asked the Minister of Power if he will undertake a complete review of the capital structure of the National Coal Board, in view of the interest charges which are at present borne by the industry.

This will be part of the review I announced in the reply I gave my hon. Friend on 1st December, 1964.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this review, which is very long overdue, will give a good deal of satisfaction to the miners and the mining community of this country, but can he give any indication when he will be able to make a statement as to what progress has been made?

No. I will get on with the review as quickly as possible, but I cannot at this stage anticipate when it will be completed.

Without committing myself, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he is aware that any massive write-off of capital which would amount to a subsidy for coal is likely to receive a very chilly welcome from this side of the House?

Perhaps we had better await the outcome of the review.

asked the Minister of Power what is Her Majesty's Government's policy toward allowing the National Coal Board to manufacture the machinery and equipment it needs; and what proposals he has for implementing this policy.

asked the Minister of Power if he will introduce legislation to require the Central Electricity Generating Board to use their pulverised fuel ash for the manufacture of bricks and building blocks.

asked the Minister of Power if, in order to encourage the National Coal Board to manufacture some of the machinery and equipment it needs, he will remove the present restrictions; and if he will make a statement.

With permission I will answer this Question and Questions Nos. 23 and 35 together.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is grave uncertainty among firms manufacturing equipment for the National Coal Board, not least in the factory which makes mining pit props in my constituency? Will he do nothing to extend the area of the nationalisation? Will he undertake to leave things as they are in this matter?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that, under the Act, the Board has extensive powers to manufacture machinery, equipment, and other goods. Whether these powers are adequate is a matter we shall be considering in the review.

Will my right hon. Friend press on with all speed in allowing the National Coal Board to provide in its own workshops as much of its equipment as it possibly can, in particular in development districts like Cowdenbeath where further work for the Board's workshops would be very welcome?

The Board's policy is to employ its own men on such work as sinking shafts and driving roadways where it feels that this would be to better advantage than placing the work with private industry. In the review we shall look at the matters raised by my hon. Friend.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Was my right hon. Friend answering my Question No. 23, as he said he would? The Question dealt with the Central Electricity Generating Board and not the National Coal Board.

The right hon. Gentleman said that he would answer Question No. 23. I was observing the hon. Lady's movements with some interest but they did not take place.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is under-used capacity in the National Coal Board's workshops which could well be used for the manufacture of machinery and equipment? Will he advise the Board to institute a searching inquiry to see what surplus capacity there is for this purpose?

As I have said, the National Coal Board has powers within the Statute to do certain types of manufacture. I will be discussing these matters with Lord Robens in the near future.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the National Coal Board now produces about 8 per cent. of the country's brick output? Is he further aware that this nationalised brick industry is anxious to make its contribution to the building programme of the new Labour Government and that it is "raring" to go? Will he give the nationalised brick industry—a most profitable part of the National Coal Board—the green light to go ahead and do precisely that?

I am very keen, as is my right hon. Friend the Minister of Public Building and Works, to see a substantial increase in the number of bricks available and I hope that the National Coal Board will look very seriously to see if it can increase its output of bricks.

asked the Minister of Power how stocks in November of opengrate and other solid smokeless fuels compare with those in November last year; and whether he is satisfied that supplies are adequate to meet demands due to the increased number of smoke control areas.

asked the Minister of Power if he is satisfied that supplies of all kinds of smokeless fuel will be adequate during the coming winter; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Power if he is satisfied that there is an adequate amount of smokeless fuel for the winter; and what steps he is taking to stimulate supplies.

Stocks of most smokeless fuels are better than last year and in general supplies will be adequate this winter; but there may be local shortages of particular types. The producers are fully seized of the importance of satisfying the market and consumers can help by placing orders in good time.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in the area near my constituency there are local authorities which have come to very different conclusions? Is he satisfied with the working of all the regional advisory councils, and particularly the one near my area?

The confirmation of an order is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government. I shall write to the hon. Gentleman about the advisory councils.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that we on this side of the House are glad to know that he has been left with adequate stocks for the current year? Will he make the greatest effort to ensure that there are adequate supplies of both Gloco and reactivated fuel for unimproved open grates?

All grades of gas coke are stocked to higher levels than at this time last year. The hon. Gentleman referred to Gloco, the cheapest open fire coke. This is in good supply in the South and in the Midlands, and in adequate supply for existing consumers in smoke control areas in the North and North-West. Those gas boards which make premium fuels, Cleanglow and Phimax, expect to meet the demand for them.

In view of the various statements which have appeared from one year to the next about the output of smokeless fuel at Birch Coppice, can he say whether one single ton has been produced at this plant for household consumption?

If I understood the hon. and gallant Gentleman correctly, with regard to adequate supplies of fuel in future, the National Coal Board has under consideration a number of other sites for making smokeless fuel. The rate at which plants are set up will depend largely on the demand.

That is not what I asked. I asked whether any production was occurring at this moment at Birch Coppice. The hon. Gentleman is aware that £9 million of public money has been spent on that plant. I am sure that the House will be anxious to know whether at long last anything is being produced for the householder at that plant.

I am sorry that I did not correctly understand the question. If the hon. and gallant Gentleman puts down a Question about that plant, I shall endeavour to answer it.

asked the Minister of Power if he will take steps to control the retail price of prepacked smokeless fuels.

No, Sir.

Does the Minister realise that the shocking prices charged for these bags of fuel last winter was a particular hardship on elderly people, living in one or two rooms in a smokeless zone, who were compelled to buy the fuel in this form because they had no storage space? In view of the fact that the worst of the winter is before us and that there is a real danger of some of these old people dying from hypothermia, will he review the machinery for price control to prevent a similar racket this winter with the accompanying tragedies which may well follow?

I am aware of this difficulty. The ability of consumers in general to shop around and choose is the most effective safeguard against excessive prices for prepacked fuel. I am aware of the suggestion of the Domestic Coal Consumers' Council that the recommended selling price should be marked on packets of prepacked fuel. I hope that this practice will be adopted as far as is practicable. I have no power to require the price to be marked on packs in this way.

asked the Minister of Power if he will make a statement on the extent to which the impetus behind the drive for clean air and smokeless zones is being arrested by the dearth of suitable fuel at suitable prices.

I am not aware of a general shortage of suitable fuels. While gas coke may not be available in some parts of the country there should be ample supplies of other smokeless fuels, some of which may cost no more to use than gas coke.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that a bag of ordinary coal costs 10s., whereas a bag of smokeless fuel costs 14s., and that this makes smokeless zones very unpopular, particularly with old people, and puts local authorities which are doing their best to carry out a clean air programme in a very awkward situation? Will he do something to remove the discrepancy between the prices of coal and smokeless fuel which people are obliged to burn in these zones?

I have no power to control prices. This is a matter for the producers, who are in active competition with each other, and can be relied on not to endanger their own markets.

asked the Minister of Power how many horses were employed below ground in the mines throughout the country last year.

The National Coal Board employed 4,737 on 30th June, 1964.

Can my hon. Friend hold out any hope of these animals being replaced by machines?

Horses are still kept in some of the older coalfields, where the method of work is such that mechanical help is impracticable. The National Coal Board expects that by the early 1970s horses will be no longer needed in the mines.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind the fact that although we are all animal lovers, some hon. Members on this side of the House—and certainly those with recent experience in the mines—believe that more attention should be paid to the welfare of the men who work in the pits than to financial and production considerations? Will he give this point some attention?

Mrs. Renée Short.

Question No. 23.

Answered.

Order. There has been some confusion. The hon. Lady's Question No. 23 has already been answered; we had a little word about it. I called her to ask Question No. 24.

I thought, Mr. Speaker, that we were answering Question No. 24 and calling it Question No. 23.

asked the Minister of Power if he will give a general direction, in the public interest, to the National Coal Board to increase its output of bricks, and to modernise its plant for this purpose.

No, Sir, but I have been in touch with the National Coal Board and understand it is planning a substantial increase in its production of bricks.

If there is to be an increase in the production of bricks or anything else by the Coal Board, will the right hon. Gentleman say whether he intends to squeeze out the private manufacturers outright, because it is important for them to know the answer to that question?

I do not know why the hon. Gentleman should object, especially at a time when there is such a great shortage of bricks—probably brought about by the lack of planning on the part of his right hon. Friends when they were in Government. As a matter of fact, the production of bricks by the Board in the year 1963–64 was 488 million. This year it is expected to be 506 million. Current plans provide for an increase up to 550 million by 1966–67.

Will my right hon. Friend rest assured that he will have the full support of hon. Members on this side of the House if he restores to all the publicly-owned undertakings for which he is responsible full commercial freedom to carry out whatever undertakings they determine are in the best interests of the nation?

As I said in answer to a previous Question, there are within the Statutes powers to manufacture. I have also pointed out that we propose to conduct an inquiry to see whether those powers are wide enough. When we have concluded our inquiry I will let the House know the result.

asked the Minister of Power whether he is aware of the general concern felt at the quality of coal reaching the domestic consumer; and what action he proposes to take to help solve this problem.

I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Goole (Mr. George Jeger) on 1st December.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that in spite of heavy investment in new machinery by the coal industry and in spite of the closing down of uneconomic pits, the industry is making a loss of £40 million a year? Will the Parliamentary Secretary assure the House that he will not raise the price of coal so that old-age pensioners particularly, and others, do not have to pay more for the inefficiencies of nationalisation?

I do not know from where the hon. Member gets the figure of £40 million a year. I appreciate his concern for the old-age pensioners. I wish that the party opposite had felt equally concerned in the last 13 years. I have no reason to suppose that the quality of coal generally is poor or that the practice of selling lower or mixed quality coals at high-grade prices is becoming widespread. The National Coal Board does everything possible to maintain the quality of coal as it leaves the pits.

asked the Minister of Power whether, in view of the continuing concern expressed in West Sussex over the decision to construct a 400 kilovolt overhead line from Bolney to Lovedean. he will order a public inquiry to be held.

asked the Minister of Power what representations he has received concerning the decision to construct a 400 kilovolt overhead line from Bolney to Lovedean; and whether he will review the decision.

A public inquiry was held in 1963. There has been a considerable volume of further protest since my predecessor came to a decision last July. On the possibility of a review I have nothing to add to the reply I gave to my hon. Friends, the Members for Wood Green (Mrs. Joyce Butler) and Brighton, Kemptown (Mr. Hobden) on 1st December.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, in supporting this decision, he is going against expert advice about the safety of these pylons, that there is considerable dispute about the cost of underground cables and that, in upholding the decision, he is going against the advice of his own Department's inspectors about the routing of these pylons? In the light of these factors, will he now call for a further inquiry and take what further steps may be necessary to reverse the existing position?

The hon. Gentleman should realise that this was not just an administrative decision. It was a formal consent issued to the Board under the Act after all statutory requirements had been applied. If a Minister had power to withdraw consent at any time, boards would be placed in an impossible position.

In view of the great concern over the increase of pylons crossing the countryside, could not the right hon. Gentleman at least give an assurance that everything possible is being done through scientific research to hasten the day when this type of cable can be economically buried underground? Will he be able to make a statement on the subject in the near future?

I think that the hon. Gentleman is aware of the figures. The cost of putting a 400 kV cable underground would be about £1 million per mile as against £54,000 per mile for overhead construction. The Board and I—as was, I am sure, my predecessor—are very conscious of the problem of amenity and will do everything possible to improve the position as scientific research makes it possible to do so.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the M.1 on its most expensive stretch cost less than £1 million a mile and that we find it quite impossible to believe that it would cost even one-tenth of that to bury a cable?

My hon. and learned Friend will remember some of the things that have happened to the M.1 as well. I do not claim expert knowledge on this matter. I merely take the figures that experts have given to me.

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 to raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

asked the Minister of Power whether the White Paper, the Second Nuclear Power Programme, Command Paper No. 2335, remains the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

asked the Minister of Power if he will make a statement on the future nuclear programme in the electricity industry.

asked the Minister of Power whether the Government have yet completed their review, with the electricity supply industry and the Atomic Energy Authority, of the type or types of reactor to be built in the second nuclear power programme; and what decision has been reached.

I would refer the hon. Members to the reply I gave my hon. Friend—the Member for Bristol, Central (Mr. Palmer) on 1st December.

Can the Minister tell us whether any progress is being made in finding a reactor to replace the Magnox system at present being used, because this is very important to the programme as a whole?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, there are decisions to be taken about the types of the reactor to be used. At this stage it is impossible to give a precise date when we will have these tenders, but the Government are keeping in close touch with the progress that is being made in this matter, and as soon as possible I shall inform the House.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many tenders have been received for the AGR type of reactor and how many for the water moderated type of reactor, and when we can expect a final answer on this, as the White Paper was laid in April?

Tenders will be received in February, but before receipt I cannot say for which type of reactor they are going to tender.

Is the Minister saying that we shall have to wait at any rate until February before we hear anything on this important matter? I hope that he will do everything that he can to clear up this damaging uncertainty.

The date for the receipt of tenders is February, and, as the hon. Gentleman knows from his experience, until we get the tenders we cannot anticipate the sort of reactors for which they are going to tender.

asked the Minister of Power what consideration he is giving to the production of electricity through peripheral generators placed in tidal barrages in suitable estuaries, where such barrages could also be used to support roads in place of the construction of bridges.

The possibilities are kept under review, but in the most promising such scheme proposed in this country, the Central Electricity Generating Board estimates the cost of generating electricity would not be competitive.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that electricity is generated by tidal power in France and that there are schemes for doing the same thing in America? Further, is he aware of the excellent research done at Sheffield University which shows that the new type of generators could generate electricity at ½d. a unit? Is it not madness to have these millions of horse power of tidal power going to waste around our shores?

As the hon. Gentleman is aware, there are real fundamental engineering difficulties here. The main engineering problems are silting up of the barrage basin and hindrance to navigation. Another problem is that power is not always produced when it is needed.

asked the Minister of Power how many 160-ft. towers for 400 kW. lines have now been erected; and what representations he has received from the areas affected.

1,377 towers 160 ft. or more in height have now been erected in various parts of the country. Since the work of erection has begun one complaint has been received in the Ministry from Dorset and a petition from North Wales about the crossing of the Dwyryd estuary.

Is the right hon. Gentle, man aware that many complaints have been made to hon. Members, pointing out how unsightly these towers are? Will he consult the Board about them and see whether some improvement can be made in their general design? He said earlier that he was interested in the amenity aspect of the matter.

The provision of electricity is also a pretty good amenity. The design of these towers was submitted to the Royal Fine Art Commission, which made no comment. [Laughter.] I say that to show how fair I am in these matters. In preparing the final design the Board had the advice of Sir William Holford.

Will the right hon. Gentleman indicate whether it is the policy of his Ministry constantly to pursue improvements in design from the point of view of aesthetics and amenity? Has there been any consultation with foreign countries, in order to ascertain whether their designs are susceptible of adaptation to our landscape?

I can assure the hon. Lady that we are as concerned as she is about this kind of thing. A great deal of research has gone on, and as soon as there is a possibility of improvement we will do everything possible to bring it into being.

asked the Minister of Power if he will now give a general direction to area boards to use their powers under Section 29 of the Electricity Act, 1957, to control the price at which electricity supplied by them is resold through privately-operated meters.

asked the Minister of Power if he is aware that some tenants, sub-tenants and guests are being forced to pay high prices for metered electricity; and if he will issue a general direction to boards to take steps, under Section 29 of the Electricity Act, 1957, to ensure that prices charged are reasonable.

I am aware of a number of cases where there has been overcharging for electricity re-sold through privately-owned meters. The Chairman of the Electricity Council, in a letter to the former Minister which was reproduced in the OFFICIAL REPORT for 13th February this year, has explained why the electricity boards have not so far used their powers under Section 29. My right hon. Friend is examining with the Electricity Council how to prevent these abuses.

Can the Minister say how widespread this practice is, and what information his Department has received? Does not he agree that Section 29 makes provision for every conceivable variation in circumstance of resale, and in those circumstances is it not desirable that the boards should fix a maximum resale price?

A number of cases has been brought to our attention. I should prefer not to go into detail as to the possible ways of meeting the difficulty until my right hon. Friend has had an opportunity of discussing this matter with the Electricity Council. He will certainly bear in mind any suggestions that are made in this House, and any complaints that reach him.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the freedom to make this excessive charge for metered electricity also enables landlords to make a substantial increase in their rent incomes, and that this helps to violate any controls we have upon rents? Will he therefore emphasise the urgency of the matter with his friends in the electricity boards?

I appreciate to the full the point that has been made. I am sure that my hon. Friend will be aware that many practical difficulties arise from the fact that tariff structures and amounts used by the consumer vary, and also the first block of units is priced differently from later blocks. Difficulties also arise from the fact that although meters which are the property of the electricity boards have to be certified, those which are the property of the landlords—as they frequently are—do not have to be certified. These practical difficulties exist, but my right hon. Friend is consulting the Electricity Council as to the best means of meeting what is undoubtedly an important problem.

Is the Minister aware this is one of the worst rackets of irresponsible landlords, and is very widespread? Could not the problem be tackled by making it illegal for anybody other than an electricity board to retail electricity at a profit?

The hon. Member knows a great deal about irresponsible landlords. [Interruption.] I am not referring to the hon. Member personally—but the party opposite were in power for 13 years, and landlords have from time to time taken unfair advantage of their tenants. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will agree that if we are to do justice in this case we must find the most practical solution.

asked the Minister of Power whether he will take steps to alter the conditions of connecting groups of isolated cottages to mains electricity, so that occupiers who refuse to join a scheme are not subsequently connected to the supply without bearing their share of the capital cost.

I regret that my right hon. Friend has no power to deal with my hon. Friend's point under existing legislation.

Is my hon. Friend aware that that is a disappointing Answer? Will he consider amending the legislation so as to give the Minister power to remove this anomaly, which causes considerable injustice to people who live in isolated cottages?

I cannot say when it will be possible for my right hon. Friend to introduce amending legislation. As for the general point, as the electrification of the countryside nears completion the problem becomes a diminishing one. In practice, in most cases boards manage to settle these difficulties by agreement.

asked the Minister of Power what would be the extra cost of carrying out the recommendations of the Central Electricity Generating Board's inspector to adopt the blue route in the Fernhurst Valley as opposed to the red route for the line of 160 ft. high pylons proposed, thus following the least conspicuous route across the area about to be declared as of outstanding natural beauty.

About £108,000. The recommendation was made by inspectors appointed by my predecessor to hold the public inquiry.

Does the fact that consent has been given mean that even the route cannot be varied? In view of the very small extra cost, in comparison with the cost of burying this cable, is not the best answer a compromise of this sort, rather than that we should ruin one of the most glorious stretches of the English countryside?

The main reason for rejection was that the so-called blue route appeared to have little hope of being more acceptable than the present route, since the National Parks Commission, the National Trust and the Council for the Preservation of Rural England preferred the red route, which the Board put forward on the recommendation of Miss Sylvia Crowe, the eminent landscape consultant.

How does the Minister explain the fact that his own inspectors preferred the blue route as opposed to the red route in this area, on the specific ground that it would affect far fewer residents than would have been affected by the original route?

I cannot explain the reasons for the inspectors coming to that decision; all I can say is that the Minister is not bound to accept the recommendations of his inspectorate. I should think that the answer is that the hon. Member might have consulted the former Minister of Power.

What does the Minister mean when he says that the blue route would have little hope of being more acceptable than the red route? What has that to do with it?

All the objections that have been raised in respect of the existing route would have been raised in connection with the other route, if that had been preferred. There would have been equal protestation from those who would have been affected if that route had been taken.

asked the Minister of Power what is his policy concerning financial objectives for those nationalised industries for which he is responsible.

The nationalised fuel and power industries for which I am responsible will continue to work to financial objectives agreed from time to time between the Government and the boards.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his reply is very welcome? We are delighted to hear that he is to follow the policy set by the previous Government, which is very important. Is he further aware of the great sympathy we will feel for him in explaining this to hon. Members opposite?

asked the Minister of Power what steps he is taking in order to ensure that, in future, facilities for the import of iron ore into South Wales will be considered as a whole.

The National Ports Council is at present studying ore importing facilities in South Wales and will be making recommendations to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport. Future planning and action on this matter in the iron and steel industry will be greatly facilitated by the restoration of public ownership over the main part of the industry.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, quite apart from that last shot, it would be totally intolerable if a jetty were built from the Spencer Steelworks at Newport to Bristol Deeps until there is a complete survey of the economic arrangements in South Wales and adequate protection of all amenities on the Somerset coastline?

In view of his interest in this matter, the hon. Member should be aware that the National Ports Council is conducting a survey of all the interests concerned and of all the matters concerning South Wales and will be making recommendations to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport. I understand that the hon. Gentleman and other hon. Members saw the Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport on 25th November about this matter.

asked the Minister of Power whether he will make a statement on the future of firms which have substantial interests outside steel.

As my right hon. Friend, the First Secretary of State, told the House on 4th November, the Government do not intend to use the nationalisation of the steel industry to take into public ownership the main activities of companies which have substantial iron and steel interests but whose predominant interests are clearly in engineering and other activities. Consultations about this have been started with the industry.

But does the Minister realise that it is necessary to remove as much uncertainty as quickly as possible in this area? Does he accept that almost the only thing we agreed upon in the steel debate was that this should be done as speedily as possible? Will he now undertake to make a statement of intent before Christmas?

I cannot give an absolute date, but since the debate took place we have been in constant touch with as many segments of the industry as wished to discuss things with us, including the Federation, the Steel Board and any other components of the industry which wished to discuss matters with us.

asked the Minister of Power if he will give the volume and value of natural gas imported this year; how much has been fed in to the natural gas pipeline grid between Canvey Island and the North; and what information he has about the future supply of natural gas to gas undertakings connected to the grid.

Twenty million therms of Algerian gas have been imported at an estimated landed cost of 6¼d. per therm, and rather more than three-quarters of this has been supplied to area gas boards. The planned rate of the scheme is about 350 million therms per year which should be reached during the course of the winter. There are no firm proposals for imports of natural gas beyond this.

While thanking the Minister for that reply, may I ask him to state whether the programme for feeding natural gas to all the gas works through the grid has gone according to schedule, and whether he is satisfied with that programme?

Yes, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the enterprise of the gas industry, in co-operation with private firms, in making arrangements for these new supplies of gas is much admired? Will he bear in mind also the great urgency of proceeding as quickly as possible with arrangements for the underground storage of the gas, because this is essential to enable the industry to get the best benefit out of it in the interests of the consumer?

I agree with the right hon. Gentleman about the great enterprise shown by this nationalised body. The second point is rather a different matter, which one has very much in mind.

Now that my right hon. Friend is able to import this gas at a very cheap price, may I ask when consumers will reap the benefit in prices, too?

The Algerian gas will help the boards to offset increased costs and to stabilise prices, but it is still a very small proportion of the boards' total supplies and it cannot at this stage lead to general price reductions.

May I press the Minister on the point raised by my right hon. Friend the Member for Sutton Coldfield (Mr. Geoffrey Lloyd)? Is the Minister aware that if the gas industry is to make full use of these important developments like methane it is necessary to provide underground storage? Can he press his right hon. Friend the Leader of the House to allow time for a Gas Bill for this purpose?

I am seized of the importance of this point, and it really is a question of when we can get legislation into the programme. I agree with the hon. Gentleman about the importance of this project.

asked the Prime Minister what is to be the practice of Ministers regarding the priority they are to give to making Departmental statements to the House of Commons, or to the Press.

asked the Prime Minister why, and at what time, information was given to the Press regarding the proposed corporation tax, before such information was announced to Parliament.

asked the Prime Minister by what criteria Ministers decide which matters should be announced first in the House of Commons before release to the Press.

Hear, hear.

I am obliged to hon. Members on both sides of the House.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the leaks which have taken place since his Government took office seem to indicate that in some way the Government are trying to by-pass Parliament? Why was it that on this occasion the Chancellor of the Exchequer did not take the first opportunity to follow up his leak with a statement in the House?

If the Opposition really want to call into question a convention which they used for 13 years and which goes back far, far longer than that, we are willing to discuss it with them but I suggest that the hon. Gentleman would be better advised to talk to his right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition about it before in fact he does it.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that this is very much a House of Commons matter and not a matter of party politics? Does he further agree that the maintenance of the existing very friendly relationship between Press and Parliament is of great importance, highly valued and well tried; but that the week before last it appeared that this relationship was seriously upset when the Government refused to give Parliament information to which hon. Members thought they were entitled, and subsequently gave it to the Press, and even refused to confirm to Parliament what the Press had already been told?

No, Sir, and I repeat that I think the hon. and gallant Gentleman had better talk to his own Front Bench about this before he goes on with the subject.

Does not the Deputy Prime Minister appreciate the constitutional significance of leaking to the Press unofficially, through an unnamed spokesman, matters relating to taxation? Will he say who in fact was responsible for the actual leak? Who was it who actually made it? Will he confirm that in fact it was none other than the Prime Minister himself?

There was no leak. [Horn. MEMBERS: "Oh."] Very well, if the Opposition want to challenge a convention that was in existence many Parliaments before we arrived here, let them do it. I wonder whether one of the alternative Leaders of the Opposition would like to get up and support his hon. Friends.

Hear, hear.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is no wish on our side to challenge the confidential relationship between Press and Parliament, nor in this instance is there any criticism at all of the action of the Press? May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that what seems to us to have been an abuse of this practice is to use that method of passing on particular information with the intention that it should be acted upon?

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman, who was recently the Leader of the House, tell me what he used to do on a certain evening in the week?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I can find no previous example where information with regard to taxation)—[Hors MEMBERS: "Oh."]—was passed on with the intention that action should be taken upon it?

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that I could find many—[HoN. MEMBERS: "Answer."]—This is a matter for Parliament—[HoN. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] If the right hon. and learned Gentleman and his hon. Friends want to play politics, O.K., but is he aware that I have many examples where he did exactly the same thing?

asked the Prime Minister how long is the tenure of office of the Governor of the Bank of England.

I have been asked to reply.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether there has been any recent attempt to terminate this tenure of office by premature resignation and, if so, why?

That does not seem to arise on this Question. I answered the Question as it was put down.

Are not the Labour Government very much beholden to the Governor of the Bank of England? Have they not changed the slogan "Workers of the World, Unite" into "Bankers of the World, Unite" to save sterling from Socialism and the Socialists from themselves?

Order. No word of that arises from the Answer.

asked the Prime Minister when he will announce the special measures Her Majesty's Govern- intend to take to offset the effect of the Government's deflationary policy upon the economy of Northern Ireland.

I have been asked to reply.

Is the right hon. Gentleman seriously telling us that the policy of the 7 per cent. Bank Rate and the additional tax on petrol are not meant to be deflationary, because so far as I understand it that is quite the contrary to what his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer said about this measure? If they are meant to be deflationary, should not the Government take special measures to safeguard Northern Ireland from them?

There are very many differences between the policies we are pursuing and those tragic and almost fatal ones which the hon. and gallant Gentleman's right hon. Friends pursued and which landed the country in the difficulties it is now in.

If the right hon. Gentleman does not agree that it is the policy of the Government to introduce an element of deflation or disinflation into the economy, will he kindly read the recent speeches of his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer?

And as the right hon. Member for Barnet (Mr. Maudling) was one of the band who got us into this trouble, he should try to help to get us out of it.

Since the effect of the 7 per cent. Bank Rate is not likely to be reflected in the unemployment figures of Northern Ireland for some time to come, is not this the time for the right hon. Gentleman to look at the whole I.D.C. situation with a view to seeing whether he can get a more positive deflection of industry to Northern Ireland?

If the hon. Gentleman is really trying to help Northern Ireland, as distinct from trying to score a political point, he may like to know that the Ministers of Northern Ireland and I have been in much closer contact during the last seven weeks than they ever were with the previous Administration. We will do our best to see that the tragic situation that has afflicted Northern Ireland during all these years of total Tory rule there does not go on any longer.

asked the Prime Minister if he will give instructions to all Government Departments to increase the output of information, statistical and otherwise, for the benefit of Members of Parliament and of the general public.

I have been asked to reply.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that this might well involve a major reorganisation of the Government's statistical machinery and, if so, will he give an undertaking that such a reorganisation will be carried out expeditiously?

Yes, Sir. If that emerges from the investigation the answer is "Certainly".

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that too much information is given to the public? Is he aware that on one Sunday I read in four Sunday newspapers about the reduction of the Rhine Army, that the next day that was contradicted and that a few days later that story was also contradicted? Is not the British public getting bewildered by this welter of information?

The Question is about information. The hon. Gentleman is talking about fairy tales.

asked the Prime Minister if he will consider conserving manpower by using dogs to guard Chequers in future.

I have been asked to reply.

Surely life under Socialism is a dog's life? Should not dogs play a fuller part on these occasions?

The last time dogs were used was to protect Mr. Macmillan.

Would my right hon. Friend agree, if he is going to consider the use of dogs to guard Chequers, that he should not employ dirty dogs—and so avoid any infiltration by hon. Members opposite?

Would the right hon. Gentleman not consult the R.S.P.C.A.—[Interruption.]

Order. I cannot hear if we are concerned with cruelty to animals or whatever it is.

Would the right hon. Gentleman not consult with the R.S.P.C.A. before using dogs for this purpose?

asked the Prime Minister in view of the fact that the Ministry of Technology is to be the sponsor department for the machine tools, electronics, telecommunications, and computer industries, whether he will give an assurance that this arrangement will not entail strings being attached to Government contracts with a view to the acquisition of capital by the State in such industries.

I have been asked to reply.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that does not answer the Question, which asked if he would give an assurance to industry that no strings will be attached? Will he answer that Question, or perhaps the House will excuse him while he gets on the "hot line" to Washington?

I am sure that that was well worked out, but it did not really work. The answer is the exact reply which I gave to the Question: that my right hon. Friend will use such measures as in the circumstances seem right.

asked the Prime Minister when he will appoint an Ombudsman.

I have been asked to reply.

Would my right hon. Friend, whom we all hold in high regard, agree, particularly in the light of recent cases affecting the police, that it is of the utmost importance that there should be an outside, independent person to deal with matters of this kind?

As it is 33 years since I first made a speech urging the hon. Member's return to Parliament, I take the first part of his remarks as a rather belated but a nevertheless welcome recognition. The answer to his supplementary question is, Yes, Sir, but I am not yet ready to announce an actual decision.

Would the right hon. Gentleman consider including in the terms of reference of this Ombudsman the provision of some sort of clearing house facilities for hon. Members so that they may address their letters on behalf of their constituents to the right Departments and be able to find their way through the mass of Bills, orders, leaks and so on and know the right Ministers to whom to address their remarks?

If the new Chief Whip opposite is not available, I am sure that my right hon. Friend will be.

Before the right hon. Gentleman comes to any decision on this matter, will he give the most careful consideration to the proposition put forward by a former learned Clerk of the House, Sir Edward Fellowes, for the setting up of a Select Committee designed to establish whether an abuse about which a grievance has been made was caused by faulty legislation or faulty administration?

We have this very much in mind. There are a whole range of questions to be discussed and some very real points for which we must try to make provision. As I say, these things are in mind.