asked the Minister of Works whether, in view of the recommendations by a committee of the Arts Council which surveyed the housing of the arts in London and in the annual report of the Royal Opera House that his Department should purchase the Opera House rather than continue to hold it on the present short lease, he proposes to open negotiations to this end.

I cannot add anything at present to the reply by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the hon. Member for St. Pancras, North (Mr. K. Robinson) on 26th January, 1960.

Although the right hon. Gentleman's Answer says practically nothing, will he at least say that, in general, he is in sympathy with the idea that something should be done about this matter and that it is really quite ridiculous and indefensible that the whole of our opera and ballet should be in private hands and that the building will revert to private ownership in thirty years' time, making it quite impossible to carry out now the necessary improvements and modernisation which the building so urgently requires?

The right hon. Gentleman's Question really goes to the merits of the case, and I do not want to comment on them. I would remind the right hon. Gentleman that he is scarcely accurate in his substantive Question about the short lease because, in point of fact, it still has thirty-one years to run.

asked the Minister of Works what steps he now proposes to take to remove the Royal United Service Institution from the Banqueting Hall at Whitehall, to furnish the building appropriately, and to permit the public to enjoy its classical architecture and Rubens panels.

I cannot yet add to my replies of 17th November, 1959, to the hon. Member for Dagenham (Mr. Parker) and 8th December, 1959, to the hon. Member for Bristol, North-West (Mr. McLaren)

Cannot the Minister at least say that he will have a word with the Georgian Group and other bodies interested in this building? Very excellent work having been done on restoring the ceiling, does not the right hon. Gentleman think it ought to be possible to admire the place without squeezing oneself in between models of the Battle of Waterloo which would really be better housed elsewhere? Would not Inigo Jones, Rubens and King Charles I turn in their graves if they knew what was happening at the present time?

The hon. Gentleman would be giving these two incumbents the wrong impression if he tried to suggest that no one was trying to do anything about it. As he knows, it is not an easy passage, but I can assure him that I am trying to help.

asked the Minister of Works for how many weeks the firm of contractors has now been at work on Birdcage Walk; and how many more weeks it is estimated that it will be before it completes its task.

Work has been in progress for nineteen weeks. The completion date for the contract is 12th June, 1960, but I hope that work may in fact be finished by mid-April.

Is there nothing more the Ministry can do to persuade this firm of Lavender McMillan to curtail the period during which great public inconvenience is caused?

The fact that it might well be possible to finish by mid-April shows that the firm is doing its best to get this job finished. One reason why it has taken longer than might appear on the surface to be necessary is that we have had to keep a right of way open all the time. We could have done it much more quickly if we had shut the whole road.

Could the Minister say how many men are employed on the work? Is it not possible sometimes to employ more men and get the job done more quickly without incurring more cost?

I will look into that and let my hon. Friend know. I have not got the figure.

asked the Minister of Works to what extent the Clock Tower and the Victoria Tower of the Palace of Westminster are not vertical; and what action he is taking to remedy the structural defects.

The Clock Tower is about 15 inches out of vertical towards the north-west. The Victoria Tower is out of vertical towards the south-west by about the same amount. Both Towers are being kept under close observation, but there is no indication that the tilt is of recent development in either case, nor is there any cause for concern as to the safety of the Towers.

While we all regret that Parliament is not as firmly based as we thought, will the Minister continue to keep a watchful eye on the situation to try to get things straightened out as soon as he can? Does he not agree that London has sufficient tourist attractions without adding the "Leaning Towers of Westminster" to them?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his helpful suggestion.

asked the Minister of Works what representations he has received from the National Coal Board on the proposed conversion of the heating system at Windsor Castle from coke to oil.

The National Coal Board recently asked for an opportunity to make proposals for solid fuel to be retained at Windsor Castle. But, as my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary explained to the House on 16th February, it is too late to consider changing the system now being installed.

Will the Minister use this unhappy incident—[HON. MEMBERS: "Why unhappy?"]—as a lesson for the future and give early notice to the National Coal Board and other authorities interested of installations under his control which are likely to be converted to oil, so that they may look at them in time and suggest more efficient and cheaper ways of running them than by oil?

What happens in the future is one thing; this is quite another. The hon. Gentleman is less than fair in suggesting that this particular incident has anything unhappy about it at all.

Hear, hear.

The Minister himself admitted it. Is he not aware that last week his Parliamentary Secretary stated that like had been compared with like, but that that is not the case, because since the first plan three years ago, there have been many modern developments in coal utilisation to allow of all the things which can be done by oil to be done more cheaply by coal?

Indeed, the whole point is, as the hon. Gentleman himself recognised in the speech which he made on the afternoon of the same day last week, that it is too late in this case to do anything. That is the point, and there is no need to go on about it.

asked the Minister of Works, in view of the finding of the Select Committee on Accommodation 1953–54 that a disproportionate amount of space in the Palace of Westminster is at present occupied by other users of the Palace than honourable Members, what steps he is taking to provide alternative accommodation for these other users.

The allocation of space in the Palace of Westminster is a matter for the authorities of the Palace. I have had no requests from these authorities to provide alternative accommodation for the users to whom the hon. Member refers.

Does not the Minister think it is time that the control of this Palace was taken over by the House of Commons, as recommended by the Select Committee?

That is a matter of opinion, which is not for me to express.

Does not the Minister agree that all hon. Members of this House have a very great interest in the proper use of the accommodation here? Will he not lend us his support in establishing some kind of democratic control in determining the use to which the accommodation is put?

I have tried accurately to set out the constitutional position, and I cannot go beyond it. Within that, I am certainly not myself as Minister aware of obstruction from any quarter.

Oh.

If the right hon. Gentleman is unable to express an opinion for some reason or other, does he object to the House of Commons expressing an opinion about this anachronism? Why does he not tell the Lord Great Chamberlain to mind his own business and let us decide to look after ourselves?

Obviously, I can have no objection at all. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] It is not for me to object to the House expressing an opinon. The right hon. Gentleman asked me whether I had any objection to the House expressing its opinion. The answer is that I have no objection at all. It might be very interesting.

asked the Minister of Works why the construction of galleries in the House of Commons Library as proposed by the Select Committee on Accommodation was not carried out.

The Library Committee agreed in 1956 that, as the estimated cost of this proposal was out of scale with the benefits gained, it must be deferred.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that, in the Report on Accommodation, it was suggested that further estimates for a less elaborate arrangement should be obtained? Could he not look at the matter again, because the arguments used in favour of it in that Report still obtain?

I think the answer to the hon. Lady's point lies in the fact that instead of 75 yards of shelving costing £20,000 having been provided, which is what would have happened had the original idea gone ahead, the same amount of shelving has been provided on the Ministers' floor at a cost of about £700.

But the question of access for Members to the shelves in the Library has not been dealt with at all.

asked the Minister of Works how many desks there are in each of the three Members' Typing Rooms; and what is the floor space of each room.

I assume that the hon. Member is referring to the Desk Rooms in the Upper Committee Corridor. There are now five of these rooms, and the figures are as follows:

• Room 1. 18 desks—470 sq. ft.
• Room 3. 14 desks—405 sq. ft.
• Room 8. 13 desks—430 sq. ft.
• Room 9. 10 desks—320 sq. ft.
• Room 10. 17 desks—470 sq. ft.

Is the Minister aware that these three rooms are grossly overcrowded, imposing almost intolerable conditions on hon. Members who try to work in them? Is he also aware that the floor space available to each desk is less than that regarded as the minimum for office accommodation in the Gowers Report years ago? When is he going to do something to improve this situation?

A comparison with the Gowers Report as it stands is not a fair one, because these standards apply to work being done the whole time in that space.

Is the Minister aware that, unless he does something to improve these conditions before the Offices Bill reaches the Statute Book, he will be in danger of prosecution?

I am obliged to the hon. Gentleman, and I neither wish that to happen nor to fail to do something to help the hon. Member as far as I can. That is exactly what I am now trying to do.

asked the Minister of Works what is the average number of square feet per desk provided for the use of hon. Members in Room No. 1 in the Upper Committee Corridor.

A little over 26 sq. ft.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are eighteen desks in that room and that the conditions in which hon. Members have to do their work in those rooms are absolutely shocking? Does he not think the time has come when hon. Members should be given better accommodation facilities to do the work which they have been sent here to do? Should they not be granted some means of privacy for carrying out their duties? Would he not recommend that the Prime Minister, who is responsible as the "parent" of this House, should himself see the conditions in which Members have to work?

Of course I am aware of these conditions; I have worked in them myself for about fifteen years. I quite agree with the hon. Member that they leave an awful lot to be desired—in my view, at least. That is why I want to do what I can to help. I assure the hon. Member and the House that I am considering ways and means to help, but it is not easy, although I am sure something can be done.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this accommodation works out at 19 sq. ft., less per person than that recommended in the Gowers Report? That was a minimum figure. Is not this a very shocking situation? Does he realise that he cannot get away with it by saying that these desks are not in regular use? These rooms are occupied for the most part by hon. Members on this side of the House, who use them frequently and regularly and work all the time.

The hon. Lady is being rather naughty. She knows as well as I do that a great deal of hon. Members' time is spent outside these rooms—for instance, in the Chamber, as now.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is no answer to this problem except the building of a private office block for the House of Commons? Can he tell the House whether any consideration is now being given to that?

Consideration of that problem, as of other similar problems, is being given.

asked the Minister of Works when he estimates that he will be able to provide sufficient working rooms to accommodate every hon. Member of this House.

It is not possible to give a precise forecast yet.

Will the Minister take into account that this Palace was built in the middle of the nineteenth century? We are now in the second part of the twentieth century and all the executive work is far greater than it was then. Will he see that the Government seriously tackle the provision of a new office block such as was spoken of a moment ago by my hon. Friend the Member for Pembroke (Mr. Donnelly)?

If I may answer the hon. Member in the terms of this question, I can assure him that it certainly will be before the first half of the twenty-first century that something is done.

It is time this Government got out quickly.

asked the Minister of Works how many desks are now provided in the Palace of Westminster for the exclusive use of hon. Members or their secretaries and how many are on order.

There are 72 desks allocated to hon. Members in desk rooms and 109 for the use of their secretaries: in addition, there are 232 writing places in various parts of the House. Another 16 desks are on order for hon. Members, and 24 for their secretaries, for Nos. 6–7. Old Palace Yard.

Is the Minister not aware that what hon. Members are anxious to have is desks exclusively for their own use, not merely a place in which they can perch like a bird of passage to do a bit of writing? Is he aware that as long ago as 1954, in answer to a questionnaire by the Stokes Committee, 295 Members said they wanted such a desk for their own exclusive use, yet, according to his own figures, 100 hon. Members are still without one? Is it not intolerable that 100 hon. Members have not even a desk of their own, let alone an office?

There is a great deal to be said for the point of view of the hon. Member. [An HON. MEMBER: "Then say it."] Most hon. Members on both sides of the House would like to have some place of their own where they can concentrate and can keep their own things.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that it seems that we are arriving at a situation where, in the view of hon. Members opposite, an Englishman's desk is his castle?

Is the Minister aware that my hon. Friend the Member for Blackburn (Mrs. Castle) is being far too modest in this matter? What hon. Members want is not one desk crowded out by others in close proximity, but a properly appointed office in which we can have two desks, one for a secretary, with a telephone and facilities not inferior to those enjoyed, for example, by medium-rank officials of local authorities? Otherwise, we cannot do our jobs properly on these premises and will have to go elsewhere.

The possibility of office accommodation is one of the things I am looking at. The hon. Member perhaps rather over-egged the pudding when he spoke of telephones and that sort of thing, but office accommodation is a different thing.

Is it not possible at the moment to take steps at least to have telephones on the desks we now use? We waste hours waiting to get hold of secretaries, those few of us who are lucky enough to have them.

Yes, I shall bear that in mind.

asked the Minister of Works what decisions have so far been reached with regard to the extensive building operations visualised by the Select Committee on Accommodation, 1953–54.

I am considering various plans for providing additional accommodation for the use of Members. As a first step, I am making available space in Nos. 6–7 Old Palace Yard as already announced in my reply to the hon. Member for Islington, East (Mr. Fletcher) on 1st December, 1959, and this will be ready at the beginning of next month.

Surely the Minister is aware that that paltry bit of accommodation across the road is not the extensive building operations for which the Stokes Committee called urgently six years ago? It is no good the Minister expressing regret about the grossly overcrowded and inadequate conditions to which we have been referring unless he is prepared to get a move on. Will he also realise that when accommodation is provided, hon. Members on this side of the House want it to be on this site, not somewhere else? We believe that other users of the Palace should go across the road while we should be near the Chamber where we do our work.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, if there were to be building, many of us would very much regret the replacing or cutting down of the beautiful catalpa trees in Old Palace Yard?

Is it not clear that from all the answers of the Minister it is high time "the wind of change" started blowing through the Palace of Westminster and we had our own Committee of the House to deal with these matters?

That is hardly for me to say. On the whole of this question, as hon. Members have asked it from both sides of the House, I realise perfectly well the whole House wants something substantial to be done. I realise that hon. Members do not want the accommodation to be too far away. Within these limits, I am sure the House realises perfectly well it is not going to be easy to find a solution, but I believe that one can be found. I am doing my best now to find it and to suggest it to the House.

asked the Minister of Works for how long the internal temporary shell in St. Stephen's Hall is likely to remain.

Until the end of the Summer Recess.

Does the Minister appreciate that, meanwhile, this very prosaic approach to the Central Lobby and the respective Houses is not at all encouraging to overseas visitors, who have the idea that this is the best that we can do in the circumstances? Cannot he speed the matter up?

It is being speeded up as much as possible, but, as so often happens in a case like this, as the hon. Gentleman will realise, more was found wrong than was suspected when the work began. So far as the appearance of St. Stephen's Hall is concerned, I agree with him, but one hopes that visitors from overseas will, with their quick intuitiveness, realise that this is something temporary.

asked the Minister of Works which items relating to expenditure in that part of the Palace of Westminster occupied by the Commons are borne on the Vote of his Department.

As the list of these items is long. I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that the time has now come when all these items ought to be put together on a House of Commons Vote, to be dealt with as such, in the same way as another place has its own Vote?

I think it works very well as it is.

Oh.

asked the Minister of Works to what extent anti-litter legislation has had an effect in reducing the amount of litter deposited by the public in the parks and open spaces under his control.

Although no statistics are available, I am glad to say that there has been a noticeable reduction in the amount of litter left on the ground.

Is it not true that account is kept of the number of tons of literature—[Laughter.]—I mean litter, including literature, collected on Bank holidays? Could we have some comparative figures on that basis?

It is not possible to differentiate between litter properly deposited in baskets and litter improperly deposited on the ground.

Can the Minister say whether there has been any estimate of the amount of litter deposited by the Front Bench?

That is another question.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will set up an independent committee to examine and collect all the evidence of the effect of hydro-electric schemes on salmon stocks and to obtain accurate figures of fish caught in nets in the affected rivers.

Most hydro-electric schemes have been in operation for too short a time to enable the effect they are having on salmon stocks to be reliably determined, but I shall certainly bear my hon. Friend's suggestion in mind. As regards the second part of the Question, returns for fish caught by nets in all Scottish rivers are already furnished to me under statute.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the irreparable damage that is being done in Norway, and also of the experiments which are now being carried out by Liverpool University and the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board, and could he co-ordinate the work so that some definite information will be available to the river boards?

I am aware of the various studies that have been made of the problem, and I myself have studies being carried out between the Hydro-Electric Board and the statutory Fisheries Committee.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is aware or the dangers arising from the three lanes on the Edinburgh-Glasgow road; and if he will transform it into either a two-or four-lane highway to avoid danger from the centre lane being used to pass in both directions.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations has received from the Midlothian County Council concerning accidents on the Edinburgh to Glasgow trunk road A.8; and what proposals he has for converting the present three-Lane road into a dual carriageway.

I share the concern which Midlothian County Council have expressed at the number of accidents on this road. Plans for the reconstruction of the Baillieston-Newhouse stretch, with dual carriageways, are in preparation and the improvement of the whole road will proceed as quickly as the funds at my disposal permit.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, apart altogether from the width of the road, the fact that there are three lines itself constitutes a danger, and that people driving on the road would feel far safer if there was a line down the middle which should not be crossed except on the responsibility of the person crossing it, and that that would be far safer than having three lines with a passing space between two sets of vehicles?

I know that that opinion is held, but the evidence suggests that the number of junctions and not the three-lane construction is the principle cause of accidents. I can give the right hon. Gentleman relevant figures.

In view of the developments which are now taking place around the road, can the right hon. Gentleman say whether he will deal with the matter rather more urgently? Can he give us some indication of when he is likely to do something more about the other part of the road?

We are at present, in consultation and in conjunction with the West Lothian County Council, examining the implications of the establishment of the B.M.C. factory at Bathgate and will proceed with the early stages of the work as quickly as we can get on with it.

In saying that he will go ahead with the work as quickly as he can, is the right hon. Gentleman telling us that the funds at his disposal are hopelessly inadequate to the needs of the situation?

No, Sir. As the hon. Gentleman knows, at any given moment there is only a certain amount of money available. I hope that the Baillieston-Newhouse part of the road will be started early in the financial year 1961–62.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland why the assurance given by him to the hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland in a letter dated 15th January, 1958, that no loss would be borne in the first year by Caithness County Council as a result of the operation of the Local Government and Miscellaneous Financial Provisions (Scotland) Act, 1958, has not been fulfilled.

The assurance related to gains and losses ascertained in accordance with Section 18 (2) of the Local Government and Miscellaneous Financial Provisions (Scotland) Act, 1958. In the current year all such losses are being made good. Under a recent recalculation Caithness are now shown to be a gaining authority as so ascertained.

Is it not the case that Caithness had to spend a great deal of money on providing new schools because of the siting of the Dounreay establishment in Caithness and that when it received an assurance and a favourable answer from the right hon. Gentleman it went ahead with the projects and is now suffering a very heavy loss? Will the right hon. Gentleman look at the matter again, for it is a serious situation for a poor landward area like Caithness?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, I have great sympathy with Caithness in the position in which it finds itself, but the fact is that the assurance given could be related only to the provisions of the Act. While I regret any misunderstanding that there might have been, I do not see what else could have been said.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if, in view of the danger to health, he will inquire into the housing situation in Lybster where some families are living in homes which are unfit for human habitation and others in homes without piped water or sanitation; and if he will make a statement.

I have been keeping in touch with Caithness County Council about housing needs in Lybster. Since the war the council has built 42 houses there, 10 are under construction and further building is proposed. In addition it has improved 7 houses and grant-aided the improvement of 14 others.

In spite of the houses which have been built, there is a very real need in this large village where people are living in thoroughly unhealthy conditions. As the Secretary of State is the Minister responsible for housing in Scotland, will he ensure that the matter is not left entirely to the county council?

As I have said, I have been keeping in touch with the Caithness County Council, and I understand that the council is thinking in terms of a further ten-fifteen houses to be built in the year 1960–61.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what proposals he has for increasing the present rate of land reclamation for agricultural purposes in Scotland.

None, Sir. I consider that the present range of incentives offer ample scope for the reclamation of land that can economically be put to fuller agricultural use.

As there are large areas which could be reclaimed and as only same 10,000 acres have been reclaimed in four years, does not the right hon. Gentleman feel it is time he gave more thought to the matter and proceeded to get the best possible use out of the land of Scotland?

There are a substantial number of incentive schemes available. One must also have regard to the ultimate economic possibilities of the operation.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether, in view of the increased and rapidly increasing provision of State financial help to private industry, he will now take steps to introduce legislation providing for the full re-rating of industry.

Industry was partially re-rated as recently as 16th May, 1959, and I have no further proposal to make at present.

Why not? As increasing amounts of public money are being given to private enterprise and at the same time local authorities are having to increase their rates because of the Government's policy, will not the right hon. Gentleman introduce, as a matter of simple justice to the local authorities and the ratepayers, a Measure to ensure that industry pays its full share of the rate burden?

I am by no means certain that at this moment when we are trying hard to encourage industries to go to Scotland I ought to take steps to increase their overheads.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that to restore re-rating of industry would be one of the best ways to keep industries away from Scotland?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will indicate the total number of new students enrolled at the central institutions for the session 1958–59.

4,033 full-time and 9,390 part-time students.

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied with that rate of progress?

The figures show an increase of 236 and 183 respectively compared with the previous year.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give details of the projects which have been completed in the technical education building programme of £10½ million announced in 1956.

As the list is fairly long I shall, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT. The total value of the work completed, which includes a new technical college at Thurso, is £345,000.

Surely the right hon. Gentleman cannot be satisfied with the rate of progress in this matter? What he is suggesting is that projects costing between £130,000-£200,000 are taking four years to complete. Is not this most unsatisfactory?

I am never satisfied with the rate of progress of almost everything with which I have anything to do, but I believe that the full £10 million will be committed by the time we said it would and that progress is being made now.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the total acreage of arable land in Scotland.

The total arable acreage—i.e. land under tillage crops and rotation grass—was 3,349,000 in 1959.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what was the total cultivated acreage of arable land in Scotland for the years 1957–58, 1958–59 and 1959–60, respectively.

The acreage under tillage crops (that is crops other than grass) in Scotland in 1957 was 1,611,000; in 1958 1,580,000 and in 1959 1,546,000.

Has the right hon. Gentleman prepared any plans for the future which will greatly increase Scotland's tillage acreage? Is he aware that such plans would lead to a much healthier agricultural industry in Scotland and also save much shipping space at present used for the importation of essential food?

The decline in acreage shown by the figures which I have been given has been largely offset by the increase in the acreage of rotation grass. As the hon. Gentleman will appreciate, good husbandry demands a relatively high proportion of grass in rotation. The Government's main objective has been set out in the White Paper on Agricultural Guarantees for 1959, and our object at the moment is the maintenance of the arable acreage at roughly the present size.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what proposals the South East of Scotland Regional Hospital Board has made for the immediate provision of urgently required geriatric beds in the East Fife Hospital Board area.

The South-Eastern Regional Hospital Board has submitted proposals for the building of a geriatric unit at the Randolph Wemyss Hospital, Buckhaven, and I hope to give the Board a decision on this matter very soon.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that only 4·3 beds per 1,000 of the population over 65 years of age are available to the County of Fife at the present time as opposed to 11·2 per cent. in England and Wales, that almost 30 per cent. of the old people admitted to hospital die within a year of admission because they are so late in being admitted, and that a number of old people are left to die in their own homes in the most miserable and distressing conditions? Will he ensure that the hospital at Buckhaven is built as soon as possible?

The hon. Gentleman has given a number of statistics which I am sure are correct. I am aware of Fife's needs, and, as the hon. Gentleman knows, we are trying to improve the situation as fast as we can.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the extent of teacher shortage in primary, junior secondary, and senior secondary schools in Lanarkshire.

Separate figures for different types of school are not available, but I shall, with permission, circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a table showing the shortage according to the qualifications of the teachers required.

Surely it would be a simple thing to get separate figures for each category? Surely each education authority knows the number that it is short in the primary schools and the junior secondary and senior secondary schools? Surely the Secretary of State could ask for those figures?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many uncertificated teachers are employed in primary, junior secondary, and senior secondary schools in Lanarkshire.

At the last count on 5th October, the numbers were 65, 133 and 18 respectively, plus 64 others, most of whom are visiting teachers of practical subjects.

As I said, the figures are not at present available. I will examine carefully what the hon. Lady has said.

The right hon. Gentleman has said that he will circulate these figures. Is he satisfied with them? Does not he realise that many people are seriously worried about this teacher shortage among the big education authorities like Lanarkshire and Glasgow? What does the right hon. Gentleman propose to do to help such authorities?

I am also concerned about the shortage of teachers, but I am glad to say that the number of students undergoing teacher training has increased in recent years to more than ever before.

Does the Secretary of State realise that the figures he has given show that the junior secondary schools are the worst off in this respect? Does he also realise that children in junior secondary schools leave at the age of 15 and have little chance after that of any kind of education? Surely he should do something to help those children, who are the under-privileged, to obtain better teachers for the work which they should be doing?

As I indicated in my previous answer, we are alive to the problem; and it is comforting to know that the steps which have been taken are showing some result in the form of increased recruitment.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what changes are being made in the distribution of responsibilities within his Departments; and whether, for the guidance of the public and hon. Members, he will make a statement.

I have given a direction under the Reorganisation of Offices (Scotland) Act, 1939, making from 1st April, 1960, some changes in the distribution of functions within my four Departments.

The main effect is to transfer from the Scottish Home Department to the Department of Agriculture, which will in future be known as the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, functions relating to fisheries, fishery piers and harbours, steamer services and the Highlands, and to the Scottish Education Department functions relating to child care, adoption and remand homes.

The purpose is to secure a better distribution of the burden of work and the changes will have no effect on policy, for which I remain responsible. I shall, with permission, circulate full details in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

We shall study these details but there is one point about which I am not clear. Is there any change being made regarding forestry? From what the right hon. Gentleman said, may I take it that there is no suggestion that forestry and agriculture are to come under one Ministry, because that would be bound to lead to trouble?

I am glad that the right hon. Gentleman has raised that important point. There is no intention of changing the present arrangements regarding forestry.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what measures he is taking to encourage local authorities to build larger size houses.

Local authorities are free to build whatever sizes and types of houses they consider necessary to meet the needs of their areas.

Is the Secretary of State aware that only 26 per cent. of the houses built by local authorities in Scotland are four-apartment or five-apartment, compared with 73 per cent. built in the six years from 1945 to 1951? Does not he think that the present position is thoroughly unsatisfactory, particularly when we consider Scotland's history of overcrowding? Will the right hon. Gentleman do something about this and, in particular, consider the restoration of the subsidy differential according to the size of the house?

The answer to part of the hon. Member's supplementary question is "No." My own view is that we concentrated too much on the larger houses for too long. The hon. Member may be interested to know that an analysis of a representative sample of 1,000 households which my Department made recently showed that over 75 per cent. of the households required houses of three apartments or less.

How on earth can the Secretary of State say that we concentrated for far too long on large houses? Does he realise that we have far worse conditions of overcrowding in Scotland than in any other part of the United Kingdom or most other parts of Europe? Does not he realise that even people in Scotland who support him and his party take the view that we should not have departed from the differential subsidy so that we could provide an inducement for local authorities to provide the houses needed in their areas?

The real answer is that we want more houses but not necessarily larger houses. That point is very important. Had we had more even of the three-apartment and two-apartment houses, we might have been able to clear up some of the overcrowding problems more quickly by a proper process of decanting.

Is the Minister aware that the bulk of the pre-war houses are grossly overcrowded even on his own figures?

The answer is that we need more houses, which is why we are going on building.