asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies why the publicly-owned land at Cabrits, Dominica, formerly an ancient naval station, is left in a derelict condition, with its historic buildings overgrown; how many acres it comprises; and what action he proposes to take to restore the land, reinstate the buildings as an ancient monument or seek some other productive use.

The area of land known as Cabrits comprises approximately 250 acres in the northeast of Dominica, of which about 20 acres are used for forestry research work. The Dominica Government have been anxious to restore and maintain the 18th century fortifications situated there but have been unable to devote funds from available resources for this purpose. They have no immediate plans for developing the surrounding land.

Cannot the British Government offer some money? Is it not rather scandalous that we should have over 200 acres of potentially usable land just lying idle and unable to be approached except by penetrating semitropical jungle? Could we not find some productive use for it and restore the very beautiful ancient buildings as relics of the eighteenth century?

As my hon. Friend knows, at the moment Dominica is a grant-aided territory. There are many demands there for development projects. Perhaps my hon. Friend will use some of his influence with his moneyed friends to provide some funds for this purpose.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what reply he is making to the request made by the Government of Dominica that, on the principle that regional institutions shall not be concentrated in any one territory but shall be dispersed among the islands, this island should be the site of a regional agricultural school on the lines of the former Eastern Caribbean Farm Institute.

A reply is still under consideration. The Eastern Caribbean Farm Institute in Trinidad still exists, and its facilities are available to the territories of this area. The Secretary of State has received no proposals from the Governments concerned that it should be replaced, and the question of where the replacement, if any, should be located is therefore premature.

As Barbados has the police training centre, Antigua has the teacher training centre, and St. Kitts has the regional technical college, is it not time that Dominica got something in this area? Is my hon. Friend aware that the poverty in this island is a disgrace to the British name, and that it is about time we did something more active to revive its economy and give it better facilities?

That may be so, but my hon. Friend realises that his Question refers specifically to a farm institute. Until we have had discussions with the other territories, which are equally involved in the question of a farm institute, it would be premature to give any decision on this question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies to what extent United Kingdom financial and economic aid to the Colonial Territories will be increased during 1965.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how much United Kingdom economic and financial assistance to Colonial Territories will be provided by 1965.

On present estimates, financial and economic aid to dependent territories in 1965–66 will amount to about £40·25 million as against some £38 million in 1964–65 to the same territories.

Could the hon. Lady say how much of that is going towards current educational services in the Colonies, and will particular attention be given to this in the next two or three years?

Educational services comprise quite a large part of this, but I could not give a specific answer without a Question on the Paper.

While thanking my hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask her whether she is aware of the great pleasure felt by all of those on this side of the House at the announcement made by the hon. Member for Kettering (Sir G. de Freitas) at the United Nations when he announced the contribution of £4 million to the technical aid programme which will give great benefit to these territories?

I am sure hon. Members on both sides of the House will be very glad indeed that we are making this considerably increased contribution to the Technical Assistance Fund of the United Nations.

Is the hon. Lady able to tell us what financial aid she is able to set aside for our worthy Gambians who this day week become independent, and will she tell us who will represent the Government at the celebrations?

As I think the hon. Member knows, announcements were made as to the aid to be offered to the Gambia up to July, 1967. The amount of development aid remains as previously stated. On budgetary aid, I think we may find that a little less will be required. Her Majesty's Government will be represented by my hon. Friend the Minister of State, Commonwealth Relations Office.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how many United States bases there are on British colonial territory; and if he will list the Colonial Territories which are subject to some defence agreement with the United States of America.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies in which Colonial Territories there are United States bases; and in respect of which territories there are defence agreements with the United States of America.

Under defence agreements concluded in 1941 and 1961 the United States have a right to maintain naval or air bases in seven Colonial Territories, namely Antigua, Barbados, St. Lucia, Turks and Caicos Islands, Bermuda, Bahamas and British Guiana. These rights are not at present being exercised in British Guiana.

While thanking the hon. Lady for that detailed reply and in view of the fact that the Secretary of State for the Colonies has in the past had a well-known implacable opposition to foreign bases on British territory, may I ask her for an assurance that no steps will be taken to abrogate these agreements?

The matter has not even been considered.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many of us hope that she will watch most carefully the effect of this type of agreement and occupation, if I may use that word without being rude, on British institutions in these territories, which in many cases are very proud of retaining their own British characteristics?

I sympathise with those concerned, but we have received no representations from any of these territories which lead us to suppose that the present installations are not welcome.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the territories in his Department will be allowed access to the proposed Commonwealth Secretariat.

The general objectives of the Commonwealth Secretariat, as defined in the communiqué issued by the Commonwealth Prime Ministers at the close of their 1964 meeting, was to strengthen co-operation between the independent Governments of the Commonwealth.

While thanking the hon. Lady for that reply, may I ask whether she realises that it may be difficult for some of the smaller dependent territories to become entirely independent in the future? Would it not be a good idea to consider how they might have contact with other parts of the Commonwealth through the Commonwealth Secretariat?

That would have to be considered by the Prime Ministers' Conference, which is being reconvened in June of this year.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will consult the Government of Hong Kong in order to expedite the laying of a pipeline from the mainland to Hong Kong island so that the periodic shortages in the water supply may be prevented.

The Lantau pipeline completed last year has much improved the water supply to Hong Kong Island. Under the vast Plover Cove scheme, an additional pipeline will link the island with the mainland, but we are advised by the Hong Kong Government that this part of the scheme will not be completed until 1968.

I welcome that reply as far as it goes, but is my hon. Friend aware that when I was in Hong Kong in 1956 this deficiency was very serious indeed and Hong Kong was importing water from China? Is she further aware that in August this year, even with the pipeline, the shortage of water was still serious, despite the improvement which she has indicated? Would my hon. Friend consider paying a visit to Hong Kong to see some of these serious problems at first hand and also perhaps to help to stimulate the Government to greater activity?

A number of schemes for improving local resources are being carried out in addition to the Plover Cove scheme, and the new agreement with China to provide an additional 10,000 million gallons per annum from the Chinese mainland will come into effect on 1st March. I should be most happy to visit Hong Kong at any time my official duties permitted.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what is now the position with regard to the daily supply of water in Hong Kong to private residents and to hotels; and whether, in view of the adverse publicity this has been given throughout the world, which has harmed the tourist trade, he will give the present situation the fullest publicity internationally and so help Hong Kong's tourist industry.

The Hong Kong Government announced on 20th January that the present 24-hour water supply will be maintained until next May when the summer rains may normally be expected to commence.

Does the hon. Lady realise that, although the hon. Member for Glasgow, Govan (Mr. Rankin) was not able to get a bath last August, things are now perfectly all right.

On a point of order. Do I infer from what the hon. Gentleman said that he is making a personal accusation against me? Is that in order?

It is no good asking me what the hon. Member infers. It appeared to me that it was an expression of sympathy.

In any event, I should like to confirm what the hon. Member for Brighton, Pavilion (Sir W. Teeling) said. The situation is now very much improved.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what action he proposes to take in regard to the request presented to him by the Hong Kong Civic Association that the urban council should be expanded into a House of Representatives with additional powers.

No such request has been submitted to my right hon. Friend.

Does my hon. Friend realise that the need for some form of popular representation and expression is growing very rapidly in Hong Kong? Is she aware that that is due to the fact that the Chinese population, which is, by a long chalk, the largest section of the whole population, has only one selected representative, that the Indian population, which is very small indeed, has one representative and that the Portuguese population, which is almost negligible, also has one representative? This parity of representation is anachronistic in the present population distribution in Hong Kong. Will my hon. Friend see what she can do to improve the situation?

As I think my hon. Friend knows, there will be an addition of four unofficial members to the urban council on 1st April next, two nominated and two elected. Also, there are proposals for an extension of the franchise which are now being studied by a working party set up by the Governor.

Would my hon. Friend agree that in Hong Kong for water and other things we depend on there being a régime which is acceptable to the Chinese Government? While the British Government are acceptable to the Chinese, no form of Honk Kong democracy would be.

Considerations of that nature have to be kept in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies why five Chinese journalists, who had been in Hong Kong since they left China in 1949, were suddenly arrested last summer; whether this was the result of their Press activities; how long they were detained and why; why they were deported to Formosa; and to what extent their activities were connected with the opium haul, made near the Communist border, reported on 7th February.

A number of persons, six of whom could be described as journalists, were arrested in July and September, 1964. They were, in fact. Kuo-Min-Tang Intelligence agents. They were detained for nine to twelve weeks and then deported to Taiwan. Their arrest and deportation had no connection with their activities as journalists or with the recent seizure of narcotics in the New Territories.

Does the hon. Lady realise that her Answer will give great satisfaction to people who feel that there might have been something connected with these journalists' Press reports about what was happening in Communist China? Will she also bear in mind that some of us are very worried about the fact that these men had to be kept in detention for so long without any definite accusation being brought against them?

We dislike keeping anybody in detention, but we are deeply concerned about the use of Hong Kong as a base for such activities.

Will the hon. Lady say what steps the Government have taken to protest to the Government of Taiwan at the use they are making of the British Colony of Hong Kong for their intelligence activities?

The hon. Member will know that we do not recognise the authorities in Formosa. Therefore, we cannot make or receive any representations.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what restrictions are now being enforced on the frontier between Gibraltar and Spain.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what is the present state of the blockade of Gibraltar by the Spanish authorities.

Travellers entering or leaving the Spanish customs post at La Linea are subject to long delays and to exceptional searches of baggage, vehicles and other formalities. In some cases duties which are apparently new are being charged on goods taken across the frontier in either direction.

However much the attitude of Her Majesty's Government towards the Spanish Government may have contributed to this dispute, may I ask the hon. Lady whether she will assure the House that Her Majesty's Government will do everything possible to protect our fellow citizens in Gibraltar from what is rapidly becoming a persecution?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that similar action was taken in 1954 under the previous Administration. We are, of course, determined to do everything possible to sustain the Gibraltarians in this situation.

Will the hon. Lady point out to the relevant Socialist authorities that the resurrection of this vendetta has, in the opinion of the overwhelming majority of people in this country and in Spain, led to a deterioration in trade between the two countries and to the discomfort and dismay of the loyal and friendly population on both sides of the frontier?

We certainly wish the present situation to be brought to an end in a reasonable manner. We believe that this is possible. But, as the hon. Member will appreciate, we cannot talk about any matters which may need further discussion under duress.

Does not my hon. Friend think that this would be a very good moment for Her Majesty's loyal Opposition to stop licking Franco's boots?

While fully supporting the strongest protest which the Government are, no doubt, making to the Spanish Government, may I ask whether the hon. Lady can say what measures of any kind the Government have taken during their term of office to improve relations with Spain?

We have offered, through diplomatic channels, opportunities for consultation as soon as the present quite unreasonable restrictions are removed. Further questions on diplomatic matters should be addressed to my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what reports he has received from the Governor of Gibraltar regarding the effect of recent Spanish actions on the frontier upon the economic life of the Colony; and whether he himself will make a visit to Gibraltar at the earliest possible opportunity.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will make a statement about the latest developments at the Gibraltar-Spanish frontier.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what form of action he intends to take in answer to Spanish activities on the Gibraltar frontier; and whether he will make a statement on the situation.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will make a statement about the present situation in Gibraltar.

As I have just informed the House, fresh restrictions have been imposed quite recently.

While welcoming the news from the hon. Lady and wishing her a successful visit to Gibraltar, may I ask her for an assurance that when the Government get around to taking some action, it will be constructive action and that she will not be deflected by those elements on her own side of the House whose only concern in this appears to be to try to make relations between London and Madrid worse than they have been for many years?

I have already assured the House that we have every intention of standing by the people of Gibraltar. As far as my own Department is concerned, that is our main concern.

Is the hon. Lady aware that we welcome her decision to go to Gibraltar, all the more as we have been rather concerned at the apparent inability of the Government to get the position improved? Will she assure the House that she will tell the Governor, the Chief Minister and the people of Gibraltar that they have with them the solidarity not only of the Government but of every political party in this country? Will she consult the Governor and Sir Joshua Hassan as to what measures to take and will she undertake to report to the House in a statement on her return?

I am going there after consultation with the Governor. I shall naturally consult him, the Chief Minister and other authorities, including the naval authorities in Gibraltar. If it is desired, no doubt we can arrange some statement later.

Will the hon. Lady arrange for such a statement?

As far as it lies within my power, yes.

Can my hon. Friend confirm the report that school children are being stopped on the frontier and searched by Spanish Customs officials? Will she give an undertaking that the positive measures which the Government intend to take if these provocations do not cease will not include the supplying of frigates to Spain, as was suggested by the Opposition some while ago? Will she also make an appeal, if the provocations do not cease, to tourists to cancel their holidays in Spain?

Perhaps the hon. Member would phrase that Question in some other way. It is not in order to ask a Minister to confirm or deny a report unless she is responsible for it.

Is it the case that Customs officials of the Spanish authorities are stopping and searching British school children?

Using frigates to do so?

I understand that there has been an interference with the transport of school children. The fact that some of the reports in the newspapers have been somewhat exaggerated is one of the reasons why I wish personally to go to Gibraltar to see what is happening. I would point out, with respect to my hon. Friend, that the supply of frigates is not a matter for the Colonial Office.

I wish my hon. Friend every success. Can she tell us a little more about what is happening to British subjects living over the border? What is this transit camp in which we are placing some of our people on the way? Can she tell us a little more about that?

As the House will have heard, it is true that persons who were living on the Spanish side of the border without residence permits have been made to cross into Gibraltar if they wish to continue to work there. Temporary arrangements have been made for their accommodation, and this again is one of the things that I shall see for myself, to decide whether these arrangements are satisfactory, or whether improvements should be made.

While congratulating the hon. Lady on the stout way in which she is standing up for the rights of Gibraltarians, may I ask whether she would agree that the situation has been greatly exacerbated by the foolishness of the Prime Minister? What steps have been taken to raise this matter in the United Nations? We are spending a vast sum of money on this organisation. Do the Government think that there is no point in raising it there?

Possibly the hon. Gentleman is not aware that the cause of a good deal of this trouble in the way in which our predecessors in Government handled Gibraltar's Constitution last year. Had this been done with greater diplomatic success, these troubles might never have arisen.

Mr. Sandys, to ask the next Question.

rose—

Sit down.

What is the trouble? I am asking for an explanation of the noise made by the right hon. Gentleman.

I thought that the hon. Lady raised a rather important point, and I wanted to pursue it.

I am afraid that that happens sometimes. Mr. Sandys, to ask Question No. 13.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has received the report of his senior economic adviser on Gibraltar; and whether he will make a statement on the action he proposes to take.

A draft report is likely to be available very shortly. It will be presented to the Gibraltar Government. On receipt of their views my right hon. Friend will consider what action should be taken by the United Kingdom Government. As soon as Gibraltar's needs are established she can rely on us to consider urgently and with the utmost sympathy what help we can give.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Will she bear in mind that any steps which she takes to help Gibraltar will now receive the united support of the whole House? Will she bear in mind that this is in contradistinction to the situation of May, 1954? When Her Majesty the Queen visited Gibraltar, the Spaniards closed their consulate there and imposed the restrictions which now exist and have been intensified.

I am sure that in the present circumstances we are all determined to do everything we can for the people of Gibraltar.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what arrangements he has made to ensure that the hospitals of Gibraltar are kept fully supplied with necessities, including oxygen, now being denied to them by the Spanish blockade.

The Governor has reported that due to the prompt action of the Gibraltar authorities and help from the naval dockyard the position is satisfactory. Future supplies of oxygen and other necessities have been assured.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will consult the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs about the restriction of British tourists to Spain, except through Gibraltar.

The hon. Member will appreciate that specific questions on matters relating to Spain are for my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary. We are in close consultation and my hon. Friend the Minister of State hopes to catch your eye, Mr. Speaker, later today on the Motion for the Adjournment.

Are we to understand that the Government, having got into this quarrel, will allow the diversion of British tourists to every point of entry except Gibraltar?

Not at all. That is certainly not our intention.

As this traffic across the frontier between Gibraltar and Spain is a two-way traffic, what is my hon. Friend doing by way of retaliation?

For the time being I see no reason why we should behave in such a childish way as the Spanish Government are behaving.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will make a statement about the present security position in Aden.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what steps he proposes to take to eradicate terrorism in Aden.

The seriousness of the security situation in Aden has been evidenced most recently by the throwing of a grenade into a Services cinema on 29th January and by attempts to assassinate Special Branch officers.

I echo the hon. Lady's congratulations to the local security forces. Can she say to what degree the National Liberation Front receives financial and other support from outside the territory and to what degree this terrorism is influenced by infiltration from the Yemen?

There is a Question later on the Order Paper about the first point raised by the hon. Gentleman. He is aware that there is infiltration from the Yemen. One cannot specify exactly how much.

Would the hon. Lady agree that the scale of terrorism in Aden has increased very alarmingly in recent weeks resulting, as she said, in the death of many British and Arab people and the wounding of many more? As these outrages are clearly inspired from the Republic of the Yemen and from Egypt, what representations have Her Majesty's Government made to the Government of Egypt to stop these outrages and with what results?

I do not think we should exaggerate the extent of the recent difficulties. It is quite true that there has been a number of incidents which we very deeply regret. But I repeat that I do not think we should exaggerate the increase in terrorist activities. We have made representations to the Egyptian Government and pointed out that this kind of behaviour makes it extremely difficult to maintain friendly relations, which we would very much wish to have with them.

The Aden Legislative Council fears that any detainees sent outside the territory are subject to torture. Can my hon. Friend give an assurance that the 47 detainees inside the city at the moment will be kept for lawful trial inside the territory which we administer?

I should have notice of the Question. I do not wish to mislead the House in any way. To the best of my belief, the majority are in Aden itself, but I should like further notice before giving the details.

On a point of order. On reflection, Mr. Speaker, I beg to give notice that I wish to raise on the Adjournment the matters in Questions Nos. 4 and 5.

The notice is defective and also out of order. Its validity therefore is nil.

Further to that point of order. I understood from previous Rulings that notices of an Adjournment Motion could be served at any point after the Question had been tendered.

If that impression were ever given to the hon. Member, I hasten to cure it. In any event, the notice can relate only to one Question.

May we return to Question No. 8? With respect to the hon. Lady, is it right that she should seek to play down this matter and ask us not to exaggerate it? After all, British Service men have lost their lives, British children have lost their lives and an Arab police inspector has lost his life in Aden. Many people have been wounded. There have been innumerable incidents in the last few weeks. Should not the hon. Lady take this much more seriously? Is she aware that there is great feeling in Aden and in this country about it?

I sincerely assure the hon. Member that we are very deeply concerned about what has happened. All I am suggesting is that it would be unwise to give the impression that more has happened than has in fact been the case, and that the terrorists have been more successful than they have been. That would be casting a very strong reflection on the security forces in Aden, which I am sure the hon. Member would not wish. The facts are that there was the deeply tragic incident just before Christmas when a European girl was killed. There was also the equally regrettable incident at Christmas time when an Arab inspector of police was killed. Other persons have been injured, but there have been no other fatal casualties.

What about British Service men?

I am speaking of the most recent period. Deeply as we regret all these incidents and deeply as we sym- pathise with those concerned and those living and serving in Aden, I do not think that we ought to give the impression that the terrorists have been so successful.

rose—

Mr. Fisher for Question No. 9.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what information he has as to the foreign sources from which arms and training are being supplied to those who are carrying out attacks upon British and Federal troops in the Federation and bomb outrages in Aden.

The activities to which the right hon. Member refers are known to be the work of the so-called National Liberation Front which is armed and trained by the Egyptian Intelligence Service.

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for speaking so frankly. Does she realise that British people will not very much longer tolerate the maintenance of diplomatic relations with a Government which is actively organising civil war in our territories, and is stimulating the murder of our Service men and their families, and other people for whom we are responsible?

As I have told the House today, it has been made clear to the Egyptian Government that these activities make difficult the improvement in Anglo-U.A.R. relations, which we would welcome. We had hoped that, rather than stimulate terrorism, the U.A.R. Government might have shown some concern for the people of the South Arabian Federation and supported the current preparations for their orderly progress towards independence.

Is not that a very feeble thing to say, that it makes difficult the improvement of relations? I hope that the Government will adopt a much more virile attitude to this problem.

It is hardly for me to adopt a virile attitude. We would wish, as I am sure hon. Members on both sides would wish, to be on friendly terms with the U.A.R. It is they who are making it very difficult for us to maintain friendly relations with them.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether and when he will convene a conference to consider a constitution and a date for the independence of British Guiana.

My right hon. Friend is due to arrive in British Guiana tomorrow for a short visit. He wants to see the situation there for himself, and to make personal contact with the Premier and leaders of Guianese political parties.

Provided that peace between the races in British Guiana continues, would the hon. Lady agree that there is no reason now to withhold independence from British Guiana and that it would be appropriate to hold a conference, perhaps this summer, with a view to independence towards the end of this year?

These are precisely the matters which my right hon. Friend has gone to British Guiana to study for himself. I think that it would be advisable to wait until he comes back.

Will he make a statement?

Certainly.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that no independent Government which excluded the largest political party in British Guiana would for long be viable?

That, again, is something which my right hon. Friend is there to study and judge for himself.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies when the proposed constitutional conference on the Federation of South Arabia is to take place; and whether he will make a statement.

The conference is due to begin on Tuesday, 2nd March, at Lancaster House. I have no doubt that my right hon. Friend will wish to inform hon. Members of the outcome of the conference as soon as it is ended.

Can the hon. Lady say whether the compositions of the delegations have been agreed?

Not yet. The High Commissioner is still in consultation.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will make a statement about recent disturbances in Bermuda.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will make a statement upon the rioting of 3rd February in Hamilton, Bermuda, resulting in serious injuries to 17 workers and a British policeman, and causing the calling up of police reserves and the Territorial Army.

I would refer the hon. Members to the reply which I gave yesterday to the hon. Member for Surbiton (Mr. Fisher), to which I would add that since yesterday those who were striking in sympathy are returning to work and only the electrical workers are still on strike.

Is the hon. Lady aware that the way in which this matter has been handled has given widespread satisfaction?

I thank the hon. Member.

Is it not a fact that the Bermuda Electric Light Company denied the workers official recognition and would not allow them to have their own ballot, and used blacklegs? Will she guarantee that the workers in any of our Colonies are given the usual rights of association, as free men?

As was made clear in the reply that I gave yesterday, the labour adviser to my right hon. Friend is now in Bermuda. I am sure that he will try to see that proper practices are established on both sides of the industry.

Will the hon. Lady take this opportunity to make it clear that in this incident—which we all regret—there was no element of racial tension, particularly as the island is enjoying happier race relations than for a long time past?

I am not aware of any such element.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what representations he is making with a view to improving the unfavourable place Fiji occupies in the Australian tariff structure as a result of the Ottawa Conference of 1932.

None, Sir. This question was closely examined with the Australian Government a few years ago, but G.A.T.T. difficulties and the position of other Commonwealth countries precluded any worthwhile action. The situation has not changed since then.

Will the hon. Lady have another look at the situation? Is not she aware that the position today is very different from the one in which the island found itself in 1932? In these circumstances, ought not she to try to make representations on behalf of the industrial development of Fiji to see that it gets a better share of the Australian market?

This question may have to be considered as part of the far wider one of arrangements under G.A.T.T. for less developed countries.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he will appoint independent and non-official members to the regional planning boards.

No, Sir. The boards will consist of officials under the chairmanship of a representative of the Department of Economic Affairs. But the regional planning councils will have the kind of membership the right hon. Gentleman has in mind.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that the fact that these boards are simply composed of his officials is causing some anxiety among local authorities throughout the country, and that in the West Midlands, where prosperity was brought to its highest pitch under the Conservative Government, there is additional anxiety that it will not be maintained under the present Government's policies? Does he agree that considerable reassurance would be given if he would allow independent members to sit on these boards?

The right hon. Gentleman has got it all wrong once again. Local authorities are very glad that under the new Administration there will be machinery, for the first time, to provide that they can be brought into the area where planning decisions are made.

In considering these regional planning boards, will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the membership of N.E.D.C. so as to allow the Chancellor of the Exchequer to be a member of it?

Will my right hon. Friend consider the appointment of Sir Roy Dobson to one of these boards?

asked the Prime Minister if the agreement announced by one of his predecessors on 1st November, 1960, providing facilities for United States Polaris submarines will extend to cover the new missile Poseidon.

The arrangement made with the United States Government covers the provision of facilities for missile-carrying submarines, and is not restricted to any particular mark of missile.

I welcome this very firm statement that the increased weight of the American nuclear deterrent will receive the hospitality of the British shores, but can the Prime Minister say when this new weapon is likely to arrive? If he can give that date, will he consider forming a reception committee to give it a welcome, comprising the 15 per cent. of his Government who were against the formation of the Holy Loch base?

I have had no information yet from the United States Government as to when this is likely to arrive. The House will recognise that the rapid development of missile technology quickly makes a whole lot of arguments from the other side out of date.

In view of the fact that the arguments from the other side about the Polaris submarines are already obsolete, will my right hon. Friend consider stopping the construction of the new British naval base in Gare Loch, which is likely to cost £25 million, and make proposals to transfer that expenditure to housing, education and hospitals, where it is much more badly needed?

I explained to the House in considerable detail our policy in relation not only to that base but to the whole nuclear question, in the debate on 16th and 17th December.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the over-urbanisation and over-population of Great Britain, Her Majesty's Government will take steps to reduce immigration from the Commonwealth and from foreign countries, to stimulate emigration and to consider afresh the implications of the high birth rate among people of all races resident in Great Britain.

My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary made a statement last week about Commonwealth immigration. We have no present proposals for a change in policy regarding immigration from foreign countries, which is already closely controlled, nor have we any plans to stimulate emigration, which did in fact rise by 33 per cent. in 1963 compared with 1962.

Is the Prime Minister aware that only half the land surface of Great Britain remains farming land, and that another 1 million acres will be taken for development in the next 15 to 18 years?

Not in Scotland.

Has not the time come to make future long-term plans to achieve a proper balance between land and people, so that posterity will not resent our folly?

Yes, Sir, but the proper way to plan between land and people is to tackle the problem of land and not the problem of people.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in the opinion of many who are qualified to make this kind of assessment the most serious deficiency in the growth of the British economy in 1965 will be the shortage of manpower and the wasteful use of manpower?

Can the Prime Minister explain his answer to my supplementary question?

Yes, Sir. What we need in this country is the most intelligent use of the land that we have. There are very large tracts of land which are not available to the British people as a whole. As I understood the right hon. and learned Member's original Question, he was raising the whole issue whether we could afford the present high birth rate. It is more important to plan the land than to plan the people or the birth rate.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the declaration by the Warsaw Alliance Powers on 20th January concerning the proposed multilateral and Atlantic nuclear forces, he will now propose to President Johnson that both these projects be withdrawn and priority given to the need for negotiations with the Soviet Union.

No, Sir.

Does my right hon. Friend recall that on 23rd November he told the House that in any defence measure proposed by the Government it was paramount that it should not only not make disarmament more difficult but, so far as was possible, facilitate agreement, and that any defence policy which did not bear in itself the seeds of a programme of disarmament was no longer appropriate? In view of the complete rejection of the A.N.F. on the same grounds as the M.L.F., and the statement by the Warsaw Powers that proceeding with this scheme would increase tension and lead to countermeasures, is it not time that my right hon. Friend dropped this proposal?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for the close study he has given to what I said in the House in November. If he will now give equal study to what was, I am afraid, a very lengthy speech which I made on 16th December, he will find the whole theme of our defence and foreign policy and our proposal for an A.N.F. is to stop substantial proliferation and spreading and acquisition of nuclear weapons.

asked the Prime Minister what reply he has received from the Leader of the Opposition to the suggestion that matters relating to national defence should be the subject of consultation between the Government and Privy Councillors who are members of the Opposition.

The right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition has now let me know that he would be very willing to meet me for a discussion on defence matters.

Am I to understand from what my right hon. Friend has said that the conversations will be confined to the Leader of the Opposition and himself, and that the proposal that has been advocated by hon. Members on both sides of the House, and which is in the national interest, that there should be consultation on defence matters between both sides, has been rejected?

That was not really raised in the proposal I made to the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition. The arrangement is that we should meet first to discuss what changes could be made, what further consultations of a regular character—or possibly at infrequent intervals at the convenience of the right hon. Gentleman—what arrangements could be made for mutual discussion on defence problems. The question mentioned by my right hon. Friend, taking it much wider, for bilateral talks between defence spokesmen on the two Front Benches, is something we can always consider again, but, quite frankly, no decision has been taken in favour of it yet.

May I ask the Prime Minister—I hope he will agree —whether from time to time either my right hon. Friend the Member for Monmouth (Mr. Thorneycroft) may accompany me—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]—or of course the Secretary of State for Defence accompany him? This may be thought right and convenient. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will agree, too, that these discussions should not be a matter for continuous Questions on the Order Paper asking how we are getting on. That would make a difficult matter even more so.

It would be improper for me to try to regulate what Questions are put on the Order Paper. Regarding what the right hon. Gentleman has said, the position is quite clearly what he has in mind. Indeed, when the proposal was first made in the debate last December, I did say that the Leader of the Opposition and his defence spokesman or shadow Foreign Secretary—whoever might be appropriate in this connection—should meet their opposite numbers in the Government and discuss any problem of mutual interest in the field of defence. The talk to which I referred in my first Answer to my right hon. Friend the Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell) was intended purely as a talk between the right hon. Gentleman and myself—a talk of a procedural character —to decide how these talks should take place in future.

In view of what the Leader of the Opposition has just said, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether these conversations will be of a secret character and that what is conveyed to the Leader of the Opposition will be confined to him and not disseminated among his colleagues?

There have always been talks between the Leader of the Opposition of the day and the Prime Minister of the day on very secret matters. As the House will know, because this was reported to the House, 1 had a number of talks—not only with the right hon. Gentleman opposite, but with his predecessor—on questions affecting security, for example. These were always regarded as purely personal exchanges of opinion and not to be transmitted even to one's closest colleagues. So far as defence is concerned, right hon. Gentlemen opposite were, of course, until recently fully informed on all the most secret aspects of defence, weapons and the rest of it. We have long thought that it would be helpful, not only to the House as a whole but particularly to the defences of the country, if leading members of the Government and appropriate members of the Opposition were to discuss what was going on in the defence field on the basis that it would not inhibit either side from speaking freely—but with due discretion—in this House.

asked the Prime Minister what representations he has received from financial sources in the City of London on the nation's economic position; and what proposals they have made to him.

My right hon. Friends and I have received representations and proposals from various sources about the economic situation. Some have been made public; others were confidential.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that not everybody in the City of London looks with disfavour on Her Majesty's Government and that there are many persons in the City, leaders in finance and business, who are very anxious to enter into consultations with members of the Government on matters of mutual interest? Will my right hon. Friend encourage these persons, of whom no doubt he is aware, to meet the Government from time to time?

Yes, Sir, it is certainly the case that we get very valuable informal advice from a number of very distinguished people in the City of London who are only too anxious to co-operate with any Government of any colour in this country. But, of course, I think that too much has been made in the past by the House of the word "City". What I think is of fundamental importance, if we are to solve our problems in the industrial field, particularly in relation to exports, imports and technological innovations, is that we have the closest co-operation and the closest consultation with productive industry also, and this we are doing.

Is the Prime Minister proposing to act on the advice given to him by the Governor of the Bank of England at a dinner where the Chancellor of the Exchequer was present, that there could be no real cure for the nation's economic position unless there was a severe cut in local government and Government expenditure? If the right hon. Gentleman is not going to take that advice, why not?

I think that particular sentiment has been expressed with great vigour and authority by successive Governors at certainly every annual bankers' and merchants' dinner in October each year, and has been urged very strongly on successive Chancellors. So far as this year is concerned, my right hon. Friend will be announcing the Estimates in due course. The House will be well aware that the commitments and expenditure programmes entered into before we came to office for this year already show a high proportionate increase over last year, going far beyond any increase related to the increase in national production.

All these things—

Order. I realise that it is a very wide question and that is one of the reasons why we must get on.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement about the conversations he had with Mr. Rapacki in December.

I have nothing to add to the Answer given by my hon. Friend the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs to my hon. Friend the Member for Ashfield (Mr. Warbey) on 23rd December last.

Is the Prime Minister aware that several of his senior Ministers, and indeed the Secretary of State for Defence, have in the past spoken in favour of a nuclear-free zone in Europe as advocated by Mr. Rapacki? Does he think that such an idea is at present a practical possibility?

I hope that the whole House supports the idea of a nuclear-free zone not only in Central Europe but in other parts of the world. I think it important that Africa should be a nuclear-free zone. This would be a further contribution to any easement which will be achieved when we are able to get a non-proliferation agreement, but we have to proceed in agreement with our allies on this question and with others with whom we negotiate, and a relevant point is that in addition to the area in which nuclear missiles are at present found we must have some thought to the area at which nuclear missiles outside that area are pointed.

With all respect to M. Rapacki and Poland, is it not the case that there are great dangers in any partial disengagement plan? Should not any plan for disengagement in Europe include the withdrawal of Soviet forces to the U.S.S.R.?

The hon. Gentleman is of course stressing some wide and long-term objective which I am sure the whole House would endorse. That does not mean that any lesser plan would be dangerous. Regarding proposals of this kind we have always made plain that there must be absolute equality on both sides of the dividing line so that there is no weakening or destruction of the balance of military power on each side. Certainly any plan of this kind could not be confined to Germany only. That would be quite unacceptable. It must also take account of the fact that at the present time Germany is at the receiving end—if that is the right phrase—is the target for a large number of missiles deployed not in the area covered by the Rapacki Plan, but further east.

While accepting that the acid test of any such agreement would be that it should not worsen the strategic position of either East or West and that no such agreement would be possible on any other basis, would my right hon. Friend consider actively pursuing discussions with the Soviet Gov- ernment and with other Governments concerned on the most recent model of the Rapacki Plan which has been improved and which is designed to take into consideration some of the points mentioned? Will he not be discouraged by the carping and negative criticism from hon. Members opposite who have always been opposed to these agreements?

As my hon. Friend says, there are a number of plans. There are two versions of the Rapacki Plan. There was the very constructive plan proposed by the then Opposition, known as the Gaitskell Plan, and, of course, last year, there was the Gomulka Plan, which was merely a freeze on existing missile delivery systems, or warheads, to prevent the situation getting worse until one can start to get some reductions in missiles there. I think that it was right to say, however, as I have said, that negotiations of this kind must raise wider issues, issues of the future unification of Germany, for example, and also the issues covered by the existence of medium-range missiles outside the Rapacki Plan area.

On a point of order. There is a misprint on the Order Paper which needs to be corrected. In Question No. 35, 150,000 should read 550,000 May the record please be corrected?

I am obliged to the right hon. and learned Gentleman. I will ask that the matter be noted and corrected.