asked the Minister of Aviation what categories of persons passing through London and other airports are accorded Very Important Person treatment; and what is the annual cost of maintaining these facilities.

Special arrangements are accorded to persons whose public positions, here or abroad, justify the provision of some privacy or ceremonial reception, for example, royalty, heads of State, Ministers and holders of senior political, diplomatic and military office. The cost is about £13,000 a year.

That seems reasonable as as far my hon. Friend's Department is concerned, but is the aware that many of the nationalised airways are increasingly providing V.I.P. treatment and what is called Commercially Important People treatment for people and that this is getting out of hand? Would it not be a good idea if my hon. Friend's Department represented to I.A.T.A. that on all tickets where people request either V.I.P. or C.I.P. treatment there should be an extra 10 per cent. charged? This would cut it down considerably.

I will certainly consider my hon. Friend's interesting suggestion. I would point out that in practically all the cases, and I think all the cases which have attracted public criticism recently, it has been the airline operators and not my Department who have been responsible for the practices criticized. We have no power to compel airlines to alter their practice in this matter.

Can the hon. Member do something about securing V.I.P. treatment for distinguished authors and other literary persons?

It is our practice in an extremely limited number of cases, going beyond the categories which I have listed, to give such treatment. Needless to say, we do this with a most critical eye. Only a very small handful of people of personal eminence have been so treated on our initiative. They include, for example—and I merely give examples—the Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Brabazon and you, Mr. Speaker.

Sir Arthur Vere Harvey.

But is it not a fact——

Order. I feel that we ought to get a move on with Questions, and I called the hon. Member to ask the next Question.

asked the Minister of Aviation which executive aircraft are allowed to land and be housed at London Airport.

Private and executive aircraft are permitted to use London (Heathrow) Airport in accordance with the rules set out in Civil Aviation Information Circular No. 56/1961. I am arranging for a copy of this circular to be sent to my hon. Friend.

Will my hon. Friend take another look at this matter and try to emulate what happens in other countries, for example at Idlewild, Newark, U.S.A., and Zurich, where many more executive aircraft are landing? In turn, that helps the revenue and the facilities available. Why do we take such a narrow view of this matter?

I do not think it is true to say that we take a narrow view of the matter. The airports which my hon. Friend mentioned are in different circumstances in one way or another from Heathrow. After the information circular, to which I referred, had come into effect, over 1,200 landings of executive aircraft took place in the following twelve months at Heathrow.

Is there not a very large scope for an increase in the manufacture of executive-type aircraft? Would it not help our manufacturing industry enormously if the Ministry adopted a less restricted attitude towards private executive aircraft, consistent with safety?

There is certainly very great scope for it, and we do everything we can to encourage it. Heathrow is the only civil airport in which there is any limitation at all. Bearing in mind that it is intended primarily for the use of civil aircraft operating scheduled passenger and freight services, I do not think that the limitations are unreasonable, also bearing in mind that there is no other airport to which they apply.

asked the Minister of Aviation (1) to what extent the Services' requirement for helicopters is declining; and

I cannot anticipate defence decisions, but plans provide for continuing high deliveries of helicopters to the Services for several years ahead at least. Following the cancellation of the Rotodyne, Westlands are considering other possible civil helicopter projects in relation to the future programme of military requirements. They are keeping in close touch with the Ministry on this.

Whilst thanking my hon. Friend for what sounds to be an encouraging reply, may I ask him not to forget that his Ministry's requirements both for the Services and for civil pro- jects form the mainstay of support for the British helicopter industry and that irregularly phasing the orders causes temporary redundancies which lead to the permanent loss to the industry of skilled craftsmen with years of experience and knowhow? Does my hon. Friend deprecate this outflow of skill from the industry?

Yes. I am well aware of the importance of Government orders to the industry. They are continuing at a high level for a number of years ahead, and the fact that there have been some contractions in some parts of the industry is a measure of the success of the policy of rationalisation, which has made it possible to keep up the level of production with a more efficient deployment of labour.

Are any aircraft of this type being ordered from the United States of America? If so, it could be destructive in this country. I understand that there are worries in southwest Middlesex regarding short time in the aircraft factories.

There is no such case that would fit the description the hon. Gentleman has given. There is still under consideration a project for joint use for B.E.A. and Sabena of the Vertol 107 aircraft, but this is at present only under consideration. No order has been placed.

asked the Minister of Aviation what is the present concession on fuel used for private flying; and what improvement he proposes in order to encourage people to take flying lessons.

A rebate of duty on petrol used by flying clubs is paid at a rate for the present year of 1s. 3d. a gallon. It is not possible to improve on this within the finance available for the scheme.

Has the Minister given recent consideration to the desirability of forming a pool of pilots in this way?

This scheme was introduced in the first place expressly in order to help to form a pool of pilots. The fact that the increase in private flying last year has, so to speak, bumped against the ceiling of the subsidy is evidence that the encouragement given by the Government to private flying has been very successful.

Will my hon. Friend consider allowing petrol supplied for seaplanes to be duty-free?

That is a slightly different question, of which I would require notice; but I will consider it.

asked the Minister of Aviation whether he will state Her Majesty's Government's policy on the future of Short Brothers and Harland, Belfast.

asked the Minister of Aviation what steps Her Majesty's Government plan to take in order to ensure a reasonable continuity of research and development work and of production orders with the firm of Short Brothers and Harland in Belfast.

asked the Minister of Aviation whether he proposes to place a further order with Messrs. Short Brothers and Harland for the Belfast freighter, in view of military needs.

asked the Minister of Aviation (1) what steps he is taking to place further orders for Belfast freighters or other aircraft with Messrs Short Brothers and Harland, Limited;

asked the Minister of Aviation what plans he has for placing further orders with Short Brothers and Harland, Belfast.

asked the Minister of Aviation what is Her Majesty's Government's policy with regard to the future of Short Brothers and Harland.

Short Brothers and Harland are at present working on an order for 10 Belfast aircraft due for delivery to the Royal Air Force in 1964–65. The Government recognise, of course, the importance of Shorts to the economy of Northern Ireland, and this is a factor which will be given due weight in the placing of future orders for aircraft requirements.

Is the the hon. Gentleman aware that there is now the very gravest apprehension about the future of Short Brothers? Some of us feel that the firm has been neglected quite disgracefully. An order for ten Belfasts is an uneconomic proposition. The floor programme there will speedily dry up unless repeat orders are given quickly. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that some of us are beginning to look with suspicion at the neglect of Short Brothers? The firm led the world in vertical take-off aircraft. It was messed about with the Britannic and now it is being messed about with its successor, the Belfast freighter.

I am aware of the apprehension which has been expressed, and I am particularly anxious not to say anything which would encourage that apprehension. I do not think it is true to say that Short Bros. has been neglected. The firm is a part of the aircraft industry of the United Kingdom and, when my right hon. Friend's predecessor announced the new policy in February, 1960, special reservations were introduced in that policy to take care of exceptional cases, such as Shorts, and they have been applied to the case of Shorts.

Has the attention of my hon. Friend been drawn to the recent statement by the Chairman of Shorts that, unless further work is given soon, he will be faced with an immediate redundancy, thus breaking up a very valuable development team? Further, unless orders are placed soon for these aircraft, which are capable of being adapted for use both for tactical and strategic purposes, it may not be possible to have the planes delivered as quickly as the Army needs them in the future.

I have the point raised in the last part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question very much in mind. As the House knows, Short Bros. has presented a project for consideration for the requirement for a tactical freighter. That will be carefully considered along with other submissions. I have also had my attention drawn to the press conference given by the Chairman of Shorts a short time ago. I have not seen an exact transcript of the whole of what he said. [AN HON. MEMBER: "Why not?"] Because no such transcript exists. I understand that he pointed out that, unless new orders were coming along, it was only a matter of time before the factory would be without work. This is true of Shorts as of any other firm. Nevertheless, the position at present is that the work which Shorts has in hand will carry the firm well into next summer, irrespective of future orders.

Does the hon. Gentleman realise that what he has told us does not harmonise with what the Chairman of Short Bros. has told us? Will he inquire a little more closely into that aspect of his statement, which I do not dispute; I accept it as he gives it? However, would he inquire a little more closely into that, because we are told that there is a steady filtering away from Short Bros. of design staff? In view of what the hon. Gentleman said latterly, we surely do not want to lose such a valuable investment to the aircraft industry?

It is true that a rundown in numbers of any sector of the aircraft industry takes place initially among the design staff. I have no reason to think that anything I have said today is inconsistent with what the Chairman of Shorts said at his Press conference, though, if the hon. Gentleman can demonstrate such an inconsistency I will carefully look into it.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the designers and technical people are very worried about this position because there is no alternative employment for them in Northern Ireland, with 9 per cent. unemployed and possibly more now, and that there is a great possibility of this integrated team breaking up entirely with great loss to the British aircraft industry?

Yes, Sir. I am indeed aware of that anxiety, and I shall, of course, take that into consideration in considering our future placing of orders, but I cannot place orders for aircraft for which the Services have no requirement.

Can the hon. Gentleman give a categorical assurance on behalf of the Government that it is the intention to keep this organisation together and that sufficient orders will be placed to do that?

I cannot give any categorical undertaking about future orders for reasons that I have already made clear. As I think the House knows, the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland is coming over next week to discuss all these matters with my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary including the aircraft industry among others, and in anticipation of these discussions I do not think it would be possible for me to give any categorical undertaking.

Does the hon. Gentleman realise that what he has said adds to the anxiety felt by everyone connected with Northern Ireland and the aircraft industry? If there are orders sufficient for a year, surely the time is now overdue when his right hon. Friend and his Department should consider placing further orders? What is to happen to this organisation? Is it his desire, as in the case of Gloucester, to preside over the liquidation of the aviation industry?

It is not my desire or that of my right hon. Friend to preside over the liquidation of the aviation industry. We have over the last two years taken measures essential to enable the aviation industry to withstand the very great difficulties that otherwise it would have been facing. This applies as much to Shorts of Belfast as to any other factory.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that not only is the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland coming over here for important discussions next week, but there is also to be a delegation from the Confederation of Shipbuilding and Engineering Unions and the works committee of Shorts; and that they are extremely worried about this matter? Can he reaffirm that this aircraft, the Belfast, and the development of it is the right type of machine that we shall require for the future, because somehow it seems to have become a matter of political wrangle? Are the Government satisfied as the majority shareholders of this firm that they are carrying out their duties to the firm in Northern Ireland and the 7½ thousand men who have worked there?

I am very glad indeed to give that assurance. The qualities of the Belfast are fully recognised by the fact that it has been ordered by the Royal Air Force, and there is no reason why its merits should enter into a political wrangle.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the Government have a very especial responsibility in this matter, that they own something like 70 per cent. of the equity, that Shorts over a year ago tendered for operational requirement 351, which the Government are still considering, and that at least two Cabinet Ministers have been to Shorts this spring? When are we to get something done about it?

I am very well aware of the Government's responsibility as the major shareholder in the firm. Concerning the requirement of the O.R. 351, Shorts are not the only firm that has put in a project for this requirement. We have others to consider from two of the major aircraft groups in this country. It is an extremely important problem with far-reaching consequences, and we must give it mature consideration before we take a decision.

asked the Minister of Aviation what representations he has received from the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland and Members of Parliament of Northern Ireland with regard to the possible closing down of Messrs. Short and Harland Ltd. on account of the loss of United Kingdom Government orders.

My right hon. Friend is in frequent touch with Northern Ireland Ministers about matters concerning the aircraft industry in Northern Ireland.

How can the Parliamentary Secretary regard that as an adequate answer in view of the crisis affecting Short Brothers and Harland and the unemployment in Northern Ireland? Is he not prepared to say more than that to allay this anxiety? Will he do something to stir up the Ministry of Aviation?

I am indeed conscious of the anxiety in Northern Ireland, but I am not prepared to disclose the confidential discussions which are going on between my own Department and Departments of the Northern Ireland Government.

While ignoring the rather obvious political odour of this Question, would the Parliamentary Secretary recall the Motion I proposed in the House on 30th March, which was unanimously passed and which said that exceptional measures might be taken to alleviate unemployment in Northern Ireland? In looking at the future of Short Brothers and Harland, is it the intention of my hon. Friend to bear that Motion in mind?

I recall my hon. Friend's Motion, and I was present during the debate. It has, in the context of the aircraft industry, always been the policy of Her Majesty's Government to make exceptional provisions for the industry in Northern Ireland, and that will continue.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary give a categorical assurance that there are no negotiations taking place or contemplated to sell Short Brothers and Harland to American interests?

Yes, I can give that assurance.

asked the Minister of Aviation what further consideration he has given to Britain's contribution, financial or otherwise, to the launching of a space vehicle.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend to the hon. Member for Eastleigh (Mr. D. Price) on 16th April, when he stated that certain countries, including the United Kingdom, had signed the Convention for the European Launcher Development Organisation. A copy of that document has since been published as Cmnd. 1731. The Organisation's launcher will be available for the launching of space vehicles for various purposes and the document referred to shows what the United Kingdom's contribution will be.

Is it not the case that we are contributing £120 million to the £170 million which will be the total cost of the European space vehicle? It will not be launched until 1966 at the earliest, and we share this cost with six other nations. Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that the French Government announced that France will launch an entirely French space vehicle in 1965 and that its cost will be less than the cost that we already contribute and which we share with six other countries?

I think that the hon. Gentleman had the figure which he quoted a little wrong. The initial programme of E.L.D.O. is estimated to cost £70 million over five years and not £120 million, and our contribution to that is one-third or possibly a little more.

While I entirely agree with the figures which the hon. Gentleman has given, has he completely forgotten that we contributed to Blue Streak, which has cost £90 million already, which brings the total up to £160 million?

asked the Minister of Aviation whether he will make a statement on the report he has received from the commissioner considering the appeal by British European Airways against the decisions of the Air Transport Licensing Board in respect of air routes being proposed for use by independent airlines.

asked the Minister of Aviation whether he will now announce the decision of his commissioner upon the appeal by British European Airways against the decision of the Air Transport Licensing Board.

My right hon. Friend has not yet received the report of the commissioner appointed to hear these appeals. It is expected shortly. It will then be for him to decide the appeals, and he is well aware of the desirability of doing so as soon as possible.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that there has been quite a delay, and, as soon as he receives the report, will he in coming to his decision have regard to the fact that the independent airlines have pioneered throughout a very difficult period many routes and that they deserve much better treatment of this application than they have received previously from the hon. Gentleman's Ministry? Will he look at it with favour when it comes along?

I shall certainly convey my hon. Friend's suggestion to my right hon. Friend. I cannot accept his remarks about delay. These things necessarily take a considerable time, but a large element in what my hon. Friend refers to as delay was due to the fact that the applications were in some cases put in several months before the regulations requiring these licences came into effect

Will the hon. Gentleman take it from me that to accept this application would not correspond, in the opinion of many millions of people in this country, with the statement of his hon. Friend the Member for Rutland and Stamford (Mr. K. Lewis), who would consider it in the same relation to B.E.A. as the Eagle Cunard is to B.O.A.C.?

I shall convey the hon. Gentleman's suggestion to my right hon. Friend also.

Will my hon. Friend realise that we are living in the jet age and that many of the matters under consideration by his Ministry appear to be dealt with as if we were still living in the days of sail? Will he do his utmost to speed up his decisions and those of his Ministry in these matters which are of vital importance and urgency?

As I have already pointed out, this particular decision is not yet under consideration by my Ministry because we have not yet received the commissioner's report, but as soon as we do we shall see that a decision is reached with all possible speed.

asked the Minister of Aviation why the lowest tender for the new multi-storey car park at London Airport was not accepted and why the various designs submitted in this competition have not been published.

The lowest tender failed to meet the specifications because it would have accommodated too few cars. Another tender, which was the lowest in terms of cost per car space, was functionally unacceptable. This was not an architectural competition, but an invitation to tender for design and construction. It is not Government practice to disclose details of unsuccessful tenders, and in the present case copyright of these designs remains with the firms submitting them.

Is it not the general impression that this was an open public competition, in which various firms were invited to submit solutions of the very interesting technical problems posed by this construction; and, in accordance with the usual practice when open public competitions are held, should not the designs have been published?

That may be so in competitions of an essentially architectural character, but this was not a purely architectural competition. Many of the designs submitted involve technical innovations or improvements, and we have no reason to think their sponsors would wish to have them published for the benefit of their competitors.

asked the Minister of Aviation on what date work is expected to begin on erecting the piers for passenger use at London Airport.

The office blocks now being built incorporate the first part of the pier system for No. 3 Passenger Building, and bridges to connect them with the aircraft stands will be begun next summer. At about the same time we shall also start the first pier for the short-haul terminal.

When will this work be completed? Will my hon. Friend press upon his right hon. Friend that the facilities at London Airport need overhauling completely? For instance, buses are used continually. Will this work obviate the necessity of using buses to take passengers to and from aircraft?

The answer to the first part of my hon. Friend's question is that the south office block with the piers will be completed in July, 1962, and the north office block in May, 1963. The first pier from the short-haul building will take about nine to twelve months to build. As to the second part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question, London Airport is in a state of continuous change and development, and will continue to be so for as far as one can see into the future.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that some passengers have to walk enormous distances from the waiting hall before they even get on to the bus? Will he do something about that?

Yes. I will do my best to make it as easy as possible for passengers.

asked the Minister of Aviation what consideration he has given to harmonising British policy with regard to air traffic rights with the policies pursued by the Common Market countries.

There does not yet exist a common policy of the Common Market countries on traffic rights, and aviation is at present excluded from the scope of the Treaty of Rome. The question does not, therefore at present arise, but my Department will watch future developments carefully.

Is it not the case that, in practice, the Common Market countries very carefully and closely integrate their air traffic rights, whereas our system is one of free-for-all competition between the corporations and the private air companies? Will not that present us with considerable difficulty if and when we enter the Common Market?

I think that at present it is likely to present greater difficulties to the Common Market countries themselves who, so far from having integrated their practices, are in a number of cases pursuing radically different lines of policy in the matter. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we shall watch this position most carefully, but there is no sign at all that the Council of the Community regards it as a question of urgency.

asked the Minister of Aviation what representations he has made to the International Civil Aviation Organisation about the introduction of a standard international air navigation system following the recommendation of the International Federation of Airline Pilots Associations that the Decca system HARCO be tested for use in this field.

Arrangements are now being made by the Eurocontrol Association to test whether HARCO satisfies the Eurocontol specification of an area coverage system. It would be premature to make any approaches to the International Civil Aviation Organisation pending the outcome of these tests.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the International Federation of Airline Pilots Associations was well aware a the fact that Eurocontrol was carrying out an investigation of the system when the International Federation made its own investigation, and recommended that the International Civil Aviation Organisation should carry out its own tests now, because it was thought essential from the point of view of air safety? Will not my hon. Friend at least support those recommendations in the interests of air safety, because it is an urgent matter and one of great interest to the country?

I am aware of the resolution passed by the organisation—which, I suppose, we must pronounce "IFALPA"—but the fact is that I.C.A.O. does not conduct tests and, in any case, it has taken a decision on standardisation which remains valid until 1975. However, my right hon. Friend has been in touch with B.A.L.P.A.—the British component of the International Federation—which is aware of what we are doing in seeking to get HARCO tested with Eurocontrol, and has agreed that this is the best way to attempt to approach standardisation on a larger scale.

But is not my hon. Friend aware that the original decision taken by the International Civil Aviation Organisation is now under question, and that there is some doubt whether that organisation was right to take its decision. Is it not time, therefore, to press for a reopening of the whole matter?

It is quite possible that the time will come, before the present standardisation runs out, to press for a reconsideration, but not before HARCO has been fully tested by use with Eurocontrol. If it were to be approved and adopted by Eurocontrol, that would automatically entail reopening the case with I.C.A.O.

asked the Minister of Aviation what conclusions he has reached on the future employment of Dectra, following the success of its trials by the Aircraft Armament and Experimental Unit at Boscombe Down.

No conclusion has yet been reached. Further development of Dectra is necessary before the system could be put forward for adoption as a standard aid.

As this scheme has been operating and has been checked and used to high degrees of accuracy for some five years, can my hon. Friend say how much longer he will take to get ahead with it so that we may be able to compete with the Americans, who are working hard to overhaul us?

It depends to some extent on how fast the Decca Company is able to complete the programme of development. The conclusion from the tests so far is that Dectra is not sufficiently developed for the purposes for which it is intended.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary make it quite clear that we are concerned that the best types of instruments shall be in standard use, and that we are not happy in the least if heavy economic power is to be the determining factor rather than the accuracy of the instruments?

I share that view with the hon. Gentleman. I have no grounds to think that heavy economic power determines the question with regard to either HARCO or Dectra.

asked the Minister of Aviation what success he has lately enjoyed in securing the acceptance of British systems of aerial navigation as against their foreign rivals.

There has been no opportunity of securing the acceptance of a British system since 1959.

Was not 1959 rather a clear demonstration of the British trumpet sounding a most uncertain note, so that only the Americans prepared for the battle? Will my hon. Friend do his best in the forthcoming negotiations to give rather stronger support to this country's manufacturers than has been given hitherto?

I would not accept that the decision in 1959 was due to pusillanimity on the part of the British Government, but I can assure my hon. Friend that we shall in the future, as we have in the past, do everything that is reasonably possible to ensure that decisions on navigational aids are taken on the merits of the various products and not on political grounds.

Is it not a fact that the decision of 1959 was taken on considerations other than those purely concerned with safety in the air, and, as I said earlier, is this not the time again to raise the whole matter?

I have explained why this is not the moment to raise the whole matter again. It would be better to wait until HARCO has passed its tests with Eurocontrol. The decision taken in 1959 was, as the House has been told by my right hon. Friend's predecessor, one which we very much regretted, but it is impossible for us to break up an international organisation because we regret one of its decisions.

asked the Minister of Aviation what request he has received for assistance from Aeroflot in connection with the proposed adoption by the Soviet authorities of the Dectra system in conjunction with the North Atlantic traffic control.

None, Sir.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that great interest has been taken for some years past by the Soviet authorities in the Decca Dectra system? Does he appreciate that a decision is imminent and is likely to be taken shortly at high level in Russia? If this decision goes the right way, and we all hope that it will, does my hon. Friend—notwithstanding the earlier reply he gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Gosport and Fareham (Dr. Bennett)—not think it a little invidious that the Russians should adopt, on technical grounds alone, a British system of navigation when our own Ministry is so conspicuously lacking in giving the support we all expect for the system?

That supplementary question sounded like a series of hypotheses. I cannot answer for a decision of the Russians about which we have received no information at all. I am aware that they have expressed interest in Dectra to the company, and if we are asked for our help in promoting a sale to the Soviet Union we shall of course give it

asked the Minister of Aviation what research is being conducted into the relative safety of jet and piston-engined aircraft.

Studies of aircraft accident statistics are made over a wide area, and include comparisons between types of aircraft where these suggest lines of research which may increase safety. The causes of accidents to individual aircraft are also minutely investigated, but such studies not do suggest any valid basis for generalisations about the relative safety of jet and piston-engined aircraft.

Is it not time to try to evaluate these relative safeties, in view of the fact that so far in 1962 half of the fatalities have been incurred by jet aircraft? Does not that give the Minister some food for thinking about inquiring into the relative safety of the two types of aircraft?

It does, of course, give us great cause for anxiety, and it is a problem that we have under review continuously, but the fact is that these large jet aircraft have been in service for only a short time, whereas the pistonengined aircraft, even the largest of them, have been in service for a very long time. That makes it extremely difficult to make valid comparisons between them. The accidents that have occurred in 1962 have been most disquieting, but, as an example of the impossibility of basing generalisations on them, I would point out that one of the most disastrous of them all is now generally thought to have been due to sabotage, which is not something that is confined to one particular type of aircraft.

But did not the Minister suggest on Thursday that we might prevent accidents by applying the I.C.A.O. standards to the older aircraft? Does he remember that when I put that very point on 14th May his right hon. Friend took the opposite view and pointed out that the older types of aircraft were safer than many of the new types? Why, then, apply the modern standards to the safer aircraft?

It is quite true that some of the older aircraft, such as the Dakota, to which we were then referring, have an extremely good air safety record. The point I made in my speech, to which the hon. Gentleman now draws attention, was that those aircraft came into service before the present standards were laid down and that it was, therefore, impossible absolutely and exactly to apply the modern standards to them. What we are now seeking to do is progressively to apply some of the modern standards to the alder aircraft where they are relevant to the type of construction, which now goes back some thirty years.

asked the Minister of Aviation What is the estimated total design and development cost of the Short Belfast freighter aircraft.

In accordance with normal practice, I cannot disclose estimates of 'this kind.

Can my hon. Friend confirm, without disclosing the magnitude of the figure, that it is between a third and a half of the cost which one would normally associate with developing an aircraft of that type? Is this not one of the many advantages which recommends this aircraft for more fields than that merely of British military requirements?

I cannot, for the reasons I have already given, confirm my hon. Friend's estimate, but I certainly agree with him that the aircraft is suitable for many kinds of requirements. It is a matter of regret to us that the hopes originally entertained by the firm for foreign civil sales did not materialise.

asked the Minister of Aviation what are his plans for the ordering of freighter aircraft to meet the tactical and strategic needs of the armed services over the next five to seven years.

As regards tactical aircraft, the Argosy is already entering R.A.F. service and, as the House knows, my right hon. Friend is also ordering a military version of the Avro 748, now known as the Avro 780. The Belfast has been ordered to meet the strategic freighter needs. Proposals for a tactical freighter aircraft as a possible replacement for the Beverley and Hastings are under consideration.

Is my hon. Friend aware that an aeroplane takes six or seven years to develop but that by using the existing types, as recommended in the Defence White Paper—and by the use of advances, such as laminar flow —the Belfast aircraft could be developed and be capable of lifting such heavy loads of Chieftain tanks or carrying 25 tons for 8,000 miles? Would it not be advisable to expedite a decision on the needs of the Army over the next five to seven years so that the planes are ready when the Army needs them?

Yes, the potentialities of the Belfast will certainly be very carefully considered on the lines my hon. Friend has suggested. They are being so considered. So, similarly, we have to consider the potentialities of rival aircraft for the same requirements. I think that my hon. Friend can rest assured that there is no danger of the Army's needs not being met in time.

Is it not the case, however, that the R.A.F. simply does not possess at present an efficient strategic freighter aircraft? Will not the Parliamentary Secretary, for that reason, give more attention to this than he has indicated in his previous replies?

I think that my previous replies indicated that we are giving close attention to this.

Has the Parliamentary Secretary had any discussions recently with Short Brothers and Harland on this matter? My understanding of the situation from people concerned in the area is that the Belfast aircraft could be developed in very many ways but that the difficulty at the moment is that no one knows what development there should be or what will be required. If my hon. Friend could give some idea on the matter, we should indeed be grateful.

I cannot attempt to define the requirements here in the House, but we are in continuous consultation with Short Brothers and Harland.

asked the Minister of Aviation what are the technical qualifications of the Permanent Secretary of his Department; and what is his previous experience in the field of aviation.

The qualifications required of a Permanent Secretary of a Government Department are that he should have those qualities of mind and character and that breadth of managerial and administrative experience which fit a man for the highest posts.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Will he now do me the courtesy of answering the Question on the Order Paper?

The qualifications required of the head of a Civil Service Department are not technical in the sense of being related to aviation or whatever may be the particular function of the Department. They are administrative. The Department has a large number of very competent technical staff who work under a Permanent Secretary and technical problems are in their hands.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will take steps to reconstruct the financing of the National Insurance Fund by charging the contributions on a percentage basis, supported by a supplementary payment similar to that now paid by the Exchequer; and if he will take steps to concentrate additional benefits on the payment of higher retirement pensions, sickness and unemployment benefits, and widows basic rate, whilst requiring all persons with incomes above £9 or £10 per week to pay to a graded pension scheme, and whilst leaving all the dependants' benefits stationary until the new scheme has been implemented.

No, Sir.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that I had no hope whatever of his giving much consideration to a question such as this because he believes in retired pensioners having to undertake a means test? Does he not realise that the time has come for a different policy to be adopted towards these aged folk if they are to have anything like security? Is he aware that on the last occasion he gave 7s. 6d. to the pensioners he placed Is. 6d. extra on the National Insurance contributions of ordinary people and that it would take about 8s. 6d. extra to give a £5 pension? Has the time not arrived when a pension of £5 should be aimed at for aged people, although it will never be achieved under the present system?

The hon. Gentleman is not entitled to draw from my answer the inference with which he began his supplementary question. On the merits of the matter, apart from any other difficulties, I should find it very difficult to go with him in the proposal which he makes, that when the time for increases comes, dependants—for example, the children of widowed mothers—should be excluded from such increases.

rose—

We really must pass to the next Question.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what steps he proposes to take to help pensioners living in decontrolled houses who are being compelled to pay for repairs, as such payments are not taken into account for National Assistance purposes.

None, Sir. The Board tells me that if a tenant of decontrolled property who is receiving assistance is known to be responsible for repairs and insurance, allowance can be made for this in assessing his grant. If the hon. Member has a particular case in mind, perhaps he would write to me or to the Chairman of the Board.

Is the Minister aware that I have here a letter from an old-age pensioner tenanting a decontrolled house, who has not the money to mend a leaking roof and who is frightened to report it to the public health inspector for fear of eviction? What advice can the right hon. Gentleman give this old lady? If the National Assistance Board pays rent increases arising from the operation of the Rent Act, should not the Board pay this kind of expense as well?

I cannot advise the hon. Gentleman unless he sends me details of the case. If he will be good enough to send me the details I will gladly study them. I have stated the general rule in my main answer.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how many old-age pensioners are in receipt of National Assistance in the area covered by the Easington Parliamentary division.

I regret that this information is not available as the Parliamentary Division of Easington is served by three offices of the National Assistance Board which also serve areas in other divisions.

Is it not possible to analyse the number of cases at the various offices? Why should not this information be available? Is the hon. Lady aware that we are becoming very worried about the number of cases of hardship brought to our notice? In those circumstances, is it not possible to step up the National Assistance payments so as to relieve the hardship experienced by many of these pensioners?

We could not possibly analyse the payments by any statistical process. It would mean a separate count. I can give the right hon. Gentleman the figures for the three offices which serve his division and areas around it.

That is all I asked for.

The figures for the three offices—which is not the Question asked by the right hon. Gentleman—are: Houghton-le-Spring, Durham and Hartlepool, totalling 8,494.

That is exactly the information that I am trying to get. Does it not denote that the pension is completely insufficient? It is no use the right hon. Gentleman shaking his head in that negative way. Will he come and listen to the tales that we hear about the difficulties experienced by these people? Is he aware that we are not going to put up with this sort of thing very much longer?

I am sorry that the right hon. Gentleman is disappointed that my right hon. Friend is not answering his Question, but I do not think his conclusions follow from his premise.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how many war pensioners have suffered a reduction in or lost their pensions outright in each of the last five years; what were the reasons; and what guidance is given to pensions tribunals in such cases.

As the answer includes a table of figures, I will, with permission, circulate this in the OFFICIAL REPORT. The reasons were that their medical condition had improved to an extent which made them no longer eligible for pension, or for as much pension. As regards the last part of the Question, pensions appeal tribunals are independent statutory bodies appointed by my noble Friend the Lord Chancellor, and I neither have nor ought to have, any power to give guidance to them.

Ought not the Minister and the Government to take into consideration that many ex-Service men returning home from military hospitals after being badly wounded can no longer follow their occupations and have to take up light duty types of employment? Will the right hon. Gentleman and his right hon. Friends bear in mind this fact when they next consider pensions for this type of ex-Service pensioner?

We not only have considered this but we have already in operation the allowance for lowered standard of occupation to take care of just that situation.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will consider combining the old-age pension and National Assistance books to avoid embarrassing pensioners who dislike showing that they have two books and are receiving National Assistance.

This suggestion has often been considered. It has the practical disadvantage that whenever the National Assistance order book has to be withdrawn for amendment the pensioner would be unable to cash his retirement pension. I would add that there are many people apart from recipients of National Assistance who present more than one order book for payment at post offices.

Does the Minister agree that there are very many old-age pensioners in real need of National Assistance but who do not apply for it for the reason given in the Question, even if the Minister thinks that it is a case of mistaken pride that they do not like showing two books in the post office? Surely it is not beyond his wit to devise some way of overcoming any administrative difficulty involved?

I have no reason to believe that the obligation to present two books—which is shared by a very large number of people who draw, for example, family allowances, war pensions and industrial injury benefits—has anything to do with the matter. The hon. Gentleman will know that a little time ago, to deal with any difficulty over the presentation of books, we took the words "National Assistance" off the cover. That was a practical measure. I honestly do not think that the hon. Gentleman's present proposal would really help.

I think the right hon. Gentleman will agree that there is a slight difference between the National Assistance book and other kinds of books. Whilst he and I may not think it wrong to apply for National Assistance, lots of people think it slightly shameful and therefore they do not like their neighbours who go in the post office to know about this. Could he not overcome this difficulty?

I do not think that a neighbour can spot out of a pile of books that many people bring in that one is a National Assistance book, when it has not even got the words "National Assistance" on it.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what reply he has sent to the telegram sent to him by Mr. Melling, Secretary of the National Federation of Old Age Pensioners' Associations, calling for an immediate increase in old-age pensions to meet the increased cost of coal.

A courteous acknowledgment.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a courteous acknowledgment without any effective action is just no answer at all? Does he not think that the time has come to increase the basic old-age pension? Does not the fact that he has recently increased the National Assistance scales owing to the rise in the cost of living mean by implication that the basic pension ought to be increased for the same reason, or is he busy turning the Welfare State into the Means Test State?

All Governments have from time to time raised the National Assistance scales at a time when they have not been moving the level of retirement pensions. On the particular point specified in the hon. Lady's Question, on coal prices, a change in retirement pensions would be a singularly inflexible weapon for this purpose when one remembers, first of all, that many retirement pensioners are not in need and, secondly, that coal prices vary throughout the country.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is not only coal that has gone up in price? The cost of living has increased by 6 per cent. since the last increases in National Insurance were made. If I send the right hon. Gentleman a telegram asking him what he is going to do about this, is a courteous acknowledgment all that I will get?

No, Sir, I will send the hon. Gentleman a very courteous acknowledgment.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how many widows of ex-Service war pensioners who have died away from home in Great Britain have been refused financial assistance to have their late husbands brought home for re-interment.

The only application in respect of re-interment known to me is that about which the hon. Member has been in correspondence with my hon. Friend.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that is not good enough?

I do not think the hon. Gentleman is being quite fair. The facts of this case, Which I have studied, are that this gentleman unfortunately died away from home and was buried by the local authority, with his widow's consent, in Cumberland. His widow received the National Insurance death grant and, as my hon. Friend the Joint Parliamentary Secretary explained to the hon. Gentleman in a very full letter, there are no powers of which I am aware for the payment under the Royal Warrant of the charge for exhumation and reinterment elsewhere of an ex-Service man. I understand that in this case contact had been made with the voluntary bodies but that they also did not feel that this was an appropriate use for their funds.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what was the cost of living index when the present rates of retirement pensions and National Assistance were granted; what is the index now; and what the difference represents in money value.

The Index of Retail Prices for April, 1961, when the present rates of retirement pensions and national assistance were first granted, was 113·3 and the index far May, 1962, was 120·1. This represents a difference in money value of 3s. 5d. in the standard pension and 3s. 3d. in the scale rate for a single householder.

Is the Minister aware that it is literally impossible for the people receiving these pensions to manage to make ends meet or to live at all adequately? Is he prepared to do something to meet the situation?

The hon. Gentleman is simply not facing the facts, first, that when we are dealing with 5½ million retirement pensioners, some well off, some not well off, but a complete cross-section of our community, one cannot effectively make generalisations of that kind, and, secondly, that today the real value o4 the retirement pension is higher than it was at any time before the present scales were introduced.

We are getting tired of this kind of answer. Does not the Minister realise that a 3s. rise in the cost of living is much more serious to people on old-age pensions or widows' benefits than it is to any of us in the House? Does not he agree that the method of giving National Assistance increases while not at the same time raising the basic pension is just not good enough today?

As I am sure the hon. Lady knows, the National Assistance Act provided that National Assistance scales might be moved more quickly and more easily by way of Resolution rather than by legislation for the very reason that it would have to be done more frequently. That was contemplated because National Assistance provides the effective method of dealing with hardship, when action has to be taken speedily. The hon. Lady is ignoring the whole history of the matter in suggesting that it is National Insurance benefits which should always be moved whenever the Index of Retail Prices moves.

Is it not a fact that, on every occasion since 1951 when the retirement pension has been raised, the amount of increase in the basic pension has been larger than the increase in the cost of living for the comparable period, all of which has, by aggregation, given a real value of the pension immeasurably higher than at any time since it was inaugurated?

It is the fact, as my hon. Friend has said, that the real value of the pension today is higher than at any time under any Government before the present scales were introduced.

Will the Minister bear in mind that, even though he did announce today that there would be a change, it would probably be four months before it took effect, and, remembering how the cost of living has risen in the past four months, can he say exactly what will be the likely level in another four months?

The first part of the hon. Gentleman's question is wholly hypothetical. As to the second part, I think that questions about the Index of Retail Prices are for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour, not for me.