asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what steps he is taking to make his Department's advice on access to public buildings for the disabled more widely known among architects and those in local authorities responsible for public buildings.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what action he is taking to ensure that in public buildings and centres under his control there are no avoidable obstacles for the disabled.

A pamphlet containing advice has been circulated to local authorities and the technical Press has given publicity to the subject. Buildings erected by the Ministry will conform with its recommendations.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that much distress is caused to disabled people by the present arrangements in many public buildings?

Yes, Sir, and I hope that every opportunity will be taken to publicise this very simple but very important pamphlet, and that when new construction is done and alterations are made, full note will be taken of it.

Could yet another circular be sent to local authorities, because there are many complaints that buildings which are still being built by local authorities are causing great inconvenience to the disabled?

That is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government, but I will certainly draw his attention to it. We are most anxious to do everything possible to ensure that facilities are provided for the old, the disabled and the blind.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what can be done about the conversion of old buildings so that they may equally give access to the disabled?

Some of the things are quite simple, such as accessible car parks, ramps instead of stairs, rails, and letters standing out so that the blind can feel them. All this sort of thing can be done in existing buildings at very little cost.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what progress has been made in the erection of a statue in the Palace of Westminster to commemorate Sir Winston Churchill; and if he will make a statement

Mr. Oscar Nemon, the sculptor recommended by the Memorial Committee, has been commissioned. A one-third scale model in plaster should be ready by the autumn. If this is approved, the bronze statue should be completed within a further two years.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what discussions he has had with the building and construction industry about the effect of the Selective Employment Tax.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what representations he has received from the building and construction industries in regard to the Selective Employment Tax.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what representations he has received from the building and construction industries in regard to long-term fixed-price contracts as affected by the Selective Employment Tax; and whether he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what representations he has received from the National Federation of Building Trade Employers in regard to the Selective Employment Tax.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what representations he has received from the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors in regard to the Selective Employment Tax; and what replies he has sent.

Immediately after taking office, I arranged meetings with organisations representative of all sides of the construction industry. At many of these meetings the effect of the tax has been discussed.

Would the hon. Gentleman agree that the National Plan indicated that, if anything, the construction industry was too small? Why, therefore, do the Government think it necessary to penalise it for every man which it employs?

I think it would be generally agreed that another feature of the construction industry is that its efficiency varies greatly and that there is much scope for more effective use of labour, and I hope that the tax will have an effect in that direction.

Has the hon. Gentleman's attention been drawn to the statement by the National Federation of Building Trade Employers, that the reasons why the housebuilding target of 400,000 will not be achieved are the widespread belief that there is deliberate Government discrimination against private house builders and the high cost of labour? Are not both these fears fully justified by the introduction of the tax?

I know what the views of the National Federation of Building Trade Employers are on this matter, and I can well understand that it, like anyone else affected by a new tax, would protest against it. I think, however, that it is being too pessimistic. We are entitled to tell private builders that they could be doing better and could be getting on with the housing programme better and that they must not use the tax as an excuse for some of their shortcomings.

In view of the uncertainty and the rumours of the last few weeks, will the right hon. Gentleman say clearly whether local authorities are to be authorised to renegotiate long-term fixed price contracts or not? No one knows at the moment. Is not this another example of an ill-thought-out tax?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, the Government are considering this and I hope to be able to make an announcement very soon.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors is already over-pressed and will become more so with the imposition of Land Commission duties, and that, in the case of surveyors, the S.E.T. will not result in people moving to other industries but will simply mean an extra cost which can only be passed on?

I am aware of the problem. But I do not accept that surveyors or anyone else connected with the construction industry must necessarily pass on the full effect of the tax. I hope that all concerned will do their best to make economies and avoid passing the extra cost on to the consumer.

However that may be, surely the inevitable effect of the imposition of the S.E.T. on the building industry will be to increase the cost of housing. Is that the Government's policy?

There will be an increase in costs, which we estimate at about 2 per cent., from the S.E.T. on its own. But I remind the right hon. Gentleman that other provisions in the Budget relieve building costs in other respects. I hope the House will agree that we want to see this extra cost absorbed by higher efficiency as far as possible and not automatically passed on.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works if he will give an estimate of the increased cost of essential building in Newcastle-upon-Tyne caused by the effects of Selective Employment Tax.

I estimate that if none of the increase were absorbed by the contractors or offset by higher productivity or otherwise the tax would cause an average increase in the cost of building of about 2 per cent. It is not possible to make any useful estimates in respect of particular localities.

Does the Minister realise that in cities where there is still a long waiting list for houses and a long housing programme for slum clearance and general purposes, the effects of this tax must eventually lead to a rise in rents'? Will he consider essential industrial building in development areas?

The second question is for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer or my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour and will be discussed in the next week or two. As for the first question; we have already had Questions about this and I repeat that I hope that hon. Members opposite will encourage the view that there could be a considerable increase in productivity in order to offset the extra costs of the tax.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works how many Government contracts there are at present in existence with Ruddock and Meighan Ltd., of Wealdstone, Middlesex.

Three, on all of which site works and financial settlements are virtually completed.

In view of the evidence I put before the Minister of the underhand manner in which this firm dealt with my constituents at Burford Court, Wokingham, will the hon. Gentleman ensure that no fresh contracts are placed with this firm for Government work?

The receiver who was appointed hopes to make the firm viable. Of course, my Department would need to be assured of the renewed financial viability of the firm before any further Government contracts were allocated to it. I hope that that meets the point made by the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will now make a statement on what buildings of historic or architectural interest in the Royal Ordnance Factory, Woolwich, he is recommending to be restored and maintained, following the closure of the factory.

After consultation with the Ministry of Housing and Local Government, the Crown Estate Commission and the Royal Fine Art Commission, my Ministry has made recommendations for preserving certain buildings and other features of the Royal Ordnance Factory, but as individual buildings are unlikely to be known to hon. Members I will, with permission, circulate the details in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what plans he has for cleaning of public buildings in London and elsewhere in Great Britain, in view of the recent cleaning done in Paris.

My right hon. Friend is interested in a new method of cleaning which was recently tried at the Custom House and at Admiralty House. The results appear to offer some improvement over traditional methods and are being considered.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. In view of the magnificent success of the cleaning of St. Paul's, will he institute the cleaning of at least Whitehall and Trafalgar Square without further delay and, preferably, start an imaginative and far-reaching plan for the whole city, as has been done in Paris, whose cost would be repaid by tourists?

Paris has been at it for rather a long time and London dirt appears to be heavier than Paris dirt. I am fully in sympathy with the general idea, but we shall have to look at the question of cost.

Will the hon. Gentleman think of cleaning the Foreign Office before he demolishes it?

What will be the cost of cleaning Whitehall and the Houses of Parliament?

I cannot answer that without notice.

asked the Minister of Public Buildings and Works, in view of the fact one of the firms working at the Royal Naval Hospital, Stonehouse, Devonport, and on new construction at the Royal Marine Camp, Bickleigh, Devon, has gone into liquidation, what action he is taking to see that work is carried out as the accommodation in both cases is needed urgently.

Some work is continuing on the latter project. Urgent discussions are being held with the liquidators about the completion of both.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it better to have more local organisation, giving more power to regional officers so that they could get on with these very urgent matters without having to keep so closely in touch with the Ministry?

There is already a great amount of delegation to the regions, but I will consider any detailed points that the hon. Lady wishes to put to me. We, too, are concerned with the urgency of getting on with these projects. Some delay is inevitable but we want to cut this as much as possible.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what estimate he has made of the number of bricks of all types likely to be produced in Great Britain in 1966.

It is not yet possible to make an estimate.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that brick production continues to fall at a time when, according to the National Plan, it should be increasing sharply? In view of the continuing slowdown in the number of houses being built and the continued high level of brick stockpiling, what plans has the hon. Gentleman for increasing production?

We are in close touch with the brick makers and have had a number of discussions with them. We are trying to do what we can regionally as well as nationally.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the 1965 brick production was down on the 1964 figure and that the same thing will happen this year? Is it not clear also that the present stocks will not be cleared by the end of this year? Is not this another blow at the industry's confidence?

We hope that the stocks will be cleared up by the end of this year.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what representations he has received from the Chairman of the National Coal Board regarding the stocks of bricks held in April, 1966.

None, Sir.

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that in April the stocks of National Coal Board bricks stood at 80 million and that the Chairman of the National Coal Board estimated the increased cost per 1,000 bricks at 10s. per 100? Will not that put up the cost of housing?

Of course the Coal Board has large stocks of bricks, but the encouraging thing about this is that the Board is quite prepared to increase efficiency and investment and production of bricks, because it has obvious faith in the need for bricks in the house building side of the construction industry.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what was the stock of bricks of all types in Great Britain at the latest convenient date; and how many traditional-type three-bed-roomed houses this stock represents.

896 million. None, Sir; a brick stock does not represent houses.

Is the hon. Gentleman ware that I can quite understand his unwillingness to relate the stock of bricks to the number of three-bedroomed houses? However, will he not agree that this is a tremendous indictment of the Government's mismanagement of the housing programme? In view of the fall in the rate of house building and the Minister's concentration on non-conventional building, will he not tell the brickmakers that they will be required to produce far fewer bricks in 1966 and 1967?

It does not do much good to say that stocks of bricks represent houses. That only confuses the issue. As the cost of the bricks is only about 10 per cent, of the cost of a house, the hon. Gentleman's statement does not help. The negotiations and discussions now going on between my right hon. Friend and the brickmakers are much more helpful in trying to get a solution to the problem.

asked the Minister Public Building and Works what estimate he has formed of the additional cost to building material producers arising from overstocking of bricks in the last quarter of 1965 and in 1966.

Brickmakers' own estimates range from about 10s. to £1 per thousand bricks.

What is the estimated wastage due to bad storage conditions for bricks? Can the hon. Gentlamen say what estimate there is of what capital is tied up in the storage of bricks?

I should need notice of both questions.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will offer guidance to brickmakers as to the likely requirements of bricks in 1967.

My right hon. Friend and I have recently had meetings with the brickmakers to discuss their production problems.

Is the hon. Gentleman's unwillingness at this stage to make any forecast due to the disastrous effects on the building industry of his predecessor's forecast in November, 1964?

There was a special emergency then and he acted quite rightly. Estimates of the load on the construction industry in 1967 are now being worked out between the Government and the industry in the economic development committees.

Does the hon. Gentleman forecast a reduction in the requirements for 1967?

I am not prepared to go further than what I have said.

May we be told who it was who acted quite rightly? Was it the Minister? Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that any forecast would be better than the previous forecast?

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what representations he has received from representatives of the building industry regarding the control of the price of houses built by private builders; and what replies he has sent.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what information he has given to the building industry concerning the control of the prices of houses built by private builders.

I have had no correspondence or discussion with the industry on this subject.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the imposition of price control would reduce still further the number of houses under construction?

I am not sure that that supplementary question arises from this Question. In any case, it is hypothetical.

But cannot the right hon. Gentleman tell us something about the extraordinary statement of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government, who stated that there might be something to be said for controlling house prices? Can we have a guarantee that the Government will not start that sort of control of prices, since they themselves are responsible for the rises in prices?

My hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government was referring to what appeared to be a suggestion by the right hon. Member for Kingston-upon-Thames (Mr. Boyd-Carpenter).

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what was the percentage rise in building costs in the last 12 months.

Between the first quarter of 1965 and the first quarter of 1966—the latest period for which figures are available—the index of new building costs rose by roughly 4·5 per cent.

Was not the rise in the new house prices last year in percentage terms higher than in any period since records have been kept? Does not the right hon. Gentleman further agree that the Government, by imposing the Selective Employment Tax, will increase costs still further by 2 per cent., as he himself has admitted? What are the Government doing to get house prices down?

The hon. Gentleman's question related to building costs in general, which I have stated will go up by about 4·5 per cent. This figure, in fact, compares with an average in the last 10 years of about 3 per cent. Indeed, there have been years in which the rise has been higher than last year's figure. I have already answered a number of questions about the S.E.T. I hope that a large part of this extra cost will be absorbed by greater productivity.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I suggested last week that the way to reduce house prices was to remove restrictions and taxation—not impose them?

That is a supplementary question to Question No. 11. When the right hon. Gentleman made that point last week my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government reacted by saying that the right hon. Gentleman was getting near to suggesting price control. My hon. Friend did not say that the Government were suggesting price control.

Will the right hon. Gentleman now pass the correct housing figures to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government?

I have no doubt that my hon. Friend gave the correct figures to the House.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what estimate he has formed of the likely increase in building costs in the private sector over the next six months.

Up to 3 per cent., but the figure depends on the extent to which the cost of Selective Employment Tax and the forthcoming wage increase are absorbed by contractors or offset by higher productivity.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that last year house prices rose by a record 10 per cent, and that, as a consequence of Government policy, it looks as though that rise may be exceeded this year? Is he not further aware that this rise in house prices will cause severe hardship and resentment among young couples struggling to accumulate deposits to become house owners?

Any rise in house prices is of course serious and gives us concern. But I do not think that the hon. Gentleman need be as pessimistic as that. There is no immediate sign of a rise in the cost of materials. There is to be a wage increase of about 4·3 per cent, in November this year, under arrangements already agreed, but wages account for only about one-third of cost. There is the effect of the Selective Employment Tax, but, once again, I say that I hope that a good deal of the increase in both taxes and wages will be absorbed by higher productivity.

Does the Minister deny the possibility of a further increase of as much as £150 for a Parker Morris house?

That is an excessively pessimistic view. While hon. Members opposite are entitled to attack us as much as they like, I do not think that they help the building industry or people waiting for homes by continually giving currency to the most pessimistic views which increase the pessimism of some people in the industry and may well do further harm by slowing down productivity. Let them join us in encouraging the industry to pull its socks up and do better.

As the right hon. Gentleman keeps saying that he hopes that these higher costs, which are all of Government making, can be offset by higher productivity, can he say how higher productivity is to be obtained?

Not within the scope of what you would allow, Mr. Speaker. There has been some rise in productivity in the building industry in most recent years. There is scope for a further increase. I think that the hon. Gentleman will agree that there is a big variation between the most efficient and other firms in the industry and that many could increase their productivity very rapidly.

Will not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the construction industry in recent years has probably had the best productivity record of any industry? Would he not agree that all that is putting up costs is Government policy?

No, Sir. A number of factors enter into costs, the cost of materials, the cost of wages and so on As the right hon. and learned Gentleman is aware, the best firms in the construction industry have had a very good record of increasing productivity in recent years. Others have not had such a good record and it is our task, through our Research and Development Group and in other ways, to try to get the best methods known and to see that we have a better increase in productivity than there has been in the past.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works to what factors he attributes the increase in building costs over the last 12 months.

Material prices and wages.

Would not the Minister agree that, with the addition of the Selective Employment Tax, the increases relating to prices and wages will make the financial restrictions imposed both on local authority building and on private building still more emphatic in the coming year?

No, Sir. That is similar to supplementary questions on an earlier Question. I repeat that we are entitled to ask for an increase in productivity to offset these costs.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what representations he has received from the building industry in regard to on-site manufacture or assembly of industrialised housing and components.

The effect of the Selective Employment Tax on site-manufacture of components was one of the points made to me by the Economic Development Committees for Building and Civil Engineering. This aspect of the tax is being examined by the Government.

Will the right hon. Gentleman try to get it right? Factory-made houses appear to get the rebate whereas those houses built on site appear to get none.

Clause 10 of the Selective Employment Payments Bill gives discretion to treat parts of an establishment constructed in separate locations as separate establishments. The way in which this Clause will be used in relation to the problem the hon-Gentleman has raised is under consideration.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works how many applications for authorisation of building projects have been refused in respect of shortage of materials and because of regional manpower difficulties.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works how many applications for authorisation of private building projects are now outstanding with his Department.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works how many applications for authorisation of private building projects have been refused consent by his Department; and how many have been granted.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether, for the guidance of the industry, he will make a statement about the number, type and geographical situation of applications for authorisation of private building projects which have been granted, refused, and are under consideration, respectively.

252 authorisations have been granted and 17 refused. 62 are under consideration With permission, I will circulate a statement giving details in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Does the hon. Gentleman hope to have the force of law for the licensing procedure?

That is hardly a matter for me. We will act expeditiously when it comes up.

Because of the severe restriction on the output of the building industry, is it not the case that output of houses in 1966 is 5,000 down on the comparable period of 1965?

We will wait until the end of the year. The restriction is not severe. When the hon. Gentleman sees the figures, he will realise that a considerable amount has been licensed.

Does not the hon. Gentleman think, in view of the strictures by the right hon. Member for Leeds, West (Mr. C. Pannell) about the effects of the tax on the building industry, that the Government might as well withdraw the Building Control Bill altogether?

No, Sir—and that is another question anyway.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works how many building workers, construction workers, electricians, plumbers and labourers were employed at the Polaris base in Scotland during the week ended 18th June, 1966.

The latest figures available are for the week ending 28th May. There were then 1,706 building and construction workers of whom 90 were electricians, 42 plumbers and 514 labourers.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this has had a disastrous effect on building costs in the rest of Scotland, that as a result of it labour has been diverted to this site and that costs in

The hon. Gentleman says we must wait until the end of the year for the final figures. But does not he agree that there is little likelihood of building 400,000 houses this year?

No, Sir. There is considerable likelihood.

My hon. Friend will be pleased to know that the building force involved has nearly reached its peak, so that the situation will not get worse. If this work were not done, one might almost say that conditions for the Navy would be sub-standard.

Will the hon. Gentleman accept from me that there are other costs in Dunbartonshire which contribute to the excessive cost of certain buildings there?

I note the hon. Lady's remarks.

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what estimate he has formed of the growth in the building and construction industry over the next 12 months of sub-contractors operating on a labour-only basis.

There is as yet no evidence on which to base any estimate.

As the Selective Employment Tax is bound to increase the labour-only basis of work, is not the Minister aware that many of us on this side of the House are extremely worried about the effects of the tax on the safety of workers in the industry? Will he not call for a report from the Ministry of Labour on the effects of Government policy on the safety aspects?

I think that the hon. Gentleman would wish me to distinguish between labour-only sub-contracting in which there is a contract of employment between the workers and the contractor, and the rather bogus form of self-employment which has been growing and which may grow further as a result of the S.E.T. This is something which my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour and I are watching very carefully. My right hon. Friend has had discussions with his National Joint Advisory Council and I discussed the matter with the unions at their conference at Skegness a few days ago. The unions and the employers have condemned, as we would all condemn, any attempt to pretend that people are self-employed in order that they can dodge such things as taxation, National Insurance contributions, redundancy payments, training levies and things of that sort.

Will my right hon. Friend take every possible precaution to ensure that builders do not avoid the Selective Employment Tax by relying on increased labour-only sub-contracting?

As I have said, we shall keep a close watch on this and so will my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour. We are concerned about the dangers in the growth of this practice and we shall keep it very closely under review.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if she will define what is meant by a self-employed person for the purpose of regulations under the National Insurance schemes.

A self-employed person for the purposes of the National Insurance Act, 1965, may be broadly defined as one who is gainfully employed in employment in Great Britain which is not employment under a contract of service. Modifications have been made by regulation in a number of cases where the nature and circumstances of particular types of employment have made this desirable. I am sending my hon. Friend a copy of the relevant regulations.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is a growing practice, particularly in the building and road haulage industries, of employers encouraging their employees—I use the word advisedly—to register as self-employed and so evade their responsibilities under P.A.Y.E. and all the rest? Can my right hon. Friend take any steps to stop this?

Yes, Sir. The Government are aware of that and try wherever possible to take action against it. In reply to an earlier Question, my right hon. Friend the Minister of Public Building and Works showed that the Minister of Labour is also concerned in this matter.

Do people who seek by these devices to avoid their responsibilities under the National Insurance scheme, and so on, deprive their employees of benefit under that scheme also?

Yes, they suffer in certain ways. For their own good, it is much better if the full ordinary insurance is paid.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if she will amend the conditions for entitlement to sickness benefit under the National Insurance scheme to ensure that expatriate Britons are treated as favourably as immigrants.

No, Sir. The National Insurance scheme makes no distinction between these two groups.

Surely the Minister must agree that a first entrant has to wait simply 26 weeks before he or she gets benefit and that this applies to immigrants, whereas an expatriate Briton coming back to this country must wait any length of time from 11 to 23 months before qualifying for benefit?

Yes, Sir; but, as the hon. Member is aware, there are special arrangements for new entrants for insurance. This special provision applies, however, to all new entrants for insurance, irrespective of whether they are recent school-leavers or people coming to this country for the first time. There is no question whatever of discrimination against expatriate Britons or in favour of immigrants coming to this country. They are all treated alike.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether she will initiate a review of industrial injury benefits and compensation.

These benefits form part of the general social security scheme and will be included in the review on which we are engaged.

Will the Minister bear in mind when considering this matter in the review that some of the people who are disabled through accidents in industry gel: a very small return and are in great difficulty for the rest of their life, and that if one compares what they receive, with, for example, those involved in motor car accidents, the comparison is not very good?

All these points will be taken into account. The hon. Member will, of course, be aware of the machinery that is set up under the Industrial Injuries Act for the assessment of the disability.

Can the Minister say when this reform is likely to be introduced and whether it will include the whole question of disability, whether industrial or not?

I have not spoken about any reform. In answer to the Question, I said that the industrial injuries provisions were being considered under the general review.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance (1) why Mrs. May Tazzar has not yet received her widowed mother's allowance, in view of the fact that her husband was killed last winter while working aboard the Sea Cow, a drilling rig, off the Yorkshire coast; and if she will expidite this case;

Mrs. Tazzar has been receiving her benefit since 24th May. I have written to my hon. Friend about this case.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I am indebted to her for the very full explanation of this unfortunate case which she has given me in writing? In her reply, however, my right hon. Friend states that, while she is not concerned with any legal question of presumption, nevertheless the date on which the claimant—[Interruption.]

Order. The hon. Member cannot quote in his supplementary question.

Might I say it, then, Mr. Speaker, without quoting—that the date of death of the claimant must be established. Was it not established in the Press almost the following day? Why was not that acted upon?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising this question on the Floor of the House. I regret very much the very long delay in this case, which I think was unwarrantable. I assure my hon. Friend that we are doing everything possible to ensure that such a delay does not take place again.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what method of identification is available to a pensioner drawing his retirement pension quarterly to enable him to obtain concessionary rates available to pensioners on production of their pension book or other similar document.

All such pensioners are given a notice of award of pension.

Will not the hon. Gentleman have another look at this matter since a number of pensioners who are paid quarterly have no means of identifying themselves so that they can obtain concessions which are available to pensioners paid at other times?

It is quite correct that a pensioner who receives his pension quarterly does not possess an order book. I draw the hon. Member's attention, however, to the fact that such a pensioner will have received a notice of entitlement when his pension was first awarded. If that is presented to the operators of these concessions for old people, it functions in the same way as the order book.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what sum of money will still be available under the National Plan for real improvements in social security benefits up to 1970 after the provisions of the Ministry of Social Security Bill are put into operation.

Rather more than £280 million, in 1969–70, over and above anything needed for adjustments to meet price changes.

Does the right hon. Lady agree that this is an exceedingly small sum in relation to the increased resources which have been made available for pensions and other benefits under previous Tory Administrations? Does she propose to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer to make more resources available so that progress can be continued?

I do not at all accept what the hon. Member has said. This sum of money is over and above the 12s. 6d. increase which was made last year, the very biggest increase ever given.

Can the right hon. Lady give a firm assurance that these extra resources will be used to provide help for the chronically sick and severely disabled group of people who do not benefit under the Social Security Bill?

I have told the hon. Member previously that those chronic sick who are not covered by the existing National Insurance provisions are among those whom we are considering in our review. I would add, however, that there were so many things left over for us to consider that it is not surprising that it is taking us time, but at least we are bringing each stage forward as we are ready.

asked the Minister of Health if he has received reports from all regional hospital boards on the review of pay beds requested in Circular, H.M.(66)26; and how many beds are proposed for transfer from section 5 arrangements.

No. Sir; those received are being considered, but I have as yet taken no decisions on them.

Whilst it is only 20 days since my right hon. Friend called for these reports, will he exert pressure to get either an interim result or a report by the Summer Recess?

I have sent a reminder to all boards which have not yet sent their reports.

Why does the Minister encourage the view expressed by his back benchers that it is almost a crime to have these pay beds? Has he not given away enough in free prescriptions already?

The only stricture that I thought was implicit in my hon. Friend's supplementary question was the delay in submitting reports by the time they had been asked for.

Does the Minister recognise that an increasing number of people of modest incomes are insuring themselves for hospital treatment? Will he give an assurance that he has no intention of penalising these people in our hospitals?

I should like to await the information for which I have asked the regional boards before making any further policy statement on this matter.

asked the Minister of Health if he will conduct all future negotiations concerning hospital doctors of all grades with the Central Consultants and Specialists Committee of the British Medical Association instead of with the Joint Consultants Committee.

No, Sir. The Joint Consultants Committee and the Staff Side of Committee B of the Medical and (Hospital) Dental Whitley Council represent the profession in negotiations on behalf of hospital doctors and I have no grounds for believing that a change is desired.

Would my right hon. Friend look at that again, in view of the recent discontent of the junior hospital doctors with the Report of the Joint Consultants Committee, in order that we might get more adequate representation of the hospital side?

As my hon. Friend knows, it is for the profession and not for me to decide who should represent it in negotiations. In the current negotiations on implementing the Review Body's recommendations, the Joint Committee's representatives have included a representative of the junior staff.

asked the Minister of Health whether he will now introduce legislation to make oral contraceptives available on the National Health Service on social as well as medical grounds, as it is becoming impossible for voluntary organisations such as the Family Planning Association to deal with this growing need.

As the hon. Member is aware, a Bill to extend the powers of local health authorities in relation to family planning has been introduced by my hon. Friend the Member for Bebington (Mr. Brooks).

Cannot the Minister go a little further than that? On 19th May, at a national conference, he left the impression with delegates that he was more than sympathetic with this. In view of that, could he not take some action?

I do not know what the hon. Gentleman says that I was sympathetic about. I was certainly sympathetic with the aims and the objectives of the Family Planning Association, and the circular which I sent recently to local authorities encouraged them to extend their family planning advice services. That does not involve the supply of contraceptives free of charge.

Would not my right hon. Friend discourage the use of all oral contraceptives on both medical and social grounds, because considerable uncertainty still exists as to their freedom from dangerous side-effects?

No, Sir. The recent statement made on behalf of the Dunlop Committee did not suggest that oral contraceptives should be withdrawn from the public.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that some general practitioners require the written consent of husbands before prescribing the oral contraceptive pill to women patients? Will he issue a directive to general practitioners to stop that feudal practice?—[Interruption.]

I am not sure that that this is a matter for me. If my hon. Friend would like to put a Question on the Order Paper, I would be glad to consider it.

Can my right hon. Friend give an assurance that this will not be regarded by our critics as a split in the party?

asked the Minister of Health if he will now make a statement on Her Majesty's Government's policy towards cigarette advertising in media other than television.

An agreement has been reached between the principal United Kingdom manufacturers and the Government for the limitation of expenditure on the advertising of cigarettes through Press and posters during the six months from 1st June, and for advertising in cinemas and on radio to cease on the expiry of existing contracts. The manufacturers have also agreed to undertake a review, jointly with the Government, of future levels of advertising in these media and of expenditure on coupon schemes with the aim of making comprehensive arrangements for limitation to come into operation on the expiry of the current six months period. An understanding has also been reached to restrict the distribution of free samples.

Whilst thanking my right hon. Friend for that Answer, may I ask whether he can estimate how far the agreed levels which he has announced today will compare with the previous level of cigarette advertising?

Without wishing to disclose the actual figures, I can assure my hon. Friend that it is at a rate considerably below the total advertising expenditure before the ban on advertisements on television.

As this matter is of very wide general interest, and all hon. Members would like to know them, is there no means of giving in outline a greater degree of information about the nature of the arrangements than the right hon. Gentleman was able to do in his Answer? Will they not be published?

If the right hon. Gentleman would like further information, perhaps he would put down a Question on the Order Paper. He will appreciate that there are commercial considerations involved in this matter as between firm and firm.

While welcoming the Minister's announcement, may I ask him to consider in the future completely banning advertisements for cigarettes, because the quite frightening death rate from cancer of the lung in this country is the largest public health problem that we are facing today?

I certainly agree with my hon. Friend that it is a very serious problem, but here we have been able to achieve a voluntary agreement by the manufacturers, and I would prefer to try to build on that for the present.

Will the right hon. Gentleman in due course give the House the effect which the ban has had on sales of cigarettes?