asked the Minister of Defence the total sum that has been spent on the British armed forces and their equipment in Egypt since 1945.

I have been asked to reply.

Is it beyond the capacities of the electrical calculating machine at the Ministry of Defence to find out how much money has really been spent in Egypt? If that calculator cannot give the answer, can the hon. Gentleman tell me what the British taxpayer has got for this expenditure?

It is only in the last two or three years that the Services have in fact kept records and made detailed estimates on a per capita basis of every formation.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs how many British citizens originally employed by the British forces in the Canal Zone have been assisted in leaving Egypt; how many have been employed by the base contractors; and how many are now unemployed.

I am advised that 76 British subjects originally employed by the British forces in the Canal Zone have been assisted to leave Egypt. Some further applications for such assistance are under consideration. Three hundred and thirty have been given employment by the contractors in the Canal Base. Seventy-six are known to be unemployed.

Will my hon. Friend undertake to keep his eye on the situation, because it may well be that these British subjects may be forced to choose between remaining unemployed and becoming Egyptian nationals?

Yes, Sir. We shall certainly watch the situation.

Will the hon. Gentleman look into the case of some of these men, many of them Maltese, Cypriots and others, who have given loyal service to us for many years and who are now left apparently completely abandoned? Will the hon. Gentleman have another look at the whole question?

Certainly, if the hon. Gentleman will give me details of what he is thinking of.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what action has been taken since March, 1955, to obtain redress for the British shareholders of the Egyptian Delta Light Railways; what has happened concerning the two lawsuits brought in 1954 on behalf of the company's debenture holders; and what communications he has had from the Egyptian Government following the report of the commission appointed by that Government on this matter.

Since the developments described in the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Essex, South-East (Mr. Braine) on 7th November last year, Her Majesty's Embassy have on several occasions drawn the attention of the Egyptian authorities to the British interest both in the shares and the debentures of this company and have pressed for an early indication of the Egyptian Government's attitude. Last December, the Egyptian Minister of Communications informed the Embassy that he had submitted the whole question to the Egyptian legal authorities; and that after receiving their opinion, and the technical report on the railways for which he had called, he would make a recommendation. I understand that the court cases are still sub judice.

Does my hon. Friend not feel that this is taking rather a long time, and can we be told now or at some future date if further pressure is to be put on the Egyptian Government on this matter? In the meantime, would it not be a good idea with regard to claims such as this if a register were now opened in this country to deal with the many claims against Egypt which are pending at the moment?

On that last point, perhaps my hon. Friend would put down a Question. Generally speaking, I cannot comment on those suggestions while these cases are sub judice, however unsatisfactory the position.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) whether he will refer the decision of Egypt to nationalise the Suez Canal to the Permanent Court of International Justice at The Hague;

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) what were the specific changes in Egyptian political and economic policy which took place between February and July of this year and which led the Government to withdraw its offer of financial help for the Aswan Dam project;

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in view of the latest action of the Egyptian Government in relation to the Suez Canal, whether he will give an assurance that Her Majesty's Government are prepared to co-operate with the other permanent members of the Security Council represented at the Summit Conference in Geneva last July, in order to bring about a settlement through the United Nations of all outstanding issues in the Middle East.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what further information he has received from Egypt on the Suez Canal dispute.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what preparations Her Majesty's Government made in June of this year against the seizure of the Suez Canal, in view of the fact that it was officially stated by Mr. Burhansaid, the Egyptian director of the Canal Company, on 4th June, that the Egyptian Government already had in being plans to take over the canal.

My right hon. and learned Friend is engaged this afternoon in conversations with the United States Secretary o f State and the French Foreign Minister. There is also, as the House knows, to be a debate on the Suez Canal tomorrow. I would therefore ask those hon. Members who have put down these Questions not to press me for answers today.

While thanking the hon. Gentleman for his Answer and realising that this House of Commons has a grave responsibility at this juncture in trying to find a peaceful solution, may I ask the Minister if he is aware that there will be millions of people of different political points of view in this country who deprecate the irresponsible leading article, for instance, in the Daily Express today which is—

The Minister is not responsible for the leader in the Daily Express.

I am fully aware of that fact, Mr. Speaker, and I merely want to ask the Minister if he will assure the House that the Government will try every international avenue to solve this problem in discussion and legally, because it is far better for a few statesmen to get ulcers than for young men to get shot?

rose—

There is to be a debate tomorrow, and I think that the House should go on with the other Questions.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it not a rule of this House that Members are allowed to ask supplementary questions?

It is not a rule. I generally try to permit it if I can. I hope that the House will agree with me that, in view of what the Minister has said, which is practically nothing, we should go on with Questions and wait until tomorrow to discuss this matter.

Further to the point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it not generally the practice that hon. Members are entitled to ask Questions when a debate is anticipated in order to elicit information which may be of use to them during the debate?

Yes, if the Minister has any information to give, but I gathered from the reply of the Joint Under-Secretary of State that he had no information to give. That is what I took to be the meaning of his answer.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) when and by whom the last discussions were conducted with the Greek Government concerning Cyprus;

It is not the practice to disclose information of this sort about the conduct of diplomatic exchanges.

Is not that a rather surprising reply in view of the fact that a good deal has been disclosed by the Prime Minister and various other right hon. Gentlemen? Are we to understand from the answer that, during the whole of the period between the visit of Field Marshal Sir John Harding to London and the final statement by the Prime Minister, and after a series of changes of Government policy, constant consultations are going on in Ankara and none whatever in Athens, because that is the inference that will be drawn from the answer?

The hon. Gentleman is not entitled to make that inference at all. I cannot give an answer to the Question as he asked it, as he knows very well.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will invite the representatives of the United States of America, Greece and Turkey to a quadripartite conference with Great Britain to consider suitable guarantees to Turkey arising out of any implementation of the principle of self-determinantion in Cyprus.

Her Majesty's Government do not think that such a conference would be helpful at the present time.

If the Government do not think that, what do they think?

I have answered the hon. Gentleman's Question, and I have nothing more to say.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, following the recent visit of the United Nations Secretary-General to the Middle East, he will make a statement on the present situation on the borders of Israel and her Arab neighbours.

The Secretary-General of the United Nations recently visited the Middle East in continuation of his efforts to ensure full compliance with the armistice agreements between Israel and her Arab neighbours. He has not yet reported to the Security Council on this visit. On 26th July, however, he issued a statement with regard to incidents which took place on the Israel-Jordan demarcation line on 24th and 25th July. Her Majesty's Government associate themselves with Mr. Hammar-skjöld's expression of sympathy to the United Nations Observers who were seriously injured while on duty in the cause of peace, and with his strong appeal to those concerned to take all measures necessary for the maintenance of the cease-fire.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the aggressive action taken by the Egyptian Government in respect of the Suez Canal, Her Majesty's Government will reconsider their decision not to allow the Government of Israel to purchase such arms as they consider necessary for the effective defence of Israel.

Her Majesty's Government's policy with regard to arms supplies to Middle East countries is based on the Tripartite Declaration of 1950 which relates to the Arab-Israel dispute. The nationalisation of the Suez Canal is not related to that dispute. Her Majesty's Government, therefore, see no reason to change their policy as regards the supply of arms to the Middle East as a whole.

Does my noble Friend really mean to tell us that, in the light of the present situation, Her Majesty's Government are going to make no change in their policy of refusing certain classes of modern arms to Israel, at Israel's own request—that they do not recognise any difference in the situation which has arisen in the last few days?

I have tried to tell my hon. Friend what the Government's policy is with regard to the Arab-Israel dispute, and upon that we stand at present.

Does the noble Lord appreciate that if there had been an adequate response to the demands made by hon. Members on both sides of the House, that there should be a proper balance in the provision of armaments in the Middle East, and if Israel had been properly supplied, we might have been able to avoid the present impasse with Egypt?

I think the right hon. Gentleman knows that in the view of the Government a balance has been struck, and that is precisely what the Government, with the other Powers in the Tripartite Agreement, have done their best to do all the time.

Would my noble Friend not agree that while the three parties to the Tripartite Agreement are now actually meeting in London, this would be a very appropriate occasion to review the undertakings and to see whether any new circumstances have arisen which might affect that Agreement?

My right hon. Friend will, no doubt, hear the statement which will be made in due course after these very vital conversations have taken place.

Has not the Government's policy in fact amounted to arming their enemies and penalising their friends?

No, Sir.

Can my noble Friend clear up what really is happening to these destroyers which are said to be in preparation for Egypt, which might in certain eventualities be a grave embarrassment to us in another part of the world?

No, Sir; that is another question.

Are we to understand from what the noble Lord says in reply to his right hon. Friend the Member for Kelvingrove (Mr. Elliot) that the Government are contemplating making a statement tomorrow or at a very early date, obviously before the Recess, indicating whether, in view of the changed position in the Middle East, they intend to supply adequate arms to the State of Israel? Is that what he means?

No, Sir, not at all. I simply asked my right hon. Friend to await the statement on the results of these vital conversations. I do not know any more than the right hon. Gentleman himself what the statement is going to be.

Do the Government realise that if they had taken a firm attitude when the Suez Canal was first closed to Israeli shipping, they would be in a very much stronger position to handle their difficulties today?

On a point of order. I desire to give notice that I shall seek to raise this matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will arrange to make available to the general public, by sale or otherwise, the pamphlet "Why we are in Cyprus," issued as background notes for British Service men.

Yes, Sir. This pamphlet has been given on request to journalists, lecturers and members of the public by my Department and by the Cyprus Government Office in London. It has been sent by the Central Office of Information to members of the public who have asked to receive regular information on foreign and colonial affairs.

May I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply, because this is a most excellent document which sets out very clearly why it is necessary to maintain British sovereignty over Cyprus?

Will the right hon. Gentleman make this document available in the House of Commons so that we may find out whether public money is being used for party propaganda purposes?

I will certainly see that the right hon. Gentleman has a copy.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if the Customs Department of the Seychelles now possesses the correct type of hydrometer and conversion tables for estimating the alcoholic percentage of rum and wines.

Yes, Sir.

Has the Minister of State made inquiries into why the Customs Department of the Seychelles did not possess the proper instruments for a period of four years, so that £89,000 was lost in revenue? Will he say who was responsible for this state of affairs, which has been admitted by his right hon. Friend, and whether disciplinary action has been taken?

I think the hon. Gentleman's facts are not quite right. As I understand it, in January, 1955, it was found that the old hydrometers had become inaccurate and steps were taken to replace them. Unfortunately, owing to delays in this country, the manufacturers were not able to supply new hydrometers until October of that year.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that his right hon. Friend has had to write off a sum of £89,000 which was not collected in Customs duties in the Seychelles owing to the lack of proper equipment? Surely some action should have been taken against those responsible?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that, if he is asked, my right hon. Friend will deal with that matter in the debate. It is not part of this Question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies why, in the accounts of the Supplies Department of the Seychelles for the year 1954, transactions which actually resulted in a loss of Rs.29,887 were shown as yielding a profit of Rs.74,291.

This discrepancy arose from two errors: (a) the inclusion in the 1954 account of exceptional receipts of Rs.108,899 arising from trading in previous years; (b) an accounting error of Rs.4,719.

Is this not an extraordinary and disgraceful state of affairs? Is it not also extraordinary that the right hon. Gentleman's Department, which has been in possession of the auditor's report for six months, has so far taken no action whatsoever to find out why half the departments in the Seychelles should not have their accounts audited and why such exceptional discrepancies and extraordinary fiddling of the books has been going on?

The hon. Gentleman's assumptions are quite incorrect, but I will deal with the matter in the debate.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies with respect to the revision of salaries in the Seychelles in 1954, how many officers were converted to a salary higher than the correct one; and in how many cases retrospective approval was given for these officers to remain on that salary.

Only two cases of conversion to a salary higher than the correct one are known to have occurred, although nine other cases are under investigation. In one case the officer concerned has reverted to the proper salary, and in the other the conversion made, whilst strictly incorrect, was considered equitable and it was, with my right hon. Frend's prior approval, confirmed.

Is it then the case that the Minister of State is disputing the word of the principal auditor who audited the accounts of the departments in the Seychelles, which were presented to his office in January of this year, when he said:

"Following the revision of salaries in 1954, many queries were issued regarding the wrong conversion of certain officers. In every single case where an officer was erroneously converted to a salary higher than the correct one, retrospective approval was given for these officers to remain on that salary."

I have in front of me the actual quotation which the hon. Gentleman has given. I can tell him that what happened was that the principal auditor had seven such cases in mind. On examination, five of these cases were found to be in order. It is the other two to which I have referred; one of those was confirmed and one officer reverted to his previous salary.

What is the matter with the auditing of this Colony? It is not only last year, for, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, there are scores of items going back to 1951 which the auditor has found impossible to check, and he cannot even get evidence with which to check them.

That was not the Question I was asked. I tried to answer the hon. Gentleman on the specific point that he raised. I think these are probably all matters which should be raised in the debate.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that this auditor's report is one of the most extraordinary documents that hon. Members can possibly have ever read? There is hardly a paragraph in the report which does not condemn the Administration. As we are going to discuss this matter very shortly, and as the present Governor was appointed only in 1953, will the right hon. Gentleman say whether he has armed himself with information about what steps have been taken to remedy the situation since?

The right hon. Gentleman is already trying to start the debate. There is nothing about the auditor in the Question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the recent request made to the Governor by the Christian Council of Kenya asking for an all-party delegation to be sent to the Colony to clear up uneasiness about conditions there, he will now arrange to send such a delegation.

The matter is at present under consideration.

Is it not a fact that members of the Christian Council of Kenya have protested to the Governor of Kenya against the attacks by Mr. Wellwood on Colonel Young, who was described by Mr. Wellwood as an irresponsible policeman who stabbed Kenya in the back, and it failed to get satisfaction from the Governor when it asked whether this was the official view of the Kenya Government? Is not this another instance of the unsatisfactory attitude of the Kenya Government towards the problems of Kenya which necessitates an impartial inquiry by hon. Members?

I am sorry that the hon. Lady has used the opportunity of a quite sensible suggestion by the Christian Council of Kenya for a Parliamentary delegation on the lines of that led by my right hon. Friend the Member for Kelvingrove (Mr. Elliot) to revive some of the other charges against the Governor of Kenya. I will answer the hon. Lady, even though her supplementary bore no relation to the Question. The matter is under consideration. There is a great deal to be said for it, provided that it is in no sense a commission of inquiry, but an all-party delegation, and I am in touch with the Governor about it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what have been the results of the investigation into the allegations made by Miss Eileen Fletcher regarding conditions in prisons and detention camps in Kenya.

As I informed the hon. Member for Rugby (Mr. J. Johnson) in a Written Reply yesterday, copies of a memorandum setting out the results of investigations completed to date into Miss Fletcher's allegations have been placed in the Library. Since that memorandum was prepared, I have received a statutory declaration by Miss Fletcher and copies of this will be placed in the Library tomorrow. When Parliament reassembles, I will make available comments on those parts of the statutory declaration which are not covered in the first memorandum.

Will the proposed Parliamentary delegation have the opportunity to consider both the charges that were made by Miss Fletcher and the replies made by the Government of Kenya so that they may come to some impartial Government decision between one and the other?

There can be no question of anything approaching what can be thought to be in any way a commission of inquiry, but naturally Members of this House and of the other place going to Kenya will have read the documents which by then will have been fully available.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will make a statement on the demonstration by people of Luo on 31st May at Mombasa and elsewhere against the consolidations of their land holdings in the Nyanza province of Kenya; what action has been taken against those responsible; what is the density of population in the areas affected by these consolidation schemes; and what plans are proposed to relieve land hunger.

At meetings in Mombasa and Nairobi on 31st May and 3rd June, demonstrations occurred when a Government spokesman attempted to explain proposals for land consolidation in Nyanza in order to refute false rumours. Subsequent discussions with leading Nyanza Africans in Mombasa and Nairobi together with broadcasts have gone far to allay fears and suspicions about these proposals.

Is the Minister aware that in Nyanza there is real land hunger and that that was the root cause of these demonstrations? Is he further aware that adjacent to the Province there are the fertile lands of the White Highlands? Is it not possible to use the under-developed parts of the White Highlands to relieve the overwhelming population density that exists in the Province?

That is another question. What I am concerned about is that land at present under occupation by Africans should be properly used. I am glad to say that after they had been taken to see some of the spectacular results of consolidation in the Kikuyu Reserve there has been a change of view.

Whilst not opposing the introduction of land consolidation, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman to be very careful how fast he goes? Is he aware that not only in Mombasa on the coast but also inland at Kisumu in Nyanza itself there have been riots?

I am very conscious of that and of the need to carry the people with us. The president of the Luo Union, with whom we are in constant touch, is helping to do that.

Can my right hon. Friend confirm that the Agricultural Department of the Kenya Government is making tremendous strides in meeting the existing land hunger and that the progress is wonderful?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will make a statement on the trouble among Mau Mau prisoners at Mageta Island detention camp, Kenya, which led to the detailing of 50 extra prison staff to the camp on 16th July.

Mage. Island is a special detention camp in which 1,995 Mau Mau adherents are detained in the interests of maintaining public order. It is a potentially valuable agricultural area covered with thick bush, which is being cleared by the detainees who are paid for the work they do. Since 22nd June, however, the detainees have refused to do any work other than camp maintenance.

Is it not a fact that, under the Emergency Regulations of Kenya, detainees in special camps of this kind can be compelled only to do work which contributes to the ending of the emergency, and that these men have been compelled to do general agricultural work which does not fall within this category? Can the right hon. Gentleman honestly say that it is rehabilitating offenders to compel them to do work contrary to the law?

I cannot accept the assumption of the hon. Lady that this work is contrary to the law. My information is that the work is within the Emergency Regulation under which it has been ordered. I will certainly look into what the hon. Lady says, but I think she is wrong.

Can the hon. Gentleman say how many out of nearly 2,000 of these persons have actually been charged with offences or convicted of offences, and how far, therefore, it is proper to describe them as offenders?

I think the hon. Gentleman should know that these are the hard core of Mau Mau, most of whom have not been tried by the courts because it was impossible to bring witnesses forward in face of the intimidation and threats which have been levelled.

They are not offenders—is that what the Minister means? They are persons who are detained in the public interest. How long have they been detained, and if they are engaged on agricultural work, is it work for the Administration or work for private persons?

I have used the word "detainees" throughout. The length of time that these people have been detained obviously varies very much. Without full investigation, I cannot begin to answer that question.

Is it not desirable to obtain information if there is a Question on the Order Paper which relates to unrest amongst a large number of prisoners who are detainees at Her Majesty's pleasure in the public interest and for the purpose of maintaining public order? Would it not have been desirable to find out whether their resentment is not against their continued detention over a long period of time with hardly any hope of getting out.

Again I think it is unreasonable of the right hon. Gentleman to suggest that I should have found out full details of how long all these people have been detained when it was not in the Question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies the establishment of rehabilitation officers in Kenya and the number of permanent and temporary rehabilitation officers at present employed; and how many of the permanent officers are European, Asian and African, respectively.

The establishment of rehabilitation officers has recently been increased to 84. Eleven permanent and 61 temporary officers are at present employed; of the 11 permanent staff eight are European, three are African and none is Asian. There are, in addition, 126 African rehabilitation assistants against an establishment of 149.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that this type of rehabilitation and welfare work is an excellent outlet for the educated African? Would he look into the possibility of increasing the permanent number of Africans in this welfare work?

I will certainly consider what my hon. and gallant Friend has said, but one hopes that the need for rehabilitation of the hard core of Mau Mau will be a decreasing and not an increasing need.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what proportion of the financing of the Kariba Dam contract was originally sought from the Colonial Development Corporation.

The Corporation sought and were given approval for a loan of £15 million. I am not aware that any other amount was sought from the Corporation.

Is it within the power of my right hon. Friend to suggest to Colonial Governments that they should apply to the Colonial Development Corporation for the full amount of finance required, so that we can do without the World Bank?

On a previous occasion I, or one of my colleagues, explained that if all the finance of this or comparable schemes came from the Corporation there would be nothing available from that body for other smaller but very important schemes.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies on what grounds prosecutions have recently been instituted against seven persons responsible for three newspapers in Uganda; and what were the sentences imposed.

These persons have been charged under the Penal Code with printing and publishing seditious matter. Three have been convicted and awarded fines ranging from £50 to £250. The cases against the others are still sub judice.

In relation to the cases which are not sub judice, does the right hon. Gentleman not think, in view of the desire to begin afresh after the return of the Kabaka and the discussions now going on about constitutional changes, that it is a mistake to begin charges in the courts which interfere with the free expression of opinion?

The hon. Member really knows that all these matters are within the discretion of the courts of Uganda. They are not within the discretion of the House of Commons. These were decided by the Uganda courts, and I do not think that there is any other comment I can make.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies why no persons are allowed to enter the district of Karamoja in Uganda without a permit; and what steps are being taken to enable residents of this district to elect representatives to the Legislative Council in next year's election.

As regards the first part of the Question, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Eton and Slough (Mr. Fenner Brockway) on 15th June, 1955. As regards the second part, no change is contemplated in the composition of the Uganda Legislative Council which would provide for representation from Karamoja next year.

Is the Minister not aware that, in isolating Karamoja from the rest of Uganda, he may promote the very discontents that he is seeking to avoid, and will he not consider removing the ban which exists against members of the Uganda National Congress being admitted into the district?

I will certainly consider what the hon. Gentleman has said, but I think the answer is in the negative.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has now heard from the Governors of Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland concerning the adoption of the Lidbury Commission recommendations on Civil Services rates and conditions in their application to African employees; and if he will make a statement.

The Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland Governments have decided that the recommendations of the Lidbury Commission would not be suitable in those territories. Revised salaries and conditions of service for the African Civil Service have, however, been introduced in Nyasaland and the Government of Northern Rhodesia will shortly be announcing a revision there also.

Is the Minister aware that this Commission, after going very thoroughly into the matter, recommended that these Civil Service conditions should be applied, irrespectve of race, and that this was accepted by the Kenya Government? In those circumstances, would the Minister explain why these conditions are not acceptable in Northern Rhodesia?

It is always dangerous to compare situations in differing territories. One must remember that in East Africa the basis of the Lidbury proposals was that there should be the same basic salary for Africans as for locally recruited Europeans, but that there should be an inducement payment to people recruited from outside. In the case of the two Northern Territories in the Federation, regard should be paid to the fact that there would naturally be reluctance on the part of the Federal Government to accept differentiations between the salaries of officers recruited in Southern Rhodesia and those recruited from outside. This is one of the differences, but at the end of the day what matters is the pay packets of the African employees, and I am satisfied that in both territories there should be worth-while improvements.

Does that mean that Southern Rhodesian practice is being adopted in the other parts of the Federation?

No, certainly not.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how many Africans have been arrested in Mufulira in connection with the Northern Rhodesian African Congress boycott campaign; what were the sentences imposed; under what sections, of what Acts was this done; and in particular what was the charge brought against Simon Kapwepwe in Abercorn, and what was the sentence.

Four Africans were charged under Section 358 (4) of the Penal Code of conspiring together at Mufulira to injure traders in their trade. All were acquitted.

Would the Minister give the House an assurance that all African Congress members so charged will be allowed bail and given time to get counsel for the defence, and in so far as this boycott campaign is proving peaceful, will the Minister give an assurance that he will not pass legislation to make the boycotting of shops illegal in Northern Rhodesia?

I cannot give any guarantees to the hon. Gentleman, but I will certainly see that what he has said is taken note of by the Government concerned.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what further progress has been made with the constitution of the Whitley Council for Tanganyika, since 22nd February, 1956.

Discussion of the draft constitution for the Whitley Council is still deferred, pending consideration (which is now in progress) of proposals for reconstituting the staff associations on a non-racial basis.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that as long ago as 15th August, 1955, the Minister wrote to me telling me that a committee had been set up to establish these Whitley Councils and saying that the board was likely to be replaced before long by a Whitley Council? Can he give any hope that this matter is likely to reach a conclusion early?

The Tanganyika Government are fully alive to the importance of staff relations and, therefore, of trying to establish Whitley Councils, but I think that the hon. Member will agree that for the future it is immensely important to try to secure the formation of non-racial staff associations. These things will require delicate negotiations, but I do not think that there will be any undue delay.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how many people were killed and injured in Aden on 9th July when the police fired on demonstrators in connection with the labourers' strike; and on what authority the police opened fire.

Four people were killed and fifteen injured. Also four policemen were injured. The police, who were being attacked by an unlawful assembly in circumstances endangering public security, opened fire as authorised by Section 97 of the Aden Criminal Procedure Ordinance.

Is this not really a most alarming state of affairs, that four civilians should have been killed and 15 injured by fire from the police when they were meeting in connection with a demonstration arising out of the general strike? Although this may have been an unlawful assembly in Aden, does it not seem to the people of this country a perfectly normal piece of civilian activity, and will not the Colonial Secretary look into the question of the general administration of the police in Aden in view of the violence used on this occasion?

I am perfectly satisfied with the excellent work achieved by the Governor of Aden, who has just left the Colony, and also the work that will be done by his successor who will arrive there shortly—[Laughter.] I am also quite sure that the action taken prevented a far more serious outbreak with far more grave consequences.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that his assurance that he is perfectly satisfied with all the administrations for which he is responsible is not only becoming boring but more and more inaccurate? [HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."]

asked the Lord Privy Seal (1) what arrangements there are for controlling and keeping records of all dumping of radio-active material in the ocean;

Only mildly radio-active material is disposed of by dumping in the sea and prior authorisation is required from the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, who sets limits to the amount to be dumped in any one area, taking into account the nature of the material. A responsible official of the Atomic Energy Authority witnesses each disposal. He provides the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food with a record of the total weight and number of containers dumped, the area of dumping and an assurance that the conditions stipulated by the Minister have been fulfilled.

I wonder if the Lord Privy Seal has studied the report produced in Washington by the National Academy of Science, one of whose nine recommendations suggested the urgent necessity for international control of the dumping of radio-active materials in the ocean and the recording of such dumping? In view of this very important report, would not the Government be prepared to look at the need for international control of such dumping?

I do not think that we need go in for international control of such dumping. Of course, I am aware of the report to which the hon. Gentleman refers. I think that the answer I have given about the really almost uninteresting level of the health hazard should reassure hon. Members. The hon. Gentleman may be glad to hear that the levels of radiation to which staff who take part in the dumping operations are exposed are limited by internationally accepted standards, so to that extent we do pay attention to international standards.

Why should the United Nations not be asked to keep a record of the places where this material is dumped, in case later on it may be discovered that there is greater radio-activity than is now known?

I will investigate whether it should be the United Nations or not, but I am certainly ready to listen to what the hon. Member has suggested.