asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he intends to introduce the legislation to implement the undertakings in the Agricultural Price Review regarding winter keep and permanent grassland improvement.

I regret that I cannot yet say when it will be possible to introduce this legislation.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that, although this will be United Kingdom legislation, it is of paramount importance to Scotland and that its necessity is increased by the fact that the present M.A.P. regulations will be finished by 31st December?

Yes, Sir. I am fully seized of that point, but my hon. Friend will understand that I cannot make forecasts about the timing of legislation.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether, in view of improvement in veterinary knowledge and techniques, he will review the present quarantine regulations for dogs and cats entering Great Britain, and in particular dogs and cats returning to Great Britain after a short stay overseas.

The view of those who have made an informed study of the problem of rabies, including the expert committee set up by the World Health Organisation, is that apart from a prohibition of entry, a quarantine period of at least six months is the only sure protection against the disease. Our quarantine regulations have kept the country free from rabies for over forty years and I am not prepared by any relaxation of our present arrangements to take a risk of re-introducing it.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the World Health Organisation has recently published a further report on the control of rabies with the likely development of the Flurry vaccine, and that one month's quarantine with an injection of this vaccine may give better control than the six months' quarantine required by the present arrangement? Will he look into this matter again?

No, Sir. The report to which my hon. Friend referred stated categorically that it was the opinion of the expert committee that those countries which were free from rabies, and so in a position to have quarantine up to six months if possible, should continue with that arrangement, and that that was the only sure way of ensuring that the disease did not come into the country.

Are experiments being conducted in this country to improve on the present position?

I think that there is a very good state of affairs inasmuch as we have been completely free of this most terrible disease for forty years. I do not think that that can be improved upon. Any change is likely to be retrograde.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what new steps he is taking to combat the rise in farm fatalities last year.

There are too many accidental deaths on farms and we are taking steps further to increase safety consciousness through publicity, education, advice and the vigorous enforcement of the existing safety regulations by a strengthened Safety Inspectorate. Further regulations concerning field machinery are being made which will be laid before the House shortly for approval.

Would my hon. Friend bear in mind the possibility of having printed a number of posters depicting certain of the major causes of farm fatalities, such as tractor accidents, and distributing them with the normal correspondence which farmers receive from various departments of the Ministry of Agriculture?

I will certainly consider that. We have a good deal of printed matter, although I am not sure whether we have something which exactly covers that point.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that the answer to this problem is the immediate appointment of more farm inspectors? While appreciating that much has been done in recent times, everybody interested in agriculture is concerned with the increase in accidents, especially fatal accidents. Will he consider the immediate appointment of more safety inspectors?

I referred to the reorganisation and the strengthening of the Safety Inspectorate which is, I think, what the hon. Gentleman has in mind.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food why a grant has been refused to the Essex River Board to carry out the proposed Mundon Wash scheme.

I appreciate that this scheme was designed to benefit a large area of agricultural land but after full inquiry I regret it has not been found possible to approve this scheme, which would be very expensive in relation to the land deriving benefit.

Does my hon. Friend realise that this decision means that people who have been paying drainage rates will now be put out of business and that it is not only the people in the immediate vicinity of the Mundon Wash who are suffering, but an increasing number of farmers further back from the actual outlets who will lose their livelihoods?

I said that the proposal which we have been considering was very complicated and expensive. There is generally more than one way of tackling large problems like this and it is not uncommon that the best, most elaborate and most expensive is not the only way. It may be possible to devise something which would be effective, if not quite so elaborate, and less expensive. We will willingly consider that if the river board will put such proposals to us.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will take powers to compensate persons whose land has been flooded by water draining from upland areas.

No, Sir. I do not think this would be practicable or appropriate. I would remind my hon. Friend that during the financial year 1961–62 Government grants for land drainage works, including flood protection, carried out by river boards and internal drainage boards amounted to £3,900,000.

Does not my hon. Friend realise that it is just the success of his upland drainage schemes which is causing the suffering to the people who are down nearer the sea wall? Because the rainwater drains off so quickly, it floods the lower land. Increasing the effectiveness of drainage higher up makes other people lose their livelihood.

I think that the reference to loss of livelihood is going a little far. As my hon. Friend says, it is true that water flows downhill, and it has been our principle to deal with drainage problems where they occur, and that means mainly at the lower levels. Nevertheless, my hon. Friend will have noticed that the Land Drainage Act, 1961, gives river boards permissive powers to levy additional charges on agricultural land, including land in upland areas, to help them finance additional work.

In view of the importance of this matter, I beg to give notice that on the earliest occasion I shall raise it on the Adjournment.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will make a statement on the potato supply position.

The Potato Marketing Board estimated on 13th April that stocks of home-grown main crop potatoes in Great Britain amounted to about 230,000 to 240,000 tons. Imports of main crop potatoes have so far amounted to about 90,000 tons. How long these stocks will last depends on the rate of consumption and on the level of imports of both new and main crop potatoes.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I have in my hand a slip from the menu of a restaurant in Cardiff saying that owing to the potato price rise all menu items have been surcharged threepence extra? Is he aware that in South Wales potatoes were being sold singly at the weekend and that in the village school near where I live in Wales the children have been told that they will have only half quantities of potatoes? How does the right hon. Gentleman reconcile that with the fact that some of my constituents have been fined for growing too many potatoes? Does he not realise the incalculable damage that this sort of asinine rot does to the good name of the British farmer among the townspeople?

The hon. Gentleman participated in our recent debate and did me the courtesy of listening to an extremely long speech by me in which I did my best to set out all the facts of the situation, with which I believe he is well acquainted. The constituent to whom he has referred is, in fact, paying the excess levy on the acreage of potatoes that he grew in 1959, 1960 and 1961. Those were all early potatoes, and two of the years were surplus years and farmers growing extra in those years affected the price which all farmers got on the market.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that is still not good enough? There is the constituent to whom he has referred, but there are many others who have also been fined for growing potatoes in the past year. If they had not grown potatoes, the present situation would have been even worse. I should have thought that the Government should have been conferring life peerages on them instead of fines.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will state the basis upon which potato acreage allocations are made to individual farmers by the Potato Marketing Board.

Each producer registered with the Board has a basic acreage, which is assessed by reference to actual plantings in a recent period. The Potato Marketing Scheme also provides that, in any case of hardship or unusual circumstances, or for the purpose of good husbandry, a registered producer may apply for a new or increased basic acreage. The Board has statutory powers to determine whether a given year shall be a quota year in which a registered producers' plantings may not exceed a stated proportion of his basic acreage without his becoming liable to payment of excess acreage contribution.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the answer which he gave to my previous Question undermines the Answer that he has given to this one? The administration must be most unsatisfactory for us to be in this present situation of shortage. Somebody must be misdirecting arrangements. Cannot he take some positive steps to ensure that there are more flexible arrangements within the producer marketing boards? Those of us who want our producer marketing boards to be successful do not want their good name damaged amongst the townspeople.

That is not so. I refute what the hon. Gentleman has said. The Potato Marketing Board tried at the beginning of this planting season to get an acreage of about 700,000. As the hon. Gentleman knows through contact with the country, the weather was such that the people who intended to plant potatoes could not get them in. There was a shortage of acreage, and, therefore, a shortage of potatoes.

Is it not a fact that this year the Potato Marketing Board has decided not to institute an excess quota fine?

Yes, Sir; that is so. This will be a non-quota year.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that hon. Members on this side of the House have every confidence in what he is doing about potatoes and that we realise that the hon. Member for Pembroke (Mr. Donnelly) is trying to make cheap political capital out of something which the Minister has very great difficulty in controlling—the weather?

There is a great deal in what my hon. Friend says.

Despite the intervention of the hon. Member for Harwich (Mr. Ridsdale), who obviously desires to be a P.P.S.—[HON. MEMBERS: "The hon. Gentleman was one."]—I was one before the hon. Member, though—is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a serious potato shortage? We think that flexibility in the policy of the Potato Marketing Board could have been achieved. Is the Minister satisfied that imports are coming in properly from the countries from which he prevents them coming in?

Am I satisfied that imports are coming in properly from the countries from which I prevent them coming in? That is not happening, I trust. However, I am satisfied that the Board is making every effort to import potatoes from countries which are permitted to send them here.

What about the State of Maine, which says that its products are free from disease and that it could export to this country? Can the right hon. Gentleman make any comment about that?

From the point of view of disease, we have to be the judge of the sources from which we import potatoes.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply and in order to show the right hon. Gentleman how expensive political capital is, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this subject on the Adjournment.

I constantly ask hon. Members to adhere to the traditional formula in these matters and not to make speeches.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what was the average value in pounds sterling, of agricultural production per person employed in agriculture in 1961, in the United Kingdom and in the European Economic Community.

I regret that comparable figures are not available. It is not possible to obtain comparable statistics of the value of output or comparable definitions of persons engaged in agriculture. Moreover, a calculation based on prevailing farmers' prices in each country would reflect the systems and levels of farm support as well as differences in productivity.

Is this not quite extraordinary? How on earth are we to compare the agricultural systems in the respective countries if we cannot have figures such as these? It makes it far harder to assess the balance of advantage. I believe that such figures would show great advantage to British farmers if we joined the Community. Will my right hon. Friend confirm that?

Perhaps it would help my hon. Friend if I were to give the figures in a slightly different way. The proportion of the total active population engaged in agriculture in the United Kingdom is about 4 per cent. and the proportion of the total gross domestic production which that percentage produces is about 4 per cent., whereas in the E.E.C. countries together, according to published information, the proportion of the total active population engaged in agriculture is about 21 per cent. and it is producing about 11 per cent. of the total gross domestic production.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that those figures indicate that there is tremendous scope for improvement in the agricultural production of the Common Market countries? Are not their standards of mechanisation and building lower than ours? Are not these things in which they can make progress? Would my right hon. Friend like to prepare a White Paper indicating the increase in their production which is liable to take place in the next ten years, to the disadvantage of British agriculture should we enter the Community?

It would be a very rash man who would prepare a White Paper in this country about what will be the state of agricultural production in other countries.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will take power to ensure that the increase in the price of ice cream and sweets, following the Budget, is not excessive.

This is sometimes inevitable where the tax is a small fraction of a penny. But I understand some of the new prices include increases which manufacturers had in mind before the announcement of the tax.

Is the Minister aware that, following the imposition of 15 per cent. Purchase Tax on the wholesale price of ice cream and sweets, the trade has announced increases of 20, 25 and 33 per cent., and similar figures, on the retail price of sweets? Is this not a great gap, and are not the Government going to do something to prevent the trade exploiting this situation to give another upward twist to the inflationary spiral?

No, Sir. That is not the objective. It would appear that on the basis of changes so far announced on some lines there will be no change, on others the weight will be reduced to keep the price unchanged, and on others prices will go up from 6d. to 7d. and from 1s. to 1s. 2d. In this respect I think that the hon. Lady would like to know that in the last seven years chocolate prices have gone up by less than 2 per cent., while there have been substantial increases in some of the manufacturers' costs.

While conceding the truth of what my right hon. Friend says, may I ask whether he would recognise that in certain instances—and it may be a minority of cases—the increases in retail prices, notably on chocolates, are now of the order of 33⅓ per cent. compared with the pre-Budget price, whereas the Chancellor's Purchase Tax is only 15 per cent. on the wholesale price, and therefore the margin of price increase is more than double the amount of the tax?

This may be so in certain instances. I have not the figures which my hon. Friend quoted, but, in general, this is a competitive industry, and it must be left to the manufacturers to be the best judges of what they should do about their prices in relation to the Purchase Tax and other costs.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that this trade has been extremely prosperous over the past years? Its present profits do not justify this entirely gratuitous increase, although the right hon. Gentleman seems to be prepared to accept it as normal, and to accept that routine increases in prices Should take place at intervals whether or not the profitability of the industry demands it. How can the Government have an incomes policy when they are so lax with their profits policy?

The hon. Lady talks about an industry, but this concerns a number of firms within an industry taking individual decisions, and there is considerable competition. If one firm steps outside and puts on unusually high prices it will soon find itself in trouble.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what action he has now taken to implement the recommendations of the Committee on Transactions in Seeds.

The Seeds Regulations, 1961, gave effect to a number of the recommendations of the Committee on Transactions in Seeds which did not require fresh legislation. Proposals for legislation to implement other recommendations of the Committee, including a system of plant breeders' Tights, have been discussed with the interests concerned, but I regret I cannot yet say when it will be possible to introduce this legislation.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that this is a very similar Answer to one given six months ago, and that in the meantime the agricultural industry is being deprived of important varieties of seeds? Can he give any indication that he is going to get a move on and put legislation on the Statute Book?

We are anxious to proceed with legislation, but there is a considerable amount for the legislative programme. All I can say is that there will not be room for it this Session.

As there is a considerable measure of agreement about plant breeders' rights, will my right hon. Friend make available all the facilities within his Department so that this can be brought forward as a comparatively simple Private Member's Bill in the next Session?

This would mean quite complicated legislation, but it is not a question of differences of opinion that is holding it up. It is the fact that there are many clients for future legislation.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will state the tonnage of frozen processed eggs which are expected to be imported into the United Kingdom this year.

Quantities imported will depend upon the requirements of traders. Consequently I cannot give any figure for the year as a whole, but total frozen whole egg imports to 31st March, were 4,702 tons compared with 4,633 tons during the same period of 1961.

Can my right hon. Friend explain the figure of 31,000 tons which the egg producers have got hold of? I understand that this is made up of 10,000 tons of Chinese eggs; 6,000 tons of Polish eggs; 5,000 tons of eggs from miscellaneous countries; and 10,000 tons from Australia. Secondly, would not the production from home sources need only an extra 5,000 tons to meet usage? Could not my right hon. Friend liaise with his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade, especially about Chinese and Polish eggs, because many of the producers regard these as dumped eggs?

As regards Poland, between 1st January and 31st March last year, 94 tons of eggs were imported. None have so far been imported this year. The figure which my hon. Friend quoted of 30,000 tons is a figure which some people have estimated as the number of eggs likely to come in, but the figures that we have available show that nothing like that is in prospect.

Can my right hon. Friend assure the House that Polish and Chinese eggs will not come in this year?

I certainly cannot say that. The importation of frozen eggs is left to the trade. Naturally it is affected by the level of prices in this country and there is free trade with a tariff in this commodity, subject to anti-dumping legislation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the whole question of importing eggs into this country at a time when home producers have plenty is something which is causing a lot of worry to egg producers in Norfolk in particular? Will he give an assurance that he will carefully watch the import of eggs into this country at a time when we are producing plenty of our own?

The figures that I gave show that imports this year are very similar to imports last year.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, in view of the opposition to the recommendations of the Plant Committee on Fowl Pest, if he will take no action without the agreement of all the interests concerned.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the Answer given to my hon. Friend the Member for Newbury (Sir A. Hurd) on 12th April.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in Scotland the compensation payment has been very small due to the policy that we have adopted there of not allowing chicks and hatching eggs into Scotland, thus creating a reservoir of healthy stock? Is he aware of the opposition in Scotland to any suggestion that the Plant Committee's recommendations should be carried out relaxing the regulations on slaughtering?

I am in touch with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland in this regard, and any action that we decide to take in the end will be based on the national interest as a whole.

Will the Minister reject the advice of his hon. Friend, because if we accept what he implied in his question no action will be taken? There must be positive action by the Government at some time.

When it is decided on, it will be on the basis of the national interest as a whole.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will take powers to require the owners of ponies and cattle left on open moors during the winter months to provide adequate food and shelter for these animals.

It is an offence under the Protection of Animals Act, 1911, for a person responsible for an animal to cause it unnecessary suffering. Any apparent breaches of this requirement should be reported to the police. I have no reason to think that further legislation is required.

Does the hon. Gentleman know that according to local reports, which have been verified by the hon. Member for Tavistock (Sir H. Studholme) since I put down this Question, last winter a substantial number of animals died of hunger and exhaustion on Dartmoor where they had been turned out and left to fend for themselves by callous and unscrupulous local farmers? Will the hon. Gentleman take steps to see that the law is enforced?

I said in my Answer that apparent breaches of the regulations should be reported to the police, and I am sure that the chief constables con- cerned will take note of what the hon. Gentleman said.

Is my hon. Friend aware that I am in touch with the Dartmoor Commoners' Association and that I am hoping very soon to arrange a meeting with Members of Parliament whose constituencies are concerned and representatives of the Dartmoor Commoners' Association and the Duchy of Cornwall? Animals on Dartmoor have suffered a good deal during this hard winter, and we shall discuss this and other questions related to animals on the moor.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will take steps to prevent the import of meat from countries outside the Commonwealth during peak home-killing periods.

I have asked exporting countries to take account of the state of the United Kingdom market when planning their exports to this country. The pattern of imports is that they tend to be lower in the second half of the year when home production is at its highest. There would be serious objections to applying compulsory restrictions, with ramifications on our whole trading policy and on our international obligations.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that these marginal imports from countries outside the Commonwealth make a great deal of difference to our whole trading pattern and policy? If that is so, would he not agree that all that is happening at the moment is that a very great deal of damage is being done not only to the home producers but to the taxpayers of this country? Can he say what kind of answer he has had to his letters to foreign Governments asking them not to send so much meat this year?

I have on the whole had satisfactory communications from the Governments as well as from all the major exporters of meat to this country. The tenor of them is that they do not expect to be exporting any greater quantities of meat to this country this year than they did last year.

Is my right hon. Friend saying that he has no intention at times of home peak killing in this country of stopping imports from non-traditional suppliers of meat to this country?

I believe that if this were to be done we should build up considerable trouble for ourselves in other months, when the meat that would come in in those months would tend to be in greater quantity, and I do not think that would be the solution to our problem.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I will raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible opportunity.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, what assurances regarding the marketing of cereals have now been given to Her Majesty's Government by representatives of the European Economic Community.

Our discussions with the E.E.C. must necessarily be confidential and the Government cannot disclose what assurances may be sought or received by Her Majesty's Government on cereals or other commodities during the course of the negotiations.

The Minister said recently when addressing the National Pig Breeders' Association:

"For cereals, for example, the system of target and intervention prices which the Six have adopted would seem in principle to provide a pretty effective form of guarantee."

What I said was "in principle"—that was what I was referring to there. The question asked what assurances we had asked for with regard to the marketing of cereals. That is a broader and more detailed question and this I cannot disclose.

The Minister said in his speech that this was an effective form of guarantee. Does he confirm that?

There is no doubt that the levy system can be an effective form of guarantee to farmers.

Surely we ought to know more about what is happening in Brussels. If hon. Members opposite want to hide this, that is all very well. But surely in the cereal regulations the decision has been made. Does the Minister agree with this system and does he believe that it would be an effective guarantee from the point of view of our own home production?

A number of suggestions have been made on the subject of cereals and I cannot disclose them.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what progress has been made in agricultural negotiations concerning the United Kingdom's entry to the Common Market; and why he has decided not to attend the Ministerial meeting in Brussels this week.

My right hon. Friend the Lord Privy Seal has been keeping the House informed of the progress of negotiations and he will be making a further statement after the meeting this week. My right hon. Friend is responsible for the negotiations in Brussels and discussions at this week's meeting will not be such as to require my presence.

In view of the fact that here we are negotiating about important matters which affect British agriculture, is it not important that the Minister should be there? Is not the reason really that there is a deadlock? Why cannot the House be informed about the state of progress of the negotiations? Why all this secrecy? As I have asked before, are the Government going to have a private package deal?

There is no question of any deadlock, as the hon. Gentleman knows. My right hon. Friend is in charge of the negotiations covering the whole field—the very wide field—in which agriculture forms an important part. From time to time he may find it advisable to take some of his colleagues with him to these negotiations.

Does not my right hon. Friend have any information when the Common Market countries will reach agreement on those commodities which were not agreed in January? Will he confirm that the British Government do not propose to enter the Common Market until the detailed position of Common Market agricultural policy is known in respect of all commodities?

For a number of the more important commodities there is a timetable for them to be submitted to the Minister by 1st July. That is the timetable at present.

Does not the great reluctance on the part of the Government to furnish details about the progress of the negotiations on the agricultural and other aspects mean that one fine day, or perhaps one bad and tragic day, the Government will present a fait accompli to this House? Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that if the present arrangements for British agriculture are abandoned, he may find himself without a job?

As to the first part of the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, I think that he is fully aware that it would be intolerable and impossible for my right hon. Friend the Lord Privy Seal to carry on negotiations in Brussels if at the same time he was going to make public his position on this matter.

asked the Minister of Defence why a basic objective of British defence policy, namely, the defence of sea communications, is not mentioned in paragraph 3 of his Statement on Defence, 1962.

The statement in the White Paper of the basic objectives of Britain's defence policy is in general terms. The defence of sea communications is one of the essential means by which we seek to carry out the three objectives set out in the White Paper.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Will he agree that the 1935 Defence White Paper contained a statement to the effect that the security of sea passage to this country forms the basis of our system of imperial defence, without which all other measures would be of little avail, and can he say if any circumstances have arisen since, assuming a limited war, which invalidate that statement?

I gladly confirm what my hon. and gallant Friend has said that the maintenance of sea communications not only for this island but for the Commonwealth as a whole is an essential part of our defence programme. I agree entirely.

What is the point of maintaining sea communications with ports which the right hon. Gentleman admits that he cannot defend?

I have not admitted that we cannot defend any particular port. If the hon. and learned Gentleman wants more information on that, perhaps he will put down a Question.

asked the Minister of Defence what conclusions have been reached from the study of the Canadian Forces Medical Service that was recommended in the Fourth Report of the Select Committee on Estimates of Session 1958–59.

I am having a further examination made of the desirability of some measure of integration of the medical branches and the information we have obtained about the Canadian Medical Service will be taken fully into account in this examination.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that statement. It takes a long time for the penny to drop. The Select Committee recommended this three or four years ago and we should be glad to know what is happening now. What will be the nature of this inquiry? Who will make the inquiry? How long does the right hon. Gentleman think that it will take, and how long will it be before attention is given to this issue?

In answer to my hon. Friend, I think that it might well be a little difficult to make the penny drop the whole way. I think that I had better undertake an investigation myself, with the help of my Ministry, so that I can form my own views as quickly as possible.

When will that be?

In ten years' time.

asked the Minister of Defence what steps he proposes to take to amend Paragraph 1 of Command Paper No. 1666, Service Pay and Pensions, published in March, 1962, so that the reference to the Government White Paper isued in November, 1958, reads (Cmd. 570) and not as stated.

I regret that the reference was made to the Report of the Advisory Committee on Recruiting Cmd. 545 and not to the Government's comments thereon Cmd. 570. A corrigendum slip was issued at the time.

I notice that the Minister smiles. Does he take it that an inaccurate reference in a major State document is something of no account?

I smiled because I hoped that the hon. Gentleman was going to allow me to thank him for keeping an eye on my Ministry while I was out of the country.

I much appreciate that acknowledgment, but that conveys that it is necessary for me to do so.

It also conveys that I think that the hon. Gentleman was also at fault in his question as I was perhaps on the original occasion.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he will make a statement on his recent discussions with the American Secretary of Defence.

I have had a most valuable discussion with Mr. McNamara which covered the whole range of our defence interests. I found that we were in general agreement on all subjects, including the rôle of conventional forces in N.A.T.O.

I am not asking the right hon. Gentleman to disclose confidential aspects of these discussions. Nevertheless, is he aware that President Kennedy has been pressing the need for further conventional forces and an increased allocation from the United Kingdom? What has been the right hon. Gentleman's response to these requests?

I am afraid that I cannot answer for President Kennedy. What I have said in my Answer is that Mr. McNamara, the United States Secretary of Defence, and I had a very careful examination of all these problems, and we came to the conclusion that we were in general agreement. I made the Government's position on these matters quite plain in my reply to the debate on the Address, in November of last year.

Has my right hon. Friend had any discussion about, or assurances in respect of, the progress being made by Skybolt?

Yes—some very satisfactory ones.

Can the right hon. Gentleman throw some light on Mr. McNamara's comment, made when he was here, that it was only a possibility that Skybolt might be available for our V-bombers and his own B.52s?

I hope that I shall be forgiven if I am wrong, but my recollection is that that was a report of a statement which Mr. McNamara made to an American committee, early this year, I believe.

Arising out of the Athens conversations, can my right hon. Friend confirm that the five American Polaris submarines and those under N.A.T.O. will, in war, if in the Eastern Atlantic, come under the command of the Commander, Submarine Forces, Eastern Atlantic, who is a British officer?

No. What I assume—it is for the Americans to answer, and not for the British Government—is that the American's Polaris submarines allocated to N.A.T.O. in that area would come under SACLANT.

asked the Minister of Defence what steps he has taken to remove from nuclear weapons work any officer or man in the Armed Services who might be found to be mentally unbalanced or unreliable.

We have always applied very stringent selection and training procedures in the case of officers and men dealing with nuclear weapons. These ensure as far as possible that mentally unabalanced or unreliable personnel do not become engaged on such work. In any case, no one man can initiate the use of nuclear weapons.

Has the right hon. Gentleman considered the new measures introduced by the United States Air Force to alter the arrangements which they previously had, and which were thought generally to be pretty good, but which they now think need improving in this respect?

I do not underestimate the importance of the question. I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that we must leave no loophole. I am having it looked at again, but my first look indicates that our measures are as foolproof as they can be.

Would not any person who pressed a button which might destroy Western civilisation be mentally unbalanced?

That would depend on many things which are not relevant to this question.

asked the Minister of Defence if, in his discussions at Athens, he opposed the proposals made by West Germany for giving West Germany, directly or indirectly, control over nuclear weapons or weapons with a nuclear capacity.

There are no such proposals.

Has not the Minister noted the public demand by Defence Minister Strauss, made before the Athens conference? Does not he think that it is yet a another step in a dangerous direction if the increasingly powerful German generals are now to be told the details of where the nuclear weapons are stored, and what are their targets and their possible use?

It is not for me to explain German defence policy in this House, but, as I understand it—and I think I am correct—the Western German Minister of Defence has remained correctly based on his position as a N.A.T.O. ally. In this position he does only what he is asked to do by N.A.T.O. which is to have the means of delivering nuclear weapons, the warheads of which are kept under strict lock and key by the Americans.

Will the Minister confirm that neither directly nor indirectly will the Western German authorities be given any control over the use of nuclear weapons?

That is quite a different question.

Oh.

asked the Minister of Defence what action is being taken by Her Majesty's Government on the proposal that the authority of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation in European defence should be increased.

Her Majesty's Government welcome any effective proposals for strengthening the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. The decisions recently taken at Athens are an important step in this direction, inasmuch as they will give greater assurance to the non-nuclear members of the Alliance that not only will they be able to play a full part in the formulation of N.A.T.O. defence policy but that the nuclear weapons on which their defence depends will be available.

Was not one of the principal proposals that came before the recent discussions with the Ministers of N.A.T.O. that a nuclear force should be established under the authority of some N.A.T.O. people? Do I understand that that has been completely abandoned?

There was no discussion at the Athens meeting of the N.A.T.O. Powers of what I believe is commonly called the N.A.T.O. M.R.B.M. force. I think that that is what the right hon. Gentleman is referring to.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether or not, as a result of the meeting in Athens, N.A.T.O. is now even more dependent upon an early resort to nuclear weapons than it was before?

No, I would not judge that to be the case. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will await my Answer to a subsequent Question.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he will make a statement on the Athens meeting of the Defence and Foreign Ministers of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation.

asked the Minister of Defence if he will make a statement about the defence aspects of the recent North Atlantic Treaty Organisation meeting in Athens.

We had an excellent meeting of N.A.T.O. Defence Ministers in Athens, at which many decisions were taken which should greatly strengthen the Alliance. The more important of these in the defence field were:

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it a matter of profound regret that the full Athens communiqué has not been published in any organ of the British Press? Is it not a fact that the statement issued by the White House on the eve of the Athens conference has also escaped notice, whereas, on the other hand, last week the Minister's Department ceaselessly put out one story after another, presenting the defence policy of this country in a light which had little or no relevance to the facts? Is it not now clear, as a result of the Athens conference, that the President of the United States has put forward a courageous and intelligent policy, and that the Western world has to thank God that he is leading our defence and foreign policy, and that it is not left in the pusillanimous and misleading hands of Her Majesty's Government?

The hon. Member may have his own views about our defence policy. He has usually been proved wrong, and in this case he is certainly wrong.

Can my right hon. Friend confirm or deny some of the Press reports referring to disagreements between this country and the United States? Secondly, can he say whether he has made any progress in getting an assurance that Britain will receive her fair share of N.A.T.O. orders?

It is not part of a Minister's duty to confirm or deny Press reports.

I am sorry, Mr. Speaker. I will put the question another way. My right hon. Friend has referred to the discussions that have taken place in Athens. Can he give us an assurance that there were no disagreements between him and his opposite number from the United States?

As for our getting a reasonable share of N.A.T.O. orders, the arrangements which were unanimously agreed in Athens will result in a considerable speeding up of N.A.T.O. procedures, and in getting joint weapons systems. I hope that as a result Britain will get her fair share. As for reports of disagreements between either the American Government and the British Government, or the American Secretary of Defence and myself, they are completely and utterly unfounded. We found ourselves in general agreement on the whole range of questions which faced us.

Can the Minister tell us a little more about the new arrangements for the control of nuclear weapons? In particular, is it not the position that Polaris remains under American control—or are the reports that it is to be handed over to N.A.T.O. to be taken to mean that N.A.T.O. can fire it? Can N.A.T.O. fire it, or has it to be consulted only on occasions, and in respect of the targets at which it may be fired?

If I answer the right hon. Gentleman as I should wish, I must not be taken as dealing with very difficult and detailed matters in a general answer. It was to deal with this kind of problem that we wanted the N.A.T.O. Nuclear Committee set up, in order that all nations belonging to N.A.T.O. might be able to discuss these difficult and complicated problems and know what they really mean and try to come to an agreed conclusion.

Were not there discussions at Athens about the desirability, expressed by some Government representatives, of increasing conventional forces? Did not the right hon. Gentleman say himself, in a statement which appeared in the newspapers, that this country would carry out its Treaty commitments, whatever they may be, and he hoped that some of the other N.A.T.O. countries would increase their conventional forces? What happened in Athens about this?

The right hon. Gentleman, who has knowledge of these problems extending over a long period, is perfectly correct. The only thing is that it did not fall to the Athens con- ference to discuss it. The triennial review which deals with the level of conventional forces will shortly be doing this complicated work. That is where the level of conventional forces will be discussed. I have said to the House that, when they fall to be discussed, so far as I can honestly see there will be no difference of policy between the Americans and ourselves on the question of the level of conventional forces.

Was there any consultation, or were decisions taken, about increasing co-operation between N.A.T.O. and the C.E.N.T.O. and S.E.A.T.O. alliances?

Not specifically but I believe there have been some unofficial talks which I very much welcome.

Is the right hon. Gentleman seeking to say that Mr. McNamara told him that the American Administration regards B.A.O.R. as being an adequate contribution from this country to N.A.T.O. commitments and a proper performance of our Treaty obligations?

That is a different question. I was saying that we are agreed with the Americans on general strategy, for example on the central N.A.T.O. front, which no doubt the hon. and learned Gentleman has in mind. We shall do our best to fulfil the strategy when it is worked out in agreement.

The strategy, but not our contribution to it.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he agreed to plans involving an increase in defence expenditure at the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation conference at Athens.

So far as it is possible to estimate at the moment, none of the decisions reached in Athens will involve increased defence expenditure for the United Kingdom.

Will the Minister consider the possibility of reducing our expenditure in connection with N.A.T.O.? Has his attention been drawn to a rather startling article by Mr. Chapman Pincher in today's Daily Express in which it is suggested that Dr. Adenauer may be planning the withdrawal of German troops from N.A.T.O.? Would not he agree that it might be a good thing to tell the Germans to make their peace with the Russians, as that could result not only in ending N.A.T.O. but in ending the Warsaw Pact and changing the whole direction of expenditure?

I think that the simple answer to the hon. Gentleman is, "No."

asked the Minister of Defence what decisions affecting the Polaris base in Scotland were made at the recent North Atlantic Treaty Organisation conference at Athens.

Her Majesty's Government very much welcome the decision of the American Government to allocate Polaris nuclear submarines to N.A.T.O. No doubt some of these submarines will be based on Holy Loch.

If the Americans are to leave the Holy Loch—a decision which would be greatly welcomed by the people of Scotland—is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this increase of Polaris weapons and the development of the Polaris strategy is being matched by the increased activity of the Russians in inventing megaton rockets and exploding them? Is not it a fact that the result of this Polaris strategy will be that we shall enter into and continue in an arms race when there is no sign that we shall win?

I am aware that the very generous allocation of Polaris submarines to N.A.T.O. greatly increases the power of that force to keep the peace. I should be surprised if the majority of the people of Scotland did not support this.

Is it not the case that there is no real change; that despite the allocation of the extra Polaris submarines to the Holy Loch and to N.A.T.O., politically the control still remains in the hands of America?

I do not believe that there is any fundamental change at this moment. This will be one of the problems which the N.A.T.O. Nuclear Committee will be looking at.

asked the Minister of Defence whether he is aware that the proposal of the United States to set off a hydrogen bomb in outer space may have unfortunate effects with regard to the disturbance of the Van Allen belts; and whether he will arrange for these dangers to be checked by the scientific staff of his Department so that official representations can be made to the United States Government.

I would refer the hon. Member to the statement made yesterday in answer to Questions on this subject by my right hon. Friend, the Prime Minister.

That was a very unsatisfactory Answer.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether he is satisfied that there is not increasing danger, and very considerable danger? If there is increasing danger, will he see to it that the matter is inquired into properly so to that no further action may be taken?

As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said yesterday, our defence scientists have been in close touch with the Americans over this test. I must make it plain that from the defence aspect I consider that it is essential.

When the right hon. Gentleman talks about his defence scientists, is not he referring to military scientists who are not so well informed in this matter as the true research scientists?

That would be a matter of opinion.

It is a matter of fact.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty when it is intended to lay down a third nuclear submarine.

I am not yet able to make any statement on this matter.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the Americans will shortly be launching one nuclear submarine a month from six different shipyards where nuclear submarines are built and that the Russians will certainly have a comparable programme? Does he not think that if we are to have any pretentions to being a maritime Power we are falling behind these other nations?

I have already said that our nuclear submarine programme is expensive and it may take some time before it is decided exactly what we want in future years.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty in view of the discovery of opium and heroin on the British cruiser "Belfast", whether he is satisfied with the security precautions in the Singapore naval base; and what steps are being taken to prevent British ships being used for the carrying of illicit drugs.

My answer to the first part of the Question is "Yes". There are standing arrangements between the Naval and Customs Authorities at Singapore for the prevention of smuggling at the naval base; these include the searching of H.M. ships. The effectiveness of these arrangements is evidenced by the discovery of the contraband to which the hon. Member refers. As to the second part of the Question, these arrangements are of course adjustable; and any additional measures required will be taken in the light of the joint investigation into the "Belfast" incident now being held by the naval and customs authorities in close consultation.

Does the Minister agree that it would be regrettable if, as a result of the publicity given to this incident, unfair reflections were cast on personnel in the Regular Navy? If, as I understand it, those concerned in this case were casual labour, are they subject to the same security measures as the Regular naval establishment. Thirdly, is the Minister satisfied that there is the closest possible consultation between all the authorities concerned in trying to stop this traffic in illicit drugs?

I am confident that no United Kingdom Royal Navy personnel were in any way involved. On the contrary, I think that it reflects to the credit of the Royal Navy personnel that they discovered this illicit drug traffic. Regarding security, all Chinese employees must have five years' residential qualification in Hong Kong or Singapore and must have satisfactory references covering the last five years. They are checked by the relevant Service security authorities. On the last point, the Controller of Customs at Singapore has personally stated that the local authorities have received every possible assistance from the naval authorities.

Can my hon. Friend say what are existing security arrangements at Singapore and Hong Kong?

There are three separate checks liable to be imposed in the dockyard area. In addition to the police patrol for the dockyards in Admiralty waters there are facilities given for customs officers to search Her Majesty's ships. Additional special precautions may be taken in consultation with customs, and all Her Majesty's ships leaving the Orient are thoroughly searched for illicit drugs. It was during one of these searches that the drugs were discovered.