asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department on how many occasions in the last five years he has withheld the police grant to a county police force; and for what reasons.

Payment of Exchequer grant in respect of a county police force has been withheld on one occasion during the last five years. In that case the police authority had decided to restrict recruitment, although the strength of the force was substantially below the authorised establishment, and my predecessor was satisfied that this would prejudice the efficient policing of the county.

Is withholding the police grant for the county the only method by which the Home Department can bring pressure to bear upon chief constables and standing joint committees? Is it not a fact that if the counties themselves wish to make up the grant from their own resources they can do so and so defy the Home Secretary?

I do not think that they would wish to defy the Home Secretary. The answer to the first part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question is substantially "Yes, Sir."

Has there been any case where this action has been ineffective?

There has been no case where the action has been ineffective.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will introduce legislation to give himself power to initiate disciplinary inquiries into the activities of provincial police forces and the activities of individual members of provincial police forces.

No, Sir. It is an essential feature of the police system of this country that disciplinary control is vested not in the central government but in the local disciplinary authorities.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that hon. Members whose constituencies are served by county forces have no means of raising in this House matters of indiscipline by police officers? Why are they denied rights possessed by hon. Members whose constituences are within the Metropolitan area?

It is not for me to interpret the rules of the House. In short, it is because I am personally responsible for the police in the Metropolitan area and in their case for disciplinary matters, and not for the county police.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind, in giving consideration to this matter, the great danger to liberty that has occurred through the establishment of State police forces?

Yes, and I am perfectly content to interpret the duties of Home Secretary as they have been handed down to me, namely, to keep the Queen's peace by a division of responsibility.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware that the principle and practice on which he at present proceeds in assessing and awarding out of public moneys ex gratiapayments to persons wrongly detained in custody or sentenced are unsatisfactory in that such payments are not publicly heard and determined in a judicial manner on evidence and argument adduced by the persons concerned; and if he will take steps to improve the procedure accordingly.

No, Sir. The procedure which the hon. and learned Gentleman proposes would be inappropriate where no question of legal liability arises and payments are made purely as of grace, I have, however, decided that in future where a decision is taken to make an ex gratiapayment out of public funds to a person who has been detained in custody as the result of an error not involving legal liability the advice of an independent person of standing should be sought on the amount to be paid.

While thanking the Home Secretary for that part of his Answer, which is favourable to my idea, may I ask whether he will go a little further by giving accused persons an opportunity of adducing evidence and by changing what is now an ex gratiagrant into something of the nature of ocmpensation which would bear a direct relation to the wrong which the acquitted person had suffered?

That is going too wide. We must be content with small mercies as we get them.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether, in obtaining the opinion of an independent adviser—a decision about which I think all hon. Members would like to thank and congratulate the Home Secretary—the person involved would have any opportunity of being heard on the point by such an inquiry?

I would like notice of the question. In general, I would say that the answer would be "No, Sir." The only question to be settled by the outside assessor is the amount of compensation.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make available for Members of Parliament a transcript of the shorthand notes of the trial of Dr. Adams.

Sir Lynn Ungoed-Thomas.

The Question has been answered in a most effective way—by the Attorney-General last night —and I do not intend to put it. I should like to express my thanks for that reply.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he proposes to take to assess and award out of public moneys a payment to Dr. Adams, who was recently wrongly detained in custody for a considerable period on a charge of murder, tried at the Central Criminal Court, found not guilty and discharged; and whether he will set up a tribunal publicly to hear and determine in a judicial manner on evidence and argument the correct amount to be so assessed and awarded to Dr. Adams.

It is not the practice to make an ex gratiapayment from public funds to a person who has been acquitted of a criminal charge unless there has been misconduct or negligence on the part of the police or other public officials. If a defendant is acquitted after trial on indictment the court has power under the Costs in Criminal Cases Act, 1952, to order the payment of such sums as appear to the court to be reasonably sufficient to compensate the accused for the expenses incurred in carrying on the defence. I understand that the court did not make any order in this case, and I can find no grounds on which I should be justified in making a payment out of public funds.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that I am interested in the principle and not on behalf of this particular person, but that there is great risk of loss and damage to a particular accused unless he is given an opportunity to make representations, adduce evidence and appear either in person or otherwise before the Home Secretary? Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to see that justice is served in this way?

I would draw the attention of the hon. Member and of the House to the power that the court has to make orders.

To ask he Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether inspection of the Dangerous Drugs Register of Dr. John Bodkin Adams was made subsequent to 13th August, 1948.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what evidence he has that Dr. John Bodkin Adams kept a properly entered Dangerous Drugs Register subsequent to 13th August, 1948.

Dr. Donald Johnson.

On a point of order. I would cask for your ruling, Mr. Speaker, as to the propriety of putting these Questions on the Order Paper, allowing an Answer to be given by the Home Secretary. I understand that proceedings are pending against the gentleman mentioned in the Questions. Therefore, this case is sub judiceIn particular it seems to me, with great respect, that Question No. 8 contains an innuendo against the person named in it. Is it proper that this Question should be asked?

The Question is in order. I understand that the proceedings which are pending against this man are not for murder, but are on other charges. It seemed that the Question was concerned with whether or not there should be a sum paid to him in respect of a charge of murder.

I am referring to the next two Questions.

I misunderstood the right hon. Gentleman. I thought he was referring to Question No. 6. I should like to hear what the Home Secretary has to say on the point.

I was about to reply that as certain charges under the Dangerous Drugs Act, 1951, were pending it would not be proper for me to make any comment.

I am much obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for drawing my attention to that point. I thought at first that the right hon. Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell) was referring to the previous Question.

Further to that point of order, I understand that the charges against Dr. Adams are not actually in regard to this Question, but are in regard to supplies under National Health Service prescriptions. I am open to correction—

Order. The hon. Member must be ruled by me. I think they come too near to the subject to be safe and proper Questions to ask.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proposals he has for the rehousing of Anglo-Egyptian refugees in Brigend Hostel, at Stonehouse; and whether he will make a statement.

The Anglo-Egyptian Resettlement Board is authorised to help these British subjects to settle in permanent accommodation outside hostels, and deals with individual cases on merits. As part of its arrangements for payment of resettlement grants the Board can help in appropriate cases towards the deposit for the purchase of a house and has now been authorised to provide financial assistance to local authorities or housing associations which are able to find accommodation for these British subjects. The Board is also able to help with grants towards furnishing homes.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that that part of his Answer which dealt with financial assistance to local authorities will be very welcome? Is he further aware that, rightly or wrongly, the efforts of a very large number of devoted people in favour of these Anglo-Egyptian refugees do not seem to be making the progress that one would hope? Lastly, is my right hon. Friend aware that at the Brigend Hostel, at Stonehouse, arrangements that could be quickly and cheaply carried out to turn these huts into units of family accommodation have been refused? Will he look into the matter?

Efforts have been made to find accommodation outside the hostel. but I understand that 34 men and 11 women are in employment but still live in the hostel. I will certainly look into the points raised by my hon. Friend and any information he likes to give me. It is the desire of myself and those responsible to deal with this question of Egyptian refugees as expeditiously and humanely as possible.

How much has been spent in this way already? In view of what the hon. Member for Stroud (Mr. Kershaw) has said, can the right hon. Gentleman assure us that something more will be done to help these people who are, in a very special sense, victims of Government policy?

The broad question has been debated both here and in another place. There are many different aspects of the matter which I could not deal with by way of answers to supplementary questions. If the hon. Gentleman desires, I will answer any Question which he puts on the Order Paper.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how far street betting in London has increased recently; and how many people have been prosecuted for street betting in London this year compared with last year.

Arrests during the first four months of 1957 totalled 1,773 and exceeded those for the corresponding period of last year by 406. This increase is to some extent due to the larger number of Metropolitan Police now available as compared with last year. It would not be safe to assume that the rise in the number of arrests reflects an increase in the amount of street betting.

Having told the House on 28th February that the law on off-course betting is unfair because it does not exist, how does the Home Secretary explain what looks like a renewed blitz on street bookies, especially in South London? Why not press on with new laws instead of trying to enforce either non-existent or obsolete laws which have not got the backing of public opinion behind them, and not make the police carry out duties which are not as important as other duties the public want carried out?

The hon. Member will be aware that the Royal Commission reported on this matter, and the question of legislation is under consideration by the Government.

When the hon. Member for Ashford (Mr. Deedes), was Joint Under-Secretary of State to the Home Department he announced to the House that legislation on this topic was to be brought forward. Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that if he wants some nice, non-controversial legislation to fill up the Parliamentary timetable, this would be his chance?

I have quite enough legislation—so has the House—for this Session, and the question of including this in next Session's legislative programme must be a matter for later announcement. I am aware of the Answer given by my hon. Friend the Member for Ashford (Mr. Deedes), to which the right hon. Member has drawn attention.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what documents are still in his possession relative to the trial of Sir Roger Casement; and if he will now agree to hand over all such documents to the National Library of Ireland, in Dublin.

Certain confidential documents are among the papers of my Department but, like my predecessors, I am not prepared to disclose their nature. The answer to the second part of the Question is "No, Sir."

Could the Prime Minister [Laughter.]—my subconscious mind is working again. Could the Home Secretary tell us whether this collection of documents includes an alleged diary which is reported to have been found on the possession of Sir Roger Casement? Could he explain why a certain limited number of people seem to have been given, by the Home Office, access to these documents? Does he not think it would be wise and generous now to hand these documents over to the Irish people, who seem to think that they are slightly interested in this controversy?

No, Sir. I have considered this matter, but I am not prepared to disclose the nature of these documents, nor to hand them over to the National Library of Ireland.

Can my right hon. Friend say by what right the diaries which were seized with Casement's other effects before his arrest, but not used in evidence at his trial, are retained by my right hon. Friend's Department? Should they not be handed over to Casement's next-of-kin in accordance with the provisions of the Forfeiture Act, 1870, which states quite clearly that any effects of a person executed for high treason and not used at his trial should be restored to his family?

I have not by me this afternoon the Forfeiture Act to which my hon. Friend has referred, but I will certainly examine it in the light of the question which he has asked. For the time being, pending my examination of the Act to which he has drawn my attention, I cannot go further than my Answer today.

May we deduce from the fact that the right hon. Gentleman will not make these documents available that he is holding them in his custody until a proper inquiry into the circumstances of the Casement case has been held?

No, Sir. I am simply simply following the tradition followed by my predecessors in holding documents of this sort.

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

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what reasons were given to his officials by a prisoner serving a life sentence for murder, who was recently released on parole to permit him to attend the funeral of a close relation, who was looking after his children, for not taking advantage of the facilities afforded to him.

I am sorry to say that the prisoner in question was deterred from attending the funeral owing to his fear of the presence of Press representatives and photographers.

In the interests of the welfare of prisoners and their families I must, in the light of this incident and of the general issues involved, reconsider the policy relating to the release on parole of prisoners on any future occasions. I shall be glad of any help I may receive from the Press with a view to preventing the recurrence of such incidents.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that the action of the Press was reprehensible in this case? Does he contemplate not stopping prisoners from being paroled in those circumstances, but taking some steps to see that the Press do not behave in such a way in future?

This matter has been brought to my attention only in the last two or three days, and I am making the contacts necessary before I make up my mind, but I certainly do not want to prejudice prisoners and their families. I have made an appeal to the Press, which I hope will be noticed in the light of my Answer to this Parliamentary Question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will relax the restrictions on the admission to this country of Hungarian refugees from Austria.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave on 14th March last to my hon. Friend the Member for Armagh (Mr. Armstrong).

Is the Home Secretary aware that there are 40,000 Hungarians still living in refugee camps in Austria, and that this is a tragic problem which Austria alone cannot possibly tackle? In view of the recent plea by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, could not Britain do something more to help in finding a home and work for these unfortunate people?

I think that this country has been generous. In all, approximately 21,000 Hungarian refugees, including the Coal Board recruits, have come to the United Kingdom from Austria. So far 3,500 have gone to Canada, and that movement is still in progress. Until we see how far the movement in progress to other countries is carried forward, I could not undertake that we should take more.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will make available the details of inquiries that have taken place regarding confessions of guilt that exonerate Terence Darken from complicity in the crime for which he has been jailed;

The prisoner Darken pleaded guilty in January, 1956, to a charge of larceny as a servant. His solicitors wrote to me in February, 1957, a letter in which, for the first time, it was represented to me on behalf of the prisoner that he had pleaded guilty in order to obtain a lighter sentence and that in fact the crime had been committed by other persons who had intimidated him, in view of his record, into taking the blame. The solicitors forwarded a statement of another prisoner confessing that he and two other persons had been guilty and not Darken.

It is no part of my duty to retry a case, but I asked the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis to make any necessary inquiries. I am satisfied, having considered all the representations made to me in the light of the police report, that there are not grounds on which I should be justified in recommending any interference with the conviction of the prisoner Darken and that no further action is called for on my part.

Does the Home Secretary agree that although Darken's past is reprehensible it there is a shadow of doubt as to his guilt he ought to he interviewed if there is any sort of inquiry? I understand that no one has seen Darken, or his wife, or anyone connected with his side of the story. In all these cases there must be two sides, but I understand that the man has never been interviewed.

I have made particular inquiries and find that the reason we have not done that is that we had such full representations from the prisoner's solicitors that we thought it unnecessary to interview the prisoner. I will pay attention to what my hon. and gallant Friend has said, but I think that we have all the information to make up our minds in this matter.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make inquiries in the Metropolitan Police district regarding the establishment and activities of a British branch of the Ku Klux Klan, which arc liable to result in breaches of the peace.

I am informed by the Commissioner of Police that he is aware of the existence of Ku Klux Klan sympathisers. Their activities are on a very small scale and appropriate action will be taken if any of their activities seem likely to lead to a breach of the peace.

Whilst recognising that we do not want to interfere with the rights of organisations or the expression of views, and that the response from British people is likely to be small, may I ask if the right hon. Gentleman is aware that this organisation has agents in seven towns in this country, that it has a membership of several hundreds already, and that it is planning guerilla action by small, anonymous groups. not only against coloured persons, but those of the Jewish race and certain Christian communities? In view of this plan, and the lynchings and beatings which have taken place in America, will the Home Secretary keep a very close watch on these activities?

Yes, Sir, certainly. The authorities will keep very close watch upon their activities, as indicated in my Answer. If the hon. Gentleman cares to give me any information, I shall be only too glad to examine it.

The Home Secretary says that it is a very small organisation. Does he not remember the time when Sir Oswald Mosley's skulduggery was stated to be very small? That led eventually to much disorder. This matter is very much in the minds of the people in the Midlands, where there has been a certain amount of activity by this organisation.

Yes, Sir.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Education (1) what proportion of the total cost of secondary and elementary education during the current year represents the maintenance and improvement of existing buildings, new construction and the emoluments of the teaching stall, respectively

As the replies contain a large number of figures, I will circulate them in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following are the replies:

It is estimated that the expenditure of local education authorities on primary and secondary education in 1957–58 will be about £376 million. This includes direct expenditure on primary and secondary schools, the school health service, school transport and loan charges, but not school milk and meals, administration, aid to pupils, capital expenditure out of revenue or recreational activities. About £243 million will be met by grants from the Exchequer, including Exchequer equalisation grant, leaving £133 million to be met from the rates.

Teachers' salaries and employers' superannuation contributions account for 60·2 per cent. of the total, upkeep of buildings and grounds for 6 per cent. and loan charges on previous capital expenditure for 8·1 per cent.

Capital expenditure in 1957–58 on new schools and improvements to existing schools is not included in the above figures. It is expected to total £66 million (mostly met from loan), excluding capital expenditure on the school meals service.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Education if, because of the delay experienced, he will now take the steps necessary to expedite the acceptance of the articles of government by the church authorities concerned with the St. Michael's Church of England Secondary Modern School. Oldbury.

My noble Friend very much regrets the long delay which has occurred and is doing all he can to settle this matter quickly.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the continuous delay in securing agreement on the articles of government for this school is not only affecting the school's administration but is also acting to the disadvantage of the children concerned?

Yes, Sir, I am well aware of the difficulties. It is, of course, true that under Section 17 of the 1944 Act, the power to make articles of government for voluntary secondary schools rests with my noble Friend, but, as the hon. Gentleman is aware, my noble Friend is always anxious, so far as he can, to secure the full agreement of the parties concerned.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Education what estimate has been made of the increase required in the numbers of scientific and technical students taking sandwich courses to enable the Government objective of doubling the output of scientific manpower to be achieved; and what plans his Department has prepared to bring about this increase.

The Government's plans for increasing the output of scientific manpower depend on the expansion of university facilities and of all types of courses in technical colleges. I cannot say precisely to what extent we shall require to increase the contribution made by sandwich courses in particular, but it may be by as much as five or six times the present number. The technical colleges are already making encouraging progress in developing new courses in consultation with industry, and the necessary accommodation is being and will be provided as part of the programme for the development of technical education.

Does the Parliamentary Secretary realise that it is six weeks since he promised to write to me on the subject of these sandwich courses, and that his Answer today does not sound as though he has mastered the arithmetic of the problem at all?

I will certainly look at it again, and see if there is any further information that I can send to the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Education what plans his Department has for reviewing the methods and principles at present applied in the teaching of mathematics.

The teaching of mathematics in schools and training colleges has been receiving the special attention of Her Majesty's inspectors, and my noble Friend is considering the issue of a pamphlet on this subject.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Education if he will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a statement on the pilot experiment to be undertaken by the Leicestershire education authority in the Hinckley and Wigston areas, so that hon. Members may have a clear knowledge of what is proposed.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Education whether he will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT the details of the proposals of the Leicestershire education authority concerning the organisation of secondary education.

This is an experimental scheme for the reorganisation of a strictly limited number of secondary schools. The scheme, which is long and detailed, is in print and any hon. Member who is interested can obtain a copy from the Leicestershire local education authority. My noble Friend regrets that it cannot be accurately summarised within limits making it possible to publish it within the OFFICIAL REPORT, though various summaries have appeared in the Press.

Is the Minister aware that newspaper reports on this scheme have been incomplete and inaccurate? Is he further aware that wide publicity has been given to Dr. Alexander's statement that the scheme is illegal? Will he say something more to indicate that this experiment is legitimate, significant, and welcomed by his Department?

I must say that my noble Friend, as I have said before in this House, welcomes any well-thought-out scheme introduced experimentally and on a limited scale. The Leicestershire scheme does not require his specific approval under the 1944 Act, because it does not involve the opening, closure or enlargement of any existing schools.

The Education Act, 1944, requires education authorities to educate children according to their aptitude and ability. It does not require them necessarily to do that by holding a special examination at the age of 11 for the purpose of putting children into different schools. Does the Parliamentary Secretary agree, therefore, that there is no legal obligation on any authority to do that?

As this is a matter of the exact interpretation of a Section, perhaps the hon. Member could put down a Question on the subject.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Education whether he will encourage the development in north Warwickshire of courses in secondary modern schools to meet requirements agreed between the principals of technical colleges and the heads of secondary modern schools; and whether, as part of these arrangements, he will agree upon examinations to be taken in the schools prepared by the technical colleges.

My noble Friend wishes to encourage the closest possible cooperation between the secondary schools and technical colleges in Warwickshire, as elsewhere, but the precise form which it should take is a matter for the local education authority.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that discussions are taking place in north Warwickshire on the subject mentioned, and can he say whether it is true that Her Majesty's inspectors are the stumbling-block to the proposals which are at present under discussion?

I know nothing of what the hon. Member has just said. All I would say is that I hope that this Question and Answer will draw attention to my noble Friend's keen interest in the matter, but the details of the organisation of school courses and local examinations are surely best left to the local education authorities themselves.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Education what plans he has for the training of full-time youth leaders.

My noble Friend is continuing to help Swansea University College and Westhill Training College to provide courses for this purpose.

Did the Parliamentary Secretary notice, when he addressed a conference recently, that there is much concern amongst those active in the youth movement about the provision of proper training and standard of qualifications for full-time youth leaders?

Yes, Sir; we keep these matters very closely under review, and I did notice what the hon. Member has referred to. We debated this subject in the House not long ago. As the hon. Member knows, my noble Friend's policy is to rely, as in the past, mainly on voluntary and part-time youth leaders.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he will make a statement on the result of the talks between officials from the Admiralty, Air Ministry and Treasury and the Ceylonese Government on facilities to be granted to Britain after the transfer of United Kingdom bases to Ceylon next October.

I have been asked to reply.

I am not in a position to make any statement since discussions with the Ceylon Government are still proceeding.

When does the hon. Gentleman expect these discussions to be concluded?

I cannot give any exact date at the present time.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he will make a statement on the official discussions with the Prime Minister of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland regarding the future of the Federation.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations whether he will make a statement on the recent conversations between Her Majesty's Government and the Prime Minister of the Central African Federation.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations whether he will make a statement upon the recent discussions with Sir Roy Welensky, Prime Minister of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland.

In the absence in Ghana of my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations, I have been asked to reply.

Her Majesty's Government were glad to welcome Sir Roy Welensky to this country as Prime Minister of the Federation, and his visit provided an opportunity for useful discussion of a number of questions concerning the Federation. A joint announcement and declaration by Her Majesty's Government and the Government of the Federation were issued on 27th April, and I will circulate the texts in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

In view of the importance of the decisions which were reached, does not the right hon. Gentleman think that a full statement should be made to this House? So far as the official communiqués are concerned, will the right hon. Gentleman answer two questions? First, will there be consultation with the African populations of Nyasaland and Northern Rhodesia in 1960 before the Federal structure is maintained? Secondly, will he guarantee that before self-government is handed to the Federation, there shall be a democratic franchise in which the population will be able to express its views?

It is difficult to answer questions of such importance within the compass of a Parliamentary Answer. We are to have a debate on colonial matters in this House on Monday, and I shall be very glad then to answer any points raised. If, however, the hon. Member has any specific points in mind, I will attempt to answer them now. With regard to his first point, I can assure him that it is, of course, our intention that the conference in 1960 shall be a fully representative one

Can the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that the British Government have not committed this country in advance to any modification of the safeguards of the economic and political interests of the African inhabitants of these territories? Secondly, is it likely in the near future that there will be any increase in African representation at Federal level?

In regard to the first part of the Question, I can assure the hon. Gentleman that I and my colleagues found the Federal Prime Minister, and his colleague, Mr. Greenfield, fully conscious, as we knew they were, of the importance of the African population in the Federation, and of their obligations to them. There was no need for us to stress the need to see that responsibilities are properly discharged. In regard to the second part of the Question, it has been made clear I think, that in the 1960 conference the whole field of Federal problems, including franchise and representation of different races, will be open for review.

Is the Colonial Secretary fully aware of the tension in the Federation, and the anxiety felt by the African leaders regarding Sir Roy Welensky? They feel that some matters discussed are a violation of the agreements of 1953 entered into by the right hon. Gentleman's predecessor, Lord Chandos. Is he further aware that the Africans place most emphasis upon a fair franchise, and that anything like the Tredgold Commission, which will not send to Salisbury an appreciable number of black M. P. s, will be surely looked on as a sham and hypocrisy? Will he give an assurance that in that event he will use his power of veto, if such legislation is placed before him?

I wish that the hon. Member—whose interest in these matters I fully recognise—would do all he can—and he could do quite a lot—to reduce the tension. I would suggest to him that the statement that was made as a result of the conference, that the Prime Minister of the Federation

" could assure the United Kingdom Ministers that a Franchise Bill would be introduced and would ensure that British-protected persons otherwise qualified would not he required to change their status in order to he eligible for the Federal franchise."

is a matter of very great importance; and if—as I am sure he is—the hon. Gentleman is anxious to reduce the tension, I wish that he would sometimes concentrate his attention on definite undertakings of that kind, for which, I think, the Federal Government deserve a great degree of credit.

In view of the fact that it was understood that there would be a standstill arrangement in regard to the Constitution, how did it happen that the Government have now agreed to the abrogation of Section 29 (7) which diminishes the powers of the British Parliament and at the same time increases the diplomatic rights of the Federation and in other respects modifies the Constitution as we understand it at the present moment?

I do not think that the right hon. Gentleman is really correct in either of his assumptions. In regard to the question of United Kingdom legislative powers, the powers of Parliament remain unaffected. The passage in the statement merely states what is the accepted practice, that the United Kingdom Government do not initiate any legislation on matters within the Federal sphere except at the request of the Federal Government. The powers of Parliament in regard to the territories remain quite unaffected. As to the second question, on matters of external affairs that are to be entrusted to the Federation, I think it is reasonable, in view of the achievements of the Federation and its importance in the world, that proper recognition of that fact should take place in the field of external affairs; and I shall be very ready in the debate next week to develop this argument and to give illustrations of the increased scope which will quite properly now be open to the Federal Government.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give a clear answer to the question put by the Member for Huddersfield, West (Mr. Wade) [Interruption.] We do not know what we shall be debating on Monday. May I ask the Colonial Secretary this question? is there anything in the agreement which has been reached with the Federal Government or anything in the impending legislation which will lessen the degree of protection which this House at this moment exercises in regard to African inhabitants of the Protectorates?

Nothing whatsoever, Sir.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the fact that since 1952 the percentage of total trade with Commonwealth countries has fallen from 46·3 per cent. of United Kingdom trade to 44·9 per cent. of United Kingdom trade in 1956, what action he proposes to take in this connection.

Our trade has increased considerably since 1952 with Commonwealth countries as well as with the rest of the world, and in these circumstances small changes in the pattern and proportions of the trade are to be expected.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that to a large number of people that will be a disappointing Answer. Can he not give some indication that Her Majesty's Government have some ideas in mind which will increase this percentage rather than allow it to drift and decline as at present?

We are always anxious to see more trade in all directions and particularly with the Commonwealth. My hon. Friend will notice that trade in manufactured goods has expanded faster than trade in primary products, and also that balance of payments difficulties caused certain Commonwealth countries to restrict their markets last year.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that because of persistent American economic penetration in the Commonwealth countries, the volume of United Kingdom Commonwealth trade is bound to diminish? Why does he take such a complacent view about Commonwealth trade relations? Is he aware that unless the Government do something about it, we must make them?

I do not take at all a complacent view. On the contrary, we are very glad to see that the Australians, for example, are now expanding their imports. The right hon. Gentleman has just been to Australia and perhaps he assisted in that. Unless the Australian Government issue import licences, it is not possible for this country to sell goods there.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what additional possibilities of trade with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the countries of Eastern Europe have been opened up as a result of the continuous review of the controls on trade with those countries.

Controls on trade with these countries have not recently been changed, but trade continues to expand as shown by the fact that exports have increased from less than £16 million in 1953 to over £43 million last year.

Does the President of the Board of Trade regard the figure of £43 million as a ceiling? Does he take the view that it cannot be exceeded? Is not the fact that this trade is now under constant review, to use his own words, an indication that we are not taking the necessary action needed to overcome these artificial barriers to our trade?

Trade with the Soviet is showing fairly healthy expansion year by year. There are a great many goods that the Soviet can buy from us, and which I think their people would like to see bought from us, and anything that we can do to assist that expansion we will do.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in the interests of road safety, he is prepared to disregard for the purposes of taxation, the extra weight of protecting drivers of lorries from the dangers of shifting loads by the provision of adequate fittings to lorries.

No, Sir.

Is the Financial Secretary aware that these accidents are causing a great number of fatalities which could be avoided? Is he also aware that there is a double danger, first, from the load coming through the cab when a lorry runs into something, and, secondly, because drivers of lorries are chary of putting on the brakes suddenly, because they know that will happen. There have been two fatal accidents in my constituency recently. Will my hon. Friend look at this matter again?

I am aware of all those points. The fact is that it is a legal requirement that lorries should be so fitted that their loads can be properly secured, and it would not be proper to give tax relief for compliance with a legal requirement.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury on what date the Civil Service Union first presented its claim on behalf of the messenger and paper-keeper grades for improvements in the pay and conditions of these grades; when his Department replied to this claim; and whether he now proposes to concede the claim.

The Treasury received the Civil Service Union's claim on 26th July, 1956, and on 30th July telephoned the Union to arrange a meeting, which was fixed for 18th September. An interim settlement retrospective to 1st October, 1956, has now been reached, subject to clarification of certain details.

At a time like the present, when the Government and all of us are urging improvements in industry in negotiating machinery, does not the Financial Secretary think that it is time that the Government put their own house in order? Is he aware that, according to the Civil Service Union, these men, who received no benefit from the Royal Commission, put in a modest claim. They had to wait seven months for a reply, and that reply offered the lowest-grade men, earning £7 10s. a week, an increase of only 1s.? Is he also aware that he is shaking the faith of a very loyal body of men in the Civil Service Union?

I do not believe that the time that has elapsed since this claim was first made up to the present has in any material way prejudiced the settlement.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what consultations there have been through the Whitley machinery of his Department with those of his staff affected by the moves resulting from the recommendations of the Arton Wilson Report.

There has been regular consultation with the Staff Side of my Departmental Whitley Council on all the changes arising from the Wilson Report. Their advice has been most valuable, and their views have been taken fully into account in all decisions reached.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there is much anxiety among the local staff of his Department owing to the lack of consultation? Will he look at the matter again, and try to ensure fuller consultation, down to the local level?

I cannot say that I am aware of that. I know that in certain areas the implementation of the Wilson Report has undoubtedly brought problems—which it was bound to do because of the economies which it has effected by way of amalgamations—but I understand that there have been no real difficulties which have not been adequately met during the course of negotiation.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what limits are set to the expenditure of dollars on the import of animal feeding stuffs; and how the total expenditure of dollars under this head has increased or decreased over recent years.

Practically all animal feeding stuffs may be imported from dollar sources without restriction. Expenditure on such imports in the three calendar years 1954, 1955 and 1956 was about £41 million, £73 million and £67 million respectively, but the level of imports in 1954 was affected by the rundown of Government stocks at that time

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether, with a view to encouraging the greater consumption of fish in this country and absorbing the excess landings of the trawler industry, he will take steps to assist the movement to encourage the public of this country to buy and serve fish on Tuesdays as well as Fridays.

It is for the interests directly concerned to promote a campaign of this kind. Both the White Fish Authority and the industry have been conducting valuable publicity to increase the consumption of fish, and my right hon. Friend welcomes the enterprise and initiative of the industry to this end.

May I take it that that Answer really means that the Minister quite approves of this idea of a Tuesday fish day?

Only on Tuesday this week I attended the annual dinner of the Fishmongers' Company, where I corn-mended it. I shall be glad to send my hon. Friend a copy of the text of my speech, if he will do me the honour of reading it.

The only result of propagating a Tuesday fish day as well as a Friday one will be to increase the cost. Is the hon. Member further aware that because so many people buy fish on Friday, the prices are, without any consultation with the little fishes, always made higher then, because of the demand? Does he now intend to make the prices higher on Tuesdays as well as on Fridays?

I do not think that that follows at all. I would say that in any case there are always adequate supplies on Tuesdays, as a result of the catches over the weekend. I should not have thought that there was any tendency to raise prices in such a way.