asked the Minister of Land and Natural Resources if he will introduce legislation to remove the obligation on certain leaseholders to collect ground rents from their neighbours on behalf of the ground landlord.

I am very conscious of the trouble, and even hardship, that this duty to collect ground-rents on neighbouring properties can cause, but I already have powers—under Section 20 of the Landlord and Tenant Act, 1927, and earlier legislation—that enable me to deal with the difficulty in the great majority of cases that come to my notice.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Is he aware that this simplified explanation of the powers he already has is only just becoming known in an area which I have the honour to represent, where this problem is acute, bearing particularly heavily on older people? I trust that where problems arise due to interpretations of the powers already held we shall have every assistance from his Ministry in trying to help those who are burdened with this problem.

Yes. The steps we have taken have had considerable effect. Previously we were dealing with these cases at the rate of about 130 a year. We are now dealing with these cases at the rate of about 150 a month. If my hon. Friend has cases to which he wishes to call my attention, I will certainly look at them.

Does the fact that the right hon. Gentleman has answered this Question, and indeed the substance of his Answer, indicate that he has taken over from his right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government responsibility for landlord and tenant questions; and, if so, when did this transfer of responsibility take place?

No. The right hon. Gentleman will be aware, if he reflects, that it is a specific responsibility that I have undertaken.

asked the Minister of Land and Natural Resources what recommendations he has received from the Home Timber Advisory Committee; and what action he proposes to take on them.

On 26th May the Forestry Commission passed to my right hon. Friend a submission from the Home Grown Timber Advisory Committee making recommendations on the future size of the forestry programme and on related problems such as land acquisition. As my right hon. Friend stated in the course of the debate on forestry on 14th June, this submission will be taken into account in the course of the Government's current review of the forestry programme.

Would the Joint Parliamentary Secretary place a copy of this submission in the Library, or is it regarded as confidential?

I will make inquiries to see whether we can meet the hon. Gentleman's request.

asked the Minister of Land and Natural Resources how many acres of forestry have been planted by the Forestry Commission in the year 1964 and in the first half of 1965 in the County of Devon.

The figures available relate to the planting season, which ends in May. In the season which has just ended the Forestry Commission planted 534 acres in Devon. In the previous season it planted 537 acres.

Is this enough? In my view, nothing like enough acres are being planted in the West Country. Would the Minister consider encouraging the Commission to do more than this and, indeed, to consult the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to see if some of the poorer land could be turned to use for forestry?

The question whether it is enough must be related to the Commission's commitments in other parts of the country. There are 3,300 acres more to be planted in the county, and it is hoped to accomplish that within the next 6 or 7 years.

Is the Minister having a survey of the West Country carried out, particularly of Devon and Cornwall, to see what extra land would be suitable for afforestation?

Private studies are being made, to which we hope to have access. If they are insufficient, we may have to supplement them.

asked the Minister of Land and Natural Resources whether he will make a further statement on the reorganisation of the work of the Forestry Commission; and whether it has been given new terms of reference.

The Forestry Commission has not been given new terms of reference, and I have nothing to add to the statements I made in reply to the hon. Member's Question on 10th May and in the debate on the Seventh Report from the Estimates Committee on 14th June.

When the new Commission is complete, will the right hon. Gentleman consider issuing a new directive making clear the position of the Government in support of forestry policy?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, we are reviewing the planting programme and, pursuant to that, we will be making a statement.

asked the Minister of Land and Natural Resources when he proposes to introduce legislation to set up a Land Commission.

asked the Minister of Land and Natural Resources when legislation setting up a Land Commission will be introduced.

The hon. Members must be patient a little longer.

While seeking to exercise that admirable quality, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that very precise proposals on this matter were advocated by himself and his right hon. Friends at the General Election nine months ago, and that great uncertainty and confusion are being caused by the fact that these proposals have not been followed either by legislation or even so far by the promised White Paper? If a Bill is not coming forward this Session, would it not be in the interests of all concerned to say so?

As to the first part of that supplementary question, yes, I am so aware. As to the second part, the right hon. Gentleman will appreciate that this is a question of Parliamentary time, and if he will give me assistance through the usual channels I shall be much obliged.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is a little difficult to give even as agreeable a Minister as himself such assistance until one knows what he has in mind? Is he further aware that the fact that the various leaks from his Department completely contradict the specific election pledges made last October only adds to the confusion, with its very serious effect on the bringing forward of land for development, which the right hon. Gentleman is responsible for creating?

I have in mind legislation to implement the election manifesto. I need Parliamentary time to implement that and, as I say, I shall be obliged to the right hon. Gentleman if he can help me in that regard.

asked the Minister of Land and Natural Resources in respect of how many individual planning appeals he has been consulted since his appointment.

It is not in accordance with normal practice to give particulars of discussions between Ministers.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has said that the right hon. Gentleman is responsible for general supervision of the use of land? One of the major methods by which the Government make their decision effective is through the decisions on planning appeals. If the right hon. Gentleman is unable to assure the House that he has even been consulted on one of these, he must leave the House and the country very much in doubt as to whether his planning responsibilities exist.

If the House accepts the assumption of the right hon. Gentleman it will be misinformed.

If the right hon. Gentleman wishes to challenge my assumption, is it not extremely easy for him to give the figures?

No, the right hon. Gentleman knows—he has held office—that it is not the convention to disclose discussions between Ministers.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many' times he has been consulted concerning agricultural land which is liable to go out of production and into other use?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put down a Question on that point.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said that had there been a Minister of Land and Natural Resources years ago we would not have problems such as urban overspill and encroachment into the Green Belt? Therefore, will the right hon. Gentleman make it clear that he is consulted and that those consultations bear some fruit?

I can assure the House that I am consulted in accordance with the functions which have been given to me.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the past where planning decisions have been turned down or accepted on the advice of the Minister of Agriculture, or the Minister of Transport, this has always been perfectly well known? Is it not just as easy for him to make it known when he intervenes in any way in planning decisions?

If the hon. Gentleman has in mind any specific case perhaps he will put down a Question.

asked the Minister of Land and Natural Resources, whether, in arranging the review of the procedure for making tree preservation orders, he will ensure that representatives of the woodland owners concerned will be consulted from the outset and throughout the review, as recommended by the Estimates Committee in its Eighth Special Report.

I would draw the hon. Member's attention to the final observation of my right hon. Friends recently published in the Eighth Special Report from the Estimates Committee. In this they stated that the Forestry Committee of Great Britain, which represents the interests of private woodland owners in England, Scotland and Wales, would be fully consulted in the review of the arrangements for tree preservation orders on land suitable for forestry.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in that observation he said that he would consult the woodland owners at the appropriate time and that the implication was that the inquiry was already in being? Would it not be much more satisfactory to have the woodland owners concerned in at the beginning?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that there is no intention of going back on the observation. We are only too anxious to get their views when we are ready to receive them.

asked the Minister of Land and Natural Resources if he will take steps to require local authorities to apply similar provisions of purchase at market value to property threatened by possible development, as applies to property in areas which are designated for development.

Local authorities are required to buy certain classes of property when its value is depreciated by designation for development under the "blight" provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1962. It would put an impossible burden on authorities to extend these provisions so as to require them to buy any property whose value was affected by possible development.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a very real problem here in that there are often vast areas which will be possible areas of redevelopment? Is he aware that in the City of Newcastle, for instance, there are three possible schemes for the Jesmond Road-Stephenson Road Motorway? Does he realise that this is having a frightful effect on the value of properties in all three possible areas? Will he look at this to see if he can do something about the protection of house-owners who wish to sell in such circumstances?

I am aware of the problem. I think the 1962 Act struck a balance. However, if the hon. Gentleman wishes me to look at the cases to which he has referred me I will do so.

Will the Minister bear in mind that local authorities have powers to purchase in advance of requirements, even though the case does not actually fall within the definition in the Act to which he has referred? Will he encourage them to do so where hardship arises, and pay the same value which they would do if the "blight" provisions were in operation?

This is a case where one has to strike a balance and not impose too heavy a financial load on the local authorities. Again, if the hon. Gentleman wishes to call attention to a case in which he thinks there is hardship I will look at it.

asked the Minister of Land and Natural Resources what estimates are being made of the use of the Pennine Way since it was opened along its full extent earlier this year.

No estimate of the use of the Pennine Way has yet been made, but the National Parks Commission has the point under consideration.

Will my right hon. Friend say whether he is willing to carry out some further investigation into this matter? It would be of great interest to know how many people are using the Pennine Way.

I share my hon. Friend's interest. I believe that the National Parks Commission is discussing this with the officers of the parks planning authorities tomorrow, and I shall be anxious to learn the result of their discussions.

asked the Minister of Land and Natural Resources whether he will make a statement on the progress made in establishing long-distance footpaths, other than the Pennine Way.

Nine long-distance routes, other than the Pennine Way, have been approved and are in course of negotiation. The nine routes involve a total of 1,023 miles and 134 local authorities. New rights of way for which negotiations are not yet completed total 135 miles; they vary from a few yards to 15 miles of pathway.

While welcoming my right hon. Friend's statement, may I ask whether he is aware that while the routes have been generally approved, the negotiations take an appalling length of time? Has he any suggestion to make as to how these negotiations can be speeded up?

I am aware of the recommendations made in the Reports of the National Parks Commission. These we are considering in the light of our review of the 1949 Act.

As these long-distance paths—this applies also to part of the Pennine Way—may often go along disused railway tracks where the lines have been pulled up, could the right hon. Gentleman liaise with the railway authorities and the Minister of Transport and try to see that the bridges are not always destroyed when the lines are pulled up? These tracks often have amenity possibilities and the bridges are necessary.

I am obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for calling my attention to this matter. I have been considering the use of disused railways as green paths, and certainly the point that he has made is one that we shall consider.

Has the right hon. Gentleman consulted the Secretary of State for Scotland, and are there plans for these paths in Scotland?

This does not affect Scotland.

Will my right hon. Friend say whether he protects rights of way where there is possible development along a portion of long-distance paths—say, forestry development?

That is certainly a matter which I will consider.

asked the Minister of Land and Natural Resources how many acres of forest have been planted and replanted in Hampshire by the Forestry Commission since the beginning of 1964.

The figures available relate to the planting season, which ends in May. In the 1963–64 season, the Commission planted 297 acres and replanted 537 acres in Hampshire. In 1964–65, the figures were 203 acres and 699 acres respectively.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that reply. Will he bear in mind, in the interests of better farming, that a lot of small woodlands which have been done away with and hedgerow trees must be replanted if the acreage is to be maintained? Can the hon. Gentleman say what scheme he has in mind to replant and to further the interests of afforestation in Hampshire? The figures quoted were good, but they are not good enough.

There are about 5,000 acres remaining to the Commission in Hampshire which it is proposed to replant in the next five or six years. In addition, further planting will take place in the New Forest itself. In the previous season, ending in May, 142 acres were planted in the New Forest area and 304 acres replanted. The work going on in the county is up to the estimates of expenditure which we have been able to make for individual counties but if we can further increase it we shall do so.

asked the Minister of Land and Natural Resources if he has considered the memorandum on National Land Use and the Dartmoor National Park submitted by the Standing Committee on National Parks of the Council for the Preservation of Rural England; and what reply he has sent.

The memorandum which was submitted on 19th June has been acknowledged and is receiving consideration by my right hon. Friends and myself.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that arguments in the memorandum for the removal of damaging military training from Dartmoor are most convincing? Is it accepted that National Park amenity considerations will have priority in future?

I am sure that my hon. Friend will not expect me to comment on a document which I have just received, but we will consider it expeditiously and make a statement.

Will the Minister give an assurance that proposals will not be accepted which will preserve rural England at the expense of rural Scotland? Although the right hon. Gentleman has no responsibility for Scotland, will he give an undertaking that before any of these movements are transferred to the Highlands he will consult the Secretary of State for Scotland?

I can assure the hon. Member that there will be full consultations and that all factors affecting this question will be considered.

Will my right hon. Friend consider the points made in this memorandum when he considers amending the National Parks Act?

Yes, Sir, certainly.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that what is needed is a happy balance and that the military are very profitable to some of our smaller towns around Dartmoor? Will he maintain a happy balance between the National Parks, the military and the small farmers?

I assure the hon. Member that I am a happy balancer.

Will my right hon. Friend say that he will try to do a little more to rehabilitate Dartmoor National Park than the party opposite did during the 13 years it was in power?

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he is aware that there is currently a shortage of cement in Norfolk; and what steps he is taking to maintain supplies.

A marginal gap between supply and demand is affecting cement supplies in most parts of the country. I have no evidence to suggest that the situation in Norfolk is exceptional.

As the cement industry has a brilliant record of expansion and is ahead of its E.D.C. target, and as imports of cement now seem to be becoming scarce, what is the right hon. Gentleman doing to provide for more economical use by revising building regulations so as to secure a more efficient use of cement?

The reviewed building regulations are to come shortly. Deliveries of cement in 1964 were 22 per cent. higher than before and 5 per cent. higher in the first part of 1965 than in the corresponding period of 1964. New production is coming during the course of this year and in 1966 and very large orders are being placed abroad and are being brought in gradually this year.

Will my hon. Friend keep in mind that there is a serious shortage of cement in the southwest of Scotland? Will he give that problem his attention? It is holding up housing schemes to a considerable extent.

It has not only my attention but the attention of my right hon. Friend, of cement makers, and of a considerable number of Members of Parliament. We are doing all we can to see that supplies are kept up.

Can the hon. Gentleman give the quantities imported and tell us where they were imported from?

This year 600,000 tons are being imported at more than twice the cost of British cement. The difficulty at the moment is shipping.

In view of the investments now taking place and estimated to take place in the next few years, how long will it be before the shortage is overcome?

We hope that it will be overcome very soon but I cannot be a prophet in this matter. The cement people themselves have given estimates and things have not turned out according to their estimation.

The hon. Gentleman referred to a meeting with the cement manufacturers. What steps are being taken to ensure that supplies which are agreed should be maintained for local authority housing are being so maintained? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that I had two letters this morning from building firms in my constituency which are having to lay off men in local authority housing because of the shortage?

The manufacturers gave an undertaking that they would give priority to housing and public building generally. They are trying, but the position at the moment is not as easy as it might be.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works if he is aware that the cushions provided for the use of guests viewing the Trooping the Colour ceremony stained the clothing of guests; and what action he proposes to take.

Yes, Sir. I am prepared to consider making exgratia payments to those whose clothing was stained by the cushions; I am very sorry about this.

Would the right hon. Gentleman give me a further explanation why these cushions were used? Is he aware that a private supplier of green cushions has had his trade diminished because of this scare? Will the right hon. Gentleman give some assurance that the private enterprise cushions did not stain? It was the Minister's party-coloured cushions that offended.

I can assure the hon. Member that the red cushions which were the offending ones—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—there was no political significance in this—were bought during the term when the hon. Member was Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Minister. I hope that what I have said completely exonerates the private contractors. All these cushions were cushions which belonged to the Ministry itself. In the compass of a Parliamentary Answer I cannot go into the long document and the inquiries which I had made arising out of this matter, but if any claims are to be made against my Ministry they should be submitted in the first instance to Room 133, Lambeth Bridge House, S.E.1.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the duty of a Parliamentary Private Secretary is to cushion the Minister and not take an interest in cushions supplied by the Ministry?

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works how many Canadian-type timber houses have been erected by his Department in this country in the last 12 months; and how many have been ordered by local authorities.

A new town corporation is in negotiation for 170 houses and my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government has approved 6 houses to be erected by a local authority.

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied with this number of orders? In considering this system, will he bear in mind that it uses a large amount of plaster board which is in short supply? Will he consider how the use of plaster board in this type of construction can be avoided?

Yes, Sir.

Can my right hon. Friend tell the House what these timber houses cost? Does not he think that they are too expensive for the local authorities? Could not the houses be made here and the materials imported from rouble areas and not from more expensive dollar areas?

I do not at the moment know the answer to my hon. Friend's Question. If she will put a Question down I will try to answer it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that nothing will be done to discourage the use of timber-framed houses as a method of construction? Is he aware that they have proved satisfactory in other countries and that it should assist us in our trade relations with Canada?

Yes, Sir.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that there are several firms in this country manufacturing timber houses which could be used, perhaps, to better advantage economically than imported Canadian houses? Second, is he satisfied, in consultation with his right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government, about the fire risks which prevail in timber construction?

There has been a great deal of experience in timber-construction houses in other parts of the world. I do not know so much about the fire risk. We are prepared to consider on its merits any firm which builds houses, but I think that it would be rather wrong, after having sent a mission to Canada, if we were to attempt to disparage something on which the Canadians have co-operated greatly with this country.

If the Minister is not at the moment aware of the cost of these houses, will he be good enough to inform himself and let the House know what the cost comparison is with traditional houses? [An HON. MEMBER: "He said so."] I am asking the Minister himself, not a twerp of a back bencher. Will the Minister also say what is the expected life of these houses compared with traditional houses?

If the hon. Gentleman cares to write to me on that, I shall attempt to set the matters out in great detail. When we first had the Question from the hon. Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Costain) we were rather expecting another angle of questioning—I shall not say of attack—on it.

asked the Minister of Health if he will state the weekly cost, in expenditure and depreciation of equipment, of Liverpool Stanley Hospital standing idle; if he will state the aggregate cost since the hospital closed; from which funds the cost is being borne; and for how long he proposes this state of affairs should continue.

Excluding depreciation of equipment, which cannot readily be assessed but is small, about £300 per week; £5,367 up to the end of May; from Exchequer funds allocated to the board of governors for running the United Liverpool Hospitals; so long as the possible need to re-open this hospital remains.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply, but is he not aware that this is still a subject of much concern in the Kirkdale constituency and constituencies geographically allied to mine? Will he take the necessary steps to bring to the notice of the regional hospital board the cost involved in depreciation and idle equipment, and, at the same time, ask that immediate action be taken to bring forward proposals for the use of this building and the idle equipment now standing there?

As my hon. Friend knows, this hospital is being retained on a care and maintenance basis in the period before the new department at Walton Hospital comes into service in, possibly, May, 1966, in case the other hospitals in the area cannot cope with the work previously done there. On the second part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question, I now have under consideration a proposal that the regional hospital board should reopen the hospital as one in a series of consequential moves arising from the impending closure of a hospital accommodating geriatric patients.

Has my right hon. Friend any information about pressure by the previous Government to close this hospital as soon as possible? Is he aware that the board of governors was under very great pressure to close it, and had to close it, because of decisions taken by the previous Minister of Health?

Since I came into office, the matter has come before me also; but it was generally considered that the right answer was to close it and to keep it on a care and maintenance basis during the interim period. It may well be that a different use will now he found for the hospital.

Is it not a great pity that this hospital is not used in any way, whereas the chest hospital, also closed recently, has been taken over by the education authority and its use as an overseas students' hostel refused? Is there any chance of one being used temporarily for this purpose?

I can only tell the hon. Gentleman that the present use of this hospital is that determined by the hospital board, and, on the whole, I think it came to the right decision.

asked the Minister of Health, in view of the anxiety of doctors in the area, if he will make inquiries to find out to what extent the pressure on the casualty and out-patient departments at Bootle Hospital and others is due to the closure of Liverpool Stanley Hospital; and if he will make a statement.

New accident and emergency cases at Bootle and the four other North Liverpool hospitals increased by 11 per cent. in the first five months of this year compared with the corresponding period in 1964. But this 1964 figure was 7½ per cent. up on 1963, and I cannot, therefore, say how far the continued increase in 1965 was due to the closure of the Stanley Hospital. The number of out-patients attending the Stanley Hospital was not large enough to increase significantly the pressure on other out-patient departments.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the deep concern which is being expressed by doctors in the locality about the delays in the treatment of casualties in this area due to the severe increase in the other four hospitals in the area?

I am not aware of that, and the figures I have do not suggest a severe increase. At Bootle Hospital the number of new accident and emergency attendances in the first five months of the year actually increased by a lesser percentage this year than in the previous year. The total out-patient load at the Stanley Hospital represented no more than 7 per cent. of the total load of the other five hospitals which have now assumed it.

asked the Minister of Health if he is aware that, since the closure of Liverpool Stanley Hospital, patients in urgent need of hospital medical treatment have had to be sent to Southport, Ormskirk and Birkenhead because there were no beds available in the North Liverpool-Bootle area; and what action he will take in this matter.

My information is that there has been no increase in the number of admissions of Liverpool residents to hospitals outside the city.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that we are receiving growing complaints on this matter, and will he agree that, if the regional hospital board it not aware of the facts, it is not in a position to indicate where new hospitals should be located because its information must be inaccurate?

I have no reason to believe that the information which has been given to me is inaccurate. I am told that the total of admissions arranged by the emergency bed bureau to hospitals outside the city during the first five months of 1965 was less, in fact, than during the corresponding period of 1964.

asked the Minister of Health if, in the planning of hospital arrangements for the North Liverpool-Bootle-Crosby region, he will take account of the proposal of Mersey Docks and Harbour Board to build a new £65 million deep-water dock, the size of a new port, north of Gladstone Dock.

Yes, Sir. The new accident and emergency centre now being built at Walton Hospital will have sufficient capacity to deal with the accident cases likely to arise from a dock of this size.

In view of what my hon. Friend has just said, may we have an undertaking that the Stanley Hospital may be reopened and the Bootle Hospital casualty department not closed until these other arrangements have been made? Second, may we be assured that there will be consultation with the local authorities before any further closures take place, and will my hon. Friend give a definitive statement about the future of Bootle Hospital?

As my hon. Friend is aware, there always are consultations with local authorities before closures take place. We feel that this new unit, which will be completed in April, 1966, will be able to deal with the situation. So far, there has not been a definite decision to build the new dock. We think that it will be done, but the new unit will be there in time.

asked the Minister of Health what improvements he plans in the machinery through which the conditions of service of registration officers is negotiated; what has been the reason for the delay in announcing the new salary scales; and how he proposes to ante-date the new awards.

I have no locus in the National Joint Council which negotiates the salaries and conditions of service of registration officers but I am exploring the possibilities of setting in train some form of inquiry into their pay structure with the co-operation of the Council. I am informed that there is at present no salary claim on behalf of registration officers before them.

Does not the Minister of Health feel that there is something seriously wrong when such a public-spirited and highly representative body as this feels so very much frustrated, as he knows it does, following discussions with its representatives recently? Will he use his good offices to speed up the negotiations?

I am using my good offices in rather difficult circumstances, because I have no locus. The difficulty is that registration officers are not employed by local authorities but they are paid by them, and it is, therefore, by agreement that their conditions and pay are negotiated on the National Joint Council. I am very anxious to make progress, and I am moving as fast as I can in this matter.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that there is probably a quite strong case for an independent inquiry covering the whole range of Health Service negotiating machinery, because not only are there these quite serious delays but about 130 cases have been referred to arbitration since 1948, which would surely indicate that there is a lack of confidence to some degree in the existing machinery?

I think that there was a lack of confidence, but if the hon. Gentleman will look at the records since last October he will see that the situation is very much better now than it was in the time before the General Election.

asked the Minister of Health if he will introduce regulations to ensure that doctors wishing to resign from the local executive council's list shall submit such resignations personally in order to avoid the possibility of the resignations which were signed six months ago in one set of circumstances now being sent in when circumstances have changed.

I have noted my hon. Friend's suggestion, but I doubt if such a change is necessary.

The safeguard which the Minister has announced in his Answer will be welcomed, but is he aware that, during the time when the pressure was on, quite a number of doctors were almost intimidated into putting their notices in and it is, therefore, most desirable, now that temperatures have cooled a little, that there should be a breathing space before they are actually applied?

I had a certain amount of information about alleged intimidation, but I think that, as my hon. Friend's question implies, these resignations are very much out of date now, having been collected for the most part during February and March.

There is confusion in the public mind at the moment about the exact position of the doctors vis-à-vis the Minister of Health. Will the Minister be in a position at an early date to make a clear statement to the country as a whole of what the real position is?

With your permission, Mr. Speaker, perhaps I may make a clear statement now. The fact is that the conference of local medical committees on 16th June and the special representative meeting of the B.M.A. on 23rd June voted against submitting the resignations, and therefore the question of resignation does not now arise. The negotiators are empowered to continue negotiating with me, and I have no reason to believe that these negotiations will not be brought to a successful conclusion in time for implementation by April next.

In view of what my right hon. Friend has just said about the decision of the doctors' representatives recently about withdrawing their notices, may I ask whether he would regard the notices given some months ago as valid if they were to be used in the future?

I think that the question posed by my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Exchange (Mr. Will Griffiths) is hypothetical for the reasons that I have just given. I can only repeat that if any doctor felt that his resignation was no longer valid and it was sent in, it would be a simple matter for him to write to the executive council saying, "Please disregard my notice."

asked the Minister of Health if he will review the machinery he now uses for maintaining contact with general practitioners within the National Health Service with a view to recognising one national assembly only with the right to represent all doctors, and that to be based on local medical committees which shall have an increased democratic function to fulfil.

I share my hon. Friend's wish that I should maintain contact with the whole body of general practitioners and there is already machinery, based on local medical committees, whereby I can do this.

While I do not wish to interfere with the profession's right to decide its own negotiating machinery, may I ask whether my right hon. Friend does not agree that it is very confusing to have these three national conferences, which have recently met, talking about resignations? Would it not facilitate the negotiations if the profession had only one conference? Would my right hon. Friend look again at the powers which he gives to local medical committees? They have conducted a ballot about resignation. I understand that that is not my right hon. Friend's responsibility. Is it, therefore, admissible that this kind of undemocratic machinery should exist as part of the framework?

It is a fact that what local medical committees do in that connection is a matter not for me but for the profession. I agree with my hon. Friend that the position, with these various bodies taking decisions, is confusing, but it arises out of the structure of the medical profession, which I am always assured is completely democratic. Perhaps that is why it is rather complicated. However, I am not at all sure that the matter would be simplified if all doctors were represented by a single negotiating body in their discussions with me.

Will the right hon. Gentleman resist the suggestion by his hon. Friend that he should restrict the freedom of doctors to band together in any association that they want? We believe with the right hon. Gentleman that this is a matter rightly left to the doctors, and I hope that he will confirm that that is his view.

I am certainly very willing to leave it to the doctors. I do not accept the suggestion by the right hon. Gentleman that that was what my hon. Friend was putting forward. I think that what my hon. Friend wanted to do was to see whether there was some way of simplifying the machinery. If there is to be simplification, I think that it must come through the initiative of the profession itself.

Would the right hon. Gentleman consider some action in regard to the Chairman of the Birmingham Executive Council, Mr. Rhydderch, who, in a very tense situation in relation to general practitioners in Birmingham, is issuing inflammatory political statements?

I do not accept for a moment the hon. Gentleman's interpretation of the action of the Chairman of the Executive Council in Birmingham, who is faced with a difficult situation. If the hon. Gentleman has any questions to ask about the situation in Birmingham, I should be glad if he would put them on the Order Paper.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I was not seeking to interfere with the right of doctors to have their own machinery, but my hope is that in the negotiations it might be in their own interests if he would seek to persuade them to have a more streamlined and effective method, which would be for their own good and the good of the country?

asked the hon. Member for Liverpool, Exchange, as Chairman of the Kitchen Committee, what progress has been made during the past three months with regard to the Special Report of the Committee's conclusions, based on the general review of the administration of Refreshment Department; and if she will present an interim report to the House containing recommendations for increasing the wages of the catering staff and improving conditions for them.

The general review by the Kitchen Committee of the administration of the Refreshment Department is still in progress. I hope, however, that the Committee will be in a position to make an interim Special Report before the House rises for the Summer Adjournment, which will deal, among other matters, with the wages and conditions of staff.

Hear hear.

While I appreciate that reply from the hon. Lady, may I ask whether she would, in view of the recent increase in the price of meals and of salaries of Members, think of recommending an immediate increase in the remuneration of the staff, who give very excellent service to the House?

I did not want to have to say this, but the hon. and learned Gentleman is a little behind the times. This matter has already been dealt with to a very large extent and will be recorded so that it can be discussed by the House when our Special Report is submitted.

Might I heartily associate my right hon. and hon. Friends and myself with what the hon. Lady has said about the splendid service given to us during the all-night sittings? Is the hon. Lady aware that there are some part-time staff who are not paid extra for additional hours of service? Will she look into this immediately?

The Committee is looking into the whole question of payment of staff, and it has already dealt with a great many of the staff. There may be one or two more still to be dealt with. All these matters will be included in the Report which we hope to have ready for the House before it rises for the Summer Recess.

I appreciate the recent increase, of course, but would not the hon. Lady consider making a proper and substantial review of the remuneration, and making it even before the House rises for the Summer Recess?

The Committee has already dealt with this position, and I do not think there is any member of the Refreshment Department staff who has not received an increase in salary already. The Kitchen Committee will be meeting today, and it will deal with any matters which are outstanding and consider its Report for submission to the House, which we hope will be before the House rises for the Summer Recess.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will take steps to ensure that river authorities replace Form W.R.5, being the application for a licence of right, with a simplified version capable of easy interpretation.

The information asked for in this form is essential to enable river authorities to carry out their licensing duties under the Water Resources Act, 1963. There will be no occasion to use the form after 30th June.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the complexity of this form is such that many farmers are unable to complete it without professional assistance? Furthermore, it is therefore impossible for these farmers to submit their returns by 30th June. Is the hon. Gentleman also aware that only about 500 out of 1,000 of these forms have been received in Cornwall? Will he instruct the water boards to extend the time limit?

I take note of what the hon. Gentleman has said. There have been complaints about the form but the information was required and, indeed, the need for it has been debated twice in this House already. If there is anything we can do, we shall do it.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, in my years as a farmer, I have filled in some pretty bad forms but that this form is the limit? Should it not be withdrawn and a simpler form put in its place?

The form is a consequence of the Water Resources Act, 1963, passed by the party opposite.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that "taking note" is not good enough? The time limit expires on 30th June. Will he now take action and give us an assurance that those farmers who, through no fault of their own, fail to send forms in by then, will be given extra time? This is very important to them, because, if they miss the date, they will not get a licence of right.

I can give that assurance to the House. My Department will help those people who are unable to fill in the form and we shall have consultations with the water authorities.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government to what extent he proposes to allow local authorities to acquire redundant land at present within the ownership of the nationalised industries, and what conditions will be attached to such acquisition.

My right hon. Friend is prepared to issue loan sanction to local authorities for the acquisition of land by agreement from nationalised industries wherever he is satisfied that they have a good case for buying the land.

I thank my hon. Friend for that satisfactory reply. I hope that, in areas where there are fairly large tracts of land redundant because of rail closures, the conditions of transfer will at least be favourable to local authorities, which are the appropriate bodies to carry out developments within their districts.

My right hon. Friend's policy is to encourage local authorities to purchase land for housing as an essential part of their function. We shall do all we can to help.

The hon. Gentleman, in his reply, used the words "by agreement". Does that rule out the possibility of local authorities acquiring land where nationalised industries have control? If it does, then that is a retrograde step.

If a local authority reports difficulties with a nationalised industry we shall gladly intervene and help it acquire the land.

Is my hon. Friend aware that, in the past, some of the nationalised industries have given preferential treatment to private enterprise in selling land that local authorities have also wanted? Will he ensure that, in future, preferential treatment is given to local authorities to purchase land needed for housing and other building from nationalised industries?

I again make it clear that it is the Minister's policy, in conjunction with the nationalised industries, to get all the land possible for local authorities to carry out their housing programmes. If there are individual difficulties in obtaining land from any bodies, either Ministries or nationalised industries, my Department will be glad to intervene and do what it can to help.

May we take it that similar facilities will be given for War Office land that becomes redundant? Will the hon. Gentleman make special representations to the War Department to make certain that it has not available land which is not at present being properly used?

Whereas the procedure was that, as land became available, it went for private auction, today it has to be considered for public use.