asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the work of the Joint Committee set up by the British Standards Institution and the Electrical Development Association to cover electrical appliances and accessories; and what further development of the work of this committee is contemplated.

The Joint Committee of the Electrical Development Association and the British Standards Institution on the safety of electrical appliances and accessories was set up after the war to test and advise on cases submitted to it where there may be doubt with regard to safety.

I understand that no development of the work of the Committee is contemplated; it will continue to operate as at present.

Is the Minister aware that that is exactly what I feared? Does he know that the Consumer Advisory Council of the B.S.I. has been pressing for a long time for a Kite Mark scheme on this range of appliances? Can he give any indication whether that is likely to materialise?

No, but I will make inquiries.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the contamination of apples imported from the Lebanon for sale in Coventry by arsenic and lead on the skins; and what care is exercised by his Department to ensure that imported fruit is of the required standard when making trade agreements.

I am aware that some Lebanese apples have been found to be contaminated. All the Lebanese apples have, of course, been imported privately but the question of contamination has been taken up by Her Majesty's Embassy in Beirut and the Lebanese authorities have given an assurance that they have arranged for future consignments to be inspected before shipment. As the hon. Member will have gathered from the Answer given to her on 5th May by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Health, fruit imported into this country is subject to examination on arrival under the Public Health (Imported Food) Regulations, 1937.

Is the Minister aware that that Answer will give satisfaction, certainly in Coventry? Is he further aware that we were worried not about the examination at this end but about the examination in the exporting countries? May I thank him for what he has done?

Does not this trouble over the importing of apples from a country which does not usually send them here arise because the Government have imported them for balance of payments or political reasons? Should not the Government provide better protection, by means of stiff import duties on foreign apples being imported into this country, in order to see that only those of high grade are brought here?

That raises very different issues. I think that the circumstances in which we relaxed the quota restrictions in this case were very special and were understood by everybody.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that Pakistan is now dumping textiles into Hong Kong at prices which only cover the cost of raw materials; since both are selling below Lancashire costs, if he will call a conference of all Commonwealth textile interests to prevent their mutual self-destruction; and if he will make a statement on the position.

No, Sir. I have no evidence that Pakistani textiles are being dumped into Hong Kong.

As regards the second part of the Question, the representatives of the United Kingdom industry have been holding discussions with representatives of the Indian and Pakistani industries. If these discussions eventually result in agreement the way will be open for the Lancashire industry to take up the conditional offer of the Hong Kong industry to reopen negotiations for a voluntary agreement.

If I send my hon. Friend a report from The Times giving the details of these complaints in Hong Kong, will he look at there? Secondly, can he tell the House whether Sir Frank Lee reached any agreement with Hong Kong on his recent trip there, and, if so, what?

A statement has already been made about Sir Frank Lee's visit. Answering the first part of the question, any evidence of alleged dumping is a matter in the first instance for the Hong Kong Government.

Is not the Minister aware that the recent talks have been concerned only with grey cloth being brought into the country, that the question of yarn has not been mentioned and that the spinners of Lancashire feel that, even though an agreement is reached, nothing will be done to protect their side of the industry?

The Question which I was answering referred to textiles rather than to yarn.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what consultations he held with members of the Waste Trade Federation before allowing the importation of Japanese wiping rags under open general licence; and what steps he is taking to protect firms engaged in the general waste reclamation trade against the dumping of these articles.

None, Sir. I have at present no evidence of dumping, but it is, of course, open to the industry to present its case.

is my hon. Friend aware that the importation of these very cheap Japanese wiping rags has grave consequences for firms which were engaged in this reclamation trade before the war? Will he consult the trade further about the matter and at least give an assurance that he will take action if the firms concerned are threatened by this dumping?

If they consider that they are threatened by the dumping, it is. I think, for them, in the first instance, if they are the injured party, to take the necessary steps to put the matter before the Board of Trade. I would remind my hon. Friend that this is one of many commodities used by industry which were put on open general licence on 1st August. 1957, as part of our policy of removing import controls as the balance of payments permits.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the usual length of time required by the Export Credit Guarantees Department for the consideration of applications.

Seventy-five per cent. of applications for approvals of amounts which may be shipped to individual buyers under short-term policies are dealt with within three days. The time taken to deal with applications for policies varies considerably. If the hon. Member would let me know exactly what sort of application he has in mind. I will see if it is possible to give him more precise information.

I am obliged for that Answer. When there is delay, is it due, possibly, to the inadequacy of machinery in some countries for obtaining the necessary information, and does the Minister feel that more professional advice, rather than reliance on the trade attachés in the different countries, would be better?

I should want to examine what the hon. Gentleman means by "professional advice". Inevitably, there is some delay when it is a matter of investigating the creditworthiness of a firm in what may be a distant country. It would be best if the hon. Gentleman would let me have particulars of any case he may have in mind, and I will look into it myself.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is yet in a position to make a statement about measures to meet complaints from farmers, firms, organisations and Governments at home and in other parts of the British Commonwealth and Europe regarding imports of butter from Sweden and Finland, having regard to the fact that there is a case of dumping.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will now state the result of his discussions with the New Zealand Government about butter imports.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he has now reached a decision on the validity of the complaint made by New Zealand and the English Milk Marketing Board on the dumping of butter by foreign suppliers to the United Kingdom market; and whether he will take apropriate action in the national interest under the Customs Duties (Dumping and Subsidies) Act, 1957.

I am not yet in a position to make a statement, but an announcement will be made very shortly—I hope, early next week.

Is my hon. Friend aware that a satisfactory statement about effective action is eagerly awaited by all who are concerned not only for the prosperity and interests of our fellow subjects in New Zealand but for the future of the British export trade to that country?

I would rather not say anything which would in any way forestall the statement.

Why have we been fobbed off by all these vague words, repeating exactly what the Minister said last week? What have our good friends in New Zealand done to merit the disgraceful treatment meted out to them by the present Government?

The hon. Gentleman is forgetting that this is only the second dumping decision which we have had under this comparatively new legislation. I do not think that the House will expect me to make any apology for the fact that very weighty consideration has had to be given to all the matters involved here, including submissions from many Governments.

As this is clearly such a complex matter and many other countries appear to be dumping one kind of food or another in the United Kingdom, will the Government, once they have reached their decision, issue a White Paper setting out fully the considerations which have weighed in this particular case concerning butter?

I will note my hon. Friend's remarks.

Is the Minister aware that this matter of trade with New Zealand has been a subject of public notice for a considerable number of weeks? Does he realise that the House, which has a great respect for New Zealand, a country which has been a very loyal and co-operative friend of the United Kingdom, feels that undue delay is being experienced here and that it is time the Government reached not only a settlement but a settlement which will, we hope, be favourable to New Zealand?

I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will note my remark that it is hoped to make an announcement early next week. I must remind him also of the procedure in this matter. We had to give reasonable time for all those concerned to submit their arguments, and they were given until the end of March. I do not, therefore, think that it can be said that a really unreasonable time has been taken to consider the very complicated matters involved.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what quantity of butter has been imported from Poland in the first four months of 1958; what has been the average free on board price per cwt. of these imports; what price the consumer pays for butter in Poland; and whether he is satisfied that these relative prices do not contravene the existing anti-dumping agreements.

During January to March, 1958, imports of butter from Poland amounted to 5,796 tons. The figures for April are not yet available.

The Board of Trade has no information about the free-on-board price of these imports, nor about the price the consumer pays for butter in Poland.

With regard to the last part of the Question, there is no anti-dumping agreement with Poland, and the question of contravention of anti-dumping agreements does not arise.

What does arise is the question whether this butter is dumped contrary to the Customs Duties (Dumping and Subsidies) Act, 1957. Has my hon. Friend no power at all to stop dumped butter from Poland?

We have received no complaint in regard to Poland. We have, however, recently received representations about the level of Polish butter imports, which we are considering.

Is my hon. Friend stating that at no time in the course of their discussions have the New Zealand representatives mentioned Polish imports?

They may have been mentioned in the course of the wider discussions on New Zealand's agricultural problems which are taking place, in the main, with the Minister of Agriculture. I was referring to a complaint under the Customs Duties (Dumping and Subsidies) Act.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the Registrar of Restrictive Trading Agreements regards himself as having no power to withdraw from the register agreements which have been abandoned whether before or after proceedings have been commenced in respect thereof; and whether he will introduce declaratory legislation to ensure that an agreement abandoned before proceedings are commenced in respect thereof may be dealt with under Section 12 of the Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1956, as being no longer an agreement of any substantial economic significance.

I am sure there can be no doubt that the Registrar's interpretation of his powers is correct. The answer to the second part of the Question is "No, Sir." The intention of the Act would not be met if agreements which had been abandoned were by that fact alone to fall within Section 12.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the fact that deadlock has been reached between the British Standards Institution and manufacturers, following all reasonable negotiation, whether Her Majesty's Government will now consider legislation on a consumer standard.

No, Sir. There is no general deadlock. Discussions about the application of the Kite Mark to consumer goods have come to a standstill on one item only, children's footwear. In any case, my right hon. Friend and I do not consider that compulsory standards would be the best way of serving the consumer's interests.

Is the Minister aware that I am very grateful, after three and a half years, to have wrung an admission from him that deadlock has been reached in this matter of children's footwear? Will he now enlighten me on something which is really puzzling me? If the Government are not prepared to legislate when manufacturers refuse to co-operate with the B.S.I., what is the answer? Is the consumer to do without a standard in children's footwear because the manufacturers say that they will not co-operate with the B.S.I.?

No, I do not think that we should generalise on the basis of one example only of deadlock. I think that we should also rely on the strong competition which exists in these articles; there are many possible choices which the customer has before making a purchase of children's footwear.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment as soon as possible—not, of course, mentioning legislation.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if, in view of the fact that rubber has dropped to 1s. 9d. per lb. in the United Kingdom, the lowest price for four years, and that the prices of metals, like copper, tin, nickel, and aluminium have been saved only by drastic cuts in production, he will explore the possibility of calling a special conference of all industrialised countries in order to produce some price stability in raw materials; and if he will make a statement.

No, Sir. The Government's attitude to this important problem was fully explained by my right hon. Friend, the President of the Board of Trade, in his speech in the Budget Debate on 16th April.

Is my hon. Friend aware that that is a disappointing reply? Does he realise that, in North Malaya, for example, of the 497 tin mines, 144 are closed, and that of the 41 tin dredges, 10 are not operating, and 20 per cent. of the workers are unemployed? Is not it stupid for us to be spending £1,500 million a year on armaments to contain Communism while doing nothing to help its containment when it is coming in at a back door in the Far East? Will he look at the matter again?

I thought that it was rather a disappointing Question, because it proved that my hon. Friend had not read my right hon. Friend's speech. I hope that he will now remedy the omission. We certainly do not exclude the possibility of stabilisation arrangements for particular commodities, but I must remind my hon. Friend that the International Tin Agreement took many years to achieve.

Does the Minister appreciate that the whole House shares the confusion of the hon. Member for Louth (Mr. Osborne) about the Government's attitude to this question? Is he aware that, when it was first proposed by us as early as last October, it was turned down flat in a speech by the President of the Board of Trade, and that his speech in April added nothing except a vague reference to discussions at the Commonwealth Conference, but that, when the question was raised by the hon. Member for East Aberdeenshire (Sir R. Boothby), the Prime Minister promised to consider it most sympathetically? Will the hon. Gentleman now give us some action instead of all these equivocating Answers?

I will draw the attention of my right hon. Friend to the right hon. Gentleman's remarks, but I still think that the Government's policy is perfectly clear. The basic problem is a general one of maintaining a high and stable level of world demand.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what representations he has made to the Canadian Government to retain the preferential duty on imported British yacht sails; and if he will make a statement.

Representations now would be premature. The Primary Textiles Institute of Canada has requested an increase in the British preferential duty on sails, but this request has not yet been considered by the Tariff Board.

Surely this is the time when representations should be made, before the matter is considered by the Tariff Board, otherwise it will be too late. If this preferential duty does go, it will make it increasingly difficult for a very fine craft industry, which is exporting quite a lot to Canada, to retain its hold on that market.

I am not unsympathetic to the approach of the hon. Gentleman. The Tariff Board does hold public hearings at which all the interested parties, Canadian, British, and the others, have full opportunity to make their representations for or against changes in the present duties.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the recent agreement between Great Britain and Japan for increased imports into Britain of Japanese salmon, indicating in particular why this agreement was made in view of the fact that there are available ample supplies of Scottish salmon.

We are increasing the import quotas for both Japanese and North American canned salmon in order that larger supplies of this popular article of diet may be available to British housewives. There is no reason to think that these increases will affect in any way the market for Scottish fresh salmon.

Does not the hon. Gentleman realise that the British housewife and her family are exposed to grave risk by the importation of salmon from the Pacific, where bomb tests are taking place? Has the hon. Gentleman taken any steps to assure himself and the public that the salmon are not infected?

I think that the hon. and learned Gentleman had better address a Question on that matter to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what changes have been made in the rate of interest paid on Post Office Savings Bank deposits since its establishment.

None, Sir; but since April, 1956, the first £15 of interest have been exempted from Income Tax.

Would not it be in accordance with modern practice and result in increasing deposits if the rate were raised? It seems very low.

It has always been thought that it is better to keep the interest rates on Post Office savings at a constant level through periods of high and low interest rates. That has been the view of successive Governments on this particular form of saving.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is prepared to make a substantial financial contribution to the two proposed dry dock projects on the Tyne; and if he will make a statement.

I am prepared to consider applications in respect of these projects and they will be considered on their merits. The amount of any contribution must depend on the circumstances.

While being grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for what he has said, may I ask him to bear in mind that the Tyne is the major ship repairing centre in this country and that there is a certain amount of unemployment now? If the shipping slump continues, that will increase. Therefore, these two projects are extremely important. Finally, will the right hon. Gentleman say whether, in his Budget speech, he had some new arrangement in mind or whether he envisaged assistance under the existing Distribution of Industry Act?

This will be assistance under the existing Distribution of Industry Act if it is, as in this case, in a special area. If it is outside one of those areas, it will fall to be considered under the new Bill, which is now before the House.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the percentage increase in personal savings from 1946 to 1951 and from 1951 to 1957.

Personal saving, before providing for depreciation and stock appreciation, fell by 75 per cent. between 1946 and 1948, rose by nearly 150 per cent. between 1948 and 1951, and rose by over 600 per cent. between 1951 and 1957.

Would my right hon. Friend like to express his great satisfaction at this sign of confidence in the Conservative Government?

Yes. I find that very agreeable indeed, and I hope that the trend will steadily improve.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that his hon. and gallant Friend must be rather hard up for propaganda material if he is trying to draw attention to the fact that savings were inevitably low in a period just after the war, when hundreds of thousands of people were setting up homes for the first time and were also able to buy goods which were coming on to the market for the first time after the war?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the latest available figure of the National Debt and the difference of interest payable for 1957 against 1951.

The National Debt outstanding at 31st March, 1958, was £27,232 million. The cost to the Budget Revenue in 1957–58 was £149 million higher than in 1951–52.

Is the Chancellor aware that these figures will be of great interest to the general public? Moreover, is he aware that it is about time his Department or the Government sought to introduce forms of policy to give the benefit to the general public instead of to the bankers and moneylenders?

No, I do not think I am aware of the points that the hon. Gentleman has mentioned. I am aware that the current higher interest rates have been one of the contributory causes of the very favourable personal savings figures.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what progress he has to report in the negotiations for the establishment of a European Free Trade Area.

We are awaiting the document which the six countries of the European Economic Community are preparing on the basis of French proposals. In the meantime useful work is proceeding on a number of important details.

Is not time an important factor in this matter? Since the common market began to operate at the beginning of this year and the tariff reductions will begin from 1st January next, are the Government pursuing these negotiations with a sufficient sense of urgency?

There is no doubt about the sense of urgency on behalf of the British Government. I entirely share the hon. Gentleman's views on the urgency of the matter.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that only about two per cent. of all science graduates in Great Britain have even a slight knowledge of Russian; and whether he will increase the facilities for teaching that language so as to provide an adequate preparation for life for scientists in modern circumstances.

It is true that relatively few science graduates have a knowledge of Russian. The curricula of university courses are a matter for the universities. They are conscious of the need for Russian courses suitable for scientists and I understand that an increasing number of these is being provided.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that very few secondary schools have facilities for the teaching of Russian and that the New Scientist has described the present position by saying that the number of secondary schools which offer the teaching of Russian is ridiculously small? Does not that mean that scientists of standing have to spend a considerable amount of time in learning Russian to be able to cope with various publications? Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that he ought to give some encouragement by giving grants, and do something about increasing the teaching of Russian so that these people will not be at a disadvantage later on?

The hon. Gentleman ought to refer any questions concerning secondary schools to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Education. I understand that there will shortly be courses at most of the major universities and at quite a number of the technical colleges, too. The supply of teachers can expand only gradually, but the universities will make every effort to ensure that the supply of teachers is expanded and that the number of courses is expanded as far as possible to meet any increasing demand.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when the discussions between the Inland Revenue and the Post Office regarding the amount to be paid over by the Post Office in respect of 2d. receipt stamp-duty will be completed.

Not for some months.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the passing of the Cheques Act has meant that almost the only people giving stamped receipts today are the small traders doing cash business? In view of the substantial reduction in revenue from this source, the confusion that there is in the public mind and the general uncertainty of the situation, particularly with regard to tax avoidance, would not my right hon. Friend agree that it would be as well to abandon altogether the legal obligation to put stamps on receipts?

I suggest to my hon. Friend that that is a broader question.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what steps he is taking to ensure that qualified applicants for degree courses who have so far failed to secure admission to such courses will be able to secure admission in the coming academic year, and that all new applicants who are properly qualified will also be able to secure admission.

The announcement which I made on 20th February showed that the Government are alive to the need for a further increase in the capacity of the universities. I am confident that the university authorities will do their best to find places for those applicants they consider qualified in the coming academic year.

Yes, but cannot the right hon. Gentleman realise that the announcement he made on 20th February gives a figure which it is hoped to achieve in a number of years, and that in each successive year until we achieve that figure there may be a considerable wastage, as indeed there apparently is? His Financial Secretary two Sessions ago gave a figure of roughly 2,500 people who are qualified but unable to obtain places. Therefore, is not it desirable that each Session there should be some attempt to make sure that all students who are qualified are fitted into university courses?

Of course the hon. Gentleman knows that the capacity of the universities is steadily expanding now. The programme I announced was for a further expansion in the years ahead, but I think there is perhaps a misunderstanding about the word "qualified". It is commonly regarded that the possession of two passes at advanced level in the G.C.E. examination is a minimum qualification, but the actual standard demanded for admittance depends on the judgment of the university or institution concerned.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Professor Appleton in a Report showed that we can exclude or include people in universities by raising or lowering the standard he has referred to? Is there any sense in keeping people out of a university who are obviously qualified to benefit by university education? If they cannot get into one course, is there any possibility of their taking, or any persuasion used to get them to take, another course and thus giving their best brains to the nation in whichever sphere they can find work?

A student can apply to as many universities or institutions as he wishes, but the fact cannot be denied that there are more students now than there is capacity at the universities. What is true is that the capacity has been steadily expanding and the programme I announced recently provides for a considerable expansion.

But is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that his attitude seems to be that this is some privilege conferred on the students? Is not it a fact that it is the need of the nation to have the best brains developed to the utmost extent?

I agree entirely with the last words of the right hon. Gentleman and that was the reason for the considerable expansion programme which the Government have announced.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement about the future ownership of the Redbourn steelworks of Richard Thomas & Baldwin Limited at Scunthorpe.

I understand that the Iron and Steel Agency has no present intention of separating the Redbourn works from Messrs. Richard Thomas and Baldwins, Ltd.

is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the reports which have appeared in the Press to the effect that a consortium of steel magnates is about to take over this firm, and would the right hon. Gentleman think it right for this Government to approve of such an action or to persuade the reluctant steel magnates to take over this concern, Her Majesty's Government having forfeited all shred of confidence in the country?

No, Sir, the policies of Her Majesty's Government in this matter remain in accord with the provisions of the Iron and Steel Act, 1953.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the proposal to build, out of Development Commission funds, a factory for Messrs. Cableform Limited at Llangefni.

On 27th May last year the Treasury agreed to make a loan from the Development Fund to Welsh Agriculture and Industries, Limited to build a factory at Llangefni for occupation by Messrs. Cableform, Limited. Negotiations between W.A.I., Ltd., and Messrs. Cableform on the tenancy agreement have since been progressing and it was until recently hoped that they were on the point of completion. However, I understand that Messrs. Cable-form have found it necessary to speed up their production programme to meet their commitments; they have therefore given notice that they are no longer interested in this project and I understand that they have taken vacant premises elsewhere. I recognise the keen disappointment that this news will bring to Llangefni and I greatly hope that other projects will be developed which will help to relieve unemployment in the area.

Is the Chancellor aware that the breakdown in negotiations will be a profound disappointment to the people of Anglesey where unemployment, as he is aware, is running at between 11 per cent. and 12 per cent. of the insured population? Will the Chancellor consider allowing this factory to be built as an advance factory, because we are confident that in due course it would be tenanted, and that that is the only way in which to solve the problem we have to face?

In replying to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question—yes, I agree with him. I realise that this will be an acute disappointment to the local people, as indeed it is to me. As regards the last part of the supplementary question, I am afraid I could not hold out any hope to the hon. Gentleman that it would be prudent to build a factory, as it were, "on spec." The chances are that the specification of the factory would be unsuitable for an applicant unless it were known in advance the type of business which might be attracted.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman flying in the face of all experience when he says that? Is he aware that when we were in office we built factories not only in Anglesey but elsewhere in that part of the world? Also we built advance factories in many—[HON. MEMBERS: "That was just after the war."]—I agree there was no stagnation in our industry then—we built advance factories in many parts of the country and they were rapidly snapped up by industrialists, because this gave them the possibility of starting production without waiting a long time for the factories to be built. Further, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in this case the delay has not only been the prospective time required for building but what seems to have been the unconscionable delay in the negotiations between the Treasury and the interests concerned?

As regards the first part of the supplementary question, I think the right hon. Gentleman will agree that the first year or two after the war were extremely abnormal ones in this respect. In reply to the second part of his supplementary question, I would say that I know of no unreasonable delay on the part of any of the authorities concerned in this case, but if the right hon. Gentleman has any evidence of any such delay, I should be grateful if he would let me know.

Yes, Sir, but is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that even in 1950 and 1951 we were building advance factories, that we let them all before they were complete, and that there was no problem about specifications? Is not the right hon. Gentleman also aware that the reason for this was that industry was expanding in this country at that time, and if he would embark on expansion now, we would have no difficulty in bringing full employment to these areas?

I am afraid I cannot share either the right hon. Gentleman's opinion on this matter or his conclusions.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs, in view of known substantial increases in rents which are making it impossible for many people to rent a home, if he will inquire into the approximate number of houses automatically decontrolled by a change of tenancy since the Rent Act became operative.

I do not think any such action is called for. There has always been a substantial number of vacancies occurring among controlled houses; the difference which the Rent Act has made is that, whereas in the past these houses were almost always sold with vacant possession to avoid control, there is now an incentive to relet them.

But is the Minister aware that it is estimated that roughly one in seven, or 700,000 houses, are becoming automatically decontrolled each year as their tenants die or move to jobs elsewhere? Does not this mean that it will become almost impossible for young couples to find a house at a reasonable rent unless the Minister relents? What can they do about it?

The figure of 700,000 seems to be very high. The figure given during the debate on the Second Reading of the Rent Bill was 125,000. I agree that it would be easier for these young couples but for the immense damage done to the interests of the tenants by that disastrous resolution at Brighton.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he will make it an offence for a landlord to attempt intimidation by sending eviction notices to tenants of controlled houses.

The landlord of a controlled house can regain possession only by obtaining an order from the court. I have always advised tenants to make sure they know their rights, and anyone who is in doubt about the position can get information from his local authority or advice from any citizens' advice bureau. I do not think that legislation is needed.

Is the Minister aware that I and other hon. Members can give him evidence that this is what certain landlords are doing? In fact, I have a notice to quit in my pocket at the moment. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these landlords are taking advantage of their tenants' ignorance of the law, and, since there is enough injustice connected with the Rent Act already, could not the Minister quite easily prevent this additional injustice by making this a punishable offence?

I thought for a moment that the hon. Member was anticipating the next General Election. I say to him quite seriously that, unquestionably, making sure that the tenants have correct information about their rights is likely to be more effective than any legislation against intimidation.

Is not it a fact that this practice causes confusion between houses which remain controlled and those which have been decontrolled under the provisions of the Rent Act? Would not the right hon. Gentleman consider dealing with this matter in the booklet which I believe he is to issue in connection with the Landlord and Tenant (Temporary Provisions) Bill?

I think that the booklet had better be confined to the new Measure. I would have thought that there was sufficiently clear information already available to everybody. If this interchange of Question and Answer draws further attention to it, so much the better.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he will consider using his powers, or taking powers, to pay for street lighting on trunk roads from central funds, thus relieving parishes of financial obligations which are beyond their means.

No, Sir. My right hon. Friend, the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation, already has powers to pay grants on approved lighting schemes on trunk roads. My hon. Friend will realise that parish councils' lighting powers are permissive and not obligatory.

Yes, Sir, but is not it a fact that a parish council is a small and poor local government unit, that it is really only capable of lighting village streets, and that, when it is required to light on the standard of a main road, it should have much more help from the central Government in the national interest?

That may be, but that is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs on what grounds he has refused to sanction expenditure by the Scunthorpe Borough Council on small badges to be offered to each mayoress in recognition of her services to the citizens.

There is no statutory authority for expenditure of this kind, and sanction was asked under Section 228 of the Local Government Act, 1933. As the office of Mayoress has no status in law, it was thought that sanction ought not to be given. However, I am prepared to reconsider this, and to sanction the expenditure provided that it is nonrecurring, as it will be if the badges are bought in bulk.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that Answer will give considerable satisfaction, because so many of the mayors' ladies have given their devoted services to the citizens of the area, and it would involve only a few shillings of expenditure in each case?

I know that it will give satisfaction, and that was one of the reasons why I decided to reconsider the matter.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs to what extent the fumes given off by burning colliery spoil and refuse in tips are injurious to health; and what recent advice he has given to local authorities in regard to dealing with this nuisance.

These fumes can be unpleasant, and in certain circumstances they might be injurious to health. Section 18 of the Clean Air Act requires the use of all practicable means to prevent or minimise the emission of smoke and fumes from spoilbanks. Local authorities are responsible for enforcing this requirement, but my right hon. Friend has offered them the technical assistance of his alkali inspectors should they need it.

Is my hon. Friend aware that usually the advice or technical assistance that is given is to spray these tips? Is he also aware that there is, in fact, a tip in my constituency which has been sprayed for eight years without effect? Cannot the alkali inspectors look into this matter to see if they can persuade local authorities to use some methods that are more effective?

I do not know whether, in the case to which my hon. Friend refers, the services of the alkali inspectors have been brought in, but I will discuss that with them.

Has the Ministry got enough alkali inspectors?

Yes.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what representations he has received from the Uxbridge Borough Council and other local authorities about the hardness of water supplied by the Rickmansworth and Uxbridge Valley Water Company, and the refusal of this company to discuss the problem with the local authorities concerned; and if he will make a statement.

My right hon. Friend has had letters from the Uxbridge Borough Council and the Yiewsley and West Drayton Urban District Council, and I am sending the hon. Member a copy of his reply. The matters at issue are primarily for the company, but it is only fair to say that my right hon. Friend understands that the water it supplies is not exceptionally hard. In present financial conditions he could not give his encouragement to the company incurring heavy expenditure on the installation of softening plant.

Does not the hon. Gentleman's right hon. Friend believe that this company's action in refusing to discuss the matter with the local authorities concerned is very high-handed and is to be deprecated? Could he encourage, or use his influence with, the company concerned at least to get it to listen to the local authorities and discuss the matter with them?

I do not know whether there was any refusal to discuss the matter. If that is the case, I will certainly do what I can to help the councils. I understand that there was general agreement between the local government bodies and the company that the latter would not be pressed to install a water softening plant.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he has yet made a decision concerning the erection at Hatfield new town of a public house and community centre provided under the same roof by a firm of brewers; and whether he will require that there be no connecting door or hatchway between the one and the other and that no proprietary registered club shall be permitted in the community centre.

A public local inquiry is to be held into this proposal, and my right hon. Friend's decision will be announced after he has studied the report of the Inspector. I cannot anticipate that decision by commenting now on the second and third parts of the Question.

May I ask the Minister if he is aware that children seem to be attracted to the new towns, and also that in the new towns there is a scarcity of places of public concourse? Will he take special care that those that do exist do not become drinking dens?

Yes, most certainly. I would rather not comment on this proposal at the moment, because there is to be a public inquiry, but from what I know of it, I applaud the motive behind it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will introduce legislation in Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland to make it a punishable offence to show racial or ethnic aversion or hatred, or to commit an act which is calculated to provoke such aversion or hatred.

No, Sir; I share the hon. Member's dislike for all behaviour showing racial aversion or hatred. The existing provisions of the Penal Code in Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland cater for the grosser forms of such misbehaviour; and in Northern Rhodesia the Racial Relations Committees have now been established. Legislation is, of course, primarily for the Governments concerned to consider. In any case, there are limits to the efficacy of legislation in this matter.

Does the Colonial Secretary agree, as I know he does, that the colour bar in any form is incompatible with the concept of partnership? Is he aware that the Africans in the Protectorate referred to in the Question are aware that, over the border in the Belgian Congo, a decree, outlined in my Question, was published by the Belgian Government last December? Would not it do a great deal to launch the Federation on a proper basis if the Governments of Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland were to follow the suit of the Belgian Government?

I have looked at that decree, and I doubt very much whether it differs in purpose or effect from the provisions of the Governments of Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies to what extent the cost of living has risen in Nyasaland and Northern Rhodesia since 1953; and to what extent he estimates that this is due to an increase in customs duties and the removal of subsidies, respectively, by the Federal Government.

The cost of living for Europeans in Northern Rhodesia has risen by 17·3 per cent. since 1953. Figures are not available for Africans or generally for Nyasaland. There has been little increase in prices due to the removal of subsidies or increases in duties in Northern Rhodesia and none in Nyasaland.

Is not it a fact that there has been a whole series of measures resulting in an increase in the cost of living, such as increased postal charges as well as increases in customs duties and the removal of subsidies? Is it possible for the right hon. Gentleman to give an exact estimate of the effect which this has had on African standards, because there is a widespread belief inside the Territory that this has helped to remove from the Africans some of the economic benefits supposed to come from Federation?

I hope the hon. Lady will do her best to dispel any such erroneous belief. Of the increase in the cost of living of 17·3 per cent., only 2·3 per cent. is due to increased duties on imported foodstuffs. As for her remarks about the removal of subsidies, there were no subsidies to remove.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will give an assurance that he will not surrender his power to control the issue of passports for British protected persons in Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland and therefore the right of hon. Members of this House to raise any question arising out of the issue of those passports.

The Federal Constitution provides for discussions between the Governments of the Federation and of Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland on matters of common concern. Since the Federation Government have raised certain questions relating to the issue of passports to British protected persons, it has been agreed that this matter should be discussed shortly between the three Governments concerned in accordance with the terms of the Constitution.

Is not this Answer extremely alarming, and does not it contradict the Answer given by the Minister to me a short while ago on a similar question? Is it a fact that these British protected persons are to remain under the safeguards of the Colonial Secretary and this House, and should not the answer to my Question have been an automatic and emphatic "Yes"? Will not the Colonial Secretary's reply cause widespread alarm amongst Africans in the Federation?

My reply means nothing more than I have said. This matter is to be discussed and points of view are being put forward.

Although that is so, may we ask the Colonial Secretary what advice he proposes to give to the Governors of Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland, for whom, presumably, he is responsible in matters of policy? Will he bear in mind that if there was any proposal that the issue of passports should be taken over by the Federal Government, it would create widespread alarm among, I suppose, the overwhelming proportion of Africans in these two Territories, who value their British connections above everything else?

In regard to the first part of that supplementary question. I do not think it would help if I said at this stage what advice I am giving to the Governors. With regard to the second part, the point which the hon. Gentleman has put forward is clearly a very relevant one.

Will the Colonial Secretary give an undertaking that this matter will not be taken out of the hands of the two Northern Governments, Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland, without the Colonial Secretary giving the House an opportunity to express its views about it?

I will consider that.

asked the Minister of Works if he is aware that some of the disabled ex-Service men employed by him as liftmen in the Palace of Westminster are experiencing difficulty in getting home after late sittings during the bus strike; and what arrangements he is making to enable them to do so.

My right hon. Friend has agreed with the authorities of the House that only one lift need be manned after 11 o'clock when the House sits late. He has also made arrangements for the attendant on this lift to be taken home when necessary.

Is my hon. Friend aware that that Answer will give great satisfaction to the whole House and to the disabled men themselves?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware of the contribution which the atomic energy scheme at Crimond will make towards the reduction of unemployment in north-east Scotland; what progress has been made with it; and if he will expedite its completion.

I am aware that the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board is considering the suitability of various sites for a nuclear generating station should one be required in its area. Test borings have been carried out at Crimond and the Board is examining the results but has not yet submitted any proposals to me on this matter.

Can the Secretary of State say whether he has received representations from the Aberdeen Trades Council on this subject indicating that it would reduce unemployment? If so, what reply has he sent as to when the work will begin; how many workers will be employed there, and what provision is being made for their accommodation?

The position is, as the hon. and learned Member realises, that this whole proposal is in an early stage of examination and I cannot commit myself about dates or anything else.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the number of deaths from lung cancer in each of the last eight years; and whether the increase is greater or less than that for Western Europe as a whole, as published in the recent Report of the World Health Organisation.

As the Answer contains a number of figures I shall, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether his attention has been drawn to the shortage of hospital beds for maternity cases in Glasgow, a matter which, on account of the unsatisfactory housing conditions still obtaining in many districts, is causing concern to those responsible for the conduct of maternity and child welfare services in the City; and if he will undertake to ensure that a fair proportion of the beds which are no longer required for the treatment of tuberculosis will be allocated for this purpose.

Yes, Sir. This matter has recently been discussed between my Department, Glasgow Corporation and the Western Regional Hospital Board, and I am now considering it further in consultation with the Board which is already preparing proposals for a substantial increase in the number of maternity beds in Glasgow. On the future of tuberculosis beds, I have already undertaken, in reply to a Question from the hon. Member for Lanarkshire, North (Miss Herbison) on 6th May, to make a comprehensive statement.

While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for that Answer, may I ask whether he is aware that this matter of beds for maternity cases is one of extreme urgency, since the infant mortality figures for Glasgow, although dramatically reduced in the last twenty years, are still about twice the national average?

I assure the hon. Lady that I share her concern in this matter. We are pressing on with it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Answer given by the Joint Under-Secretary to my Question last week, that some of these hospitals may go on a care and maintenance basis, has caused great distress in Scotland? In making his review, will he ensure that every single hospital is used for purposes such as those suggested by my hon. Friend?

I must ask the hon. Lady to await my comprehensive statement, since to deal with the matter piecemeal would be very unwise.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that the Chief of the Air Staff, together with other members of the Air Council, have publicly criticised the defence policy of Her Majesty's Government at a conference arranged by the Air Council in London on Tuesday, 6th May; and, in view of public concern, if he will redefine the limits of responsibility between the Ministry of Defence and the Air Ministry.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the constitutional issues which have arisen from senior officers of the Forces making public statements contrary to Government defence policy; and what action he is taking in this matter.

asked the Prime Minister if he will redefine the extent to which the Minister of Defence is now responsible for co-ordinating the activities of the Air Ministry with those of the other Service Departments.

asked the Prime Minister to what extent serving officers are permitted to express in public their opinions on the defence policy of Her Majesty's Government.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that the continuing public controversy between the Minister of Defence and members of the Air Council as to the future of manned military aircraft is having an unsettling effect on the Royal Air Force and the aircraft industry; and whether he will make a statement.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement about the Royal Air Force Conference Prospect which was held on Tuesday, 6th May, 1958.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will take steps to see that all Government Departments follow the technique of public relations used by the Royal Air Force in Conference Prospect.

This was by no means the first conference of its kind to be held by one of the Services. Its purpose was to expound to a widely representative audience some of the problems which the Royal Air Force sees ahead—many of them a considerable way ahead—and to ventilate for discussion the various possible solutions to which thought is being given. I am assured that nothing that was said at the conference conflicted with the Government's declared defence policy.

As regards the responsibilities of the Minister of Defence I would refer hon. Members to what I said on Thursday last.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a careful perusal of the hand-outs and Press reports reveals that the wisdom of holding these conferences can be called into question?

Is he also aware that there is no doubt that these distinguished officers, as they said, are very greatly concerned about the future of their Service and about the confusion in the public mind? Is he aware that the fact that this confusion exists can be ascribed only to the failure of the Government—and perhaps even to the House of Commons—to explain to the country the implications of the last two Defence White Papers?

If the right hon. Gentleman himself has looked at these Papers, does not he share the concern of these distinguished officers about the implications of the Government's defence policy, which might result in the country facing humiliating diplomatic or military defeat?

The hon. Member has asked a good many supplementary questions. So far as I can recall them, I will do my best to answer them. He asked whether this kind of conference was wise. There are many reputable precedents for conferences of this kind, including in particular one held by Lord Tedder in 1949, and named Ariel. There are many arguments for and against having rather wider discussion and knowledge among the public and the Press. Some people might feel that it is better to keep all this completely secret; but, on the whole, although these experiments should be carefully watched, it is an advantage for these various conferences to have free and frank discussion of some of these difficult and in many cases distant problems.

With regard to the deductions drawn from some of the facts in both the Press and elsewhere, I have done my best, while having a good many other problems with which to deal, to read as carefully as I could all the records with which I have been provided. I want to call the attention of the House particularly to some of the points mainly criticised. I think that the premise upon which these speculations were based is not well understood. The Assistant Chief of Air Staff explained that he was considering a situation which might arise or would arise if a defence to the ballistic rocket were found; in other words, if science so progressed in the future that a defence to this form of weapon, against which there is no defence, so far as we now know, were found. This weapon would then be made of less importance and some new scientific device might reduce or take away its paramount or ultimate power.

If that should happen, he said, all questions of bombers and manned aircraft and all that would have to be reconsidered. I hope that the House and the country will understand that all this speculation was based on a premise which we have no reason at present to believe is likely to arise—certainly not in the near future.

As one of those who was there, may I ask the Prime Minister to accept from me that anybody there would find it very difficult to visualise that meeting being based wholly on the premise which the Prime Minister now puts forward? Has his attention been drawn to the fact that the first half of the morning session was wholly a political discussion on the philosophy of the rightness or wrongness of the nuclear deterrent, a discussion in which serving officers impersonated Members of Parliament and reproduced debates which had taken place here? May I say in justice to hon. Members opposite that their case was not as well presented as they have presented it. Does the Prime Minister feel that it is the function of a Service Department to provide an occasion for the reproduction of a political debate, or does he think that that ought to be done by us in Parliament?

Secondly; is he aware that the second half of the morning session was the half concerned with the discussion of Government policy for more or fewer manned bombers and fighters? Does the Prime Minister—assuming that it is his view that there ought to be discussion of Government decisions in this matter—feel that it is right for one Service Department to provide an occasion to discuss the rights and wrongs of the Government's decisions on manned and unmanned aircraft?

In reply to the first part of the supplementary question, I can only quote from the script with which I have been provided. The Assistant Chief of the Air Staff explained that he was considering the situation if a defence was found to the ballistic rocket. He said:

"It is obviously impossible for me to say here and now precisely what the answer will be."

that is to say, if the ballistic rocket is found not, as we now believe to be the case, to be a weapon against which there is not a defence, but a weapon against which a defence could be devised. He went on to say:

"I suggest we will need what will amount to a second generation of these manned and unmanned weapons and they will continue to be complementary one to the other. This is not to say that we cling to the idea that we need a bigger and better bomber. That would be a reversal of decisions already taken and is not our intention. A manned vehicle, that is something retaining discretion, and not tied to large and vulnerable airfields … may be the answer."

I repeat that all this was based on what would be, or should be, the right reply if this situation should develop; that is to say, if a defence which nobody now believes is possible were found to the ballistic rocket.

In regard to the second part of the right hon. Member's supplementary question, as to the propriety or wisdom of this kind of sketch, if I may call it that, opinions may vary, but I think we must not take too harsh a view of these arrangements. I think that hon. Members who were there probably felt that it added in a dramatic way to the discussion of an important question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the whole question of inspired Press leaks and adverse public comments by officers of the Forces is denigrating the status not only of Ministers and the Government, but of the whole House? If a civil servant had made comments of this kind publicly would not demotion have followed? Is not the course now clearly open to the Prime Minister to do exactly the same to these chaps?

No, Sir. I think it is a matter for discussion—certainly this particular matter will require consideration—how far this kind of exercise, which was only one in a considerable series, is wise or unwise. On the other hand, I have often heard it argued that these things are kept secret too much and that the public and the Press are not sufficiently brought into these matters. I do not think we ought to come to a too hasty conclusion on the principle.

Whether it was well carried out is another matter. Whether there is a general feeling that exercises of this kind are not good for the public and relations with the public we shall have to consider. As I say, it is not novel; this was one of a series. On the whole, although this was not the custom, certainly, when I first came to the House, it is felt that there ought to be closer association between the Services and the public.

Will the Prime Minister look at my Question No. 51? Is not the fact that there is this public controversy between the Minister of Defence and the Air Council due to the over-optimistic appreciation by the Minister of Defence of the state of development of missiles? Will not the Minister follow his retreat over Fighter Command by abandoning the project of the Thor missile in particular, which is widely regarded as obsolete?

No, Sir. The whole point was on the assumption that the rocket would be found by some scientific modern devices to be something which might be destroyed before it could reach its target. If that is the argument, we have to consider what would be done in the bomber and fighter fields. It would create a new, element. The Assistant Chief of the Air Staff went on to say:

"It is the manned fighter which provides the most difficult conundrum. As you all know, a year ago it was officially announced that we would not develop another fighter. Circumstances change very rapidly though, and if we do find a reliable defence against the ballistic missile, we could easily have a changed threat which would call for a long-range fighter designed to intercept, identify, and destroy beyond the practical range of surface-to-air guided weapons."

There again, it was governed by the premise that the ballistic rocket, against which at present, as far as I know, there is no possible defence, should be found to be a weapon which is not the ultimate weapon, but only one against which normal defensive weapons could be devised in future. He said that if that happens, some of these considerations will have to change.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is the Prime Minister quoting from a document which is not before the House? Should not the House be in possession of the whole of that document?

I do not know what the document is. I do not think it is a State paper but a script.

Will not the Prime Minister agree that as a result of these Questions the House has been informed of several matters affecting the defence position about which hon. Members hitherto have not had any information? Can he say if the purpose of this conference was to furnish information on the air aspect of defence? Would not it be desirable that a wider audience might have been informed? Could he arrange that in future, if information of this character, or discussions of this kind, are to be continued, we might have the Central Hall, the Royal Albert Hall, Westminster Hall or even the House of Commons for the purpose? In any event, why cannot it be done through the medium of the Minister of Defence?

I do not think the narrowness of the circles in which these discussions were held was really one of the most embarrassing parts of the matter.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is more than one opinion about this question? I was present at the conference and I think I heard every word of it. In my honest opinion, there was not a single word said which was either in conflict with the White Paper on Defence, or the Memorandum on the Air Estimates. Does not the Prime Minister agree that nowadays in discussing defence it is quite impossible to separate political and strategic considerations? Does he not think it would be a good thing if more Government Departments were to arrange such meetings to explain what they are doing and how they are spending the taxpayers' money?

The hon. Member's intervention makes me feel glad that I have not reached a decision because, clearly, there are balancing arguments as to whether these forms of discussion are on the whole good or bad. It is very interesting to have his testimony, as I understand he was present there.

Does not the Prime Minister agree, after studying these texts, that the conference was very clearly told that a defence against the ballistic missile would be found, and that, from that point onwards, the point of view presented in the playlets was the purely Departmental one in favour of manned aircraft, fighters and bombers, which may be right or wrong? Does he really think the presentation of a purely Departmental point of view at such conferences is desirable? If so, does he think, like my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Central (Mr. Short), that this should be done by all other Government Departments, and that, for instance, the Treasury should put on a little play in favour of inflation and the Ministry of Housing and Local Government should put on a little play in favour of higher rents?

Perhaps this matter can be further discussed when the right hon. Gentleman has had an opportunity of discussing it with his hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Central (Mr. Short). In regard to the technical side of the question—not the last part, which was very good merriment—I understand the position to be that it was said that throughout history, normally with every great weapon of offence, in time it is likely that some defence against it can be devised. That might happen. There is no sign of it at present. It is a long way ahead. It is a very big scientific question. If that should happen, then the premise upon which some of these decisions were taken no longer stands and the decisions will have to be reconsidered. It seems a very sensible point of view.

Does the Prime Minister realise that hon. Members on the Government Benches were very appreciative of the invitation of the Air Council to attend this conference, which we found was most instructive? Does he also realise that we very much resent the futile endeavours of the Opposition to make party capital out of it? [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] Furthermore, and reverting to my right hon. Friend's original Answer, may I ask whether he agrees that it would be quite impossible for any Royal Air Force officer to impersonate members of the Opposition?

All this goes to show to me how very good it is to collect evidence when different people who attended this demonstration take such diametrically opposed views about its value, and indeed about what happened there.

May I ask the Prime Minister whether he agrees that it is clear that the Minister of Defence has not effective political control over his Service Chiefs of Staff? That is an important point that is worrying us here. If the Minister of Defence is not capable of giving effective political guidance to his Chiefs of Staff, has not the time come for him to join the serried ranks of ex-Ministers of Defence?

No, Sir. I have heard some criticisms of my right hon. Friend, but I have not heard the criticism that he is of weak character and not in control of the Service Chiefs of Staff.

Will the Prime Minister arrange either for the publication of the record of this conference or that it should at least be placed in the Library and be made available to hon. Members? Further, does he appreciate that what is really at issue here is the constitutional point, on which I should think there would be no difference of opinion in the House, whether it is appropriate for a Service Department to conduct a conference of this kind which has given the widespread impression that it was designed to present a purely Departmental view and not necessarily the point of view of the Government themselves? Would not it be most undesirable if there grew up in this country a custom, which is not unknown in the United States, of different defence Departments each putting its own point of view independently before the public?

I will consider the first part of that Question but I doubt whether there is a record actually of this kind, a verbal record. I have certain scripts which I got from what was said. I will consider that point. I have such an enormous list of people—from the House of Commons, the House of Lords, other Government Departments such as the Admiralty and the Ministry of Defence—that all kinds of people seem to have been there, and there must be a fairly wide knowledge of what took place, although different impressions were no doubt made on different people, as we have heard today. With regard to the constitutional point, it would be a mistake to exaggerate this. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] When a Government have decided—I have seen something of it both in war and in peace and it applies to any Government—that a difficult decision has to be taken on defence policy, I have always found that the heads of the Services are the most loyal servants of the country and of any Government that is in office.

Will the Prime Minister tell the House whether the Minister of Defence was aware of the calling of this conference and whether he gave his consent? Was he aware of those who were invited to attend?

The Minister of Defence was aware of it. Unfortunately, both he and the Secretary of State for War were invited but were not able to attend.

Oh.

Will the Prime Minister answer the second part of my Question? I understand that the Minister of Defence was aware of it; did he give his consent?

My right hon. Friend informs me that he was both aware of it and raised no objection to it, and in that sense gave his consent.

Did he know what was to be said?

Does the right hon. Gentleman know what is going to be said in Brighton?

Is not the Prime Minister aware that that kind of silly retort—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—is no substitute—[HON. MEMBERS: "Withdraw."]—for answering a serious Question on an issue of constitutional importance which even some of his supporters ought to take a little more seriously?