asked the Secretary of State for War if he will define the rôle of the Territorial Army.

The three basic rôles laid down for the Territorial Army in 1960 in the White Paper Cmnd. 1216 will continue. These rôles are related to the threat of general war and are first, reinforcement of the Regular Army overseas, particularly Rhine Army, secondly, aid to the civil power and support of the Regular Army in the United Kingdom, and thirdly the provision of a framework on which general preparations for war can be built up.

Will my right hon. Friend accept the sincere thanks of all those interested in the Territorial Army for that reply? Is he prepared to say whether reinforcements, particularly for B.A.O.R. and elsewhere overseas, are sent individually or in units? Since it is clear that the Territorial Army will augment the very stretched resources of the Regular Forces, will my right hon. Friend give an assurance that it will be equipped and trained in a manner suited to the emphasis laid on its preset it rôle and on its primary phase?

Wherever possible B.A.O.R. reinforcements will train together and be called out together as a sub-unit to go to a similar unit in B.A.O.R. On arrival, these reinforcements will be used at the discretion of the receiving unit, which is normal practice. The Territorial Army is involved already in the reinforcement of B.A.O.R. but the units in question are mainly administrative.

Can the right hon. Gentleman assure us that the proposal to involve the Territorial Army in the B.A.O.R. commitment does not involve any proposal to reduce the professional element in B.A.O.R.? Is he aware that we welcome the proposal that the T.A. should take a closer and more intimate part in civil defence, which we have often said we feel should be its rôle?

I am obliged to the hon. and learned Gentleman. I will certainly give the assurance he asks for in the first part of his supplementary question.

May we have an assurance that the new T.A. commitment to fight the results of a nuclear fire storm will not mean that the amount of time previously devoted to civil defence training will be increased at the expense of the time available for military training? What effect will this new arrangement have on the position of the T.A. Emergency Reserve? How will that be affected?

Each T.A. major unit now does civil defence training every fourth year. In future, half the units having this training in any particular year will be given training to cope with the fire hazard. No additional time will be spent on the civil defence rôle.

asked the Secretary of State for War what was the total value of rail travel warrants issued at Catterick camp over the last convenient period of 12 months.

During the 12 months from 1st January to 31st December, 1963, about £96,000.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will offer the Borough of Woolwich an option to purchase a proportion of the 500 acres of Woolwich Arsenal land released by his Department.

No, Sir. It is the view of my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government that the release of this substantial area of land will best contribute to the most pressing needs of Londoners if it is made available as a whole to the London County Council. It has therefore all been offered to them in one lot.

Will my hon. Friend appreciate that this decision will be disappointing to Woolwich Borough Council? In any future release of Arsenal land, will he bear in mind that an offer should be made to the council of part of the land concerned? Will he certainly bear in mind the importance of consulting the council in any future development which may take place in this area?

Yes, Sir. That will, of course, be considered by the review committee which, as my hon. Friend knows, is going into the matter. As I have said before, we have no intention of departing from normal planning procedures.

asked the Secretary of State for War what consideration he has given to the defence of troops going into action in helicopters, having regard to the heavy casualties sustained by United States and South Vietnam troops landed in operational areas in helicopters in South Vietnam.

Helicopters being used for carrying troops in present operations are armed and further developments are taking place in this field.

Will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that this matter is pursued even further? Will he bear in mind that as increasing numbers of our young soldiers are likely to go into action in these circumstances, it is a particular responsibility of the Government to make sure that they do not become casualties needlessly?

Yes, Sir. I ought to make it clear that troops are carried in Royal Air Force or Royal Navy helicopters. Army helicopters are used for reconnaissance and liaison. However, we are aware of the importance of the points which the hon. Gentleman has made and we are considering improvements both in the weapons of helicopters and measures to protect the crews.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many helicopters are in service with the Army; if he is satisfied with the present numbers; and if he will make a statement.

It would be contrary to normal practice for me to disclose the number of helicopters in service in the Army. I can however say that the number is being steadily increased.

Could my right hon. Friend confirm that there is an Army requirement over the next couple of years for several hundred additional helicopters? Could he give an assurance that if an American helicopter is required it will be constructed in this country?

We shall continue to require more helicopters. Their procurement is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Aviation, but I know that he is well aware of the interests of my hon. Friend.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a great shortage of helicopters everywhere where the Army is serving? It is the one thing the Army needs. Is he aware that at present for reconnaissance there is the American Bell, for the medium range there is the French Alouette and, for the heavy one, the Canadian Westland, and these in their classes are miles better than anything we produce? Is he aware that the shortage is caused by the disaster of the Scout, which is an expensive failure, and that the needs of the Army will not be complied with while the Army is treated as a soup kitchen for an indigent aircraft industry?

I do not accept that the Scout has been a failure. It is coming into service now—it is in service in places—and it is an excellent aircraft.

asked the Secretary of State for War what steps he is taking to dispose of the site of the former Royal Ordnance factory at Swynnerton; and if he will ensure that its disposal will contribute to the expansion and diversification of industry and employment in North Staffordshire.

The disposal of the site is under consideration with the local planning authority. As my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government made clear in his statement to the House on the 14th January, 1964, major development of the kind that would depend on the issue of industrial development certificates, or the provision on a substantial scale of new housing and community services, would not be desirable.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the local Press has named this site "The fantasy of seven years", because for seven years 700 acres in Swynnerton in mid-Staffordshire have lain idle because of the length of the bureaucratic discussions about Birmingham overspill? Is he aware that a decision is urgent? Quite apart from the rigmarole from the Ministry of Housing which he has just read out, can he now say that he will come to a decision with the local planning authority to provide some site for new industry and housing development for the benefit of the people of mid-Staffordshire?

We are consulting the planning authority which is now studying possible future uses of the site. Questions of industry or housing are not a matter for the War Department.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that people have been studying the future use of this site for seven years in the Ministry of Housing, the local planning authority and the Board of Trade—everyone except the hon. Gentleman's own Department? Will he consult the students who have had a seven-year period for study and ask them now kindly to take a decision on the use of this site?

Our job is merely to get rid of the site.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many contracts for the supply of arms to South Africa still exist; how many of them relate to spare parts for Saracen armoured vehicles; when these contracts were made; and when they end.

It is not the practice to disclose information about arms supplied to other countries, but as regards Saracen spares my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister indicated on 19th December, 1963, that we intend to complete the present contract but not to make new ones.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when that contract will expire? Can he repeat the assurance that no further contracts will be entered into? Can he tell us whether the South African Government has been informed and can he say what consultations his Department has had with the Prime Minister as British capital, I.C.I, capital, is being used to build small arms factories in South Africa where, among other things, tear gas is being manufacfactured which can be used only for internal purposes?

The last part of that supplementary question is another question. The quantity involved is small and the contract will end when delivery of the outstanding order is complete, which will not be long.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that Saracen troop carriers in the South African context are almost certain to be used almost wholly exclusively in internal disturbances? Is not this the sort of arms which the United Nations has asked us not to supply?

I cannot necessarily accept what the hon. and learned Gentleman has said. The policy in this matter is well understood and is governed by the broad distinction between arms which would enable the policy of apartheid to be enforced and those which any country would be likely to need for its own defence. This distinction works in practice.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many acres of land were used by his Department in the Stanford battle area, Norfolk in1946, 1952, and 1963, respectively; when the latest review of this area took place; and when he will again review this area.

In 1946, 1952 and 1963, the land used by the War Department at Stanford was some 27,500, 25,000 and 19,500 acres respectively. In conformity with our policy of releasing all land not required for War Department purposes the need to retain Stanford is kept under review, but we are likely to go on needing it.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that this is a colossal area of land to be retained for these purposes? I appreciate that some land has to be kept for training purposes, but is not an area of nearly 20,000acres too much? Is the hon. Gentleman confident that it is all needed for training? Is he aware that local people say that a considerable acreage could be given up? Will he seriously reconsider this matter, as land is our most valuable possession and as it is criminal that it should be kept for these purposes?

We look at the whole matter regularly and we have no desire to hold on to an acre of land which we do not need. We let out for such agricultural use as is compatible with military training as much land as we can, but we need the site and it is in pretty constant use.

asked the Secretary of State for War why the number of administrative, executive and clerical grade civil servants employed by the War Office has increased by more than 10 per cent. since 1st April, 1958, while the number of soldiers has decreased by more than 125,000 during this period.

The transfer of functions from the Ministry of Supply to the War Department resulted in an increase of staff in these grades by about 10 per cent. Since then there has been a substantial reduction in the number of posts providing the administrative backing for the smaller all-Regular Army. But because of our policy of civilianisation, the total numbers in the civilian grades referred to has altered very little.

Is my hon. Friend aware that Professor Parkinson might draw different conclusions from the actual figures? At some future date, can my hon. Friend make a statement about civilianisation, in the House or outside, giving specific examples of how civil servants have stepped into soldiers' shoes?

There has been a reduction of about 10 per cent. in the posts covered by the grades to which the Question refers, excluding staff transferred to the Ministry of Public Building and Works. Because of the smaller size of the Regular Army, we are now using civilians for posts which used to be filled by soldiers. If my hon. Friend will put down a specific Question asking for specific information, I will give it to him.

Does the hon. Gentleman recall the criticisms of the Estimates Committee in 1962 of War Office staffing, and that it was admitted by one witness that the staff of 7,000 men aimed at was merely a figure thought up; that there had been a failure to have a balanced reduction of staff and that the reduction had been in the clerical and lower branch staff grades only, a reduction in typists and tea boys and not top brass? What has been done since then and has that trend been reversed?

We have naturally studied the matter very carefully since then and we think that we are approaching the target of 7,000 at which we are aiming.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will make a statement on the situation of British personnel seconded to the Army of Tanganyika and of their dependants.

Of the 47 British officers and N.C.O.S seconded to the Tanganyikan Army, nearly all, together with their families, are now in Nairobi or have been flown to the United Kingdom. Those still in Dar-es-Salaam are in the British High Commission.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is a great comfort to know that these men, and particularly their families, are safe? Is he also aware that this is very tragic news and that a successful mutiny is bad history for any country?

Will my right hon. Friend agree that, in fairness to the British officers and N.C.O.s who have now been expelled from Tanganyika, it should be made clear that many of them have served for many years with African troops and have enjoyed the loyalty and affection of those troops? Would he agree that there are no real grounds justifying the revolt through dissatisfaction arising out of any lack of speed in replacing British officers and N.C.O.s with Africans or dissatisfaction over pay or conditions? Were any African officers involved in the revolt? Does he place any significance on the fact reported in the Press that the self-styled field-marshal, Okello, was present in Tanganyika on the night of the revolt?

On the last two parts of that supplementary question, we do not know enough to be able to comment. On the first part, I am glad that my hon. Friend was able to say what he said and I accept it. One of the few pieces of news which has reached us is that one of the detachments involved was saying goodbye to its officers with regret and seeing them off from the airport.

asked the Secretary of State for War what is the weight of the walkie-talkie wireless set at present used by the infantry; and what would be the weight of an equivalent transistorised set.

Infantry platoons use a VHF manpack radio which weighs 10 lb. Its replacement, which will use transistors, is expected to weigh about 8 lb.

When are the transistors likely to come?

It will be some time before this, particular pack is replaced by a transistorised one, but I emphasise that there is not very much difference in the weight. Another set used by the infantry is due to be replaced before long by a transistorised model and again the weights will be about the same, but the use of transistors will enable other characteristics such as longer range to be built in.

Can my right hon. Friend explain why this is such a heavy article? My impression, having seen the civilian equivalent, is that it should weigh about 2 lb. or 2½ lb. How does my right hon. Friend whip it up to 8 lb.?

This tends to be the way with military equipment which has to have qualities of robustness of construction which entails added weight to stand up to Service conditions.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many air raid shelters built for and during the last war still remain in the City of Aberdeen; and what are his plans for their removal.

I understand that there are about 2,600 last war shelters left in the City of Aberdeen. Normally the removal of shelters at public expense is authorised only if they are structurally unsound, a danger to health or impeding approved development. However, in connection with the scheme for additional capital investment in development districts during this winter, my right hon. Friend has authorised the town council to remove before 31st March next some 500 shelters which do not come within any of these categories and whose potential value for civil defence is negligible.

Does the Minister realise that air raid shelters, which were a valuable protection in the last war, would be quite useless in conditions of any unhappy future war? Will she, therefore, take steps to have the remaining ones removed?

No, Sir, because some of the shelters are needed by some of the tenants or owner-occupiers for storage purposes. Some are still needed for civil defence purposes. To give general approval for the demolition of all the shelters would be far too costly.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland for what reasons he decided not to advise Her Majesty to exercise Her Royal Prerogative of Mercy in the case of Henry John Burnett.

It is the long-established practice not to give reasons for decisions in individual cases of this kind.

Does not the Secretary of State remember that in this case there was a great body of expert and powerful evidence adduced against this hanging? Will he realise that it is quite inconsistent with British ideas—Scottish ideas—of justice that people should be killed without the reasons being made public, particularly in a case of this sort?

I understand what the hon. and learned Member has said—that expressions of opinion have come from a number of different sources—but it is my duty to take into consideration all the relevant information, both medical and other, that I am given, and I must stick to the long-established practice that particular reasons are not given in individual cases.

Why does the Secretary of State act on evidence secretly adduced and presented to him which is contrary to evidence publicly adduced and the subject of cross-examination before judge and jury in open court?

I do not think that the hon. and learned Member is right. The evidence which is considered in court is given to the court, and the action which I take may be after that and may have to consider other factors, but it is not contrary to what is stated in court and judged by the court to be right.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he has now considered the Wheatley Report, Command Paper No. 2066;and whether he intends to introduce the necessary legislation to establish a general teaching council.

My right hon. Friend has still to receive comments on the recommendations from some of the interested bodies, who have until the end of the month to convey their views. I cannot say at present when my right hon. Friend will be in a position to make a statement.

In considering this matter, will the hon. Lady ask her right hon. Friend to bear in mind the growing perturbation not only among teachers but among parents about the large proportion of teachers who are uncertificated and who fall below the standard necessary? Will she also bear in mind that the last revision of these regulations took place in 1931 and that therefore there is urgency for this reform? Finally, will she bear in mind that many of the Robbins Committee's recommendations cannot possibly be carried out unless and until such a council is formed?

I am sure that all these matters will be considered, but I have said that we have to wait for the last representations until the end of the month.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware of the continuing delays and postponements of pleading diets and trials and of congestion at Glasgow sheriff courts; if he is further aware that the measures announced by him on 5th February, 1962, to deal with this problem have not proved adequate; and what further proposals he has to deal with the back-log of cases, and to reduce the time and money spent by solicitors and civil and police witnesses.

My right hon. Friend is aware that the criminal business of the Glasgow sheriff court is increasing and that the court is congested. The long-term solution may be the provision of a new courthouse and at my right hon. Friend's request the Courthouse Commissioners have provided an estimate of requirements which is now being considered by his Department and by the Ministry of Public Building and Works.

While appreciating the information which the hon. Lady has given the House, may I ask whether she will bear in mind that figures which her right hon. Friend recently supplied to me show that in the month of November, 1962, no fewer than a quarter of all the cases awaiting trial had to wait for four to six months and that in November, 1963, this had increased to two-thirds? With this increasing sense of urgency will her right hon. Friend look at the problem with a view to giving it some priority?

Yes. The hon. Member will no doubt recall that in Feruary an extra sheriff substitute was appointed, and another two in the fall of last year, and that two extra court rooms were added. This certainly had an effect in reducing the congestion, but unfortunately the volume of crime is increasing.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give details of the advantages, financial or otherwise, which accrue to localities inside the designated growth areas of Central Scotland as compared with scheduled development districts outside such growth areas.

Both types of area are eligible as development districts for the financial benefits of the Local Employment Acts and last year's Finance Act. But a decision on whether to remove a growth area from the list of development districts would depend upon the economic position of Central Scotland as a whole, not only upon its own unemployment position.

Is the hon. Member aware that we have all read that many, many times, that the Fife County Council and others have read it and that we are still no further forward as to what are the precise advantages to be obtained from being within the boundaries of a growth area compared with being outside the boundaries? Is he aware that the letter which I received from his right hon. Friend on this matter simply made confusion worse confounded in that he said that the boundaries had been very carefully drawn after enormous consideration but that it did not matter very much whether one was inside or outside the boundaries?

If the hon. Member reads carefully what I said in my Answer before I referred to the White Paper, which I did only to provide him with further detail, he will see that there are there two advantages: first, that a development district in a growth area will not necessarily cease to be a development district simply because of a change in the position of its own unemployment; and, secondly, that there will be more investment in and for a growth area.

Surely the Minister is aware that the Government have already stated in reply to the Estimates Committee that they would hesitate before removing any development district from the schedule because of a drop in unemployment. There is no change there. The fact is that in Scotland all the growth areas were already in development districts. What Chapter 1 says and what he said is that this is purely a matter of definition and that there is no difference at all. Will he tell me, for instance, how much of the additional £30 million of public investment which is being spent this year—because this is to be the biggest boom year in respect of this matter—is being spent in the growth areas?

I hope that this does not mean that the hon. Member is against the principle of growth areas, because the principle has been supported by economists, economic journals and other reports. I cannot off the cuff give him an answer to the second part of his supplementary question. It is a different question, which no doubt deserves a place on the Order Paper.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what action he has taken arising from the petition sent to him by Jane Buxton concerning conditions in Gateside Women's Prison, Greenock.

Improvements are continually being made in prisons, and since Miss Buxton was in Gateside Prison two years ago, for example, there have been new styles of dress, and shoes, underwear, stockings, and face cloths have been issued and sprays have been provided in the bathrooms. Miss Buxton's recent paper has been circulated to the visiting committee and is being studied in detail in my department.

Will the hon. Lady give me a complete assurance that the Secretary of State, to whom I addressed the Question, has paid regard to the allegations contained in the petition sent to him by Jane Buxton concerning hygiene, medical care, lack of changes of clothing, education, lack of exercise and the fact that the exercise yard was very small? Will she give an assurance to the House today that we shall try to attain the highest possible standard for this, the one women's prison in Scotland, and not have complaints emanating from it because of the conditions there?

Miss Buxton was in prison two years ago. I cannot comment on any specific allegations in the document until it has been studied in detail, but I assure the hon. Member that it will be studied in detail—and has been so studied by myself and, I am sure, by my right hon. Friend.

In view of the hon. Lady's answer to my hon. Friend, may I ask for an assurance that the Secretary of State will answer a letter which I sent to him dealing seriatim with the points of the memorandum which Miss Buxton made, in view of the fact that she is obviously a very unusual type of prisoner and has made a constructive effort to try to improve conditions in that prison?

I know that the hon. Member's letter was only acknowledged. The reason that he has not had a full reply is that we are awaiting the visiting committee.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what estimate he has made of the additional road improvement expenditure which will be necessary if Dr. Beeching's rail closure proposals are adopted.

I cannot give an aggregate figure. But as regards the 14 passenger service withdrawal proposals, on which the Scottish Transport Users' Consultative Committee has so far reported to my right hon. Friend, the Minister of Transport, the additional roads expenditure that would be needed, if these were implemented, is negligible.

This is a shocking reply. Is the hon. Member aware that I am not requesting information about those which have been dealt with—the negligible ones, the 14 he mentioned—but the whole proposals? Surely he is aware that there ought to be some blueprint for Scotland emanating from the Beeching Report? What is the expenditure which will be necessary before more traffic is thrown on to the roads, causing more deaths and injuries?

As I suspect the hon. Member knows, the cases are being dealt with one by one and not as a single exercise. The cost of the consequential road improvement is assessed in respect of each case which goes to the Minister of Transport for decision following a report of the consultative committee. There would be no useful purpose at this time in trying to assess an aggregate figure.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what reply he has sent to organisations protesting to him about the British Railways proposals to close the lines north and west of Inverness.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has now received regarding the pro posed closure of the Inverness-Kyle of Lochalsh and Inverness-Thurso railway lines; and what replies he has sent.

My right hon. Friend has received a considerable number of representations and in reply has referred to the statutory procedure under Section 56 of the Transport Act for dealing with rail closure proposals and to the consultations which will take place between the Minister of Transport and himself before any decisions are reached. He has also said that he is seeking advice from the Highland Transport Board.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that his reply is most disappointing but no: surprising? Is he aware that a member of the Transport Users' Consultative Committee, Mr. J. R. C. Ballantyne of Sutherland, in a letter to the Ross-shire Journal has stated that the Government, although they made no public announcement, had indicated privately before the proposed closures were announced that they had no intention of putting them into effect north and west of Inverness? Is he aware that we on this side consider that this public inertia of the Secretary of State on a matter of such importance cannot be counter-balanced by this news management in private? What has the hon. Gentleman to say about the position?

My first comment is that it distresses me but does not surprise me that the hon. Gentleman should think this is a disappointing reply. I express my surprise that he with all his experience should believe everything that he reads in the newspapers, even in the Ross-shire Journal.

Is the Under-Secretary aware that he cannot just brush aside the allegation as simply as that? It is widely felt in the North that these private assurances had been given and that there is a great deal of politics involved in this. Cannot we get the matter cleared up? Are these lines to be closed or not? If a decision has been taken by the Secretary of State that they shall not be closed, why cannot he say that in public instead of allowing this farce of meetings of the T.U.C.C. to be gone through? Is not the whole position extremely confusing and unsatisfactory?

I must tell the hon. Gentleman that, so far as I and my right hon. Friend are aware, there is no substance in any of the private assurances which the hon. Gentleman says have been given. I referred in my reply to the statutory procedure which must be gone through. This must be persisted with.

Can my hon. Friend arrange for these hearings to be brought forward to a very early date because of the uncertainty—also the hearing in connection with the Stranraer-Edinburgh-Hawick line?

My hon. Friend has raised a slightly different point in the last part of his supplementary question. The closing date for objections with regard to the Highland lines was two days ago. The hearings have been fixed for the 9th and 10th March, which is a good deal earlier than usual.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is aware that Glasgow recently was relatively clear of fog in the smokeless zone area but handicapped beyond it; and if he will make a statement on the benefits derived from this smokeless zone since its inception.

Yes, Sir. I am glad that the results appear to register success of the smoke control policy. Apart from the immediate benefits experienced at times of fog, smoke control in Glasgow and other areas is removing a serious health hazard letting more sunlight through, keeping buildings and their contents cleaner, and reducing maintenance costs in a number of ways.

Is the Secretary of State calling the attention of other cities to this benefit? Is he taking any steps to increase the supply of smokeless fuel so that this can be developed more quickly?

With a few outstanding exceptions such as Glasgow, which plans to have nearly the whole city under smoke control, progress is not as fast as my right hon. Friend would wish, and he is taking every opportunity to encourage it. My right hon. Friend is also concerned to encourage the supply of smokeless fuel. The right hon. Gentleman may have seen recent reports of a new plant which should be in bulk production later this year.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that his right hon. Friend the Minister of Power published a White Paper in December, 1963, in which he admitted the continuing shortage of solid smokeless fuel and said that this shortage would become greater in the next few years if we persisted in having any further enlargement of smokeless zones? There is a difficulty here which must be looked into. Is the hon. Gentleman aware also that in Glasgow in particular the availability of solid smokeless fuel is declining all the time because the Gas Board is going over from coal carbonisation to the manufacture of town gas from light oil distillates?

My right hon. Friend is well aware of the dilemma here and of the desire to press ahead with smoke-controlled zones, but at the same time not go so far ahead as to overtake the supply of fuels. This is a problem which is appreciated, and the distributive trade is doing its best to overcome it.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland for what reason he has refused the application for an off-sales licence to Messrs. Lemon & Co., Aerated Waters, Ltd., Dingwall, when at a meeting of the Dingwall and District Licensing Court the company's application was granted.

My right hon. Friend considered Messrs. Lemon's application carefully, but found no sufficient reason to justify the grant to them of authority to sell liquor by retail in a State Management District.

I thought that it was the policy of this Government to encourage competition. Is my hon. Friend aware that this firm has given a guarantee that it will not open a retail shop? Surely it is an anomaly when firms outside the State Management District can deliver within that area but independent firms cannot deliver in their own vicinity?

My right hon. Friend and the Government are always ready to encourage competition, but in this case my right hon. Friend felt unable to grant authority. He would do so only when an applicant is able to provide facilities which it is impracticable for State management to provide.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when he intends to authorise sufficient expenditure by the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board to enable it to provide supply in North Uist and Barra, and to complete its proposed five to six years' programme, as recommended in the Mackenzie Report.

My right hon. Friend has authorised the Board to increase its expenditure for this purpose during the next two years; but it is for the Board to decide the order in which the areas covered by its programme should be tackled. Expenditure to be authorised in later years will be settled at the appropriate time.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Hydro-Electric Board is most anxious to complete the 5 to 6-year programme recommended by the Mackenzie Committee and that it is complaining bitterly that, after repeated appeals to the Secretary of State, he has not authorised it to spend its money in such a way as to bring electricity to the outlying islands of North Uist and Barra for at least three or four years yet to come? At a time when the Government are supposed to be developing the Highlands, modernising Britain and developing the tourist industry, how can they justify leaving these islands in darkness for the next four years?

I hoped that the hon. Gentleman would be pleased at the information about the increase. This additional expenditure is intended as an interim measure to enable the rate of rural distribution to be speeded up immediately. I am well aware of the recommendation in paragraph 172 of the Mackenzie Report that the programme should be completed in five or six years, but this is for the immediate next two years.

Is the Under-Secretary aware that it is quite impossible, according to the Hydro-Electric Board, for it to commit itself to the completion of this programme or to do it systematically within the timetable recommended, as the Government have repeatedly refused to authorise the expenditure of an adequate amount of money? Does not this occur to the hon. Gentleman?

I note what the hon. Gentleman says, but it is up to the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board itself to decide which areas it will tackle first.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland why he approved the Western Isles Ferry Services timetable of Messrs. MacBrayne's without consulting the island district councils and other responsible people in the islands best able to give guidance on local and tourist needs; and whether he is aware of the concern in North Uist about the inadequacy of the ferry service and in South Uist at the lack of a direct sea link from Lochboisdale to Mallaig at least twice weekly.

Before approving Messrs. MacBrayne's proposed timetables for the new car ferry service my right hon. Friend consulted the County Councils of Ross and Cromarty, Inverness and Argyll and also received the advice of the Advisory Panel on the Highlands and Islands. My right hon. Friend thinks that it was reasonable to expect that local opinion on the new services would be conveyed to him through these bodies.

While I believe that the hon. Gentleman honestly believes what he has said, is he aware that it is utter nonsense? Is he aware that none of the local district councils were consulted, as they have been in past years when there has been a reorganisation of steamer services, and that hon. Members who represent constituencies in the area and who know some of the practical difficulties involved were also not consulted? Is he further aware that the Secretary of State signed a document which was radically and dishonestly different from the timetable document which was approved by the county council and the Highland Panel? Does the hon. Gentleman realise that all those people have seen the first document but have not seen the second one? I know that this will come as a surprise to the hon. Gentleman, but will he look into this matter and try to make Messrs. MacBrayne's revert to the daily services to Uist which the hon. Gentleman himself said were important when he was present at the launching of one of the vessels in this service?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that I will look into this matter. It is certainly a fact that the county councils were consulted, and so was the Advisory Panel. As to the signning of some other arrangement, I can inform the hon. Gentleman that there has been no objection from the county council concerned.

rose—

Mr. Dalyell, Question 26.

On a point of order. The Under-Secretary is so lamentably misinformed and appears to be unwilling to bring himself up to date on the facts that I must give notice that I will raise this matter on the Adjournment.

Order. There is a traditional form of words for giving notice and, in giving notice, the hon. Member cannot make another speech.

On a point of order. With respect, Mr. Speaker, the Undersecretary has given information to the House which is grossly wrong, including the statement that there have been no objections about the matter. What I was pointing out—

The hon. Member must remember that there is a traditional form of words to be used when giving notice, the object being to prevent hon. Members occupying the time of the House by making further speeches.

On a different point of order, Mr. Speaker. I, of course, accept what you say, but are you aware, or may I make you aware, Sir, that the Under-Secretary has given grossly wrong information to the House? Is he in order in doing so?

That does not give rise to a point of order.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland on what precise date the first 45 houses in the scheme of 270 at Livingston Station will now be ready for occupation.

I understand that the first 45 houses may not now be completed until August of this year. A precise date cannot be given.

Why was a different Answer given on 20th November?

This programme was delayed for two reasons; firstly, the ban on overtime in the building industry and, secondly, the exceptionally wet weather in November which severely handicapped earth-moving equipment. Efforts are being made to catch up on lost time.

Was not the wet weather in November known on 20th November?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what recent surveys have been made of the laundry needs of elderly persons; and to what extent these needs are being met.

The Scottish Old People's Welfare Committee recently made inquiries through its affiliated committees and concluded that in a number of areas the laundry needs of elderly persons were not being fully met. Local authorities have copies of the report, and I am about to issue a circular asking them to consider what more they can usefully do.

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that we have been pressing the Government to do more about this matter for almost 10 years? Is not it time that the Government stopped fiddling and fumbling around and devised methods of meeting a really urgent need?

I very much hope that local authorities will develop this service. A circular was sent to them some time ago and I am about to issue a further one urging them to do this. However, I think that we should leave this matter, if at all possible, to the enterprise of local authorities.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland in how many local authority areas there are regular joint meetings of the local authorities, voluntary associations and National Health Service committees for the purpose of promoting the welfare of the aged.

My right hon. Friend has told both the local authorities and the main voluntary organisations that he attaches the greatest value to co-operation in local arrangements for the welfare of old people. I have no knowledge of the extent to which regular meetings are held for this purpose.

Is the Under-Secretary aware that the former Secretary of State told local authorities and voluntary associations that almost 10 years ago: that it is quite clear from the available evidence that adequate co-operation does not exist and that until we have such co-operation it will not be possible to meet the needs of elderly people efficiently, properly and with the degree of urgency that is necessary?

The Scottish Old People's Welfare Committee has recently told my officers that local authorities are now co-operating with the voluntary interests more closely than ever before. I think, therefore, that we can say that progress is being made.

Far too slowly.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he is taking to ensure adequate school accommodation in the Burgh of Clydebank.

Responsibility for ensuring adequate school accommodation rests primarily with the education authority. In its programme for the next three years Dunbartonshire has included three new schools and the replacement or extension of four others in Clydebank.

Is the noble Lady aware that the programme for the County of Dunbarton for 1964–65 represents a serious reduction on what the County needs? Is she aware that the education authority has demanded a far higher rate of building than the Department in Edinburgh is prepared to concede to it? Will she take into consideration the fact that the Development Department in Edinburgh is encouraging the new town of Cumbernauld and the burghs to expand and develop while, at the same time, the Education Department is cutting down the school building programme? Is she aware that this is leading, particularly in Clydebank, to a shortage of school accommodation which will remain for the next three years?

The authority was given a provisional allocation of £1·1 million for starts in 1964–65 last October. The authority has drawn up a realistic programme of school building and there will be final adjustments made in March.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received respecting the shortage of primary school accommodation in the Burgh of Kirkintilloch.

Since my right hon. Friend's reply to the hon. Member's Question on 27th November, he has had a request from the Town Council of Kirkintilloch for a meeting to discuss the situation.

Will the noble Lady give urgent considerationto the provision of this primary school at Oxgang, which is urgently needed because of the pressure coming from the use of the Lenzie Academy as a result of secondary students from the new town of Cumbernauld going there? Is she aware that unless something urgent is done a large number of 5-year-old children in Kirkintilloch will not be able to be accommodated in school during the next 12 months?

I understand that the authority felt that the Westergreens School was important and wished to start it in May. This is primarily a matter on which the local education authority must decide the priority.

Is the noble Lady aware that the Westergreens School gives primary education to Roman Catholic children in Kirkintilloch while the Oxgang school is a non-Catholic one and that, therefore, it does not give a fair balance to say that because one was granted the other should not be granted, since the other is just as necessary as the Westergreens School?

As I said, it is primarily a matter for the local education authority to arrange its priorities.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland for what reason nominations are already being sought from hotel and catering interests for membership of the proposed Scottish Tourist Amenities Council; and whether, in view of the fact that the Countryside and Tourist Amenities (Scotland) Bill has only recently been introduced into Parliament and may be substantially amended before reaching the Statute Book, he will postpone seeking such nominations until a later stage.

My right hon. Friend has informed the organisations concerned that, in the event of the Bill becoming law during the current Session, it is expected that the Scottish Tourist Amenities Council will be appointed soon thereafter, and he has asked them to let him have any names which they would wish him to consider in making appointments to the Council. No time limit has been fixed for the submission of nominations.

Was not this a rather premature request to this organisation, particularly when one considers the Answer given earlier to Question No. 15? Is it not a fact that the hotel owners have notified him that they are totally opposed to this imposition to pay for the working of this Council? Because of this, will the hon. Gentleman urge his right hon. Friend to withdraw the request for nominations at this early date?

It is not unusual for consultations to take place while a Bill is still before the House. My right hon. Friend's letter made it clear that appoint- ments to the Council were dependent upon the Bill being passed. Criticism has not been levelled at the formation of the Council but at other parts of the Bill. The hon. Member will recall that recently there has been criticism of my right hon. Friend because of a delay which occurred in appointing members to the Highlands Transport Board. It is to avoid any delay that my right hon. Friend is trying to move off early in this case.

But this Bill has not even had its Committee stage yet. After that, it must have its Report stage and Third Reading, and then there are the whole of the proceedings in another place. Would it not have been much more sensible to wait until the House of Commons had discussed the duties and responsibilities of the Council—indeed, until it had authorised the establishment of such a Council—before proceeding in this way?

My right hon. Friend has made it entirely clear that the recommendations are completely subject to the Bill's passing through these stages. His object is to try to save time by ensuring that there is no delay later on.

Is the Minister aware that it was announced yesterday that there is to be a very big reduction in the Government contribution to this tourist organisation? Is this the commencement of development under the Bill—to reduce the contribution to tourist organisations?

That is an entirely different question.