asked the Minister of Public Building and Works when suitable arrangements will be made for displaying the Crown Jewels so that visitors can see them without the necessity for long queueing to the disappointment of tourists.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works when he proposes to start work on an underground building at Tower Green for better display of the Crown Jewels.

My right hon. Friend is examining the schemes which have been prepared for a new Jewel House and will make a statement as soon as he can.

Will my hon. Friend inform his right hon. Friend that a foreign visitor who stayed in my house queued for over an hour to see the jewels? Is my hon. Friend further aware that parties of Women's Institutes coming to London do not think it is worth going to the Tower to see the jewels for this reason? Would it not be better to display the jewels in a larger underground room so that more people could see them at a time than is possible at present in the very narrow place in which they are on show?

My right hon. Friend appreciates the difficulties which visitors have in trying to see the regalia, and he will do everything he can to provide better facilities as soon as that is possible, but I think that my hon. Friend would agree that it is not an easy matter to design and construct new accommodation which will be absolutely secure and, at the same time, display the regalia to more visitors.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works (1) what proposals he has made, following the Emmerson Report, for utilising the maximum capacity of the building industry in those areas where there is unemployment amongst building workers;

I will be giving consideration to these matters.

That is a pretty stony answer. What comment has the right hon. Gentleman to make on the paragraph in the Emmerson Report which refers to the way in which the surge of private enterprise building has passed Scotland and my constituency by and caused twice the unemployment in the building industry in Scotland compared with England and Wales, and what constructive steps is he going to take for areas like Scotland and my constituency?

These are, of course, very important matters. I am studying the whole Emmerson Report, not only one paragraph of it. I frequently find it better to allow thought to precede action.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what are the customary additions above the cost of labour and new materials in the public works and building trade when working on Government contracts; and if he will give the corresponding figure when secondhand materials are specified.

There are no set figures customarily quoted in either case.

Will my right hon. Friend have a look at this question, because it is widely believed that very substantial additions are sometimes made in these cases whereby it is possible that public money may be excessively expended, and it is believed that that is especially so when secondhand materials are very properly specified? I ask my right hon. Friend to look into the matter to see whether economies can be effected.

I will certainly look into the matter, and I should be grateful if my hon. Friend could give me further details of any matter he has in mind. Of course, the majority of contracts now are fixed-price lump-sum contracts entered into on a competitive basis. How the contractor arrives at his tender is, of course, no concern of ours.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works which specifically Welsh building materials are being used in the reconstruction of No. 10 Downing Street.

Welsh slates are being used to replace all slated roofs of No. 10 Downing Street and also 11 and 12 Downing Street.

Is my hon. Friend aware that that information will be warmly received in all parts of Wales, particularly in those areas which are so dependent on the slate industry? Will my hon. Friend further endeavour, wherever possible, to use Welsh slate on other buildings under the control of the Ministry and also to give the widest possible publicity to the fact that Welsh slate is being used on this important building so that other architects and designers may follow the good example of his Ministry?

Yes, Sir.

May I also put in a word on behalf of Wales and supplement what the hon. Member has said? Will the Minister bring to the notice of all contractors, especially those connected with public works, the great improvement which has taken place in the quarry industry and the need to support it?

That seems to be very far away from Downing Street.

asked the Postmaster-General if he has yet come to a decision on the site of a satellite television station in Weardale for the north-west Durham area.

The B.B.C. tells me it hopes to start a survey in the Weardale area about the beginning of September. It will, however, take some time to select a site which will give the best coverage, since this is particularly difficult country and a series of tests will need to be made.

Will the Postmaster-General bear in mind that the North-East still suffers from a shared sound wavelength and that many of my constituents, together with the constituents of my hon. Friend the Member for Bishop Auckland (Mr. Boyden), are paying an additional fee to private firms to have a television picture? Will he seek to remove these anomalies before he considers any national increase in the licence fee?

I will certainly bear in mind the considerations the hon. Gentleman has mentioned.

The right hon. Gentleman is do doubt aware that there are still a number of shadow areas. Has any survey been carried out nationally by the B.B.C. and the I.T.A. to ascertain all the difficulties involved and what early prospects there are of giving shadow areas good reception?

Yes, The B.B.C. and the I.T.A. have this constantly under review. The B.B.C, in particular, is pressing forward with Stages 1, 2 and 3 of its plans for new stations, and eventually Stage 4, to help areas with poor reception.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will exercise his powers under Section 15 (1) of the Licence and Agreement of the British Broadcasting Corporation to amend the prescribed hours of Home sound broadcasting, so that the British Broadcasting Corporation could broadcast all-night programmes of music for the benefit of sick and elderly people.

The B.B.C. has never sought a prescription of this kind. It has said, however, that it would wish to extend the Light Programme up to 2 a.m. in due course, and, as paragraph 21 of the White Paper on Broadcasting says, extensions up to this hour will be authorised. I think this is as far as we should go at present.

Is the Minister aware that for the elderly, the sick, the disabled and the injured these hours can be hours of loneliness and, in some circumstances, fear? Would it not be worth while having some experiment into the possibility or advisability of providing some form of light music as solace during this period?

I confess that I am not quite sure what the hon. Gentleman has in mind, but I find it rather surprising that the hon. Gentleman or anybody else should think that sick and elderly people want to listen to light music throughout the night.

Is the Postmaster-General aware that there is quite a demand for this from my part of the country? Representations have been made to me to that effect. I am surprised that he is out of touch with the feelings of some sections of the community. I ask him to reconsider the matter and gain some information about it. Some research should be conducted into the matter.

Does my right hon. Friend think that there is any connection between this Question concerning sick and elderly people and the length of all-night sittings?

asked the Postmaster General if he will give an assurance that substantial improvement in the British Broadcasting Corporation television reception in the areas of Budleigh Salterton, Sidmouth and Seaton will be achieved before a third channel is initiated for the benefit of more favoured areas.

I recognise, and so does the B.B.C, that an improvement in reception is desirable in the area to which my hon. Friend refers, and the needs of the area will be borne in mind in future planning.

Will my right hon. Friend not only take it into account but ensure that early action is taken in this regard, because there is often a very substantial difference in the quality of reception in these areas as between the I.T.A. and B.B.C? An immediate improvement is essential.

Yes. I recognise what my hon. Friend says. Although the B.B.C. has made no proposals about satellite stations in the third stage of its programme, I hope that it will do so in the next one.

May I press the point on my right hon. Friend which I made the other day, that it would be more sensible to get proper reception in these areas on the existing B.B.C channel before we start on another one?

No. I do not altogether accept that point of view, because the probability is that when programmes are put out on U.H.F. on bands 4 and 5 reception right throughout the country will be better.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he will require the British Broadcasting Corporation, under Section 15 (4) of the Licence and Agreement, to refrain from sending broadcasts by practising members of the medical profession, unless their anonymity is effectively guaranteed.

The matter raised by my hon. Friend is really one for the B.B.C. and the medical profession. The inclusion of the surgeon's name in the broadcast I think my hon. Friend has in mind was most unfortunate. It was made inadvertently and the B.B.C. has apologised.

Despite what my right hon. Friend says, will he ask the B.B.C. generally to get itself organised on this question of names? I accept that this unfortunate incident happened in the way he has described, but I seem to remember that a year or two ago I got myself into great trouble for using a name which was already entirely public. There does not seem to be any system about the use of names on the B.B.C.

I have discussed this unfortunate error with the B.B.C. As my hon. Friend knows, the Corporation normally respects the wishes of the General Medical Council that members of the profession should remain anonymous. Even if I were to take the action suggested in the Question, it would not prevent an occasional lapse of this kind occurring.

asked the Postmaster-General when he received a communication from the hon. Member for Carlisle about the content of British Broadcasting Corporation programmes; and if he will give a direction to the British Broadcasting Corporation under the Licence and Agreement not to broadcast programmes containing epithets such as those contained in the communication.

I received my ban. Friend's letter on 10th July. The powers of direction contained in Clause 15 (4) of the B.B.C. Licence and Agreement were not designed to enable me to control the detailed content of B.B.C. programmes, and I regret that I cannot agree to use them for the purpose my hon. Friend has in mind.

Despite what my right hon. Friend has said, is he aware that this is in fact the only allegation of this kind I have received from my constituents about any broadcasting? In the event of his appointing any future commission in connection with broadcasting, may I ask him to include one of my constituents with a view to presenting a balanced point of view?

I will consider that idea, but I have also discussed this with the B.B.C. and the Corporation tells me that it does not deliberately set out to shock or offend people. Very often the cam-plaint is the other way round. The B.B.C. is sorry if the use of these expletives has given offence to some of my horn. Friend's constituents. The same expletives were also used on a recorded television programme, and they came from the lips of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition.

The Minister and the hon. Member for Carlisle (Dr. D. Johnson) are indulging in a very esoteric discussion. May we be told what it is all about? Is it not in the public interest when allegations of this kind are made about broadcasts that we should know what the allegation is, what the programme is, and what they are talking about?

I should be very glad to tell the hon. Gentleman what the characters were talking about, but I am afraid that Mr. Speaker would rule me out of order if I did.

In the light of what the hon. Member for Swindon (Mr. F. Noel-Baker) has said, I think my hon. Friend will agree that I did send him the actual instance, and if he would kindly return the letter to me I should be very glad to have it.

Order. I do not understand this—it is neither a Question nor something prompted by a matter of information not given to the Minister.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Ordinarily, this would rest where you want it to rest, but the Postmaster-General has used the name of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. Surely, as my right hon. Friend is not here, the Postmaster-General will at least publish in HANSARD what the complaint is?

I do not know what this treasured word was—[Laughter.]—but I do not propose to stick my neck out by forcing unparliamentary language in obedience to a point of order because I do not know what it was.

asked the Postmaster-General if, in view of the evidence, contained in the annual report of the Chief Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, that violence on television contributes largely to increased criminal activity, he will exercise his powers under Section 15 (4) of the Licence and Agreement of the British Broadcasting Corporation and Section 9 (2) of the Television Act, 1954, to require the British Broadcasting Corporation and the Independent Television Authority to refrain from showing programmes containing violence and brutality.

No, Sir. The powers of direction contained in the B.B.C. Licence and Agreement and in the Television Act were not designed to enable me to control the detailed content of B.B.C. and I.T.A. programmes. The Government are, however, concerned to improve the standards of television programmes and recognise that programmes should, in particular, include less violence. As stated in the White Paper on Broadcasting, we shall discuss these matters with the B.B.C. and I.T.A.

I appreciate that Answer, but the Commissioner of Police has stated that it is not only his opinion but, he says, the belief of every policeman that the daily presentation of violence in dramatic form has largely contributed to the increase in crime. How long are we to wait before some action is taken to minimise this?

With respect, the hon. Gentleman is quite wrong. The Chief Commissioner of Police for the Metropolitan area did not say that at all. He referred to one possible contributory cause of the increase in crime and then referred to television, but made it perfectly dear that there was no evidence in support of this assertion. The amount of crime and violence shown on television is one thing and the effect that it has on society is quite another. That is why I think that the whole House welcomed the initiative of the then Home Secretary in setting up a study group or committee to look into this whole matter.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that while it is difficult 'to prove the effect of a particular programme on the viewing public, the degree of violence and brutality contributes to the climate in which our young people are growing up? Surely he should take this report very seriously and also his duties under the Act.

Of course, the hon. Gentleman may well be right, and it is precisely on account of that possibility that we have stated in the White Paper that in the Government's view there is an excess of violence and crime on television at the present time, and we propose to discuss this with the authorities to try to improve the position.

I hope that I did not misrepresent the Commissioner of Police, but the words he uses in the Report are:

"… but it is my belief and that I think of all policemen, that the daily presentation of crime in dramatic form …"

I have read the Report very fully, and what I have said is, I Chink, a fair representation of what the Chief Commissioner stated.

asked the Post-master-General when he proposes to start discussions with the Independent Television Authority on the problems of violence and triviality in television programmes and on the natural break, in accordance with paragraphs 40 and 65 of Command Paper No. 1770.

I hope to start discussions with the broadcasting authorities on the standards of television programmes, and with the I.T.A. on natural breaks, very soon after the forthcoming debate in this House.

While sharing the Minister's anxiety not to intervene with the content of the programmes either of B.B.C. or of I.T.A., is he aware that there is public feeling that these discussions should take place and that he should take a firm line on them, and will he say when he intends to report to the House on this and in what form?

I have already said that these discussions will take place at an early date, and I always take a firm line over everything.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, in view of the profits now declared by television programme contractors and of the fact that 80 per cent. of the public criticise advertising in natural breaks, he will introduce legislation restricting television advertising to periods between programmes while also limiting the number of short programmes in any three-hour period.

The hon. Member will have seen from paragraph 65 of the Government's White Paper that we now propose to discuss with the I.T.A. the question of a possible change in the minimum interval of time between breaks.

But would not my proposal take care of the danger noted in the Pilkington Report that to limit the advertising in the way I suggest might lead to a proliferation of rather short programmes? Secondly, is the Postmaster-General aware that the public are getting rather fed up with seeing stupendous profits made out of this intrusion into viewing time, and would it not be good to put on a physical limitation of the kind I have suggested? That would make everybody happy.

Frankly, if the hon. Gentleman had any idea of the complexities associated with the question of natural breaks, I doubt whether he would have asked those two supplementary questions. I have given an enormous amount of thought to the matter, and I have come to the conclusion that the best way to tackle it is to have early talks with the I.T.A. to see what we can hammer out.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I refused to be included in "everybody"?

The Minister says that he has given considerable thought to this problem, but is he aware that the abuse of the natural break, which is now generally deplored, has in fact been defended at that Dispatch Box by himself and his predecessor, and will he now take a much stronger line with I.T.A. on this?

I do not think that it is very rewarding to look at the past; we have to look to the future.

Surely the remedy is in the hands of the viewer—to reach out and turn off the knob.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will examine the possibility of introducing mobile post offices to serve the remoter rural areas where full-time offices have had to be withdrawn.

I have looked carefully into my hon. Friend's suggestion; but I am afraid mobile post offices would be a very uneconomic way of giving counter services in these areas. The rural postman on his rounds sells postage and savings stamps; he also buys postal orders for customers on request, and accepts telegrams and unregistered and registered letters and parcels for despatch, and I think this provides a reasonable alternative.

May I make it clear to my hon. Friend that I am not suggesting that this should be an alternative for existing posit offices, but is she aware that in scattered districts where post offices have been closed there is considerable hardship and inconvenience caused, particularly to the elderly who wish to draw their pensions, and so on? May I suggest that it is time that the Government ceased to chip away at all our rural services as they seem to be doing at the moment?

I accept the difficulties of rural areas because I live in one myself, but I do not accept that we chip away at rural services. I believe that we give as good and as economic a service as possible. I said in my Answer that the rural postman serves as a good friend to people in these areas.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will make an additional monetary award to the sub-postmistress in Bristol, details of whom have been sent to him, who was recently attacked while on duty.

These awards have always been regarded as tokens of the Post Office appreciation of the person's conduct. I should not think it appropriate to increase the particular award which I was glad to be able to make personality to this gallant lady whose services the Post Office has greatly appreciated.

Is the Minister aware that this lady does not seek publicity. In fact, she resents it. All modest people who perform deeds of this character are like that. However, she sustained a bone fracture and was knocked about by these men, who were subsequently captured. Then the Minister gave her an award of £20. She did her duty to the public and the Minister ought to do his duty and award more than £20 in a case of this character.

The position is nothing like as simple as the hon. Gentleman represents it to be. This was a token award in recognition of this lady's gallantry, but, in addition, during the time she was disabled the Post Office made arrangements for her welfare and paid for substitute staff. The truth of the matter is that this lady has expressed her appreciation of the attitude of the Post Office.

Is the Minister aware that he had another case last week in South Wales where 15 guineas were awarded but no train fare and not even an opportunity to buy a meal? The man in this case did exactly the same as the lady in Bristol did. I ask the Minister to reconsider his attitude in this matter.

I think that the Post Office behaves very well in these cases. If the hon. Gentleman wants to table Questions about other cases, I should be glad to answer them.

asked the Postmaster-General what steps he is taking to improve the postal service between Hay Mills, Yardley, Birmingham, and Edinburgh.

I am looking into this matter and will write to my hon. Friend as soon as possible.

Would not my hon. Friend agree, and bear in mind the fact, that if it takes two days for a firm situate in Yardley to communicate with its subsidiary in Edinburgh, it shows extreme inefficiency and is liable to cause delays and unnecessary expense? Would she also bear in mind the fact that there are, on occasions, criticisms in Birmingham that it takes two days for a letter to travel from one part of the city to another?

We are, of course, anxious to keep our services as efficient as possible and to give a good service between Birmingham and Edinburgh, and we are taking steps to ensure that that is carried out.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, in view of the fact that the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament is a body with purely political aims, and in view of the fact that it franks letters with the words "Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament," he will take steps to see that the use of this frank is discontinued.

This particular frank incorporates the title and symbol of the organisation concerned and was supplied to it some years ago by our agents. As I told my hon. Friend on 22nd May, it is used by the organisation on its own correspondence only.

Will my hon. Friend be assured that I am not getting at this organisation on political grounds, but that the point at issue is whether, for purely political reasons, political propaganda should be made use of in the Royal Mail?

I do not think that the use of the name of the organisation strictly comes under the heading of political propaganda. It is the name of the organisation and, on those grounds, we consider that it would probably be unwise to go further in the matter.

Is it not the case that the use of the words "political propaganda" in this connection usually means not questions that have a broad political significance but questions of party political propaganda? Is it not clear that this organisation is not limited to a single party and that its aim, which is to discredit the use of nuclear weapons throughout the world, is one that it is in the public interest to popularise?

I cannot accept what the hon. Gentleman says, but I would again repeat to the House that it is the name of the organisation and that the organisation is quite at liberty to print it on its envelopes if it so wishes. My own personal view is that we should, perhaps, leave the matter as it is.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he has yet reached a decision regarding the future of the Post Office bulk supply agreements for the purchase of telecommunications equipment; and if he will make a statement.

I have given the most thorough consideration to the bulk supply agreements made by the Post Office with the principal telecommunications manufacturers. I have decided to change the present arrangements.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the announcement he has just made will, so far as it goes, be received with great satisfaction by all members of the Public Accounts Committee on both sides of the House, but will he say why the proportion is only to go up to 25 per cent.? Would he also say why he regards the exchange equipment agreement as being a special case to be continued?

I think that the increase in the reservation provision for telephone apparatus from 10 per cent. to 25 per cent. is, for the moment, just about as far as we can go, but there we must wait to see what the reaction of the manufacturers is before we see the shape of things to come. I think that the exchange equipment agreement is a special case and one that does not lend itself to competition. This is highly specialised equipment, and, of course, the Post Office works in the closest co-operation and partnership with the principal manufacturers in quite refined electronic developments.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this side of the House welcomes his statement because he is at last starting to break down the monopoly position of the manufacturers' "ring"? There is the question of the ring keeping its monopoly position in regard to exchange equipment. Is not the Postmaster-General aware that a month after the Public Accounts Committee reported, a further merger took place inside this particular ring and that the Plessey Company, the Automatic Telephone and Electric Company and Ericsson Telephones merged in a £55 million merger and captured 40 per cent. of all the telecommunication and telephone equipment supplied to the Post Office? Will he say to what extant now this ring, or this combine within the ring of firms, will be able to carry on in its monopoly position in regard to exchange equipment?

There is no monopoly position in the sphere of exchange equipment. I think that the steps I have announced to the House this afternoon represent a vary reasonable move towards genuine competition in this field, and I think that we would be very well advised to see how the new arrangements work out before coming to further conclusions.

I take it that the Postmaster-General has it in mind to review these agreements periodically, and at much more frequent intervals than in the past?

Yes, Sir, certainly. After a reasonable interval of time we shall see how the new arrangements are working out and shape our course accordingly.

asked the Postmaster-General (1) what is the annual cost of running the Forces Savings Branch; and what percentage of the Forces avail themselves of this service;

The cost of running the Forces Savings Branch was £691,000 in 1961. A total of 51 per cent. of the Forces use this service. The average annual total of deposits, in terms of the past three years, is £24·9 million, and of withdrawals £25·1 million. The average balance on individual accounts is £28 6s. 8d.

I thank my hon. Friend for that information, but does she not consider that the cost of administering the scheme is very high in relation to the numbers using it and the amount of money involved? Further, would she ask her right hon. Friend whether he will look into the problem to see whether it is possible to find a cheaper system of securing this end without damaging the thrift of those concerned?

It is, of course, a fairly expensive scheme to work, but I think that we all accept that on social grounds it is very valuable and that none of us would like to see it discontinued. I can assure my hon. Friend that we are all the time trying to find out more economical ways of running the service and will, therefore, keep in mind what he says. But it is a good thing to start the habit of saving among Service people.

While I agree with almost everything that the hon. Lady says, will she and her right hon. Friend keep in mind the advantages of the giro system in dealing with members of the Forces and of the civilian community?

We will certainly keep that in mind.

asked the Postmaster-General to what extent, during the last twelve months, the number of incidents of wilful damage to apparatus in telephone kiosks in the borough of Leyton and elsewhere in the London area has increased; and what further means are now in operation to prevent or minimise such damage.

I am glad to say that the extent of wilful damage to apparatus in telephone kiosks in the East Telephone Area of London, including the borough of Leyton, has been materially reduced during the past twelve months, I feel sure that the hon. Member will agree that it would be unwise to describe in detail the measures that have led to this welcome improvement.

While I express great pleasure at the information given by the right hon. Gentleman, will he at least in general say whether the method of detection is now some method of giving audible notice of any attempted depredations in these kiosks.

Broadly speaking, the answer to the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question is "Yes".

asked the Postmaster-General when it is intended to open the new post office in High Road, Leytonstone; how long since the premises were acquired it has taken to reconstruct and prepare the office; what are the extended facilities for the public; and to what extent business has increased during the last five years at the existing High Road office.

I am glad to say that the new branch post office at Leytonstone High Road was opened for business yesterday. Completion of the scheme was unfortunately delayed for some months, partly because of a number of small difficulties arising in the course of the work, and partly as a result of a change in operational requirements to enable "all purpose" service to be introduced. The volume of business has not increased during the past five years.

May I ask the hon. Lady why a note could not have been put in the old Post Office to indicate when the new one was to be opened? I have had several inquiries on this point. As a matter of fact, I now know through the local Press that it is open, but I did not know that when I put down the Question.

I shall look into that.

asked the Postmaster-General what steps he proposes to take to improve the telephone service in the Coventry district.

I am not aware of any general dissatisfaction with the telephone service in the Coventry district. 90 per cent. of Coventry subscribers now have S.T.D., and it is to be extended to the remaining 10 per cent. within the next few months. If my hon. Friend has particular difficulties in mind and will let me have details, I will gladly make inquiries.

Is my right hon. Friend not aware that Coventry has had one of the longest waiting lists for telephones almost since the war, and would he try to provide on the new estates more telephone kiosks? Is he not aware that those subscribers who have not subscriber trunk dialling have to wait on occasions for as long as four minutes for the operator to answer the telephone? Could not he see that more operators are present on some occasions?

I was not aware from the phrasing of the Question that my hon. Friend was referring to 'the difficulty of getting new telephones installed, but I shall certainly look at the position in Coventry. As to kiosks, in general, the Post Office is opposed to putting up more telephone kiosks because we lose so much money on them. The service during the late hours in the evening in Coventry is not as good as I should like to see it, due to the shortage of staff, but we are doing all that we can to put it right.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what information he has about the progress which has been made in the creation of public parks out of pit slag-heaps; and whether he will make a statement.

My right hon. Friends information does not distinguish public parks from other open space. In England and Wales grant or loan sanction has been given since 1946 for reclaiming 234 acres of spoil heaps which local authorities proposed to use for open space purposes. In addition the reviews of development plans so far submitted to him by local planning authorities under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1947 show that 54 acres of spoil heaps have been reclaimed for open space.

While that report is very encouraging, does not the hon. Gentle-man feel that the progress is very slow indeed and that many more of these man-made monstrosities might be abolished and turned into parks of public amenity and beauty? Is he aware that this has been done extensively in Europe not only with regard to slag heaps but also bomb damage and rubble heaps, and could not he get a move on to do work of that kind in Britain?

My right hon. Friend appreciates the value of the hon. Gentleman's suggestion and is preparing a booklet describing and illustrating a number of schemes which have been carried out in recent years. He hopes that this will stimulate further interest and effort.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if toe will make a statement on the policy he will adopt towards the location of new office building; and whether he will seek powers to prohibit new developments which conflict with public policy.

This is under urgent consideration.

As a new Minister, will he show whatever urgency he can about this? Does he agree that there is no hope of having an intelligent policy for the distribution of employment until there is an intelligent policy over the distribution of office and that no one will solve the problem of housing in London until the latter problem has been solved?

I can only repeat what I said.

Will the right hon. Gentleman also take into account the number of betting offices being put up at present? Will he restrict this number until more houses are built?

That is a separate matter, but when betting offices need planning permission all such factors are taken into account.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs, if he will now publish the revised programmes for slum clearance submitted to him by local authorities at his request; and if he will make a statement.

In Circular No. 2/60 local authorities were asked to submit further proposals for slum clearance where appropriate, at a stage depending on their progress with what are known as the 1955 proposals. As the majority of local authorities have not yet submitted further proposals, and as those that have been submitted relate to widely differing base dates and may well be subject to further revision, I do not think any useful purpose would be served by publishing those my Department has so far received.

Is the Minister aware that he or his predecessor was able some years ago to publish such a report, and may I ask him how it is proposed to help these local authorities to accelerate their slum clearance programmes, as at the present rate it will take two generations in some areas to do so? Is this not a national problem requiring national assistance?

We were able to publish some detailed figures in 1960 because we had a special survey. I do not want to take away officers who are on the job now to make another survey when we are hoping to make individual contacts with the authorities most in need. I think that is how we could help most.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the total amount spent annually by Her Majesty's Government on research work; what proportion of this is devoted to military purposes, and how much to the health development of the nation.

The available information does not distinguish between research expenditure and development expenditure. Total Government expenditure on research and development is of the order of £400 million a year; about three-fifths of this is for defence, where development work is the major element. Expenditure by the Government on health and medical research, including an allowance for that at universities, is about £15 million a year.

Can the hon. Gentleman explain why his Department is always so parsimonious and cheeseparing when it comes to expenditure on health whereas expenditure on destruction or research work for destruction is given out ad lib?

As I think I indicated, the figures for defence and health are not really comparable because the proportions spent on development work as distinct from research are greater in the case of defence than for health. In view of the hon. Gentleman's observations, however, I should point out that the total of Government expenditure provided in the current Estimates for health and welfare is £768 million.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what further progress has now been made in steel denationalisation; what steps he now proposes to take in connection with the sale of Richard Thomas and Baldwins Ltd., in view of the impending completion of the Spencer works; what is the aggregate inventory value of steel stocks and shares of all classes still held by the Iron and Steel Holding and Realisation Agency at the latest convenient date; and how this figure compares with the aggregate inventory value when the denationalisation programme was inaugurated in 1953.

The book value to the Iron and Steel Holding and Realisation Agency of its investments and obligations on the 20th July, 1953, was £364·3 million. The book value on the 20th July, 1962, was £155 million, of which £73·9 million related to securities in and loans to Richard Thomas and Baldwins Ltd. The House was recently informed of the sale by the Agency of its debentures in the Guest Keen and Nettlefolds Companies, with a book value of £29 million. I have nothing to add to previous statements concerning Richard Thomas and Baldwins Ltd.

Would my hon. Friend confirm that it remains the policy of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to follow the earlier statements made by four of his Conservative predecessors to complete the denationalisation of steel in the lifetime of this Parliament?

I think I cannot do better than to repeat to my hon. Friend and the House the very clear expression of intention by my right hon. Friend the previous Chancellor of the Exchequer which remains our policy, namely, when he said on 22nd May last:

"We have said again and again that our intention is that the concern should be de-vested, but when depends on the circumstances. I think that the important factor is to judge the time at which a fair price can be obtained, and that depends on the development plan, which is not yet completed."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 22nd May, 1962; Vol. 660, c. 214.]

In spite of the egregious clamour of the hon. Member who tabled this Question, will the Financial Secretary bear in mind the fact that there is a very considerable body of opinion in this country which is most interested to see a publicly and privately owned steel industry going along side by side to show the irrelevance of the ownership of the capital to the efficiency of a concern?

We all have our own particular contacts, but I am bound to say that I have not found the people of this country over-enthusiastic for nationalisation.

Does the Financial Secretary not recognise that the Labour Party is fully committed to the nationalisation of the whole of the steel industry? Would not the Chancellor of the Exchequer serve the interests of the whole steel industry much better by making it quite clear that there is not the foggiest chance of their being able to denationalise Richard Thomas and Baldwins Ltd.?

I am sure that the House will be grateful to the hon. Member for that clear expression of policy.

asked the Prime Minister what consultations there have been with regard to finding acceptable machinery to investigate and determine the scales of payment of honourable Members of Parliament and Ministers.

asked the Prime Minister if he will now give consideration to the proposal that a non-Parliamentary Commission be appointed to examine the present method and scale of payment to honourable Members of Parliament and Ministers with a view to allowing recommendations which would provide a more permanent solution of payment for the future.

asked the Prime Minister what proposals he has for setting up independent machinery to recommend appropriate salary scales for Ministers and honourable Members of Parliament.

I am considering various suggested methods of dealing with Ministers' and Members' salaries, but I do not at present contemplate setting up special machinery.

Does my right hon. Friend recognise that this problem always causes extreme difficulties for any party which is in government? Is it not properly the responsibility of all hon. Members, and could we, perhaps, invite the comments of the Leader of the Opposition and the Leader of the Liberal Party on this matter?

Of course, I understand the difficulties, but I am not persuaded that the House is anxious to hand over its responsibilities to some other body.

Might I thank the right hon. Gentleman for the extent of his reply, which indicated that at least the matter was under review and that he was considering what he could do? Is he not aware that it is in the interests of all hon. Members, Ministers and, indeed, the public that we should stop this consistent, periodic, sordid survey of hon. Members' salaries, which has been subject now for many years to a three-or four-year periodic review? Would it not be far better if the suggestion contained in the all-party Questions on the Order Paper could be adopted by the Prime Minister? Has he anything in mind to assess this particular point of view of the House?

Of course, I am conscious of the arguments. On the other hand, I think there are some arguments for which the House should accept its own responsibilities. However, as I say, I am considering this matter which, I think, is really in the long run a matter about which the general sense of the House should be taken.

Is the Prime Minister aware that many hon. Members and far more people outside think that it would be most untimely to take this step now? Before he is induced to take this step, will my right hon. Friend consider what repercussions there would be among, fox instance, the old-age pensioners?

All these matters are, of course, relevant, but the real question is on whom should the responsibility lie?

Is the Prime Minister aware that most of us would accept the point made by the hon. Member for Birmingham, Selly Oak (Mr. Gurden) that this is essentially a matter for the House as a whole and that it should be considered by ail parties together? The Prime Minister said that he had been considering ways and moans. Would he be prepared to receive an all-party deputation —perhaps the three hon. Members who have tabled the Questions under discussion could represent other hon. Members—to discuss their particular proposal? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, while appreciating that there are certain objections to outside bodies, there is also a fairly strong argument in favour of this kind of decision being, to some extent, supported by outside evidence and the views of outsiders? Many of us feel that there is something a little undignified for the House of Commons to have continually to revert to this subject. Many of us would support a system such as exists in some countries whereby the salaries of hon. Members are automatically related to those of other public servants.

I am willing to consider all these questions. If the Leader of the Opposition would like to discuss the matter with me personally, or if there were a desire for an all-party deputation either to me or the Leader of the House, we would be happy to receive it.

The House will be grateful to the Prime Minister for having said that he has got the matter under consideration. It is never a convenient moment for the House of Commons, of its own accord, to vote itself an increase in salary. This is a powerful reason for having a more detached process for deciding whether an increase is justified. I hope, therefore, that the right hon. Gentleman will seriously consider the suggestions that have been made to him.

All these matters, of course, would be discussed if we had this meeting.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has asked President Kennedy for details of the numbers of nuclear tests, both in the atmosphere and underground, which the United States Government intends to authorise in the present series of tests; and what was the reply.

As I have told the House, I was fully consulted about the programme of tests at Christmas Island before it began, and I have been kept fully informed of its progress. There have been 24 tests in this series, which is now completed.

When the Prime Minister says that the series is completed, does that refer to both atmospheric tests and underground tests? Would he, when the series is completed, agree to publish in some suitable form a list of all the tests conducted by all the Powers since testing stated, together with the nuclear Powers involved, so that we may have the full facts on the subject?

I will certainly consider that suggestion. It would be quite a difficult operation to get all this information, but I will certainly consider it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that alter the recent statement by the President of the United States there will be the very greatest pressure that at least after the Russians have held their next series of tests, deplorable as those may be, a test ban should be negotiated if it is conceivably possible?

Yes, Sir. That has been our object for very many months and I begin to hope that we may succeed.

asked the Prime Minister if he will now make a statement about the results of the high-altitude nuclear tests carried out by the United States authorities on 9th July.

I have nothing as yet to add to the answer I gave on 12th July on this subject.

The Prime Minister told us that before these high altitude tests took place he had sent to the United States Government a memorandum drawn up by Sir Bernard Lovell on the subject. Could he say whether the information that he may have received from the United States Government on these high altitude tests has been subjected to independent investigation by British scientists, and will he submit the evidence of Sir Bernard Lovell, amongst others?

These tests, as the House knows, are conducted by the United States Government at Johnston Island and are quite separate from the Christmas Island tests in which we agreed to collaborate. It is not yet possible to give a full account of what took place. Our scientists are kept fully informed as a matter of courtesy by the American scientists on tests carried out entirely on their own authority.

When the right hon. Gentleman says that because these tests are conducted at Johnston Island they are, therefore, in some way in a different category from the others, surely we are as much interested in what happens in outer space as the rest of humanity, and we have as much right to know what goes on? Could not the right hon. Gentleman, therefore, get from the United States Government as early as possible the fullest account of these high altitude tests so that all the world shall know what really happened?

Yes, we received these because of our close partnership and collaboration with the United States Government. I was only pointing out that whereas at the Christmas Island tests we had a rather different degree of responsibility, the Johnston Island tests are carried out with the United States Government's authority.

Has the right hon. Gentleman seen the very strong protest made by Sir Robert Watson-Watt, the inventor of radar, against high altitude tests and particularly against any tests that can reach the Van Allen belt?

Yes, all these tests have in fact taken place. What I am asked is whether I should be able to publish some comprehensive account of them. I will look into it. At present the results are being what they call "evaluated", and our scientists will be fully informed.

asked the Prime Minister if he will publish a White Paper, before the Conference of Commonwealth Prime Ministers, setting out the state of the negotiations for Great Britain's entry into the Common Market, including the general outline of a possible agreement if this is available in time.

My right hon. Friend the Lord Privy Seal expects to make a further statement next week on the progress of the negotiations. If negotiations continue after the House rises, my right hon. Friend will make a report public in the same way as if the House had been sitting. I will consider with my right hon. Friend the possibility of publishing a White Paper when the present phase of the negotiations is over.

While welcoming this assurance by the Prime Minister, may I press on him the desirability of publishing a fairly detailed White Paper giving a resume of all the phases of this very complicated negotiation over the past twelve months so that the House as well as the Commonwealth Prime Ministers may have plenty of time to evaluate the results before various conferences meet to consider them in the autumn?

In answer to the first part of the supplementary, I think the hon. Gentleman has re-stated what I said. I hope we shall be able to do this. It is just a matter of working it out in conformity with our courtesies to the Prime Ministers' Conference. Perhaps I could have notice of the second part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question.

While also welcoming the Prime Minister's undertaking possibly to lay a White Paper, may I ask him whether he will also ensure that we shall be kept informed of the progress of the Cattani Commission?

Yes, Sir.

The right hon. Gentleman has said that if necessary the Lord Privy Seal will make a public statement. Surely the House is entitled to be communicated with directly, even if we are in recess, and the way to do that is, as suggested in my hon. Friend's Question, by publishing a White Paper?

No, I think there are two stages. My right hon. Friend the Lord Privy Seal has made a statement after each stage of the negotiations. The House has been sitting. He made one, I think, yesterday. He hopes to make one next week. The hon. Gentleman suggested that a similar statement should be made if the House is not sitting. Then there is a quite different question as to whether a summary of all these things could be brought together. That, I was saying, I would consider carefully having regard also to the period of its publication and the meeting of the Prime Ministers' Conference.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that many of us sit for agricultural constituencies and that the important statement made yesterday by the Lord Privy Seal was carefully curtailed in subsequent discussion? If there is a White Paper published, could full emphasis be given in that White Paper to all the complexities inherent in the agreement reached so far that the Common Market Six accept the principle of an annual price review, as it is the predominating interest in these agricultural seats?

All that will be borne in mind. There are two questions —first, the making of a progress report while the House is sitting, the making of a progress report as soon as the negotiations finish; and then whether it would be helpful to bring them all together into a joint publication stating just what are the problems and what progress is made towards their resolution. All that we will try to do to meat the convenience of the House and to meet the quite proper requirements of the country, but also bearing in mind our prior obligation to inform, as we are in every detail, the Prime Ministers of the Commonwealth.

On the two points which have been distinguished by the Prime Minister, may I ask him whether he is aware that the Lord Privy Seal's statements in the House of Commons are published in HANSARD in full and that, therefore, hon. Members have access to them, whereas a statement made to the newspapers when the House is not sitting may only be published in an abbreviated form? Is he aware that this is really the case for publishing the Lord Privy Seal's statement, if one is made when we are not sitting, in a White Paper?

As I said, I will consider it, but I could not give a definite assurance now because I have to try to consider what are the courtesies due to the Prime Ministers of the Commonwealth.

asked the Prime Minister if he will define the responsibilities of the Minister of Housing and Local Government in relation to Welsh Affairs.

It is the responsibility of the Minister for Welsh Affairs to safeguard all Welsh interests in Government matters and to take any action necessary to ensure that these interests are fully taken into account, particularly in Cabinet. This arrangement does not diminish the specific responsibilities of other Ministers towards Wales.

Whilst appreciating every platitude that the Prime Minister read out, may I ask him why in his valedictory letter to the former Minister for Welsh Affairs, he thanked him for his work in housing and local government but seems completely to have forgotten that he was also Minister for Welsh Affairs? Is he aware that throughout the Principality this is taken as a further indication of the contempt which the Government seem to have for Welsh matters?

I thought that my right hon. Friend had been so successful in that part of his work that it was not necessary to underline it.