asked the Secretary of State for Air (1) whether he is aware that a company called the National Flying Services, Limited, has been formed to establish aerodromes and flying schools and generally to carry on the business of aviation on a commercial basis; that the schemes of this company were developed in close co-operation with an official or officials of the Air Ministry, with the result that this company has secured for itself a privileged position amongst its commercial competitors by the promise of an exclusive subsidy from the Government; that one or more of the officials has since resigned from the Air Ministry and is now financially interested in this company; and whether he can give an assurance to the House that the existing aviation clubs and similar companies will not be penalised by being placed in a worse position financially by reason of the discontinuation of Government subsidies or other assistance;

(2) whether, before granting a Government subsidy to National Flying Services, Limited, he has satisfied himself that the commercial prospects of this enterprise have been examined and approved by any commercial aviation expert outside the Air Ministry;

(3) where any aerodromes now under construction by private firms are situated; and whether the proposed subsidy to National Flying Services, Limited, will be extended to them?

In view of the widespread interest in the scheme to which these questions refer, I will, with the permission of the House, answer them somewhat fully. As regards the first part of Question No. 44, I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the white paper (Cmd. 3264) which was laid last week and which gives brief particulars of the grants to be made to National Flying Services, Limited.

I may supplement these particulars by saying that I am hopeful that this company's organisation will give those interested in aviation in a number of provincial centres an opportunity of associating themselves with the development of flying in this country and, if they so desire, of actually qualifying as pilots, which has hitherto been denied them, but for which I am satisfied that there is at the present time a widespread and growing demand. I may add that the scheme is essentially one of payment by results and I need not elaborate the manifest advantages which will accrue to the State, no less than the general public, if it meets with the success which its promoters anticipate, These advantages—for example, the provision of a large reserve of qualified pilots and the creation of a chain of new aerodromes and landing grounds—could not possibly be secured otherwise than through the medium of a commercial organisation without a very much larger expenditure from Air Votes than is entailed by the proposed grants.

As regards the second and third parts of the question, proposals for the formation of a company on these lines were first communicated to me by the right hon. and gallant Member for Bristol, North (Captain Guest), to whose public-spirited efforts to promote the development of British aviation I should like to pay a passing tribute. Prior to their embodiment in the scheme now adopted, there were naturally a number of consultations both with myself and Air Ministry officials. It is the case that one temporary official, whose services I am very sorry to lose, has resigned his appointment to take up work in the new company. I may add that his appointment was a technical one, and that he was not responsible in any way for the conduct of the financial negotiations. Any implication, therefore, that undue favour was secured by the company through his instrumentality is entirely devoid of foundation.

As regards the last part of the question, no change is contemplated in the agreements under which the existing light aeroplane clubs are subsidised.

The answer to Question No. 48 is in the negative. The commercial prospects of the company are a matter for the promoters and subscribers, and the Air Ministry's part in the transaction is confined to the payment of certain grants dependent upon the concrete results explained in the White Paper. Since, however, certain acknowledged financial and commercial flying experts have accepted seats on the board, it would seem a legitimate deduction that these gentlemen are satisfied that the company's scheme is soundly conceived and has a reasonable prospect of success.

As regards Question No. 49, apart from the aerodromes in contemplation by municipal authorities and National Flying Services, Limited, the only aerodrome under construction by a private firm, so far as I am aware, is that situated at Heston, near Hounslow. An application for a licence for an aerodrome site at Tavistock has also been received from a private individual. The answer to the second part of this question is in the negative. The self-contained and comprehensive scheme of National Flying Services, Limited— covering as it does the provision of aircraft as well as aerodromes and landing grounds, the training of pilots, and numerous other activities for the development of flying in a number of different centres where there are at present no facilities—is obviously in an entirely different category from the construction of isolated individual aerodromes with or without shed accommodation.

rose—

After the long answer that has been given, if we had any sup plementary questions we might have a repetition of it which would not be desirable.

I wish to raise a point of Order. The answer just given by the right hon. Gentleman makes it plain that an appeal is about to be made to the public for subscriptions of capital based on the assumption—

That is not a point of Order.

rose—

No point of Order arises.

I wish to ask you, Mr. Speaker, whether—

The question which the hon. Member was putting to me contained no point of Order.

Then I wish to raise another point of Order. I did not quite catch the remark which you made, Mr. Speaker, when the hon. and gallant Member for Enfield (Colonel Applin) rose to put a supplementary question after the answer to his three questions had been given. I desire to ask you, Mr. Speaker, when three questions are answered as one whether you rule that not a single supplementary question can be asked and for what reason?

No, I did not give that Ruling.

I beg to give notice that I shall raise this question again on the first available Motion for the Adjournment of the House.

At end of Questions:

I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a-definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, the announcement made for the first time by the Secretary of State for Air, to-day, that a private company is to be formed, subsidised by the. Treasury up to a maximum of nearly £ 100,000, without the consent of this House, and without any Government control or voice in its affairs, and that a public subscription of nearly £ 500,000 is shortly to be invited for a company whose commercial prospects are grounded upon the prejudged approval of this House.

The subject of the Motion which the hon. and gallant Member desires to move in order to secure the Adjournment of the House, obviously does not come under Standing Order No. 10. It is clear that the time to raise the question will be when the Government ask for the money for this particular purpose.

May I respectfully submit that there is an element of urgency, in that the Minister has announced that the public are to be invited immediately to subscribe this very large sum of money, contingent upon the approval of this House. which has not been given? I submit that, if this practice is to be continued, without some discouragement from the Chair and the House, the House is liable to find itself faced by similar actions in the future and may be influenced in voting the money by the fact that the public have already subscribed.

That does not alter the fact that the time to raise this question will be when the Government ask the House to vote the money.

With great respect, may I not submit that when the Government come to ask the House to approve of the expenditure, it will be too late to prevent the money being subscribed by the public, and that, if the House in the exercise of its undoubted discretion refuses to vote the money, the people will have been mulcted in a loss.

Mr. Clynes.