Will not the right hon. Gentleman agree that this decision by the Special Fund is very welcome indeed, and does it not indicate that there exist in the Commonwealth worthwhile projects which cannot be adequately financed by the Colombo Plan and other forms of Commonwealth aid?
For the financial year 1959 Her Majesty's Government pledged $1 million to the Special Fund. Canada pledged $2 million, the Netherlands just over $2·4 million and Sweden $21 million. However, I can tell the House that the United Kingdom contribution to the Fund for 1960 will show a substantial increase over the $1 million pledged for 1959.
In view of the substantial grants already made by the Special Fund to Commonwealth countries, as indicated in the right hon. Gentleman's Answer to my last Question, and in view of the admission he has made that there are many worth-while projects to be financed in Commonwealth countries, and in view of the further fact that the United States has promised to match contributions made by other countries by contributions by herself, would it not now be wise greatly to increase the United Kingdom's contribution to the Special Fund?
Yes, but surely the right hon. Gentleman will agree that, whatever promise of reform there may be for the future, for this year, 1959, in which we are told on the highest authority that we have never had it so good, our contribution is derisory measured by the benefits we receive and the contributions made by other countries?
When my right hon. Friend says that our contribution is to be made in dollars, does he mean in the equivalent of dollars? Secondly, is this Fund conducted without excessive administrative expense?
I think the Fund is conducted in a most admirable manner. The term "dollars" is used because that is the denomination in which everybody's contribution is normally announced. Of course, quite a lot of this expenditure may well be in sterling.