asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications whether he will now issue a general direction to the Post Office Corporation to give absolute priority to disabled persons in the allocation of telephones.

No, Sir. The Post Office tells me that priority is given to disabled people who have a special need for telephone service.

Is the Minister not aware that all disabled people have a far greater need for a telephone than other people? Is he further aware that the prices which are charged and which some people can pay are a great burden on disabled people and often prevent them from having a telephone? In the circumstances, first, will he take steps to relieve disabled people of at least some of the charges, and, secondly, give a direction that all disabled persons who need telephones will be given absolute priority on all occasions?

This must be a matter for the Post Office. The Post Office gives a very high priority to—for example—disabled people living alone and requiring a telephone as an essential means of summoning assistance in an emergency. But it is essentially a matter for the Post Office.

Is the Minister aware that in my constituency two people, both suffering extraordinarily severe disablement, have been waiting since May for the installation of a telephone, and that I have been told that this depends upon the Post Office? If I were to send him particulars of this case, would he be kind enough to help to get a telephone quickly for this family who need it so much?

If the hon. Gentleman will send me details of this case I will ensure that the Post Office looks at it very carefullay, but, as he will appreciate, it is a matter for the Post Office.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications what proportion of first-class mail posted on Fridays is delivered on Saturdays.

Separate statistics are not available for Saturdays, but I understand from the Post Office that the proportion of overnight postings delivered is rather less than that of 94 per cent. on other days because there is no second delivery and many firms are closed.

I accept that statistics are difficult to obtain, but would my hon. Friend agree that there is a fairly widespread view that it is not worth putting a 3p stamp on an envelope on a Friday if it is not going to be delivered on the Saturday? Is he also aware that much of the official mail from this House posted before the end of business on a Friday does not arrive in constituencies until the Monday?

If there is that belief, it is not well founded. I am told by the Post Office that 84 per cent. of first-class mail posted the day before is available for first delivery, and that that figure probably holds good for a Saturday—although some proportion of that 84 per cent. cannot actually be delivered because the firm is closed.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications whether he has studied, and is satisfied with, the terms, provisions and limitations subject to which a broadcast receiving licence is issued; and if he will make a statement.

I consider the conditions on which broadcast receiving licences are issued to be generally satisfactory. Changes may be needed from time to time, and the position is kept under review.

Now that an increasing number of television licences are for colour, costing the not inconsiderable sum of £12, does my right hon. Friend not consider that it is time to review the situation whereby such licences cannot be encashed for any reason if they are not used to their full date of expiry? Is this not a case where an arrangement could be made similar to that which operates in the case of motor licences, for example, which also have to be paid for in advance but which can be paid for quarterly and can be encashed if not fully used?

It would put up the cost of the licensing system considerably if we were to have quarterly licences and the arrangements suggested by my hon. Friend. These costs would have to be met in some way—presumably by an addition to the licence fee. On the whole therefore, I believe that the present regulation and the present dispensation for encashment within 28 days is probably as far as we should go.

Is the Minister aware that there is tremendous dissatisfaction among elderly people, such as pensioners, about the present system, whereby they pay the same amount for a licence as is paid by a wealthy person with a colour television and four other sets in his house? Does he consider that that is fair? If not, will he now do something about it?

I do not believe that it would be right to have a general concession for all elderly people since, among other reasons, that would involve a much larger payment on the part of others, some of whom would be worse off than those benefiting from the concession.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications whether he now expects to introduce legislation this year for the extension of local radio.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications whether he can now state that he will introduce legislation to implement the Government's proposals for commercial radio in the next Session of Parliament.

I cannot anticipate the contents of the Queen's Speech.

Can my right hon. Friend confirm that in the early stages of the new system it is still his intention that stations which are licensed should include a few experimental stations covering relatively small communities?

Yes, Sir. That remains my intention.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications if he will make a statement on the progress of the Post Office's research into vandalism in telephone boxes.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications whether he will give a general direction to the Post Office to ensure that a greater proportion of public telephones is maintained in order.

The Post Office assures me that it is progressively introducing countermeasures to make kiosks less vulnerable to damage, and research into further measures is continuing. It is also doing all it can to maintain kiosks in working order. A general direction would not be appropriate.

What are the counter-measures and how much are they costing?

I am afraid that I do not have a figure from the Post Office of the costs involved. However, about one-third of the 75,600 telephone kiosks that exist have so far been fitted with strengthened equipment and about another 2,000 new-type kiosks have been installed.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that at times during the Recess seven-eighths of all the public telephones at Euston Station were out of order? Is not this state of affairs extremely bad not only for the people of this country but for visitors?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. It is extremely important to counter vandalism by every means possible—though the national figure for the proportion of kiosks out of use is much smaller than that quoted by my hon. Friend.

Has the right hon. Gentleman considered making a payment to shopkeepers—other than those with postal premises—who are prepared to put telephone kiosks in their shops? They would be available only during shop hours, but they would represent an improvement on the present state of affairs, especially in places like Liverpool, where it is possible to search for miles without finding a telephone in working order.

I will ensure that the Post Office considers that suggestion.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the siting of telephone kiosks can help to reduce vandalism? Will he consult local authorities to see that telephone kiosks are placed at the base of multi-storey flats and other public places which are less subject to vandalism?

I agree with my hon. Friend. The Post Office is paying increasing attention to the siting of kiosks to minimise the risk of vandalism.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications if he will encourage local authorities to erect communal television aerials in order to reduce the number of individual aerials in those parts of their areas where population densities are extremely high or where flats are provided in considerable numbers.

I recognise that there are strong amenity arguments for the use of communal television aerials. My powers under the Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1949, are, however, confined to securing that no one piece of wireless telegraphy apparatus is a source of harmful interference to another.

I recognise the need for supervision within the terms of the Act to which the right hon. Gentleman referred, but does he agree that local authorities should be encouraged to provide communal aerials in areas of dense population? Will he take steps to ensure that these people, particularly in urban district councils like Rawmarsh, in my constituency, are not caused the considerable expense and fuss that occurs in this matter?

I believe that the charges made for licences are reasonable. As for the licences from my Ministry, the charges are designed simply to meet the costs involved. They do not amount to more than a few pence per year per subscriber.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications if he will give a general direction to the Post Office Corporation to have a reduced charge in respect of redirecting mail and the re-installation of telephones when this has been brought about by the rehousing of a family under a compulsory purchase order.

No, Sir. I understand that bodies acquiring property by compulsory purchase have discretionary powers to reimburse such costs in appropriate cases.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I have in mind people who are being sent as far as Liverpool and who do not wish to go there, or leave their homes anyway? Does he appreciate that it is an added imposition when, on having to leave their homes, they are made to pay yet again for the installation of a telephone at the new premises? Will he examine this matter afresh?

It would not be reasonable to expect the Post Office to meet the increased costs thus incurred. However, as I say, the bodies which acquire property by compulsory purchase have discretionary powers to make reimbursement where appropriate.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that many elderly people cannot get reimbursement from anyone although the telephone is of the greatest importance to them? They face a tremendous problem if, because of being obliged to leave their homes, they have to pay for their telephones to be re-installed? Will he re-examine this matter and see that something is done to help these people?

It is reasonable that this should be a charge on the community and not on the Post Office. It is more fitting that the bodies which are doing the compulsory acquisition should have power to compensate.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications when he expects to receive the Post Office Report and Accounts for 1970–71.

I have presented the Report and Accounts to Parliament today and they should be generally available tomorrow afternoon.

Is the Minister aware that the Press seems to have received the Report and Accounts rather earlier than hon. Members of this House? When making statements about these documents, will he draw attention not only to the disappointing postal figures but also to the excellent telecommunications profits which the Press tell us have been earned in the last 12 months?

I would not necessarily guarantee that the Press reports which the hon. Gentleman has seen correspond to the figures that are being published tomorrow. The leak—if it was a leak—which occurred was certainly not by design.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the seriousness of this matter? On 7th October, the Daily Telegraph published an article saying that there would be a profit of £93 million on the telecommunications side and a loss of £50 million on the postal services—figures which are evidently broadly correct. Is he aware that we are told that as a result of these figures there is to be a dampening down of demand for telephones, that the tariff is to be raised and that because the postal services lost money postal charges will be increased? Can the consumer never win with this dreadful nationalised corporation?

My hon. Friend asks a number of questions—

Good ones, too.

—to which I do not have time to reply this afternoon. The telecommunications side of the Post Office is required to meet a target of 10 per cent. return on capital and it has come very near to meeting it.

I know—9·8 per cent.

Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that it is intolerable for these reports to appear in the Press before Parliament is given the figures? Is he aware that if as a result of these reports the Post Office, sanctioned by him, allows postal services to be cut and the telephone rental to be increased, he will go down in history as the Minister who presided over the worst postal services at the highest prices?

There is a later Question about tariffs. When we reach it I will have an opportunity to reply to some of the points made by the hon. and learned Gentleman. As for the ability of the Post Office to instal telephones and meet the rapidly escalating demand for them, he will know that this is conditioned largely by investment decisions taken four or five years ago.

And also because private manufacturers supplying the Post Office cannot keep to their target dates.

The demand for telephones is now running at 28 per cent. above the figure forecast. The Post Office has succeeded in connecting telephones at a rate 10 per cent. above the forecast, which represents a substantial achievement on the part of the telephone service. In so far as it is falling behind demand, that is because the investment decisions taken four or five years ago have limited capacity.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications if he will give a general direction to the Post Office to improve the special equipment required to trace telephone calls so that offensive or threatening calls may be traced.

No, Sir. This is a technical matter within the Post Office's managerial responsibilities.

Is it not shocking that people are able to make nuisance calls involving threats of all kinds—which can be extremely upsetting—apparently without anyone's being able to trace them in less than 18 months, the time which elapsed in a recent case involving 300 such calls? Cannot we do better than that? These calls are worrying many people.

I appreciate that calls of this kind cause a great deal of anguish. When the Post Office and police are alerted they do all in their power to trace the calls. The Post Office has some well-tried methods of limiting or deterring calls of this sort.

One of my constituents had hundreds of such calls within a few months. In this technological age, is it not possible to have some means whereby a subscriber can alert an engineer in his or her exchange, so that the call can be traced?

My hon. Friend probably knows that if the Post Office and the police are alerted in such cases it is possible to detect the source of the calls.

Does the Minister acknowledge the desirability of advising subscribers that they should use only initials rather than a fuller name or description in telephone directories? That can save a great deal of inconvenience and difficulty, particularly for ladies.

I am sure that subscribers and potential subscribers will take note of that advice.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications what are the total number of households in the United Kingdom still on the waiting list of the Post Office for a telephone.

According to the Post Office, 164,000.

This is a magnificent market available to the Post Office. Will my right hon. Friend arrange that the Corporation has increased investment to enable it to take advantage of this market, since it would improve its profitability if it could do so? Does it make any sense that the Post Office should be advertising extra services such as additional telephones and the like when it cannot supply people who really want a telephone?

The Post Office's advertising is designed principally to ensure that the telephone is more heavily used in off-peak hours. There are considerable financial advantages to the Post Office in a heavier use of that kind. My hon. Friend will know that investment is running at a much higher level than ever before and that the Post Office has done extremely well in making 10 per cent. more connections during this year than forecast.

But does not the Minister realise that with so many people waiting for the telephone it would be intolerable to discourage the market by increasing the rentals? Secondly, if there is a hold-up in the manufacture of telephone equipment, why on earth is he so doctrinaire as to insist upon maintaining the ban on the Post Office's manufacturing its own equipment? Why not lift the ban and let it get on with the job?

I have had no request from the Post Office for permission to manufacture and I have no evidence to suggest that that would help matters in any way. The hon. and learned Gentleman will be glad to know that delivery dates have steadily improved over the past year and that the Post Office has moved about as far as it could have done to meet the greatly increased demand.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications, having regard to the urgent need for stabilisation of prices and competitiveness of exports, whether he will undertake to ensure that his embargo on increased postal charges for 1971 is extended throughout 1972; and whether he will make a statement.

There is no embargo, but the Post Office will adhere to the terms of the C.B.I. initiative.

That is a half-baked reply. It does not answer the Question. Will my right hon. Friend now read the Question in detail and answer it? If there is any increase in postal charges, as already announced by the Post Office Corporation, will it not be highly inflationary? Further, having regard to the overall surplus of the Post Office—about £40 million—is it necessary to increase either telephone charges or postal charges? Even if there is an increase, can it not be kept strictly to the 5 per cent. clamped on by the C.B.I.?

My hon. Friend is not as familiar as I should expect him to be with the C.B.I. initiative. I have told him that the Post Office will abide by the terms of that initiative, as other nationalised industries have undertaken to do. That means that there will not be increases of more than 5 per cent., although, as my hon. Friend will know if he has studied the terms of the C.B.I. initiative, it would allow for increases in certain circumstances which might take the form of a weighted average within the 5 per cent.

In seeking to abide by the C.B.I. initative, will the Minister take an early opportunity to make a statement to allay the anxiety of Post Office staff that he is seeking to achieve the target set by the C.B.I. by making 20,000 postal workers redundant as a consequence of postal economies?

There is no question of 20,000 postal workers being made redundant, although, as the Post Office has made clear, it is examining the scope of its services to determine what is a sensible structure for them in the 1970s.

Has the Minister received any approaches for an increase of tariffs? Will he give the House an undertaking that if he does receive such approaches from the Post Office he will not grant them before the House has had an opportunity to discuss them?

I am discussing with the Post Office a number of possibilities along the lines indicated in my previous answer. No decisions will be taken in the matter without informing the House.

We should have a debate in the House.

In view of the unsatisfactory answers to Questions Nos. 12 and 15, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment as soon as may be.

Order. The hon. Gentleman is out of order in the notice which he gives on Question No. 12. The reference to Question No. 15 is permissible.

I withdraw the reference to Question No. 12, Mr. Speaker.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications what further consideration he has given to measures and machinery to secure compliance by the British Broadcasting Corporation with the terms of the Licence and Agreement, and the provision, whether by a Broadcasting Council or otherwise, of means of vindication and redress for television and radio performers and producers and for the public.

None, Sir. I do not accept it to be the general opinion that there is a failure by the B.B.C. to comply with the Licence and Agreement. As to the second part of the Question, I believe that the best safeguard for the public and for broadcasters is a B.B.C. governing body of high quality charged with a clear and undiluted responsibility for the conduct of the Corporation's affairs.

Does my right hon. Friend ever listen to or watch B.B.C. programmes? Is he not aware that comment is frequently made on the news by the staff of the B.B.C. which is contrary to the Licence and Agreement? What is being done about it? Is it not clear that the governors are not governing?

There is no prohibition in the Licence and Agreement upon news comment by those appearing on television or speaking on radio. I consider that our system is right in placing a square responsibility upon the governors for the performance of the Corporation.

Will the right hon. Gentleman pursue this a little further? The point raised by his hon. Friend the Member for Chigwell (Mr. Biggs-Davison) on the question of the Licence and Agreement is that the B.B.C. itself is prohibited from expressing opinions. At what point does an employee of the B.B.C. cease to be the B.B.C.? Is it not the case in law that all employees of an organisation are responsible to their employers, and that if they express opinions they are the opinions of their employers?

Nothing in the Licence and Agreement prohibits comment from those who are either employed by the B.B.C. or are engaged by the B.B.C. on contract. There is, however, a clear obligation upon the Corporation to achieve impartiality and balance.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications whether he will seek to change the Licence and Agreement with the British Broadcasting Corporation so that the Corporation is required to insist upon payment for advertising material broadcast.

No, Sir.

Will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider this matter? Is it not the case that the amount of free advertising on the B.B.C. is increasing and that this constitutes an intolerable favouritism, with unfair competition, and even opens up the possibility of the danger of corruption? Will he conduct an examination into this question? There have been many instances of free advertising. The matter should be examined to see whether something is going on which should not be allowed to go on.

There is always a difficult line for the B.B.C. to draw. At the one extreme it would be ridiculous to prohibit the mention of any firms but, at the other, the B.B.C. must always be careful not to provide undue free advertising. This is a difficult line, and I think that it is true to say that it is overstepped from time to time. It is a matter about which the hon. Gentleman is right to complain on occasion to the Governors.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications what representations he has received on the subject of a second television channel for Independent Television; and whether he will make a statement.

The Federation of Broadcasting Unions has sent me a copy, which I have noted with interest, of a letter it has sent to the Director-General of the Independent Television Authority. As far as the Government's attitude to this matter is concerned, I have nothing to add to my reply to the hon. Member for Putney (Mr. Hugh Jenkins) on 21st July.—[Vol. 821, c. 1436]

I do not wish to press my right hon. Friend for any date or time scale, but will he nevertheless confirm that it remains the Government's policy to extend the choice available to the viewing public in television broadcasting at the earliest practical opportunity?

It is the Government's intention to enlarge choice wherever possible. As regards use of the fourth channel, the I.T.A. is to give me its views towards the end of the year about a possible ITV 2 and I shall consider them at that point.

Has the Minister noted the statement of the Director-General of the I.T.A. that there should not be a public debate about ITV 2—or TV 4, as some of us might wish to call it? Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that it would be a scandal if there were not a public debate, and a debate in the House, about the disposal of this scarce public asset?

That was a quotation taken very much out of context. There is already considerable debate about the matter.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications on what date the term of office of the Chairman of the Governors of the British Broadcasting Corporation expires; how many vacancies now exist on the governing body; how long those vacancies have existed; and when it is proposed to make appointments to fill them.

The answer to the first part of the Question is "31st August, 1972". There are three vacancies which occurred on 1st July, 31st August and 30th September respectively, and which I expect will be filled shortly.

Has my right hon. Friend studied the research just published in TheTimes indicating a majority view that the influence of the B.B.C. now exceeds the influence of Parliament? Does not that create a new situation in which precedent is not necessarily to be followed? Does he accept that the new Chairman of the Governors should, unlike his predecessors, give his full time to the post? Does he also accept in the interests of harmony it might be a good thing to keep any vacancies unfilled until he has had a chance to consult the Chairman-elect?

I saw the figures to which my hon. Friend refers, but I do not agree with the conclusions. I will take account of his observations about the next Chairman. It is important that we should fill the vacancies fairly soon, particularly that of a national Governor for Wales, about which an announcement will be made shortly.

Will the right hon. Gentleman inform the B.B.C. that some of us are concerned that in their attempts to meet those who are trying to put shackles on the B.B.C.'s freedom the Governors should not seek to evade their responsibility by shuffling it off on to a special committee? Will he convey to them that they are the body with authority under the law to deal with complaints from the public and that that should remain the position?

I am satisfied that it is clear to the Governors that it is they who have responsibility and who are answerable to the House.

Is it not a fact that the Governors, having undertaken this action, have underlined the contention of many of us that it is impossible to carry out both the function of being guardians of the B.B.C. and the function of representing the staff in the way that they have seen fit to do in the past year?

I do not believe that that is the implication of the action that the Governors have taken. Certainly the Governors accept that they have a responsibility to society as a whole for the way in which the B.B.C. is run and are not simply there in order to manage it efficiently.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree—and this applies to all Ministers in future—that when looking for chairmen of boards the Government should advertise the posts and ensure that the political persuasion of any applicant is not a barrier to his taking up a certain position? Would not that avoid charges of nepotism and any signs of patronage?

I do not think that there is much to be said for advertising such posts. In filling this post and others we shall be guided only by the desire to get the best men for the job.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications for what period of time Governors of the British Broadcasting Corporation are normally invited to serve; on what date Sir Hugh Greene was appointed; how long he served; under what circumstances he resigned; and if he will make a statement.

The normal period is five years. Sir Hugh Greene was appointed on 1st July, 1969, and resigned as from 31st August, 1971, on his own initiative, on the ground that he was to become full-time Chairman of Greene King and Sons Limited.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that the B.B.C. must be a forward-looking Corporation, sensitive to the climate of its time; that to appoint a former Director-General—however eminent—who must be concerned with decisions that he himself took ten years ago, formed an unfortunate precedent, and that my right hon. Friend had better not repeat it?

It probably is not a precedent that many would want to follow in future. I think that that view would be shared by Sir Hugh Greene himself.

When the right hon. Gentleman makes these appointments in future, will he make it clear that the people appointed must resist the pressures that are being applied by some of his hon. Friends, who do not want comment to be made by the B.B.C.? Is it not a scandal that the programme, "It's Saturday", which criticised last year's Tory conference, came off because of the type of pressures that were being exerted by some of his more reactionary friends?

The Governors are not there only to resist pressures. They are there also to take account of feelings in the community outside. It is therefore right and proper that views should be expressed about the way the Governors are discharging their responsibilities and right and proper that they should take note of them.

I was a little concerned about what the right hon. Gentleman had to say about Sir Hugh Greene. Does not he agree that Sir Hugh was a remarkably successful and innovating Director-General; that his period at Broadcasting House was one of the most remarkable that the B.B.C. has known, and that whether one agrees with the precedent or not he is proving an extraordinarily valuable Governor?

The hon. and learned Gentleman is not quite keeping up with events, because Sir Hugh is no longer a Governor. I pay tribute to Sir Hugh for the service that he gave to the B.B.C.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications when he will be in a position to make a statement on the future of Giro in Bootle.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications if he is yet in a position to make a firm statement about the future of Giro.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications when Cooper Brothers will have completed their report on the future vialibity of the Giro banking service; whether that report, together with the report of the inter-departmental working party, will be published; and when he will make a statement about the future of Giro following examination of these reports.

I am urgently considering the views of the consultants and Post Office comments on them, which I have now received. I hope to make a statement soon.

I appreciate the difficulty in which the right hon. Gentleman finds himself, but I remind him that Merseyside has 50,000 people unemployed and that 3,500 people in my constituency are employed by Giro. These people have been very patient and are very anxious. Why are we waiting so long? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that all the E.E.C. countries have Giro banks and control in their countries? Can I be assured that after 28th October we will have a viable and prosperous Giro organisation in this country?

I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's anxiety in this matter. I assure him that I share a number of his concerns. Over these past months I have been intent upon trying to find some basis upon which the Giro could eventually break even. It is in pursuit of that objective that I have had the advice of Cooper Brothers on a number of unresolved financial questions.

The right hon. Gentleman has not answered the point that I raised in my Question about publication of the report. Will he bear in mind that any further procrastination in the matter can only continue to damage the viability of the undertaking, that several thousand jobs are at stake, and that there is grave anxiety among members of the staff of Giro because they are concerned that the Government should not seek to carry out another U.C.S.-style exercise on Giro?

No procrastination is involved. It would be contrary to all precedent to publish confidential advice from officials. Certainly it is not usual to publish confidential reports by consultants, which must necessarily be frank in commenting on people and things.

Will my right hon. Friend draw the attention of Giro to the fact that it is in danger of losing many customers, including me, because of the incomprehensibility of some of its cheque forms, which seem to go out of their way to differ as far as possible from those used in the banking system familiar to us all?

I am sure that the Post Office will take note of my hon. Friend's observations.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to designate further National Parks and areas of outstanding natural beauty.

I am currently considering an order designating part of the Wye Valley as an area of outstanding natural beauty. I am pleased to say that 16 per cent. of the land surface of England is already designated as either a National Park or an area of outstanding natural beauty. I shall be pleased to consider any proposals for increasing this percentage.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Does he agree with the principle that designation of National Parks should be based not only upon choosing areas for preservation of the inherent beauty of those parks but also deliberately taking parts of the country—not excluding urban areas, and certainly including derelict areas—which are ripe for a face-lift?

We want to extend positive policies in face-lifting bad urban areas, but I should have thought that designation as a National Park is not the right machinery. There are certain areas where we can clear derelict land and thereafter they can be designated as areas of natural beauty.

Does the Secretary of State now consider it appropriate to issue a directive on what sort of development he would regard as appropriate in the National Park areas? There has peen considerable controversy about this.

It is clear that there is a strong case against development in the National Park areas unless there are strong and remarkable reasons for doing so. Providing that Governments pursue that attitude there will be no problem.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the progress to date of his house improvement publicity campaign.

Fifty-six local publicity campaigns have been held to date and 40 more are planned, including a major campaign next April in Greater London. This Joint effort by central and local government has un-doubtedly been a major factor in the remarkable general increase achieved in the rate of progress with house improvement.

I recognise the publicity which has been given and the progress which has been made. Politically, economically, socially and from every point of view, is not renovation better than demolition? Is my hon. Friend prepared to keep an open mind not only on the question of increasing the grants but also on the question of increasing the proportion of the cost for which a grant will be made available?

I agree with my hon. Friend's preliminary remarks and note his later comment. He will be pleased to learn that discretionary grants are up by as much as 61 per cent.

As these grants are 75 per cent. of the total cost from public funds, why are the Government so ready to give away to wealthy landlords public money to this extent whilst at the same time they are determined to reduce housing subsidies?

The question of housing subsidies is another matter which we shall have plenty of opportunity of debating. On the right hon. Gentleman's first point, I hope that he and all other hon. Members who have constituencies in the intermediate and development areas which are getting 75 per cent. grants will encourage their local authorities and everyone possible to apply for them.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there are great anxieties about the number of houses that are being moved out of the control and occupancy of lower income groups through improvement schemes of this kind?

There is no need for any such anxiety. The hon. Gentleman must recognise that in the Government's new proposals, for the very first time in our history, all unfurnished tenants will get the right to a rent allowance.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what investigations have been made into the commercial possibilities of converting sewage into compost for agricultural purposes.

The Working Party on Sewage Disposal has suggested that local authorities should investigate and embark on more positive marketing methods for sludge as a fertiliser. I will encourage them to do this.

I am delighted. Will my right hon. Friend accept my thanks for that very positive reply and accept also that with the trend towards continuous cereal cropping that has grown up in many parts of the country, with the consequent loss of humus, he can kill three birds with one stone by encouraging good farming, healthy living and the useful disposal of such sludge?

I shall certainly endeavour to kill as many birds as possible.

Does "encouragement" mean financial encouragement?

Probably not.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he now expects to announce the result of his review of the system of fines imposed for pollution.

I shall propose, as soon as opportunity for legislation offers, that the fines that can be awarded on summary conviction should be increased substantially, and that more offences should be dealt with on indictment.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his determination to cure offenders. Are not prevention and cure better than punishment? Will he take note that in my constituency with the assistance of the Electricity Research Council, we are attempting to cure a very serious pollution problem by means of an oxidation ditch? If we are successful, will my right hon. Friend encourage other local authorities to follow our example?

I will certainly encourage local authorities to follow any example which succeeds in this way. It is because we believe that prevention is the best possible means that we have taken measures to increase the strength and size of the Alkali Inspectorate.

Will the Secretary of State examine the whole question of the disposal of mercury cell batteries, hundreds of thousands of which are thrown away each week by users of hearing aids? This is having an effect on pollution in food intake.

I will examine this matter. The topic has not been raised with me individually. The disposal of any article with mercury in it can cause substantially adverse results. We recently discovered that the disposal of thermometers by a hospital was causing adverse effects on a river. I welcome the hon. Gentleman's comments.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what representations he has received from the various bodies within the voluntary housing movement since the publication of his White Paper "Fair Deal for Housing", Cmnd. No. 4728; and if he will make a statement;

Discussions on the White Paper have been held with the National Federation of Housing Societies and the National Association of Almshouses.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Is he aware that there is considerable concern in the voluntary housing movement? Although the movement accepts that the White Paper is designed to assist it, it is concerned that in some circumstances it may make it much more difficult to get new housing associations going if the terms of the White Paper are not to some extent changed.

The White Paper proposes a generous subsidy for deficits on new building. There will be special arrangements to give additional help in difficult cases, if my hon. Friend has any specific point in mind I hope that he will get in touch with me.

The House will be relieved but surprised by the Under-Secretary's reply. Is he aware that at the recent conference organised by the National Federation of Housing Societies alarming statements were made by—as I understand it—every speaker about the effect of the White Paper on the future of the voluntary housing movement? The hon. Gentleman must accept that there is great anxiety on this subject. We should be grateful for an oral statement.

There are differing views within the voluntary housing movement. Many representatives of the movement have expressed full support for the proposals in the White Paper. The important point is that in total extra sums will be available to the movement, which I hope will be of considerable assistance. If there are specific problems—and I understand that there are—I will examine them further.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he intends to announce his decision concerning the Fleet Line.

I announced my decision on 18th August to pay 75 per cent. grant towards the cost of the first stage of the line, from Baker Street to the Strand. This is a commitment of £26 million, the biggest grant ever made to London Transport.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reply and for his statement after the Question was tabled, but is he aware that many people feel that the section from New Cross to the Strand is as important as the line from the Strand to Baker Street? If he is making some inquiry, would it not be a good thing to authorise that work now, as it can stand on its own feet?

The Dockland Study is an important aspect here and I am advised that this stage had to go ahead first. We will make a decision in plenty of time for the next stage if it is decided that it is the correct thing to do.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the stretch of line from Lewisham to New Cross is a vital link now that the arrangements for motorways and similar roads in the area seem to be going ahead? May we have an early decision on this point so that the local authority may make suitable preparations for the reception of this end of the line?

As soon as we know the results of the Dockland Study, which is of immense importance to London as a whole, we will make a decision. The grant for the first stage, the extra bus grants, investments for trains, and so forth, that I have announced show that the Government are doing far more for London Transport than any of their predecessors did.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he expects to make an announcement concerning trunk road developments in South-East England.

My right hon. Friend gave full details of the Government's trunk road plans throughout the country, including the South-East, in a reply on 23rd June to a Question from his hon. Friend the Member for Exeter (Mr. John Hannam).—[Vol. 819, c. 288–292.]

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that there was a phrase in the report which mentioned that a further announcement was to be made concerning trunk roads in the Greater London area? Can he assure the House that no announcement will be made which would prejudice in either direction the findings of the Greater London Development Plan Inquiry now in process?

We have always made it clear that any announcements within the G.L.D.P. area would have to be viable independently of the G.L.D.P. plan.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will now issue a circular to all local authorities requesting them to take special measures to provide housing for the aged.

The Government's policy is to encourage the provision of more housing for old people. At the moment local authorities are devoting over a quarter of all their new house-building to one-bedroom and bedsitting room accommodation, most of which will be intended for the elderly. My right hon. Friend does not think that a circular is called for at the present time, but he will keep the situation closely under review.

Is it not right that elderly people as a whole are far less well off than the rest of the community? Is it also not right that elderly people find it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to obtain mortgages? In those circumstances, would the Minister reconsider his decision and give a firm directive to all local authorities that absolute priority should be given to homes for elderly people?

The figures that I have given show that an ever-increasing proportion is being devoted towards that purpose. We will certainly keep the situation under review. There is a lot in what the hon. and learned Gentleman says.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the figure of 25–26 per cent. of local authority housing devoted to the elderly has been fairly constant for a number of years? Does it not follow that if there is a reduction in the total number of houses built there will be a reduction in the number of those built for the elderly? What action does he propose to take?

The hon. Gentleman will be pleased to learn that the proportion has risen to nearly 31 per cent., so that the question is not strictly relevant.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that the encouragement given to local authorities by this Government to get on with the job is far better than the issue of stern directives such as the hon. and learned Member for Leicester, North-West (Mr. Janner) suggests, which would be another interference with local government?

My right hon. Friend has no power to issue a directive on this matter. I think the views of the whole House are that local authorities should devote an increasing proportion of their time and energies to this purpose, and they are doing so.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what advice he has now received from the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution and the Noise Advisory Council on the reduction of noise; and what action he will take in the immediate future.

The Royal Commission has listed noise as a "priority for action". The Noise Advisory Council has recommended noise criteria for the planning of new roads and useful reports by it on aircraft and neighbourhood noise have just been published. Decisions on its recommendations will be announced as soon as possible. A further report on traffic noise is in preparation.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Royal Commission's first report said that regulations dealing with traffic noise were not frequently enforced? Will he see to it that in future there is more enforcement of these regulations?

The problem of enforcement of traffic noise regulations is rather difficult, but I take note of what the hon. Member has said and I am sure that the police will.

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he is aware of the hardship caused to individual families and firms in Newcastle-under-Lyme arising out of the construction of the Stoke-on-Trent D road; and whether he will make attempts to minimise these as much as possible.

Yes, Sir. My hon. Friend has in fact already taken steps to minimise hardship and disturbance.

Is the Minister aware that since I last heard from him the people of Orford Street, in my constituency, have become subject to flooding for the first time and that they believe that the very difficult conditions in which they will have to live for two years or so entitle them to some compensation?

The Government's review of compensation has not yet been concluded. We are aware of the real difficulty of the hon. Gentleman's constituents. I hope he will understand that we have made every effort to ensure close liaison with the contractors and our resident engineer, and that we have done all we reasonably can for what is bound to be a difficult period until the road is completed.

asked the Lord President of the Council if he will now bring forward proposals to extend the time available for Parliamentary Questions on the lines suggested by the Select Committee on Procedure in the previous Parliament.

Last April I indicated to the House that I thought it would be wise to consider the effect on Question Time of the various changes implemented at that time. I am certainly prepared now to consider any representations as a result of experience so far.

Does not experience so far confirm that if an hon. Member puts a Question down for Oral Answer to one of the Ministers named in Question No. 36 the odds are against his getting an Oral Answer? Does not that indicate that there is inadequate time for Answers to Parliamentary Questions? In view of the wisdom and quality of the Answers now given, would not the House be benefited by a longer time to enjoy them?

I agree with my right hon. Friend's last comment. The House as a whole must consider carefully how it wishes to use its time to the best advantage as between Question Time, Private Notice Questions and Statements, and the normal Business of the House. I am prepared to consider the exact amount of time which is used for each.

Would there not be far more time for genuine Questions if Ministers who do not like to answer Questions did not seek to have too many "stooge" Questions put down?

I would not accept that. Question Time would be much more profitable if the many odd Questions which are tabled for purely political purposes and which are not designed to seek information were not tabled.

Has it occurred to my right hon. Friend that 24 minutes each week could be added to Question Time if it began at 2.30 p.m. and Prayers were taken beforehand, with Mr. Speaker entering the Chamber at the beginning of Question Time at 2.30 p.m.? Is he aware that that would not rob anyone?

It is not for me to pronounce one way or the other on what your personal desires might be in this matter, Mr. Speaker. It is possible to start Question Time 10 minutes earlier if the House so desires. As yet I have not been made aware of any general desire of the House suggesting that this should be done. I am ready to consider it if I am given such information.

asked the Lord President of the Council whether he is aware of the difficulty experienced by hon. Members in putting Questions for Oral Answer to the Secretaries of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, the Environment, Defence and Social Services; and what proposals he has to improve the position.

I am prepared to consider any particular difficulties which may be represented to me. If changes in the Question roster would help I am always ready to discuss them through the usual channels.

Arising from that Answer and the Answer to the previous Question, can my right hon. Friend think of any other way in which the seven or eight minutes involved in the Select Committee's recommendations could be better spent than by allowing perhaps eight or nine Oral Questions to Ministers to be fully answered?

I am quite prepared to consider that point of view and am grateful to my right hon. Friend for expressing it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the increasingly unlikely event of this country entering the European Economic Community the scope of Questions of the kind to which his right hon. Friend is referring will be greatly limited, since the E.C.S.C. rules prevent general directives being issued, in which case no more general directive Questions could be put? Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to safeguard the rights of the House in this matter?

If the hon. Gentleman does not think that we will enter I do not see why he is asking the question.

asked the Lord President of the Council when he expects to set out proposals for the broadcasting of parliamentary debates.

I have previously indicated to the House that I agree that there should be an opportunity at the appropriate time for this important issue to be debated again, but I do not anticipate a debate in the immediate future.

As none of us will know how long this or any other Parliament lasts, could the Lord President say at what stage of a Parliament new Members are sufficiently mature to make a decision on this?

This is a very important and serious question. I accept it in that sense. I notice that whenever this subject is raised and I make a hopeful comment about an early decision there are nasty noises all around me. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] When I say that the matter might be delayed a little longer there is a great deal of applause around me. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] If that is the case we should consider the matter in the context of the various noises made.

In view of what my right hon. Friend has done for the standing of Parliament by his part in the Government's decision to allow a free vote at least on this side next week, will lie look sympathetically in the new Session at the likelihood that the standing and understanding of Parliament among the public might be further improved by the properly supervised and edited televising of our procedures?

I must make it clear that questions of free votes or otherwise are now, fortunately—in this Parliament as compared with the last—nothing to do with me. The other question is a matter of opinion and I am quite prepared to have it debated.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that if he were to decide to delay, or advise his right hon. Friend to delay, the whole question of entry into the Common Market he would get even more sympathetic noises from all over the country?

I do not think that that point arises on anything to do with broadcasting.