asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the present average cost of new places in approved schools; and how this compares with the cost of places in other boarding establishments.

The new places provided in approved schools since 1st April, 1960, have been obtained by extending or adapting existing premises, at an average cost of £2,300 a place. New building will cost considerably more. As the purposes and requirements of other boarding establishments vary so widely, no useful comparison can be made.

Are not these figures very high indeed? Is the hon. Lady's Department taking any steps to carry out major reconstructions or build new schools in conjunction with consortia and effecting economies in that way?

Although these figures seem high, adapting old premises is expensive and new premises cost even more.

Is the country getting value for all this money? Does the hon. Lady consider that she and her right hon. Friend have all the control necessary to ensure that the country does so?

Yes. I can assure the hon. Lady that we are getting good value, and I believe we have adequate control.

Why should delinquent boys get better treatment than lads who behave themselves? Why should we build palaces for these scoundrels? Why cannot we treat them more harshly?

I do not think they get better treatment, but I believe that the treatment we give is in the best interests of society as a whole.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware of the increase in sheep stealing; what action he intends to take by legislation, or otherwise; and whether he will make a statement.

Separate national statistics for sheep stealing are not available. There has been some increase in the total figures for thefts of sheep, horses and cattle. The police do all they can, in co-operation with farmers, to prevent and detect these offences, and on the information at present available my right hon. Friend does not consider that action on his part is necessary. The maximum penalty for these offences is fourteen years' imprisonment.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the penalties are severe enough if the culprits can be caught? Does she agree that the difficulty experienced by the police at the moment is catching the rustlers on moorland country? If the situation were to deteriorate, would my hon. Friend's Department be prepared to set up an inquiry into the situation?

I appreciate the difficulties. As I think my hon. Friend knows, farmers are at present seeing what they can do to co-operate with the police.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the present accumulation of arrears of work in the registration division of the Charity Commission.

I am informed by the Chief Charity Commissioner that the present number of charities entered on the Central Register is roughly 33,000 and the number of applications awaiting attention 5,000. The arrears are being overtaken at the rate of about 300 a week.

Has not something gone seriously wrong? Does the Home Secretary recollect that a couple of years ago he promised the hon. Member for Putney (Sir H. Linstead) that the scheme would be pretty well in operation by the spring of 1963? Yet there are now these arrears, largely due to the shortage of staff. What is he doing about recruiting extra staff?

I was not Home Secretary a couple of years ago. Big arrears did mount up last year, partly due to the slowness of charity trustees to apply for registration at the proper time, so that we had a very heavy concentration of applications in 1963 which should have come in 1961 and 1962. We experienced difficulties in recruiting sufficient suitable staff during the early part of last year, but those difficulties have now been overcome and, as I said, we are overtaking arrears at the rate of 300 a week.

Would my right hon. Friend consult my right hon. and learned Friend the Leader of the House with a view to us having a debate on this subject and on the Charity Commission's work in general in the foreseeable future?

I am sure that my right hon. and learned Friend will take note of it, but my hon. Friend knows that I do not arrange the business of the House.

Can the Home Secretary assure us that none of the applications is in any way prejudiced by the delay in registration?

Yes, I can certainly give that assurance. I can go further and say that, if expeditious registration is required for some good reason in an individual case and the need for it is explained, the Commissioners will do their best to deal with that case quickly.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware of recent accidents resulting from the sale of inflammable material for the making of nightwear; and if he will take further action to protect consumers against this danger

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will take steps to make it an offence to offer for sale inflammable nightclothes or to make it obligatory to specify clearly that the goods are inflammable.

I would refer the hon. Members to the reply I gave on 16th January to Questions by the hon. Member for Huddersfield, East (Mr. J. P. W. Mallalieu) and the hon. Member for Bradford, South (Mr. George Craddock).

I thank the Home Secretary for drawing my attention to that reply. Can he say whether discussions with the trade on this matter have already started, and can he forecast how soon he will be able to report to the House on the possibility of making regulations under the Consumer Protection Act, 1961?

I have already sent a letter, following my announcement last week, to 26 associations of manufacturers and distributors. I have asked for their early replies and indicated my intention of arranging a meeting to consider the position in the light of their replies in the next week or two.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why he has decided that the Skelhorn inquiry into the Woolf case shall be held in private; if he will reconsider this decision; and if he will give an assurance that the proceedings, as well as Mr. Skelhorn's report, will be published

I decided that, in the absence of any power to compel the attendance of witnesses, a private inquiry was more likely to lead to a full and frank examination of all the evidence, and thus would better enable Mr. Skelhorn to arrive at the truth. I am sure that this decision was in the public interest. To publish the proceedings at the inquiry would be inconsistent with the decision to hold the inquiry in private; but Mr. Skelhorn's report will be published in full.

While recognising that it was a slip of the tongue on 19th December, when the Home Secretary referred to a public inquiry, does he not agree that this is rather an unusual step to take? Is it not normal to allow the commissioner, or whoever is appointed to make an inquiry ofthis kind, to decide whether the proceedings are best held in private or in public? Is not one of the purposes of this inquiry, not only that there should be a fair and impartial investigation of the Woolf case, but that there should be seen to be a fair and impartial investigation? How can this be done if the Home Secretary himself orders it to be held entirely in private?

I am sure that the report which I shall receive in due course will show that this has been an impartial, objective and comprehensive inquiry. I know that I am reported in Hansard as saying that there would be a public inquiry, but it must have been a slip of the tongue, because I have no recollection of saying that and I had already conveyed to Mr. Skelhorn that the inquiry should be in private. My reason was that, having no power to compel the attendance of witnesses, it seemed to be much better to ensure that they would attend by holding the inquiry in private. All the essential witnesses have been invited to attend, and I have every reason to believe that they will do so.

What is the good of saying that it will be a comprehensive inquiry when the right hon. Gentleman does not know whether or not vital witnesses will turn up? Surely, if he does not have power under this form of inquiry to summon witnesses and hear and cross-examine them on evidence on oath, this type of inquiry is inadequate for this purpose—an inquiry about which there is wide public interest and about which a great deal of public anxiety has been aroused, whether or not justifiably so we do not know?

When the Police Bill, which I presented to Parliament and which is now under discussion in Standing Committee, reaches the Statute Book, I will have power to set up a statutory inquiry at which the attendance of witnesses can be compelled. At present I have no such power, and it has not been suggested to me that this would be a suitable and appropriate case for using the powers under the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Act, 1921.I am not sure whether the hon. Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Hale) is aware that this inquiry started seven days ago.

Is the Home Secretary aware that it is rather unfortunate that he made that slip of the tongue and referred to a public inquiry, thereby, quite unwittingly, misleading the House to some extent? Does he not agree that the only way in which public anxiety can be allayed, since the inquiry is now proceeding in private, would be for him to give the House and the country the fullest possible report of the proceedings?

I have already expressed my apologies to the hon. Members concerned if I made a slip of the tongue. I have written to them about the matter. I have already stated on more than one occasion that whatever Mr. Skelhorn reports I will publish in full.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will make a statement with regard to the death in Her Majesty's Prison at Wormwood Scrubs on 26th December of Edward Charles Panting, and the events leading up to it;

Panting was in the allocation centre at Wormwood Scrubs awaiting transfer to a training borstal. He was found hanging by his belt from his cell window; all efforts to resuscitate him failed. He was not in solitary confinement, but earlier in the evening he had been involved in a fight and had been placed in a separate cell pending inquiry. He appeared to be perfectly normal when an officer took him his supper, which he ate. Less than 45 minutes later he was found hanging.

Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that there was adequate supervision of the boys in the television hall prior to the fight which led up to Panting being put in a cell on his own? How is it that this boy could start a fight on three occasions and get hold of some broken glass with which to attack one of his fellow prisoners if there was adequate supervision at that time? Can he say whether force was used by the warders, as has been alleged in the court, to put Panting in a cell on his own? Is my right hon. Friend further aware that on the occasion when Panting attempted to cut his wrist in Aylesbury Prison he also removed the stitches from his arm and attempted to allow himself to bleed to death? Was that not an attempt at suicide?

With regard to the last incident mentioned by my hon. Friend, the medical officer at Aylesbury Prison considered that it was not an attempt at suicide. Of course, it is not uncommon for prisoners or borstal inmates to do themselves slight damage by cutting themselves, often with a view to getting into hospital as a result. I can assure the House that there was adequate supervision throughout. I do not believe that the House wishes that there should be, as it were, one prison officer to every inmate who should be watching his every movement throughout the day. There must be a measure of association. Panting was a boy who, on more than one occasion, got into a fight. Unfortunately, this happened. It seemed right to put him in a cell by himself for a time and, most unfortunately and wholly unexpectedly, he put something around his neck and hanged himself. It is a terrible tragedy, but I really do not believe that the right thing would be to supervise individually every borstal inmate, with a large staff, every moment of the day.

Will the Home Secretary consider further the evidence that he not only slightly cut his wrist in Aylesbury gaol but then tried to tear out the stitches? We are told that this was no evidence, but if there was any adequate psychological study of these cases it would be clear that this boy had tendencies to suicide. Is it not an indictment of the lack of observation that we should have reports now that there was no evidence on which to come to this conclusion?

No, Sir. The prison medical staff are very well experienced in judging these men and boys, and there was no reason to believe that what happened in Aylesbury Prison was a suicide attempt of any kind. One does not like to speak about those who are no longer living, but Panting had shown himself when he had been in custody to be a somewhat aggressive young man and was certainly considered someone who was more likely to injure others than himself.

the Secretary of State for the Home Department in how many of Her Majestys' prisons the hostel scheme is in operation; and if he will make a statement on how the scheme is working.

The hostel scheme is in operation at 16 prisons, 2 of which are for women. Three new hostels were opened in 1963. The results of the scheme continue to be encouraging. Research into its effects with different types of prisoners is proceeding.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House how many prisoners have taken part in the hostel scheme, and how many of those have subsequently been reconvicted?

Up to the end of 1962, 460 men serving sentences of imprisonment had been in hostels and had been discharged from them at the end of their sentences. Four hundred and fifteen of those 460 had not been reconvicted a year later, at the end of 1963, and it was on this ground that I said that the experience was encouraging.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he has taken to implement the recommendations in the Report of the Advisory Council on the Treatment of Offenders in relation to the organisation of after-care; and if he will make a statement

As my Advisory Council recognised, the fulfilment of their proposals must necessarily extend over a period of years and will call for a great expansion of the probation service. The first step is, in consultation with the interests concerned, to draw up detailed plans for the implementation of the proposals. This is already in hand. I attach great importance to achieving a major improvement in after-care, and I am most anxious to press forward.

Can the Home Secretary say whether prison officers are now receiving training in methods of rehabilitation and after care?

The Prison Officers Association passed a very helpful resolution at its last annual conference. That has led to the discussions between representatives of the Association and of my Prison Department to consider how prison officers can take a more positive part in social work in prisons.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware that a blind deaf person, who is officially registered as such, is nevertheless liable to jury service and can only be excused when called for jury service, on production of a medical certificate; and if he will introduce early legislation to give all such registered persons complete exemption from jury service

The question whether physically disabled persons should be exempt from jury service is among those being considered by the Departmental Committee under the chairmanship of Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest.

I note what the hon. Lady has said, and I appreciate that the problems are being considered, but is not the present position ridiculous, and are not similar situations which have arisen ridiculous? Can she not advise the officers concerned that when they are satisfied that a person is registered as blind and deaf, or that some responsible society has accepted that person as being blind and deaf, or blindor deaf, such person should not be put to further trouble or expense at any future time? If she cannot do that under the Acts, is she not prepared to bring in legislation forthwith to deal with the ridiculous position at least and not wait for the report of the Committee? The complaint is so perfectly obvious.

It is because the present law needs overhauling that my right hon. Friend has set up the Departmental Committee. I think that we should see what the Committee reports, but I can assure the hon. Gentleman that it is making good progress and will be able to report before the end of the year.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek an early opportunity to raise this question on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will introduce legislation which would require dealers in scrap metal to obtain a licence so to deal, which could be revoked if certain conditions were not fulfilled by the licensee, and which would increase the present maximum penalties for dumping unsaleable scrap by the side of the road and for camping on the highway.

I doubt whether the licensing of all dealers in scrap metal would be a satisfactory method of dealing with the problem of dumping by itinerant dealers. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport and I will consider an increase of the penalties for depositing rubbish and camping on the highway when an opportunity for legislation occurs.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask him whether he will hurry up this consultation, because many parts of my constituency are rendered absolutely hideous by this intolerable nuisance committed by these "diddicoys", as they are called? Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Hertfordshire police made no fewer than 600 prosecutions against these people in 1962, and that the Metropolitan Police prosecuted 300, without making any impression at all on the problem? My constituents look to the Government to do something about the matter?

General questions about the adequacy of the law relating to the dumping of material on highways, and the powers of highway authorities in this respect, are for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport rather than for myself. My hon. Friend might like to follow up the matter with my right hon. Friend. I have given my answer about the penalties, which are a matter for me.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will now establish a police training college on the lines of that inaugurated at Hendon by the late Lord Trenchard, which ceased to function during the last war and has not since been reopened.

The higher training of the police is, in my view, well provided for at the Police College at Bramshill, which was established in 1948.

Will not my right hon. Friend agree that the Hendon College was a very great success in its day; and that many of the people who are now at the top in the force were graduates there? Would it not be a good thing to reinstitute it?

The Hendon College was for the Metropolitan Police alone. It was an experiment which started in 1934; the arrangements were substantially altered in 1938 and, inevitably, it came to an end during the war. But I hope that my hon. Friend, and any other hon. Members on both sides of the House who are interested, will take the opportunity to visit the new Police College at Bramshill, if they have not done so. I think that they will be very greatly impressed by the higher training going on there.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will now make a statement on the inquiry into the circumstances in which various persons were charged with carrying offensive weapons during a demonstration at the time of the Greek royal visit.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will publish in full the report of the police inquiry into incidents connected with the visit of Queen Frederika of Greece last July

The Commissioner of Police has received a report from the senior officer whom he directed to carry out this inquiry, and after studying it he has thought right to refer it to the Director of Public Prosecutions. The House will appreciate that it would be improper for me to say anything more until the Director has decided what action, if any, he will take.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware of concern at the considerable increase in the number of deaths from burns among young children in the Birmingham area; and what action he proposes to take to remedy the situation

I am deeply concerned about the number of avoidable deaths of children from burns, not only in Birmingham but throughout the country. The primary responsibility for preventing these tragedies rests upon parents and those in charge of children, and I am doing all I can to bring that home to them. My Department has sponsored a film to be shown on television about the danger of burns from clothing, and also gives support to the efforts of organisations such as the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents. As I announced last week, I am opening discussions with the trade, and other interested parties, on the possibility of prohibiting by regulation the sale of flammable nightwear.

I appreciate that Answer, but is not the Minister aware that the number of deaths from this cause among children in the Birmingham area is quite unprecedented this year and has caused very considerable alarm? Does he not think that it would be good to have a conference on the improvement of propaganda so that we can seriously change the present situation?

I will do everything that it is open to me to do here. I think that the House last week accepted, and fully supported, my decision to open discussions without delay on the possibility of dealing with the matter by regulations. I have indicated that I am doing all I can by publicity, and the Consumer Council is also active in the matter. These are avoidable tragedies, and if the hon. Gentleman cares to point out any other steps he thinks it worth while to take I would most gladly and sympathetically consider them.

Is the Minister aware that the Shirley Institute, Manchester, which I have recently visited, has carried out the most exhaustive researches into the fire proofing of textile materials to minimise or mitigate these risks? Will he bear in mind that the facts of the situation are well known? Types of textiles that do not expose children to fire risks are available on the market, and it is only because of the lack of public conscience—and the lack of conscience on the part of commercial firms who are importing large quantities of these dangerous materials from the Far East, and elsewhere—that this risk to our children remains so grave. Will he not regard it as urgent for his Department to produce legislation to prohibit the sale of the type of flannelette that exposes so many children to this great risk?

I have already said what I am doing with the general support of the House. The matter is not quite as simple as the hon. Member suggests, because the non-flammable materials are at present more expensive than the flammable ones. But I am pressing on as hard as I can, and everything I can do to diminish this terrible toll of children's deaths, I shall do.

When the right hon. Gentleman consults about the prohibition of textile materials, will he also consider inflammable toys, which I understand are one source of this sort of accident?

That is a rather different question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proposals he has for building remand homes for young persons in Devon; and if he will give the number of remand homes in the county at the present time.

The provision of remand homes is the responsibility of county and county borough councils. The Devon County Council provides one remand home and Plymouth another.

But is my hon. Friend aware that at the moment this lack of places and of remand homes is causing great concern to magistrates in the county? Is there not something that my hon. Friend can do to encourage the county council to provide more remand homes for young people?

We are not aware of an acute shortage of remand home places, but if my hon. Friend has any specific examples we shall be glad to look into them.

Is the hon. Lady aware that that is exactly what her right hon. Friend said during the passage of the Children and Young Persons Act, last year, and that we gave him ample evidence of a shortage of remand homes throughout the country? While we know that this is the responsibility of the local authority, may I ask whether sheis satisfied that the financial arrangements for building new remand homes as between the Home Department and the local authorities is satisfactory?

As the hon. Lady knows, this situation tends to fluctuate from month to month. I agree about what was said during the passage of the Act. We believe that the financial arrangements are adequate, but of course we are watching the situation all the time.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, in view of the continued large influx of Commonwealth immigrants into this country, and the problems they are creating in certain areas in housing, schools and jobs, if he will introduce amending legislation to the Commonwealth Immigrants Act forbidding all immigration for a period of five years, or until the present immigrants have been properly absorbed; and if he will make a statement.

No, Sir. In my view, the Commonwealth Immigrants Act is effectively serving its purpose, which is to control the rate of immigration from the Commonwealth, but not to stop it.

Is my right hon. Friend not aware that very serious and regrettable disturbances on racial grounds took place recently in Yorkshire towns? In view of the fact that men of good will throughout the world have found it impossible to solve racial problems, whether in East Africa, in Zanzibar, in India or in South Africa, is it not the height of criminal folly to bring these problems unnecessarily into this country? Will not my right hon. Friend do something about it?

The Government did a great deal about it by introducing control through the Commonwealth Immigrants Act. I am thankful to say that we have been extraordinarily free from racial disturbances in this country in recent years. The number of Commonwealth immigrants unemployed is now less than half the number at the time of the introduction of the control. I shall, of course, continue to watch the situation carefully.

If he has not done so already, will the right hon. Gentleman have a look at the representations which were made by Lambeth Borough Council in a deputation which I introduced to the Colonial Office as long ago as January, 1955? Unfortunately, all of that deputation's carefully considered, constructive suggestions were ignored. If they had not been ignored, many subsequent difficulties would have been avoided.

Since then the Commonwealth Immigrants Act has been passed and I have available an Advisory Council, sitting under the chairmanship of Lady Reading, which is of great help to me in giving me considered views about the problems that arise.

In view of the fact that the next influx in the second year of the operation of the Act is so much greater than it was during the first year, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he will indicate what he considers will be the tolerable limits on admissions during the year? Would my right hon. Friend not consider it reasonable in present circumstances to limit the issue of work vouchers to those who have jobs to go to or who have special skills, instead of issuing large numbers to those who have neither of these qualifications?

The question of issuing work vouchers is one for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour. I do not think that it would be right to attempt to define a tolerable limit to the rate of immigration.

Why not?

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

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what was the average weekly cost of food for male prisoners in Her Majesty's prisons at the last convenient date for computation; and how much of this was expended on fresh meat and fresh fruit and vegetables, respectively.

With the benefit of the savings achieved by bulk purchasing and long-term contracts, food supplied to all prison service establishments in 1962–63 cost about 14s. 6d. per week per head, of which 13s. 3d. was spent on purchases and 1s. 3d. represents the cost at "grower's price" of food from prison farms. The value of fresh vegetables, computed on the same basis, was 2s. 4d., made up of 1s. 1d. worth purchased and 1s. 3d. worth from farms. Fresh meat cost 1s. 10d. and fresh fruit 4d., per week per head, at contract prices.

Is not this figure a lamentable admission of a wholly inadequate food service? There was a good deal of talking going on when the hon. Lady was replying and, unhappily, I did not hear all the figures, but I understood her to say that 14s. 6d. a week is the average cost of feeding a prisoner who is engaged in work in a factory in a prison. Does it not occur to the hon. Lady that this matter should be looked into and that the whole question of diet should be considered in relation to health by an expert advisory committee?

I would stress again to the hon. Member that these are contracts and these are bulk purchase prices. The retail prices would be considerably greater, even double. Therefore, when judging the figure one must compare it, as the hon. Member himself has said, with the cost to other institutions. I do not accept that this is an inadequate diet, but I agree that as standards in society outside improve we ought to see that improvement reflected in prison diets.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department in how many cases in the most recent period of 12 months for which figures are available an accused person has been detained in prison because bail was refused or was not provided by the accused; and how many of such cases were dealt with by fine, or probation, or by acquittal

35,244 untried persons were received into prison in 1962. Of these 1,265 were subsequently found not guilty. It is estimated that about half the remainder were dealt with by fine, probation or discharge, but the exact number is not available.

Does not the Under-Secretary realise that a refusal of bail has all the social effects upon an accused person of a short sentence of imprisonment—perhaps the loss of employment and all the other difficulties? When bail should be granted as a matter of right, unless circumstances of a special nature are proved, is it not monstrous to say that 35,000 people were sent to prison, to be fed for 14s. 6d. per week, before they were tried? Will the hon. Lady not consider with her right hon. Friend the necessity of taking steps to see that people are granted bail as of right unless there is real evidence to the contrary?

The hon. Member knows that this is a matter for the courts and not for my right hon. Friend.

Granted that it is a matter for the courts, it is also a matter which intensely concerns the House and the public. The figures which the hon. Lady has given are most astonishing. Will she not, with her right hon. Friend, use her influence to instil into magistrates and those responsible for the administration of the law that the withholding of bail is punitive and ought not to be used for punitive purposes and that wherever possible bail should be granted as of right?

These figures reflect a great many people who are not in prison for very long. Some are there for a very short time while sureties are provided, and so forth. I am sure that what has been said in the House will be noted by magistrates.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what consultations he has had with the Government of Northern Ireland regarding the amount of the Imperial contribution to be paid by them into the United Kingdom Exchequer

None, Sir.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us why he has not had consultations on this important matter, since the Imperial contribution would be reduced or even extinguished if aid for economic development in Northern Ireland were wasted or improperly used, as seems to have happened in a recent case which was judged in the Northern Ireland courts? Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that this House has sufficient control over money authorised to be spent in Northern Ireland? If he is so satisfied, will he kindly explain the extent of our control over the spending of this money?

I do not accept any of the allegations that the hon. Gentleman makes. The reason why I have had no consultations is that the Government of Ireland Act, 1920, passed by this Parliament, places the duty of determining the Imperial contribution on the Joint Exchequer Board, of which I am not a member.

Does not the size of this contribution plus the oil subsidy and the coal subsidy determine the sort of subsidy which this country sends to Northern Ireland? Therefore, ought not the Government to look into the affair which my hon. Friend has mentioned, since, if they do not safeguard the moneys spent on industrial development in Northern Ireland, there is no guarantee that it will be the only case which we shall have to bring to the Government's notice?

The administration of Northern Ireland grants to industry is a matter entirely within the competence of the Northern Ireland Government. Any question on the amount of the Imperial contribution should be addressed not to me but to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether an excess in the legal limit of weight of alcohol to each 1,000 parts of blood is to be accepted as an accurate indication of ability to drive without other medical investigation

There is no provision for this criterion in the Road Traffic Act, 1962, which was passed after very full discussion in both Houses. There has not yet been sufficient experience of the working of the Act to warrant amending legislation, but my right hon. Friends the Minister of Transport and the Home Secretary are keeping the matter under constant review.

In view of the pressure on the Government to introduce more stringent measures, will my hon. Friend bear in mind, before contemplating any change in the law, that the law in Sweden has recently been amended to prevent an excess of alcohol intake over the legal limit being taken by itself, without medical and police evidence, as an indication of inability to drive?

Yes, Sir, I am aware of the fact to which my hon. Friend has drawn attention because we keep a close watch on the practices of other countries; but, although they can be useful in guiding us in our decisions, I do not think there is any reason to follow them in all cases automatically.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what further consideration he has given to the need of small traders to be allowed to keep their shops open for longer hours; and if he will make a statement

I have received no recent requests from small traders to be allowed to keep their shops open for longer hours. I propose, however, to invite the up-to-date views of interested organisations, including representatives of shop keepers, trade unions, consumers and local authorities, as to the need, if any, for further legislation.

Now that resale price maintenance is to end, is there not a case for allowing much greater freedom to small traders to keep their shops open during those hours which best suit them? Is there not a justification for the total abolition of the existing Shops Acts and their replacement by a Measure which will allow much greater flexibility in trading hours?

I am sure that my hon. Friend will support the policy, which I have just announced, of obtaining the up-to-date views of all those who are concerned, including the small traders. I think that we ought to have those up-to-date views and then make up our minds.

Will the Home Secretary resist all temptation to respond to the blandishments of his back benchers in this matter without the fullest consultation with the trade unions which are responsible for the welfare of the people employed in shops, and will he bear in mind that, prior to the original Shops Act and its successors being put on the Statute Book, the most refined form of slavery in this country was to be found among shopworkers, going back to the days of H. G. Wells, who wrote about it eloquently in one of his most famous novels?

This is 1964, not the time of H. G. Wells. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will approve my statement that I intend to consult the trade unions, but not only the trade unions. I intend to consult also shopkeepers, local authorities and, above all, the consumers.

In considering this matter, will my right hon. Friend take into consideration the great change in the composition of the working population of this country since the war? Will he bear in mind that nowadays one-third of our entire working population consists of women and that roughly one married woman in every three now goes out to work? Does not he think that this great social change since the war justifies a reconsideration of shopping hours?

I hope that women's organisations will be among those who will favour me with their up-to-date views on this matter.

asked the Prime Minister if he will move for a Select Committee to consider the desirability of placing a statue of the late Mr. Neville Chamberlain in the precincts of the Palace of Westminster.

These matters would usually first be discussed informally between the parties.

Will the Prime Minister initiate such discussions, because Mr. Chamberlain really has a claim on the affections of the House and the country as a pioneer in the public ownership of banking? If the right hon. Gentleman is ashamed of his association with the appeasement policy, does not he nevertheless consider that a suitable memorial to Mr. Chamberlain would be the continuation and extension of the principle of public ownership of the banking system?

I do not think that to peg a supplementary question of that kind on an original Question such as this receives much support in any quarter of the House.

Has my right hon. Friend considered the desirability of placing a statue in the Palace of the late Mr. Ramsay MacDonald?

asked the Prime Minister what proposals he has made to the President of the United States of America for reconciling the Soviet Draft Treaty of General and Complete Disarmament under Strict International Control with the United States Outline of Basic Provisions for a Treaty of General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World.

Any proposals I may make to President Johnson would be confidential. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary stated in the House on 20th January how we propose to proceed at the Geneva Disarmament Conference.

Does the Prime Minister still consider that the Russian and American draft treaties are the right basis for negotiation and that a treaty could be made by having the best out of both, as he said two years ago?

That is what I said two years ago and what I still hope. The conference is now working to an agenda which, I understand, covers all the important points in the first stage of the United States and Soviet plans.

Will the Prime Minister give us a White Paper setting out President Lyndon Johnson's proposals regarding a freeze of strategic nuclear means of delivery and an explanation of Her Majesty's Government's views about that?

I am always ready to explain Her Majesty's Government's views if a Question is put down on this. I shall have to consider the suggestion for a White Paper.

Since President Johnson has sent a personal message to the Disarmament Committee making specific proposals in the direction of a disarmament treaty, will the Prime Minister do the same himself, or has he no ideas of his own?

We work very closely with the Americans on these matters and we shall be working with them in Geneva, because we support the American disarmament plan, and have done all along. This aspect of it is a matter which has to be discussed round the table with the Russians and the other people at the disarmament conference.

asked the Prime Minister what proposals he has made to the President of the United States of America for making the verbatim records of the Committee of 18 Nations on Disarmament more speedily available to hon. Members, and for giving them wider distribution to members of the Press and to other interested persons and organisations.

I do not think that it would be appropriate for me to take up a matter of this kind with the President of the United States personally. We were able to speed up publication of the verbatim records a year or two ago, but my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary would be pleased to look into the question again if the right hon. Gentleman will send him his ideas.

I am much obliged to the Prime Minister for that Answer. Does he realise that it is of great importance that people interested in this subject should have the records soon and that it is simply a question of giving the Secretary-General enough money to bring them out the following day after each meeting, as he always does for the Security Council, the General Assembly or other meetings?

When I managed to get some speed in this matter two years ago, I did not find that it was a question of money. It is a matter of delegations wanting to check up on what their delegates have said the day before, and this sometimes takes a little time.

Would not my right hon. Friend's proposal be of considerable advantage to the Prime Minister in that if he has any ideas of his own about how to get on with disarmament they could be put on the record and given full publicity?

I am all for the idea that the statements of Her Majesty's Government and of all the other delega- tions should be available as speedily as possible. It is simply a mechanical matter of getting the records checked.

asked the Prime Minister what machinery exists to co-ordinate the policies of the Foreign Office and Colonial Office with regard to the export of arms to South Africa from or through Colonial Territories.

Arms cannot be exported from or imported into a Colonial territory except under licence. No case has come to my notice of a Colonial Government being asked to issue a licence for the export of arms to South Africa. An application for the export of repressive arms would be refused. In cases of doubt Her Majesty's Government's advice would be sought.

We can assume, then, that no arms of a repressive kind have gone to South Africa from Colonial Territories?

I think that that would be a fair assumption.

Will my right hon. Friend assure us that we will continue to uphold our obligations to South Africa and help to maintain an effective defence of that part of the world? Concerning the co-ordination of policy between the Foreign Office and the Colonial Office, will my right hon. Friend make certain that the Colonial Office is particularly alerted to the dangers of subversion in Colonial and ex-Colonial Territories? Perhaps the Foreign Office will tell it something about that.

What has been happening lately in some ex-Colonial Territories is a matter of great anxiety. I have made our position clear on the question of arms to South Africa time and again.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the serious situation in the Middle East arising from the dispute over the Jordan waters, the recent Cairo conference of Arab heads of state and the joint responsibility of the two governments under the Tripartite Declaration of 1951, he will discuss with President Johnson on his forthcoming visit the Johnston Unified Water Plan for the Middle East as a possible basis of settlemen

My talks with President Johnson will cover many problems of common concern but the discussions will be confidential. I do not think it would be right for me to refer to the Agenda in public in advance of our meeting.

Would not an agreement, if achieved, on the basis of the Johnston Unified Water Plan be equitable to both sides? Will the Prime Minister consult President Johnson with a view to persuading the Arab riparian States to consider this plan?

I will consider the right hon. and learned Gentleman's point of view.

Is it not true that the Johnston Unified Water Plan has been discussed for a very long time and that the Arab States will not accept it at present? Therefore, there seems no option but for Israel to go ahead with its part of the plan. Is it not a waste of time trying to get the Arabs into a frame of mind to accept this plan?

I do not think that there would be much advantage in my pursuing this matter by question and answer at the moment.

Has consideration been given to the fact that the Israel plans come solely within the territory of Israel, that these are no concern of any other territory and that Jordan has already proceeded with the water plan, on her territory, without consulting anybody else? The courageous and energetic attempts being made by Israel to arrest the desert should be encouraged and not deprecated by anybody, and we will not put up with the kind of blackmail being used by the Arab States. [An Hon. Member: "Who are 'we'?"]

An hon. Member says. "Who are 'we'?". I think that, on the whole, it is better for the House to leave the matter as it is at the moment.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in order to save individuals and local authorities further expense, he will give an assurance that approval will not be given to closure of the railway services north and west of Inverness until the wider implications of these closures have been considered by the Highland Transport Board.

My right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Scotland, has already given an assurance that he will obtain the Board's advice on these proposals.

My right hon. Friend will be aware that considerable consternation has been caused by the uncertainty of the position. Will he ensure that the Government announce a decision in this matter soon and say how ridiculous these proposals are?

I think that my right hon. Friends the Minister of Transport and the Secretary of State for Scotland must have the advice from these bodies dealing with hardship and every other aspect of the case before taking a decision.

I take it that the Prime Minister sticks to his assurance, given repeatedly in Kinross and West Perthshire, that there will be no closures unless the Secretary of State is satisfied that adequate alternative transport facilities are available and that this assurance applies equally to England and Wales. If he reconfirms that statement, does not he agree that it makes absolute nonsense of the speech of the Minister of Transport last April?

No, Sir. When I make a pledge and say what is going to be done, I do not have to reaffirm it.

Will the Prime Minister give an assurance that not only will the views of the Highland Transport Board be sought before any question of closure arises but that no closures will take place before the Government produce a plan for Highland development?

I think that both right hon. Members must consider the questions which have been looked at by the Transport Board. That is what the Question on the Order Paper is about.

Since it took four supplementary questions to get the right hon. Gentleman to reaffirm in the House what he said in Kinross and to say that it applies to England and Wales, will he now answer the second part of my question as to whether or not this is a complete derogation of what the Minister of Transport told us in April when he said that one-third of the railway services were to be closed and that a further one-third were under consideration for closure?

The answer to the first part of the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary question is "No, Sir". The answer to the second part is that what I have told him three times is true.

The Prime Minister has given an assurance that he will obtain the advice of the Highland Transport Board. Will he also assure us that he will accept the advice of the Transport Board?

I cannot give an assurance that advice will be accepted until I have seen it.

asked the Prime Minister if he is satisfied with the interdepartmental machinery for the financial control and forward estimating of the Government-sponsored aircraft production programme, and with the techniques applied for monitoring individual projects; and if he will make a statement.

In the defence field the Government have already thoroughly overhauled the procedures for forward estimating on new projects. Experience may well show that further improvements in the interdepartmental machinery and in the technique of monitoring are necessary. As the House is aware, the Estimates Committee, in its recently published Second Report, has made a number of recommendations concerning transport aircraft. The Government is examining these recommendations carefully and a reply will be made in due course.

Bearing in mind that the Estimates Committee's Report indicates that the Minister of Aviation has entered into contracts on unfavourable terms with the British aircraft manufacturers and the French Government without proper Treasury participation, is it not urgent that the Prime Minister should look into this matter and improve Treasury co-ordination, particularly bearing in mind that £240 million has been spent by the Ministry of Aviation on aircraft projects which have been cancelled?

As the hon. Member knows, the Public Accounts Committee reviewed the changes in procedure in 1961–62, and in paragraph 53 of its Report it recognised that some time must necessarily elapse before it is possible to judge the extent of the improvements achieved. I am perfectly willing to make any improvements which seem to me to be necessary and to examine this matter.

My right hon. Friend has said that a reply will be sent to the Estimates Committee in due course. It would be of great service to the House if a reply could be sent very soon because I think that we should have an early debate on this matter.

I note what my hon. Friend says.

Does not the Estimates Committee's Report reveal that there is a serious lack of Treasury control over the Concord project? Is it not a bit too late to consider these recommendations of the Estimates Committee since £85 million of public money has already been committed?

I was asked whether any improvements could be made and I said that I was always willing to consider improvements. I take it that that was a sensible thing to say.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on his discussions with the Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany.

I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer which I gave the hon. Member for Ashfield (Mr. Warbey) on 21st January.

Is not the Prime Minister aware that it is unsatisfactory that his discussions with Dr. Erhard on Britain's resumption of negotiations to go into the Common Market should remain confidential in view of the public speculation? Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether this was discussed with Dr. Erhard and what assurances he gave?

No, Sir. Conversations with Prime Ministers and Foreign Ministers of other countries are always confidential.