asked the First Secretary of State if, in view of the current uncertainty of Southern Rhodesian participation in the forthcoming conference at Victoria Falls to arrange for the dissolution of the Federation, he will now give an assurance to the Southern Rhodesian Government that Her Majesty's Government would recognise the independence of Southern Rhodesia on the adoption of a new constitution based on a wide franchise.

The Southern Rhodesia Government's request for an assurance on independence is the subject of discussions with Her Majesty's Government which have not yet been completed.

Is 'it not increasingly clear that a solution of this problem will be reached only if the Government are allowed their independence on the condition of a wider franchise, and is it not much better to make this clear now rather than allow the dangerous situation in Southern Rhodesia to develop?

We are in process of discussing this and similar problems, and I cannot give a final answer.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that had not the British Government in 1953 embarked upon the experiment of federation, Southern Rhodesia would have been independent many years ago? It is, therefore, quite unrealistic in my view for Her Majesty's Government to deny her independence when they are contemplating ending federation.

That raises rather a wider Question than the one on the Order Paper. We are discussing the matter of independence with the Southern Rhodesia Government now.

In these discussions, will the right hon. Gentleman stick to the principle that we do not surrender our responsibility to any minority group in a Colonial Territory and that independence in Southern Rhodesia, as in Northern Rhodesia, must first depend on the achievement of a majority Government?

I do not think that the situation can be stated quite as simply as that.

asked the First Secretary of State if he will make a statement about his talks with the Prime Minister of Southern Rhodesia.

asked the First Secretary of State whether he will make a statement regarding his conversations with Mr. Winston Field.

As I informed the House on 21st May, the current discussions in London are a continuation of the exchanges with the Southern Rhodesia Government on the question of independence which began with the correspondence published in Command Paper 2000. I am not able to make a statement until these exchanges have been completed.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that we all realise the very difficult task that is in front of him and that we wish him well? Would he agree that time is not on his side if there is to be secured an orderly dissolution of the Federation? When does my right hon. Friend think that he will be able to make a statement on this matter?

I do not think that it will be possible for me to do so in the next two days, because I do not think that the conversations will necessarily be concluded this week.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. You have not called Question No. 12.

It was answered with Question No. 5. I looked fervently towards the hon. and learned Gentleman, who did not rise to ask a supplementary question

asked the First Secretary of State if he will appoint independent commissions to arbitrate between the Governments of Nyasaland, Northern Rhodesia, Southern Rhodesia and the Federal Government when disputes occur regarding the allocation of Federal funds and services prior to and during the dissolution of the Federation.

It is Her Majesty's Government's objective to secure an orderly dissolution of the Federation in the interests of all concerned, but I cannot answer Questions about measures to be taken in hypothetical circumstances.

But is it the case that this is so hypothetical? Are there not already difficulties between Nyasaland and the Federal Government regarding the allocation of finances? In order to secure a dissolution of the Federation which will bring the least racial conflict, is it not desirable that the Minister should consider some arbitraral body which may be able to settle these issues?

There is already Sir George Curtis who is performing the job of allocating assets and liabilities and considering the question of the Federal debt and other matters as between Nyasaland and the Federation. This is working quite satisfactorily, but, if necessary, we shall have to enlarge that idea.

asked the First Secretary of State if he will make an immediate survey of the needs for social services in the territories of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland for which Her Majesty's Government is responsible with a view to ensuring that the supply position does not deteriorate during the period of the break-up of the Federation.

I see no cause for such action at present. As I informed the House in my statement of 21st May, I am communicating with the Governments concerned about a conference to discuss the orderly dissolution of the Federation and the consequential problems involved.

Has the right hon Gentleman seen the disturbing reports in the Guardian recently about diminishing supplies in the social services in Northern Rhodesia, controlled by the Federal Government? Does he know, for example, that it is said that there is a shortage of drugs in the hospitals? Would he cause inquiries to be made to find out whether there is a deterioration in the supply situation so that immediate action can be taken during this difficult interim period?

I am aware of these reports, but I understand from my initial inquiries, which are not yet complete, that the Federal Government deny these allegations.

asked the First Secretary of State what action he is taking to safeguard the right of civilians of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland when that Federation is dissolved; and whether compensation will be paid to those who lose these rights.

After dissolution, the safeguarding of individual rights will be a matter for each territory. Southern Rhodesia and Nyasaland already have a constitutional Bill of Rights and it is intended that one should be introduced for Northern Rhodesia as soon as possible.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there are certain rights attaching to Federal citizens which would not apply if they were living in a city which became Malawi or Zambia? Will he assure the House that the Government have no intention, unilaterally, of introducing legislation which would deprive them of these rights?

The question of Federal citizenship in relation to the future of the individual territories is one which will have to be discussed upon the dissolution of the Federation.

asked the First Secretary of State whether he will now state the estimated cost to the British taxpayer of the secession of Nyasaland, both at the time of secession and in each of the five subsequent years.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Barnsley (Mr. Mason) on 30th April. It is too early to estimate these costs and Her Majesty's Government cannot be committed in advance.

Will my right hon. Friend soon be in a position to say what is the capital cost as well as the budgetary annual subvention which will be required to preserve the present standard of living in Nyasaland? Is it not clear that it is considerably more than the figure mentioned here before?

There is the question of the development programme, to which the Nyasaland Government attach great importance, and the annual current Budget. We are, of course, attempting to assess, although we are not in a position yet to give the final figures, the two different costs of the deficit in the current Budget and what is necessary to buttress the development fund.

Will the right hon. Gentleman not agree that the Federal Government have subsidised Nyasaland to the tune of about £5 million a year in recent years, that this is due to end at the end of June next and that Her Majesty's Government will be faced with the decision of paying this subsidy? Has the right hon. Gentleman yet made up his mind? Are the Government going to pay it or not?

It is not quite as simple as that, because the Nyasaland Finance Minister and his deputy, who have seen me in London, have indicated that what Dr. Banda told me is correct, namely, that they are themselves proposing to impose charges and to institute cuts in order to try to reduce the deficit in the Budget. This will still leave a deficit in the Budget, and it is consequently natural that Her Majesty's Government should be considered as a possible source of future help.

Yes, but is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that a serious situation is developing here, that this is a protectorate of Her Majesty's Government and that the Americans are starting to move in with token forces of young pioneers who are taking over teaching, doctoring, and so on? To what extent do Her Majesty's Government view this intrusion?

If the hon. Member will give me some particulars of these forces coming in, I shall be glad to give him an answer.

asked the First Secretary of State what guarantees of individual liberty he proposes to obtain in Nyasaland prior to the final grant of independence.

This is already provided for in the Bill of Rights which is included in Nyasaland's new Constitution.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that disturbing attitudes towards individual liberty are developing with the new Government in Nyasaland, as can be supported by evidence which is readily available? Is he likewise aware of Dr. Banda's reported statement at his first Press conference to the effect that the Bill of Rights is "just a piece of paper?" Will he ask Dr. Banda to clarify that statement?

Dr. Banda accepted the Bill of Rights in the course of the Constitutional Conference which was held in London. It is true that he added the words:

"…the real Bill of Rights here for Europeans or for anyone who is not an African, is the good will of the people of this country.."

In that statement from which my right hon. Friend quoted, did not Dr. Banda advise people who might have a complaint against trespassers not to go to the police or the proper authorities but to the local political organisation of the Malawi Congress Party? Does this not show that the rule of law is being replaced by one-party dictatorship, and what effect will this have on the people in Northern and Southern Rhodesia, where we all hope to see political advances made for all the communities?

When I was in Nyasaland there was some difficulty about encroachment on property, as it is a very closely populated country. I spoke to Dr. Banda about this matter, and I am satisfied that the matter is in hand. I hope, in agreement with my hon. Friend, that it can be dealt with through the normal channels he has mentioned.

Would the First Secretary not agree that since Dr. Banda became Prime Minister he has taken steps to urge racial co-operation between the communities in Nyasaland? Is there any justification for the allegations that he is going back on that in any way?

I believe that Dr. Banda fully realises that the 8,000 Europeans—a very small number compared with the 3½ million Africans in the country—should be permitted rightly to live their lives to the full. I believe that to be his view, and it is a view which I would encourage.

asked the First Secretary of State what plans he has for the establishment of a Social Science Research Council; and whether he will make a statement.

The Government have decided to set up an independent Committee of Inquiry to look into the whole question of research in the social sciences. Lord Heyworth has agreed to become Chairman of this Committee and I expect to be able to announce its membership and terms of reference very soon.

As this subject has been under discussion for quite a long time, is my right hon. Friend aware that his decision to appoint this Committee of Inquiry will be very welcome? Will he urge the Committee to come to its conclusions as speedily as possible?

Yes, Sir. Certainly.

asked the First Secretary of State what would be the estimated cost of setting up a Social Sciences Research Council; what discussions he has had with university social scientists on the need for such a council; and if he will make a statement.

These are matters on which I shall wish to have the advice of Lord Heyworth's Committee.

Why should it be necessary to have a Committee when we have a Minister for Science who, presumably, is perfectly competent to look into this matter? Why, in addition, should it be three years after this side of the House has asked for consideration to be given to this before even a Committee of Inquiry is set up?

I do not think that this is necessarily a matter for the Minister for Science. The social sciences are rather broader than his remit. and this is a matter for which I have been asked to take responsibility. In reply to the last part of the hon. Lady's supplementary question, this matter has been very seriously canvassed. Contact has been made with university social scientists on the need for such a council. We have in the end come to the conclusion that the setting up of this inquiry is the best way to do it.

is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there will be profound disappointment, after all these years of agitation and research into this matter, at the fact that the Government should now have to take refuge in setting up yet another Committee of Inquiry? Why cannot the Government, with all the resources at their disposal, make up their own mind on a question like this? Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware of the urgent need for this, that many more graduates are needed in this sphere and that while we have every confidence in Lord Heyworth, if it must go forward on this basis, will the right hon. Gentleman ask Lord Heyworth to give him early recommendations so that they can be implemented?

I am aware of the urgency of the matter, and I will certainly convey to Lord Heyworth what appear to be the wishes of the House.

Was the First Secretary serious about what he said about the Minister for Science? Do we understand that he is only the Minister for exact science? Where do the Government draw the line about the responsibilities for science?

The Minister for Science had, I think, better answer that for himself. All I know is that, in regard to the social sciences, I have been asked to take the responsibility.

asked the First Secretary of State what consultations he has had with the Northern Rhodesian authorities regarding the establishment of a minimum school-leaving age for children.

This matter is the responsibility of the Northern Rhodesia Government.

Would the First Secretary not agree that we have some duty to assist this Government in eliminating the use of young children, often of a very young age, as domestic drudges? In this age of equality, when 240 million Africans are demanding the same equality, would it not redound to the credit of the United Kingdom if we were to sit down, side by side with the other parties, face up to these problems and formulate a plan for establishing a minimum school-leaving age for these young people, even though that would mean the building of schools and the acquiring of teachers?

The difficulty is that I cannot answer on matters which come under the Government of Northern Rhodesia, but I can exercise influence and advice. Education is compulsory in only certain urban and other areas where local authorities consider it practicable. I am, therefore, in somewhat of a difficulty in answering the hon. Member's Question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if, in view of the calling off of Irish Republican Army activities, the amnesty granted his fellow prisoner, Donald Murphy, and the tuberculosis he has suffered in prison, he will now release Joseph Doyle from Wakefield jail, whore he has been imprisoned for the last seven and a half years, and allow him to return to Ireland.

I decided last month that, subject to continued good conduct in prison, Doyle should be released on licence in July.

Whilst I am grateful for that reply—which would have been even more welcome had the information been announced before rather than after the Question was tabled—would the Home Secretary now consider, in view of the three special factors mentioned in the Question, releasing Doyle now? Why wait till July?

No, Sir. I cannot go back on my decision in this matter. There have been no signs of active tuberculosis for the last three years, which is one of the points mentioned in the Question, and there is no evidence that imprisonment has been detrimental to Doyle's health.

But as the Home Secretary was good enough to allow Doyle, most unusually, to go to Ireland unaccompanied, and he returned, is it not obvious that the man's character is now such as to enable him to be released now without damage to anyone?

I have taken my decision. I think that it was right to allow Doyle to go to Ireland on parole to attend his mother's funeral, but it would be unfortunate if it were to be accepted that any prisoner who went out on parole and came back should, on that account, be released earlier.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what are the factors which have brought him to the conclusion that the balance of advantage lies in not harmonising United Kingdom time with that of Europe.

To extend the period of Summer Time throughout the winter would inconvenience certain out-of-door industries, in particular farming, which require light for an early start to the day's work, and would mean that for a few weeks more people, including school children, would have to leave home in the dark. So far, these disadvantages have, in our judgment, prevailed against the advantages of an extension to the whole year.

Does not my hon. Friend think it remarkable that he should consider our farming community when on the Continent there is at least four times the percentage employed on farms? If we are to harmonise our affairs with Europe, is it not time that we took positive steps in even small matters?

The Continent is a different place, and what we have to consider are the advantages to and convenience of people in this country. It is a matter of balance. It is a difficult question, and I can only assure my hon. Friend that my right hon. Friend's mind is not closed to a final decision.

Does the Under-Secretary of State seriously suggest that British cattle need different clocks from Continental cattle? Does he really think that he is helping parents by these changes of time? Does he not believe that most parents—although in this country we normally pay more attention to animals —find constant changes in the time very inconvenient? But can he tell us the real differences between British and Continental cattle?

I do not make any assertions comparing Continental and British cattle. As to the children, I think that this is a matter of inconvenience that many parents feel, but it is a matter that we are prepared to reconsider, and we do so annually, with a view to deciding whether or not the period of Summer Time should be extended.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what scientific means are used to determine and review police establishments; what outside aid has been called in on organisation and methods; and what allowance has been made in the review of establishments for the work now done by traffic wardens.

Establishments are fixed, subject to my approval, by police authorities, but they are kept under close review by H.M. Inspectors of Constabulary. As I announced in the House on 29th April, the new Police Research and Planning Branch at the Home Office will include a unit which will study the criteria upon which establishments should be based. The work done by traffic wardens is taken into consideration when alterations in police establishments are considered.

Will my right hon. Friend give special attention to this problem since, as he admits in his Answer, exact criteria on which establishments are based are to be set up for the first time?

Yes, Sir. I attach importance to this matter, and I think that my hon. Friend—and, indeed, the House generally—will think that I am doing right in establishing this new police research unit in the Home Office, which will, I think, be able to give us great help on matters of this character.

But is not the real difficulty in harmonising police establishments and methods to be found in the fact that police administration is something of a law to itself and is not subject to the control of this House or a Minister of the Crown? Is it not a serious gap in our Civil Service arrangements when a very important Department under Crown administration is divorced from the general practice applying to other Departments of the Crown? Would it not be better if the Home Secretary and his colleagues set about bringing the police into line with Civil Service practice in every other Department?

I do not accept that the police are axactly parallel with the Civil Service, but I have already said that I am in course of preparing a new Police Bill, which will no doubt provide a convenient occasion for the hon. Member to express his views.

May I ask whether the Home Secretary is adopting the recommendation of the Royal Commission that the Home Office should depart from its traditional system of not allowing an establishment to be increased until the old establishment is actually full, with the consequential effect of disguising a true shortage?

If the hon. Gentleman would be good enough to put a Question down on that point I should be very glad to give him a considered answer, but, in general, I do not think that we should wait to review an establishment until the force is fully up to strength.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what enquiries he made before 2nd May into the incident in which the Queen of Greece claimed to have been molested near Claridge's Hotel; and if he satisfied that no physical violence was offered to her.

I would refer the hon. Member to my reply to the hon. Member for Bristol, Central (Mr. Awbery) on 16th May.

Whatever view is taken of this incident, is it not at least desirable that the House of Commons should be correctly informed? Does not the right hon. Gentleman recall that he has repeatedly stated that the Queen "was not touched," while the Prime Minister said that Her Majesty's Government naturally accepted the Queen's account of the incident, in which she claimed to have been seized by the shoulders? Will he kindly clarify the point? These two statements cannot both be true.

The Prime Minister stated that the Government accepted absolutely the Queen's account of these proceedings. I made reference to an initial report I received from the police. I have no doubt whatever that what the Queen said was the fact, but I would suggest to the House that we might now all endorse what my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said—that he regarded this incident as closed.

Can my right hon. Friend devise any means by which we can give a special welcome to their Greek Majesties on their State visit, so as to show how deeply we deplore the insults offered to Her Majesty as a guest of this country?

I certainly hope that that will be the case, because I believe that any insults that were offered to her by ill-intentioned people are deplored by the country as a whole.

If the facts of the matter are so unsure, and if the police, according to the Home Secretary, were so unobservant that they did not notice this physical violence being offered to Her Majesty, what guarantee can the right hon. Gentleman offer the Greek Government that she will be properly protected if the State visit occurs?

The hon. Gentleman must recognise that, in regard to any sort of scuffle, the first reports one receives are bound to be confused. This is not something of which one has a film and can examine precisely what happened. But, in my view, the matter has been cleared up, and I hope that the House will regard it as closed.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many boys and girls, respectively, were committed to the care of the Kent County Council, during the period 1st January, 1960, to 31st December, 1962, as a result of prosecutions alleging nonattendance at school; and how many parents of these children have been denied access to or information concerning their child.

I understand that in this period 21 boys and 16 girls were committed to the care of the Kent County Council as a result of irregular school attendance; the parents of seven of the boys and five of the girls had been prosecuted on this account. One parent of these children was not allowed to visit her child for a time.

Is it not quite wrong that children should be placed in the care of a local authority and sent away from their parents on grounds of truancy alone? Will my hon. Friend now consider extending free legal aid to poor parents who are placed in the position of having to defend their children before the courts?

As my hon. Friend knows, there are several courses open to juvenile courts for enforcing school attendance, but there are circumstances in which committal to care is in the child's best interest. The second part of the supplementary question is another matter, but I will draw my right hon. Friend's attention to it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many convictions there have been for being in possession of dangerous drugs since 1st July, 1962; how many of those convicted were Commonwealth immigrants; and how many such immigrants could not be recommended for deportation because they had been resident in the United Kingdom for five years or more.

The number of convictions is 522. Of those convicted, 326 originated from other parts of the Commonwealth, and of these I estimate that nearly half had been resident in the United Kingdom for five years or more.

Has my right hon. Friend taken note of the fact that more than half of these offences are attributable to Commonwealth immigrants and that since they are only 2 per cent. of the population this indicates that they are 25 times more prone to this offence than the average inhabitant of this country? Does my right hon. Friend consider that a matter for serious concern?

The House gave consideration to a Bill produced by my hon. Friend on this subject a little time ago and decided to refuse leave to introduce it. I certainly cannot give my hon. Friend any encouragement to think that the Government would be prepared to introduce amendments in the existing law.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many convictions there have been for living on immoral earnings in the Metropolitan Police District since 1st July, 1962; how many of those convicted were immigrants from the Commonwealth or the Republic of Ireland, respectively; and how many such immigrants were immune from deportation through having been resident in the United Kingdom for five years or more.

In the Metropolitan police district between 1st July, 1962, and 18th May, 1963, 154 persons were convicted of living on immoral earnings. Sixty-eight came from Commonwealth countries and 18 from the Irish Republic. Of these 86, 58 were not liable under the Commonwealth Immigrants Act for deportation because they had been resident in the United Kingdom for at least five years.

In view of the fact that in connection with this offence and the matter of being in possession of dangerous drugs these Answers indicate that more than 50 per cent. of convictions are attributable to Commonwealth immigrants and immigrants from the Republic of Ireland, does my right hon. Friend not think it really regrettable that the majority escape deportation because they have been in this country for more than five years? Would my right hon. Friend take this into account and recognise that if this disability were removed the incidence of these serious crimes in this country would be greatly reduced?

I am prepared to take everything into account, but it seems to me that it would be anomalous if, though we were prepared to offer naturalisation to foreigners after five years' residence in this country. we were to say that Commonwealth citizens who had been resident here for five years could be deported.

Would the right hon. Gentleman explain to his hon. Friends that as long as they continue to insist on racial discrimination by refusing permission to the Bill which has often been before the House, there will be the lack of integration into society which produces criminal behaviour?

The Minister cannot be asked to give explanations to his hon. Friends.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that the figures which he gave in answer to the second Question really are dreadful and are bound to cause great disquiet about this serious offence of living on immoral earnings? Cannot my right hon. Friend give careful thought to seeing what can be done about it?

These are grave crimes, but the penalty of deportation is not the only penalty which the courts can consider. It is open to the courts to impose very severe sentences upon them.

Tell them not to do it again!

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the present shortage of schoolmasters and of housemasters in approved schools.

In schools under voluntary management there are vacant at present 23 teaching posts out of a total authorised establishment of 350; 30 instructors' posts out of 344; 32 housemasters' posts out of 195; and 6 housemistresses' posts out of 39. Similar figures for schools managed by local authorities are not readily available, but I have no reason to think that the proportion of vacancies to authorised posts is materially different in these schools.

Is not one of the difficulties with instructors and housemasters the inadequate career prospects? Will the hon. Lady look at this and consider whether something could be done to improve the situation?

I would not agree that one of the difficulties is the inadequate career prospects, because there are adequate recruits coming forward. In the past we have been short of training facilities, but this has now been remedied.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the present shortage of probation officers; and in what areas the shortage is most serious.

The number of vacancies now advertised or otherwise known to exist is 67 (52 men and 15 women), but the real shortage is probably greater. Most of the vacancies are in the densely populated areas.

Would the hon. Lady not agree that great damage to recruitment to the probation service has been done by the long drawn out pay negotiations? Could the Home Office give a guarantee that in future when negotiations take place they will be speedier and that automatic arrangements will be made to review pay as it falls behind the rising cost of living?

I would not accept what the hon. Member says. Recruitment has improved recently and we hope that more and more recruits will be coming forward.

Apart from salary negotiations, what contacts are maintained between the Department and the Association of Probation Officers to discuss means of improving conditions?

Contacts are very close.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what progress has been made in the consultations taking place about amendment of the Fugitive Offenders Act, 1881, in the light of its relationship to the future pattern of the Commonwealth; and if he will bring forward proposals to amend the Fugitive Offenders Act, 1881, so as to ensure that in future Commonwealth citizens will be in no worse position than aliens in respect of the right of political asylum in the United Kingdom.

I am in consultation with my right hon. Friends on the future of this Act. I cannot anticipate the result of the review of the Act, in which other members of the Commonwealth are closely concerned also.

Can the Home Secretary say that the Government, within a definite period, will bring forward an amendment to the Act whatever the results of the consultations? Was it not a fact that in our discussions over the case of Chief Enahoro practically everybody agreed on the necessity of reforming the Act? Is not the least that the Home Secretary can do to remove some of the discredit arising from the treatment of Chief Enahoro to speed up an amendment of the Act?

While not accepting the implications at the end of that supplementary question, I can certainly say that the Government intend to carry out a review of this Act in conjunction with our partners in the Commonwealth. Quite obviously, I cannot anticipate what the result of that will be.

Would my right hon. Friend agree that a solution of this problem would be assisted if it were found possible to institute a Commonwealth Court of Appeal to exercise on a wider and more comprehensive basis the jurisdiction traditionally associated with the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council? Will my right hon. Friend make representation to his colleagues to initiate discussions with the Commonwealth in this regard?

I will certainly take note of what my right hon. and learned Friend has said and bring it to the notice of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance, in view of his unhappy experience in the case of Chief Enahoro, that the Government will take the earliest possible steps to have the Fugitive Offenders Act amended?

I will certainly give an assurance to the House that the Government are pressing forward with their review of this Act, but we cannot amend it unilaterally. We must do it in conjunction with our Commonwealth partners.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what new restrictions he is proposing in regard to the sale of fireworks during the coming autumn.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Belfast, West (Mrs. McLaughlin) on 4th April.

Is this really all that the hon. Gentleman can do? Would it not be possible for him still further to restrict the period during which fireworks are on sale and the age of the children to whom they can be sold? Could he not send a circular to local authorities encouraging them to organise public fireworks parties to which parents and children can be invited instead of their having their own? This would not need legislation.

My right hon. Friend is always willing to consider fresh suggestions of this kind, but the hon. Lady will see from the Answer that in co-operation with the industry we have succeeded in eliminating what is probably the most serious danger in fireworks, that is the cheap banger, and the increased publicity which they have undertaken to put out this year will help, we believe, to reduce accidents substantially.

Would my hon. Friend agree that if fireworks manufacturers are co-operating so successfully in this, no restrictions can possibly be necessary as long as this co-operation continues?

I certainly agree that co-operation with the industry is the most effective way of reducing danger, though, of course, neither that nor legislation can safeguard against carelessness in the use of fireworks, which is one of the most common causes of accidents.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what was the total of fees paid to the police in the Metropolitan area by industrial owners of over-sized loads on the roads for their services in piloting them through the area during the last 12 months.

No charge is made for the services of the police in escorting abnormal loads.

May I ask two questions? First, why not? Secondly, how can I get hold of the figures of fees paid to the police throughout the country for this service, in view of the fact that a great number of large loads are carried, thus making the problem of the roads very difficult?

In reply to the first question, the reason is that it is the duty of the police to regulate all traffic, and regulating these abnormal loads is just as much in the general interest of road users as it is in the general interest of the owners of the loads. As to the second part of the supplementary question, I can only suggest that my hon. Friend should put down a Question.

Would my hon. Friend be kind enough to tell me to which Minister I should address such a Question? Secondly, with regard to his earlier answer, does he appreciate that the fact that there is no fee to be paid to the police encourages industrial owners to put these large loads on the roads, to the great inconvenience of many people?

The suggestion in the second part of that supplementary question is not entirely true, because the Commissioner has to be notified in advance of any movement by road of an abnormal load. He can then decide the route which it has to take, and he can also decide whether or not a police escort is needed. There is also a requirement for authorisation by the Minister of Transport for the movement of loads above certain dimensions and weight. As to the first part of that supplementary question, I think it would be best if my hon. Friend would write me a letter.

On a point of order, to save my writing my hon. Friend a letter, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he will make a statement on the financial assistance to be provided for those who appeared before the Radcliffe Tribunal.

The Office of the Treasury Solicitor has invited the soli- citors whose clients were granted legal representation before the Tribunal to submit their bills of costs, if they desire to do so. The Treasury Solicitor will then ask the Tribunal to advise whether a claim from each particular applicant for an ex gratia contribution from public funds should be entertained and, if so, what proportion of the reasonable costs incurred the contribution should represent. If the Tribunal favour the application, the Treasury Solicitor will then negotiate with the applicant's solicitor as to the amount of costs, including disbursements, which can be regarded as reasonable. If agreement cannot be reached on this point, the assistance of the Chief Taxing Master of the High Court will be sought.

Will all these figures be published so that we can see what has actually happened? Has the Home Secretary taken note of the fact that apparently members of the Government are proposing to take legal action, partly at least, as it is said, to recoup themselves for expenses involved in connection with the Tribunal? Does he not think this is a very curious procedure and, it may be, an improper use of the findings of the Tribunal to use them to influence the courts later, particularly as those who have suffered injustices in the course of the proceedings of the Tribunal have no remedy whatsoever?

I think we had better take this one step at a time. The whole House agreed that the Tribunal should have an opportunity of expressing a view as to whether applications for ex gratia contributions should be entertained. That is the stage which we have now reached. Surely we should give the Tribunal an opportunity to express its views when the applications have been received.

In view of the general public importance of this matter, will the Home Secretary make representations to the effect that it would be most desirable that the Tribunal, whilst considering these applications, should sit in public?

I think this really must be a matter for the Tribunal itself and that I ought not to interfere.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether Her Majesty's Government have now considered the Report of the Departmental Committee on Proceedings before Examining Justices, which was presided over by Lord Tucker and reported on 10th July, 1958; and whether they have arrived at any decision on the recommendations contained in the Report.

An undertaking was given during proceedings on the Criminal Justice Administration Act, 1962, that the Government would undertake an inquiry into the nature and purpose of committal proceedings. This is in progress, and until it has been completed no decision can be taken on the Departmental Committee's recommendations.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that the recommendations were arrived at unanimously by a very authoritative Committee, that they are a matter of great importance in the administration of justice and, when we are dealing with the administration of justice, how many years does the right hon. Gentleman need to make up his mind?

It is not a question of my needing time to make up my mind. While the Government have undertaken an inquiry to decide whether there should be any fundamental change in the form of committal proceedings, it surely would be premature to reach a decision on the single question of what publicity should be allowed to these proceedings.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if, in view of the danger to fire-fighting personnel when a fire breaks out near a place containing cylinders of propane and butane gases, he will take steps to ensure stricter precautions in the storage of gas cylinders.

My information is that the danger arises principally in connection with the storage of these substances in industrial premises and building and road works sites. I understand that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour is preparing regulations under the Factories Act, 1961, which will inter alia, require precautions to be taken in respect of the storage and use of these substances in all such premises; and he hopes to have draft regulations ready for circulation to interested bodies in the near future.

I am much obliged for that reply. Will the hon. Gentleman urge on his right hon. Friend the need for these gas cylinders to be stored in a separate building away from where they are normally used and to make certain that only the minimum number of cylinders is in the building where the industrial or other works are being undertaken?

I will convey those points to my right hon. Friend. The draft regulations will be circulated to interested parties before they are tabled.

Will these regulations be of nation-wide application, including Scotland, or will they apply only to local fire-fighting personnel.

I understand that they will be nation-wide.

Will the Minister make certain that the fire officers and the Fire Brigades Union are consulted on what kind of measures should be taken to ensure the greatest safety in the storing of these vessels?

I will convey that point to my right hon. Friend. Of course, the fire authorities will be among those to be consulted.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the purpose of the network of radiation detection posts now being built; and if he will make a statement.

The purpose of these posts is to enable the Royal Observer Corps to measure radioactivity in the event of nuclear attack on the United Kingdom, and to enable fall-out warnings to be given to the public. The development of the warning and monitoring system has been referred to in Defence White Papers.

Is there any intention to use these posts in conjunction with present arrangements for detecting radioactive fall-out from nuclear tests and the effect on food, water and general health? Is the Home Secretary proposing to use them in peace-time?

These are for war-time use.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT, a list of prisons in London and the Home Counties, giving the number of prisoners in each, and the number sleeping three to a cell in each.

Yes, Sir. I will, with permission, circulate, the figures in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what date he saw the Lord Chief Justice about the Enahoro case; and whether he then informed him that the Nigerian Government proposed to exclude Mr. Foot and Mr. Gratiaen should they present themselves as counsel for Chief Enahoro.

No, Sir. My consultation with the Lord Chief Justice was on 5th March. The information referred to was not given to me by the Nigerian authorities until 9th March.

Did the right hon. Gentleman at any time give the Lord Chief Justice that information? Did he ever give the Attorney-General that information, or did he allow the Attorney-General to read his affidavit and thus cheat the courts as an innocent instrument?

I certainly cannot accept that sort of implication. I said in the debate on Monday—if the hon. and learned Gentleman had listened that the information given me by the Nigerian authorities was in the possession of the Government as a whole. I had only that one consultation with the Lord Chief Justice, which took place before I had received the confidential communication from Nigeria.

Will the Home Secretary say why, when he did receive the information from the Nigerian Government, he did not pass it on to the Lord Chief Justice?

It did not occur to me that it was for me to do that.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us fairly and squarely: had he told the Attorney-General prior to 22nd April when he signed the affadavit that my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Ipswich (Mr. D. Foot) and the other Queen's Counsel would not be admitted to Nigeria?

Yes; I have said that now two, if not three, times.

asked the Minister of Power whether he will forecast the approximate demand by the National Coal Board for home-grown timber for roof support over the next 10 years or any shorter period.

Requirements for pit timber are a matter for the National Coal Board. I am therefore asking the Chairman to write to my hon. Friend.

Will my hon. Friend ask the Chairman to give me a certain amount of detail, since, as the National Coal Board is the largest single customer of the whole industry, either public or private, it is important that we should in future have more information than we have had in the past?

I have no doubt that the Chairman of the National Coal Board will read what my hon. Friend has just said with interest.

I have no doubt that the Chairman of the National Coal Board will take careful note of what my hon. Friend has said. With interest.

No doubt, my hon. Friend sees Lord Robens from time to time. Will he press on him the need to have regard to the business of homegrown hardwood production and to use as much as possible in the National Coal Board's work?

As I have said, this is a matter for the National Coal Board. I have no doubt that Lord Robens will bear in mind what both my hon. Friends have just said.

asked the Minister of Power what approval he has given to proposals for major capital expenditure by the National Coal Board to increase the number of collieries with storage bunkers and facilities for rapid loading of trains.

The National Coal Board is discussing these matters with the Railways Board but has not yet made any proposals for additions to its investment programme in this respect.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that Answer. This is a vital matter. There are about 22 million wagons involved, each for about two days on every turn-round, and the cost is about £11 million a year. Would not this development accelerate the operation of the railway system and bring costs down as a result of more efficient methods?

I have no doubt that the Chairman of the National Coal Board will take careful note of what my hon. Friend has said.

asked the Minister of Power what reply he gave to Salford City Council regarding the price and quality of smokeless fuel and the setting up of local consumer councils to deal with smokeless fuel problems.

The council has been told that the suppliers of smokeless fuels are responsible for their price and quality and that, as machinery for investigating complaints already exists, the creation of new local consumer councils is not necessary.

But does not the hon. Gentleman agree that the Domestic Coal Consumers' Council, a national body, is far too remote for most aggrieved housewives? Why cannot we have local councils as in the gas and electricity industries?

No, Sir; I do not agree at all.

asked the Minister of Power if, before granting a pipeline authorisation for any major new pipeline development under Section 1 of the Pipe-lines Act, he will make a report to the House of his preliminary conclusions on the applications submitted to him.

No, Sir.

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that his right hon. Friend will, in many circumstances, have to deal with competing applications involving substantial financial interests, and that, in order to ensure that the public interest is served in reaching a decision in such cases, it would be highly desirable for him not only to do justice but to see that justice is done publicly? Would not the method of preparing something like a draft scheme before coming to a final determination in such cases be very helpful to the Minister?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend will be very grateful for the hon. Gentleman's advice, but I think it most unlikely that he will accept it. My right hon. Friend has every intention of following the procedure laid down by Parliament in the recent Act.

Will the hon. Gentleman take a slightly more serious view of a suggestion put forward to assist his right hon. Friend to carry out the intentions of the Pipe-lines Act, which were that the Minister should act in the public interest?

I should hate to give the impression that my right hon. Friend would not give very serious consideration to any advice offered by the hon. Gentle-man. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] A great deal of it was offered during the proceedings on the Pipe-lines Bill.

Is not the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the type of answer which he gives to hon. Members on this side is not the type that we expect from someone sitting on the back benches? We expect rather more courtsey from the Front Bench.

I assure the right hon. Gentleman that no discourtesy was intended. I merely said that my right hon. Friend will seriously consider any advice given to him in this House.

asked the Prime Minister what plans he has for an early meeting with President de Gaulle.

There are no plans for an early meeting between me and President de Gaulle.

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that the time is now right to take some positive steps to renew our traditional friendship with France and to stop making these rather futile gestures of petulance which followed the breakdown of the Common Market negotiations?

. That is another question. Of course, I have had many meetings with President de Gaulle and hope to do so again.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Foreign Secretary's public speech at the Canadian Club in Ottawa on 21st May, on the subject of the retention of British nuclear weapons, represented the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes) on 28th May.

As the reply was "Yes", perhaps the Prime Minister could elaborate by explaining why he authorised his Foreign Secretary to diminish or demolish his own stock argument for an independent British deterrent by saying that we did not need it for fear of being left alone in a crisis by our allies, nor to acquire prestige, namely, greater weight in the counsels of nations? Why did he then allow him to put forward the Alice in Wonderland argument that we must have an independent nuclear deterrent because of the danger of the idea spreading to other countries? Finally, would the right hon. Gentleman not consider issuing an authorised version to his colleagues for telling the tale to the public instead of creating confusion by allowing them to ad lib in this way?

We had a number of Questions and Answers on this subject the other day. We have had long debates on it, and I do not think I can add to it by further question and answer.

asked the Prime Minister what reply he has sent to the petition delivered to him on Monday, 20th May, by residents in the Archway area of the Metropolitan Borough of Islington, on the subject of proposed traffic diversions at the Archway.

I asked the Minister of Transport, whose responsibility it is, to reply to the petition, which he did yesterday.

Will the right hon. Gentleman look into this matter again? Is he aware that there are two proposals here, one for a peak-hour clearway on a main road, and the other for a one-way scheme which will put over 1,000 heavy vehicles an hour through completely residential streets? Would the right hon. Gentleman see whether it cannot be possible to try out a peak-hour clearway first, to see whether that gives sufficient benefit which may render the one-way diversion unnecessary?

I will certainly convey that to my right hon. Friend.

asked the Prime Minister what decision has now been reached by Her Majesty's Government on the integration of the United Kingdom defence organisation; what Departments are to he included; and what will be the designation of the respective Ministers.

The principles of the proposed defence reorganisation were outlined by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Defence during the Defence debate. Detailed plans will be published in the promised White Paper, I expect in the next month or so.

Can the Prime Minister say whether it is intended that military research into weapons and the like will be concentrated in the new Ministry of Defence organisation, and will he also say whether it is true that it has been decided by the Government not to include in the Ministry of Defence new integrated organisation the Ministry of Civil Aviation in so far as it occupies itself with military aircraft?

I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will appreciate that we had a debate on these matters. We are working hard on the elaboration of our proposals. We hope shortly to publish a White Paper, and it would be a mistake for me to give premature answers to Questions on matters which are under consideration.

Does not the right hon Gentleman realise that this is a matter of prime importance and all that one is trying to do is to offer some guidance to the right hon. Gentleman before he finally makes up his mind? We want to avoid any further mistakes in the creation of a sound military defence organisation.

I quite under. stand the right hon. Gentleman's motives, for which I am grateful, but I still think he will agree that it would be a mistake to announce decisions which cannot be taken till the next stage when we have the White Paper ready.