asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in view of the Egyptian claim for £71 million for the events of last autumn, how much this country is claiming for the damage done as a result of the "Voice of Cairo" and other methods of propaganda used by Colonel Nasser.

No claims of the kind referred to by my hon. and gallant Friend have, been presented by the Egyptians to us or by us to them.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that had it not been for the policies advocated by the "Voice of Cairo" there need have been no Suez war and no damage at all?

That raises rather wider questions.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what representations he has received respecting the possible effect of the recent increase in the Bank Rate on house purchase for occupation; and what steps he proposes to take to offset the burden being placed on building societies and young people desirous of buying a house.

Apart from a few letters, none. I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Erith and Crayford (Mr. Dodds) on 29th October.

Is the Minister aware that I have come across many instances where young people who had intended buying houses because of the Rent Act are now finding themselves in the position of having to submit to extortionate increases in rent? Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it desirable to encourage young people to acquire their own homes?

I have answered the Question on the Order Paper.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware of the handicap the Bank Rate of 7 per cent. imposes on our export trade; and when he proposes to reduce it.

No, Sir.

Is the Chancellor aware that the Soviet Government have just lent India £44 million at the criminal and wicked rate of 2½ per cent.? How does he expect British capitalists to compete with Russian Communists in these markets if the Bank Rate has gone up to 7 per cent.?

I do not share the hon. Gentleman's desire to follow in too much detail the example of Soviet Russia.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer to what extent the figures at his disposal indicate that inflation is being checked.

Gold is flowing in instead of out and there is more confidence in the £ both at home and abroad, but our policies must be pressed home with vigour to ensure success.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why certain works of art and real estate were accepted from the executors of the late Duke of Devonshire in settlement of Estate Duty; what was the value of the works of art, houses, and land, respectively; and how the valuation was made.

The acquisition of these items through the National Land Fund was considered to be desirable under the terms of the relevant Finance Acts. The works of art were valued at £1,195,000 and Hardwick Hall and Park at £34,000. These figures were reached by negotiation between the executors and the Commissioners of Inland Revenue.

May I ask my right hon. Friend if it is not a fact that two of these pictures were found to be in a very unsatisfactory condition, that extensive work had to be carried out on them and that they now have to be kept in special scientifically-controlled conditions? May I further ask my right hon. Friend whether the condition of the pictures was known when they were taken over and whether it is not most unsatisfactory, at a time when economy is needed, to spend over £1 million for a purpose of this kind?

I do not think so. Parliament has approved this particular method of paying Estate Duty and though these pictures needed repair, and are being most carefully repaired by experts, they are a great acquisition to the nation.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will take action to alleviate the hardship suffered by children when their parents have died simultaneously yet it is nevertheless presumed for the purpose of collecting Estate Duty that there has been an interval of time between the deaths of the parents with a consequent double payment of Estate Duty.

I will consider the hon. Member's suggestion when I am making my general review of taxation in connection with next year's Budget.

Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that sympathetic consideration of this matter by him would bring him universal accord?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will amend the terms of reference of Lord Cohen's Council on Wages, Prices and Productivity so as to allow the Council to inquire into and report on the extent to which industrial management has not introduced modern machinery and modern methods of operations as recommended in the Reports of the Productivity Council.

The Council's existing terms of reference, which include the review of changes in productivity, would be sufficiently wide for such inquiries, but it is for the Council to decide whether or not it wishes to pursue them.

Could the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Council is, in fact, making these inquiries, because, if it is not doing so, it will be in danger of producing a one-sided report as it is quite obvious that managerial inefficiency which keeps earnings low and prices high is one of the prime causes of inflation in the country?

No, Sir. I must make it quite plain that I can answer for the terms of reference which the Government laid down, but not for the Council.

In view of that fact, will not the right hon. Gentleman give instructions to the Council to cover every aspect?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what action he proposes to take under Section 4 of the Bank of England Act, 1946, to safeguard the position of the depositors in the Ideal Bank, Limited, in view both of the directors' statement that they are forced, as a result of Government policy, to suspend withdrawals, and of the general loss of confidence to which this may lead.

None, Sir. The House will be aware that the position of the depositors in the Ideal Bank, Limited, has been fully safeguarded as a result of action taken by Barclays Bank, Limited. I am happy to say that the fears expressed in the last part of the Question have proved unfounded.

Whilst appreciating that events have moved a little in the way we all welcome since this Question was put down, does not the Chancellor realise that there was considerable local concern about it, and is he satisfied that no other small banks in the country are likely to find themselves in this position as a result of his policy?

:I cannot answer for either small or large banks in this matter. I answer for the Exchequer. The fears which the hon. Gentleman expressed were held at one time, but I am sure that he is as glad as everybody else to see that they are unfounded.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what percentage of the total national income was represented by wages in the years 1948 and 1956, respectively.

Wages and salaries—which include the pay of many directly comparable to wage earners, e.g., clerical workers, as well as managers—together represented 65·2 per cent. of the national income in 1948 and 67·4 per cent. in 1956. For wages alone the proportions were 44·1 per cent. and 44·8 per cent. respectively.

Is the Chancellor aware that his figures reveal that the wage earners' share in the national cake was almost precisely the same in those two years? Is he further aware that there were more than 2 million extra workers in 1956, so that the individual worker's share was considerably less? Will he bear that in mind and bring it to the notice of his colleagues when considering all questions of productivity and wages?

I will bear these things in mind, but I think it is idle to pretend that the increased weight of purchasing power from higher wages has not had a very important effect on the economy.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the cost of administration, advertising, and prizes, respectively, to date, in connection with the Premium Bond Scheme.

The costs of administration and advertising up to the end of October, 1957, are estimated at £1,400,000 and £400,000 respectively. The total value of the prizes in the first six draws, including that in November, was £2,325,000.

In view of all these very heavy costs, does the Chancellor think, especially since the scheme is so controversial, that it is worth while going on with it?

What matters is what savings are attracted. The scheme has attracted £111 million worth of savings. I hope the hon. Gentleman will invest in a Premium Savings Bond.

Are not these savings the consequence of money withdrawn from other forms of saving?

No, there is no doubt that the scheme is attracting new savings as well.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will give an approximate estimate as to what proportion of the £150 million outflow of net private long-term investment in the balance of payments in the first six months of 1957 was due to private purchases of non-sterling area securities.

About half.

Does not this indicate that the recent balance of payments crisis was due largely to the flight of private capital into non-sterling areas, and that the real spanner in the machinery is not wage increases but the notion of Conservative freedom applied to exchange control?

No, Sir.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the relative value of the £ sterling in February, 1956, and the latest available date.

On the basis of the Index of Retail Prices, and taking the purchasing value of the £ as 20s. in February, 1956, the comparable figure for September, 1957, was 18s. 10d.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his answer shows how much the pensions of civil servants and of local government pensioners have declined in value since the House began its last pensions increase Measure? Does he not think it is time that the Government did what they did two years ago and brought in a second Pensions (Increase) Bill?

I should have thought rather that it was a good justification of the policies announced by the Government.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, as on a previous occasion, he will announce any proposed changes in Purchase Tax in January rather than in April.

It would be wrong for me to indicate when I might contemplate any action in regard to Purchase Tax.

While not wishing the Chancellor to anticipate in any way his Budget Statement, may I ask him to bear in mind that the action of his predecessor in announcing a change of Purchase Tax out of the usual routine in January was of benefit to trade and commerce? If he has any such changes in mind, will he make them at the beginning of the year?

I will bear all these matters in mind, but it will really not help the trade and industry of this country if I start to announce dates about alterations in Purchase Tax.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) for what reason it has been decided that basket-ware articles, whose primary function is within the home, such as baby baskets, bread baskets, washing baskets, and waste-paper baskets, only pay Purchase Tax at the rate of 5 per cent., whereas similar basketware articles for use outside the home, such as perambulator baskets, are subjected to tax at 30 per cent.; and whether arrangements may be made in due course for all baskets to be taxed at the same rate;

(2) for what reason the exemptions for glass chimneys and primary glasses under Group 14 (a) (iv) and 14 (d) (ii) apply to lamp glasses for candle and oil-burning lamps designed both to assist combustion and protect the flame, as well as glasses of this kind for lamps which are designed to function without a separate internal chimney, but not lamp glasses, globes, and shades, which are used to surround an internal chimney; and whether he will review this matter at an early date;

(3) whether he is aware that the present rules of the customs and excise authorities with regard to Purchase Tax provide that all preparations for the promotion of suntan, whether perfumed or not, are subject to Purchase Tax at 90 per cent., whereas preparations for the prevention of suntan are taxed at 90 per cent. if perfumed, but only to 30 per cent. if on perfumed; and whether, in view of the damage which such anomalous and heavy taxation causes to the building up of our export trade in such products, he will arrange for an early review of the matter.

As the House is already aware, I am examining alleged anomalies in the Purchase Tax to which my attention has been drawn in the debates on the last Finance Bill and elsewhere. In that review I will take note of my hon. Friend's researches.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that my researches in this matter have been lengthy and that there are another fifty Questions at least to him to follow, and I can provide him with another fifty if he wants them? As there are literally hundreds upon hundreds of these anomalies, would my right hon. Friend apply himself thoroughly to them between now and the next Budget, and today would he tell the House, for example, why there is this discrimination, revealed in Question 19 in the matter of baskets, in the Treasury?

While respecting my hon. Friend's knowledge of baskets of all kinds, I had in mind in drafting this particular reply the fact that there were a further fifty Questions which might be asked.

They are asked.

I am bound to say this to my hon. Friend. While the question of anomalies in Purchase Tax is a serious and important matter, I do not believe that the debating in Question and answer of individual changes, in advance of any change being announced, would be in the interests of the traders concerned.

Can the Chancellor tell us whether he has any knowledge of the fact that the hon. Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro) actually voted for these increases in the last Budget?

Is my right hon. Friend aware, in relation to the last supplementary question, that none of these matters referred to in the three Questions are increases in Purchase Tax, but all stem from the original Purchase Tax Schedules in 1941 as made worse by the party opposite?

Since he is having an examination into all these matters and it would save the time of the House if we could have the answer to that examination, can my right hon. Friend let us know when he expects to report on the elimination of all these anomalies? It would save such a lot of time and trouble.

I shall keep him up to it.

No, Sir. I do not think that it would be advantageous to announce a date when changes in Purchase Tax are going to take place. To do so would really do a very great deal of damage to a very large number of traders in the country. I urge my hon. Friend to exercise a little caution in the interests of the traders concerned.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what official requests for financial aid were made by Mr. Krishnamachari, Indian Finance Minister, on his recent visit to this country; and what reply was given by Her Majesty's Government.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Dundee, East (Mr. G. M. Thomson) by my right hon. Friend the Member for Flint, West (Mr. Birch) on 31st October last.

Is the Chancellor aware that the Soviet Union has recently provided India with a credit of £45 million on favourable terms? Is he also aware that yesterday the Foreign Secretary, speaking of the situation in Tunis, said:

"…it would be most unfortunate if the Tunisian Government should be forced to rely upon arms coming from the Soviet bloc."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 18th November, 1957; Vol. 578, c. 34.]

Do not similar considerations apply in granting aid to India? While welcoming any aid for India's second five-year plan, would it not be most unfortunate if India were forced to rely too much on economic aid from the Soviet bloc?

This Question asks what Mr. Krishnamachari said to me and what I said to him, and those sorts of conversation are confidential.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when farthings were last minted; and whether, in view of the ¾d. reduction in the price of petrol, he will now mint more farthings.

Farthings were last minted in February, 1956. The present supply should be sufficient to meet requirements.

As it costs ½d. to make ¼d., is it not rather stupid of the oil companies to try to force this useless coin into greater circulation again? Will the Chancellor, therefore, ask the oil companies and the petrol retailers to forgo ⅛d. per gallon each and thus give the public 1d. reduction? It would be very much simpler and more sensible, would it not?

Yes, Sir, but I am answering for the Mint and not for the oil companies.

Why not ask them?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, in view of the increase of the Bank rate, he will agree to increase the maximum holding of the tenth issue of National Savings Certificates with a view to encouraging saving amongst people of modest means.

I am not proposing to make any changes in the terms of National Savings at the present time.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it would be a much more worthy way of encouraging people to save than the very doubtful expedient of Premium Savings Bonds?

I do not think it would help at all if I were to forecast changes in the terms of National Savings Certificates.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why the Public Works Loan Board does not give specific reasons for the rejection of loan applications by local authorities; and whether he will issue an instruction that such reasons should be given in the future.

The reason for the rejection or partial rejection of an application is normally that the Board is not satisfied that the authority applying has made full use of its credit to borrow in the market. It is the practice for this to be explained to applicants.

Is the Chancellor aware that there are grave suspicions that the Board does nothing of the kind, that it does not look at each case objectively on its merits, and that on occasions the intervention of a Minister of the Crown can make the Board change its mind? Does not he think that is a most unsatisfactory state of affairs?

If the hon. Gentleman has any complaints about an individual case and will let me know, I will look at it.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he intends to introduce a new Pensions (Increase) Act.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the increase granted to retirement pensioners now announced, he will accord similar appropriate increases to postal and other retired civil servants.

A new Pensions (Increase) Act, became effective as recently as April, 1956, and it is not the Government's present intention to introduce another.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the Prime Minister's pledge at Brighton to those living on small fixed incomes, and is he aware that the pledge at Brighton was given after the passing of the last Pensions (Increase) Act? In view of the fact that he has already implemented the pledge to the old-age pensioners, may I ask why there is this discrimination against those living on small fixed incomes, and may we have a satisfactory answer?

I do not think that I can add anything to the Answer I have already given to my hon. Friend.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, before the Bill proposing Local Government Reform is introduced, he will lay a White Paper indicating what steps are being taken to improve the position of ratepayers living on small fixed incomes.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will include in his Bill for Local Government Reform measures to protect those who do not pay Income Tax from any additional rate burden in respect of transfer of financial responsibility from the taxpayer to the ratepayer.

I have been asked to reply and, with permission, I will answer this Question and No. 65 together.

The general effect of the Government's proposals will be an overall financial gain to local government. The position of persons living on small incomes is, in other respects, beyond the scope of a Bill whose purpose is to make adjustments in the rating system and in the system of Exchequer grants to local authorities.

On a point of order. In view of the fact that I have had one Question on a similar subject transferred by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the Minister of Housing and Local Government, might I ask why two Questions were not transferred, and why does not the Chancellor stand up for his own Department himself? Then, may I ask my supplementary? Is my right hon. Friend who is answering for the Chancellor of the Exchequer aware that I am not so interested in the overall gain to my part of the world, though I hope it will be substantial, but that what I am asking is whether those living on small fixed incomes, who are quite as important as those who have large incomes, are to have a protection? Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that I am unlikely to support the proposals unless some sort of satisfaction for those in whom I am interested is provided?

If we can get through to the end of Question Time, I have given notice to present a Bill then, and perhaps my hon. Friend would read it.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that a British hire-purchase finance corporation has been advertising abroad for loans at high rates of interest; since this evades the Government's policy of restricting borrowing, what steps he is taking to stop this form of evasion; and if he will make a statement.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the Reply that I gave to the right hon. Member for Huyton (Mr. H. Wilson) on the 12th November.

Since 12th November, the City Editor of The Times last Thursday called attention to this rather important problem and suggested steps which might be taken. I wonder whether my right hon. Friend has looked into those suggestions. If not, would he do so and make a statement in the future?

I will certainly look at any suggestions.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will strengthen the Capital Issues Committee and arrange for it to meet more frequently.

No, Sir.

Bearing in mind that the decisions of the Capital Issues Committee have not produced universal satisfaction and that last year it dealt with over seventy cases per sitting, is not there a case for introducing the improvement I have suggested?

The scope of the Capital Issues Committee will fall, amongst other things, within the general review of the Radcliffe Committee. I do not think that we need have another Committee.

But is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he has just said that he does not propose to strengthen the Capital Issues Committee, thereby accepting that it requires to be strengthened?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been drawn to the observations of the Court of Appeal in re Hodge's policy; and whether he will introduce legislation to amend Section 11 (1) of the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1889.

I am reviewing this matter in accordance with the undertaking given during the Finance Bill debates, but I cannot anticipate the Budget Statement.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that, according to the words used by the Financial Secretary in the debate on 3rd July, the present state of the law is impossible to defend?

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will make it obligatory on owners of caravan sites to provide caravan dwellers on their site with rent books in which the address of the local medical officer of health is clearly stated.

No, Sir. My right hon. Friend has no power to do this, and can see no advantage in it.

Surely the Minister realises that health and sanitary conditions on caravan sites are even more important than in permanent dwellings, and, since many caravan owners do not know the address of the medical officer of health, they have to put up with insanitary conditions? Can he do something about it?

Yes, but the proposal in the hon. Gentleman's Question is that this information should be conveyed through the medium of rent books. As these caravans are not subject to rent control. I do not think that that would be the right way.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will cause a directive to be issued to local authorities containing an indication of the minimum safeguards to be imposed before granting owners of caravan sites a licence to use such sites for caravans used as human habitations.

Local authorities have power to attach conditions to the licences which they grant for caravan sites. My right hon. Friend does not think there is need for him to offer special guidance to local authorities on how they should use this power.

But could not the hon. Gentleman's Ministry which, after all, is concerned about the housing of the people, lay down a specimen set of conditions and rules; and, since many caravan dwellings are held on a weekly basis, can he not give any protection at all in security of tenure?

Of course, there are model conditions in existence already, which some local authorities use. Local authorities, by and large, have this power to set down standards for hygiene, sanitation and so forth, but conditions at the various sites vary so much in different parts of the country that my right hon. Friend does not think it right to issue a general directive.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what mileage of unmade roads in the County Borough of Poole was made up from 1945 to 1955, inclusive, in 1956, and in 1957 up to date; and what mileage and how many streets still remain to be made up.

I regret this information is not available from my Department's records. I think it could best be obtained from the local authority.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether it remains his policy as set out in Circular 52/56 to encourage the regrouping of water undertakings.

Yes, Sir.

May I assume from that answer that the Thames Valley scheme, which has been jointly sponsored by Reading Borough and Berkshire County and falls well within the ambit of the circular, will have the right hon. Gentleman's sympathetic consideration and, subject to details, his approval?

Everything has my careful consideration, but the hon. Gentleman's Question was framed in general terms and so was my Answer.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when he expects to be able to give a decision on the planning appeal of Mr. Arnold, of Merriott, Somerset.

My right hon. Friend has allowed the appeal.

While thanking my hon. Friend for that Answer, may I ask whether he is aware that my reason for putting the Question on the Order Paper was that, although the whole matter is very small, it has taken about eight months to clear it up? Would he and his right hon. Friend, who have shown no lack of courage in facing many problems, apply those qualities to the bumbling machine of town and country planning which we inherited from the party opposite?

My hon. Friend would no doubt agree that a delayed decision that is right is better than a quick one that is wrong.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will make a statement on the effects of the Rent Act; and which of the objectives for which the Act was designed have been or are being achieved.

It is too soon to see the full effect of this Measure.

With the knowledge the right hon. Gentleman has already, is he unmoved by the mounting toll of misery among elderly people, many of whom know that, by next October, they will have to leave houses in which they have lived for many years? Is he not aware also of the misery caused as a result of insecurity of tenure to untold numbers of other elderly people who live in houses which are decontrolled? Is this one of the main objectives of the Act? If it is not, what does he propose to do about it?

In reply to the hon. Gentleman's Question, I used the exact words spoken by the hon. and learned Member for Kettering (Mr. Mitchison) in the House last week. In reply to the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, I will say that I am proposing this week to send a circular to local authorities about the housing of old people.

Is not the Rent Act already bringing forward a large number of houses—[HON. MEMBERS: "Where?"]—and has it not already performed one act of justice, that is, to give the landlord a more proper return on his property?

I have no doubt whatever that the Rent Act has stimulated the doing of a great many much-needed repairs.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that, if he waits much longer, he will be too late to prevent the very hard bargains which are being driven at present by the landlords of decontrolled houses? Those leases are being negotiated, and landlords have the whip hand; tenants, with eviction threatened, are having to accept what are really grossly unfair terms. [HON. MEMBERS: "Where?"]

I spoke about this at length in the debate last week, and I am glad to say that the great majority of new three-year tenancies are being entered into on reasonable terms.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what steps he is proposing to take to amend Schedule VI, paragraph 21, of the Rent Act, 1957, in view of the judgment given by Judge Carr in the Stourbridge County Court on 3rd October, 1957.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether his attention has been drawn to a county court judgment at Stourbridge in October with regard to paragraph 21 of the Sixth Schedule of the Rent Act, 1957; and what action he proposes to ensure that the greater hardship proviso shall remain part of the Act.

I have taken note of this judgment, but a decision in a county court does not constitute a binding precedent in other cases, and it is not to be assumed that a similar view would necessarily be taken by other courts. If a similar decision were reached by a higher court, I should certainly consider whether steps ought to be taken to give effect to the original intention.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman's reply quite unsatisfactory because, first, he fails to deal with the position of the tenant in the case of Perry v. Downing, against whom the judge found on this issue and who, for all we know, may have been evicted because of the dubiety of the right hon. Gentleman's own Act? Is he not also failing to deal with the fact that as long as there is this dubiety there may be other county court decisions? Is not the only way to deal with this matter to have a simple amendment of the Act which would put the issue beyond all doubt?

It is not for me to interpret the law, but the decision of the county court is not final on a matter of this kind, and there is an appeal to a higher court. I think that it would be better to suspend judgment until a decision is given by the higher court.

While, in the circumstances, I welcome the Minister's assurance that he will look at this matter again if there is an appeal, may I ask whether he should not follow the suggestion made by my hon. Friend the Member for Blackburn (Mrs. Castle) and do something now, since he made it quite clear in Standing Committee on the Rent Bill that it was his intention that the court should decide which was the greater hardship, and a number of cases on this point are coming before the county court?

I cannot compel anybody who loses a case to lodge an appeal, but when an appeal is lodged we shall get a decision by the higher court.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that the decision of the county court judge is in direct conflict with the answer in his own guide to the Rent Act? Does he intend to reprint the guide, or does he intend to wait until somebody pays the money to go to the Court of Appeal, because his own Act has not been clearly drafted and has misled one county court judge, at any rate, and there are conflicting decisions? Is not it right, in the circumstances, to bring in a short Bill to make perfectly clear that his own answer in Standing Committee and his own advice in the guide to the Rent Act is what he intended should be and what ought to be the law? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that if he did that we on this side of the House would facilitate the passage of a Bill for that purpose?

On a point of order—

Answer.

Order. A point of order has been raised.

On a point of order. Would I have your permission, Mr. Speaker, to congratulate the hon. and learned Member for Kettering (Mr. Mitchison) upon using his position on the Front Bench opposite to ask a record number of supplementary questions to the exclusion of questions by back-benchers?

That is not a point of order for me.

May I have an answer from the Minister?

There is no doubt about my intention and there has been no change in my intention, but it would be contrary to all precedent to ask Parliament to alter a law which is on the Statute Book on the basis of one judgment given in a county court before any higher court has had any opportunity to pronounce upon it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman pay the costs of an appeal?

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he is aware of the concern of local authorities at the high rates of repayment now being asked for loans for house building; what steps have been taken to ascertain the effect this will have on the building of council houses when present contracts have been completed; and what are the prospects for the future.

I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer I gave the hon. Member for Bristol, Central (Mr. Awbery) on 12th November.

Is that the best Answer the right hon. Gentleman can give? Is he not ashamed of himself?

It was a first-class Answer.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he is aware of the decision of the Middlesex County Council to suspend the granting of loans for house-purchase, even where tenants have had to leave rented property; and, in so far as this and similar decisions by other local authorities are due to the recent increase in the Bank Rate, what action he proposes to take in the matter.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he is aware that a number of local authorities have suspended home mortgage advances since the increase in the Bank Rate to 7 per cent.; and what action he proposes to enable them to resume these functions so as to assist those who are compelled to purchase their homes because of the decontrol provisions of the Rent Act, 1957.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will take steps to ensure that the cost of loans under the Small Dwellings Acquisition Act does not exceed the present rate of interest on these loans.

I would refer the right hon. and hon. Members to the Answer I gave to the hon. Member for Bristol, Central (Mr. Awbery) on 12th November.

In what we understood was to be a property-owning democracy, is it not most regrettable that these local authorities, because of the Government's financial policy, now find themselves, or state that they find themselves, unable to help in the matter of loans for private house purchase?

I think a number of the local authorities might reconsider the matter after my statement last week that I should be ready to consider new or revised schemes which provided for varying the rates of interest to borrowers.

Does not the Minister realise the real dilemma of local authorities who either have to refuse loans to people who are threatened with eviction under the Rent Act, or, if they make advances, land themselves in great financial difficulty and face the fact that they are hanging a millstone of high interest rates round the necks of the people who are forced to borrow or else find themselves homeless?

I would ask the hon. Lady again to read the announcement which I made last week, which creates a new situation which I am sure all local authorities will wish to examine.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what powers are enjoyed under his Regulations by local authorities to deal with the overcrowding of houses by landlords who exploit the housing needs of coloured immigrants in London.

Section 90 of the Housing Act, 1957, empowers local authorities—in London both the London County Council and the metropolitan borough councils—to serve notices upon landlords fixing, at their discretion, the number of people who may sleep in a room. Appeal lies to the county court.

In view of the difficulties which this problem is creating in some of our towns, will the right hon. Gentleman call the attention of local authorities to these powers and ask them not to wait until complaints are made by white people, which is what they are doing at the moment?

The hon. Member himself has a local authority background. These are discretionary powers already enjoyed by local authorities, who do not, I think, need any direction from me.

Has the right hon. Gentleman any suggestion to make to local authorities as to where the surplus occupants of overcrowded houses are to live?

That is clearly something which a local authority must take into account when considering the exercise of its powers.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how many local housing authorities have reduced the number of houses they are building compared with 1955; and how many have decided not to build any more houses, stating as their reason the additional heavy costs arising from excessive interest charges on loans.

In answer to the first part of the Question, I would refer the hon. Member to the published Housing Returns.

In answer to the second part, out of a total of 1,468 housing authorities 38 have informed me that they have decided to reduce their housing programmes because of increased loan charges.

Does not the Minister realise that if thirty-eight housing authorities have already decided that because of the present extortionate interest charges they cannot go on with more housing, that will spread like a disease all over the country? Does he not realise that many more are considering doing this? Is he aware—I am sure he is—that even the London County Council has had very considerably to restrict the area of its loans for house-building purposes because of the extremely high rates of interest?

The latter part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question deals with a separate matter. The fact is that a number of local authorities have in any case decided that they are within sight of satisfying the housing need in their area. I have to deal with the situation as it is, and the present situation is that fewer than 3 per cent. of the housing authorities have acted in the way that the hon. Member indicates.

Does the right hon. Gentleman's figure include local authorities which have stopped without telling him? Does it include such cases as Bristol where the programme, which was for 3,000 houses last year, will be reduced to 600 next year, and similar cases all over the country, including those in my county, where six out of fourteen local authorities had no houses building at the end of September?

I have answered the Question on the Order Paper and have indicated that fewer than 3 per cent. of the total number of housing authorities have so far informed me that they are reducing their programme.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether, in the light of the recent debate on economic affairs, he will now state the total number of houses and flats which he anticipates will be completed by local authorities in England and Wales during 1958; and also the number that will be started during the same year.

I do not propose to make a speculative forecast of the number which will be completed in 1958. I am prepared to give approval for the starting of 100,000 houses by local authorities and New Town Corporations in that year.

But is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Secretary of the National Housing Council, a non-political body, has forecast that by next summer the total number of houses being built will not exceed an annual rate of 100,000, including private enterprise houses? For how much longer will the right hon. Gentleman stand at the Dispatch Box and be wilfully blind to the miseries which his policy is causing? Will he not see the local authorities and try to avert this tragic happening of local authority housing coming to a standstill?

On the contrary, I am ready to give approval for a very large amount of local authority housing, and with respect to the gentleman whom the hon. Gentleman has quoted, I entirely disagree with his statement.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government to what extent reasonable living accommodation in England and Wales now equates with the population; and what is his estimate of the number of new houses still needed.

There is not sufficient evidence on which to base a reliable estimate, and I would rather not make guesses.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that as long ago as November, 1953, the right hon. Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Bevan) said that we were not very far from the amount of total accommodation which this nation required? If that was true then, can we not assume that it must be very much truer today?

That is certainly one of the significant statements of the right hon. Gentleman.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will initiate legislation to provide a measure of decontrol of those mortgages which still remain subject to the Rent and Mortgage Interest Restriction Acts.

Mortgage control is lifted where a house comes out of rent control. Where the landlord is still restricted as regards the rent he can charge or the regaining of possession. I think that he should continue to enjoy his present protection against a mortgagee.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of these very old mortgages, pre-1914 mortgages, are included in small trust estates and that the low rate of interest is causing considerable hardship to those entitled to the income from such estates?

I agree with my hon. Friend that this is a difficult matter, but it was considered by the Government at the time of the introduction of the Rent Bill, and I think that we reached the right conclusion.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what reply he has made to the complaints submitted to him by the Council for Wales concerning his failure to proceed with his promised review of Welsh water resources.

I stated last February that I was arranging forthwith for my engineers to undertake a technical appraisal of the water resources of Wales. Considerable progress has been made with this investigation. I also stated my intention to set up a Committee to advise me on matters connected with the conservation and use of water resources in Wales.

The membership and terms of reference of this Committee I will be announcing in the near future.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that last February he said he would appoint this advisory Committee before the investigating engineers had completed their work? Does he think he need have waited from February to the present date before taking action in this matter? Is he not aware that it has aroused considerable misunderstanding and great irritation in the Principality?

I am sorry if it has aroused misunderstanding. I have considered this matter carefully. There has been no time wasted. We have been pressing on as rapidly as possible with the technical investigation. I want the Committee to be appointed and to have some positive work to do the moment it meets.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he has already got two advisory Committees considering the shortage of water, the water supplies and such matters? Is there any overlap with this new Committee? Does he expect the new Committee to report before or after the two existing Committees?

I hope the hon. and learned Member will not oppose the giving of special attention to Wales in this matter.

asked the Prime Minister what proposals he has for delivering a broadcast speech on the defence of Britain similar to that made by President Eisenhower in his broadcast on 7th November.

Many people, including the hon. Gentleman, make proposals to me not only on what I should talk about but also what I should say.

Is the Prime Minister aware that President Eisenhower undertook the broadcast in order to restore confidence in his Government? Does not the Prime Minister think he should do the same for the Government here; or does he think that if he broadcasts till Christmas it will not have that effect?

We have rather regular rules about political broadcasts in this country, to which I propose to adhere.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will arrange for one Government Department to be responsible for maintaining records of the numbers, qualifications, and types of appointment held by engineers and technologists of professional standard.

asked the Prime Minister if, in view of the difficulties experienced by the Advisory Council on Scientific Policy in obtaining accurate details regarding the loss of highly qualified research scientists, engineers, postgraduate physicists, and chemists by reason of emigration to countries abroad, he will arrange for one Government Department to be responsible for maintaining records of all such emigration.

My right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour is already responsible for collecting information about the employment of persons in Great Britain, including engineers and technologists. Records as full as those suggested could be kept only with a degree of expense which would appear disproportionate to their value.

As regards migration, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Poole (Captain Pilkington) on 14th November.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the question is not entirely one of fullness of the records, although fullness is needed, but of the accuracy of the figures which are kept? Is he aware, for instance, that at the Ministry of Education it is difficult to disentangle the records relating to the qualifications of engineers from those relating to people qualified in other subjects, because they are all kept together? A similar difficulty arises over emigrants, of whom records are kept by the Commonwealth Relations Office. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in recent months there have been statements by scientists well placed to know to the effect that we shall not achieve the modest target of the number of scientists and technologists we have set ourselves? Is it not clear, therefore, that we should make a special effort, even at some expense, to find out where we are using those we have?

There are two quite separate questions here. One is the encouragement of technological training and scientific teaching by every possible means. Those the Government are pursuing with great effort. The second is the question of the keeping of the records in the most suitable way. I quite agree, and I will certainly look into the point the hon. Gentleman has raised. I would, however, remind him that I do not think it would be in conformity with the general view of the moment that we should revert to the period of war time when, of course, there was compulsory registration of all scientists, engineers and so forth by the Ministry of Labour and National Service. Those powers have now expired, and I should not think it would be agreeable to the House if I were to ask to revive them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Advisory Council on Scientific Policy itself is conscious of the widespread belief that the emigration of scientists, technologists, chemists and others has increased considerably during the past few years? Further is he aware that hon. Members have put Questions to Ministers responsible for a variety of Departments and can get no accurate information at all? Is it not worth while, therefore, expending some money in order to have records on this very important subject?

It is not only a question of money. It is a question, as I have tried to explain to the House, of taking back powers of compulsory registration of all people which the Ministry of Labour and National Service had in the war. That I am not prepared to do. Short of that, I am quite ready to find all possible information that can be got without reversion to those powers.

My hon. Friend was, I think, concerned with the question of the emigration of scientists, and I would ask the Prime Minister if he does not feel that it is desirable to clear up the good deal of confusion which appears to exist on this subject by providing figures of exactly how many scientists of various kinds have emigrated.

Yes, but that is just the point—how to obtain those figures in the most effective way without the use of compulsory powers.

asked the Prime Minister if he will announce the terms of reference and the members of the Royal Commission on Greater London.

asked the Prime Minister if he is in a position to announce names and terms of reference of the Royal Commission on Reform of London Local Government.

Her Majesty has been pleased to approve the appointment as Chairman of the Commission of Sir Edwin Herbert, K.B.E. The other members will be Paul Cadbury, Esq., C.B.E., Miss Alice Johnston, O.B.E., M.A., W. H. Lawson, Esq., C.B.E, Professor W. J. M. Mackenzie, M.A., Sir Charles Morris, M.A., and Sir John Wrigley, K.B.E., C.B.

The terms of reference are:

"To examine the present system and working of local government in the Greater London area: to recommend whether any, and if so what, changes in the local government structure and the distribution of local authority functions in the area, or in any part of it, would better secure effective and convenient local government; and to regard, for these purposes, local government as not including the administration of police, or of water, and the Greater London area as comprising the Metropolitan Police District together with the City of London, the Boroughs of Dartford, Romford, and Watford, the Urban Districts of Caterham and Warlingham, Chorley Wood, Hornchurch, Rickmansworth, and Walton and Weybridge, and the Parish of Watford Rural in the Watford Rural District."

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the appointment of this distinguished body will give great satisfaction to those people who believe that there is urgent need for a comprehensive review of local government in the London area? Can he say when the Royal Commission is likely to be able to begin its work?

I think we all should be very grateful to the distinguished men and women who have agreed to serve on this Commission. It will be very arduous work, to which, I am sure, they will give of their best. As to the date when they will report, I am afraid I could not say now.

None of us, of course, knew those names until we heard them today, or had any idea of them. May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if this Commission is to sit continually as one Commission or whether it will have power to sit, if it so wishes, in some committees or smaller bodies? Has the right hon. Gentleman any idea of the sort of time it is expected to take in making a report, which will affect, of course, not only the area covered by the Commission but other parts of the country, especially those immediately outside that area?

I have already replied to the second part of that supplementary question. I am afraid I cannot give any estimate of the time the Commission will take. As to its own arrangements, the Royal Commission will, no doubt, like any other Royal Commission, make what internal arrangements it thinks best for the management of its business.

asked the Prime Minister to what extent during his recent meeting with President Eisenhower he discussed the problem of the Arab refugees.

I am aware of my hon. Friend's concern over this problem. We had a general discussion on Middle East affairs, but my hon. Friend will understand that it is not possible for me to go into details.

Will my right hon. Friend take an early opportunity to impress upon President Eisenhower the necessity of ending Western indecision, for which America bears a large share of responsibility, on this subject at the earliest possible moment, and put it to the President that this problem does not get easier with the passing of time but rather steadily and tragically worse, until another generation grows up amid the degradation and squalor of those camps?

Yes, as my hon. Friend knows, this is a very serious and, alas, very intractable problem. As to the actual maintenance, Her Majesty's Government, like other Governments, make an important contribution. We quite realise the urgency of trying to find some final solution of a problem we have at present been able only to mitigate, not to solve.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will associate Her Majesty's Government with the recent official statement by the Canadian Prime Minister approving the holding of a world conference of scientists on the dangers to mankind of a thermal nuclear war.

I assume the right hon. and learned Gentleman is referring to exchanges which took place in the Canadian House of Commons on 12th November during which the Canadian Prime Minister made it clear that the suggestion was—to use his own words:

"…not a matter of national Government consideration".

The question does not, therefore, arise.

Surely the Prime Minister can go as far as the Canadian Prime Minister went? Did he not say in the same statement that in his view a meeting of the scientists of the world for this purpose could make a definite contribution furthering peace in the world? Is not the Prime Minister prepared to go as far as that?

I wish I were so confident that the mere knowledge of a danger automatically produces the methods of reducing it. The scientific facts about the dangers are, of course, well established and well known to the public, at least on this side of the Iron Curtain. Whether a special scientific conference would be valuable or not, while I would consider it, I feel rather doubtful. At any rate, the whole matter is now being fully studied under the aegis of the United Nations.

asked the Prime Minister whether the policy of Her Majesty's Government is still guided by the declaration of his predecessor, Sir Anthony Eden, at the July, 1955 summit conference, Geneva, to the effect that a nuclear war would mean the annihilation of both the belligerents and the neutrals; and what steps he proposes to take to prepare and summon another summit conference in order to avert this possibility.

The policy of the nuclear deterrent is outlined in the White Paper on Defence. I have nothing to add to what I told the hon. Member on 12th November, about a summit conference. The danger of nuclear war could best be averted if the Soviet Government would accept the Western Powers' proposals for partial disarmament.