asked the Minister of Supply how far he estimates that the present military aircraft programme is going to prove sufficient for the nation's defence requirements during the envisaged long transition period from manned aircraft to missiles; and whether he is now in a position to make a statement on his future policy in regard to aircraft research and development.

asked the Minister of Supply if he is now in a position to make a statement regarding the Government's future policy for research and development in the aeronautical industry.

asked the Minister of Supply what is the reason for the delay in announcing Government policy with regard to aviation research and development; and if he will make a statement.

The present military aircraft programme is intended to meet the needs of the defence policy outlined in Command Paper No. 363. A report on future policy in regard to aircraft research and development has been submitted by a working party of officials and is now being considered by Ministers. I hope to make a statement to the House in the near future.

Is that not exactly the trouble? Have we not been waiting too long for this inter-departmental report? Why the delays, which the Minister should realise are causing a great deal of anxiety and frustration in the aircraft industry? Is it not logical to assume from Ministerial comments in past months that we cannot envisage an expansion from the present position because the Government have no plans for maintaining the present productive capacity in the industry? What plans have the Government in the offing to allay the anxiety in the industry, and particularly to find jobs for the people who are to be unemployed?

I admit that there is a degree of uncertainty in the aircraft industry. It is the purpose of Her Majesty's Government to dissipate it as soon as possible. On the other hand, I really cannot think that the six weeks' or two months' delay which has taken place over this report, as against my earlier promise, is of that magnitude or is of the catastrophic nature which the hon. Gentleman suggests.

Is it not only about a year since the White Paper on Defence was published? Curtailment of military aircraft was envisaged in it. Does that not make it all the more vital that we should have a policy of research and development in the aircraft industry? We have been promised a statement for a long time; when does the Minister think he will be able to tell the House the policy of the Government?

I agree that the industry ought to know where it stands, and I am genuinely sorry that I have fallen short of my promise. I really do think that in the near future I shall be able to make a statement.

While accepting the Minister's apology and recognising that the delay has not been his fault, may I ask whether the Minister does not think that the House is entitled to know what is going on? Does he recall that he gave us a promise with some degree of scientific precision, defining exactly when the first day of spring falls, and stating that we could expect a policy statement before that date? What is the reason for the delay? Is it because the Government are going back on their defence policy? What is the reason?

As I happen to manage a scientific department, scientific precision is the last thing I should ever attempt. There are no sinister reasons behind the delay. The reason is that the machinery of government works a little more slowly than most of us like. If the hon. Member for Uxbridge (Mr. Beswick) has any strictures to make, I think he ought to reserve them until I make my statement.

asked the Minister of Supply how far the proposed changes in his relationship with the aviation industry will give greater control to the Royal Air Force over research in the various fields of military aviation.

I know of no proposed changes in my relationship with the aircraft industry.

If there is a scheme by which there is greater devolution of research to the ordinary civilian firms, can the Minister assure us that the military aspects of this research will not be neglected, now that the civilian application of research is so much more profitable to the industry?

I think the hon. Gentleman had better await the statement which I have promised more than once, but I think I can assure him that there will be no neglect of research valuable for military purposes.

asked the Minister of Supply to what extent he intends including the weapon system in the order for additional P.1 fighter aircraft now being constructed.

It is the intention that orders for the associated weapons will be so placed as to match deliveries of the aircraft.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this answer will be well received by all concerned? Will he tell the House when he expects this contract to be finalised so that the firm can get on with the job?

I can only say, as in my original answer, that it will be at a time such as will ensure matching the deliveries of the weapons with the deliveries of the aircraft.

asked the Minister of Supply to what extent the merger of Bristol Aero Engines and Armstrong Siddeley Motors measures up to his policy for integration of firms within the aircraft industry.

It is my policy to encourage the industry to reshape itself into stronger units. The association between the Bristol Aero Engine and the Armstrong Siddeley Motor Companies is an important step in this direction, and I therefore warmly welcome it. I hope that it will lead to an even closer association between the two groups of companies concerned.

Could the Minister say to what extent he is encouraging further integration in the aircraft industry, and whether, following these measures, he anticipates a surplus of skilled labour, and whether the Government have any plans in mind for using this particular kind of skill?

I wish to see a greater degree of combination within the aircraft industry, and one purpose of such combination would be to eliminate redundant capacity with greater ease than would otherwise be possible, but I do not think the hon. Gentleman should blind himself to the need for some elimination of capacity.

Is the Minister aware that, when the announcement of the merger was made, it was stated that it had taken place with the support of the Minister of Supply? Would the Minister be good enough to say what that "support" entails? Does it entail the guaranteeing of orders, and, if so, under what conditions?

I do not think I recollect the word "support". I would have thought that what was meant was that the merger had taken place with my approval. Both companies came to me and told me what it was they proposed to do, and, since it is desirable to reduce the number of management units in the industry, I welcomed the step.

Will the Minister consult the Minister of Education in regard to the deep concern felt by young people in choosing careers? What are the future prospects of careers in this industry, and will the right hon. Gentleman take early steps to consult his right hon. Friend on that aspect of the matter?

I am only too happy to try to answer the right hon. Gentleman's questions, but I must say that I see great difficulty in relating that subject to the original Question on the Order Paper.

asked the Minister of Supply what is the position today at the Royal Ordance factory at Maltby; and what progress has been made in getting private industry to take over all or part of the factory.

The rundown of work at this factory is proceeding smoothly, and I understand that almost all the workpeople so far discharged have been placed in other employment. No arrangements for the disposal of the factory have been made, but I have inquiries from interested firms.

asked the Minister of Supply whether he will make a statement on the accident to the missile launched on Wednesday, 30th April, at the Missile Research Establishment, Aberporth.

At 10.30 a.m. on 30th April an experimental rocket was fired from the Royal Aircraft Establishment, Aberporth, on a trajectory out to sea within the Cardigan Bay ranges. The rocket deviated from its course and fell on farm land near New Quay, on the Cardiganshire coast. So far as is at present known, no damage either to persons or property resulted. I much regret this incident and any anxiety or disturbance it may have caused. I have asked for a very full investigation and for a report to be made to me without delay.

Is the Minister aware that those of us who have visited this establishment have been deeply impressed with the care taken to prevent something like this happening, but unless the self-destructive device is improved, will it not be necessary for the Minister to look into the matter again to see if these experiments should not take place in centres further away from population?

I think the hon. Gentleman had better await the outcome of the inquiry. The establishment has been there for ten years, and the firing of rockets has been going on for the best part of ten years. The number of occasions on which a rocket has fallen on land is very few; I think at most five times.

Would the right hon. Gentleman go a little bit further and give an assurance to people living in the locality that this sort of thing is most unlikely to happen, that inquiries will be made into the technicalities of it, but that, in the meanwhile, nothing will be undertaken which might result in a recurrence?

Pending the outcome of the inquiry, nothing likely to lead to a recurrence will be undertaken.

Will the Minister give an undertaking that as soon as the inquiries are completed he will make a full statement to the House?

Clearly, security considerations arise here, but within the limits permitted to me by security considerations, I will be as forthcoming to the House as I can.

asked the Minister of Supply if he will give a progress report on the Blackburn aircraft, N.A.39; and indicate what is to be its future operational rôle.

Development of the N.A.39 is proceeding well, and the first of the development batch aircraft made a satisfactory first flight on Wednesday last. It will be used by the Fleet Air Arm as a long range strike aircraft.

In view of the fact that there now appears to be doubt whether this aircraft will be a successor to the Canberra or not, and, secondly, some doubt whether it will have any future at all, could the Minister say that he will guarantee sufficient orders for the N.A.39 to warrant the complete development of the aircraft?

I am not at all sure what the hon. Gentleman means by uncertainty. There is a naval requirement for the aircraft, but what I imagine the hon. Gentleman is wanting to know is whether there is a Royal Air Force requirement. As he has been told by my colleagues from the Air Ministry, the question of a replacement for the Canberra bomber is now under consideration.

Can the Minister tell us whether this aircraft is subsonic or supersonic, because there is a conflict in the technical Press and the Sunday Press and it is important to Blackburn's and to everyone else that this should be known?

I hope the hon. Gentleman will forgive me when I say that I should require notice of that question, because I would not wish to go beyond security considerations.

If the aircraft is likely to replace specification 339, it is important that the industry should know, because on that specification it has been waiting for a decision for eight months. What is being done by the Government to further overseas orders for the N.A.39?

If my hon. Friend means a successor requirement for the Canberra bomber, that, as I have already indicated, is under consideration. As for export orders for the N.A.39, attempts are being made to enlist the interest of other countries within the Western Alliance.

asked the Minister of Health if he will abolish hospital private beds and replace them by the same or greater number of amenity beds.

No, Sir.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that the demand for these amenity beds by those to whom privacy is essential for speedy recovery is far greater than the number available? As a result, they are being forced into private beds at a very great and sometimes extortionate cost? Will he reconsider his decision?

I am always prepared to consider proposals both for private or amenity beds where this is possible and where, in the view of the regional hospital board, there is a demand, but I would point out to my hon. Friend that there is still a demand for private treatment, and I do not think it would be appropriate to go back on the decision which the House took in this regard in 1946.

asked the Minister of Health if he will make a statement on the present position concerning the reconstruction work being carried out at the Coventry and Warwickshire Hospital.

As a number of details are involved, I will, with permission, circulate a statement in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

That is not particularly helpful. This matter has gone on for a long time. Is the Minister aware that, in the case of the front block, excellent progress has been made, which I saw myself on Saturday, but that although progress with the back block is now better, it was commenced as long ago as November, 1955? While we should pay tribute to the matron and the staff in the transfer of patients to the new wards, may I ask the Minister for an assurance that the finishing date of the front block will be October and the finshing date of the back block will be July, both of this year?

I do not have in mind the geographical layout quite as precisely as the hon. Lady, but I assure her, as she well knows, that very good progress has been made with this building scheme as a whole in the past year and that expenditure in the last financial year considerably exceeded the estimate. We are expecting to finish the kitchen, dining and physiotherapy block in August, and the casualty and fracture unit and additional wards in September of this year. The addition to the outpatient department is, of course, dependent upon those two, and further discussions are taking place in regard to other aspects of this work.

asked the Minister of Health if he will widen the membership of the proposed working party on the medical staffing structure of the hospitals to include representatives of other bodies than the Joint Consultants' Committee and his Department.

I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer given by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland to a Question on 29th April by the hon. Member for Greenock (Dr. Dickson Mahon). My right hon. Friend and I are not proposing any change for our part.

Is the Minister aware that there are those in the profession who believe that the advice he will receive from the Joint Consultants' Committee may not be entirely detached? Does he not think there is at least a case for having one representative of the senior registrars on the working party?

This is a Joint Committee of my right hon. Friend and myself and the Joint Consultants' Committee in co-operation. As the hon. Member knows, the Joint Committee consists of representatives of the Royal Colleges, the Scottish Royal Corporations and the British Medical Association. Its composition is a matter for these three bodies, and my right hon. Friend and I cannot interfere with the professional representation on this working party, which is a matter for the profession.

Is the Minister not aware that those people are all consultants? As well as representatives from the right hon. Gentleman's Department and the Joint Consultants' Committee, could not the Minister include one or more representatives of the senior registrars?

The composition of the membership of the working party is not yet decided. We shall have to appoint our members, and I will bear in mind what the hon. Member has said. I cannot, however, interfere with the professional representation, which is a matter for the profession.

asked the Minister of Health if he will instruct the working party on the medical staffing structure of the hospitals to pay special attention to the understaffing of the mental hospitals and to the need for a substantial increase in the number of psychiatrists in all grades.

The terms of reference of the working party apply equally to mental and other hospitals and no specific reference seems necessary.

In view of the fact that this is by far the most undermanned specialty in the whole of the hospital services, does the Minister not think that at least one word on this problem might be included in the terms of reference?

The hon. Member can take it that a joint body such as this will be fully aware of all the circumstances relating to the structure and staffing of the mental and mental deficiency hospitals.

asked the Minister of Health how far negotiations have progressed regarding the implementation of Sir Noel Hall's Report; and when he expects to receive firm proposals for his approval.

The committee appointed by the Whitley Council to examine this Report have met eight times and have so far been considering its application to the general grades of hospital staff. I understand that the position reached in these discussions will be considered by the full Council on 14th May.

Is this not taking a rather long time in view of the undertaking given by the Minister that it would be dealt with speedily? Is it not a fact that it is his own representatives on the Whitley Council who are primarily responsible for this delay and that their views on this matter are at variance not only with those of the Council, but of all the other members of the management side?

No, Sir. It is not rewarding to make those speculations upon the work of the committee while it is in session. The committee met for the first time on 28th January. It has met eight times subsequently, and I do not think it could fairly be said that there is any delay on the part of the committee.

asked the Minister of Health if he can state the present policy of hospitals regarding X-ray examinations of expectant mothers having regard to the potential danger to the unborn child; and what investigation is being made into the industrial use of radiation plant, in view of the danger to life and health in its unqualified use.

It would be for the doctor concerned with any particular case to decide whether an expectant mother should be X-rayed, balancing his estimate of the potential danger against the medical value of the examination. The industrial use of irradiating apparatus is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour, who has asked me to refer the hon. Member to the Answer given to a Question by him on 26th February.

While thanking the right hon. and learned Gentleman for his reply, may I ask whether he does not agree that a very careful watch must be kept on this situation at present, particularly in view of the fact that every time an X-ray takes place some tissue is affected? And now that, unhappily, there is fall-out through the use of materials in bomb tests which cause this difficulty, will the Minister do what he can to see that the greatest care is taken in the use of X-rays?

I recognise that central guidance on radiation hazards from diagnostic X-rays would be welcomed by the medical profession, but this subject is being studied by the Committee under Lord Adrian's chairmanship. Meanwhile, I think we ought to be clear that there is no reason at all to suppose that X-ray examinations will be ordered in an irresponsible way.

asked the Minister of Health what information he now has as to the efficacy of the Russian vaccine for multiple sclerosis.

I cannot as yet add to the replies I gave to Questions on this subject on 21st and 28th April.

May I take the opportunity of putting the supplementary question which I wished to put then? Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that I have sent him the names and addresses of six patients in this country who are receiving this treatment, and will he, in the investigations as to its efficacy, about which I acknowledge that we must be very careful, get reports from the medical officers of these patients?

Yes, Sir. The hon. Gentleman and I have been in correspondence about this matter for some little time, and I would certainly bear in mind what he has to tell me on this and other occasions.

In view of the increasing number of unfortunate patients subjecting themselves to this treatment, would not the Minister think that in view of the fact that last time he said he was not prepared to undertake the tests because it would take five years, it would be merciful for these people to know that he was willing to undertake the test?

Five years would be a longish time for them to have to look ahead. What I am now waiting for, as the right hon. Lady knows, is a reply from the Soviet Union, in regard to what official claims are made for this particular vaccine. When that reply is received, it can be considered by the experts, and then we will have a surer basis of foundation than we have at the present time.

asked the Minister of Health if, after having received the information from Russia that he is now seeking, he will issue a White Paper on the Russian vaccine for multiple sclerosis so that both doctors and the public may have reliable information available.

I do not think this course would be appropriate since the responsibility for using the vaccine must rest with the doctor, not the patient. I will continue to ensure that any information reaching me is made available to doctors who wish to use the vaccine.

While thanking the Minister very much for his very great services in connection with the Russian vaccine, may I ask him whether he does not think that information should be given to the public? Could he arrange at frequent intervals that the latest information which he has to hand is provided for the medical profession through his Ministry or through one of the journals, or in any other way he thinks to be appropriate?

I will certainly bear that in mind. As the hon. Member knows, the ordinary method of communicating information to the medical profession is through the medical Press, supplemented, if necessary, in the case of those practising in the National Health Service, by references in prescribers' notes. I will certainly bear all those matters in mind.

Is it not almost unprecedented for a Minister of Health to pass on to doctors information about a vaccine from a foreign country while at the same time he refuses to undertake any tests of the vaccine?

What the hon. Gentleman asked me to do was to make available in a suitable form to the medical profession such information as we have. I must say that I thought that was a very reasonable request, which I said I would try to meet. I see no inconsistency between that answer and telling the right hon. Lady, as is a fact, that field clinical trials would take five years to show results.

This is a rather important matter, because there are a large number of people in this country suffering from disseminated sclerosis who read these answers of the Minister carefully. If he is prepared to identify himself so closely with these trials that he is prepared to pass on information to the doctors, is he not at the same time playing a kind of confidence trick and should he not at the same time, in order to satisfy the doctor and the patient, promise to undertake a test?

I am sorry, but the right hon. Lady has not followed this quite clearly. Two propositions are involved here. One is the proposition that we should now proceed to hold field clinical trials of this vaccine. The other is the proposition that such information as we get, whether from the Soviet Union or elsewhere, should be disseminated to the medical profession in an appropriate form. The first proposition was that made by the right hon. Lady. I dealt with it last Monday and said that it could not show rewarding results for at least five years. The second proposition, which is quite distinct, is that made by the hon. Member for Barking (Mr. Hastings), and I have answered that today.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that apples for sale in Coventry recently were found to be contaminated with arsenic and lead; and if he will make a statement on the report submitted to him from Coventry.

Yes, Sir. This particular shipment, which was from the Lebanon, was sampled for analysis at Southampton on 12th March and the results were communicated as soon as possible to the local authorities concerned. I understand that the Lebanese authorities, to whom representations were made in February, have arranged for consignments of apples to be inspected before export.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary look at that again from the viewpoint of his statement that the local authorities concerned were informed? Is he aware that the chief public health inspector in Coventry said that the inquiries had revealed that neither the local authority nor the wholesaler was aware that these apples were contaminated and that that was the reason for the submission of the report?

Yes, Sir. The history is that on 15th March, on receiving the results of the analysis, Southampton port health authority notified the local authorities to whose areas consignments found to be contaminated had gone. Owing to a misdirection, Westminster City Council, which is responsible for Covent Garden, did not receive its letter until Tuesday, 18th March, after most of the apples had been further distributed. Birmingham City Council was informed the same day, and Coventry was informed on 20th March through Meriden Rural District Council.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary ask his right hon. Friend to make a statement concerning the possibilities of adulteration of vegetables and fruit from fertilisers and sprays in this country and abroad?

That is another question, but no doubt my right hon. and learned Friend will take note of what the right hon. Lady has said.

They should have bought the apples in Worcestershire in the first place.

asked the Minister of Health what further measures, following on the report of the Working Party on Health Visiting, are to be made for the recruitment of health visitors.

With the long-term aim of improving recruitment, the working party recommended improvements in the status of health visitors and the organisation of their training. My right hon. and learned Friend is in general agreement with these recommendations, and discussions on matters of detail are proceeding with the local authority associations and professional organisations.

Does the hon. Gentleman realise that this is becoming an extremely urgent problem for local authorities, and that the fact that many of them are understaffed increases the tremendous difficulties which confront health visitors? My own local authority has just half of its complement. Cannot this work be speeded up?

I will do my best in that matter.

Will the Minister give consideration to the better training of health visitors in health and spending less time on training them as nurses?

The principal suggestions of the working party were for the introduction of a new grade of group adviser and for the constitution of a central training body with wide responsibilities for the conduct and supervision of training. There is controversy about some aspects of these proposals, but I cannot say precisely when decisions will be taken upon them.

asked the Minister of Health what steps he intends to take to intensify the publicity campaign showing the relationship between cigarette smoking and lung cancer, in view of the recent report of the United Nations World Health Organisation which shows an increase in recent years in the number of deaths from this disease.

My right hon. and learned Friend will be obtaining further information on the campaigns which local health authorities have been undertaking during the 12-month period following the issue of the circular on this subject last June. He cannot decide what further action may be necessary before studying the results.

Has the Minister any reason for being satisfied with the impact of the Government's campaign on this matter? Is he aware that there is considerable feeling in the country that the impact has been nil, in view of the alarming figures in the Report, which show that in Western Europe the increase in the number of deaths from lung cancer in the last eight years has been greater than deaths resulting from any other disease? Will the Minister step up the campaign regardless of the vested tobacco interests?

On the question of impact, we must assess the local authorities' views on the effect of their campaign; and any decision to step it up or otherwise would have to be based on that.

asked the Minister of Health whether, when his discussions with the British Medical Association are finished, he will issue a statement; and whether, during his negotiations, he will ask the Association for an estimate of the average weekly number of private patients who receive medicines or drugs.

The answer to both parts of the Question is "Yes", but I am not yet able to say when the discussions will be completed.

Is it not extremely unfair that private patients who are forced to contribute to the National Health Service should have to pay for their own medicines and drugs? Is this not just the kind of vindictive Socialist legislation which the people of this country expect the Conservative Party to put right?

I have indicated on a previous occasion that the Government are not unmindful of the principle which my hon. and gallant Friend has in mind, but I also said that it would not be possible at the present time to introduce legislation which would result in increased expenditure.

asked the Minister of Health what has been the outcome of his consultations with the Secretary of State for the Home Department about the sale of Persomnia without prescription from a registered medical practitioner.

The matter has been referred by my right hon. Friend to the Poisons Board.

Without seeking to rush matters in any way, may I ask the Minister whether he has any idea when the Board will report?

I have no precise indication. The Board is an independent statutory body advising the Home Secretary on these matters, and I have no doubt that it is proceeding with the greatest speed which is compatible with thoroughness and efficiency.

Is not the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that this has been going on for a very long time? The Poisons Board was asked to look at it some eighteen months ago. Will he not see whether it can be speeded up, in the interests of people who suffer from this problem?

The Board will report to my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary and not to me. I recognise the hon. Lady's interest in this matter over a period, but I am sure she agrees that although speed is desirable it is essential that we get the best and most authoritative advice on this problem.

If it is a fact, as the hon. Lady said, that the members of the Board have been investigating this for eighteen months, perhaps they have taken some of the preparation themselves.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs on what grounds the Attorney-General stated at the recent Conference on the Law of the Sea at Geneva that Great Britain favoured the extension of territorial waters from three to six miles.

My right hon. and learned Friend did not say that Great Britain favoured an extension to six miles. He said that we submitted the proposal reluctantly, in recognition of the strength of the feeling in many quarters against the three-mile principle as such. He added that we still regarded the three-mile limit as representing the fundamental rule of law in the absence of agreement on any other limit.

Does the Minister realise that the House never gave the Government any sort of authority to make any such offer, and that if that offer had been accepted it would have inflicted on the fishing industry a very great loss? Will he give an assurance that no such offer will be made by the Government at any future conference of this kind or otherwise?

Last week, both I and my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture made it quite clear that we fully share the grave concern of the fishing industry about the situation which resulted from the absence of any decision on territorial waters at Geneva and its possible effects on the economy of this country. We have done, and we are doing, everything we can to safeguard the interests of the deep sea fishing industry.

While all of us would favour a three-mile limit, is it not a fact that the Government would have been very wise and very pleased to have obtained a compromise, if that had been possible, rather than return to total anarchy with nations claiming up to twelve miles and with us being unable to interfere?

Yes. I think the House will agree that a six-mile limit would be better than a twelve-mile limit.

Do the Government feel that there would be any better prospects from some kind of a regional rather than world-wide consultation, which would provide a higher proportion of votes of those who are seriously interested in fishing matters and have serious responsibilities?

We most certainly have that in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is now in a position to resume his negotiations on the future status of Cyprus with Turkey.

I cannot add anything to the Answer which my right hon. and learned Friend gave to the hon. Member and to my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland, South (Mr. P. Williams) on 23rd April.

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that the news from Cyprus today is extremely serious and that the Government have missed a golden opportunity by their procrastination over the last few months? What does he intend to do about it, because the situation is now reaching a point where there is likely to be a recurrence of the violence which was stopped a few months ago?

I think that my right hon. and learned Friend made it quite clear in his Answer last week that he wished a statement to be made as soon as possible. I greatly regret the recent incidents in Cyprus. They can only make an eventual solution of the problem more difficult and, in the meantime, impose hardships on the Cypriot people. Hon. Members should, of course, address Questions on the internal situation in Cyprus to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies.

Does my right hon. and gallant Friend realise that what is wanted is not so much a resumption of negotiations between either Greece or Turkey about the future of Cyprus, but an announcement by Her Majesty's Government of what steps it will be possible to take to allow the Cypriots themselves to begin the process of governing their own country, provided that law and order is maintained?

As my right hon. and learned Friend said last week, he hopes that a statement will be made as soon as possible, and I am afraid that I have nothing to add to that today.

But in view of the seriousness of the situation, cannot the Minister of State at least tell us whether it is the case that Sir Hugh Foot is returning to this country for discussions?

I am afraid that I have nothing to add today.

Does the statement made some time ago mean that, in the event of Archbishop Makarios using his influence to stop violence, there will be a resumption of negotiations with the Archbishop with a view to a settlement?

I think that Her Majesty's Government have made their position quite clear in the past.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what progress is being made in the construction of a British public school in the Middle East, supported by Government funds, to replace Victoria College, Alexandria.

A school run on such exclusively British lines as was Victoria College, Alexandria, would no longer meet local demand. In co-operation with local governing bodies, the British Council assists schools run on British lines but adapted to local conditions in Iraq, Libya and Ethiopia, and my right hon. and learned Friend hopes that the Lebanon may be added to this list before long.

Would my hon. Friend agree that Victoria College served both the Middle East and this country well, and would he undertake to do all he can to see that other schools run on British public school lines are established in the Lebanon and elsewhere?

I should like to pay a tribute to the work done by Victoria College and at the same time agree with what my hon. Friend says. I think my hon. Friend knows that we are making every effort to give assistance to the British Council in this important work.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will make a statement on the progress made at the diplomatic level in preparation for the proposed Summit Conference.

In the Western Governments' Aide-Mémoire of 24th April it was proposed that, to save time and avoid inconvenience, Mr. Gromyko should talk to the three Western Ambassadors jointly instead of separately. The Soviet Government rejected this idea and offered us a choice of proceeding by separate meetings or else by joint meetings at which, in order that both sides should be represented equally, they proposed that the Polish and Czechoslovak Ambassadors should take part. They made it clear that they themselves preferred the first alternative. In consultation with our Allies, we decided to accept this proposition, and so informed the Soviet Government on 3rd May. I hope that it will now be possible to make progress.

What is the objection of the three Western Governments to conceding numerical parity to the Soviet Government? Surely, there is no question of principle involved.

As I think I made clear in my Answer, Mr. Gromyko said that he would rather have separate meetings, and we therefore agreed.

What is the basis of the objection to allowing the Russians to have Czechoslovakia and Poland there if the Russians desire it? The right hon. and gallant Gentleman should be aware that we on this side also think that we should have collective meetings; but why on earth object to having Czechoslovakia and Poland included?

The right hon. Gentleman really cannot have it both ways. Last week he made a tremendous fuss because we would not accept separate meetings. Now we have said that we will accept separate meetings, he should be grateful.

Is the Minister of State aware that he is entirely misrepresenting us? Is he not aware that we on this side expressed the view that the Russians were wrong in not having collective meetings? What we now want to know is why on earth there should be objection to the Czechs and Poles being present.

I think that the right hon. Gentleman made it quite clear last week—[HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."] Yes, I will answer the question. The right hon. Gentleman made it quite clear last week that, in his view, normal diplomatic meetings should be separate meetings——

No.

Yes, he did. If he consults HANSARD, he will see that that was the point of view he put forward to my right hon. and learned Friend. As I have said in my Answer, the Russians preferred this course, and we have accepted it.

I have now asked twice: what is the objection on the part of this country and the Western Powers to meeting the representatives of Russia, Czechoslovakia and Poland together?

It does not seem sensible to us, Mr. Speaker, that the question of the composition of any Foreign Ministers' meeting, or a summit meeting, should be decided by any formula or for reasons of prestige. I have said that the Russians proposed this as their first choice, and we have accepted it.

Surely the position is quite clear, which is that the Russians are perfectly able and free to speak for themselves and the Poles and the Czechs, but that each of the Western countries must speak for itself. Does my right hon. and gallant Friend agree?

Answer.

Can we take it from the Minister of State's Answer this afternoon that Her Majesty's Government have no objection in principle to according numerical parity to the Soviet Union?

What I have tried to make clear is that the Soviet Government preferred that choice. We have accepted it, and our note to the Soviet Government on 3rd May made it clear that our acceptance of the procedure of separate meetings with the ambassadors in Moscow was not in any way intended to prejudge the question of the composition of the Foreign Ministers' meeting, or of a summit meeting.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what progress has been made so far in regard to a simplification of the rules governing trade with Communist countries at the meeting of the Co-ordinating Committee now proceeding in Paris.

The discussions in the Co-ordinating Committee in Paris are continuing, but the outcome of the review is not expected for some time.

Then would the hon. Gentleman instruct our representatives in Paris not to accept any decisions at Cocom which would result in restrictive practices that would do damage to British trade?

Our representatives in Paris are well aware of the interest of British trade and are carrying out their consultations with that in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs on what date he received an approach from Sir Bernard Docker, for the purpose of complaining about the treatment his wife and son had recently received by officials in Monaco; and whether he will make a statement.

Sir Bernard Docker called at the Foreign Office on 28th April to make a complaint about the expulsion of himself and Lady Docker from Monaco and the French Departments of Var, the Basses-Alpes and the Alpes Maritimes. The answer to the second part of the Question is, "No, Sir."

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the working-class people of this country—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh".]—the real dockers—deeply resent the fact that these well-known Tories spend most of their time on the Continent spending hard-earned currency and then come back here for occasional board meetings and tell the workers what they should do to conquer inflation? Is he further aware that the workers will be very pleased by this announcement that the Foreign Office has taken no action in the matter——

Order. The Minister is not responsible for the conduct of Sir Bernard Docker.

s asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what recent action he has taken in connection with the agreement to dispose of the Krupp armament monoply; and whether he will make a statement.

On 25th April, the Federal Government communicated a memorandum to the British French and United States Embassies in Bonn describing the progress that had been made in completing the outstanding deconcentration measures, one of which covers the property of Herr Krupp. This is now being studied by the Three Governments.

Has the attention of the Joint Under-Secretary of State been drawn to the Press reports that von Krupp said on 26th April that he did not intend to break up this monopoly and that he had the active support of the Adenauer Government? Can we take it that Her Majesty's Government stand absolutely and unreservedly behind the statement made by the then Prime Minister, Mr. Attlee, in 1951, when he said:

"There is no question of Krupps being allowed to resume ownership or control of the former Krupp industrial empire?"—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 12th February, 1951 Vol. 484, c. 68.]

As to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question, many people say things which are reported in the Press and which are not entirely advisable. On the second part of the question, we have already given assurances in the House on our position.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what was the first and most recent date upon which he approached the West German Government concerning the investigations which that Government are making into allegations that former Nazi judges and prosecutors are being re-employed in their former positions.

This question was first discussed with the Federal German authorities on 5th July last year. It has since been discussed at frequent intervals with the German authorities. The last occasion was on 2nd May.

Can the hon. Gentleman give us some idea how long it will take to conclude an investigation such as this? It now appears that it has been going on for ten months. The matter was first raised in this House in May last year when the Minister then promised that he would take action. Why did it take him from May until July before he "got cracking" in the matter? When does he expect to be able to give us some positive reply to the numerous questions which were put, mainly from this side of the House, by Members interested in the matter?

With regard to the statement so colloquially put about the Minister "getting cracking", that is not accurate. Continuous contacts have been made with Bonn on this subject, and while I sympathise with the hon. Gentleman about the length of these discussions, they are, after all, complicated and require considerable investigation by the German Government.

Are the Government making similar inquiries about the employment of ex-Nazis by the East German Government?

No, Sir.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what consultations are taking place with other Governments, especially those of France, Italy and Ethiopia, regarding the coordination of policies for the development of the territories inhabited by the Somali peoples when Somalia becomes independent in 1960.

As stated in my hon. Friend's reply to the hon. Member for Rugby (Mr. J. Johnson) on 27th January, discussions about the future of the Horn of Africa are actively proceeding through diplomatic channels. The purpose of these discussions is to coordinate the policies of the powers with responsibilities in the area.

Does the right hon. and gallant Gentleman expect to be able to make any kind of a statement in the near future? No doubt he is aware that there has been a lot of anxiety expressed in the House and in the Press, but there has been no information from the Government.

I cannot guarantee to make a statement in the near future, but I will certainly bear in mind the right hon. Gentleman's question.

Will my right hon. and gallant Friend bear in mind in these studies that somehow or other a good deal of money has got to be found from somewhere, from somebody, to keep alive this independent State when it comes into being in 1960, because without a good deal of subvention it cannot possibly live?

Yes, Sir. Her Majesty's Government fully recognise the great importance of the Horn of Africa and the need for ensuring that its problems are not tackled piecemeal but in a co-ordinated manner.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, in view of the agreement just concluded between Great Britain and Japan for the import of large quantities of salmon from Japan to Great Britain, and in view of the fact that these salmon were caught and are being caught in Pacific Ocean waters where nuclear tests have been and are being made, what steps Her Majesty's Government have taken to ensure that these salmon are not prejudicially affected by those tests in such a way as to make them dangerous as human food.

I am advised that no nuclear tests have been undertaken near the Japanese salmon fisheries and that there is no risk of contamination of salmon from these fisheries.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not realise that the fall-out travels throughout the Pacific Ocean where these salmon were caught, and is it not his duty to take steps to prevent an epidemic of poisoning in this way? What steps is he taking?

I do not think the hon. and learned Gentleman could have heard my answer. There is no question that there need be any danger of contamination in the way that he suggested. This is based on sound scientific advice which I have received.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what action is being taken following the Report of the Committee on Transactions in Seeds.

The organisations representing the interests affected by this Report have been invited to submit their views. When all of them have been received and considered they will need to be discussed with the organisations before decisions can be reached on the action to be taken on the Committee's recommendations.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when we can expect this report —his own report—and whether it will be before the summer?

I cannot at this stage let the hon. Gentleman know. I am still waiting for representations from two important organisations, but I will certainly see that there is no delay.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will make a statement on the question of a world food reserve.

I have nothing to add to the reply given to the hon. Member for Meriden (Mr. Moss) on 12th December, 1957.

In view of the food surpluses in the world, will the right hon. Gentleman see that this subject is kept alive? Will he pay attention to it and try to get something done?

I think the hon. Gentleman knows that the Director-General of F.A.O. is submitting a report fairly soon in which these matters will be discussed. I think he also knows Her Majesty's Government's reactions in principle.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, whether he will make a statement on commercial sales of wheat and flour from Australia following the Trade Agreement, 1957.

This Question originally appeared by error as No. 25 on the Order Paper and was attributed to my hon. Friend the Member for Barking (Mr. Hastings).

Imports of Australian wheat and flour in the calendar year 1957 amounted to 639,900 tons and 59,400 tons, respectively, a total of 722,500 tons in terms of wheat equivalent. In the present calendar year imports are likely to be much smaller because the poor Australian harvest at the end of last year has reduced the quantity available for export.

Owing to the fact that the returns for last year, quite apart from this year, were below the expectation, can the right hon. Gentleman say whether we have had any consultation with the Australians about the future of the wheat trade?

The whole position is be-devilled by the fact that there was a very poor harvest last year.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how many women in recéipt of the widowed mother's allowance are also in receipt of National Assistance; and what proportion this represents of the total number of recipients of the widowed mother's allowance.

It is estimated that at the end of 1957 some 20,000 National Insurance widowed mother's allowances, or roughly one in seven, were being supplemented by weekly assistance grants. This, of course, was before the increase of National Insurance benefit rates in January of this year.

Would the Minister not agree that this indicates what a difficult time widowed mothers are having in trying to manage on the allowance? Has his attention been drawn to the recently published survey by the Institute of Community Studies which provides serious factual information to support this suggestion?

I have read the very interesting report to which the hon. Lady refers. She herself, of course, will appreciate that the interviews on which it is based took place before two subsequent increases in the rate, and I think she will be aware that at 70s. the present rate for a widowed mother with one child is more than twice in money terms what it was in 1948 and in real terms 18s. 5d. more. In fact, there has been a bigger proportionate increase for the very reasons that she has given than any other National Insurance benefit.

s asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance in what circumstances, under his regulations, a widowed mother does not qualify for the full widowed mother's allowance, other than by reason of the earnings rule.

The widow's own part of widowed mother's allowance is payable at a reduced rate if her husband's contribution record was deficient. The allowance is also subject to reduction during prolonged hospital treatment, or if the widow is receiving certain alternative benefits.

Is it not hard on the widowed mother that she should have her allowance reduced because of some default in her husband's contributions? Surely it costs her just as much to keep herself and her family together? Will the right hon. Gentleman not reply to this in party terms, because I do not think that either side of the House has done all that should be done for the welfare of the widowed mother?

On the first part of the supplementary question, I think the hon. Lady will appreciate that it is inherent in an insurance scheme that the contribution record on which the benefit is based should affect the amount of, or indeed in extreme cases the entitlement to, that benefit. This is, after all, an insurance part of our social services and it is fundamental to it that if contributions are deficient benefits must be less.