asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when he expects to be able to announce the Government's proposals for lower mortgage rates.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what steps he is taking to make mortgages more readily available for house purchases; what steps he is taking to obtain a reduction in mortgage rates; and whether he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government (1) whether he is aware of the shortage of funds available for advances for house purchasing; if he will give the figures for mortgages granted for the latest period for which these are available; how these compare with those for a similar period a year previously; and what action he proposes to take;

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when he plans to implement the Government's policy to provide low mortgage interest rates.

As I stated in the course of the home loans debate on 29th April, the Government's plans for specially favourable interest rates relate both to the private and to the public sector of housing, and will be designed to bring benefit to the council house tenant as well as to the house purchaser. I hope to have proposals ready for discussion both with the building societies and with the local authorities in the near future.

That Answer is not good enough. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that during the election campaign his Parliamentary Secretary, the hon. Member for Bermondsey (Mr. Mellish), came to my constituency and said on the subject of mortgage rates that, whatever the Labour Party offered, it would never be as high as 6½ per cent.; it was the party's policy that it should be 3½ per cent., a more honest and honourable figure? Can the right hon. Gentleman suggest what I am to tell young people in my constituency and in other parts of the country who consider——

Order. Perhaps the Minister had better answer as far as we have got.

I could make suggestions on the latter part of the supplementary question, but they might be out of order. On the other part of the question, the speech of my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary, I should have to look up exactly what he said. But I am sure that what he said was what we all said, which is that we are determined to introduce specially favourable rates for owner-occupiers and also for councils. I repeat that we are going to do it. I warn the Opposition that the more they build up on this the more they will find that when the proposals are made—and they will be made and announced this summer—they will be to the satisfaction of the people who put us into power and who expect us, as we shall do, to carry out this pledge.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that builders are now cutting back their building programme because of the shortage of funds for house purchase? Has he seen the statement the Chairman of Wimpey's made yesterday that that company had been forced to do just that? Is he aware that this time of year is the most favourable time of year for building? What action is he taking to prevent a fall in the building programme this year?

Yes, I can give the right hon. Gentleman some information on that subject. We have had a good many different statements by different builders. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Public Building and Works has had a very careful estimate of the actual situation in the building industry, which I think was announced today. The best calculation we make now is that the builders who had been talking in January of 280,000 starts are now talking in terms of about 250,000 starts, which is the same as last year. The other thing I would add is that the number of starts does not determine the number of completions and it may well be—I have no reason whatever at present to doubt it—that the completions will be extremely satisfactory, at least to this side of the House, when they are announced at the end of the year.

Does that answer mean that the right hon. Gentleman intends to take no step to secure improved output from the building industry this summer?

I repeat what I said in the home loans debate. There is no evidence to justify the belief that special financial aid is required to be pumped into the building societies. This is the only concrete thing which we have been asked to do—to put it in there. We do not think that it is necessary now. We are preparing our plans for assisting the building societies and shall announce them in the summer.

Has the Minister's attention been drawn to the writer in the Daily Mail who said that he had to apply to four brokers, three building societies and three insurance companies, all without success, and ultimately had to get his mortgage at 18 per cent. over five years, through a finance house? Does he think that this is exaggerated? When he talks about owner-occupiers being helped, does that include those who have already been forced to buy houses at a high mortgage rate?

I would fully sympathise with what appears clear from the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question—the determination he and I share to prevent ordinary people being forced to buy a house by a shortage, presumably, of houses to rent. This is why we are determined to increase the number of houses to let. [MEMBERS: "Answer."] I am answering the question asked by the hon. Gentleman, which was whether I approve of people being forced to buy a house when they might prefer to rent a house. The answer is that I do not. The other half of the question was whether I believed that the story the hon. Gentleman quoted which appeared in the Daily Mail was true. Of course I believe that it is true. I do not see why somebody should invent it. Of course it is true that there is a difficulty now, a constriction in getting mortgages from building societies. I also noticed—in fact I cut this out of the paper—this statement made yesterday by the President of the Halifax Building Society:

"We are continuing to offer new mortgages at the rate of £3 million a week".

Does not the right hon. Gentleman recall that the last ten years saw a magnificent growth of home ownership in this country? Is it not a fact that what has happened since the last election and the way in which this trend has been halted has made a mockery of all that the Labour Party said at the last election?

What the hon. Gentleman says simply does not correspond with the facts. The record for house building, measured by standards of completions or of starts, was achieved in the first three months of this year. What we are discussing is whether in April there has been a setback. We find that in terms of building societies there has been a considerable improvement in the situation. For instance, the liquidity ratio of the building societies—[Interruption.]—I ask hon. Members who ask me questions to wait for me to answer them. The liquidity ratio of the building societies, which is one of the tests which we must take most carefully, has, I gather, somewhat improved last month, so we can hope that movement out of the societies has been slowed down. Of course I do not think that the situation is wholly satisfactory—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—but the sensational remarks made by hon. Members opposite bear no relation to the actual facts of building now or of building society advances.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government (1) if he will make a statement on his discussions with the National House Builders' Registration Council with regard to improvements in the standards imposed for houses built and in the remedies provided for purchasers;

I hope to make a statement before long.

Will my right hon. Friend when he makes the statement bear in mind the study of the Consumers' Association on the question of jerrybuilding? Will he also consider approaching the Building Societies Association to ensure that any new contracts for houses contain safeguards for consumers?

Yes, I accept both the points my hon. Friend makes. I should in fairness point out that the criticisms made by Consumers' Association were made before the latest specification was laid down by the N.H.B.R.C. We have been talking with the building societies and our talks with the other concerns are nearly completed. I do not think it should be long before we are able to make a statement on this very important subject.

In addition to having in mind the Report of the Consumers' Association, will the right hon. Gentleman have regard to the more recent debate in the House and the observations there made from both sides?

I am glad that the right hon. and learned Gentleman has given me the opportunity of saying that I found the debate extremely interesting. I thought that my hon. Friend's reply was as full as one could possibly make it, but we must await the completion of the rest of the talks. I can add that the building societies, I am glad to say, have now started talks with the N.H.B.R.C. about the very issue of the warranty to which my hon. Friend has referred.

Does the right hon. Gentleman acknowledge the undertaking given by the Parliamentary Secretary when I withdrew a Private Member's Bill dealing with jerrybuilding? The undertaking was to the effect that on condition that I withdrew the Bill I would be called into consultation by the Minister.

Yes, Sir. I have taken that fully into account and I will certainly do that.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will introduce legislation to ensure that when prospective house purchasers pay a fee to a building society for a surveyor's report on the property the contents of the report should be made available to them.

My right hon. Friend does not consider this to be an appropriate matter for legislation but he is in touch with the Building Societies Association on the suggestion.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Should not people who wish to purchase houses have a full right of access to surveyors' reports? Would it not be perfectly possible for the building societies themselves freely to give this access if it was so wished?

I understand that many building societies already arrange to pass on to the purchaser any relevant information included in their valuer's report—and hon. Members should remember that this is a valuer's report.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is a danger in this in that building societies' surveys are designed solely to cover the security and that if purchasers relied on this method they might very well be misled about the value of their property as a whole?

I quite agree. The requirements of the purchaser and of the building society are not necessarily the same. The idea that this is somehow a special surveyor's report is not correct. It is really a valuer's report.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what reasons led him to decide that the regulations for standard improvement grants should not be extended to cover the renewal of defective or old electrical wiring installations; and why renewals of this kind are eligible for discretionary grants.

Both standard and discretionary grants are intended to provide amenities lacking in older houses, not to help with maintenance, which is a normal responsibility of ownership. Discretionary grants are more extensive in scope, but they are paid for the renewal of wiring only where it is disturbed by improvement work or in conversions.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that the same situation could arise in cases where the standard grant is paid? Bearing in mind the substantial danger that there is in old wiring, could not my hon. Friend reconsider his decision at some future date?

We have not discounted any idea of giving aid here, but it must be put on record that only a year ago when the previous Government brought in amending legislation to deal with improvement grants, they did not think it necessary to deal with electrical wiring. Frankly, from our inquiries, we do not think it necessary either at this moment of time.

Will the hon. Gentleman recognise that there was an Amendment to that from what was then the Government side and that the then Opposition did not support it?

All I know is that when the party opposite was in power it could have done exactly what it wanted with the majority it then had.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that when we were the Government we could not be expected to be perfect in all things? Surely, after all their talk of the Socialist E1 Dorado, the present Government are capable of thinking particularly of the safety aspect that is involved in the Question. It is very important.

We have not much to beat compared with what the Tories did as the last Government.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government (1) if he will introduce legislation to enable tenants of private landlords to obtain certificates of disrepair more quickly and more easily;

My right hon. Friend decided against overhauling the legislation relating to existing controlled tenancies at this stage in order to get on the Statute Book as soon as possible the Rent Bill with its new scheme of rent regulation. The certificate of disrepair procedure will lapse as controlled tenancies are brought into this scheme. Under the Bill the fair rent will reflect the state of repair of the property and, where a landlord lets his property get into disrepair, the tenant will be able to seek a reduction in the rent. My right hon. Friend is considering what further action will be needed.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this is one of the most serious social problems in housing in our older towns and cities? Is he aware that as a result of the 1957 Act it often takes as long as eight months or more to obtain a certificate and that consequently the numbers of certificates issued since 1957 are only a fraction of those offered before, with a resultant decline in the standard of housing in those towns?

I can accept what my hon. Friend says about the state of repair of many of these old houses, but the point is that the reduction of rents is purely a financial sanction to prevent exploitation. It does not get the work done. My right hon. Friend is concerned to find a more positive way of getting the work done.

Would the hon. Gentleman agree that a partial solution of the problem would be to bring the standard improvement grants up to date to take account of the fall in the value of money since these grants were initiated, a fall which is proceeding at a rapidly increasing pace under the present Government?

As I spent many happy hours last summer in Standing Committee on a housing Bill which was designed to bring improvement grants up to date, I think that it was a little unreasonable to ask us to consider again bringing them up to date so soon after the last Government. One would have hoped that in this matter at least they had not made a complete mess of things.

Would my hon. Friend consider restoring the procedure under the 1954 Act whereby a tenant could deduct part of his rent immediately a certificate of disrepair is granted? While it would be grossly out of order to suggest it at the moment, may I ask whether it could be done while the Rent Bill is going through Committee?

My hon. Friend well knows that the Rent Bill is in the early stages of consideration in Committee and no doubt this matter will come under careful perusal. I still think, as my right hon. Friend hinted on Second Reading, that amendment of the Housing and Public Health Acts is probably a more direct and positive way of achieving what we all want.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will initiate discussions with local authorities to encourage them to pool their housing lists and resources.

I shall take every opportunity to encourage local authorities to co-operate in meeting housing needs. Housing procedures vary greatly between one area and another, and it would not be possible to apply exactly the same criteria of need in all areas as would be implied in pooling.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, if we are to make a major break-through with industrialised building and improve on the number of dwellings built by these methods last year, it is necessary for large orders to be given so that large runs of housing built by industrialised methods can be given to builders, and it is only by pooling local authorities' resources, sites and lists and by organising the work on a large scale in regional development that we can really produce the kind of economic situation we need?

The question of consortia of local authorities for the construction of houses is rather different from the question of the allocation of houses by housing authorities. The first is, I think, 100 per cent. good. In the second I see the difficulties which I referred to in my original Answer.

Will my right hon. Friend agree, nevertheless, that one of the most important functions which could be undertaken by the new regional planning boards would be co-ordinating the use of resources within a region, as my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton, North-East (Mrs. Renée Short) has suggested?

Yes, but I still remind my hon. Friends that the allocation of council houses, like the renting of council houses, is a matter for the councils themselves, and I am very anxious not to trespass on their right to run their own affairs.

Reverting to the content of the original Question, has the Minister's Department conducted a survey of pooling or liaison arrangements, or, if not, is such a survey proposed?

As the hon. Gentleman knows very well, we have been concerned with the question of the pooling of the general lists in Greater London, a subject in which my hon. Friend the Joint Parliamentary Secretary has taken a direct interest. This is an area where we are trying to work on co-ordinated lists. It is a great deal more difficult to do this outside London, but I am certainly looking at it because every effort to try to get a more rational distribution of houses is, of course, right.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will give the number of compulsory purchase orders on private dwellings made in the years 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963 and 1964.

With permission I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a table for those years of the number of orders confirmed by the Minister of Housing and Local Government which were concerned primarily with the acquisition of houses for slum clearance or to prevent homelessness. Orders made for purposes not primarily concerned with the acquisition of houses may incidentally include some private houses, but the records are not in a form which would enable me to give the details.

I accept the need for compulsory purchase in the complex affairs of society, but is the hon. Gentleman entirely satisfied with the law relating to compensation? Is he aware that many of my constituents, particularly the older people who cannot get mortgages, do not feel that the strict test of market value is adequate compensation?

With respect, that is quite different from the Question which the hon. Gentleman has put down. If he cares to put down a Question about compensation, I shall try to answer it.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government (1) if he will introduce legislation to give ratepayers the right to pay rates by monthly or, at most, quarterly instalments;

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when he will make an announcement on his proposals for rating reform.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when Her Majesty's Government's review of local government finance will be completed.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government when he expects to announce his proposals for the relief of hardship caused to certain categories of ratepayer by the annual increase in the total rate burden.

I have nothing to add to my statement in the debate of Wednesday, 5th May.

Will the Minister bear in mind that this is by far the most practicable and best way of easing the rate burden on many people? Would he take steps to see that this facility is available to every ratepayer?

I made a statement on this in the debate on rates last week and I pointed out that this is available to every council. The only issue is whether we should compel the laggard councils to follow the example of the good councils. This is something I shall certainly bear in mind.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that we are being inundated with complaints from ratepayers about the inadequacy of the previous Administration's legislation regarding the relief of hardship to ratepayers?

Yes, I am aware of the deep political sagacity of the ratepayers who make these distinctions. These wise ratepayers are aware that the rates they are paying now are levied on a system developed under 13 years of Tory Government which we have not yet had time radically to reform, as we shall do. I am glad that in my hon. Friend's constituency that degree of sagacity is there, and I hope that it will be registered next Thursday.

As the right hon. Gentleman said in the debate to which he has referred that he had all the facts he wanted, when can we expect action? Will he cease to behave like a tortoise?

Hon. Members must contain themselves for a few more months in patience. The reform of the rating system, as was pointed out in the debate by several hon. Members opposite, cannot be undertaken straight away. We shall have our proposals ready in a few months and in due course we shall pass the legislation required to reform the rating system.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what proposals he has for improving the procedure of the Valuation Panel in New-castle-upon-Tyne when appeals for reduction in the rateable assessments of house properties are received and heard.

The broad outline of the procedure to be followed by valuation courts is laid down in the Local Government Act, 1948, and the Regulations made under it. Subject to that, the procedure is for the court to determine.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many Newcastle ratepayers have complained that they do not get a fair crack of the whip in the present appeal procedure and that public confidence in the city in this procedure is lacking? Would he agree that, if the points in the memorandum which I have submitted to him were put into effect, confidence would be restored, especially as this morning the Chairman of the Newcastle Valuation Panel has stated that he agrees with all my proposals, except one?

I think that the points which my hon. Friend sent to me mainly affected the valuation rather than the administration of the valuation courts. If this is so, they are points for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and I have sent him a copy of the memorandum for his consideration.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government how many definitive maps of rights of way have been produced by the Derbyshire County Council as required under the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act, 1949; for what areas; and when the remaining maps will be completed.

Two definitive maps have been produced, for the Swadlincote and Repton districts. I cannot say when the remaining maps will be completed, but I have been in communication with Derbyshire County Council who are, I know, anxious to get on as quickly as possible. I have also sent a reminder to other county councils.

In view of the fact that this Act has been on the Statute Book for 15 years and an enormous amount still remains to be done, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman will keep up his pressure on the county council?

Yes, Sir, I will. In the case of Derbyshire I find that there were special reasons. The number of footpaths in Derbyshire is almost a record for a county. I satisfied myself that the council is treating this as a matter of urgency, but I made a special request to it that it should regard footpaths in the Peak National Park area as a matter of top priority, as I have done to all other county councils which have parts of national parks in their areas. The right thing is to complete these footpaths and we can deal with the others afterwards.

If Swadlincote is to be preserved for the nation, can the collected speeches of the Minister on mortgage rates be also preserved for the public?

Order. A definitive map does not plot mortgage rates.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will introduce amending legislation to give protection to families living on permanent caravan sites.

My right hon. Friend is considering this problem and possible remedies. But there is not likely to be early legislation.

Does my hon. Friend realise that many hundreds of families in this country live in caravans because of the housing shortage and they appear to be the only section of the community denied the protection of the Rent Bill which is now going through Committee? Is he aware that these people have to pay large rents and large pull-on fees, and that site owners can lay down any kind of condition which they themselves wish, the local authorities having no control over them? Will my hon. Friend treat this matter with considerable urgency and see whether he can introduce amending legislation as soon as possible?

I agree that what my hon. Friend says is correct, and I think that there is a great deal of abuse in the renting of caravans. The difficulty is that they are not rentings of caravans which could come within the Rent Bill. It is a different problem which has to be looked at in the light of other legislation.

In considering this matter, will the Parliamentary Secretary bear in mind that caravan sites are often let for short periods at seaside resorts during the holiday season, and will he see that nothing is done to stop this practice being continued?

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. My Question refers to permanent caravan sites.

The sites may be permanent even if they are by the sea. I do not know.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many caravan site dwellers suffer oppressive terms from site owners, and could he introduce legislation such as the Protection from Eviction Act to protect people living in these circumstances?

I should be glad to receive any suggestion from any hon. Members about the exact way to do this. One of our difficulties, as is shown this afternoon, is that we are undertaking a good deal of legislative work and there are limits even to what my right hon. Friend can persuade his colleagues to give us in the way of Parliamentary time.

Does the hon. Gentleman appreciate that the existing law on caravan sites is already extremely complicated and has given rise to a great deal of litigation and difficulty of construction in the courts? Will he agree, therefore, that amending legislation would impose a considerable burden on the Parliamentary draftsmen which they could reasonably be expected to meet only if they were excused some other labours of a more controversial nature, perhaps, on the Steel Bill?

I do not quarrel with the right hon. and learned Gentleman on the subject of the bad drafting of the last caravan sites Act which, apparently, led to the Chertsey decision, which many people much regret. As regards the strain on the draftsmen, any Government who are a progressive, driving and vigorous Government have difficulty in getting all their work done quickly.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will appoint a committee to examine all possible measures for encouraging population movement away from London and the South-East, and to recommend accordingly within the next 12 months.

No, Sir. This is being considered in the Government's review of the South-East Study. I do not think a further committee is called for at this stage.

Is not this rather disappointing because, clearly, there will be considerably more than 3½ million additional people in the region in the next 17 years unless special inducements are given to go elsewhere, such as special grants to people living in the region if they will move out on retirement? Is not my right hon. Friend really doing only half his planning job if he accepts the trend instead of trying to master and divert it?

Far from accepting the trend, as was slightly implied in the South-East Study, this Government have decided not to. This is why the South-East Study is being reviewed all over again by the Department of Economic Affairs, and why we do not want to make decisions until we have carried out the review expressly to take into account considerations of the kind mentioned by my hon. Friend.

Will the Minister look again at the suggestion made by his hon. Friend? Could he consider, if not a committee within his own Ministry, consultation with his colleagues to see whether this matter could be looked at in a national light and not simply in the light of the South-East Study?

The hon. Gentleman may not be aware that the South-East Study was, in fact, an inter-departmental study—it was not something I can take credit for—and we are doing precisely what he suggests. We need to have a national study of the problem of stopping the trend to London. In order to do that, one must have an estimate of the situation, and one must then make one's major decisions. I have made a number of decisions for new towns in the North which are interim attempts to halt the drift, but our major decisions on halting it must await the reassessment of the South-East Study.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that this question is important for the whole of this island, because it is linked with the drift south from the north and north-east of Scotland, which is being denuded of population and of craftsmen in particular? If my right hon. Friend gives proper attention to this, the drift might be made the other way, to the advantage of the whole nation.

I am aware that the drift does not start at the Border.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when the review is likely to be completed, because a great deal is hanging on it?

I hope by the end of the summer.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will seek to make it obligatory for developers who use private roads leading to building sites to make good any damage caused to the roads.

No, Sir. I have nothing to add to my reply to the hon. Member on 2nd February.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that, while it might be wise that many of these roads should be adopted by the local authorities—which is what he replied to a previous Question from me—the authorities will not take them over until they are brought up to a certain standard? Does not this create difficulty?

This is an intricate problem. Many responsible developers make ex gratia payments for any damage they do. This precedent might well be copied both by private developers and, in some cases, by public authorities.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that ex gratia payments are not a really satisfactory answer to this very difficult problem?

It is probably a quicker way to get results than trying to define precise terms in which a compulsory grant would be given.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will seek powers to ensure that Regular Service men seeking council houses shall be exempt from the residential qualifications which are often required by local authorities before names are accepted on a housing list.

My right hon. Friend will shortly be sending to local authorities a circular giving them his views on their obligations towards the housing needs of Service men, and he would prefer to see what response is made to this before considering the need for legislation.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that helpful reply. Will the recommendation state that strict residential qualifications cause hardship, anomalies and unfairness in the allocation of houses?

Yes. I think that the hon. Gentleman is on a very important point here. Many local authorities give no credence at all to the difficulties of a man coming out of the Armed Forces. It is time that they did so and we shall do all we can to induce them to recognise that these men deserve better.

Will the circular point out that residential and other qualifications, whatever their merits in other directions, are quite inapplicable in relation to service in the Armed Forces?

Yes. I would add that this is not the first time the local authorities have been asked to give this matter consideration. If we do not get results from this final appeal, we shall consider what is to be done.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this problem involves people other than Service men? It also applies to people employed abroad who wish to return home, and to others who cannot have residential qualifications.

But where a man has given 20 years' service or more to the Forces of the Crown it is said that, when he comes out, he should be told that he cannot be put on the housing list because he has no residential qualifications.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if it is his intention to introduce legislation to require all water provided for private and industrial purposes to be metered.

No, Sir.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there are two very good reasons why this legislation should be introduced? First, there is the unfairness between those who pay for unmetered and metered water. The person who gets metered water pays far more. Secondly, there is likely to be an increasingly grave shortage of water in this country and we must do all we can to conserve this natural resource.

It is usual for water undertakers to maintain a balance between the charges on metered payers and people paying on rates. The difficulty, which appeared from the report of the subcommittee on the subject, is that, in many cases, the cost of metering is out of proportion for the small consumer.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what financial assistance he is giving local authorities to expedite the implementation of the Clean Air Act; and whether the implementation of the Act is being slowed down by the short supply of smokeless fuels.

My right hon. Friend pays grant to local authorities at the rate of four-sevenths of their expenditure on fireplace conversions in private houses in smoke control areas and two-fifths of their expenditure on conversions in their own houses. He has no evidence that progress is being slowed down by shortage of smokeless fuels.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that, in my constituency of Halifax, the target date for clean air is as distant as 1977? Does not he agree that this delay, which is common to many towns in the industrial North, might be reduced if more financial assistance were given to local authorities?

If there is any way in which we can help my hon. Friend's constituency we will do so. About 216,000 premises have been covered by smoke control orders in the last six months as against 175,000 in the previous six months, so there has been an improvement.

Will my hon. Friend treat this as a matter of urgency? Is not he aware that there now seems to be a substantial amount of evidence appearing to prove that air pollution is far more responsible for lung cancer than smoking?

We are certainly agreed that clean air is a matter of urgency. As I said, if any hon. Members find difficulties in their localities we shall be pleased to discuss the matter and see what we can do.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he is aware that concern caused by Manchester overspill development arises from unsatisfactory layout and design; and whether he will use his good offices to ensure that, consistent with cost factors, only the most acceptable form of development is pursued.

My right hon. Friend is as concerned as the hon. Member that overspill developments for Manchester should be designed to the highest standards; and so is the city council.

Will the hon. Gentleman take a close personal interest in this matter, since the best interests of overspill areas and Manchester will be served by maintaining the highest possible level of design?

As I think the hon. Gentleman knows, Manchester City Council is consulting the county council, particularly about Wilmslow, on getting good schemes prepared.

asked the Prime Minister if he will introduce legislation so that the power to appoint suffragan bishops shall rest with the Prime Minister of the day.

No, Sir. Under existing legislation the power to appoint suffragan bishops rests with Her Majesty the Queen.

Is the Prime Minister aware that there is a feeling, shared by many, that the Evangelical representation is disproportionately low and should be dealt with? Is there likely to be legislation following the Howick Commission's recommendation? Will the right hon. Gentleman set in motion legislation to correct the unfairness?

The present practice and law require the diocesan bishop to make a petition to the Queen. I cannot comment on what the hon. Gentleman has said about the theological views of the bishops. As he knows, the Church Assembly is still considering the Report of the Archbishops' Commission on Crown Appointments, and I think that we should wait to see what views it reaches on this matter before considering it any further.

Is the Prime Minister aware that there is a very real problem here because, to put it bluntly, many Evangelicals feel that they are not getting a fair crack of the whip in this?

If it is a question of appointment of suffragan bishops, to which the Question on the Order Paper refers, that is entirely a matter for recommendation to be made by diocesan bishops, but I have said that the whole matter is under consideration by the Church Assembly and perhaps we should wait to see what the Assembly says.

asked the Prime Minister if the public speech of the Foreign Secretary at Brussels on 11th February with regard to defence represents the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

Yes, Sir.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the Foreign Secretary talked of the need for equality of control of nuclear weapons among non-nuclear Powers who would participate in the proposed Atlantic Nuclear Force? Does not the Prime Minister agree that to give Germany a finger on the safety catch alone will not meet her just requirements for defence? Does equality of control mean that the right hon. Gentleman intends to give Germany a greater say in this matter?

This has been fully explained. If, however, the hon. Gentleman would like a more up-to-date statement, I should be happy to send him a copy of the speech I made at the opening of the N.A.T.O. Conference today.

It is now six months since the Prime Minister put forward his proposition for an Atlantic Nuclear Force. Since then both he and his colleagues have made a number of speeches on it, including the right hon. Gentleman's speech today. When does he intend to begin substantive discussions on the proposal? Does he intend to move forward?

I am sorry that the right hon. Gentleman is disappointed with the progress. I have made it clear that I do not think that we shall get a final conclusion this side of the German elections. That is a realistic view. Discussions have taken place bilaterally between us and other countries and discussions are going on now in working groups. We have not, in fact, been very long over this. We reached agreement within the Government in a month. The last Government never reached agreement on the mixed-manned force after two years.

Can the Prime Minister give us a little elucidation of this proposal and of the speech made by the Foreign Secretary? Are we to take it, for instance, that, in an Atlantic Nuclear Force, a non-nuclear Power would be able to veto the use of American nuclear weapons?

It has been made clear all along that, while there would be a common sharing of control in respect to the N.A.T.O. nuclear weapons in the A.N.F., of course no other Power has the power to nullify or veto the use of American nuclear weapons not operating under N.A.T.O. control. That has never been proposed. Our proposals provide for consultation about the use of N.A.T.O. nuclear weapons in any part of the world which, up to now, we have not had.

What does this phrase "equal control" mean? Are the Germans to be able to veto the use of American nuclear weapons? They cannot do so, of course, under the N.A.T.O. Alliance. Will they be able to do so in the Atlantic Nuclear Force and, if not, what is the difference between this and the existing arrangements?

I made this clear, and I thought that it was made very clear in our debates last December. We shall have to agree with the Atlantic Nuclear Force on the arrangements for the use of the veto, but our proposal is that any nation would have a finger on the safety catch and the right of veto in the matter of firing the A.N.F. vehicle.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that those of us who share his desire that there should be no spread of nuclear weapons are rather concerned about the situation beyond the N.A.T.O. area and where we appear to be maintaining our own independent nuclear weapons? What proposals does he have for dealing with the situation outside the N.A.T.O. area?

It is nice to find the right hon. Gentleman agreeing with us about something. We have made it plain that we take the first priority in dealing with the urgent problems of the Atlantic Alliance, because of the situation which had been reached because of the proposals for the M.L.F. In regard to the situation in the Indian Ocean and in Asia; we have said—and discussions on this are ready to proceed—that we would like to have discussions about providing common safeguards from nuclear Powers to non-nuclear Powers in that area to provide in that area also a deterrent to the spread of nuclear weapons and to provide a guarantee that other countries in that area will not become nuclear.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recollect when in opposition describing mixed manning as a tired device which would have no part in Labour Party policy? Would he mind telling the House why he has now so radically changed his views that this particular tired device is one of the central themes of his policy?

As a matter of fact, I referred in the same quotation to what the naval aide, Herr von Hassel, himself a former submarine commander, had said—"Mixed-manned submarine? Thanks, I'd rather swim". We are still opposed to the mixed manning of Polaris or other A.N.F. submarines, or to the mixed-manned surface fleet which the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition was so keen to sell to the rest of the Cabinet last year. We are still opposed to the mixed manning of these ships.

asked the Prime Minister how many trade unions have sent him resolutions on the subject of Vietnam; and what has been his response.

I have received about 170 resolutions on Vietnam from trade unions, and in reply I have referred to my statements in this House.

Does the Prime Minister recollect among that large number of resolutions one highly critical of Government policy from the Transport and General Workers' Union? Is it not time that the Minister of Technology decided whether his loyalty is with the Government or with the trade union?

The Minister of Technology has a full-time job doing a lot of the things which ought to have been done years ago. The hon. Member who is getting anxious about trade union resolu- tions, many of them from trade union branches, should recognise that this is a democratic country and that people are entitled to make their pronouncements. They do so under democratic control. The difference is that we now have a Government which receives representations in public from democratically controlled organisations while our predecessors were given secret instructions from the people who provided their funds.

Can the Prime Minister tell the House how many trade unions have indicated their satisfaction with his reply?

Most of these resolutions were expressing dissatisfaction with the action of the bombing in North Vietnam. I do not have a statistical tabulation, but the vast majority were extremely concerned about what is going on in North Vietnam. I hope that so is the right hon. Gentleman. I did hope that the right hon. Gentleman would answer the point which I had just made about the secret instructions to the Conservative Party when in office.

Can my right hon. Friend say how many resolutions from trade unions in the last 10 years have been sent to previous Tory Governments expressing dissatisfaction with their policy?

No, Sir.

We are governed by the subject matter of the resolutions mentioned in the Question.

Will the Prime Minister now answer my question? Will he tell the House how many of the trade unions which approached him indicated satisfaction with his reply? Is the answer none?

No, Sir. I do not have a statistical tabulation, as I said, but I will certainly make one if the right hon. Gentleman will put down a Question. Most of them wrote a letter and got a reply referring to the statement which I made in the House and saying that I had no further comment. If the right hon. Gentleman wants to know on how many occasions they replied welcoming or not welcoming my reply, I shall be glad to make inquiries, if he thinks that to do so would be worth the time of the House.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will take steps to ensure that, when management consultants are asked by Ministers to advise on the workings of Government Departments or nationalised industries, their reports are invariably published.

No, Sir. Each case must be considered on its merits.

Does the Prime Minister recall that during the period of office of the last Government very strong criticisms were made from the Labour benches of the failure to publish the Corbett Report on B.O.A.C.? Does he also recall that the main reason given by the present Minister of Aviation for refusing to publish this report not long after he took office was that it contained information which might be of value to competitors? How does this criterion apply to the Government's refusal to publish the McKinsey Report on the Post Office? Is it fear of competition?

We have to consider each case on its merits. Normally, I would have a strong predilection in favour of making these reports available wherever they are of public interest, wherever they can reassure the public that everything possible is being done to get the maximum efficiency, whether there is competition, or whether there is monopoly. We do not find the same willingness to consider on their merits the reports of consultants about private monopolies.

In view of what he has just said, will the Prime Minister reconsider the statement of the Chief Secretary in the debate of the postal services on 30th March when he said that it was not the intention of the Government, as at present advised, to publish the McKinsey Report?

I have made it clear that we shall look at the Report when it is ready to see whether it would be appropriate to publish it.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the House itself has a Committee on Nationalised Industries and does not need to depend on outside or inside reports?

Everyone will agree that for some years the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries has done an extremely valuable job, and a very thorough and probing job by all its members, on particular nationalised industries. It is for that Committee also to put questions about the efficiency and about the work of consultancy services.

asked the Prime Minister why no person with recent experience of negotiations at factory level has been appointed to the Royal Commission on Trade Unions and Employers' Associations.

I am satisfied that the experience of the members of the Commission will enable them to examine all the problems within their terms of reference with knowledge and understanding, and it is important that a body of this kind should not be too large.

Has the Prime Minister thought about how long it is since any of the persons appointed to the Royal Commission had practical experience of negotiations? Is he aware that one of the important problems in this matter today is the relationship between national and local bargaining? Would it not have been advisable to appoint to the Royal Commission persons with experience of both, in particular a shop steward and a works manager?

Many members of the Royal Commission have recent experience of wage bargaining—I agree not on an individual basis in a factory, but many of them at one time or another will have been brought into the problems arising from the transfer of wage negotiations from factory level to regional or national level.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the opposite point of view, namely, that with Royal Commissions it is normal to appoint people who are wholly apart? Would it not have been better to do so in this case, so that the chief protagonists would have been free to put their case before wholly independent persons?

Obviously this matter was considered. What the right hon. Gentleman says is quite usual. In this case, it was felt that we were more likely to get a constructive report and one which would be not only of academic interest, but of practical interest and carried out, if it was done in this way. I agree that there are arguments both ways about it.