asked the Minister of Defence what percentage of the working population is now either in the Services or supporting them; and how this compares with three years ago.

The percentage of the working population now in the Services or supporting them is estimated at 4· 7 per cent. This compares with 60 per cent. three years ago.

Is it not a fact that in the 1957 White Paper on Defence the figure was no less than 7 per cent.? Does not this show that the Defence Services have made a big contribution to the economic difficulties of the country? Will my right hon. Friend make representations accordingly to the Chancellor of the Exchequer?

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for what he has said. It is perfectly true that the Services have carried out a very painful operation in trying to reduce their dependence on the manpower of our working population.

Would it not be more realistic to quote numbers rather than percentages?

And cost.

No, I think that the percentage gives a fair figure.

asked the Minister of Defence how often the Defence Board met in 1959 and 1960. respectively.

It is not in accordance with custom to give details of the working of committees of this sort. The Board meets as business requires.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether this new Board has given him assistance in formulating policy as was envisaged in the White Paper two or three years ago, following which the Board was set up?

Yes, Sir. I am glad to do that. I find the work of the Defence Board absolutely invaluable in helping me to consult my colleagues and formulate policy by general agreement, which is my wish.

asked the Minister of Defence what stage has been reached in the negotiations for the provision of facilities for German forces on British soil.

asked the Minister of Defence what proposals have been made recently by West Germany for military bases and training facilities in Great Britain; what help he has offered; and if he will make a statement on his discussions with General Heusinger.

asked the Minister of Defence what form of agreement was signed on German bases in Great Britain on the occasion of General Heusinger's recent visit to this country.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he will make a statement regarding the arrangements that have been made for the training of West German armed forces in the Castlemartin area of Pembrokeshire.

asked the Minister of Defence how many Federal German Service men will be stationed in Great Britain under the recent arrangement.

asked the Minister of Defence what additional facilities he is providing for training German troops in Great Britain.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he is aware that since the conversations between Her Majesty's Government and General Heusinger anxiety has increased about the admission of German forces into Great Britain for training or other purposes; and what steps he now proposes to take to prevent their admission from taking place.

As the House knows, the Federal German Government have recently concluded arrangements through N.A.T.O. for storage and training facilities in other N.A.T.O. countries which cannot be met within their own territory. Discussions will shortly be taking place between the Germans and ourselves under the auspices of N.A.T.O. to see whether similar facilities can be provided in this country. Until these discussions have taken place, we do not know whether we can meet the needs of the German forces. The visit of General Heusinger to this country was not connected with these discussions.

Is the Minister aware that most people in this country hate this proposal and will be shocked by his Answer? Is there no hope of the discussions breaking down, or is the right hon. Gentleman determined to go down in history as the man who succeeded where Hitler failed and put German troops on British soil?

The hon. Member, of course, knows, first, that that is a completely misleading supplementary question, and, secondly, that it does not represent the views of the enormous majority of the population of this country. At any rate, let me make the Government's decision quite plain. The Government welcome wholeheartedly the German desire to incorporate their armed forces with their N.A.T.O. allies.

Will the Minister give the House two very reasonable undertakings? The first is that no high-ranking former Nazi officers will be allowed here. The second is that no training will be given in the use of missiles or nuclear weapons.

I am not prepared to give any undertaking. What I said some time ago, and perhaps I may remind the House of it, was, first, that certain limited training of German personnel has already taken place, and I said then that if this was to be largely increased I would certainly undertake to inform the House.

It the Minister really not aware of the widespread opposition in Britain to the growing armed forces in Germany? Is he not aware that a large number of people in Britain believe that the Government should devote themselves wholeheartedly to limiting armed forces and armaments in Germany, both East and West? Will he not, therefore, devote himself to that task?

That is a quite different question which should be put down to the Foreign Secretary.

If the Germans have not enough room in their own country, would it not be much more sensible to bring back here the British forces at present in Germany and let the Germans do in their own country whatever training N.A.T.O. or their present Government want them to do? Would not that be a very much more sensible way of dealing with the problem, which will cause very grave disquiet, if not disgust, among many good British citizens?

I agree that this is an emotional subject for most of us; most of us have memories of one war, and some of us have memories of two wars. All I would say is that those who want to ensure that such a terrible tragedy cannot happen again should very strongly support the integration of Germany's forces with her allies.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that the introduction of forces from Germany into this country will cause very serious anxiety to people who have suffered from the Nazis and are now in this country, particularly as there is a neo-Nazi party being recreated in Germany, as he probably knows? What steps will he take to ensure that the German forces which are brought into this country will be properly vetted so that they will not cause any damage, even if he will not stop them from coming altogether? Will he bear in mind that when in the past people of a similar nature have been allowed to come here they have on occasion indulged in the publishing of anti-semitic and other Nazi vicious propaganda here? Will he take that into consideration?

I wonder whether the hon. Gentleman has studied the extreme care with which the Federal German Republic acted when its forces took over certain training facilites in France. I am advised that, as a result, no trouble or difficulties arose, and there are certainly as deep feelings in France on this matter as in Great Britain.

Will not the right hon. Gentleman acknowledge that this is really a Gilbertian situation? We are having to offer the Germans facilities to train their troops here because they have not enough room at home, while we have 50,000 or 60,000 troops stationed in Germany. Would it not be sensible to follow the advice given by my hon. Friend the Member for Brixton (Mr. Lipton)? Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that if he did so he would save more for the British taxpayer than the mean, miserable economies which the Minister of Health is now determined to impose on the babes, the maimed and the sick?

The hon. Gentleman will have an opportunity to pursue that subject later.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I have had a letter from the Mayor of Lydd, a town which has a military camp, saying that certain members of his community would welcome German troops going there for training?

There are, as my hon. Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Costain) has fairly indicated, two sides to this question. I would ask hon. Members, who have a perfect right to feel deeply on this subject, just to reflect on the fact that none of us wants the tragedy of the last two world wars to happen again. Surely the best way to ensure that that does not happen is to try to tie the Germans tightly into our Western Alliance, and that is the wish of the Germans themselves.

asked the Minister of Defence if he will now reduce present arms expenditure.

As I informed the hon. Member for Wednesbury (Mr. Stonehouse) on 1st February, I see no prospect of significantly reducing defence expenditure until there is an international agreement on disarmament or a real lowering of international tension.

Is it not a fact that the annual military expenditure has risen from £770 million in 1950 to approximately £1,620 million today, which may explain the present National Health Service cuts? Can the Minister at least give us an assurance that reports of yet another increase in this year's Estimates to £1,700 million are false?

It is not customary to anticipate the White Paper on Defence. When the hon. Gentleman sees it, he may find that we have done a little better than he thinks.

asked the Minister of Defence, in view of the relaxation of international tension as a result of the release of the RB47 airmen, if he will now reconsider the decision to agree to a Polaris base in Great Britain.

No, Sir. Her Majesty's Government welcome this gesture by the Soviet Government but reductions in the defences of the Western Alliance can only flow from agreed measures of disarmament.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is a curious welcome to proposals which are likely to reduce international tension to establish this atomic monster on the Clyde? Does he not realise that this monster is designed to destroy the civil population of the Soviet Union, and that the result might be the destruction of this country? Does he not think that some gesture of this kind would be heartily welcomed in Russia and certainly in Scotland?

The hon. Gentleman and I could not be further apart, because we disagree on the basic contention. It is my contention, and that of, I think, all reasonable people, that the Polaris submarine weapon system, because it is a second-strike weapon, makes the chance of war much less likely.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he is aware that, now that the United States Government has decided to reduce the number of Service families allowed to be stationed abroad, there is no longer a similar need for housing, schools and similar facilities to be available near to a Polaris submarine base; and whether the Government will now reconsider the decision to have a base at Holy Loch.

The nearness of housing and schools was not the determining factors in choosing the Holy Loch, though it was one of several factors. In any event, President Kennedy's statement of 1st February makes it seem unlikely that families wishing to join members of the crew of the depot ship will be prevented from doing so.

I saw that President Kennedy had let me down. Nevertheless, would it not be sensible to look at this again to see whether the technical facilities required cannot be provided somewhere else and prevent, as we all know, this housing requirement being the determining factor in putting this base so near a very crowded urban area?

I quite see the point of the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. This was gone into very carefully, but perhaps I should make it plain, because a great many people are creating a misleading impression by saying that this is a base. What it is is a few buoys in a sea loch to which a depot ship will moor, and nothing could be more mobile than that. Certainly at the present time this seems to be the best anchorage that can be provided, for a whole range of very technical reasons, and that is why it is going there.

In considering this matter, will my right hon. Friend take into account the matter which is today before the British courts and is sub judice?

I take note of my hon. Friend's point.

asked the Minister of Defence if, in the forthcoming White Paper on Defence, he will state whether it is still Her Majesty's Government's policy to initiate the use of nuclear weapons in certain circumstances.

asked the Minister of Defence whether, in the forthcoming White Paper on Defence, he will include an estimate of the proportion of total defence expenditure which is accounted for by nuclear weapons and their means of delivery, including expenditure on research and development.

It is not customary to disclose in advance the contents of the White Paper on Defence and I must. therefore, ask the hon. Members to wait until it is published.

As the right hon. Gentleman still has some time to give very serious consideration to this in view of the further development of rockets and nuclear weapons since this doctrine was first enunciated, and in view of the utterly suicidal nature of this doctrine for this country now, will he consider inserting something in the White Paper to show that he has returned to sanity and abandoned his policy?

The hon. Member had better await the White Paper.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that if we were to eliminate the nuclear element from our strategy the savings realised would be sufficient to pay for the necessary expansion of scientific and industrial research and of our health, education and welfare services without imposing a single penny of extra burden on the taxpayer, the insured contributor, the patient and the consumer?

No, Sir; I would not. The hon. Gentleman will see that for himself if he bothers to look at the figures.

Has the right hon. Gentleman seen the statement recently made by the President of the United States of America that in no circumstances would they fight first? Does he not appreciate that the British Government's intention, as set forth in a former Defence White Paper, that in some circumstances they would strike first creates a fundamental division between the defence policy of the Government and that of their principal ally in N.A.T.O.?

There will probably always be varying views about what has been written in the past, but over a whole series of White Papers it has been clearly said time and time again that this country would never be an aggressor.

asked the Minister of Defence what steps he is taking to ensure that the British Army of the Rhine is fully organised, equipped, trained and deployed to meet threats to peace in Europe without recourse to nuclear weapons.

In dealing with aggression, N.A.T.O. forces would not necessarily have recourse to nuclear weapons. B.A.O.R., as the United Kingdom's land force contribution to N.A.T.O., is organised, equipped, trained and deployed to meet the N.A.T.O. military authorities' defence plans, which call for both nuclear and conventional capacity.

But is it not rather a disturbing fact that the B.A.O.R. as at present organised and trained is virtually incapable of operating in any conventional rô le? Is it not a fact that all the B.A.O.R. exercises last year were held on the assumption of the use of nuclear weapons? Is not this contrary to General Norstad's own policy?

The B.A.O.R. exercises last year were, as they will be this year, in exact accordance with the Supreme Commander's doctrine, and that is that we must be prepared to use either nuclear or conventional weapons as circumstances dictate.

Will the Minister consider circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT public statements made by British officers with the B.A.O.R. about the use of nuclear weapons?

I think that there is a Question down to my right hon. Friend on that subject. What I must make plain on the broad policy issue is that there is no change and that we work as loyal members of N.A.T.O. to the directives, both political and military, laid down by the Alliance, and we have not departed or budged from that.

asked the Minister of Defence what records are kept by Service Departments of a Service man's race or mixture of races.

Such information is recorded as is necessary to ensure that coloured members of the Forces are not sent to areas where they may be denied equal treatment with their white comrades.

In view of that rather startling reply, which shows that the Service Departments have now adopted a policy which the Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of Pensions and National Insurance have refused to undertake, would the right hon. Gentleman care to enlighten the House a little more about the methods of recording the selections? Is there a colour chart distinguishing between "medium oak" and "dark oak"? Are there some ancestral notes? Are relatives to come into it? Does the nature of a kink in the hair come into it? What bogus racial doctrine is followed in compiling these statistics?

The hon. Gentleman knows as well as I do that the reason for this is the very sensible one that it is the duty of a commanding officer to look after the men under his command and to ensure that they are not subjected to unpleasantness when serving in the Forces of the Crown.

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied about the accuracy of these racial records? Is there, for example, a right of appeal by a person who is, in his view, classified incorrectly? Would it not perhaps be advisable for the right hon. Gentleman to have consultations with the High Commissioner for South Africa, who has far greater experience in these things and no doubt would assist?

Is the Minister aware that this is a most serious reply? It seems to conflict completely with the Prime Minister's reply yesterday. Will the Minister give us a list of the places to which our coloured fellow citizens are not sent, and will he review it with the Prime Minister to see whether the Government want to adhere to this policy?

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said yesterday that we would look at this whole question, but the point I am on is a perfectly proper one for the Minister of Defence or Service Ministers whose first duty—as the right hon. Gentleman knows there is no colour bar at all in Her Majesty's Forces and no discrimination between race, colour or creed—is to see that these men, when they are on duty, are properly looked after and not subjected to any improper treatment or put in an embarrassing situation.

The Minister has not answered the second part of my supplementary question. Will he give the House a list of the places to which coloured members of the Services are not sent?

If the right hon. Gentleman wants to pursue that, perhaps he will put down a Question. It would be very difficult to give an exact list because this is purely a matter for the discretion of the Service, or sometimes of the commanding officer, to try to see that the men are not put in an embarrassing position

asked the Minister of Defence if he will state the nature and give the text of the safeguards which protect British national interests in the plan to put Fighter Command under North Atlantic Treaty Organisation control.

Great Britain retains the right to decide the size, composition, rô le and deployment of their air defence forces assigned to SACEUR.

May we take it from that Answer that we will have complete control over the use of Fighter Command for non-N.A.T.O. purposes? Can the Minister tell us how many aircraft will be involved? Can he say how many Hunters and Lightnings and so on will be involved in this? If we can abstract our Fighter Command at any time for our purposes, how will that affect the purpose for which this integration is being made, which I presume is an attempt to provide defence in depth?

The last part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question sums it up very well. It is entirely to deploy the defence in depth which the change in the air situation makes necessary. If he will be kind enough to study the words used in my original Answer, the hon. Gentleman will see that this gives us complete control over our own fighter forces. For many years we have been pressing in N.A.T.O. not for integrated defence, but for unified air defence, and that is what we have now secured.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he will hold an investigation into the inadequacy of United Kingdom defence arrangements in the Caribbean area, in view of the weakness of United Kingdom detection methods, as revealed in the lengthy search for the "Santa Maria".

No, Sir.

How can the right hon. Gentleman make that outrageous statement when it took almost four days to find out where this great vessel was, maintaining complete radio activity? What would have happened had it been a hostile submarine submerged and maintaining radio silence? We should not have found it yet.

I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman served at sea, as I did, during the last war. if he did, I think he will accept that an ocean is a very big place. As to the particular case which concerns a British frigate, it would have needed second or third sight on the part of the commanding officer to ascertain that, when he was quite justifiably in need of refuelling, the "Santa Maria" was about to sail.

Would it be a fair point to ask the Minister whether the commander should not be congratulated upon his obvious use of the Nelson touch to give Her Majesty's Government time to get their policy right?

I think what the right hon. Gentleman is saying is that this was a diplomatic running out of fuel. I am happy to assure him that it was an actual and very practical running out of fuel.

What makes the right hon. Gentleman happy about that?

asked the Minister of Defence how much joint working has been achieved between the three Services.

Except for operations that by their nature concern only one Service, all operational planning is now carried out by the Services jointly; and their orders of battle and their equipment are planned as a whole. Their technical and administrative support is pooled wherever this is calculated to make for economy and efficiency.

Is the Minister satisfied that sufficient progress has been made in that direction?

No, I am not entirely satisfied, and I hope to take it a good deal further before long.

asked the Minister of Defence if he will make a statement on the Government's policy with regard to the United States proposal that the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation should be provided with a medium-range ballistic missile multilateral force.

No, Sir.

Is the Minister aware that there is still a great deal of vagueness about the proposal? Are not we entitled to know what the Government think about it? Is he aware that there is a considerable feeling that N.A.T.O. should not be made into a fourth nuclear power?

My right hon. Friend the Lord Privy Seal made a fairly full statement on the Government's present position on 20th December. I have nothing to add to that at the moment, because negotiations are still going on.

In view of the fact that nobody could understand the Lord Privy Seal's statement on that occasion, will the Minister now tell us whether the British Government are in fact so opposed to the proposal for putting some of these Polaris weapons into Europe?

I confess that I find equal difficulty in understanding the hon. Member's contribution to defence questions.

Mr. Wall.

Answer.

Order. I have called the next Question. We are not getting on very well.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he will arrange to purchase Polaris missiles for use in conventional surface or underwater warships of the Royal Navy.

There is no need for us to take an immediate decision in this matter.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether the installation of this weapon in conventional hulls is being considered? Would not this be a way of reducing costs? Has he noted that the Americans are installing this weapon in the cruiser "Long Beach"?

I have noted my hon. Friend's point, which is an important one.

Is the Minister aware that one of these Polaris submarines costs £50 million? If he orders any more, will there have to be further cuts in the Health Services in order to pay for them?

I have not ordered any yet.

asked the Minister of Defence what steps he is taking to integrate the training of officers of the three Services at all levels.

It is my aim to extend joint Services training as much as possible, and I am now having the possibilities examined.

It may be good at the top level, but can my right hon. Friend give attention to the need for increasing this Service training at the Dartmouth, Sandhurst and Cranwell level?

I have great sympathy with the question of trying to integrate Service training. My hon. Friend may like to know that the whole subject is now being examined in great detail.

asked the Minister of Defence if, in view of the developing mobility of the Armed Forces, he will consider reducing the period of National Service for all National Service men.

No, Sir.

Does the Minister appreciate that as a result of increasing mobility it becomes quite desirable and practicable to telescope training facilities, thus reducing the period of National Service? Does not he realise that by doing so we could eliminate the wastage of many young Service men and release additional manpower in order to assist the country to face the present economic challenge?

We have released certain National Service men who, for reasons of the cut-down in training commitments, and other reasons, have become redundant. We will keep to that policy. But as I said in answer to the Question, I see no chance of cutting down the term.

asked the Postmaster-General what is the estimated cost of setting up a satellite transmitter to enable the North Regional Home Service programmes to be better received in the North Lincolnshire area; in view of the large number of complaints his Department has received on this matter, what steps he is taking; and how soon they will be effective.

I have already authorised the British Broadcasting Corporation to provide a V.H.F. sound station in East Lincolnshire in the second stage of its satellite scheme, and this is expected to cover those parts of Lincolnshire not now adequately served by existing V.H.F. stations. All stations in this stage are due to be completed by March, 1964.

I am much obliged to my right hon. Friend for that promise. He hopes that the scheme will be completed by 1964. Cannot we have it a little quicker? Both viewers and listeners in North Lincolnshire feel that they are on the outer fringe of both the Northern and the Midlands Service, and that they do not get a good service from either. Cannot this be completed a little earlier?

The second stage will be finished by 1964, and I hope that that part of the programme with which my hon. Friend is concerned will be finished well before that.

asked the Postmaster-General what consultations he has had with the Independent Television Authority under subsection (5) of Section 4 of the Television Act, with a view to banning drug advertisements on Independent Television forthwith.

None, Sir.

Is the Minister aware that the British Medical Association has now confirmed the suspicions of many viewers by stating that a number of medical advertisements on I.T.V. are bogus and misleading, and by recommending a ban on drug advertising on I.T.V.? Why, when the Minister has power to stop this very profitable abuse, does he constantly aid and abet it?

I am well aware of the advice which the British Medical Association has put to the Pilkington Committee. It is, in the first place, a matter for that Committee to consider, and not for me, but in fairness I should point out that the I.T.A. is governed by the advice of its Advertising Advisory Committee, which includes representatives not only of the British Medical Association but of the British Dental Association, the Pharmaceutical Society and the Ministry of Health. The I.T.A. has repeatedly made it clear to the members of that Committee that if they feel that the standards of advertising are being infringed they should say so to the I.T.A.

Are we to assume from that reply that up to the present, at any rate, the Committee has not shown the same concern about this matter as has the British Medical Association? Secondly, in view of the general concern which is felt about this subject all over the country, does not he think that he should remit this matter specially to the Committee for its examination and reply?

The answer to the first part of the hon. Member's supplementary question is "Yes". The answer to the second part is that this is the first occasion on which the B.M.A. has expressed this view.

asked the Postmaster-General why he displays a poster indicating that the correct address of the locality is Helensburgh, Dumbartonshire, while the nameplate above the posting box is Helensburgh, Dunbartonshire.

I am sorry about this discrepancy. The poster is being brought into line forthwith with the notice above the posting box. Further, this form of spelling will be adopted generally by the Post Office as soon as possible, a course which I am sure will be welcomed by the county council.

I thank the hon. Lady and her Department for at last adopting the spelling preferred by the County Council of Dunbartonshire, and I express my appreciation at the fact that the Post Office are no longer "Dumb".

asked the Postmaster-General what are the proportions between reading matter and advertising in newspapers which determine his decision to register such newspapers for postal purposes.

Publications are accepted for registration as newspapers provided they contain at least one-third news matter or articles on current topics and that they satisfy the other requirements of registration.

Is the hon. Lady satisfied that this regulation is being carried out?

Yes, Sir.

Can she produce any evidence that it is being carried out?

I should be interested if the right hon. Gentleman would produce evidence to the contrary.

asked the Postmaster-General whether the figures of expected growth of the telephone service set out in paragraph 14 of the White Paper on Post Office Capital Investment, 1960–61, Command Paper No. 973, still represent Post Office expectations; and whether he will make a statement.

The Post Office capital allocation for 1960–61 has been increased by £2 million since the White Paper was published. I now expect to improve on the forecast in paragraph 14 of the White Paper. I hope that the number of new connections will be 465,000.

asked the Lord Privy Seal if he will investigate the circumstances surrounding the dumping, for several months, at the Royal Air Force airfield at Abingdon, of 8,000 tins of corned beef intended for starving people in the Congo; what it is now intended to do with the food; and if he will make a statement.

This corned beef was part of a supply set aside for the Congo last summer after an appeal from Mr. Hammarskjoeld for help in combatting food shortages in urban areas in the Congo. It proved to be surplus to the consignment which the aeroplanes undertaking the operation were able to carry. We have more than once been in touch with the United Nations authorities about the meat; and we have now heard that they do not require it for famine relief. We shall, therefore, dispose of it through Government channels and remit the net proceeds to the United Nations.

Is not it a terrible thing that many months ago the people of the Congo were dying of starvation and that this food would have been very useful? Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that a spokesman of United Nations, Mr. Norman Wright, said in Rome that he had never heard of it, and that this food would have been of great value many months ago? Since someone has blundered and this mountain of beef is at the airfield, will the right hon. Gentleman have an investigation to find out who is responsible? Will he make a statement so that the public, which is deeply concerned, can know whether the authorities are looking after these things as they should in an emergency of this sort?

I have made a very clear statement as to how this corned beef came to be at the aerodrome. I have also said that on more than one occasion we approached the United Nations about this and it has informed us that it does not require the food, and therefore it is to be sold. We have been in touch with the F.A.O. about the statement to which the hon. Gentleman referred, and Dr. Wright categorically denies that he made that statement.

Withdraw that one.

In view of the statement made by the Minister and the need to have it thoroughly investigated, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Lord Privy Seal if he will instruct Her Majesty's Government's representative at the United Nations to support the proposals recently made by Ceylon for dealing with the present critical situation in the Congo.

asked the Lord Privy Seal what new proposals Her Majesty's Government will make at the current meeting of the Security Council regarding the Congo situation.

The Security Council met again yesterday and has adjourned until 10th February at the earliest. Her Majesty's Government retain the belief that internal political and constitutional difficulties are, in the first instance, matters for the Congolese people to settle for themselves, and will give support to those measures which they believe will help the Congolese in this matter.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is an abdication of British influence? Would he not agree that the proposals put forward by Ceylon are realistic and are broadly supported by India? Is it not time, in this rather dangerous situation, that Her Majesty's Government began to show a little initiative?

These matters are still being discussed in the Security Council. Our views will be expressed on the proposals of the delegate from Ceylon, but our purpose is to help the Congolese to solve these problems themselves. That is not an abdication of leadership or of influence, but one must be quite clear about the United Nations trying to impose a solution on the people of the Congo, with all the consequences that would involve.

While there might be general agreement with the broad proposition which the Lord Privy Seal has adduced, is it not a fact that there has been a great deal of foreign intervention, particularly by Belgian personnel, in the affairs of the Congo, that the arrest of Mr. Lumumba was carried out by troops under Belgian orders and that he is now being held in a prison which is effectively under the control of Belgian personnel? In this situation, surely it is not enough for Her Majesty's Government to take refuge in a completely Pontius Pilate attitude?

Her Majesty's Government have always taken the view that intervention by outside Governments was excluded under the Security Council Resolution, but where authorities in the Congo themselves have recruited nationals from a whole variety of countries that is a matter of their own internal affairs.

Surely the right hon. Gentleman must be aware that if he takes this line there is nothing to prevent other Congolese authorities, such as Mr. Tshombe, inviting Soviet military personnel—and possibly military personnel from China—to strengthen their position? Surely the attitude taken by the Lord Privy Seal is the recipe for an international civil war in the Congo?

I cannot accept that that is the conclusion because of the fact that United Nations forces are there under the Security Council resolution to maintain order.

asked the Lord Privy Seal if he will instruct the British representative on the Security Council to raise the purchase by the Katanga administration of French-built jet fighter aircraft, as a threat to peace in Africa.

The Government of France have announced that no such purchase has been made in France. It is, of course, the policy of Her Majesty's Government, in accordance with the General Assembly resolution of 22nd September, that any military assistance to the Congo should be supplied through the United Nations.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that while no such purchases have been made in France, these planes are alleged to be proceeding through France on their way to the Congo? Will he take steps to get further information and, if necessary, try to take action through the Security Council of the United Nations to avoid the shipment of quantities of modern arms into this area?

We are not in possession of the information which the hon. Member mentions, but I shall endeavour to find whether what he says is correct.

Is it not precisely this type of action in the Congo which has led Mr. Hammarskjoeld to say that unless it is stopped he will have to ask for the withdrawal of United Nations forces from the Congo? When are the Government going to open their eyes to the facts of the situation?

The eyes of Her Majesty's Government are very much open to the facts of the situation. It is a very great over-simplification of the case to say that this was the cause of the Secretary-General's statement on the matter

asked the Lord Privy Seal what representations have been made to the United Arab Republic about compensation for the United Kingdom stockholders in the Egyptian Delta Light Railways; and with what results.

This case, which first arose out of the transfer of the control and management of this Company to Egypt in 1945, has, I understand, been taken up in the Egyptian courts on behalf of certain debenture holders and is still forming the subject of legal proceedings. In the circumstances it would not be appropriate for Her Majesty's Government to make representations in the matter to the Government of the United Arab Republic.

asked the Lord Privy Seal what further representations have been made to the United Arab Republic about compensation for the British officials summarily dismissed from the service of the Egyptian Government nine years ago; and with what results.

Repeated representations have been made and are still being made to the Government of the United Arab Republic about compensation for these officials but so far Her Majesty's Government have not been informed that any decision has been reached.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that a number of these officials have already died; that the rest of them are getting on in age; that it is nine years since they were dismissed and that many of them have great difficulty in maintaining themselves? In view of the recently improved relationship between Great Britain and Egypt, which we welcome, will my right hon. Friend instruct our new Ambassador to take this up as a matter of priority and point out to the Egyptian Government that this is a matter in which the national honour of Egypt is very much involved?

Yes, Sir. I have every sympathy, and I know that the House has, for these former British officials. The Financial Agreement arranged that a commission would be set up to re-examine this subject. That was done in July last and we know that the commission has reported to the United Arab Republic Ministers, but, so far as we know, the Ministers have not reached any decision about it. I will, therefore, adopt the suggestion of my hon. Friend.

asked the Minister of Labour (1) what were the figures for unemployment in respect of Commonwealth and Colonial immigrants in the Midlands area for August, 1960 and December, 1960, respectively; and

The count of unemployed Commonwealth immigrants is made at quarterly intervals in February, May, August and November. In August, 1960, the totals were 4,667 in London and 1,397 in the Midlands. In November, 1960, they were 6,374 and 2,610, respectively. The figures for the February, 1961, count are not yet available, but I will send them to my hon. Friend as soon as possible.

asked the Minister of Labour why National Health and National Insurance contributions are not included as an item taken into account in assessing the cost-of-living index; and whether, in view of the increased and increasing importance of this item in the budgets of millions of people, he will now give it due weight in the index.

On the recommendation of the Cost of Living Advisory Committee (Cmd. 9710) these contributions and similar payments were excluded because of the difficulty of measuring the services provided in return. I understand that no satisfactory way of including them could be found.

Is the Minister aware that the urgency for reconsideration of this matter has been increased by recent developments? Is he aware that, when the new Insurance Scheme comes into operation in April and the new Health Service charges and the consequent contributions are imposed, something like 12s. a week will be taken out of a basic wage very often of £8 a week? That represents a very substantial part of a wage of that kind. Is it not a fact that to suggest that this cannot be incorporated in the cost-of-living index makes nonsense of the index?

As to reconsideration the operation of the index is constantly under review by the Ministry of Labou but, as this item has been considered by the Committee on three different occasions, each with the same result, I see no purpose in asking the Committee to look at it again.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that my hon. Friend the Member for Fife, West (Mr. W. Hamilton) is on a most important point? Would he agree that especially those in the lower wage brackets will now be asked to pay something which is an appreciable percentage of their income and which in fact is a penal poll tax9 Will he ask his right hon. Friend to agree to submit this item again to the Cost of Living Advisory Committee in view of the great importance and the great hardship which is involved?

There are many payments such as Income Tax which it has been found could not be included in the index but, as I told the House, the index is constantly under review by my Department.

Will the hon. Member explain why it has been found to be impracticable to include a factor for National Insurance contributions in the formula when a factor is included by the mathematicians for domestic insurance, such as industrial injuries, death benefits and so on, paid to private insurance companies? Why can they make an allowance for one item when they miss altogether a much bigger item which has a bigger impact on the wage envelopes of millions of people?

I am afraid that I am not in a position fully to answer that very complicated question, but I can tell the hon. Member that matters such as life insurance premiums are certainly not included in the index.