asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many applications for bookmakers' permits and betting agency permits have now been received by justices; how many have been granted and how many refused; and whether he is satisfied with the progress of this new procedure.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many bookmakers' licences and betting office permits had been granted at 1st May, 1961.

I would refer to the Answer given on 15th June to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Bromsgrove (Mr. Dance).

Can my right hon. Friend say whether there is any truth in the allegations that some of these permits have been unreasonably refused, or is that not the case?

Such inquiries as I have been able to make suggest that the scheme is working smoothly. There have been difficulties in occasional places, but they have been only very few.

Has not the right hon. Gentleman called for a return of these figures and can he say when the evidence will be available? Can he also explain how it is that the Secretary of State for Scotland is already able to give these figures while we are lagging behind? Can he say what is the impact on the general pattern of betting?

I should need notice of the second part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. With regard to the first part, our licensing period ended on 31st May and licensing authorities have been asked to send in their returns by 31st July.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his tests of the new radio paging systems are complete; and if it is the intention to adopt them for the Metropolitan Police Force.

Tests of such a system for use by the fire service are about to start. But my right hon. Friend is advised that this system would not be appropriate for police purposes, and alternative methods of meeting police requirements are under examination.

Does not my hon. and learned Friend realise that this paging system offers the greatest advance in policing effectiveness since his right hon. Friend's illustrious predecessor, Sir Robert Peel, first put the "bobby" on the beat? Does not he realise that any unnecessary delay in granting Home Office approval may well lose for our manufacturers the world lead which they have in the development of this system, with consequential detrimental effects on export potential?

We are hoping for a better system for the police, and experiments with pocket wireless receivers are being put in hand this year.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what grounds restrictions were placed on marchers past South Africa House and the residence of the South African High Commissioner, planned by the Anti-Apartheid Movement, on 28th May, 1961.

I am informed by the Commissioner of Police that the organisers of this march were warned that they would not be allowed to carry out their original plans because it was considered that serious public disorder might have been caused.

Will the hon. and learned Gentleman consider this as a point of psychology? Is he aware that the organisers called off these marches because trey feared that the restrictions would lead to disorder? Is he further aware that, when the marchers were allowed to pass South Africa House, there was no violence whatever, and that violence is created only when crowds have a sense of frustration by being kept in side streets? Will he look at this from the point of view of psychology?

These are factors which the Commissioner of Police bears in mind, but there have been disorders at earlier demonstrations. It is the duty of the police to take steps to preserve public order, and they have a special duty to protect diplomatic premises.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware of the tests of domestic fire extinguishers, recently conducted by the Consumer Advisory Council, which have shown that many of these extinguishers are defective; and what steps he is taking to ensure that manufacturers improve the standards of such extinguishers, and to warn the public generally that many of those now on the market, and in private homes, are undependable and dangerous.

My right hon. Friend has seen a report of the tests. His responsibilities do not extend to regulating the standards of performance of fire extinguishers placed on sale to the public. Advice on suitable types of extinguishers is given by local fire authorities on request, and I understand that the Fire Protection Association is shortly to issue a pamphlet of guidance on this matter.

If the hon. and learned Gentleman is, to some extent, repudiating responsibility for this matter, will he recall the perhaps comparable case of the paraffin heaters, in which, after lives had been lost, the Government did accept responsibility, even though private manufacturers were concerned? Will he look at this matter again and take a slightly more positive attitude than he has in his Answer?

The Consumer Protection Bill will enable my right hon. Friend to make regulations laying down safety requirements, and to that extent there will be an advance on the present position. Suitable extinguishers of all types are on a list of appliances approved by the Fire Offices Committee.

Is not the hon. and learned Gentleman responsible for many aspects of safety? As my hon. Friend the Member for Barking (Mr. Driberg) has said, why, if the Home Secretary was responsible to some extent for taking action on oil heaters, has he no power in this matter?

It simply is a fact that my right hon. Friend has no power, but he was glad to support the Consumer Protection Bill.

Will the hon. and learned Gentleman consider recommending to his right hon. Friend that power should be taken and regulations laid under the Consumer Protection Bill?

That will be a matter for consideration when the Bill has passed into law.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many immigrants from the Commonwealth came to the United Kingdom during the first five months of 1961; what was the corresponding figure for each of the previous five years; from what countries principally they came; how they compare with the previous five years; and whether he is now in a position to make a statement on the Government's intentions to control this immigration.

I will, with permission, circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT such figures as are available. I have no further statement to make at present on the question of controlling immigration from the Commonwealth.

Does my right hon. Friend recall that in a Written Answer on Tuesday, which I had not seen when I put down this Question, it was stated that the number of immigrants from India and Pakistan in the first five months of this year was more than 13,000, compared with less than 2,000 last year? Does not this suggest that the voluntary agreement controlling immigration, exercised by the Governments of India and Pakistan, has broken down? Are Her Majesty's Government going to do nothing about this new danger to our country?

If my hon. Friend will study the figures which I have published, he will see that they approximate to those which he has mentioned in relation to India and Pakistan. All these matters are under consideration by the Government.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, by percentage of population, High Wycombe has one of the greatest concentrations of coloured immigrants in the country? Although we welcome very much this accession to our labour requirements, this is giving rise to considerable housing and social problems, which are due almost entirely to the rate at which immigrants are coming in. Should not we at least do something to control the rate?

My hon. Friend has been to see me about this problem. I am well aware of it, and it is under consideration.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will now give an estimate of the number of coloured immigrants which the United Kingdom can safely absorb; in view of the high birth rate amongst coloured immigrants, how soon he proposes to introduce legislation to control immigration; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what legislation is now contemplated to check the inflow of immigrants from the Commonwealth; and if he will make a statement.

The whole matter is under consideration by the Government but I am not in a position at the moment to add anything to previous Answers on this subject.

My right hon. Friend says again that this is under consideration. Is he aware that he has been giving me that answer for the last five years? Did he see the most temperate and reasonable editorial in the Daily Telegraph on Monday, which suggested that action was not being taken because of fear of opinion in the West Indies? How long is it to be that the West Indian opinion of 3 million people should override the opinion of this nation of 52 million people?

I read that article with profit, but I have nothing to add at the present time.

In view of the fact that in the first five months of this year, 41,000 immigrants have arrived from the West Indies, Pakistan, India and Cyprus, compared with 17,000 in the same period last year, does not my right hon. Friend consider that urgent action is necessary? Is there any reason why he should give a hint of the Government's intentions to the annual conference of the Conservative and Unionist Teachers' Association, and deny any information to this House on the matter?

I did not go further on that occasion than to suggest—as I do now—that the matter is under consideration. It is under consideration, and, as I have often told the House, we are trying to look at it without prejudice.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many of us deprecate the emphasis which is put by some Members opposite on coloured immigrants? Is he aware that the coloured immigrants are not the only immigrants among whom there is a high birth rate?

Yes. The proportion of coloured immigrants is only about 50 per cent. of the total.

Hear, hear.

On a point of order Mr. Speaker—[Interruption.]—when the black claquers are finished—in view of the unsatisfactory nature of that Answer, I shall, with your permission, seek to raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible opportunity.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate he has made of the number of extra migrants who have arrived from the West Indies in the first five months of 1961 as a result of advocacy of restrictions and uncertainty as to whether free migration will continue to be allowed.

No such estimate is possible.

Does not the hon. and learned Gentleman agree that many of us on this side of the House have kept very quiet under intense provocation, knowing that unfortunate speeches here fill a boatload or planeload every time in Jamaica and make matters worse? Would not it be better to have a quiet period for consideration? If we are to have a moratorium on speeches, would not it be a good thing if the Home Secretary were to be more careful? Does he realise the immense harm done by his speech at the weekend when he talked about the solution of the British Government not being based on colour prejudice alone? For heaven's sake will somebody explain what the right hon. Gentleman meant by that instead of allowing this harm to go on?

This Question raises a matter the answer to which can only be anybody's guess. There is no power to question immigrants as to why they are coming here, or why they have chosen any particular time to come here.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what consideration he has given to the statements made by the Prime Minister of Jamaica, shortly after his arrival in the United Kingdom, that any restriction of immigration into this country from the Commonwealth would be strongly resented in the West Indies; and if he will make a statement.

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the reply which I gave on 15th June to Questions by my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Kirkdale (Mr. N. Pannell) and the hon. Member for Salford, West (Mr. C. Royle).

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is rather infuriating that Prime Ministers from other Commonwealth countries come here and lecture us publicly on how to run the country? Would he also agree that Mr. Manley's remarks, when considered in conjunction with the statement reported to have been made by Sir Grantley Adams yesterday, mean that the policy of controlling immigration into this country by consultation and cooperation with other Commonwealth countries has completely broken down?

I would rather not make comments on these speeches, although I will say that they have been carefully noted.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say what he meant in his speech at the weekend? Was it intended to be some advance indication of legislation by Her Majesty's Government?

Order. How can that arise on this Question? I do not follow.

Would not it be a little odd if the Government were to introduce new restrictions on immigration from the Commonwealth at a moment when the Foreign Secretary has made a speech in another place saying that we have no option but to enter into an arrangement in Europe which would open the flood gates to immigration without control into this country from every country in Europe?

I could not accept literally the words in the mouth of the hon. Gentleman because the Treaty of Rome is not literally without controls, but it would be a very good thing for the House to realise that these considerations very much complicate this issue.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware that, under legislation now before the United States Congress, the West Indies, after independence, will have the right for its citizens, on terms of equality with other independent central and South American States, of free entry into the United States of America without quota restriction; and, since this legislation will alter the whole pattern of migration from the West Indies, whether he will give an assurance that no restriction will be placed on West Indian migration to Great Britain while this legislation is pending.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been drawn to legislation now being considered in the United States Congress which would give free entry to West Indians on the achievement of independence; and, in view of the responsibilities of Her Majesty's Government for the rights of citizens of Commonwealth countries administered by them, if he will, while this legislation is pending, give an assurance that free entry to the United Kingdom for West Indians will be maintained.

I have already indicated that there is no question of legislation on this subject in the present Session of Parliament.

Is not that Answer very incomplete? Does the right hon. Gentleman, first, confirm that this legislation is before Congress, and that, under the McCarron Act, the independent States of Central and South America have the right of free access, without a quota of immigrants, to the United States? Does he not further confirm that it is very likely, to put it at its lowest, that the United States will wish to apply this to the newly-independent West Indies Federation? If this is so, have we any cause whatever—particularly bearing in mind that practically all these West Indians here are now working—to be rushed into panic measures of restriction as proposed by his hon. Friend?

I do not think it can honestly be said that there has been any disposition to rush into panic measures. The fact that certain members of the United States Congress have introduced Bills which will affect the position of West Indians under United States immigration quotas has been brought to my attention. I cannot speculate on how these Bills will get on, or on the hypothetical situation which may arise out of them. I will only say that they have been brought to my attention.

If the United States, which has no responsibility for Commonwealth countries, is prepared to consider opening its doors to West Indian immigrants, is it not absolutely monstrous that we in this country should even be using the word "consider" in relation to migration from the West Indies? Have we not got a much deeper responsibility, and will the right hon. Gentleman cease any form of pandering to this anti-Commonwealth attitude of some of his hon. Friends.

No, Sir. I think that that is really an exaggeration of the position. We cannot tell what will happen or what the fate of this legislation in the United States Congress will be. Secondly, we must consider our own domestic situation in the light of what presents to all of us, whatever our feelings, a very serious problem, and that is precisely what we are doing without any sense of panic or rush.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that in the Congress of the United States, as here, there is a great gap between a Bill and an Act, and that this matter of immigration into the United Kingdom is now becoming extremely urgent because of the rapid and progressive growth of the numbers coming in in this way?

Yes, Sir. My hon. Friend's language rings a bell in relation to our own programme.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether his Answer to the original Question means that he is contemplating legislation in the next Session?

Of course, he is.

I have said already—I think three times at Question Time this afternoon—that this is a serious matter now under consideration by the Government, and it is well-known that it is under consideration. I cannot carry it any further today.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if provision is made to insure policemen and policewomen against loss of life while on duty.

No, Sir, not from public funds. The Police Pensions Regulations provide for special pensions to be payable to the dependants of officers who die as a result of injury received in the execution of their duty.

Would my hon. and learned Friend consider asking the Home Secretary to make a strong recommendation that the personnel of police forces throughout the country should be so insured for life, because the cost would be quite infinitesimal? When tragedies occurred, this would at least ease the financial burden sustained by wives and families of police officers and such a suggestion would receive the support both of the people and of this House.

No, Sir. We feel that the right way to deal with this matter—which obviously does need to be dealt with, and has been dealt with for many years—is to make sure that there are adequate benefits under the Police Pensions Regulations, which are approved by the Police Council. The current arrangements appear to give general satisfaction and are considered to be adequate.

Is the hon. and learned Gentleman aware that there is no feeling of satisfaction about the adequacy of the pensions of police widows, and that in West Ham in particular, which was the scene of the recent tragedy, there is a great feeling of indignation about the inadequacy of these pensions? Can he say what pension is payable to the widow of the shot police inspector?

Each of the two widows whose husbands were shot the other day receives total pensions and benefits exceeding £10 a week.

In view of the most unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will consider issuing traffic wardens with a police whistle for use in emergencies, such as in cases of personal assault, when witnessing smash and grab raids, and for other similar occurrences.

As far as the Metropolitan Police District is concerned, I will certainly bring this suggestion to the notice of the Commissioner.

While thanking my hon. and learned Friend for that encouraging reply, may I ask him if he is aware of the growing concern amongst traffic wardens about their conditions of service? In the last few weeks, there have been several bad cases of assault. These men do a police job with very little protection in law. Could not there be a better link in emergency between the traffic wardens and the police, especially when meters start in October in Soho?

Although tens of thousands of standard penalty notices have been issued since the scheme began, the number of wardens assaulted in the Metropolitan Police District so far has been only seven. I will, of course, bear in mind what my hon. Friend has said.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps Her Majesty's Government now proposes to take to assist the Government of Northern Ireland to arrest the rising unemployment in Northern Ireland.

As indicated in the Answers that I gave to the hon. Member for East Ham, North (Mr. Oram) on 23rd March and to my hon. Friend the Member for Belfast, South (Sir D. Campbell) on 4th May, a joint study group appointed by the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland Governments is considering what measures can be taken to bring about a lasting improvement.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that the high unemployment figure in Northern Ireland has existed for quite a long time? Whether one's constituency is adjacent to Northern Ireland or not, there is general concern that, whereas in some districts there is over-employment, in Northern Ireland there has been a pretty high rate of unemployment for a considerable time. Does not the Minister appreciate that something more fundamental should be done to give them something like the average which has appertained throughout England and parts of Scotland?

Yes, Sir; every endeavour will be made. There are special conditions in Northern Ireland which make the situation very difficult to deal with. It has been discussed with the Northern Ireland Government and with hon. Members who represent Northern Ireland constituencies. I am hoping that with the agreement of the Northern Ireland Government this study group will do some good.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when he hopes to receive a report from the study group? This problem has existed for a long time. There is considerable feeling about it, and many of us have received representations. When does the right hon. Gentleman hope to receive a reply?

I hope that it will not necessarily be a final report, but that we shall receive reports from time to time. I hope that it will be a continuing process to keep us informed. [An HON. MEMBER: "When will the report be ready?"] I shall have to look into that and ask the chairman, but I hope to keep the House informed of progress.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that my Ulster colleagues and I welcome the assistance given by the Government to the Northern Ireland Government to help solve the unemployment problem, and in particular their efforts to relieve employers in Ulster of the payroll tax if it should be introduced? Will my right hon. Friend impress on the working party—that is, the Brittain Committee—the need for urgency in submitting its recommendations, particularly with regard to our shipbuilding industry?

Yes, Sir. I am glad to make an affirmative answer, and to thank my hon. Friend for his tributes to what we have attempted to do. As a proof of that, last year we achieved the highest level of employment ever in Northern Ireland. There has since been a deterioration due to the shipbuilding situation. This is common to other parts of the country, but it is especially severe in Northern Ireland, and I will pay attention to what my hon. Friend said.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if, in view of the shortage of well-qualified housemasters in the approved school service and their limited opportunities for promotion, he will arrange for suitable housemasters to attend professional courses on full pay and with course expenses provided.

Yes, Sir. My right hon. Friend has invited managers of approved schools to recommend suitable housemasters for secondment on full salary to attend courses which are being organised for or are open to them. Tuition fees and travelling expenses will be met from public funds.

Is the right hon. Gentleman saying that they are to be on full pay as well? If they are, how many housemasters are likely to be involved in this scheme?

Certainly they will be on full pay, and they will get their expenses and tuition fees in addition. I cannot give the number involved, but we are starting two additional courses, with the hope of a fourth, so the numbers will be fairly considerable.

Is not one of the reasons why there is difficulty in getting staff for approved schools that in most of the schools the staffs realise that they are working only for a local committee and not for a local authority, and that therefore there are no chances of promotion?

That differs from my experience in visiting approved schools.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the growing number of cases of cruelty to children, he will introduce legislation to increase the penalties for this type of offence.

The law relating to the prevention of cruelty to children was among the subjects considered by the Ingleby Committee, which recommended an increase from £25 to £100 in the maximum fine that may be imposed on summary conviction of an offence under Section 1 of the Children and Young Persons Act, 1933. The Committee's recommendations are under consideration, but I cannot yet say when it will be possible to introduce legislation.

That does not take us very far. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, as in the revolting case of the man who blinded his six months' old child for life and received a trivial sentence of six months, the public are staggered by such leniency? Why are such vile cases dealt with in a petty way by petty courts, when, for example, for maiming cattle a prison sentence of up to fourteen years can be imposed? Is not the law far too kind to these brutal and sub-human men?

The maximum penalties on conviction on indictment are a fine of £100 or two years' imprisonment, or both. On summary conviction the penalty is a fine of £25, which it is proposed to increase, or six months, or both. The Ingleby Committee made only one recommendation, having reviewed this very thoroughly.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that recently we were all shocked by the case of a child of six months who was blinded for life by a beating from his father, and that the maximum punishment was six months' imprisonment? Surely that is quite out of proportion, and legislation should be introduced to deal with this sort of case?

I can but note what my hon. Friend said.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this case received seven years in a higher court in the last day or so?

Not this case.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will give an assurance that, when giving his approval under Section 2 of the Betting Levy Act, 1961, to any scheme for the distribution by the Horserace Betting Levy Board of moneys levied under this Act, he will ensure that no such moneys are paid to the proprietors of any racecourse from any of the enclosures of which persons are debarred by reason only of the nature of their business or profession.

Before considering this matter my right hon. Friend would wish to know the views of the Levy Board and others concerned.

I appreciate that my hon. and learned Friend wants the views of the Levy Board. Does he not think that it is slightly ridiculous that he should have taken powers to levy a payment on off-course bookmakers to support racecourses and to improve amenities and at the same time deny them the opportunity of enjoying the amenities which their money helps to provide?

This question will arise perhaps next year when the Levy Board submits a scheme, but until then, with respect to my hon. Friend, the question is premature.

Can my hon. and learned Friend tell the House how he is getting on with the Levy Board, and when it will start its work?

That is an entirely different matter. It is right outside the question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware of the continuing shortage of places in remand homes and the undesirable alternative of remanding persons in prison or police stations when it is necessary to retain them under supervision; and what further progress is being made to provide additional places in remand homes.

It is only lawful to remand a young person over 14 to prison if he is too unruly or depraved for a remand home and police stations are not used for remand except where the difficulty of an overnight journey to the remand home makes it unavoidable. My right hon. Friend is very much aware of the shortage of places in remand homes and replies to Questions by the hon. Member for Liverpool, Exchange (Mrs. Braddock) on 15th June and the right hon. Member for West Bromwich (Mr. Dugdale) on 13th April indicated what is being done to relieve the pressure on the remand homes.

Is the Home Secretary aware that a fortnight ago there was only one remand home vacancy in the whole of the country, and that the person involved in the case before the magistrates at the time could not be sent there because it was not a suitable one? Is not the Minister able to do anything, even as a temporary measure, until this peak is passed?

I am very much aware of this problem, especially as it exists in north-west England. I am not unhopeful that the authority which my hon. Friend represents may be able to help us in this respect.

Is not the Minister aware that it is not only the north-west of England but the whole of the north of England which is concerned? Children's officers sometimes spend hours on the telephone trying to get places, and sometimes the only place available is as far away as Taunton or Plymouth. In future could not there be some modification of the financial arrangements, so that local authorities were not required to pay quite as much towards the provision of remand homes?

I am aware of the situation referred to in the first part of the hon. Lady's supplementary question. As for financial arrangements, she has a later Question on the Order Paper, but they are not necessarily the only factor which causes difficulty.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the position at the moment is so bad that many magistrates are informed by the clerks of their courts before they hear cases that it will be quite useless to send people to remand homes, because no places exist. Is it not a farcical situation that magistrates should sit in judgment on people knowing full well that they cannot administer the necessary punishment?

I fully accept what my hon. Friend says. This is a serious position, which arises in part from a shortage of places at approved schools. We are taking emergency measures to find extra remand accommodation.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has vet concluded his consultations with the Secretary of State for Scotland, regarding the desirability of instituting an amnesty for the surrender of firearms; and whether he has any other special proposals to make for restoring law and order and combating crimes of violence.

My right hon. Friend is not yet in a position to make a statement on this subject. As regards the second part of the Question, the Government are doing all they can, by the strengthening of the police service and in many other ways, to deal with the incidence of crime. My right hon. Friend will be glad to consider any particular points my hon. Friend may have in mind.

Does my hon. and learned Friend realise that that is not a very satisfactory Answer? Is it not a fact that in pre-war days a number of amnesties were held from time to time, but that there has not been an amnesty held since 1946, on which occasion no less than 76,000 weapons were handed in? Is it not time for another amnesty, with teeth in it—an amnesty which would be followed by legislation being introduced to increase the penalty? At present the maximum penalty is three months' imprisonment for possessing a firearm without a licence.

As I have said, my right hon. Friend is considering the question of an amnesty. Indeed, I hope that it will not be long before he is in a position to say something further about it. As for legislation, I should like to consider that possibility.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects to publish the report of the working party which studied the question of compensation for victims of criminal assault; and whether he is now in a position to make a further statement of Government policy on this matter.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has completed his examination of the report of the official working party on the question of compensation for victims of crimes of violence; and when he expects to make the terms of the report public.

I will, with permission, answer this Question and Question No. 27 together.

I welcome the statement that the report will be published this week. Can the right hon. Gentleman say what attitude the Government are taking about it? Is he aware that there will be a great deal of public disappointment if there is no Government legislation on the matter in the next Session? This situation has existed for a long time, and the longer the delay the greater the number of people who will be injured without compensation being available.

This is a complicated subject. If the report is read it will be seen how complicated it is, and how important it is to get public reaction—because the cost would fall on the public. I am hoping, by publishing the report, to get the public's reaction.

Why should my right hon. Friend, in reply to Question No. 29, also seek to answer Question No. 27, which was called by you, Mr. Speaker, but not asked? Is not this a waste of time?

I did not call Question No. 27. I called the name of the hon. Member who had his name to that Question and who, had he been here, might have asked it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Deportment how many offences, cautions and summonses were registered during 1960 under the Motor Vehicles Regulations relating to emission of fumes.

In England and Wales during 1960, 1,875 offences against Regulation 79 of the Motor Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations, 1955, were dealt with by prosecution. The police gave 406 written warnings in respect of alleged offences. No record is kept of the number of oral warnings issued.

Will the hon. and learned Member draw the attention of the Home Secretary to the fact that over ninety coal lorries per hour pass through the County Borough of Derby, and practically all of them commit an offence every day?

I suggest that the right hon. Gentleman draws these facts to the attention of the chief constable.

Can the Minister say how many of these cases related to alcoholic fumes, and also how he distinguishes one fume from another?

The Question relates to diesel fumes.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if, in view of recent cases of the killing and maiming of horses by gangs of youths, he will introduce legislation to increase the penalties for such offences.

The maximum penalty for an offence against the Protection of Animals Act, 1911, is a fine of £50 or imprisonment for three months or both. My right hon. Friend has no reason to think that this is not adequate.

Is the Minister aware that according to Press reports ten horses have been killed or so badly injured—mostly by gangs of youths—that they had to be destroyed, during the past six months? Is not this a deplorable state of affairs, and cannot some action be taken about it?

I have seen these Press reports but it seems that the authorities have not been able to prosecute so far, and my right hon. Friend cannot comment on that state of affairs.

Is not my right hon. Friend aware that many people think that the penalties involved are grossly inadequate, and that these are the sort of cases where corporal punishment might be given with advantage?

I note what my hon. Friend says.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will authorise the Metropolitan Police to search persons detained at police stations on suspicion of violence before they are charged.

It is already the practice in the Metropolitan Police force for any person who is to be detained in a police station to be searched.

That does not quite answer my Question. Will my hon. and learned Friend say whether there is power to search before a person is charged? If so, it appears that many station officers are reluctant to carry out a search before a person is charged. If people who are believed to be violent were searched before being charged, would it not prevent the occurrence of events such as have happened recently?

The point is that under the common law there is power to search an individual who has been arrested, and it is the practice of the Metropolitan Police to do this.

With great respect, that is when he has been arrested. Can my hon. and learned Friend say whether there is a difference between being arrested and being detained for questioning? That is the whole point of my Question.

Quite clearly there is a difference. The police exercise their right of search in the case of those who are to be detained.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will have an inquiry into the advisability of setting up night magistrates courts in all big cities to see whether they could be of assistance to the police in dealing with night crime.

My right hon. Friend has no information to show that such an inquiry is desirable.

Is not my right hon. Friend aware of the great concern felt in this country about the increase in crime? Is the Home Office doing anything at all to help the police in their fight against crime? I realise that this would mean extra work for magistrates, and that their co-operation would be required, but it is an idea worth looking at. Will my right hon. Friend consider it?

I will certainly do that, but I have no indication that representations have been made by the police authorities to this effect. The question was considered by the Royal Commission on Justices of the Peace in 1948, but rejected. If my hon. Friend cares to get in touch with me, I should like to hear what he has to say about it.

If magistrates' courts were held in the evenings, would not many police be in the courts instead of on the streets, trying to detect crime?

My hon. Friend has in mind night courts and not evening courts.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what action he intends to take in respect of the sworn declaration by William Frederick Nicholls that, in the robbery for which he was convicted, Alfred George Hinds was not in any way connected and is innocent, in view of the fact that Hinds is serving a sentence of twelve years detention on being convicted of being implicated in the crime.

None, Sir. The declaration that Hinds is innocent does not accord with the statement made by Mr. Nicholls earlier this year to two senior police officers.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that this statement, made on oath by the man Nicholls, deserves examination, and that if it is perjury, surely some action should be taken against him? If, on the other hand, he made the statement, apparently without any hope of material gain, it deserves much more serious attention than is being given to it at the present time.

The question of perjury or anything of that sort is a matter for the police and the prosecuting authority, and one on which I cannot comment. I have given the hon. Gentleman the only answer I can give.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that at Hinds' original trial, the Lord Chief Justice, who presided over the trial, described this man Nicholls as the principal offender in this case, and, therefore, he knows better than anyone who his accomplices were? is he further aware that Hinds has protested his innocence at the time and ever since, that he has escaped from prison several times in order to assert it, and that the principal police officer who was concerned in his prosecution has now retired from the police force and is getting richer emoluments elsewhere? Does he not think that all this amounts to a case for a new inquiry in case a miscarriage of justice has occurred?

No, Sir. I will consider anything that the hon. Gentleman gives me to consider, and we had better leave it there. On the present evidence I have, I think I cannot carry it any further.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he intends to give me a fuller reply by correspondence, in addition to what he has said today?

If it would help the hon. Gentleman, I will certainly do so, or I will see him if he so desires.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he has as yet any evidence as to the effectiveness as a form of punishment of detention centres for young offenders.

At the end of last year, out of over 3,600 boys released in 1957, 1958 and 1959, 55 per cent. had not been reconvicted. Of those who were first offenders when sentenced to detention, 74 per cent. had not been reconvicted.

May I ask my right hon. Friend whether there are any plans to greatly speed up the building and provision of more of these detention centres?

Yes, Sir. Three have been opened this year, and it is hoped to open two more in September, including one in the area which my hon. Friend represents.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what are his intentions with regard to the girls who are placed in custody for less than six months? Is it the Government's intention to have girls' detention centres, or are other provisions being made?

It is the present intention to provide a girls' detention centre in Staffordshire, though the proposals for it have not been completely finalised.