asked the Minister of Defence what further consideration he has given to the granting to officers attending the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation Defence College in Paris of appropriate marks of qualification in their Service lists.

It has now been agreed that attendance or service at the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation Defence College should be recognised in Service lists by the symbol "n.a.d.c.".

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask him whether he does not agree that it is very desirable that we should give the same attention to this important college as our allies do?

I quite agree. I think it does very useful work indeed, and I am very glad that we have been able to give it this recognition.

asked the Minister of Defence how many officers have attended the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation Defence College in Paris in the last five years; and how many of these are still serving.

Fifty-six officers of the Armed Services, including those on the current course, have attended the college since March, 1957; 51 are still serving.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that that is a very satisfactory proportion and will correct the impression which has sometimes been given that some officers who attend are just about to retire and are, therefore, not very useful to their Service?

I am very glad that my hon. Friend has raised that point, because it has been brought to my notice before. I think that officers who have served on this useful course ought to go back to their own Service and carry the tradition with them.

asked the Minister of Defence what consideration he is giving to the amalgamation of the intelligence services of the three Service Departments with a view to reducing overhead expenses.

I doubt whether an amalgamation would result in significant economies but I keep all matters of this kind under review.

Would my right hon. Friend not agree that it is rather unnecessary for the Service Departments to deal with political intelligence, which surely is the prerogative of the Foreign Office, and could he not find in this amalgamation a means of reducing overheads?

I should like to reduce overheads, but on this issue I think the intelligence departments of the Services are tailored to the direct needs of the Services; while I will certainly have another look at this point, do not think there are substantial savings to be made here.

While, no doubt, this would reduce overhead expenses, it is not the main consideration, as the Minister will agree. Is there not something to be said for concentrating all intelligence sections under the Ministry of Defence?

I think there is a good deal in what the right hon. Gentleman says.

asked the Minister of Defence how many advisers, special or ordinary, he employs in his Department; and what is the total annual cost of their combined salaries to the taxpayer.

There are eight officers who are attached to my Department and whose appointment includes the title "adviser" in one form or another. The total cost to the crown is about £25,000 per annum. In addition, until quite recently, Field Marshal Sir Francis Festing has given me valuable assistance as my adviser on a special study of future defence policy which has now been completed. I am also indebted to Sir Frederic Hooper who advises me, in an honorary capacity, on recruiting problems.

While not wishing to dispute with the Minister his choice of persons whom he calls upon for advice, may I ask whether he feels it necessary to call upon Sir Francis Festing when he has got the C.I.G.S. available to him? Secondly, will he give further consideration to using the Service advisers rather more in a concentrated form instead of in such a wide way?

I am not sure if my hon. Friend is aware that Sir Francis Festing's term of service in the Ministry of Defence was recommended by the Chiefs of Staff and had their full approval, which certainly includes that of the C.I.G.S. I would welcome this opportunity to say how grateful I was to the Field Marshal. He would like to have gone and had a little rest after his arduous and very successful duties as C.I.G.S. He stayed on because he felt it was his public duty.

Is it not a fact that the Ministry of Defence Vote, unlike some other Departments, shows a reduction of £210,000 for the forthcoming year?

Yes, Sir, it does, but perhaps I should not take too much credit for that.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say who advises him on civil defence and whether the reason why he did not mention this subject in the debate yesterday was that he was not adequately briefed or that he did not have time?

The second reason is the correct one. As the hon. Gentleman knows, departmentally civil defence comes under the Home Office. However, I want to make it perfectly plain that that does not mean that I do not attach the greatest importance to it. I very much regret that there was not time last night in my winding-up speech to deal with the hon. Gentleman's remarks.

asked the Minister of Defence whether, in view of the expense to public funds arising from the fact that each of the three Armed Services maintains separate recruiting offices in commercial premises in the central area of the city of Coventry, he will arrange to amalgamate their activities in a single property.

If suitable premises capable of providing adequate space for all three Services could be obtained on an economic basis I should be prepared to consider the hon. Member's suggestion. I understand, however, that there is little prospect of finding a suitable property.

While welcoming the Minister's reply, may I ask whether it has not been gross extravagance on his part in the past to maintain under peacetime conditions premises adequate to a wartime establishment? In view of the protest of the Coventry Planning Development Committee, which obviously has in mind to offer adequate space for alternative premises, will he go into the matter very carefully with it in order to take the action which he has undertaken?

If the Committee can offer adequate space which will enable us to have adequate premises for recruiting, I shall be only too glad to look into the matter.

Will my right hon. Friend be prepared to look into this matter on a national basis? It is very often difficult to find recruiting offices. It seems to be a way in which Service co-ordination can take a step further forward.

I should like to explain to the House that the difficulty is that as long as we recruit on a three-Service basis it is not always the most satisfactory method to have a centralised form of recruiting whereby an officer recruits for a Service with which he is not perhaps familiar. However, I do not think that in the long-term this is an entirely economic way of going about it, and I have been looking at the whole recruiting system.

asked the Minister of Defence what progress has been made with the provision of special educational facilities for the handicapped children of Service parents.

Handicapped children of Service parents use the special educational facilities provided in this country by local education authorities and voluntary bodies. The Services introduced new arrangements just over a year ago for considering the interests of such children and for helping them to obtain places in suitable schools. These arrangements are proving extremely valuable.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say now whether the handicapped children of Service parents have the same opportunities and facilities as the children of ordinary residents with a good local education authority?

I believe so. If this is not so in any case, I should very much like to hear about it, because I think that these children are deserving of special care and help. If the hon. Gentleman has a particular problem, I shall be very glad to look into it.

asked the Minister of Defence what is the percentage increase of the latest total of Defence Estimates compared with such expenditure in 1951.

The total of Defence Estimates for 1962–63 is 53·5 per cent. above the actual net expenditure in 1951–52, but if the comparison is made in terms of constant prices, expenditure in 1962–63 is expected to be 2·4 per cent. below expenditure in 1951–52.

But compared with, say, 1949, is not the increase 125 per cent—

No.

—and is not the £70 million increase this year the biggest single increase in Government expenditure? Does the right hon. Gentleman foresee any further rise over £1,720 million? Is there to be no ceiling at all?

The hon. Gentleman appears to be asking quite a different question. Perhaps the best way to answer him is to say that the fairest assessment is according to the slice of the gross national product which is taken, and if he examines that he will see that it has fallen since the date about which he asked. As I said in the recent debate, it is the Government's hope to keep it at about 7 per cent. of the gross national product.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that, both in defensive terms and in terms of attacking power, whether on a global, a regional or a local basis, the nation is getting immensely greater value for money from the present Estimates than at any time since the end of the last war?

I agree with my hon. Friend. I should just like to add—this is a matter which the House has to face—that I do not think one can pay a smaller insurance policy premium for peace than the present defence budget. It is, in my view, a perfectly justified share of the national income to try to keep peace in a very dangerous world.

When the right hon. Gentleman says that the fair way to assess these things is by the proportion of the national product, will he consider applying that to his pensioners?

Answer.

asked the Minister of Defence what is the strength of British forces at El Adem and Tripoli; and if he is satisfied that these are adequate to honour our treaty obligations.

It is not the normal practice to reveal the number of forces in any given area. Taken in conjunction with our ability to reinforce if necessary, the forces now in Libya are fully adequate to meet our obligations under the Anglo-Libyan Treaty.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that is a rather surprising statement to make, as these facts were quoted in the national Press only last week and that they reveal a very ineffective garrison in that theatre? If it is necessary so substantially to supplement our forces to meet our treaty obligations, would it not be in our interests to get rid of the garrison? We are depending anyway on large-scale reinforcements from some other theatre.

I cannot comment on statements in the national Press of which I am not aware. What I have said is that we have a garrison in Libya which is fully adequate to meet our obligations under the Anglo-Libyan Treaty, and that is what we are asked to do.

asked the Minister of Defence what was the total cost of running the Hertford Hospital, Paris, during the last financial year; and what was the cost per week for each occupied bed.

The total cost was £134,415, giving a figure of £83 10s. Id. per week for each occupied bed. In view of these high costs it was decided to terminate military use of the hospital as from 30th November last year. Our main requirements are now covered by an agreement with the American Military Hospital in Paris.

While I am very glad to have that news, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will not agree that it has taken his Ministry a very long time to arrive at that decision? It is more than three years since the Public Accounts Committee referred to the extravagance and cost of the hospital. I am very glad that the Minister has at last decided to do the only right and proper thing.

I do not at all disagree with the hon. Gentleman that the hospital was costing far too much. I regret that it was not possible to end its military use sooner, but we had great difficulty, unfortunately, in finding alternative accommodation.

asked the Minister of Defence what rank will be held by the senior officer to be appointed Director of the new Joint Warfare Staff in the Ministry of Defence.

The rank of the Director of the Joint Warfare Staff will be Major General or equivalent.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what has been the total amount spent in each of the last three financial years on new construction and modernisation of warships, respectively.

In the three financial years 1958–59 to 1960–61, the cost of new construction warships was £40·7 million, £49·6 million and £56 million. Modernisation costs in the same years were £6·7 million, £5·2 million and £9·2 million.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind the importance of saving all possible money for new construction? Will he bear in mind that at this moment, I believe, the Americans have a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier on trials and that we have no nuclear propelled surface ships envisaged for this year?

I will certainly bear these points in mind.

Will the hon. Gentleman say what the very great increase in the expenditure on modernisation was for?

In the year just finished we were spending money on H.M.S. "Albion" and that took a good deal of money, and the refurbishing of H.M.S. "Eagle" also took a very considerable slice.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what is the current annual cost of the Royal Marine Hospital at Deal; if he will give separately the number and rank of doctors, nurses and other staff employed there; how many naval personnel have been treated there in the last 12 months; and how each of these figures compares with the corresponding figures five years ago.

When in full operation the annual cost is estimated at £72,000. Officers, ratings and civilians manning the sick quarters total 56. As the quarters were under reconstruction during 1961, facilities were limited, but the average number of cases treated in each of the last four months of that year was 53. Since the close of R.N. Hospital, Chatham, Deal will cater for all naval patients, and surgical cases for all three Services in the south-east area. This makes comparison with five years ago invalid.

I will, with permission, circulate details of the staff employed in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Do not the details of the staff show a considerable increase in both numbers and rank without a commensurate increase in the number of Service patients using the facilities of the hospital?

In January, 1962, 143 new patients were admitted to the hospital. While it is true that the staff has increased, so have the medical commitments which that staff has to look after, as I said in my original Answer.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether future building of nuclear submarines will be subject to tender, and not concentrated at Barrow.

Until our future programme of nuclear submarine building has been settled, I cannot say where these boats will be built.

But could I have my hon. Friend's assurance that, when the programme has been settled, there will be no special concentration of the nuclear power technique in the west coast of England or in any other part of the country, but that the "know-how" will be properly spread over all areas and there will be fair tendering at all shipyards so that everyone may share in what seems likely to be a new technique for nuclear propulsion in its marine application?

I do not think that I could possibly give an undertaking that we shall spread the building of nuclear-powered warships and submarines all round the shipyards of this country.

Well, to the Tyne, then.

Submarine building has always been a rather specialised undertaking, and we have to bear this in mind when considering where we shall build future submarines.

Will my hon. Friend give an undertaking that on this occasion he will resist the blamdishments of my hon. Friend the Member for Tynemouth (Dame Irene Ward) and base this building, or at least a fair share of it, in the Royal Naval Dockyards, particularly Chatham, which is well equipped to carry out the work?

That supplementary question shows that I was very wise in not giving a preference to one area over another.

Can the hon. Gentleman say when consideration of this programme by the Admiralty is likely to be concluded?

Our nuclear submarine programme is a very expensive project, and it may take some time before it is decided exactly what it will be in future years.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty how many offered themselves for the direct graduate entry for commissioned rank in September, 1961; and how many were accepted.

Four candidates offered themselves for the postgraduate direct entry for permanent commissions in September, 1961, for service in the Engineering Specialisation. Two were accepted.

Does this come up to the expectations of the Admiralty, and is entry open to other categories?

With regard to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, this was, as he knows, a new arrangement. We are now employing one officer to maintain liaison with the universities and thereby give greater publicity and encouragement to the scheme. We have other schemes—the Supplementary List Electrical Specialisation, the Instructor Branch, and the Medical and Dental Branches—to which we seek to attract graduates from the universities.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what progress has been made in the programme of experiments in the organisation of manpower arising from the recommendations of the committee on lower deck structure.

The Committee on rating structure concentrated on two main aspects—the function of the seaman branch and the best arrangement for the maintenance and use of modern weapons, which are becoming increasingly numerous and complex. As a result of its report, two general principles have been accepted. One is the need to give the seaman branch duties which will be useful and interesting; the other the need to move towards a greater integration of the duties of users and maintainers.

The Fleet is still carrying out experiments to find how far it is practicable for the seaman to undertake 5ome weapon maintenance.

Am I to understand that the new branch, Weapons Mechanician, is the result of this consideration? Further, in view of the fact that the Minister of Defence is talking in terms of closer co-operation and men of the various Services will probably be working together more frequently in future and comparisons will be made, is it not time that the question of the master rate was looked at again?

I should not like to answer the first part off the cuff. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put a Question down for next week. The master rate is really a hardy old annual, and I do not think that it comes quite within the purview of this Question.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what priority in naval preparedness he attaches to the maintenance of coastal shipping.

A certain amount of coastal shipping would, of course, be required on defence grounds in the event of global war, but it is not my noble Friend's task to allot a priority to the maintenance of coastal shipping.

No, but, having regard to that Answer, will my hon. Friend kindly convey to the Minister of Transport that coastal shipping is not only a matter as between coastal shipping and the railways, and will he please take a hammer and a nail and drive into his right hon. Friend's head that coastal shipping is also part of our defence programme?

It is out of order even to urge persuasion of a milder kind.

Will it not be in order, Mr. Speaker, if I put my question, leaving out the hammer and the nail?

I do not remember what there was apart from something being done to the other right hon. Gentleman.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I wish my hon. Friend just to convey to his right hon. Friend that coastal shipping is part of our defence programme and that coastal shipping is not only a matter for discussion between coastal shipping interests and the railways, as my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport seems to think.

It is not the Minister's duty to convey messages to another one. Perhaps the hon. Lady will be content with having asked her question.

My hon. Friend the Civil Lord says that a certain amount of coastal snipping is necessary. Can he be a little more specific? Is there a minimum tonnage requirement for defence needs? Further, will he please note the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Tynemouth (Dame Irene Ward), that if coastal shipping continues to decline at the present rate, this will not only be a tragedy economically for Britain, whether we enter the Common Market or not, but also will undermine our position in terms of war and survival?

Hear, hear.

My noble Friend is well aware, of course, that coastal shipping would play an important part should a major European war be upon us. We, therefore, do look at its level, although it is not in any way our responsibility. I can say that at present it more than meets the possible need.

It must be maintained.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what are his plans for allocating naval vessels for refit to Cardiff, Newport and Barry in the near future.

We have no plans for allocating naval vessels for refit to Cardiff, Newport and Barry. We invite competitive tenders for work of this kind if we are unable to arrange it in the Royal Dockyards. Two Cardiff firms tendered unsuccessfully for an R.F.A. refit which is due to start shortly in South Wales. The ship-repairers in the Cardiff-Newport-Barry area will be given the opportunity to tender for the refit of two more of our R.F.A.s shortly.

With due deference to you, Mr. Speaker, is the Civil Lord aware that the working strength of the ship-repairing industry in Cardiff has declined by one-third in the last four years and of the remainder 13 per cent. are unemployed? Will he, therefore, give special consideration to allocating some ship on competitive tender for repair, lest this industry should decay and men be attracted to more stable employment?

I judge from the hon. Gentleman's opening words that he realises that responsibility for the well-being of the ship-repairing and shipbuilding industry rests with my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport now. We shall certainly make sure that ship-repairing firms in Cardiff are given the opportunity to tender. I hope that, perhaps, their tenders will be so competitive in the future that they will win awards.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what progress is being made by the Fleet Work Study Team; and how much money is likely to be saved as a result of their recommendations.

The Fleet Work Study Team is showing good results, but it is not possible to measure these entirely in terms of money saved. Some of the studies, for instance, have led to the more efficient use of existing manpower, and others to improved safety arrangements, higher standards of maintenance and longer periods of operational service for ships and equipment.

How many teams are there, and does my hon. Friend think that they are really justified?

From everything I see, I am absolutely certain that they are justified. They are more than paying their way. We have 16 teams in all, and last year they pursued with a successful outcome more than 35 studies of different aspects of naval work.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty if he will have a survey made of the accommodation provided by his Department for the Women's Royal Naval Service, both at home and abroad, to ascertain whether it is adequate for the needs of this service.

The accommodation needs of all naval personnel are considered annually when the works programme for the next five years is reviewed. The needs of the W.R.N.S. are naturally included. New accommodation is being provided for the W.R.N.S. at a number of naval establishments in this country and I do not think a separate survey is desirable.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. There have not been any requests from the W.R.N.S. about accommodation, but I have seen some of it myself, particularly abroad and in Gibraltar. These women play a very important part in the naval service, and I hope my hon. Friend will ensure that they have adequate accommodation.

I have looked at their accommodation in Gilbraltar, and I agree that it is far from ideal. I will make certain that they are considered fairly with all other branches of the Royal Navy.

Is it not a fact that, in case of need, the men in the Royal Navy will always be ready and willing to share accommodation with the Women's Royal Naval Service?

Unlike my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Devonport (Miss Vickers), I have received complaints from a member of the Women's Royal Naval Service about the accommodation at Portsmouth, which is apparently inferior to other accommodation. Will my hon. Friend consider this, because the accommodation is not up to standard?

We are considering plans for new accommodation for the Women's Royal Naval Service in the Portsmouth area in the next five years. Although the Women's Royal Naval Service makes up only 3 per cent. of Vote A, it looks as if 9 per cent. of our works programme will be devoted to accommodation for its members.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether he will give details about the two replenishment tankers now under construction.

Yes, Sir. These two ships, being built by Hawthorn Leslie, Hebburn-on-Tyne, will be of 13,100 tons gross and have a speed of 17 knots, the same as the existing "Tide" Class. They will, however. have improvements including a helicopter platform and up-to-date replenishment arrangements. These ships reinforce our seaborne capability under the strategy outlined in this year's Defence White Paper.

Does not my hon. Friend feel that a speed of 17 knots is a little slow for modern ships accompanying a fleet?

We must balance the amount of money that we have with our desire for extra speed. However, we hope that future tankers will have a speed rather higher than 17 knots.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether he will make a statement about the two dry cargo freighters now being built for service in the Royal Navy.

These ships are 4,700 tons dead weight with a service speed of 15 knots. They are being built by H. Robb and Company, Leith, to the order of the British India Steam Navigation Company, which will charter them to the Admiralty. The first ship, "Hebe", was launched today. The second ship, "Bacchus", is to be launched in May.

Does not my hon. Friend feel that the speed of these ships is much too slow for modern times?

We are not talking about first-line ships. In this case, there is less need for speed and we must balance that need with economy.

What proportion of the very large increase in Vote 8 expenditure for this year is attributable to the four ships mentioned in this Question and in the previous Question?

None under Vote A. because they will be manned by Royal Fleet Auxiliary civilians.

What expenditure is involved under Vote 8?

I cannot answer that. I have not the necessary papers with me. No doubt that point will be raised in Committee on the Navy Estimates. I shall be glad to answer it then.

Can my hon. Friend say who will man these ships? Will they be manned by the Royal Navy or by the R.F.A.?

They will be manned by R.F.A. civilians.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty if he will arrange for the discharge from the Royal Navy of Able Seaman Murray, who is presently employed in the officers' mess of H.M.S. "Pembroke", and whose wife is now on hunger strike.

I am looking into this case at the moment and I will let the hon. Member know what is decided.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that the squalid exhibitionism of Mrs. Murray, who is now in hospital, merely highlights the dignity and patience with which the majority of the wives of serving -men accept their responsibilities, often during the prolonged absence of their husbands abroad? In considering this matter, will my hon. Friend take into account the fact that this man is almost certain to be a liability to the Royal Navy, however long he remains in it? The sooner he is sent packing, the better it will be for all concerned.

I will balance the two factors which my hon. Friend has mentioned.

If all the wives of all the seamen in the Royal Navy go on hunger strike, will all the seamen be discharged?

I am glad that the hon. Gentleman has also drawn attention to this difficulty. It is one of the factors that we have to take into careful consideration.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what action is being taken against the intruders who painted the word "Rag" twice on the nuclear submarine "Dreadnought"; and if he will make a statement.

I understand that the civil police are taking active steps to try and identify the persons responsible. The question of what action may be taken against the culprits is not a matter for me.

Although the action may not be a matter for the hon. Gentleman, presumably he consults about it. If and when they are identified, is it proposed to prosecute them under the Official Secrets Act?

Naturally, we have looked into the circumstances which led to this prank, but the question of prosecution is, I think, one for the Chief Constable and for the Director of Public Prosecutions, and I cannot possibly comment on it.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what facilities are provided to enable ratings serving afloat to prepare for the educational qualifications required for promotion and advancement.

The larger ships of the Fleet carry instructor officers, who also serve with destroyer and frigate squadrons. Correspondence courses, in a great variety of subjects, are provided for ratings to whom instruction is not locally available.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what results have been obtained by naval ratings who sat for the examination for the General Certificate of Education during 1961.

3,386 subject passes at O level in the General Certificate of Education were obtained by just under 3,000 ratings who sat for this examination during 1961.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that these results are extremely satisfactory and that the Navy should be very proud of them and of what it is doing for these people?

I think that it is. The fact that more than 100 ships sent forward examinees for this examination shows that it is widely spread throughout the fleet.

In view of the Admiralty's policy of raising the quality of the officer branches, with which I agree, does it not become increasingly important that educational facilities for the lower deck should be provided so that the numbers coming from the lower deck will not fall?

We are paying attention to that point, which is so directly connected with the strength and calibre of our instructor branch. The better the officers we can attract to the instructor branch, the better our results will be.

Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied that a rating's dialect is not taken into consideration when he applies for promotion? We have a suspicion in the North-East, which we have had for a long time, that a number of bright Service men from our part of the country have been deprived of the chance of promotion because of their Geordie dialect.

This examination was taken on paper, not verbally. How men can convey their dialects to paper is beyond my comprehension.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that the Government of the United States of America are building submarine-chasers and hydrofoil ships capable of speeds up to 60 knots; what research is being carried on in this country into ships with hydrofoils; and if he will make a statement.

The Royal Navy is in very close touch with current developments by the Government of the U.S.A. and by others of our N.A.T.O. allies and we are watching the possible military applications of these techniques with interest.

Would my hon. Friend agree that the hydrofoil ship seems to have a great future as a submarine chaser? The Russians are building one and the Americans are building an 80-tonner with a speed of 60 knots. Should not we, as a maritime nation, be in the forefront of this development and use all our brain power to get there?

There are many research and development projects on which we should like to spend money, but we have to be strictly selective. In this instance, there would be no point in duplicating the efforts of our close allies.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the increasing emphasis on amphibious strike forces, it is proposed to limit the Royal Navy assault ships to the two vessels now envisaged; when those vessels are likely to be put into service; and when further Commando ships will be provided in addition to H.M. ships "Bulwark" and "Albion".

H.M.S."Albion" is expected to commission next July, and the two assault ships in about three years. There are no plans to have more than two assault ships and two commando ships in commission. When all these four ships are in commission the amphibious capability of the Royal Navy will be roughly double that of the Amphibious Warfare Squadron which they will replace.

This is rather disappointing news. It means that the Admiralty is not planning to have more than one task force afloat at any one time, Is it not a fact that as soon as the "Albion" is ready the "Bulwark" will go in for a rather extended refit? When will the hon. Gentleman be in a position to provide a seaborne task force. Including commando ships and assault ships, as forecast in paragraph 27 of the Defence White Paper?

It is true that the "Bulwark" will go in for a refit, but for much of that time we shall have two commando carriers available and, when they come forward, two assault ships. We have to balance the many claims on our resources—aircraft carriers, antisubmarine vessels and the whole submarine programme—with the demands of our amphibious forces.

asked the Secretary of State for War when he proposes to undertake the review of Army pay in accordance with Command 954 Service Pay and Pensions, February, 1960; and whether he will give an assurance that the pay pause will not affect this undertaking.

I would refer the hon. and learned Gentleman to the announcement made by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Defence during the Defence debate on 5th March.

Now that the right hon. Gentleman has an all-voluntary Army in circumstances of full employment, does he not feel that the time has come when he must experiment in being honest with it and fulfilling the bargains upon which he secures his recruits?

"Very dangerous", did the hon. and learned Gentleman say? I simply do not accept what he says, that we are in any breach of any obligations. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] No. We undertook to review Service pay automatically every two years. That is what the Grigg Committee recommended. That is our undertaking, and that is exactly what we have done.

Is the right hon. Gentleman unaware that that undertaking was extended by his predecessor into specific terms—not only to review, but to pay in accordance with the review? It would, one would have thought, if there was an undertaking to review, obviously have followed, but it was actually spelled out by the right hon. Gentleman's predecessor the present Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations.

I think that if the hon. and learned Gentleman reads the White Paper, which will be published, he will see that we have fulfilled our obligation, and I believe that the Army as a whole will understand this.

Is the right hon. Gentleman really saying now that to maintain an obligation he has merely to look at it and not to do anything about it? Is he saying that if he merely looks at it he has carried out his obligation which the men in the Service expected him to carry out?

What I said was exactly what was correct. If the right hon. Gentleman looks at the Government's comments on the Grigg Report, he will see that the Government agreed that Service pay and conditions should be looked at regularly at intervals of not more than two years, and that is what we have done.

Is the right hon. Gentleman proposing to circulate copies of the White Paper to all ranks in the Army, and does he suppose that recruits who now believe they have been cheated by the Government will be happy about it when they read the White Paper? Is he himself happy at having to defer this increase of pay?

I have already said that I believe that what has been done is correct, and it conforms with the policies described in paragraphs 8 and 9 of the White Paper on Incomes Policy. In spite of all that the hon. Gentleman has tried to do to sow seeds of discord, I believe that the Army will accept this as fair.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that no one is sowing seeds of discord except himself?

asked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the confession of another soldier of his guilt of the offence for which Rifleman Denis Robinson, of the Royal Ulster Rifles, was court-martialled on 30th September, 1961, he will now arrange for the release of Rifleman Robinson, and clear his name.

In consequence of the decision of the Courts Martial Appeal Court on 2nd March, I have already caused action to be taken according to the recommendations of the Lord Chief Justice.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say what that means in plain English? Is Rifleman Robinson still in detention? If so, how many people must be in detention for one and the same crime to conform to War Office justice? Is it not the case that another man has confessed to this? Obviously, Rifleman Robinson did not want to let down his colleague. Would the right hon. Gentleman now say that in view of all this Rifleman Robinson will be released?

No, I am afraid I cannot accept that Rifleman Robinson should be released. The other soldier who since the trial has said he did the assault himself gave evidence for the defence at "the trial and made no admission regarding this at all. The hon. Gentleman will understand that I have got to be absolutely satisfied about this. In view of what he has said in his Question, I will see that an examination is carried out as quickly as possible, but I am not in a position to release anybody till the case is substantiated.

Is my right hen. Friend aware that this man is a constituent of mine, and will he arrange to meet me personally to discuss the circumstances of this case? Secondly, is he aware that the hon. Gentleman the Member for Newton (Mr. Lee) gave me no notice that he was raising a question relating to a constituent of mine? Is he aware that the hon. Gentleman has been a Member of this House since 1945? Am I to accuse him of innocence merely or of carpet bagging?

Oh.

I do not know about the last part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question, but I think that the first part is perfectly proper, and, of course, I will give my hon. Friend the undertaking that I will discuss with him a matter which concerns one of his constituents.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that my hon. Friend the Member for Newton (Mr. Lee) was raising a point of principle and not merely a matter concerning a constituent of the hon. Member for Belfast, North (Mr. Stratton Mills)? As I understand it, two men are in detention now for one charge. Does that mean that the right hon. Gentleman is now defending having two different men in detention in relation to the one charge?

I am not defending that at all. I am merely saying that I cannot release Rifleman Robinson, about whom the Question was asked—and I am answering that Question—till I have substantiated the truth or otherwise of the other allegation. This has been referred by the Lord Chief Justice to the Army Council to deal with.

Whereas he had to serve nine months, he has now served six months of this period. How long must it be before he gets justice accorded to him? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Rifleman Robinson has now been told that he must remain in till the appeal, but that if he remains in till the appeal takes place in London, then by the time that happens he will have served the full sentence? Surely justice should be done more rapidly than this?

I have given the undertaking that now that the matter has been referred by the Lord Chief Justice to the Army Council I and my colleagues will see that the procedures are carried out with the utmost despatch.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will state the number of officers serving in the Army who are under the age of 25 years; how many of them are married; and what is the number of such officers who are now stationed abroad.

There are 3,190 officers in the Army under the age of 25; of these 333 are married, and of this latter number, 136 are serving abroad.

In view of the fact that a very small percentage of these officers are married and are under 25 and abroad, would the right hon. Gentleman make certain that the wives of those officers can join them and that the Government will be responsible for their fares?

I am afraid I cannot give that undertaking. There is a longstanding regulation that officers under the age of 25 do get treated not so well as those over 25, and I do not see—and I have had a look at this very carefully—any way in which I can alter this arrangement.

Does not the Minister think it a very unjust and very unfair penalty on these young men? What right have the Government to say that a man shall not marry till he is over 25 years of age? It behoves the Government to make certain that they play fair and justly with these boys. Will the Minister give further consideration to this?

We always give further consideration to these matters and we are considering them the whole time. The hon. Gentleman asked what right the Government have in this matter of marriages of young officers under 25. We have no right, and we are not saying that we have. With regard to what right we have to say that those under the age of 25 do not get special consideration, that right was laid down by hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite when they were in office.

asked the Secretary of State for War what action he is taking to use, or dispose of, the site of the former Royal Ordnance Factory at Swynnerton.

One hundred and twenty-seven acres of the former Royal Ordnance Factory at Swynnerton have been sold to the British Motor Corporation, and the Staffordshire Potteries Water Board has acquired the water facilities. Most of the remainder of the site is now available for disposal. We are meeting the local authorities to establish what kind of use can be made of the land to be given up.

asked the Secretary of State for War why Mrs. E. Buckley, a registered disabled person, has been dismissed from the Blackburn Royal Ordnance Factory.

I have no information to add to my hon. Friend's letter to the hon. Lady. Mrs. Buckley's continued ill-health prevented her from giving satisfactory service; and after very careful consideration it was decided that she must be discharged. I have much sympathy with Mrs. Buckley in her poor state of health, but I am sure that this decision was right.

Is this not the equivalent of sacking a registered disabled person just because she is disabled? Is not this a total violation of the policy for the employment of registered disabled persons which the Labour Government introduced? Is it not particularly incumbent upon the Government in a Government-run factory, a Royal Ordnance Factory in my constituency, to carry out the policy in this connection? Has Mrs. Buckley any other blot against her name but the fact that she has been ill because she is a disabled person? Will the right hon. Gentleman set an example to private employers by giving me the assurance here and now that when Mrs. Buckley comes out of hospital after her latest operation she will be offered her job back again in the Royal Ordnance Factory?

I do not think I can give that undertaking—

Why not?

May I just answer the hon. Lady? First of all, we do employ our statutory quota of registered disabled people. At the Royal Ordnance Factory in the hon. Lady's division where Mrs. Buckley is employed, over 6 per cent. of the labour force is under some form of medical restriction. This led us to discharge her because of long periods of illness. I very much regret that it had to be done. The decision was fully discussed with representatives of her trade union. Beforehand they had sponsored an appeal on her behalf, but asked for it to be withdrawn after the hearing.

On a point of order, in view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I wish to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for War (1) whether he has now agreed to the cancellation this year of the Aldershot Queen's Birthday Parade; whether he is aware that the parade is the only annual comprehensive parade of all units in the Aldershot district; to what extent the "At Home" proposed to be held a fortnight afterwards is designed to serve as a substitute for this traditional occasion; and if he will make a statement;

(2) why he has agreed to the cancellation this year of the Aldershot Show; and whether he proposes to reconstitute this limited form of army publicity at an early date.

This decision has been taken because of our shortage of manpower. The usual comprehensive parade involves a good deal of special training and administrative effort. This year in its stead there will be unit parades to mark the occasion and the ceremonial artillery salute will be fired. The Aldershot Show has not been cancelled. It was decided last year that the 1962 Show would be held without the Tattoo which has formerly been an adjunct to it, and advantage has been taken of this arrangement to replace the Tattoo by an "Open Day". These arrangements will be reviewed next year.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that it involves at most only two extra parades? Is he also aware of the value of this traditional spectacle and the fact that this decision to cancel it will cause a great deal of disappointment to those who live in the area? Concerning the Show, will my right hon. Friend make it quite clear that this year Rushmoor arena will be made available for civilian purposes of a show, and will he give an undertaking that next year reconsideration will be given to the question of a military Tattoo in the Show?

I will certainly give consideration to the number of problems which my hon. Friend has put. I am sorry that I cannot give a more satisfactory reply from his point of view concerning this year, but I would remind him that we are doing this for the reasons that I have given and will review the whole position next year.

asked the Secretary of State for War who will pay the cost of training French paratroops in this country.

This visit is not yet definitely arranged, but we would follow the normal practice and invite the French Government to pay the extra costs arising from the participation of their troops, for example for food, petrol and other consumer items.

Torture.

While, of course, recognising the Government's need to earn foreign exchange by whatever means become available, is it not ridiculous that we should extend the practice of training foreign troops here and sending our troops to be trained abroad? Would it not be cheaper and more sensible if each country trained its own troops in its own territory?

I cannot agree with the hon. Gentleman. I am quite sure that diversification of training is a very important item in our curriculum. It is only an extension of interchangeability of training between the N.A.T.O. countries, which I am quite convinced is the right thing to do.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that public opinion in this country would deeply deplore these French paratroopers being brought into this country to brainwash our own troops in the kind of brutal behaviour for which these paratroopers have made a name for themselves in Algeria and elsewhere?

Whatever the hon. Lady's private views may be, I do not believe that she represents general public opinion in this country.

Is it not undesirable that so often we have from some benches opposite general support for N.A.T.O. and during the rest of the time we have these individual insults to our allies.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will state the extent to which military signals communications use transistor equipment.

Transistors are already incorporated in certain equipment and, within the limits of their technical development, will be used extensively in equipment which will come into service within the next one and two years.

When the right hon. Gentleman says "within the scope of their development", does he realise that this has been developed for almost all civilian equipment and has been in general use for the last five years? Is it reasonable that even for walkie-talkie equipment there should be added this great weight of valves when transistors are available? Why does it take the War Office so much longer than anyone else?

Simply because, by and large, commercial development of transistorised techniques has taken place since the current range of Army equipment was developed. We must use our present equipment, but as soon as we can switch over to new equipment we shall use modern techniques.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the police are now transistorised, whereas the Army are still receiving deliveries of valve equipment which, in fact, costs twice as much?

I do not know about the police. That is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary. The hon. and learned Gentleman knows that we still have radio equipment which is not transistorised—

What a rotten word.

which has not transistors in it. I am sorry, I was succumbing to the jargon. I am advised that in the present state of development transistors are not suitable for every type of Army transmitter.