asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has made for the prevention of accidents on Scottish roads.

There is no simple solution to the problem of road accidents, but my policy is to attack it by every means at my disposal. It is one which all road users can help to solve by exercising more care and patience on the road.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman holding up his hands in despair at this dreadful and tragic situation? Does he not realise that it is his duty to tackle it in a forthright way to find out whether the accidents are due to the state of the roads, the negligence of drivers, or to alcoholic excess? Surely he ought to set up an expert committee to investigate this very tragic problem and find a solution?

I agree with the hon. and learned Gentleman that this is a very tragic problem. He will realise that a great deal of examination is going on into all the causes of accidents and he may know that, at my request, local authorities are at the moment engaged in a campaign to publicise the various aspects of road safety.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland why the staff of the Department of Agriculture has increased in each of the last three years.

Leaving aside the 280 officers who were transferred from the Scottish Home Department to the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries when responsibility for fisheries and certain other work was transferred from the former to the latter Department, the net increases in the last three years have been 12, 34 and 35. These additions were required mainly for new work arising out of recent legislation.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this increase has not always been matched by what has happened in England? Is he also aware of the very undesirable growth that has been taking place continuously for five or six years? Is he further aware that although an answer to a supplementary question yesterday revealed that Mr. Parkinson was not in the Foreign Office, it seems a near certainty that someone of that name has gone into the Scottish Office?

If my hon. Friend studies carefully the reply that I have given he will realise that the increases have been very modest. When I add that out of the 12, 34 and 35, a number are employed in connection with computer machines which will ultimately effect substantial savings in manpower and costs, he will realise that we are pursuing a wise policy.

Is not the main trouble with the Scottish Office not that there are too many officials, but that there are too many Ministers?

Certainly not. If the right hon. Gentleman studies the work that Scottish Office Ministers do, he will realise how necessary they are, and how valuable.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will name the local authorities, other than small burghs, which are currently not building houses; and whether he will ascertain the reasons for this lack of activity.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what are the names of the nine local authorities, apart from the small burghs, which were not building any houses at May, 1960.

At the end of May one of the 24 large burghs, viz., Port Glasgow and 8 of the 33 counties, viz., Berwick, Kincardine, Kinross, Orkney, Peebles, Roxburgh, Selkirk and Wigtown, had no local authority houses under construction. Six of these authorities I understand, consider that their urgent needs are met or largely met, but some of them contemplate providing further houses from time to time as required. The other three authorities, Port Glasgow and Kincardine and Wigtown Counties, have expressed concern about subsidies and interest rates but are I understand now considering proposals for further building.

What exactly does the right hon. Gentleman mean when he says that the urgent needs are "met or largely met"? What is meant by that phrase? Can he say whether any local authorities have made representations to him about the likely effect of further restrictive measures which have been imposed since the figures for local authority building were given a week or two ago?

The hon. Gentleman will understand that the words "met or largely met" are very clear and are the kind of brief expression which it is necessary to use in answer to Questions. He does not need any explanation of those words from me. I will have to examine the latter part of his supplementary question to see whether any representations on this subject have been made to me in the last week.

Is it not a sad reflection on the policy of the Government and the Secretary of State for Scotland when local authorities from those Tory areas which the right hon. Gentleman mentioned are blaming him for their complete failure to carry on with the house building required? What does he intend to do to change that policy and stimulate the building of the houses which the public requires throughout Scotland?

They are not blaming me. They have raised questions about interest rates. We have had many discussions on that subject, as the hon. Gentleman knows.

Yes, but they are not building the houses which are needed. What is the right hon. Gentleman doing about that?

The hon. Gentleman knows that we have debated this subject in Committee and that I have answered many questions about rates of interest, which are only a relatively small element in this matter.

Does not what the right hon. Gentleman has said conclusively show that local authorities have cut back, or, in some cases, discontinued building houses because of the high cost of providing them? In those circumstances, will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to have the matter reviewed in view of the urgent need for many more houses in Scotland?

I have said very often that local authorities in general should have no difficulty about continuing to build houses if they pool the subsidies they receive and charge reasonable rents.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will arrange for further publicity to be given to the availability of house improvement grants so as to accelerate the modernisation of houses in Scotland.

Yes, Sir. In addition to the explanatory leaflets and posters which have been widely distributed, I am planning further publicity, for example by practical demonstrations of improvements of the kind recently staged at Paisley with the co-operation of the Town Council.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that the owners of many houses in Scotland which are occupied and let do not realise that these grants are available? Will he consider using television as a medium for advertising these grants?

I will certainly consider any method of improving knowledge about the availability of these grants. We have already done a good deal to publicise them.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what use has been made, or is going to be made, of Section 7 of the Local Employment Act in Scotland.

At the end of March I invited local authorities to apply for grant in respect of improvements necessary for the purposes of the Act in basic services for which I am responsible. So far I have had applications from 17 authorities in respect of 31 schemes, mainly water and sewerage.

In view of the possibility of this Section of the Act being used to assist in providing essential services, will the right hon. Gentleman give very favourable consideration to any applications from Orkney and Shetland?

I will study them very carefully, but my "favourable consideration" would have to be wider than just one constituency.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many schools in Scotland are equipped with television receivers, film and sound projectors, film only projectors, and film strip projectors, respectively; how many there are of each per school; and to what extent these are used.

These particulars are not available but I shall send the right hon. Member the necessary information as soon as it can be obtained from the schools.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many films are available for educational use in Scottish schools; how many copies of each exist; and to what extent these are used.

The Scottish Central Film Library has for hire 4,531 separate films with between 2 and 24 copies of each, giving a total of 10,917 prints to be precise. Of a total 70,000 reels hired in the year ended 31st March, 1960, about four-fifths went to schools. The Library also assists schools to obtain films from other sources, such as, the Central Office of Information and the British Film Institute.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that my correspondence shows that many schools possess merely a token of this apparatus and that in many cases these facilities are not available to teachers? Is he aware that teachers say that they would like them to be available? Will the right hon. Gentleman look into the question and make these modern facilities available to schools at the earliest possible moment?

On the information available to me, I am rather puzzled by what the right hon. Gentleman has said, but I will examine the matter very carefully.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether his attention has been called to the high proportion of poisonous solanine found in early new potatoes imported from an eastern Mediterranean country; and whether he will ensure that such potatoes are not sold unless they have been passed as safe by his Department.

I am aware that an unusually high solanine content was found in potatoes imported into England in March, 1959, but I understand that potatoes from the country in question have not been imparted directly into Scotland. Potatoes, like other imported food, are subject to examination at ports of entry for their fitness for human consumption.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his reply. Is he aware that the report of the Government Chemist points out that potatoes grown in sub-tropical climates are liable to have this high content of solanine? Will he give an assurance that all future cargoes of potatoes from Mediterranean countries will be carefully scrutinised?

I am aware of the problem which my noble Friend has mentioned, but I am certain that the right point of control is the port of entry. I have no doubt that the port authorities concerned are alive to the circumstances in which special attention to the solanine content of imported potatoes is called for.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us what solanine is and whether is means "lack of sun" as its name implies? Will he say a little more about this poisonous substance?

It would be more desirable for the hon. Gentleman to consult the textbooks where he would get a fuller and more accurate reply than I can give in answer to a supplementary question.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of reports that many imported new potatoes are not new potatoes? What steps is he taking to strengthen the procedure whereby the youth or age of imported potatoes is assessed?

That is a fascinating supplementary question, but it does not directly arise from the Question on the Order Paper.

Will my right hon. Friend agree that if there is reason to believe that imported potatoes may contain this poisonous substance, great publicity should be given to his Answer so that the public can learn that there are much better and ample supplies of old potatoes available throughout this country?

My hon. Friend has made his point very well.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland why he has refused to make a grant to assist major redevelopment schemes in the central area of Greenock.

There has been no decision to refuse grant. As the Town Council is aware, I have the matter under consideration in the light of a further discussion with them recently and hope to reach a decision shortly.

As he has withheld all grants to local authorities for major developments for more than a year. pending publication of his regulations for the grants, since May, 1959, will not the right hon. Gentleman agree that this scheme in Greenock has not yet been sanctioned because of confusion between the Transport and Town Planning Divisions of the Home Department? As he is in an apologetic mood, will he recognise that it is rather silly to authorise a redevelopment scheme in which shops and houses are being constructed while not allowing a grant for the building of a road? Is that not rather ludicrous and will he do something about it?

I am not aware of all the details of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, and I am not aware that anything has been greatly held up so far. I realise that the town council is very anxious to get information and I will try to get to the council as soon as I can.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland by how many acres the area planted by the Forestry Commission in 1959 in the Highland counties fell below the acreage announced for that year in the Review of Highlands Policy, Command Paper No. 785.

I am glad to say that in 1959 the Commission planted in the Highlands about 350 acres more than the 10,000 mentioned in the White Paper.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is the first time during his term of office that I have been able to say that his Answer is satisfactory? Can he give an assurance that the same happy progress will be made this year?

At the risk of the hon. Gentleman again saying that it is satisfactory, he would like to know that in 1960 it is proposed to plant 500 acres more than the 11,500 proposed in the White Paper.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what has been the average percentage increase in local rates in Scotland since 1951.

The average amount of rates collected per £ of rateable value has increased by 70 per cent. since 1950–51.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I did not expect him to maintain his record for very long? Is he aware that an intolerable burden has been imposed on the ratepayers of Scotland? Is it not time that he seriously considered alternative or additional methods of supplementing the present rating revenue?

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will realise that I did not expect him to retain his rather surprising view for very long. The figures I have given are a reflection of the activity of local authorities in building houses and schools and extending their services generally. Ratepayers naturally contribute to that. I can tell the hon. Gentleman that Government grants have risen by 134 per cent. over the same period.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that with the great increases in rates over the last eight years, he is barking up the wrong tree in what he says about the need for local authorities to charge economic rents, because the local authorities with the highest increases of rates are those which have had the highest rent increases? I give him the example of Edinburgh where the increase has been 120 per cent. rather than 70 per cent.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will make a statement about changes in green belt policy; and what effect he estimates that the rising price of land in urban areas will have on housing policy.

I have no intention of departing from the policy of establishing and maintaining green belts, which I reaffirmed recently in a circular to local planning authorities of which I am sending the hon. Member a copy. The housing policy of the local authorities is governed by many factors and I would not expect it to be much influenced by the cost of land, which in Scotland is still a relatively small part of total capital costs.

I am glad that the right hon. Gentleman has decided not to depart from his policy in regard to green belts, but does he not realise that the scarcity of land has been created by the speculators purchasing land three, four and five years ahead of time? Is he not aware that that necessarily involves an increase in land values, and that in Glasgow, with 130,000 people on the waiting list, we have not a single site on. which to build a house?

I am not yet convinced that what the hon. Member has said has been a serious factor in cost. I know the hon. Member's view about the Glasgow position.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether, under Circular 33/1960, a local authority which has actively reduced the unfit housing problem will now be authorised to build houses with subsidy for families in overcrowded, sublet, and health categories.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland in what circumstances he will authorise local authorities to build with subsidy for general housing needs after 23rd August, 1960.

Any local authority proposing to build subsidised houses for needs outside the priority categories defined in the recent circular will be allowed to do so where they show that it would not be reasonable in the circumstances of their area to expect that these needs could be met in any other way.

Could the Secretary of State explain just what he means by meeting building needs "in any other way"? Is he aware that the municipal houses that are being built are, in the main, largely being built by private enterprise firms, and that these firms are. fully engaged? If a town council has radically relieved its area of unfit houses and is now dealing with the overcrowding and sub-letting problem, should he not automatically say that it can go ahead and get on with that job, instead of having a rule of thumb to decide whether it should do so or not?

We have to keep these things in balance. I have said that we will discuss the matter, and I might add that discussions have already taken place with two authorities—Lanark County and Hamilton—which are authorities which have already carried out surveys and established a case for subsidised houses for other needs for some time to come. This process is going on in a very rational way between my Department and the local authorities.

The right hon. Gentleman has not answered my second Question, No. 15, in which I asked him whether the local authorities will get subsidies if they build three-apartment houses for elderly couples. He did not mention that.

I think there seems to be some confusion. I understood the Minister to be answering Questions Nos. 14 and 16. Nothing has happened about Question No. 15 yet.

How long does the right hon. Gentleman expect the local authorities will have to wait to find out how their housing needs will be met by other means? Is he not aware that the record of the private builder in building houses to let in Scotland was so deplorable that, away back in 1917, we decided, because of that failure, to go on with local authority building? The position has not improved. Will he tell me how many houses to let have been built by private enterprise in Scotland last year? Did it build a single one?

The hon. Member is running wide of the original Question. On the main point, I have made it clear that there has been no unreasonable delay in the consultations with my Department in deciding what proposals can be approved under the terms of the circular I have issued.

Surely, the right hon. Gentleman talked about local authorities having proved need for housing which cannot be met in any other way? The only other way is private building and private builders are just not meeting the needs of Scotland.

I do not want to prolong this argument by question and answer. Some houses become vacant in the ordinary course of events, and the number might be increased if authorities did not encourage the occupation of houses by tenants well able to provide accommodation for themselves. That is one way. Another way is that private enterprise can help directly or indirectly by the transfer of tenants from existing local authority houses.

Will they do it?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether, under Circular 33/1960, he will authorise local authorities to build three-apartment houses with subsidy for the rehousing of elderly couples.

Not normally, Sir. In the usual case three-apartment houses should be provided only for families who require that size of house for their own use.

Will the right hon. Gentleman have another look at this question? Is he not aware that, when illness takes place in the case of either one of an elderly couple occupying a one-bedroomed house, that person usually has to go into hospital? If there were a three-apartment house available, and if the couple were able to pay the rent, another member of the family, a married daughter, for instance, could come in to nurse that elderly person and so relieve the hospital?

I think the hon. Gentleman will agree that old persons' houses should be as compact and easily run as possible, and that if the house has an extra room, it would not only be more difficult to look after, but would carry a higher rent and cost more to furnish with curtains and carpets. In exceptional cases, I am prepared to consider some relaxation.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that in some instances an extra room leads to less work rather than more? Is he not also aware that many of these old couples have families which occasionally like to come to visit them, and that, particularly in Scotland, they have odd members of the family who come from abroad and wish to stay—[Interruption.] This is important. I have seen many of them personally, and they wish to stay with their parents rather than go into somebody else's house. Would the Minister assure me that hon. Members opposite would be content with a two-apartment house for their elderly parents?

As I implied in my earlier answer, I recognise that there are some small houses where two bedrooms are required, and I am ready to consider any special case put forward by an authority which has a relatively large number of such families to provide for. From personal acquaintance with many of the people in these small houses, I can say that they are extraordinarily happy in them.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware of the need for new general hospitals in Lanarkshire; and when a hospital will be erected to meet the increasing needs of the Coatbridge and Airdrie districts.

There is no shortage of general hospital beds in Lanarkshire, but some of the present hospitals are inconveniently situated and some are in wartime buildings. Proposals to provide new units are under consideration, but the pattern of future development is not yet settled and it is too early to say when work will start.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that only very recently a prominent medical specialist in Lanarkshire said that some Lanarkshire hospitals were fifty years behind the times, and would not stand comparison with Continental hospitals? Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that we have been asking him for years to consider the hospital situation and provide us with the new hospitals which are long overdue?

I am aware of certain problems in Lanarkshire, and the regional hospital board has made a review of the distribution of the population and the number of hospital beds, and it is at present discussing the result of that review and some tentative proposals based on it with my Department.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what was the total amount of interest paid by the Scottish local authorities on their capital debt in the financial years 1950, 1953, 1956, and 1959, respectively.

The amounts are, for the year beginning May, 1950, £8·6 million; for 1953, £14·7 million; for 1956, £23·7 million. No figure is available for 1959, but the estimate for 1958 is £30·5 million.

Is the Minister aware that the total capital debt between 1950 and 1959 has increased by only two and a half times, and that the figures he has given indicate the increasing interest paid by local authorities, which is now about four times what it was? Will he therefore desist from exhorting Scottish authorities to ask people to pay economic rents for municipal houses when the additional money paid by the tenants will not go to the persons who build the houses but will line the pockets of the money-lenders?

This again is a question of an old argument, but I might point out that interest rates form only a part of the local authority revenue expenditure, and that the level of Government grants has risen more than correspondingly with revenue expenditure as a whole.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the case of certain authorities almost 25 per cent. of the rate-borne expenditure is in respect of interest rates, and therefore, represents a considerable proportion of the rates collected?

I do not think that that supplementary question invalidates what I have just said.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what was the number of houses built by Kirkcaldy Town Council in the years 1957, 1958, and 1959, respectively; and whether, in view of Circular 33/1960, he will give an assurance that no deduction will take place in the numbers to be approved for subsidy purposes while homeless and overcrowded families remain on the Kirkcaldy housing list.

Kirkcaldy Town Council completed 416 houses in 1957, 188 in 1958 and 233 in 1959. As indicated in reply to earlier Questions, I am ready to examine with any council proposals to build for needs outside the priority categories defined in the recent circular.

Is not the Secretary of State aware that his previous Answers indicate that those local authorities which have been allocating a substantial percentage of their new houses over the past years to persons in unfit houses are penalised under the circular and that he will cause considerable hardship and suffering to those persons still on the waiting lists for the homeless and overcrowded? If that is not the case, why issue the circular?

I think that the hon. Gentleman is taking an entirely gloomy view of the circular which is not substantiated by its wording. If a local authority takes the view that there is an exceptional need to build new houses for families which are overcrowded I should not refuse approval for subsidy purposes, if the case could be fully substantiated.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland to what extent his Department uses the publicity services of the Central Office of Information to publicise the industrial potentialities of Scotland, and the opportunities available for foreign investment.

My Department fully utilises the Central Office of Information publicity services for these purposes.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any examples of the kind of pamphlet or leaflet which has been issued by the C.O.I at the instigation of the Scottish Office? Is he aware that very elaborate pamphlets are produced for recruiting campaigns for the Services and, in view of the unsatisfactory state of Scottish industry, will he consider using the efficient services of the Central Office of Information in this regard?

The hon. Member will be interested to know that Scottish industrial news items are sent daily to the C.O.I. Overseas Press Service which distributes them to Government information officers in every part of the world, and that in addition a monthly Scottish newsletter with a large proportion of industrial items goes out from the C.O.I. and is sent to twenty overseas countries for use by Press and radio.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that the efforts of the Central Office of Information to help industry in Scotland are hampered by the gloomy approach of hon. Members opposite?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware that two Scottish trawlers were arrested by a Danish frigate while fishing off the Faroe Islands last week; and what action he is taking to safeguard the rights of Scottish trawlers while fishing in these waters.

Yes, Sir. Fishing in the waters off the Faroe Islands is regulated by the Anglo-Danish Agreement of 1959, which provides for the exclusion of British vessels from fishing inside a line drawn roughly six miles from the Faroese coast. The Danish and Faroese authorities have the right to ensure that this limit is observed and I understand that the trawlers were arrested for infringing it. The skippers concerned have been convicted by a local court for illegal fishing and I understand that the owners are considering an appeal against this verdict. In the circumstances no immediate action seems called for in these two cases but I am keeping a close watch on the situation.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm or deny that these trawlers were fired on by the Danish naval vessel? Is he aware that they assert that they were outside the six-mile limit? Can he tell the House what advice they received from the British Consul before the trial took place and will he do something about the penal sentences imposed on these trawlers which in fact amount to fines of not less than £5,000?

I am sure that the hon. Member will realise that, as there is a possible appeal pending, I must be very careful in what I say.

That may have some reference to the last part of my supplementary question, but will the right hon. Gentleman answer the first part? What about the action of the British Consul to protect their rights? Will he confirm or deny that these British trawlers were fired on by this Danish naval vessel?

I understand that they received a warning. I should want notice of a Question about the full details; there are various stories on this matter. The services of the British Consul were at all times available.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware that a fatal accident occurred on Tuesday, 5th July, in which a 24-year old Airdrie girl was killed and two others seriously injured, and that the ambulance service was notified at 10.58 a.m. but did not arrive until 12.14 p.m.; and, in view of this and other examples of the unsatisfactory nature of the ambulance service, if he will now order that a public inquiry be held into the management of the ambulance service.

I should like to express my sympathy with the relatives of the girl who was killed and with those who were injured. My inquiries show that the ambulance authorities were not notified until 12.4 p.m., and the ambulance left for the accident at 12.5 p.m.—one minute later. Inquiries into the reasons for the delay in notifying the ambulance authorities of the accident are not yet complete.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the information appearing on the Order Paper has been carefully checked and found to be quite accurate? Does not he realise that even the Scottish Sunday Mail published a chapter of unfortunate incidents in connection with this ambulance service and that the secretary of the Transport and General Workers' Union in Scotland said that an inquiry would serve a useful purpose? In view of this—[HON. MEMBERS: "Speech."]—this is a very serious matter—

Order. It may be a serious matter, but I hope that the hon. Gentleman will get on with his supplementary question.

Is the Minister aware that further disclosures have come to light? In the interests of the Scottish public, will he order an inquiry into this unsatisfactory ambulance service?

I do not accept what the hon. Gentleman has been saying. In many cases which I have already investigated the problem has been one of notification and not of action by the ambulance service. If the hon. Gentleman has any further evidence and will write to me I shall be glad to receive it, but by and large we find that the ambulance service moves very fast once notification has been received.

In view of the most unsatisfactory reply of the right hon. Gentleman, I wish to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make an investigation into whether the level of prescribing under the National Health Service in the City of Dundee is adequate in relation to the medical needs of those seeking treatment.

No, Sir; I have no reason to think that the family doctors in Dundee may not be providing their patients with all the necessary medicines required for their treatment.

Does the Secretary of State think it worth investigating the position in Dundee, where there is a lower level of prescription than in any other major Scottish city and yet the Dundee doctors are being punished on a larger scale for over-prescribing than is the case in any similar Scottish city?

I have no indication of any patient in Dundee suffering because of this.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what increase in capital expenditure for school building in Scotland is proposed for the financial year 1960–61 in fulfilment of the undertaking given in paragraph 21 of Command Paper No. 603, Education in Scotland—The Next Step.

Investment in school building for 1960–61 will be increased by fully £1 million to £13·2 million, which is above the annual average required to fulfil the undertaking to which the hon. Member refers.

I thank the Secretary of State for that Answer. On the general question of Government expenditure in Scotland would he undertake to make a statement before the House adjourns for the Summer Recess?

I cannot do that. The matter is under examination and I cannot say when any statement will be possible.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he proposes taking to free the River Clyde from pollution.

I am discussing with the Clyde River Purification Board the question of making an early Order extending to the estuary and other tidal parts of the Clyde the powers which the Board at present exercises in relation to the non-tidal part of the river.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recollect that the Act has been on the Statute Book for nine years and that during that time pollution in the rivers in his area and in mine has become worse than ever? Will he give a promise that he will expedite this Order with the greatest possible speed?

The hon. Member will realise that there are complex problems affecting local authorities and industries and many matters of great importance to be considered, and I think that we are moving as fast in this matter as is reasonable.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he last had consultations with the Minister of Aviation about the possibility of a tunnel under the major runway at Prestwick.

The Government's decision on this matter was intimated to the House by my hon. Friend the then Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport and Civil Aviation in the Adjournment Debate on 17th July, 1959. In it he said that if the runway extension was to go ahead at all it must be without a tunnel. There have been no consultations on this particular issue since then.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the Report which we shall discuss this afternoon he says that progress is being made towards the jet age at Prestwick? Is that progress represented by a widened taxiway, an extended runway and £7,000 spent on buildings which will be only temporary; and then there is a hold-up when the passengers get on to the road? Is that his idea of progress in the jet age?

Let me give the hon. Member one piece of news which he ought to consider satisfactory. Very good progress indeed is being made with the trunk road bypass, a scheme which was started only about seven months ago. I hope that traffic will be able to use it, at least in times of congestion, by early autumn.

In view of the unsatisfactory knowledge of Prestwick and its problems displayed by the Secretary of State, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland by what date he expects to receive from hospitals their surveys, at present being undertaken, about waiting times in their out-patient departments.

I have received the reports from the hospital authorities, and they are now being studied in my Department.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the growing volume of complaints from out-patients—and indeed, from some doctors—about the frustrating experience in the time lost in waiting at these departments? Will he undertake to publish the results of this survey at an early date?

Again I shall have to ask permission to consider whether the full reports can be published and whether they are in a form that makes that possible, but I am well aware of the importance of this problem.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will state the numbers of accidents which took place in the home for each of the past two years, at any convenient date.

Numbers of accidents in the home are not available but deaths from such accidents in the years 1958 and 1959 were 1,108 and 1,088 respectively.

Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that these numbers are twice the total of deaths which occur as a result of accidents caused by cars on the road? Can he say whether it is his intention to publish the results of the research project recently carried out in this matter?

I shall have to examine whether we can publish the full report. I will inform the hon. Member.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will appoint a small committee of inquiry to examine the means by which the Scottish universities fulfil their obligations under Section 30 of the Universities (Scotland) Act, 1889, and to recommend ways in which the responsibilities of the Scottish universities to provide information to Parliament and to the public can be best achieved.

No, Sir. I have not been aware of any need to review the question of the provision to Parliament of information about Scottish universities.

Is the Secretary of State aware that, although the Scottish Universities Commission, which was set up under the 1889 Act, laid down that the four Scottish universities should publish each year in their calendars a full financial statement, the universities have in fact ceased to do this, in the case of Glasgow since 1913, St. Andrew's since 1917, Edinburgh since 1921, and Aberdeen since 1938? Will he look into the reasons why they ceased to publish their statements?

I shall look into that, but a great deal of information regarding the activities of universities is contained in the annual Command Paper, "Returns from Universities and University Colleges in Receipt of Treasury Grant", published by the U.G.C.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is the practice of English universities to publish an annual report and that a similar publication from each of the Scottish universities would in all probability satisfy the inquisitiveness of Scottish Members.

Order. Let there be less noise. Half the intellectual pleasure of Questions is lost if one cannot hear what one is supposed to be aware of.

I shall certainly examine what the hon. Member has said.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will now build further advance factories in areas of high unemployment.

My right hon. Friend is keeping the matter under review, but no decision has yet been reached.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the advance factory in Anglesey has been let to an excellent firm months before completion? Does not this and other inquiries prove that such factories are a real inducement to industries? If the hon. Gentleman has confidence in the policy, why does he not build more in areas of high unemployment?

I am delighted that the Holyhead factory has been let to Midland Electric Manufacturers Limited, but as I said in my original Answer, the question of where further advance factories should be built is being discussed between Departments.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that there are now in Scotland representatives of the Government of Canada for the purpose of developing Scottish trade with Canada; and if he will make a detailed statement of his conversations with them and the progress made towards reciprocal trade between Scotland and Canada.

My right hon. Friend assumes that the hon. and learned Member is referring to the appointment of a Canadian Government Trade Commissioner in Glasgow early this year. The Board of Trade Office for Scotland is in touch with the Trade Commissioner and hopes to work closely with him on all matters concerning the promotion of trade between Scotland and Canada.

Is the Minister aware that I am not referring to anything of the kind, but am referring to the trade delegation which was in Scotland at the time when this Question was put on the Order Paper? Is it not an abject confession of ignorance on the part of the Minister if he does not know of that delegation? Will he consult some expert—say, Mr. Roy Thomson—who is conversant with the needs of Scotland and the potentialities of trade with Canada, with a view to doing something really practical for the trade and industry of Scotland?

I think the hon. and learned Gentleman has caught me out properly this time. If he had not got this habit of always postponing his Questions they would not get out of date.

asked the President of the Board of Trade who are the members of the Council of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade; what is the extent of the increase of the Secretariat agreed to at Geneva by the contracting parties thereto; and what additional contribution is to be paid by the United Kingdom as a result of decisions made at this Geneva meeting.

As there are twenty-nine members of the Council, I will, with permission, circulate the list of names in the OFFICIAL REPORT. The Contracting Parties to the General Agreement have approved in principle that the Secretariat should be enlarged but they have not yet examined precise proposals on this subject or decided what additional contributions individual countries should be invited to make.

Is this a case of Parkinson's international law? Is my right hon. Friend aware that many people think this organisation has done enough harm already to British and Commonwealth trade?

I am aware of the sincerely held views of my hon. Friend. I do not think this is a case of an international application of Parkinson's Law. I explained to my hon. Friend, in reply to a Question which was answered on 15th July, why it was decided to set up the Council. I think those were good reasons.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will vary the recent hire-purchase restrictions on a regional basis so that the employment position in the north-east of England is not affected.

No, Sir. To have varying degrees of restriction according to the locality in which the hire-purchase transaction took place would be quite impracticable.

Will the hon. Gentleman say why this cannot be done? If this instrument is to be used to deal with inflation, cannot the Government apply it a little more selectively and intelligently instead of indiscriminately to the whole country? Is he aware that before the Chancellor's action there was a high level of unemployment in the North-East and that this has increased considerably in furniture making and other trades as a result of these restrictions?

Hire-purchase restrictions like Purchase Tax must go with the goods and not with the locality in which the sales take place. The effect of the release of any one area would inevitably lead to transactions being carried out in the exempt area so as to escape the incidence of the control. This would inevitably weaken the present measures which are to stabilise the economy.

If that is the case, cannot the Government apply it selectively as between trades to help the furniture-making and other industries where there is increasing unemployment in the North-East and elsewhere as a result of Government policy?

No. What we can do is to steer industries, as the hon. Member knows we are doing, to the area.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will hold an inquiry into the announced voluntary liquidation of Francis Morton and Company Limited, constructional engineers, of Garston, Liverpool.

No, Sir. The Board of Trade has no power to investigate the affairs of a company which is in liquidation. That is the duty of the liquidators appointed by the members of the company.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the reasons being given for the voluntary liquidation are not considered by those who are working in the industry to be the correct ones? In view of the very prosperous times through which this industry has been going, is it not possible for some inquiry to be made, because unemployment will be the outcome of a voluntary liquidation in these circumstances?

All we know about this particular case is that two chartered accountants were appointed liquidators in March last but, under Section 334 of the Companies Act, the liquidator in a voluntary winding-up is required to report to the Director of Public Prosecutions if he suspects anything wrong.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the outcome of the recent official discussions with the sponsors of the proposed graving dock at Greenock.

As a result of discussions between the sponsors of the proposed graving dock and the Board of Trade Advisory Committee, my right hon. Friend has communicated to General Macmillan a revised offer of the terms on which Government assistance can be made available.

While welcoming the announcement, which I hope represents a very substantial step forward, may I ask if we may take it that the Government are contemplating any definite time limit to be imposed on this offer?

The actual offer was made on 6th July. The amendments relate not so much to the terms of Government assistance as to the arrangements to be made by the company for raising that part of the finance to be found from non-Government sources. It is not that we have altered the basis of our offer, but the company is altering the basis of its.

asked the Prime Minister, in view of the difficulties that have arisen over the use of United States aircraft operating from bases in the United Kingdom, since the agreement to allow such United States bases, if he will now consider ending this agreement.

asked the Prime Minister if the permission of Her Majesty's Government must be obtained before any U2 flights take place from this country.

asked the Prime Minister what consultations he has had with the United States administration regarding the flight of United States aircraft on reconnaissance missions from Lakenheath airfield.

asked the Prime Minister on how many occasions in the past six months the use of the United States bases in this country has been the subject of a joint decision by the Governments of the United Kingdom and the United States in accordance with the understanding reached in October, 1951, and confirmed in January, 1952.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will consult with President Eisenhower with a view to securing the closest degree of prior consultation and information on all reconnaissance missions of United States aircraft from the United Kingdom.

asked the Prime Minister whether reconnaissance flights over Soviet territory or Eastern Europe have been made by United States aircraft operating from bases in Great Britain; and whether he had given his approval before such flights were made.

With permission, I will answer Question No. 40 with Questions Nos. 41, 42, 43, 44, 48 and 50.

On a point of order. Before I can decide whether I should like my Question No. 44 to be answered with the others, and since my Question deals particularly with Brize Norton and was put down to the Secretary of State for Air and has been gathered up by the Prime Minister, I should like to know from the Prime Minister how far he is going to treat U2 flights and RB-47 flights in the same way.

The hon. Member asks about Question No. 44. There is a Private Notice Question down by the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition, so that perhaps I ought to leave that Question until then. Had I considered this previously, perhaps I should have left out that Question.

I have given these matters careful consideration, as I promised. These Questions have a bearing on either the scope of Intelligence activities or the way in which they are conducted and controlled. It has never been the practice to discuss such matters in the House, and I have come to the conclusion that it would be contrary to the public interest for me to depart from precedent on this occasion.

Nevertheless, on the matter of consultation raised by several of these Questions, I feel able to say this. Ever since the Attlee-Truman agreement with regard to the use of bases in this country, we have had good working arrangements between ourselves and the Americans. But I am taking up with the President the question whether there should be any modification or improvement of these arrangements.

Does the Prime Minister recollect that ten years ago the right hon. Member for Woodford (Sir W. Churchill) uttered a very historic warning about the dangers to this country caused by creating American bomber bases in East Anglia saying,

"… we have made ourselves the target and perhaps the bull's eye of a Soviet attack".[OFFICIAL REPORT, 15th February, 1951; Vol. 484, c. 630.]

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the latest incidents have burned this into the minds of the people of this country and that they expect the Prime Minister to speak for the people of this country and not to be a mere puppet of the Pentagon?

I do not know whether the hon. Member gave notice to my right hon. Friend the Member for Woodford (Sir W. Churchill) that he proposed to quote from his speech. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"] These are very grave issues in which my right hon. Friend is known to have taken a great part and, without seeing the whole of the speech, I would hazard a venture that this quotation is taken out of a speech in which my right hon. Friend draws the whole picture of our problem as regards air defence and the working of the deterrent. There are, of course, those who feel—and I have every sympathy with the hon. Member; we know his views—that the presence of the United States bases in this country, is, as he says, a threat to our national security. But I am bound to say that I think that there are many more of us who feel that their absence would be an even greater threat.

While welcoming the news that the Prime Minister has decided to approach the American President to improve consultations, may I ask whether this is not an admission that Her Majesty's Government were not fully in control of the activities which have been going on until now? Secondly, is the Prime Minister aware that the American Senate has already been given details of flights by American reconnaissance planes from British airfields? Is it not quite improper that Her Majesty's Government should refuse similar information to this House, because surely the penetration of foreign air space by reconnaissance aircraft is not only a violation of international law which carries peculiar dangers, which have previously been stressed by my right hon. Friends, but has recently been the subject of threats which it would be unwise entirely to ignore?

In answer to the first part of the supplementary question, it is perfectly fair to say that everything is capable of improvement. I think that perhaps the second part of the question is that to which the hon. Member attached the greater importance. I have seen the text of the evidence given to United States Senate Committee about the U2 flights from Lakenheath, and I am bound to say that it does not seem to refer at all to the anxieties which are disturbing some hon. Members, for it is quite clear—I will have the papers put in the Library—that it refers to flights not over Soviet territory.

The Prime Minister cannot get away with that. Is he aware that the Secretary of State for Air refused to answer my Question referring to this evidence on the ground that these flights concerned Intelligence activities? It is no good now pretending that they did not.

It is not very easy to please the hon. Member. We do our best, and we have many links. When it is my duty to refuse to answer Questions, as far as possible, on Intelligence matters, then we are accused of not giving information. When we try to relax the strictness of that rule a little, we are told that we are inconsistent. All I can say is that we have tried to give as much information as we can—it is quite a heavy burden upon all Administrations in these matters—but to preserve what we believe to be the interests of the country.

May we take it from the Prime Minister's original answer that the Attlee-Truman agreement applies to these reconnaissance flights and that therefore we were consulted before they took place?

Of course, consultations took place—ever since that agreement was made—as to the flights which may take place from this territory. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh"] Since that agreement. Before that agreement was made there could not have been any necessity for such consultations because there were no American bombers in this country.

I venture to ask the Prime Minister to answer the question which last week he invited me to put down: since it is universally admitted that reconnaissance flights by spy aircraft are illegal under international law, is it not desirable that the House of Commons should know whether the Prime Minister is consulted before such flights are made from British bases and whether he has given his approval?

As for the flights referred to, I should have thought that it is not a matter which exercised anxiety in this country now, for it was made clear on 16th May in Paris by President Eisenhower that these flights were suspended and would not be resumed.

In view of the very welcome announcement which the Prime Minister has made that he proposes to take up this matter with the President, may I ask him whether he will consider putting this point to the President: that one of the greatest anxieties which people in this country have is lest the military machine should become the dictator of political policy. In the interests of a continuing amicable and successful alliance in N.A.T.O., will he ask the President to do all that he can to make it abundantly clear that the military instrument is within the control of the politician?

I think that that is so. There are occasionally mistakes; of course, there must be. But, broadly speaking, we have consultations and arrangements for operations which we regard, and I think that those opposite who know most about these matters would regard, as essential if there is to be a deterrent and if its value and strength is to be maintained.

Does the Prime Minister's silence in reply to my Question No. 43 mean that during this period. when there have been U2 flights, combat readiness alert and now the RB47 flight, the Attlee-Truman agreement has been quite ineffective and that the British Government have been a silent accomplice in these provocative actions?

While I try to meet legitimate and very proper questions from those who, I think, share the broad views of the House that we should have a common defence and play our part in it in one way or another, I honestly feel, while I understand the hon. Member's views, that I am entitled to give the kind of reply which I gave because we know that he does not share that view as to what our country ought to do and as to the role that we should play in the world.

Mr. Longden.

Does my right hon. Friend agree—

Order. It is difficult to make sufficient noise over the noise which is being made by the House, but I called Mr. Longden.

While I agree with what was suggested by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for the Isle of Ely (Sir H. Legge-Bourke), may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he will make it clear in his reply to Mr. Khrushchev that our relations with our allies in N.A.T.O. are not to be dictated by the Kremlin and that, as an employer of more spies than anyone else in the world, Mr. Khrushchev had better put his own glass house in order before threatening to send us a rocket?

There is a Private Notice Question on that issue and I think that it would be more courteous if I waited to answer that, but the point made by my hon. Friend will certainly be borne in mind.

In view of the Prime Minister's statement that reconnaissance flights are not to be resumed over Russia by aeroplanes based in this country, and in view of the impossibility of establishing where a plane is when it is shot down by the Soviet Union, would he consider discussing with President Eisenhower the possibility of notifying the Soviet Government of all scientific survey flights which may be made from American bases?

These are of course possible courses which might be taken. I must remind the House that a great number of activities of this kind are carried on by the Soviet Government, some of them very near our shores. These are the symptoms, not the causes, of the tension. What I regret is that such efforts as I tried to make to reduce the tension have temporarily been halted, but I do not intend to give up that purpose. If we can do that, then some of these things which are really the grievous symptoms of the state of the world will become easier to deal with.

Is it not clear that the circumstances in which the original agreements were made differ considerably from those which obtain today? The original agreements spoke of the use of these bases in an emergency, whereas it is quite clear from the Prime Minister's answers to Questions today and on other occasions that these bases are in fact being continually used for various expeditions of one kind or another. Is it not, therefore, perfectly clear that we must have another agreement on these bases? In welcoming the Prime Minister's announcement that he intends to take this up with the President of the United States, may I ask him if he will inform the House of the outcome of these talks with the President and publish the terms of the new agreement?

No. I do not think that it is a question of a written formal agreement. There was not one before. All kinds of activities went on from 1948 onwards under all Governments. I will consider what the right hon. Gentleman has said. I know how much he cares for effective defence, and I would be very willing to consult with him as to the result of any of our discussions. I cannot undertake—I am sure that he would not wish me to undertake and would not himself in my place today undertake—to publish the results of some private communications which might pass between us and the American authorities. I said that I would discuss with the President, but it would be a question of going through a whole series of procedures and looking at them again with a view to making them more effective and more secure.

Is it not clear that a distinction should be drawn between matters which can properly be treated as coming under the head of security—for instance, any particular individual flight —and the terms of an agreement regarding consultation? Why should the way in which we consult our allies involve security aspects at all? Does the Prime Minister realise that it is in some sense the absence of precision in the previous agreement that has led to so much public concern over this matter? Will he, therefore, reconsider the question of giving the House and the country as much information as possible about the outcome of his talks with the President of the United States?

I will, of course, consider what we can say and how much we can say.

References were made several times by the Prime Minister and other right hon. and hon. Gentlemen to the terms of the Attlee-Truman agreement, as it has been described. Will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to tell us what are the terms of that agreement? [HON. MEMBERS: "The right hon. Gentleman was in the Cabinet."] Would it not help to clarify this matter if we knew the terms of the agreement? In fact, was there any written agreement? Since there has been some scepticism from hon. Gentlemen opposite about my knowledge of the matter when Minister of Defence, may I ask the Prime Minister whether he is aware that as a member of the Cabinet at that time I am not aware of any written agreement?

I do not think that I have said that there was a written agreement. As the House knows, an understanding was reached between the United Kingdom and the United States Governments in October, 1951, under Mr. Attlee's Premiership, under which the use in an emergency of bases in this country by United States forces was accepted to be a matter for joint decision between the two Governments in the light of the circumstances prevailing at the time.

As I told the House on 12th December, 1957, this understanding depended on no formal document. It was accepted as a mutually satisfactory arrangement. It was subsequently confirmed in the joint statement issued on 9th January by my right hon. Friend the Member for Woodford (Sir W. Churchill) and President Truman in Washington.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, whatever we may think about the desirability, to say nothing of the efficiency, of certain aspects of American intelligence work, we should not play the Russian game by saying anything in this House which is calculated to encourage a climate of opinion towards the discontinuance of American bases in N.A.T.O. and other allied countries?

I very much welcome what my hon. and gallant Friend has said. The fundamental basic thing is to continue, to make more effective, and to make perhaps more precise, the close association between Britain and America in this matter, as with all our N.A.T.O. allies.

Is the Prime Minister aware that none of us on this side either wants to play either the Russian game or the American game? We want to play the game with the British people, whose lives are at stake. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, as he and his Ministers themselves have said, there is no such thing as a written agreement and the position today is not the same as it was when that understanding was made? The word "emergency" has been inserted by the right hon. Gentleman and his friends to cover up a situation which neither he nor any Member in any part of the House can justify at this serious moment.

I understand the hon. Gentleman's views, but I do not think that they carry the broad approval of the House.

I quite appreciate the Prime Minister's reticence on these matters, but can he not tell us at what level these decisions are taken? Are they taken at Prime Minister level, or are they taken at the level of the man commanding the station from which the planes are sent?

If the right hon. Gentleman will reflect, he will see that it is the duty of subordinate commanders to carry out the general arrangements reached by their superiors.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in this House on 30th May the Secretary of State for Air gave an assurance that United States military aircraft entering or leaving the United Kingdom filed a flight plan? Would the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to tell us whether that undertaking is being carried out? If it is, does it not mean that every aircraft, whatever its enterprise may be, is carrying out its object with the full knowledge of Her Majesty's Government?