asked the Minister of Public Building and Works if he will make a statement about his recent discussions with leaders of the construction industry.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will make a statement on his meeting with representatives of the building industry and the architectural profession regarding the state of trade in the industry.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what representations he has received from architects regarding the current level of new commissions for building work; and what replies he has sent.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what recent discussions he has had with trade unions and employers' bodies and other bodies concerned regarding the high level of unemployment in the construction industry; and what proposals he has to alleviate the situation.

I have had regular discussions with representatives of the industry, and at the meetings held on 22nd January the Chairman of the E.D.C.s for Building and Civil Engineering and the Presidents of the R.I.B.A. and the National Federation of Building Trades Employers gave me their views on the present state of the building industry. I am considering their advice with my colleagues.

My right hon. Friend has not given the House any information at all. Is he aware that a large number of hon. Members share the concern of the building industry about the present state of the industry and the fact that the building materials producers are working to only about half their capacity? Is he further aware that by 1974 nearly 80 of the larger municipal corporations will have stopped building? As long ago as 1967 I proposed to his predecessor that a national building corporation should be started. Why has no action been taken on this?

There are a number of questions here. I thought that I had answered the original one. Obviously, the state of the building industry is a matter of concern to the Minister, and that was precisely why I called the representatives of the industry in to see me.

We have.

The hon. Lady may have made representations to my predecessors three or four years ago, but she has never made any to me.

Read the Report of the Estimates Committee.

Is the Minister aware that the industry and the profession can no longer be put off by expressions of sympathy, and that they need immediate positive action, such as the removal of selective employment tax and the easing of credit terms, to get them out of what threatens to be the worst depression affecting the industry since the 1930s?

These were among the points made by members of the various professions who saw me, though not by the architects, with whom the hon. Gentleman's Question was concerned. Of course one is aware of the degree of concern in the industry, but the peak of building at this moment throughout the industry is considerably more than it was at the time when hon. Gentlemen opposite were in control of our destiny.

Is the Minister aware that the architects' latest quarterly inquiry showed a record slump in new commissions, which may be reflected in building activities 18 months hence? How many more indications of a slump does he require to jerk him out of his complacency?

I do not think that I have been complacent in this matter because, as I said—perhaps the hon. Gentleman did not hear me—it was I who called the leaders of the industry to see me. The architects, with whom I have great sympathy, put their point of view very clearly. Nevertheless, it is a patchy future for them. In some regions the figures are holding very well; it is mainly the London-based offices which appear to be feeling a drop in commissions at the moment.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that, with 125,000 building operatives out of work, 5,500 of them on Merseyside alone, this is a most serious crisis in the building industry? One-fifth of our total unemployed are concentrated in the building industry. Does there not need to be drastic action on the part of the Government, and will my right hon. Friend, with whom I sympathise, inform the Treasury that action must be taken, and taken soon, to overcome this serious problem?

I share my hon. Friend's concern about the unemployment figures. This was one of the factors which led me to call the leaders of the industry together. I am considering with my colleagues the very questions he has raised. As far as I am concerned, there is no complacency and no lack of action by me or my colleagues.

If the Minister is not complacent why did he not act months ago on the requests made continually from this side, and the other side of the House, that he should go to the Chancellor and ask that house builders should be placed in a priority class? Why leave it too late and let the industry die through letting it down?

In the first place, I do not think that this feeling that I have let the industry down is shared by the industry. I have had regular discussions throughout, and it is well aware that all representations made to me have not been exactly kept to myself. I am bound to say that this new concern of hon. Gentlemen opposite—[Interruption.] Yes, new concern. If hon. Gentlemen will listen to me, I am perfectly happy that our record should be judged, especially when it is realised that in our three worst years of house building we built 150,000 more houses than hon. Gentlemen opposite during their three best years in office.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that St. Helen's Corporation housing department has in the last financial year paid almost £750,000 in interest rates and that in the next financial year the amount will be over £1 million? Will he concern himself with this problem, and take up with his right hon. Friend the question of the cost of borrowing money for housing, because it is far too expensive?

My right hon. Friend is well aware of the fact that interest rates are high in this country and in almost all industrial countries of the world.

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

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what representations he has received from the National Federation of Builders and Plumbers Merchants regarding the state of trade in the building industry; and what action he has taken.

I have received a copy of a memorandum from the Federation, and I am meeting it on 12th February.

Will the Minister be frank and admit that this memorandum points out that the building industry is suffering the worst depression since the war? Does he further realise that unless he is prepared to persuade the Chancellor of the Exchequer to remove S.E.T., the industry will not accept that he is trying to help it?

The points made by the federation were similar in content to those made by the builders. I think that we are all aware of those points. There has been no lack of publicity of them.

I do not think that my right hon. Friend is either cheating or complacent. Whilst the number of completions this year unavoidably will now show a further decrease, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he is aware that the number of starts in the house building industry could be rapidly increased if he successfully persuaded the Chancellor to get the banks to make priority loans for house building purposes?

This was one of the points that the builders made. It is a matter for my right hon. Friend to consider.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works, having regard to the 26 per cent. increase in building constructional labour costs now agreed and 11 per cent. to 13 per cent. increase of prices proposed by the British Steel Corporation, what estimate he has made of increased building constructional costs in 1970–72; and whether he will make a statement.

It is not yet possible to make an estimate of increased construction costs up to 1972. The final overall effect of the recent wage agreement will depend on the contribution to increased productivity which the Government and the industry expect the agreement to make. The rise in steel prices will by itself add an average of about one third of 1 per cent. to overall construction costs: the precise increase will depend on the type of work.

Has not the Minister neglected to observe that there are 629,000 people out of work, of whom 525,000 are men, more than half of them over 45 years of age, and more than 100,000 from the building and construction industry? Is he aware that if these men leave the industry they will never return? Will not that raise costs enormously, and to the tune of 5s. in the £ with these other factors, during the next two years?

I do not think that the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question really follows from his original Question. In any event, I would not agree with him.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take this seriously? Does he appreciate—it is no good the Minister laughing—that the industry is in a most difficult situation? Does he not appre- ciate that my hon. Friend's Question was right on the point? Is he aware that it is no good his saying that one-third of the cost increase is due to an increase in the price of steel, because so little of the house building industry uses steel? Does he realise that apprentices are not joining the industry? Will he take note of what his hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Heffer) says if he will not believe us on this side of the House?

The hon. Gentleman should re-read his hon. Friend's Question. He was asking about the increase in building constructional costs as a result of a price increase by the British Steel Corporation. I answered that Question. It amounts to a total of £3 per house, and I would maintain that that is not of very great consequence.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the hopelessly unsatisfactory nature—

Notice must be given in the conventional way.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works on how many occasions between 17th December 1969 and 13th January, 1970, inclusive, the morning temperature in window seats in the typing pool in Room 1231 of the Central Office Block in Portsmouth Dockyard was below 60 degrees Fahrenheit; what is the estimated cost of making good the heating and ventilation of this building; and whether he will make a statement.

The occupying department carried out checks in this block during this period and temperatures were recorded below 70°F on only two occasions. Tubular heaters will, however, be fitted in this room adjacent to the windows in cold areas between heating vents. I am proposing to improve the ventilation of this office block at an approximate cost of £70,000.

While thanking my hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask him whether he would not agree that the temperatures to which he referred did not apply to the entire room space? Would he not further agree that these intolerable working conditions are another example of inadequate design or inadequate construction, or both, and that a full departmental inquiry ought to be held into the building of this office block so that similar expensive mistakes can be avoided in future?

I am not sure that there are design faults in this. The temperatures recorded by the staff, which no doubt prompted my hon. Friend's Question, were temperature readings taken within 18 inches of the windows. I appreciate that there are bound to be variations in temperature in a room. All I can say is that we are looking at the problem and will do whatever we possibly can to ensure that the staff have reasonable working conditions.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will take steps to encourage the adoption of common trench layouts for the installation of utility services to building sites in order to avoid repeated inconvenience to the public.

A major publicity campaign is in progress following the publication in 1969 of my Ministry's two Bulletins on Co-ordination of Underground Services on Building Sites.

While thanking my hon. Friend for that reply, and appreciating that to a great extent this is in the hands of the local authorities, might I ask him if he will emphasise to them that this is an area in which a little planning and forethought can spare the public a great deal of danger and frustration?

I certainly take my hon. Friend's point. I go a bit further and say that if we could get local authorities and others thinking in terms of the co-ordination of underground services we should save a lot of money. We are examining inter-departmentally the drafting of a letter to local authorities to try to stimulate some interest in this worthwhile project.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this is not just the responsibility of the local authorities, and that some of the greatest problems arise through the activities of electricity boards, gas undertakings, telephone exchanges and water undertakings? Is he aware that local authorities often try to get the co-operation of these bodies? Is he further aware that a letter to local authorities will not be sufficient but that some real action is required from the Minister?

I have opened a number of conferences to which representatives of not only local authorities and the building industry but the allied services to which the hon. Member refers have been invited. I appreciate that very often local authorities have some difficulty with organisations supplying services. On the other hand, local authorities can sometimes be the focal point upon which the whole operation can be co-ordinated.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what estimate he has made of the extra staff required by his Department to carry out recommendation 3 c of the Phelps Brown Committee, namely, that long-term building forecasts should be prepared for the regions in order to make for more stable conditions in the building and construction industry.

My existing staff are adequate for this task.

Then why is it not carried out? Surely my right hon. Friend will agree that if this purely administrative plan were implemented, it would very much ease out the wild fluctuations in the building industries and the building materials industries and help correct their present difficulties?

Consideration of regional prospects has always been a function of the regional joint advisory committees of my Ministry. We are reviewing the arrangements with the aim of achieving greater uniformity in the methods of forecasting adopted by the individual regions.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will now hold a public inquiry into the proposals for Richmond Terrace.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will set up a public inquiry into the proposed redevelopment of Whitehall which involves the destruction of Scotland Yard and Richmond Terrace.

I am considering public reaction to the proposals for this site, which have recently been exhibited, and it is hoped to make a further announcement to the House very shortly.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether any cost-benefit or other analysis has been made of the proposals to house 4,000 civil servants on the site of Richmond Terrace, and will he commission an independent inquiry to look into those proposals and report separately?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the whole question has been gone into thoroughly, and it will not be very long before I am in a position to make a further announcement. In view of that, I hope that he will not press me too hard at this moment.

Is the Minister prepared to say whether he is considering a planning inquiry commission as set out in the 1966 Act?

It is a later Act than that. I think that it is the Housing Act, 1968. However, I do not think that it would help if I were to answer that question today.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that much of Richmond Terrace is now slum property and represents a disgraceful waste of valuable space in the heart of the Commonwealth? Will he take steps to pull down the place as soon as possible?

That rather shows the difficulties for a Minister who wishes to make a decision of this sort. There are so many conflicting views upon it.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works when the new restaurant will he opened to the public in St. James's Park.

On Monday week, 23rd February. I am pleased to be able to tell the House that the opening ceremony will be performed by Mrs. Harold Wilson.

May I congratulate the Ministry on two counts? Doubtless the Prime Minister's wife will celebrate this. The first count is that at last the Ministry has managed both to begin and to finish one small building. The second count concerns the pleasing aspect of the new restaurant. I hope that the identity of the architect will be made known. It is a very pleasant building, and some very welcome amenities will become available when it is opened.

I am not too sure about the hon. Gentleman's first congratulation. However, if he cares to go along, it will be one of those occasions when he can have his cake and eat it.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works to whom the site in the City of Westminster, formerly intended for a new Colonial Office, has been leased; for how long, for how much, and on what conditions; and what is to be the future development.

Most of the site is now occupied by National Car Parks Ltd. on a six-monthly basis. A comprehensive redevelopment, to provide a Government Conference Centre and new Headquarters for the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors and the Institution of Civil Engineers, which own buildings to the north, is under consideration.

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that over the years the site has been put to the best and most profitable use?

As the hon. Gentleman probably knows, the site was the subject of a public inquiry. The Martin Plan of 1965 had advised against offices and in favour of a building of national or international importance providing conference and other facilities for the Government. I cannot help feeling that, as matters have turned out, bearing in mind that this is a subject which goes back over some years under successive Governments, we shall be providing what the centre of London badly needs, which is accommodation for conferences. Therefore, in that sense, I am certain that the best use has been made of it.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will make an appreciation of the accessibility of the public parts of the Palace of Westminster to those using wheel-chairs, make recommendations and issue a simple route plan, to include the siting of suitable sanitary facilities, to assist disabled visitors and those who are guiding them.

Yes, although I should like to make it clear that the authorities of the House already take special care to ensure that invalids in wheel-chairs visiting the Palace of Westminster are afforded all possible assistance, including the use of the lifts to reach all the main public parts on the Principal floor. The suggestion of a route plan is for the authorities of the House to consider, and I will invite their attention to it.

While I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman's reply of "Yes", it does not take us very far. Is he aware that disabled people in wheel chairs want to live as normal a life as possible? Will he take further steps with a view to making access to parts of the House more easily available to them?

I think that the hon. Gentleman has forgotten his Question, which asks whether I will make an appreciation of the accessibility to the public parts of the Palace of Westminster. I said "Yes, Sir"; in other words, I undertake to make an appreciation with a view to assisting, as far as possible, people who are unfortunate enough to be invalids to get into this House.

While I recognise the special needs of the disabled in this respect, will my hon. Friend acknowledge that there are many hon. Members who are not disabled, yet who find the House inaccessible to them, are forced to have their rooms at considerable distances from the House, and cast particularly interested glances at the facilities at the other end of the building?

Order. That is wide of the original Question.

In a matter of this kind, I think that we should concentrate our attention on trying to assist those people who experience difficulty in getting into this House.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works by how much the output of the construction industries, measured at constant 1963 prices, declined in 1969; and to what factors he attributes that decline.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether, taking 1963 as equalling 100, he will give the figures of the index of production of all construction work, seasonally adjusted, of the third quarter of 1959 and the equivalent figures for 1964 and 1969.

Information for the full year 1969 is not yet complete, but, taking 1963 as 100, the indices of total construction output for the third quarters are 1959, 89; 1964, 111; and 1969, 118.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that if, as appears likely, there has been a decline in constant prices in 1969 compared with 1968, this is the first such decline since 1951? Is it not apparent that his predecessor was grossly optimistic in his forecast to the House on 3rd December, 1968?

The figures will be available in any event at the end of February. I derive some amusement from the hon. Gentleman's use of the word "decline" in his original Question. A decline would bring us almost to the low level reached when right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite were in charge, and that is not what has happened.

Do not the figures show that growth in the output of the construction industry runs at about 1 per cent. a year under Socialism whereas it is about 5 per cent. a year under Conservatism? What does the Minister intend to do about it?

It does not show anything of the sort.

Has my right hon. Friend any forecast of what construction output would be if right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite abolished housing subsidies, as apparently was threatened at the Selsdon Park conference?

I have not. It is bad enough trying to answer for the Opposition, without going into the future as well. At a time of housing shortage, such as after the passing of the Tory Rent Act of 1957, when a record of evictions was established by right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite, their figure was 254,000 in the year.

Is it not time that the right hon. Gentleman stopped cheating the House, as he did on the last occasion on which he was asked this question, by taking refuge in current price figures of output, which are totally meaningless? Is it not time that he took off his blinkers and realised how serious the situation is in the construction industry? Will he not get down to doing something about it?

I am replying to Questions as they are asked me. If the hon. Gentleman wishes to ask me Questions, he is entitled to do so at any time.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works how the work of the Agrément Board is progressing.

The board has made good progress in increasing the rate at which agrément certificates are issued: three in 1967, 30 in 1969. I hope that designers will, as a matter of course, specify certificated new products in preference to un-certificated ones, and that manufacturers will recognise the acquisition of an agrément certificate to be an essential part of the promotion of a new product.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on the progress of the board. Has it not helped to increase the efficiency and productivity of the building industry, which the party opposite does not recognise, and has it not also helped to increase exports of building materials?

Any system of testing of materials and component parts is bound to improve our chances in the export market. But I think that it goes further. If we can get an increase in the number of applications for testings from manufacturers and can usefully complete 100 a year, I think it would improve the design and the construction of buildings in the future.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what surveys he has carried out into the effect on productivity on Government contracts of British Standard Time during the darkest month of the year; and what have been the findings of those studies.

None, Sir.

Is it not a proven fact that B.S.T. raises builders' costs and reduces productivity? Is it not time that this unnecessary and unpopular imposition was removed?

I think the hon. Gentleman realises that there has been a two-year experimental period and that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary will be considering all relevant points in connection with the economy and the country as a whole at the correct time. But the Ministry has asked the construction industry to provide all its statistical information. This will be presented initially to the National Consultative Council in March and subsequently to my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that recently in Strasbourg I discovered that it is light at 8 o'clock in the morning? Yet we were informed that it was important to have British Standard Time to bring us into line with European time. Is it not important that we reconsider this whole matter? It has caused a great deal of difficulty in the building industry, and it ought to be removed at the earliest possible moment.

This is one of the many points for and against which my right hon. Friend will be considering. But I take it that I carry my hon. Friend with me when I say that even if we believe and accept that it harms the building industry to have British Standard Time, this is not necessarily the end of the story, because every part of the nation's economy must be considered at the same time.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what progress he has made since the month of December, 1968, in minimising the duplication of departmental forms sent to building contractors asking for statistical information; and whether he will make a statement.

A general change is in progress toward a unified system of governmental statistics, including the collection and processing of statistics by the Business Statistics Office. Discussions with the building materials industries started last year, and negotiations with the contractors' organisations will follow this year.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is growing scepticism in the industry about the worth-whileness of all this information being collected by three Government Departments? Does the Parliamentary Secretary think that it is worth while in getting the industry anywhere?

We must face the fact that certain statistics have to be collated. It is desirable to have a system whereby there is the minimum degree of effort on the part of the industry in supplying the required information. This is what we are aiming at now. There may be duplications, but when we amend forms of this kind we consult the interests concerned so that we can eliminate duplication as far as possible. The hon. Gentleman can rest assured that I want to see the minimum of effort expended on obtaining this information. If he has any particular information that he would like to give to me, he can either send it or discuss it with me.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works when he next proposes to attend a meeting of the Economic Development Committee for Building.

I have been invited to the Economic Development Committee for Building meeting on 27th April.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that 10 months ago the Economic Development Committee for Building predicted an increase last year of 3 per cent. and that recently it had to revise it to a fall of 2 per cent.? Does he not think that it is urgent that he should consult with the committee to see that its predictions are nearer the target?

It is very useful for me to be made aware of everything that the committee is considering. I have promised to make myself available whenever it should wish to see me. It has so asked, and I shall be happy to attend on 27th April. It is true that there was a change in forecast, but this happens in all industries and to all groups of people; they revise as they come nearer to the facts.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works when he will introduce legislation to implement the recommendations of the Report of the Phelps Brown Committee on labour-only sub-contracting.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works when he now proposes to implement the Phelps Brown Report's recommendations on self-employed men in the building industry.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works when he intends to introduce legislation to deal with the problem of labour-only subcontracting.

I have invited both sides of the industry to consult with me on the main measures I intend to incorporate in forthcoming legislation.

If the Bill is as urgent as we understood from the Gracious Speech, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman appreciates that on 12th November he promised the House that he would have these consultations? Why have they not already taken place?

My memory may be at fault, but I do not think that the hon. Gentleman is right when he says that I promised consultations. I think that I promised proposals as soon as possible. I believe that I am now able to put forward definitive proposals, but it is natural that I should want to discuss them with both sides of industry.

Does the right hon. Gentleman intend to present the Bill to Parliament before Easter? Does he recall that in October the Prime Minister said that it was necessary? The building industry is now beginning to wonder whether it is coming along at all in this Session.

Perhaps I might reassure the hon. Gentleman before I reassure the building industry, which I shall be seeing early in the week after next. The Bill will be coming forward, and I shall be discussing proposals with the industry.

As it is now four and a half months since we were promised in the Queen's Speech that this legislation would come in and as labour-only subcontracting is still a growing problem in the building industry, may I ask my right hon. Friend to indicate when precisely the consultations are to take place and when we shall have the legislation before us?

The consultations will be early in the week after next. Obviously I will inform the House as soon as possible.

Concerning this promised Bill which was so urgently needed, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that any further increase in S.E.T. on the construction industry will be intolerable anyway, but that it would be more intolerable and, indeed, an outrage if it happened before the House had a chance to discuss the Bill which very much affects the situation?

I shall pass on the hon. Gentleman's comments to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I would regard my measures as radical enough to please my hon. Friend and I hope not too radical for him.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what is the present annual cost to the construction industry of the selective employment tax.

About £155 million is paid by the construction industry.

Would the Minister not agree that with these charges, taxes, levies and duties, it is costing about £6 per man per week to get him on to the site and that as a result there has been a reduction in output in the industry and an increase in the number of self-employed?

The hon. Gentleman may be aware that before S.E.T. came into existence in 1966 the number of self-employed people was increasing at the rate of 10,000 a year. The figure in 1966, which I quote from memory, was 175,000. Therefore, we cannot blame S.E.T. totally for the situation. It is certainly not true that S.E.T. accounts for £6 a week.

Will the Minister examine the cost of S.E.T. in terms of the percentage that goes on to building?

Yes, I would say that in a full year it adds a little less than 4 per cent. to construction costs.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works how many members of his Department he has seconded to give full-time assistance to Professor Reddaway in his inquiry regarding the effect on the construction industry of selective employment tax; and whether they are primarily resident in Cambridge during their secondment, or in London.

None, Sir.

But is the Minister not aware of the urgency of this inquiry? Was it not said in July of last year that additional help was required to give Professor Reddaway a chance to publish his important findings?

Professor Reddaway has a number of staff, and their recruitment and deployment is a matter for him. I am satisfied that he is pursuing his inquiries energetically. He has secured the assistance of a former member of the staff of the Building Research Station, but when he may report is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

In view of the fact that one quarter of the income from S.E.T. comes from the building industry and that that industry bears one-fifth of the unemployed, is it not time that the whole question of S.E.T. as it affects the building industry was looked at speedily, and, indeed, abolished for that industry?

The question of looking at S.E.T. in the building industry is being pursued, as has been said, by Professor Reddaway. It will be very important and interesting to see the result of that inquiry.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will give the annual average figures for the index of the cost of new construction, taking 1963 as equally 100, for 1960, and the equivalent figures for 1964 and 1968.

Ninety-one in 1960, 102 in 1964 and 118 in 1968.

Is it not a fact that construction costs have risen far more sharply in the first four years of Labour Government than they did in the last four years of Conservative Government, and that if one were to take the years 1959 and 1969 the position would be even more unfavourable to the Government?

The difference is the marginal one of about 1 per cent., but the hon. Gentleman must also take into account the rather wider perspective and must not be too parochial. The index of construction costs in the United States and in most industrial countries in Europe is greater than, or at the best the same as, in this country.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what progress has been made in implementing his decisions regarding the directly employed labour force of his Department, in the light of the Mann Committee Reports and subsequent surveys; and whether he will make a statement.

Those needed to operate basic services and to meet special requirements have been identified. The work of the remainder and its cost have been analysed, and the results will be reviewed in due course. Measures recommended by management consultants to increase efficiency are being introduced. Negotiations are proceeding with the trade unions on a possible productivity agreement.

Is the basis of the Ministry's policy that where the work on non-security buildings can be done economically this can be undertaken by contractors?

We are attempting to evaluate the directly employed labour force as against the use of contractors. We shall use the directly employed labour force in certain areas where it is necessary to use it and in all of the instances where it is competitive with contractors.