asked the Minister of Works if he is now in a position to state when it is expected that work will begin on the rebuilding of the Bernhard Baron Sports Pavilion in Regent's Park; and when it is expected that the work will be completed and the pavilion available for use.

I hope, as I informed my hon. Friend in reply to his Question on 17th November, 1959, that, if funds can be made available, the building of a new pavilion on this site will start in 1961. Work would then be due for completion early in 1963.

I thank the Minister for that reply. Do I understand aright that it is now certain that the work will start in 1961 and will be finished in accordance with what he has just told the House?

The start of the work depends on the availability of funds next year. That depends on Government policy when the Estimates are put in, but I hope that the answer is "Yes".

asked the Minister of Works what systematic steps he is taking to preserve outstanding examples of early British industrial monuments.

I await with interest the outcome of the general survey of industrial monuments which the Council for British Archeology plans to carry out, starting with a pilot survey in Staffordshire. In the meantime, I am willing to consider the use of my powers to protect any outstanding examples in this field which may be in special danger of destruction.

Does the Minister realise that the Ministry of Works has been waiting since 1954 to take action in this matter and that it has been singularly unsuccessful in persuading industry to do much about the problem? Does he realise that popular opinion is very much in advance of the Ministry of Works, and that the least he ought to have is a small staff of his own and a budgetary allocation in order to protect the very important ancient monuments of our industrial history?

The hon. Gentleman is entitled to have his supplementary question ready before my Answer comes, but I think that, if he reads my Answer, he will see that it is encouraging in the way he wants it to be.

asked the Minister of Works why he has not accepted the recommendation of the Ancient Monuments Board for England that every scheduled monument should exhibit a public notice board describing its historical significance.

All ancient monuments which come within my full control are named. Some have a description of their historical significance. To extend this to all scheduled monuments, which number 7,000 and which often comprise only indentations and undulations in the ground, for example, a barrow, despite their importance would not in my view justify the expenditure of £70,000 which is the amount which would be involved.

Is the Minister aware that the committee which advises him on these matters has been advising him since 1957 that it is very necessary to safeguard these monuments and that continuous destruction is going on for lack of action? Further, is he aware that the exaggerated language which he charged me with using on a previous occasion was the language of his own advisory committee?

There is all the difference in the world between protecting an ancient monument of a certain sort and putting a sign on it. We do our best always to see that they are protected, but it is not always easy.

Is the Minister saying that he would like to do this if the Chancellor agrees?

No, Sir. If the hon. Gentleman is asking for my opinion, as I think he is, it is that I do not think that this expenditure would be justified.

asked the Minister of Works which lodges in Hyde Parke will be re-sited as the result of the Park Lane development scheme; and what will be the cost.

Cumberland Lodge and Grosvenor Gate Lodge, at a cost of approximately £11,000 and £10,000 respectively.

Is it not clear from that Answer that it will cost about £21,000 to move two lodges 60 yards or so? Dots not it confirm the public's impression that when it comes to Hyde Park the Minister is up to no good and is very expensive, to boot?

No, I do not think that it means that at all.

asked the Minister of Works what steps he is taking to acquire the site to the south of the British Museum extending to New Oxford Street designed to house the new National Library which is proposed as part of the scheme announced for the expansion and rebuilding of the British Museum.

Negotiations have already opened for the purchase of a substantial part of the site and, subject to the availability of funds, it is hoped to complete the purchase of the whole of the site in a programme spread over the next six or seven years.

When the Minister talks about the availability of funds, what does he mean? Is it not the case that this project has been agreed by the Government? Is it not the duty of the Minister to acquire the site so that the project can be carried out?

I very much hope that it can be carried out, but I am bound to make it conditional on the money being available. I can do nothing else.

Is it not a fact that the longer the acquisition of the site is delayed the more public funds are likely to be involved in acquiring it? Would it not be good economy to get going now in view of the present gross inflation of site values?

I think that there is something in what the hon. Lady says and that is why I hope very much that we shall be able to do it.

asked the Minister of Work how many men and women, respectively, are employed in the official car service under his Department; and what are their respective rates of pay.

As the Answer contains a table of figures I will, with pre-mission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is it not a fact that Ministers are being driven about by girls in green who get 85 per cent. of the men's rate for identical work which they certainly do with identical efficiency, and ought not women Members of the Government to go on strike against this exploitation of their sex which they would not tolerate for a moment in their own position? Will the Minister approach the Chancellor and ask him to apply the principle of equal pay for identical work to the staff of his own Department?

The fact is that in the other organisations it is not universal practice by any means to pay men and women equal rates for driving duties. If the hon. Lady has a complaint about the general rule or custom, it is not really for me to answer a Question about it.

But does the Minister realise that what I am referring to is the fact that the girls who drive Ministers about receive only 85 per cent. of the rate of men drivers, although their work is entirely similar? Indeed, if their work was not efficient, Ministers would not trust their lives to them. Is not this an intolerable situation, particularly in view of the fact that in the passenger transport industry—on the buses, for instance —the girls a£re receiving equal pay? Ought they not to receive it from the Government?

asked the Minister of Works what are the reasons which prevent his Department from accepting ownership of articles of archaeological value discovered as a result of excavations for commerical purposes, such as those contemplated by the Esso Petroleum Company.

The treatment and display of newly discovered articles of archaeological interest is a responsibility proper to museums. My Department's functions are limited by Statute to the care and protection of structural monuments. This long-established distinction works satisfactorily, and I see no reason to disturb it.

There may be a general question here, of course, but I am bound to repeat to the hon. Lady that I am not going against what is the generally accepted rule for drivers in other organisations apart from my own Ministry.

Is not this an absurd inter-Governmental muddle? Is not the Minister aware that the Esso Petroleum Company, which is promoting the Bill, has agreed that if, in the course of excavations for its pipeline, it finds any material of archaeæological or historical interest it is prepared to hand it over to the Government? All that we are asking the Minister to decide is that he will accept it. Cannot he make arrangements with the Treasury so that either he or the museums will accept anything of interest which is found?

It is not the practice for us to receive anything of this sort, and I do not see why we should make an exception in this case. The Esso Petroleum Company has been extremely co-operative and has agreed to make anything that it finds available to the museums. I do not want to alter a practice which is working extremely well. If it did not work well, then I think that it would be wise to alter it.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what proportion of the money spent by local health authorities on the dental care of nursing and expectant mothers is provided by his Department.

Local health authorities' expenditure on this service is taken into account in fixing the aggregate amount of general grant payable, but no part of that grant is paid specifically for this or any other particular service.

Does not the Minister think that the case of Mrs. Whyte, a constituent of mine, which I have brought before him on two occasions, has been turned down because of the working of the general grant? Is he not aware that my constituent has been very unjustly treated and that possibly the local authority feels that it can do nothing because of the working of the general grant?

I have explained the circumstances of this case in great detail to the hon. Lady, and, while I have sympathy with her constituent, I have no power to order what she has asked me to do. I cannot see a connection with the general grant in this case.

The Minister will be aware that sympathy will not pay the costs which my constituent has had to pay for something which she ought not to have had to pay for at all.

As the hon. Lady will have noticed from the letters which I have written to her on this subject, that is a matter for the local authority concerned, and I have no power to deal with it.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he has considered the recent report of Her Majesty's Inspector of Constabulary in Scotland; and what measures he proposes to take with a view to eliminating the amount of wastage among probationer constables, which the report discloses.

Yes, Sir. Before deciding whether any additional measures are needed to deal with wastage, I propose to await the interim report of the Royal Commission on the Police, which is expected before the end of the year.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Scottish police force, which, in my opinion, is efficient and well officered, has been labouring under considerable shortages for some time? Does he realise that one of the best ways of attracting the most suitable men and women into this work is by making the remuneration much more attractive, otherwise we shall get only what we pay for?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, that is one of the matters under consideration by the Royal Commission, and I must await its recommendations.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many offenders, under 18 years of age and under 16 years of age, respectively, were detained in Barlinnie Prison during the year 1959.

I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT a table giving details by different categories of detention of the 44 boys and one girl under 18 who were detained in Barlinnie Prison on 1st July, 1960. I regret that corresponding figures for the whole of 1959 are not available.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that it is very desirable that young offenders should be placed somewhere where they can be completely segregated from habitual criminals? Will he consider the matter with a view to eliminating this practice in Barlinnie Prison?

I am very much aware of the desirability of what the hon. Member asks for. I will gladly discuss the problem and some of the details with him, because they are too complicated for question and answer.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland to what extent he estimates that the increase in the Bank Rate will contract social and economic developments in Scotland; and if he will make a statement.

It is the Government's belief that this and other measures in the field of monetary policy will not inhibit sound and worth-while development in Scotland.

Is the right hon. Gentleman telling us that our road, housing and education programmes will not be cut despite the Government's restrictionist financial policies? Will industry be expanded in order to absorb Scotland's unemployed? Is that what the right hon. Gentleman is telling us?

The hon. Gentleman, I think, is anticipating other Questions on the Order Paper.

I am not anticipating anything.

The hon. Gentleman will remember that last week I dealt with a number of Questions on this subject, and I do not wish today to add to what I have said.

Will my right hon. Friend assure the House that there will be no cut or delay in the Highland road programme which is so important for the economy of the whole area and which has been neglected for years?

I can certainly say that considerations which apply specially to Scotland are being very much taken into account.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think that there is any need for a curb on the economic and industrial expansion of Scotland?

The hon. Gentleman is trying to draw me with a supplementary question which I do not propose to answer.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether there has been any change in afforestation policy in view of the modern estimates of future need for timber.

No, Sir. There have been no changes of sufficient magnitude since the policy was reviewed in 1958 to justify a change in the planting programme then approved for the ten years from 1959 to 1968.

As there will probably be a decrease in the use of timber for props, and as the timber programme as originally forecast may not be required, is the Forestry Commission considering planting other types of tree and adjusting its planting programme to fit in with the needs of agriculture?

All the changing demands for timber are taken into account in considering the long-term programmes of the Forestry Commission.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when the new roads for servicing the British Motor Corporation factory at Bathgate are likely to be started and completed; and what part of the normal programme is to be curtailed to balance the extra outlay.

It is intended that work should start in August and be completed by May, 1961. The cost will be met out of funds available for major improvement works this year, but these funds must always be administered flexibly in order to allow for schemes of special urgency and it is not yet possible to say precisely what adjustment of the programme may be necessary.

In other words, these flowery words mean that something else will be cut in order to provide this extra road for the B.M.C. In view of what has been said about unemployment in Scotland and the availability of labour and road-making machinery, does not the right hon. Gentleman think it disgraceful that, because this extra work has to be done, other valuable road work in Scotland must be stopped?

The right hon. Gentleman really should not always assume the worst. It is a great mistake.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware that a scientific expedition from Oxford and Cambridge Universities, jointly, has been organised to explore the depths of Loch Ness in the current month of July to seek a solution of the mystery of the monster of Loch Ness; what assistance his Department plans to give the expedition; and what steps he is taking to protect the wild life of Loch Ness and to record the scientific results of the expedition.

I have seen reports about this expedition which do not suggest that danger to wild life should arise. I have no plans to give assistance although some information about eels has already been given to a member of the expedition. The recording of such scientific results as may emerge is a matter for the organisers of the expedition.

Does the Secretary of State realise that, when he says he has no plans, that is an old story characteristic of his policy in Scotland? Does he realise that the matter referred to in the Question has passed beyond the realms of fantasy and that it is a job for him and the Minister of Science to investigate the potentialities of Scotland, which have been much neglected in the past?

If I were asked for further assistance, I might look to see whether I could give it, but the whole question of monsters and other things must be left to the scientific examination which, undoubtedly, it is receiving.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what decision he has reached with regard to augmenting the present road programmes, in order to reduce the increasing number of accidents causing injury and death on the roads.

The current road programme runs to 31st March, 1962, and I have no announcement to make as to its revision.

Will the Secretary of State stop dodging these great Scottish issues when trying to reply to Questions? Is he not aware of the growing concern among Scottish local authorities about the increasing deterioration of our roads? Will not he make some inquiry into what is happening in Northern Ireland and Eire, where, obviously, national road plans are in operation? It would do the right hon. Gentleman and his Department a great deal of good if he found out what was happening there and did something like it in Scotland.

I was not aware of any question in that supplementary. In reply to it, however, I will say that if the hon. Member studies what has happened concerning expenditure on the improvement of roads in Scotland in recent years, he will realise that very useful progress is being made.

Will the Secretary of State look at the second part of the Question and indicate whether any conclusions have been reached concerning the suggestion made in the Scottish Grand Committee that a full-time official should be appointed in his Department to look after road safety?

That hardly arises out of the Question and I should not like to give a categorical answer at this moment.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what action he proposes to take on the recommendations of the Law Reform Committee for Scotland with regard to the existing law of security; and if he will make a statement.

I will, with permission, answer Questions Nos. 17 and 31 together—

On a point of order. I object to my Question, No. 31, being answered with No. 17. My Question was addressed to the Lord Advocate. It is about a Report of a Committee appointed by the Lord Advocate, a Report to the Lord Advocate. It is about lawyers and by lawyers and the Secretary of State is not competent to deal with it.

There are a number of topics there, only one of which can be pursued. I understand that the hon. and learned Member does not want Question No. 31 to be answered with No. 17. No doubt, in those circumstances—

Further to that point of order. I wrote you a letter, Mr. Speaker, in which I gave my reasons for this objection. You replied, Mr. Speaker, saying that it was not part of your function to interfere with the transfer of Questions—

Order. I did not say that. I am obliged to the hon. and learned Member for his courtesy in writing to me. He was complaining about the transfer of his Question and I explained to him that there would be difficulties in the Chair allowing him to argue the matter at Question Time, because transfer raises no point of order for the Chair. The Chair is not responsible.

With the greatest respect, Mr. Speaker, the doctrine of noninterference may be carried to excess and interfere with the due answering of Questions in this House.

It may do all sorts of things, but what it does not do is to raise a point of order for me. That is why I cannot allow, even with every ground of affection and admiration, even the hon. and learned Member to argue about it now.

This is a very important matter, Mr. Speaker—

It may be, but it is not a point of order, so I cannot allow the hon. and learned Member to argue about it now.

I submit, with respect, Mr. Speaker, that it is a point of order. This doctrine may be carried to excess. Take, for example, a Question to the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food which is transferred to the Minister of Defence—

Order. I must insist on the hon. and learned Member desisting, because I have to look after the interests of the House as a whole. I am afraid that it is not a point of order.

I am in a slight dilemma as to whether I am to reply to Question No. 17 separately.

No. 17 alone.

The Law Reform Committee has suggested that the changes in the law required to give effect to its recommendations could be effected by amendment of the Companies Act, 1948. Company law is the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade and I am in touch with him on this matter.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that Answer so far as it goes, may I ask whether he is aware of the view expressed in the Report that inability to create a security over movables is one of the reasons which has prevented sufficient Scottish capital being invested in Scotland and has, in the words of the Report, caused a barrier to successful economic development? As it is the Government's declared intention to do as much as they can to solve the unemployment problem, will my right hon. Friend do all in his power to overcome this barrier?

I am fully seized of the point which my hon. Friend makes. I am discussing it with my right hon. Friend. It is possible to over-estimate the importance of the matter, but I agree that it has great importance.

Am I right in thinking—

On a point of order. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] My Question was replied to. May I ask a supplementary?

To separate the issues, I indicated to the Minister that I would be grateful if he did not reply to No. 31 and he complied with that indication.

Am I right in thinking that this is the Eighth Report of the Law Reform Committee for Scotland, that in seven of those Reports recommendations for legislation have been made by the Committee, that in only two cases has legislation followed and that on both occasions the legislation was initiated by the Opposition? In these circumstances, is there any reason to think that this Report is more likely to result in legislation than any of the other seven Reports?

I should require carefully to check the hon. and learned Member's statistics, because they are not quite right. I am sure that this matter will be followed up with the usual speed and energy with which all these matters are followed up.

The right hon. Gentleman says "the usual speed and energy". Are we to expect that the usual speed and energy will result in legislation on one of the earlier special Reports, that on intestate succession which has been outstanding for nine years?

The speed of legislation depends not only on myself, but also on hon. Members who sit in the Scottish Grand Committee and the Scottish Standing Committee.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he plans to take to implement the recommendations made in the Eighth Report of the Law Reform Committee for Scotland, Command Paper No. 1017; in taking such steps, what regard he will have to the note by Professor T. B. Smith in Appendix I; and what account he has taken of the suggestions in Appendix II which were not included in the recommendations.

As I said in reply to Question No. 17, the Law Reform Committee has suggested that the changes in the law required to give effect to its recommendations could be effected by amendment of the Companies Act, 1948. Company law is the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade and I am in touch with him on this matter.

Is the Secretary of State aware that I am sorry that we will not hear the Lord Advocate's voice on this Question? Is he aware that the original remit was too narrow and had to be widened, as a result of which the labours of this Committee were greatly extended and involved investigation of various systems of law ranging from Ancient Rome up to English law today? If all these labours have been crowned with success, will the right hon. Gentleman give us an assurance that the Committee's recommendations will be put into force without the usual delay?

I have noted with great interest what the hon. and learned Member has said. I was nervous that he was going to insist upon my explaining the words "hypothecation" and "impignoration", which appear in Appendix I of the Report, and I did not propose to do so. I have noted what the hon. and learned Member has said about the need for urgency.

Does not the difficulty in pronunciation which the right hon. Gentleman experienced show the folly of his leading on questions of law such as this, which might be better dealt with by the Lord Advocate, to whom the Question was originally addressed?

On the other hand, the mispronunciation is that which would be experienced by any member of the public who happened to read the Report.

Is the right hon. Gentleman creating a precedent for the practice of assuming the right to reply to Questions on a Report which has been addressed to Parliament by the Lord Advocate?

I will investigate the precise reason for the transfer of the Question, but obviously the reason is that the recommendations become the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade.

On a point of order. Will you give the House your guidance, Mr. Speaker, on the result of the protest made by my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Aberdeen, North (Mr. Hector Hughes) about the answering of Questions together? Has a precedent now been created?

No. I made it quite clear. Because a number of issues were arising I thought that it seemed obvious that we should get on better if the Minister replied to the Questions separately.

Further to that point of order. Is it, then, the case that if one of the hon. Members concerned lodges a determined protest the Minister will not answer two or three or more Questions, with permission or without?

The hon. Member knows quite well that no precedent is created by this. I have repeatedly explained that I have no power to compel a Minister to answer Questions in any way.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he intends to issue regulations defining major redevelopment under the Local Government and Miscellaneous Financial Provisions (Scotland) Act, 1958.

I am sending this week to the local authority associations, as a basis for consultations with them, proposals for the revision of the grant regulations under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Acts in the light of the provisions of the 1958 Act.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that the local authorities are extremely dissatisfied with the consistently long delay in initiating these regulations? To make amends for this rather shameful business, will the right hon. Gentleman now give an assurance that the regulations will be sensible enough to ensure that not every case of central development by local authorities will have to go to him for individual decision?

This has been a complex matter, as the hon. Member knows, and discussions have taken place with the local authorities concerned and the local authority associations. I will certainly see that everything is done to hurry the matter as fast as we can.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland to what extent he intends increasing the present hospital building programme in Scotland in the light of recent announcements by the Government.

As I announced last November, I expect expenditure on hospital building to increase from £3·25 million in 1960–61 to £3·9 million in 1961–62.

The Secretary of State has not answered the point of the Question about the present hospital building programme. In consideration of previous replies which the right hon. Gentleman has given about this matter and in view of the special provisions within the Government's credit squeeze and other restrictions, does not the Secretary of State agree that this is the time to increase the public works programme in Scotland to offset the influence of Bank Rate and other Government economic decisions that will adversely affect Scotland's unemployment position?

I do not understand the hon. Member's supplementary question, because in my reply I gave the facts about the present building programme, which is increasing.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is aware of the recent recommendation of a Glasgow jury that fire alarm systems should be fitted in all bonded warehouses; and what steps he proposes to take to give effect to this recommendation.

I am aware of the recommendation referred to. When I have received and studied the transcript of the evidence given at the inquiry I shall discuss the question with other Ministers concerned.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that some rather disturbing facts came out at the inquiry? If he cannot say anything at the moment, will he give the assurance that he will follow up this matter with unusual speed and energy?

No, Sir—with my customary speed and energy.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the estimated final cost of the new hospital proposed for Dundee.

It is not possible to estimate the final cost of this hospital until sketch plans have been prepared. These will not be available for some time yet.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the Government's decision to build this hospital was originally announced as part of the pre-General Eleclion programme in 1955? Is he also aware that the starting date for the building of this hospital is now to be in 1963, that costs are rising and there is a waste of public money? Will not he reconsider the decision and bring forward the starting date of this hospital?

The hon. Gentleman knows my views on this matter. It is not a question of money that has been holding this up, certainly in these latter stages. It is a question of getting the right plans properly drawn up for a hospital which will be of great importance for the future, and I agree that sometimes there is an element of the ideal being the enemy of the best.

Is it not really a scandal that a start on this hospital has fallen back eight years and cannot the Secretary of State now give us a firm estimate of the cost and of when the hospital will be started?

I cannot at the moment, for the reasons I have given; but I assure the right hon. Gentleman that we are anxious to get on with the building of this hospital as fast as we can.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the Government's intentions regarding a review of public expenditure in Scotland.

The question is under urgent consideration and I am therefore not in a position at the moment to make a statement.

Will the Secretary of State tell us whether he has been instructed by his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to freeze public expenditure in Scotland during 1960–61 at the level of the last financial year and, if that is so, will he give the House an assurance that he will fight this decision in view of Scotland's special need in relation to unemployment?

I have no intention of adding to the reply which I have already given to the hon. Member's Question, because I am not able to do so. As I have said in reply to other Questions, special considerations in Scotland are always relevant and are realised to be so.

Is it not the case that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has said in the House that United Kingdom expenditure will be frozen at the 1961 limit during 1962, and can the Secretary of State tell us whether or not that will apply to Scotland?

The statement about general intention does not necessarily apply to individual details within the general intention.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what extra financial burden he estimates will he borne in the current financial year by local authorities in Scotland, as the result of the requirement to pay market value instead of existing use value for land compulsorily acquired.

A precise estimate is impracticable, but I have no reason to think that additional capital expenditure will exceed the figure of £300,000 which I mentioned when the Town and Country Planning Bill was before Parliament.

Is the £300,000 the figure for this year? Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that this is rather a big sum to pay for the follies of Tory legislation?

I said that a precise estimate requested for this year is impracticable and the £300,000 is an estimate of the capital expenditure. What the hon. Gentleman has in mind, I think, is the interest payments that will arise.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he proposes to take to prevent the exploitation of local authorities in Scotland by land speculators.

I have no evidence to suggest that local authorities in Scotland are being exploited in this way.

In view of the present trends regarding land speculation, will the right hon. Gentleman keep this very much in mind and take immediate action, whenever he has any evidence, to prevent local authorities from being exploited?

I shall be interested to hear of any particular case where the local authorities may have been affected in the way in which the hon. Gentleman suggests.

Will the Secretary of State advise the Minister of Housing and Local Government how to avoid this exploitation, which is apparently not going on in Scotland but which is only too prevalent in England?

I am always prepared to give any help that I can to my colleagues in the Government, but I have enough troubles on my hands regarding Scotland at the moment.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the question of the crofter's house to which the hon. Member for Lanarkshire, North, has drawn his attention in correspondence.

As I have already explained in correspondence, the Crofters Commission decided after consulting me as landlord and granting the crofter a hearing, that the croft house in question was required for the future occupation of the croft and should not be separated from the land. The dispossessed absentee crofter's request to retain ownership of the house was accordingly not approved by the Commission whose decision in these matters is final.

Is the Minister aware that in his latest letter to me on this case there was a number of statements which just were not true? What is he doing in the meantime to find out the exact truth about this matter? Is it not a serious matter that a house built by this man's father, with no help from anywhere financially—the local authority or the Government—should be taken from him and that he should be dispossessed?

The hon. Lady is, I think, very well aware of the complexities of this whole crofting problem and the problems which the Crofters Commission finds itself up against. It should be borne in mind that in this case the former tenant has a house and a job and had never worked on the croft and that the new tenant, a married man with three children, has crofting experience and is urgently in need of a house.

It is quite untrue to say that this man has done no work on the croft. The Minister has that information. Is he aware that there have been houses lying empty for ten years where the new crofter and his family could have lived?

If the hon. Lady can say where the facts are wrong, I will, of course, follow them up and find out whether they are wrong.

But I have given them to the right hon. Gentleman.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will, as a matter of urgency, take whatever steps are necessary, legislative and administrative, to ensure adequate and efficient systems of fire prevention, fire warning and fire escape in shops, offices and warehouses.

My colleagues and I are reviewing the matter, but I am afraid that I am not in a position to make any statement today.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that fire prevention officers at the moment cannot tender advice unless they are invited by the proprietors, and that in various areas there is doubt about which is the responsible authority? In view of the urgency of this matter, as exemplified in Liverpool and elsewhere, will he bear in mind that fire risks obtain in warehouses other than bonded warehoues?

I am very well aware of the urgency of this situation and I have been trying to get over, by public statement, the desirability that proprietors of warehouses should consult the fire officers about safety precautions.

Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that the Select Committee on Estimates drew the attention of the Minister responsible to the importance of this seven years ago? Are we to take it that nothing has been done?

There are various powers in various Acts which apply to certain types of premises, but we are examining the whole question urgently.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) how many applications have been made for improvement grants in respect of tenant-occupied houses since the passing of the House Purchase and Housing Act, 1959;

I regret that separate figures for owner-occupied and tenant-occupied houses are not at present available. They are, however, now being collected, and figures for the first six months of this year will be published in the next Quarterly Housing Return in a few weeks' time.

I thank the Secretary of State for that reply. Does he appreciate that this is where we really want information to find out whether this Act is working, because it is in tenant-occupied property that there is the greatest scope and most urgent need for imprcvement and, from our experience in the past, it is in this sphere of housing that there is least action?

I certainly agree with the hon. Gentleman that we need this information.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the reasons for the delay in coming to a decision about the site at Summerston for housing purposes; and if he will make a statement.

A proposal to use an area at Summerston for housing purposes is included in the Quinquennial Review of the City Development Plan which was submitted to me by Glasgow Corporation on 1st July. As required by Statute the proposals in the Review are being advertised by the Corporation and objections may be made by interested parties. Until objections have been received and considered, I cannot make any decision on the proposals.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is now over three years since the first inquiry was held into this matter? In view of the urgency —I appreciate that replies have to be awaited to the advertisement—will he thereafter give an assurance that he will at the earliest opportunity come to a decision about it?

The hon. Member will appreciate that I am just as concerned as he is about the difficulty of getting on with this problem, and I can assure him that we will do all that we can to expedite the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he has given further consideration under the capital development programme to assisting the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board in connecting up areas and islands still without electricity; and if he will use the provisions of Section 7 of the Local Employment Act in this regard.

The problem of rural electrification in the Hydro-Board's area is under examination and I am unable to make any statement at present.

Is it not the case that this must have been under examination for some time, because the Hydro-Electric Board is in the position that it has now reached these outlying areas, which are very expensive to connect up, and it really needs the Government's decision as to whether they are going to do it or not? Can the Secretary of State tell us when that decision will be reached?

I cannot forecast how soon there will be a decision or make any announcement. The matter is being examined. It raises great difficulties as the hon. Gentleman knows, but I will press on with it, as usual.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that this problem has been obvious for a very long time, and that from time to time we have been told that Her Majesty's Government have no statutory power to help in this kind of provision, but is not the power in Section 7 of the Local Employment Act and will he say whether that power will be used?

I am not at all satisfied that that power applies, but I will examine it.

asked the Lord Advocate what is the estimated increase in cost in his Department consequent on his appearance on the Order of Questions.

None, Sir.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware, then, that we are probably now getting value for money? Would he agree that it would be still cheaper and better all round for him not to be here at all.

I shall be agreeably surprised and flattered if I feel that the fact that I now take the top of the list on certain days leads to hon. Members asking additional Questions in order to have the pleasure of hearing my voice.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what has been the total value in the present year of United Kingdom imports of a type from which quota restrictions have been removed in the past two years.

I regret that this information is not readily available.

Can the Minister explain why that was so, and if he cannot give the figure now, will he give it to us within a reasonable period of time?

The reason is that the liberalisation measures of the last two years covered a very large number of individual commodities and applied only to certain areas. Therefore, it would require a great deal of additional work to extract the information in the form which the right hon. Gentleman requires. If he cares to have a word with me about the matter, I shall be glad to see whether I can help him in any way.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what progress he has made towards the entry of Great Britain into the European Common Market.

The subject of the longterm relations between countries of the European Free Trade Association and the European Economic Community remains on the Agenda of the Trade Committee in Paris, but no progress can be made until there is a general desire for a negotiation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the implication of what the Prime Minister said to the House a few days ago was that the British Government have no intention of entering the European market? If that situation continues, could the right hon. Gentleman say what advice he would tender to British industry which at the moment exports to countries of the Common Market? Should industrialists continue to put their investment into factories in this country or should they consider additional investment on the Continent of Europe?

Advice to British industry is a question quite other than that on the Order Paper.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of us feel that our exclusion from the Common Market is infinitely more serious than is generally realised and that, therefore, every possible effort must be continuously made to try to get our participation?

We are, of course, continuing to make those efforts, but I repeat what I said in my main Answer, that there must be a general desire for negotiation.

Is it not clear that France and Germany have now strong objections to our entering the Common Market? What plans has the right hon. Gentleman for meeting that situation?

I am not aware of those strong objections.

Is the desire to negotiate completely lacking from the other side, and are there any obstacles on our side?

I was referring to the Trade Committee which met recently and at which we hoped there would be some discussion of a long-term solution. Members of the Six who were present said they preferred to discuss short-term matters.

What proposals are the Government putting forward?

We have suggested that at the Trade Committee we should discuss the measures necessary to achieve a long-term solution.

Does the right hon. Gentleman's earlier reply mean that it is Her Majesty's Government's view that there is no desire to negotiate on the other side? If that is the case, what do Her Majesty's Government propose to do?

I was saying that at the meeting of the Trade Committee there did not appear a desire to negotiate on long-term matters but a preference, on the other hand, to discuss short-term palliatives. The Committee will meet again and we shall see what takes place there.

asked the President of tire Board of Trade what proportion of the citrus imports into the United Kingdom, for the two years to the latest convenient date, came from the Union of South Africa and the British West Indies, respectively; and what contracts have been made for such imports from these two areas for the period 1960–62.

The proportions by value of the total imports of citrus fruits, fresh and preserved, and citrus fruit juices during the two years ending April, 1960, from the Union of South Africa and the British West Indies were, respectively, 20·2 per cent, and 4·8 per cent. Contracts, other than those made by Her Majesty's Government for concentrated orange juice for the Welfare Foods Service, are the subject of commercial negotions about which I can give no information. I understand from my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food that contracts have been made covering imports of concentrated orange juice during 1960 but not yet for any subsequent years.

In view of the things said in yesterday's debate and the general attitude of the British public towards the Union of South Africa, will not the right hon. Gentleman do more to encourage imports from a part of the Commonwealth which has proved that a multi-racial society can exist very successfully and so help the West Indies in a way in which that is not being done at the moment?

The import of citrus fruits from the two areas in question are matters for private commercial arrangements.