asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what further steps he is now taking to encourage provision to be made for assisting the disabled in the design and construction of public buildings.

I am considering revising and republishing the pamphlet "Access to Public Buildings for the Disabled" which was issued in 1965. In addition, at the invitation of the Central Council for the Disabled, I have recently nominated a member of my staff to help in the work of the Council's Accessibility Panel. I am reviewing further ways in which my Ministry could help.

I am glad to hear of the Minister's interest in this. Has he accepted the British Standards Institution's Code of Practice No. 96 on access to buildings for the disabled, and is he stipulating that it should be observed in the design and construction of buildings for which he is responsible?

Yes. The liaison between ourselves and the Central Council is, as I have just said, very close indeed. My Department has set an example in our own design work, and there is close collaboration between my Ministry, the Ministry of Housing and Local Government, and the Ministry of Health. I accept from the hon. Gentleman the implication that we have to do much more for the needs of the disabled.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what machinery exists for liaison between his Ministry, the Ministries of Housing and Local Government, Technology, and Education and Science for the implementation of metrication in the construction industry; what representations he has received from the industry on the rate of progress being made; and if he will list the practical experts with day-to-day knowledge of the production and financial problems who are being consulted.

Metrication in the construction industry is a very large subject and a number of committees exist through which Departments exchange information and co-ordinate their decisions. I understand that progress so far is satisfactory, but if the hon. Member has any particular point in mind I should be glad to look into it. As regards consultation with the industry, I have set up a special working party of my National Consultative Council to identify and consider any specific difficulties that may arise.

Is the Minister aware that for metrication to work in the construction industry the change-over has to be made at the same time in various other industries, such as engineering, furniture, the manufacture of washing machines, cookers, and so on, in order that these will fit into houses designed for the metric units? Has he seen the proposal by the building industry for a metrication board to co-ordinate all these fields?

Yes. The hon. Member must clearly understand that the construction industry has set the lead here. One industry had to take the initiative, and this industry has done it. In consultation with my own machinery we have ensured that the difficulties arising from their leadership are known and understood and that Government Departments will back them up. The consultation is very good indeed.

Has the Minister noticed that in the second last line of the Question practical experts are referred to? Scotland has a high proportion of such practical experts but does not get a high proportion of the work involved. Will my right hon. Friend look into this with a view to seeing that Scotland gets fair play?

I do not know the nationality of the experts but, as far as I know, those we have are as good as one can possibly get, and I have no doubt that there are some Scots among them.

Since the Standing Committee on Metrication positively recommended the setting up of a metrication board many weeks ago, why the delay, especially as I understand it will cost virtually nothing?

The metrication board is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Technology. I said in reply to the hon. Gentleman the Member for Orpington (Mr. Lubbock) that the construction industry took the lead. It follows from what they are doing that a number of things will have to fall into a pattern, if that lead is to become worthwhile. Arising from that, I have set up machinery following the implications of this lead. I take the hon. Gentleman's point about the metrication board and I hope that my right hon. Friend will be saying something about that.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what are the considerations which have caused the removal of construction firms, without their knowledge, from his Department's approved lists.

Any firm wishing to be added to my Ministry's list of approved contractors will be asked to present details of work recently done, and to submit to technical inspection and financial viability.

Construction firms are removed from my Ministry's lists of approved contractors only when confidence is lost in them on grounds of unreliability, bad performance or financial instability. In these cases the firm will have been informed.

Why have some firms which have been dropped from the list not been informed? This would obviate misunderstandings about their capabilities and about the type of work involved.

My experience of my contracts division is that it has a very honourable record. I think the hon. Gentleman has in mind a particular firm. I will not go into detail, except to say that I understand it remains on our list for general surfacing work but has not been included in the small specialist list for contracts for airfield paving work which is highly specialised. I have today written to the hon. Gentleman about it.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what progress he has made since sterling devaluation, eight months ago, in imports substitution, by British produced building and construction materials; and what is his estimate of the value of such imported materials saved by British substitution, pro rata to a full year, since devaluation.

For many years my Department has encouraged the use of home-produced materials whenever it was practicable and economic. The Construction Materials Group of the E.D.C.s for Building and Civil Engineering has considered the hon. Member's suggestion made in his Question to me on 11th March, and the building centres have volunteered to draw particular attention to new British building materials in their monthly list of new materials. The Construction Materials Group is also drawing the attention of architects to the need to pay close attention to competitive British materials in specifications.

No statistics are available to provide a meaningful estimate of import savings.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that, since the Prime Minister's statement on 16th January last, which laid heavy emphasis on import substitution, much greater urgency ought to have been imparted to this substitution programme? Cannot he translate into statistical reality by the beginning of next year the economies effected in this programme to date?

The trouble with the hon. Gentleman is that he over-simplifies everything. It is not like this, or as simple as he suggests. First of all, one has to get the agreement of the professions involved; for example, the architects. One has to take into consideration our trading partners in E.F.T.A. It is not something which is done overnight. We are trying to get the good-will of the industry. I think that we have it, but time will tell. If it is a matter of providing information about how much we have been able to save, I will engage some more civil servants to get the information.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works in relation to 1969, how many houses in the aggregation he has advised producers of building materials, notably bricks, to budget for; what increase this represents in 1968, per centum and ad valorem; and what further steps he plans to take in 1969 to encourage the use of British-produced building materials.

The Forecasting Committee of the E.D.C.s for Building and Civil Engineering estimated that the number of houses started in Great Britain in 1969 will be between 415,000 and 420,000. The Government think that this is a reasonable estimate for planning purposes. It represents practically no percentage change on the number of houses likely to be started in 1968, although there may be a marginal increase in the cost, owing to rising standards. I shall continue to urge designers and contractors to use British-produced materials where these are competitive with imported materials.

Is this not a splendid opportunity comparable to the saving in imported foodstuffs, for example, to save in imports for the building and construction industries, notably with timber, and cannot the right hon. Gentleman do something more substantial than he has done already without resort to the bureaucracy?

I do not know what all that means. Hardwood, for example, is giving way to such finishes as linoleum, vinyl, and where appropriate, asphalt. Chipboard is being used increasingly as a substitute for solid timber in flooring. The whole emphasis of the industry is moving away from that which we have to import to substitutes which are already available in this country but it does not happen overnight, and the industry must be given a chance to work it out.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what is his estimate of the total expenditure to be incurred at Caernarvon Castle for the investiture of the Prince of Wales; what alternations are to be made at the castle; what temporary buildings are to b6 erected; and at what cost.

I expect the net cost of the work for which I am responsible to be about £55,000.

No alterations will be made to the castle itself, nor will any temporary buildings be erected inside the castle.

Is this in addition to the £200,000 about which we have heard already? Would it not be far better to put the money into a housing scheme or schools rather than spend it on temporary buildings intended for something which will last only a couple of hours?

That is a very unfair criticism. The £55,000 to which I have referred is part of the global sum already given by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales, and my hon. Friend should recognise that it is almost impossible to estimate how much money will come into Wales as a result of the hundreds of thousands of people who will wish to see this very remarkable ceremony. In our whole design with regard to Caernarvon Castle, we have in mind that it will probably be viewed by something like 400 million people throughout the world. I think that it is a very worthwhile ceremony.

Order. Long answers mean fewer Questions.

Is the Minister aware that this type of Question so often put down by the hon. Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes) and many of his hon. Friends causes great offence to the Royal Family and the public in general, who find these comments unacceptable?

In fairness to my hon. Friend the Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes), he has every right to question any expenditure. He has a viewpoint which he has always had the courage to express. However, in this matter, I think that we shall get wonderful value for the money involved. I might mention, too, that some of the chairs that we shall make will be sold at a profit.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works how the arrangements for enabling pedestrians, especially sightseers, to cross the road in the neighbourhood of Buckingham Palace are working; and if there have been any accidents in recent months.

Considering the crowds that assemble in this area, particularly at the time of the Changing of the Guard, the arrangements are working reasonably satisfactorily. Three pedestrians were slightly injured in accidents there during the first six months of this year.

May I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reply and the assurance that it has given. However, is he aware that there is often a lot of confusion between pedestrians and motorists as to who has the right of way, there being no pedestrian crossings? Will he bear that in mind?

I am on record as saying that I am trying to avoid pedestrian crossings and traffic signals anywhere in the vicinity of the parks. I have made a statement today that, starting from next Sunday, that part of the Mall from Horse Guards Approach Road to Queen Victoria Memorial Gardens, will be closed to vehicles between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. on Sundays, and will be made a pedestrian precinct.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the Metropolitan Police are very good on these occasions in controlling the movement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic at these points so that there is a continuous flow all the time, despite the congregation of considerable crowds?

I think that that is fair.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what estimate he has made of the area of Government office requirements in 1969; and how this compares with 1965.

Something over 40 million sq. ft. in 1969, compared with about 35 million sq. ft. in 1965.

Is not this a very large increase? Has the Minister no control over other Government Departments? Is he satisfied that the accommodation is satisfactory, anyway?

That is the whole point. The conditions in which many of our civil servants live can only be described as conditions of squalor. That has been the position for years, and we are trying to improve conditions, some of which would not be tolerated under our own Acts of Parliament. It is the policy of the Government that there should be no net increase in the total number of civil servants this year.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works if he will give the percentage saving represented by the rents which his Department pays for office space in the provinces compared with rents for similar accommodation in London.

The average rent of office accommodation held on lease by my Department is about 60 per cent. lower in the provinces than in London. For new hirings the difference is nearer 70 per cent.

Does not this information show the necessity to get more Government Departments out of London? Would the right hon. Gentleman make an announcement about how he intends to do this?

We have an extremely good reoord on that, compared with the record of the previous Government. During the last five years, something like 9,000 Government office jobs have been dispersed from London. On present plans, the figure will increase by another 15,000. In this time, offices employing over 5,000 staff on new Government work have been opened outside London, and that figure will go up to 10,000.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he has now completed his discussions with the trade unions on the Mann Committee Report; and whether he will make a statement.

There have been three Reports by the Mann Committee. Discussions with the trade unions on the 1st Report, which dealt mainly with the methods of executing maintenance and minor works by contract, were concluded some time ago.

Discussions with the trade unions on the 2nd Report have just commenced, and are continuing. None have yet taken place on the 3rd Report.

I am unable to make a statement at this stage of the discussions.

There seems to have been an awful lot of delay here. Can the Minister say what proportion of the maintenance work of his Deparament will in future be continually done by direct labour?

As a matter of fact, the proportions of maintenance work done by direct labour and contract labour are about 40 per cent. and 60 per cent. respectively. This concerns the whole Department and many thousands of staff. As I see my job, it is first to improve management, because direct labour cannot be complained about unless management is right. I am also having discussions with the trade unions.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will now make a statement on his policy regarding the refund to contractors engaged on public sector contracts of the Selective Employment Tax as from September, 1968.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what representations he has received from builders regarding the refund of Selective Employment Tax to those contractors who engaged in a public contract after 4th May, 1966, but before the introduction of Supplementary Condition No. 62 in CCC/Wks/1 in November, 1967 and new Clause 31 in the Royal Institute of British Architects Form of Contract in October, 1967 and whose contracts will continue after 2nd September, 1968; and what replies he has sent.

I have received representations from many sources that concessions should be made on construction contracts for the public sector where those contracts did not include provisions to enable contractors to reclaim the extra cost of the increased rate of Selective Employment Tax which will become operative in September next. The Government have considered this request but have decided not to grant it, since this is a change in an existing tax and not the introduction of a new one.

Is the Minister aware that that Answer will be deplored throughout the country, particularly in the building industry? Is he further aware that it will completely undermine the construction industry's faith in the fixed-price contract system? Why has he capitulated to the Treasury in this cowardly way?

Whatever else I am, I am not a coward. I understand the feelings of some of those involved. The truth is that for local authorities to have been able to apply thisex gratia payment legislation would have been necessary. The number of those having contracts with my Department is very small indeed. I very much hope that there will be no hardship.

Does the Minister recall that on 17th June he said:

"I want to see justice done."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 17th June, 1968; Vol. 766, c. 685.]

How does he reconcile this completely unhappy reply with that statement?

I was then talking about the very few people involved having contracts with my Ministry. When one talks about this as a principle, one puts it right across all Government Departments and, therefore, the numbers involved are much more difficult and complex. As I explained, legislation would have to be introduced to enable local authorities to operate such a refund. It is for these reasons that the principle of this had to be denied.

Is the Minister aware that this is utterly mean, shabby and confidence destroying for the industry—all the more so because the Government themselves accepted the fluctuation principle in CCC/Wks/1 and the R.I.B.A. form of contract?

The hon. Member must not over-state this. The number of contracts involved is infinitesimal compared with the major number. This was a collective Government decision, for the reasons that I have given.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works how many projects of between £50,000 and £99,999 in value were refused a building licence between 11th August, 1966, and 31st March, 1968; what was the value of those projects; and whether he will make a statement.

There were 48 such projects with a total value of £3½ million, as stated in the Annex to my Report presented to the House on 22nd May, 1968. Such projects are, of course, now exempt from building control as a result of Statutory Instrument, 1968, No. 781, also laid before Parliament on 22nd May, 1968.

In view of the extremely small number of licences which had to be refused during two years of economic crisis, how can the Minister possibly justify continuing with these controls over the next few years when, as all his colleagues tell us, we shall have a period of economic recovery?

I give this assurance. At this moment of time those applying for licences are being treated extremely generously. I am considering this issue very carefully. The moment the opportunity is there I shall ensure that the controls are removed.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will now make a statement on his policy regarding the use of serial contracting by public sector building owners so as to keep together specialist design and construction teams at the conclusion of one-off jobs.

I have always attached considerable importance to the recommendations of the Banwell Committee that aim at better continuity of work for contractors. Serial tendering is one way of achieving this. All public sector clients are being encouraged to make use of serial procedures where these are appropriate. Five experimental serial programmes have been organised within my own Department. These should provide useful experience which will be made available as widely as possible.

Does the Minister agree that this form of contracting is extremely useful, particularly in very expensive projects such as hospital building? Is he in consultation with the Minister of Health to ensure that what he likes to do the Minister of Health likes to do as well?

Yes. It is my objective for my Ministry to set the example as to contracting procedures and for other Government Departments to follow. Our knowledge on this, particularly the experience to which I have just referred, is one that other Government Departments will willingly follow.

The Minister has indicated that he appreciates the value of this, but does he realise that the Question is directed to design and construction teams? Is it not a great advantage that these teams should be kept together so that early mistakes can be corrected in future designs?

I accept that. Forty per cent. of my Department's major works programme was let by term, negotiated or extension contracts. I take the point about the continuity of the design teams.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether, in the light of the announcement of a 14½ per cent. increase in the pre-tax profit by Tunnel Portland Cement for 1967–68, he will now remove the special 2s. per ton surcharge on cement authorised in 1967.

I refer my hon. Friend to the Answer I gave him on 27th May, 1968. As a result of the statement by my right hon. Friend on the fuel oil surcharge, the Cement Makers Federation has reiterated its undertaking to remove the 2s. surcharge as soon as all the extra costs have been recovered.—[Vol. 765, c. 1212.]

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this company, which accounts for only 14 per cent. of cement manufactured, has recently announced profits of £2,600,000? Does not my right hon. Friend agree that profits of this order do not require an unearned bonus of a 2s. per cent. surcharge? Is it not high time that this temporary arrangement was seen to be temporary and removed?

The N.B.P.I. investigated this company and its claims for increases and agreed same. I have an assurance from the company that the moment that it is practicable so to do this surcharge will be removed. I very much hope that we shall be hearing more about that within the next three months.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what studies he has initiated into the effect on productivity in the building industry of the introduction of British Standard Time; and what have been the findings of those studies.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what esimate he has made of the loss in productivity on building sites as a result of the introduction of British Standard Time; and whether he will make a statement.

None, Sir.

Does this mean that no account has been taken of the difficulties of site working in darkness? If as a result of this local builders and their operatives change their working hours, will not they add to the peak hour traffic load of office workers? How will this help productivity?

On the one hand, I am constantly being asked by hon. Members opposite to stop sending out questionaires and forms to the building industry; and I am trying to comply with their request. On the other hand, I am being asked for more information about this. The only way to get it is by asking the building industry for it. No one in the industry is complaining to me. I do not know why the hon. Gentleman keeps complaining.

Does not the Minister agree that the greater proportion of accidents in the building industry takes place in the early hours of the morning in winter? Is not he concerned that the introduction of British Standard Time will result in an increase in the accident rate?

British Standard Time was not introduced as an arbitrary decision on the part of the Government. There were discussions with industries. The matter was debated on the Floor of the House. The majority of those involved favoured it. There is to be a three-year experimental period. At the end of that time I assume that there will be some statistics to justify either its continuation or its abolition. It is too early yet.

What consultations did my right hon. Friend have with the Home Secretary? Does not he realise that there will be an increased cost of building as a result of the introduction of artificial light?

At the time that British Standard Time was being discussed there was consultation between the Ministers responsible for all Departments concerned and, in my case, consultations with industry as a whole. Even in Scotland there was a majority in favour of this —only a very small majority, but nevertheless a majority. [Interruption.] Because there seem to have been more complaints about the effect of this on Scotland made by hon. Members opposite than there have been complaints about any other region.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what was the total value of output on new work by contractors in Great Britain in 1967; what is the approximate annual value of licensable work under the Building Control Act 1966; what was the value of work for which licences were refused from the commencement of controls until 31st March, 1968; and upon what criteria those licences were refused.

£2,906 million, £170 million and £19·2 million. My Report to the House on 22nd May, 1968, contained a statement of the criteria upon which building licence applications are considered. Rather than take up the time of the House, I would refer the hon. Member to the Report.

In view of the very small proportion of work done subject to licence and the small amount refused, and the fact that the right hon. Gentleman has already indicated to my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Gar-ston (Mr. Fortescue) that he will reconsider this whole question, will he go further and decide that this is a lot of nonsense and, as the unemployment rate in the construction industry is higher than it has ever been at this time of the year, will he not abolish the licensing system?

The industry is not complaining to me that I am causing it any hardships. I repeat that when the time is opportune these controls will be withdrawn.

In view of these interesting figures, can the Minister estimate what was the immediate impact on the balance of payments of these measures as forecast by the Prime Minister in July 1966?

Not without notice.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what estimates he has made of the probable level of output in the construction industry in 1969 and 1970; and whether he will make a statement.

I expect ouput on new work in 1969 and 1970 to increase by between 4 and 5 per cent. each year.

Is not that rather small increase another reason for cutting out licences? The Minister is trying to meet us on this question and he says that he will look at it, but does he not appreciate that he must work hard to increase the throughput of the industry? In this day and age, we could be aiming at something like a 10 per cent. increase?

Yes, but one must not underrate what these figures mean. Year after year, at constant prices, there has been an increase in output. Last year, there was an all-time record for the industry. Now we are looking for a 4 per cent. increase on that; next year, we hope to have a 4 per cent. increase on what we hope to achieve this year, and so on. It is a very creditable record.

I welcome the information which my right hon. Friend has given the House, but could he do more to persuade small building firms to co-operate together in the purchase of expensive machinery, which could then be shared among them in the same way as small farmers share expensive machinery, in order to increase productivity still more?

Small builders do present a problem, I agree. I have a later Question about them, and at this stage I merely tell my hon. Friend that we have a procedure now by which we discuss with the industry the problems of large, medium and small builders. If that proposition is put to me, I shall gladly consider it.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will now make a statement on his policy regarding competition between public and private enterprise in the system building sector.

I welcome the development of industrialised building methods and consider that competition between one system and another stimulates technological advance. In my view, there is room for systems sponsored both by contractors and by clients in the public sector.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that considerable concern is felt by private enterprise school-building systems sponsors that they are in danger of being squeezed out of business?

I have not heard that. Private enterprise systems in the building industry are widely supported in high-rise work. One of the troubles here -I know something of this from my housing days—is that there are so many systems in low-rise work, and competition between them all is not very lucrative for some.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what special arrangements he is making to make available finance to small builders unable to obtain overdrafts.

None, Sir.

The small builder has an essential part to play in the construction industry, especially for repairs or alterations. If they cannot secure finance, how can the Minister expect them to continue in business? If he wants them to continue in business, will he go to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and do something about it?

In my view, the small builder today has a greater future than he has had for a very long time, owing to this Government's proposals for the improvement of older houses which give him a vast reservoir of work which I hope he will be able to undertake. It must be done via the local authority machine — that is all-important—but I hope that the local authorities will organise it properly for him and that all questions of that kind will be taken up with the local authorities.

My final word on the small builder is this. Let us not have it said that small builders are suddenly going bankrupt in large numbers. There have always been small builders who went bankrupt.

Does not my right hon. Friend find this question rather odd, bearing in mind that small builders have not gone bankrupt only recently but they have as a sector of industry always been top of the annual list of bankruptcies?

That is what I have tried to say. The industry is very much a jungle, and the small and weak animals often get devoured.

Does not the Minister realise that work for local authorities which do not pay quickly is most difficult work for small builders? This is a question of finance, not bankruptcy.

Speaking to one of the larger animals in the industry, I accept that as a fair point from the hon. Gentleman. My views about payments by local authorities are well known. Some of them are quite disgraceful, and it is about time they made themselves better clients.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works why picture postcards depicting King William III are not available to the public at Hampton Court Palace; and if he will ensure that supplies of such cards for sale are again provided.

This card was withdrawn in 1966 because there was little demand for it. Because of the limits of space, only the most popular items can be offered for sale.

Will the right hon. Gentleman personally reconsider this matter and reach his decision not solely on a commercial basis but to honour the glorious pious and immortal memory of a great historical figure, King William III, Prince of Orange?

I am advised that the most popular card at Hampton Court is that of Henry VIII and his wives, all six of them. I can only say that we are in this as a commercial business and no notions of love or hate for William III come into it. We were selling only 700 cards of William III a year, and, since there are nearly 550,000 visitors a year to Hampton Court, this shows that he is not very popular this side of the water.

Is my rieht hon. Friend aware that when King William III occupied Hampton Court he never paid any rent? Will he ask King William's family to pay the debts they owe the country?

If I remember the story of King William, he was dominated by his wife Mary. That may have been part of the trouble.

Will the Minister publish a postcard showing a picture of His Holiness the Pope?

That has nothing to do with Hampton Court Palace. That is the point. I should publish any picture postcard which we thought we could sell. I should even be prepared to publish one of the hon. and learned Member for Antrim, North (Sir Knox Cunningham) if I thought we could sell it.

Would it not be better to encourage a preoccupation with the deeds of King William III rather than with the marital proclivities of Henry VIII?

But the public are not like that. They like to see a picture of Henry and all his wives together. They are not interested in William III. I cannot help that.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Would it be in order for the Minister to concentrate on the King and leave out the wives?

Order. The hon. and learned Gentleman knows that that is not a point of order.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what is the machinery for liaison with the Board of Trade in publicity for ancient monuments for the furtherance of tourism in Great Britain.

There is normal interdepartmental liaison on matters relating to tourism and the presentation of ancient monuments. In addition, we work closely with the British Travel Association, which is responsible for general tourist advertising overseas.

In view of the wealth of ancient monuments within the purview of his Ministry and their potential for tourism, is my right hon. Friend satisfied that everything is being done in the matter of consultation?

If I thought that there were weaknesses, I should set about making improvements, but I am advised that my commercial manager, who is on the British Travel Association committee, liaises with the British Travel Association all the time, and there has been no complaint on that score. Last year there was an all-time record number of visitors to ancient monuments—over 10 million in all—and our income was nearly £750,000. It was an all-time record.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what public response there has been to the sale of statuettes at the Tower of London.

About 5,000 of each of the armoured figures have been sold since they were introduced in August and November last year.

That will give a good deal of satisfaction, but, in view of the level of sales, will my right hon. Friend think of widening the range of such statuettes? I am sure that such a move would be popular.

I am obliged for that suggestion. As my hon. Friend probably knows, this scheme is in its infancy. It is going extremely well, and large numbers are being sold. By the way, the statuettes are in Henry VIII armour. I hope that we shall be able to venture into other fields.

Would my right hon. Friend consider extending the range to include statuettes of some hon. or right hon. Members? Perhaps a statuette of the hon. and learned Member for Antrim, North (Sir Knox Cunningham) might sell well as showing an ancient monument.

I have an idea that if we did that we should not sell any statuettes at all.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether necessary works during the coming Summer Recess will result in disturbance to Members' rooms.

I am sorry to say that it will. The works programme for this Recess includes the replacement of the existing annunciators by closed-circuit television sets, and the considerable extension of this service, as recommended in the Fourteenth Report of the Select Committee on House of Commons (Services), Session 1966–67. The wiring for this installation is inevitably extensive and will affect a great number of rooms.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that, although we congratulate him on trying to improve facilities in the desk rooms, most hon. Members will not be satisfied until adequate provision has been made for proper office accommodation for all who wish to have it?

Yes, Sir, and hereby hangs another tale. What we must do is put up another new building across the road in Bridge Street, and one day the House will give me permission so to do.

What is the cost of installing these closed-circuit television sets in all the desk rooms?

I cannot answer off the cuff, but it is considerable. The hon. Gentleman must understand that I was given an instruction by a Select Committee of the House comprising Members of all parties. I have to take the instructions of the House in this matter.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will make a statement on the work of his Department arising from the Industrial Expansion Act.

Under the industrial investment scheme provisions of the Act, the House approved the Computers Merger Scheme on 21st June, 1968. I am now considering with industry a number of individual and general projects which may in due course call for action under these provisions.

I shall soon be completing the agreement to purchase the assets of the Beagle Aircraft Company. The arrangements for financial support for the production of Concorde are under discussion with the firms concerned. The increased finance for the National Research Development Corporation and the Shipbuilding Industry Board will, of course, be used to support the future activities of these organisations.

Now that the I.R.C. is working so much more effectively, does my right hon. Friend consider that perhaps some of the schemes he originally envisaged introducing under the Industrial Expansion Act will not be necessary? In other words, does he think that he will need the Act quite as much as was first thought?

My hon. Friend has another Question on the Order Paper about the I.R.C. There is no overlap here. In the case of the computer merger we put in £10 million in research and development, which the I.R.C. was not in a position to do. I do not visualise any difficulty between the two provisions.

asked the Minister of Technology whether he is satisfied with the operation of the machinery for cooperation between his Department, the Department for Economic Affairs and the Industrial Reorganisation Corporation as regards the assistance given to George Kent in their successful takeover bid for Cambridge Instruments; and if he will make a statement.

Yes, Sir. The Corporation kept my Department and the Department of Economic Affairs in touch with the situation as it developed. The arrangements by which close relations are maintained with the Corporation worked well.

Is not the position becoming a little absurd in view of the large number of Departments involved in such cases—presumably in this case my hon. Friend's Department, the D.E.A. and the Board of Trade? Would my right hon. Friend consider having discussions with his colleagues with a view to bringing all matters of this sort under the auspices of one Department and one Minister?

Questions of the machinery of Government are for my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister. There was no difficulty in this case because I am the sponsoring Minister for the electronics industry and the Department of Economic Affairs is concerned with the I.R.C.

asked the Minister of Technology what studies he has made of the implications for British nuclear technology of the decision to withdraw British participation from the proposed CERN 300 GeV nuclear accelerator.

The decision not to participate was taken only after the most thorough examination of all relevant factors, including the industrial implications of the project.

Does the Minister agree that without a healthy foundation of fundamental research applied research cannot exist at all, and that ultimately the whole work of his Department depends on full participation by British scientists in fundamental research on a European or even a world scale?

Fundamental research is vitally important, but it is a question of priorities.

The way in which the Government announced the decision left many of us with a feeling of deep disquiet. Will he ensure that a much fuller statement of the implications of the decision is published as soon as possible?

I was not aware of the disquiet. It seemed to me that my right hon. Friend's announcement was fairly complete, but I shall bring my hon. Friend's point of view to his notice.

Does the Minister recall that in the White Paper is was stated that British industry had been remarkably unsuccessful in obtaining contracts for C.E.R.N., and that if we spent £44 million in our contribution to this project we should have that much less to spend on other advanced technologies, the rewards for which are much higher?

That is undoubtedly correct.

Will my hon. Friend assure the Germans and other Europeans that there is no sense of absolute finality about our decision?

I think that there is finality about this decision, but that does not mean that we do not want to go on collaborating on other projects.

Does the Minister agree that basic research lends itself more favourably to international cooperation than does development work in which there are commercial pay-offs and which lends itself to a good deal more political argy-bargy, for understandable reasons, than does fundamental research?

That is a somewhat philosophical question, but I should think that it is correct.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will now make a further statement on the A300 Airbus project.

A report by officials of the three Governments has now been submitted in preparation for the international Ministerial meeting planned for the end of the month.

Does the right hon. Gentleman understand that if the airbus is to keep to its programme of certification by 1972 and entry into service the following year metal must be cut and orders must be placed by the end of this year? Does he see any real prospect of that happening?

The object of a project definition stage is to give an opportunity for partners and firms to look at these projects very carefully. As has been made clear by my right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General and myself, our interest in aircraft which we build or in which we participate is that there should be a good economic return on them. That is why the project definition stage takes place, and that is why there is to be the meeting at the end of this month.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that a few weeks ago we were assured that this project was proceeding? Is that still the case? Are there now other thoughts about the future prospects for the airbus?

My hon. Friend will recall that what we said was that the project definition stage was proceeding, but we have always said that the object of that stage was to allow the partners involved to decide whether or not the aircraft was a proposition in which they should invest and advance with us. That has always been the reason for the project definition.

asked the Minister of Technology if he is satisfied with the co-operation of British industry with the grant-aided Scientists Appointment Service, designed to attract British scientists back from North America; and if he will make a statement.

This Service has been operating in its present form for only three months, and it is too early yet to assess its results. However, the initial response from industry has been quite encouraging.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of a rather disquieting report of the Royal Institute of Chemistry quoted in theSheffield Morning Telegraph of 10th July that 200 top-rank British scientists are trying to return from America and that industry has shown an interest in only four? Can he jolt his industrial friends on this?

It has always been the case that large numbers of people in the United States, both British residents there and Americans, would like to work in this country, and the brain drain has always been seen, at least in part, as a problem of British industry's absorbing good people and using them fully.

Is the Minister aware that some evidence has come to me that the Scientists Appointment Service is not necessarily asking the right questions of British scientists in America in order to get the marriage of their talents to British industry? I should like an opportunity to talk to him about this.

I have no doubt that there can be an improvement in techniques, but the Service has been going for only about 12 weeks. Its object is to improve the prospects of bringing people home. If the hon. Gentleman has any suggestions, I should be very grateful to hear them.

asked the Minister of Technology what is the forecast price for Concorde upon which airlines have based their decisions to place options; and if he has now calculated what revision of the price has been necessitated by the delays in the 001 programme.

Airlines took out their options at different times, and based their decisions on different prices. The likely selling price is continually reviewed in the light of all relevant changes in circumstances.

Is my hon. Friend aware that that has not begun to answer the Question, which asked for a specific price to justify an £800 million investment in research and development? Does he agree that the record of Anglo-French co-operation in this venture, not to mention the A.F.V.G. and the recent escalation in cost of the airbus on the part of the French, suggests that bilateral cooperation in this respect is rather misguided?

It is not possible to give a direct answer to the Question other than the Answer I have given because the prices are very widespread. We are watching the escalation in costs with our French colleagues with extreme care.

Is work on the next two pre-production models of Concorde up to schedule, or is it still lagging behind?

We have authorised production work to proceed.

asked the Minister of Technology how much had been paid to the contractors responsible for the TSR2 by 6th April, 1965; what calculation was at that time available regarding further payments, including cancellation charges; and what was, in the event, the actual total of these outstanding payments.

At the time of cancellation, payments to TSR2 contractors amounted to £125 million. Further payments, including cancellation charges, were then estimated at £70 million. Since cancellation such further payments have amounted to £53½ million. The final total is expected to fall well within the original estimate.

We are dealing with figures of rather large dimensions and there still appears to be a substantial discrepancy. In order to clear the air once and for all on this, will my hon. Friend consider publishing a full and accurate document indicating the reasons for the discrepancy?

The discrepancy between the estimate and the actual payments so far made is due in part to the fact that some of the sub-contractors concerned have not yet put in their claims. Others have put in claims that were manifestly too high.

When the hon. Gentleman tells us that £248 million has been spent on the TSR2 and we have no aircraft to show for it, will he add the cancellation costs of the F111?

That would be an entirely different question, but I shall certainly look at the amount of money we should have had to spend if this cancellation had not taken place.

asked the Minister of Technology what further consideration he has given to the deteriorating situation of the shipyards outside development areas; and if he will propose measures for assisting their survival, especially in districts of high unemployment.

I shall be writing shortly to my hon. Friend about the suggestion he made at a recent meeting for further help for yards outside development areas.

asked the Minister of Technology how many qualified engineers, technologists and scientists are employed in his departments; and what percentage each of these represents of total staff.

The Ministry of Technology employs a total of approximately 4,200 qualified scientists, engineers and technologists. This represents 12 per cent. of the total civilian staff directly employed. I regret that separate figures of each category are not available.

Would my right hon. Friend agree that the work of his Department—its coverage and so on—has greatly expanded during the last two or three years, and can he assure us that the supply of staff along the lines that I have indicated in the Question has expanded nearly correspondingly?

There has been an expansion of the work of my Department, but my hon. Friend should not suppose that it is our intention greatly to increase the number of qualified scientists and engineers that we employ. There has been a rundown in the Atomic Energy Authority, there is a reduction at Farn-borough and Malvern, and we are trying to hold the civil establishments stable. The object is in part to get more research done in industry.

asked the Minister of Technology how long his negotiations with Mallory Batteries Limited have now lasted; what action he now proposes to take to secure the implementation of Report No. 64 of the National Board for Prices and Incomes; and if he will make a statement.

As I informed my hon. Friend on 1st July negotiations with Mallory Batteries Limited began on 13th May. When these are concluded, which I expect to be soon, I shall report to the House.—[Vol. 767, c.169.]

Is it not disgusting that with the biggest rise in any commodity the Report of the Prices and Incomes Board is being ignored? Does my right hon. Friend recall that the request was that the firm should withdraw "pending" negotiations, not "during" negotiations? Is he aware that it has an international monopoly and that the National Health Service has no alternative supply of these important commodities?

I think that the appropriate adjective to apply is "complicated" rather than "disgusting". There are a number of practical problems, including distributors' stocks, investment, development and the difference between domestic and export prices. In the discussions with the firm, which have been very full, we have approached a solution which I shall announce in the House as soon as I can.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I shall raise the subject on the Adjournment.

asked the Minister of Technology what plans he has to assist co-operation between industry and higher educational establishments in order to ensure that the professionally qualified recruits in industry will normally be graduates.

An increasing proportion of chartered engineers in industry are graduates and I am supporting the requirements of the Council of Engineering Institutions that after 1973 all candidates will be of degree standard.

Is not the present tendency for the numbers of those who leave school at 15 and 16 to increase, and does it not seem that in the near future industry at graduate level and my right hon. Friend's Department may be starved of these recruits? What steps is he taking to fend off that tendency?

I am well aware, as everyone who has studied this is, that the shift away from the sciences in the schools and the shift from industry of university graduates poses potential dangers for industries. But the Science Research Council this year, by its policy of post- graduate awards, is hoping to produce far more people for industry, and by this means and a number of other means we are hoping to ensure that the demand is met.

Will the right hon. Gentleman in those considerations not underestimate the importance of the alternative ladder to chartered engineer status—that is, coming up through the works on O.N.C. and H.N.C.? Would he not agree that, however mature we are in our degree examination, there must always be the alternative route kept open to potential chartered engineers?

I think the point is very well understood by the C.E.I.

asked the Attorney-General whether he will take steps by legislation or otherwise to allow alleged infringements of individual human rights to be brought before the Court of Appeal in accordance with Article 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The human rights specified in the Convention are already accorded under the existing law and practice in this country and remedies against infringements are already available, so that it is unnecessary to make provision for the kind of appeal suggested by the hon. Member.

Is it not a fact that there is no court in this country specifically empowered to adjudicate on violations of human rights? Are the Government not, therefore, in this way in contempt of the European Convention, and would not Human Rights Year be a very appropriate time to put this right?

No, Sir; I do not think so. I am satisfied that the existing United Kingdom law conforms with the obligations imposed by the Convention and that the rights listed in the Convention are covered by remedies enforceable in our own courts.

Leaving aside the solution proposed by my hon. Friend, is the Attorney-General satisfied that all decisions taken which can affect the citizen are justiciable—in other words, can go to a court in this country—or is there not a field in which there should be a much closer review of decisions, particularly administrative decisions?

The Government have instituted the Parliamentary Commissioner as an important advance in the protection of the rights of the individual citizen.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity if she will refer to the National Board for Prices and Incomes the increase of approximately 8 per cent. over the past 12 months in the average weekly cost of temporary secretarial staff employed by the Board.

The National Board for Prices and Incomes obtains temporary secretarial staff from employment agencies; and the question of charges made by such agencies, and the salaries paid by them to the staff they provide, has already been referred to the Board.

While the Board is meditating on the points involved, would the hon. Gentleman ask it to tell him, and, so, the House, whether there has been a corresponding increase in the productivity of the staff?

I advise the hon. Gentleman to await the Board's Report, when no doubt it will make a relevant comment.

How much of the Department's time has been wasted by the typically childish Question by the hon. Member for Woking (Mr. Onslow).

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what machinery exists for consultation between her Department and the Ministry of Health to restrain increases in the prices of pharmaceutical products.

Full use is made of the normal machinery for consultation between Departments.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there have been very large increases recently which are excused by the pharmaceutical industry on the plea that the Ministry of Health has granted them? Is he aware that a 10 per cent. increase in the price of insulin has passed through? Is there some way in which he can bring prices down?

The price of insulin is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health, and I understand that my hon. Friend has a Question on the Order Paper to him. My hon. Friend will know that there is in existence a voluntary price regulation scheme, which is under consideration by my right hon. Friend in the light of the Sainsbury Committee's Report, and on which negotiations will shortly be taking place.

Can the hon. Gentleman confirm that the increase in price was vetted and, therefore, thought to be correct?

Indeed, Sir. Any price increases on pharmaceutical products prescribed by pharmacists are subjected to the voluntary price regulation scheme, which obliges the companies concerned to submit their price increases for consideration by my right hon. Friend, who has to be satisfied that the increases are necessary and justified, and also has to take into consideration the Government's prices policy.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity if she will make a statement on the outcome of her investigations into the increase in remuneration of the Chairman of Hambro's Bank from £20,866 to £25,145 a year in the last 12 months, in addition to share dividends.

Mr. Hambro has given my Department information about the recent increase in his remuneration. In view of my right hon. Friend's recent decision to refer the whole question of top salaries to the National Board for Prices and Incomes, it is not proposed to pursue his individual case any further.

Yes, but if no real action is taken on the general case, does it not mean that Mr. Hambro's little increase has been quietly buried, and how will the bus men react to that?

No, Sir; Mr. Hambro's increase has not been quietly buried but will be taken into account by the Board in reaching its conclusions. I advise my hon. Friend to await the outcome of the Board's Report.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether this question would ever have been raised if Mr. Hambro's company had given a subscription to the Labour Party instead of the Tories?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman and the House that when a Question was originally asked referring to Mr. Hambro we were unaware of the contribution made to Conservative Party funds, and it would not have made the slightest difference to whom the contribution had been made.

Tell that to the Marines.