asked the Secretary of State for Air on how many days between 1st January and 30th June, 1956, the wind blew from a north and easterly direction as compared with a south and westerly direction; and what is now officially accepted as the prevailing wind over the British Isles.

I am circulating with the OFFICIAL REPORT particulars of wind direction for different parts of the country. Taking the country as a whole, north-easterly winds were unusually frequent during this period, but south-westerly winds were still predominant, and this must continue to be regarded as the prevailing direction.

If we are to get a great deal of east wind in the future, will my hon. Friend inform the Minister of Fuel and Power that we shall want some more coal? Will he also ask his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Air whether, from his recent experience he can state that the eastern breezes are likely to be a little more friendly and benevolent in future?

The easterly winds are what they are, and the westerly winds continue to be warmer and generally more agreeable.

Will the hon. Gentleman inform his hon. Friend that the mining community is inviting new recruits for the mining industry?

asked the Secretary of State for Air (1) if he will make a statement on the school facilities provided for the children of Royal Air Force parents at Khormaksar and Steamer Point, Aden, with particular reference to the number of primary and secondary schoolchildren for whom education is being provided and the character of the facilities available;

(2) what complaints he has received about the character of school facilities for the children of Royal Air Force parents in Aden; and what action he is taking;

(3) what proposals he has under consideration for a new school for the children of Royal Air Force parents in Aden; and when work on this project will begin.

Primary education is provided at Khormaksar and Steamer Point for 299 children, including 279 of R.A.F. parents. Secondary education is provided at Khormaksar for 102 children, including 89 of R.A.F. parents. Although we have received no complaints, my right hon. Friend realises that the accommodation is unsatisfactory. We plan to build a new school at Khormaksar which will provide, under one roof, primary and secondary school facilities for most of the children at Khormaksar and Steamer Point. A few of the younger children at Steamer Point will continue to attend the primary school there, to avoid travelling.

On the assumption that so long as this base exists the Minister should act vigorously for the welfare of the children of Service men, may I ask the hon. Gentleman the following questions? First, is it a fact that some infants have to travel 14 miles daily in order to attend school, and is that not very undesirable? Secondly, is it the fact that the secondary school lacks most of the secondary facilities that such a school should have? Thirdly, would the hon. Gentleman tell the House how long the plans for the new school have been on the stocks, and can he give a date when work will actually commence?

We realise that the position is unsatisfactory. That is why we are planning to go ahead and build this new primary and secondary school. We hope to be able to start early next year.

asked the Secretary of State for Air how many Ceylonese are employed directly or indirectly at the Royal Air Force installations in Ceylon; and the estimated annual cost to the British taxpayer of maintaining these installations.

The number of locally entered employees is about 2,000, and the annual cost of maintaining the installations is about £1·5 million.

Can my hon. Friend say whether any arrangements have been made to give financial help to any men who may lose their employment as a result of these new arrangements?

When a statement was made at the end of the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference it said that the representatives of the two Governments would meet at an early date in London and later in Colombo to make the detailed arrangements in regard to these matters, and I have no doubt that both Governments will bear in mind the point raised by my hon. Friend.

asked the Secretary of State for Air if he will make a statement on his official discussions with Mr. Khrushchev during his recent visit to Moscow.

My right hon. Friend had no formal discussions but certain matters of common interest were discussed.

Apparently the hon. Gentleman's right hon. Friend had some informal and unofficial talks with Mr. Khrushchev about which various reports have been given. Could he persuade his right hon. Friend to give us an account of what happened then?

No, Sir. My right hon. Friend had no formal discussions. The discussions that did take place were in private, and I doubt very much whether he would wish to make a statement about them.

asked the Secretary of State for Air whether he is aware that airmen must buy their raincoats; and if he will ensure that they get a free issue in future.

In present circumstances, we are not able to make a free issue of raincoats.

Does that mean that the hon. Gentleman has not got the money? Is it logical to give airmen a greatcoat to keep out the cold and not give them a raincoat to protect them from the rain? The hon. Gentleman cannot do the one without the other. Is it a matter of money?

Money, of course, does enter into the matter. Greatcoats and groundsheets are issued, but to issue raincoats would cost between £1 million and £2 million, with a recurring cost of up to £1 million a year.

Is it not important that this matter should be looked into if we are to make the Service sufficiently attractive to young men and be able to do away with National Service?

It certainly has been looked into, along with a good many other things that we should like to do if we could.

asked the Secretary of State for Air what plans he has for re-equipping Fighter Command with high performance aircraft already developed by our North Atlantic Treaty Organisation Allies, thus relieving the taxpayer of the cost of development of comparable replacement aircraft for Fighter Command.

At the moment, we are re-equipping Fighter Command with Hunters and Javelins. Major development work on these aircraft is already complete. Certainly there is much to be gained from co-operation with our Allies in the field of research and development, but it would be a mistake to assume that the purchase or manufacture of aircraft developed by other countries would necessarily relieve us of any substantial expense.

Does not the Minister agree that, in order to avoid duplication within N.A.T.O., it would be better to re-equip Fighter Command, as replacements become necessary, with excellent high-performance aircraft of our Allies, and to concentrate our efforts on developing more advanced types of fighters?

There are two major difficulties about re-equipping with aircraft from America. First, there is a considerable dollar expenditure involved; and second, fighter aircraft are only a part of the whole defence system, of which the control and reporting system is an equally important part. The control and reporting system in this country is quite different from that in the United States, and all our fighters are geared to our system and American fighters are geared to the American system. By that I do not mean to imply that we will never buy any aircraft from our Allies, but I am only pointing out that it is not necessarily as easy as may appear at first sight.

asked the Secretary of State for Air which of the recommendations of the second Hollinghurst Report have been adopted.

A number of the recommendations are still under consideration, and I am not yet in a position to make a comprehensive statement.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Secretary of State himself referred to this matter as long ago as the Air Estimates debate? Surely some decisions have been come to, particularly in such matters as the centralised servicing of aircraft, which might result in a considerable saving in skilled manpower?

The Committee was set up in June last year, and its Report was received in December last year. Certainly, my right hon. Friend referred to it in the Air Estimates debate, and it was natural that he should do so, but there were 34 recommendations, and a number of them are still under discussion within the Department. When the time comes, and the whole thing is settled, my right hon. Friend will be in a position to say much more.

Since there were 34 recommendations, will not the hon. Gentleman speed up this matter, with a view to getting some results, because time is passing?

It is going very well.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he will make a statement on the proposed electrification of the Deeside railway between the city of Aberdeen and the town of Ballater.

We know of no proposal to electrify the railway between Aberdeen and Ballater.

Will the Minister make himself au fait with what is happening in Scotland, because there are such proposals? Will he bear in mind the proximity of hydro-electric power, the enormous growth of the tourist traffic and the amazing natural beauty of Scotland, and see that the railway is electrified at an early date?

I will slightly modify what I originally said, and now tell the hon. and learned Gentleman that there is no proposal to electrify the railway between Aberdeen and Ballater.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what estimate was made by Her Majesty's Government of the additional loss likely to be incurred by the British Transport Commission as a result of stabilisation of railway charges until the end of 1956 made at the request of Her Majesty's Government; and how it is proposed by Her Majesty's Government that the Commission shall meet it.

The undertaking given by the Chairman of the Commission on 28th June was the result of its own decision and not of a Government request. The first part of the Question does not, therefore, arise. On the second part I can add nothing to the Answer I gave to the hon. Member on 4th July.

But are not the Government acting quite irresponsibly in this matter? Is it not a fact that the Commission is accumulating a deficit at the rate of £45 million a year and that in about one year's time it will exceed £100 million? The Government cannot shelve responsibility for the difficult financial position of the Commission, which is largely due to the Government's own action.

I do not agree with anything that the hon. Gentleman has said. The first thing I want to make plain is that the Opposition really must consider where they stand on this matter. Do they really want prices stabilised or do they not? If they do want prices stabilised they ought to congratulate the Commission on being one of the leading industries in the country to try to do it. As to the financial position of the Commission, which has not been materially altered one way or the other by the present proposals, the fact is that we are, as the hon. Gentleman knows, working very hard on an examination of the position in which the Commission finds itself. It certainly does not arise as a result of Government action.

How can the right hon. Gentleman say that he does not agree with what I say when it is a fact that the Commission is accumulating this large deficit? He cannot deny that. The Government are responsible for this position, are they not, because they did request the Commission to take the action in regard to refraining from raising freight charges? The Government set aside the Transport Commission's advice that it should be permitted to raise its charges. Is not it a fact that the Commission will have to put up its charges even more when the standstill comes to an end than would otherwise have been the case?

I think it puts the matter into proportion if I say that the Government are responsible to the extent of £8 million out of a deficit which the hon. Gentleman is quite right in saying may reach £100 million by the end of the year.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether satisfactory progress is being made with the railway modernisation scheme, and whether, in the long run, that will increase the earning capacity of the railways?

Very good progress is being made with the modernisation scheme. What we are doing during the six months is, among other things, to carry out a detailed assessment of its progress so that we can see clearly when it will pay off.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what are the particular principles of private enterprise not now in force which it is proposed to apply to the railways.

The most important principles of enlightened private enterprise are to give as good or better service than one's competitors; to provide such a service under fair and reasonable conditions at a fair and reasonable price. The purpose of the 1953 Act was to give the Commission freedom to develop these principles.

Is not it really ridiculous to suggest that there are any principles of efficiency which apply particularly to private enterprise or to public enterprise? In view of the enormous strides made by the British Transport Commission in the greater efficiency of its railways, which have been revealed every year in its Annual Report, is not it slighting to the Commission and its staff to suggest that there are ideals or proposals which are peculiar to private enterprise which they have not thought of?

I do not agree with that, but I think that it is a perfectly fair point. There is a fundamental difference between the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues and the Government. The difference is that they quite sincerely believe—and I do not question it for a moment—that the right way to run a nationalised industry is to run it on strictly nationalised principles which, the whole country accepts, have, on the whole, failed. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] The Government's view is that the right way to run these nationally-owned industries is on the principles of enlightened private enterprise, with competition and the use of most up-to-date business methods. That is the clear difference between the two sides of the House.

Has not British industry in the last hundred years built up a good code of managerial efficiency on which the nationalised industries might draw?

Is not the Minister making a great mistake in trying to bring these political arguments into a technical problem of efficiency? Is not it a fact that the principle on which the nationalised industries—this and the others—run is the principle of giving the best possible service to the nation and to the people? In view of the extraordinary progress, the reduction of costs all round, and the extraordinarily cheap services for freight and passengers on the railways which the Commission gives, compared with the prices asked in almost every other industry, is not it ridiculous to suggest that we should introduce principles from some other system, from private enterprise, in order to teach this great national service what it ought to do?

I do not think that this is a matter that we can properly debate at Question Time. I would only answer by saying that if the right hon. Gentleman will study the 1953 Act, the statements made by the Government on the modernisation plan, and the 1956 Act—and he knows what they contain—he will see that they have radically changed the organisation of the Commission to its advantage—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]—by making it into a more flexible and commercial undertaking.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation, in view of the prospective reduction in superannuation contributions and payments to certain members of the London Transport and railways staff, what consultations he had on this matter with appropriate trade unions; and what representations have been made to him respecting alleged hardships likely to be suffered by those who joined the service before 1948.

The terms of the modifications of the superannuation schemes of London Transport and the railways, to take account of the National Insurance pension, were first discussed and agreed between the British Transport Commission—or the London Transport Executive—and all the trade unions and staff associations concerned. The draft of the modifying Regulations was sent by me to all these bodies and was agreed by them before I made the Regulations on 15th May last.

Two hon. Members have sent me letters from individual employees of London Transport complaining of certain of the terms. Replies have been sent to the hon. Members concerned, explaining these terms and pointing out that they had been agreed by the recognised representatives of the employees.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he will reconsider the regulation which requires 24 hours' notice to be given to the police before harvesters travel along public roads, in view of the fact that changeable weather renders this regulation impracticable.

Notice is at present required for the moving of a combine harvester only if it is over 8 ft. wide and the journey on roads exceeds five miles. I already have these and other requirements under review, and I am proposing to amend them so that notice is not required for harvesters up to 9½ ft. wide.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask him if he can give an assurance that this amendment will come into operation before the coming harvest?

I will do my best.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he will give details of the reduction of £105,000 in expenditure on ports included in the economy statement recently announced; and whether this affects the port of Goole.

This reduction is entirely on Civil Defence expenditure, and it would not be in the public interest to give details about a particular port.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that he will do nothing to impede the development and efficiency of the port of Goole, which is the only port of the West Riding of Yorkshire?

I will certainly do that. This expenditure does not relate to the commercial efficiency of the port, but purely to Civil Defence.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether his attention has been drawn to a case in which a woman has been killed as a result of a blow from a bottle thrown from a passing motor coach; and whether he will introduce regulations making it an offence to throw bottles and other refuse from the windows of vehicles, and making it obligatory for the proprietors of motor coach companies to provide inside the vehicles suitable litter bins together with notices warning the passengers of the consequences of throwing litter through the windows.

It is already an offence under the Regulations governing the conduct of passengers in public service vehicles to throw bottles or litter out of the vehicle. The provision of litter bins and warning notices is a matter best left to the discretion of operators.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether, in view of the fact that traffic at Hyde Park Corner often gets choked up in an immovable mass, he will experiment with a return to the former system by which traffic between Constitution Hill and Hyde Park would drive straight across the centre, by the road now unused, and be controlled by traffic lights or police.

Comprehensive proposals for improving the flow of traffic at Hyde Park Corner are under consideration. Meanwhile no purpose would be served by reverting, as my hon. Friend proposes, to a system which, after wide experience, was abandoned in 1926.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that when that scheme was abandoned traffic was nothing like so congested as it is now? Would he not agree that it would be much better to have an orderly regulation of traffic going across the junction, stopped by traffic lights or police, and the other traffic similarly stopped, instead of the disorderly chaos that occurs at intervals now?

That does not seem to fit in with the figures, which seem to show that the roundabout is entirely successful. For example, the number of vehicles using the roundabout has gone up by 25 per cent. and the delay has been reduced by 30 per cent., comparing the figures for 1954 with the position in 1925. So, on the whole, we have got a measurable improvement, although I quite accept that it is not nearly good enough.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider that a census at Hyde Park Corner would show that about 80 per cent. of the vehicles between 9 and 10 o'clock in the morning have only one person inside them? Would not a solution of the traffic problem of London be to forbid parking in the streets within five miles of Charing Cross?

I agree; I think the right hon. Gentleman's estimate of cars with only one person in them is possibly correct. They are the largest contribution to congestion in inner London. I would not go as far as the right hon. Gentleman's suggestion of banning them all, but I agree that we have to restrict the parking of that kind of vehicle.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he can yet say what improvements are to be carried out to increase the flow of traffic at Marble Arch and at Hyde Park Corner.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what plans he has made to reduce traffic congestion at Hyde Park Corner and Marble Arch.

I attach great importance to getting the right comprehensive scheme for improving traffic conditions at Marble Arch, Hyde Park Corner and Park Lane. Detailed consideration is now being given to the related problems of amenity, traffic flow and the details of the roundabouts, but the study is not yet complete.

How long has this consideration been going on? Is it not time that action was taken?

Quite frankly, it does not interest me how long consideration has been going on. I am only interested in how soon I can do the job, and that will be as soon as possible.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that the length of time likely to elapse before anything is done may have some relationship to the length of time during which the matter has been considered by the Ministry without any action whatsoever?

I think that the right hon. Gentleman knows that there are difficult problems, as I said in this House recently. There is the difficulty of whether we ought to knock down Decimus Burton's screen at the entrance to the park, or destroy the lodges on the fringe of Hyde Park, things about which a great many people feel very strongly. I do not think the time that has been taken, if it is considered to be long, has been entirely wasted.

The right hon. Gentleman has still not told us what he is going to do and when he is going to do it. Unless he does something about the creeping paralysis of traffic in London the right hon. Gentleman will be driven— and this is probably the only driving he will do—to the banning of private cars from central London altogether.

I hope that the hon. and gallant Member for Brixton (Lieut.-Colonel Lipton) will facilitate the final stages of the Road Traffic Bill when it returns to this House, because that is what I want.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether, in view of the increasing accident rate on the A11 trunk road in the Potter Street area, Harlow New Town, he will accelerate the completion date for the Potter Street diversion scheme announced in February, 1955.

We have no evidence that the accident rate in the Potter Street area is increasing, but I can assure my hon. Friend that everything possible is being done to expedite the start of this important scheme.

Is my hon. Friend aware that his Department itself supplied me with these statistics, showing a sharp increase in accidents of a personal nature, and will he look into the matter again?

I looked into it before I came into the House. On the length of road to be by-passed by the Potter Street diversion, the number of accidents in 1953 was 13, in 1954, 17, and in 1955 only five, which does not indicate that there has been an increase in the number of accidents.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation why it will not be possible to obtain the land required for the purposes of the A11 trunk road diversion at Potter Street until the summer of 1957 having regard to the fact that practically all the said land is vested in one public owner, that is to say the Harlow Development Corporation who are ready and willing to facilitate this scheme.

Although the order establishing the line of the road for the Potter Street diversion was made last year and the scheme has been authorised this year, the necessary statutory procedure will take some months. The draft order dealing with side roads was published on 6th July, 1956, but the period for objections does not expire until 6th October next. If there are no serious objections, the Order will be made in November. As some common land is required, there will have to be a compulsory purchase order which cannot be published in draft form until the side roads order has been made. If there are no serious objections, we hope that the compulsory purchase order will be made early next year.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation to state the area of land to be acquired for the construction of the new motorway for the Severn Bridge project, together with the number of properties and people affected; whether notification has yet been made to all those concerned; and at what date he anticipates that work will be commenced.

About 150 acres will be needed for the bridge and approach roads from Almondsbury to Haysgate. As I cannot yet say when this project will be started, it would be premature to prepare the detailed land plans, without which it is impossible to ascertain the number of properties and persons likely to be affected.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Gloucestershire County Council has published some plans of this motorway, with the result that it is inevitably having considerable hardship effect on people who are disposing of their property in the area? Would he give consideration to the prevention of publication of such plans until he is in a position to give some idea of the date on which the work can be commenced?

I quite understand, and I sympathise with those people who feel that the value of their property is affected by one of these great bridge or road schemes, but I think I am right in saying that that particular publication was not within my control. I will see what I can do in future to ensure that plans are not published until we are ready to go ahead.

Can the Minister say whether the purchase of the land will be on the basis of existing use value or speculative value?

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will put that question down.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he will now say when construction of the Newbury east—west relief road will begin; and how long the work is likely to take.

I hope soon to authorise the preparation of the engineering details, after which acquisition of the necessary land can be put in hand, but until considerable progress has been made with this work it is difficult for me to say when the consructional work will start or how long it is likely to take to complete it.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that a very short length of relief road running east and west through Newbury would greatly facilitate the flow of traffic, which is becoming progressively heavier each weekend, and that it would be of great benefit to many thousands of travellers?

Yes, Sir, I entirely agree, but I know that my hon. Friend will agree, equally, that I really must not trample over the rights of people whose land we have to buy to make these roads.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what recommendations he has received from the Warwickshire County Council for improving the safety of any stretch of Watling Street, between Atherstone and Dordon; and what was his reply.

We have received a recommendation from the county council for the imposition of a speed limit on part of this length, and this is now under consideration.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind, when considering this matter, the enormous amount of housing and industrial development that has taken place on either side of that stretch of road?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation how many underpasses, overpasses, fly-overs and similar road junctions are planned to relieve traffic congestion in the greater London area; and if he will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT a list of them, together with the estimated cost and the expected date of completion.

I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT details of eight schemes of this type in the London Traffic Area which are included in the road programme for the four years from 1st April, 1955, to 31st March, 1959.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he has considered the communication sent to him by the hon. Member for Meriden with reference to an accident at Hubbards Hill, near Atherstone; and whether he will take steps to improve the safety of this stretch of road.

Yes, Sir. A widening of the carriageway would make conditions safer, but I cannot yet say when it will be possible to authorise an improvement scheme.

Is it correct to assume that these are not the only plans which my right hon. Friend has in mind, and will he do his utmost to speed up the provision of junctions of this kind? Are they not the best way of relieving congestion?

My hon. Friend is quite right. The eight which I have announced, although they will cost about £3 million, are only the beginning of plans of this kind for fly-overs and underpasses, but they are the only firm proposals on which I am engaged at the moment.

Has the right hon. Gentleman noticed that in this serious accident the question of speed was greatly concerned, that one car was travelling at 45 miles an hour, that an oncoming motorcycle was travelling at between 50 and 55 miles an hour and that that was followed by a car travelling at 60 miles an hour? Is not that an argument for imposing a speed limit on that stretch of road?

We are carrying out a careful analysis of all the acidents that have taken place recently on that length of road.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation by how long it is estimated completion of the Cromwell Road Extension would be delayed if a fly-over were constructed at Hammersmith in place of the projected roundabout.

I am advised by the London County Council that if the fly-over were included in the present scheme the provision of a through route would be delayed by two or three years. The hon. Member no doubt appreciates that there is no question of a fly-over being an alternative to the projected roundabout. The complete scheme provides for a fly-over and a surface roundabout.

Since the Minister stated last week that in his view this fly-over will ultimately be necessary, is it not shortsighted to take the view that it is not necessary at the present time? Surely it will cost more when it is constructed later on, and more dislocation of traffic is likely to occur when the volume of traffic is so much greater? Cannot a new decision be taken?

The hon. Gentleman is making a very good point, but I have discussed this matter personally in great detail with the London County Council. The difficulties are that there is a great deal of property acquisition to be done before the fly-over can be built and that local opposition, which is very strong, is by no means overcome. I think I can best say that the scheme is going to be fitted for the fly-over, but not with it at the moment. I do not think that that will much increase the cost when it can be and is built.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation to what extent the volume of traffic in High Road, Leytonstone, has increased during the past two and ten years, respectively; particularly, in view of the heavy morning incoming and evening outgoing traffic, what statistical information he has in respect of increase in passenger cars during those hours; what consideration has been given to serious congestion mounting during forthcoming years; and the long-term plans to deal with this.

I am sorry that the information asked for by the hon. Member is not available. Traffic at a census point about a quarter of a mile south of the junction of Church Lane and High Road, Leytonstone, increased by about 32 per cent. between 1938 and 1954, and the number of private cars increased by about 21 per cent. The long-term plan to improve this important exit from London is the construction of the Eastern Avenue extension.

I am aware of that proposal. Is there any other proposal, in view of the fact that the whole of that area is rapidly becoming a bottleneck? If the Joint Parliamentary Secretary could go down there in the morning I am sure he would be most alarmed at the prospect.

I told the hon. Gentleman recently that the survey for the new road is making good progress. I do not think that it will be possible to deal with the situation until we build the new road.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation the earliest date on which the contract for the Hammersmith Viaduct on the Cromwell Road Extension could be let if preliminary negotiations were begun immediately; and how soon the ground level work between Gliddon Road and Hammersmith Bridge Road will be completed.

The London County Council tells me that it would probably be possible for it to let a contract for the viaduct by the middle of 1958. I hope the present ground level scheme between Gliddon Road and Hammersmith Bridge Road will be completed by the middle of 1958.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation how long it will take to complete the construction of the Doncaster A1 by-pass.

Between five and six years. The necessary statutory procedure and the acquisition of land will take two to three years and constructional work a further three years.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what schemes, other than the by-pass and the Don Bridge, are being considered for the purpose of dealing with the traffic congestion in and around Doncaster.

I have recently made a grant towards the cost of improving the junction of North Bridge Road (Route Al) and Trafford Street, and this scheme when completed, together with the new bus station now under construction over the River Cheswold and the proposed one-way traffic system in the High Street, should relieve congestion very considerably. I hope also to be able to authorise this year a small scheme in St. James Street.

Has the Minister ever looked into the possibility of creating a diversionary road where roads already exist some miles north of Doncaster? Is he aware that this traffic is getting worse every week? Is he aware that last Saturday there was a queue nearly a mile and a half long before 9 o'clock in the morning, and a few hours later it was at Woodlands, between four and five miles long? The R.A.C. patrol man said it was the worst he had ever seen. Will the Minister see if it is possible for at least the lighter kinds of cars to be diverted in order to give some relief?

Certainly I will look into that suggestion very carefully. I think that Doncaster at the moment is getting its fair share of attention, but if there is anything we can do to hold the position in the next year or so we will do it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that if this by-pass is not to be completed short of six years from now all the traffic will have come to a complete stop long before that time?

Perhaps the right hon. Member can tell me how he would propose to purchase land other than through the normal statutory procedure.

Has my right hon. Friend had a survey made of the roads many miles north of Doncaster in order to see whether at comparatively small expense it would be possible to make a material improvement?

I flew over Doncaster a few days ago to look at the town. On the way to Newcastle I looked at it from the air. I think there is something in what hon. Members have said. I will look into it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the congestion in and around Doncaster is by far the worst in the whole of the British Isles? Will he and his Department do everything they can and use all the pressure they can to speed some solution of this problem, particularly in view of what must be a stupendous economic loss resulting from the hold up of traffic?

I quite agree with the right hon. Member. Doncaster is a very bad town—[Laughte.]—I mean a bad town in the sense of traffic congestion. I will see what I can do to provide some temporary diversion.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that now during race week traffic is diverted and directed by Barmby Dun and Armthorpe? If that can be done at this time it could be done at other times.

Does not the time taken to acquire land for these by-passes, normally two or three years, indicate that we should now try to find a new procedure for the acquisition of land?

I have recently looked at the procedure for acquiring land for these roads because I shall be acquiring a very great deal of land in the next few years. I am satisfied that if we are to give the owners the right to object we cannot shorten the procedure.

Has it ever occurred to Her Majesty's Government to introduce a thoroughgoing tax on land values, which would remove the obstructionists?

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation in what way the radio position-finding device to be used in conjunction with land-based transmitting stations for purposes relating to the safety of life at sea can be used also for purposes relating to safety of life in the air; and the approximate cost and the nature of the adaptations to aircraft which will be necessary for these purposes.

The hon. and learned Member is presumably referring to the Decca Navigator system. An aircraft, given the necessary equipment, can use this system in the same way as a ship. Not only can it calculate its position with a very high degree of accuracy, but by means of an automatic flight log it can maintain on a special chart a continuous plot of its path.

The aircraft equipment is available on hire from the Decca Navigator Company. The cost of hiring it varies with the type of installation and presentation, but a typical charge would be £750 per annum. Certain structural modifications to the aircraft are necessary to permit the installation of the equipment and its special aerial system. A typical installation charge would be about £170.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that I am referring to the Decca Navigator System, and that there is a chain of transmitting stations all over Europe and in this country? Is not this a most valuable device, which should be encouraged by the Government?

The Government are doing everything possible to encourage this system.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation whether he is aware that members of the airport staffs have been utilising the facilities in the bars at the airports which were originally intended to meet the needs of air passengers only; and what steps he proposes to take in this matter.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what instructions he has given with regard to the staff at London Airport enjoying the 24-hour drinking facilities provided at the airport under the Licensing (Airports) Act; and to what extent members of the staff employed at the airport are permitted to patronise the bar after the conventional licensing hours.

The bars referred to are in the Customs bonded area, access to which is confined to passengers and to such staff as have occasion to go there in the course of their duties. Under general staff regulations, Government officials are forbidden to drink on duty, and I understand that most of the operating companies have a similar rule. When the 24-hour facilities came into force, all operators and other airport tenants were, however, specifically requested by the Commandant to instruct their staffs that there is to be no consumption of liquor at these bars, save in the most exceptional circumstances, and so far as I am aware the instruction is being complied with.

If what the Parliamentary Secretary has said is correct, why has the Air Commandant recently expressed serious annoyance that these facilities had quite obviously been available to the staff there?

I cannot accept the hon. Gentleman's contention. It was not the Air Commandant who expressed that view. There has been a newspaper report to that effect, but I repeat that after investigation we are satisfied that there has been no contravention of the Minister's regulations, and further steps have been taken to ensure that that situation should continue in the future.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation what difficulties now present themselves in the way of framing a scheme to prevent the collision of aircraft flying in controlled air spaces, which are fundamentally different from those which existed when the original scheme was formulated.

The difficulties are not fundamentally different now from what they were when the existing scheme was formulated; but they have been intensified by increasing traffic and by the higher speeds and altitudes at which civil aircraft now fly. Against this certain improvements in the system can now be considered as a result of greater radar coverage.

Can the Joint Under-Secretary assure us that he has full co-operation from the Air Ministry in this matter and that the Air Ministry is not as sticky now as it was in 1949, when the original scheme was framed? While we await the complete scheme can he say how many near-accidents have been reported to his Department in the last six months by the captains of British civil liners?

I am not aware that the Air Ministry has ever been sticky, but I can assure the hon. Gentleman that it is not sticky at the moment and is co-operating to the full. With regard to the second part of his Question, the Answer is that 58 incidents were reported in the six months ended 30th June. I should stress that the phrase "near-miss" is capable of misinterpretation. A pilot has to report any occurrence of an unusual nature which might have developed into a hazard. I think I would be right in saying that not more than two of these so-called "near-misses" required any violent action without which there might have been a collision.

Even two of these incidents may have caused serious loss of life. Are any arrangements in existence whereby the R.A.F. gives notice to the civil aircraft authorities if it is going to shoot right across the tracks of the civil aircraft?

The answer to the second part of the question is "Yes, Sir." The Air Ministry and my Department are trying to make that system better. I quite appreciate that a near-miss, if it developed into anything worse, would cause loss of life. That is why my right hon. Friend and the Secretary of State for Air have set up a Joint Committee of Inquiry which we hope will report in about a month's time.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation the instructions or regulations now governing the flying of aircraft over urban areas; what record he has of the number of accidents caused to urban areas by aircraft during the last ten years; and what recent consideration has been given to this matter.

The regulations which specifically govern flights by civil aircraft over towns or populous areas are contained in the Air Navigation Order, 1954, Schedule II, Rules 15 and 19. There have been nine recorded cases in the United Kingdom since 1947 in which injury to persons or damage to structures was caused by civil aircraft in urban areas. The Regulations have recently been reviewed and I am considering whether as a result certain minor amendments should be made to them.

While thanking the Minister for that reply, may I ask him whether, within his range of consideration, the matter of noise is also being considered, because that is particularly obnoxious in many areas?

Yes, Sir, I am certainly considering it.

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation which British aircraft have been considered for approval by him, together with the Boeing 707 and the DC8, for future use on the North Atlantic route by the British Overseas Airways Corporation.

The technical discussions which British Overseas Airways Corporation is undertaking with aircraft manufacturers in this country and in America are not yet completed and I cannot anticipate what proposals the Corporation will put forward.

Is the Minister aware that there appears a very serious contradiction between what he has said and what his right hon. Friend the Minister of Supply said on this matter? Can the Minister say what responsibility he or the Corporation have for the specifications sent to the industry last January, whether there has been any response from the industry to those specifications, and if any such proposals are now being considered?

I think that the specification issue is a matter which the hon. Member should pursue with my right hon. Friend. So far as B.O.A.C. is concerned, I have made the position quite plain to the House. The Chairman is now in America with an expert technical mission, looking at these aircraft. He and his colleagues are examining whatever project the British aircraft industry can offer. That is how the matter rests at the moment.

Is it not a fact that the selection of future aircraft is in the hands of a committee of the Board of B.O.A.C., including one of its senior air pilots? In the meantime, whatever the future long-term policy may be, is it not essential that we should have aircraft which will keep B.O.A.C. flying, with traffic in British, hands throughout the world?

I do not disagree. It is a very difficult task. All I can say is that I am quite satisfied that the Corporation now has a very much better set-up for trying to judge what for its commercial future it really needs in the way of aircraft. As my hon. Friend has said, it has added a pilot to its technical committee, and that is very wise. It is now really up to the Board to make up its own mind.

asked the Minister of Defence (1) if Her Majesty's Government will now make arrangements to abolish National Service in 1957; and if he will make a statement;

(2) if Her Majesty's Government will now undertake to reduce the period of National Service in the autumn of this year; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Defence to what extent proposals for reducing or ending National Service are mainly contingent on increasing the number of Regular Service men.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he will make a statement about the policy of Her Majesty's Government for ending National Service.

asked the Minister of Defence, in view of the improved international situation, whether the Government will reduce the length of National Service this year.

As I have previously explained to the House, the factors which determine whether any changes can be made in our National Service policy are the prospects of Regular recruitment and the level of the commitments which the Services have to perform. I have no statement to make at present.

If I am not putting the Minister and the Government under too much strain, may I ask if it is not time that the House heard considered plans by which this matter could be resolved, to the benefit of the men and the economy of the country?

I have no complaint of the way in which the hon. Member was good enough to phrase his question. I think it would be premature to form a judgment about what ought to be done until we see more of the effects of the raising of pay which has taken place and began to take effect in April. We have only two months' recruiting figures at present, with the figures of prolongation.

Is it not generally agreed in Government circles that it is going to take about a year to get a real appreciation of the effect of these proposals? Has the right hon. and learned Gentleman observed the supposedly inspired articles in the Tory Press about the ending of National Service? Can he say whether they are really inspired or indicate that there is to be a continuing state of dither in the Government mind?

The right hon. Member can take it from me that at any rate I am not the source of that inspiration. On the facts of the matter I am hopeful that we shall be able to form a better judgment in a shorter period than the right hon. Member suggested in the first part of his supplementary question.

Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman realise that the parents and youth of this country have made up their minds that National Service must be entirely and quickly abolished, and that they will not be put off with selective call-up—which is unfair—or any sops of that kind? Is the opposition to abolition coming from within the chiefs of staff, the Government, or the Conservative Party?

I do not know how far the hon. Member is entitled to give the views of the whole population of young people and so forth. I would only say that that is not the view which has been expressed to me.

While I appreciate that my right hon. and learned Friend is unable to make a statement about a reduction in National Service at the present time, may I ask whether he will undertake to look at the regulations regarding release of Service men to assist with hay making?

If my hon. Friend wants further information than has been given on that subject, he ought to put down a Question.

Pursuing what I was saying earlier, can the right hon. and learned Gentleman tell the House, for its enlightenment, whether the Government have given any real consideration to a reassessment of the manpower necessary to supply effective Armed Forces, having regard to new weapons? That is what we are all waiting for, but we get nothing whatsoever out of the Government.

I do not know why the right hon. Gentleman expects to get an answer to that point on a Question dealing with National Service, but I will do my best to get the facts and figures relating to recruitment and prolongation available before the debate.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he will investigate the arrangements made by the Service Departments for the supply and maintenance of guided missiles to prevent overlapping between the Services and waste of the limited skilled manpower in the Royal Air Force.

I keep in close touch with all these matters. I am not aware that there is any unnecessary overlapping between the Services or risk of waste of skilled manpower, but if the right hon. Gentleman has any particular points in mind and will let me know what they are, I shall be very glad to consider them.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman accept the general proposition that, if there are components and missiles used commonly by the three Services, he will have common maintenance for servicing and not waste technicians in the three Services?

There is a distinction between the two. In the case of common services, we are doing, and are going to do, what we can to improve co-ordination. I do not think it follows as night does the day that the maintenance is not best done by the individual Services.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he will withdraw sufficient troops and installations in Germany to equate commitments of this country with the amount to be received in support costs from the West German Government.

The level of our forces in Germany is necessarily governed by other considerations, such as strategic needs and treaty commitments.

Is the Minister aware that the Government have nevertheless made a very bad bargain indeed over the agreement? Are we not in grave danger of breaking our backs economically while maintaining an illusion of strength in Germany? Is it not time we had an overall discussion with our Allies in N.A.T.O. about the whole basis of our forces in Germany?

As to our position in N.A.T.O., it is a matter for discussion between the various countries there represented as to what the shape and size of the forces ought to be. That consideration is continually taking place in S.H.A.P.E.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he will investigate the arrangements made by the Royal Air Force and the Army for the maintenance of Auster A.O.P. aircraft to see whether tile maintenance could be carried out by the Army to avoid waste of the limited skilled manpower in the Royal Air Force.

I have no reason to think that the existing arrangements are wasteful of skilled manpower.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman please look at the matter again? Is not the Auster the simplest of all aircraft? Do not many people believe that the skilled men available in Army units using Austers could easily be used for first-line maintenance of the aircraft instead of there being R.A.F. units attached expressly for the purpose?

The conclusion reached hitherto has been that the Army could not service the Auster with fewer men or with less-skilled personnel than the R.A.F. use. I am not persuaded that there is any waste, but I will certainly look at the matter again.

asked the Minister of Defence how many Soviet troops he estimates have been withdrawn from East Germany since the decision of the Soviet Government to reduce its armed forces by 1,200,000 men.

Of the 1,200,000 men which the Soviet Government say that they intend to demobilise only 30,000 will come from the Soviet forces in East Germany. Of these, a few Army and Air Force units have been withdrawn in the last few weeks.

Does this mean a really substantial withdrawal from Germany, or is it just the tail end which is being picked off? Is there any substantial reduction in the actual fighting strength of the Russian armed forces in Eastern Germany?

No, Sir. The figures which I have given demonstrate that it is only a small proportion of the Soviet strength which is involved in respect of Eastern Germany.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT the information regarding Regular recruitment shown in paragraph 53 of the Statement on Defence, 1956, brought up to date by showing actual figures for 1955–56, and the estimated figures for 1956–57, revised to take into account the recruiting trends disclosed by the actual Regular enlistments in the period April—June, 1956.

Regular recruiting figures for 1955–56 were given in a return placed in the Vote Office on 31st May. I will, with permission, reproduce them in the OFFICIAL REPORT. The Regular recruiting figures for April and May, 1956, which I have already given to the House in reply to Questions are insufficient data on which to base a revision of the estimated recruiting figures for 1956–57 given in the Statement on Defence, 1956.

asked the Minister of Defence if he will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT the estimated male Regular strengths of the Royal Navy, the Army and the Royal Air Force on 1st April, 1960, taking into account the internal and external recruiting trends, including prolongations and re-engagements, shown during the period April—June, 1956, and assuming no further call-ups under the National Service Act take place after 1st April, 1958.

It is too early yet to gauge the long-term effects of the new Pay Code on Regular recruiting. The assumption in the last part of the hon. Member's Question would add one further uncertain factor to the problem of making an estimate of male Regular strengths of the Forces nearly four years ahead, and I am afraid I cannot attempt such an estimate.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT the male Regular strengths shown in paragraph 54 of the Statement on Defence, 1956, brought up to date by showing actual strengths on 1st April, 1956, and the revised estimate for 1st April, 1957, after taking into account the internal and external recruiting trends, including prolongations and re-engagements, shown during the period April—June, 1956.

The strength figures on 1st April, 1956, were made available to the House in a return placed in the Vote Office on 24th May, but for convenience I will, with permission, reproduce them in the OFFICIAL REPORT. I hope to give to the House before the summer Recess complete figures of Regular recruiting, prolongation and extension of service for the months April to June, 1956. Even when we have these figures, I do not consider that they will provide an adequate basis for a revision of the Estimates given in the Statement on Defence 1956 of Regular strength on 1st April, 1957.

asked the Lord Privy Seal to make a statement on the present and future development of the nuclear power station at Dounreay, with particular regard to its relation to power for domestic and industrial purposes in Scotland.

I have been asked to reply. Dounreay is primarily a research and development establishment. An experimental model of a fast breeder reactor capable of producing power is under construction and electricity generating equipment with a capacity of 15,000 kilowatts is being installed. Owing to the experimental nature of the project, however, it is not yet possible to forecast when, or on what scale, it may provide a continuous supply of electricity.

Does that answer mean that this station will ultimately be used for the much-needed industrial development of the North of Scotland?

As I pointed out in my Answer, this is an experimental station. As was said in reply to a Question two or three days ago, the provision of stations in Scotland is being considered.

asked the Lord Privy Seal what was the deposit, in milli-curies per square mile, of the isotope strontium 90 before the first major thermo-nuclear tests were started two years ago; the deposit now; and what he estimates the deposit will be in 1964.