asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations, in his discussions with the Rhodesian Government, what modifications of the 1961 Constitution he stated that Her Majesty's Government would require before granting independence to Rhodesia.?

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations, following his visit to Rhodesia, what plans he has for seeking a revision of the 1961 Constitution.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what negotiations are now in progress with Rhodesia; and if he will make a statement.

I am not able to add anything to my statement of 8th March. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is still in confidential communication with the Prime Minister of Rhodesia.

Will the right hon. Gentleman agree that the 1961 Constitution could be a basis for negotiated independence, and will he agree also that there is very little time or room left for manœuvre and the whole issue should be settled before the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference?

We have said that we must be satisfied that the basis upon which independence is granted is acceptable to the people of Rhodesia as a whole. As regards the next Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference, we shall have to wait and see what develops between now and then.

The right hon. Gentleman never mentioned the 1961 Constitution in his statement. Until he has some other plan, is there not a lot to be said for encouraging all interests to try to work the 1961 Constitution?

There is something to be said for saying that we must accept the 1961 Constitution, whether as it is now or whether it is to be added to in the future.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether, when he was out there, he gave an absolutely specific assurance that there would be no question of attempting unilaterally to alter it against the wishes of the present Rhodesian Government?

There is no attempt to do anything unilaterally either on the part of this Government or, I would hope, on the part of the Rhodesian Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what information he has on the effective percentage rate of taxation levied on British companies in respect of their operations in Ghana.

The normal company tax in Ghana is 9s. in the Ghana £ on profits. In addition, profits which are remitted to Britain pay a further tax of 4s. in the Ghana £, making the total tax 13s., or 65 per cent. Many British companies are also liable to a further 10 per cent. charge on their profits in respect of excess profits tax.

This is a most unsatisfactory state of affairs. What steps does the hon. Gentleman propose to take to remedy it? Does he appreciate that there are several Commonwealth countries now subjecting British firms to unreasonable rates of taxation and discouraging further investment? Will he take steps to have this whole matter discussed at the next Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference?

Naturally, this is a situation which Her Majesty's Government have to take into account. My right hon. Friend and the High Commissioner in Accra are fully alive to the need to support the interests of the British community in Ghana, and we are always ready to assist them by presenting major points of grievance to the Ghanaian authorities.

Is there any difference between the level of taxation on British firms and taxation on firms of other nationalities, and has my hon. Friend any knowledge of disinvestment in Ghana by British firms as a result of these levels of taxation?

Firms of all nationalities are treated similarly. As regards disinvestment, the position is not an incentive to British firms or firms of any other nationality, but, as I said, Her Majesty's Government keep the siuation constantly in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations whether he will now ban the sale of warships to Ghana.

No, Sir.

I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on that very sensible answer. May we assume also that this does not imply any condonation of any breach of human rights which may have taken place in that country? Can it, therefore, be further assumed that British exports will not be diminished by means of moral judgments on any country, whether it be Spain, Ghana, South Africa, Russia or anywhere else?

Trade should be encouraged by all. We want to see trade peacefully developed so that it can bring great benefit to all countries.

I agree with the right hon. Gentleman's reply, but is he aware that 13 other African States have expressed strong condemnation of what is going on in Ghana and also of the subversive activities by Ghana in other African States? Is the Commonwealth doing anything about it?

I suggest that that has nothing to do with Question on the Order Paper.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what progress has been made towards a solution of the Cyprus problem.

The Report of the United Nations Mediator has been submitted to the Secretary-General, and I understand it will be published later today. Meanwhile, the Security Council on 19th March agreed unanimously to renew the Mandate of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force. We strongly supported this. We have also said that we will continue to provide a contingent of about 1,000 men for the Force, a further financial contribution of $1 million, and logistic support.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that both sides will welcome the fact that Great Britain is doing so much to try to arrive at a peaceful solution of the Cyprus problem? When the Mediator's report is published, are we likely to see the first steps to a final solution being taken, or will the report be interim?

We have not yet seen the report. Until we do so, there is nothing further to be said on the matter at this stage.

Have the present Government had discussions with the Mediator? Are they keeping in touch with the other Governments of the guarantor Powers?

It would not be true to say that we have had discussions with the Mediator. We have seen him and have had talks with him about what is going on in an attempt to bring about peace in Cyprus. With regard to the other powers concerned, on every possible occasion we do what we can to make sure that peace is secured in Cyprus.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what action he proposes to take, as one of the guarantor Powers, to end the present position in Cyprus by which some 10,000 Greek soldiers are serving in Cyprus, contrary to the provisions of the constitution and the Treaty of Guarantee.

The British Government as well as the Greek and Turkish Governments accepted the Security Council Resolution of 4th March, 1964, under which the United Nations Peace-keeping Force was set up and a Mediator was appointed to promote a settlement of the political dispute. Her Majesty's Government's policy continues to be to give full support to the U.N. Force and to the Mediator's efforts. We have made it plain to all concerned that we deplore any actions which exacerbate the situation and make the achievement of a settlement more difficult.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the question was not about the United Nations Force? Under the Constitution, the Greeks were allowed 950 troops in the island, but there is now a far larger number there. Does he agree that posts guaranteed to the Turkish-speaking Cypriots under the Constitution have been taken over by Greek Cypriots? Have we protested? If not, why not?

The Security Council has repeatedly called on both sides to exercise the utmost restraint. We have joined in those representations and I have nothing further to say now.

There is more than a suspicion that the Government are committed to an eventual take-over of Cyprus by Greece. If this is not the Government's view, can we ensure that a one-sided build-up is not being made to the detriment of the Turkish community in Cyprus?

Appeals have been made by the Security Council to both sides not to worsen conditions. I would hope that Members on both sides would not at this stage try to worsen the position by questions of that kind.

Will not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the Government have followed a consistent policy to assist the Secretary-General and his Mediator? If they request the use of one of our bases in Cyprus, will the right hon. Gentleman be kind enough to give the matter urgent consideration? In addition, could we not have more police and fewer troops in Cyprus?

The question of British bases does not arise. That is a matter for the British Government alone. Therefore, there is no need to ask for any further action by anybody in this respect. As to the question of police rather than soldiers —as a general principle I would say that we would agree with that if it was possible to bring it about.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he will now state the trading figures of Bailey (Malta) Limited, from the date the Council of Administration took over the Dockyard in February, 1963, to date, or for any part of that period.

I regret I am not able to give the figures.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, at an arbitration tribunal in Malta on 19th January which settled a dispute between the General Workers' Union and the managing agents, full figures of the losses on the dates I am asking about were given? In these circumstances, why is the hon. Gentleman unable to give the figures to me? I have asked for them twice. As the Council of Administration is responsible for the legal costs of Bailey's, will the hon. Gentleman confirm that the British taxpayer will be paying the full costs of the Government and of Bailey's in this protracted legislation?

The main preoccupation of the Government is to protect the British taxpayer in this matter, as the hon. Gentleman will know, particularly if he has studied the inquiry of the Public Accounts Committee. I explained the position to him fully in a letter I wrote to him on 23rd February, and perhaps I may briefly repeat what I said then. The Council has not been able to produce audited accounts for 1963–64 owing to the circumstances in which it took over the yard in 1963, the difficulties it had in getting books and papers of the company; and the items in dispute with Baileys Ltd. in the intercompany account.

Are not these legal proceedings continuing far too long and piling up heavy costs which eventually will have to be borne by the British taxpayer?

My right hon. Friend has agreed that an attempt should be made to reach a settlement.

Will the hon. Gentleman confirm that the Council of Administration has done a splendid job and has put the dockyard on to a good footing?

That is perfectly correct.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that I am aware of his letter to me, but that I was asking what the figures of losses are? They have been given to the Tribunal in Malta. Why cannot he supply them to us in this House? Who will bear Bailey's costs in the litigation? I believe that it will be the British taxpayer.

I have told the hon. Gentleman that the accounts are not to hand and I prefer to wait for them.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations whether he will extend the scope of the Overseas Students Welfare Expansion Programme to include provision for the wives and children of Commonwealth students, in view of their difficulties in obtaining family accommodation.

Some small proportion of the additional accommodation provided for students under the Overseas Students Welfare Expansion Programme is now available for married couples. The double rooms provided for married students can accommodate cots but difficulties arise when the student has older children. The problem is presently being studied by the British Council, and the review of the programme which is currently being undertaken will take into full account the special difficulties of married overseas students with children in getting accommodation in Britain.

Is my hon. Friend aware that that news will give encouragement to people who are helping to provide suitable accommodation in London and other cities? Is he further aware that the problem of families is very pressing and that it is highly desirable for additional grants to be provided and not merely an alternative use made of such funds as the Government feel able to allocate?

Yes, Sir. Perhaps it will help my hon. Friend if I tell him the position of the programme in March, 1965. A total of 3,427 additional hostel places had been approved. There were 73 projects, 25 of which are in London. The number of places so far actually available is 1,979 and the total number of grants paid is £1,207,679. We are making considerable progress and hope to make more in the coming months.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what arrangements he has made to help the British exhibitors at the World Fair in Montreal in 1967.

The exhibition to be held in Montreal in 1967 is not a trade fair, but a first category exhibition under the 1928 Paris Convention. The organisers have invited Governments to participate and erect national pavilions, conforming to the overall theme "Man and His World". The British Government pavilion will be planned accordingly and a large part of it devoted to depicting our scientific and industrial achievements and potential. We look forward to the co-operation of industry in providing much of the exhibit material.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that reply. Can he give further details? For example, what plans have the Government for employing an architect for the exhibition? Secondly, what will be the outlay of the Government? Thirdly, how far does he feel that the British Government's participation will act as a stimulus to individual firms?

Sir Basil Spence will design the pavilion and we are allocating £3 million to cover expenditure on the exhibition. We shall also be dependent on a wide range of industries for the provision of much of the material to be displayed in the pavilion, especially in the large section devoted to scientific and technological achievements. Firms or groups of firms will have limited opportunities for the retail sale of consumer goods and we hope that British industry will take full advantage of these opportunities.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations whether he will now visit India and Pakistan.

I last went to India and Pakistan in 1962 and I hope I shall be able to visit those countries again before very long. I shall be visiting Australia, New Zealand and Malaysia during the Easter Recess.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Will he bear in mind that, in the present critical stage of the Far Eastern crisis and in view of the latest news of atrocities in Saigon, it is vitally important that Her Majesty's Government should be in the closest personal contact with the Governments in Rawalpindi and New Delhi? Secondly, can he perhaps suggest in a delicate fashion to the Prime Minister that he should make such contact a very high priority, bearing in mind the great tradition of the British Labour Party in bringing freedom to that country?

My hon. Friend will be aware that the Indian Prime Minister was here just before the end of last year and that the Pakistan Foreign Minister was here at the beginning of this year, so that we have had the opportunity of very close personal talks with them. I entirely share his views and I will pass on his comments to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister.

Is the right hon. Gentleman to join Mr. Patrick Gordon Walker in the Far East?

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what facilities are provided by the United Kingdom Government in Australia and New Zealand for advice and assistance to British migrants.

The principle is well established that the receiving country which has recruited the migrants is responsible for arrangements for settling them on their arrival. I am satisfied that the Australian and New Zealand Governments do everything possible to assist migrants from Britain to settle happily. The British High Commissioners in Australia and New Zealand are of course available to give advice and help to United Kingdom citizens who have migrated to those countries and decide not to settle there permanently.

What co-operation exists between the officials of these Commonwealth countries and the organisations by which emigrants are transported? Is my hon. Friend aware that an Airdrie lady waited the best part of a year and was then told that she would still have to wait before transport could be found to send her to this part of the Commonwealth? Can he say what consultations he could have with these officials to expedite the transport of individuals emigrating to Commonwealth countries?

I sympathise with my hon. Friend's constituent, but I am sure my hon. Friend will be aware that Her Majesty's Government have no responsibility in this matter. It is for the Governments of the receiving countries to decide the rate at which they can admit immigrants under any Government-operated schemes.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations whether he will make representations to the new Government in Ceylon on behalf of United Kingdom shareholders in sterling companies operating in Ceylon.

I would refer the hon. Member to my answer to the hon. Member for Torquay (Sir F. Bennett) on 9th February, when I stated that it was our intention to make further representations to the new Ceylon Government which emerged from the general election in Ceylon on the subject of remittances from Ceylon to this country.

I am obliged to my hon. Friend for that reply. I clearly understand that the new Prime Minister in Ceylon has had only a very few days in office, but would the hon. Member nevertheless take the opportunity of representing to him that few things would do more to improve the climate between the two countries than some statement of understanding of the difficulties of shareholders, many of them very small people and some of them wholly dependent for their incomes on remittances in this way?

Yes, Sir. We are fully aware of all the implications of this matter.

Will the hon. Gentleman suggest to his right hon. Friend that when he is in orbit to Australia at Easter he should call in to see the new Ceylon authorities to see whether he can help them in their immediate economic problems?

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the Ceylon Government are still putting pressure on the tea companies not to pay preference dividends out of accumulated funds situated in London?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that there is now a new Government in Cyelon. It has not had very many days to settle down and perhaps we should await events.

Is the hon. Gentleman more optimistic about the situation now that the Ceylon electorate has repudiated socialism and put in another from of government.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he will make representations to the Nigerian Government to expedite the hearing of the appeal by Dr. Victor Allen against his conviction on charges of sedition.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he is aware that Mr. V. L. Allen, a British citizen of Leeds, who was arrested on 16th June, 1964, in Lagos, found guilty on 10th November, 1964, after lengthy trial, sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment on three charges of sedition against the Nigerian Government and who has appealed, is still waiting to have his appeal heard but remains in custody and has been on hunger strike since 17th March; and if he will make representations to the Nigerian authorities to expedite the hearing of the appeal and to release Mr. Allen on bail pending the hearing of the appeal.

The hearing of Dr. Allen's appeal has now been fixed for 1st April. He ended his hunger strike on 25th March and has not meanwhile applied for bail. I see no call in the circumstances for representations to the Nigerian Government.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his Answer. Can he tell the House why the delay in hearing the appeal has been so protracted? Dr. Allen may almost have completed his sentence before knowing the result of his appeal. Can my right hon. Friend tell the House whether he is satisfied that the conditions of Dr. Allen's imprisonment are reasonable and humane, and has he any news of Dr. Allen's state of health?

I ask my hon. Friend to remember that Dr. Allen was convicted of serious charges. The hearing of his case lasted upwards of 100 days and the record of the court proceedings ran to about 500 pages. By the time the record became available to all interested parties, on 23rd February, counsel for Dr. Allen had still not been able to complete all the necessary formalities in connection with the appeal. The situation was further complicated by the fact that his original counsel withdrew from the case and there was some delay before another counsel could be found. However, as soon as the necessary preparatory steps had been taken for the appeal a judge of the High Court considered the case on 10th March and at once granted an application for an accelerated hearing. I am assured that Dr. Allen was reasonably treated in all the circumstances.

Have any representations of any kind been made in this case?

I have been in constant contact about this case all the time and I am satisfied that the High Commissioner and his staff have done everything possible on behalf of Dr. Allen. Although the prison at Jos is a very long way from the nearest British office in Nigeria, members of the staff have paid no fewer than 14 visits to Dr. Allen. In addition, the High Commissioner has been in constant touch with both Dr. Allen's counsel and the court authorities about the progress of the case. Moreover the prison authorities have treated Dr. Allen with special consideration and the services of a medical specialist have always been available to him. In short, bearing in mind that Nigeria is an independent member of the Commonwealth, I am satisfied not only that everything possible has been done by the British authorities on behalf of Dr. Allen, but that the Nigerian Government for its part has dealt with the case in the judicial tradition which we expect from a fellow member country of the Commonwealth.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what official talks he has had with Sheikh Abdulla, the former Chief Minister of Kashmir, on his recent visit to this country; and if he will make a statement.

My only meeting with Sheikh Abdulla during his visit was on a private occasion. I had no official talks with him.

If the right hon. Gentleman did not have official talks, can I at any rate hope that his private talks were fruitful? I am sure he realises that Sheikh Abdulla is one of the few people in the world who have a measure of confidence of both the Indian and Pakistan Governments, that he came here with the consent of the Indian Government, and that if we are to reach a solution he can be very helpful in this matter.

He said that he wanted to promote a climate of opinion in which discussions could be carried on and all possible solutions considered.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what is the policy of Her Majesty's Government with regard to the taking of a new initiative towards the settlement of the Kashmir dispute.

Her Majesty's Government have always hoped that the Kashmir dispute would be settled by agreement between India and Pakistan. That is still our hope. We stand ready to help in any way that might be acceptable to the parties concerned but, at the present time, there does not appear to be scope for an initiative on our part.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that under a former Secretary of State some progress towards a settlement seemed to be being made shortly before Mr. Nehru's death and after the release of Sheikh Abdulla? Is he aware that all the tendencies now are for there to appear to be a deterioration rather than otherwise? Is it not about time that we made a fresh effort in this matter to carry on the momentum, with particular reference to the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference this year?

No, Sir. I do not think that any unsolicited intervention on our part at this time would be helpful.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what communications he has had with the Malaysian Government about the offer of President Ayub of Pakistan to mediate with a view to halting the Indonesian aggression against Malaysia; and if he will make a statement on the outcome.

None, Sir. I understand, however, that the Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister recently had talks with the President of Pakistan and that Tun Razak reaffirmed that the Malaysian Government would welcome the good officers of President Ayub Khan in the sense indicated in the hon. Member's Question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that reply will give some satisfaction? Would not he agree that the Pakistan Government, as a Moslem Government, may have a specially valuable part to play in this matter?

Yes, Sir. There are other countries which have offered their help, and we are very grateful that this should be so.

Was one of those other countries Japan? If not, can approaches be made to that country, since it has great interests which are our interests as well to obtain pacification in this part of the world?

The other countries concerned are Japan. Thailand and Ghana.

In view of the important military assistance we are giving to Malaysia, may I take it that the Malaysian Government are closely consulting Her Majesty's Government on political development?

Yes. The consultations which normally take place between Commonwealth Governments continue in this instance.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what Commonwealth countries Lord Mount-batten's immigration mission will visit; and when the visits will take place.

It has not yet been finally settled which Commonwealth countries the mission will visit. We are consulting a number of Commonwealth Governments about the possibility of a visit by the mission, but we have not yet received all their replies. It is proposed that the mission should begin its visits overseas after Easter.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what the term of refer- ence of this mission will be and what matters it will discuss? Could he say whether these bilateral talks are what the Government had in mind when they put forward Commonwealth consultation as their policy on this matter, or does he envisage that there should be an item on the agenda of the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference dealing with migration, or, indeed, a Commonwealth migration conference later in the year on a multilateral basis?

It would be premature to say exactly what will happen as a result of the mission's visit. It is going out to try to ascertain facts in Consultation with Commonwealth Governments. On the question of whether this will be an item on the agenda of the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference, it is true that last year it was agreed that the subject might be discussed. But it is not normal to draw up the agenda of the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference before it meets.

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is essential that all the principal sources of immigrants to this country should be visited?

This is a matter for the mission, but I have no doubt that that will be done.

Is it the firm intention of the mission to visit Pakistan?

Yes. In place of the leader, Sir Charles Cunningham, Permanent Secretary to the Home Office, as deputy leader, will be the responsible person who will accompany the mission to Pakistan.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what was the date of the last meeting of the Oversea Migration Board; and what is his policy for its future.

The last meeting of the Oversea Migration Board was on 8th December, 1964. The future of the Board and its functions are at present being reviewed.

Could the hon. Gentleman give any indication that the Government will make use of this Board and see that it considers specific proposals, which is why it was set up?

We are carrying out a review because we wish to know what useful rôle the Board can play in future. Its members have given very useful service, and I believe it to be the wish of the members of the Board that there should be a reappraisal of what it could usefully accomplish in future.

I used to be a member of the Board during its more active days. I was wondering whether the hon. Gentleman could tell us what it does now. I think that it does very little indeed. Has not the time come when it should either be disbanded or given something more useful and constructive to do than merely collecting statistics?

The Board does exactly the same work as it did when the hon. Gentleman was a member. It meets to consider and approve its report on emigration statistics. As the hon. Gentleman knows, it was appointed to advise the Commonwealth Secretary of specific proposals for emigration schemes put to him by other Commonwealth Governments or migration organisations. As I have said, we are conducting a review and perhaps we had better wait to see what the results of it are.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in former days we used to make recommendations—they were not always acted on—and studied the problem? Now the Board merely collects statistics and is not very usefully employed.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations whether Her Majesty's Government has proposed that the Commonwealth Secretariat should be staffed by officials on secondment from Commonwealth countries, or by the establishment of an independent Commonwealth career service.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations whether the Commonwealth Secretariat will be staffed from seconded officials from Commonwealth countries or from an independent career Commonwealth service.

The method of recruitment and the career structure of the Secretariat are subject to the recommendations in the Report of Commonwealth Officials which, as I informed the hon. Member for Haltemprice (Mr. Wall) on 23rd March, is still under consideration by Commonwealth Governments. It would therefore be premature to reveal or comment upon the way in which the Secretariat will be staffed, though I may say that there has been no suggestion that an independent career service would be appropriate.

Will the Commonwealth Secretary ensure that these officials are recruited from as wide a field as possible in view of the importance of this service?

This is a matter for the Commonwealth Governments. The best personnel possible will be recruited.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what consultations Her Majesty's Government have now had with the Nigerian, Kenyan, Tanzanian and Ugandan Governments about their applications for association with the European Economic Community concerning the trade interests of the United Kingdom.

We are in close touch with the four Commonwealth Governments concerned. The Government of Nigeria have told us that they have been asked by the E.E.C. for small preferences on a few items in return for advantages for their products in E.E.C. markets. We are in consultation with the Nigerian Government on this matter. The three East African Governments have let it be known that they have told the E.E.C. they are not prepared to offer their preferences in return for advantages in E.E.C. markets.

While welcoming very much the initiative which has been taken, may I ask the Commonwealth Secretary whether he can assure us that he will keep in very close touch with developments in view of the importance of the trade interests to the United Kingdom?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Minister of Power whether he will arrange for Government Departments to install coal-burning heating systems in their establishments when the need for new heating systems arises.

asked the Minister of Power if he will seek to arrange for the installation of solid-fuel heating systems in Government Departments when the need for new heating systems arises.

I ask the hon. Member and my hon. Friend to wait for a statement I hope to make soon on behalf of the Government.

Will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that he will withstand all pressures from behind him to install anything but the most modern heating systems in Government Departments?

I do not think the hon. Gentleman should take it for granted that coal would not provide the most modern system.

Will my right hon. Friend take note that many of us on this side would like him to disregard what we consider to be the hysterical opposition to the coal industry by Members opposite? Will the question of coal-burning apparatus and its installation and co-ordination in Government Departments be considered by the Advisory Council which he has set up?

I am looking more to the short-term aspect of this matter. I assure my hon. Friend that the Government are very active on this, and I hope to be able to make a statement very soon indeed.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take careful note of my hon. Friend's supplementary question, which was not what he appeared to think it was?

Yes, Sir; and I hope that the hon. Gentleman took note of my supplementary answer.

asked the Minister of Power what is his policy on competition between the electricity, gas, coal and oil industries.

asked the Minister of Power to what extent he intends to encourage competition between the gas, electricity, coal and oil industries.

asked the Minister of Power to what extent it is his policy to encourage co-operation between the coal, electricity and gas industries.

Some competition between the fuel industries is inevitable and desirable: and co-operation among the nationalised fuel industries is essential. The co-ordinated fuel policy which I am developing in my review will have regard to both aspects.

In view of the importance of this matter both in terms of the balance of payments situation and for social and economic reasons, would the right hon. Gentleman consider publishing a White Paper outlining his fuel policy?

I do not rule that out. I will certainly keep the House informed about this matter. It may be that it is not suitable for a White Paper.

Will my right hon. Friend work towards a national fuel policy so that the three Boards can work closely together to cut out wasteful competition?

Yes. As a matter of fact, I am having all three together this afternoon for that purpose.

How long do we have to wait for a statement of the right hon. Gentleman's fuel policy? Does his reply mean that he will continue the policy of the last Government, which we would welcome? Will he say now when he will make his statement to explain the nebulous reply which he has just given?

I am very anxious to make the statement as soon as possible. I understand the hon. Gentleman's concern that this Government should do things more quickly than his Government did, but we also have a reputation for perfection and I want to keep that reputation.

Will my right hon. Friend consider that economising on imported oil may be one of the best ways of balancing our imports and exports account? Will he reverse the policy of the late Government in this regard?

We are very conscious of the problem of the balance of payments, and it is one of the points that we have under the most active consideration.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say who, at the meeting which he said would be held later this afternoon, will represent the interests of the consumers, both industrial and the householder?

I will.

If my right hon. Friend discovers what was the policy of the previous Government, will he publish a White Paper saying what it was?

"If" is very important in that respect. If we find it, it will have to be a black paper.

asked the Minister of Power what facts or potentialities he takes into account when considering whether to give a licence to an applicant to drill for oil or gas in the North Sea.

I have not yet invited any applications for licences.

What power does my right hon. Friend have with regard to granting licences to drill for oil in the North Sea? Does he take into account among the facts and potentialities referred to in my Question such facts as may affect fishing in the North Sea and other industries which are very important to Scotland and particularly to Aberdeen? Will he take care to see that these industries are protected?

I will, indeed. As a matter of fact, one could if necessary, attach conditions designed to protect fishing to any assent to these operations.

asked the Minister of Power if, after his Energy Advisory Committee have made their report, he will issue a White Paper setting out the Government's national fuel policy.

I shall, of course, inform the House of the outcome of the review of fuel policy which I have in hand, but I cannot now say what will be the best way of doing so. I expect the advice I shall receive from my Energy Advisory Council on these matters to be of a continuing nature, rather than to take the form of a single report.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply, but will he bear in mind that the future planning of energy supplies is of the greatest interest and importance, not only to Members of the House, but to industry generally? Therefore, would not a White Paper be a convenient way of setting this out?

I thoroughly agree with the content of my hon. Friend's supplementary question, but at this stage I do not want to say that at a certain moment of time I shall issue a White Paper. The Energy Advisory Council may continue to keep me advised for some considerable time ahead.

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that it would be most intolerable for a national fuel policy to be used as a device to protect any particular form of fuel from the natural trends which are expressing themselves in all industrial countries today?

With a Government of this type, who are determined to expand the economy, it follows that the demand for energy will increase enormously. I want to make sure that we can meet that demand when it arrives, and also that we can allocate between the various industries that share which they can meet most economically and to the advantage of the balance of payments.

The right hon. Gentleman and his party have been saying for thirteen years that they want a national fuel policy. Is he now running away from that? Is he not going to produce such policy?

I wish the hon. Gentleman would not be so pessimistic. I am sure that we are working on the right lines, and that we will produce an acceptable national fuel policy which will serve the best interests of the country, and that we will do it in a very short time.

asked the Minister of Power what were the proportions, in percentages, of energy of all kinds derived from indigenous and imported primary fuel sources for 1950 and for the latest year for which figures are available; and what is the anticipated proportionate relationship for 1970.

The respective percentages were 90 and 10 in 1950, and 66 and 34 in 1964, including nuclear power in the energy derived from imported primary fuel. A further decline in the percentage from indigenous sources is probable by 1970, but I cannot give a precise forecast at this stage.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply, but will he bear in mind that while a great deal of imported energy is essential, and, indeed, inevitable, to have too much dependence on imported energy would be a great mistake for the future, which we might well regret?

My hon. Friend will know that much of the imported energy is not in competition with indigenous fuel. I am referring to petrol and similar fuels. On the other point, I agree with my hon. Friend's analysis.

Does the right hon. Gentleman define natural gas from the North Sea as an indigenous fuel or an outside fuel?

Indigenous.

asked the Prime Minister what plans he has to make an official visit to the continent of Africa.

I am not myself contemplating visits to any country in Africa at present.

When the time comes, as I hope, for the Prime Minister to make this visit, will he try to include Rhodesia, bearing in mind that the visit of his right hon. Friend and his noble Friend to that country has done something to remove some of the prejudices and misunderstandings between the two Governments?

I thought that that particular mission would be very helpful, and while the situation is still extremely difficult, as the House knows, I think that that visit has had some useful effect. The hon. Gentleman will know that I am in touch with Mr. Smith at the present time, and, of course, if it becomes necessary for us to meet we shall press this, but, as the hon. Gentleman may know, I had quite a long talk with Mr. Smith when he was in London at the end of January.

Would not the Prime Minister think it wise to visit South Africa when he visits Africa?

My original Answer was that I had no plans to visit Africa, so I do not think that the hon. and learned Gentleman's supplementary question really follows.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of interest aroused by the recent publication of the book, "Crisis", by a Canadian, Terence Robertson, he will now authorise the preparation of an official history of the Suez affair.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that no official facilities were provided to the author of the book "Crisis", he will now authorise the preparation of an official history of the Suez affair by independent historians.

I would refer the hon. Members to the Answer which I gave to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes) on 26th November last year.

Is not the Prime Minister aware that his reply will disappoint a great many democratically minded people on both sides of the House? Would not he agree that the time has come to put an end to rumours about Suez? The best way of so doing is to authorise an honest official account of exactly what happened there. Will the Prime Minister earnestly reconsider his decision?

I am at the moment reading this book and finding it very fascinating. The way to end the rumours is for right hon. Gentlemen opposite concerned to state flatly whether the allegations in this and other books are true.

Is the Prime Minister aware that, though he informed me in an earlier Written Answer that no official facilities were provided, the author states in his preface

"that documentation from official and private sources"——

Order. There are all sorts of difficulties here. One is that one cannot quote verbatim in Questions. Another is that the Government are not responsible for this work.

I should like to ask the Prime Minister to give further consideration to the supplementary question asked by the hon. Member for Inverness (Mr. Russell Johnston) so that we can make sure that the allegations made about the Government and the Foreign Secretary of the day are officially and impartially confirmed.

Order. That is merely asking the Government to confirm or deny assertions in a book for which they are not responsible, so it is out of order.

If, as my right hon. Friend implies, no official facilities were furnished to Mr. Robertson to write the book, has he any idea how Mr. Robertson managed to get information about decisions taken in the Cabinet? Is my right hon. Friend aware that recently I had an opportunity of reviewing the book and found it full of omissions and inaccuracies?

As I go through the book myself, I am becoming more and more interested in some of the information in it certainly, but I confirm that the author has not received any help from British official sources as to what went on in the Cabinet, or, what seems to be much more relevant, what went on behind the Cabinet's back.

Has the Prime Minister ever in his life come across so virtuous a being as an independent historian, as referred to in Question No. 6?

As I say, this has been a matter of great political controversy, and it could be put beyond all doubt by a clear statement from those who had Ministerial responsibility at the time.

As to having an official historian to do this, I think that we must draw a distinction—the distinction has been drawn in past cases—between the case where the efficiency of a Government operation is in question—and there could be little doubt about the efficiency or inefficiency of this one—and one where the good faith of the Government is concerned. It has always been held, and stated by a former Prime Minister, that where good faith is involved it is a matter for the House rather than for official historians.

Is not the Prime Minister aware—as his answer suggests he is—that the only two official histories written so far are the two histories of the wars, and that therefore his decision in this matter is clearly right, and I hope he will stick to it? It is much better that when official histories are written they should see events in perspective.

I am not sure that the right hon. Gentleman thinks that I am right for the right reasons. He is getting me a little worried on this question. Since this whole issue and most of the reason why there is a strong desire for an impartial history to be written is because the good faith of certain Ministers of the time is involved—and the right hon. Gentleman was a member of the Cabinet at that time—I would hope that this matter could be cleared up in the only straightforward manner available to this House: either for the right hon. Gentleman or the former Foreign Secretary to tell us exactly what happened, not only at Villa Coublay, but elsewhere.

Will the Prime Minister bear in mind that an account of these events has been written by the Earl of Avon which leaves a good deal to be desired as history, but that many people have accepted it as official? Will he consider that it is most desirable that the British people should know what was said and done in secret on their behalf and at their expense?

I have said that this is desirable, and I think that this can be done in the manner I have suggested, if the right hon. Gentleman were able to get up and make a statement about it.

asked the Prime Minister how many members of the Cabinet are without an official personal adviser, paid or unpaid, on relations with the Press or the public.

Four, Sir.

With the abundance of advisers on public relations, why did the Government acquiesce in the lamentable course last Friday of running away from discussions on a Private Member's Bill by the device of eliminating the business for the whole of that day, or has "The Syndicate" taken over?

This does not seem to arise from the question about how many members of the Cabinet are without an official personal adviser, paid or unpaid. But if hon. Gentlemen want to look into the affairs of last Friday, they had better look a little more widely at the abuse of private Member's time by hon. Gentlemen.

Has the First Secretary of State an adviser, or anyone, to tell him what decisions are made by the Cabinet?

Yes, Sir. That is done through his presence there.

asked the Prime Minister what further communication he has received from the Review Body on the matter of doctors' pay and conditions.

None, Sir, since Lord Kindersley's letter of 26th February.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that since the Question was tabled talks have started between the Minister concerned and the representatives of the general practitioners? May we hope that they will have a very speedy and successful outcome and will provide for the patient the best possible system of medicine which we can produce and the greatest satisfaction for the general practitioner?

Yes, Sir. I am, of course, aware of what has happened since the Question was tabled, and I share the hopes expressed by my hon. Friend. But there is at the moment no further work for the Review Body to do in this connection.

asked the Prime Minister if he will introduce legislation to repeal or amend the Royal Marriages Act 1772.

No, Sir.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that some of the descendants of King George III are now very remotely related to the direct line of succession? Has not the time come for this obsolete relic of an old family squabble to be removed from the Statute Book? Does he remember that as long ago as 1955 the then Prime Minister, Sir Anthony Eden, said that he had this possibility in mind? With a modern Government like ours, can we not get ahead?

I do not intend to get at issue with my hon. Friend about the interpretation of late 18th century history. Certainly it is rather a long time ago that this Act was passed. This might be a piece of legislation very well suited for the activities of the Law Commissioners, who are streamlining and proposing to bring up-to-date some of the legislation which we find in front of us. I think that that may be the right answer. So far as the present Parliamentary timetable is concerned, we have some much more urgent legislation to put before the House than this.

asked the Prime Minister if he will advise the appointment of a Royal Commission to investigate the problem of compensating victims injured in road accidents, and to consider a comprehensive insurance scheme embracing everyone.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given by my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham, East (Mr. Mapp) on 11th March.

In view of the fact that it is increasingly difficult to prove negligence in accidents on the road, I hope that something will be done without delay.

My hon. and learned Friend said on that occasion that this matter was being carefully examined, but it is bristling with legal problems. There was a further question by the right hon. and learned Member for Warwick and Leamington (Sir J. Hobson) to the Attorney-General, who said that the legal aspects of the points raised by the right hon. and learned Gentleman were being examined.

Does the Prime Minister realise that, in this modern age, motor cars have become lethal instruments inflicting great damage on many innocent persons who are not able to prove damage, whereby great harm is done, and that such persons should be insured against the damage which they cannot prove?

This is a fact which we all recognise on both sides of the House, but it is not easy to put right by the kind of suggestion which has been put forward by my hon. and learned Friend.

Will the Prime Minister bear in mind that, in the Answer to me some weeks ago to which reference has been made, the inference was that the National Health pensions scheme might be extended to include this problem? Will he bear in mind that this problem is related to the road and the accidents on it, and that the country is looking forward to specific arrangements covering that problem and not related to the national scheme of insurance?

This whole question is being looked at, but I should not like to give any indication that we are likely to be able to solve these problems as quickly as my hon. Friends would like.

asked the Prime Minister if, following his inquiries, he has now received a full report of the statement made recently by the United States Ambassador in Saigon, concerning the unlimited intensification of the war in Vietnam; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Prime Minister, following his inquiries into the matter, what report he has received regarding the statement of General Maxwell Taylor, the United States Ambassador in Saigon; and if he will make a statement.

My right hon. Friend at my request took this up with United States Ministers. He was assured that General Taylor's remarks did not mean that there had been any change in United States policy.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for making those inquiries and passing on to us the result of them—whatever it means—may I ask him whether he or the Foreign Secretary will be able, in Thursday's debate, to deal with the whole question of the risks of escalation in Vietnam, and bearing in mind what happened in Korea and what President Truman had to say to General MacArthur, to what extent President Johnson is still in detailed control of military operations?

We shall, of course, in the debate on Thursday, give the House as full a statement as possible. I think that my right hon. Friend intends to speak quite fully about it. We are all very concerned about the possible dangers here of escalation. While I have seen some three or four different accounts from different sources of what General Taylor is supposed to have said, it is extremely hard to form a clear view of what he said or what he meant to say. What I rely on is the clear statement given by the United States authorities in Washington that nothing he said or meant to say in any way derogated from what the President said about his own intentions.

Would my right hon. Friend confirm that this means that General Taylor's remark that there might be unlimited escalation of the war has been repudiated by the President and not that this is the policy of the United States Government?

There is some argument as to what was actually said at this apparently rather strange Press briefing conference by General Taylor. Certainly—this was stated outside the White House by my right hon. Friend last week—my right hon. Friend made it plain that he had sought specific assurances on this question and had got them.

Did the Foreign Secretary consult the Prime Minister before making his very tactless remarks to the National Press Club?

I think that the hon. Gentleman is one of the very few in the House who do not welcome the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary. As to consultation, we were both in complete agreement as to what should be done and what should be said last week.

In view of the fact that nobody, including General Taylor, seems to know exactly what he said, or what he meant, can we all conclude that he was just "blethering"?

My study of the various reports suggests that even that would be a rash assumption to make on the wording that I saw. Certainly, as I say, we must have our relations with the United States Government on this question and their position on this is quite clear. It is, of course, a fact that General Taylor is in Washington at present and discussions are going on. If there should be any change—which I have no reason to expect—in the statement by United States Ministers to my right hon. Friend, we would be told about it and we should certainly express any views that we might have on it.