asked the Minister of Overseas Development whether she will make a statement on her latest consultations with other member States of the International Development Association concerning the Association's next financial replenishment.

As part of the continuing process of consultation between member States, the International Development Association has called a further meeting of representatives of the Part I member countries in Vienna early next week, at the invitation of the Austrian Government. I hope that at this meeting it will be possible to make further progress towards a decision on the size and form of the third replenishment.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is widespread respect throughout the international community for the forthright lead which she has given in this matter? Will she remind our partners in I.D.A. that the delay in coming to conclusions on the last replenishment seriously disrupts the ongoing programme of the organisation, and this should in future be avoided at all costs?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his comments. We have certainly tried to give all the lead we could in this matter. I am hoping that a final decision may be reached by the middle of the year. We shall do our best to persuade our friends to join with us.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development whether she now proposes to pay the pensions of locally enlisted servants of the Aden and Zanzibar Governments whose pensions are in default.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development whether the arrangements made for the payment of pensions to public servants in Southern Yemen announced on 19th March will apply, mutatis mutandis, to similar pensioners who served in Zanzibar and who find themselves likewise without any pension owing to the action of the Zanzibar Government.

In respect of the Aden pensioners I would refer the hon. Member for Hemel Hempstead (Mr. Allason) to the written reply my right hon. Friend gave to the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Mr. Sharpies) on 19th March. Her Majesty's Government are prepared to make ex gratia loan advances equivalent to the amount of pensions to indigenous pensioners who were members of the civil administration and civil police. In respect of the Zanzibar pensioners our representations are still continuing. [Vol. 798, c. 208-9.]

Should not the Government take the same steps for Zanzibar that they have taken for Aden? Will the Minister explain why the operative date for Aden is 1st April, 1970, when some pensioners suffered hardship before that date?

The hon. Member will appreciate that arrangements have to be made to ensure that matters work out satisfactorily. He will be aware that there is a clear distinction between the situation in Zanzibar and in the South Yemen. Whereas no agreement was reached with the Southern Yemen Government, there was a contractual agreement established with Zanzibar on independence, and it is the Zanzibar Government who have defaulted.

What hope is there of the Zanzibar Government coming to an agreement with Her Majesty's Government, how many pensioners are likely to be affected, and will they be treated as individual cases?

The British High Commissioner in Dar-es-Salaam has made repeated representations, and more recently to the President of Zanzibar, about the non-payment of Zanzibar local pensions. While everybody sympathises with this situation, to derogate from it would be a standing incentive to others to abrogate their contractual obligations.

Does not the hon. Gentleman realise that there are many people in this country who do not understand how British taxpayers' money can be made available to a Government that behaves so disgracefully towards its former public servants, whose only crime was that they faithfully served the Crown before independence?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that there is a clear distinction between the situation in Yemen, where there was no agreement covering these pensioners, and the fact that when Zanzibar became independent a public officers' agreement was concluded and a pension safeguard written into the Constitution.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what was the value of Great Britain's capital assistance, technical assistance and budgetary assistance to Botswana and Swaziland in 1969–70; what is the estimate for 1970–71; when she will terminate budgetary assistance; and whether she will make a statement.

In 1969–70 our development aid, budgetary aid, and technical assistance to Botswana amounted in rounded figures to£ 6.1 million, and to Swaziland £3·5 million. The estimate for 1970–71 is, respectively, £ 4·6 million and £2·4 million. Budgetary aid to Swaziland ended in 1969–70 and in the case of Botswana is expected to finish at the end of 1971–72.

Will my right hon. Friend accept that we all cheer the ending of the need for budgetary assistance to these two territories, but, because of the general political situation in that part of the world, there is widespread feeling on this side of the House that Botswana and Swaziland should continue to receive high priority in the Government's aid development programme?

Yes, and I can assure my hon. Friend they will continue to do so. He will appreciate that the reduction in the level of our aid is a consequence of the increased revenue that both countries are receiving under their new Customs agreement with South Africa, but we fully intend to do whatever we can for both countries.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development whether she will now give figures for both official aid and private flows during 1969 and an estimate of their percentage of gross national product.

In the calendar year 1969 gross official aid was £210·8 million, and net financial flows counting towards the U.N.C.T.A.D. target were £178·7 million official and, provisionally, £ 210 million private, representing together 0·85 per cent. of g.n.p.

Will my right hon. Friend break down the 0·85 per cent. g.n.p. into figures for private flows and Government aid? Will she tell the House whether Government aid in percentage of g.n.p. is still declining as it has been declining since 1964?

Yes, the breakdown is as follows. Net official flows in 1968—that is not gross, but net—stood at 0·42 per cent. Despite the increase in the actual amount, in 1969 this became 0·39 per cent. Private flows, on the other hand, increased from 0·33 per cent. to 0·46 per cent. My right hon. Friend will fully recognise that the programme which I announced in November last year is designed precisely to reverse this trend.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what plans she has for reducing the number of civil servants employed in her Department in the United Kingdom; and what plans she has for increasing the number of representatives from the Minister of Overseas Development serving overseas.

The answer to the first part of the Question is "None, Sir ". I am considering setting up additional development divisions overseas but am not in a position to make any statement at present.

Is the Minister aware that there are 25 civil servants serving in the United Kingdom in her Department for every representative of Her Majesty serving overseas, and that many experts think that the administration of the aid programme would be improved if this balance were shifted? Many of us think that the regional development centres do an excellent job in providing a link between the Ministry and individual recipients. Will the Minister say whether she is proposing to set up new centres?

In answer to the last part of the supplementary Question, I cannot yet say, but I will do so as soon as I can; these matters are under consideration. I think that the hon. Gentleman may be a little confused in breaking down the total number of O.D.M. staff in Britain. This includes about 1,000 who are in our special units, for example, the Directorate of Overseas Service, the Tropical Products Institute and the other institutes which we finance and which are not directly concerned with administration of aid but are staffed by specialists, scientists, surveyors, and so on.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that those of us who have seen the excellent work done in the Middle East by the Regional Development Commission at Beirut welcome the statement that she is considering setting up other offices, and we hope that she will soon come to a conclusion?

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's comments on the Middle East. Had he visited the Caribbean Development Commission ha would have been even more reinforced in this view, and it is this which is leading me now to consider the establishment of further divisions.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what has been the loss of interest and capital on the £1 million loan given by the Commonwealth Development Corporation to Rhodesia for African urban housing; and if this loss of resources to the Corporation is being compensated by her Department.

Up to the end of 1969 the arrears totalled £237,500 and £200,000 respectively. No compensation is being paid.

Will my hon. Friend say whether there are any more considerable sums outstanding, even if no more compensation is being paid? Is this taken into account in the assessment of the figures? Is it not surprising that hon. Gentlemen opposite who continue to support the illegal regime never say anything about what it owes us?

I am entirely at one with my hon. Friend in admiration for the work that the C.D.C. is doing. In reply to the first part of his question, it has three investments in Rhodesia, but, as my hon. Friend will recognise, the responsibility for the default lies with the present temporary regime in Salisbury.

Is not this a most unsatisfactory situation? Since the C.D.C. is unable to reap any advantage from its investment of public money in Rhodesia because of the Government's policy, have any representations been made to the Treasury to the effect that this excellent instrument for overseas development should be recouped in some way?

The hon. Gentleman will recognise that the C.D.C. is but one of a great number of private people and companies who are victims of the present unfortunate circumstances in Salisbury.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development why she is increasing the amount of aid given to Kenya at a time when many residents of Kenya who hold British passports are subject to official economic discrimination.

I am not increasing the amount of aid given to Kenya. I have offered the Kenyan Government capital aid of £11·5 million which is expected to be drawn down over the next four years. This compares with £18 million for the four-year period 1966–70.

The amount of aid given to Kenya in 1970 on the capital side will be £7 million. As the decision to give such a high proportion of our bilateral aid to Kenya is clearly political, we must have tried to get some safeguards for the British passport holders and indeed the Asian community as a whole in Kenya.

The hon. Gentleman is confusing the amount of aid drawn down in the next four years with the amount that remains to be drawn down of the £18 million agreed for the period 1966–70. That is the figure he is referring to.

May we take it that there is no objection to paying aid to racialist Governments?

The aid I administer at the Ministry of Overseas Development is administered on developmental grounds. I do not know whether the hon. and learned Gentleman is suggesting that in the administration of my aid programme I should change the criteria from developmental grounds to political grounds.

Is that not precisely what the Minister and her Government are doing in the case of Lesotho and Malta? Will she not take an early opportunity in the case of both those territories to give the House an idea of the Government's intentions? The impression now being given is that the Government are using aid as a political weapon.

The hon. Gentleman will find that had one of his hon. Friends been in the House to ask a Question about Malta, the answer would have been totally in terms of developmental criteria, as I judge them at the Ministry. As for Lesotho, that is an issue concerned primarily with recognition.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what contingency planning exists to assist African development and general development in Rhodesia when normal relations have been restored.

If normal relations could be restored on the basis of a return to legality in accordance with our principles, we would be ready to resume aid to Rhodesia according to the circumstances then prevailing.

Would the Minister reconsider that answer in the light of what she has just said to her hon. and learned Friend the Member for Northampton (Mr. Paget)? Is she not giving aid to many regimes of very doubtful legality? While the Government constantly assert their trusteeship for the Africans, are they not retarding their development by their policy of sanctions? Pending an outbreak of common sense, will they see what can be done to help the multi-racial University College in Salisbury and to go on helping it?

On the last part of the supplementary question, the hon. Gentleman will be aware that the primary responsibility for what happens in the U.C.R. in Salisbury lies with the Universities of Birmingham and London and that we as a Government have a tenuous connection with that university. The first part of the supplementary question should be directed to the hon. Member for Essex, South-East (Mr. Braine), who raised the question of Lesotho, since it concerns recognition of a legal or illegal Government. This arises in the case of Lesotho and also in connection with Rhodesia. I am not sure whether he is suggesting that the principles the Conservative Party would apply would permit both recognition and resumption of aid now.

Would the Minister agree that one of the best forms of assistance to Rhodesia would be to give educational grants to those African students who have had their grants cut off by the Rhodesian Government and therefore their residential qualifications do not entitle them to get a grant from the Department of Education and Science? May I mention the case of Mr. Chideme from Liverpool who has been seeking to get into Liverpool University since last October?

I am looking into that case. I am giving a great deal of help from the Ministry to students from Rhodesia in terms of their university education here. and I should like to seek to extend this as far as possible compatible with all the requirements which have to be satisfied.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development if she will now make a detailed announcement about the resumption of aid to Tanzania.

As a preliminary to normal detailed aid discussions, I have proposed to the Tanzania Government that a senior official from my Ministry should visit Tanzania for discussions. This suggestion has been welcomed by the Tanzania Government and I hope the visit will shortly take place.

The answer is very welcome. Could my right hon. Friend say what level this senior civil servant will be, and will he discuss with the Tanzanian Government aid given to the housing programme which might have useful implications for other developing countries as well in the form of self-help?

The level of the official—I will not name him—who will be going to Tanzania shortly is Deputy Secretary. I am certain that the matter my hon. Friend has mentioned will arise in the course of discussion to see how best we can assist with the Tanzanian development programme.

Will those discussions cover the pensions of former Zanzibar officials who are not covered by the public service agreement between Zanzibar and the United Kingdom?

I do not think I have anything to add to what I said to my hon. Friend in answer to a previous Question. Undoubtedly there will be a whole range of discussions, but I hope that they will be concerned with how best Britain can again assist in Tanzania's development.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development if she will pay an official visit to the Caribbean developing nations.

I should certainly welcome the opportunity to visit the Commonwealth countries in the Caribbean, but I have no early plans for such a visit.

In the absence of a visit, would my right hon. Friend take a careful look at how a combination of both private and official aid could be used to increase employment opportunities in these countries where there is a high rate of unemployment among the young, and would this not be to the mutual advantage of developing countries and enable this country to use the Caribbean as a springboard for the sale of manufactures to the rest of the Western hemisphere?

One of the most useful contributions we are now about to make in the Caribbean generally in terms of developing countries of the Commonwealth is in the form of the new Caribbean Development Bank to whose funds Britain is contributing and in which we have taken a great initiative. This can be very helpful in the future in giving investment money for the creation of employment opportunities in the Caribbean.

Will the Minister consider the possibility of extending the development area concept which exists in the Caribbean similar to the one in the Middle East? Would she consider extending development area techniques outside these two areas to other areas in the world as recommended by the Estimates Committee so that we can have experts on the spot?

I explained a little earlier that I have now under consideration the extension of this principal. I am considering setting up further development divisions one by one, but I am not yet in a position to make a detailed statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what is the total of unemployed in north Oxfordshire.

At 13th April, 1970, the provisional number of persons registered as unemployed in the area covered by the Banbury Employment Exchange was 529.

While realising that that was just about the national average, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that under the Conservatives it was 0·9 per cent. and not about 2·7 per cent., which it is now? What are the Government going to do about it?

The hon. Gentleman knows that redundancies in British Leyland last November and the rundown in the British Railways marshalling yard have affected the figures. However, the interesting fact in Banbury is the high number of unfilled vacancies notified to the Department, which is more than double what it was in April, 1963. This illustrates the difficulty of linking up unemployment with unfilled vacancies, which is a problem we are studying. As for what the Government are doing about the situation, the hon. Members knows that in respect of I.D.C.s, after development areas and intermediate areas, priority is given to overspill towns such as Banbury.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity if she will make a further statement about her discussions with bank employers regarding the National Board for Prices and Incomes latest report on terms of employment in the banks.

I have nothing to add to the answer I gave to the hon. Member on 19th March. — [Vol. 798, c. 160.]

Is it not true that the Federation of Bank Employers has told the right hon. Lady and Mr. Jones to go boil an egg? Had he not better admit this, and is not the Federation absolutely right to have done so?

The hon. Gentleman is quite wrong, because my Department is now engaged in discussions with the banks.

Would the hon. Gentleman explain how these agreements reached between the banks and the National Union of Bank Employees are referred to the National Board for Prices and Incomes far more frequently than appears to be the case with agreements reached in other industries?

These agreements were referred in " line " with the requirement of the Government's prices and incomes policy for 1969.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity whether the 16⅔ per cent. increase in the salary of the Chairman of the National Board for Prices and Incomes on his appointment to the Chairmanship of the Commission for Industry and Manpower is in accordance with the Government's prices and incomes policy and if she will refer it to the National Board for Prices and Incomes for consideration and report.

No appointment has yet been made.

I meant there to be an element of intelligent anticipation about the Question. I recognise that the figure of 16⅔ per cent. mentioned in the Question might have to be adjusted to 25 per cent., but will the hon. Gentleman at least give an undertaking that when the increase in salary for this gentleman has been arranged it will be referred to the N.B.P.I., and if not, why not?

The question of an increase does not arise. The hon. Gentleman should have learned by now not to believe all he reads in the newspapers.

Would the hon. Gentleman say when it is proposed to make this appointment? Would he confirm that it will be Mr. Aubrey Jones?

No doubt my hon. Friend will be making an announcement very shortly.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what further discussions she intends to have with the Trades Union Congress with a view to improving industrial relations.

My Department is in regular and frequent consultation with the Trades Union Congress about serious industrial disputes.

It does not seem to be very effective. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that today we hear that B.O.A.C. can no longer run the Jumbo jet because of difficulties in the Corporation? Is he aware that there is also the threat of a newspaper strike? Has he also heard that the A.E.U. is threatening to come out of the York agreement affecting negotiations between unions and employers? This is added to all the other difficulties, and is it not a fact that the trouble is that the T.U.C. as a fire extinguisher has not enough power?

It is time hon. Members opposite paid tribute to the T.U.C. and what it is doing and also recognised the dramatic change the T.U.C. accepted in its role last year. Strikes may be a new phenomenon so far as hon. Gentlemen are concerned, but I understand we have had them ever since the Industrial Revolution. As a matter of fact, as the Prime Minister made clear in this House nine days ago, the statistics for the last six years compare very favourably with the statistics for the preceding six years.

Will my hon. Friend see whether anything can be done to give more publicity to the successes of the T.U.C.'? We hear a lot about strikes which take place, but nothing of those which are avoided by the hard and effective work being done by the T.U.C. under Vic Feather.

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, when addressing the Scottish T.U.C. yesterday, drew attention to the fact that the T.U.C. had intervened in about 150 disputes with a large measure of success.

Could the hon. Gentleman say when the tribute of the Industrial Relations Bill is to be brought before the House?

The Industrial Relations Bill, which will bring about a major reform in industrial relations, will be before the House very shortly.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service how many service-wide classes and how many Departmental classes of the Civil Service will, on present plans, have been abolished by 1st January, 1971.

Among other developments outlined in the recent National Whitley Council Report, negotiations with the staff interests have begun over the merger of the general service Administrative, Executive and Clerical classes and of the general service Scientific classes. It is honed to conclude these negotiations successfully in time for the new structures, which will initially cover approximately 225,000 staff, to take effect from 1st January 1971.

While recognising the considerable difficulties in abolishing the distinction between many hundreds of departmental classes, some of which are of great antiquity, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman would accept that this is a very important, indeed central, part of the Fulton Committee's Report on the Civil Service? Would he see that there is no side-tracking into less important issues?

Yes, Sir. I certainly agree with the hon. Gentleman that this is very important and a central recommendation of the Fulton Committee. The figures I have quoted show that progress is being made over a very wide area towards the creation of a unified structure. The special problems of the Departmental classes will be dealt with as quickly as possible, either subsequent to or as part of the general review that I have described.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the success of the open structure will depend on the way in which the specialist classes are integrated into it and that it will not be enough to incorporate only the Administrative, Executive and Clerical grades?

My hon. Friend has very close knowledge of this. We are fully alive to this problem and are proceeding as quickly as we can.

asked the Prime Minister if he will set up an interdepartmental committee to investigate which sectors of the nationalised industries are suitable for denationalisation.

asked the Prime Minister if he will set up an interdepartmental committee to examine both public and private sectors of industry which are suitable for merging in complete social ownership.

No, Sir.

Does that mean that nationalisation is the sacred cow of the Labour Party? Will the Government not consider the proposition that Government capital should be taken from, for example, the two nationalised commercial air corporations and put to a better use in building, for example, schools and hospitals?

The hon. Gentleman, most unusually, has drawn the wrong conclusions from the answer. Each case for nationalisation and denationalisation must be considered on its merits. Coal, gas and electricity are all before the House. As I understand the policy of hon. Gentlemen opposite it is to denationalise the most profitable areas for the benefit of particular interests and to leave the essential services which, by their nature, must be loss-making, to the taxpayer.

The Prime Minister has rightly rejected the absurd suggestion made in the Question. Would he consider establishing a Departmental committee to consider how the Government might give further support to industrial innovation, particularly with regard to Europe, so that we can make the most positive contribution when we go into the E.E.C.?

My hon. Friend will know that the Fulton Committee reported in favour of the hiving-off of certain public services directly under Government control to independent corporations. This has been done in one or two cases, and we are examining others. As to the question of a wider European grouping, I would refer my hon. Friend to the Answer I gave him earlier in the week.

Why does the Prime Minister evade the point of the Question in which he is asked to investigate possible weaknesses in the nationalised sector? Is he not remiss in not doing that? Is he aware that everyone outside No. 10 Downing Street realises that the nationalised industries are far from perfect? Is it not his job to see that this is put right?

The hon. Gentleman, characteristically, is incapable of understanding even his hon. Friend's Question. The supplementary question referred to weaknesses in nationalised industries. We have long had a Select Committee of this House inquiring into all the nationalised industries and these are subjects of frequent debate. We have not got a Select Committee for dealing with weaknesses in private industry.

Does my right hon. Friend appreciate that the publicly-owned steel industry is now making rapid progress, particularly in South Wales, and that any attempt to hand this industry back to private enterprise would be much resented by the people who work in the industry?

I can see no circumstances in which any proposal would be made to this House for denationalisation of the steel industry.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will consult graphologists before making appointments.

No, Sir. If handwriting came to be regarded as a major criterion in making such appointments, I fear that a Prime Minister's field of choice might be unduly restricted.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of us will be relieved to hear that the Prime Minister has set his face against a system whereby a person's job can be at risk because of his script? Would he not agree that a recent disturbing case has indicated that our privacy and security seem to be at risk from quackery, and is it not time to investigate the whole of the snooping apparatus which can cost people their jobs?

I have looked into the case which my hon. Friend has in mind but I have to inform him that the National Allotments and Garden Society is not the responsibility of Her Majesty's Government, nor does it come within the ambit of the original Question. To judge from the letters I get from all parts of the House on many matters, if this kind of test were applied, even to Members of Parliament, this would be a very much smaller House of Commons.

Is not the point that the handwriting is on the wall so far as this Government are concerned?

asked the Prime Minister whether the public speech made by the Minister without Portfolio in Manchester on Wednesday, 25th March on Great Britain and the Common Market represents the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

asked the Prime Minister whether the public speech of the Minister without Portfolio to the Manchester Junior Chamber of Commerce on 25th March on Great Britain and the Common Market represents the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

I would refer to my reply to a Question by the hon. Members for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Edward M. Taylor) and Shrewsbury (Sir J. Langford-Holt) on 7th April. — [Vol. 799, c. 50–51.]

Was not this an excellent speech? Is the Prime Minister not aware that we should like him, as well as many of us, to be able to congratulate the Minister without Portfolio on that excellent speech? Could he not, therefore, add to it and say that he accepts it?

All speeches made by Her Majesty's Ministers are excellent speeches, as is becoming increasingly recognised. As to the general policy in relation to the Common Market, I refer my hon. Friend to answers I referred to in my main answer.

Despite the terms of the original answer, can the Prime Minister dispute that instructions have been sent to British embassies overseas to explain that his right hon. Friend did not mean what the Prime Minister now wishes to mean?

Yes, Sir; I am very ready to dispute that suggestion by the right hon. Gentleman. The position is that certain newspapers overseas, but not so far as I am aware any Governments overseas, of course were in a position to misrepresent my right hon. Friend's speech. I have known over the last five and a half years even British newspapers, with their high standards, occasionally misrepresenting speeches made by Her Majesty's Ministers, but there is no misunderstanding in Europe or anywhere else about the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that we applaud the efforts of the Minister without Portfolio and that if he goes on talking as he does we shall be delighted? May I also take the opportunity to congratulate my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on his success in Scotland with the Trades Union Congress? Has he noted that in spite of his success the congress passed a resolution by a large majority against—

Order. This question is about Europe.

I think my right hon. Friend the Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell) ended his question by referring to the position about Europe taken by the Scottish Trades Union Congress. I heard part of the debate, which was unfortunately interrupted because I had to make a short intervention. He will not, I think, draw on what was voted on at Oban yesterday, because what was voted on at Oban yesterday was totally contrary to what my right hon. Friend has said. It was in fact a view expressed that we should not continue with the negotiations. My right hon. Friend has always supported the fact that we should continue with the negotiations.

To clear up the confusion which still exists, could the Prime Minister now confirm whether he has instructed his right hon. Friend not to make any more speeches about the Common Market which will raise fresh doubts about the Government's good faith on the eve of negotiations?

No, Sir. No such instructions have been issued by me or by anyone else. The position of Her Majesty's Government was made clear in the statement I made to the House in February and by Government spokesmen in the debate. There is no doubt at all in Europe about where Her Majesty's Government stand.

asked the Prime Minister whether, following his discussions on 17th April at Newcastle-upon-Tyne with the Northern Economic Planning Council, he will give an assurance that the additional support for local authorities for the building of new houses and the provision of money to do so will be forthcoming.

This matter was not discussed at my meeting with members of the Northern Economic Planning Board and three members of the Council on 17th April.

Is the Prime Minister aware that a statement was made by the Deputy Chairman of the Northern Economic Planning Council that this subject was under discussion? Does this not reflect on the Prime Minister's and the Government's view that the Government's housing policy is very satisfactory, for it is not?

I am sorry the hon. Lady is disappointed about this. It is not my recollection, nor that of others who were present, that this was discussed. As to housing policy, I went straight from this meeting to Gateshead to open its new housing development. The hon. Lady will know that Gateshead—which, just by accident, happens to be a Labour-controlled borough—has by far the best record in the area which she has the honour to represent. With the active help —of not in spite of —Government policy, we have these magnificent records set up by Gateshead Council.

Does my right hon. Friend recall that on his visit to Gateshead last Friday he saw concrete evidence of an outstanding achievement in house building? Did this not prove that the most essential ingredient for house building achievements of this kind is the will by councils to get on with the job?

I thought that point was made in an entirely uncontroversial speech I made on that occasion, Since there still seems some doubt in the mind of the hon. Lady, she might like to know that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government will shortly be tabling an Order fixing the representative rate of interest for calculating housing subsidies for 1970–71, which will have the effect of increasing the subsidy for dwellings completed in this financial year. The hon. Lady will also know from the Chancellor's Budget Statement that local authorities can now greatly increase borrowing from the Public Works Loan Board which it is estimated will mean an increase in 1970–71 of £238 million for this purpose to £915 million, or an increase of about 35 per cent. I tremble to go back to compare the figures with those when her party was in office.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Minister of Housing and Local Government found it necessary to write to Sunderland County Council to ask what it was playing at with its house building programme? The Tory-controlled council was asked why it has reduced its programme from 1,400 to 100— [HoN. MEMBERS: " Shame! "]—and has refused to take the advantage of money being made available for mortgage purposes?

My hon. Friend is no doubt correct, but this was not discussed with the Northern Economic Council. As I say, what became very clear this morning is how successful certain councils in that area are in dealing with the help given them by the Labour Government.