asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science, as representing the Lord President of the Council, if, on his visit to the North-East in the future, he will visit Blaydon-on-Tyne.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science, as representing the Lord President of the Council, (1) when he next contemplates visiting the North-East;

My noble friend is not at present in a position to say when he will next be going to the North-East or what areas he will then visit. He will bear in mind the suggestion that Blaydon should be included in an early visit.

While appreciating the nature of the reply, may I ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether he is aware that the presence of his noble Friend is much to be desired in Blaydon, especially to note the changing structure of industry and to see for himself the industrial wants of the area? Is he further aware that all the interests concerned are most anxious to learn what proposals are likely to be contained in his noble Friend's Report on the North-East? Does the hon. Gentleman not recognise that it is vital to learn what Government policy is today in order to speed progress in economic resurgence?

Blaydon Council was represented when my noble Friend met local authorities in County Durham in his March tour. In reply to the hon. Member's second and third points in that supplementary question, that matter is covered by Questions later on the Order Paper.

Whilst appreciating the fact that next time the Lord President of the Council visits the North-East he should include Blaydon in his itinerary, may I suggest that it would be a good idea if when he comes to Durham he visits the University, which will then be separate from Newcastle, because it has ideas about a medical faculty? Those concerned might like to interest the Lord President of the Council in the hope that he would use his influence to get the University Grants Committee to agree to such a project.

I will bring this to my noble Friend's attention.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science, as representing the Lord President of the Council (1) if he will now make a statement on his long-term plans for the North-East coast;

I would ask my hon. Friend to wait for the announcement which will be made later this week about the Government's plans for the North-East.

Can my hon. Friend kindly state whether the plans will be made known in the House of Commons, or perhaps in another place, or to the Press, and whether we who are vitally interested in this matter will have the chance, as I hope, of congratulating Her Majesty's Government on their decisions?

I think my hon. Friend will feel like congratulating the Government when she hears the announcement.

Is not the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Tynemouth (Dame Irene Ward) important? Is the announcement to be made in this House? If so, will it be debated?

The answer to the second part of that question would depend upon the Chair. As to the first point, I understand that an announcement will be made in this House, time and so on permitting.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science, as representing the Lord President of the Council, how many additional staff, and in what categories, he has recruited to draw up the plan for the North-East; and what numbers of staff he is retaining to deal with the implementation of this plan.

My noble Friend has been assisted by staff from all the Departments concerned with the problems of the region, not by recruitment but by drawing upon them as needed, with a small nucleus of senior officials engaged on the work full-time. This arrangement will continue for the time being.

Will the hon. Gentleman not go a little further? Surely if we are to judge the effect of this as a plan we should know what the staff is and how it is likely to be continued. Will the noble Lord's report contain references to staff and facilities at their disposal?

My noble Friend has made the report to his colleagues in the Government. This is not necessarily for publication, being an internal Government document. A nucleus of four full-time senior officials has been formed, but a large number of officials drawn from a large number of Government Departments have assisted from time to time, and some of them for a considerable amount of time.

Can the hon. Gentleman say how many staff there will be at the regional offices in Newcastle who are not attached to any one specific Ministry but who are concerned with the interests of the region as a whole?

This will probably differ from time to time, and in part it will depend upon the announcement to be made later.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science, as representing the Lord President of the Council, to what extent his plan for the immediate and long-term development of the North-East takes into account the present position and future prospects of south-east Northumberland.

The study of the region and my noble Friend's proposals have taken the needs of south-east Northumberland fully into account.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the recent closures in that area and the vital need for new industry, especially for our young people? Is he further aware that there are two excellent industrial sites at Ashington and Morpeth and that existing factories there are particularly asking for Government aid in order to promote an extension to their existing works? Will the hon. Gentleman give some help and some consideration to this matter?

I fully agree that the area is one which needs assistance, and, of course, it comes under the various measures that have been taken by the Government hitherto. Before dealing with the area as a whole, I think the announcement later this week must be awaited.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science, as representing the Lord President of the Council, to what extent he has considered, in his short-term and long-term plans for the North-East, the prevailing lack of employment opportunities for disabled persons and juveniles.

My noble Friend is very conscious of the need for adequate employment opportunities for disabled persons and young people. The best hope for improving employment opportunities for these and all other people seeking work is within the framework of general prosperity in the region. My noble Friend's plan is directed towards achieving this.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is a desperate need for immediate action to be taken in the North-East on behalf of the unemployed disabled persons and juveniles, whose position is really serious? Can the hon. Gentleman assure us that his noble Friend's proposals, particularly the short-term measures, will meet the requirements of these people?

Special attempts have been made to help young people and disabled persons in the North-East; for example, the first-year apprentice training given at the Government training centres at Felling and Tursdale, and the group training scheme on Tees-side which has been assisted by grant. With regard to the disabled persons, there is, as the hon. Member knows, an industrial rehabilitation unit at Felling and there are nine Remploy factories in the North-East. The essential thing is to get more jobs in the North-East, and this will mean that more disabled and young persons can find them.

Does the hon. Gentleman appreciate that there is a special need of employment for disabled persons in a heavy industrial area? Quite apart from full employment, there is not enough provision in the North-East, and this is one of the shortages to which his noble Friend might give attention.

My noble Friend has paid attention to this matter, but I thought it was worth placing on record the fact that there was an industrial rehabilitation unit and nine Remploy factories.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science, as representing the Lord President of the Council, to what extent he has considered the increased supply of electrical energy that will be necessary in the North-East in order to meet the energy requirements of his short-term and long-term plans for the region.

My noble Friend's proposals take account of the fact that the demand for energy will increase as economic activity in the region expands.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the long-term conflict that we on this side of the House have had with the Government about the need for a new power station to be built in Durham? In view of the fact that it has now been established that if the power station were planned immediately financial assistance could be obtained through the new standard grant under the Local Employment Act, will the hon. Gentleman advise his noble Friend to consult once again with the Minister of Power on this matter?

There is already a considerable surplus of generating capacity in the North-East and my noble Friend is in very close contact with my right hon. Friend the Minister of Power; but I have nothing further to say today.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the average consumption of electricity per household in the North-East is only 2,000 kW. hours per annum compared with 3,000 kW. hours per annum in London and the South-East? Does this not indicate a very marked divergence in the standards of living in those two parts of the country, and does the hon. Gentleman assume that this difference will continue?

Naturally one of the aims of the Government is to raise the whole standard of life in the North-East, and this will mean the consumption of more electricity. What we are dealing with here is the question of the actual date of the start of the power station which we all know will one day be necessary.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science, as representing the Lord President of the Council, what progress has been made in his general discussion with the North-East Development Council on the development of the electronics industry in the North-East.

A meeting to discuss this question is being arranged and will take place as soon as a convenient date can be found.

Will the hon. Gentleman tell his noble Friend that this is now the second month in which unfilled vacancies in the northern region are extremely low? For every 100 unemployed there are only eight jobs and, in fact, the situation is worse than in the winter of 1961. Would the hon. Gentleman not agree that the general discussions that are anticipated might be speeded up in order that this new growth industry might be accelerated?

The difficulty, I understand, has been to find a convenient date on which everybody could be present. The essential point of this meeting is, of course, that there will be representatives of the North-East Development Council, the electronics industry and officials from the Government Departments concerned. This has proved the difficulty, but I understand there is great hope that the meeting will take place before very long.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science, as representing the Lord President of the Council, to what extent he has considered the prevailing shortage of employment opportunities for adults and juveniles in the Sedge field constituency in his short-term and long-term plans for the North-East.

My noble Friend has taken full account of the present position and prospects for employment in all parts of the region.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that his reply is anything but satisfactory? Is he further aware that just before last weekend 300 men finished in the Ferryhill area, which is within the Sedgefield constituency? This is happening not only in that part of the constituency but in other parts, too. Is the hon. Gentleman further aware that while he has already mentioned the training centre at Tursdale, we could do with more of these in the North-East and particularly in the Sedgefield constituency to accommodate many of the young people who are leaving school?

I fully agree that the hon. Gentleman's constituency has a higher rate of unemployment than a number of other areas in the region, but I think the constituency should benefit from the extensive site clearance work on the Aycliffe Industrial Estate, from the advance factory already announced for Aycliffe, and also the scheduling of the whole of Tees-side as a development district.

While one can agree with the answer to the supplementary question, may I ask the hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that, although the advance factory is to come to Aycliffe, we have had a factory standing idle on the trading estate at Aycliffe for a considerable time? What is being done about it?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that the Budget gave special tax concessions for the installation of plant and equipment in development districts.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science, as representing the Lord President of the Council, what is the estimated number of persons likely to be employed as a result of the recommendations of the Lord President of the Council in the administrative county of Durham in the years 1964 and 1965.

It is not possible to estimate the total number of additional jobs which will arise, still less how many will arise in a particular year, as a result of measures the Government have announced or of those which they will announce over the coming months.

So at last we have got from the hon. Gentleman the clear answer that he does not know how many jobs will be provided in the course of the next two years. Is he aware that this question has, been asked frequently and that varying estimates have been furnished by right hon. Members opposite? For example, last week the President of the Board of Trade told me that as a result of ten advance factories which are in contemplation and in course of construction 1,100 jobs would be provided? How is it that the hon. Gentleman does not know?

The Question which the right hon. Gentleman asked my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade was slightly different from the one he put on the Order Paper today. The answer to his question must obviously be that in the area as a whole the number would be in excess of 1,100 mentioned by the President of the Board of Trade.

Presumably the hon. Gentleman speaks for the Government—or does he?—or for his noble Friend. Is it not clear from his original Answer that the Government are not in a position to give an estimate of the number of jobs which will be provided in the next couple of years?

I am not in a position to give a definite figure because it is likely that the only figure I would give would be exceeded.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science, as representing the Lord President of the Coun- cil, what forecast has been made available to him of the future growth of the chemical industry on Tees-side and the employment it will provide; and what account has been taken of this in his long-term plans for the North-East.

My noble Friend has been kept informed of the future plans of the chemical industry on Tees-side and their consequent effect on employment. He has taken these fully into account in preparing his plan for the North-East.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that there is very great concern, particularly on the north bank of the Tees, about the future of the Billingham plant of I.CI., which is in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Sedgefield (Mr. Slater) but provides employment over a large area? One would expect this plant to be a growth point for the future, but plans have been announced which will involve a considerable reduction of employment. Can the hon. Gentleman be more precise about the information which the Lord President has received so that we may more clearly assess how far the need for further employment for these people is to be met?

The hon. Gentleman is really asking me to make the announcement which will be made later this week.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science, as representing the Lord President of the Council, to what extent he has taken into consideration the unemployment situation in the Consett Parliamentary Division when preparing his long-term North-East Coast regional plan.

In preparing his plan for the North-East, my noble Friend has taken into consideration the unemployment situation in all parts of the region, including the hon. Member's constituency.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in the Consett Employment Exchange area there is 2·9 per cent. unemployment and that there is 4·7 per cent. unemployment in the Stanley Employment Exchange area? Employment prospects there are very poor. Is he aware that coal mining has been contracting and that several further closures are expected? Further, does he realise that the situation in the steel industry is very serious? Does he realise that if the Government's plan does not provide for alternative industries in the area there will be very grave dissatisfaction and disappointment felt by my constituents?

I agree that the unemployment situation in the hon. Gentleman's constituency, as in almost the whole of the North-East, is very difficult indeed, and this is why it is receiving special consideration by the Government. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will be satisfied when he hears later this week what the Government propose to do.

In reply to several Questions the hon. Gentleman has said that a statement will be made towards the end of the week. Will he be quite definite about this? Will the statement be made in this House, or will it be made in the other place so that we cannot get at his noble Friend?

I fully realise that the right hon. Gentleman cannot ask questions of my noble Friend in the other place, but I have every hope that the statement will be in such a form as to enable him to fulfil his desires.

asked the Minister of Aviation what arrangements he has considered to produce the Mirage III V in Great Britain.

None, Sir.

Does the Minister recall that on 15th July he told me that Her Majesty's Government have consistently urged the adoption of a common aircraft by the N.A.T.O. countries? Supposing that it were to be proved that the Mirage III V were superior to the Hawker P 1154, would it not then be necessary for us to have manufacturing arrangements in this country? Would it not be as well to anticipate that situation and, at least, have discussions with the manufacturers of the Mirage III V so that these arrangements could proceed smoothly if that aircraft were accepted to be the best?

I hope that the hon. Gentleman will allow me to say that his supplementary question shows that his recent appointment as shadow Patronage Secretary is something of a mirage.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that in the Hawker 1127 and 1154 programme we have a supersonic vertical take-off aircraft of excellent capacity and capability and that it would be far better, in this country's interests, if we were to proceed with British aircraft development rather than seek to cash in, as the Liberals seem to want, on anything but British?

We regard the P 1154 as holding the best prospect of meeting the requirements of the Royal Air Force and of the Royal Navy.

Apart from merely supporting the P 1154 with words, will the right hon. Gentleman give some really practical support in the future, particularly as regards having some operational experience in the use of V.T.O.L. aircraft?

I think the hon. Gentleman will find that we are doing all that he would wish us to do in that respect.

In view of the weakness of a one-jet vertical take-off aircraft, is my right hon. Friend doing anything to produce multi-jet vertical take-off aircraft in this country?

As my hon. Friend knows, we pioneered the multi-jet version in the SC 1. However, it is our view that the single vectored thrust engine is the most satisfactory solution for a fighter-interceptor or strike aircraft.

Will the right hon. Gentleman treat my question with a little more gravity? Supposing that the Mirage III V were proved to be technically superior to the P 1154, what does the Minister's previous answer mean, that Her Majesty's Government have consistently urged the adoption of a common aircraft? In that event, if we proceed with the manufacture of the P 1154 and the rest of the N.A.T.O. air forces have the Mirage III V, is it not clear that there will be no common aircraft for the N.A.T.O. countries?

The hon. Gentleman began by asking me a question in the past tense about what arrangements had been made or considered. I told him that none had been considered. He now asks me a hypothetical question. There is no action which could usefully be taken on his hypothesis.

asked the Minister of Aviation if, in view of the Wilson Report, he will grant a subsidy for the sound-proofing of bedrooms in houses which were in existence near the site of London Airport before the airport was established.

I refer my hon. Friend to the reply given by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary for Science on 3rd July. The Government do not consider that the situation at London (Heathrow) Airport justifies the making of grants from public funds for the sound-proofing of private houses.

Since the Wilson Report has said that the number of jet aircraft movements will go on increasing every year up to 1970 and that people hear these noises worse at night than in the daytime, is there not a case for soundproofing bedrooms around the airport? Does not my hon. Friend consider that we might make a start with those houses which existed before the airport was plonked down near the homes in question?

That was mentioned in the Wilson Report, but the Government were unable to accept the view that a scheme of this nature would not create a precedent. It would inevitably be followed by demands for concessions at other airports and for compensation for other forms of nuisance resulting from other public activities.

Will the hon. Gentleman arrange for the Wilson Report to be debated early in the next Session of Parliament?

That is not a matter for me. It is for the Leader of the House and the usual channels.

asked the Minister of Aviation if he will put a short time limit on aircraft standing at the passenger gates at London Airport so as to allow more aircraft to use the gates and thereby obviate the use of buses for passengers.

No, Sir. Stands are allocated in accordance with arrangements agreed with the airlines. These are designed to secure maximum utilisation, particularly of the inner stands, combined with rapid turn-round of aircraft and the most efficient use of staff and equipment.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the builders of London Airport built about 40 passenger gates on the assumption that passengers would walk to the aircraft but that these gates are now blocked by aircraft standing at them, sometimes being allowed to stand at the passenger gates for three or four hours for repairs and so on? Ought we not to have some kind of parking meter system at the gates to stop these aircraft standing there?

I recognise that point, but it is under continuous review by the airport management. An unduly short time limit on standing would lead to much greater movement of aircraft on the apron taxiways and roads, and this would defeat the whole purpose, which is a smooth and rapid turn-round.

If the Socialist-designed airport is incapable of dealing with aircraft as it is meant to do, could we at least have some modern buses to transport passengers back and forth? The present ones are completely out of date, and the arrangements we have for getting to and from aircraft are really a disgrace to Britain.

We are always looking at this sort of thing. I hope that when the piers which are to be built are completed the situation will be made much easier.

When did my hon. Friend's most recent time and motion study take place at London Airport?

I cannot say exactly, but this sort of thing is being done fairly continually at London (Heathrow) Airport, as it is at all the airports for which the Ministry is responsible.

asked the Minister of Aviation whether he will issue a general direction, in the public interest, to British European Airways to speed up the establishment of air bus services between main cities in the interests of trade and commerce.

No, Sir. It is for the airlines to consider whether and when the potential traffic and types of aircraft available will make it economic to introduce services of this type.

Is it not important that we should be in the forefront of developments of this kind? As only once in the last 16 years has any direction been given, is not this the kind of subject on which a direction could be given about what is really intended?

No; it is a question within the commercial judgment of the airlines concerned. Under the Civil Aviation Licensing Act, 1960, B.E.A. and other operators are free to apply to the Air Transport Licensing Board for a licence to operate any services for which they consider there is a commercial demand. It is not my right hon. Friend's policy to compel operators to run services against their commercial judgment.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there are many complaints about a lack of co-ordination between incoming and outgoing services? Does he realise that many services which are advertised as connecting services do not, in fact, connect? For instance, people coming from abroad and desiring to go to Aberdeen or other parts of Scotland very often find that the incoming plane arrives too late to catch the northbound plane, or it arrives too early and there is a lack of co-ordination in that way. Will the hon. Gentleman look into this with a view to seeing that the services really serve?

I recognise that these things happen, but the hon. and learned Gentleman's supplementary question goes very wide of the Question put down on the Order Paper.

Does not the whole question of inter-city travel now demand more urgent attention, since the less time people spend in the air the more time they seem to spend at airports and getting into the cities? Would it not serve a useful purpose if the Minister were to have a complete examination of this matter and report to the House?

In fact, there is a working party going into this question and considering the development of short-range aircraft for this purpose. It is working under the chairmanship of Dr. Lighthill, and its members include representatives of B.E.A. and the independent airlines. I do not think that it will be too long before it reports.

asked the Minister of Aviation what action he is taking on the recommendations of the Corbett Report on the British Overseas Airways Corporation.

asked the Minister of Aviation when he will announce his plans for the British Overseas Airways Corporation; and if he will make a statement.

The recommendations of the Corbett Report are now being studied. I am accordingly not yet in a position to make a statement. I can, however, say that in my view the matter would be best dealt with by a White Paper. I plan that this should be published when the House reassembles after the Recess.

If my right hon. Friend publishes this White Paper, will he take the opportunity to state the Government's views on the importance of prestige flights in considering the whole future of B.O.A.C, because many of us wonder what is their real value and would be interested to know the views of the Government on this? It is obviously an argument for maintaining some of the more uneconomic services of B.O.A.C.

Yes, Sir. I have my hon. Friend's point very much in mind.

It is disappointing that the whole Report is not to be published. Will my right hon. Friend say how far he will go in the White Paper? It will be very difficult to debate this matter unless hon. Members know the facts. I understand why it cannot be published, but will my right hon. Friend look at this again?

I shall do my best to make sure that the White Paper is informative and provides a good basis for debate. As I think my hon. Friend knows, and as I have said in the House before, there are three reasons why we think it would be wrong to publish the Report. The first is that it was commissioned on the understanding that it would be confidential; the second is that it is, after all, only one man's view on the activities of the Corporation; and the third is that it deals with a certain number of matters which are, or could be, of value to B.O.A.C's commercial rivals.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say why he asked a firm of accountants to do a job of accounting on a confidential basis? We want to find out what is the financial position of B.O.A.G, which should not depend on confidential matters but on arithmetic. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the House will want to feel that when we debate this White Paper we are, in fact, debating all those issues germane to the Corbett Report itself and not a truncated report which may well leave out some of the most vital issues?

I shall do my best to make sure that the House is given a good basis for debate in the White Paper. I think the hon. Gentleman recognises that nowadays accountants are asked to make inquiries not simply on an arithmetical basis but as consultants into the efficiency of a business.

asked the Minister of Aviation what reply he has made to the proposal sent to him by the Noise Abatement Society that London Airport should be transferred to near the mouth of the Thames.

I will, with permission, circulate the reply in the Official Report.

In view of the inevitable expansion of aircraft travel which within a few years will make even London Airport inadequate as an international centre, would it not be possible to develop an airport at some seaside area where the intolerable noise caused to people in the neighbourhood of an airport could be avoided? Could not this be done?

There has been a great study of this question of the need to have a third London Airport to take the overflow of aircraft from London (Heathrow) Airport, and the report of the Interdepartmental Committee on this is at the moment being considered. It will no doubt be published in due course; mean while, it would be premature for me to comment upon the recommendations. I would ask the hon. Gentleman to wait.

In view of my hon. Friend's answer to Question No. 20, asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Mr. Gresham Cooke), indicating that he was unwilling to pay compensation to people whose houses were near London Airport before the airport existed, I hope that my hon. Friend will think very deeply before he moves a new London Airport to Kent or to Essex.

That is a statement, not a Question. There is nothing to answer.

asked the Minister of Aviation when he expects his headquarters to be accommodated in the same building as the Ministry of Defence.

I am not in a position to make a statement.

In view of the contents of the White Paper, is it not a highly unsatisfactory arrangement that the Minister of Aviation should be in the same building as the Minister of Defence, bearing in mind the Minister's multitudinous responsibilities to Civil Aviation? Is is not unsatisfactory that he should be incarcerated in a building devoted completely to defence matters and at the beck and call of Ministers senior to himself and dealing with defence matters?

It has been the Government's view that, on balance, the advantages of propinquity between the Defence Ministry and the senior echelons of the Ministry of Aviation would outweigh any administrative disruption which would result from the separation of the Minister of Aviation from some of his staff.

Having regard to the deplorable state of affairs which civil aviation has got into during the last few years, particularly the situation of B.O.A.C., on which hon. Members have asked Questions this afternoon, is it not desirable that propinquity should be considered much more in regard to civil aviation than to military matters?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, there is a serious problem resulting from some of the slippages in time and cost where defence projects have been concerned, and it has been felt that this might be overcome if the senior staff on that side of the Ministry of Aviation were in closer touch with the Ministry of Defence.

Some of us view this proposed arrangement with some alarm and concern, and we are surprised that my right hon. Friend does not feel the same about it. Does he realise that even by moving into the building this is the thin end of the wedge, and will he resist this as much as possible?

This decision of the Government has been matured at some length. We have been into the pros and cons and this has been, on balance, the advice which the Government have felt bound to tender to the House.

asked the Minister of Aviation what is the number of personnel employed in his Department concerned with electronics, space and civil aviation, respectively; and what changes in the management of these sections will be made as a result of the proposed move to the new Ministry of Defence.

The numbers at 1st July of this year were: Electronics 4,545, Space 291 and Civil Aviation 7,873. It is not intended that the proposed move should lead to any changes in the management of the sections to which the hon. Gentleman refers.

Do not the figures in my right hon. Friend's reply indicate that his Department has an extremely important rôle to play in the technological progress and export potential of British industry? Would he agree that, while propinquity in defence may be desirable, complete immersion is not?

My hon. Friend has put his ringer on a difficulty, but we shall do our very best to overcome it.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give us any idea of the approximate percentage of his total personnel likely to be moving to the Ministry of Defence under the proposed reorganisation?

The hon. Member will realise that accommodation is a matter which arouses the fiercest heart-burnings in Departments. There are no fewer than five Departments which will be in part accommodated in the new building. I think that it would be unwise for me to try to give an answer to that supplementary question at this stage.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that, wherever these excellent experts live, the most important thing is that there should be a general speeding up of decision-taking and that the decisions themselves should be right? Is he satisfied that this proposed move will contribute to either of these two things?

We must do our best to make sure that it does.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that some of us on this side of the House feel very strongly about his move to the Ministry of Defence? Will he give an undertaking that he will use his office there more as an annexe than as the place for doing the real work, which is in the Ministry itself?

I will certainly take steps to keep in the closest touch with my Department and its officials.

How does the right hon. Gentleman propose to comply with the White Paper? He talked about those who are engaged on defence. Is it not the case that a number of the people to whom he has referred are sometimes engaged on defence and sometimes not? Should not the rest be somewhere near? Where do the Government propose to put them—in Parliament Square, or somewhere like that? Where is "near"?

It is the intention that they should be accommodated closer to the Ministry of Defence than they are now, but I am not prepared to say in which building.

asked the Minister of Aviation by what date he expects to complete the disposal of land held by him at Croydon Airport.

The Ministry of Aviation expects to hold a public auction of industrial land in October or November next. I hope that it will be possible to dispose of the residential area early next year. I cannot at present give a date for the recreational area.

Will my hon. Friend try to inject a much greater sense of urgency into this? It is nearly four years since all flying stopped at Croydon Airport and at that time the hope was that we should have the use of the land for more productive purposes. Today we have neither flying nor any use made of the land, and I think that this tortoise-like procedure has gone on long enough.

We wish that it would hurry up. Unfortunately, it is not within the power of the Ministry to have completely unfettered freedom to dispose of this land because local authorities and other Government Departments are also concerned in its disposal, and that is what is holding it up.

asked the Minister of Aviation if in the public interest he will give a general direction to British European Airways not to have more than five seats abreast in the Vanguard.

asked the Minister of Aviation if he will give a general direction to British European Airways not to have more than five seats abreast in the Vanguard.

No, sir.

Could my hon. Friend confirm that this aircraft was originally designed by the manufacturers, in the interests of safety and comfort, to have five seats abreast and not six abreast as B.E.A. has at present? Could he give the reason for this change?

I am afraid that I personally cannot confirm that because I do not know the answer to it. However, I will take up the matter and write to my hon. Friend. The question of whether there should be six or five abreast is a management matter within B.E.A.'s commercial discretion. The statutory powers of general direction are not appropriate to this particular problem.

Can my hon. Friend say whether it is B.E.A.'s intention to introduce the six-a-side Vanguard in competition with the Caravelle, or are the slum conditions being reserved for the home traveller?

Not at all. The Vanguards are operating on the route to Paris. When I went to the Paris Air Show, I travelled tourist class six-a-side and I was quite comfortable.

asked the Minister of Aviation (1) what steps he takes to ensure the highest standards of mechanised engineering design when he makes purchases of aircraft, machines, and equipment;

As the Feilden Committee recognises, defence development contracts have greatly stimulated the promotion of first class design teams in the industries with which my Department deals. The standards of design, ingenuity and workmanship set by British aircraft, engines and equipment bear comparison with any in the world. I shall use my power to place contracts to help maintain these standards and to improve them.

When does the Minister hope to start using contracts for this purpose?

We have been doing so for some time.

How does the right hon. Gentleman reconcile that reply with what is said in the Feilden Report? The Feilden Committee is dissatisfied.

The Feilden Report contains certain criticisms, but, by and large, it pays a very fine tribute to the work of our aircraft, aero-engine and equipment designers.

asked the Minister of Aviation if he has been able to secure another tenant for the factory which has been vacated by the British Oxygen Company in Dumbarton.

My right hon. Friend the Minister of Public Building and Works intends to take this building over. He will use part of it to accommodate a Government training centre which my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour is setting up in Dumbarton.

Would the hon. Gentleman say whether the Ministry of Public Building and Works is responsible for handing this building over to the Ministry of Labour? In view of the importance of this building to Dumbarton, why was not the Board of Trade advised? Surely, since the British Oxygen Company spent £50,000 in fitting out this building as an industrial building, the Board of Trade should have been advised with a view to its being handed to some other industrialist?

It is the established policy that when a Government Department has surplus land or buildings to spare, it shall first notify the other Government Departments in case they have a requirement.

Is not the Board of Trade a Government Department?

Indeed it is.

Why was it not advised?

asked the Minister of Aviation what further approaches he proposes to make to the Aviation Minister of the Republic of Ireland in support of a Coventry-Dublin air service.

We are expecting further talks with the civil aviation authorities of the Republic of Ireland on a number of air service matters. These may afford us an opportunity to try and persuade them to reconsider their decision against this service.

I appreciate what the Minister has already done, but when he talks to the Irish Minister of Transport will he direct his attention to the inconvenience which the Irish residents of Coventry suffer by having to go to Birmingham when they want to return home? Will the right hon. Gentleman emphasise that point when he asks the Irish Minister to re-examine the whole matter?

The hon. Member's supplementary question will be helpful in this direction.

asked the Minister of Aviation whether Hawker-Siddeley Limited has now completed its work study of the AW681; what information it has given him regarding the allocation of the work in manufacturing the prototypes for subsequent production; and what information he has been given regarding the proportion of the work on the prototype to be allocated to Coventry.

asked the Minister of Aviation what research and development work is being undertaken under his auspices in order to provide the AW681 with a vertical take-off capacity.

The project study on the AW681 aircraft has been completed. It is now being assessed in my Department. But it is too early to say what will be the distribution of work. Development directed to the provision of vertical take-off capability has not yet begun. But the aircraft is being designed with vertical take-off potential.

In making his assessment, will the Minister bear in mind the grave disquiet which is being felt among the workers of Coventry that Hawkers, in its study analysis, is intending to move the greater part of the work to Manchester and Belfast? In view of the redundancy which already exists in Coventry, will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind his own undertaking and that of the Parliamentary Secretary that a very large part of the work would be done in Coventry?

I will certainly bear in mind what the hon. Member has said.

In view of earlier statements by the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary, will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the urgency, particularly for the design staff in Short Bros, and Harland, that some speedy progress be made on the vertical take-off potential of this aircraft?

I will have in mind what my hon. Friend says, but the first requirement, which is of some urgency, for the Royal Air Force is for a short takeoff aircraft. A vertical take-off aircraft would take longer and the requirement is less urgent.

Will the ultimate development of this vertical take-off aircraft be based on the use of separate engines for lift and forward propulsion? If so, will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that the only company with experience in this field in this country is Short Bros, and Harland?

I am not yet in a position to make a statement on this subject.

Will the Minister do what he can to expedite this decision? As he knows, there is great anxiety about the ultimate destination of the various parts for this aircraft. It would be to everybody's advantage if a decision could be reached very quickly.

The hon. Member will appreciate that I am anxious to get a decision as quickly as possible, but he will also appreciate that it is better to get the right decision than to rush it and get a decision which we may have to change.

asked the Minister of Aviation if he will state the number of contracts and sub-contracts placed in the North-East for the construction of aircraft and components, respectively, in the past 12 months by his Department and by private firms under Government arrangements.

No aircraft contract has been placed by my Department in the North-East during the last twelve months. I know of no aircraft constructor in the area. Sub-contracting by Ministry contractors for components is the responsibility of the contractors themselves—the main contractors that is. They have been asked to consider Development District firms whenever possible, but we have no comprehensive records of the sub-contracts they place. I have no information about contracts placed by private firms.

In view of the unemployment situation in the North-East, with which the Minister must by now be quite familiar, has he made any attempt to find out whether there are firms in the North-East with skilled craftsmen capable of undertaking work of this character? Why should the North-East be completely neglected when it comes to the production of aircraft or their components?

I am not saying, nor would I accept for one moment, that we have neglected the North-East. I am saying that there is no firm of aircraft constructors which I know of in the area. The responsibility for the placing of subcontracts for components is with the main contractors with whom the Ministry places its contracts.

In view of the right hon. Gentleman's reply, will he make inquiries to ascertain whether there are firms in the area capable of undertaking the work?

If there is a firm of aircraft constructors capable of undertaking Government contracts, I should be grateful if the right hon. Gentleman would draw my attention to it.

asked the Minister of Aviation why he authorised foreign operators to increase the number of passengers which they carried to and from the United Kingdom on non-scheduled flights from about 100,000 in 1960 to about 371,000 in 1962.

These figures cover the inclusive tour charter market which foreign carriers have entered only recently. In authorising this increase we have had regard to the rights enjoyed by our own carriers abroad.

Is it not the case that this tremendous increase in foreign carrying for non-scheduled flights has caused the maximum embarrassment to British airlines and absolute confusion in the charter industry?

No, Sir. The hon. Member is rather overstating the case. There has been a substantial increase in the flights provided by the foreign inclusive tour charter aircraft, but our own carriers, of course, enjoy much the larger proportion of this market and we have to be careful to do nothing which would lead to their receiving less than reciprocity abroad.

Is the Minister suggesting that our own carriers are receiving anything like these enormous advantages which he has given to foreign carriers?

We have to strike a balance in these things, and we think, on the whole, that if we were more restrictive towards charter tours by foreign airlines we would lose on the deal.

asked the Minister of Aviation how much is being spent on missile development work this year; and with which companies the main development work in this field has been placed.

Contracts for missile development have been placed mainly with the two major aircraft groups, Hawker Siddeley and the British Aircraft Corporation. This has been in accordance with the Government's policy for the rationalisation of the aviation industry. Electronic and other companies however have also been associated with these contracts, and as my hon. Friend is aware, missile development contracts have also been placed with Short Brothers & Harland. It would not be in the public interest to disclose the sums that will be spent on missile development this year.

In view of the Feilden Report and the desirability of maintaining a steady flow of development work, will my right hon. Friend consider giving further missile development work to Short Brothers & Harland, so that the substantial overseas orders which have been won for the Seacat may be maintained?

I will always consider any suggestion which my hon. Friend puts to me, but I cannot go further at this time.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if determination of need is based upon what an applicant for National Assistance received in wages before applying; and what amount of assistance would be granted to two people whose needs were identical, but whose last wages were £8 and £16 per week, respectively.

Need for assistance is calculated in the first place by reference to the scale rates and other rules for reckoning requirements and resources laid down in the National Assistance (Determination of Need) Regulations. These Regulations have all along included provision for the allowance payable to an unemployed person to be restricted by reference to his normal earnings. The answer to the second part of the Question would depend upon the particular circumstances of the cases concerned.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance in how many cases of sickness, applications for constant attendance allowance were refused by his Department, between January, 1960, and the latest convenient date.

The point does not arise since constant attendance allowance cannot be paid except as a supplement to the basic pension for loss of faculty under the War Pensions and Industrial Injuries Schemes and then only where special conditions obtain.

Is the Minister aware that thousands of people who suffer long-term sickness and are denied the constant attendance allowance have proved beyond doubt that there is need for a change in the Regulations? Will not the right hon. Gentleman consider this aspect of the point which I have put to him?

I recognise that there can be difficulties and that there are difficulties, but the problem is to single out some sick people for more favourable attention than others. This allowance is based on a 100 per cent. assessment of loss of faculty, under the Industrial Injuries and War Pensions Schemes, and it would not be appropriate to graft this on to National Insurance.

Has the right hon. Gentleman ever heard of a man's wife having to give up regular employment to look after her husband because of long-term sickness? These are really hardship cases within families. They create real hardship. Is not this one of the instances that the Minister should examine and report upon to the House?

This is the kind of subject that is very much under constant examination, but there is no possibility of transferring benefits which are conferred under one scheme to another scheme. Whatever may be the ultimate solution, that cannot be it.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether, in view of the medical evidence submitted to him by the right hon. Member for Llanelly in a recent case, he will review the criteria by which the Silicosis Medical Board decide whether a coal miner's death has been caused, or accelerated, by silicosis or penumonconiosis.

No, Sir. The criteria applied by the Silicosis Medical Board are the same as those applied under the Industrial Injuries Acts and are derived from the stautory definition of pneumoconiosis, the general case-law on cause of death, and the current state of medical knowledge.

While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for that reply, may I ask whether he will now submit the case to the Industrial Injuries National Advisory Council. Is he aware that the doctor who attended this poor man for eleven years is convinced from his knowledge of the case that the man's death was accelerated by pneumoconiosis and that that is the general view of those who have wide experience in administering the Acts over the years? Will he reconsider the matter, and, in particular, since there is grave discontent about it, ask his Advisory Council to consider whether the time has not come to presume that where pneumoconiosis has been certified, death has been accelerated by the disease?

To deal with the particular case, the Silicosis Medical Board found, as I informed the right hon. Gentleman by letter, that there was no significant pneumoconiosis present. In any case, I think the right hon. Gentleman, with his great experience, would agree that it would be impossible to base a decision of this kind on a single case. I do not suppose he is basing it on a single case, but he will remember that the whole subject, especially the definition of pneumoconiosis in the Act, was throughly examined by the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council in 1953, and since then both case law and medical knowledge have been evolving.

In the past ten years we have gained a great deal of experience and know more about this, and for that reason, if for no other, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman to consider the matter again and refer it to the Advisory Council? Will he bear in mind that the men themselves contribute to the scheme? Does he not realise that many of us think that if this case had gone to court under the old Act the judge would have found that death was accelerated by the disease?

The personnel of the Silicosis Medical Board are exactly the same as those of the pneumoconiosis panels, and for that very reason they are very closely in touch indeed with the Commissioner's rulings. Perhaps it might help the right hon. Gentleman if I told him that wherever a death occurs in a case where a man has been certified to have had pneumoconiosis during his life, then, if the Silicosis Medical Board is inclined to think that the death is not attributable to pneumoconiosis the whole of the evidence is always submitted to the chief medical officer of the panels, so that in every case the matter is very fully considered indeed by experts.

I give notice that, owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, if this Parliament is still in existence when we come back, I propose to raise the matter then.