asked the Minister of Defence if, in view of the worsened situation in Cyprus, he will immediately stop sending National Service men there.

I do not see why.

Is it fair to send young conscripts to Cyprus and to use them not in defence of our own country but to clear up the dirty mess which the Government have created? If it is intended to use the thousands of National Service men in Cyprus for the purpose of intervening in the Lebanon, is that not even more shameful and also more worrying to their parents?

First of all, I should like to say that National Service men are, of course, an integral part of the British Army. Secondly, having seen something myself of the spirit of these men as they went off to Cyprus the other day, I am quite sure that if they had been left out they would have been not only disappointed but many of them would have felt positively insulted.

asked the Minister of Defence what is the minimum period of training before sending National Service men to Cyprus.

From nine to eighteen weeks, according to the Service involved.

Since the number of volunteers has risen, why cannot those men who can have a longer training be sent there instead?

I do not know what the hon. Gentleman is pursuing. He seems to suggest that there is a new policy. There is no change of policy. This has been the practice for a very long time. It was the practice under the Labour Government when they regularly sent National Service men overseas for all kinds of operations, including the war in Korea.

Will the Minister see that these National Service men are equipped with automatic weapons so that they can defend themselves?

Of course, they will be properly equipped like the Regulars.

asked the Minister of Defence to what extent it is now the policy of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation to equip West German forces with tactical atomic weapons.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given him on 21st April last by my right hon. Friend the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs.

Is the Minister aware of the widespread public dismay at the fact that the new German Army is to have access to these tools of mass destruction and because of the belief that the so-called safeguards are worthless because, before long, the Germans will be able to manufacture the warheads themselves? Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that in no circumstances would any German have the authority to give the order to use these arms?

In the first place, the weapons in question will, of course, be American weapons and the warheads will be under American custody. I think that answers most of the hon. Gentleman's questions. With regard to the manufacture of these weapons in Germany, the German Government renounced any right to manufacture such weapons in Germany.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make the point clear that, in fact, these tactical atomic weapons are not under the control of the Federal German Government but, technically, under the control of the American forces?

If it is necessary, I shall be glad to make that clear. I thought I said in reply to the hon. Gentleman that these would be American weapons and that the nuclear warheads would be under American custody.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he will make a statement on the proposed European arms pool so far as it concerns aircraft, missiles, warheads and associated equipment.

A number of proposals for joint weapon development and production have been formulated by Her Majesty's Government and certain other Governments of the Western European Union. These have been discussed by experts recently in preparation for a further meeting of Defence Ministers next month.

I welcome that statement, but is it not a fact that unless there is a great deal more co-operation and pooling among the European members of N.A.T.O. it would be wiser to cut their losses entirely and wind up Western European Union?

I am as keen as the hon. Gentleman to see really effective co-operation of arms development and production. I have been pursuing this idea, not altogether successfully, for a number of years, both with the Americans and now with our European allies. So far as Western European Union is concerned, it exists for more things than co-operation in arms development.

asked the Minister of Defence the total estimated cost of developing the Blue Streak hydrogen bomb rocket and of building launching sites for it; how many sites it is planned to build in Great Britain; and if he will consider halting the projects in order to lessen international tension and the danger of making this country more vulnerable.

No, Sir.

Can the Minister state that the reported cost of £150 million is approximately correct? If one of these missiles is launched by accident or by design, is it not obvious that there will be a military retaliation in which our people will be wiped out? What kind of defence is this? Has the right hon. Gentleman seen the maps prepared by Lord Simon of Wythenshawe, showing the devastation which would be caused if a bomb were dropped on Manchester? Will he prepare similar maps for other parts of the country to show the folly of this policy?

Of course, if a thermonuclear bomb is dropped anywhere it will devastate a large area, but that is not the issue here. I am satisfied—and I think that the great majority of people are satisfied—that the addition of this weapon will increase the effectiveness of the Western deterrent. So far as the question of whether the possession of these weapons will increase the vulnerability or the likelihood of this country being attacked in retaliation, I would point out to the hon. Gentleman and to his colleagues on the benches opposite that Great Britain has been a first-class military target for any enemies of this country ever since the Labour Government, very rightly, decided to manufacture British atomic bombs and to give the United States bomber force facilities and bases in this country.

Cannot this missile, apart from its military use, be used for scientific purposes, and can the right hon. Gentleman tell us whether it will be used for a satellite or anything like that?

We are talking now about the Blue Streak rocket. I have no doubt that all these things will have scientific applications, and there is no doubt that the progress of peaceful science has derived a great deal from the efforts put into military developments of all kinds for many years.

asked the Minister of Defence what are his plans for manufacturing in this country atomic warheads for the British Blue Streak missile and the United States Thor missile.

The nuclear warheads for the British ballistic rocket will be made in Britain. We are not planning to make British warheads for the American Thor weapon.

Can the Minister say whether, in view of the Paymaster-General's statement yesterday about military plutonium, the increased cost to the atomic energy stations will be borne on the Defence Estimates so that we may get a true picture of the cost of our own atomic weapons?

There is a separate Question on that subject on the Order Paper.

asked the Minister of Defence what forces were stationed in Cyprus on 1st May; what forces have since been despatched to the island; and for what purpose.

In view of the unsettled situation, it was recently decided to reinforce the garrison of Cyprus with two additional brigade groups. It would be contrary to normal practice to publish figures of total forces on operational duties overseas.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the terms of his answer, in view of the unsettled situation, could easily apply to the whole of the Eastern Mediterranean and only add credence to the fears that these forces which are going there may be for intervention in the Lebanon? Will he make perfectly clear what is the intention of the Government and what is the boundary of the term "unsettled situation"?

I should have thought that the hon. Gentleman, reading the newspapers, would have seen that the unsettled situation in Cyprus was quite enough to justify large reinforcements to that area.

In regard to the reinforcements and my hon. Friend's previous Question, we were given several undertakings during the period of the Labour Government that no boys doing their National Service would be sent abroad under a certain age or before having done a certain number of months' training. Is that now being applied?

I have already answered two Questions on that subject.

asked the Minister of Defence what decisions he has taken to arrange that plutonium for weapons will be produced at atomic energy plants designed for peaceful uses.

This is the Question to which I referred the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr. de Freitas).

I would refer the hon. Member to the full statement made by my right hon. Friend the Paymaster-General yesterday.

The Minister is getting more and more laconic and less and less impressive in the House. Is he aware that we thought that he was sent to his present position to reduce expenditure, whereas the increased cost of his latest decision is to put between £12 million and £15 million on our national bill? Is he also aware that this means a massive increase in national expenditure in the sixties, which will be the time when we need to use these atomic plants for industrial purposes?

If the hon. Gentleman is concerned about expenditure, all I can say is that these modifications, at a relatively small cost, will have the effect of greatly reducing the cost involved in making this additional military plutonium, should the need arise.

My question was much simpler. While not dissenting necessarily from the increased charge being put on, I should like to know if this money will be accounted for in the Defence Estimates so that we may know what the cost of this is?

The cost will be borne on the Defence Vote and, therefore, will not affect the cost of electricity.

asked the Minister of Defence the nature of the routine precautions in the field of defence which Her Majesty's Government are taking in relation to the situation in the Lebanon.

We have endeavoured to put ourselves in a position to meet any possible eventuality.

Is the Minister aware that he is getting less and less impressive as time goes on? He is supposed to be here to answer Questions and not to dodge them. Can he give a definite assurance that these troops, who were so enthusiastic about going to Cyprus, will not be used in another Suez venture in the Lebanon?

The hon. Gentleman is altogether more and more repetitive.

It is needed.

My right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary gave a definite assurance the other day that no action would be taken contrary to the United Nations Charter or to the established rules of international law. That should satisfy the hon. Gentleman.

May I say that that is not quite satisfactory? May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is in accordance with the rules of the United Nations Charter as interpreted by the United Nations or by the Government?

I believe that my right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary will deal later on with Questions on this subject which are on the Order Paper.

I am asking the right hon. Gentleman. I am asking him a question to elucidate what the right hon. Gentleman said. He was very tart with my hon. Friend the Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes). I should like him to be a little more explicit. He said that these troops were stationed where they are in anticipation of any eventuality that may arise. He said that they would only be used in connection with the Charter of the United Nations and with our international obligations. Who is to interpret the Charter—ourselves or the United Nations?

I have not so far mentioned the word "troops" in my reply to the hon. Gentleman. We do, in fact, maintain troops in Cyprus for two purposes. One is to carry out internal security duties, and the other is to have a reserve to meet possible eventualities in emergencies in the Eastern Mediterranean area. I think that the recent outbreak of inter-communal strife, as the House will recognise, made it essential to increase the forces necessary to keep order in that area, while preserving the normal reserve which we have there for outside emergencies. If we had not sent this additional force there, we should not have had enough to deal with the internal security problem and we should have had to commit to police duties the reserve force which we normally preserve as a precaution in that area.

In view of the profoundly unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I will raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he will make a statement on the recent airlift to Cyprus.

About 6,000 men and about 200,000 lb. of freight were transported from Britain to Cyprus in Hastings, Comet, Beverley and Shackleton aircraft of the Royal Air Force. The movement was carried out with commendable efficiency by all concerned.

Does not the operation show clearly that there is a grave lack of transport freight aircraft for such an operation? Is it not now time to let the Air Ministry consider the purchase of additional freight transport aircraft to enable it to do the job which is imposed upon it by Government strategy?

I think that for the operation which was carried out the aircraft proved most adequate. I should like to emphasise that the operation was not carried out at maximum speed. That was not necessary. It was thought right to give the troops reasonable warning to make their private arrangements before they left. It was not necessary to transport large quantities of freight to Cyprus. One of the elements in our policy, as I have explained to the House, is to keep stocks of heavy equipment in various theatres where they can be available and need be transported only the short distances which are necessary within the theatre.

Were any of these troops, who, I take it, were part of the strategic reserve, moved by civil aircraft, as was reported in the newspapers? Is the Minister satisfied that in time of emergency, much more urgent than that which caused these troops to be sent to Cyprus, he has sufficient aircraft to make the move quickly?

I should like to check it, but I think I am correct in saying that no civil charter aircraft were used for this move. Replying to the general question, of course I should like to have a larger Transport Command to carry out reinforcements. That is why we have ordered twenty Britannia aircraft. When they are received it will greatly increase the airlift of Transport Command. As the strength of the Army goes down, the carrying capacity of Transport Command will be going up.

asked the Minister of Defence if he has yet completed his examination of the question whether Service men who are granted compassionate leave should have their normal leave reduced.

Yes, Sir. It has been decided that in all cases the grant of compassionate leave shall, in future, not be allowed to affect entitlement to normal leave.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this is the first Question which he has had to answer today from this side of the House? Is he aware that the Answer is extremely satisfactory and will be welcomed on all sides of the House? Does it not show that in pursuing a practice which is in accordance with the best practice in industry, my right hon. Friend is a progressive and forward-looking Minister whom the House should be pleased to congratulate?

I am overwhelmed.

Is the Minister aware of the deep sense of grievance among some of the parents of the boys who have been airlifted to Cyprus that they were not given the normal embarkation leave? Is he aware that there is a feeling of great inequality about this matter, since the members of the Brigade of Guards apparently had four days embarkation leave before they were sent abroad? Will the Minister see that these inequalities do not recur?

Shower your compliments now!

I do not think there will be any sense of grievance about the reply I have given, which, of course, dealt with an entirely different point from that raised by the hon. Member for Norwich, North (Mr. J. Paton).

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) what action he has taken, or proposes to take, through the United Nations Organisation, to clarify the responsibilities and powers of the individual members of the United Nations Observer Corps on the Israeli-Arab borders; what steps he is suggesting should be taken to strengthen their authority; and what action is to be taken to provide more assurance for their personal security;

(2) if he will instruct the United Kingdom delegate to the United Nations to press for the necessity for the fullest possible inquiry into the shooting of Lieutenant-Colonel Flint, Chairman of the Israeli-Jordanian Mixed Armistice Commission.

I am sure that this House would wish to be associated with the sympathy already expressed to the Canadian Government on the death of Lieutenant-Colonel Flint. On 17th June the Secretary-General of the United Nations circulated a report on the matter by the Chief of Staff of the United Nations Truce Supervision Organisation. This document is available in the Library of the House.

I think it is for the Truce Supervision Organisation itself and the Secretary-General of the United Nations to say what support they need to enable them to carry out their task. But Her Majesty's Government have always made it plain that they stand behind Mr. Hammarskjold in this, and I know he has been taking a very active interest in the matter just recently.

Is the Minister aware that I speak with some feeling on this matter since I had the privilege of spending some time in the company of Colonel Flint a few weeks before he was shot through the head on Mount Scopus? I distinctly remember his saying to me that as a professional soldier he did not mind being shot at but that he did wish to know what was the objective to be secured. Is it not a fact that we are posting men out there with immense responsibilities but with practically no powers and no means of self-protection? Have we not a special responsibility, as the United Kingdom Government, to ensure that we look to the basic causes of unrest there, and that if we have a United Nations Force it is not only charged with responsibility but has powers to carry out this responsibility?

There is a great deal in what the hon. Member said, if I may say so. We will certainly pursue the matter with the Secretary-General.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will give consideration to ways of ensuring closer co-operation with Iceland.

Yes, Sir. Her Majesty's Government are anxious for this closer co-operation.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend think that there is any opportunity to help Iceland to decrease her economic dependence on fishing by obtaining some diversification in her forms of livelihood? Does he think we could help by advice or by offering any means of exchange of new industries to help forward Iceland's economy?

I think my hon. Friend is quite right in her suggestion. For example, we have recently provided experts to take part in a study, which the Icelandic Government asked O.E.E.C. to undertake, of a new plant in Iceland which would have the effect of diversifying her industries. We will certainly do all we can to help.

In view of the urgent necessity to conserve the spawning grounds of fish in the North Sea, does not my right hon. and learned Friend think that a fresh approach might be made to the Icelandic Government to see whether we could not come to a settlement on a scientific rather than a political basis and protect some of our own spawning grounds, for example, the Moray Firth, as well as their spawning grounds?

We shall be ready to do that. I shall be very willing indeed to enter into negotiations with the Icelandic Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the refugee problem which imposes a heavy burden on the Hong Kong Government and the fact that the money is raised in the Colony for these refugees, he will make a further special grant available through the United Nations High Commissioner for refugees of European origin in order that they should be able to leave the Colony without any delay due to financial difficulties.

I know that the High Commissioner views the present situation with considerable concern. I am therefore re-examining the problem with particular regard to the question of onward movement from Hong Kong. By 1st July, about thirteen hundred refugees should have been moved on since 1st January of this year, and the objective is to move a further two thousand three hundred during the second half of the year.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that information, may I ask him whether he would like any assistance from me with the Treasury?

I would always be obliged to my hon. Friend for any assistance in a good cause.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what action he proposes to take, either inside the United Nations or in consequence of the obligations of Her Majesty's Government under the Treaty of Peace with Hungary, on the execution of Prime Minister Nagy, General Maleter and their associates by the Hungarian authorities.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) in view of the obligations of Her Majesty's Government under the terms of the Hungarian Peace Treaty, what action Her Majesty's Government propose to take following the execution of Prime Minister Imre Nagy, General Pal Maleter and two other leaders of the Hungarian people; and whether he will make a statement;

(2) on how many occasions the British delegate at the United Nations raised the question of the whereabouts of M. Nagy and his colleagues in pursuance of his undertaking of 11th February, 1957.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will instruct the British delegate to the United Nations to express the abhorrence of the British nation at the murder of Mr. Imry Nagy and his associates in the discussions that are to take place in the United Nations on this matter.

The indignation aroused by the execution of these men in spite of the safe conducts offered to them is shared by Her Majesty's Government and, I am sure, by the whole House, and I welcome this opportunity of placing this on record.

As regards the particular points raised by hon. Members, the provisions of the Peace Treaty with Hungary have long been frustrated by the Soviet and Hungarian Governments, and there is no prospect that any representations made under the Treaty would be effective.

The Special United Nations Committee on Hungary set up in January, 1957, is considering the executions.

The whereabouts of Mr. Nagy was not raised in the United Nations debate of September, 1957. He was believed then to be in Roumania, and reliance was placed on the assurances which had been given by the Roumanian Foreign Minister that every measure would be taken to guarantee his security and that the Roumanian Government would observe the rules of political asylum.

Would my right hon. and learned Friend not agree that the action of the Hungarian Communists in betraying the safe conduct and in subsequently murdering their Prime Minister shows that the word of a Communist cannot be trusted and that some action is demanded by the United Nations if an international rule of law is ever to be established?

I think that public opinion throughout the world will draw the appropriate inference from these actions. As to United Nations action, as I have said, the Special Committee is considering the matter.

Is the Foreign Secretary aware that the real damage arising from this, apart from the personal tragedy involved, is that once one's word is broken on one matter it is very difficult to gain confidence on wider issues, and would he make it his specific responsibility to bring this point to the notice of the Soviet Government?

Most certainly, I will.

Is the Foreign Secretary aware that the feelings of repugnance that have been aroused by this action of the Communists in Hungary are shared by hon. Members on this side; but is he also very well aware that, in the interests of international peace, we should not let our vision be obscured by atrocities of this kind?

I think that the right hon Gentleman is perfectly right. It does, however, give us stronger ground for pursuing a policy of trying to get agreements compliance with which can be proved by deeds.

Can my right hon. and learned Friend say whether he has any information about other trials that may be pending, and whether deportations are still continuing?

I should like my hon Friend to put that Question down.

Is not the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that it is precisely because we believe that it is concrete obligations that should be undertaken and not vague generalisations that we have put forward definite proposals from this side?

I was not seeking to raise an element of controversy between us. I thought that, for once, there was some agreement between us.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what steps Her Majesty's Government have taken to prepare a draft scheme for the system of international inspection required to ensure that an agreement to suspend nuclear tests will be observed; and whether they will lay this scheme, as a basis for discussion, before the Committee of Experts who are to consider the matter.

We have been considering this matter for some time. Our experts will be ready to put forward and discuss constructive proposals at the Geneva meeting in conjunction with the other experts. The importance which we attach to this meeting is, I think, shown by the fact that Sir William Penney and Sir John Cockcroft have been nominated as the principal United Kingdom representatives.

While thanking the Foreign Secretary for that reply, may I ask whether I am right in understanding that our experts will put forward a concrete plan showing what measures of control we are ready to accept?

Certainly our representarives will put forward proposals, and the proposals will indicate the measure of control that we ourselves are prepared to accept.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will specify the Governments which are to be represented at the forthcoming conference of experts to be held in Geneva on 1st July, their terms of reference, and the date by which they have to report.

As a result of exchanges of letters between President Eisenhower and the Soviet Prime Minister, it has been agreed that, on our side, the team for the Geneva talks will include experts from the United Kingdom, the United States, France and Canada. On the other side, we have been informed that Soviet, Czechoslovak and Polish experts will take part. The purpose of the talks is to examine in a scientific and technical sense methods of detecting violations of any agreements that may be proposed by either side on the suspension of nuclear tests. Both sides agree that the experts will work as quickly as possible. I cannot yet say when they are likely to report.

In view of the widespread resentment and mistrust which has been created by the recent executions of Mr. Nagy and his associates, may we take it that it remains the intention of the Government to make use of the opportunity that this conference affords in order to achieve results in the methods of supervising and controlling any agreement which may be reached on the suspension of nuclear tests?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to what extent Her Majesty's Government are prepared to accept the system of international inspection embodied in the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which came into force in October, 1957, for the control of the cut-off of new production of fissile material for warlike use.

The International Agency has not yet considered the methods to be used in implementing the safeguard provisions in the Agency Statute. It would therefore be premature to estimate how much there is likely to be in common between the Agency scheme and any scheme appropriate for control of the cut-off.

Am I not right in reading the Statute to mean that there shall be a system of permanent, continuous inspection by resident inspectors of the kind that the Foreign Secretary urged on the Russians in 1954?

I have the Statute with me, and all I can say is that, on my reading of it, I think that it is rather vague as to how exactly these various obligations are to be carried out.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what proposals for the reduction of the armed forces of the leading powers and of their conventional armaments were laid before the United Nations Disarmament Sub-Committee during its session in London in 1957.

The information which the right hon. Gentleman requires is contained in the report on the proceedings of the Disarmament Sub-Committee, Command 333, a copy of which has been sent to him.

I am familiar with the document, but can the right hon. and learned Gentleman tell the House what the reductions in Western manpower would have been under these proposals, and what types and quantities of arms would have been stockpiled in the dumps on national soil for which they provided?

I really think that if the right hon. Gentleman will look at the document he will find that that information is therein contained.

I have examined it with the very greatest care, but, so far as I can make out, the proposals make no reduction in Western manpower, and there were no proposals as to the types or quantities of arms to be stockpiled. It is precisely that information that I am asking him to give to the House.

The reply to the first part of the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary is that he is quite wrong. Definite figures were put down for reduction: in the first stage, down to 2½ million, and 750,000 for us; in the second stage, 2,100,000, and 700,000 for us; and in the third stage, 1,700,000, and 650,000 for us. I think that the right hon. Gentleman is right on the other matter. Precision was not given to the actual reductions in armaments. The right hon. Gentleman, who, I hope, wishes to be fair in this matter, will remember that this is one of the points about which we have sought again and again to have discussions with the Russians.

I have every desire to be fair, but, as I understand it, the figures that the Foreign Secretary has quoted would not mean any reduction for the Western Powers at the first stage and, in the second and third stages, would not operate until undefined political conditions had been fulfilled.

In the first stage, it is true that the figures for the United Kingdom did not involve any reduction, because we had previously announced that the total of the Armed Forces was coming down substantially below that figure. I should think that was to our credit, not to our discredit. I am informed that it did involve a reduction for the others.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will lodge a protest with the Spanish Government against the continued discrimination against Protestant British subjects in Spain and, in particular, the denial to British Protestants of the right to contract a civil marriage.

If the hon. Member will send me details of any particular cases he has in mind I will certainly look into them. I know of no discrimination against British subjects as such, but Spanish regulations only permit civil marriage to those who can show that they were not baptised Roman Catholics.

I certainly will send details to the Foreign Secretary, but will he bear in mind that I have had representations that the increasing number of British tourists there are quite scandalised by the discrimination against Protestants in Spain?

If the hon. Gentleman will give me any particulars, I will be only too glad to take them up.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will now make a further statement on the situation on the Lebanon-Syrian border in view of his discussions on this matter with other Governments.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what requests have been received from the Government of the Lebanon for arms and military intervention; and what is the intention of Her Majesty's Government in relation to these requests.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement on the consultations between the United States Secretary of State and British representatives on the Lebanon situation on 15th June.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will now make a statement on Her Majesty's Government's policy in the United Nations towards the Lebanon-Syria dispute in so far as it affects world peace.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what reports have been received from the Secretary-General of the United Nations concerning the situation in the Lebanon; and if he will make a statement on the situation in the Middle East.

As a result of the submission of the matter to the Security Council, United Nations observers have been sent to the Lebanon and are attempting to operate there.

Before he left New York, the Secretary-General circulated a report, dated 11th June, on the implementation of the Security Council Resolution. A copy of this is available in the Library. I had a talk with Mr. Hammarskjold on 18th June when he passed through London. I assured him of our full support in implementing the Security Council Resolution. We await any recommendations he may put forward as a result of his visit to the Middle East.

With regard to arms, I have nothing to add to the Answer my right hon. Friend gave to the hon. Member for Merthyr Tydfil (Mr. S. O. Davies) on 11th June. No request for military intervention has been received from the Government of the Lebanon.

The answer to the Question asked by the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Mr. Swingler) is, "No, Sir."

Can we have an assurance that the Government will not participate in any military intervention in the Lebanon except upon the direct authority of the Security Council or the General Assembly and following conclusive reports from the United Nations observers who are at present in the Lebanon that there has been a direct attack upon the Lebanon by another country?

I think the right hon. and learned Gentleman asked me a similar Question on 19th May and I answered then that Her Majesty's Government would not act contrary to the Charter or to the established rules of international law. That remains our position.

I am asking the Foreign Secretary something quite specific this afternoon. I am not asking whether his assurance refers to the legal interpretation of the Charter but whether, in fact, the Government will give an assurance that they will not participate in any military intervention without the direct authority of the United Nations. I am asking whether he will give an assurance that they will not participate in any military intervention in the Lebanon except upon the direct authority of the Security Council or the General Assembly.

I have given a very carefully considered Answer—[ Interruption. ] I do not believe that any Government would answer this Question differently. I do not think that it is profitable to consider various hypothetical possibilities, but what I do assure the House is that we will give full support to the United Nations operations that are going on. I think that that is the constructive way to approach the matter. And I tell the House absolutely frankly that we will do everything we can to make the operations a success, because I think that they are the only effective way to secure peace in the Lebanon.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that, following his last statement, he will have the full support of this side of the House? But in view of the statement of the Minister of Defence and the Foreign Secretary's answer this afternoon, there is now a most undesirable ambiguity about the situation. Is it not a fact that our position is that the body responsible for interpreting the obligations of members of the United Nations under the Charter is the United Nations authority itself and not individual nations? If individual nations themselves interpret what the Charter means, or what international law means, we have gone away from collective security back once more to unilateral action. Therefore, why will not the right hon. and learned Gentleman give an undertaking, so as to remove all doubts, that the Government will not act in the Lebanon except on authority given either by the Security Council or by the United Nations General Assembly?

The right hon. Gentleman is not correct. For example, action under Article 51 is the responsibility of the individual Government—collective self-defence. There are certain circumstances which are not covered by the formula of acting only under the authority of the United Nations. I have given a very carefully considered answer on the legal aspect of the matter. As to the reality—the practical policy of the Government—we are going to give the fullest possible support to the present United Nations operation.

Will the Foreign Secretary give an assurance that we will not act in an armed way in the Lebanon except in self-defence?

Article 51 is one of the matters involved. For example, the President of the Lebanon has just said today that he would not ask for military intervention outside the framework of the United Nations. He also talked about Article 51. I maintain that no person in my position would depart from the formula which I have given.

While welcoming the statement by the Foreign Secretary that he intends to support the United Nations up to the hilt, may I ask him to make clear that he will not countenance any intervention in the Lebanon which is contrary to the decisions of the United Nations or is due to internal causes and not external causes?

My formula—"contrary to the Charter or to the established rules of international law"—covers the position.

Is the Foreign Secretary aware that suspicions have been aroused on this subject because apparently right hon. Gentlemen and hon. Gentlemen opposite have not yet realised the folly of Suez, and that if our troops were used, even in a successful intervention, this would invite immediate economic reprisals which would be disastrous for that small country? May I further ask what steps he can take to inform the House before our troops are used?

The hon. Gentleman will not draw me into a discussion of other matters. A lot of malicious people have been saying things in which there is no truth at all.

The Foreign Secretary's answer to Question No. 29 was "No". Are we to take it that there is truth in the Press reports that military conversations have taken place in Washington between United States and British representatives? There have been widespread reports in the British Press that conversations have taken place. Whether he likes it or not, is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that many people are recalling the military build-up and manoeuvres that preceded the Government's decision to intervene and make war in Egypt and are apprehensive because they recall the losses that this country sustained as a result of intervention, and that——

Order. That supplementary question is rather too long.

May I have an answer?

Answer.

The House cannot compel Ministers to answer. It is unfair to other hon. Members to hold up Questions indefinitely.

As to the beginning of the hon. Gentleman's speech, he asked whether he could take it as a fact that certain things were discussed. He should not take it as a fact.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman keep in mind that there were exactly the same sort of cheers and jeers from this side of the House preceding the resignation of the late Prime Minister?

I hope there will be a rather more constructive attitude on this occasion from the Opposition.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what proposals have been made by the United Kingdom Government during the recent talks between the Governments of the United Kingdom, Ethiopia, Italy and the United States of America on the future of the British and Italian Somalilands.

Discussions about the future of the Horn of Africa are continuing through diplomatic channels. These discussions, however, are confidential.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that Ethiopian Ministers in Addis Ababa have said that they will accept the union of British and Italian Somaliland if the Ogaden is not included in the final settlement? Will the Foreign Secretary give an assurance that he will do nothing in this matter which will further disillusion the Somalis who have been very loyal in these difficult times?

As to the future of the Protectorate of British Somaliland, it is for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies to answer. I think I have answered the Question which the hon. Member put on the Paper.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that though supporters of that friend of the Opposition, Colonel Nasser, are making progress in Somalia, there is still in that country a great good will towards Britain? Will he undertake to study the whole question of economic aid to both Somalia and British Somaliland, together with the possibility of setting up a Greater Somalia?

Those matters are certainly under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, may I ask whether the observation of the hon. Member for Haltemprice (Mr. Wall) was not only offensive but intended to be offensive? Is the hon. Member acting in accordance with the conventions of this House when he refers to Members on this side of the House as being friends of Colonel Nasser?

I did not understand the hon. Member to confine the circle of Colonel Nasser's friends, as he called them, to any particular part of the House. I thought he used the expression meaning those who support Colonel Nasser in the Middle East and other places. It may have been offensive, but it was not out of order.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs how many people have visited the Government pavilion and the industrial section, respectively, at the Brussels Exhibition; and if he will make a statement.

Up to and including Sunday, 22nd June, the total number of visitors passing through the turnstiles at the United Kingdom Government Pavilion, the approach to which forms the main entrance to the United Kingdom site at the Brussels Exhibition, was 1,228,561. Most of them subsequently visited the Industry Pavilion, but no similar check is made on visitors to the Industry Pavilion and no detailed figures are available.

The United Kingdom's contribution to the Exhibition has earned most favourable comment on its originality of conception and quality of execution. It is a fine example of co-operation between Government and industry, to whose generous and effective support I should like to pay tribute.

I am very glad to hear what the Foreign Secretary has said, but is he aware that, perhaps inadvertently, the Press of this country has not given a good impression of what has been done over there and that it is very disappointing for our people who work there, especially when British visitors say that it is a great deal better than they have been led to expect? Secondly, will not the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that we are losing a first-class opportunity in public relations by charging for some of our pamphlets? Is there time for him to look at this again, and could he not arrange for them to be issued free, as many other countries do?

I am much obliged to the hon. Lady for what she said in the first part of her supplementary. I think that what she has said, together with her original Question and my answer to her, will do something to correct the wrong impression which she says exists. As regards the second matter to which she referred, I will certainly look at it urgently.

Is the Foreign Secretary aware that those of us who have had an opportunity to visit the British Pavilion were very favourably impressed indeed by it, but we share my hon. Friend's regret that there are feelings among officials there that they have not had fair play in the British Press?

I am obliged to the right hon. Gentleman.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is now in a position to make a further statement concerning the lodging allowances scheme for workers compelled to leave their normal areas because of redundancy.

As I promised the hon. Member in my Answer on 30th April on this subject, I have kept this matter under review, but I have no further proposals to make.

Is the Minister aware that we in Coventry and, I imagine, others elsewhere are sorry that he has no further statement to make as yet? Does he hope that, perhaps in the distant future, he may still be able to reduce this waiting period?

I certainly will not promise to abolish the waiting period. I think it is of importance so that one may have a check on the prospects of employment in the home area. I am, however, frankly disappointed at the use made of the temporary transfer scheme. I will, however, keep the waiting period in particular under review.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will make a statement on the constitution and scope of the proposed national apprenticeship council.

The British Employers' Confederation, the Trades Union Congress and the Boards of the Nationalised Industries have decided to establish a council whose functions will include those suggested in paragraphs 84–86 of the report "Training for Skill". I am not in a position to make any further statement at present, but discussions are continuing and it is expected that the council will be set up in about a month's time.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that his answer will give great satisfaction to those who are interested in the training of our young people? Further, does he recollect that the Carr Committee said that the national apprenticeship council should receive full co-operation from the Ministries of Labour and Education, and can he say how this co-operation between the Ministries and the national apprenticeship council has been brought about? Finally, has he considered whether it would be advisable to have someone on the council from technical education?

The question of whom the council eventually invites to join it in its deliberations and work is, obviously, a matter for the council to decide, and I cannot say more now; but I am quite certain that it will bear in mind what the hon. Gentleman has said when making a decision.

asked the Minister of Labour what has been the percentage increase in the retail price index since August, 1951.

Nearly 32 per cent.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the comparative figure for 1945–51 was about 40 per cent?

How comes it that it has risen by 32 per cent. when the Conservatives promised to reduce the cost of living?

asked the Minister of Labour what has been the percentage increase in actual earnings since August, 1951.

Half-yearly inquiries covering manual wage earners in manufacturing industries generally and in a number of the principal non-manufacturing industries showed that in October, 1957, the average weekly earnings per worker had risen by 50½ per cent. since October, 1951. Figures for dates later than October, 1957, are not available.

Will my right hon. Friend agree that the contrast between the two figures he has given will be very widely appreciated as showing the great increase in the standard of living under the Conservative Government?

It is, of course, common knowledge on both sides of the House that there has been an enormous increase in living standards under the Tory Government.

Will the Minister not agree that this figure is quite misleading unless we have other details? How many more hours are being worked, for instance, to produce the increased earnings? Further, will he not say a word of congratulation to the workers for managing to increase their productivity despite all the efforts of the Government to keep it down?

Even if one takes rates of wages, the increase is 43.5 per cent., so the comparison still holds. The hon. Gentleman is quite wrong from his point of view to describe this figure as misleading; it is merely inconvenient.

asked the Minister of Labour the numbers of workers registered in Middlesbrough as unemployed at the latest date for which he has information; and what increase this represents above the numbers so registered four weeks previously.

One thousand nine hundred and forty at 16th June, an increase of 261 compared with 12th May.

asked the Minister of Labour how many workers formerly employed in the steel industry are registered at the Middlesbrough Employment Exchange as unemployed; and how many vacancies suitable for such workers are at present known to the employment exchange.

Three hundred and sixty-seven at 16th June. The number of vacancies notified by employers in the steel melting industry to employment exchanges in Middlesbrough and remaining unfilled at 11th June was 28.

Is the Minister aware that there is considerable misgiving on Tees-side and in Middlesbrough about this increase in unemployment among steel workers? Can he give a better assurance than his hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Power was able to give me recently when I asked whether the Government are ready with new projects to use steel constructional materials in case these numbers should increase?

It is true that the decrease, as I think my hon. Friend said in reply to the Question, is regarded, rightly, I hope, more as a fluctuation than as a permanent trend. We are trying, through such measures as the Distribution of Industry (Industrial Finance) Bill which we put recently before the House, to help in this sort of thing.

Do the Government still adhere to the policy contained in the White Paper on employment policy issued many years ago, and will the right hon. Gentleman move in quickly, if there is any substantial increase in these numbers, in order to increase steel consumption?

I cannot give a categorical undertaking on the second part of the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary question because that, I think, is not exactly within the province of my Ministry. As regards the first part, of course, full employment remains perhaps the chief primary aim in the domestic policy of the Government.

Is the Minister aware that, while we look with anxiety at the position in Middlesbrough, the position there is now becoming common throughout the whole steel industry? Will he whisper a word into the ears of his Cabinet colleagues, before they discuss any further capacity, about having a policy which will make the existing capacity more fully employed than it is at the moment?

asked the Minister of Labour on what grounds the United States singer Mr. Jerry Lee Lewis was recently given a permit to enter this country for a six-week tour of theatres and music-halls.

A permit was issued for this man under quota arrangements which have been agreed by my Department and with the Variety and Allied Entertainment Council of Great Britain for the employment of foreign variety artistes.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that great offence was caused to many people by the arrival of this man, with his 13-year old bride, especially bearing in mind the difficulty that others have in obtaining permission to work here? Will he remember also that we have more than enough "rock-'n'-roll" entertainers of our own without importing them from overseas?

This was, of course, a thoroughly unpleasant case, which was ended by the cancellation of the contract and the disappearance of the man. But, at the time the matter was before my officers, it was purely a question of a permit for employment, and his case was treated under the ordinary arrangements which apply to anybody.

asked the Minister of Labour why deferment from National Service is not granted to teachers who have passed the final examination for the Associateship of the Royal Institute of Chemistry in the same way as those who have taken a Third Class Degree at a university.

An extension of this nature could not be limited to associateship of this Institute alone and would involve drawing distinctions between different professional and academic qualifications which I should be most reluctant to undertake. Moreover, any further extension of the scheme to men with other science and engineering qualifications would deprive the Services of many men with technical or scientific training whom they cannot afford to lose.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that those who have taken technological courses of this sort feel that they are being somewhat slighted in that they do not receive the same sort of treatment as those with third class degrees receive, whom they regard as not their superiors, and, in many cases, as their inferiors?

I recognise that it is difficult to draw exact comparisons. In the precise case my hon. and learned Friend has in mind, I think that the award was one not regarded as equivalent to graduate level. If I were to accept the associateship of the Royal Institute of Chemistry, I should have to accept also that of many other bodies such as physics, the mechanicals, the electricals, civil engineering, and so forth. I feel that it is impossible to enter upon that.