asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science what advances have been made in this country during the last three months towards developing the uses of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.

It is not useful, or, indeed possible to isolate progress in scientific fields into three-monthly periods. The steady progress which has been made is described in the Annual Reports of the Atomic Energy Authority. If the hon. and learned Member wishes to put down a Question on any specific aspect of the work I shall be glad to answer it.

I thank the Minister for inviting me to put down a further Question, but does he realise that the appeal of science is as widespread as the desire of mankind for a settled peace? Will he state what steps he is taking to internationalise and co-ordinate Britain's scientific efforts with those of other nations in order to achieve the maximum benefit for mankind out of these efforts?

The United Kingdom has agreements with a number of countries, both East and West, for the exchange of scientific information on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. In addition, our representatives play a very full part in the work of the relevant international organisations, notably the International Atomic Energy Agency.

We agree that we can assess developments in this field only upon the basis of twelve-monthly reports, but can the Minister assure us that research into small power reactors is going on and is being speeded up?

Research into every kind of reactor is going on in this country, and the Atomic Energy Agency is principally concerned with the main reactor types, to which reference was made in the last Report.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science how many red deer stags were shot on the Island of Rhum in September and October of this year; what was their average weight, weighed without heart and liver; and how many hinds it is intended to shoot this winter.

The answer to the first part of the Question is forty-eight stags. All those shot during the season and brought to the larder were weighed less gralloch, but including heart, liver and lights. The average weight was 11 st. 11 lb. The answer to the last part of the question is 136.

Does my hon. Friend realise that such a low average weight as this must indicate that the island is grossly overstocked with red deer? When the Red Deer Commission, under the auspices and with the advice of the Nature Conservancy, has an absolute obsession about the over-stocking of other people's grounds, should not an effort be made by the Commission to put its own house in order first?

I do not think that my hon. Friend has yet fully appreciated that sporting estates are managed on entirely different principles, and that their figures are not comparable. In fact, fully-grown Rhum stags are as heavy as 21 st., but the heaviest shot this year was 19 st. 6 lb. It is necessary to undertake culling upon a scientific basis, and this naturally means that stags are shot which would not be shot on a sporting estate.

On a point of order. In future, do we put Questions about deer in Scotland to the Parliamentary Secretary for Science?

I shall have to investigate that matter further.

Will the Minister impose some limitation upon the shooting of hind?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science what progress has been made by the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research in the recruitment of engineering designers for the purpose of facilitating industrial design, the lack of whom is causing concern among industrialists.

My noble Friend is concerned that industry should make the fullest use of first-class engineering designers, who should, in his opinion, be recruited directly into industry, rather than through D.S.I.R. Despite the great expansion which is being made in the provision for the teaching of engineering, he is not satisfied that the supply and training of engineering designers is yet adequate for national needs. Following a constructive discussion of the matter at the Engineering Advisory Council of the Board of Trade last month, he proposes to pursue it further with the bodies which are concerned with the training of engineers.

Will the Minister take into consideration the fact that this is causing serious concern to industrialists in my part of the country? Is he aware that one factory in my constituency has had to import every machine from Germany, because of our lack of industrial designers? Does not he realise that it is our duty and responsibility to compete, even with Germany, and that we should do our utmost to do so successfully and to see that engineering designers in Britain are able to stand firm in the face of modern competition?

I appreciate the interest of the hon. Member in this vital need. I said in my Answer that my noble Friend was not satisfied with the present position. He and my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade are in close touch and are trying to find ways to ameliorate the situation.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science what investigations his Department have undertaken in the matter of eradication of strontium 90 from dried and natural milk, which can now be made to the extent of over 90 per cent.

The removal of strontium 90 from milk has been investigated by the Atomic Energy Research Establishment at Harwell, and the National Institute for Research in Dairying near Reading. Contact is also being maintained with developments in other countries, particularly the United States of America.

Will not my hon. Friend agree that scientists in the U.S.A. have now produced a method whereby over 90 per cent. of strontium 90 can be eradicated? If this country can adopt it as an economic process, and I am told that it is an economic process, would not it go a long way to allay the anxiety of young mothers?

I understand that the eradication of stronium 90 from milk by the ion exchange process has been demonstrated on a laboratory scale with extremely high initial levels of contamination. We shall need other and further investigations in order to determine whether similar success would be obtained in practical large-scale processes with the lower levels of contamination which might result from nuclear weapon tests.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary say what are the other radioactive elements against which protection has to be sought?

The Question referred to strontium 90. I should not like to give answers off the cuff to questions about eradicating other radioactive isotopes.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science what steps he is taking to ensure that any increased contamination of United Kingdom food supplies by strontium 90 is immediately detected.

The monitoring survey maintained since 1958 by the Agricultural Research Council in consultation with the Medical Research Council is designed to achieve this.

is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that scientists of the Blackburn Technical College are collaborating with the Fylde water board in monitoring the level of radioactivity in local water supplies and in the atmosphere? Does not he think that it would help to give reassurance to the public about this very serious danger if every local water authority and local technical college were encouraged to undertake a similar monitoring service?

Monitoring services with regard to radioactivity in the air, rainfall and drinking water are the responsibility of the Atomic Energy Authority and the results are published as often as the Authority deems it necessary in the public interest.

is the hon. Gentleman aware that some local authorities are doing this with their water supplies and that in north Staffordshire there have been alarming results regarding the difference between reservoirs and underwater springs? Does not he think it important that local water boards should be encouraged to do this?

I will look into the matter further, but I must take the advice of my experts on the subject.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science if he will arrange for the publication of daily bulletins on the degree of radioactive contamination of air, water, foodstuffs and milk in the appropriate regions of the United Kingdom.

No, Sir. I am advised that short-term fluctuations in radioactivity have little significance.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the present publication of results on a weekly basis is quite inadequate if there is a sudden increase in the radioactive contamination of food, as there may well be by strontium 90 in the spring? Cannot we have daily bulletins on similar lines to the Meteorological Office announcements, so that the public and those responsible for foodstuffs may be made immediately aware of any significant increase, and take the necessary action?

With regard to iodine 131 where at the moment weekly reports are being issued, I am informed that the day-to-day fluctuations give little guidance as to the trend of radioactivity. In particular, as the hon. Lady will remember, it is not only a question of taking samples but of analysing those samples and doing the necessary calculations. I am informed that the most useful guide is the average of weekly or longer periods. It is most unlikely that the rise in strontium 90 in our diet will be at anything like the speed which we had in the case of iodine 131, and I am assured that it is most unlikely that the rise could be greater than can be dealt with by the present method of sampling.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science if he is aware that a fund to be known as the Lawson Tait Memorial Fund has been established and registered as a trust to find alternatives to the use of living animals in medical investigations; and, in view of the importance of research in this matter, if he will consider making a grant to this fund to assist its work.

The reply to the first part of the Question is yes sir. As to the second part, the Medical Research Council would consider on its scientific merits any detailed research programme which might be submitted to them.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that there is so much resentment about the rise to 3,750,000 in experiments on living animals that any opportunity or attempt to find alternatives ought to have the fullest financial support of the Government? Would the hon. Gentleman be prepared to meet a deputation in order to discuss ways and means to deal with this situation from a financial point of view?

I should certainly be most happy to receive any deputation which the hon. Lady cared to bring to me. But I think that she must remember that the Medical Research Council exists to give grants for specific research and not to give grants to bodies which themselves make grants to other people.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science if he will state the number of scientists who are known to have left the United Kingdom during the past five years to take up scientific positions abroad.

I would refer the hon. Member to my reply to the hon. Member for Dartford (Mr. Sydney Irving) on 18th July last.

The Ministry and the Government are always dodging this issue. When will they give real figures? As every hon. Member knows, there is a serious drain of scientific manpower from this country. Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that unless something is done, it will be serious not only for British industry but also for our way of life?

From Questions which we have had in this House previously the hon. Member will realise the difficulty of getting any really accurate figures. I am told that it is estimated that immigration in recent years is more than half the rate of emigration. In addition, it is not only a matter of financial rewards on the other side of the Atlantic or elsewhere. Certainly, one of the main causes which has come to my notice is the existence of centres of research of international standing, conducted under inspiring leadership, where the best work may be done in particular spheres. It would be very wrong if we attempted to dissuade scientists from going to such centres and coming back enriched to give us the benefit.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that every responsible scientist and leader would give him information about the drain from our laboratories of laboratory personnel and research personnel? This is going on and it is no use being apathetic about it. The Government must do something and get the information. They have it available.

The hon. Member must realise that the information given in the Press from time to time relates to particular research laboratories or institutions. If the hon. Gentleman is asking for national figures he knows as well as I the difficulty about getting them.

Does the Minister consider that the emigration of scientists at the top is more than balanced by the immigration of people who, however worthy in themselves, are certainly not scientists?

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that a great deal of the difficulty in this problem is caused by the inadequacy of research funds in universities? May I ask how it is that when the Minister is himself responsible for grants to universities from the Research Council he should transfer my Question on this matter to the Treasury? Does not this make complete nonsense of the functions of the Minister for Science for the co-ordination of research?

As the hon. Member says, my noble Friend is responsible for grants given by the Research Councils for research work either at the universities or in association with them. By far the greater amount of university research work is done on funds provided by the University Grants Committee for which my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer is responsible.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science how many scientists are employed, in Scotland, on all forms of research, in the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research; and what steps he is taking to increase the Department in Scotland.

The number of scientists employed in Scotland by the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research is 170. The present intention is to increase the staff in Scotland; the rate of expansion will depend on assessments of changing priorities, as well as on the resources available.

While thanking the hon. Gentleman—[HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"]—for that reply, may I ask if he is satisfied, on the Report on Scientific Manpower, that the expansion of scientific research in Scotland is being raised to the standard necessary to increase in Scotland that tremendous diversity of industry so desired by everyone? Will he speed up the expansion of scientific and technological research for Scotland to increase that diversity of industry?

I assure the hon. Member that the D.S.I.R. is at present considering the recommendations of the Tooth ill Committee's Report which bear on this problem.

Will the hon. Gentleman ask his noble Friend to consider the Government's policy on diversification and reallocation of industry by the siting of research stations in Scotland as one of the essential features of stimulating growing areas, and taking industry from the crowded areas of the Midlands and London?

I hope that the right hon. Member will acknowledge that D.S.I.R., in addition to its two main research laboratories in Scotland, also has the office of the Geological Survey and substations of other research stations—the Building Research Station, the Laboratory of the Government Chemist, the Radio Research Station, the Road Research Laboratory, the Warren Spring Laboratory and the Water Pollution Research Laboratory. It has certainly done a lot to increase laboratory representation in Scotland.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science whether he has now considered the Report of the Advisory Council on Scientific Policy on The Long-term Demand for Scientific Manpower, Command Paper No. 1490; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science whether the Government accept the conclusion contained in the Report on The Longterm Demand for Scientific Manpower, presented by the Scientific Manpower Committee of the Advisory Council on Scientific Policy; what steps he proposes to take in this connection; and if he will make a statement.

My noble Friend commented fully on the Report in another place on 15th November, and I would refer hon. Members to the OFFICIAL REPORT of that debate.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that this Report has been received with a certain amount of misgiving and that, in particular, doubts have been expressed about assumptions upon which estimates of future demand for and the likely supply of technologists and scientists have been based? Does he not agree that the Report gives no justification for any easing of the drive for scientific education in this country, and that future career prospects in science are likely to be better in future than some readings of this Report might suggest?

I fully accept the hon. Member's suggestion that some of the estimates and some of the assumptions may well in the next ten years not turn out to be such as the Committee has suggested. On the other hand, I do not think that detracts from the value of the Report as an exercise in long-term forecasting. I agree fully with the hon. Member that, as my noble Friend said in another place, the prospects of any able young man or woman now about to set out on a scientific or technological career can never have been brighter.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science how many companies contribute to the work of research associations; and what steps he is taking to encourage greater scientific and technological research by these associations.

There are approximately 22,000 members of research associations, of whom a few belong to more than one association. The Council for Scientific and Industrial Research awards grants to these associations on terms providing an incentive for expansion. Special grants may be given for extraordinary capital expenditure and also for schemes designed to accelerate the application of research.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is a great deal of feeling that many of these research associations do not receive the co-operation of very large companies in making basic research into various processes of industry? The Report on the Long-term Demand for Scientific Manpower takes the view that the demand for scientists within private industry should be far greater than the demand of the research associations. Therefore, we may assume that the research associations will not expand at the rate at which they should because of the failure of many large industries to co-operate in basic research in these establishments.

I would not say that the large firms were necessarily less or more co-operative than medium-sized or small firms in active membership of research associations. It is a very difficult question to go into properly at Question Time, because there is such an enormous difference between research associations themselves. To quote an example, in the wool industry 99 per cent. of research is done in the research association, whereas in the electrical industry probably only 1 per cent. is done there.

Would my hon. Friend agree that rather than it being a problem to get research associations to undertake research, the big problem is to get all the firms which should to take up and develop what the research associations produce?

I agree with my hon. Friend in that. As the House is aware, the whole position of research associations is at present being reviewed by the Research Council at the request of my noble Friend.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that we have been hearing these Answers for a number of years now and, despite them, the total amount of research in its scientific and technological aspect in Scotland is still negligible and in some aspects it is totally non-existent? Have we now to await consideration of the Toothill Report before anything is done?

I think that the hon. Member is being rather unfair in suggesting that the D.S.I.R. does not Rut the due proportion of its total qualified manpower into Scotland, because no less than 15 per cent. goes into Scotland, whose population is only 10 per cent. of that of Great Britain as a whole.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science, in his study of the possibilities and advantages of space exploration by means of rockets, what information his Department has sought and received from the United States of America and the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics about the scientific knowledge they have thus gained from sending men into space.

Our plans for space exploration do not include any projects for sending men into space. No specific inquiries have therefore been directed to this activity. Much relevant information from both the United States and the U.S.S.R. is available to British scientists.

Is it true, as reported, that it is my hon. Friend's belief, although he has not made any inquiry, that the Americans and the Russians are not getting value for money out of sending men into space?

My noble Friend has been advised that the possible scientific benefits of sendings men into space would not justify our incurring the expenditure involved in putting men into space. This, I think, is the application of the principle to this country.

While the hon. Gentleman is considering this matter in further detail, could he give the House an interim indication of how his Ministry views the comments on space exploration by the Astronomer Royal who is reported as having said some time ago that he regarded this business as "all bunk"?

I think that goes rather wider than the Question.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science why the Natural Philosophy Department of Glasgow University was not provided by the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research with the necessary funds to proceed with the installation of its new linear accelerator which would have enabled them to undertake work in an area of nuclear physics hitherto not explored at all in Great Britain.

The Council for Scientific and Industrial Research considered the request from Glasgow University for £600,000 for a new linear accelerator in relation to other requests for major items of research equipment from universities, and in relation to the funds which they were prepared to allocate for this type of grant. The Council concluded that it could not then accede to the request from Glasgow University.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Principal of Glasgow University has said that this project might well have put Great Britain ahead in this scientific enterprise and that, for lack of funds, we shall now lag behind other countries? Is not this a rather shocking state of affairs?

The hon. Member must realise that my noble Friend must take advice on scientific priorities from his scientific advisers. That is what he has done in this case.

Is it not the case that there was a choice between Glasgow University and Oxford University and that the Department chose Oxford rather than Glasgow?

I think the hon. Member is gravely mis-stating the decision that was taken when he says that Oxford was chosen rather than Glasgow. What was chosen was a project emanating from Oxford rather than a project emanating from Glasgow. In the opinion of my noble Friend's scientific advisers on the Research Council, the Glasgow proposal, though good, was not rated as highly as the proposal which came from Oxford at the same time.

On a point of order. May I have your guidance, Mr. Speaker? Why was the Parliamentary Secretary prepared to answer this Question about research grants to universities but not the Question I put down?

I do not understand the point of order that the hon. Member is raising.

I ask for your protection and guidance, Mr. Speaker, as to how we can prevent Ministers from transferring Questions in a completely arbitrary manner and apparently according to no rule.

As the hon. Gentleman knows, I cannot as the Chair accept any responsibility for transfer.

On a point of order. In view of the very unsatisfactory nature of the Answer to this Question, I beg to give notice that I will raise the matter on the Adjournment.

Further to that point of order. I hope that you, Mr. Speaker, will agree that this is a valid point of order and of some constitutional importance. In reply to a number of recent supplementary questions the Parliamentary Secretary has continually repeated the phrase. "My noble Friend must accept the opinion of the experts". Is this a correct attitude? A Minister is under no obligation to accept anybody's opinion. He is entitled to listen to it with the deepest respect, but for any representative of the Treasury Bench to tell the House that a Minister must accept—

Order. That is no point of order whatsoever. I do not have to direct Ministers how to answer or even if they should answer.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science if he will give an estimate of the number of scientists employed on defence, and of those employed in industry, education, health and other civil services.

As the Answer contains a number of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Can the hon. Gentleman give the House an approximate indication of how many are employed on defence and how many on the other services?

Out of a total employment of 173,000 qualified scientists or equivalent in January 1959, which is the latest date for which I have figures, defence took 20,000.

Why has not the hon. Gentleman got figures for a later

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs whether he will take powers to ensure that local authorities which have approved applications for improvement grants do not subsequently withhold payment of such grants.

This is not necessary. A local authority is already bound to pay a grant, where a valid application which complies with the statutory requirements is approved.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I have a case in my constituency where an officer of the Ketton R.D.C., having approved an application for an improvement grant, has refused to issue the completion certificate for payment? Does he not think that this is a deplorable situation? Will he use date than 1959? Are not the figures kept up to date?

The difficulty here is not Government employment but employment in private industry. To get all the figures involves a very large amount of work. I do not think that it is worth suggesting that industry should do it every year. However, the figures will be collated again in January, 1962.

If my hon. Friend has in mind a case in Stamford, the application was not valid because the owner did not at the time possess the requisite interest in the property. In fact he gave inaccurate information to the council by saying that he was the freeholder. The council's approval was conditional on the production of the title deeds before any work was started. In going ahead before doing this the applicant proceeded at his own peril.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this is the first I have heard of this? As I have received a letter from his Department which did not indicate this to me, perhaps the case is different. I cannot think that his original letter and his reply today are on all fours.

If my hon. Friend will supply me with the details and so remove any danger of misapprehension, I shall be glad to reply to him.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he will introduce legislation empowering him to provide accommodation for persons evicted from their homes in consequence of the operation of the Rent Act.

I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer I gave him on 28th November.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I read that Answer with considerable amazement, as did my borough council? Does he not think that when the Government introduce a Bill leading to evictions, as the Rent Act has done, they should take responsibility for providing accommodation for persons evicted? Is he aware that in Slough in the last few weeks there have been thirteen evictions. Ten of these have been under the Rent Act. There is no accommodation whatsoever to house these families.

I recognise the difficulties of Slough, which arise in large part from a shortage of land in the area. I recognise that there is a considerable need for additional housing in the area, despite the fact that 2,500 houses have been built since the war—

Private houses.

No. Two thousand, five hundred private houses and 3,720 council houses have been built since the war.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that one of his hon. Friends, namely, the hon. Member for Holborn and St. Pancras, South (Mr. G. Johnson Smith), in a television programme has urged requisitioning as a cure for the problem of the homeless? Will he adopt the suggestion of my hon. Friend and introduce legislation to give either himself or local authorities the power to requisition to deal with homelessness?

I have no such intention.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs how many housing authorities have now submitted their housing programmes in accordance with Circular 37/61; and what proportion of these authorities have informed him that they are unable to reduce their proposed programmes due to acute and pressing housing needs.

Seven hundred, of which three have specifically informed me that they are unable to reduce their proposed programme due to acute and pressing housing needs.

In view of the serious housing shortage and the fact that 90 per cent. of our householders cannot afford to buy houses, is it not evident that any curtailment of council-house building is an economy that the nation cannot afford, particularly as the cuts will not be effective for a considerable time and council-house programmes, once disrupted, cannot easily, if at all, be restarted?

I dealt in general with the prospects for next year in the housing debate two or three weeks ago, and I have nothing to add to what I said on that occasion.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the private houses now being constructed do not provide accommodation for those most in need? Is he aware that the largest company building private houses in Slough says that 90 per cent. of those buying are not resident in Slough, and do not even work there?

Of course I am aware, as I made clear a few weeks ago, of the substantial housing problem which confronts the country, and I have nothing to add to what I said on that occasion.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs why the Edmonton Borough Council was refused permission to purchase compulsorily, in accordance with his predecessor's Circular No. 45/60, five houses of which they considered rents had been exorbitantly increased.

The two compulsory purchase orders covering these houses were not confirmed because the rents asked by the landlords were not thought to be exorbitant.

Is the Minister aware that the rents asked are about four and a half times the gross value, and that, in addition, the landlords impose a condition that tenants must have incomes of at least four times the amount of the rent, plus rates? Is he further aware that most of these people earn about £12 or £16 a week, and that if they are turned out they have absolutely nowhere else to go where they can get houses to rent; and that they are now too old to be allowed to put down the money, even if they had it, to buy a house on mortgage?

A typical house of the five mentioned was offered on a lease at £221 a year. I understand from the property company that the words to which the hon. Gentleman refers are being withdrawn, and that the tenants of the five houses are being offered alternative accommodation at considerably cheaper rents.

That is complete news to me. Where the right hon. Gentleman gets that information, I do not know. Would he not, however, agree that this shows the extreme value of the Parliamentary Questions that are now being addressed to him? Does he not also think that if powers are given to local authorities, the authorities should be allowed to use them, so that tenants are not put to weeks and weeks of utter misery waiting to find out what is to happen?

I warmly agree with the hon. Gentleman on the first point. He says that the information is new to him. It was new to me until this morning. I sought it in order to give a more effective and informative answer to him.

If four and a half times the gross value is not exorbitant, what is?

The inspector examined the circumstances in detail. He recommended that these were not exorbitant rents, and the Minister accepted the recommendation.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs (1) what effect the use of soft detergent has on river pollution; and how far its use could be extended;

The Committee reported a reduction in the concentration of synthetic detergent in effluents from sewage works in areas where soft detergent had been sold; but found that the soft detergent now in use did not provide a complete solution and that further improvement was necessary.

Would not the use of soft detergent considerably reduce foam and also the amount of detergent left in sewers? This would be a considerable saving to many local authorities and would help in the working of the sewerage departments. Could not my suggestion be examined to see how far use of soft detergent could be extended in other areas?

The Luton experiment served a valuable purpose in this regard and preliminary investigations have been satisfactory. The Committee found that it could not reach any firm conclusion on the advantages to be gained by replacing the hard detergent by the soft detergent at this stage. More research is necessary. The Committee is pursuing this and I think that we shall have some more information in its next report.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs when a public inquiry will be held to investigate objections to the Local Boundary Commission's proposals to merge parts of Leicestershire with the City of Leicester.

I cannot give a precise date but I expect to arrange this inquiry in the spring.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I have received over 5,000 letters strongly objecting to these proposals? Will he hold the inquiry as soon as possible so that over 20,000 people will have the opportunity of expressing their views through their representatives and be put out of their uncertainty as to whether they will remain in the City or the County of Leicester?

The opportunity for objectors will come in due course. The West Midlands investigations, which were the subject of a report before the investigation to which my hon. Friend refers, of themselves involve fifteen public inquiries. So it is not possible to start the inquiry in which my hon. Friend is interested until the spring.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs whether he is now prepared to assist local authorities in the financing of the redevelopment of their towns and cities, by enabling them to forgo payment of interest on loans until revenue begins to accrue; and when he will make a statement as to his intentions.

Local authorities have power to defer provision for the repayment of loans in respect of expenditure on certain services, but I am advised that it would require legislation to extend this to redevelopment. I would be prepared to consider this when a suitable opportunity arises, but I cannot say when that will be.

While, in part, thanking the right hon. Gentleman for his Answer, may I ask whether he remembers that his predecessor—and, certainly, the former Parliamentary Secretary—appeared convinced that this would be a desirable step to take? May I, therefore, urge the right hon. Gentleman, in view of his past professional career, to take steps as soon as possible to see that local authorities have the power to take this opportunity of rebuilding their cities and towns?

I had intended my Answer to convey sympathy with the hon. Member's point, but what I cannot say is when it will be possible to introduce any such change.

Further to the suggestion of my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent, Central (Dr. Stross), would the Minister do all he can to help local authorities to escape the clutches of property speculators, who are always lying in wait for an opportunity to develop town centres?

That is just a rhetorical question, intended to convey bias rather than to seek information.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what amount was expended by local authorities, and what percentage of this sum was contributed by his Department, by way of general grant during 1960, in respect of planting, reclaiming or otherwise improving derelict land; and what additional expenditures and measures are proposed for 1962.

I do not know how much local authorities spend in total on improving derelict land under their various powers. Where it is done under planning powers the expenditure is of a kind that is taken into account in fixing general grant, but it cannot without a great deal of work be isolated from other planning expenditure which is also taken into account. The increased general grants for 1962–63 assumed a 43 per cent. increase in planning expenditure over the level of the previous year.

Is it not most extraordinary that when the Minister of Education has to deal with teachers' salaries he knows precisely how much of the general grant goes in those salaries, but that where it is a matter of urgent reconstruction the hon. Gentleman does not know the figure? Is not his programme almost as bad as that of the Board of Trade, which has done no reclamation or development in the last year, or is he really trying to stimulate an interest in this work?

I do not think that it is at all extraordinary. The local authority associations do not find any difficulty at all in acting on this basis.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will arrange for the Chief Secretary to the Treasury to answer Parliamentary Questions.

The normal arrangement is that the Chief Secretary to the Treasury and the Economic Secretary answer those Questions put down to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for oral answer on a Thursday.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the Financial Secretary to the Treasury answers Questions in his own right? As the Chief Secretary to the Treasury is a very important Minister, as a member of the Cabinet and responsible, apparently, for the whole field of public expenditure, should not hon. Members have an opportunity to ask him Questions direct?

The only Questions which the Financial Secretary has, by long tradition, answered, are those that deal with the Civil Service, where he is recognised as having a special responsibility. I think that it would be really more satisfactory to keep to the normal rule of putting questions to the Ministerial head of the Department, and for them to be answered as is convenient, according to the subject.

As public expenditure is a matter of very great concern to the House, and as the Chief Secretary is a member of the Cabinet and the Financial Secretary is not, should not hon. Members on both sides have the chance to ask Questions of the Chief Secretary who, otherwise, will not appear at Question Time at all?

I think that this will work itself out in the most convenient way if Questions are put to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It just so happens that there has not been a Thursday recently on which the Treasury Questions have been reached.

Would the Prime Minister reconsider this matter? If the Financial Secretary to the Treasury answers Questions in his own right—as, of course, he does—is it not really commonsense that the Chief Secretary to the Treasury should deal with Questions on public expenditure for which he is specifically responsible, and has been made responsible by the Prime Minister himself?

I only wish to do what is convenient to the House. If Questions on these particular subjects are put to the Chancellor of the Exchequer they will be answered by the Chief Secretary, but I do not think that, without careful thought, we want to upset the whole arrangements for Questions, because we shall only deprive other hon. Members of opportunities.

asked the Prime Minister when he received a letter from Kirkcaldy Town Council calling attention to the need for Government action to remedy the effects of the closure of sixteen Scottish pits; and what was the nature of his reply.

I received the letter on 27th November. The Kirkcaldy Town Council was told that the terms of the resolution which it had sent to me had been noted.

Is the Prime Minister aware that this resolution was unanimously approved at a specially convened meeting of the Kirkcaldy Town Council which, politically, is evenly divided? Is he aware that the town council's action underlines the growing apprehension in all sections of the community in Scotland about the future of Scottish collieries? Does he deny that he condones the apparent intention of the Coal Board and the Government to close the Scottish coal fields irrespective of the grave social and economic consequences of such an action?

That, of course, is a very large issue. With regard to this particular letter, I hope that the hon. Gentleman will not think that I was guilty of any discourtesy in merely acknowledging it. I was informed that a very long, reasoned reply was being sent by the Minister of Power, and the town council informed me that it was sending a copy of that letter to the hon. Gentleman.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is not only the Minister of Power who must be concerned in this business? Is he not aware that every local authority in Scotland is concerned, and that, if there are to be closures, we want alternative industry? Alternative industry involves other Ministers, and the Prime Minister is over all.

That process is, of course, going on. As the House was, I think, informed, alternative work will be available within travelling distance of their homes for the great majority of the miners affected by these closures.

asked the Prime Minister what discussions he has had with President Kennedy with regard to the President's recent proposal for a non-aggression pact between the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and Warsaw Pact countries.

In the reports that I have seen of the interview that President Kennedy gave to the Editor of Izvestia the President said this:

"I think it would be helpful if N.A.T.O. and the Warsaw Pact engaged in a commitment to live in peace with each other. I certainly believe we should take every conceivable step to prevent surprise attack".

Would not the Prime Minister agree that the signing of a non-aggression pact between the N.A.T.O. Powers and the Warsaw Pact Powers would be a useful contribution to the reduction of East-West tension and the building up of European security? May we take it that Her Majesty's Government will support this proposal by President Kennedy?

The signing of a pact is not in itself important, although it may be valuable. What is important, and I hope we shall work at it, is trying to get a negotiation on Berlin, then, gradually, the possibility of getting a settlement of wider questions and then, in the terms of the President's proposal, we might be in a position to get some sense of security into Europe.

Is the Prime Minister aware that many of us feel—as I am sure he does himself—that the President's interview with Izvestia gave a very welcome leadership to the West and one that was long-awaited on this as well as on other issues? On this issue, would the Prime Minister, in advance of his meeting with the President, say that he agrees with and endorses the words used by President Kennedy in respect of an agreement between the two pact organisations?

President Kennedy carefully avoided the use of the word "pact" and I must remind the House—as I have been reminding myself by reading the history of the years immediately before the last war—that there were more pacts signed by everyone on every conceivable subject, from the Kellogg Pact onwards. What we want is a basis on which the President's proposals can become effective.

That was interesting, but would be Prime Minister now answer the question whether he, in advance of his very important meeting with the President, agrees with the words used by President Kennedy on that occasion which, as he said, made no reference to the word "pact"? Does he agree with those words?

Yes, of course. President Kennedy said:

"… it would be helpful if N.A.T.O. and the Warsaw Pact engaged in a commitment to live in peace with each other."

"I certainly believe we should take every conceivable step to prevent surprise attack."

"… if the relations between our countries can be normalised, there will be less military buildup on both sides; but we cannot now withdraw our troops from Europe, way back across the Atlantic Ocean, when you "—

"merely withdraw your troops to the Soviet Union which is only a few hundred miles away."

Would not the Prime Minister agree that the settlement of Berlin may itself depend on some wider settlement in Eastern Europe? When the President speaks of commitments and the Prime Minister speaks of finding a basis for peace, what can this mean except some form of agreement or pact covering the area?

I do not want to be drawn into a discussion of how we should now best approach what is a very difficult and may become a critical situation. Myself, I feel and hope that we shall soon be in a position to make a fruitful negotiation. Exactly its extent and how and where it should begin and end must be a matter first of agreement with the Western Powers, and then we can see how the negotiation can proceed.

asked the Prime Minister what review of security arrangements he has ordered as a consequence of the recent evidence on security concerning the atomic reactor in H.M.S. "Dreadnought", details of which have been sent to him by the hon. Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Central.

None, Sir. The security of H.M.S. "Dreadnought" has not been compromised nor are her security arrangements unsatisfactory.

Yes, but is the Prime Minister aware that, much as I dislike his Government, I am not trying to embarrass him on this question? Is he not aware of the importance of the allegations made on 2nd June by Senator Clinton Anderson, which have just been revealed, and which should be cleared up; allegations in which he said that American secrets of submarine nuclear propulsion had gone from this country to Russia? Would the Prime Minister be a bit more forthcoming about that, and say whether the Radcliffe Committee has yet reported to him and, if so, whether it has considered this specific matter?

There are three parts to that supplementary question. First, much as he may dislike me, I do not dislike him at all.

I did not say that.

Me and my colleagues. I do not dislike him or his colleagues at all. On the second part, there was no evidence at all. On the contrary, the hon. Gentleman sent me a Press report consisting of a denial by the United States authorities of an assumption made by the United States senator in question. On the third part, I hope to make a statement before Christmas after considering the Report of the Radcliffe Committee. I will be in touch with the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition as to the best moment for making that statement.

asked the Prime Minister if he will consider the appointment of a Secretary for Industrial Health and the establishment of a new department to promote and administer a comprehensive occupational health service.

No, Sir.

In spite of the good work being done by the Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of Health, may I ask whether the Prime Minister is aware that there are still two or three people killed every working day and that fifty-six times more people are absent from work through illness than through strikes? According to Parkinson's Law, if one divides things between two Ministries one gets little advance. Perhaps the Prime Minister will consider doing the same as was done for the Department of Technical Co-operation, and combine two Ministries in this way?

I am anxious to make all the progress we can. I do not wish to stand in the way for purely administrative reasons, and I will discuss this matter further with the Minister of Labour to see by what means he thinks further progress can be made.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will take steps to review the arrangements for the classification of official documents in Government Departments.

This is one aspect of our security procedures, all of which have recently been under review by the Radcliffe Committee.

Will not my right hon. Friend agree that there is a terrible tendency in most Government Departments to overgrade documents, and will he look into the matter and advise Departments to downgrade wherever possible, which would lead to fewer incidents than has been the case in the past?

I will consider this matter in connection with the Report.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware that trade and industry in the North of Scotland are suffering as a result of the lack of co-ordination between the policies of Her Majesty's Government with regard to transport and trade, respectively, in that area; and if he will direct the Secretary of State for Scotland, the President of the Board of Trade, and the Ministers of Aviation, Labour and Transport to consult together as to the best means of encouraging trade, industry and labour to the North of Scotland.

My right hon. Friends concerned always maintain the closest consultation in implementing the Government's policy of steering industry into development districts like the North of Scotland; so no special direction by me is necessary.

Will the Prime Minister look down from his great eminence on the conflicts that are going on between the Ministers mentioned in the Question and the immediate chaos of trade, industry and employment in the North of Scotland, and take urgent steps to resolve the conflict so that full employment may be achieved?

I cannot accept the hon. and learned Gentleman's premises and, therefore, I cannot accept his conclusion. As he knows, in the area of Aberdeen the rate of unemployment for the three months ending November was 2·9 per cent. compared with 3 per cent. in the previous year.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in his forthcoming discussions with Dr. Adenauer, he will propose that, in the forthcoming negotiations with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the question of future security arrangements in Central Europe shall be discussed as well as the Berlin situation.

asked the Prime Minister to what extent, in his forthcoming meeting with Dr. Adenauer, he proposes to convey to the German Chancellor the concern in Great Britain about the growth of the German armed forces and the proposals made in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation to arm Germany with nuclear weapons.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in forthcoming discussions with Dr. Adenauer, he will express clear British opposition to any proposals made in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation for the establishment of a North Atlantic Treaty Organisation nuclear deterrent and the supply of nuclear weapons to West Germany.

I have nothing to add to the reply which I gave to the hon. Gentleman the Member for Leeds, East (Mr. Healey) on 28th November.

Yes, but can the Prime Minister say whether the Government accept the policy impressed on them by Dr. Adenauer and the N.A.T.O. military chiefs that it is better to keep Berlin and Germany divided with all the fateful consequences of such a policy rather than to accept any form of arms control or disengagement in Central Europe?

As to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementry question, I cannot accept his statement and, therefore, I would not discuss the value of the policy which he alleges has been accepted.

Can the Prime Minister say if the supply of nuclear weapons to Germany is now the policy of Her Majesty's Government? Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that concern is growing in the country about the increased military organisations and the military strength in Germany?

With regard to the second part of that supplementary question, German armaments are in accordance with policies agreed both under the Brussels Treaty and N.A.T.O. With regard to nuclear weapons, no nuclear warheads are under German control.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that President Kennedy recently made a new declaration on this subject in his interview with Izvestia, that Dr Adenauer has made a report to his Parliament on the subject—a report which seems to contradict what has been said by President Kennedy—and does not the right hon. Gentleman think that it is his duty to give to the British House of Commons as full a report on this matter as Dr. Adenauer has given to the German Parliament?

No, Sir. In the present situation—I ask for some forbearance from the House—I think that the best contribution that our country can make is to play its rôle in these preliminary discussions and hope that they will lead to fruitful negotiations.

Reverting to Question No. Q8, has the Prime Minister abandoned for the, as we hope, forthcoming discussions on Berlin any idea that a zone of controlled disarmament should be introduced? Is not this one of the most fruitful ideas, and one which he discussed with Mr. Khrushchev some time ago? Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that there is strong support for this idea in the country?

I must remind the right hon. Gentleman that, when I discussed that with Mr. Khrushchev and published it jointly with him, it was part of a larger peace plan as a whole.

Nevertheless, is it not a fact that in the communiqué to which, no doubt, the right hon. Gentleman was referring, it was stated that both he and Mr. Khrushchev agreed that the plan was well worth further study, and we have always been trying to find out when that further study was to be given to it?

The point was that it was to be part of a larger settlement. I am asked now whether I will state what proposals we shall put forward. I ask again for the forbearance of the House. The first thing to do is to try to get through the immediate Berlin problem and crisis. To do that we want to reach a joint Western position. We must then enter into negotiations. The negotiations may be difficult and prolonged, or they may be much easier than we think. We may be able to widen them into something more fruitful or we may have to rest content in the first stages with a narrower agreement. What we want to do is to remove the sense of crisis and try to get at least the beginning of some settlement. I honestly ask the House to allow the Government to play their rôle as best they think in trying to arrive at this result.

I think we all understand the Prime Minister's request for forbearance, but is he aware that, although we all welcome what he has just said about the factual situation in relation to nuclear arms for Germany, namely, that they do not have them, is he aware that we should all welcome from him a clear statement—which would not in any way tie his hands—that Her Majesty's Government will oppose any change in that situation and will insist that nuclear arms be not given to Germany?

Her Majesty's Government can play their part so far as they have power under the Brussels Treaty, under which, as the right hon. Gentleman well knows, the Germans are precluded from the manufacture of nuclear arms. That, therefore, is within the power of Her Majesty's Government as signatory to the Treaty. On other questions, it is a matter not of power but of influence.

Does not the Prime Minister realise that, although we all understand the limits affecting one ally in consultation with other allies, what the House would like is an expression of the Prime Minister's own opinion on this matter? In view of his reference to the agreements under which German armaments were allowed and to the fact that under those agreements nuclear weapons were not permitted, could not the right hon. Gentleman give one word of reassurance to the House that Her Majesty's Government are at this moment opposed to any alteration of those agreements which would result in the German forces having control of nuclear weapons?

This is where there has been so much misunderstanding and mis-statement in the country. The Germans do not have control of the nuclear war heads. There has been great pressure that their forces should be less well armed than those of their allies. That I believe to be impossible in any military formation; they must have the same armaments as the formations working by their side. Control of the warheads which are given to them by the American Government lies in the hands of the American Government alone.

But will the Prime Minister at least agree that any building up of nuclear arms in Germany which led to the impression that forces in Germany were becoming more and more dependent on nuclear arms rather than conventional arms would create the worst possible atmosphere for starting the sort of negotiations of which he has spoken?

I do not think that the hon. Gentleman realises what are the actual formation and military arrangements by which the tactical nuclear weapons are held. So far as the N.A.T.O. authorities wish them and have agreed that they should be held, there is no distinction made between the various allied countries in N.A.T.O. What remains is the control of their use, which, in the case of these weapons where the warhead is nuclear, lies with the American Government.