asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he is aware of the continued decrease in rural transport services in the County of Northumberland; and what plans he has for dealing with the matter.

There have been no withdrawals of bus services in Northumberland since the hon. Member's previous Question nine months ago. The British Transport Commission is, with my full support, pursuing a policy of withdrawing uneconomic rail services, and four stations have been closed to passengers in the same period. The interests of the public are fully taken into account in the consultations which take place with the appropriate transport users' consultative committee before any rail service is withdrawn.

While I appreciate the point made by the Minister, that does not seem to be in accord with the facts, or with the feeling among those who are in a position to express opinion in the County of Northumberland. At a conference called only last week considerable concern was expressed at the increasing limitation of both rail and road transport, particularly in the rural areas. I am wondering if the Minister will examine the possibility of integration of rail and road transport so that the rural areas at least may be assured of an efficient service.

I will consider any possibility, but I must make it plain to the House that completely uneconomic services run by the British Transport Commission are to come under increasingly close scrutiny.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he will publish a White Paper on the talks he had with the British Transport Commission which led it to withdraw its applications to the Transport Tribunal for increased fares and to limit the increase in freight charges to 5 per cent.

No, Sir. The position was fully explained in the statement which I made on 19th March.

Is it not a fact that the British Transport Commission had already applied to the Transport Tribunal for an increase in fares and charges in fulfilment of its statutory obligations when the Minister intervened. As a result of his intervention, has not the Commission withdrawn its application, or is not proceeding with it? Therefore, was the Minister able to produce a very persuasive argument to cause the Transport Commission to change its mind, and should not Parliament be told what it was?

The hon. Member has slightly confused the position. Of course, the British Transport Commission does not need my approval or authorisation for any decisions it takes on passenger fares. Therefore, those decisions were entirely its own and I accept its very helpful co-operation. I am answering a Question about freight charges later.

Would the Minister state the position about passenger fares? Will fares remain at their present level or is the Commission raising them? The House was informed by the Minister last week that the Commission would make a statement, but I am not aware of a statement having been made.

The Commission has made its position plain. It is that, apart from certain adjustments in sub-standard fares with which it is going ahead, it has decided to defer any general fare increase until the end of a six months' period.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation the percentage rise of fares charged by British Railways compared with the immediate pre-war period; and the percentage increase in freight charges during the same period.

Compared with the pre-war period, the percentage rise in fares charged on British Railways is approximately 100 per cent., and the percentage increase in the authorised level of freight charges is approximately 175 per cent.

Do not these figures indicate that fares and charges have gone up far less than have retail and wholesale prices? Does not that indicate that the increased costs have to some extent been absorbed by the Transport Commission through greater efficiency and economy?

No, that is not the point at all. I do not want to mislead the House. I have answered the hon. Member's Question; but, to put it another way, freight charges have gone up roughly three times since before the war, which brings them to about the level of other costs. I agree that passenger fares have not gone up in the same ratio. They have roughly doubled.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation by what authority the Government requested the British Transport Commission to refrain from applying to the Transport Tribunal for certain increases in freight charges and fares in pursuance of its statutory obligation to pay its way; why the Government did not proceed by general direction; and how far this change of policy is being applied in the cases of other nationalised industries.

The British Transport Commission's application in respect of increases in freight charges is being dealt with in accordance with the procedure laid down in Section 82 of the Transport Act, 1947. As to fares, as I explained on 19th March, the decision of the Commission to defer those increases in fares for which it had already applied to the Transport Tribunal was taken by it as a measure of co-operation in the policy I then outlined, and accordingly there is no need for a direction. I can assure the hon. Member that the Commission's statutory duty to pay its way taking one year with another has not been overlooked either by the Government or by the Commission. The circumstances of nationalised industries vary considerably and therefore the policy adopted in the special circumstances of the Commission is not necessarily applicable to other nationalised industries.

If the necessity for the British Transport Commission to fulfil its statutory obligations by paying its way has not been overlooked, what has the Minister in view to enable it to meet its obligations? What is the Minister proposing to do to assist the Transport Commission to meet the very large deficit which the Minister has admitted? Whatever the position regarding the Transport Tribunal is, is it not a fact that the Minister has by-passed the Transport Tribunal, because he has persuaded the Transport Commission to refrain from raising its freight charges more than 5 per cent., without waiting for the Transport Tribunal to give its decision? Has that decision been given? Has he received the decision from the Transport Tribunal?

Those are rather a lot of questions to answer. I have not received the decision of the Transport Tribunal. The broad general answer is that I recently explained in the House that the six months' period was adopted in order that we should not traverse the one-year period and that the Commission should have to look at this again before a year was up. The other general answer is that it is my view and that of Her Majesty's Government that we must make a concerted effort to try to stop the continual passing of this sort of charges to the general public.

In view of the fact that the British Transport Commission has now stated that it does not intend to use its power to raise passenger fares, would the right hon. Gentleman like to review his figure of £20 million for a 5 per cent. increase in freight charges? Is it not a fact that by the end of the year the Commission will have a deficit of more like £125 million than £100 million?

Perhaps the hon. Member will put down that Question.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he will give an assurance that the postponement at his request of the freight and fare increases which the British Transport Commission desired will not result in a steeper increase later.

I can give no assurance one way or the other as to the future at this stage. As I said in my statement on 19th March, the whole position must be reassessed in the light in the financial and operating prospects as they will exist in six months' time.

Does that mean in fact that, in view of the right hon. Gentleman's interference, it is quite possible that freights and fares may go up far more steeply than they might otherwise have done? If that is not his idea, surely he should have some practical policy to put before the House about how to deal with the growing deficit of the Transport Commission?

I am sorry that the right hon. Gentleman takes a poor view of the future of the Commission. I do not. I take the view that it is now at a stage where we may look for considerable development and improvements, and that is why I took the action which I did.

Why does the Minister suggest that only now may we look forward to improvements in this system? Is he not aware that there have already been economies of over £20 million brought about by the Commission, and that it is a continuing process? Does the Minister expect a sudden change in this process?

Of course it is a continuing process, and I am in no way suggesting that the Commission, and particularly its Chairman, has not worked very hard and efficiently in recent years. But, as in any process, one has to put in a lot of hard spadework before one begins to get results, and it is my judgment that the time has come when results may begin to flow.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he is yet in a position to say if it is intended to introduce a 40 miles-per-hour speed limit on the Great West Road.

No, Sir. Until I have decided whether or not to accept in principle the recommendation of the London and Home Counties Traffic Advisory Committee to introduce a 40 m.p.h. speed limit on some roads, it would plainly be premature for me to express any view on particular lengths. In any case I would first wish to have the views of the local authorities concerned.

Will the Minister bear in mind that a few weeks ago there was an accident on the Great West Road in which seven cars were involved; that a few days later there was another accident in which fifteen cars were involved; and that accidents occur simply because cars are allowed to "belt" along at almost any speed? Can the Minister tell the House whether he is likely to make a decision in principle in the near future or whether he is willing to accept this Report?

Yes, Sir, I hope to do so very soon after Easter.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what remuneration is given to the members of the Scottish Transport Council.

The Chairman and members of the Scottish Transport Council serve without salary. Expenses of the chairman, the two independent members and the representative of the Transport Users Consultative Committee are met from Government funds, whilst the expenses of the other members are met by the bodies they represent.

Can the Minister tell us precisely what is the amount, because it seems to me that at the moment we are getting only a glossary of the methods by which it will be paid?

I am sorry but I could not do that in answer to this Question.

Does the Minister realise that hon. Members on these benches feel that the salary is quite in keeping with the importance of the work which the Council seems to be doing?

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what response there has been to the appeal made by the Chairman of the Scottish Transport Council asking members of the public to submit suggestions for consideration.

I understand that the Council met yesterday to consider these suggestions. It will, no doubt, make public from time to time such information and details about its work as it thinks desirable.

The Minister has not said how many suggestions have been received. Is he aware that during the discussion of the 1953 Bill we were told that this Council was to initiate consideration of co-ordination? Is it not a farce that men of this calibre should be asked to be office boys and await suggestions and complaints from the general public?

That is not true at all. This body has a very useful and essential job to do. It has only just started on its work, and I think it should be given a chance to get on with the job before we criticise it.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he will give a general direction to the traffic commissioners to relax their restrictions in granting permits for buses to operate without conductors in remote areas where traffic is light and eicpenses are heavy.

I am confident that licensing authorities are fully aware of the difficulties of bus operators in remote areas, and that within the needs of public safety they already use their powers of dispensation whenever there is good reason for doing so. No general direction from me is therefore required.

Arising out of that reply, may I ask whether my right hon. Friend is aware that there are still many remote areas which have not a bus service, the reason being that it is too expensive to run one, but that if buses could be run with one man acting as driver and conductor, a great deal of the expense problem could be overcome?

I should be glad to hear from my hon. and gallant Friend of any cases where he thinks that we could make adjustments to help rural transport, but I am advised that on the whole licensing authorities go a very long way to meat these cases.

Is the Minister aware that in Hampshire, despite attempts by the local operators to run bus services to country villages, it is proving extremely difficult, on grounds of expense, and considerable damage is being done in country communities as a result?

As I have said, if any hon. Member will bring suggestions to me on this point, I shall be only too pleased to consider them.

Is not the short and simple answer to repeal the 1953 Act?

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation the numbers of fatal road accidents in the second half of 1955 in built-up areas, and open country roads, respectively; the number in which mechanically propelled vehicles only were involved in each of these two categories; the number in which pedestrians died in each category as the result of coming into contact with mechanical vehicles; and the number in which cyclists were involved in each category.

The figures asked for by my hon. Friend are not readily available, and to extract them would require a considerable expenditure of time and labour. Police reports show, however, that in the second half of 1955 1,835 persons in all—of whom 1,061 were pedestrians—were killed on roads with a speed limit and 1,395 persons—of whom 278 were pedestrians—were killed on roads without a speed limit.

In view of my hon. Friend's reply—I wish it had been more detailed—may I ask whether more attention should not be given to making the roads in built-up areas safer? Will he consider the introduction of more zebra crossings in built-up areas and making it an offence for any pedestrian to cross a highway except over the pedestrian crossing, when one is available on that highway?

The answer to the first point raised by my hon. Friend is that approximately two-thirds of our road programme each year is devoted to urban areas or to schemes such as by-passes, which should have the effect of reducing casualties in built-up areas. With regard to my hon. Friend's second point, in accordance with the policy initiated by Mr. Barnes when he was Minister of Transport, we think it desirable that there should not be too many pedestrian crossings. Mr. Barnes aimed at reducing them to one-third of the number which there had been before. We believe that, on the whole, that is the wisest policy to follow. My right hon. Friend is following the policy of trying to improve the traffic flow in built-up areas.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what will be the estimated loss of trade to the Port of Cardiff caused by putting part of the cold store at Cardiff Docks out of service.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he is aware of the anxiety caused in Cardiff by the announcement that 50 per cent. of the Cardiff cold store is to be placed on a care-and-maintenance basis; and whether, in view of the efforts now being made to obtain for Cardiff a greater share of the meat trade with New Zealand and Australia, he will take steps to retain this cold store in full operation.

I am advised that as half of the refrigerated space will remain in operation, and the other half can be brought back into refrigeration at a few days' notice, the change should have no significant effect on the import trade of Cardiff.

Is the Minister aware that nobody locally holds that view, and that, in addition to this Governmental decision, a further blow is to fall on Cardiff by the cutting out of coal exports, which will also be a Governmental decision? Do the Government intend this port to be strangled, and, if not, what help or advice has the right hon. Gentleman to offer the port, which is struggling hard to improve its trade?

The only advice which I can give on this matter is that if Cardiff can get more refrigerated ships the store can be brought back into service almost at once.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that now that his right hon. Friend the Minister of Fuel and Power has wiped off Cardiff as a coal exporting centre this decision is a confession of defeat about food imports into the city? Does he not think that he and the Government have some responsibility for the welfare of the city, and for helping with its trade?

One of the difficulties is that of the last cargo of refrigerated meat which came into the port the vast majority of it then went by rail to London.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he has now received the interim Report of the panel of experts examining the Forth tube crossing; and if he will make a statement.

I have not as yet received this Report, but expect to do so very soon. The Government must have a little time to consider, and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland will hope to be ready to make a statement shortly after we reassemble.

May I ask my right hon. Friend for an assurance that he and his Department will do their best to help the Secretary of State for Scotland to get an early start made with building a crossing, whether it be a bridge or a tube, because it is badly needed?

I have not received the Report, but my Department will certainly collaborate very closely with the Secretary of State if we can help him in any way.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation the amount of the grant which has been promised towards the reconstruction of Bencoolen Bridge, at Bude; and when the work is to begin.

The amount of the grant, which has now been made, is £6,000. I understand that the county council has yet to obtain tenders, but work should be able to start in two or three months.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that I was advised more than a year ago that formal approval was about to be granted for this work and that the work was expected to start in early spring—spring of last year? Will he bear in mind that in the meantime about 100 people are living under the constant threat of flooding whenever there is heavy rain?

I am glad to tell my hon. Friend that it is likely that the work will start in June this year.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he will include in the regular official statistics relating to road accidents, the quarterly figures of persons killed or seriously injured on zebra crossings.

Figures of casualties on zebra crossings are already given in the monthly returns of road accidents issued by my Department.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary arrange to publish these figures quarterly or annually so that the general public can realise that there has been a substantial increase in the number of accidents even on zebra crossings? The figures went up from 675 in 1953 to 920 last year.

These figures are made available in the Library of the House of Commons regularly every month. I have not drawn the hon. and gallant Gentleman's attention to that previously because I thought he liked putting Parliamentary Questions on the subject.

In view of the totally unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter again.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he is aware of the danger caused to school children crossing the main Cardiff-Swansea trunk road at Ely, Cardiff; and whether he will arrange for traffic islands to be established at convenient points from Culverhouse Cross down to Lower Ely.

At three points on this road, adult patrols or the police assist school children to cross. My right hon. Friend has had no application from Cardiff City Council for grant towards the cost of providing refuge islands on this road.

Surely the Minister realises that this is the most dangerous road in Wales? It is the main arterial road from Cardiff to the West. It is heavy with traffic, and school children have to cross it four times a day. May I assure the right hon. Gentleman that there is a need for these islands, which has been expressed by the local people, as otherwise I should not have addressed the Question to him?

I do not really know why the hon. Gentleman is putting this Question to us. The Cardiff City Council is the highway authority responsible for this length of road, on which there are six pedestrian crossings, and at three of them there are adult patrols or police who assist school children to cross in safety.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what reply he has sent to the memorandum submitted to him by the Industrial Association of Wales and Monmouthshire concerning the serious effects on industrial productivity in Wales and Monmouthshire caused by bad roads; and whether he will make a statement.

This memorandum, which only reached me within the last week, is at present being examined.

Will the Minister give some urgent consideration to this matter, because the state of the roads is one of our major problems there? We look to the right hon. Gentleman for a considerable measure of help in this matter.

I certainly will, and, of course, I shall examine it myself.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation the total commitments to date under the new roads programme; and the present rate of expenditure.

Works of major improvement on trunk and classified roads which will cost the Exchequer just over £47 million have been authorised in the two years 1954–55 and 1955–56. By the end of 1956–57, I expect authorisations to reach a total of about £81½ million including works in Scotland.

As my hon. Friend will appreciate, Exchequer payments on such works rise much more slowly, the actual expenditure on most schemes being spread over a number of years. In 1954–55 some £5 million from the Exchequer was spent; in 1955–56 some £8 million; and the provision for the coming year is £14½ million

All these figures exclude the cost of land acquisition and other preliminary expenses of trunk road schemes.

May I ask my right hon. Friend whether, as the speeding up of this programme will result in a great saving in the costs of industry, he will give an assurance that everything possible will be done to speed up the rate of progress and to press on with the improvements?

I certainly will, taking into account the general economic policy of the Government. My hon. Friend might like to know that this year we shall spend £90 million in total on roads.

Will the Minister bear in mind, when considering all these matters, that while the need for road improvement in this country is probably greater than in any other country, our programme is much below that of other countries less industrialised than our own?

There are all sorts of views about the road programme, but at the moment it is going to schedule and according to the plans which have been announced.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what is being done about motorways in the new roads programme.

The acquisition of land for the Ross Spur is about to start, and preparation of contract details for the London-Birmingham section of the London-Yorkshire motorway is proceeding.

Work preparatory to the publication of a draft scheme under Section 1 of the Special Roads Act, 1949, is in hand for the second section of the London-Yorkshire motorway and for the Preston-Birmingham motorway.

I will, with permission, circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a detailed statement on the first section of the London-Yorkshire motorway.

Can my right hon. Friend say when the first section of this highway will be opened? Will the statement which he is circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT give any idea of the stages at which this road will be completed?

The statement deals mainly with the methods of land acquisition, and that is the first step. We are trying to press on with that as fast as we can. I cannot say anything concrete until we have bought the land.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what representations he received about the commandant's suite at London Airport; what alterations were made as a result of these representations; and the estimated cost of the alterations.

I have received no representations. The rest of the Question, therefore, does not arise.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that widespread publicity has been given to the fact that an additional £40,000 was spent at London Airport recently because of certain accommodation? Is that without justification?

What I am aware of is that I have asked that plans should be prepared for an alternative method at London Airport of dealing with very special occasions. That is a purely planning project. No cost has been ascertained, no money has been spent, and no construction is projected.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he will state the reasons given to him which caused Sir Miles Thomas to resign from the chairmanship of British Overseas Airways Corporation.

The reasons were clearly stated in the Chairman's letter to me of 7th March, which has been published.

Can the Minister explain what Sir Miles meant by "back-bench sniping" and say whether or not that had any influence in his resignation?

Perhaps he meant what the hon. Member is now doing.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what facilities he has given to Sir Miles Thomas to engage in part-time commercial activities, unconnected with his function as Chairman of the British Overseas Airways Corporation since 23rd November, 1955.

None, Sir, apart from the two part-time directorships of which my predecessor informed the House on 23rd November.

Arising out of that reply, and in view of the rather opportunistic comments by Sir Miles Thomas on nationalised industry, will the right hon. Gentleman make sure that the successor to Sir Miles is at least in sympathy with the form of organisation which he is appointed to serve?

As I said in my letter to Sir Miles Thomas, he has done a very fine job in B.O.A.C., for which I feel the whole country should be grateful to him. Sir Miles resigned for reasons which he has made quite clear, and which I fully understand and accept. So far as I am concerned, that is the end of the matter.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that we shall be very lucky if we get anybody comparable to Sir Miles Thomas as his successor?

While everyone agrees about the competence of Sir Miles Thomas, in view of his statement that one of the reasons for his resignation was that he disliked the sniping from the back benches, did the Minister ask him, when he took on the job, whether he was aware that there was the power of Parliament and the right of hon. Members to question Ministers about the affairs of the Corporation?

I quite agree with the right hon. Gentleman. That is the constitutional position of chairmen of all nationalised industries, which I am quite sure they understand.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he will report on his talks with the Chairman of the British Transport Commission on the question of pensions for railway superannuitants.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he will now make a statement about adjustment of railway superannuation payments to meet the increased cost of living.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he will now make a statement regarding increased pensions for retired railwaymen.

The Commission proposes to introduce, with effect from 1st April, 1956, a further scheme of pension supplements which will apply to a large number of pensioners who are outside the scope of the existing scheme. It will be limited to those who are not entitled to benefit under the State insurance scheme and will extend only to cases in which the pension plus supplement will not exceed £250 a year. The maximum amount of supplement, for those who have been retired a number of years, will be £28 a year, but pensioners who are already getting a larger supplement under the existing scheme will continue to receive it.

With permission, I will circulate the full details in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

May I ask my right hon. Friend to accept my thanks for this propressive step? Will he convey to Sir Brian Robertson the appreciation of many people for recognising the needs of old railway servants who have helped to build up the grandeur of British Railways? May I ask my right hon. Friend to accept my assurance that I like Ministers who are not frightened of creating precedents and that I am bored with Ministers who are made static by precedents?

Mr. Brockway.

rose—

The hon. Member for Eton and Slough (Mr. Fenner Brockway) had a Question on the Order Paper which the Minister has just answered, and he is entitled to be heard first.

I thank the Minister for his reply, but I did not hear the date when the new pensions are to come into operation. Would he consider backdating them to the time when pension increases were made for other public servants? Would he also consider whether the cost of the pensions could be borne by the Treasury rather than the Transport Commission, which already has such a heavy burden?

The date is 1st April. This is a quite proper burden for the Commission to carry. In answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Tynemouth (Dame Irene Ward), I would say that both the Commission and I have tried very hard about this scheme. I say frankly that we would have liked to have done more, but at least we have tried to do something for the people who are worst off.

Does the scheme mean that all railway pensioners will be brought up to a minimum of £250 a year, and does it apply to the widows of pensioners?

The answer to the first part of that supplementary question is "No"; but the scheme takes no account of other sources of income; there is no means test. It takes no account of whether an annuitant is married or single, and there is no lump sum benefit deduction, as there was under the previous scheme.

Am I right in understanding the Minister's statement to mean that in effect practically none of the ex-wages staff of the railway will receive any benefit from the announcement that he has made?

That is partly true, but not completely so.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he can now report the result of his discussions with the British Transport Commission on the question of further financial assistance to railway superannuitants and pensioners; and what consultations he has had with the appropriate trade unions.

As to the first part of the Question, I would refer the hon. Member to the replies I have given today to my hon. Friend the Member for Tyne-mouth (Dame Irene Ward) and the hon. Members for Accrington (Mr. H. Hynd) and Eton and Slough (Mr. Fenner Brockway).

The Answer to the second part of the Question is, "None." I have, however, had many representations from organisations formed by the superannuitants themselves, and my predecessor received a deputation from one of them.

While expressing our appreciation of the Minister's sympathetic activity in this matter, may I point out to the right hon. Gentleman that there are some unsatisfactory features about the new scheme, and in view of the necessity for taking the unions along with the Commission on this sort of matter, will he not advise the Commission to discuss these difficulties with the appropriate trade unions whose members the super-annuitants are?

To be fair to the British Transport Commission, I think that it did see T.S.S.A. about this, but I agree that the notice was short. I must take part of the blame for that because it has been a long and difficult process to work this out.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he will now make a statement about the progress of negotiations with regard to the electrification of railways in south-west Scotland.

I understand that substantial progress has been made in the negotiations for an agreement between the British Transport Commission and the Glasgow Corporation. This is an essential preliminary to the electrification of the Glasgow suburban railway system.

Is the Minister aware of the volume of disquiet at the protracted negotiations over this matter? Will he do all he can to get an early decision in view of the great importance of these railway systems?

I think that progress is now being made.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation the extent of the savings he anticipates will be achieved by greater efficiency in the running of the railways during the next six months.

As the right hon. Member will realise, any estimate of savings limited to six months, even if it could be made, would have little relevance to the point to which attention will be directed when the time comes. That, as I said in my statement on 19th March, is the financial prospect over the next few years.

Yes, but as the Minister, in his statement last week, based his plea for postponement on the economy measures which he anticipated would be put into operation in the next six months, surely he must have some idea of what they will be; otherwise he has no justification for interfering and reducing the income to the Commission from the £37 million which it desires to £20 million?

One of the main things which has already been put in hand is an objective review of the whole future of the Commission's financial and economic situation, which will take some time to carry through. There are a great many other points of detail which will be examined, such as modernisation, freight charges, productivity and regional structure, and in my view all these things mean that there is a need for a breathing space for the Commission of six months in order that the plans may be pressed forward.

But in view of the drastic nature of the right hon. Gentleman's interference, is it not really unrealistic and dangerous for him to base his important change of policy on the expectation of some magical occurrence during the next six months?

If the right hon. Gentleman calls my interference drastic, I would reply that there is a drastic need to stop the continual passing of costs on to industry and the public.

May I ask whether my right hon. Friend anticipates that among the advantages of greater efficiency would be included greater punctuality?

To be fair, I should say that trains are already running with greater punctuality. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] If hon. Members will draw my attention to those which are not—as they fairly frequently do—I will endeavour to have their complaints looked into by the Transport Commission.

asked the Minister of Defence how many additional men he requires to be recruited to the Forces before abolishing National Service.

I regret that I cannot give any accurate estimate. A number of factors must be taken into account, including the size and nature of our commitments, the rate at which men are recruited on Regular engagements, and the average length of time for which they serve.

Does that mean that if the Minister fails to secure the desired increase in volunteers, conscription must remain indefinitely? Is he aware that West Germany proposes to cut her call-up from eighteen months to twelve months?

I was asked for an estimate of the number I wanted. We trust that Regular recruitment will improve as a result of the pay improvements, which take effect on 1st April next. It is premature to give an estimate at present.

Does not my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the two principal factors determining the level of our Armed Forces are the strength of the Russian armed forces and the activities of Russia in promoting Communism in all parts of the world? Does not he agree that our level cannot be reduced until Russian visits, words and smiles are followed by deeds?

Arising out of the original Question and the original Answer, is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that only a few weeks ago his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War explicitly stated, in reply to a question during a broadcast, that he required 300,000 Regulars before being able to abolish National Service? Has that figure been revised or has the right hon. and learned Gentleman not been informed about it?

I have been informed. That figure was given against the background of our present commitments. In the matter of Regular recruitment for the Army—and only the Army was under discussion—to get the figure up to 300,000 would mean the intake of another 100,000 men, and I thought it premature to base any estimate upon that assumption.

asked the Minister of Defence if he will arrange for the setting up of camp councils in the Services, on the basis of the Whitley Councils, composed of officers, non-commissioned officers and men to enable complaints and matters affecting general welfare to receive adequate treatment.

I have no reason to think that the existing methods for the consideration of complaints in the Services are unsatisfactory.

Is the Minister aware that the long pipeline, through N.C.O.s and junior officers, through which complaints have to go really means that they never get to the right quarter? Is he further aware that where camp councils were set up during the war, and in different parts of the country since the war, they were very successful, and were more efficient from the point of view of the units as well as of the men?

I still think that the method for making complaints, which has stood the test of time, is a good method. I am well aware that the Royal Navy has its welfare committees, the Royal Air Force its station committees and the other Service welfare, N.A.A.F.I. and other committees. If there is some detailed difficulty' about them, I am sure that Questions will be put down to my right hon. Friends who are responsible for these Departments.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs how far, as a result of the recent consultation between Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom, the United States Government, and the French Government, applications from the Government of Israel for modern aircraft and tanks will be met in accordance with the provisions of the Tripartite Declaration.

All requests by Middle Eastern countries to Her Majesty's Government for arms are considered in the light of the principles laid down in the Tripartite Declaration of May, 1950. As I have repeatedly stated, it would be contrary to Her Majesty's Government's normal practice to disclose what arms are supplied in response to such requests.

Is not the danger of war in the Middle East considerably increased by the fact that substantial numbers of modern aircraft and tanks are being supplied to Egypt and are being denied to Israel? What policy reason is there which the Foreign Secretary can adduce which would justify the prevention of a reasonable supply of comparable types of aircraft and tanks being made to Israel, so as to avoid any suggestion of an arms race?

The question of arms deliveries to individual countries is a very sensitive matter. Generally speaking, I think it is accepted that over the past five years we have managed to keep a fair balance. We shall continue to try to do that.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what further progress has been made in the discussions in Washington about methods of implementing the Tripartite Declaration on the dispute between Israel and her Arab neighbours.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will now make a statement on the recent discussions in Washington on the implementation of the Tripartite Declaration, 1950.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, pending a decision of the Security Council on measures to deal with the dispute between Israel and the Arab States, the signatories to the Tripartite Agreement have now decided how to implement the provisions of that Agreement in the event of aggression by any of the Arab States against Israel.

I have nothing to add to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Shrewsbury (Mr. Langford-Holt) on 21st March.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the continued deterioration of the position in the Middle East is due largely to the absence of any policy on the part of the West? If we cannot persuade the Americans to agree upon a joint policy and joint action, would it not be better to produce a policy of our own?

I think that my hon. Friend is failing to draw a distinction between policy and the means of implementing policy. Our policy in the Middle East is perfectly clear. First, we wish to strengthen the means of keeping the peace on the frontiers of Israel—and I think that hon. Members on both sides of the House agree that that is the right thing to do—and, secondly, as we have made perfectly clear again and again, we stand by the spirit and letter of the Tripartite Declaration.

Is the Foreign Secretary not aware that the failure to give an indication as to how the Tripartite Declaration is to be implemented is one of the main causes of trouble in the Middle East that neither the Arabs nor the Jews have any faith in this as a Declaration, and that he should make it perfectly clear where we stand, as a country, in relation to its implementation?

That has been made clear again and again, and I really think that it would be most unwise to indicate the action which might be taken in hypothetical circumstances.

But how can the right hon. and learned Gentleman claim that this matter is being raised in hypothetical circumstances? Already the representatives of the Soviet Government have declared their intention of vetoing any decision by the Security Council on this matter, and if there is a danger—which is apprehended by many persons concerned—of the Security Council discussions breaking down, what is to be the position of Her Majesty's Government? Are they to implement the provisions of the Declaration in whatever way is open to them, or are they to leave matters as they are, with all the dangers that are entailed?

The Tripartite Declaration refers to action both within and without the United Nations, and we have made it perfectly clear again and again that we do reserve the right to take action without the United Nations.

May I ask the right hon. and learned Gentleman to be a little more explicit and to indicate to hon. Members what kind of action he contemplates? If the peaceful efforts break down—and that may happen—what action is to be taken? Are the provisions of the Tripartite Declaration to be implemented, and will he make it perfectly clear to all States in the Middle East, including Israel and Egypt, that in the event of any aggression or the threat of aggression, the provisions of the Declaration will be implemented?

We have said that again and again. [Laughter.] I do not see why that should be the cause for mirth, because it is a very serious obligation which might have very serious consequences, and it is certainly no laughing matter.

Will my right hon. Friend be able to make a statement soon as to how the aggressor would be determined in the event of an outbreak, and whether, in the event of such an aggressor being determined, positive action would be taken, and whether a joint declaration to that effect cannot be made, on the principle that we certainly cannot "go" this matter alone?

The obligations are laid down in the Tripartite Declaration, and those obligations will be honoured.

In view of the admittedly serious situation which exists on the borders of Israel and the Arab countries—we are told in The Times that three regiments of infantry, with armoured support, have been deployed in the Gaza strip by the Egyptian Government—is not this problem one of great urgency? As these discussions have been going on for nearly six weeks without any sign of being terminated, can the Foreign Secretary tell us when he expects the conference to come to a decision?

Of course the matter is one of the greatest urgency, and we have said that repeatedly. But these discussions deal with methods, and I have said to the House before that I think that in any event it would be most inappropriate to have public statements about the methods to be adopted.

Is the Foreign Secretary saying that the discussions have now been concluded but that he does not want to reveal their outcome? May I ask him whether he does not feel, in view of the enormous importance of making it perfectly plain to all parties in that part of the world what we are going to do, that, despite the need for some degree of security in military matters, a precise indication should be given as to what we will do in the event of a violation of the frontiers?

The discussions have not been concluded—they are continuing—but I still think that it would be most unwise to indicate what precise action is to be taken in a hypothetical situation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that unless he gives some precise indication—or some fairly precise indication—of what he and Her Majesty's Government will do, the parties to this dispute will not believe that any action is to be taken?

I really do not think it possible publicly to disclose plans.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will make a further statement on negotiations with Jordan.

The right hon. Member will now have seen the joint communiqué issued on 24th March. I have nothing to add at present.

Will the Foreign Secretary say whether reports which have been very authoritatively appearing in the Press are correct, namely, that we are proposing to continue at approximately its former level our subsidy for the military forces of Jordan, while, at the same time, we have lost all assurance that those forces will be used in any way in conformity with British policy? Is he aware that there is very great anxiety about that in this country?

I am aware of the anxiety, but I think that until the negotiations are over I can add nothing.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what further action Her Majesty's Government now propose to take through the United Nations in order to secure a relaxation of tension in the Middle East.

The right hon. and learned Gentleman will be aware that the Security Council met on 26th March to discuss the situation in Palestine. A draft resolution was introduced by the United States Delegate requesting the Secretary-General to investigate the situation, to arrange for certain measures to be taken by the parties affected in order to reduce existing tension and to report to the Security Council within one month. This Resolution has Her Majesty's Government's full support. The Council adjourned until today.

Can the Foreign Secretary say whether General Burns' organisation—the United Nations Truce Supervisory Organisation—has powers to investigate concentration of troops on either side of the border? If it has, can he say whether it is to investigate, as requested by the Government of Israel, an alleged concentration of Egyptian troops in the Gaza strip?

I think that I would require notice of the precise definition of the powers, but my impression is that the powers of the Organisation are limited to investigating breaches of the armistice agreement, as a concentration might be, of course.

Are we to understand from an earlier Answer of the Foreign Secretary's that in certain circumstances the Powers, including ourselves, who are parties to the Tripartite Declaration might consider taking action not merely outside the United Nations but possibly in conflict with a decision which the United Nations has taken? Having regard to the Answer which he has now given, does he not think that a very far-reaching statement to be made in so casual a way?

I certainly did not intend to make a statement in a casual way. The point is that there might be absence of decision by the Security Council. That is the contingency for which, of course, it is very necessary to keep open other action.