asked the Minister of State for Defence what is the value of an Army pension at present granted on retirement to an officer holding the rank of major.

The retired pay of a major who is retired compulsorily on the 1971 code ranges from £925 to £1,575 a year dependent on the total length of reckonable service, as shown in Cmnd. 4788.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many of us are very pleased that the pension should be regulated upwards in line with the rise in the cost of living, but we do not understand the logic of the requirement that a man should have to wait until the age of 55 before receiving the increase?

I think we all accept that for retirement pensions there must be a date, and we can argue about whether the age should be 60 for women and 65 for men. It is generally accepted that most people who retire from the Services retire at an age when it is possible for them to engage in another occupation and earn money. Consequently, it is thought to be not unjust that the age at which such people draw their pensions increases should be 55—and this is an innovation.

asked the Minister of State for Defence on how many occasions he has attended the Ministerial Aerospace Board.

My right hon. and noble Friend the Secretary of State for Defence and I attended the one meeting which has so far been held.

Does the fact that there has been only one meeting indicate that the Aerospace Board is not very active? When will the board give the Americans an answer about British participation in the post-Apollo programme?

It does not mean that the Aerospace Board has been inactive. The board is meant to oversee collaboration between Ministries, and collaboration continues at all levels irrespective of meetings of the board. The Aerospace Board co-ordinates procurement policy for space, but the actual policy for space is a matter for the Cabinet and the ordinary Cabinet machinery.

In view of the thirst for knowledge on defence subjects displayed by the hon. Member for West Lothian (Mr. Dalyell) in the number of Questions that he has put down for Written Answer, will the Minister say whether the hon. Gentleman gave him information in advance about which Questions were to be taken orally and which were to receive Written Answers?

No. The hon. Gentleman has put down about 40 Questions, but as far as I know we received no indication of which were to be taken orally.

asked the Minister of State for Defence what plans he has to provide more effective air cover for the fleet at sea.

Air cover for the fleet at sea will be provided by the aircraft complement of H.M.S. "Ark Royal", by helicopters carried in ships and by aircraft of the R.A.F. and of allied forces. The effectiveness of these forces will be increased as new aircraft and weapons enter service.

Will my hon. Friend undertake not to be distracted by expedience from the important task of giving the Harrier much greater range and capability to provide cover for the Fleet in the open sea? In particular, will he undertake to see that the development of the Pegasus 15 engine is pressed ahead?

We are completing a feasibility study of the Pegasus 15 engine, and it is too early yet to say whether further steps will be taken. My hon. Friend will recognise that the Pegasus 15 cannot be accommodated in the existing Harrier without airframe modification.

Will my noble Friend take note of the report that the Russians are constructing aircraft carriers? What credence does he give to the report that the hull laid down in Nikolayev is for an aircraft carrier capable of carrying V/STOL aircraft?

We will certainly take notice of that point.

asked the Minister of State for Defence if he will now give an estimate as to when the operations, of the British Army against terrorists in Northern Ireland are likely to be successfully concluded.

No, Sir. As I have said repeatedly, there can be no purely military solution. Attrition of the I.R.A. continues, but I do not propose to speculate about the time scale for further improvement in the security situation, and even small numbers of terrorists can create great havoc.

Although the Army is playing its part with efficiency, humanity and courage, is it not apparent that there is no hope of a military solution? Is it not therefore urgent for the Government to take a political initiative and to have the courage to abolish internment and greatly modify or get rid of the Stormont Government?

The hon. Gentleman's description of the work undertaken by the Army is shared by everybody in the House and in the country. The Government will make a statement on the wider issues of a political solution at a time which they judge will be most effective in securing progress.

Does my hon. Friend agree that, despite the dedication and great courage of the British Army and its achievements to date, the terrorists will not be finally defeated until the Government of the Republic of Eire do something about the terrorists who are walking about openly in Eire?

Any further assistance which the Government of Eire can give us in securing the arrest of killers is most welcome.

Is the Minister aware that the Opposition welcome the firmness with which he has stated this afternoon that there can be no complete success in military terms without political progress, but does the Minister not agree that the Government's delay in initiating a political step is embarrassing the Army in carrying out its task?

The Government have said on frequent occasions that there is no purely military solution and that unquestionably a political solution is also involved, but it must be for the Government to decide the exact moment when such a solution can best be advanced to secure the interests that we all have in mind.

asked the Minister of State for Defence when he next proposes to pay an official visit to Northern Ireland.

I have no immediate plans to visit Northern Ireland.

In view of the fact that it is now a year since the Minister was in Northern Ireland, does he not think that he should make another visit to that country? The right hon. Gentleman will recall that before the departure of his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence to Northern Ireland last autumn, he was reported in The Times on 2nd October, 1971, as being in an optimistic mood before departure. From the Minister's own acquaintance with the log book of events in Northern Ireland since 2nd October, can he give one single item to support that optimism felt by the Secretary of State?

During the last 10 months my colleagues and I have made a total of seven visits, and a further ministerial visit is planned in the fairly near future. There has been a steady attrition of the I.R.A., but it is unwise for those who are responsible for military operations to speculate as to exactly when final success can be achieved.

Is it not a great mistake to go on the basis of certain spectacular I.R.A. incidents and to assume, as the hon. Member for Sheffield, Attercliffe (Mr. Duffy) appears to assume, that the Army is not making substantial progress?

Yes; it struck me that every assumption made by the hon. Gentleman was completely fallacious.

Is it not possible for the Government, even on an informal basis, to make some arrangements with the I.R.A. to have some sort of cease-fire or cessation of operations until a political initiative is taken by Her Majesty's Government?

It would be more appropriate to address questions about any political initiative to my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary.

asked the Minister of State for Defence if he will mobilise the Territorial Army for use in Northern Ireland in the present emergency.

No, Sir. The resources of the Regular Army and the U.D.R. are at present sufficient.

Surely this is an "Alice in Wonderland" situation where the United Kingdom faces a major security problem and 3,000 highly trained and disciplined men in the Territorial Army are not used. Can my hon. Friend give an assurance that he will consider the possibility of removing the red tape surrounding this matter so that, if the situation merits it at any stage in the future, he will be able to change the present absurd position?

This is a matter for legislation. If the TAVR wished to serve on a part-time basis, we should need to legislate. There is no doubt that individual members of the TAVR can serve on a part-time basis if they join the U.D.R. Most of them know the strains and the considerable disruption caused to civilian occupations if they are called out en masse.

Will my hon. Friend at least give an assurance that should the G.O.C. at any time represent to him or to the Secretary of State that there is a need to increase further the number of troops in Northern Ireland, everything will be done to meet that request?

I can give the assurance that we shall certainly consider most seriously any recommendations on that score made by the G.O.C.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that we on this side of the House are getting a little tired of remarks from the benches opposite about the views of my right hon. and hon. Friends? There is every sign that the Government are trying to cover up the divisions in their own party over Irish policy by attacking my right hon. and hon. Friends. Is the hon. Gentleman aware, further, that the Government's policy of drift and delay over an initiative in Ireland is the real source of the present problem and that so long as it goes on the Government are letting down our soldiers there?

I cannot accept those remarks. I can understand why some people in Northern Ireland think that it is a nonsense that the TAVR is not playing its part. I know that many individual members of the TAVR would like to do so. If they wish to serve on a part-time basis, there is the Ulster Defence Regiment. If they wish to serve as members of the TAVR, however, it will involve legislation.

asked the Minister of State for Defence what action has been taken by the Army to restore security in Strabane, Northern Ireland.

Since the Army strength in Strabane was increased last December, considerable efforts have been made against the terrorists who are the main source of the trouble there. This is one of the areas where much of the terrorist activity is mounted from across the border. Nevertheless, renewed efforts are being made and only yesterday a further platoon was deployed in the area.

I am grateful for that reply. Is my hon. Friend aware of the published documents from courageous and beleaguered people in Strabane and the fact that shortly after publishing them the main civic centre was blown up? This town is perhaps the most easily defensible of all, because of the bridge separating it from Lifford, in the Republic. Would not Mr. Lynch demonstrate his good intentions by making certain that his side of the border in that case at least is looked after properly?

That would help a great deal.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware also that in the town of Strabane there is a 29 per cent, rate of male unemployment, and that if the Government did something about that they might help ease the situation?

asked the Minister of State for Defence whether he will now give fresh consideration to the formation of permanent units of the Ulster Defence Regiment.

We have considered this matter, but recruitment is going well and we have no plans for permanent units.

Are not locally based forces with local knowledge crucial, particularly against the eventual withdrawal of Regular forces? If my hon. Friend is worried about legislation, is it not the case that the House would give its full co-operation over the U.D.R. and the Territorial Army, which was the subject of a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Belfast, North (Mr. Stratton Mills)?

It is possible for men to become permanent staff of the Ulster Defence Regiment. We have recently increased its numbers. We welcome those who wish to give full-time service becoming members of the permanent staff. It is appropriate that I should remind them that there are also vacancies in the police reserve, in addition to the full-time administrative posts in the Ulster Defence Regiment.

Is it not a bit difficult to go on with this regiment on a part-time basis when it is impossible, when they are off duty, either to protect them or to deter their murderers?

It is wrong for the hon. and learned Gentleman to suggest that they cannot be protected. It would be quite incorrect to assume that.

What about those who have been murdered in their houses?

Following what the hon. and learned Member for Northampton (Mr. Paget) has said, may I ask whether my hon. Friend is yet satisfied with the arrangements being made for the personal protection of members of the U.D.R., including their personal arms?

This matter is under review by the Commander of the Ulster Defence Regiment.

asked the Minister of State for Defence if he will make further arrangements for Opposition Members of the House of Commons to pay official visits to British Army units operating against terrorists in Northern Ireland.

I will consider any request—from either side of the House—that is made to me. But I am sure the House will realise that whether facilities can be granted or not will depend on the circumstances at the time. There is, of course, no restriction upon any Member visiting Northern Ireland in a private capacity.

I have no doubt that the Army is behaving as humanely as possible. However, is it not the case that its operations must involve a large degree of harassment of the Roman Catholic population who are, in effect, now living in the worst kind of police State? Would not this situation be remedied if hon. Members had opportunities to see that they were not suffering undue hardship?

I simply refuse to accept the hypothesis on which that question is based.

Is it not obvious from previous questions that such visits would not only be highly welcome, but that they are clearly very necessary?

As I said, there is no restriction on such visits. However, we should be careful to avoid burdening the troops at a time when they are under great strain and working hard for the preservation of peace and order in Northern Ireland.

asked the Minister of State for Defence if the Army has examined the feasibility of stricter military security measures on the border between Ulster and the Republic of Ireland.

This is a matter which is kept under constant review.

Would my noble Friend not agree that it is desirable now to introduce normal international forms on the border, to include passports and vehicle documents, pending military measures to seal this enemy line of communication?

The question of passports is not one for me to answer, but the Government do not consider that it is practicable to seal the Border effectively. The force level required—the border is 300 miles long—would be prohibitive. Also, such measures would cause immense inconvenience to the peaceful traffic and economic well-being in the area, and would also involve the complete dislocation of life for those people who live in the border areas.

Would the noble Lord agree that the best hope of controlling the border more effectively than it is at present stems from the co-operation of the Government of the Republic of Ireland, and that that co-operation is less likely to be forthcoming if the kind of measures recommended by the hon. Member fox Esher (Mr. Mather) are followed?

The Government of course welcome the measures which have been taken by the Government of the Republic of Ireland, but we would welcome more assistance in this respect.

Does my noble Friend not realise that there is grave anxiety about border security in Northern Ireland, and that while it may be unreasonable to ask armed units to under take this task, it is a job which could be done by an expanded Ulster Defence Regiment if the obstacles in the way of transfer from the T.A. on a part-time or full-time basis were removed?

I can only repeat that the Government do not consider the sealing of the border to be practicable. The force levels required would be completely prohibitive.

asked the Minister of State for Defence what was the total number of recruits for the Armed Forces in Scotland in each of the last 10 years.

Figures prior to 1965–66 are not available. From 1965–66 to date the figures are:

• 3,839,
• 4,231,
• 3,178,
• 2,960,
• 3,676,
• 4,854; and for 1971–72 the estimated figure is 5,925.

Is it not a great pity that figures are not available before 1965? They would show a close correlation between the doubling of male unemployment between 1961 and 1971 and recruitment—in other words, that the best recruiting sergeant for the Army is the dole queue?

The hon. Gentleman is quite mistaken. What comes out of the figures that I have given is that under a Labour Government in 1966–67, when unemployment rose by 200,000 recruiting fell at the same time by a dramatic number.

asked the Minister of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the fisheries protection measures in being at the present time on the Northumberland coast, and in particular in the area from Coquet Island to Berwick-on-Tweed.

Since early February, ships of the Fishery Protection Squadron have been maintaining a continuous presence of between one and three ships off the coast of Northumberland. During this time some eight foreign fishing vessels have been arrested and subsequently convicted for fishing offences. Over £3,000 in fines and costs have been awarded in addition to confiscations of gear and catches, valued at about £7,000.

Is it not to be regretted that this information was not available to the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster when he was on the Continent negotiating the fisheries agreement? The imposition of a six-mile limit on the stretch of coast mentioned in my Question clearly indicates that in that area, as well as on the rest of the East Coast, there should at least be a 12-mile limit for fishery areas, which contain a number of valuable herring and salmon grounds?

I do not know how the hon. Gentleman draws that conclusion from my answer. What should be drawn from my answer is the fact that an efficient fishery protection service is maintained along the coastline.

In view of the large number of arrests in recent times in this area, and bearing in mind the disgraceful sell-out of north-east coast fishermen by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, would the right hon. Gentleman not agree that when we enter the E.E.C. we shall need a bit of gunboat diplomacy in that area if our fishermen are to eke out any kind of living?

I am not sure that I would echo the hon. Gentleman's phrase "gunboat diplomacy" as being a desirable objective. What is important is that there should be an efficient fishery protection service, and by 1st January, 1973, we shall have increased the number of minesweepers available for fishery protection duties from six to eight. We are also acquiring a fast patrol boat, "Tenacity". We intend to make further use of Royal Navy and Royal Air Force helicopter services which will be of great assistance in improving fishery protection.

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

asked the Minister of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the additional fisheries protection measures needed on the Northumberland coast, particularly in the area from Coquet Island to Berwick-on-Tweed, as a result of the fisheries agreement conditional on Great Britain's entry into the European Economic Community.

I would refer the hon. Member to the Reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Haltemprice (Mr. Wall), on 20th January which announced that we shall be increasing by about 50 per cent. the effort currently deployed by the Services on coastal fishery protection. This increased effort will become part of the total Services fishery protection effort and will be deployed, in the light of fishing activity at the time, to cover the coastal waters of the United Kingdom, including the Northumberland coast.—[Vol. 829, c. 651–2.]

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that that answer is to be even more deplored than his answer to my previous Question on the same subject? Is he aware that this extra Government expenditure for the British taxpayer on fisheries protection vessels is made necessary because the fisheries agreement was not concluded with the Six until this House has decided on principle to enter the European Economic Community?

I thought that my previous answer, which announced a substantial increase in the strength of the Fishery Protection Service, had been generally welcomed in the House and the country.

Is the noble Lord aware that any defence protection here could be minuscule compared with the possible eventuality in the North-East Atlantic and Icelandic waters? Would he turn his mind to the need for defence and protection measures after 1st September, in the unhappy event that our fishermen are then fishing within the 50-mile limits?

I will certainly consider that point, but the hon. Gentleman will appreciate that what I have announced is an increase of 50 per cent. in the effectiveness of the Fishery Protection Service.

asked the Minister of State for Defence if he will retain the Wessex Brigade Juniors Training Regiment at Wyvern Barracks, Exeter.

The training of juniors will not continue at Wyvern Barracks, Exeter after the closure of the depot there at the end of 1974.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that most people in the South-West regret this decision to move the Wessex Depot to Lichfield, although the recent decision to delay the move until 1974 is welcomed. Does he agree that the South-West peninsular, with its excellent record of recruitment and training into the Wessex Regiment, will now lose its infantry presence, and that this will have a bad effect on future recruitment in that area?

I can well understand my hon. Friend's feelings and those of his constituents on this matter. The Wessex Brigade has a very strong presence in Hampshire and Wiltshire. There will be a continued existence of regimental headquarters in the various areas and a strong TAVR presence. Army recruiting teams will visit the areas represented by my hon. Friend.

Is not the Minister rather glossing over this matter? The concept that there will be no headquarters presence of the Wessex Brigade in Somerset. Cornwall, Devon and Dorset is just not good enough. Of the three structures—

Order. Is the hon. Gentleman asking a question or imparting information?

I am merely trying to make a speech, Mr. Speaker, and I apologise. Will my hon. Friend appreciate the strong feelings about this matter and try to do something in the next two years to give the Brigade an existence after 1974?

I do not want to ride away too easily on this matter by giving an assurance, and I am sorry that I cannot do so. The only local regimental recruitment which is liable to be affected by the closure of the Wessex depot is that of the Devon and Dorset Regiment. The present depot is a recruiting depot only. This stems from decisions taken at an earlier stage involving a slimming down of the Army. It was decided to change over from the brigade to the divisional concept, which means that in consequence we have fewer depots. These decisions have been taken, and it would be costly to go back on them.

asked the Minister of State for Defence what is his estimate of the relative strengths of North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and Russian forces on the northern flank in terms of ground troops, air and sea forces, respectively.

It is impossible to quantify the relative strengths of these forces in simple terms. The area is vast, dispositions of forces can be changed rapidly and relative capabilities cannot be measured with any precision. However, the Warsaw Pact certainly has a substantial superiority in all three arms.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. May I draw his attention to the statement of General Sir Walter Walker, who has just retired from Norway, in which he says that on the northern flank N.A.T.O. forces are outnumbered by Russia by four to one in terms of ground troops, six to one in the air, and six to one at sea. Is my right hon. Friend aware that this causes great concern to many people in this country?

I am well aware of General Walker's recent remarks on the imbalance of forces in his late command. The position is that neither Norway nor Denmark will allow foreign troops or nuclear weapons to be stationed on their soil in peace time. The critical factor in that area, therefore, is the arrangements for reinforcements and the speed with which the area can be reinforced in a time of tension. This does not diminish the importance of the local forces in the area being strong enough to contain an immediate pre-emptive attack in order to enable our reinforcements to be deployed.

To what extent have the Government considered that the stated inferiority of N.A.T.O. in terms of conventional forces is compensated by superiority in nuclear weaponry? Do the Government agree that that is a frightening and dangerous situation? What steps are the Government likely to take to move away from that situation?

I find it very difficult to quantify the information that the hon. Gentleman requires. I am sure that we have the resources available in N.A.T.O. to sustain the policy of flexible response which has been the policy of both Governments.

My right hon. Friend will know that a hydrographic ship of the Soviet Northern Fleet is due in the Pool of London for a visit beginning on Monday. In view of the disgraceful part played by the Soviet Embassy in the recent naval security case, will my right hon. Friend reconsider whether the visit is to be welcomed? If it takes place and the ship arrives, will my right hon. Friend keep a look out for the Assistant Soviet Naval Attaché peering into old beer cans up and down Tooley Street?

The conduct of the Soviet Naval Attaché and any comments referring to his conduct are matters for my right hon. Friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that it does no service to the rational discussion of defence matters to exaggerate the extent of the threat, and will he undertake to look at recent Army recruiting advertisements in our national newspapers which talk of a two-to-one conventional superiority of Soviet forces in the central front and other simpliste figures? Will the right hon. Gentleman justify the figures in those advertisements?

I will justify them now. They are absolutely correct.

asked the Minister of State for Defence what functions will be performed by the Linesman system of air defence radar when it is operational; and whether he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of State for Defence when the Linesman military air traffic control system will be fully operational; and if he will make a statement.

I have nothing to add to the very full account I gave to the House during the course of the Defence Estimates debate on 2nd March, when I specifically covered points raised by the hon. Member for Nuneaton (Mr. Leslie Huckfield) in the previous debate.—[Vol. 832, c. 774–6.]

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in that debate he said nothing in answer to the points that I raised? Does he accept that, while it may be appropriate for foreigners not to know anything about Linesman, it does not inspire confidence in our own people who are supposed to operate it that they do not know anything about it, either? Does the hon. Gentleman accept that our basic system of air defence radar is about the same as it was in the Second World War and that—implying no disrespect—it needs only A.R.P. wardens, bicycles and wind-up telephones to complete it?

I cannot accept that. Linesman represents a considerable step forward, and it would be wrong to underestimate it.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that the major cause of delay in the Linesman contract was the appalling lack of contract administration by the previous Government throughout their six years in office?

There have been considerable difficulties over the software.

asked the Minister of State for Defence what steps he is taking to increase the security of military installations in England, Wales and Scotland.

It would not be in the general interest to disclose the measures which have been taken. I can give an assurance, however, that steps have been taken to improve security to the maximum extent practicable.

Will my right hon. Friend say whether it is possible for the Territorial Army to assist in guard duties, thereby relieving Regular troops? Secondly, will my right hon. Friend take an early opportunity to congratulate the Home Secretary on the prompt action taken by the police to search the homes of 60 suspects yesterday in connection with the Aldershot outrage?

It would not be practical to use the Territorial Army in this particular rôle. I am sure that the whole House supports the police in the efforts which they are making to secure the arrests of those responsible for the murders at Aldershot.

asked the Minister of State for Defence what is the percentage tonnage of steel imported from the United States of America for constructing nuclear submarines.

The percentage of steel imported from the United States of America for nuclear submarines under construction or ordered is about 55 per cent.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that reply. I have had correspondence with him on the matter. Does he agree that this is an indictment of the British Steel Corporation? I know that the Minister is anxious to purchase steel in this country. Will he make representations to the British Steel Corporation, bearing in mind the redundancies which are taking place in development areas, to manufacture the necessary steel and thereby give employment to many of the people in those areas?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, we are buying from the British Steel Corporation as much of this special steel as it is able to allocate to us. I assure him that we shall be glad to buy more steel from British sources whenever it is available.

asked the Minister of State for Defence whether he will make a statement on his plans to pay an official visit to the city of Portsmouth.

I have no plans to do so.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in Portsmouth there is a desperate shortage of land for housing, recreation and further education and that, as employment prospects decline in the dockyard, there is an urgent need for land for alternative industry in which to employ the citizens of Portsmouth? Does he agree that the relatively spacious provision of amenities for the Navy is hard to bear and that it aggravates the city's financial problems in terms of rate revenue? Will he undertake to transfer far more Service land to the city, but not at extortionate existing market rates?

If the hon. Gentleman had put down a Question about land holdings I should have been able to give him a more detailed answer. I understand that in the past six years the Services have disposed of 18 per cent. of their land in the City of Portsmouth. We will certainly consider whether more land can be disposed of as it becomes available for disposal. I shall certainly consider the points made by the hon. Gentleman.

If the right hon. Gentleman has no plans to visit Portsmouth, may I ask whether he has any plans to make a statement about the recent breach of Naval security, a lot of which came from H.M.S. "Vernon", which is a Portsmouth establishment? Will he give some indication whether the Government intend to make a statement on this most serious breach of Naval security, relating to submarines and information which could give a great deal of succour and comfort to our enemies?

Again, that does not arise from the Question. However, the House will know that the case is subject to appeal. In those circumstances, it would be wrong for me to make any statement.

asked the Minister of State for Defence what are the characteristics of the interrogation in depth which is to continue to be used by British Forces.

When British Forces are operating in aid of the civil power, the conduct of interrogation is a matter for the civil authorities. If it should become necessary for Service personnel to carry out interrogation in order to obtain intelligence in any future military operation, the methods used would be based on the practice of the civil police in the United Kingdom.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise that doubt will be caused by the words

"the methods used would be based on the practice of the civil police in the United Kingdom"?

That is how I answered the Question. The methods used will be based on the practice of the civil police in the United Kingdom. The procedures will be laid down in the revised joint directive.

Will my right hon. Friend assure the House that there is no weakening in the Government's resolve to maintain and improve the quality of intelligence available to security forces in Ulster?

I can give my hon. and gallant Friend a most categorical assurance on that subject.

asked the Minister of State for Defence whether he will now make a further statement on whether he will develop the Rolls-Royce Pegasus Aeroengine for military use; and what is his latest estimate of the cost involved.

I have nothing to add to the Answer which I gave to my hon. Friend on 17th February.—[Vol. 831, c. 142.]

Is my hon. Friend aware how disappointing that answer is? Many of us on this side of the House believe, like foreign navies, that if the Pegasus 15 were developed for a relatively small investment there would be a substantial benefit to our balance of payments from the overseas sales of this very fine aircraft.

As my hon. Friend knows, we are currently considering these matters and a feasibility study is under way.

asked the Minister of State for Defence how many times he has taken the chair at the National Defence Industries Council.

My right hon. and noble Friend the Secretary of State for Defence is chairman of this council. He has taken the chair twice, and my right hon. Friend and I have deputised on two other occasions.

Giving credit where credit is due, our information is that the N.D.I.C. is doing a good job. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the reason for my cussedness in putting down 40 Oral Questions is that there was no indication, either in the defence debate or in the debate on the Air Estimates, that serious thought was being given by his Department to Shuttle Tug and the rest of the post-Apollo programme, which is a matter of 5,500 million dollars, 10 per cent, of which is the possible British participation? What is really at issue here is the future of the British electronics industry in many of its aspects.

As I have tried to explain to the Hon. Gentleman before, the space programme is primarily a civil matter—

It is not.

—and is primarily for my right hon. Friend the Minister for Aerospace. However strongly the hon. Gentleman may feel about these matters, it would have been easy for him to put down 40 Questions and to specify which two would be Oral. That would have saved a great deal of time and expense.

asked the Minister of State for Defence whether he will publish in the Official Report details of all those Royal Air Force and Royal Navy air bases in Great Britain at which there are regular joint military and civilian operations; whether he will publish details of the extent of those joint operations; and whether he will make a statement on his plans for the extension and development of such joint operations throughout Great Britain.

I will, with permission, publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT particulars of the 52 Royal Air Force and Royal Navy airfields at which facilities are available for civil aviation. We will continue to make such facilities available whenever possible.

I thank the hon. Member for that reply. Would he not agree that, in the cause of economy of public funds and resources, it would make good sense to develop a programme of joint rational use of civil and military aircraft wherever possible?

There is considerable liaison between the authorities concerned, and a lot of use is made in this way.

asked the Minister of State for Defence when the break-up of H.M.S. "Eagle" will be started and completed.

As stated by my right hon. and noble Friend in another place on 9th March, a decision on when to dispose of "Eagle" for scrap will probably not be taken before the end of 1973. Some of her equipment is earmarked to support "Ark Royal".

Will my hon. Friend be prepared to place some restraint on this programme in order to give the air cover that the Navy must have until the through-deck cruisers arrive and which the Royal Air Force manifestly cannot satisfy?

The decision has been taken after very full consideration of all the issues involved—the cost of the refit, the need to adapt "Eagle" to operate Phantoms, and the problem of manpower, which is equivalent to the ships' companies of five frigates. This must be weighed against the manpower that will be needed to operate the new vessels coming into service and the new naval weapons.

Is the noble Lord aware that he and the Government are to be congratulated on this decision, which they have taken despite the vehemence of their perorations in defence debate after defence debate in the years when they were in opposition? They have now seen the sensible decision, that to carry on H.M.S. "Eagle" as they themselves proposed would be prohibitively expensive, and they are to be congratulated on changing their minds.

When the hon. Gentleman congratulates the Government we always have to re-examine a programme with the utmost care. This we have done, and this re-examination has confirmed the decision which we had already reached.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will establish machinery to ensure that the administrative practices and techniques sanctioned by Government Departments are in conformity with civil law and with the United Kingdom obligations in international law.

No, Sir. Departmental procedures are designed to this end; and the ultimate and best safeguard is the law itself.

But since it is clear from the Parker Report that practices sanctioned by the Government are at best of doubtful legality, and since the answer to this kind of problem, suggested last summer by my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Dulwich (Mr. S. C. Silkin) terminated when the debate was counted out on the initative of the Government Whips—in the middle of my speech—is there not some responsibility on the Prime Minister to suggest a safeguard?

As I have already said, the best safeguard is the law itself, to which the citizen can have resort. As for the Parker Committee, I have already announced the Government's clear decision on that matter. As for legality in Northern Ireland, the majority report reserved its view pending legal proceedings in Northern Ireland and I would not wish, therefore, to comment.

Is it not an essential condition of a free society that those in responsible positions shall uphold the law and support the lawful authority? Is it not therefore regrettable that right hon. and hon. Members opposite appear prepared to vote against that principle?

I agree with my hon. Friend's thesis and I hope that the House will always support it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that countries other than ours are increasingly using the kind of machinery to which my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Rowley Regis and Tipton (Mr. Peter Archer) referred? Will the right hon. Gentleman cease being complacent about this matter?

I am not in the least complacent about it, but neither the hon. and learned Member for Rowley Regis and Tipton (Mr. Peter Archer) nor the hon. and learned Member for Dulwich (Mr. S. C. Silkin) has given me evidence that any requirement of this kind exists. We have had the specific case of the circumstances under which the Parker Tribunal was set up. The very speedy action that I took was to set up the Tribunal. It carried out a very thorough inquiry and made its report, and we have acted on it. In the meantime, there are legal proceedings in the courts. That seems to us a satisfactory procedure.

asked the Prime Minister if he remains satisfied with the coordination between all Departments on all matters pertaining to incomes and prices: and if he will make a statement.

Yes, Sir. All Departments are aware that it is an essential condition of price stability that increases in incomes should not exceed increases in productivity; and the Government's policies are framed accordingly.

But does not the right hon. Gentleman think that the miners' pay settlement and the information published last night by the Department of Trade and Industry on price restraint suggests that the right hon. Gentleman's policy on incomes and prices has hitherto been too inflexible, and has therefore inevitably acquired a certain brittleness—in other words, that "N" has become crucial and more important than the merits of a particular wage increase? Would he not therefore put his future policy in this sector in a more generous framework of reference?

If the hon. Gentleman studies the awards over the past 18 months, apart from the award to the miners, he will find considerable variation between them. There has been flexibility in the private sector. This is bound to depend on the results of bargaining between employers and unions.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the constant cry "Give them the money" from hon. Gentlemen opposite is not at all popular with those who have to foot the bill in the form of higher prices because of wage awards?

There is growing public understanding of the relationship between the two, and this has been shown very recently. I believe that the public understand that one cannot have inflationary wage increases and also keep prices down.

Is there any Department or activity of his Administration with which the right hon. Gentleman is not satisfied? [Laughter.]

That is the easiest supplementary question that the hon. Gentleman has ever asked me. The answer is "No"—and if there were, I would change it.

asked the Prime Minister if he will establish new machinery for scrutiny of the Honours system.

No, Sir.

Did the Prime Minister read the article in the Spectatorof 4th March dealing with the conferring of a knighthood on a certain individual, allegedly for charitable purposes? This individual was in the Prime Minister's list and is alleged to have given £600,000 to the European Movement, for which charity the hon. Member for Louth (Mr. Jeffrey Archer) was a principal sponsor—[Interruption.]—taking his usual cut—[Hon. Members: "Shame."]—and the Prime Minister was the most enthusiastic supporter of that Movement. The article therefore impugned the honour of the Prime Minister and the hon. Member for Louth. Does the right hon. Gentleman therefore not consider that the matter should be referred to the Committee of Privileges?

On a point of order. Is it in order for an hon. Member to cast a reflection on another hon. Member who is not in his place?

It is the convention of the House that if any kind of imputation is to be made notice is given to the hon. Member concerned.

Further to that point of order. I gave notice to the hon. Member for Louth of my intention to raise this matter. I have not yet had a reply from him.

The article to which the hon. Member for Fife, West (Mr. William Hamilton) referred consisted of a succession of nasty innuendoes based on a series of unfounded and completely irresponsible statements. I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman should have used his opposition to European policies to attack a distinguished man—[Interruption.]—and his opposition to Her Majesty's Government to attack a very distinguished man who has made this country his home, who has contributed greatly to its prosperity, and who has made a quite outstanding contribution to charities, in particular to medical care and research, to cancer research, to the creation of a Welsh sports centre, and to the national sports centre which is now under construction in Islington.

It is always regrettable when matters of this kind are debated in the House—by tradition they are not—but may I ask the right hon. Gentleman, first, to express regret for the words he used to so distinguished a pro-Marketeer as my hon. Friend? [Interruption.] Will he, secondly, give a great deal of thought to this problem? Will he confirm that it is an extremely difficult and delicate matter for Prime Ministers from either side of the House—[Laughter.] This is not a laughing matter. I am trying to get this issue taken out of the kind of atmosphere in which hon. Gentlemen opposite apparently want it to be. If they object to that, I am quite prepared to stop trying.

In regard to my right hon. Friend's alleged mistake about the sentiments of the hon. Member for Fife, West (Mr. William Hamilton) concerning our entry into the Community, may I ask him if it would not be easier, and avoid confusion, if all hon. Members voted on this question in accordance with their views and principles?

If the hon. Gentleman had been supporting us in the Lobby I would gladly have been paying tribute to him, but he will be the first to agree that that is not the case.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for those remarks. The reason why I did not complete what I wanted to say was the behaviour of certain hon. Gentlemen opposite—[Interruption.] I am not being touchy. This is a matter for which the Prime Minister, and the Prime Minister alone, is responsible. The same has been true of previous Prime Ministers. [Interruption.] If hon. Gentlemen opposite want to exercise their normal political reaction to most things that are said from this side of the House, then on this issue they are only making it more difficult for the Prime Minister, whom I was trying to help. [Interruption.] I can only regret the attitude of hon. Gentlemen opposite, who want to treat this matter with their usual parliamentary discourtesy. That was why I sat down.

I am grateful to the Leader of the Opposition for what he has said. When any allegations of substance are made I am always prepared to look into them. I would have thought that my record as Prime Minister bore that out. If the right hon. Gentleman has other matters at which he would like me to look, I hope that he will bring them to my attention, when I will certainly look into them.

asked the Prime Minister if the public statement on the subject of wages and unemployment made by the Secretary of State for Employment on B.B.C. Television on Monday, 28th February represents Government policy.

Yes, Sir. My right hon. Friend referred to the failure of the statutory prices and incomes policy pursued by the previous Administration, and reaffirmed our interest in a voluntary understanding based on the shared objectives of Government, employers and trades unions.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a certain difference of view arose between the Secretary of State and myself on that occasion? Will he, from his impartial position, adjudicate between us? Is he aware that the Secretary of State said that there was absolutely no connection between a moderate fall in the level of wage increases and 1 million unemployed? Does the Prime Minister now believe, in the light of all the experience of his Government, that a formal prices and incomes policy is the price that we must pay for full employment?

I cannot agree with the hon. Gentleman. Experience of the last 10 years shows that a formal incomes policy does not produce the result we want. [Interruption.] Hon. Members are entitled to argue whether there has or has not been a formal incomes policy. I would have said that an incomes policy imposed by statute was about as formal as one could get.

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree, from the examination that he has obviously carried out into the level of wages in manufacturing and the fact that 7 million workers receive payments by way of the results system, that the higher wages go, so, proportionately, prices come down? That is the experience of those who operate under piece-work conditions.

Increased wages are justifiable so long as unit costs can be maintained or, as the hon. Gentleman said, brought down; then they are valuable. But to the extent that wage increases exceed that point, and therefore allow unit costs to rise, even with increased production, they are undesirable; and any study of manufacturing industry will show where that stage is reached.

Is the Prime Minister aware that his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry said that no Government can survive without a prices and incomes policy? Will the Prime Minister tell us whether the Government intend to survive or have a prices and incomes policy?

We have constantly made it clear that we have a policy for dealing with prices, which has been clearly carried out through the reduction of purchase tax and the other measures that we have taken. As to incomes, the policy is that they should increase. This has been taking place in the past 18 months, in that when we took office they were increasing at a rate of between 13 per cent. and 15 per cent., and they are now down to 8 per cent. to 8½ per cent. in the public sector and 9 per cent. in the private sector. That is an effective prices and incomes policy.