asked the Postmaster-General whether he will consider a reduction of postal charges on parcels to refugees during World Refugee Year.

Much as I sympathise with the aims of the World Refugee Year, I am sorry that I cannot make this concession. There are very many charitable and benevolent causes which could make equally strong claims for favourable treatment.

Would my hon. Friend bear in mind that the World Refugee Year is a precedent for this country and that it seems rather hard, when people give clothes to refugees, that they should have to meet these postal charges? Would she look at this again to see whether some reduction can be made in postal charges on parcels from donors to clearing centres for the collection of parcels, because I do not think it would entail any additional expense on the Post Office.

My hon. Friend says that this is a precedent. That is why we are very nervous about making this concession, because we believe that there will be a great many of these efforts in the future, such as World Hunger Year. We feel that it would be a very heavy expense on this country.

asked the Postmaster-General if, in pursuance of better relations with the public, he will overhaul the structure of the Post Office ad- visory committees, providing an advisory committee for each head-postmaster's area, and exhibit the names of the members of such committees in the post offices within their areas.

The structure of local advisory committees was last reviewed as recently as 1956 when 62 committees were in being. There are at present 188. I should like to see more.

I am much obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for that very helpful reply. Does he not think that in these days, when the association of administration with the public is extremely desirable, in each head-postmaster's area there should be an advisory committee which would keep a contact between the public and the Post Office? Will he consider revising the whole structure along these lines?

Yes, indeed I do, and I should be very happy to confer with the right hon. Gentleman as to what he has in mind.

asked the Postmaster-General what steps are being taken to reduce the waiting list for business and private telephones in the Ongar parishes of the Epping and Ongar rural district, having regard to its increase from 46 to 134 during 1959.

There are fifteen exchanges in this district but the increase in the waiting list last year was mainly due to shortage of capacity at the Ongar exchange. The new automatic exchange is now well advanced and I expect it to be ready by September. As I said to my hon. Friend on 27th January, we are also providing additional exchange equipment and cables in other parts of the district.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will make a statement on the work carried out in the Federal Telephone Exchange in Great Peter Street, Westminster.

The Federal Telephone Exchange is a manual exchange giving direct connections between Ministers and senior officials of the Service and Civil Departments. It gives them the same kind of facilities often provided for the top executives in a commercial organisation by its private branch exchange. It has no other functions.

Why is it necessary to surround this exchange with so much secrecy? Do not the Government have enough to hide without adding this telephone exchange to the list?

Far from there being any secrecy about this organisation, it has received far more publicity during the past week than any other part of the General Post Office.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will consider issuing a circular to all television relay companies emphasising the conditions under which he licenses them to operate.

Relay companies already has this information, but if the hon. Member has any particular point in mind I will gladly consider it.

Is the Minister aware that many people in the Dunston area of the Blaydon constituency are being misled by a company operating rediffusion there, in offering specially low terms to some subscribers to attract them to television? While recognising that the right hon. Gentleman may have no responsibility for such commercial dealings, may I point out that at least he provides them with a licence? In the public interest cannot he do something about it?

I did not infer from the Question that that was the point which the hon. Member had in mind. In view of what he has said, I will take a note of it and see what I can do.

If the Minister is made conversant with the dealings of a firm which appears to be using a shady commercial practice, particularly performing under a licence from him, will he take a dim view of it, especially when the licence comes up for renewal?

I should first want to satisfy myself what the facts of the case were.

asked the Postmaster-General his plans for improving the television service in Dunston and district with direct services, instead of allowing a sub-standard rediffusion service to develop.

Neither the B.B.C. nor the I.T.A. has any present plans for improving reception in Dunston. It is well within the service area of B.B.C. and I.T.A. transmitters, but the district is low-lying and intervening hills spoil reception. In most cases the use of carefully adjusted multi-element aerials will overcome the local difficulties of B.B.C. reception.

Is the Minister aware that a great number of people in this area are paying licence fees for reception which is deplorable? Is there any reason why there should not be research into this matter to enable people to get value for money?

I think that the hon. Member's Question refers to direct services instead of rediffusion services. As the House knows, the B.B.C. is pressing on with its satellite station scheme as fast as it can. It has no immediate plans for this part of the country, but I shall be very happy to draw its attention to this situation.

Is the Minister aware that in the shadow areas it is impossible for the non-wired service to give satisfactory reception? Will he consider, in conjunction with the B.B.C, whether a wired service should be started by the B.B.C. in areas of this type, which cannot otherwise be served?

The hon. Member for Blaydon (Mr. Woof) is complaining about the poor quality of the wired service provided by this company.

asked the Postmaster-General on what date instructions were given to the Television Advisory Committee to study and report on future technical standards and colour; and how often the Committee has met for this purpose since that date.

In the first place during March, 1956, but certain questions which had been put to it were elaborated in 1959. The main Committee has met six times; the Technical Sub-Committee has met twenty-one times.

Is not four years a preposterous time to take for this report, however complicated the subject? Six meetings do not seem very many. What is the reason for the delay and what is the Minister doing about it?

The reason for the delay is that the questions which are being considered by the Television Advisory Committee are immensely complicated. The bulk of the work has been carried out by the Technical Sub-Committee, of which the chairman of the main Committee is a member. I appreciate that the Committee has been a long time, but these are difficult questions. As I said to the House last week, however, I hope to have the report next month.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, in order to assist him in carrying out his duties under Section 4 of the Television Act, 1954, he will request the Independent Television Authority to make available to him the reports of its Advertising Advisory Committee.

No, Sir.

Why not? Is not the Postmaster-General aware that the Section referred to in the Question states that:

"… it shall be the duty of the Authority to consult from time to time with the Postmaster-General as to the classes and descriptions of goods or services which must not be advertised and the methods of advertising which must not be employed"?

Indeed, it is the duty of the Authority to consult me from time to time about the classes and descriptions of goods or services which must not be advertised—some goods and services are, in fact, prohibited from advertising on television—and to consult me on the methods of advertising which must not be employed. That is precisely what the I.T.A. does. The Question on the Order Paper, however, refers to the rather different question of whether the reports of the Advisory Committee should be made available to me.

Would it not be of assistance to the House and particularly to people who take an interest in this matter —because we are certain that the standards of commercial advertisements can be bettered—if the reports which are made available to the Postmaster-General could be made available in the Library of the House so that we may peruse them?

I would not go as far as that. I can, however, say to the hon. Member that the Advisory Committee has recently been considering the rather vexed question, which was ventilated in the Chamber last week, of misleading advertisements, which, perhaps, include substitute products. The Advisory Committee will shortly be putting a report before the Authority which will be coming formally to me to consider.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that the whole population is involved in this matter? This is a question of protecting the population from what have been described as misleading advertisements. Will the Postmaster-General place in the Library of the House the report which he receives from the I.T.A. on this matter?

No. I can give no such undertaking.

asked the Secretary of State for Air if he has yet been able to persuade Mr. Abraham Solomons to return the automatic gun parts, and on what conditions; and, in view of the importance of mutilating all machine gun parts before disposing of them as scrap, what disciplinary action has been taken against those responsible for the sale of parts costing £40,000 for £26 to Mr. Solomons in the same condition as they were purchased for Service purposes.

I understand that Mr. Solomons has now sold the spares to a registered arms dealer. The sale of un-mutilated spares was not contrary to the Departmental regulations in force at the time, and there is therefore no question of disciplinary action.

Can the right hon. Gentleman deny that the series of Answers which he has given on this matter is a classic example of how the Minister can seize upon a grain of truth which, when intelligently used, can give an entirely different impression of the real situation and so cover up a costly blunder? Will the right hon. Gentleman at least admit that there is no one in his Department who has been concerned with this transaction who has acted with the wisdom of Solomons?

asked the Secretary of State for Air to what extent instruction in any of the techniques of brainwashing is given by or to men or women serving in his Department or in the Royal Air Force and its auxiliaries and reserves.

None, Sir.

Are we to take it that no instruction whatever is given to men in this Service in the technique of brainwashing so that they may be in a better position to resist attempts should they ever be captured?

There are two quite separate points. One is the so-called technique of brain-washing, with which we have nothing whatever to do. The other is normal instruction in resistance to interrogation. For this, we give lectures and films to aircrew so that they will know what they may expect.

Can the Secretary of State deny that, during some invasion escape exercises in Yorkshire during the middle of last year, pilots of the Royal Navy and of the Royal Air Force were interrogated by the Army?

They may have been interrogated, but they were not brain-washed.

Were they not brainwashed in the sense that they were forced to sit on a stool, stripped naked, searched, and so on, and that this can go on for two or three hours? Is not the truth of the matter that the purpose is not to destroy the brains of our own pilots and others, but to get them ready to do this to an enemy in the future?

No. There is absolutely no question of that. All our interrogation training is given in accordance with the Geneva Convention. Naturally, however, we have pointed out to aircrew who are liable to capture that an unscrupulous enemy might not keep to the Geneva Convention and that they might expect violent treatment. That is all we warn them about.

Following the first part of the Minister's supplementary answer, can he give a categorical assurance that the techniques described by Professor Kennedy in his recent lecture were never used by the Royal Air Force anywhere in the world during the last war?

Certainly, I can give that categorical assurance.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will make a comprehensive statement on the manner in which his economy drive has affected the efficiency of British Railways in the North-East of Scotland; and what are his present and future plans relating to rail transport in, to and from the North-East and North of Scotland within the capital reorganisation scheme.

No, Sir. I have nothing to add on this matter to the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 10th March. The Commission hopes to improve the overall efficiency of the rail services in, to and from the North-East and North of Scotland by modernisation and by cutting out little-used stations and spur lines.

Does not the Minister realise that the principle that he is applying to the railways mentioned in the Question conflicts with the principle which his own Government apply in the Highlands and Islands Shipping Services Bill, and that it is further evidence of the penalties which the Government are inflicting upon the people of the North-East of Scotland, where they want better transport, better population—or, rather, more population—and more industry and employment? Will the right hon. Gentleman address his mind to this aspect of the matter?

I am sorry that the hon. and learned Member thinks that they want better population. I do not think they need better representation. I am, however, bound to say that I disagree, as nearly always, with almost everything that the hon. and learned Member has said in his supplementary question.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will give a general direction to the British Transport Commission requiring it to extend the period of validity of all season tickets on the railways by as many days as trains have failed to run on the lines concerned, during the period of validity of the ticket, by reason of a strike.

No, Sir. I understand that it is the normal practice of the British Transport Commission in such circumstances to extend the period of validity of season tickets by the length of time for which travel facilities are not available.

asked the Minister of Transport if he is aware of the critical situation developing in many of the coal fields where pits are still working but are always on the verge of stopping owing to a shortage of empty railway wagons, and that this is causing particular difficulties for the National Coal Board at a time when its stock-piles are gradually being reduced; and, in view of the urgency of this matter, if he will give a general direction to the British Transport Commission to take steps to alleviate this situation.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will give a general direction to the British Transport Commission requiring it to provide a more adequate supply of railway wagons for collieries.

No, Sir. I understand from the Commission that difficulties arose from shortages in the supply of empty wagons to collieries and opencast sites in the early part of the year, but these have now been substantially overcome.

Is the Minister aware that this has caused great concern in the Yorkshire coal fields for many weeks? Hon. Members who represent mining areas have had representations not only from the Yorkshire Area of the National Union of Mineworkers but also from the Yorkshire Colliery Managers' Association. Will he try to see that we do not have a recurrence of this situation in the future?

This is a matter which ought to be put to the management of the British Transport Commission, but I will see that the Commission is given notice of the Question asked by the hon. Member. The Commission meets the National Coal Board daily at regional level and weekly at national level. This shows that they are trying hard to cooperate in order to overcome the difficulty.

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that everything has been done this winter to shift coal from South Wales and other areas by providing sufficient wagons and a sufficient number of workers on the railways, having regard to the vast stocks of coal which are accumulating at coal fields, the shortage of coal in the Lea Valley earlier this year and also in Pwllheli earlier this year, and the shortage in Swansea, on the edge of the coal field, only this weekend?

The trouble is greater in the Midlands than in Wales, including Pwllheli. I can assure the hon. Member that I personally saw Sir Brian Robertson about it.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will give an assurance that any discussions with the British Transport Commission on the Guillebaud Report will include the position of railway superannuitants.

The position of railway superannuitants is primarily a matter for the British Transport Commission.

Having regard to the fact that the Guillebaud Report did not deal with railway superannuitants, has the British Transport Commission made any suggestions about dealing with them? Is my right hon. Friend aware that when I asked my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer about railway superannuitants yesterday he suggested that I should put down a Question to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport? Can my right hon. Friend explain to me why people in work are always entitled to have their claims considered while people who have done useful service on the railways are always neglected? It is absolutely monstrous.

I am aware of my hon. Friend's concern for the superannuitants, and I will see that Sir Brian Robertson and the Commission are made aware of her views.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the fact that, whether or not this matter is involved in the Guillebaud Report, it is certainly involved in the whole process of railway reorganisation with which my right hon. Friend has shortly to deal?

The unions and the British Transport Commission arranged for the Guillebaud Report, and the Report is to them and not to the Government. But there is no reason why either party should not bring this issue into the negotiations which are now proceeding.

asked the Minister of Transport (1) how many public footpaths and bridleways were extinguished in the construction of the Birmingham motorway M.1;

Ninety-six footpaths and twenty-seven bridleways were diverted for part of their length. Only three footpaths were wholly stopped up, but another convenient route was provided in each case.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that reply. Since other motorways are projected, will he give an assurance that special care will be taken to see that those motorways do not prevent the use of cross-country footpaths, as the cost involved is very small relative to the total cost of motorways as a whole?

Yes, Sir. The Special Roads Act, 1949, under which motorways are built, lays down the procedure for dealing with footpaths and bridleways. Quite shortly, the stopping up or diversion of those routes can be done only by order of the Minister, after full opportunity for objection has been afforded followed by a public inquiry, if necessary. Our experience with the M.1 indicates that that is sufficient safeguard.

asked the Minister of Transport, in view of the fact that the route of the Birmingham-Bristol motorway was selected over ten years ago, whether he will, before finally deciding this route and the siting of its junction with the Ross Spur motorway near Strensham, consider the recommendations in a recent letter sent to him from the Council for the Preservation of Rural England to the effect that, in order to preserve local amenities in the vicinity of Bredon and the Avon Valley, the motorway north and south of Strensham and the Ross Spur junction should be moved further west; and if he will make a statement.

I have carefully considered the recommendations recently made by the Council for the Preservation of Rural England. For the reasons which I explained in my letter of 10th March to my hon. Friend, I should see great difficulty in accepting its proposals.

If preparations are now so far advanced—though work has not yet begun—that great expense would be entailed, offsetting any saving in changing the road and also considerable delay before a new route could be devised, will my right hon. Friend direct the skill and energies of his Department to seeing how far the road south of the proposed junction could be deflected to the west in order to save something of the amenities of an incomparable valley in England?

A compulsory purchase order was published on 4th March. If there are any objections to it, there will be a public inquiry. As I shall have to make the final decision on the compulsory purchase order, I think that it would be better if I did not commit myself any further at this stage.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there are as many objections to the proposed motorway passing to the west as there are to its passing through my hon. Friend's constituency?

In this Ministry I find that there are conflicting claims. One is to build roads quickly and the other is not to take any ground for the roads.

asked the Minister of Transport if, when making grants to local authorities towards the cost of civil engineering projects, he will make it a condition of the grant that the local authority will require the contractor for the project to appoint a fully qualified officer responsible for the safety of the workers employed thereon.

I do not think it would be appropriate to make this a condition of grant. The safety of workers on such projects will be covered by the new regulations under the Factories Acts which my right hon. Friend, the Minister of Labour, is proposing to make shortly.

While the proposed extension of the Factories Acts to constructional engineering is a step in the right direction, does not my right hon. Friend feel that on some major projects a whole-time safety officer is needed? Does he not think that if such an officer had been appointed earlier for the Barton Bridge, we might have avoided two accidents and saved six lives?

I am certain that local authorities concerned will bear in mind the recommendations of the jury at the recent Barton Bridge inquest to provide constant supervision by a competent representative of the contractor who must be approved by the highways authority engineer, and it is on that person that responsibility must rest.

If that is so, why does not my hon. Friend make it a condition of giving a grant?

In view of the years of delay in issuing satisfactory regulations, will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to consult his right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour with a view to dealing with this as a matter of extreme urgency?

I am already in touch with my right hon. Friend. In view of my experience in private life before I came into public life, I can assure the hon. Member that I have the matter very much in mind.

asked the Minister of Transport why it is necessary to close road A.6034 between Steeton and Silsden for 18 out of 20 days before Easter; and why no consultations took place with Silsden Urban District Council before this decision was taken.

I understand that the Yorkshire (West Riding) County Council proposes to close this road under the powers granted to highway authorities by the Road Traffic Act, 1930. The purpose of the closure is to enable British Railways to repair points and signalling equipment at a level crossing. Advance copies of the notices to be posted on the highway were sent to the Silsden Urban District Council on 3rd February.

Is not nearly three weeks a totally unreasonable time for a level crossing to be closed? Does not my hon. Friend realise that it is absolutely vital for the small town of Silsden that the crossing should be opened as soon as possible? Will he give instructions for speeding up the operation?

No, Sir. I am afraid that we have no power to order the speeding up of this operation, even if it were desirable to do what my hon. Friend requires. The local highway authority is the county council, which is fully aware of the difficulties caused to traffic, because in the notice which I mentioned it gave details of alternative routes which would be available.

asked the Minister of Transport the estimated extra cost per mile of reflecting kerbs compared with the ordinary type; and what approximate extra percentage this would add to the cost per mile of new road.

I have nothing to add add to the reply my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland gave to a similar Question yesterday.

Will the Minister personally look into this matter, because anything which will add to safety on the roads at such negligible cost should be adopted immediately? Several types of these reflecting kerbs are available and they cost practically nothing extra, while giving extra visibility in the worst conditions, thus being a great contribution to safety.

Not only the capital cost, but the effectiveness has to be considered. The value of a reflecting kerb is limited by the difficulty of keeping the surface clean.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that is not a problem? Is he aware that the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research has tested this device and has shown that it keeps clean and is almost as effective for reflecting light as the studs?

The Road Research Laboratory is looking into the matter at the moment and I am awaiting its further report.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he has considered the Reports of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, RN 1689/ PJFW GCW, 1952, and RN/2993/AWC Mar., 1957, reporting that the use of reflecting kerbs can be made visible at night up to 100 yards; and whether he will specify, as a measure of road safety, kerbs with a normal night visibility of a minimum of 80 yards for all new roads.

I have nothing to add to the reply which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland gave to a similar Question by the right hon. Member yesterday.

Will the right hon. Gentleman not, as he appears to have done, make up his mind before he has seen the Report of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research? I understood that he was a very enterprising Minister and willing to hear all the evidence before making up his mind, but he has just given a decision before hearing all the evidence.

No, I did not. I did not say that my mind was made up. I said that not only capital cost, but maintenance and keeping the surface clean had to be considered. The Road Research Laboratory is now carrying out field trials, and no decision will be made until the results of those field trials are known.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in Scotland these kerbs are working very effectively?

Some things work in Scotland which do not always work in England in the same way.

asked the Minister of Transport his reasons for opposing the request of Croydon Council for a pedestrian crossing in Lower Addiscombe Road, by Ashling Road.

There are already two pedestrian crossings on a 400-yard stretch of Lower Addiscombe Road which covers its junction with Ashling Road. Multiplication of pedestrian crossings is no necessary guarantee of safety; a better solution, which we have asked the council to consider, would be the re-siting of the existing crossings, with pedestrian guard-rails to ensure their maximum use.

Does not my hon. Friend realise how frustrating it is to a local authority when its proposals in these matters are so consistently turned down, and how disturbing it is to local opinion when these proposals are backed, as in this case, by the finding of the coroner at a recent inquest? Is my hon. Friend satisfied that more authority could not be delegated to local highways committees?

No, Sir; these are extremely difficult questions and we have to be guided by the advice of our divisional road engineers, who are highly qualified and who know the district mentioned. I am not always certain that the views of the local authority are necessarily the best in these cases, but in this instance it would be as well if our suggestion to the council could be very carefully considered.

asked the Minister of Transport what consultations he has had with other Government Departments regarding the creation of adequate parking facilities where space exists in close proximity to their buildings.

I have consulted with my colleagues wherever it seemed likely that space adjoining or associated with Government buildings in London might conveniently be used for off-street parking. Some of the special Christmas car parks resulted from such consultation. The provision of staff parking space for Government offices is the concern of my right hon. Friend the Minister of Works.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, in particular, the Air Ministry building in Whitehall Gardens appears to be surrounded by a vast amount of space, some of which could be given up to add to the car-parking facilities, and that, in general, it is hoped that Government Departments will play their part in assisting in this vital problem?

That is a problem for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Works, and I will bring that supplementary question to his notice.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will take steps so that the courts may have the power in their discretion to require persons convicted by them of drunken driving or other serious driving offences to display a distinctive yellow and black diamond sign on the windscreen of any car such persons may drive within up to five years of such conviction.

No, Sir. I am satisfied that the penalties for driving offences prescribed in the Road Traffic Acts are adequate.

Does not my right hon. Friend consider that in the worst cases of dangerous driving and drunken driving this would act as a deterrent at least as effective as the alternative of imprisonment, while being far cheaper for the taxpayer?

No. If there has been dangerous driving or drunken driving, the right thing to do is to disqualify the man from driving. There is no point in allowing him to go on the road and display his guilt publicly. It is better to withdraw his licence.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will investigate the practices of lorry drivers and others with regard to flashing and dipping of headlights at night; and if he will arrange for those practices which have accepted meanings in relation to road safety to be described in an appendix to the Highway Code.

I doubt whether signals of this kind are likely to be understood if used by an inexperienced driver, and I do not think that they could safely be included in the Highway Code.

Will my right hon. Friend consider this. These secret and cabalistic signs will continue to be used, and we ought to come to terms with them. The other day a motorist thought he had the "come on" signal. He went on and had an accident and was then told by the other driver, "You fool, I gave you the 'keep back' signal".

That is all the more reason why they should not go in the Highway Code. The National Road Safety Committee of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents felt that the practice was not only objectionable but indeed dangerous.

asked the Minister of Transport what steps have been taken to bring before the forthcoming Safety at Sea Conference the question of special regulations which will become necessary with the operation of nuclear-powered ships; and if he will propose that the regulations ultimately laid down shall have international application.

The proposals made in the Report of the Committee on the Safety of Nuclear-powered Merchant Ships (Cmnd. 958) will be placed before the Conference.

Is the Minister aware that within the next two or three years we will have a large number of ships propelled by nuclear power? Is it not necessary, therefore, that we should have regulations to govern them? When the regulations are introduced will they be carried out internationally, and not like the three-mile limit, the six-mile limit and the twelve-mile limit for fishing?

I cannot agree that there will be a large number of nuclear-powered ships on the oceans in two or three years' time. I am certain that there will not be. As the Committee itself considers it desirable to wait for further inquiries before putting these into precise international rules, I am sure that the best thing to do is to agree with it in that respect.

asked the Minister of Transport what progress he has made in his discussions on the recommendations of the committee on the safety of nuclear-powered ships; and if he will make a statement.

I have asked for the comments of the representative organisations of the shipping, shipbuilding and port industries, and these are now being received. I do not propose to come to any final decisions on the Committee's recommendations until they have been discussed at the International Conference on the Safety of Life at Sea, which is to meet in London in May.

While the right hon. Gentleman is thinking about those things, will he also remember that the berthing of nuclear-powered ships near heavily populated areas is fraught with danger unless special precautions are taken? Will he consider ensuring that special disciplinary clauses are inserted in the articles of agreement of these ships?

I will bear that point in mind after the Conference has been held.

asked the Minister of Transport if he is aware that flag discrimination against British shipping still continues; what means he is using, in collaboration with the shipping industry and other countries, in opposing such practices; and what machinery has been established for continuing consultation on this matter with the United States of America and other European Governments.

Yes, Sir. I am well aware that flag discrimination is one of the most serious problems now confronting British shipping, and Her Majesty's Government oppose it by whatever means are considered most effective in each case.

This is the most vital industry in the country. A few years ago, 50 per cent. of the shipping of the world was controlled by this country. The figure is now 17 per cent. These regulations are necessary, and it is vital that the nations concerned should consult each other with a view to bringing about uniformity in the running of our ships.

I wish that consultation was able to get rid of flag discrimination. I should be very pleased if it was, but I can assure the hon. Gentleman that far more than consultation is needed. It is very difficult, patient, uphill work because we have very few cards to play. We rely on free trade, and others have the power to restrict us.

Will my right hon. Friend consider urging the British shipping industry to ventilate its problems a bit more sharply than it does, and make public opinion both here and in America very much more sharply aware of its problems? Perhaps he will suggest, as an example, that our industry should follow the example of the flag of convenience owners who employ a vast hoard of highly-skilled public relations people who do not hesitate, and who do not lose an opportunity, to put their point of view.

I shall certainly put that view to the shipping owners in this country, but it is much easier to define the problem than to define remedial measures.

What does the right hon. Gentleman mean by taking effective measures? Does he regard the association with O.E.E.C. as effective? Is he not aware that the principal offender in this problem is the United States? If the United States Government responded to the request made by the European and other maritime nations, they could bring pressure to bear on the shipping interests of the United States to end this deplorable state of affairs.

I do not dissent from that. I disagree in a friendly way with what the United States is doing. What I have said is that it is difficult to propose effective action to make the United States not indulge in the discrimination in which it does indulge. I assure the right hon. Gentleman that if he has any constructive suggestions to make I shall listen to them with a readiness and willingness not always manifest in some other quarters.

asked the Minister of Transport if he has yet received a resolution from the Chamber of Shipping of the United Kingdom expressing concern over discrimination against British shipping by foreign Governments, and appealing for international agreement on equal trading opportunities; and what reply he proposes to make.

Yes, Sir. I have received copies of a resolution passed by the Chamber of Shipping at its Annual General Meeting on 25th February, 1960. I am in constant touch with the shipping industry concerning flag discrimination, which is certainly one of the most serious problems now confronting British shipping.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that at the annual meeting of the Chamber of Shipping, Mr. Hugh Hogarth, the new vice-president, stated that the shipping industry could no longer stand alone? In view of that public declaration, is it not time that the right hon. Gentleman himself, as the responsible Minister, got amongst them to find out why they cannot stand alone, and to see what he can do to hold them up?

I was amongst them yesterday, asking them for their suggestions as to which way I could help.

asked the Minister of Transport if, in considering the sale of the Government-owned ship s.s. "Empire Fowey", he will restrict such sale to British shipping interests solely.

I have nothing to add to the reply which I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Tynemouth (Dame Irene Ward) on Wednesday, 9th March.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that if the situation posed in the Question is not kept in the mind of the Minister, and if this ship should be disposed of to some other source, other than British interests, it will work precisely against his Answer to an earlier Question regarding flag-of-convenience owners. The shipping industry of this country—not only owners but those who go down to the sea in ships—is concerned about the principle involved in this. Will he give it his earnest consideration before coming to a conclusion?

Tenders have not yet been received. I think that we had better wait until they are. The Government's refusal to sell to foreign interests would not necessarily benefit shipping owners in this country, since it would be open to foreign owners to buy elsewhere, which they could do quite easily with the large surplus tonnage available in the world.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman, with the limited experience —and I say that in a friendly fashion— he has acquired on shipping affairs since he occupied his honourable position, realise that this is one of the most serious problems that has faced the shipping industry of this country for many years; namely, the sale of old ships to foreign owners because these ships enter into competition with British-owned vessels? It is no use him running away from the problem by suggesting that foreign owners would buy ships elsewhere. This is a second-hand vessel. Surely he could restrict its sale to British owners if they desired it, and, if not, he could break up the vessel.

I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that I think that this is a serious problem. That is why I saw an ex-president of the Chamber of Shipping about it yesterday, knowing full well that the right hon. Gentleman would be in his place and would take this matter most seriously. I can assure him that the position is not as easy as that. I was told yesterday that it is a question of what type of ship it is, because a tramp vessel is not the same as a liner, and so on. I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that I have it very much in mind, and if I think it is detrimental to British shipping it will not be done.

Referring to my right hon. Friend's Answer to the original Question, may I ask him to bear in mind that leadership would be helpful in this matter? If we want to indicate to the Americans what we think about their antics, would it not be a good thing for us to give a lead? Leadership from Great Britain would do a great deal in the world today.

I will bear my hon. Friend's remarks very much in mind.

asked the Minister of Transport what tenders have been received from British shipowners for the purchase of s.s. "Empire Fowey".

The advertised closing date for submitting tenders is not until 1st April and none has yet been received.

When tenders are received by the right hon. Gentleman's Department, will he give serious consideration to selling this old vessel to British rather than to foreign owners? If he is not fully acquainted with the subject, will he advise his right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to revert to the old practice of a Ministry of Shipping, and hive off shipping from his Department?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister will listen with interest to anything that the right hon. Gentleman ever has to say. I will certainly have every consideration in mind when the tender is received.

asked the Minister of Defence to what extent and in what numbers West German military personnel are to be trained on the South Uist guided missile range.

I have been asked to reply.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is widespread and growing resentment and dismay at the prospect of bringing General Speidel's jackbooted troopers into this country, when we were defending ourselves against them not so many years ago? Is he further aware that this resentment is not lessened by the fact that the proposal involves one of the most patriotic constituencies in this country, which suffered more, proportionately, than any other part of the British Empire? Can the right hon. Gentleman give us an assurance that this proposal will not be tolerated?

As I said, this offer has been made to all N.A.T.O. countries and not just to Western Germany. It is entirely in accord with the principles of interdependence that one N.A.T.O. country should make available to other N.A.T.O. countries any spare capacity it has on its training ranges. If Western Germany, as a member of N.A.T.O., makes a request for the use of this range, we shall certainly give it sympathetic consideration.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that that is not the end of the question? There are considerable objections, based on very strong grounds, to providing any bases in this country for the training of any German troops. Will he please bear that fact in mind?

There is no question of setting up a German base of any kind. Any foreign units which practise on the British range would do so only occasionally and for short periods.

asked the Minister of Defence what arrangements he has made, or is contemplating, to make British bases available to the German Army and Air Force.

asked the Minister of Defence if he will make a statement about the latest negotiations over German air, missile and Army bases in Great Britain.

asked the Minister of Defence to what extent he proposes to provide bases for the German Army in Great Britain.

I have been asked to reply.

Is the Secretary of State aware that he has not answered that part of my Question relating to training facilities for the Luftwaffe? As there have been reports of this, will he answer that part of the Question, and recognise that a deep feeling of repugnance exists in this country at the idea of Luftwaffe units once more flying over the territory of Britain? Will he give an assurance that the Government will now take action, through N.A.T.O., to ensure that a halt is called to further German rearmament, and that steps are taken to prevent the spread of German forces over Western Europe, by means of disengagement and disarmament?

The question of facilities for the training of German personnel in this country is a separate one, which is the subject of Question No. 48. The question of supply depôts at ports, for the support of the German Army, arises from the general problem of maintaining supply sources across the Atlantic in war time. Nothing specific has so far been put forward.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there seams to be a good deal of misunderstanding about this subject? Is he aware that there is evidence that some people who ought to know better think that independent German forces are to be used? To that extent cannot the utmost publicity be given to the fact that this is not a resuscitation of independent German forces?

I have tried to make it clear that there is nothing remotely resembling a German military base in this country.

Earlier the Minister used the word "interdependence". Would he qualify this? Do we understand he is suggesting that one member of N.A.T.O. might make arrangements on its own with another member of N.A.T.O. for bases, supply depôts and so on? Or is it to be co-ordinated by N.A.T.O. and only through N.A.T.O.?

Naturally, the original proposal will be discussed by N.A.T.O. and afterwards, presumably, it will be put forward as a specific proposal to us.

I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman recognises the need to be completely open and above-board about the question of German bases or troops coming to Scotland or elsewhere in Britain. Is he aware that there will be complete repugnance to bases of the character or soldiers of the units he describes coming to Scotland? Already we are getting far too many letters from our constituents on the subject, and I am sure that many of my hon. Friends who represent constituencies in Scotland will agree with me.

Is it not obvious that facilities for Germany in Britain would further encourage the German militarists, who are fast becoming the strongest military Power in Europe and hankering for the seizure of their lost provinces, which would precipitate a third world war?

The point is—

Hit him hard.

—that the German Army is using certain equipment of British origin and therefore it is not unreasonable that we should train a small number of German personnel to understand, operate and maintain that equipment.

Will not the right hon. Gentleman make an effort to realise that, quite apart from differences between the political parties, and what the politicians and generals may have to say about it, there is among members of the public in this country—sometimes among those with not very strong political interests—a very strong feeling that to train German troops in this country would be to make a mockery of all this country stood for in two world wars?

I am quite certain that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Defence, for whom I am answering, is by no means insensible to the feelings which the hon. Gentleman has expressed. On the other hand, we must remember that Federal Germany is a member of N.A.T.O. and the policy of Her Majesty's Government has been expressed as interdependence between partners in the N.A.T.O. alliance.

asked the Minister of Defence whether paragraph 12 of the Defence White Paper of 1957 still represents the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

I have been asked to reply. Yes, Sir.

Does that mean that it is still the policy of Her Majesty's Government to seek to repel an attack with conventional arms not merely by using nuclear weapons, but by being the first to use them? Is that not what paragraph 12 says quite clearly? Is the right hon. Gentleman really saying that that represents the policy of Her Majesty's Government today?

With respect, I think the hon. Gentleman is referring to a different paragraph from that mentioned in the Question on the Order Paper—

No.

—because paragraph 12 of the 1957 White Paper deals with the question of providing adequate protection for the people of this country against the consequences of an attack with nuclear weapons. It certainly remains the case that at present there is no means of providing full and adequate protection under nuclear attack. But that does not mean that there is not a great deal which can be done to mitigate the effects of such an attack, and so it is the purpose of the Government's civil defence policy and planning to do whatever we can to mitigate it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer my supplementary question? I am sorry if I have contributed to any misunderstanding. The point of my question was whether it is still the Government's policy to resist an attack by conventional weapons by using nuclear weapons and by using them first?

That does not arise out of the original Question.

asked the Minister of Defence how many Royal Air Force officers of the rank of air commodore and above are serving on the staff of international or inter-Service organisations.

I have been asked to reply.

Is the Minister aware that these figures do not support the argument justifying the increased proportion of air officers in the Royal Air Force which is now as great as 240 in number? Will he bring to the attention of himself, in his other capacity as Secretary of State for Air, that it is no argument to justify the top-heavy structure of the Royal Air Force today?

May I continue to wear the hat I am wearing at the moment— that of my right hon. Friend the Minister of Defence—and reply that I gave the Answer which was asked for by the Question, the number of officers for whom the Ministry of Defence has financial responsibility. There are many other officers in inter-Service organisations who are the financial responsibility of the Service Departments.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will now make a statement on his discussions with other Governments concerning proposals to be put forward by the Western Governments at the 10-Power Committee on Disarmament.

Yes, Sir. Five-Power agreement was reached on a Western Plan for comprehensive disarmament. The text of this Plan will be published as a White Paper.

Can the Joint Undersecretary explain why the ban on tests of atomic weapons does not figure anywhere in the Western Plan for disarmament? Can he assure the House that it is still the policy of Her Majesty's Government to reach such an agreement with the Soviet Union and the United States and to seek the adherence of other members of United Nations at the earliest possible moment?

Yes, I think I can give that assurance. This agreement would come out of the other Geneva Conference at present being held.

Will the Joint Under-Secretary of State propose to his right hon. and learned Friend that in the White Paper should be included the text of what the Foreign Secretary said in the United Nations Assembly last September?

I will ask my right hon. and learned Friend to consider that.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what requests Her Majesty's Government have received for the sale or transfer of rockets or other arms to the Government of Israel.

In the view of Her Majesty's Government, as a matter of general principle, it is not in the public interest to disclose whether or not requests for arms have been received from foreign Governments, nor to state the extent, if any, to which particular requests will be met.

Will the Minister give an assurance that such requests as this would not in any circumstances be met before the House had had an opportunity of discussing the matter?

I could not give such a blanket assurance as that.

Why not?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to what extent it is Her Majesty's Government's policy to seek the co-operation of the Soviet Government in maintaining a balance of arms among Middle Eastern countries, as laid down in the Tripartite Declaration.

In the view of Her Majesty's Government, it is the duty of the great Powers to show restraint in the supply of arms to the countries of the Middle East. This view is well known to the Government of the Soviet Union,

Can the Joint Undersecretary tell the House whether the Government are in negotiation with the Soviet Union in order to reach some formal agreement on this matter? Surely, as was pointed out by my hon. and learned Friend in his supplementary question, it is highly undesirable that the countries of the Middle East should waste their money piling up armaments when agreement between the great Powers might make this unnecessary?

We are fully aware of the dangers of an arms race in the Middle East or anywhere else. That is why we attach such particular importance to the 10-Power Conference opening in Geneva.

Can the Joint Under-secretary say whether the Government are in negotiation with the Soviet Union, the United States and France to obtain agreement on this matter? Declarations of intent are surely irrelevant here.

There are no negotiations on this matter at the moment.