asked the Secretary for Technical Co-operation what steps he is taking to publicise the Teachers for Africa programme in British schools, training colleges, and universities.

Continuous publicity is undertaken with other bodies to increase the flow of teachers to overseas developing countries. Special measures are being taken for the Teachers for East Africa Scheme. My Department has begun a series of visits to university appointments boards and departments of education. A pamphlet has been prepared and will be distributed with a brochure on teaching service overseas. Advertisements will appear in educational journals.

While welcoming this news, may I draw the Minister's attention to the fact that there are still thousands of young men and women in British educational establishments who would greatly welcome an opportunity to serve in this scheme but who, at the moment, are quite unaware of how to apply and what the details are? Will the right hon. Gentleman again look into the question of publicity to make sure that in future they will be fully acquainted with all the details?

I am glad to hear the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, because I shall have some 800 vacancies to fill in the next few months. I have been much concerned with this matter and have reorganised this side of my Department. Any suggestion which the hon. Gentleman or any other hon. Member can make to help in recruitment will be very welcome.

Will the right hon. Gentleman pay particular attention to the need for teachers of the handicapped in Africa? This is a very great problem indeed.

I know the right hon. Gentleman's interest in this matter. On the whole, my demands for this form of teacher are more limited, but I will do what I can.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Hampshire County Council is trying to engage teachers for future work with that local education authority provided they are prepared to serve three years overseas beforehand, and will he look into this and perhaps advise other local education authorities about it?

I am very well aware of Hampshire's lead in this field and I would certainly commend its approach in this matter to other local authorities.

asked the Secretary for Technical Co-operation whether, in the light of his recent visit to Africa, he will now extend the Government's low-priced books scheme to countries in the African continent.

During my visit to West Africa I looked carefully into the various ways in which British books are made more widely available there, but I am not yet ready to make any statement about the possibility of adding this one.

While I thank the Minister for that reply, as far as it goes, may I ask him to give really careful consideration to this matter? Does he recall that when the scheme was originally introduced it was felt on both sides of the House that Africa was one of the places where it would be most helpful?

Yes, but I think that the needs of Africa in this respect are less serious than the needs of Asia, where the scheme has been introduced. There are other ways in which we can help. There is the British Council's multiple scheme, libraries and so on, and I am awaiting a report on East Africa. When I receive that report I will be able to make a decision as to whether we can implement this proposal.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what consideration he has given to measures designed to lessen the present rate burden.

I am certainly giving the most careful consideration to this subject, but cannot hold out a prospect of reduction. Local government expenditure increases—for valid reasons. It has to be met. The taxpayer already pays more than half and I do not think that there is a case for increasing that share. Rates now make up a smaller part of personal expenditure than before the war.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is widespread feeling that the rate burden falls unfairly on people and that the education part of the rate falls extremely unfairly?

Yes, but I hope that people will not be frightened to talk of higher assessments. Rate poundages are bound to fall and, as for education, the whole country desires an increasing expenditure on education. Over half the cost is being borne by the taxpayer and I think that the call on the rates is, therefore, inevitable.

Will the Minister not accept that the services which local authorities are required to provide are continually expanding, that the total amount of money that has to be raised is increasing and that while the system of rating might have been all right when the total sum was less, it is not satisfactory today?

I do not accept that there is any easy panacea to be obtained for the combination of rates and taxes which, of course, pay for the services which the whole House considers essential for this country.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what is the average delay between the holding of inquiries held by his Department's inspectors, arising out of planning appeals, and the publication of his decisions, concerning property in England and Wales as a whole, and Staffordshire in particular.

Recently the average time for England and Wales as a whole has been ten weeks, and for Staffordshire cases seven weeks.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that there is acute cause for disquiet? Those may be average figures but there are some appallingly different figures which I can and will produce.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what is the average delay between the date of planning appeals and the holding of inquiries by his Department's inspectors in respect of appeals concerning property in England and Wales as a whole, and Staffordshire in particular.

In appeals decided recently the average time has been twenty-four weeks in England and Wales and about twenty-seven weeks in Staffordshire.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is need to review the whole procedure for the handling of appeals? Has his Department examined the possibilities of regionalising, with proper constitutional safeguards, the appeal procedure?

The main cause of delay is, of course, the increase in the number of appeals. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we are considering every reasonable suggestion made to reduce this delay, but I cannot commit myself on the particular suggestion he has put forward at this particular moment.

Will not the Parliamentary Secretary reconsider this issue, because almost every local authority is in the position of having long delays, much longer than twenty-four weeks from the time when the appeals are heard? Consequently people are disturbed, local authority routines are upset and people are condemned to live in slum property for much longer than they should be. Will the hon. Gentleman look at this matter again?

I am not sure that I see the connection between people living in slum property and this Question, but I can assure the hon. Lady that we are concerned about this problem and that we are examining every reasonable suggestion to reduce the delay.

On a point of order. In view of those replies, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment as soon as possible.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs whether he will give further consideration to the Stoke Nos. 29/35 (Penkhull) Clearance Areas Compulsory Purchase Order, 1961, and accept the recommendations made by his inspector at the inquiry.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he will review the decision made on the Stoke-on-Trent Nos. 29/35 (Penkhull) Clearance Area Compulsory Purchase Order in order to make it accord with the recommendations made by his inspector after the (inquiry.

I have no power to review once I have given a decision on a compulsory purchase order.

Is the Minister aware that this lack of power which he now describes and the fact that he has no discretion left means that a scheme of comprehensive development for the whole of this village has been completely spoilt? Will he accept that most hon. Members consider this to have been most deplorable?

I cannot accept that. There is an elaborate procedure which ensures that all interests in the area are represented. There were a number of voices raised, both for and against this particular scheme, and I came to the decision, as falls upon me. I cannot reopen the merits of that decision by way of Question and Answer.

Is this not a glaring example of the Minister's personal responsibility? His inspector recommended 98 per cent. of the premises in the Order, but has he not now reduced this to one-third? Does he not think that he should be able to look at a case like this again, for on his decision rests the conditions of many in the village who will be condemned to live in slum houses?

The hon. Lady speaks as if there was not a point of view the other way. In fact such a point of view was expressed articulately at the inquiry, and I have made my decision on the balance of the facts. In this case Stoke make it quite clear that there was plenty of land on which they could get on with their housebuilding.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs What progress he has made with the study of the main planning problems likely to arise in South-Eastern England over the next twenty years.

Provisional estimates have been made of the nature and size of the population increase to be expected in the South-East, and of the likely overspill from the London conurbation. On this basis work is proceeding on the question how and where the needs can best be met. The study has far-reaching implications, and it will be some time before my right hon. Friend is ready to announce any conclusions.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary pay attention in this study to the deficiencies in our transport system, our schools and other amenities, which are already suffering? Will he bear these factors in mind when considering planning appeals which involve further residential development in these areas and which also involve a worsening of the situation?

Yes. All these are matters for consideration, but I would impress on the hon. Gentleman that the object of this study is not to plan the South-East in detail but to provide the framework within which the local authorities can formulate their own development plans.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the train services in mid-Kent are much improved and that the education service in Kent is among the finest in the country?

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs when ratepayers will be told what their revised assessments will be in 1963.

Rating authorities will get the new lists on 21st December and will arrange for them to be open to inspection. Ratepayers will not, of course, know what they have to pay until rating authorities make their rates two or three months later.

Is not this rather unfortunate timing to spoil the Christmas holidays of hundreds of thousands of ratepayers all over the country? May we take it that it is pretty well established that anyone with a rateable value of £36 will have it stepped up to about £96 when the new valuation comes into effect?

The hon. Gentleman is really seeking to confuse people's minds. What will come out at the end of this year is the revised rating assessments. People cannot take that as indicating in any way any addition to the rates that they have to pay. For that, they must wait until the rate poundage is declared by their local rating authority in about March, 1963.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think that he is being fair to local authorities in not giving this information sooner? Does he appreciate how much has to be done between 21st December and the day when they make their rating proposals? Would it not be a good idea, if he cannot make it public sooner, to provide local authorities with the information confidentially, so that they can get on with the work that they have to do?

On the contrary, I think that the hon. Gentleman, through not entirely knowing the subject administratively, in this way is being unfair to the Valuation Office. There has been a gargantuan task of typing to get the lists ready for local authorities by this date. I fear that I cannot improve upon it.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what consideration is given to the availability of smokeless fuels before he confirms the necessary orders bringing into effect smokeless zones within cities.

No smoke control orders are confirmed unless my right hon. Friend is assured by his right hon. Friend the Minister of Power that adequate supplies of smokeless fuel will be available.

While I appreciate the importance of this policy for health purposes, may I ask whether my hon. Friend is aware that there is a grave shortage of solid smokeless fuels in the Midland area? Will he ask his, right hon. Friend to look into this matter to see whether the hardship which is being caused at the present time, particularly to old-age pensioners, can be alleviated?

I shall certainly ask my right hon. Friend the Minister of Power to look into this, but I am advised that there is no overall shortage, although there may be shortage in particular grades of premium fuels.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what progress has been made with the improvement of the River Trent at Burton; and who will bear the cost of the scheme.

Burton-on-Trent Corporation's proposals for a new sewage treatment works were approved in principle last July when the corporation was authorised to obtain tenders. The works are estimated to cost £1,700,000. The Burton brewers have agreed to make a contribution of £73,000 annually for fifteen years.

I recognise with gratitude the improvement in the state of the River Trent as a result of the various sewerage schemes which have been put into operation, especially the £10 million scheme for the River Tame, but is my hon. Friend aware that, as a result of experiments carried out by the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research at the instance of the Trent River Board, certain suggested schemes have been put to the River Board for the improvement of the state of the river at Burton? Whose responsibility is it to initiate action on these schemes, and can my hon. Friend tell me when we may expect action on any one of the schemes suggested?

That covers a number of other questions, and I should be grateful if my hon. Friend would put them down.

Mr. Boyden, Question No. 20.

The purpose of the question I put, Mr. Speaker, was to elicit the information for which I have asked.

This is not the occasion for the hon. Gentleman to make a speech about it. If he wants to give notice, he may. Otherwise, I have called the next Question.

In view of the answer I have received, I shall endeavour at the earliest opportunity to put the matter down for an Adjournment debate.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister of Welsh Affairs which of the schemes for improvement of industrial sites under the Local Employment Act approved by his Department have now been completed.

Two such schemes have been completed. These are in the urban districts of Hetton-le-Hole and Ilfracombe.

Is it not a scandalous comment on this provision in the Local Employment Act that, with all the unemployment and the need for schemes of this kind, only two have, in fact, got under way?

The hon. Gentleman will appreciate that the onus is on the local authorities to initiate these schemes. In July last, in reply to a Question from the hon. Gentleman, I said that seven such schemes had been approved. Since then, there has been some further progress; one further scheme has been approved, two have been completed and an additional two schemes have been received for consideration.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs whether he will receive a deputation of parents and teachers following on the protest meeting to be 'held at the Central Hall, Westminster, on Tuesday, 6th November, in regard to the repercussions of the Greater London Plan on educational services in London.

I am afraid I cannot receive a deputation today; and if the protest refers to the L.C.C. area I do not understand it since the proposal is to retain the service intact, pending subsequent review. But if it is desired to discuss particular points following the meeting, I will certainly consult with my right hon. Friend, the Minister of Education about arranging for this.

If and when the right hon. Gentleman, together with the Minister of Education, is gracious enough to receive a deputation, will be bear in mind the tremendous indignation which has been evoked by this plan? Wall he also bear in mind that the plan, if carried through, will mean the break-up of one of the finest educational systems in the country, one which has been approved not only by the Royal Commission but by Her Majesty's Government?

The hon. and learned Member should acquaint himself with the facts before tabling Questions like this one. The educational services of the L.C.C. are being left intact under our proposals.

When the right hon. Gentleman says that they are being left intact, does that mean that the Government have abandoned their previously announced intention to review the proposed plan within five years with the object of seeing whether it can be broken up?

That undertaking to review is still perfectly compatible with the fact that I have stated, namely, that the educational service in the L.C.C. area is being left intact.

For how long will it be left intact?

That cannot be answered until the review has taken place and the then Parliament has decided.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what steps he has taken to expedite the provision of water for the Regent Oil Company's proposed oil refinery at Pwllcroehan, Pembrokeshire.

Responsibility for the supply of this water rests with the Pembrokeshire Water Board which on 1st October, 1962, applied to me for an order under the Water Acts to enable it to abstract the necessary water from the Eastern Cleddau River. Objections have been made to the order by the river board and other interests and a public inquiry must therefore be held. This has been fixed for 28th November, 1962, and there will be no avoidable delay in announcing a decision.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the responsibility for this hold-up rests with one of his more obstinate and myopic predecessors at the time of the Milford Barrage Bill? Can he explain why his Department, which has overall responsibility for water, failed to foresee a situation in which a very important project involving many millions of pounds would be held up and in which a thousand of my constituents were kept out of work over Christmas? Why was not this dealt with in time?

I do not accept that at all. The initiative was firmly with the local authority. As the Minister would have to decide between conflicting interests, it would have been improper for me or for my predecessors to intervene beyond ensuring that the local authorities concerned knew the urgency of the matter.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs how many local authorities have been compelled to raise municipal rents in the last twelve months; to what extent their action has been caused by high interest charges; and what steps he is taking to make the provision of homes at reasonable rents financially possible.

I have no comprehensive information about rent increases in the last twelve months; but I am quite sure that municipal rents are not generally beyond the means of tenants. They certainly need not be if the authorities will allow rebates as and where needed. Authorities can provide homes at reasonable rents if they will adopt sensible rent policies.

If the Minister has not got the detailed information, how does he know that the rents are not beyond the means of the tenants? Is he aware that many local authorities have made substantial increases in municipal rents in the last twelve months? Does he recognise that this is due to the very high rate of interest on housing loans? Will he not recognise, in view of his speech last week, that this is likely to prove the principal obstacle to many progressive local authorities in trying to expand their housing programmes?

No, I do not accept that at all. I have undertaken to keep subsidies under review. The rent-paying capacity has in general increased over the years, and provided local authorities allow, by rebates, for those whose rent-paying capacity has not increased, this should not inhibit substantial progress on the housing front.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs whether, in view of the high proportion of obsolescent houses in South Wales and Monmouthshire and the present difficulties of small local authorities, he will take steps to initiate a housing consortium of local authorities in the region.

I am arranging conferences of Welsh local authorities to discuss all aspects of housing, including the possibility of joint action. The hon. Member will remember that I made a suggestion about these conferences in the Welsh Grand Committee debate on Housing on 18th July, 1962.

Might I express the hope that the Minister will call this conference early and that, in particular, he will consider the question of staffing the Welsh office with sufficient technical staff to serve the needs of the small local authorities which are desperate for technical staff?

The first conference was held yesterday at Machynlleth. Others will follow in the winter, and I certainly agree with the rest of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs, in view of the difficulties in many small fully occupied properties lacking bathrooms and a hot water system of installing both these amenities, whether he will cease to make it a condition for a standard grant for a hot water supply that a bathroom, in addition, be installed.

Standard grants are intended to help owners to bring sound houses up to a desirable degree of convenience and comfort and I am concerned that this objective should be achieved wherever possible. I do, however, recognise that there may be cases where it would be impracticable to attain the full standard and where it would be reasonable to relax the existing grant provisions. This would involve legislation. I am considering what might be done about this.

I thank the Minister for that reply, but may I ask whether he will continue to bear in mind that in South Wales and parts of Lancashire there are large numbers of houses which are too small to have bathrooms installed and where the woman with a young family is unfortunately barred from having a hot water supply because of the existing regulations?

Yes, Sir, but I cannot hold out any hope of allowing grants just for a hot water system if there is no bath, hand-basin or sink for it to serve; but I take the hon. Gentleman's point.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what special action he will take to reduce the number of homeless families in London.

The immediate problem of providing for the homeless lies with the London County Council and it is substantially increasing its provision.

But behind this lie a number of factors: the pressure on London's housing, the possibilities of increasing the rate of building and the difficulty of finding enough land to sustain bigger building programme.

I am pursuing this whole question and I intend, when ready, to make a comprehensive statement. But I am unlikely to be ready until the New Year.

Will the Minister bear in mind that it is no consolation to these 1,005 homeless families—an all-time record—to be told that by about 1964, when he will no longer be in office, we will start to overtake the backlog more rapidly? Is he not aware that it has never been more difficult and more expensive than at the present time to find somewhere to live in London, and that this is due to Government policy or lack of it?

I think that we have to distinguish between the two parts of action. The L.C.C. is making as fast progress as it can, with such help as I can give it, for the immediate relief of housing needs in London. I think that what the House will want to know is what I and the Government can do to increase the land available for that purpose and to enable local authorities and private enterprise to build faster on the land available and thus, by one means or another, to reduce the pressure on London's housing.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he is aware that landlords are not at present legally obliged to carry out and pay for necessary repairs to the hot water system in their houses; and if he will introduce legislation to make this compulsory.

Under the Housing Act, 1961, the landlord is responsible for such repairs if the lease was granted after 24th October, 1961, for a term of less than seven years. Controlled tenants can use the certificate of disrepair procedure under the Rent Acts.

But surely it is a ridiculous anomaly that when a public health inspector can insist on the landlord of a normal house repairing leaking roofs, he cannot insist on the landlord repairing burst pipes? Is the Minister aware that I can give him details of a case where a tenant in poor circumstances has had to go without hot water for weeks because the landlord will not do the repairs?

The 1961 Act put on landlords in tenancies occurring after the date mentioned the obligation where the lease is shorter than seven years. If the hon. Gentleman will send me details, I shall see if anything can be done within the existing law.

Can my right hon. Friend say what steps have been taken to reduce the need for repairs and also to stop wasting running water by having a different design of tap from that now in existence? He will be aware that on the Continent there are other kinds of taps that make the need for repairs Jess, and they certainly stop a great deal of water wastage.

That is another and most constructive suggestion and I hope that my hon. Friend will put down a Question.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what immediate plans he has for attracting and maintaining qualified staff in all phases of slum clearance work in sufficient numbers to help overcome this problem in the older towns before 1970.

This most important contribution to this is, I think, to settle long forward programmes so that all concerned know what will be needed. But we must also ensure economy in the use of qualified staff, and this I hope to do by encouraging co-operation between local authorities, especially in the use of standard building types, components and fittings, and in placing contracts for industrialised building systems.

Is the Minister aware that the bottleneck has been there for years? Will he consider, in the light of what he said a few days ago, recruiting a major task force to his Department, which could be on loan to the local authorities which have a very heavy backlog, or, if he is unable to do that, will he consider ways and means in which local authorities can provide the inducement to get this vast volume of technical qualified staff to their service from the private sector?

I hope that my Ministry's office in Manchester, although not large in numbers, will be a most effective task force. I think that the hon. Gentleman has underestimated the attractions to professional staff of long forward programmes which I am now enabling local authorities to have.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what steps he has taken, in consultation with the fifty local authorities whose slum clearance programme indicated the worst problem on 22nd November, 1960, to ensure that each authority has now a satisfactory complement of technical staff.

The technical staffing of local authorities is a matter for the authorities themselves. But my new Northern Housing Office will be fostering co-operation between housing authorities in the use of a limited range of dwelling types, and of improved systems of building. Both measures should reinforce the efforts of the technical staffs of authorities.

Will the Minister explain how, for instance, some of the small authorities in the North-East are to cope with the extra building—for which we are very glad that he is providing the money—if the staff are not already there? Will not the setting up of a consortium of this sort require extra staff at the local level to begin with before the work of the consortium can take effect? What will the Minister do in the next twelve months?

Specifically, this joining together of local authorities for certain purposes will economise in the efforts of officers in examining different systems or going through various processes connected with contract procedure. I hope that it will be very effective.

Is it not the first stage which requires more staff? Will not the actual negotiations and complications in setting up 'the consortium require more staff and more effort for the time being?

No; the hon. Gentleman is wrong. It may take more effort in the first stage, but the results will be much more effective when they come about, and the effort can be shared between the officers of different local authorities.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs when he will be able to indicate his decision whether land at Sholver and for overspill at Buckstones Road can be included for housing development by the Oldham local authority.

The council knows that I accept that the land at Sholver is suitable for housing: the formal documents are being prepared. I have no information regarding the possible purchase of this site by the council.

My decision on the Oldham-Buck-stones Road Compulsory Purchase Order will be issued within the next few days.

I appreciate the last comment of the Minister, but is it not a fact that the overspill project has been delayed for nearly six months, and is it not also a fact that local authorities because of these delays enter into private arrangements when, if the impetus of the machinery of his Department was increased, there would not be such delays on either side?

I cannot accept that at all. The inquiry concerned was in July. We have an elaborate procedure to go through, laid down by Parliament, to reconcile all interests, and I think that we have been fairly prompt in this case.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he is aware of the difficulties caused to owner-occupiers of houses who have to give up their homes, in which they have lived all their lives and on which they have invested their life savings, at the expiration of the lease of the land; and if he will take steps to compel landowners to compensate these householders for the value of the property on the site at the time of the expiration.

A leaseholder is not an owner-occupier; he possesses simply the leasehold interest in a piece of land and in whatever building happens to be on it, whether erected by himself or a predecessor. At the expiration of the lease, he has the protection of the 1954 Act, and, moreover, he can usually get an offer of renewal or alternatively the chance to buy—unless the landowner is proposing redevelopment.

Am I to understand that a man who rents a piece of ground, builds a house upon it and lives in it for fifty or sixty years must, when the lease expires, vacate the land and the house, handing them over to the landowner? Does the right hon. Gentleman think that it is just and honourable for the owner-occupier to have to do that, while the landlord takes the property without making any contribution to the value of the land or the house?

Firstly, the occupant of the house does not by any means always have to vacate the house, as I have explained. Secondly, he is not the owner-occupier, as I have explained. Thirdly, it was on the basis of that bargain that he or his predecessor originally leased the land and took or built the house. However, I have undertaken to make a statement in due course.

What about the responsibility of the landlord?

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he has considered the findings of the report on leaseholds prepared by Alderman Arthur Dolman of Newport, Monmouthshire, for the Wales and Monmouthshire Conservative Association, a copy of which report has been supplied to him; and if he will make a statement.

I am aware of the report by Alderman Dolman and will take it into account when I come to make a statement on the leasehold problem.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that, whereas the inquiry of solicitors and other professional people which preceded the Government White Paper seems to have been made on a very selective basis to particular professional people, Alderman Dolman reports that he addressed his application and investigation to solicitors and professional people in general? Is it not significant that his inquiry has revealed in South Wales a far greater volume of hardship than was acknowledged in the Government's White Paper?

No; I cannot accept that the instances of hardship quoted in the report give enough information for a judgment to be formed. However, I an taking this report into account in coming to my own view.

Will the Minister, while he is considering what kind of statement he will make, be good enough to consider, following the precedent set by the last Labour Government, the introduction of legislation to extend the period of existing leases by about two years so as to allay the real hardship now being created?

No. I will, of course, take into account any suggestions, but I gather that in a lot of the cases there are several years to run. However, I will take note of what the hon. Gentleman has said.

Is the Minister aware that, since a large number of these houses were built in the nineteenth century, the leases are now running out and, unless legislation comes very quickly, considerable hardship will be caused and many people who have given their lives to building and maintaining their own houses so as to think of themselves as owner-occupiers will be dispossessed? May we have a promise of legislation this Session?

I cannot give the right hon. Gentleman that promise. All I can promise is that I shall make a statement as soon as possible.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what the total cost is of a council flat costing £2,600 to build, after charging interest payment at the current rate of 6⅛ per cent. for 60 years; what is its economic rent, excluding rates and subsidy: what proportion of this rent is required to pay interest charges; and what steps he is taking to relieve the increase in council rents and building society interest charges which result from these high interest rates.

Most local authorities, borrowing in the open market, do not raise 60-year loans at the current rate. The total cost of the flat, were they to do so, would be £9,815, and the economic rent, excluding rates and subsidy but including 6s. 0d. a week for maintenance and management costs, would in such circumstances be £3 8s. 11d.; about two-thirds of this would represent interest charges. It is entirely within the power of local authorities however to reduce such rents by pooling their Exchequer subsidies and adopting realistic and fair rent policies. I have no responsibility for rates of interest charged by building societies.

Is the Minister aware that the Government's high interest policy is continually forcing up council house rents and council rates to such an extent that the local authorities are becoming the victims of tremendous discontent and the scapegoats of the Government? If the Labour Government could keep interest rates down to 2½ per cent. or 3 per cent., why should not the present Government be able to keep them within somewhat similar limits?

That is a question for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. When the Labour Government were in power they did not have a massive and simultaneous programme of investment on every social and industrial front such as we now have. Secondly, local authorities have it entirely within their power to reduce rents for those who cannot afford them. In fact, in most towns and cities the average rent of local authority property is still just below twice gross value.

Does the Minister realise that, if he means what he says about urging local authorities to do much more slum clearance, they will have to rehouse many people who could not possibly pay rents like the rent he has just described? When he says that that situation is to be met by rebates, does not that simply mean a further burden on the rates for which he has already refused them any help?

I have acknowledged from the very beginning that, in order that the programmes which lie in front of them may be completed, there may well have to be a review of subsidies for local authorities. What I am saying is that, at the moment and in the foreseeable and immediate future, interest rates do not and will not inhibit local authorities with sensible rent policies.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the replies, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter at the earliest possible opportunity.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what is the number of privately-owned slum clearance houses to be demolished in Hull; and what assistance he will provide for the Corporation to enable slum clearance to be speeded up and new houses built in lieu.

Twelve thousand of the houses reported by the Corporation to be unfit in 1955 have still to be demolished. The Northern Housing Office of my Department which has recently been opened in Manchester will give administrative and technical assistance to Hull and other authorities with big slum clearance tasks, and help them in every possible way to speed up clearance and rebuilding.

From where is the additional labour to come? The Minister has already admitted that the building industry is fully occupied. Why does not he check office and shop and other luxury building and so free labour for the first priority of council house building?

I am allowing local authorities to set firm building programmes for five years ahead. That will enable them to attract building firms and building labour which have not so far worked in their areas.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what steps he will take to enable Hull Corporation to build an increased number of houses yearly, in addition to those for the replacement of slum clearance houses.

The Corporation's priority task is to clear and replace the slums and I understand that it is its intention over the next few years substantially to increase its output for this purpose. It is for the Corporation to decide how to allocate its houses; so far as I am concerned, the important thing is that it should build as many as it can.

How is the extra land to be obtained and how are the exorbitant prices to be paid? Prices have rocketed under the Tory Government so that the position now is worse than it was in 1951, and many people in the lower income groups are unable to pay economic council rents.

I have already said that land has to be provided to enable local authorities to keep up an accelerated rate of progress. I still stand by that.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what would be the approximate annual cost of freeing all building societies of Income Tax payments; and what proportion of their receipts from interest on loans for house purchase is absorbed by Income Tax.

It is estimated that to exempt building societies from Income Tax apart from the tax they pay in respect of share and deposit interest going to investors would cost £11 million, or about 6 per cent. of their receipts from interest on loans.

Does my hon. Friend agree that it would be better to encourage people to buy their own homes instead of encouraging them to buy second motor cars? Could not some of the taxation reliefs announced yesterday have been given to building societies so that people could buy their own homes instead of putting more motor cars on overcrowded roads?

As my hon Friend will I am sure remember, this matter was debated over and over again at the time of the Finance Bill, and I dealt with it only a few months ago. Even if we were to do as my hon. Friend seemed to suggest, the consequence would be no more than to reduce the rate of interest charged by building societies to borrowers by about one-quarter of 1 per cent.

asked the Prime Minister what steps have been taken to improve security procedures following the publication of the Radcliffe Report.

In the light of the recommendations of the Report, Departments have reviewed and, where necessary, strengthened their security organisations; security responsibilities have been clarified; Departments have been instructed to introduce the detailed procedural changes and improvements recommended in the Report; and security education and training have been intensified.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, however stringent our security precautions, they will be in vain if those in high places appear to show the simplicity of approach and attitude towards Russian techniques of espionage to which I referred in a previous Question to him and which seem to have been evidenced in the most recent case?

Of course, these matters ought all the time to be strengthened and reviewed, but, if my hon. Friend is referring to the recent case, these activities took place long before the Radcliffe Report—

And after.

—and this man has been caught.

Is the Prime Minister aware that it is not enough to catch a spy? What is unsatisfactory is that spies should get away with it for a long time. Is the right hon. Gentleman further aware that Vassall continued his work of espionage right up to the point when he was arrested and after the changes introduced as a result of the Radcliffe Report? Will the right hon. Gentleman read, if he has not already done so, the report of the debate on Friday, particularly the very powerful speech made by my right hon. Friend the Member for Smethwick (Mr. Gordon Walker) and the totally inadequate reply of the Minister of Defence, which was regarded as inadequate not only by hon. Members on this side but by virtually every newspaper in the country? In the light of this, will the Prime Minister reconsider his decision simply to appoint a Committee of civil servants and consider the suggestion for a much higher level independent Committee of Inquiry?

Of course, I have read the report of the debate. I will tell the House what I did, which I still think was right. As soon as I heard of this, I appointed this Committee. It seemed to me not necessary to reopen the whole question of procedure, which had been dealt with very widely by Lord Radcliffe's Committee. I wanted to find out the facts. As soon as the Committee reports the facts to me, I shall have the responsibility of taking any action on them. In addition, I would be very ready to discuss the report with the right hon. Gentleman and to show it to him to read confidentially. I have also invited Lord Radcliffe, who has kindly agreed, to advise me, when the report is available, as to what lessons are to be learned from it and to give me any advice which he may be able to give.

While I appreciate what the Prime Minister has just said, nevertheless can he explain why in this third case, in which Ministers were more closely involved than they were in the other two cases, it was decided to appoint a Committee of civil servants whereas in the other two cases there were independent inquiries? Further, why did not the right hon. Gentleman follow the procedure which he followed in the Blake case, namely, to consult the Opposition before taking any action?

In the first case, the Portland case, and the Blake case it was a question of making a very comprehensive inquiry into the whole procedures of our security, and that was done. I thought that now it was more necessary to find out the facts as rapidly as possible, which I am sure this inquiry will do. Having got them, I will have to exercise any responsibility that falls to me, but I will also try to discuss with the right hon. Gentleman and with the Lord Radcliffe what further steps should be taken and what further lessons can be learned.

The Prime Minister is aware that, rightly or wrongly, allegations have been made against Ministers. Does he think it suitable that these allegations should be inquired into by civil servants?

I feel sure that all the facts will be made known to me, and it will be my responsibility then to deal with them.

Is the Prime Minister aware that I tried once to discuss this matter with him privately and received a brush-off? If we on this side cannot discuss it with him privately the only other course, which we do not want to take, it to raise it publicly. This is not a matter of procedures, nor of internal security. This is a matter which involves Ministers. Is the right hon. Gentleman willing to discuss with us the evidence which he knows and we know is available in order to decide what we ought to do about it, or does he wish it to be discussed publicly in this House?

In the case of the Romer Committee, it was breaking new ground as to the official Admiralty security procedures. The Radcliffe Committee, following a very serious case, raised the whole question of our security procedures and made a comprehensive study and presented a valuable Report, which I discussed with the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues and have tried to put into operation. In this matter, all the evidence will be made available, and is available, to the Committee which I have asked to inquire into it as rapidly as possible. When the Committee has reported, I will, as I say, make its report available to the Leader of the Opposition. I will also take any steps that I feel it to be my responsibility to take.

asked the Prime Minister if he will seek a mandate from the electorate before agreeing to Britain's entry into the Common Market.

I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer which I gave him on 8th February.

Is the Prime Minister aware that that Answer was quite unsatisfactory? Is he not aware that at the last election, the Conservative Party did not support Britain joining the European Economic Community but, quite the reverse, many Conservative candidates who now sit behind the right hon. Gentleman fought the election on a programme which included points against going into the Common Market? Is it not flying in the face of all our democratic traditions for a decision to be made without consulting the electorate and against the mandate that the party in power received at the last election?

As I said in February, these negotiations should be brought to a conclusion as rapidly as we can do so. Then it will be the duty of the Government to consider the situation and to recommend to the House what course, in their view, should be pursued. Until that point has been reached, I do not think that other questions arise.

While the general question of whether there should be an election before we enter the Common Market can be pursued more satisfactorily in the debate which we are to have this week, there is one question which I should like to put to the Prime Minister on this matter. Would he agree that he has pledged himself and his Government not to repeal or amend the Agriculture Act, 1957, during the lifetime of the present Parliament? I think he will find that that is so. If that is the case, may we take it either that no changes in that Act will be made necessary as a result of the entry of Britain into the Common Market or that, if there are such changes, before they are made-there will first be a General Election?

It depends upon what are the transitional arrangements, the time from which they date and, of course, upon the ultimate arrangements which are arrived at.

asked the Prime Minister what reports he has now received from his scientific advisers on the consequences of the present United States and Soviet series of atmospheric tests.

As the right hon. and learned Gentleman knows, the Government continue to receive regular monitoring reports of fall-out radioactivity in air, water and diet. Towards the end of August there was an increase in the amount of the short-lived iodine 131 isotope in milk, but the levels recorded have been considerably lower than those obtaining last year. The average of the levels recorded over the past twelve months amounts to less than one-sixth of the annual average level Which the Medical Research Council has advised is acceptable.

In view of the resolution passed yesterday at the United Nations Political Committee by eighty votes to nil, can the Prime Minister say whether Her Majesty's Government are now ready to sign an agreement banning all nuclear tests as from 1st January next, provided that the verification of seismic events is undertaken by an international scientific commission?

That, roughly speaking, is the position which we have been trying to argue. What we hope to get is a comprehensive agreement, including the underground tests as well as the atmospheric and under-water tests. Up to now, that has broken down or been delayed on the question of international verification. In addition, the President of the United States and the British Government have joined to offer to make a ban of all atmospheric tests as a separate matter. That is revelant to the Question which the right hon. and learned Gentleman asked, because it is from the atmospheric tests that the possibility of dangerous fall-out comes.

Can the Prime Minister tell us what conclusions he reached about the evidence of high altitude tests given by Sir Bernard Lovell, Sir Robert Watson-Watt and other scientists, and what action he took about it?

I prefer that question to be put upon the Order Paper. In these scientific matters, one wants to be sure before giving an answer. I would sooner not answer off the cuff.

When I asked the Prime Minister the same question a little while ago, he gave me the same answer and said that he would consider the matter. Will he now say whether he will consider it?

If the right hon. Gentleman wants me to give what, I think, is called a scientific evaluation, I should prefer to have the question on the Order Paper to be sure that my reply was completely correct in all particulars.

asked the Prime Minister what arrangements have been made for him to be consulted on the use of offensive weapons from United States bases in this country in the event of hostilities between the United States and another Power.

asked the Prime Minister whether it remains his general understanding with the American President that, except in an emergency situation created by a massive attack, American nuclear weapons will not be used anywhere except after consultation with the Prime Minister of Great Britain.

The arrangements under which certain bases in this country are made available to the United States forces provide that the use of the bases in an emergency would be a matter for joint decision by the two Governments in the light of the situation prevailing at the time. I have also a general understanding with President Kennedy that we would consult one another before using nuclear weapons in any part of the world.

Can the Prime Minister say whether this means that during the recent dangerous Cuban crisis, it would have been possible for permission to use the bases here to be refused to America despite the fact that we were, apparently, not being consulted on American action in the Cuban crisis?

Yes, Sir. The pledges given to Lord Attlee in October, 1951, to Sir Winston Churchill in January, 1952, and by President Eisenhower's Administration in 1958 and now reaffirmed by President Kennedy last year, of course held, and they cover any use of bases in this country by the American Administration.

How can the House and the country have any confidence in these arrangements when it is obvious that they broke down completely during the recent Cuban crisis? Is it not a fact, which the Prime Minister virtually admitted last week, that at what he called the climax of the crisis he handed over to President Kennedy the sole power to determine Whether the people of this country should live or die in a nuclear war? Did he do that voluntarily or because he had to?

If the hon. Member reads carefully what I said on Tuesday last, he will see that he has completely misrepresented the facts. No question of nuclear weapons arose, fortunately.

In view of the fact that the Prime Minister has reminded us of a pledge governing the use of nuclear weapons which was made at the time of Lord Attlee's Administration, why is it that on 25th October last the right hon. Gentleman was able to tell the House only that he had been informed about the action of the President of the United States, which involved the use of nuclear weapons, and could not tell us that he had been consulted?

It did not involve the use of nuclear weapons.

asked the Prime Minister who will be responsible fox the work in the House of Commons of the Scottish Law Officers.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland will deal with legal questions arising from Scottish business.

Yes, but is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the fact that we have important legal Scottish Bills coming before us this Session? If the right hon. Gentleman does not think it is necessary to have the Scottish Law Officers in the House for this purpose, would he consider the suggestion made by some of us before that both those offices should be offices of profit under the Crown, barring their occupants from being in the House?

I am afraid I do not quite follow the purpose of that supplementary question. I thought that what the hon. Gentleman had in mind was that they should be Members of the House. He now suggests they should be barred from the House.

Does this mean, then, that when the Scottish Standing Committee meets the Secretary of State for Scotland is going to be in attendance? As will be remembered, the last Secretary of State did not make a habit of attending the Committee.

The Secretary of State or one of the Scottish Ministers will receive and pass on to the House such legal points as are necessary to deal with. This is a situation which is not novel. I remember it very well when I first got into the House of Commons. It is an unfortunate one, but it is not unprecedented.

May I ask the Prime Minister whether the fact that neither of these Scottish Law Officers is being put up for Woodside is a clear indication that the Prime Minister has already written that by-election off?

No—no more than it is a clear indication of the hopelessness of the Opposition's desire to obtain office that not a single member of the Scottish Bar sits upon the benches opposite.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the hon. Member for Edinburgh, East (Mr. Willis), who raised this Question, argued not very long ago with equal passion that the Secretary of State could just as well answer for the Lord Advocate in this House?

Would the PrimeMinister—

Mr. Macleod.

I think, Mr. Speaker, you did call me?

I think that the hon. and learned Member is on this occasion mistaken.

I beg to move. That this House entertains a just sense of the exemplary manner in which the late Major-General Ivor Hughes, K.C.V.O., C.B., C.B.E. D.S.O., M.C, uniformly discharged the duties of the office of Serjeant at Arms, and devoted himself to the service of the House. The words of the Motion are, of course, formal and traditional, but the words we use in support of it are anything but formal. They are an expression of our very real gratitude to a man who was a great servant both of his country and of this House.

With this Motion, we pay tribute to one who exceptionally served in all three posts of Assistant, Deputy and Serjeant at Arms. In all of them he showed how richly he was endowed with all the necessary qualities which he put so freely at our service. From his appointment in 1935 until his recent illness, General Hughes, upon whom, last July, Her Majesty was pleased to confer the honour of a Knight Commander of the Royal Victorian Order, had never missed attendance in the House on any day that his duty required him to be here.

I put it in this way because, as many Members will remember, his service was broken in 1940 when he rejoined the Armed Forces and served with distinction for the second time in a world conflict. Right hon. Members and hon. Members who were here at the time may well recall that my right hon. Friend the Member for Woodford (Sir W. Churchill), then, of course, Prime Minister, reported to the House on General Hughes's activities at El Alamein. Some of us, like myself, can remember him, although we were in a very junior capacity, in war time, but all of us can remember the quiet efficiency, courtesy and kindliness with which he served us.

We would like to send Lady Hughes and his relatives our sincere sympathy. We shall all miss him very much.

Hear, hear.

I should like to support the Motion which has been moved in such appro- priate language by the Leader of the House and thereby would associate my right hon. and hon. Friends and myself with the sentiments he expressed.

General Hughes's death is not only a great loss to the House of Commons, but a personal sorrow to all of us. I will not speak of his career, which has been well covered by the right hon. Gentleman, but will say only this. General Hughes was a Serjeant at Arms who obviously enjoyed and was passionately interested in his work in this House. He was a kindly and modest man of marked ability who never used his very considerable powers in an unpleasant way, but looked on himself as somebody who was serving all of us, and it was for this reason that he won our confidence and respect and friendship.

We shall miss him a great deal. I join with the right hon. Gentleman in sending our deep sympathy to Lady Hughes and her children.

I should like to associate the Liberal Party with what has been said in support of the Motion, and if I do so very briefly it is partly because no one, I am sure, would have been less apt to judge the quality of speeches by their length than the late Serjeant at Arms.

In addition to what is said in the Motion and to what has been said in its support, I would say that General Hughes was a friend, a personal friend, and was felt to be such by Members on both sides of the House; and that is no mean tribute to a man who had many awkward duties to perform.

Those who have paid tribute to the late Serjeant at Arms are leaders of parties. They are the general officers commanding; they are the people who have billets and Parliamentary Private Secretaries and flunkeys and batmen, but, generally speaking, the people who needed the Serjeant at Arms were the P.B.I, of this House, the back benchers, the Lobby fodder. We came more in contact with him because we needed him more. We had a good Serjeant, and we pay tribute to him today.

There are people, of course, television commentators, journalists, and other disappointed applicants to come into this House, who tend to think that Parliament is not what it used to be and that Members now are not as good as their grandfathers were. I do not hold that view—but let it pass.

I have made some investigations recently into the precedents affecting Serjeants at Arms and I can confidently affirm that the one to whom we are paying tribute today was probably the most esteemed Serjeant that this House has ever had, because he came through the whole of the service of the House since 1935 and he showed too, conspicuous loyalty in other ways. Those of us who were here will remember that the previous Serjeant of Arms had not been well for a large number of years. He certainly leant very heavily on General Hughes. It seemed to us that General Hughes got that office in a way which was unnecessarily delayed but he carried on cheerfully because he was extremely loyal.

General Hughes had many great gifts to which we pay tribute, and one at which the Leader of the House hinted: he had a reticence which is proper in a Serjeant at Arms, and which made us esteem him very much. He was a kindly man. I happen to have served on two Select Committees on Accommodation. New Members may think that the accommodation and provisions of the House are not too good, but if they had seen them thirteen years ago they would know that General Hughes was concerned to help to make them much more comfortable for right hon. and hon. Members.

We are very sorry that General Hughes did not live to receive the accolade from Her Majesty, but we all give the accolade to him today as we pay our deep respect to those whom he loved the most.

In the absence of our right hon. Friend the Member for Woodford (Sir W. Churchill), I should like to say, as one of the few who have been Members of the House since the late Serjeant at Arms entered its service, that I have never received from any Serjeant more kindness, more courtesy and a more genuine desire to be of assistance. That is how it seemed to me, and apparently everyone else felt that way as well about General Hughes.