asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will ensure that Man of War Bay in the Southern Cameroons will not be converted into some form of naval base.

There has never been the slightest intention of establishing a naval base at Man of War Bay.

Would my right hon. Friend confirm that various Cameroon politicians have thought there was, but that anyone who has been in Man of War Bay would agree that it is extremely unsuitable for any form of naval base?

Yes, Sir, I think that is so.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware of the recent statements made by the Premier of the Southern Cameroons criticising the activities of United Kingdom expatriate officials; and whether, in order to maintain confidence in the public service, he will call for the withdrawal of these statements.

I have seen Press reports of the Premier's remarks and have asked for a report.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that such remarks have a most discouraging effect on British officials in West Africa, many of whom will be required to serve in these countries after they have attained independence?

Yes. We will inevitably have a very difficult problem of staffing on the separation of the Southern Cameroons, and certainly if these remarks were made I would very much deplore them.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Federal Government of Nigeria has now taken back into revenue the £4,900,000 of the widows' and orphans' pension scheme which was thought by the overseas service to have been funded in 1954

Yes, Sir. At the same time the Federal Government have introduced a Bill to bring the level of supplementary pensions payable to widows and orphans up to the level of those payable to retired officers; to authorise the Governor-General to increase supplementary pensions whenever retired officers' pensions are increased; and to charge pensions and supplementary pensions on the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Federation.

While welcoming any increase in the somewhat low pensions, may I ask whether my right hon. Friend would confirm that there will be no diminution in security for the widows of the civil servants concerned?

Yes, Sir, I can certainly do that. Indeed by the Answer I have given, undertaking that pensions can be increased in the circumstances I have mentioned, there is an added advantage to these people.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state the number of missile tracking stations in the United States bases in British-controlled territories in the Caribbean area; in which territories they are situated; and if the agreement of each unit Government has been sought and obtained to the continued existence of the stations.

There are eight missile tracking stations in British islands in the Caribbean area. Four are in the Bahama Islands and one each in the Turks and Caicos Islands, Antigua, St. Lucia and Trinidad. The prior agreement of the Governments concerned to the establishment of these stations was obtained in each case except Trinidad, where the United States already had the right under an existing agreement to establish the station, and the Government was notified that the United States were exercising that right.

Does not this show a rather large hold on the part of the United States in a British territory? Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the forthcoming tripartite conference has as its aim the ceasing of these tracking stations and also whether every territory will be represented at the conference to put forward the point of view of the individual islands?

There is a difference between the Trinidad station and the other seven which I have mentioned. The other seven purely collect informa- tion from the missile as it passes from the long-range proving ground. The Trinidad installation is more strictly concerned with defence, and that is why the United States had the right to put an installation there under the 1941 Agreement. The talks under the 1941 Agreement which are to take place will be tripartite, but I understand that the deputation from the West Indies will include representatives of the unit Governments.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies the total financial aid extended to territories in the Federation of the West Indies during the past three years; how this was allocated; and what proposals have been made in respect of developing light industries in the smaller islands for which funds were not granted.

Approximately £9·1 million of Colonial Development and Welfare Funds and £6·58 million of other United Kingdom grants and loans were issued for the benefit of the Federation during the three years ending on 31st March, 1960. In addition £2 million was advanced to the Colonial Development Corporation for projects in the Federation. The detailed list of allocations is very long and I am with permission circulating it in the OFFICIAL REPORT. I have asked the administrators of the small islands for the information required in the last part of the Question and I will write to the hon. Member.

While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for that reply, may I ask if he is aware that there is a great desire and demand for light industries in some of the smaller islands, particularly Grenada? Is anything being done to meet this desire and demand, particularly in view of the fact that otherwise they will have to depend largely upon agriculture?

There is always a danger in all countries, including this country, that those areas which have large populations and are, perhaps, more prosperous than others, will attract new industries. I agree that we will have a clearer idea of the picture when I receive the information for which the hon. Gentleman has asked.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will make a statement about the progress of the Federation of the West Indies and the nature of the criticism and complaint made by the Trinidad Government against the Federation.

The constitutional progress of the Federation depends essentially upon whether the political leaders of The West Indies can resolve the differences which emerged at the Conference of West Indian Governments last September. I understand that this conference is to be reconvened in the near future.

Is it not true that one of the criticisms made by political leaders in Trinidad is that the existing Federal Constitution does not allow for the advent of independence such as has been achieved in other ex-Colonial Territories? In the right hon. Gentleman's judgment, is that true or not?

I do not know whether that particular criticism is true or not. What I hope to see is the reconvening during the summer of the Government delegations to discuss independence. I hope that we can move fairly swiftly thereafter if agreement is reached there.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies the number of African tenants who have been threatened with eviction by Nairobi City Council; and the reasons why they have been so threatened.

Although about 1,200 African tenants have been served with eviction notices for non-payment of rent, I am informed that first indications are that the serving of notices has led in most cases to payment.

A report in The Times showed more than twice that number. Was that report incorrect? Does this situation have anything to do with the reports and rumours about unemployment and under-employment in Kenya, about which many people are gravely concerned?

My information is from the Kenya Government, but I will check it, in view of the figure mentioned by the hon. Gentleman. It is quite likely that one of the main reasons has been the influx into Nairobi, which has probably led to pressure on people to take in families and relatives. We will probably know that more clearly when we get the report on unemployment and under-employment in Kenya.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in order to reassure public opinion in Kenya, he will make a statement of his intentions regarding the release of Jomo Kenyatta.

The Governor stated on 31st March that he remained of the view that in prevailing circumstances the release of Jomo Kenyatta would be a danger to security. I am firmly convinced that his return to normal life in Kenya would in present circumstances bring a direct threat to the maintenance of law and order and thereby would prejudice the fulfilment of our recent decisions for orderly advdnce in that territory. I therefore fully endorse the Governor's decision.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that his reply will give considerable satisfaction in Kenya and do much to restore confidence, particularly of African government servants of the Kikuyu loyalists.

I think that it should be said that there is nothing particularly new in my reply. I have made it at least half a dozen times.

Will the right hon. Gentleman also take into account the not inconsiderable public opinion in Kenya and here that Jomo Kenyatta, having been sentenced and punished, and having served his punishment, should now be regarded as, and should be, a free man?

When I last replied to that question about two weeks ago I said that this case, like all others, is kept under review by the Governor, and that is the position. But there are very special circumstances surrounding the detention of this man, and there never has been any disagreement between the Governor and myself as to how this case should be treated.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any information as to what these special circumstances are, so that we can understand what would be the special danger to security if this very old and very sick man were allowed to return to normal life? When the hon. Member for Haltemprice (Mr. Wall) reassures the right hon. Gentleman about public opinion in Kenya, will he bear in mind that that is the public opinion of only one section of the population?

If the hon. Member paid a visit, as I did quite recently, to the Kikuyu reserve he would find that what he says about African opinion is by no means true. As far as I know—and the last report I had was only a few weeks ago—Jomo Kenyatta is in very good health indeed. He was charged with the offence of organising Mau Mau, was found guilty and sentenced to imprisonment on that charge. He was subsequently restricted by an order of the Governor, following a recommendation of the court. That is the position, and I think that people who know the circumstances in Kenya think that these are special circumstances which must be in the mind of the Governor.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies when the official report on Mau Mau in Kenya will be published.

Mr. Corfield hopes to complete the editing of his historical survey of the origins and growth of Mau Mau today or tomorrow. In view of the importance of the subject, I am arranging for it to be published as a Command Paper. This will inevitably mean a delay beyond what would be necessary for its publication in Kenya alone, but I hope that it will be available before the end of the month.

Has the right hon. Gentleman seen reports that the original version of the Corfield's Report included allegations that certain hon. Members had in some way been associated with Mau Mau? Will he assure the House that when it is produced the White Paper will be a full, uncensored version, so that the Members concerned will have a full opportunity of replying to the unwarranted sneers and innuendoes?

I think that the hon. Member had better wait to read it before he makes observations of that sort. The position is, as the Attorney-General in Kenya made clear, that Mr. Corfield is doing the editing and any changes made will be only in agreement with the Attorney-General. There is no question whatever of modifying the strength of the Report, either against individuals or against the Mau Mau movement itself. As the Attorney-General made dear, it is only on matters such as organisation of intelligence and the names of witnesses that Mr. Corfield is undertaking the editing mentioned.

When the Report is published, does my right hon. Friend intend to release for publication the evidence on Mau Mau, which evidence was previously restricted to the Library of the House of Commons? Is he aware that the decision, because of its horrors, to restrict that evidence to the Library of the House did not permit the public to know the detestation of Mau Mau which is felt by most people who know anything about it?

I think that my hon. Friend will find that many of these matters are covered in the Corfield Report. Perhaps I should make it clear that the Corfild Report is not something related in any way to any recent events which may have taken place, but was called for by the Legislative Council in Kenya in December, 1955, and has taken four years' preparation.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies the present degree of African unemployment in Nairobi; and what steps are being taken to cope with this problem.

I am asking the Government if figures of African unemployment in Nairobi can be provided in advance of the findings of the current survey on unemployment and underemployment in the Colony, and if so, I will circulate a further reply in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

If the figures are as disquieting as I fear they will be, will my right hon. Friend consider setting in motion a public works programme which might have to have financial backing from this country?

I will consider whether, and if so in what way, we can help when I have had these figures.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a constant flow of people into Nairobi to look for work and that if some action is not taken by the Government of Kenya, possibly with the assistance of the right hon. Gentleman's Department, perhaps through public works as the hon. Gentleman the Member for Haltemprice (Mr. Wall) suggested, the effect in Nairobi will be very serious? Is he aware that the authorities in Nairobi are very concerned about the growing figure of unemployment in that part of Kenya?

I agree that this is a serious and worrying problem. It is largely because of that that the special investigation called for by the Kenya Government is taking place.

Does my right hon. Friend appreciate that this is possibly the most difficult problem facing Kenya at the moment and will he do everything possible to urge forward further employment in Nairobi and Nakuru?

indicated assent.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will urge upon the Hong Kong Government the need to hold a public inquiry into all the circumstances surrounding the death of a Chinese woman, Ng Sam Mui on 23rd January last, after she had been knocked down by a tram-car, particularly since the jury at the coroner's inquest criticised the action taken in the casualty department of the Queen Mary Hospital.

No, Sir. In view of the official investigations already made into the circumstances of this case, there seems to be no occasion for a further inquiry.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it rather remarkable that this woman, who was supposed to have been competently examined physically, returned six hours later to the hospital and died within forty-eight hours, when it was certified that she was suffering from multiple fractures of the ribs, laceration of the brain and general injuries? Does it seem as if the original examination was competent? Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that this has caused much comment? Will he think again about making closer inquiries?

It is precisely those matters which were the subject of the departmental investigation. The result of that was made public and the question of whether the delay in her admission had any effect upon her chances of survival is essentially a matter for professional judgment and opinion. I do not see how a further inquiry could add to our knowledge.

Surely the right hon. Gentleman has been misinformed? The admission of the person concerned was not delayed. She was taken immediately after the accident to the Queen Mary Hospital, dismissed after what was called a sufficient physical examination, and readmitted six hours later.

That, of course, is true. I have telescoped two events into one. I was talking about the question of her second admission for treatment. The departmental investigation concluded that there was no medical evidence to support the suggestion which the hon. Member is making.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what approaches have been made by the United Kingdom Government to other Governments and interested institutions to explore the possibilities of establishing an organised scheme for the resettlement of suitable farmers in British Honduras.

Before it is possible to make any definite approaches in this matter much preliminary groundwork must be completed, in assembling information on such things as the size of holdings and the type of farming which is best suited to the conditions, the type of organisation which will handle the work of settlement and the physical establishing of settlers, and the financial and other terms on which immigration can be organised. This work is now in hand.

Does my right hon. Friend agree with the Downie Report, in its general conclusions, that there can be no development of this territory without substantial immigration? After years of such recommendations, does not he also agree that this is now a matter for urgent action, and that it would be reasonable for the territory to hope that immigrants will arrive in the fairly near future?

I agree with that and with the conclusions of the Report to which my hon. Friend referred. There was general agreement at the recent British Honduras Conference on the importance of immigration to the future of this territory, and we are doing everything we can to encourage it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how many political leaders are detained or restricted in Uganda; how many political parties they represent; and when it is proposed that they will be released.

Three political leaders have been deported from Buganda to other parts of Uganda. One other is restricted to a small area round his home. None of them is in prison. All four belong to different political parties. The relevant orders will be revoked when the authorities are satisfied that these people can be released without prejudicing law and order. Deportation orders are in force against seven, and restriction orders against 140 others, who were not in the category of political leaders.

Is the Colonial Secretary aware that the details he has given reveal that all the political leaders of the major political parties are restricted or in detention? Is not that a rather extraordinary state of affairs? Is he not aware that when the Belgian Congo receives independence, in seven weeks' time, there will be a great increase of political awareness and political tension in Uganda? Will he arrange to release these political leaders and gain their co-operation?

No. That must be a matter for the Governor who, of course, keeps these cases particularly under review. Although the three political leaders who have been deported from Buganda are all members of different parties, equally they were all ex-leaders of the Uganda National Movement, which was a banned movement.

When does the right hon. Gentleman contemplate that Mr. Mulira is likely to be given his freedom and not be restricted any longer? Secondly, does the right hon. Gentleman realise that many people in this country have recently been protesting about restriction orders and detention orders made by the South African Government and that people in glass houses cannot cast stones?

Mr. Mulira's case, like any other, is reviewed by and is a matter for the Governor. The second part of the right hon. Member's supplementary question is a sort of Mad Hatter observation. To compare the restrictions in these cases, which arise out of a boycott which has brought great misery to perfectly innocent people in Uganda, with what is happening in other countries betrays a sad appreciation of the situation in Uganda.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies when it is his intention to reply to the letter submitted to him by the Uganda European Civil Servants' Association submitting a claim for an increase in salaries.

After consultation with myself and the other East African Administrations, the Government of Uganda last month informed the Uganda European Civil Servants Association that a review of the salaries and terms of service of all civil servants in the Protectorate is in prospect. I hope to be able to announce details at an early date.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what proportion of the Fiji population is represented by Indians; and what is the present rate of increase of the Indian and Fijian peoples, respectively.

At the last census in 1956 the Indian population of 169,403 represented 49 per cent. of the total population. The Indian and Fijian populations during the same year showed increases of 41 per cent. and 26 per cent. respectively over the previous census in 1946.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that this very rapid increase in the Indian population, arising from the first introduction of Indian indentured labour, is likely to give rise to some problems between the races in the not-too-distant future? Can he suggest what action can be taken to ensure that that does not happen?

The growth of the population to which my hon. Friend refers was one of the matters specially considered by the Burns Commission on which my hon. Friend has the next Question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what action is being taken to ensure that the economic development of Fiji keeps pace with the increase in population.

The Burns Commission's Report, published on the 14th March, recommended how the development of the Colony and its resources should proceed, account being taken of trends in population. This Report is now being studied in Fiji and will form the basis of a further development plan.

As the Commission estimated that the gross national income would have to rise about 3½ per cent. per year to keep the standard of living at its present level, does my right hon. Friend expect that it will be possible to increase the economy at the rate desired?

We will certainly do what we can to help to carry out the very useful recommendations of the Burns Report. Those are first being studied in Fiji and I must wait for the development plan and then assess what financial assistance is needed.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what steps he has taken this year to restore to Malta an elected Legislature with a Government responsible to it.

I would refer the hon. Member to my reply to the hon. Member for Eton and Slough (Mr. Brockway) on 28th April.

It is appreciated that the Secretary of State is faced with considerable difficulties, but is he aware that these difficulties are becoming an increasingly less valid excuse for depriving Malta of the responsibility of self-government? Is he also aware that on this side of the House there is considerable impatience at the replies he has been giving to Questions of this kind?

I have no intention of stalling on this matter. I have said that I should like to move forward in this, but one of the great difficulties is the complete divergence of views among the Maltese political parties and leaders themselves about what should happen. If they would come a little more closely together in their views we might be able to get on more quickly.

Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate the difference in the manner of negotiating in the Mediterranean and in this country, and will he make allowances accordingly?

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will make a statement on the circumstances of the recent strike of doctors in the Malta Government service.

The strike arose over the appointment of a new deputy senior medical officer, and the administrative channels for dealing with the affairs of the Medical Department within the Government Secretariat. The Medical Officers' Union advised the Government on 30th April of its intention to strike as from midnight the following day, without previously giving any notice of the existence of a dispute.

Was not this strike precipitated by the circumstance that the Government appointed a deputy senior medical officer contrary to the recommendations of the Joint Advisory Board? Was not this an act which showed a considerable lack of administrative tact, having regard to the general political situation and to the discontent which has been present in the medical profession there for many years?

With respect, I think that is only half the story, because the Government were also advised by the Public Service Commission to appoint the man whom they did appoint, and, in spite of the advice of the medical board to which the hon. Gentleman referred, that the post should be advertised, the Government felt that was not a proper thing to do for an administrative post, and that ordinary promotion should carry on. That is what the Government did.

Is not it a fact that there has been considerable anxiety and unrest among doctors in Malta for three or four years? In considering this matter, will my right hon. Friend look at the whole problem over the last four or five years?

That is perfectly true, and it gives me a great deal of concern. I should like to look into it.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether, in view of the fact that over £42 million worth of British agricultural and horticultural produce was exported in 1959, he will initiate discussions with the interests concerned to extend these exports, with a view to avoiding a ceiling on British agricultural and horticultural production.

My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade and I are very ready to discuss exports of particular products at any time, although exports of those agricultural commodities which receive subsidy do raise difficult problems.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many farmers think that the only answer to disincentives in the recent Price Review is to increase production to maintain relatively the same amount of income? If we could alter our policy so as to expand markets abroad for British agricultural and horticultural produce, would it not lead to a continuing prosperous and expanding agricultural industry? Will my right hon. Friend have a look at it from that angle?

Yes. As I have said, my right hon. Friend and I are prepared to look at it but we must not minimise the difficulties. We have our international obligations to G.A.T.T., and obviously urgent problems would arise if there were any substantial increase in exports of agricultural commodities that were heavily subsidised. That is our difficulty, but it does not mean that we are not prepared to look at the problem.

As all but £8 million of these exports are sent out of the country unprocessed, does not this show that this could be of great help to our home producers? Is it not a thing that ought to be actively encouraged and increased?

As I have said, my right hon. Friend and I are prepared to see what we can do, but I have issued a perfectly sensible warning about the difficulties.

Surely, the right hon. Gentleman would not think of exporting produce produced under guaranteed prices for sale abroad? Surely, the thing to do is to sell it here?

I think that is true. We have the possibility of large expansion in our home market, and I do not accept that our policy is restrictionist. What it does is to try to limit the liability of the taxpayer, but it does not limit farm output.

In this considerable total could my right hon. Friend say what part is played by the provisioning of ships, what one might call "human bunkering"?

That is a rather detailed question. I will be delighted to give my hon. and gallant Friend an answer, either privately, or if he puts down a Question.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the expenditure on farm subsidies, represented as a percentage of total national expenditure, for the years 1955–56 to 1959–60.

Expenditure on agricultural support in the United Kingdom expressed as a percentage of total Government ordinary expenditure for the four years 1955–56 to 1958–59 was 4·6 per cent. 4·9 per cent., 5·8 per cent. and 4·7 per cent. respectively, and for 1959–60 it is an estimated 4·9 per cent.

Do not these figures confirm that in real terms farmers are receiving slightly less than they were a few years ago? Will my right hon. Friend confirm, in view of recent rumblings to the contrary, that it is the Government's intention to keep a prosperous and healthy agricultural industry which will pay a fair return to farmers and farm workers alike?

I readily respond to what my hon. Friend said. It is the intention of the Government to keep a prosperous and flourishing agricultural industry. The agricultural industry has the benefit of the 1957 Act, and it also has a pledge by the present Government that the percentage alterations on which cuts could be made would not be altered during the lifetime of this Parliament.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when the Terrington Committee will report.

I understand that the Committee has almost completed taking evidence and will shortly be in a position to make its Report.

Has the Minister any comment to make on the report that appeared in the Farmer's Weekly two weeks ago?

I have no comment, because I have not seen the report. When I have read it, I will comment on the report on the Report.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a further statement on the Report of the Committee on Grassland Utilisation.

The House has previously been informed of decisions on individual recommendations of the Caine Committee affecting grants and subsidies for ploughing, silos, fertilisers and small farms. I have referred the Committee's recommendations on basic research to the Agricultural Research Council. I am seeking to increase the staff of the National Agricultural Advisory Service. The Agriculture Departments are following up other recommendations of the Caine Committee.

I am obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for at last giving us a statement about the Committee's Report, but does he realise that it is somewhat disappointing that, after this delay, we have the subject of research no more than referred for further consideration? This is an urgent matter which ought to be attended to. Will he endeavour to meet the target set by the Committee, to increase the advisory services by 25 per cent.?

I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman says that it has taken me a long time to reply. I think he agrees that this is a valuable Report with a large number of recommendations. We are taking action which I believe will adequately put into effect those recommendations. I am glad to be able to say that this year we are recruiting a larger number for the National Agricultural Advisory Service, and we are satisfied with the quality of the intake.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what has been the cost of preparing and presenting the Order, dated 7th April, 1960, authorising the landing of two more wart hogs at Bromborough; and what is the reason for this further importation of wart hogs.

The total cost of preparing, duplicating and publishing the Order and presenting it to Parliament is estimated at £14.

I appreciate the commendable object of bringing in the wart hogs, but is this not a rather heavy and comparatively costly piece of machinery to use to bring in two pets? Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that he might adopt a method similar to that adopted in respect of road hogs, and charge nothing for a wart hog coming in?

I do not know about their being pets, and I am not sure about the last remark made by the hon. Member, but I do not propose to encourage long-term contracts for wart hogs, and I rather agree with what he says about the machinery. I am considering making standing orders in respect of a limited number of urban zoos which will enable them to import ruminating animals and swine under the veterinary provisions of the standing orders, thus avoiding the need to make a separate order on each occasion.

Is the Minister aware that if the two wart hogs are of opposite gender there will be no necessity for this provision?

Will my right hon. Friend take steps to see that people do-not mock these animals? They feel it very deeply. Is he aware that to the male wart hog the female wart hog is of supreme beauty, and their family life might be a model to us all?

My hon. Friend has a very great knowledge of these matters, and we all appreciate the great efforts he makes to ensure that the sensitivity of these animals is kept properly in mind.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is aware of the concern felt by the National Farmers' Union and the National Union of Agricultural Workers at the decline of the proportion of the national income received by the agricultural community in the country generally and in Linconshire in particular; and what assurances he will give them in this matter.

I am aware of the views expressed about the general level of agricultural income, though it is not possible to make estimates for particular counties. But I must point out that the industry is in a healthy condition and its future is safeguarded by the long-term assurances of the Agriculture Act, 1957, and by the Government's determination to maintain a flourishing and prosperous industry.

Is the Secretary of State aware that that does not go down very well in Lincolnshire? Is he further aware that the last time a Conservative Minister of Agriculture visited Lincoln and talked to the N.F.U. he had to be rescued by the police after a resolution was carried that he should be lynched? If the Secretary of State is going to Lincoln soon, will he consult the Home Secretary before doing so?

I am very grateful for the hon. Gentleman's solicitude for me— although I would remind him that I am not a Secretary of State; I presume that he meant to refer to me as the Minister of Agriculture. It would be a pity for the hon. Member or me to exaggerate. I have no evidence that agriculture in Lincolnshire is less prosperous than it is elsewhere, and there are those who might say that Lincolnshire was better off than other counties.

Can the Minister tell the House of any county committee of the N.F.U. that has not demanded his resignation?

The list would be such a long one that I should have to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he has considered the correspondence between Mr. John R. Harvey, General Secretary of the Poultry and Egg Producers' Association of Great Britain and Major General John H. Ives of the United States Air Force, copies of which have been sent to him by the hon. Member for Lincoln, on the possibility that fowl pest is caused by the importation to the United States Air Force of dead poultry; whether he is aware of the possibility that the recent serious epidemic arose in this way; and whether, as an experiment, he will ask the United States authorities on Royal Air Force stations not to import such poultry for a period of twelve months.

I have read this correspondence. I have no evidence that the recent epidemic of fowl pest was in any way attributable to poultry carcases imported under special and exceptional arrangements for use in United States Air Force messes in this country. I am satisfied that the responsible American authorities are observing the stringent veterinary conditions laid down for the purpose of these imports.

Is the Minister aware that this is a very responsible association? Is it not a fact that those who welcome the United States Air Force into the Eastern Counties regard this as a very small contribution which they might make to help in this experiment? It would merely mean denying themselves the importation of carcases for one year.

As I said, I have considered very carefully the representations and the correspondence dealing with this subject, and I am satisfied that our restrictions and precautions are adequate to prevent the danger which the hon. Member's constituents feel may arise.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what consultations he has had with the United States Government concerning the exports of British pedigree cattle to the United States of America.

The United States Government prohibits on animal health grounds direct imports of cattle from this country and I have had no recent consultations with that Government on this subject.

Referring to the Question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Enfield, East (Mr. Mackie), it is reported in the excellent Farming Express that the Director of Animals Inspection and Quarantine Division of the United States Department of Agriculture stated, even before the Terrington Report has been published, that that Report will not necessarily have any influence on American policy? Is not there a danger that there will be a further restriction on British exports?

The United States Government prohibit direct imports of cattle from this country, on animal health grounds. It would be better for the hon. Member and myself to read the Report and see what it contains before coming to conclusions upon the possibly wholly fallacious reports that we have read in the Press.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how much more an agricultural worker receiving the standard wage and overtime would be paid today for a 50-hour week than would have been the case in 1948; and how much of the annual bill for farm support is due to this increase in farm workers' wages.

In England and Wales the increase would be £4 5s. 10d. per week on the basis stated. Although changes in agricultural wage rates are taken into account at Annual Reviews, along with other relevant factors, it is not possible to say how much of the annual bill for farm support is due to this increase in farm workers' wages.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the percentage increase in the value of farm workers' wages is matched by a proportionate increase in the value of work done by farmers and their families, who outnumber regular agricultural workers by about 50 per cent.? Is it not true that the value of the work done by farmers and their families is not taken into account in the Annual Price Review, although it is included in the estimated income of the agricultural industry?

What my hon. Friend says is generally true. I would not quarrel with what he says about the work done by farmers and their families, although without looking at the estimated figures it would be difficult to give a final or clear answer, because the two sets of figures are not strictly comparable.

Will the Minister inform his hon. Friend that farm workers are still working longer hours for less wages —a 46-hour week for a minimum of £8? Will he bear in mind that for many farm workers the minimum is also the maximum? Does not he agree that it is time farm workers had a fair share of the national prosperity, about which we hear so much from hon. Members opposite?

I am sure that none of my hon. Friends would dispute for a moment the great contribution made by the farm workers to the success of the industry, but it would be wrong for the hon. Member to try to induce me to take part in a discussion on the Floor of the House about agricultural wages. He knows, perhaps better than anybody in the House, that it is a matter for the Agricultural Wages Board, and it would not be proper for me to make any comment on some of the remarks that he has just made.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will state the average retail prices for beef for the latest available date and for the corresponding date in 1951 and 1955.

No official retail prices for beef are available. But the latest available information from the National Food Survey gives the average price of beef and veal in the last quarter of 1959 as 4s. 1d. per lb. compared with 2s. 3d. and 3s. 7d. in the corresponding periods of 1951 and 1955 respectively.

I do not want the Minister to carry out too much research, but is he aware that present beef prices are quite outrageous? Is he aware that this is not only due to the question of supplies from the Argentine? While we have the taxpayer's support for beef production there is a responsibility upon the Minister to see that the taxpayer's wife does not have to pay these exorbitant prices.

It would not be wise for the hon. Member to follow up that point too far. Although I have quoted cheaper prices in respect of 1951, I must remind the House that the taxpayer was then paying £20 million in the form of subsidies, as opposed to £4 million at present. Again, it is unwise to try to make out that beef prices, or food prices in general, are unduly high. In spite of the extra cost, considering our whole food front, we are enjoying lower prices, which have helped to keep down the cost of living, as he knows.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department the current estimated shortage of probation officers; and how many are now in training and likely to be available to meet this shortage.

The current estimated shortage is about 150 officers. One hundred and fifty-seven are in training and 72 more have been accepted for training. Eighty-eight of them should be ready for appointment by the end of this year.

Would the right hon. Gentleman consider approaching the Departmental Committee to see whether it could make recommendations immediately regarding recruitment to the probation service in view of those figures and of the emergency of which we are all aware?

I will consider that, but I think this is a matter which should be left to the Departmental Committee to initiate. I do not know whether my right hon. Friend would want to make an approach at this stage.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why Mr. Thompson, a motorist, who stopped to inform a police officer off duty late on Saturday, 16th April, that the rear light of his motor cycle was not working, was taken into Brixton police station; why his wife was not allowed to see him; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Thompson was reported by two officers of the City of London Police returning from duty by motor cycle to the officer on duty at Brixton police station for an alleged offence against the Road Traffic Acts. According to the officers concerned, no reference was made to the rear light on their motor cycle. After investigation the Brixton officer decided not to charge Mr. Thompson. An apology was tendered to him, and he was allowed to go. His wife was not allowed to see him because her behaviour on entering the police station led to her being arrested and charged with another offence. The charge was later dismissed.

Can my hon. and learned Friend say how it is that there appeared in very responsible newspapers the statement that Mr. Thompson had reported to a police officer that his rear light was not operating and that, as a result of that action, he was taken into Brixton police station? Is he aware that in fact no charges whatever were pursued against Mr. Thompson; that according to Press reports his wife appeared in court the following day charged with being drunk and disorderly, and that the magistrate elicited the fact that she had had three drinks during the previous evening and said that there was some doubt in the case and that her actions were responsible for the charge? Would not my hon. and learned Friend agree that it is highly probable that his wife, or the wife of anybody else, seeing her husband taken to the police station and making application to see him and not being allowed to do so, would become a little emotional, to say the least?

I should point out that these were City of London policemen and that my right hon. Friend is not the police authority for the City of London. Perhaps I may say that the magistrate, dismissing the charge against Mrs. Thompson, said that obviously her behaviour was such that it would have led to her being arrested. Mr. Thompson, it appears, had taken drink, but when a police surgeon was called, he did not find that Mr. Thompson was unfit to be in charge of a car. The City officer found that his rear light was not working, but neither he nor the other officer recollect Mr. Thompson having drawn their attention to it at any stage.

If the behaviour of the police officers was completely correct, for what exactly did they apologise?

I do not think that police officers should be blamed for apologising, if an apology might be appropriate. At any rate, the circumstances were that this gentleman seems to have taken drink but not sufficient to enable the police surgeon to decide that he was unfit to drive a car.

Mr. Norman Pannell.

That is no answer to my question—

Order. Mr. Pannell.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if, in view of the increase in the number of assaults on prison warders since 1957,he will reconsider his recent policy of disallowing the great majority of awards of corporal punishment for such offences.

I interpret the duty laid upon me according to my reply to the hon. Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes) on 10th December, 1959.

Will my right hon. Friend take account of the fact that in 1958,during which all recommendations for corporal punishment were rejected by him, the total number of attacks on warders was 152 and that in the following year it rose to 213? Is not this a clear indication that corporal punishment is a deterrent in the case of such offences?

I think that in certain circumstances when there are attacks on warders corporal punishment is a deterrent. In other circumstances I do not think it is. In answer to the hon. Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes) —

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. This matter does not belong to South Ayrshire. It belongs to Ayr.

Corporal punishment appears to be the same in both places. Mr. Grey.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary was in the course of replying to my supplementary question to Question No. 37, when you called the following Question. Will you please give my right hon. Friend an opportunity to complete his answer to me?

If that be so, I beg the pardon of the hon. Member and that of the Home Secretary. I thought that the right hon. Gentleman had finished his answer. I am afraid that we must now go on.

I hope that the House will allow me to behave irregularly in order to cure an injustice I unwittingly perpetrated. I wonder whether the Home Secretary would be good enough to assist me by answering the supplementary question of the hon. Member for Kirkdale (Mr. N. Pannell) on Question No. 37, which I frustrated when there was some competition between areas in Scotland.

I did answer the supplementary question, but in the range of supplementaries that might have followed there was a certain curtailment. I think that the difficulty arose because the hon. Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes) did not fully realise that I was referring to an Answer I gave him on 10th December, 1959. It so happens that in one way or another Ayrshire always gets taken up on this question of corporal punishment. In that Answer I detailed the type of offences, prevailing conditions in the prisons and other considerations which led me to make up my mind. I say to my hon. Friend now, and I am glad to have the opportunity of saying it to him, that I will certainly consider all these cases on their merits, taking into account the four considerations in my Answer of 10th December.

As my name has been dragged into this, Mr. Speaker—

I did not hear the hon. Baronet's name being dragged in.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, in view of the continuing concern at the fact that girls have to undergo Borstal training at Durham Prison, and the urgent need for them to be removed to a more suitable place, if he will give increased priority to the new security Borstal for girls so as to have it completed well before the end of next year.

The contract for the building of the new security Borstal for girls has already been placed. Work has started and will be completed with all possible speed.

Is the Minister aware that this Question, and others which have been asked on the same subject, cast no reflection on the Governor or the staff of the prison, who are doing an extremely good job under peculiar conditions? Does not he think that the position is rather serious and that it calls for greater urgency of action? May I ask whether he has seen reports which have been issued about how near the girls are to the men and the peculiar methods which have been adopted so that women or girls may get in contact with the men? Is he aware that it has also been reported that one woman met her husband in prison? In view of these matters and the fact that the Answer of the Minister indicated that there will be a lengthy period before building work is carried out, can he indicate that more immediate steps will be taken?

I hope that the time will not be long. Priority has been given to this urgent matter and work has started. I will examine the matters to which the hon. Gentleman has referred. Owing to the pressure on the penal system as a whole, no other reorganisation would be possible short of a new Borstal.

Is the Minister aware that newspaper reports about this prison were very disquieting? Is he futher aware that the arrangements for women prisoners in the whole of the North of England are most unsatisfactory and that with the exception of Askham Grange, which holds only sixty women prisoners, all women prisoners are accommodated in buildings which also house men prisoners?

That is a different question. The Question on the Order Paper deals with the girls' Borstal. But I accept that the position is not satisfactory. That is why my right hon. Friend is pressing on with the building programme and work has started on reorganising the girls' Borstal system.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he has now considered the Summary Jurisdiction Bill lately submitted to him by the Governor of the Isle of Man; and, since this Bill makes provision for penalties different from those imposed for similar offences in the United Kingdom and may therefore have unacceptable repercussions among some of the half-million holidaymakers from the mainland who visit the Isle of Man annually, if he will advise the Privy Council to recommend that the Royal Assent to it be withheld.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will advise the Privy Council to recommend Her Majesty to withhold the Royal Assent to the Summary Jurisdiction Bill of the Isle of Man.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department having regard to the large numbers of Lancashire young people who spend their holidays in the Isle of Man, if he will advise the Privy Council that the Royal Assent should not be given to the Summary Jurisdiction Bill of the Isle of Man, which imposes penalties which this country has long discarded.

The responsibility for advising The Queen on the legislation adopted by Tynwald rests upon the Privy Council, which tenders advice after receiving a report from a Committee of the Council to which insular legislation is referred for consideration and report. The Royal Assent is signified at a meeting of The Queen in Council.

While the right hon. Gentleman may not be able to anticipate that advice, when he is considering it will be bear in mind that the phrase "unacceptable repercussions" in the Question is a quotation from his own Department's memorandum, which goes on to say that when there are likely to be unacceptable repercussions outside the island, the possibility that the Royal Assent might be withheld in these circumstances "can never be discounted"?

I have examined the circular and I am quite clear that it was not intended that this sort of matter should be regarded as an unacceptable repercussion. We consider Tynwald as having independence to make its own laws subject to the arrangements which I have described. I have read the Home Office circular and it was taking into account such matters as resolutions which run counter to international obligations or affect the United Kingdom revenue.

Would not the Home Secretary agree that the constitutional position is clear? As the Minister primarily responsible for advice to Her Majesty on this matter, he is just as responsible to this House as he is in connection with any other advice given to Her Majesty. Will the Home Secretary say, in considering what attitude he is going to adopt, whether he is in favour of the introduction of corporal punishment in the Isle of Man?

I have to weigh my own views with the obvious desirability of preserving the independent power of legislation of Tynwald, subject to the powers, which I described, of intervention by the Secretary of State in giving the advice to the Privy Council. Subject to that, I think it desirable that we should all respect the independence of Tynwald.

Would the right hon. Gentleman explain to the House how far he regards himself as responsible to the House of Commons for the advice which he gives to the Privy Council? Will he consider the matter further and bear in mind that, while no one wishes to interfere with the rights of the Isle of Man Government, nevertheless British subjects from the mainland who go there are not able to avail themselves of the kind of consular or diplomatic protection they would get in foreign countries, and therefore the external effects of legislation in the Isle of Man are matters which ought to be taken into account, as his own memorandum makes clear?

Yes, Sir. I definitely think that if, so to speak, terror were thrust into the breasts of tourists from Britain, owing to this power having been taken by the Manx legislature, the Secretary of State of the day would certainly feel that he had to intervene in the way suggested in the memorandum of the Home Office. But I cannot believe that this power taken or introduced in this legislation will very much alter either the temperament or temper of the many tourists who will visit the island.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that, whereas it is important to keep the legislative independence of this island, it is not a question of terror being thrust into the hearts of the citizens of this country, but the fact that they would come under these laws when they went to the Isle of Man; and therefore the repercussions on all the rest of us cannot altogether be ignored in a matter of this kind? If there is a grave difference between the laws of the two countries, surely that is a consideration of importance?

I had to weigh this matter and I have not given the House my final decision because I must preserve that. Anyone who is a Member of the House of Commons, particularly a Minister, should listen and pay attention to the views of the House of Commons and, equally, I think, to the constitutional position of the desirability of retaining the independent power of the Manx legislature to legislate.