asked the Minister of Technology what plans he has for initiating a new British combat aircraft.

asked the Minister of Technology what discussions he has held with German Ministers on a replacement for the F104.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will make a statement on the present position of negotiations for the development of an advanced combat aircraft in co-operation with certain other European members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation.

As a result of further discussions with the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy and the Netherlands on the possibility of collaborating in the development of a multi-role comlaat aircraft, a feasibility study is now being carried out by industry.

Can the Minister assure the House that there is now a definitive aircraft, or are we still discussing which of several different concepts to adopt? Can he also assure us that there will be no question on this occasion, given our experience in this field, of giving design leadership to another country?

The project is not at the definitive stage yet. We are still trying to match requirements. I very much hope that the design leadership will rest in British hands.

Is the Minister giving a holding contract to B.A.C. Wharton to continue with its independent work, pending an agreement with the Germans? How long can this situation be allowed to continue?

I hope not for very much longer.

Returning to the question of design leadership, will the Minister impress on the Foreign Ministers concerned that as we are the only country with an aircraft industry capable of design leadership it is in their interests as well as ours that our design leadership should be accepted?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that that has been done.

asked the Minister of Technology whether he will make a statement on progress with the A300 Airbus.

asked the Minister of Technology whether he will make a statement about the A300 airbus.

asked the Minister of Technology whether he will now make a statement about the European airbus project.

asked the Minister of Technology what progress is being made in the development of the 300 Airbus.

Reports have just been received from the airframe and engine contractors on the further study work carried out at the request of Ministers since July. Revised cost estimates have also recently been submitted. Negotiations with airlines are also in hand. Ministers from the three countries will meet again as soon as the new reports have been fully evaluated and airlines have expressed their views.

Is it true, nevertheless, that the French are beginning to have second thoughts about a 240-seater, as opposed to a 300-seater? Does not he think that if that is true it is too late and unreasonable at this stage, after all the work on research that has been carried out, that we should think about changing from a 300-seater if we want to meet the time scale required?

There is an awful lot of talk going on all the time in the aircraft business. The one thing that emerged very clearly from the meeting we had in Paris in August was that we were agreed that the concept of the A300 was absolutely right. We are doing the extra work to see if we can produce it in such a way as to meet the demand at a price t hat airlines are prepared to pay.

In view of the very differing financial policies now being followed by the three sponsoring Governments and the noticeable lack of enthusiasm for the A300, by two of the nationalised airlines involved, will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that his mind is not closed to giving Government backing to the BAC311 project, which is now very much in existence, as he knows.

As I have just said, everybody is always thinking about all sorts of alternatives all the time. If we are serious about international collaboration, a project of this kind, on which a great deal of work has been done and which meets a pretty clear need, should be pressed forward, and we shall have a Ministerial meeting shortly to have a look at the latest figures provided.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the current estimate of airframe R and D is about £180 million? Will he say categorically that the aircraft, if it flies, will have British engines, and that he sticks to the assurance of the former Minister of State that it will be built?

My right hon. Friend the former Minister of State, in talking about this matter, always said that he should have to look at it stage by stage, but he expressed confidence that the airbus would go ahead, which is a very different thing. The final figures have not yet come to me. That is why we gave extra time to the companies. But we shall evaluate them soon. The RB207 is available for this aircraft.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that accidents with aircraft of this capacity would not be tolerable, and since accidents often arise from incidents in flight, will he now make the notification of all incidents by present captains compulsory, so that we may find out what guide technology can give us in preventing possible trouble with these aircraft in the future?

I agree with my hon. Friend that accidents with bigger aircraft, just like accidents with bigger tankers, pose much more serious problems for the community. He may be assured that as we move on to these more sophisticated aircraft the degree of testing work done and the safety standards to be met are infinitely greater than we have accepted for earlier aircraft.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that there is a requirement for this size of aircraft not only in Europe but in other parts of the world, particularly North America and the continent of Australia, and that if we do not build it one of the American manufacturers will fill the gap?

I confirm that immediately. The aircraft will be wanted not only in Europe but elsewhere. Indeed, although we are concerned probably with the initial market before the final go ahead is given, we do not intend to be satisfied with anything but a share in the world market.

asked the Minister of Technology if he is aware that the French Dassault Company is proposing to build a 200–250-seater airliner; and what consideration is being given to this proposal in the negotiations with the French and German Government on the A300 airbus.

No, Sir. The large civil aircraft project by Dassault of which I am aware is the 130–140-seater Mercure.

I apologise for over-stating the estimated size of this aircraft. Does not my hon. Friend agree that such a project—which appears to be a replacement for the Caravelle—represents some threat to the proposals for building an airbus?

I would not have thought so. It might be a competitor for the 311. if that were developed, but I would not have thought that it would compete with the airbus.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will state the latent estimated launching costs of the A300 airbus; what proportion of this will be borne by Great Britain; and to what extent the share of work will reflect this contribution.

The sum required by the constructors to launch the project is still under negotiation but their combined airframe and engine estimate is close to the figure of £285 million given to the House on 24th June, 1968. The United Kingdom share is expected to be rather less than one half of the total costs. Oar work share will be broadly commensurate.—[Vol. 767, c. 1–4.]

Is my hon. Friend satisfied that the British aerospace companies will receive a reasonable share of this work? I am thinking in particular of the avionics side. Will these companies be able to compete fairly with their French opposite numbers, and receive value for money if the process goes ahead?

Our total share will certainly be a fair one. On the question of the avionics side of the work, I very much hope that that situation will apply, too.

Will the hon. Gentleman make it clear to our partners in this project that if the aircraft is not fittted with British engines Britain will have a right to expect a greater share of the airframe work?

In these negotiations we shall look after our own interests as best we can.

asked the Minister of Technology (1) what progress he has made with the financial reorganisation of Short Brothers and Harland; and if he will make a statement.

My officials met the Rohr Corporation for further exploratory talks on 18th October. I do not yet know when they will be ready to enter into firm negotiations. No firm proposal has yet been received from them. Meanwhile the Government have decided to defer action on the financial proposals put forward by the company's Board.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the great strain placed upon the board and management by the delay in the financial reconstruction? Is he also aware of the concern felt by the employees of Short Brothers and Harland, particularly as to the future of the design unit? Will he expedite a decision on these matters?

I am very well aware of those things. Although negotiations of this kind may well take some time, I should not want to see them delayed or prolonged longer than was necessary.

asked the Minister of Technology what military aircraft development projects are currently being sponsored by his Department.

Buccaneer S Mark 2, Harrier, Nimrod, Jaguar (in collaboration with France) and the Speyengined Phantom. In addition the possibility of developing a multi-rôle combat aircraft in collaboration with the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy and the Netherlands is being examined. In the helicopter field we are developing the Sea King, the SA340 and the WG13, the last two in collaboration with France.

Would the hon. Gentleman agree that of that list the M.R.C.A. is the most important for the long-term future of the industry? Will he give an assurance that if it proves impossible to draw up some multi-national collaboration on this we are prepared to consider going on with it alone?

We shall certainly have to consider the possibilities if we cannot get international collaboration, but I hope we can.

Would the hon. Gentleman remember that when we have an international collaborative aircraft the engine is almost inevitably provided by Rolls-Royce, and this means that the rest of the aircraft—the avionics and the airframe—has to be provided by overseas designers and suppliers, and that this is not a basis on which to maintain a healthy aircraft industry in this country?

I entirely agree with the hon. Gentleman. We are watching that all the time. We hope that we can get rather more avionics than we have been doing.

asked the Minister of Technology what tests he is carrying out to determine the effect of sonic boom on ancient buildings.

My Department, as I informed the hon. Member for Oswestry (Mr. Biffen) on 19th November, has been conducting an investigation into the effects of sonic bangs on cathedrals. It is planned to extend this survey to include other buildings.—[Vol. 773, c. 266.]

Does the existence of this decision mean that the Government seriously intend to allow aircraft to fly at supersonic speeds across Britain? If so, has the right hon. Gentleman any idea how many flights will take place daily and how many people will be affected? If it is right to test buildings to see how they stand up to strain, what about testing people? What about having a test to see how right hon. and hon. Members stand up to it? Even better, what about a test to see how the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues stand up to it?

Order. Long supplementary Questions make sonic booms.

Whether we make supersonic airliners or not, someone will do so and some British Government will have to decide whether to allow them to fly over land. To help with that difficult decision some tests are necessary involving buildings, and of course they must be public tests. This is why I held some early tests last year of a preliminary character.

Will not the tests be more useful when we know what sort of boom the Concorde will make?

The Church authorities have shown great enthusiasm for the tests because the tests are telling them something about the safety of the cathedrals with or without supersonic aircraft.

asked the Minister of Technology what action he is taking to encourage the development of a vertical take-off and landing or short takeoff and landing airliner; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will make a statement outlining his Department's proposals for the further development of techniques of vertical/short take-off and landing in the field of civil aviation.

asked the Minister of Technology what progress is being made with the short take-off and landing aircraft.

The study which my predecessor referred to in answer to the question of 18th March last [Vol. 761, c. 3.] by the hon. Member for Liverpool, Garston (Mr. Fortescue) is still continuing.

I must thank the hon. Gentleman for that very informative Answer. Is he aware that the French, with the Breguet 941, and the Americans are well ahead of us on vertical takeoff techniques, although they were pioneered in this country many years ago? Is he further aware that, since vertical take-off aircraft could control the whole policy of this overcrowded island on new airports, the development of such an aeroplane in this country is of the utmost urgency?

On the hon. Gentleman's second point, it is for that reason that the study is very wide-ranging and detailed. I would not accept for a moment the first part of his Question, that the. French are ahead of us in this technique now.

Will the hon. Gentleman regard this as a matter of real urgency? Quite apart from the other considerations mentioned by my hon. Friend, it is clear that the possible ramifications of this type of development on the design and operation of airports can be considerable and could be relevant to the present inquiry.

Yes, I accept that e ntirely.

Could the short takeoff and landing technique be applied to the airbus, or is my hon. Friend satisfied that existing runways are sufficiently long to handle it?

I do not think that it could be applied to the airbus. That is not in the design. But, on my hon. Friend's second point, I am satisfied that existing runways are adequate.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the very interesting project that Westlands have in hand for vertical take-off and landing civil airliners? Is there a prospect of giving additional support to this work? Would he comment on the urging from the benches opposite for further money to be spent, in view of their Leader's charge on Monday that the Government are spending too much?

I will leave that last point to the Leader of the Opposition. I am aware of the work being done by Westlands, and my Department is participating with Westlands and H.S.A. in a design study. We hope to have a drift specification by the end of the year.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will make a statement on the progress of the Concorde project.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will make a statement on the progress of the Concorde project.

Manufacture of the two prototype aircraft is now complete, and first flight is expected early in the new year. Manufacture of the two preproduction aircraft and of the static test specimen is well advanced, and work has started on the fatigue test specimen and on the first three production aircraft.

Has my right hon. Friend seen in the Press speculation about cuts from the French side due to their financial difficulties? Could he say what effect this will have on the programme and also what representations he has had from the French Government? Does he also, as many Members do, deplore the kind of speculation that this project is in danger, when we all know that it is not true?

It is true that one difficulty that faces me is the speculation, which tends to be extreme in character. We have had some examples this morning as a result of the statement made yesterday in France about their economy measures. We were not consulted, nor would I expect to be consulted, about them. To the best of my knowledge, it does not affect the progress of the project during 1969, and I have no reason to believe that it will have any bearing on the future of Concorde.

Will the Minister confirm that there will be no comparable financial cuts on the British side, and can he also state categorically that it is the intention of both Governments to carry the project through to its conclusion?

Through to its conclusion means that flight testing will take place, as planned, next year. But Concorde will decide its own future. Let us be quite clear. If it succeeds and people buy it, it will be a success. If it does not succeed and people do not buy it, it will be a failure. If people could realise this and not think that it was the machinations of the Governments concerned that was the cause of the trouble, some of the speculation would not occur.

Is it not extraordinary when my right hon. Friend says that he does not expect to be consulted?

I certainly would not have consulted the French Government about measures taken as part of our own economy discussions at different stages involving central economic policy in either country. Of course not. If there were to be a change by either Government that affected the progress of the project, that would be different. But I understand that this is rephasing of payments by the French Government, and I would not expect to be consulted about it.

Is the Minister aware that, whilst we welcome the Concorde project and wish it well, Salisbury for seven hundred years has strained every muscle to keep the spire up and it is not anxious now to see sonic booms knock it down?

I do not want to knock down old cathedrals, in case anyone believes that I do. This is why we have had these recent tests, which have been welcomed by the Deans and Chapters who found that Concorde gave them the opportunity to see whether they are safe anyway.

Will the Minister make a distinction between measures which the French Government properly took to defend their own economy and measures which are bound to have a bearing on our economy and upon which there is a mutual sharing arrangement between France and Britain? In these circumstances, is he entirely satisfied that this is purely rephasing of the expenditure for 1969?

My Department is in close touch with our opposite numbers in France, as we expect, about a project of this kind. The project has been affected by decisions taken unilaterally, including our own decision to devalue last year, which affected the calculations of the cost share on each side. I am satisfied that the measures announced yesterday will not affect the progress of the project next year. I cannot go further than that.

Can the Minister, nevertheless, give a categorical assurance that there will not be any similar cuts by Britain?

I will be perfectly candid. I have always looked at this programme from the point of view that I am responsible, first, to see that it should succeed and, secondly, to see whether there were economies to be made at any point, be- cause I am also responsible for public money. If it were possible, as a result of the programme, to make an economy, perhaps by improved management, I should think it right to do so. I would not be doing my job if I did not have regard to the money that I am spending at a very high rate on Concorde.

Will my right hon. Friend, who is a Bristol Member, give an assurance to his fellow Bristol Members that no financial difficulties will be allowed to stand in the way of the completion of Concorde?

No, I will not give that assurance. I never have given the assurance that no financial difficulties will stand in the way. If, as a result of major redesign difficulties, we found that the cost of Concorde had risen to the point where it had no prospect of being a commercial success, both Governments would look at it. I have never given unqualified assurances about Concorde. I have done this, I think, quite rightly, although I am a Bristol Member. I live with Concorde during the week and at weekends. I do not think that anybody else in the House does.

asked the Minister of Technology what steps he has taken in his support for the British computer industry to co-ordinate the work of librarians and those concerned with the collection, dissemination, storage and retrieval of scientific and technological information with those who design and construct computers.

The Department is in touch with the computer manufacturers and, in close co-operation with O.S.T.I., with many other interests inside and outside Government, who are concerned with information storage and retrieval.

Cannot Great Britain take a lead in this new data storage revolution ranging from the House of Commons experiment to the computerisation of the Statute Book, and is it not the case that the computers for this purpose need not necessarily be number crushers but may to disc storage machines? Will the hon. Gentleman ensure that initiative is taken to bring together the brains that are working on these things? As he is responsible in this respect, will he take the initiative?

Yes, Sir. We are in fairly constant discussion with potential users and also publishing firms as well as computer firms, which are having very active discussions with each other and ourselves.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that this matter is very closely related to the general pressure that is building up for an effective national scientific reference library in which the British computer industry has a very large part to play? Are we any nearer now towards resolving the dichotomy between the Department of Education and Science on the one hand and the hon. Gentleman's Department on the other?

Both Departments have an interest in this field. Obviously, in working together we have to keep in close touch with each other. We are well aware of the work of the Parliamentary and Scientific Committee in this matter, and are in touch with hon. Members about it

asked the Minister of Technology what estimate he has made of the effect on motor car sales, respectively in export and home markets, of the hire-purchase restrictions announced on 1st November, 1968.

The estimated effect of this measure is that home market demand in the next twelve months will be reduced by about 5 per cent. below the level which would otherwise have been achieved. The measure does not affect exports directly, but indirectly I believe exports will benefit from this reduced home demand on manufacturers.

As the Question was tabled before the Chancellor's package last Friday, has the Parliamentary Secretary taken into account that the 5 per cent. diminution of home sales arising from severer hire purchase restrictions is now made worse by the increase in Purchase Tax, and what evidence is there that by making motor cars dearer on the home market we shall sell more motor cars in overseas markets? Stop whispering; let the hon. Gentleman answer the question!

Despite the measures of last Friday, which I would expect to reduce home demand by up to a further 3 per cent. next year, my expectation is still that home demand next year will be at least at the level of home demand this year.

Would my hon. Friend like to comment on the statement supposed to have been made by some of the executives of Vauxhall Motors Limited that the Purchase Tax changes caused the abolition of the night shift at the Luton factory?

I am not in a position to answer for the executives of Vauxhall Motors Limited, but it seems to me highly unlikely that this could be the explanation for the abolition of night shift working at this stage.

Will the hon. Gentleman say what steps the Government are taking to consider alternative economic regulators on the demand side of the supply and demand equation that do not hit the motor industry, which is a mass production industry, and also investment in it quite as severely as do the economic regulators in respect of hire purchase, Purchase Tax and the like?

We are always willing to consider any alternative scheme that may be suggested, but, in essence, this is a matter for the Chancellor, and I suggest that the hon. Gentleman should address his question to him.

asked the Minister or Technology if he will make a statement on British participation in the European Launcher Development Organisation.

As I told the House on 23rd April, the Government have decided not to undertake additional financial commitments to E.L.D.O. At the European Space Conference in Bonn on 12th-14th November, I indicated that if the United Kingdom were released from its present financial commitments to E.L.D.O., this would enable us to participate in applications satellites, and other developments.—[Vol. 763, c. 40–7.]

As France and Germany seem likely to go on to build a European launcher, will Blue Streak nevertheless be available to them? Also, what does the new policy mean as regards a possible increase in the cost of our space effort, and does the Minister propose to authorise a U.K. 4 satellite?

Yes, Sir; Blue Streak will be available. Yes, if the switch is possible, it would mean an increase in our commitment to European space expenditure. On the applications side, which we think will be profitable, the opportunity provided by the Bonn conference of explaining our desire to go out for these space projects which will be profitable was very valuable. I should like further notice before answering the last part of the question.

What does this mean in terms of our relations with E.S.R.O.?

At the conference—I shall be reporting about this on another Question—we came forward with another increase for E.S.R.O. over a period of three years at 6 per cent. a year in the perspective of a further period at the same amount. We believe that the role of E.S.R.O. in respect of applications work will develop, and we look forward to a new uniform European space organisation.

The right hon. Gentleman will be aware that this is far too big a subject for exchanges by way of Parliamentary Question. Will he present to us a full White Paper or Blue Book giving the Government's proposals, giving the alternatives and, above all, giving all the comparative figures in relation especially to his argument, with which I have a lot of sympathy, for our concentrating on telecommunications satellites and not going for launchers? Will he recognise that in the absence of official figures it is difficult for hon. Members on either side of the House to take an intelligent view?

Order. Questions should be brief.

I should greatly like a debate and agree that the value of one would be much improved if we had figures available. I will consult the hon. Gentleman about the kind of figures that he would like. I cannot undertake to bind them in a Blue Book, but I will give an undertaking to make them available in the Library.

asked the Minister of Technology what action he proposes to take following recent representations made by six Western European countries to Great Britain to reconsider her decision to leave the European Launcher Development Organisation in 1971; and if he will make a statement.

The Government decision on the European Launcher Development Organisation announced in the House on 23rd April, 1968, was based on economic consideration. No new factors have been revealed in recent discussions which would justify a reconsideration of that decision.—[Vol. 763, c. 40–7.]

Bearing in mind the increasing number of European projects in science and technology, does not my hon. Friend agree that the time is ripe for a White Paper setting out clearly where our scientific and technological collaboration with Europe begins and ends?

My hon. Friend will have heard the answer given by my right hon. Friend a few moments ago on that issue.

Does the Minister realise that it is calculated that on long-range communications no less than £8,000 million will be spent in Western Europe during the next 10 years, and that the E.L.D.O. project could make a useful contribution to the space communication satellite, and that it is desperately important that Britain should retain an interest and capability in this sphere?

I am well aware of the enormous possibilities of work in space. Where a dispute would arise is on the part that the European launcher would play in this. It could be a serious handicap because of its enormous expense.

asked the Minister of Technology when he proposes to introduce legislation for the reorganisation of the nuclear reactor industry.

asked the Minister of Technology when he will be introducing legislation to establish a new publicly-owned company to take over the Atomic Energy Authority's responsibilities for nuclear fuel.

I cannot anticipate when legislation will be introduced, but, as the hon. Members are aware, some aspects of the reorganisation which do not require legislation are already going ahead.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is disappointment among members of the Select Committee on Science and Technology, who worked hard on this question, at the great delay in reorganising the nuclear reactor industry? Does not he recall that he himself told the Committee well over 12 months ago that the need for the reorganisation was urgent and that it should be carried through as quickly as possible?

I appreciate that, but we have one design construction company going. The negotiations on the second one have fallen through. The work, involving the Atomic Energy Authority and including legislation, has proved a very big job indeed. I assure my hon. Friend that we have not been slow in tack ling this very complex problem, on which we most certainly received help from his Committee.

I understand many of the right hon. Gentleman's problems, but why cannot progress be made with getting ahead with the publicly-owned nuclear fuel company? Does not he agree that continued delay is bad for the morale of the staff both of the A.E.A. and of the private nuclear engineering firms involved?

I appreciate that point, but if we are to have proper legislation it means dealing with the Authority's future, with the Atomic Energy Board and with a number of other things, and all this cannot be rushed. In the industry itself there is now a greater degree of certainty about the future than there was before we were able to announce our dicsion.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that, despite the difficulties we are experiencing in the regrouping and reorganisation of the boiler-making side of the industry, and also in the civil engineering, we should try to speed up the process in order to give a chance to this very important industry? The more delay there is the more difficult the problems become.

The delay on that side is not being caused by me but by the difficulty in getting the industrial mergers set up. I asked the I.R.C. to undertake this some time ago and I am not directly engaged in the negotiations.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will make a statement on the progress being made with the reorganisation of the nuclear reactor industry.

asked the Minister of Technology what progress has been made with the further reorganisation of the nuclear engineering industry; and if he will make a statement.

The formation of the first of the two design and construction companies envisaged in my statement of 17th July was announced on 16th September. Negotiations for the formation of the second company are continuing, after the setback which recently became public.—[Vol. 768, c. 1428–38.]

A few minutes ago the Minister said that he was not directly involved in the negotiations about the formation of a boiler company among three of the existing firms, because he had asked the I.R.C. to do it on his behalf. Has the I.R.C. reported back since the breakdown of negotiations, and what steps are being taken to have them restarted?

We left it to the I.R.C., because this is a matter where business skill and flexibility is of the greatest importance. We are in continual contact with the I.R.C., but we do not have formal negotiations or discussions with it. I know that it was disappointed at the setback and it is continuing its work to find a solution.

Is the Minister aware that the long delay in completing reorganisation is causing great anxiety to workers and management in the nuclear engineering industry in my constituency? The question that must be put is: what will be the future of those firms at present within the nuclear engineering industry which may be left out on the fringe of a second consortium structure?

The truth is that if we try to reorganise anything it is bound to affect those concerned in the work which was done before, and uncertainty is inseparable from this process. If my hon. Friend has any particular points in mind which he would like to bring to me I will see what I can do to ease unnecessary uncertainty.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will make a statement on the recent successful experiments conducted at the Culham Laboratory of the Atomic Energy Authority in the containment of superheated plasma in a magnetic field.

Recent experiments reported in the Press demonstrated that the ideally-expected slow rate of escape of hot plasma across the confining magnetic field can be achieved under these particular experimental conditions. This is encouraging to the scientists whose work is directed ultimately to the development of a fusion reactor.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that nuclear fusion is still of the greatest importance to the development of nuclear reactor technology in this country?

Certainly I agree that it is of immense importance, and a great deal of important work has been done on it.

In view of the very much longer time scale on which most of the work at Culham operates compared with the rest of the work in the A.E.A., will the hon. Gentleman consider the possibility that the S.R.C. might be the better auspice under which to put the Culham Laboratory?

These things are being considered and I will look at that suggestion.

asked the Minister of Technology what steps he has taken to publicise to British industry inventions communicated to the National Research and Development Corporation, but which are not taken up as a project by the Corporation.

The National Research Development Corporation is responsible for publicising to British industry all inventions communicated to them by Government Departments. They write to firms, circulate data sheets, and publish a booklet "Inventions for Industry" every six months. In view of the large number and variable quality of inventions submitted from outside Government the approach to firms is adapted to each case.

Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied that the information gets through to industry? How is it that so many useful British inventions get adopted in the United Staes and we then have to pay for them on their arrival back here?

I would be happy to look at any case which has been put to the N.R.D.C. which has failed to be adopted in this country and which has been adopted in the United States. Of course, the N.R.D.C. seeks licencees in the United States as well.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will make a statement about progress on fast breeder reactors.

The Atomic Energy Authority's Dounreay Fast Reactor, which commenced operation in 1959, has provided information and operating experience needed to design a prototype reactor for full scale power production. This 250 MW(E) prototype reactor is now being built, and it could be the basis for designs of commercial fast reactors to be introduced by the mid to late 1970s.

Is my hon. Friend aware that I have some difficulty in comprehending the meaning of that answer? Is he telling us that there was another gross miscalculation in the White Paper on Fuel and Power?

I am sorry that my hon. Friend has difficulty in understanding the Answer and that he draws that sort of inference from it. There has been no miscalculation that I know of.

Will this development put more coal miners out of work? Since tens of thousands of miners are going home with less than £14 a week wages, will the hon. Gentleman see that their interests are safeguarded in this development?

This is a development for the mid-1970s. The future of the coal miners will be safeguarded.

Is any work being done by the A.E.A. on gas-cooled fast reactors? Has the hon. Gentleman had discussions with European countries, such as Sweden, which are interested in this kind of project?

I had better have notice of that question. I know that some research is being done but I have not the details.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that before the mid-1970s power will be available to Scottish industry from the prototype fast reactor?

Yes, certainly.

asked the Minister of Technology what is the estimated number of personnel with scientific or engineering university degrees or degree equivalents etr ployed in research establishments of the Ministry of Technology.

Approximately 2,850.

What is the Minister doing substantially to reduce this very large number? Will he initiate a policy of sub-contracting to private industry much of this research so that it may be pursued in a much more commercial atmosphere?

We are encouraging more research in industry. On the defence side we have been able to get a reduction. On the civil side, the position is being held. As our industrial policy develops and bigger corporations come into being, I want to see as much research as possible done in industry for the reason mentioned by the hon. Gentleman.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that a lot of useful and decisive work is being undertaken in the research establishments of his Ministry, much of it of great use to industry, and that this reduces the prices of the ultimate products?

There is no doubt that the value of the research done in Government establishments, not least the A.E.A., has been of enormous importance to the nation. But I think that everyone who has thought about this matter has realised that the transfer problem, of getting the work directed towards commercial ends and the product of that being applied commercially, is easier if one can clear one's links with industry.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will take steps to ensure that international companies operating in Great Britain do not exclude, as a consequence of rationalisation, products made at their factories in this country from vital world markets which are then assigned to their foreign-based plants.

I am well aware of the problem here. I shall seek assurances where appropriate and watch the situation carefully.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of reports that the Ford Motor Company is planning to transfer the export market in North America for cars to Ford of Germany? Would this not have a very detrimental effect on our exports if it were carried out, and will he ensure that the interests of achieving a healthy balance of payments are put before the individual private interests of any such organisation?

This really encroaches upon the next Question that my hon. Friend has on the Order Paper, but I am happy to answer them together. The relationship between national interests and the rationalisation policies pursued by international companies is a very interesting one to which a great deal more thought has to be given. International companies own about 10 per cent. of our industry and do about 20 per cent. of our exports. Ford has had an £850 million net balance in exports in the last few years, and £200 million this year. We have done quite well out of the exports of these big international companies.

Would the right hon. Gentleman resist any narrow and introverted blandishments from the benches behind him and recognise that West Germany is Britain's second largest export market after the United States of America and that we do not want to take action which is likely to diminish that important export trade?

Certainly I will note that, and I would agree with the hon. Gentleman that he would never be guilty of a narrow introverted blandishment.

Putting on one side narrow extroverted or introverted blandishments, would my right hon. Friend say how many other companies since 1960 have been asked to honour their assurances? If this information is not available, will he make it available?

I will look at that. I was involved in two other cases. One was Chrysler and Rootes, and the other was Philips and Pye. I will see what others there were, if any.

Will the right hon. Gentleman not agree that the logic of modern technological development is for the emergence of cross-frontier companies, whether American or British in origin? Will he ask his right hon. Friends, when making arrangements for immediate economic difficulties, to bear that fact more in mind than has been done in the case of the special deposits on imports?

I am aware of this. But the hon. Gentleman will be aware that, as the international companies develop, national Governments, including our own, will be reduced to the status of parish councils in dealing with the large corporations which will span the world. That is a real problem to which right hon. and hon. Members on both sides of the House will need to give careful attention.

asked the Minister of Technology if he is satisfied that the Ford Motor Company is continuing to honour the assurances given to Her Majesty's Government in 1960 in connection with the acquisition of the British-owned shareholding by the parent United States organisation in that year; and if he will make a statement.

I have really answered this in replying to my hon. Friend's supplementary to his previous Question. At my request the company have provided information which satisfies me that they are honouring the assurances given in 1960 which are still applicable.

Is it not a fact that the increased manufacture of components overseas which could be produced in this country inevitably will add to our import bill?

My hon. Friend raises a very real point. One can either look at individual examples or at the overall effect on the balance of payments. I think that we have to look at both. It is a fact that, as this company and others develop, they will be thinking of Europe in a much freer way than any national company looking simply at its manufacturing capacity in the United Kingdom. That is the nature of the problem which I tried to describe just now.

Has the right hon. Gentleman read the statement by a Ford executive yesterday that Ford Motors has lost £25 million in exports this year through industrial unrest? Is he aware that this is a two-way bargain and that, if we want all the benefits, we must get our own house in order?

That is why my right hon. Friend the First Secretary has been engaged in these discussions. We are living in an increasingly open world, where investment decisions will be taken according to a variety of factors and where the brain drain will draw away people who wish to be employed elsewhere at higher salaries. That is the nature of the change, and it is a very important one.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the very strong rumours that the Ford Motor Company is dividing its export programme in the sense that North Atlantic exports, in particular of the Escort, will take place from Genk in Belgium, and that Commonwealth exports of it will take place from Britain? Irrespective of what hon. Gentlemen opposite may say, this is a very important question. and I would like my right hon. Friend to indicate whether he has heard the rumours and, if so, what action the Government intend to take about them?

I appreciate the importance of what my hon. Friend says. Some time ago, I initiated discussions with the motor companies about developments of this kind. If he would care to get in to touch with me specifically about this point, I should be happy to hear from him.

asked the Minister of Technology what study he has made of the use of hovertrains to link urban centres such as London to potential off-shore airport sites; and if he will now consider making more money available for hovertrain research and development.

My right hon. Friend has recently approved additional expenditure of £1½ million by Tracked Hovercraft Limited to produce an experimental manned vehicle on a track several miles long.

Does my hon. Friend at least accept the implication of the possibility of airports being sited on the coast and that Government resources should be devoted to the problems of the design of such airports and the development of fast links to urban centres?

Of course, it would be very nice to have all airports sited in the middle of the Atlantic, but there is the problem of reasonable access to where people want ultimately to go. The question cf fast transport to and from airports is being seriously considered.

As this hover-train experimental track runs through my constituency, is the reason for the shortening of the original track by about 4½ miles, announced a short time ago, due to the Chancellor's recent package?

Not that I know of.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will make a statement on the progress made in prospecting for uranium in Scotland.

As part of the uranium reconnaissance programme carried out in the north of Scotland numerous samples of water and stream sediments have been collected. Much analytical work has still to be done but at least four areas appear to merit more detailed assessment.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this has created a great deal of interest in the Press in Scotland? Can he tell the House whether any calculations have been made of the economic and financial advantages this would mean to the economy?

I am sure that it is arousing interest in in Scotland, as elsewhere. On the economic question, this is trying to prepare an insurance, a fall-back position, in case there is any difficulty in getting supplies from elsewhere.

Can the hon. Gentleman tell us whether a comprehensive mineral survey is being carried out in Scotland and, if not, whether he has any plans to do it, because it is known that there are some very fine mineral deposits of many kinds in Scotland?

I think that is a different question.

asked the Minister of Technology what consideration has been given by the National Research Development Council to participate in the development of the advanced passenger train, or the gas turbine power unit to drive it; and what proposals he has for the future.

Participation by the National Research Development Corporation in the advanced passenger train project was considered. It was decided that it would be more appropriate for the Ministry of Transport to contribute to the development. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport told the House on 11th November that he had offered assistance to British Rail, and there are other Questions for him to answer today.—[Vol. 773, c. 21–2.]

Why was my Question transferred to the Minister of Transport, bearing in mind that there was a possibility of the N.R.D.C. taking a bigger role and his own Ministry taking a bigger role? Do we understand from this that the active role by the industry for which the Minister is responsible is a smaller one. Is it not regrettable that the Minister has not got a bigger interest in it?

No. I think this arrangement is most appropriate. The work on the advanced passenger train project was, after all, done by British Railways, in the first place. It is, therefore, right that the Minister responsible for the finances of British Railways should look after this particular project.

May we at least have an assurance that the project will go forward under a new project manager and that there will not be a duplication of Ministries?

There will be no confusion at all between responsibilities in separate Departments.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will make a statement on the development of a nuclear reactor for surface ships.

I have nothing to add to the Answer my right hon. Friend, made in reply to a Question by the hon. Member on 14th October.—[Vol. 770, c. 4–5.]

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Italians are now building a nuclear-powered naval auxiliary ship? Is it not time that this country, the leading maritime nation, should begin to get some experience of this new type of propulsion afloat? Will the Government con- hider building some sort of naval vessel to give us that experience?

The hon. Gentleman asked about naval vessels. If he wants an answer on that subject he must address his question to the Secretary of State for Defence. We have two shipbuilders in touch with us about possible mintech support for a study of this and other projects, and we shall need to do some work on it. We are determined to go ahead with a prototype ship only if it can be justified in terms of the expected benefits to British industry, and if they are commensurate with the costs.

Does my hon. Friend recognise that we are being leapfrogged in maritime reactor technology by Japan, West Germany, and Russia, and that active attention is urgently necessary?

Much of the technology is quite familiar to us. My hon. Friend must accept from us that we are determined to do only what is commercial. We are not going to commit ourselves to a prestige project which is not commercial.

Is not the hon. Member aware that his reluctance to add to his statement of 14th October is a little odd in the light of the news which has since come to hand that Germany now proposes to build a second ship after the "Otto Hahn"? Should not we examine carefully the economics which led Germany to that conclusion?

The hon. Member is aware that in terms of nuclear power technology we have a considerable lead over the Germans. It may be necessary for the Germans to do more research in this field than it would be necessary for us to do. I repeat that we shall go ahead with the project when it shows commercial viability

asked the Minister of Technology whether he intends to publish a White Paper outlining the Government's future policy towards Government research establishments.

As my right hon. Friend has previously explained, he has decided to defer the publication of the White Paper on Research Policy in view of the Defence Review and the current investigation of the Select Committee on Science and Technology into research and development.—[Vol. 762, c. 48.]

Can the Minister say when he expects to get the Select Committee's Report?

That is a matter for the Select Committee. I have no influence over it. Present indications are that its report should be expected in the spring.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service what representations he has received from the Vice-Chancellors in respect of Civil Service training colleges; and what reply he has made.

None, Sir.

Are the Vice-Chancellors still discontented?

As far as I know, no. They are aware that we are completely at their disposal to discuss this subject if they want to do so.

Will the right hon. Lady bear in mind the fact that in setting up this suggested college it is necessary that it should not become a hothouse for the Civil Service for studying at weekends or at any time time? Is she further aware that there would be great advantage in having a mixture of business people and civil servants so the we could have discussions between Government organisations and outside private industry?

That point was fairly fully discussed in the very interesting debate that we had last week. I can assure the hon. Member that the very last thing we want to do is to create a Civil Service hothouse. We want to expose it to outside influence as much as possible.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service what plans he has for a Civil Service residential college in Scotland or the north of England.

The Civil Service College is likely to need a residential centre close to London, and for this we intend to use the former Civil Defence College premises at Sunningdale, and another centre which can be in some other part of Britain. We are not yet near a point of decision about its siting.

Although in the view of many of us what the Fulton Committee said about civil servants' lack of knowledge of areas outside London was too glib by half, will my right hon. Friend nevertheless recognise that there is a strong case for a Civil Service College either in the North of England or in Scotland?

The factors which will govern our decision on this college will be, first, that it will have to have premises which are suitable; secondly, that we shall want the premises to be near either a university or a large technical college and, thirdly, that we shall want our decision to be totally in line with our overall and very successful policy for dispersal.

Will the right hon. Lady consider going in for advanced planning, and consider her other function, as Minister for devolution, and then go for a college sited near a Parliament, namely, one in Scotland?

I was wondering how the hon. Lady would resolve her conflict on this question. It would be an advantage to Scotland or to any other part of Britain far from London if we were able to site this part of the college somewhere else.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service in which Departments of Whitehall senior policy advisers have been appointed in accordance with the recommendations of the Fulton Committee.

A number of Departments have senior officers with particular responsibility for long-term policy. No new advisers have been appointed since the publication of the Report with precisely the role and status recommended by the Committee. But this recommendation is being studied.

Is this not rather an urgent matter in the light of the events of the last few days and the stormy history of the Government? Is not the impetus for forward thinking which Fulton argued would follow the setting up of senior policy advisers and planning units badly needed? Should not we get on with this matter?

We are getting on with this matter. There is a distinction to be made between medium-term and long-term planning, and there is also a need for each Department to work out the best arrangements for its responsibilities and needs. There is real urgency in our approach to this matter.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service what steps she is taking to initiate an early review of the question of hiving off public programmes into autonomous public boards or corporations, as recommended by the Fulton Committee Report.

I have nothing to add to what my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said when he moved the motion on the Fulton Report (Cmnd. Paper No. 3638) on the Civil Service on 21st November, 1968.—[Vol. 773, c. 154265.]

But is the right hon. Lady aware that we did not gather very clearly what the Prime Minister intended when he spoke in that debate? Does she not accept that the hiving off of Departments is inseparable from the development of the Civil Service Department and the whole Fulton Committee philosophy? Could she tell us what plans are intended and what Departments will, possibly, disappear as a result of setting up separate agencies instead?