asked the Postmaster-General when the European Conference of Posts and Telecommunications Administrations last considered the speed and efficiency of the transport of mails between European countries.

A sub-committee of the conference is currently studying the postal and allied customs procedures applied to parcel mails at post offices with a view to simplification and speedier treatment.

Whilst thanking my hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask hex whether she is aware that I have already given her some examples which she is very kindly looking into? Would she not agree that the mails between this country and Italy and between this country and France are apt to be very erratic and sometimes very slow, and in view of the speed of air traffic these days, does not the whole question want looking into?

I think that the instances which my hon. Friend has cited are instances in which the other postal administrations have, perhaps, been more to blame than us. It is difficult for us to improve their services, but I can assure my hon. Friend that we are doing our best to make our own services as efficient as possible.

asked the Postmaster-General how many sacks of mail were dispatched during 1961 to and from stations between Inverness and Kyle of Lochalsh and Glasgow and Mallaig, respectively.

About 220,000 between Inverness and Kyle of Lochalsh, and about 90,000 between Glasgow and Mallaig.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the widespread fears that exist in Scotland that these two lines may be subject to closure? Has her Department investigated any alternative methods of carrying the mail which would be as reliable as those which are being used at present?

I think that we all recognise the fears that people have about their communications, particularly in the Western Highlands. Certainly our Department keeps in very close touch with the British Transport Commission, and should anything happen alternative arrangements would be made. I can only tell may hon. Friend at present that these things are all very much in the future, and all we can do is hope that we get the best solution.

Will my hon. Friend ensure that her colleagues take special note of this, because the present system is much more economic for her Department than anything that we can visualise in the near future?

I can assure my hon. Friend that when I say that we are working very closely with the British Transport Commission I mean that it is the economic handling of mails that we have in the forefront of our minds.

asked the Postmaster-General what measures are being taken by his Department to place more orders for Post Office requirements in the County of Durham and the North-East.

My right hon. Friend is not aware that there are suitable firms in the North-East which might wish to tender for Post Office contracts but have not had an opportunity to do so. If the right hon. Gentleman has some particular firms in mind which are not already on our lists, we shall be only too glad to consider them.

Is the hon. Lady aware that I am asking similar Questions of various Government Departments? In view of the Government's expressed wish to reduce unemployment in the North-East, is it not the responsibility of her right hon. Friend to ascertain whether there are suitable firms in the area, or is that responsibility to be placed on the right hon. Member to make inquiries about the whole of the County of Durham? I suggest that her right hon. Friend should make inquiries as soon as possible, because this is one way of mitigating the severity of the economic position in the North-East.

I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that we make these inquiries. But we will make further inquiries to make certain that we have not left out any suitable firms.

asked the Postmaster-General whether private manufacturers, of either British or foreign origin, will be allowed to own, control or operate space telecommunication equipment in the United Kingdom.

Apart from certain telegraph cables, the Post Office operates the overseas telecommunications services in this country and owns the equipment, looking to the manufacturers for its supply. I do not visualise any change in these arrangements in the satellite era. Satellites will extend the present means of international communication by cable and radio, and the use of the various media will clearly need to be integrated.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I am very satisfied with his reply?

asked the Postmaster-General what financial contribution the British General Post Office has made to the development and launching of the Telstar communication satellite.

The development and launching of the Telstar satellite was entirely an American project, and was paid for by the American Telephone and Telegraph Company.

Does that reply mean that we have no direct interest at all in this modern miraculous venture? Is not that rather surprising, in view of the fact that in all other technical telephonic developments this country has been in the forefront?

No, I do not think that it is surprising when we compare the relative resources of the United States and this country. This development was planned and put into operation by the American Telegraph and Telephone Company, which is a private American concern, at a capital cost of about £20 million, which is rather more than the Post Office could afford from its own resources. But it does not follow from that that this country will have no stake in future developments.

Would it be true to say that some years ago some of our leading industrialists and scientists placed before the British Government a very detailed plan of possibilities in this direction, and that they were able to prove that, with a comparatively small outlay, there could be reasonable returns of profit within a fairly short period? Why did the British Government not do something then?

With respect to the hon. Member, I do not think that that is so. It was certainly not the case when I first assumed my rôle as Postmaster-General. Indeed, two years ago there were widely conflicting views amongst British scientists as to the feasibility of satellite communications.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will now make a statement on the plans to use Telstar by the General Post Office during the satellite's useful life, particularly regarding future public television transmissions and telephonic experiments.

The object of the Telstar experiment is to gain technical knowledge, and its main use will, therefore, be for technical tests. I would not envisage anything except occasional use for television and public demonstrations once the initial phase is over. But this is a question we are about to discuss with the American Telephone and Telegraph Company, and the French Posts and Telecommunications Department.

I am much obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for that reply. Do I understand, first, that we use Telstar rent-free from the Americans? Secondly, will this situation continue in respect of the next satellites that the Americans are about to launch into space in this series of experiments? Thirdly, in view of the fact that high rents will be demanded by the Americans from the G.P.O. if they perfect this satellite space communication system, what is our G.P.O. doing in a positive fashion, either with Europe or the Commonwealth, to develop our own satellite relay system?

The answer to the first two supplementary questions, is "Yes". The answer to the third one is that, so far, this country has limited its active co-operation to the construction of a ground station in Cornwall. Our scientists and engineers in the Post Office have been very active, especially during the past twelve months, working out ideas for a British satellite, but we cannot have a British satellite system unless we first have a launcher.

The right hon. Gentleman is surely aware that only a few weeks ago we had in London a special Commonwealth conference to discuss the future of the Commonwealth effort? Has not he anything yet to reveal to the House about the extent to which we are satisfied that there can be a Commonwealth venture in this respect?

Following the Commonwealth conference, talks have been arranged between Canada, the United Kingdom and the American authorities, and other talks between this country, Australia and the countries of Western Europe. After these discussions have been completed we shall have a much clearer picture of the possible participation that this country can have in satellite operation.

Is it true that the Americans are now planning three stationary satellites on the Equator, revolving at the speed of the earth but in an opposite direction? Is it not desirable that these tremendous space experiments in communications should be under some international authority, rather than under the control of any one nation?

I do not think that that question arises out of the Question on the Order Paper. I can assure the hon. Member that Hear Majesty's Government are fully alive to the possibilities of satellite communications, and when it comes to an operational system we shall not be left out in the cold.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, in view of the success of the Telstar communication satellite, he has considered to what extent satellites can be used in future for international telecommunications and for television relaying; and if he will make a statement.

My hon. Friend will, I am sure, share my satisfaction at the striking success of Telstar. This is, however, only the first stage in a series of experiments with communication satellites designed to provide several hundred telephone and telegraph circuits, and a television channel. These experiments will, I hope, give the technical information which is essential for the design of a satellite communication system suitable for commercial operation.

Can my right hon. Friend tell us a little more about Britain's possible share in future activities of this sort?

As I have already told the House, so far our participation has been limited to the ground station. But it seems almost certain now that there will be at least one system of satellite communication within the next seven to ten years in which we hope to participate. It may well be that in time there will be a second system in which, perhaps, a larger participation on our part might be justified.

Can the Postmaster-General give an assurance that future Telstar programmes will not be used, as was the case last night, for putting over blatent Conservative political propaganda?

Order. That supplementary question is a long way from the Question on the Order Paper.

Is the Minister aware that the British Space Development Company presented the Government with the outline of a system of global telecommunication nearly a year ago? Can he tell the House what has happened to this plan? If it has not been shelved, what encouragement has been given to the company?

Those proposals were discussed with the company at some length about six to nine months ago. But, of course, it is one thing to put forward proposals in this sphere. It is quite another to find the huge capital expenditure to finance them.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will make a statement on the design of the new Post Office central headquarters near the railway station at Stoke-on-Trent; what consultation and co-operation there have been with the local authorities, including the city council and British Railways; whether it is intended to include an electric conveyor system so that mail bags can be conveyed direct from the station platforms; and whether it is intended to lay out the area with turf, trees, shrubs and plants.

I am glad to say that the new building at Stoke-on-Trent will be completed in the autumn of next year. It will contain a modern public Post Office, a sorting office with a conveyer, and a postal garage and workshop. The plans were agreed with the local authority and British Railways. The site layout will preserve existing natural features as far as possible, and I am sure that the hon. Member will regard it as attractive.

I appreciate that reply. Would the hon. Lady agree with me that the present method of conveying mail bags is obsolete? Would not this have provided a unique opportunity to carry out an experiment with a view to conveying the bags from the train and the platform to the Post Office?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, I took a close personal interest in this project, partly because I know it so well. I examined the conveyer system and I came to the conclusion that it would not be economic to try this sort of experiment there.

asked the Postmaster-General what restriction upon the making of telephone calls he is imposing upon new subscribers to the Amersham telephone exchange; for what reason he is making it; how long he expects it to last; and what reduction in rental he is making in consequence of it.

I regret that we can only give a restricted service to new residential subscribers at Amersham because the exchange is heavily overloaded during parts of the day. Subscribers with restricted service undertake not to make calls between 9 a.m. and 11.30 a.m. on weekdays; they can receive calls at all times. Their rental is reduced by £1 a year. More switchboards are being installed in the exchange, and we hope to be able to remove the restriction early in 1963.

Does my hon. Friend realise that, while I am grateful that this restriction is to be removed in 1963 and not at a much later date which she first gave me, nevertheless a restriction of this kind is a most regrettable one so many years after the end of the war? Can my hon. Friend explain how it becomes necessary to impose such a restriction on new subscribers and also whether they will be able to make emergency calls during this period of the morning when they cannot make ordinary calls?

The most important reason for this restriction in Amersham is the very rapid growth of population and the limitation on capital expenditure. Cables are going in as quickly as possible, and we hope to give a full service to everybody coming along. I can assure my hon. Friend that people can make emergency calls in this restricted service, and so should not have any difficulty in this respect.

Are the people who are subject to this restriction already subject to the restriction of party lines?

I do not know how many of them are on party lines.

asked the Postmaster-General (1) when it is intended that television will be available in Shetland;

The B.B.C. hopes to open its television and V.H.F. sound station for Shetland, which I authorised in the second stage of its satellite station scheme, before the end of 1963. As the right hon. Gentleman knows, Orkney receives good sound reception from the B.B.C.'s V.H.F. sound station there. The I.T.A. has in mind the needs of these and other areas in drawing up tentative plans for completing its coverage.

I thank the Minister for confirming that the plans already made will stand. Do I understand that I.T.A. also has plans now for serving at least Orkney? If the Shetland station is to be completed by 1963, when may we expect the work to start?

I have made inquiries of I.T.A. and I know that when drawing up plans it has in mind the needs of this area. I do not think I can give a date off the cuff for the actual start of the work, but I assure the right hon. Gentleman that the Shetland station will be finished before the end of 1963.

Did the right hon. Gentleman say what area this will cover and whether a link will be supplied for the area in the Outer Isles which will serve the western seaboard of Scotland?

Regarding the Western Isles, the B.B.C. hopes to open the stations which I have already authorised for Lewis and Skye by the middle of 1964. Until those stations are working, and we know their effective range, it is not possible to decide whether further stations should be located in the Western Isles.

Does the statement in the recently issued White Paper mean that, if the rest of the channel 3 frequencies are handed over, all the fringe areas will be covered and not only the Western Isles?

I do not think I can go quite that far, but it certainly means that we shall utilise the remaining unused frequencies in band 3 to help the areas to get good reception.

Even the Soke of Peterborough?

asked the Secretary for Technical Co-operation what steps he is taking to encourage British administrators, teachers, doctors, veterinary surgeons, engineers and agricultural officers who are now employed in the Colonial Territories to remain there if their services are required by the new Governments after independence; and how and by whom it is proposed that their salaries and subsequent pensions shall be paid and their future prospects made secure.

These officers are employed by the overseas Governments concerned, not by the British Government, and their salaries and pensions are paid by those Governments. The British Government help in this by reimbursing under the Overseas Service Aid Scheme the cost of inducement pay and education allowances, and half the cost of passages. We also reimburse under the Scheme the cost of additional pensions arising from inducement pay and half the cost of compensation.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that these British administrators are already drifting away much faster than they can possibly be replaced by Africans? Would not it be wiser and more generous for the Government to assume full responsibility for their salaries and pensions and thus be able to transfer them wherever their services are required and most necessary?

I am aware that many of these officers are doing a first-class job in overseas territories. But I cannot compel overseas Governments to continue to employ them. All that I can do, and I do it, is to make the terms reasonable for them to continue serving.

asked the Secretary for Technical Co-operation why a Commonwealth Advisory and Technical Service, as advocated by the Select Committee on Estimates some two years ago, has not yet been inaugurated.

The reasons are fully explained in the White Paper "Recruitment for Service Overseas" (Cmnd. 1740) which I published in May. This also described in detail the positive steps we are taking to organise recruitment for service abroad.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that Answer and I shall certainly study the White Paper. Is not it time that a greater sense of urgency were put into this matter?

If my hon. Friend studies the White Paper I think that he will find that expressed in it.

Is the Minister aware that some of the difficulties in the past were due to Departmental rivalry between the Colonial Office and the Commonwealth Office but the principal difficulty was due to the parsimony of the Treasury? Now that there is a Minister jointly in charge of the Commonwealth and Colonial Offices and a former Colonial Secretary at the Treasury, will he have another look to see whether he can get the kind of Commonwealth service proposed? Is he aware that although there may be difficulty in getting individual Colonial Governments to continue the employment of people in these specialist grades, it would not be very difficult to get an alternative territory to take them on afresh?

The arguments against the Commonwealth service are not financial but simply that people returning from overseas service do not, generally speaking, meet the demands which I receive for people to proceed overseas, so that we prefer a short overseas service and to have a home-based service.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the arguments adduced by the Estimates Committee still remain unanswered? Is he aware that theme is still room for some common pool to furnish these experts who are so urgently needed overseas by the newly-emergent territories?

I do not deny that for certain specialists there is room for a pool, and this we are trying to organise. But, as I have said, in general overseas service will, in future, be part of a home-based career.

asked the Secretary for Technical Co-operation (1) if he is aware that many Commonwealth students in the United Kingdom experience particular difficulty in obtaining work during their vacation, especially of a kind which would provide them with practical experience of the professions and callings Which they intend to follow in their own countries; and what guidance his Department gives in this matter to the students concerned, Government Departments and agencies, and industry generally;

About 500 of the Commonwealth students and trainees in Britain now under arrangements made by my Department, for scientific and technical courses, get practical training as part of their courses, but my responsibility is confined to those who come under arrangements made wholly or partly by my Department. Such practical training is within the terms of reference of the Council for Technical Education and Training for Overseas Countries which I recently appointed.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that two problems are involved? First, there is the need to provide opportunities for work for students generally from the Commonwealth because of the financial and social difficulty that afflicts them, especially during their long vacations When they cannot afford to return to their countries. Secondly, there is the special difficulty which affects the Commonwealth student who is here to pursue a professional course and finds grave difficulty in providing himself with practical training which is a necessary part of that course. In view of the fact that the Advisory Committee on facilities for Commonwealth trainees in British trade and industry now comes under his Department, would the right hon. Gentleman consider setting up a proper clearing house which will comprehensively assemble and manage the needs of the students on the one hand and the availability of positions for them in industry on the other?

I should like to examine the problems arising out of the latter part of that supplementary question. This is a matter which comes within the terms of reference to the Committee I have recently set up. I am aware that there is a shortage of practical training places for some of these students, but most of them come to this country privately. I am only too willing to help collectively with particular problems, but I cannot act as an individual clearing house for each student who comes privately and finds that he is in difficulties.

While paying tribute to the way in which the right hon. Gentleman looks after the 500 or so Who come under his responsibility, may I ask if he is aware that that is a small minority of the group and therefore there is a case for extending his responsibilities? Will he compare our record with the arrangement made by the West German Government and see how badly we come out of that comparison?

The hon. Member is quite right in saying that I am responsible for a very small proportion. The majority come privately or are sponsored by overseas Governments. If those Governments put proposals before me and seek my help, I am only too willing to consider it, but I cannot do it for individual students who come privately.

asked the Secretary for Technical Co-operation what is his present estimate of the number of ex-colonial and Sudan government British pensioners whose pensions would need to be increased to bring their total pensions up to the level of retired officers from the Home Civil Service covered by the Pensions (Increase) Acts.

The latest estimates are that 3,250 overseas—including Sudan— pensioners and 2,700 dependants are not receiving pension increases up to the level granted under the United Kingdom Pensions (Increase) Acts.

In view of the comparatively small number involved, may we hope that their interests will be taken care of in the proposed Pensions (Increase) Bill?

I think my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary to the Treasury made it quite clear in his statement that that would be so.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us how much money is involved in this?

That is a very difficult question to answer because it varies from month to month. An estimate at present would be something under £500,000.

asked the Secretary for Technical Co-operation whether he was consulted by the Paramount Chief of Basutoland before the latter left to visit West Germany in order to discuss the possibility of financial help to Basutoland; and whether he will make a statement.

I was kept informed of the Paramount Chief's plans to visit West Germany, but he did not consult me. My Department is of course concerned with technical and not financial assistance.

Is it not very unfortunate that at the time when we have fewer countries for which we are directly responsible there should be so little money available for this territory from the United Kingdom, and that it has to go to Germany to seek assistance? Is not this an appalling commentary on our administration of those territories for which we are responsible?

I said in my original Answer that I am responsible for technical but not financial assistance. I understand that the Paramount Chief was seeking the latter. My Department provides technical assistance through the Overseas Service Aid Scheme, the Directorate of Overseas Surveys and teacher training under the Commonwealth Education Scheme.

Is the right hon. Gentleman saying that in fact the responsibility is that of his colleague the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations and Colonies? I have put down a Question to him to which I have no doubt he will attempt to give a satisfactory reply, but I cannot see how he will do so.

I am saying that the financial responsibility rests with my right hon. Friend to whom the later Question is addressed.

asked the Secretary for Technical Co-operation if the Government will reconsider the level of their contribution in 1962 to United Nations technical assistance and pre-investment programmes in the light of the discussions currently taking place in the Economic and Social Council on the United Nations Development Decade.

I would refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply given him on 10th July by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that after the United Nations General Assembly approved the resolution on the U.N. Development Decade it passed another resolution setting a new target of 150 million dollars for technical assistance and pre-investment programmes for 1962 and the United Kingdom voted for both resolutions? In those circumstances, how can he maintain and justify a contribution geared to the old target if the Government are to prove their sincerity in approving the whole idea of the Development Decade?

If the hon. Member studies those resolutions, as I am sure he has, he will see that we have pledged ourselves to review our contributions in the autumn and that we are seeking to do.

Not for this year?

Not for this year.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs how many turnstiles there were in municipal public conveniences at 11th August, 1961; how many have since been removed; and how many local authorities have refused to comply with his request to remove them.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs how many turnstiles have been removed from municipal public conveniences since he wrote to the local authorities requesting that these should be removed as soon as possible; and how many other local authorities have plans to remove these turnstiles within the next twelve months.

About 670 turnstiles were in position on 11th August, 1961. Figures so far available show that 139 have been removed and five have been taken permanently out of use. Two hundred and twenty-three are to be removed this year or next by eighty local authorities. Forty-six authorities have refused to remove their turnstiles and eight have removed some and retained others.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that letters of protest about the continued operation of these turnstiles are still rolling in to me and since the Minister issued his circular I have received particulars of twenty-five areas where they are in operation together with those of authorities such as, for instance, Swaffham Rural District Council, which openly refuse to carry out his circular? In view of this defiance by such a large number of local authorities, will the Minister now fulfil the promise made by his predecessor and introduce legislation to make it obligatory on local authorities to take these turnstiles out without any more delay?

I am not, of course, familiar with the hon. Lady's mail, but I stress that the number of turnstiles to be removed is 367 which, according to my calculations, is 55 per cent. of the total and this has been achieved in under a year, the date of my right hon. Friend's circular being 11th August last year. I do not think it can be said that this is an entirely unsatisfactory state of affairs or that local authorities on the whole are proving unco-operative. So far as legislation goes, the circular reiterated my right hon. Friend's undertaking, although I cannot give any guarantee that Government time will be available.

As forty-six local authorities have refused to remove turnstiles, what is the Minister going to do about it? Is he to allow the recalcitrant local authorities to defy Government policy instead of keeping up with the standard of the best?

The hon. Lady will be aware that the date in the circular was May this year. We feel that powers of persuasion have not yet been exhausted.

Will the hon. Gentleman explain the distinction in his Answer between removing the turnstiles and taking them out of permanent use?

Perhaps the hon. and learned Member would receive more satisfaction by consulting his hon. Friend the Member for Blackburn (Mrs. Castle) on that.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs whether he will introduce legislation to compel all owners of disused quarries, sand and gravel pits, which are a danger to the public, to fence them adequately, and, wherever possible, to fill them in or tidy them up.

No, Sir. Local authorities already have powers under Section 151 of the Mines and Quarries Act, 1954, to require the fencing of disused workings which are in places accessible to the public; and under Section 144 of the Highways Act, 1959, to deal with sources of danger adjoining a street. Filling in would generally be impracticable, but particular sites can be dealt with by local authorities under their powers for restoring or improving the appearance of derelict land.

Is the Minister satisfied that this legislation goes far enough? He, or at least his Department, knows that several youngsters have been drowned in these pits recently. Is it right that people should be allowed to dig great monstrous pits and to get money out of it, and then to stroll cheerfully away, leaving them there for ever, a deadly danger to children and a blight on the landscape, leaving the land permanently unfit for normal use?

My right hon. Friend takes the view that these powers are generally adequate, but I emphasise that the primary responsibility is with local authorities and, as these are local matters, in my view must be with local authorities. The hon. Member referred to these works being left as a source of danger, but he is aware that it is almost universal practice, when planning permission is given, to attach suitable conditions for rehabilitation.

Could not the Minister arrange to move some of these disused turnstiles to the quarries?

Will the Minister consult his right hon. Friend with a view to considering the advisability of sending out a circular to local authorities reminding them of their responsibility in order to minimise the dangers in this respect?

I will certainly consider that suggestion.

Does the Minister realise that local authorities do their best to get these private owners to fill in these pits but that they keep on resisting this proposal? If it falls back on the local authority, it becomes a very expensive job, which ought not to be the responsibility of the local authority. Will he look at that aspect of the problem?

Very strong powers of enforcement are available to the local authorities. I do not think that that is a limiting factor.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs on what grounds seven members of the Slough Borough Council have been refused by him dispensation to vote on matters relating to housing.

Dispensations enabling members to vote on a matter in which they have a pecuniary interest are granted only where half or more than half the council members would otherwise be disabled from voting or where there is a possibility of the adoption of a policy to which the majority of the council are opposed.

Is it not time that the Minister reconsidered this policy? Is he aware, for example, that in Slough more than half the hocusing is on public estates and that in effect this means that on housing matters relating to those estates their representatives are disfranchised? Will he look at this matter again?

I am sure that the House agrees that as a general rule it is undesirable for members of local authorities or committees to vote on matters in which they have a pecuniary interest. My right hon. Friend has laid down the principles on which he will allow dispensation in a circular with which I am sure the hon. Member is familiar. Dispensation to discuss is very readily given, but dispensation to vote is governed by the principles which I set forth in my original Answer.

Will the Minister ask his right hon. Friend to look at this policy again? It is not a very sensible policy as it stands. After all, if it is going to make any difference, the members are allowed to vote. Surely, provided that the public in general know that members have the interest, does it greatly matter that they vote?

I should not like to go into all the ramifications of that, but, as the hon. Member knows, my right hon. Friend's predecessor promised a statement on this matter. This statement is already being considered with the Law Officers, and he hopes to make it shortly.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he will introduce legislation to control the level of noise on all building sites.

Any noise or vibration Which is a nuisance can be dealt with by local authorities as a statutory nuisance under Section 1 of the Noise Abatement Act, 1960. Whether further legislation is necessary to deal with noise on building sites must be considered in the light of any recommendations made by the Committee on the Problem of Noise, which I understand is examining this question among others.

Since this question has been selected for debate on the Summer Adjournment, I will merely ask the Minister one supplementary question: will he turn up on Friday and have better answers than that?

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what consideration he has given to the housing proposals of the Association of Public Health Inspectors, a copy of which has been sent him; and if he will consider implementing, in particular, the section dealing with the installation of baths, hot water and inside toilets in houses lacking them.

These proposals recommend the introduction of a statutory standard for a satisfactory house with powers to enforce the improvement of houses which fall short of the standard.

Does the Parliamentary Secretary agree that while the Leeds scheme, which I believe he has in mind, for improvement area grants is a good one, nevertheless it takes up to three years to obtain compulsory purchase orders where landlords fail to play their part and it excludes vast numbers of individual houses equally requiring improvement? Would he look again at the health inspectors' scheme?

We are looking at this scheme and many others. We are very anxious to see progress in this matter.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on his talks with the Prime Minister of Malaya.

The talks began on 17th July and are now nearing completion. My right hon. Friend the Commonwealth Secretary hopes to be able to make a statement to the House tomorrow or on Thursday.

While welcoming the assurance that we hope for a statement on this very important question before the House rises, may I ask the Prime Minister whether it is intended at the same time to publish the Report of the Cobbald Commission?

That is a matter for a joint decision since it is a Report to both Governments. Perhaps the hon. Member would wait for the statement.

asked the Prime Minister what proposals have so far been received from other Commonwealth Prime Ministers for a discussion of the problems of migration within the Commonwealth at the Conference of Commonwealth Prime Ministers.

None, Sir.

Can the Prime Minister assure the House that if he receives such a request either before the conference or when the conference meets, he will consider it most sympathetically, in view of the great importance of stimulating migration within the Commonwealth since our own country has restricted immigration during the last few months?

The agenda of the Prime Ministers' Conference is a matter for their collective decision, but I will certainly bear in mind what the hon. Member said.

Will the Prime Minister insist that the powers which exist and are exercised by other Commonwealth Prime Ministers will not be denied the Prime Minister of this country to control immigration into this country?

The powers are under Statute.

asked the Prime Minister if he will now make a statement on the results of the American high-altitude tests.

Information on the effects of the high-altitude tests is being assembled and evaluated, but this process may take a considerable time. It would not be helpful for me to make a statement to the House which is based on an incomplete assessment.

Would it be helpful if the Prime Minister could tell us now whether it is the Government's view that any one nation is entitled to make experiments whose results are unpredictable, affecting all nations, without full consultation with the scientists of other nations and their assent?

These tests are based on Johnston Island, which is United States territory. We are, however, in close touch with them, and if it is possible I shall make a statement when the time comes as to any evaluation of their results.

Will the Prime Minister explain to the House what is stopping an immediate agreement to end atmospheric tests, since there can be no doubt about the ability to detect these?

What is stopping that As the Soviet Government's refusal to accept this proposal when the President and I made it.

Does the Prime Minister recall that the Lord Privy Seal a few days ago said that the Government deplored the announcement that the Soviet Union was about to engage on a new series of tests? Bearing that in mind, will he tell the House what right the Government have to deplore Soviet Union tests if they approve United States tests, and especially tests of this character?

As the House knows, the American tests followed an unofficial but in fact complete moratorium for three years when the Russians suddenly produced their tests. That, I think, was the reason why we felt it necessary, to defend our security, to proceed.

The Prime Minister said that the tests were based on Johnston Island, but they took place in space. Does space now belong to the United States?

No, Sir. I was only meaning that this was not one of the Christmas Island arrangements which had been agreed.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware that the office of Lord Justice Clerk for Scotland has now been vacant for more than three months; and when an appointment will be made.

The Government are fully aware of the importance of filling this vacancy before the court resumes after the vacation.

Is not the Prime Minister aware that at the end of last year the Government asked the House for an extra judge to be appointed because of the heavy work in the Scottish courts? Why was not this appointment filled a long time ago? May we have an assurance that at least the Scottish courts will take priority over any political feeling there may be, no matter how embarrassing a by-election might be to the Government?

I am told that the courts in Scotland resume on 2nd October. We are fully aware of the importance of filling the vacancy before that date.

Can the Prime Minister assure us that he is thinking not of justice in Scotland but of political expediency, because under the usual arrangement would not the Lord Advocate be promoted? This would mean an extremely awkward by-election for the Government, which they would lose.

Although it is very common for the Law Officers to be appointed to these high posts, it is by no means a rule. I ask hon. Members to recall the office of Lord Chief Justice of England, where recently an appointment was made from the bench.

Is the Prime Minister aware that there has had to be a rearrangement of judges in the courts in Scotland, that work in the Court of Session is being very much held up as a result of this, and that many people in Scotland are very seriously concerned at the idea that their legitimate business in the courts has to be held up for reasons of political expediency?

No. Since I have said that the court is in vacation and does not resume its work until 2nd October and since I have said that the appointment will be made before that date, I do not think that there is anything in that supplementary question.

Can the Prime Minister tell us the reasons for the long delay here?

These matters require careful consideration.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will now give an assurance that, if an outline agreement on the terms of British entry into the Common Market is reached during the Summer Recess, he will not seek Parliamentary approval for it before the next Session of Parliament.

The Government abide by their undertaking given in Parliament on 3rd August, 1961, that

"no agreement … will be entered into until it has been approved by this House after full consultation with other Commonwealth countries …"—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 3rd August, 1961; Vol. 645, c. 1651.]

Has the Prime Minister realised that his failure to give the assurance asked for in the Question is profoundly disturbing? Is he seriously contemplating the possibility of bulldozing the provisional approval through Parliament during a short sitting in the Summer Recess? If he is not willing to have a General Election on the subject, will he at least give an assurance that Members of Parliament will have a full opportunity to consult their constituents and their party conferences before they are asked to cast a decision in the House?

I do not quite know what the purpose of that supplementary question is. I thought that the House was rather anxious that in certain circumstances it might be right to recall it. I am only saying that, if those circumstances should arise, the Government will ask for the House to be recalled. I am also repeating our pledge that no agreement will be entered into until it has been approved by the House.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there are to be further negotiations during the course of this week and that these negotiations can result either in success or failure, depending on how one interprets these words, or something in between? This being so, if there is either success or failure or something in between, what will be the position of Parliament on Tuesday of next week?

My hon. Friend has stated with impeccable logic all the possibilities, but I think we had better see which of them happens.

Can the Prime Minister yet say whether he has decided that any provisional agreement which may be reached will be published in a White Paper before the Prime Ministers' Conference?

I will consider that further.

asked the Prime Minister why he requested the President of the Royal Academy to delay the sale of the Leonardo da Vinci cartoon; what reply he received; and what further action he now proposes.

I asked the President of the Royal Academy to delay selling the Leonardo cartoon in order to allow time for a public appeal. This was undertaken in a public-spirited and energetic way by the National Art Collections Fund, and I should like to express our gratitude to Lord Crawford and his colleagues for what they have done. As a result of the appeal, and of the contributions made by the National Art Collections Fund, Lord Crawford informs me that they can make available £450,000 towards the £800,000 which the Royal Academy is asking for the cartoon.

Is the Prime Minister aware that he has made a very wrong decision? Does he not know that the country would have stumped up for the picture if it had really wanted it, that the National Gallery does not want it and never had it on its list of 160 pictures throughout the world which it would like to acquire, that adequate reproductions can perfectly well be made of it, as it is not in colour, that the Royal Academy never bothered to show it to the public for nearly 200 years, and that the art world and the general public never took the slighest interest in it? Would it not now be better for the cartoon to be auctioned where it might earn some foreign exchange from a country which might appreciate it more?

The hon. Gentleman has made a large number of statements which I do not think he will expect me to controvert or to accept.

Or something in between.

The situation is this, that £450,000 has been provided. I was particularly struck by the very large number of quite small subscribers who, having either seen the picture or bought its reproduction, have thought it tremendously important to keep it in this country. For my part—my colleagues have agreed with me—I think that it would be tragic if it were to leave this country. I think that it is one of the most beautiful things in the world. I believe that it is right that we should keep it here.

I welcome the Prime Minister's decision to recommend a grant, but on what evidence has it been assumed that the picture is in fact worth £800,000?

The only evidence is that of those who know most about the prices that these things are likely to fetch in the market. We are told that it is likely to fetch a sum far in excess of that if it is sold by auction.

Many of us regret that the Royal Academy has decided to sell this cartoon and think that it would have done better to have accepted a Government grant. Is the Prime Minister aware that public opinion generally will nevertheless welcome the grant given by the Government to make up the purchase price?

I am very grateful to the right hon. Gentleman. I really feel that people would be very sad if this cartoon left the country. Even in the most affluent society we should surely be allowed to turn occasionally to things of this kind and to keep them.

I echo what has been said by the Leader of the Opposition. Is my right hon. Friend aware that this action will meet with general approval, but that the background is not entirely satisfactory? Will some serious thought be given to ensuring that the public and the Government are not again faced with such a dilemma?

With regard to the great works of art, if they are held by private owners there are the rules which are applied in connection with the granting of an export licence and all that. A great number have been acquired by the country as the result of the heavy death duties system. With regard to works of art of major importance held by public or semi-public bodies, we are considering whether the procedures are adequate and whether perhaps they ought to be thought of again as a result of this case.

Is the Prime Minister aware that his statement that the procedures are being reconsidered will be widely welcomed because, although we would agree with him that it might be a tragedy if this cartoon left the country, there is considerable anxiety about whether the amounts available for art in general are best expended? We should be glad of a reassurance that the provision of £350,000 for this purpose will not exhaust the Government's assistance to art, particularly the living art.

The normal contributions are made under the annual Vote to the National Gallery and other galleries.

Mr. Arthur Henderson, for the next Question.

On a point of Order. The Prime Minister has told the House that he proposes to seek the approval of Parliament in order to find the money for this purpose. No opportunity has been afforded for ascertaining from the right hon. Gentleman when he proposes to seek the approval of Parliament. May we ascertain from the right hon. Gentleman when he proposes to do that?

My difficulty is this. There are large numbers of people who want to ask supplementary questions and it is not fair on other hon. Members with Questions on the Order Paper if we do not get on. I do not know whether the Prime Minister could hastily answer that one.

The sums will be advanced from the Civil Contingencies Fund. A Supplementary Estimate will be presented to Parliament in due course to cover the transaction.

Mr. Sandys.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Surely, you called the right hon. and learned Member for Rowley Regis and Tipton (Mr. A. Henderson) who has a most important Question on the Order Paper. Is it possible for his Question to be answered?

I think that is a most attractive argument. Mr. Arthur Henderson.

asked the Prime Minister if, with a view to raising the matter at the United Nations as a threat to peace, he will consult Mr. Nehru about the situation on the frontiers of India and China, where troops of both nations are engaged in hostilities.

I think the means of achieving a solution to this problem can best be left to the Governments of India and China.

Is it not the fact that the disputed territory in question, in Ladakh, was recognised as part of India by the previous Governments of India long before independence was granted in 1947?

Yes, Sir.

Does the Prime Minister appreciate that it would be more likely that the United Nations could use its good offices to secure a peaceful settlement of the Sino-India dispute if China were a member of the United Nations?

It would, of course, be possible then for both countries to bring the matter to the United Nations, but I do not frankly think that this is a matter in which we should intervene at the present moment.

I think that we had better now resume our robe of regularity. Mr. Sandys.