asked the Minister of Public Building and Works why he replied in his Ministerial capacity to the hon. Member for South Dorset in a letter dated 20th January to the effect that representations regarding his condition of employment made by a South Dorset constituent to his Member of Parliament were not fitting.

I wrote three times to the hon. Member and wished to make it clear that employees must not be encouraged to believe that they can obtain special concessions by approaching their Member rather than by using the normal negotiating machinery available to all.

Is it not a fact that any aggrieved citizen has an historic and traditional right to appeal to hon. Members of this House? Is not any attempt to interfere, or tell a constituent it is not fitting for him to write to his Member of Parliament, an example of monstrous Ministerial arrogance which back benchers on all sides of the House will resent?

I could not hope to match the arrogance of the statement we have just heard. I have never disputed the right of an industrial employee to approach his Member of Parliament, but an aggrieved employee can take his case to the management direct or through his trade union. It was because these methods were not exhausted in the case about which the hon. Member wrote to me that I made the remark he complained of. I am as sensitive to the rights of individuals—having had to represent them for a long period—as the hon. Member is likely to be.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say since when it has become unfitting for a Member of Parliament to approach the Crown in the matter of an employee through the Minister who is responsible for the Crown as in this case?

I am sure that we should have a state of complete industrial anarchy if people thought that was the first appeal rather than the last. I am very anxious to keep all the channels open, but it would be very wrong to encourage the belief anywhere that people can, through their Member of Parliament, get something which they cannot get through a proper approach, through the proper negotiating machinery.

Is not it a fact that whatever the rights of trade unions, to which we give great sympathy, what the Minister wrote was:

"It is not fitting that representations of this kind"—

Order. A verbatim quotation from a document is out of order at Question Time.

May I give notice that I shall endeavour to raise this matter on the Adjournment?

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will take steps to produce more effective protection to the amenities and surroundings of historic buildings officially listed as of merit and the subject of expenditure by his Department.

Planning control over the amenities and surroundings of historic buildings, whether or not they are the subject of expenditure by this Department, is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government, whose Department recently reminded local planning authorities of the need to take special care in dealing with proposals for development near historic buildings.

Surely the Minister does care about what happens to the surroundings of places which his Ministry has to preserve? Is not he aware that this is a great recommendation of the Gowers Report and the one which has not been implemented? Will he please bear that in mind?

The answer to the first part of the supplementary question is, "Of course".

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works how much he intends to spend this year on grace and favour residences within his control; and whether he will itemise this expenditure in relation to each residence.

I do not control grace and favour residences. With permission, I will circulate details in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Can my right hon. Friend give me one good reason why public money should be spent on these residences at all? Is he aware that there are some very wealthy people occupying these houses and that we are constantly being told that where a person can maintain and rent his own accommodation he ought to do so, and pay out of his own pocket? Will my right hon. Friend look at this again very carefully in view of the representations of banking and other interests that public expenditure ought to be curtailed?

My job is to look at the actual cost. I am here not the client but the contractor. It would be worth while to state that grace and favour residents are responsible for internal decorations, tenants' repairs, heating and lighting. I doubt whether this whole matter can be put fairly in any answer to a question of this sort.

Is not it a fact that many of these residences are occupied by people who have given long and distinguished service to this country and in many cases by their widows?

Order. The Minister is not responsible for the choice of occupants.

Even if a case could be made out in certain circumstances for this being continued, should not it put an end to all the silly talk about subsidising council houses?

Again I am not responsible for that. Generally speaking, there is accord between my right hon. Friend and me, but there are many things to be put on the record. Although the work carried out is a charge on my Vote, the residents are asked to pay for any special requirements.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the answer, I wish to give notice that I shall endeavour to raise the matter on the Adjournment as soon as possible.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works to what extent the shortages in the supply of building materials have been overcome.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what progress he is making in overcoming the shortages of building materials.

As I told the House on 15th March, I expect the difficulties over the supply of building materials to diminish during the course of the year as additional capacity becomes available.

Can my hon. Friend give an assurance that the house-building programme will not be upset by the current shortages of building materials? Can he give an indication of what representations he is getting from local authorities on this point? Are they, on the whole, satisfied with the current position?

I cannot be a prophet, but the difficulties are mainly local. At present, over the country as a whole, the situation is reasonably satisfactory.

In view of the fact that in Scotland we still have surplus labour and surplus manufacturing conditions, would my right hon. Friend consult the Scottish Office to see to what extent more of this industry can be introduced into Scotland, thereby helping Scotland to make a greater contribution to the supply of house-building materials?

We are in touch; in fact, Scotland has a surplus of bricks.

Has not one of the factors which has eased the Minister's problem been the falling off in house building because of the shortage of mortgages and high interest rates?

No, Sir. In fact, the number of starts which the builders are contemplating is at least as good as last year's.

Is not the Minister aware that the building of houses is being held up in Ayrshire and all over Scotland due to the lack of supply of plaster board and that contractors are writing to their Members urging——

Order. There is a specific question about plaster board, unless I am deceived, further along.

On a point of order. Surely plaster board is a building material?

Yes, but we shall not get it answered without anticipating a Question further down. That is the point. That makes the difficulty.

To ask the Minister of Public Building and Works if he will make a statement about the shortage of plaster board for the building industry.

Mr. Iremonger. It seems that he is not here.

On a point of order. Would you give a Ruling, Mr. Speaker, as to what the position is now about my question on plaster board?

I have called the next Question and I am now going to call another one.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what is the total number of persons in his Department employed on the restoration and preservation of historic buildings.

I am sorry for the delay in finding the reply, but there are so many absentees. I thought that the Opposition were anxious to get into the fray.

Surely the right hon. Gentleman is not saying that the work of his Department in relation to the maintenance and repair of historic buildings discharged entirely by the numbers of people which he has given? Is not a good deal of work also given to contractors?

The Question did not ask that. It concerned those people in my Department.

On a point of Order, Mr. Speaker. If this absenteeism is continued, will not we be able to get through all the Questions in one Session?

If we do not have too many points of order.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether the Whitehall Citadel is currently in use; and for what purpose.

The Citadel is used to House the Navy Department's Whitehall Wireless Station and for conference purposes.

Could the hon. Gentleman say whether, in view of the acute pressure on office space in London now being felt on account of the expansion of Government Departments, he could find a more fruitful use for these buildings, unless, of course, it would be more provident to demolish them?

I can speak personally on this, and I dare say that the hon. Member for Croydon, South (Sir R. Thomson) also can. The Citadel is a horrible place to work in.

Would not the hon. Gentleman therefore feel that it might be appropriate for the Cabinet to be accommodated there in future?

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what was the total number of building trades operatives employed in the London region on office building in 1963 and 1964.

Separate details for office building are not available, but the estimated figure for 1963 was 20,000, and for 1964 22,000.

Is the Minister aware that other Government Departments and other Ministers have given these figures in the House, and that they have written to me to say that the Minister of Public Building and Works is responsible for statistics? How can the Minister now say that the figures are not available?

We have not improved them as much as we should like compared to the achievement of the previous Government.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what is the charge made by his Department for designing, engineering and supervisory services in respect of buildings erected for other Departments.

The cost is normally borne on my Department's Votes. When recovered from another Department, an addition of 20 per cent. is made to the cost of construction.

Is not this figure of 20 per cent. on the cost outrageous? Will the right hon. Gentleman say what is the normal cost which is charged as a percentage of total building operation so that the House can compare it with the normal charges which obtain for professional advisers outside?

The charge covers the full range of services provided, including salaries, accommodation and associated costs, and is calculated from the cost of the service performed in relation to the Ministry's staff bill. The charge of 20 per cent. is a flat rate but applies to all clients with a few minor exceptions.

The right hon. Gentleman has not answered my question. What does it amount to as a percentage of cost on average?

The original Question did not ask for that information, but I would be prepared, of course, to take up with the hon. Member specifically any matters which he has in mind. This is a case of the swings and the roundabouts. It was intended to give a global answer, not an evasive one.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what is the charge made by his Department for acquiring freehold and leasehold building for other Departments.

For the Post Office, the full cost of the staff time spent on acquiring premises for them. For an Exchequer department, our out-of-pocket expenses: for a non-Exchequer body a sum equal to the scale fee of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Government Departments are allowed any freedom to use either the services of his Department or the services of outside bodies, if they think that these services are to be preferred?

No, Sir. Generally speaking, we do this for the Post Office, but, of course, we often put the work out to other people, that is all. But we act as the general agents for the Post Office.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what steps he will take to provide shelter for members of the public, who are unable to gain admittance to St. Stephen's Hall, when waiting for admission to the Strangers' Gallery of the House of Commons.

I understand that the police have been given discretion by the authorities of the House to allow members of the public to wait in Westminster Hall in wet weather.

Is the Minister aware that there is more seating available in Westminster Hall than there is outside St. Stephen's Entrance? Would he not agree that this Hall, being as large as it is, could be used by the public to wait in, rather than just waiting for wet weather, as a possibly permanent feature?

Yes, Sir. I am looking into this matter. I am sure that the authorities of the House will take notice of the views of the House. Sometimes, however, this is not an easy question. The authorities are opposed to a greater use of Westminster Hall, because it would interfere with its use by hon. Members and would add to the task of the police in controlling the queue. This Question conflicts in some ways with the Sessional Order. This is not an easy matter to settle, but we are anxious to meet the public's need.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works if he will provide additional accommodation where hon. Members can meet Lobby and Gallery correspondents.

I cannot provide accommodation for this purpose at present.

Will the Minister nevertheless give very serious attention to this Question, which was mentioned in the Green Book? I am sure that he will do everything possible to find accom- modation in order to get on with this quickly.

Yes. I am sure that the hon. Member does not underestimate my difficulty in this matter. I have read the book to which he referred, but all suitable accommodation in the House is already taken up, and I do not know whether we can look in some other direction. But at the present time, in view of the building in Star Court and so on, we tend, as I am sure everybody wishes us to tend, to put the needs of hon. Members first. I think that I have explained previously that I am very sympathetic towards providing what accommodation we can for the Press, but it is just not available at the moment.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works if he will display a model of the Star Court Scheme, together with plans and detailed drawings.

Yes, but not until the Select Committee have had a chance to see it.

Could the Minister inform the House when the Select Committee are likely to have reached a conclusion and when we are likely to see these plans and detailed drawings?

That is not a matter for me. Reference to the Select Committee in this matter is almost a matter of privilege. It would be impertinent if I stood at the Box and reflected on their proceedings at all. But I understand that the Select Committee have already had some meetings. It seems to me that if the House delegated to a Select Committee questions which arise from the remit to Mr. Speaker, then it was courteous that a rather smaller body should look at the matter first. There is no discourtesy to the House. As soon as I can I will see that the body of Members have recourse to all the information which I have.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will take steps to arrange for modern fixtures and fittings to be installed in the Members' hairdressing saloon in the House of Commons and for the saloon to be redecorated.

No, Sir. Two new basins were fitted in 1960, and the saloon was completely redecorated last year; and I can only say this—that personally I like the Victorian Gothic.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give us some kind of assurance that he will look at this matter? Is he aware that, however much he may be wedded to Victorian Gothic, there are those of us on this side who would like something more fitting and belonging more to the twentieth century?

I am fraid that if the hon. Gentleman wants a Beatle haircut he cannot get it in this House. I am greatly interested and have seen and spoken to a great many hon. Members who use the hairdressing saloon and have found that they rather liked the atmosphere of the place. There is no particular demand, except from people who came in at the last election, to try to alter this hairdressing saloon.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Victoriana should be maintained and sustained; that there are many excellent qualities of Victoria's age that we should respect, and that we have no respect at all for the demands of the political Teddy boys opposite?

Order. That is a bit wide of the hairdressing saloon.

Would it be possible to get a Beatle wig in this House?

Mr. Speaker has just ruled out the previous supplementary question as irrelevant, and I merely characterise this one as being rather silly.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works if he will investigate the methods of ventilation in the Members' Post Office and sorting room of the House of Commons, with a view to installing fans or other means of improving conditions for those working there during the summer; and whether he will make a statement.

These two rooms are air-conditioned through the main House of Commons air-conditioning system. Any change in temperature requested by the staff will be made immediately by the Engineer in the Control Room.

Does the hon. Gentleman appreciate that the conditions are far from perfect in really hot weather, and will he bear this in mind and keep an eye on the situation?

The staff have not actually complained but I have had a look at the position. A small thing that could be put right is to remove a waste-paper basket which obstructs two ducts.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works how many men were employed at the end of April on the Polaris submarine base at Gareloch; and how many of them were construction workers, plumbers, joiners, engineers or plasterers.

The figures are 1,148 and 862.

As these 1,148 men are building workers badly needed for housing, for schools and for construction work, will my hon. Friend assure the House that this scheme is not given priority over these necessary things?

Matters of policy of that description are not for me. Unfortunately, in the building industry, materials and men are not always in the right place. The duty of my Department is to try to see that they get into the right place.

Will the Minister assure us that there are no shortages of plaster board on this scheme?

No, Sir. There is a shortage of plaster boards, as I would have explained in answering Question No. 6.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works how the attendance figures and receipts for 1964 at the historic monuments in his care compare with those for 1963.

In 1964, some 8,330,000 people visited monuments at which there is an admission charge, and the revenue amounted to just under £427,000. These are record figures, and represent an increase of upwards of 703,000 visitors and more Than £61,000 in revenue over the 1963 total.

While thanking my hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask him whether he does not believe that the position could be still further improved if he were to include among the historical monuments under his care some hon. Members opposite?

There is, in fact, a committee meeting on this subject later today, when my hon. Friend's suggestion can, perhaps, be considered.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works on what date the negotiations with fire surveyors and fire officers were concluded; and with what result.

Agreement has not yet been reached.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I could not hear what the Minister said.

Agreement has not yet been reached.

Could I, then, ask the Minister—in view of the undertaking I was given some months ago that negotiations were about to be concluded—when we may expect the Department to honour the undertaking given to these people?

As the hon. Lady knows, this sort of negotiation is a tricky business, and the Department is proceeding as fast as possible.

That's no answer.

It appears to be an answer.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster which independent bodies working in the field of social welfare have submitted evidence to him in connection with his review of social security.

A number of organisations and individuals have written to me, but none has sent any formal evidence.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his reluctance to consult certain private occupational pension schemes has given a widespread impression that his scheme will hit at private occupational pension schemes? Will he give an assurance that such schemes will play a major and increasing part in the social security provisions of this country?

I deny any suggestion of a refusal or hesitation to consult anybody about anything in this review. The door is wide open to anybody who wishes to send anything in. I assure the hon. Member that we shall not overlook any representations which anyone cares to make. As to the representatives of occupational pension schemes, I have had conversations with at least one body, and in any case it is obviously one of the major questions of the review as to how to reconcile the interests of the occupational schemes and the State scheme.

Could my right hon. Friend say which independent bodies, if any, were asked for information by or sent evidence to the previous Administration when they were introducing their graduated scheme and what notice was taken of it?

That seems to me to be a question addressed to the benches opposite. I have no knowledge of it.

How long will this review take? Surely the Minister has enough evidence already from my hon. Friend the Member for Abingdon (Mr. Neave), especially about non-contributory pensioners, many of whom are in urgent need.

The review is proceeding, and we are making good progress, but I cannot say how long it will be before it is complete.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster whether he will list the independent bodies working in the field of social welfare which he has invited to submit evidence to him in his review of social security.

No invitations have yet been issued. As I told the hon. Member for Wanstead and Woodford (Mr. Patrick Jenkin) on 24th March, the Government will be seeking the views of major organisations on particular issues as they arise, but this will not be until work on the review is further advanced.

As many months have passed since this review was initiated, surely the time has come when the right hon. Gentleman should be able to invite outside bodies to give evidence? Could he give an assurance that when he says that he will listen to their evidence he means that he will listen more seriously than his right hon. Friend the First Secretary of State intended in his undertaking to listen to the steel companies?

We shall consult other people as soon as we are able to do so. I have given the noble Lord an assurance that this will be done, and it will be done. I wish he would stop behaving as if he were the Billy Graham of the Conservative Party.

On a point of order. Six of my hon. Friends had Questions down to the Paymaster-General. They passed the Table and then the Paymaster-General in a very autocratic and evasive way transferred these Questions to other Ministers. What protection have we against that?

That raises no point of order. I am not responsible for transfers.

asked the Paymaster-General, in view of the fact that he is not himself responsible for the co-ordination of home information services, what administrative machinery is available to him to carry out his responsibility for answering Questions on such coordination, and from which Departments it is drawn.

The Civil Service machinery is available to me and Departments are consulted as appropriate.

As it can hardly be full-time work, may I ask whether this staff also assists the Paymaster-General in his other duties?

Yes, Sir.

Does that include collecting dossiers on all Members of Parliament, or just those on the Government side of the House?

The hon. Member knows that that question is silly, so I will not trouble to answer it.

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman can tell us what these other duties are?

The hon. Member knows quite well that if he wishes to question the nature of my duties he should put a Question down to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister.

We did.

asked the Paymaster-General what steps he is taking to improve the co-ordination of home information services in explaining Government policy on land use and the granting of planning permission.

None, Sir.

Can the Paymaster-General explain reports in the Press recently that there are conflicting views between the Ministry of Land and Natural Resources and Housing and that this is what is holding up the presentation of the Land Commission Bill?

I am not responsible for what appears in the Press, particularly that section of it which hon. Members opposite inspire in the Tory Press.

Does the right hon. Gentleman's Answer explain why in fact there is no co-ordination and why, in particular, his right hon. Friend the Minister of Land and Natural Resources has nothing whatever to do in the allocation of land by way of planning permission?

If I ever needed lessons in co-ordination I should not go to the right hon. Gentleman.

Why is it that in Scotland, where the Minister of Natural Resources has no responsibility, it is possible for one Minister to carry out all his duties?

I cannot do better, in reply, than to draw the hon. Member's attention to the Answer which was given on 12th November in col. 1186.

asked the Paymaster-General whether Her Majesty's Government is satisfied with the co-ordination of home information services in explaining the Government's views on closer political, military and commercial relations with Europe; and if he will make a statement.

Yes, Sir.

Would the right hon. Gentleman explain, when he replies with the phrase "Yes, Sir", whether he is saying that he is satisfied with the co-ordination of information or whether he is saying "Yes, Sir" in answer to my Question, which asks if he will make a statement?

I am saying "Yes, Sir" because I am satisfied.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make a statement, because there seems to be a good deal of confusion resulting from the various statements made by right hon. Gentlemen opposite, as to whether or not this Government intend to go into Europe?

The confusion exists, not unnaturally, in the hon. Gentleman's mind. From my point of view, I am satisfied and I said so.

Why is the right hon. Gentleman making so much fuss and mystery about activities for which lie is paid so much, if, in fact, there are any activities?

That is a good debating point, but I do not know where it gets us. As I said before, if hon. Gentlemen opposite wish to know the precise nature of my duties in this Administration—and this goes for the duties, in this and in other Administrations, of a Minis- ter without Portfolio—they must put down Questions to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister. It is not a matter for me. [Interruption.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is no mystery whatever about the activities of hon. Gentlemen opposite; they are gunning for my right hon. Friend and he is justified, therefore, in treating them with the utmost contempt?

I am obliged to my right hon. Friend.

Address the Chair.

I beg your pardon and that of the House, Mr. Speaker. I am obliged to my right hon. Friend for his remarks. If I am being gunned for by the Conservative Party I regard that as no greater compliment, because I am no pseudo-Tory. I hate their guts, I always have and I always shall. [Interruption.]

rose——

Order. The House must conduct Question Time with reasonable courtesy, both sides of it, otherwise it degrades itself.

On a point of order. Is there anything that you or the House can do to protect the reputation of the House from the kind of behaviour—[Interruption.]

Order.

Tell the hon. Member for Cheadle (Mr. Shepherd) to behave himself.

Order. I am being addressed on a point of order. Part of the requirement of behaving oneself is for hon. Members to allow the Chair to hear what is being said.

I was asking, Mr. Speaker, if there is anything the House or you can do to protect the House and its reputation from the kind of behaviour and answer we have just heard from the Paymaster-General, since I feel that that answer must be degrading to our reputation?

I indicated that I thought that the House should abstain from that kind of thing in the interests of its reputation.

Further to that point of order. This cannot go by default. You recognise, no doubt, that the abuse originated on the opposite side of the House, Mr. Speaker, so that my right hon. Friend is perfectly entitled to reply in kind.

That is why I did not assign any blame exclusively to either side of the House but said that hon. Members should abstain from it. I said both sides, that is what I meant and that is what I maintain.

On a point of order. Is it not a gross abuse for a Minister of the Crown contemptuously to refuse to account for his duties to the House of Commons? Are not Ministers still responsible to Parliament for their duties?

That raises no point of order for me. If the answer which is given on some topic is thought to be insufficient that is not a matter for the Chair.

On a point of Order. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the Paymaster-General's reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Paymaster-General what regular publications are now being sponsored by the Government's information services.

I am making inquiries and I will ensure that the result is communicated to the hon. Gentleman.

That reply is even more irrelevant and displays a greater degree of ignorance than is normally shown by the right hon. Gentleman. Would he make some attempt to show some courtesy to the House of Commons and give us at least a reasonable Answer to the Question on the Order Paper?

The hon. Member does not seem to be aware that his Question covers the whole range of Government information services. I am not responsible for that. I am responsible only for the home services. In answer to the Question, I am telling the hon. Member that I am not in a position to give the information which he wants at this stage. I am therefore making inquiries. That is quite proper.

Is it not the right hon. Gentleman's duty to answer Questions in this House? Since my hon. Friend's Question relates only to "regular publications", why does the right hon. Gentleman not know the answer?

I could give an answer, but I prefer to give an accurate one. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] I am sure that this seems foreign to the right hon. Gentleman, looking back on his past record. The Question relates to a whole range of Government activities. If the hon. Member for Bournemouth, West wants a specific answer on the foreign services he must put down Questions to the Departments concerned. If he wants an answer to those relating to the C.O.I. then I can give it to him, but I am not sure of the points at this stage, since exhaustive inquiries have not yet been made. Therefore, I prefer to wait and then give a full and accurate answer.

Is it not time that the Paymaster-General arranged some training courses for the civil servants in his Department?

I should have thought that even the hon. Gentleman would have concentrated his attack on me and not on my civil servants.

Is it not perfectly clear that the Question about regular publications is full of ambiguity and that nobody knows the real answer? [Interruption.]

My hon. and learned Friend is perfectly correct. It is an appalling reflection on the ignorance of hon. Gentlemen opposite that they do not know that there are some publications which are paid for—and for which, therefore, one can get the information from the Stationery Office—while other publications are free and are put out by Departments. In view of this, it takes a fair while to get the sort of information sought in the Question.

asked the Paymaster-General what steps he is taking to ensure the security of his Department; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Paymaster-General what steps he is taking to ensure the security of his Department; and if he will make a statement.

The normal rules for security in Government Departments are, of course, enforced.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that helpful reply. Will he say whether the new form of positive vetting or the old form is employed in his Department?

The question of positive vetting in my Department is subject to the normal rules. The hon. Gentleman can be assured that the rules are being fully carried out.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that we have much more security now than we had during the last 13 years?

My right hon. Friend is perfectly right. This is another sphere in which we were left a legacy which was a disgrace to those who were responsible.

Can the Paymaster-General quote any case in the previous Administration where a member of the Cabinet left confidential papers in a public restaurant?

If there were, we could be perfectly sure that the behaviour of the hon. gentleman who found them would he very different from the way he behaved last week.

Is it not a fact that there is not really anything at all to secure in the right hon. Gentleman's office? Is he not presiding over a picturesque, historic vacuum?

I hope the hon. Gentleman realises that I am not the first person to hold this office. The right hon. Gentleman who was my predecessor held this office. I hope that I will discharge it more honestly, more straightforwardly and more competently than he did.

In view of the right hon. Gentleman's apparent unwillingness to perform the duties for which he was seconded to the Government, has not the time come for him to be sent back to his regiment? [Laughter.]

That got some laughs, but what relevance it has to the Question I do not know. If hon. Gentlemen opposite want to know the nature of my duties they can ask my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister just what they are. However, to make reflections, as the right hon. and learned Member for Huntingdonshire (Sir D. Renton) appeared to do, on the fact that I served in the ranks of the Regular Army is just the action of a cad.

asked the hon. Member for Liverpool Exchange, as Chairman of the Kitchen Committee, how many measures are obtained from a five-gill bottle of gin in each of the various bars under the control of her Committee.

Thirty-two measures are obtained from the bottle of gin, which contains 26⅔ fluid ounces.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply, but is she aware that her figures show that, sold by the measure, a bottle of gin provides an income of £4? Is she further aware that that represents a profit of 51 per cent. on the retail price of the bottle, not on the cost price? Since other beverages, such as whisky, show a profit sold in the same way of 70 per cent., and sherry even more, does she not think that it would be worth her while looking closely into this system of pricing in the House, because it seems to violate the policy of the Government?

Being a complete tee-totaller, I know nothing whatever of the measures, the drinking, the costs, or anything else regarding spirits, but I will promise my hon. Friend to make all the inquiries I can from the experts in the House and let him know the answer.

Is the hon. Lady aware that milk, a teetotal commodity retailing at 9s. 4d. a gallon in the House, shows a mark-up of over 300 per cent. on what the farmer gets for it?

If the hon. Gentleman will put down a Question, I will get him the answer.

asked the Minister of Health why senior posts on the nursing staff of Staffordshire mental hospitals are not advertised; and why preference is given to men in the appointment of assistant matrons.

Hospitals exercise their discretion in this, but my information is that most of the hospitals mentioned advertise these posts. I am also advised that no preference is given to men.

Would the Parliamentary Secretary consider that the exercise of their judgment on this sort of thing is not always up to what the Minister has been told? I am sure the Minister will agree that it is important that these posts should be advertised as otherwise there is fear of victimisation by certain members of the staff. Surely, in female wards there should be fully qualified female nurses in charge? Would the hon. Gentleman look at both allegations?

I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that we have already looked into the situation in the hospitals in the area to which his Question refers. I can assure him that there has been no preferential treatment given to the men. There may have been an increase in the appointment of men, but that is in the nature of things today because of women leaving to get married. Most of the jobs have been advertised. If the right hon. Gentleman likes to give me details of any particular case or cases, I give him an assurance that I will go into the matter very fully.

Will the hon. Gentleman see that all these posts are advertised?

In practice, I think that they have all been advertised, but what the right hon. Gentleman may have found, as I have found, is that where there has been no response to an advertisement in the first instance, the hospital management committee has made an appointment without re-advertising, because of the failure of response.

asked the Minister of Health if he will reprint in the OFFICAL REPORT the instructions sent on 15th October by his Department to the Brighton and Lewes Hospital Management Committee, postponing for two years the urgently needed accident centre at the Royal Sussex County Hospital; and what representations he has received about this decision, in view of the present inadequacy of the casualty department.

No such instruction was issued by my Department. I have received representations from my hon. Friend the Member for Brighton, Kemptown (Mr. Hobden), the hon. Member for Brighton, Pavilion (Sir W. Teeling) and from Brighton County Borough.

Is the Minister aware that his hon. Friend made a positive allegation that this postponement for two years resulted from a concrete directive issued on polling day by the previous Administration? Is it not quite clear from his reply that that is not the case, and will he please bear in mind that there is a great and growing need for an accident centre in Brighton and do his utmost to give it high priority?

I know that there is the need for a modern casualty department, although I understand that the present one, admittedly inadequate, is doing well. I have already said that no circular was issued by my Department. This postponement was decided by the regional hospital board as a result of reviewing its own programme which it found would have been overloaded had this item remained in it.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what is the amount of public money that has been given in each of the last five years through the British Council to provincial symphony orchestras for tours abroad; how this compares with the allocation of funds for this purpose by the British Council to London symphony orchestras; and what plans he has to improve the relative position of provincial symphony orchestras.

In the past five years, the British Council paid £22,225 to one provincial symphony orchestra in the financial year 1961–62 in connection with an overseas tour. In the same period the Council paid £113,383 to London symphony orchestras in support of tours to foreign countries. None of these payments were subsidies to the orchestras concerned but arose from guarantees against loss. Requests for assistance by all symphony orchestras are considered in the light of what will best promote British interests overseas at a given time.

Will the hon. Gentleman always bear in mind the claims of provincial symphony orchestras to get as much support as possible for their tours abroad? Is he aware that recently the Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra was arranging a tour of Europe, including Eastern Germany, and had very little financial support for the venture? Will he give such claims as sympathetic a hearing as he can?

It is not the function of the British Council to subsidise orchestras in this country, nor has it power to make such grants. It can assist overseas tours in appropriate cases by giving a guarantee against actual loss. In all appropriate cases approval of the advisory committee is sought. The chairman of that committee is Lord Harewood.

Will my hon. Friend be careful about the Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra because not so very long ago the conductor refused to play Russian music on the ground that it supported the Communists?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make representations to the German authorities regarding the necessity of providing full compensation for those victims of the Nazis who are excluded under the present law because they were living in Eastern Europe on October 1953 or were otherwise unable to claim by that date.

Her Majesty's Government have drawn the attention of the Federal German Government to the widespread concern expressed in this House and elsewhere that all persons who suffered Nazi persecution should be equitably treated in the matter of compensation.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. In view of the fact that the final decision in respect of these claims is to be made very shortly in Germany, will my hon. Friend make a further attempt to bring the Germans to realise the importance of this very necessary provision for the victims of Nazism?

Her Majesty's Government have no formal standing in this, but, without going into the details of specific categories, we have made known to the Federal German Government our concern about this matter and our sympathy with the request made by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. If we judge it appropriate and useful, we shall certainly make further representations.

Is the Minister of State aware that a certain number, although not a large number, of those excluded from compensation under the present laws and the new draft laws are not in fact British subjects and that the British Home Office has a direct responsibility? Will the hon. Gentleman look at those particular cases?

Yes, certainly, but it is difficult to renegotiate a treaty which is 10 years old. We hope that the Federal German Government will be generous when they amend the Indemnification Law.

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that there are many Poles in Germany who have received nothing from the Germans in compensation for what they suffered? I understand that the reason was that the West German Government did not recognise Poland. Now that they do recognise Poland, will the hon. Gentleman take up this matter with them?

I shall certainly bear that point in mind, but this matter is determined by a treaty negotiated 10 years ago. Although we can make representations, the hon. and gallant Member will, I am sure, recognise that there are difficulties.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs with what terms of reference British policemen are serving in South Vietnam.