asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will introduce legislation to regulate the activities of mobile shops in rural areas.

Not in the present Session.

Is my hon. Friend aware that although these mobile shops from the towns can be quite useful in rural areas, in some cases they represent unfair competition with village shops which have become such a feature of every village today?

I am aware that that and many other views are held about this subject, which is difficult and complicated. As the House is aware, my right hon. Friend is now carrying out a general review of shops legislation in the light of a questionnaire issued earlier this year to all interested organisations.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in reviewing the grants payable to students at Home Office training courses, his Department will regard these courses as entitling a student to a grant without parental means test, as is done for the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research or Ministry of Education state studentships.

Grants to child care and probation students are based upon the Minister of Education's University and Other Award Regulations, 1962, and are exactly the same as for other students taking professional training. I do not know of any grounds for treating child care and probation students exceptionally.

Will the right hon. Gentleman have another look at this? Is he not aware that many of the people engaged in these extremely important studies, which are essential to the welfare of children, and on probation work, are mostly over the age of 21? How can he expect them to be maintained by their parents? As the parents cannot be compelled to maintain them in the legal sense, how does he expect those concerned to be able to carry on their studies if the income of their parents has to be taken into consideration in this way?

There is no shortage of candidates. The number of probation students in training is now almost twice as many as in 1961, and the number of child care students nearly three times as many.

Does the right hon. Gentleman make this imposition upon them because of that? Is not that a scandalous argument?

These are perfectly reasonable regulations, and probation and child care students are treated in almost exactly the same way as teachers in training.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many drivers of motor-cars, motor-cycles, motor coaches and goods vehicles, respectively, were prosecuted, and how many convicted, for exceeding the speed limit or crossing a road junction against the traffic lights, respectively, in the Metropolitan Police District in the years 1961, 1962, 1963 and to the latest convenient date in 1964.

I will, with permission, circulate the information for the years 1961, 1962 and 1963 in the OFFICIAL REPORT. Information for 1964 is not yet available.

Irrespective of the number of prosecutions and convictions, is my hon. Friend aware that the practice of crossing a road intersection against a red light appears to be increasing? Will he give instructions to the police to keep a perticular look out for any drivers

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate he has made in terms of available manpower or money of the effort of the Metropolitan Police in accompanying abnormal indivisible loads last year; and what were the normal duties of the police officers allocated to those duties.

During 1963 traffic patrols escorting abnormal indivisible loads through the Metropolitan Police District covered 253,600 miles and the duty occupied 21,600 man-hours. These escorts are regarded as part of the normal duties of the police in the regulation of traffic. The estimated cost of this part of their traffic duties was £22,000.

The figures of prosecutions show an increase. It is not for my right hon. Friend to give an instruction to the police in this matter, but I have no doubt that what my hon. Friend has said will come to their attention.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that this is a waste of police manpower, which is short anyhow? Has not the time come to impose some kind of disincentive on those who move these loads, for instance, by making some charge? Do not they have every advantage by sending by road and not by ship or rail?

Suggestions to this effect have been made from time to time, but the practice of the police is not to make any charge for their services on the public highway or any public place. The police prevent obstructions on the roads as part of their general duty to the community, and it would not be feasible to distinguish this from their other public duties.

Would my hon. Friend confirm that these heavy vehicles already pay much in excess of normal vehicles in Road Fund duty?

That is a question not for me but for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will instruct the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis that all known cases of deliberate violation of traffic or parking regulations by the drivers of cars with diplomatic immunity are to be reported to him.

My right hon. Friend already receives from the Commissioner of Police details of most cases in which persons entitled to diplomatic immunity are alleged to have offended against the traffic or parking regulations, and where, had it not been for the entitlement to immunity, a fixed penalty might have been enforced or the police might have preferred charges. My right hon. Friend is arranging for all such cases to be reported in future.

Are the police and traffic wardens advised, or instructed, to take particulars of all drivers committing offences and of cars parked in contravention of the regulations, even if they have a diplomatic immunity sticker on the car?

Yes, Sir, I can confirm that.

What does the hon. Gentleman do when he gets this information? Does he bring it to the notice of those concerned?

It depends on the gravity of the case, but in a number of cases representations are made to the head of the mission concerned, and in the most serious cases it is sometimes thought right to request a waiver of the offender's immunity to enable a prosecution to proceed.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prosecutions have been brought under the Litter Act in each year since it became law; and what was the average penalty imposed.

From 7th August, 1958, when the Litter Act, 1958, came into force, until the end of 1962, the last year for which statistics are available, 10,242 persons were prosecuted, of whom 938 were convicted. Nearly all those convicted were fined and in 1962 the average fine was approximately £2. I will, with permission, circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a table showing the number of persons prosecuted and the number convicted year by year.

Is my hon. Friend satisfied that the Litter Act is doing what it was intended to do? In the Royal and respectable borough of Kensington, the streets often look as though a paper chase has recently been through them. Is the reason that the law is insufficient, or is it that it is not being enforced?

I gave an incorrect figure in my Answer. I should have said that 9,938 people were convicted, which gives a slightly better picture, but I agree that there is a considerable amount of litter. This is something about which we are all worried. It is principally for the local authority to take proceedings under the Litter Act, though it is open to individuals to do so. The police cannot normally undertake the primary responsibility of enforcing the Act because of their many important commitments. The provisions of the Act are for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government.

How many of these prosecutions are for the dumping of large and unsightly articles by the side of the roads?

I have not got those figures.

Will my hon. Friend be as firm as possible on this subject? Will she bear in mind that a well-publicised prosecution for this offence would do more than anything else to improve the situation?

I agree with the necessity of constantly bringing this to the public notice.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many local advisory committees on the employment of prisoners are in existence; and to which prisons they are attached.

Four; at Birmingham, Leeds, Liverpool and Manchester prisons.

Can the hon. Lady say whether there is a trade union representative on each of these advisory committees?

Yes, Sir, there is.

All the prisons which the hon. Lady mentioned are local prisons. Would not it be more appropriate if some were at regional and central training prisons?

They are large prisons in industrial areas, and these are possibly the best and most suitable places in which to have this type of committee.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what further consideration he has given to the representations made by the National Association of Discharged Prisoners' Aid Societies in which they called for a guarantee that the officers of the local societies would be given employment in proposed new Probation and After-Care Service; and what reply he has sent;

I am sure that Probation and After-Care Committees will make full use of the relevant experience and knowledge of local Discharged Prisoners' Aid Societies. I have explained to the National Association of Discharged Prisoners' Aid Societies that I as Home Secretary cannot give a guarantee that all employees of Discharged Prisoners' Aid Societies will be appointed to the proposed Probation and After-Care Service, since the decision will not rest with me; it must rest with the Probation and After-Care Committees which will be the employing authorities. My hope is that most of these existing employees will in fact be appointed to the new service, because I attach great importance to this.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask whether he will continue to do all that he can to stress the importance of employing these people in the new service, especially as they have acquired special experience and expertise? Would not he agree that many of them have been, and are, doing most devoted and loyal work, many of them for extremely small salaries which the existing societies can only just afford to pay? Will he encourage at every turn the continued employment of these people who have done such useful work?

I shall certainly do so. I said that I attach importance to the re-employment of as many of these people as possible. I think that they have generously agreed that it will be of great value if we can get the whole After-Care Service on to a more systematic basis than it has had hitherto.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that it is desirable wherever possible for children in the care of local authorities to be boarded out with foster parents, but that the percentages boarded out vary widely among different local authorities; what steps he is taking to remind authorities of their duties in this respect; and whether the total percentage of children boarded out is increasing.

Yes, Sir. A local authority is required under the Children Act, 1948, to board out a child in its care unless this is not practicable or desirable, and there has been a steady increase in the percentage boarded out in England and Wales from 37 per cent. in 1950 to 52 per cent. in 1963. When I addressed the local authorities' child care conference recently I drew attention to the scope in some areas for further development of boarding out, and I take every opportunity of stressing this.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the largest local authority in the country, the L.C.C., seems to have been particularly unsuccessful in this matter, and that it has the lowest percentage of any authority for the boarding out of children? Can my right hon. Friend say why this is so?

London is said to present particular difficulties in this respect. My hope is that when child-care work in London is taken over by the new London boroughs next year they will give special attention to this and will improve on the present figures.

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that in London it is probably the difficult housing position which creates some of the difficulties? Will he persuade local authorities to indulge in much more publicity in their areas to attract the right kind of foster parent?

I agree with the hon. Lady. I think that much more publicity is needed in some areas. We must get the right kind of foster parent, and I hope that the new London boroughs will pay special attention to this.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why Mr. Thomas Wisbey, Mr. James Hussey, and Mr. Robert Welch were held in solitary confinement for six weeks after the train robbery trial while their appeals were being considered.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why Thomas Wisbey, imprisoned in Oxford, James Hussey in Wandsworth, and Robert Welch in Canterbury, were held in solitary confinement for six weeks.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why three prisoners sentenced to 30 years' imprisonment in connection with the great train robbery were held in solitary confinement for six weeks.

All these prisoners had former convictions and were associated in the same or connected serious offences. It has been necessary in the interests of security that for limited periods they should be segregated from other prisoners and from each other.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the previous convictions of these men were for comparatively minor offences? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some of us are afraid that prison governors exercise their powers in this matter in a somewhat arbitrary manner? Is there a statutory limitation on the length of time for which prisoners can be kept in solitary confinement? Can the right hon. Gentleman assure us that these men have not been put back into solitary confinement after the rejection of their appeals yesterday?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that governors of prisons adhere strictly to Rule 43 of the new Prison Rules which have been approved by the House. It is a very frequent practice when recidivist prisoners are sentenced to more than four years in prison to remove them from association for the first weeks of their sentence. I have no information as to what might have happened since yesterday.

There have been other cases in which men sentenced to more than four years have been kept in solitary confinement for more than six weeks. Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that three men were released from solitary confinement as soon as representations were made to that effect by their solicitors?

This is not a matter of anything being overlooked. I said that it is the general practice that when a recidivist is sentenced to a long term of imprisonment he is removed from association for a period in the first instance. This is extremely desirable in the public interest.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will take steps to make the public more aware of the ways in which they can help the police in the execution of their duty; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will issue a circular setting out the duties of members of the public in coming to the assistance of police officers on duty who are attempting to deal with breaches of the peace.

I am anxious to bring home to members of the public that it is their duty under common law to help a constable in preventing or dealing with a breach of the peace when called upon to do so; and I hope that these Questions and my reply may help to achieve that. I doubt whether the issue of a circular would be appropriate. The best advice to a member of the public who is asked to help is to follow the directions of the police officer on the spot.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise that the existing procedure acts as a deterrent? Will not he establish the principle that any member of the public coming to the rescue of a police officer is automatically entitled to compensation for any loss or damage he may sustain in coming to the rescue of the officer?

I answered a Question on this subject the other day. It is the duty of a member of the public to come to the help of a police officer if he is called upon, and there are various funds in the different police forces from which payment can be made to members of the public who suffer any injury in so doing.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the hon. Member for Bristol, North-East (Mr. Hopkins) and myself put these two Questions down because of remarks made by the Lord Mayor of Bristol on this subject? Would he not agree that in the public's mind there is perhaps a little uncertainty as to how a member of the public might help, and will he continue to do all that he can to clear up this uncertainty?

Yes, Sir. I am very much obliged to the Lord Mayor of Bristol for what he said recently on this subject, and I hope that these Questions and Answers will reinforce his remarks.

The Home Secretary said that it was the duty of the public to come to the assistance of a police officer if called upon to do so. Could he clear up this point a little further? Is it not the duty of a member of the public to assist a police officer even if not called upon to do so, and, if I am wrong about that, is his liability increased if he intervenes without being called upon to do so?

There is a clear duty on a member of the public to come to his assistance if called upon to do so, but there is also a general duty on all members of the public to assist in the maintenance of public law and order.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether the new scheme for compensating victims of crimes of violence will apply to those cases, and would it not help to encourage the public to play their full part?

Yes, Sir. I hope that it will.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make it clear that it is the duty of the public to assist the police whether they are in uniform or not?

Yes, Sir. That is so.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much was spent per week per prisoner to cover food and drink, clothing, bedding, furniure, equipment, and medicines in the years 1939, 1950, 1960 and 1963; and if it is his policy that prisoners should in future be employed on more useful work, thus earning money which can supplement the sums devoted to their health and welfare.

Comparable figures for the various years are not available because the basis of accounting and methods of provision have changed. Such figures for earlier years as are available have been published in the annual reports of the Commissioners of Prisons. I will, with permission, circulate figures for 1963 in the OFFICIAL REPORT, together with an explanation of the basis on which they have been calculated. As I have said on many occasions, I am extremely anxious that prisoners should be employed more productively, but the level of expenditure on prison services does not depend on this.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some of us noted with pleasure his Answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Wigan (Mr. Fitch) on the advisory committees, and does he not think that it would help in this question of employment if there was trade union representation on these advisory committees? Is he also aware that some of us who have seen these figures nevertheless believe that they are not really in keeping with the figures that are necessary for expenditure to keep a prisoner in health and welfare and to help to restore his dignity? I am grateful to hear that the right hon. Gentleman intends to try to extend this issue of further employment, and I thank him for his Answer.

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the food in prisons, although monotonous, is adequate and good. I have often eaten it myself. I am assisted by a very valuable advisory council on the employment of prisoners, under the chairmanship of Sir Wilfrid Anson, on which trade union representatives serve.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the police now have means of measuring noise from motor vehicles; in how many cases the Metropolitan Police have proceeded against those responsible for vehicles making undue noise, and with what result; and how many prosecutions have been undertaken in the Metropolitan Police District of drivers sounding horns when stationary or in the proscribed hours, and with what result.

The law does not prescribe maximum permissible levels for noise from motor vehicles and the police do not therefore need noise level meters for law enforcement purposes. In 1963 there were 2,960 prosecutions in the Metropolitan Police District for offences relating to vehicle noise, of which 2,913 were successful; 489 cautions were also issued. There were 16 prosecutions for sounding horns when stationary or in the proscribed hours, all of which were successful; 30 cautions were also issued for such offences.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many people will be grateful to hear this and will wish the police well in their efforts to reduce what appears to be a growing nuisance? Has my hon. Friend observed that many drivers nowadays seem to be using their horns as a substitute for careful driving or as an outlet for their impatience?

I have, indeed, noticed that, as I am sure many other hon. Members have. I would tell my hon. Friend that the figures for 1963 represent a substantial increase on the figures for 1962, so he will see that the police are doing their duty in this matter.

Is my hon. Friend aware that in addition to horns some of the worst offences in this regard are caused by motor vehicles without silencers? It seems to me that the smaller the car the more noise the driver wants to make. Would he ensure, in so far as he is able, that this nuisance is brought to the notice of the authorities, and can he say whether he has had success in inviting the support of the motor vehicle manufacturers?

It is an offence under the Motor Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations, 1963, to fail to have a silencer or to maintain it in good and efficient working order. This is certainly a matter to which the police pay attention, but I would remind my hon. Friend that the police can take action only when they witness an offence or when competent witnesses are prepared to come forward. The onus to some extent must rest on the public. With regard to the last part of my hon. Friend's Question, I think that is rather a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that this is a matter in which members of the public can help very considerably by reporting instances of noisy motor cars and motor bicycles and taking their numbers to the police so that appropriate action can be taken?

I agree, but it is further necessary that they should be willing to give evidence.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what official advice has been given to banks, commercial and industrial concerns, which transport money and other valuables by road, with a view to counter-acting robbery with violence and the seizure of loaded vehicles.

It is primarily the responsibility of the owner to protect the contents of vehicles against theft, but the police are very willing to give advice on how to minimise the risks of theft, and there is increasingly good co-operation in this matter between the police and firms transporting valuables. The new Police Research and Planning Branch at the Home Office is paying special attention to this important subject.

Is not crime becoming a highly organised and lucrative business, and would not the Home Secretary appeal to the banks and other business concerns affected by this problem with a view to securing their cooperation with the police authorities to plan and organise security arrangements which will help to defeat the modern, mobile criminal?

There is far too much of this kind of crime. The Road Haul- age Committee has a vehicles security committee with which the police work closely, and I attach a great deal of importance to the work that my new Police Research and Planning Branch is doing. When it reports, I think that we shall have to give consideration to the best means of conveying its suggestions to all concerned, whether through chief constables or otherwise.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is becoming necessary to organise and plan counter-operations if we are to defeat these modern mobile criminals?

That is one of the reasons why I have taken the initiative of setting up a Police Research and Planning Branch in the Home Office for the first time.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will give his reasons for insisting upon the combining of the probation service of Merthyr Tydfil with that of the Glamorgan County Council.

I have accepted the arguments in paragraph 174 of the Report of the Departmental Committee on the Probation Service which recommended the merging of small probation areas in larger units. This policy is now being pursued throughout the country, and I have been unable, after very careful consideration, to find sufficient grounds for making an exception in the case of Merthyr Tydfil.

Is the Home Secretary aware that there is nothing dogmatic in the reference that he has made to the Morrison Committee? Has not he already complimented the splendid work of the probation service in Merthyr Tydfil? Is it not a fact that he has made no practical suggestions in respect of all the representations made to him as to how that service can be improved? Is not he aware that his action now is regarded literally as an offence against the excellent Merthyr Tydfil probation service?

No, Sir. It is in no sense a criticism. As I told the hon. Member, my decision in no way reflects upon the value which I attach to the close interest which the Committee has taken in the work of the probation officers. But the Morrison Committee recommended that any probation office which could not sustain a staff of at least six probation officers and a principal probation officer should be merged with a larger administrative unit. Until recently the Merthyr Tydfil probation service had only two probation officers. Now it has only three.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that his policy of merging smaller authorities is an excellent one, which is paying very good dividends? The hon. Member may know of the success of the probation service amalgamation of East and West Suffolk. He would be wise to ponder on that.

Yes, Sir. Frequently there is objection in some quarters to a proposed merging, but the criticism always dies away because of the success of the larger units.

My Question was addressed to the Home Secretary and not to a stranger who does not know the first thing about my area of South Wales.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, in the event of the combining of the Merthyr Tydfil probation service with that of Glamorgan, what will be the proportional representation on the then joint probation committee of each authority, respectively; and what will be the function and authority of the present Merthyr Tydfil probation committee.

I have asked the Glamorgan and Merthyr Tydfil probation committees to consult together and to advise me about representation on the committee for the new combined area. After combination, it will be the duty of the justices acting for the county borough of Merthyr Tydfil to provide a probation case committee. Case committees have a statutory duty to exercise a general supervision over the work and records of probation officers, to receive and consider reports from them on the progress of persons under their supervision, and to afford probation officers such help and advice as they can.

Is not the Home Secretary aware that he has not answered my Question? I was not asking for the obvious reply with which he entertained the House. I was asking him to be good enough to tell the hon. Member representing Merthyr Tydfil what would be the proportional representation of Merthyr Tydfil, side by side with the Glamorgan administrative county, in the so-called joint probation committee.

As I indicated in my Answer, I hope that the Merthyr and Glamorgan committees will be making agreed recommendations to me. It is not for me to be dogmatic and to lay down what they should do without consulting them.

In view of the unfavourable reply of the Home Secretary, I beg to give notice that I propose to raise this matter again at the first opportunity.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many policemen were required at Smith Square on the morning of Wednesday, 24th June to maintain order; and whether he is satisfied that sufficient police were available for this purpose.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the action taken by the Metropolitan Police as a result of the disturbances outside Transport House of 24th June.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many police were involved in keeping order during the rioting in Smith Square on 24th June, 1964.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department by what authority the Metropolitan Police were called to Transport House on 24th June to quell a riot.

I would refer my hon. Friends to the Answer which I gave to my hon. Friends the Members for Uxbridge (Mr. Curran) and Haltemprice (Mr. Wall) on 2nd July.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that it was reported that several hon. Members were roughly handled before a sufficiency of police arrived? Is he further aware that, although no hon. Member on this side of the House wishes to curtail the right of a Socialist, young or old, to demonstrate against injustices, none the less this incident happened within an area in which political demonstrations had been expressly forbidden under the authority of a Sessional Order of this House? Will he ensure that the Metropolitan Police act in liaison with the officials of Transport House in order to ensure that a sufficiency of police will be able to prevent rioting on future occasions when members of the Socialist Party are due to be expelled on doctrinal grounds?

I gather that the Metropolitan Police did their best in these difficult and unexpected circumstances. I must say that I do not think that their Socialism has taught these young Socialists how to behave.

We can understand a certain amount of sensitivity among the Opposition, but can my right hon. Friend tell us just what was the net cost to ratepayers and/or taxpayers of this incident? However small this amount is, does he appreciate that many of us resent the fact that our hard-pressed police forces should have to control warring factions in the party opposite?

I cannot isolate any extra expenditure that fell upon the Metropolitan Police, but the Metropolitan Police are always ready to deal with all kinds of extraordinary people.

Does my right hon. Friend feel that he is dealing with this disgraceful incident with the seriousness that it deserves? Is he aware that according to Press reports the hon. Member for Liverpool, Exchange (Mrs. Braddock) was lifted off her feet during this demonstration, which shows that the demonstrators were not lightly-built striplings? What steps is my right hon. Friend taking to protect hon. Ladies less well able to defend themselves than is the hon. Member for Liverpool, Exchange?

I would remind my hon. Friend and the House that it is the Commissioner of Police and not I who is responsible for policing the Metropolis. In an Answer I gave in the House last week about this incident I indicated that the demonstrators were aggressive.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we are much touched by the solicitude of his hon. Friends and realise that it is only their very great concern for our well-being and safety that has prompted these questions? Is he further aware that we are all the more touched when we realise that hon. Members opposite have never shown such a concern when members of the Government have been assailed by the Empire Loyalists?

My concern is that the Queen's peace shall be kept. I understand that some of these demonstrators were demonstrating against conscription—indicating, I suppose, that they had inside knowledge of what a Labour Government would lead to.

If these attacks by young Socialists upon their leaders get any worse, will my right hon. Friend arrange for Ministers' private detectives, who have so little to do, to go to the assistance of the Leader of the Opposition?

I think that I had better keep out of this.

On a point of order. I do not in any way wish to circumscribe the enjoyment of hon. Members, but can we take it, Mr. Speaker, that if the positions were reversed the Chair would give as much latitude to questions from hon. Members on this side of the House as has been given to hon. Members opposite?

I do not know what the implication of that point of order is meant to be. If the hon. Member wishes to suggest a want of impartiality in the Chair, it should be a matter for a substantive Motion.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will request the Advisory Committee on Delinquency to inquire into the relationship between education, social environment, industrial and recreational training and the problems of adolescence in community life.

These matters so far as they relate to the problem of delinquency are all within the scope of the Advisory Committee. I think the Committee should determine its own priorities.

Would not the Home Secretary agree that the problem of delinquency affects only a minority of young people today and that what is required is a wider examination of the moral, social and economic problems which influence young people in their everyday life?

I think that we have a problem here. If one casts the net too wide one would never get anywhere. My Advisory Committee is making a special study of certain subjects; and other studies have been initiated which are concerned with the influence of education on young people, which are not confined to delinquency. If the right hon. and learned Gentleman examines the situation, he will find that we are making a serious and systematic study of most aspects of the matter about which he is concerned.

Does not the Minister agree that delinquency is closely tied up with the educational provision made for these young people, and this Committee is surely concerned with the prevention of delinquency? Therefore, if what is suggested by my right hon. and learned Friend were studied by the Committee, would not it ease the problem with which the right hon. Gentleman has to deal?

I am very glad to have members of the teaching profession on my Committee. We have already decided to set up a sub-committee to consider the extent of the connection beween delinquency and, for example, the difficulty of adjustment at the time of transition from school life to working life.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will now make a statement about his inquiries into the possibility of a miscarriage of justice in the case of Mr. Henry Scudder, of Slade Green, who was sentenced to nine years' imprisonment on 12th May, 1960; what stage the inquiries have reached; and when they are likely to be completed.

My right hon. Friend has received this week a comprehensive report from the police of their further inquiries into this case. The report is being urgently studied and I hope to be in a position to inform the hon. Member of the outcome at an early date.

I thank the hon. Lady for that statement. I recognise that this has been done speedily. Will she also recognise that this man has been deprived of his liberty for four years without seeming to get even rough justice? I should be very pleased, therefore, if she would expedite the decision?

We shall move in this matter as quickly as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will give the names of the racecourses which will cease to receive financial assistance from the Levy Board after the end of 1965.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement concerning the Recommendations of the Levy Board; and from which racecourses it is intended to withdraw financial support after 1965.

I understand that the turf authorities have informed the managements of Bogside, Lewes, Lincoln and Rothbury racecourses that they do not intend to allocate fixtures to these courses after next year. The Horserace Betting Levy Board has submitted proposals to me under Section 25(2)(d) of the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act, 1963, for offering compensatory payments to these courses for the withdrawal of the financial support which the Board had previously undertaken to give them up to the end of 1966. I am prepared to approve such payments. I understand that the Board no longer intends to proceed with its earlier provisional proposals to discontinue financial support to certain other courses after 1966, namely, Edinburgh, Folkestone, Pontefract, Sedgefield, Stockton and West Norfolk Hunt.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reply on behalf of my constituents who live adjacent to Pontefract and who will be pleased that they are still to be able to enjoy racing in the future. Is there anything which in the opinion of the right hon. Gentleman would have prevented this statement from being made earlier, as there does not seem to be any reason why this information should have been withheld for such a long time?

It has not been withheld for such a long time. I could not make any statement until I received the views and recommendations of the Levy Board.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that his reply will be very much welcomed in the North, particularly at Stockton, Sedgfield and Pontefract, where there will continue to be racing? Can he say whether it is intended now to have steeplechasing at Stockton and what is likely to happen to the Scottish Grand National? Will he discuss with the Levy Board to ensure that if the course at Liverpool is not available, the Grand National will be kept in the north of England?

These are far-reaching questions. I should not like the House to imagine that the Home Secretary—though he has many duties—is the arbiter of all racing matters. Questions about whether there will be steeple-chasing and where the Grand National will be run are matters for the turf authorities and the managers of racecourses.

Is the Minister aware that his announcement will cause great disappointment at Lincoln, with its long history of racing? How can the Home Secretary justify the fact that the Levy Board, which receives its income from all racecourses from bets which are placed there, proposes to redistribute that income only to some racecourses?

That is a matter for the Levy Board. In this case, it is the turf authorities which have acted. It is the turf authorities, over whom I have no control whatever in this matter, who have indicated to the managements of these four courses that, in the interests of racing generally, they do not propose to allocate fixtures to these four courses after next year.

Will my right hon. Friend make clear whether there is any form of appeal which racecourse authorities, such as the Lincoln authority, can make against being cut off from the grant? Can he tell me who actually makes the final decision?

I think that the final decision as to whether fixtures are allocated to a racecourse is made by the turf authorities, and any representations should be made to them.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what special studies he has ordered with a view to shortening the period of time that elpases between a person's twenty-first birthday and the date on which he may vote.

This is one of the matters which my right hon. Friend has noted for consideration and consultation between the parties after the General Election.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that many young persons share the opinion of the Home Secretary that the present arrangements are far from ideal? Can there be any change in the law unless there has been a special preparatory study?

I do not think that any preparatory study is necessary to support the opinion of my right hon. Friend that the present state of the law is not ideal. It is also complicated, and we certainly intend to try to simplify it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if, in the scheme for compensation for victims of crimes of violence, he will direct that hearings he held in large regional cities, including Manchester.

There is provision in the scheme for hearings to be held outside London as necessary. No direction from me is required.

What criteria have been used for the scheme, particularly mentioning—apart from London—Cardiff and Edinburgh? I take it that the scheme will have regard to population areas. What difficulty is there about recognising great regional cities and saying so at this stage so that those who may unfortunately require it will know that a hearing can be reasonably accessible to them?

The White Paper paid due respect to Scotland and Wales, of which Edinburgh and Cardiff are the capitals. It will be for the board to decide from time to time where to hold hearings, whether in Manchester or other great cities. That will depend no doubt on the number of unsatisfied applicants for compensation and where they come from.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what approaches the Metropolitan Police have received to inquire into the conspiracy to defraud the public at Dagenham greyhound track on the afternoon of Tuesday, 30th June; and whether he will make a statement.

I am informed that no complaint has been made to the Metropolitan Police.

Is it a fact that the Dagenham track people should pay out the money to people who have done nothing illegal and that bookmakers should honour their bets and see that those who have "pulled a fast one" on them receive payment?

I do not think it is for me to interpret the law on this matter. I understand from Press reports that some of these matters will be the subject of legal action, so I do not think I should comment on them.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Depart- ment whether, in view of the photographic and other evidence which has been sent to him showing the different treatment given in London to parkers of large chauffeur-driven cars compared with small family cars, he will now cause an inquiry to be made.

No, Sir. The Commissioner of Police informs me that the results of his inquiries do not support the suggestion that large chauffeur-driven cars are given preferential treatment by the police and traffic wardens. I am writing to the hon. Member giving details of the results of the Commissioner's inquiries.

Could my hon. Friend tell me how much evidence he needs on this subject, because I, like probably any hon. Member, could give him daily evidence of this happening in many places?

I should be happy to study any evidence my hon. Friend gives me, but despite the form in which the Question is cast, having examined the evidence which has been sent to me so far, I can only say that it appears to relate entirely to self-driven cars.

Did the Under-Secretary see a programme on television a few weeks ago—I think it was called "The Braden Beat"—in which specific instances were given of this and where the programme producers took a Rolls-Royce car one day and a Mini car the next? The Rolls-Royce was at no point brought to book by the authorities, but the Mini was brought to book the first time it infringed the law. Will the hon. Gentleman ask the television authorities if he can have a look at the programme, if he did not see it?

That programme was, in fact, the source of the evidence which my hon. Friend the Member for Shrewsbury (Sir J. Langford-Holt) sent to me.

Will the Under-Secretary ask the television authorities from where they got the evidence?

That is hardly necessary, because it was perfectly obvious where the photographs were taken.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many disturbances requiring police action have occurred within a one-mile radius of the Palace of Westminster within the last month.

Three. Sir.

Could my hon. Friend give any details of those three instances and with particular reference to the one we discussed earlier this afternoon, as the Opposition is particularly unhappy in view of the Gallup Poll today, I do not propose to tease them any more this afternoon?

The three instances in question were: one on Sunday, 14th June, following a meeting in Trafalgar Square by the Anti-Apartheid Movement and others; secondly on Sunday morning, 21st June, when a crowd of youths assembled at a refreshment room on Waterloo Station and a dispute arose and arrests were made; and thirdly, on Wednesday, 24th June, to which reference has already been made.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if, when considering the compensation to be awarded to those now granted a free pardon after being wrongfully imprisoned on the evidence of Detective-Sergeant Challenor, he will bear in mind the sums already awarded in connection with the half-brick case to persons who spent little or no time in custody, and ensure that these further awards are proportionate to the former ones.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what basis compensation will be paid to Mr. David Silver and Mr. Lionel King, who have been granted free pardons and who suffered imprisonment as a result of conviction on evidence from Detective-Sergeant Challenor.

I informed the House on 2nd July that I should be prepared to consider any claim for ex gratia compensation by these men. I have so far received intimation only of a claim by Mr. King. In deciding the amount of ex gratia compensation in such a case, it is the practice to be guided by the advice of an independent assessor, in accordance with arrangements notified to the House by my predecessor on 2nd May, 1957.

In view of the fact that Mr. King is at present without money, without a job and without a home, and that he is most anxious not to receive charity and was in prison from 25th June last year until last Thursday when he received a free pardon, will the Home Secretary make the compensation he is to receive as generous as possible to enable him to rehabilitate himself and his family?

I think the House would wish that in this as in other cases I should put the claim before an independent assessor, someone quite independent of me, and obtain his advice.

But will the independent assessor be aware of previous awards? Without asking the right hon. Gentleman to anticipate his final decision or the assessor's recommendation, may I ask if he will not at least agree that it would be quite contrary to justice if people detained for one night only received a substantial sum while equally innocent people detained for eight or nine months did not receive appreciably more?

I shall certainly make available to the assessor any relevant information he might wish to have.

Will my right hon. Friend inform the aggrieved person of the decision to grant an ex gratia payment, should that decision be reached, so that the aggrieved person can submit a claim for damages and costs suffered, through my right hon. Friend to the Official Referee, in addition to any information he might submit to the Official Referee?

I am not quite sure what my hon. Friend has in mind. It is open to both these men to make claims, and one has done so. When I have appointed an independent assessor, I shall put before him the whole content of the claim that is being made to me together with any other relevant information he seeks.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will receive a deputation representing persons in the service of the children's department of the London County Council who are concerned about restriction of their opportunities to apply for posts in the service of the new London boroughs.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to his Question on 7th July.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, (1) how many Commonwealth immigrants were admitted by means of work vouchers during the 11 months ended 31st May, 1964; and how many dependants of immigrants were admitted during the same period; and

During the 11 months to 31st May, 1964, 26,462 Commonwealth citizens subject to immigration control under the Commonwealth Immigrants Act, 1962, were admitted as holders of Ministry of Labour vouchers, and 27,531 as dependants accompanying or coming to join the head of the household. The nett inward movement from all parts of the Commonwealth during this period was 76,483. During the 11 months to 31st May, 1963, the nett inward movement was 27,159.

In view of this tremendous increase, which represents an influx far greater than in any previous year except 1961–62, will my right hon. Friend co-operate with his right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour to ensure that all applications for vouchers are suspended for the time being and that vouchers are issued only for those who have jobs to come to until the present situation is under control?

No, Sir. I would not say that the present situation was not under control. In fact, unemployment among Commonwealth citizens is only one-third what it was when the control was introduced. The comparison between 1962–63 and 1963–64 is not an absolutely straight one, because there was an almost complete drying-up of immigration for some months after the Act had begun to operate.

Is the Home Secretary aware that currently 16 per cent. of the student nurses and pupil nurses in our hospitals are Commonwealth immigrants and that without their assistance it would be quite impossible to staff the hospitals of Britain?

I think we should all be very grateful indeed to Commonwealth immigrants who are doing valuable jobs in this country.

Is not the whole essence of the question that if they have jobs to come to they should be admitted and that therefore those to whom the hon. Member for St. Pancras, North (Mr. K. Robinson) referred have jobs and would not be affected, but that when immigrants come here without jobs great difficulties are created?

About half of those coming now are dependants over whom the Act imposes no control. The vast majority of those who obtain vouchers are either people who have definite jobs to come to or some special skill which qualifies them to be of use to this country.

Is my right hon. Friend able to say what proportion of those who apply to come are actually admitted?

Not without notice.

Would the right hon. Gentleman convey the opinions of the hon. Member for Liverpool, Kirkdale (Mr. N. Pannell) to the representatives attending the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference?

I think that the Commonwealth Prime Ministers and the Commonwealth Governments generally realise that it was necessary for us to impose a control and that we have administered it wisely and well.

Do the figures which my right hon. Friend has given for the last 12 months represent an inflow which is exceptional in some ways? If not, does he realise that an annual net inflow of that character would in ten years give us an addition of nearly one million to the coloured population of the country?

My hon. Friend may be under a misapprehension. I was giving figures of the total Commonwealth inflow, not the coloured Commonwealth inflow.

Is the future operation of this Act being considered by the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference?

That is a question not for me but for my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make an official visit to the constituency of West Ham, North, on 27th July, in view of the fact that he will be in east London on that date.

I regret that my programme for 27th July is already full up and I am therefore unable to accept the hon. Gentleman's invitation, but I am glad he recognises the value of these meetings.

I, too, am sorry that the Prime Minister cannot find time to come. I agree with him that it would appear that no good would be done either to him or to his party if he were to come.

The hon. Gentleman should not be too sure. I might come some time. He had better look out.

As one who recognises the value of these meetings, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he knows how keenly his visit to the Liverpool area is anticipated, particularly since he has chosen the period of the annual holiday at Liverpool in which to come?

I shall be very surprised if there are not plenty of people present to meet me.

Does not the question of the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. A. Lewis) and the fact that he has to be supported by the Leader of the Opposition reveal their very great nervousness at the mounting popular support for the Conservative Party, led by my right hon. Friend, and the great success of his tours to meet the British people?

Order. It is no duty of the Prime Minister to express quasi-medical opinions about a state of nerves.

Is the Prime Minister aware that people in the Exchange Division of Liverpool very much resent his refusal to meet me when he visits my constituency or to see some of the shocking conditions under which people have had to live during the period of office of this Government? In view of the fact that he has refused to do so, may I tell him that I hope he gets a very warm reception in my constituency?

I shall look forward to the warm reception, which is what I have had everywhere. I cannot go everywhere, of course, in one day.