency of Civil Service security arrangements in general.

No, Sir.

Has the Prime Minister made up his mind to cover up at all costs the dubious third man activities of Mr. Harold Philby, who was First Secretary at the Washington Embassy a little while ago; and is he determined to stifle all discussion on the very great matters which were evaded in the wretched White Paper, which is an insult to the intelligence of the country?

My answer was "No" to the hon. and gallant Member's Question, which was not about all that but asked for the appointment of a Select Committee. My answer remains "No." So far as the wider issues raised in the supplementary question are concerned, the Government take the view that it is desirable to have a debate, and an early debate, on this subject, in which I as Prime Minister will be glad to take part.

Has the Prime Minister made any investigation as to the reason why briefs supplied by Foreign Office officials to Ministers answering Questions in this House have been at so much variance with the facts of the case?

That seems to be one of the matters which might well be raised in the debate.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a full statement about the future constitutional position of Malta.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement about the recent talks on the constitutional future of Malta.

Not yet, Sir. The Malta Round Table Conference has not completed its consultations.

Can my right hon. Friend give any indication when the Conference expects to conclude its business and when the House may expect a Report of the Conference?

That is a matter for the Conference, which, from what I have read of reports of it, seems to me to have made very good progress indeed.

asked the Prime Minister to make a statement about the British Commonwealth Trans-Antarctic Expedition.

A company has been set up in the United Kingdom, under the Chairmanship of Marshal of the Royal Air Force Sir John Slessor, to undertake the organisation of a Commonwealth Trans-Antarctic Expedition. Her Majesty The Queen has graciously consented to become Patron.

As was announced in the House on 17th February, Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom are making a grant of £100,000 towards the cost. Assistance is being provided in other ways by the Government; in particular the Air Ministry will provide air support for the Expedition.

Her Majesty's Governments of Australia, New Zealand and South Africa are all contributing to the funds of the Expedition and men from all three countries as well as from the United Kingdom will take part. The New Zealand Government, who are making a generous grant of £50,000, are also arranging for support to be given by the Royal New Zealand Navy and the Royal New Zealand Air Force. The Expedition is, therefore, an outstanding example of Commonwealth co-operation in a joint effort.

asked the Prime Minister if he will give instructions to all Departments concerned to prepare and publish a programme for the gradual abandonment of the system of compulsory military service within a definite period.

No, Sir.

Is the Prime Minister not aware that that is a most disappointing reply, tending to reflect very harshly on the competence of Service Ministers? Are not the Government pledged to reduce the period of National Service and, indeed, to abandon the temporary measure of conscription at the earliest possible date? Does the Prime Minister not think that the Service Ministers are competent to prepare plans towards these ends, or when will the Government make a beginning to this job?

The hon. Member may regard it as a disappointing reply; I can hardly think that he regards it as a surprising reply because the position of the Government on this matter is known, and further consideration may arise today. This is certainly a topic on which, I understand through the usual channels, the Opposition may well ask for a debate. We shall certainly welcome such a debate. We think it will be desirable on an issue of this importance.

Will the Prime Minister consider publishing a White Paper so that the House and the country can judge the failure of the Government's manpower policy, which has planted conscription on this country for as far as one can possibly foresee?

There are some following Questions on this subject. We do propose to publish a White Paper, certainly, although I would not myself expect the country's conclusions to be those of the hon. Member.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement on the length or extent of National Service.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement on the Government's proposals to alter the system of National Service.

On 8th October I announced the Government's decision to reduce by 100,000 over the next two and a half years the numbers in the Armed Forces. I said that the period of National Service would be retained at two years and that for the present the reduction would be brought about by raising the age of call-up. We leave ourselves free to decide, in the light of developments in the international situation, whether to continue to use this method or to reduce the period of service.

I also announced our decision to reduce the burden of part-time National Service. Except for certain limited categories, details of which will be announced, the requirement will be reduced from 60 days to a maximum of 20.

As I have said, the House may wish to debate this matter and the Government would welcome such a debate. In order that hon. Members should have as much information as possible before the debate, I have arranged for a White Paper to be laid this week.

A Report prepared under the auspices of the Ministry of Labour and National Service on the effects of National Service on the employment and education of young men—a report which is important and relevant—is also being published this week. We are bringing it forward for publication this week.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether the possibility of speeding up the training has been considered so that the valuable six months of a man's time comes after a year instead of a year and a half, so that the length of service may be cut?

Yes, most certainly. I think that is one of the aspects we might well discuss further. Certain plans about that have been under consideration with the Service Ministers.

Would it not have been better and more in accordance with precedent if the statement in regard to National Service had been made first in this House and not at a party conference? May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to take note that it is the desire of the Opposition that we should debate this matter at a very early date?

I am sorry that the right hon. Gentleman should take exception to the timing of the announcement. I did consider that carefully. I was under tremendous pressure even that week from the "Daily Herald." The "Daily Herald" asked me every day to stop considering the subject and to speak about it. I therefore thought I should be meeting the views of the Opposition if I followed the advice thus given.

Is not the Prime Minister aware that before the Korean war the Armed Services sustained much larger commitments than they have now with a period of eighteen months' service? How, therefore, can he in his present statement imply that it is impossible to reduce the period to that level?

I said that in present circumstances it was, but we are, of course, reducing the numbers in the Armed Services. As the right hon. Gentleman, with his experience, knows, the reduction will be about 20 per cent., compared with five years ago, of the numbers in the Armed Forces. I do not want to debate this now, but if it is decided to make a reduction by curtailment of service, quite clearly we shall not get as good military results as we shall the other way. The House has seriously to weigh these alternatives.

The Prime Minister said in his reply that the Ministry of Labour had been asked to make an investigation into the effects upon the young people, and particularly upon apprentices, and so on. Can he say whether or not the T.U.C. and the employers' federation were consulted? Will he publish in the White Paper the opinions of the T.U.C. and the employers' federation about the effect of National Service on young people, particularly apprentices?

This was a factual inquiry, I think the hon. Gentleman knows, conducted with the men themselves, who gave their immediate, direct observations on their National Service to the Ministry of Labour. I do not want to exaggerate its importance, but I think it is a useful kind of document for the House to have when debating the matter.

To ask the Prime Minister if he is now in a position to make a statement in regard to the future scope and responsibilities of the Minister of Defence.

Yes, Sir. The responsibilities of the Minister of Defence are defined in Command Paper 6923, presented to Parliament in October, 1946. In the view of Her Majesty's Government the Central Organisation for Defence set out in that paper continues to be basically sound. While the Prime Minister must retain ultimate responsibility in defence matters, it is the Government's intention that the authority and influence of the Minister of Defence should be strengthened. I have made certain arrangements within the Government to co-ordinate under the Minister of Defence planning and training for the joint action of civil and military forces in Home Defence. As a result of the transfer—which the House will remember—from the Ministry of Supply of certain functions connected with the iron, steel and engineering industries, that Ministry has become mainly a fourth Defence Department within the co-ordinating powers of the Minister of Defence.

I am also making it clear that the Minister of Defence's responsibility for the apportionment of available resources between the three Services extends to a responsibility for seeing that the composition and balance of forces within individual services meets the strategic policy laid down by the Defence Committee.

Her Majesty's Government have further decided to create a new post of Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee. This officer, and the other three Chiefs of Staff, will jointly be the professional military advisers of the Government. He will normally be the United Kingdom representative on the Military Committee of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and on other international defence organisations.

This appointment will not affect the right of an individual Chief of Staff to tender his personal advice should he differ from his colleagues. Her Majesty's Government believe that this appointment, while not altering the collective responsibility of the Chiefs of Staff Committee for the tendering of military advice as described in paragraph 31 of the 1946 Command Paper, will materially improve the efficiency of the organisation for defence.

Her Majesty the Queen has approved the appointment of Marshal of the Royal Air Force Sir William Dickson as Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee.

I am also able to tell the House that the Secretary of State for Air is this afternoon issuing a statement that Her Majesty the Queen has approved the appointment of Air Marshal Sir Dermot Boyle as Chief of the Air Staff in succession to Sir William Dickson.