asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the constitutional future of Gibraltar.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs when he proposes to hold a Gibraltar Constitution Conference; and, in view of the votes given to the Integration with Britain party candidate at the recent Legislative Council by-election, if he will ensure that representatives of the Integration with Britain party are invited to participate in such a conference.>

As I stated on 14th June [Vol. 748, c. 565], we intend to hold constitutional discussions, probably in Gibraltar, after the referendum with representatives of all shades of political opinion in Gibraltar including the Integration Party if the majority vote to retain the link with Britain. We shall then discuss any appropriate changes in the constitution which may be desired.

Would not the hon. Lady consider including in the referendum the type of relationship which the people of Gibraltar may require with this country? Does she not agree that further delay might exacerbate the situation?

No, I do not agree. I think that it is better to take the referendum as a first step and then to follow it by the constitutional discussions.

May I ask the hon. Lady whether a new principle is being established by which a referendum is held if the results are predictable and convenient to the Government of the day but not held if the results are not convenient?

I do not know whether the hon. Member regards that as a particularly helpful remark, but the circumstances in which the referendum is being held have been made perfectly clear.

As the integrationists and the present party in power in Gibraltar have rather different ideas about the future, surely there will be difficulty in the referendum unless the people are told a little in advance what the British Government intend to do afterwards?

The hon. Member may think that to be the case, but I have no reason to suppose that any of the people of Gibraltar agree with him.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what plans Her Majesty's Government have made to enable air services to Gibraltar to be continued when weather conditions at Gibraltar Airport make it impossible to conform to the restrictions imposed by Spain.

The Governor, in consultation with the civil air line representatives, is concerting arrangements in case individual flights have to divert to Tangier due to bad weather.

If this situation arises, and it almost certainly will, what will be the Government's policy—to submit to the Spanish restrictions or to afford military support to our civilian aircraft? Has the hon. Lady considered another proposition, that of banning Spanish aircraft into and out of British airports?

The hon. Gentleman's Question related to weather conditions causing diversion from Gibraltar and my reply related to that, but even in normal circumstances there are some situations in which there has to be diversion from Gibraltar, and I have answered that part of the Question.

Is it not the fact that Britain has appealed to the International Civil Aviation Organisation in Montreal in this matter? When is consideration to be given to that appeal, and does not the hon. Lady agree that the matter is very urgent?

The question of the prohibited zone is very urgent indeed, I agree. It is perfectly correct to say that the Government are raising this matter with the I.C.A.O. The dispute will now have to follow normal I.C.A.O. procedures for dealing with disputes, and I hope that this matter may be dealt with as soon as the procedures permit.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the reopening of talks with Rhodesia.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a further statement on the situation in Rhodesia.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what plans he now has for seeking a negotiated settlement with the illegal Rhodesian régime.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a further statement about the situation in Rhodesia following the visit of Lord Alport as official investigator for Her Majesty's Government.

I have nothing to add to the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 13th June.

When does the Secretary of State expect Lord Alport to report? Can he define a little more clearly the Prime Minister's statement that he would be prepared to reconsider N.I.B.M.A.R. if there were substantial and guaranteed changes in circumstances?

In reply to the second part of the hon. Member's supplementary question, I do not think that there would be any advantage whatever in trying at this stage to spell out hypothetical circumstances. At present, it is difficult to see them. In reply to the first part, I think that Lord Aiport will probably take two to three weeks.

If, as seams likely and as we hope, the Government have abandoned N.I.B.M.A.R. as a prior condition of settlement, is it not better to say so clearly so that those who are anxious to promote a settlement can create the right circumstances?

If Her Majesty's Government had abandoned N.I.B.M.A.R., I agree that it would be better to say so. We have not abandoned N.I.B.M.A.R.

Bearing in mind the past behaviour of Mr. Smith and the language which he has used about our Prime Minister, will my right hon. Friend give a firm assurance that Lord Alport will be collecting the voices, so to speak, and will not be acting in any capacity whatever as a backstairs negotiator?

It has already been made clear that Lord Alport is not in any way negotiating. He is engaged in what might be regarded as a reconnaissance.

The question of N.I.B.M.A.R. is not entirely as hypothetical as the Secretary of State has suggested. Can he make it absolutely clear that it is no longer the Government's policy to adhere, whatever may come, to N.I.B.M.A.R. in spite of the effect that it might have on a solution?

The policy has been made clear by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister that, in the event of considerably changed circumstances, we would come back to the House, which gave an undertaking about N.I.B.M.A.R., and to the Commonwealth.

Can my right hon. Friend repeat the Government's adherence to N.I.B.M.A.R., without qualification?

No.

I have said that N.I.B.M.A.R. remains the Government's policy.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs if he is satisfied with the extent to which the policy of sanctions against Rhodesia is being observed by other countries; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs whether, in view of the fact that exports to Rhodesia of those members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and development for whom figures are so far available were running at the same level in the first quarter of 1967 as in the corresponding period of 1966, he is satisfied with the operation of the United Nations embargo; and if he will make a statement.

Mandatory sanctions opertions operate primarily against Rhodesia's major exports, and apply only to a few specified items among its imports. Their effectiveness in reducing the country's earnings of foreign exchange has been shown by the steps the illegal régime have had to take in order to control imports and over such matters as the size of next year's tobacco crop. The means whereby they can be made more effective are constantly under review. In particular, where there is evidence of possible evasions of sanctions this is drawn to the attention of the appropriate Governments.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that British sanctions do not apply to just a small number of items? Do not the trade figures recently published make it obvious that our competitors are using the sanctions as a means of stealing our markets?

I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman. Quite frankly, when we have a policy of sanctions, difficulties such as those which he mentions are bound to occur.

As the Government have admitted, is it not a fact that there has been a substantial increase in the export of cars, which are clearly covered by the United Nations embargo, from such countries as the Netherlands, Japan and France? Is it not obvious that our competitors are grabbing our market and, in our parlous balance of payments position, can we afford this?

The hon. Gentleman takes subjects and figures which suit his argument. I do not blame him for doing so, because I do it myself from time to time. However, we do our case no good —either the case which the hon. Gentleman advances or the case which the House has decided to advance—by distorting or exaggerating the figures.

If any of the allegations are true, are Her Majesty's Government making representations to the countries which are offending against this, and with what result?

Yes. Sir. Where we have evidence of an increase in trade, representations are made, and are made with effect.

Recent figures have shown that French sales in Rhodesia are up by 100 per cent. and that German sales are up by more than 40 per cent. What, in practice, are the Government doing about this?

First of all, the right hon. Gentleman ought to know that, if he looks at the French figures in detail, in 1967 they show a declining trend. I would expect him to be pleased by that. Secondly, we cannot be responsible for the French Government.

Since the hon. Gentleman said that the Government are considering ways of making sanctions more effective, could they be extended to cover telecommunications and passports?

My right hon. Friend will be dealing further with sanctions in other Questions today.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the totally unsatisfactory nature of the hon. Gentleman's replies, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs by how much the consumer price index has risen in Rhodesia during 1966.

The only available figures are those published by the Central Statistical Office in Salisbury. According to those figures, the European Index on the basis of 100 at January, 1962, rose from 107…5 for the last quarter of 1965 to 110…2 for the last quarter of 1966. The African Index, on the basis of 100 at September, 1965, rose from 100.8 in 1965 to 103…1 in 1966.

Does not that Answer indicate the total and blank ignorance of the right hon. Gentleman about what is happening in Rhodesia? Can he any longer contend that we are the legal Government of Rhodesia when it is clear that we are impotent to govern and are not even trying to govern? Ought we not to govern in fact or get out?

I shall endeavour to assist the hon. Gentleman by quoting some figures given by the so-called Ministers of the illegal régime. The so-called Minister of Finance stated on 17th April that the increase in prices for vehicles and vehicle spares was 11…2 per cent.; it was 10…6 per cent. for drink and tobacco, and 5…9 per cent. for foodstuffs. The so-called Minister of Commerce and Industry has set up a committee to look into the question of overcharging and profiteering.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs if he will detail the evidence he has of the effect of sanctions on economic and political conditions in Rhodesia.

The economic effects of sanctions have been clearly demonstrated by such measures as the illegal régime's reductions on import quotas and in the figure set for the next tobacco crop. As regards political conditions in Rhodesia, I think it will be best to await consideration of Lord Alport's report.

Whatever may have been the economic consequence of sanctions, is it not now clear that the political reality of power lies with Mr. Ian Smith, and should not the Government adjust their policies accordingly?

I would not agree that political power rests with Mr. Smith. This is one of the things which Lord Alport has to confirm, or find out what the actual position is. It is not clear that Mr. Smith would today be in a position to negotiate if negotiations started. This is one reason for Lord Alport's visit.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that, in relation to the tobacco position in Rhodesia, sanctions are beginning to bite, and great concern is being shown by the Government there, and therefore many of us on this side urge the British Government to maintain, and if necessary increase, the sanctions?

I do not want to weary the House with figures—there are many of them—but an additional one from the régime confirms that exports dropped by £60 million in 1966 and imports were reduced by £35…6 million.

Can the right hon. Gentleman explain how it is that in the first quarter of this year exports from certain major European countries to Rhodesia increased from 62 per cent. to 100 per cent., and from South Africa by 33 to 110 per cent.?

No, Sir, I cannot explain those detailed changes, but I can assure the hon. Gentleman, and I am sure he will be delighted about this, that we are getting full co-operation from foreign Powers when we draw to their attention breaches in the sanctions wall.

Will my right hon. Friend acknowledge that he has had two conflicting pieces of advice from hon. Gentlemen opposite? The hon. Member for Dorset, South (Mr. Evelyn King) asked him to do something as the responsible Government of Rhodesia, while the hon. Member for Oswestry (Mr. Biffen)—

Order. Questions must be brief.

Will my right hon. Friend take the unanimous advice from this side of the House, which is designed to bring this illegal régime to an end, and end all the difficulties for many other countries which wish to support decency and sanity in the world?

I hear advice from many quarters on how to handle the Rhodesian position. I do not always take notice of all of it.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs whether he is aware that in April Zambia Radio broadcast to Rhodesia incitements to violence; which British subjects seconded from the public service in the United Kingdom are employed by Zambia Radio; and what action has been taken.

I understand that the broadcast to which the hon. Member refers was made by representatives of the Zimbabwe African National Union. There is one British civil servant at present serving on secondment to the Zambia Broadcasting Corporation from the Central Office of Information, but he has no control over broadcasts to Rhodesia or their content, and no action in his respect has been taken.

Since it appears that the Zambian Government are paying no attention to Her Majesty's Government's representations against these incitements to violence and bloodshed from Zambia Radio, would it not be desirable for Her Majesty's Government to consider withdrawing Mr. Kittermaster from Zambia Radio, because it is most unfortunate that that gentleman and this country should be connected with that sort of thing?

While in no way condoning the broadcast—[Interruption.]because it was not a particularly nice broadcast—I ask the hon. Gentleman not to exaggerate the position. This is an isolated incident, and the hon. Gentleman does his cause no good by exaggerating.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on the present situation regarding British citizens' lives and property in Nigeria.

As I told the House on 6th June [Vol. 747, c. 810–12], there have been no incidents involving British lives or property. The High Commissioner, with whom I have been in close touch, has nevertheless arranged for the evacuation of wives and children of our people working in the Eastern Region as a precautionary measure. No further moves are considered necessary at this stage.

Can the Government provide their good offices to try to prevent hostilities breaking out, which would lead regrettably to violence and bloodshed?

I much appreciate the tone of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. We are doing our utmost and, this very day, one of our chief officers is flying out to Nigeria. The House can be assured that everything that can be done to get an understanding in Nigeria is being undertaken.

Is my hon. Friend aware that no cables or letters are coming out of the Plateau region, particularly Jos, in the north? Will he make inquiries about that?

With things as they are in Nigeria, there are bound to be communication difficulties, but I will, of course, make inquiries as my hon. Friend requires.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what compensation has been received from Tanzania for the nationalisation of British banks.

None, as yet. The claims for compensation submitted by the three British commercial banks are being considered by the Tanzanian authorities.

Has the hon. Gentleman seen a 7ecent statement by the Finance Minister of Tanzania to the effect that Tanzania will not pay any compensation at all? What is he doing to stand up for the interests of British companies there?

I am pleased to say that the Tanzanian Finance Minister has denied flat statement. He has said:

"There is no truth in this. We are ready to discuss and settle claims for compensation submitted by the British banks."

Is it not almost impossible for Tanzania to pay adequate compensation? While one sympathises with some of the sentiments in the Arusha Declaration, cannot Her Majesty's Government get together with the Tanzanian Government to see whether private enterprise can continue to help that country?

The Tanzanian authorities have assured us that full and fair compensation will be paid—

Out of what money?

The hon. Gentleman must wait for the Tanzanian Government to keep their word, as they will.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what is the result of his discussions with the Zambian Government regarding the statements made by Mr. A. M. Simbule, Zambian High Commissioner-designate; and if he will now declare him persona non grata.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs if he will now officially recognise Mr. Simbule as the High Commissioner for Zambia.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what action Her Majesty's Government have taken and intend to take about the despatch to this country as High Commissioner by the Government of the Republic of Zambia of a person whom Her Majesty's Government have declared to be unacceptable to them.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what steps he has taken to recognise officially the new High Commissioner of Zambia.

The position is as follows. In February of this year the Zambian Government sought agreement to the appointment of Mr. Simbule as High Commissioner in London and Her Majesty's approval was duly given. Subsequently, Mr. Simbule was reported to have made statements at Dar es Salaam in derogatory terms about Her Majesty's Government. Her Majesty's Government made it clear to the Zambian Government that the controversy created by Mr. Simbule's remarks would, if they were left uncorrected, make it impossible for him to fulfil the task of fostering good relations between our two Governments which would fall on him as Zambian High Commissioner in London. Mr. Simbule arrived in London at the end of last month despite the fact that our inquiries of the Zambian Government were incomplete. Since then he has made a number of statements stressing his feelings of warm friendship for the British people and his desire to strengthen Zambia's relations with Britain. Our consultations with the Government of Zambia have, however, still not been completed; consequently no steps have yet been taken to arrange for Mr. Simbule to present his Letter of Accreditation and to be received as High Commissioner.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that there are limits of self-effacement which the public will expect from Her Majesty's Government in this situation? Will he take it that the kind of gratuitous insults offered by Mr. Simbule at Dar-es-Salaam are totally unacceptable, and that his position as the accredited representative of his country cannot be accepted unless he makes an unqualified withdrawal of those remarks?

Of course, everyone in the House regrets the inane remarks of this gentleman before he arrived in this country as the High Commissioner following on the signing of the Agrément, but one does not want to be vindictive and I would have hoped that an opportunity could have been given to him, and I think it has been given to him now, to retract. Unfortunately although he has himself made some statements regretting the controversy and assuring us of his friendship, some of his colleagues have not been helpful in this respect.

If we can send Lord Alport to talk to representatives of an illegal and totalitarian régime in Rhodesia, why cannot we make this gesture to our friends in Zambia who have suffered more than most from the sanctions policy of the Government, often without consultation?

I do not accept that the position is quite on all fours with that of Rhodesia. Here was a gentleman who was accredited to this country as the representative of his country, who was to attend here as the High Commissioner, and he made remarks which I am sure he would now personally regret having made. With regard to the comparison with Rhodesia, there we have an illegal régime guilty of a treasonable act against Her Majesty and Britain.

As this gentleman has, quite rightly, been given this extended opportunity of withdrawing his remarks, and has not done so, and since during that period the Foreign Minister of Zambia has, most unhappily, repeated and approved them, is there really any alternative facing us but to declare this person persona non grata?

I accept and appreciate the difficulties, but I still feel that nothing is lost by waiting a little longer to see whether we can get the position resolved. I would remind the House that, apart from this incident, there are between 40,000 and 50,000 British subjects in Zambia.

In view of the crucial importance of this country's relations with Zambia and many other African countries over the coming months, will my right hon. Friend undertake to think very carefully before taking any irrevocable step which would cause our relations to deteriorate still further in the near future?

The fact that I have been considering this for a month since Mr. Simbule arrived here indicates that I am giving it full consideration.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when we can expect a decision on this matter? The continued inability of the right hon. Gentleman and his office to make up their minds makes him look a little ridiculous.

On the contrary. The fact that we have during the past month tried very hard to help the position by getting an adequate retraction does, I think, indicate to everyone who is fair-minded about the matter that the British Government are doing their best to resolve the problem and not exacerbate the position in Central Africa.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement on the results of the Robens Commission's visit to Malta.

I will consider making a statement when I have seen the report of the Joint Mission, of which Lord Robens is Chairman. I hope this will be completed very shortly.

In view of the added economic difficulties in Malta following the closure of the Suez Canal, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman will try to present a statement to the House before the Summer Recess so that this matter is not left in abeyance when Malta is badly in need of practical help?

I am aware of the difficulties and added problems facing Malta as a result of the closing of the Suez Canal and because their work in the dockyards is declining, and declining rapidly. I understand that Lord Robens will be reporting fairly shortly, certainly in plenty of time for a statement to be made to the House before the Recess.

Can the right hon. Gentleman confirm that Her Majesty's Government are in consultation with the Government of Malta about possible means of helping to meet these new and additional difficulties?

Yes, Sir. Certain suggestions have been made with a view to trying to get some work into the area.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a statement about the situation in Hong Kong.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs whether he will make a further statement about industrial unrest and strikes in Hong Kong following last month's disturbances in the Colony.

There have been continuing efforts to introduce widespread strike action in Hong Kong, mainly in transport and public utilities, but, I am glad to say, with only limited success.

May I express on behalf of the House its admiration for the Governor and all the authorities in Hong Kong who have been handling this difficult situation so admirably? Has the hon. Lady any information to the effect that the Bank of China is apparently the centre for supplying arms, and for broadcasting and telecommunications? Is not this wholly illegal in a place like Hong Kong?

I know that the whole House will agree with the hon. Member in his remarks about the way in which the Governor has handled matters over the past month in Hong Kong. We are highly appreciative of all his efforts. As for the hon. Member's second point, the Bank of China has been the centre for a good deal of the organisation of local Communist activity in Hong Kong. We have been well aware of this for some time, and the Governor has been dealing with the matter appropriately.

Will the hon. Lady convey personally to the Governor, now that he is here, our personal congratulations and good wishes? Can the hon. Lady say whether the volume of trade in Hong Kong has been adversely affected by the disturbances last month, and also state whether the essential services and the normal lives of the people are carrying on as usual in Hong Kong now?

In answer to the first part of the hon. Member's supplementary question, there was some uncertainty on the trading side at the time of the disturbances. I have no figures to suggest that there has been any actual decline in trade, and many efforts are being made to restore the degree of business confidence there was before. In answer to the second part of the supplementary question, efforts have been made by local Communists to induce strike action in a way which would affect various of these services. There have been temporary interruptions in some, but up till now none has been seriously interrupted.

Will my hon. Friend pay regard not merely to what she calls Communist activities but also to the low level of wages in Hong Kong, the poor standards of living, and the general low consumption level in this part of the British Commonwealth?

I think we are all aware that in dealing with any situation of this kind in this part of Asia factors of this kind will be involved. But it is important to distinguish between the general background and the specific efforts made by a number of people to create disturbances in Hong Kong.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what proposals he has for improving the youth services in Hong Kong.

As well as the expansion of existing services, new youth camps, youth centres, special facilities for young people at community centres and in welfare buildings on resettlement estates, and a training centre for youth leaders, have recently been provided or will be completed shortly. But I will, with permission, publish fuller particulars in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Would my hon. Friend agree that there is considerable evidence that both in the "Star Ferry" riots last year and in certain phases of the disturbances this year, an important factor was the very large number of young people in the Colony with too little to do and with nowhere to go except the streets? Does she not accept that this is very strong evidence that there is need for much better youth services in the Colony?

My hon. Friend will see when he reads the fuller particulars published in the OFFICIAL REPORT how much is going on in this direction; for example, tomorrow, in the new territories, a new youth centre and camp to serve several thousand young people is being opened, and this is the first part of a tremendous effort that is being made in this matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs (1) if he is aware that many textile operatives in Hong Kong are working 359 days each year; that women and young persons in the Hong Kong garment industry work a 10-hour day plus overtime, longer than in any other Asian countries; and what progress has now been made with the introduction of legislation to reduce these excessive hours;

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs if he will now make a statement on his plans for introducing labour legislation for workers in the textile industry in Hong Kong in the near future.

I am discussing this week with the Governor legislation providing for a phased reduction in the hours of work over a specific period, to 48 a week for all women and young persons employed in industry with adjustments to permissible overtime. The answer to the first part of Question No. 21 is, with some qualifications, yes, Sir; and to the first part of Question No. 22, no, Sir.

Will my hon. Friend give an assurance that the hours will be reduced from ten to eight a day in all industries, including the garment and other industries at present quite ridiculously excluded? Is she aware that, after five weeks, the Governor, despite his other commitments, has not even acknowledged the letter from the General Secretary of the Federation?

I would ask my hon. Friend, to read again carefully what I have just said. I was talking about legislation to provide for a reduction in the hours of work to 48 a week covering all industries employing women and young persons. The letter sent by Mr. Greenhalgh to the Governor did not raise any matters of which the Governor and I were not fully aware.

Will the Minister accept that working conditions for women and juveniles in this British Colony are worse than those in the Philippines, Indonesia, Korea and Formosa? Will she confirm that the Governor is here not only to talk about Communist disturbances in the Colony but about labour legislation for these women and young persons?

May I say to my hon. Friends that I completely take their point, and what I have announced just now is that legislation is now being discussed with the Governor which covers a great many of the points raised. My hon. Friends are right, of course, to be concerned, but things are being done.

Would it not be an exaggeration to say that working conditions in Hong Kong are worse than those in Formosa or South Korea? Are they not, in fact, much better?

In some respects one can make some favourable comparisons with other countries in the area, but in other respects one cannot do so.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the situation in Anguilla.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what consultation he has now had with other Commonwealth countries about the situation in Anguilla.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs what requests he has now had to intervene in the affairs of Anguilla; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the situa- tion in St. Kitts, Nevis and Anguilla in the light of the request made to Her Majesty's Government for assistance.

The Premier of St. Kitts informed us at the beginning of June of his difficulties in maintaining law and order. There have been two aspects to the problem; first, the attempt of Anguilla to secede, and secondly, disturbances in St. Kitts itself. He asked us and some of the Commonwealth countries in the Caribbean for military or police assistance, and has declared a state of emergency.

Can the hon. Lady say what action Her Majesty's Government are taking in the case of Mr. James Milne-Gaskell, a British subject who is in gaol at the moment? Can she say what charges he has to face, when he will be called to face them, and what Her Majesty's Government are doing about it?

We have been very busy on behalf of Mr. Gaskell. The British Government representative saw him personally last week. He reports that Mr. Gaskell's prison conditions are completely satisfactory. He can move about freely during the day and can have all the food he wants sent in. He and his lawyers are content with the conditions. As to the charge, a charge has been made which relates to some of his previous activities. We have been looking very carefully at the legal position in respect of charges made under the Constitution, and at the moment we are awaiting a reply from the Premier of St. Kitts to a Note that we have sent him on this matter.

Order. Questions and Answers are getting very long. We have a lot of questions to deal with.

Can the hon. Lady say whether it is true that St. Kitts landed 150 armed men on Anguilla and will she continue her efforts to get the Government and Opposition in St. Kitts round the table, under the auspices of other West Indian countries?

There appears to have been a landing. The exact numbers I am not sure of. In answer to the second part of the question, that is my intention.

Can my hon. Friend state what independent Commonwealth Caribbean countries are taking part in the discussions which she has announced? Will she bear in mind that this incident should not deter the Government from considering associate status for other small territories which want to be independent but cannot be fully independent?

My present understanding is that the countries sending representatives are Barbados, Guyana and Jamaica. I agree with my hon. Friend in the second part of his question.

Is the hon. Lady aware of the report that quantities of arms have been flown into St. Kitts? If they have, from where have they come? Can she give an assurance that they will not be used to impose any wrong solution on Anguilla?

This is where the question of our own responsibility and lack of responsibility for internal security becomes very difficult. There is the problem of where we have concern but not responsibility. As for the shipping of arms to Anguilla, there have been some supplies for the police, which have been legitimately ordered by Mr. Bradshaw, but I have no detailed information about this.

Can the hon. Lady add to her reply to my hon. Friend and say when Mr. Gaskell is likely to be brought to trial? Secondly, can she say quite clearly how the situation was left wish Mr. Bradshaw before independence? Had he any right to expect that we should be assuming any responsibility for the internal security of the island after independence?

The understanding with Mr. Bradshaw stretched no further than the constitutional agreement expressed in the White Paper and the West Indies Bill which came before this House. No further understanding than that existed. As for the rest of the question, we are going to make every possible effort and I have no reason to believe that Mr. Bradshaw will not be ready to seek a political solution of the outstanding problems concerning Anguilla. The charge against Mr. Gaskell and the time at which he will be brought to trial are matters which have been the subject of the British Government's representative's Note to Mr. Bradshaw, to which we now await a reply.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the results of the Commonwealth Planners Conference in Nairobi.

Yes, Sir. The meeting of senior officials from 22 Commonwealth countries was held in Nairobi from 24th May to 2nd June. The Commonwealth Secretariat is to prepare an analytical report of the discussions on planning with a view to publication. The meeting has submitted a number of recommendations on both these subjects to Commonwealth Governments.

What progress has been made about getting the more developed countries of the Commonwealth, apart from the United Kingdom, to give help to these developing countries?

They took their part in the discussions at the Commonwealth Conference, and I look forward to good results.

What view does Her Majesty's Government take about the Indian proposal for a market development fund?

I cannot say at this moment. All the proposals are being considered by all the Commonwealth Governments in turn.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs if he will seek to establish a memorial in the United Kingdom to victims of the Hola concentration camp in Kenya

No, Sir.

Will my hon. Friend reconsider this, bearing in mind that this was perhaps the most disgraceful episode in the 13 disgraceful years of Tory rule'?

It so happens that I took part in the debate on the Hola Camp, and I visited it. I see no advantage now in stirring up unhappy memories of a difficult period, when Kenya itself wants to put the past behind her and is concentrating on developing a successful multi-racial society.

asked the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs whether criminal proceedings in Zambia have yet been initiated against Lieut.-Colonel Arnott, Mr. Nursten and Mr. Swift, or whether they have been deported.

Lieut.-Colonel Arnott and Mr. Swift were deported from Zambia on 11 th and 19th June respectively. Mr. Nursten is still in detention. Criminal proceedings have not been initiated against any of them.

Since the Minister has stated the international position in law—that it is wrong for such a person to be detained except for the purpose of his being either tried or deported—can the hon. Gentleman say whether either of these things is likely to happen?

We have made representations. We believe that it is wrong that a man should be kept in prison without a charge being laid against him and without his being brought to trial. We will continue to make our representations.

asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of his public speech to the Confederation of British Industry on 17th May on manufacturing investment.

I did so on 25th May, Sir.

Very interesting, but in view of the Board of Trade's latest forecast showing no expectation of a recovery in private manufacturing investment before the end of 1968 at the earliest, can the Prime Minister explain why his frequent bromides about manufacturing industry have so little effect?

I think the hon. Gentleman will agree that, compared with the very gloomy predictions that were made about investment in the autumn, there has been a considerable pick-up of investment in recent months, and I think that there is wide evidence, not least the latest C.B.I. survey, that there is a more optimistic feeling that investment will pick up further.

There is particular need for the sort of investment in the development areas to which my right hon. Friend referred in his speech, but would he agree that such investment in the development areas is not likely to take place without Government intervention?

Unfortunately, I could not hear the opening words of my hon. Friend's supplementary question, but I caught what I think was the key part of it—about the development areas. The help we are giving the development areas with investment grants is on an unprecedented scale. In addition, we now have the decision about the regional employment premium, which is one of the best incentives for new development there that one could have.

asked the Prime Minister what provision he has made to represent the special interests of Scotland in the course of negotiations for United Kingdom entry to the European Economic Community, in view of Scotland's status as an equal partner with England under the Treaty of Union of 1707.

I have nothing to add to the Answer which I gave on 6th June to a Question by my right hon. Friend the Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell).—[Vol. 747, c. 189.]

Has the Prime Minister considered that General de Gaulle's apparent reluctance to allow the United Kingdom's entry to the European Economic Community might not, in part at least, be due to his suspicion of English nationalism and, in particular, to the traditional, historic rôle that England has played in keeping Europe divided? If Scotland were permitted to play a more significant rôle in the negotiations—

No.

Order. That supplementary question is, I think, long enough.

Unfortunately, in my talks with General de Gaulle we did not get on to the question of the Auld Alliance but to questions of our future. It would seem from some of the interruptions just now that some hon. Members are not keen to have separate Scottish entry to the Common Market. But, as I have said in a previous Answer, we shall see that the interests of Scotland are fully represented in the discussions.

In any negotiations such as are mentioned in this Question, will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the great advantages which flow to north-east Scotland from its close association—historical, family and otherwise—with Scandinavia?

Yes, Sir. This is fully recognised, and, of course, the decision of Scandinavian Governments to apply for entry shows that they attach the same importance to this as does my hon. Friend, and the same determination that their interests shall be safeguarded by negotiation or otherwise.

asked the Prime Minister what consultations he has had with the leaders of other countries over the Arab-Israel war.

I have had meetings in their own countries with the Prime Minister of Canada, the President of the United States and the President of France; and in London with King Faisal of Saudi Arabia, the Prime Ministers of Malawi, Australia, Singapore and Italy and the Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand. In addition, I have had personal exchanges with the President of Pakistan, the President of Tunisia, the Prime Ministers of the U.S.S.R., India and Israel, and, as my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary explained to the House yesterday, while he was in New York he had discussions with the Heads of Government or Foreign Ministers of most of the countries directly or indirectly involved.

What effective international action can be taken to help the new wave of Arab refugees? Is my right hon. Friend aware of the tremendous concern at their suffering and hardship—the same sort of concern as was expressed a few weeks ago by many people about Israel's existence?

Yes, Sir, and I think that we have all expressed this concern. In the very week of the fighting, in a speech in the country, I said that this was one of the things which must be dealt with in a permanent settlement, and, as was shown by my right hon. Friend's speech in New York and his answers yesterday, all of us attach the same importance to this as does my hon. Friend.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think that all these discussions upon which he has elaborated and those which the Foreign Secretary had with these various nations have had the slightest effect on anything at all during the course of these debates?

If it were the hon. Gentleman's policy that we should avoid all discussions of international affairs, I should be very surprised. It is necessary, in view of the vitally important and difficult discussions at the United Nations, that we should keep in close touch with our colleagues and I thought that it was the view of all hon. Members when we debated the Middle East before the trouble began that we should have the closest liaison with the Commonwealth on this question.

What will be the procedure, the methods and machinery, for getting the permanent settlement about which my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary talked yesterday? He gave the impression that it would be settled in the Security Council. May we know what is to be done?

I have nothing to add to what my right hon. Friend said. It is, of course, impossible at this stage to forecast even the result of the General Assembly Resolution, as we do not know what Resolution will be moved or its effect, and it will probably have to come back to the Security Council, as my right hon. Friend said. He made one suggestion about a senior representative of the Secretary-General going out to the Middle East aid trying to reconcile these differences. Other suggestions, such as four-Power talks, may become desirable at the last moment. President de Gaulle and I felt last week that the right moment had not come for pushing that matter.

Have the right hon. Gentleman's extensive consultations taken fully into account the urgent need for the reopening of the Suez Canal, and would he make a statement on that?

This is one of the things with which we have been dealing, and it is of particular concern to the Indian Government, because of the many food cargoes to India, where there is acute food shortage and even, in some areas, famine conditions. This has been one of our arguments, but I have nothing to add to what my right hon. Friend said yesterday about the present situation.

asked the Prime Minister if he will now make a further statement of policy about the sale of British arms and equipment for use in Vietnam to the United States, Australia and New Zealand, taking into account the common obligation with them under the South-East Asia Treaty Organisation pact to resist aggression against South Vietnam and the fact that the other co-Chairman of the 1954 Geneva Conference on Indo-China, namely the Soviet Union, is supplying large quantities of arms and missiles to the Communist side in North Vietnam.

I have nothing to add to the Answer I gave on 12th July last year to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Woolwich, West (Mr. Hamling).—[Vol. 731, c. 191.]

Are not the Government in a completely false and anomalous position? What restrictions have been placed, if any, on the use of British arms by Britain's allies in Vietnam? By what criteria do the Government judge whether to export arms to the United States, bearing in mind that the export to Australia and New Zealand is unconditional and unrestricted?

I explained this in great detail a year ago and the position has not changed. We believe that, in our position as co-Chairman, however differently the other co-Chairman to which the question referred may interpret his position, we should not be shipping arms directly for use in Vietnam. We therefore have to take a decision case by case as to what the position would be, and the United States Government fully understand this.

Would my right hon. Friend not agree that the best way for Britain to help Vietnam in its struggle against aggression is not by sending arms, either directly or indirectly, but by substantial increases in civilian aid, for example, medical supplies and doctors?

We have given help with medical supplies and doctors, particularly doctors for treating children injured in the fighting, and we have already discussed with a number of countries concerned what we hope can be given when the fighting stops, because there will be a tremendous need for economic development then.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the only British supplies really needed by our allies in Vietnam are cases of Scotch whisky?

That has not been drawn to my attention and is not on any strategic embargo list in any possible market.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that a British Government concerned with peace could best direct their efforts to the reduction of arms sales throughout the world and in the U.N.?

Yes, Sir, and this is our policy, as I explained in an answer last week. We are particularly concerned with this, the urgency of which has been shown in recent weeks in the Middle East, but in that case we want some reciprocity from the other arms-supplying countries.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a further statement on Rhodesia.

On a point of order. Is it possible to find out why the Question of the hon. Member for Mid-Bedfordshire (Mr. Hastings) is answered in this way while humbler mortals like myself have their Questions transferred to the Commonwealth Secretary?

That is a question not for me but for the Minister concerned.

I have nothing to add to the Answer I gave on 13th June to a Question by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Streatham (Mr. Sandys). —[Vol. 748, c. 305.]

Has the right hon. Gentleman seen reports of the great increases in exports from France, Japan and even the E.F.T.A. countries? Does he not realise that, whatever happens to next year's tobacco crop or the tobacco crop of the year after, Rhodesia will never be brought down by his sanctions policy? Is it not quite unrealistic to talk of negotiations or even to despatch Lord Alport to Rhodesia while he preaches that N.I.B.M.A.R. is his policy?

I have seen the figures for many countries and there have been some increases, but vast reductions have been made by some countries which previously traded with Rhodesia. As to the effect of sanctions, the difference between us is that the hon. Gentleman does not want to see the Rhodesian illegal régime brought to constitutional rule. We do want to see that, and that has been the purpose of all our policies.

How much of Rhodesia's trade is still done with Zambia?

A sharply diminished amount. For obvious reasons, because the two countries are contiguous —this applies also to Malawi and one or two others—it has not been possible to cut it out altogether, but there has been a sharp reduction made by Zambia.

asked the Prime Minister why it is proposed to transfer the Royal Observer Corps from the Royal Air Force to the Home Department.

There has been no decision affecting Ministerial responsibility for the Royal Observer Corps. Ways of improving the efficiency of the Warning Organisation, which includes the Royal Observer Corps, are under consideration, but as I have said no decisions have yet been reached.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind, in considering what the ultimate state of this Corps will be, that it attaches enormous importance to its association with the Royal Air Force and that deep concern will be felt if this long tradition were broken?

As the right hon. Gentleman knows from his experience at the Home Office, that Department is already and in his time was responsible for operational policy and control of the Royal Observer Corps and meets the bulk of the Corps' costs, but, whatever changes may emerge as a result of these considerations, the Corps will obviously continue to have close links with the Royal Air Force.

Why has there not been much consultation with the members of the Corps up to now? Will my right hon. Friend ensure that, before any final changes, they will be consulted?

There have been consultations with the senior officers of the Corps on certain of the changes. This is now being studied, and the process of consultation will be continued wherever appropriate.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT the communication, dated 16th June, 1967, concerning Stansted Airport, which he received from Mr. Brian Halliwell.

No, Sir, it would not, I think, be right for me to publish letters I receive from members of the public in this way.

If my right hon. Friend will not publish it, will he consider seriously the points contained in the letter, which I hope he has studied up to the moment?

Yes, Sir, I will continue to give the closest consideration to these points, although many people who write to me would, I think, be a little perturbed if I were to get into the habit of publishing their letters without their agreement. A reply will, of course, be sent in due course.