asked the Minister of State for Defence what steps he is taking to improve the accommodation and amenities of British troops in Ulster.

asked the Minister of State for Defence what action he is taking to improve the accommodation and amenities of British troops serving in Northern Ireland.

I would draw the hon. Members' attention to the reply to the hon. Member for Antrim, North (Rev. Ian Paisley) on 25th October last. Further accommodation improvements envisaged include equipment for canteens; cleaning, partitioning and repair of temporary accommodation; and the provision in temporary accommodation of floor-polishing machines, vacuum cleaners, industrial waste disposal units and washing machines. We have also introduced a number of further improvements in amenities. These include the provision of more coin-operated telephone boxes and television sets; free newspapers; concessional air fares and other leave travel concessions; a welfare agency staffed by members of the Women's Royal Voluntary Service; and funds for the hire of civilian coaches for welfare and recreational purposes.—[Vol. 823, c. 263.]

While appreciating the hon. Gentleman's good intentions, may I ask him whether it is not the case that a large proportion of the troops in Northern Ireland spend their off-duty time in cold, wet, insanitary, uncomfortable, overcrowded conditions? Is this not putting a strain on the continued good humour and tolerance of the British troops? Will the hon. Gentleman accelerate in every possible way the steps to improve their amenities?

I would not for a moment dispute that there are many soldiers in Northern Ireland living in accommodation which leaves much to be desired. However, I emphasise most strongly that everything possible is being done about this with considerable speed, and I draw the hon. Gentleman's attention to the announcement made not long ago in another place about an additional £½ million which will be used to help make more comfortable the many undesirable places where soldiers have to stay in order to carry out their duties.

While thanking my hon. Friend for the strenuous efforts that he is making to improve the situation, may I ask him to bear in mind that it will take far more than £½ million to put right all the accommodation deficiencies? As we are trying to boost the economy of Ulster, would it not be a good idea if some pump-priming went into providing better accommodation for the soldiers? Is my hon. Friend aware that it is intolerable that avoidable discomfort should be added to unavoidable danger for our troops?

The £½ million to which I referred is for those things which meet the more personal needs of soldiers in accommodation which is undesirable but which it is necessary for them to inhabit, if I may put it that way, to discharge their duties—that is, accommodation which is placed tactically in volatile areas. In addition to what I have said, programmes are under way for a more permanent type of accommodation. I am satisfied that we have had excellent co-operation from the Department of the Environment and that the work could not have been done more quickly. Hon. Members should bear in mind that we have had to meet the needs of increased numbers of soldiers.

Is the Minister aware that one of the best ways to improve the welfare of our soldiers in Northern Ireland is to make much better the public personal relationships that exist between them and the mass of the Roman Catholic people in the North of Ireland? Will he issue instructions to this effect to the G.O.C. in Northern Ireland? It is imperative that he do so because the situation there is deteriorating.

I assure the hon. Gentleman that the G.O.C. attaches—and certainly I do—the greatest importance to maintaining and sustaining the best possible relationship with the Catholic members of the community. I am bound to say that in the course of the visits that I have made to Northern Ireland, I have always been struck by the willingness of the Army to maintain good relationships with Catholics.

asked the Minister of State for Defence whether he will make a statement on the progress of operations in Northern Ireland.

asked the Minister of State for Defence what progress is being made by the General Officer Commanding in Northern Ireland towards achieving his operational objectives.

By their vigorous operations to combat terrorist activities, the security forces continue to make inroads into the strength of the I.R.A.

In view of the recent and commendable operations and captures by Her Majesty's Forces, may we be assured that for the sake of innocent life there will be no let-up in lawful, authorised and rigorous interrogations?

Interrogation and questioning of wanted men will, of course, continue, but in so doing we will bear in mind that the Compton Committee has reported and that the matter is under consideration by the Committee of Privy Councillors.

While one wishes to express admiration for the excellent work done by the troops in Northern Ireland, may I ask whether it is not the case that there has been no real improvement in the military situation in recent months and that there is no likelihood of improvement while our troops are confronted with a hostile population? Is it not essential that the Government should take much more swift action to obtain a political solution?

I disagree with the hon. Gentleman, because the military efficiency of the operations is steadily increasing, the number of wanted men being arrested is steadily increasing and the seizure of arms is increasing. But it would be unwise to speculate about when one can bring this very serious situation to an end.

Is my hon. Friend aware that I endorse what he says about the increasing effectiveness of the work of the security forces? Is he further aware that the fantastic response by the people of Northern Ireland, of all communities, to the Lord Mayor of Belfast's Christmas Fund—at the rate of £1,000 a day—for comforts for the troops shows how highly they are considered by the people of Northern Ireland?

I agree with my hon. Friend. The measure of the improvement can be gauged from the fact that during the last four weeks the number of arrests of wanted men has been 73, 41, 110 and 109, respectively.

Can the hon. Gentleman tell us that the G.O.C. Northern Ireland is nearer to achieving his objectives than he was three months ago?

I think that the right hon. Gentleman would be unwise to press me to speculate as to when this terrorist campaign can be brought to an end. All I can say is that the grip on the terrorist organisation is steadily and inexorably being tightened. This is a purpose which, I believe, the whole House supports.

asked the Minister of State for Defence whether he will enable army units operating in Northern Ireland to receive the standard overseas allowance, especially in cases where these units have been withdrawn from overseas.

I assume the hon. Member is referring to local overseas allowance. This is not a standard allowance but is assessed separately for each overseas theatre to compensate for the extra cost of living compared with that in the United Kingdom. It would not therefore be appropriate to pay the allowance to troops serving in any part of the United Kingdom, although, of course, the family left in B.A.O.R. continue to receive their share of the overseas allowances.

Is it not unfair that troops who have been existing in reasonably pleasant conditions, say, in Germany and who find themselves transferred of necessity to unpleasant conditions in Northern Ireland should at the same time suffer loss of income? This surely cannot be right. Will the Minister look at it again?

I understand the hon. Member's concern. Financially speaking, in real terms a soldier in Northern Ireland is not worse off. Income in B.A.O.R. is related to costs in B.A.O.R. Similarly, the income of a soldier in Northern Ireland is related to costs there. If the hon. Member has a particular case in mind and will let me know the details, I will write to him.

While there may well be a case for paying a special hardship allowance to Servicemen in Northern Ireland at present, will my hon. Friend stress that the troops there are not overseas but at home, as he has said, and that even to suggest the payment of an overseas allowance is entirely to misrepresent the situation?

I accept my hon. Friend's last point. The general point which the House might consider is that the duties in which Servicemen are called upon to engage in Northern Ireland are accepted as part of the normal terms and conditions of service. It has not been the custom in the past, nor is it now, to pay extra money for such duties.

asked the Minister of State for Defence how many members of the security forces have been murdered and how many injured, as a result of the Irish Republican Army terrorist campaign in Northern Ireland since 12th August, 1969.

Up to this morning 38 Regular Army, two Ulster Defence Regiment and 14 Royal Ulster Constabulary personnel had been killed; and 330 members of the Armed Forces had been admitted to hospital as a result of security operations. I regret that information on numbers of R.U.C. injured is not available.

In view of the increasing tempo, in recent weeks and months, of these cowardly attacks on the Army and police, both on and off duty, some while bravely attempting to defuse bombs and booby traps, will my hon. Friend assure me that the Army will take all steps necessary to discover and arrest these terrorists, murderers and bombers in order to protect innocent civilians as well as the Army and the police?

I am glad to be able to give my hon. Friend that assurance. From 9th August until 24th November this year, 1,162 people were arrested and the number of arrests of men on the wanted list for the period 20th October to 24th November was 465.

Is the Minister aware that more of our soldiers have been killed in Northern Ireland than during the whole of the Aden campaign? Does not this show how imperative it is to bring about a political solution immediately rather than a military one?

It is a source of great sorrow to all Members of the House of Commons that anyone should lose his life or be wounded in the cause of these activities, but I am sure the hon. Member would agree that there can be no hope of any political solution until we have managed to get on top of the terrorists.

Is the Minister aware, however, that it is exactly that proposition that some of us are coming increasingly to doubt? We do not wish to say anything about what the Army does—it has been magnificent—but would not the Minister agree that the idea of first beating the gunmen and then taking a political initiative is exactly the sort of policy which has led to disasters elsewhere by other nations in other lands? Would it not be more sensible to try to beat the gunmen while taking a political initiative?

With respect the hon. Member, who follows this matter closely, must read what I have said. I did not say that we should beat the gunmen first and then have a political solution. I have never suggested that, neither have my hon. Friends. Nor has any member of the Government suggested it. What I am suggesting is that one cannot have a political solution and expect it to work when there are, in some parts of Northern Ireland, conditions where terrorism holds sway. The constitution cannot work in those circumstances. I beg the hon. Member to bear in mind that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary is at all times seeking to obtain conditions from his point of view which will make it possible for political solutions to take place.

asked the Minister of State for Defence whether he will make a statement about recruitment for the Ulster Defence Regiment, and about the rôle of the regiment.

I am pleased to be able to tell the House that the strength of the Ulster Defence Regiment on 24th November was just over 5,500, an increase of 1,300 since mid-September. I would add that applications to join the regiment are still coming in at an encouraging rate of over 250 a week as compared with less than 50 a week earlier in the year. The rôle of the regiment remains unchanged.

While paying tribute to the excellent work of the Ulster Defence Regiment, may I ask my hon. Friend to bear in mind that the good recruiting figures might be even better if the regiment were given a more positive and more mobile rôle?

I would not accept that the regiment has been given a rôle which is not important and worthwhile. It carries out numerous and widely distributed static guard duties. It also has patrolling duties and as its strength grows it will be possible to allocate duties nearer members' homes to an increasing degree.

Does the Minister recall that the previous Government gave assurances that the weapons of the regiment would be centralised and not held in individual members' homes? Does that assurance still hold good or are weapons now being taken home by individual members?

I have always understood that in certain very limited circumstances, both under the previous Administration and under the present one, some members of the regiment may have their weapons at home. There has, however, been no change in policy so far as I know.

While recognising my hon. Friend's contribution to the expansion of this force, may I ask what measures are being taken to speed up the vetting procedures for men applying to join the regiment?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his opening remarks. We must always ensure that our vetting procedures are not speeded up at the cost of efficiency and fairness. A few weeks ago the procedure took about six weeks. As we are specially anxious to capture the enthusiasm of Ulstermen we have shortened the period to four weeks, and obviously we will try to bring it down still further.

Since, admittedly against precedent, the last Government, for very good and sufficient reasons, gave the religious breakdown of the regiment, it would interest us greatly to know how many Roman Catholics are now serving, since it is obviously essential that the force remains balanced.

I have always been willing to give the balance between Catholics and Protestants. It is important that we should know what the balance is and, at the same time, pay tribute to those Catholics who, often against intimidation, joined the regiment or have remained in it. At the start of the year the Roman Catholic element in the regiment was 4 per cent. of officers and 15 per cent. of soldiers. In October the figures were 8 per cent. for officers and nearly 11 per cent. for soldiers. There has been a levelling off since then and a little over 8 per cent. of both officers and soldiers are Roman Catholics. I should add that all members of the Northern Ireland community are encouraged to join this non-sectarian regiment.

asked the Minister of State for Defence what plans he has to introduce legislation to indemnify members of the Armed Forces who have committed the criminal assaults described in the Compton Report.

I do not accept that the Compton Report supports the imputations of criminal assault made by the hon. Member. If indemnifying legislation of this nature were required it would be a matter for the Northern Ireland Government.

In view of the necessarily emotive nature of this subject, will the Minister permit me to say that this Question is not intended to reflect on the courageous activity of British troops in preventing the two communities in Northern Ireland from destroying each other? While he and his colleagues have not been prepared to take the views of some of us during the last week that the activities described in the report are not only amoral but illegal, will he take account of the views expressed in The Times today showing in detail that those who have committed these acts lay themselves open to criminal prosecution? Will he agree that those who have done so—soldiers, officers and Ministers—lay themselves open, Ministers in particular, to a charge of conspiracy to commit criminal assault? In those circumstances—[HON. MEMBERS: "Too long."] In those circumstances will the Minister also bear in mind that his refusal to allow me to see one of the implements used on that occasion could be regarded as a means of preventing a Member of Parliament from taking the action necessary to bring criminal proceedings against the Minister? Will he—

Order. That is quite enough. I call upon the Minister to reply.

I am glad that the hon. Gentleman shares the Government's view, although he finds a very odd way of expressing it, that the reputation of our soldiers for discipline and restraint remains untarnished following a scrutiny of their conduct. The Compton Inquiry found that in some cases detainees suffered ill treatment and a measure of unintended hardship. Whether this amounted to criminal acts on the part of the soldiers is a matter that can only properly be decided by the Northern Ireland courts although in my view it most certainly does not.

No. 21, Mrs. Fenner.

rose—

Order. I have called the next Question. [Interruption.] Hon. Members cannot have it both ways. If we have very long supplementary questions, other hon. Members are squeezed out.

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

On a point of order. I am sorry to take up part of Question Time, but there is an important principle here. This is a matter of great interest not only to the people of Ulster but to this Parliament. [HON. MEMBERS: "After Questions."] This is an important issue and the Opposition Front Bench spokesman has not had an opportunity of commenting upon it.

I am trying to carry out the injunctions of the Select Committee on Procedure with regard to Question Time. Mrs. Fenner, Question No. 21.

I hesitate to detain the House for a moment longer than is necessary, Mr. Speaker, but I sought to catch your eye immediately my hon. Friend sat down. In those circumstances I ask leave to put my question.

I cannot grant that now because the hon. Member for Islington, South-West (Mr. George Cunningham) has said that he intends to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

rose—

If the hon. Member wishes to raise a point of order, will he do it at the end of Question Time?

asked the Minister of State for Defence what arrangements are now being made by the Army for the protection of police stations from attack by armed Irish Republican Army groups in Northern Ireland.

The Army—including the Ulster Defence Regiment—will guard as many stations as the operational situation and the Regular and U.D.R. manpower available in Northern Ireland permit. There has been an increase recently in the number of stations at which full-time or part-time guards are provided: this number was 76 in all at 19th November, compared with 61 at 20th October. The remaining stations are covered by Army patrols.

While thanking my noble Friend for that reply, may I ask him, in view of the deliberate and well-planned attacks carried out on the police both on and off duty and on their homes, to see that priority is given to protecting the stations and individual policemen in the interests of the whole community?

I appreciate the importance of the point but my hon. Friend will understand that to tie down troops on static guard duties more than is absolutely necessary diverts them from other tasks when they could more effectively and actively take the initiative in combating terrorism.

Does the Minister recognise that we cannot protect anyone, even policemen, by methods of illegality? What kind of legal power is there for officers of the R.U.C. or the British Armed Forces to engage in the methods of interrogation disclosed in the Compton Report whereby they physically assaulted men, put them up against the wall and put sacks over their heads?

I hardly see that that arises from this Question, but the interpretation of the law is a matter for the Northern Ireland courts.

In view of the gravity of the matters canvassed in the Question and the supplementary question, and in the light of the answer given earlier, will the Minister give an assurance that because of the need adequately to protect our courageous forces and so that there shall be no improper use of force to extract information, there will be a statement by the Attorney-General before the Ulster debate? There is grave concern on this matter.

We have already debated this subject in the House and there is to be a further debate today an Northern Ireland. The procedures followed were within the rules of interrogation laid down by the previous Administration. [HON. MEMBERS:" No."] They did not involve assaults on those under interrogation and, as the House knows, a Committee of Privy Councillors under a most eminent judge has been appointed to look at this difficult and important matter.

asked the Minister of State for Defence why he is not prepared to issue proceedings for trespass for the removal of a gipsy encampment on Ministry land in the village of Clapham, Bedfordshire when the villagers have complained to him about lowering of standards and general nuisance.

The Government are reluctant to seek the removal of gipsy encampments by court action, when there is no obvious alternative site.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the Caravan Act, 1968, is no answer to an action of trespass? Is he further aware that the view locally is that the Minister is proving insensitive to the hardship and difficulty that has been created by these people, who have been there for two months? May we have an assurance that he will come to the site and speak to the local people?

I am fully aware of the feelings of both my hon. Friend and his constituents but he must appreciate that forced removal of the gipsies would merely transfer the problem as well as cause hardship to the gipsy families; and it is the responsibility of the county council to provide an alternative site.

asked the Minister of State for Defence what are the most recent figures showing the share of the British gross national product devoted to military spending compared with that for other Western European countries in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, and the approximate annual saving if the former were cut to the average proportion of the latter; and what steps he is taking towards such an equalisation.

Since the answer involves a number of figures, I will with permission circulate the details in the OFFICIAL REPORT. But on the latest available figures, Britain spent in 1970 5·7 per cent. of her gross national product on defence as compared with an average for N.A.T.O. Europe of 4·2 per cent. If British defence spending were cut to 4·2 per cent. of G.N.P., there would be a saving of the order of £600 million. The third part of the Question does not arise as this would be contrary to the stated aims of Her Majesty's Government in respect of defence on taking office.

Does not the hon. Gentleman think that this £600 million could be spent on other and better things for the good of the country? Could he not go further and do as the French Government are doing in reducing the defence share of the French gross national product to 3 per cent. by 1975, since this would give us more than £950 million a year extra for the other things we need much more than this?

The criterion of what we should spend on defence depends not so much on what our allies are spending but on what potential adversaries are spending. If the hon. Gentleman is criticising the Government's social priorities, I advise him to study the White Paper on the subject which is being published this afternoon.

Is my hon. Friend aware that although the views expressed by the hon. Member for Salford, East (Mr. Frank Allaun) may be widely shared on the other side of the Iron Curtain, they are not widely shared in this country? Will he agree that the country generally welcomes and supports the Government's action in bringing forward certain defence expenditure with great assistance to the unemployment areas?

My hon. Friend expresses a sentiment held by the vast majority of our people. He also echoes the pleasure at the fact that my Department is able to bring forward expenditure to assist employment in certain areas.

On a point of order. I do not want to delay proceedings, Mr. Speaker, but there was an imputation in the remark of the hon. Member for Woking (Mr. Onslow). Since the point of view I was expressing has been held by the Pope, the leaders of the Soviet Government, leading American senators and a large number of hon. Members on this side of the House, should not the hon. Gentleman be asked to withdraw his remark?

The implications of the supplementary question by the hon. Member for Woking (Mr. Onslow) were extremely offensive, irrespective of whether they were in order. On the main point of the supplementary question by my hon. Friend the Member for Salford, East (Mr. Frank Allaun), is it not a fact that the Government have accepted the view of their predecessors that, broadly, our own defence expenditure should be at levels comparable with those of our European allies? Would it not be worthwhile, as an exercise in European co-operation, for the Government to try to bring this about?

If that were the case—and there is a great deal of strength in the point the right hon. Gentleman makes—he should bear in mind that German defence expenditure is already greater than ours and is increasing more rapidly than ours. That is a point which should be borne in mind by his hon. Friends.

asked the Minister of State for Defence if he will make a statement about the withdrawal of helicopters from Royal Air Force, Chivenor.

The helicopter detachment at Royal Air Force, Chivenor, will be transferred to Brawdy when the Tactical Weapons Unit redeploys there from Chivenor in spring,1973.

As one who had cause to be personally grateful this summer for fixed-wing aircraft and Royal Navy helicopters, may I ask the hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that they can never fully compensate for the loss of R.A.F. helicopters at 15-minute readiness? Is he also aware that up to the end of August this year the Chivenor helicopters were called out no less than 135 times and lifted 87 people, and that unless they are either kept there or replaced by civilian search and rescue operations with helicopters in readiness, hundreds of people's lives will be at risk?

I understand the hon. Gentleman's concern about this matter but he should understand that my position is to ensure that rescue services are provided for R.A.F. aircraft. The question of whether anything else is provided at Chivenor is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the arrival of these helicopters at Brawdy in my constituency will be widely welcomed in Pembrokeshire and the whole of the South and West Wales tourist belt? Does not this question emphasise the need for a national rescue service covering the entire coastal area?

Surely the House will agree that the Ministry of Defence has a social responsibility in these matters, even though the cost may have to be borne by the Department of Trade and Industry. Will not the hon. Gentleman look at this as a Government problem and bring forward proposals for this dangerous coastline, including an adequate helicopter service, which cannot be adequately done from Brawdy?

I repeat that I understand the point and the hon. Gentleman's concern and what my individual responsibility is in this case.

Will my hon. Friend give an assurance that he will keep in close touch with the National Search and Rescue Committee on the matter, so that we do not get the absurd situation of Service helicopters and aircraft being moved away with the committee shortly afterwards recommending that they should be replaced?

Certainly, Sir.

Although R.A.F. Chivenor falls within my constituency, within a wide radius, stretching from South Wales right through Cornwall, there is great appreciation and gratitude to the R.A.F. for the work it does. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that many South Wales councils feel that Brawdy would not be an adequate substitute as a rescue service because Chivenor is regarded as being very much more central for the area involved? If it is necessary for a civilian service to be substituted, in the way it has been, on an experimental basis, at R.A.F. Manston—which I visited last Sunday—will the hon. Gentleman undertake that his Department will give all the help and co-operation it can to the Department of Trade and Industry and the Home Office? It seems at the moment that three Departments are pulling in rather different directions.

I quite understand the right hon. Member's concern over this matter and thank him for the gratitude he has expressed to the R.A.F. Certainly we shall take fully into consideration everything that can help in this matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence what proposals he has for replacing Chipmunk aircraft as the initial training aeroplanes of the Royal Air Force.

We have decided, subject to satisfactory contractual arrangements, to order Bulldog aircraft to replace the Chipmunk in the University Air Squadrons and certain other rôles.

My hon. Friend will know that we all welcome this, and I think he will agree that it would be unfortunate if the order for 100 Bulldog aircraft were seen purely as an attempt to alleviate unemployment in Scotland, welcome as that is, and if no account were taken of the outstanding characteristics of this exceptional aircraft.

My hon. Friend is quite right: it is an outstanding aircraft. We are ordering a good many more than 100, and they will be of real value.

asked the Minister of State for Defence what are his plans for the future of H.M.S. "Ganges" at Shotley.

We are still considering the long-term future of the establishment after the school-leaving age is raised.

Has my hon. Friend had the opportunity to discuss with his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science the proposal made in the Defence Estimates earlier this year about 15-year old recruitment after the school-leaving age has been raised?

I cannot add anything to the answer on this subject given by my hon. Friend the Minister of State to my hon. Friend the Member for Norfolk, North (Mr. Ralph Howell) on 19th November in which he said that he was in consultation with his right hon. Friend.—[Vol. 826, c. 225.]

Does the hon. Gentleman's review of this matter extend to a review of the intolerable practice of sending these boys to naval detention quarters?

That is all under consideration, as the hon. Gentleman knows.

asked the Minister of State for Defence whether he will publish a White Paper setting out the increased contribution to European security which Her Majesty's Government intend to make after, and attendant upon, entry into the European Economic Community.

Entry into the European Economic Community involves no defence obligations of any sort.

Is it not time that the Government abandoned their insincere and contradictory line? Does not paragraph 44 of the White Paper, "The United Kingdom and the European Communities" give as one reason for seeking membership the fact that European nations should do more in their own defence? Will the Government tell the House how many extra men and how much more money and material they will commit to the defence of Western Europe if we join the Common Market?

There is nothing in the Treaty of Rome about defence, and membership of the E.E.C. does not carry any defence obligations. What is true is that the growing military strength of the Warsaw Pact countries and the current trends of the United States both point towards Europe undertaking a greater share of responsibility for her own defence.

Will my hon. Friend make it clear that our commitments in Europe fall entirely under the W.E.U. and the N.A.T.O. umbrella? We can perfectly well increase our forces if we have to should the United States decide to withdraw any part of its forces from Europe.

My hon. Friend is reinforcing in more detail the point I am making.

asked the Minister of State for Defence whether, in view of the deteriorating employment situation, he will now reconsider the policy of closure of H.M.S. "Caledonia" in Fife.

The move of the training task of H.M.S. "Caledonia" to H.M.S. "Sultan" will not take place before 1979–80. It would be premature to judge the effects of the move on the employment situation at this distance in time.

As this is a long-term policy, will the hon. Gentleman give an assurance that his mind is not closed on this matter? If, unfortunately, his party should be the Government of the day at that time, and if the unemployment situation does not improve, will he undertake that the decision will be subject to review, because there are 200 or 300 jobs involved and the men concerned are dubious about their future?

My mind is never closed to anything. This decision dates back to the Administration which the hon. Gentleman supported. As it will not be implemented for nine years, we are getting a little hypothetical.

asked the Minister of State for Defence to whom access to the personal files of Servicemen and other personnel is permitted; and whether he will make a statement.

Access to personal files is permitted only to authorised persons engaged in personnel management in the Ministry of Defence and, in the case of some civilians, the Civil Service Department, for whom access is necessary to enable them to carry out their official duties.

Since these files will soon be put on computers, is there a code of conduct covering the computer personnel who will be handling the files? Will the categories of access which the hon. Gentleman has just enunciated include representatives of South African defence and security forces in this country?

I think my answer is absolutely clear on access to personal files. The rules of confidentiality imposed in the Ministry of Defence demand that no unauthorised person is given access to personal files. If the hon. Gentleman wishes to put down a further Question about a code of conduct, I will try to answer it in more detail.

asked the Minister of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the negotiations with Germany and Italy regarding the letting of contracts for the European multi-r ôle combat aircraft.

In my reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Rochester and Chatham (Mrs. Fenner) on 19th November, I gave the position at that time on the selection of avionic equipments for the multi-r ôle combat aircraft. Since then, Elliott Automation Space and Military Systems has also been selected as prime contractor to Panavia for the avionic system integration task, in collaboration with German and Italian firms.

I welcome the fact that British industry is doing substantially better than was feared a few months ago but does the Minister agree that, in future joint contracts, further measures are required to see that the benefits go more to European than to American technology?

I agree with what the hon. Gentleman said at the beginning of his supplementary question. In future contracts we shall take everything into consideration. This particular contract was not made by us.

Is my hon. Friend satisfied that a suitable range exists in the United Kingdom for testing the M.R.C.A., bearing in mind the possible employment opportunities that testing this aircraft and its equipment could bring to Scotland?

We have that very much under consideration, and we shall certainly bear employment considerations in mind.

How many of these aircraft are likely to be sold in total?

Export considerations are too far ahead. The numbers for Germany, Italy and ourselves are at the same levels as before.

asked the Minister of State for Defence if he will give details of the work share for British firms on the two of the four items of avionics equipment for the multi-r ôle combat aircraft for which British firms are not the prime contractors.

The precise work-sharing arrangements are in the process of being worked out.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the concern being expressed about the reputed award of a computer contract to an American firm albeit to a German subsidiary? Will he comment on that?

There is no question of the award being given to an American firm.

asked the Minister of State for Defence whether he will make a statement on the future command structure of the Royal Air Force in the United Kingdom.

asked the Minister of State for Defence if he will state his estimate of the number of posts and the number of personnel to be saved as the result of the merging of the Support and Strike Commands of the Royal Air Force.

The detailed arrangements for merging the main elements of Strike and Air Support Commands of the Royal Air Force are now being studied. More details will be given in the Statement on the Defence Estimates of next year.

Would my hon. Friend agree that anything that would increase the fighting effectiveness of the Royal Air Force in the United Kingdom would be welcome? Can he give an assurance that the amalgamations which have taken place so far and the downgradings from command to group status have led to reductions in personnel and headquarters units in the United Kingdom?

Yes, Sir.

Can the hon. Gentleman be more precise? Is it intended that these amalgamations should lead to financial savings? If not, it will be impossible to adhere to the Government's own principle of holding down defence expenditure to the level at which it stood when my party left office.

There were three main reasons for this decision to merge. The first was to make the best possible use of manpower, the second to make the United Kingdom command structure of the R.A.F. as compatible as possible with the other two Services and the third to effect economies in support costs. I think that this fully answers the question.

asked the Prime Minister where and when the names and salaries of the Central Policy Review Staff will be published; and whether, pending such publication, he will circulate these details in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The October issue of "Her Majesty's Ministers and Heads of Public Departments" lists names and grades of senior staff of the Central Policy Review Staff. Fuller information will appear in next year's issue of the Imperial Calendar.

May I thank the Prime Minister for having this Question transferred from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Civil Service Department to himself—a very unusual compliment? Will he consider this proposition? Why should we wait so many months before we know what are the salaries of these gentlemen? If the result following their advice is nearly a million unemployed and rocketing prices, have we anything for which to thank this "think tank"?

The important thing is that the C.P.R.S. is being treated in exactly the same way as any other part of the machinery of Government as regards the publication of names, grades and so on; and I do not think it would be possible—at least, I do not think right hon. and hon. Gentlemen would wish this—for the document "Her Majesty's Ministers and Heads of Public Departments" to be further expanded to include everyone in the Civil Service. It is a handy volume at the moment. As the C.P.R.S. is a new aspect of Government and does not appear in the current Imperial Calendar, I am prepared to send the fullest information I can to the hon. Gentleman pending the publication of the Imperial Calendar at the beginning of next year.

As we are now discussing the police force, may I ask the Prime Minister whether he is aware that it would be a good thing to have a debate on this in view of the reorganisation which is being carried out, to some extent against the wishes of the police force? I would like to get on with the reorganisation.

I will always do everything I can to meet the wishes of my hon. Friend and I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House has noted her request. I would point out that the Central Policy Review Staff is neither responsible for the police nor under its care or custody.

Would the right hon. Gentleman think again about what is popularly called the "think tank" because there has been a great deal of speculation in the Press about what the "think tank" is discussing and the advice it is giving to him? This speculation is very unhealthy. Will he think again about regarding this as a special organisation, not part of the Civil Service, and when he does that will he make a statement to the House?

The procedure is quite clear, that Ministers receive advice from all branches of Government and it is not customary to make that advice public. That has always been the British tradition and Ministers have a collective responsibility thereafter. It is not possible to have one part of Government treated in a different way from other parts.

asked the Prime Minister how many regional development authorities have made representations to him in the period 1st August, 1971 to 31st October, 1971.

Two, Sir.

Does the Prime Minister realise that his off-hand and arrogant answers to at least some of these Questions—[Interruption]—are strangely out of tune with the contrite apologetic confessions of failure we had from his colleagues in the Cabinet from the Despatch Box earlier this week? If he agrees with their expressions of misjudgment, will he reopen his correspondence with these development associations and tell them that he has been moved by the demonstrations which took place outside the House this week to review this policy and to accept the policies being put forward by the development associations?

The hon. Gentleman asked me how many development authorities had made representations to me and I gave him the answer two. That is a matter of fact. There is nothing off-hand or arrogant about it. It just proves that the hon. Gentleman does not wish to have information but wishes merely to make a political point.

Did the regional development authorities in their representations to my right hon. Friend give him any information on what is being done by the local authority industrial development officers, and have they told him where these exist and how successful they have been?

This has been mentioned in the course of discussions, and the authorities, one in the North-East and one in the North-West, both of which I have met, in addition to submitting memoranda to me, put forward a number of policy points, all of which are being pursued. I shall be in contact with them again about the matters they have raised.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the advantages held by the development areas have been steadily eroded? So that this process may be reversed will he consult, because it is vital to encourage industry to go to these areas?

I do not entirely accept the right hon. Gentleman's first statement. Policy on these areas has been changed, but if one takes full account of all measures including the infrastructure that is now going into the development areas, their advantage has not been reduced. There has been a conflict of interest in the representations I have received. The deputation I received from the North-East asked that the I.D.C. policy should be most rigorously enforced, but when I saw the North-West Development Authority its representatives asked that I.D.C. policy should immediately be completely changed to allow free development in their region.

asked the Prime Minister if he will seek to make an early official visit to Norway.

I have at present no plans to do so.

When the right hon. Gentleman next meets the Norwegian Prime Minister, will he say that the present Government, instead of continuing tamely to accept the common agricultural policy of the E.E.C., will join with the Norwegian Government in the stand made by their Minister of Agriculture in Brussels in rejecting the C.A.P. and demanding lasting exemptions from it?

The British negotiations have been completed in Brussels, with the major exceptions of fisheries and one or two minor issues. The Norwegian Government are carrying on their own negotiations and have always accepted responsibility for them, as has every other Member of E.F.T.A. We have kept in the closest possible touch with them and the E.F.T.A. Governments have expressed their appreciation. It is not for us to advise the Norwegian Government on how to deal with their own individual aspects of the negotiations.

asked the Prime Minister if he will pay an official visit to the Borough of Goole.

I have at present no plans to do so.

If the Prime Minister ever comes to Goole, will he come by water to emphasise the fact that Goole is a port and badly needs new trade to compensate for the sharply declining tonnage handled by the port during the last year?

I know Goole as a port, and I very much agree with what the hon. Gentleman has said.

asked the Prime Minister if he is satisfied with the co-ordination between the Departments responsible for search and rescue matters; and if he will make a statement.

Yes, Sir. There is close and continuing consultation between all Departments concerned with search and rescue matters.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that already this afternoon the House has heard that the Ministry of Defence is not prepared to accept responsibility for maintaining a military search and rescue helicopter service, other than for strictly military purposes? Is he also aware that some time ago the Board of Trade recommended in a report that civilian funds should be made available for such a service where military purposes no longer exist? Could he not bring these two Departments together to ensure that where military purposes no longer exist, civilian funds will be made available?

As I have said, there is close consultation between Departments on this matter, and it is something of which I have had personal experience. The position is that where the Ministry of Defence is providing a military service because it is justified by military requirements, it provides at the same time a civilian service which is invaluable to the people in that area. When the Ministry of Defence needs to reduce the military service because it is not justified on a military basis, the Department of Trade and Industry considers the matter and, as in the case of Manston and Aberdeen, has accepted responsibility. I understand that the change at Chivenor does not take place until 1973, so that there is time between now and the removal of the Royal Air Force helicopters properly to consider special requirements and to make the necessary arrangements.

Will the Prime Minister, both in his official capacity and as a yachtsman, make sure that the Royal National Lifeboat Institution as an independent body is brought into all departmental discussions concerning search and rescue operations at sea?

Yes, Sir, and that is already the practice. It is not only the R.N.L.I. that is involved, but also Trinity House and the coastguards.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry gave a most courteous and sympathetic hearing to a deputation which I led on Monday to raise this matter? Is he also aware of the civilian experiment at Manston, and will he bear in mind that at present air-sea rescue by helicopter depends upon whether one has the good fortune to have a Service station in the area? Since many of these stations are under review and closure plans have been announced for R.A.F. Chivenor, does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that there is a strong case for an interdepartmental or independent inquiry to see what civilian organisation could be set up to deal with that sort of situation?

Yes, Sir. As I have said, in the two major cases to which I have referred, Manston and Aberdeen, where the R.A.F. service has been withdrawn, a civilian service has been arranged. I am prepared to examine whether we now need some broader-based permanent civilian organisation which can then gradually expand to take over the responsibilities which are being relinquished by the Royal Air Force. This does not alter the fact that the Department of Trade and Industry is giving urgent consideration to cases of which it is aware such as Chivenor.

asked the Prime Minister if he will recommend the establishment of a Royal Commission to inquire into the educational, social and physical needs of mentally handicapped children.

No, Sir. I believe that the services required to meet the needs of these children can be developed without appointing a Royal Commission.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is con- siderable concern about the scale and nature of the problem and that we are dealing with a subject which is either neglected or which local authorities are prepared to sweep under the carpet? I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will agree to reconsider this matter since it would appear that the only machinery which could extract the necessary information on a national basis would be a Royal Commission.

I am quite prepared to consider that matter but my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, knowing that a Royal Commission usually takes a considerable time to consider matters and make recommendations, thought it best to use the Advisory Committee on Handicapped Children as a means of getting such information as the hon. Gentleman suggests and also advice on action which should be taken to deal with the problem. If the hon. Gentleman has particular indications of where action should be taken in this respect, we shall gladly consider them.

Might we not achieve quicker progress by waiting for the completion of the first year of responsibility of the Department of Education and Science and then taking stock of the position, rather than that we should wait for a Royal Commission?

This is one of the factors we have taken into account in deciding immediately to use the advisory committee and to take action on this matter. If we were to use a Royal Commission, we would have to wait a considerable time.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware there is one special category of children—sometimes wrongly lumped with all mentally handicapped children—for whom far too little is done in the way of research, accommodation or training, namely, autistic children?

Yes, Sir, I am aware of this particular problem and I agree with the hon. Gentleman that it requires very clear consideration.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many mentally handicapped children find it difficult to get into hospital for other diseases? Although we are not to have a Royal Commission on this matter, is it not important to look into this problem at this moment?

I am prepared to ask my right hon. Friend to inquire into that particular matter straight away.

Is the Prime Minister satisfied—I am certain that he cannot be—that the provisions of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act affecting autistic children and other children suffering from childhood psychoses, as well as dyslectic children, are being treated with sufficient urgency by his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science?

My right hon. Friend sent a circular to local education authorities in June. The replies to that circular have been received and they are now being collated. It is on the basis of those replies, the scale of the problem and what is being done to deal with it and, therefore, what more is required, that we can consider action.