asked the Minister of Supply what reduction in the import of steel sheets was caused during 1950 as a result of the shortage of shipping facilities.

None, Sir.

asked the Minister of Supply if he will make a statement on the procurement of machine tools from the United States of America and European countries.

Orders for the defence programme have been placed on suppliers in the United States and in Western Europe to a value to date of approximately £40 million.

Is the Minister satisfied that great care has been taken to dovetail these orders so that our production and what we are buying from abroad will match up?

Yes, Sir. That matter has been and is giving us very considerable concern, and I think we are doing what is necessary.

Will my right hon. Friend be very careful indeed to keep in touch with the American end of the supply line, since there is some doubt in industrial quarters whether by virtue of American increased production we are getting all the supplies we want?

Yes, Sir. That is again a point that we have very much in mind.

asked the Minister of Supply the number of machine tools taken from his Department's reserve in the last six months and placed in use in industry.

Eight hundred and ninety-three machine tools have been withdrawn from Ministry store during the last six months; 424 for immediate use and 469 for reconditioning before use.

Is it possible to say what proportion that withdrawal bears to the remaining stocks?

It is quite a small proportion, because most of the remaining stocks are special purpose tools that are not suitable for our defence programme.

Has a very large number of machine tools now required for re-armament purposes been disposed of since the war?

No, Sir.

Is it not the case that we are in a better position today to supply all the machine tools we require either now or in the immediate future?

Yes, Sir.

For what purposes are these tools in store if they are unsuitable for the re-armament programme?

They are special purpose machines that were mostly used for equipment required during the last war but which are not now required according to the demands given us by the Service Departments.

Would it not be reasonable in that case for them to be sold?

asked the Minister of Supply what steps the Government intend to take to indemnify firms failing to complete their contract for the export of machine tools to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics or Eastern Europe as a result of the Government's policy for subsequent legal proceedings.

My Department have informed the machine tool industry that, for completed machines the export of which to Eastern Europe has been frustrated as a result of Government action under the Export of Goods (Control) Order of 6th October, 1950, the Government will indemnify firms against damages and costs awarded as a result of their failure to carry out contracts. No indemnity has been given for unfinished machines but, as the industry is aware, the Government will consider claims on their merits. Any payments by the Government will be conditional upon damages and costs not being otherwise recoverable under a contract of insurance and upon the firms consulting and being guided by my Department in the conduct of legal proceedings.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that considerable modifications are necessary to many of the machine tools ordered, particularly for Poland, which will not have been finished and for which, therefore, no indemnity will be available? Does he not think that it is a great hardship to the firms concerned that they have to stand the very substantial loss involved?

The hon. Member may not have heard my answer. I said that such claims will be considered on their merits.

Do I understand from the Minister's answer that British courts will be available to enable the Soviet Union to sue British firms?

Certainly.

When was this information communicated to the firms or to the industry? My information is that a short while ago they were not aware of it.

I could not say without notice the day on which the firms concerned were first given this information.

Has the right hon. Gentleman no idea at all—not even a rough idea?

asked the Minister of Supply how many British jet aircraft engines were sold to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in 1947; and of what make and design.

Twenty-five Rolls Royce Nene Mark I and 30 Rolls Royce Derwent Mark V.

Is the Minister aware that the M.I.G.15 jet engines being used against our troops in Korea are simply copies of the Rolls Royce Nene engines supplied to the Russians by his Department, and will he not now agree that the transaction in question was a blunder of the first order?

I cannot personally make any comment about the first part of the question. The hon. Member is no doubt aware that these engines were no longer on the secret list when supplied to the Russians.

Has the right hon. Gentleman any knowledge to what use Soviet Russia is putting these jet engines?

I have not myself.

Can the Minister reconcile the policy of selling these jet engines to the Soviet Government with the terms of the note of His Majesty's Government handed to the Soviet Ambassador on 17th February last, in which His Majesty's Government complained that ever since the end of the war the Russian Government had disregarded the terms of the Anglo-Soviet Treaty and engaged in hostile acts?

Arising from those supplementary questions, how do hon. Gentlemen happen to know that those engines which the Russians have are taken from the engines which we have sent to Russia?

It is a good guess.

asked the Minister of Supply whether he proposes to proceed with the eviction of Mr. James and Mr. Dixon and their families from his Department's housing estate at Stone, in view of the fact that both men were until lately in his employ, and that despite his request the local authority is unable to provide them with alternative accommodation.

Yes, Sir. Mr. James and Mr. Dixon occupied these bungalows as serving members of the War Department Constabulary. They have now resigned and the accommodation is urgently needed for their successors. Mr. James has in fact vacated his bungalow.

Surely the Minister is aware that these tied cottages, which is what they amount to, are more than four miles away from the point of work, and that in recent local proceedings the judge went so far as to say that if it had not been Crown property he would not have given an eviction order? Is the Minister further aware that of the 16 houses only six are used by his own employees? Surely Mr. Dixon should be allowed to remain, since he has a son overseas who has served in Singapore and elsewhere?

For security reasons it is absolutely essential that we should have the requisite number of constabulary to look after this Royal Ordnance Factory. There is no other place where we can put them, and therefore, although I much regret it, it is essential that we should get this accommodation.

Will my right hon. Friend, by an example, strike a blow at this most distressing side of the tied cottage question and press local authorities to permit such people as these to go on their local lists before they are actually turned into the street?

Yes, we approached the local authorities and asked if they could help to find accommodation for these people.

Surely it is utterly absurd to have security police living five miles away from the factory they are guarding? The whole argument breaks down. Surely something can be done about that?

asked the Minister of Supply if he can now give an assurance that atomic research stations in the United Kingdom are free from any elements likely to be a danger to the safety of the State.

I can repeat the assurances I have already given that I am satisfied with the security measures in force.

Does the Minister realise that, although we welcome that assurance, it is now only given after the greatest damage has already been done?

asked the Minister of Supply how far, during the interim period, he accepts responsibility for steel allocations to consumers.

There is no Government allocation of steel, apart from steel sheets and tinplate.

But did not the British Iron and Steel Federation make allocations in the past? What has happened to the advisory system which I understand existed previously?

There was no allocation system operated by the Federation. There are at present in operation informal arrangements among certain suppliers of steel, but there is no formal arrangement in operation apart from sheet steel and tinplate.

Is my right hon. Friend considering the adoption of some measures which will enable those who really need the steel to get it before those who do not need it.

asked the Minister of Supply, in view of the need for the development of helicopter travel, if he can now give information about the production by the Bristol Aeroplane Company of a new type of two-engined helicopter suitable for inter-city travel.

The Bristol 173 has not yet reached the production stage.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many progressive business houses are arranging facilities for helicopter landings in connection with their business, and in view of the need for inter-city passenger services, will he do all he can to expedite the production and use of twin-engined helicopters?

Yes, we ordered two of these helicopters from this firm. The first is just completing its prototype stage. It will then have to undergo considerable tests before it is finally passed.

asked the Minister of Supply whether he is satisfied that sufficient quantities of the right quality of steel are, and will continue to be, available to the manufacturers of ball bearings to enable them to meet the essential requirements of the engineering industries.

Sufficient supplies of steel of the types required by the manufacturers of ball and roller bearings are being maintained. Manufacturers have been asked to furnish estimates of their forward requirements and every effort will be made to meet essential needs.

In speaking about future requirements, is the Minister taking into account the present shortage of ball bearings for armament orders and therefore allowing for an extra production of that type of article?

Yes, as far as we are aware, the ball bearing making companies have been able to get the supplies which they require to maintain their present output, though sometimes with some difficulty.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that one of the largest firms manufacturing these bearings, in the Midlands, have lately been warned that they can have only 80 per cent. of their requirements of steel during period 2, which I understand starts almost at once?

No, and I should like to have information about that.

In view of the acute shortage of ball bearings which we experienced in the last war, can the Minister say what steps he is taking to expand our production or, alternatively, to stock-pile ball bearings from Sweden and other manufacturing countries?

There has been some expansion of the ball bearing industry recently, but until we have further information from the ball bearing companies, which we have asked for, it is impossible at this stage to say to what extent we shall be able to cover our own ball bearing needs.

asked the Minister of Supply for how long it is anticipated that the production of tinplate from the Margam Works will meet our requirements based upon the current rate of increasing demand.

I would refer the hon. Member to the statement made by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary in the course of the debate on 27th February.

May I ask, for further information, how long it is anticipated that these works will continue to meet our demand, in view of the continuous rise in the demand for tinplate?

It is impossible to say because we do not know exactly what the output of the new tinplate works at Trostre will be. We know there will be a substantial increase in the tinplate produced when those works get into full operation next year, but I cannot say exactly what it will be.

asked the Minister of Supply if he is taking any steps to strengthen the higher levels in his organisation to deal with industrial problems arising from the re-armament programme.

Yes, Sir. I have been fortunate enough to secure the services of Mr. S. W. Rawson, Managing Director of John Brown, Ltd., Mr. George Briggs, Assistant Managing Director of Tube Investments, Ltd. and Mr. W. C. Puckey, Director and General Works Manager of Hoover, Ltd.

Mr. Rawson will become Director-General of Machine Tools and the other two gentlemen will be concerned with the production aspects of the re-armament programme on the munitions and air sides, respectively. I should like to express my warm appreciation of the action of the chairman and boards of the companies concerned in placing the services of these gentlemen at my disposal. I am considering further appointments of a similar nature in the near future.

In addition, I have established a panel of experts to deal with the allocation of steel required for the re-armament programme. The panel, as I have already announced, will be presided over by Mr. T. W. Senior.

May I ask my right hon. Friend why he thought it was not necessary to include a prominent trade union representative in this body? May I further ask him whether he is satisfied that these distinguished gentlemen are likely to be more successful in the advice they give to him than would appear to have been the case in certain Departments where private enterprise representatives have been giving advice?

For the type of job which we want these gentlemen to do, the prerequisite is experience in the management of works and on the board of a company, and also some experience in this type of work during the last war. I think the gentlemen concerned, who are all very distinguished, are the most suitable for the type of work I want them to do.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the appointment of these singularly distinguished gentlemen will give great satisfaction to this side of the House? I am glad to congratulate the Minister on his choice.

Is my right hon. Friend aware how extremely interested we are in these appointments, and may I appeal to the Opposition not to classify these distinguished gentlemen as "quislings" merely because they work of this Government?

If I put down a Question, will the Minister give for the information of the House a full list of all the committees which advise his Ministry and act as a link between his Ministry and industry?

I will do my best. They are a large number.

What proportion of their time will these distinguished gentlemen give to the Government?

The arrangement is that they give all their time, but they are free for a day or two a month if necessary to advise the companies from which they came.

Can the Minister make available to the House, with regard to these new appointments, information concerning whether they will be in an advisory capacity to his Department, whether they will have effective powers with regard to the allocation of machine tools, and to whom they will report—to the right hon. Gentleman or to his Department?

They are advisers to me and they will be responsible for administering the policy which I, of course, will lay down and for which I will be responsible.

asked the Minister of National Insurance what progress has been made, following discussions with the Secretary of State for the Home Department, in respect to enabling prisoners in His Majesty's Prisons to maintain themselves in benefit under the National Insurance Scheme.

My right hon. Friend and I have come to the conclusion that the existing arrangements, which are described in the reply given on 13th February to a Question by the hon. Member for Lancaster (Mr. F. Maclean), are as satisfactory as is possible in all the circumstances.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that under the present unsatisfactory arrangements many men and women who go to prison have to pay a far higher penalty than the law demands, despite the time that is allowed for the payment of their contributions afterwards; and in view of the modest sum of money involved, could not something more effective be done to get rid of these injustices?

I cannot agree with my hon. Friend. Perhaps he has not recalled the regulations, that were made last year which enable these men and women after release to make their payment retrospectively. In certain circumstances, they have five years in which to do so.

Is not my right hon. Friend aware that to be imprisoned for five years and then to come out and to have these arrears added, is too much for most people who have been in prison for several years?

I did not say "if the person had been in prison for five years." I said that the person concerned would have a period of five years after release in which to make the payments.

They might have been in prison for five or seven years.

If Z men in His Majesty's Prisons are called up for His Majesty's Forces, how will this affect their insurance benefits?

asked the Minister of National Insurance why her regulations enable self-employed persons, including Members of Parliament, to draw sickness benefit under the National Insurance scheme at the same time as other emoluments; and what is the waiting period.

I have written to the hon. Member about the first part of his Question. The waiting period is three days.

Does not the Minister think it rather undesirable for company directors, Members of this House and others who are paid full salary, whether sick or not, to be eligible to draw benefit, and would not the right thing be to reduce the weekly contribution that everyone pays and to debar M.P.s from obtaining sickness benefit?

No, Sir. The hon. Member has forgotten that this is an insurance scheme. It does not matter whether the person concerned is a manual labourer or a company director. If he has paid his contributions, he is entitled to benefit.

For the interest of other hon. Members who may want to claim sickness benefit, can the right hon. Lady say what were the contents of the letter to my hon. Friend?

It explains the situation in simple language.

Mr. Vaughan-Morgan.

rose——

I thought we had had enough of that Question.

On a point of order. I was going to ask if the——

When I said that we were going on to the next Question, the hon. Member must not get up and ask a supplementary which I had stopped.

asked the Minister of National Insurance what sum was paid out in the year 1950, and in January and February, 1951, respectively, in sickness benefit; to how many people; and of how many working days this payment represents the loss.

I regret that I cannot give figures on the precise basis asked for by the hon. Member, but I am sending him such information as is available.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that in the opinion of many experts in administration some of the public are taking a mean advantage of the granting of these sickness benefits? Will she have the cases examined so that public money shall not be wasted?

There is no evidence of that at all.

asked the Minister of National Insurance what steps are taken to draw the attention of those who become entitled to retirement pensions to the fact that higher pensions can be earned by postponing retirement.

The position is explained in leaflets and other documents issued to persons approaching pensionable age. I am, however, considering what more can be done to make such persons aware that they can earn higher pensions if they postpone retirement from work beyond the ages of 65 for men, 60 for women.

As most of that answer was entirely inaudible on this side of the House, may I ask the Minister whether she is satisfied with the present position?

I am prepared to look at it again, but there are a number of leaflets in existence which are sent to the old people and which, I know, they read.

May I respectfully ask you, Sir, whether you could ask the engineers to put on a little more "juice"? We cannot hear a word in this part of the House.

I am very sorry that I cannot put that right myself. I often do not hear. I have no doubt, however, that the hon. Member's protest will be heard.

asked the Minister of National Insurance to what extent, in considering whether any case comes under the provisions of the National Insurance (Seasonal Workers) Regulations, 1950, differentiation is made between persons who are severely handicapped in their search for employment and others who are not in any way handicapped.

The interpretation of the regulations is a matter for the statutory authorities. Until decisions have been given in a fairly wide range of cases by the National Insurance Commissioner, I am unable to say how they will affect individual cases.

Has the Minister considered the case of Mr. Hugh Quigley, of 58, Elderpark Street, which I sent her when putting down this Question? Does she not think that if anyone is incapacitated and unable to obtain work during the winter, these regulations should not apply to him? Is the right hon. Lady satisfied that these regulations, which are causing a great deal of trouble, should continue to apply at all?

I have explained before to the House that the statutory authorities have wide discretion in this matter and can take all these circumstances into account.

asked the Minister of National Insurance what representations were put forward on behalf of agricultural seasonal workers, and by whom, before the National Insurance (Seasonal Workers) Regulations, 1950, were introduced; and whether those representations were accepted or rejected.

asked the Minister of National Insurance whether the organisations she consulted before bringing in regulations to prevent seasonal unemployed workers from drawing unemployment benefit included the National Union of Agricultural Workers; and whether the regulation was introduced in agreement with that trade union.

asked the Minister of National Insurance how far consultations took place with the National Union of Agricultural Workers before the National Insurance (Seasonal Workers) Regulations, 1951, were introduced; and if she will indicate the nature of the representations made by the National Union of Agricultural Workers then and since.

I understand that when the National Insurance Advisory Committee were considering the question of special rules for seasonal workers, the unions representing agricultural workers made representations to them. When I received the Committee's Report and before regulations were drafted certain representations were made to me by the Trades Union Congress and various points of view were put forward including those of agricultural workers. I take full responsibility for the draft regulations which I subsequently asked the House to approve.

Would the right hon. Lady be so good as to answer the last few words of my Question, which asked whether or not the representations were accepted or rejected? Is she aware that the regulations so far have had a most unsatisfactory effect so far as women in agriculture are concerned and is it not a pity that the advice of the union was not accepted?

When the National Insurance Advisory Committee made their report to me, representations were made to me from the T.U.C. and a deputation came to see me representing all the unions which were concerned with seasonal workers. The hon. Member for Huntingdon (Mr. Renton) now asks me to disclose to this House what one individual, or two individuals maybe, of certain unions said—in fact, in Question 28 I am asked to give the name. I believe it would be a breach of confidence to do that publicly and would be calculated to prejudice my discussions in the future.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that the National Union of Agricultural Workers have been opposed to the imposition of these regulations all the way through? Did she not say in a letter to the union:

"I am sorry if any remarks I may have made in the House of Commons on the 5th February have been taken as implying that these Regulations had actually been agreed with the agricultural union"?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer I have just given, but I must also recall that when I made the draft regulations and submitted them to the Advisory Committee, no unions made representations. Furthermore, when I came to the House and asked for approval of the regulations—the House will recall that approval was necessary in this matter—I got them on the nod and there was no debate.

Are we to understand from the earlier reply that these regulations were approved by the T.U.C.?

Not at all; I invited the T.U.C. to send a deputation to see me. The hon. Member has asked me what certain individuals said and I have refused to disclose publicly what they did say.

Will the right hon. Lady bear in mind that some weeks ago in this House she replied to me that she considered that the unions were the obvious people to advise and that we ought to have their advice? Is not the effect of her reply that she has not accepted their advice?

When I am given advice, on whatever matter it is, I consider the advice given. I do not always take it.

On a point of order. The right hon. Lady has misstated what I said only two minutes ago. I have never asked what individuals had said. I asked her what the unions had said.

asked the Minister of National Insurance what unemployment benefit is paid to persons who normally work five days a week and are now only working four days a week owing to shortage of material.

On the facts stated, two days' benefit would normally be payable provided the claimant does not receive wages for the period in question and is not otherwise disentitled.

Why are people paid two days' benefit for one day's unemployment?

I should have thought that the hon. Member would have known these rules. This is nothing new. This is common practice, and has been so for many years. The position is that if a man does a normal working week of five days, is unemployed on the fifth day, registers at an exchange and makes himself available for employment for the rest of the week, he is then entitled to two days unemployment benefit.

Do I understand, then, that if a firm works a five-day week with the same number of hours as a firm which works five and a half days, all those who work what they regard as a full five-day week can draw unemployment pay on the Saturday.

Certainly not. They cannot draw unemployment pay if they have already worked a full week. They can only draw it if they are unemployed on the fifth day of their normal work and are then available for two more days.

Then anyone who works four-fifths of a week is entitled to two days' unemployment benefit? [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] Of course, that is the interpretation.

To get the answer correctly, may I ask the right hon. Lady whether a man who works only four days through shortage of materials, and so on, is entitled to draw two days' unemployment benefit?

I have said this three times already. If the man has a normal working week of five days but works only four days, registers at the exchange and then is available for work for the rest of the week but no work is forthcoming, he can then draw unemployment benefit for two days.

asked the Minister of National Insurance whether, in view of the increasing number of old age pensioners and of the necessity for as many persons as possible remaining in work, she will reconsider the anomaly by which self-employed persons in shops, smallholdings, etc., are forced to abandon either their work or their pension on reaching pensionable age.

asked the Minister of National Insurance whether, in view of the increasing need for maximum output of every kind in industry, she will consider the introduction at an early stage of the necessary legislation to enable State pensioners, in all categories, who are willing and able to work, to be allowed to do so without any restriction on the amount earned.

It was unanimously agreed by all parties in 1946 that the pensions to be provided under the new scheme were to be retirement pensions for those who gave up regular work. They were designed to encourage people to go on working beyond minimum pension age by providing higher pensions for themselves and their wives when they retire or reach the age of 70. I do not think the abolition of the provisions would have the effect the hon. Members desire.

Surely the right hon. Lady would agree that things have changed a great deal since 1946 and that if the older people who can carry out jobs of this sort have to go, they have to be replaced by younger people? Surely it is worth looking at the regulations again?

We are anxious to encourage older people to go on working.

Without abandoning the principle of the retirement pension, could my right hon. Friend do something to increase the amount which it is permissible for these old people to earn before they are disqualified from drawing their benefit?

I am quite prepared to consider that.

Does not the right hon. Lady consider the present position, arising out of the urgent need for production, vastly different from that obtaining in 1946, and will not she have the matter reconsidered?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Minister of National Insurance (1) at what values coal and light were assessed in 1948 and today, respectively, in assessing the earnings allowable together with a retirement pension;

(2) whether she will consider raising the amount of earnings allowed without loss of retirement pension by an amount equivalent to the average rise in wage-rates since the National Insurance Act was passed.

asked the Minister of National Insurance whether the Government have any intention of increasing the permitted level of earnings for old age pensioners before reductions in retirement benefit are made.

The amount of earnings to be disregarded was fixed in the Act of 1946 as a measure of the amount of employment which could be ignored consistently with the principle that the pensions provided were to be retirement pensions. It was not related to specific items of expenditure or to a particular level of wages. I have, however, noted the hon. Members' suggestions.

May I now have an answer to Question 21, which was not included in the answer given by the Minister?

I have answered it, as the hon. Member will see if he reads my answer.

Will the right hon. Lady bear in mind that the level of wages in comparison with pensions plus casual earnings must necessarily be a relevant factor in considering how much casual earnings should be ignored?

I said in answer to the previous Question that I am considering that.

Can the Minister give us any idea whether there is any intention on the part of herself and the Government to bring in necessary amending legislation in the near future to assist in solving this problem?

I am afraid that I cannot commit myself.

How soon does the right hon. Lady suggest she can bring in any amendments?

The same answer applies to the right hon. Gentleman's question.

asked the Minister of National Insurance (1) whether she is now in a position to announce any changes in the assessment of part-time or casual earnings of old age pensioners, in order to encourage all who wish to do so to contribute to the national productive effort;

(2) whether, in view of the steady rise in the cost of living since current rates of pension were fixed, she will now consider an increase in those rates;

(3) when she expects the present review of the operation of the National Insurance Act, as it affects old age pensioners, to be concluded; and whether she will expedite this review, in view of the difficulties old age pensioners are encountering owing to the rise in living costs.

I regret that I am not in a position to make a statement on these matters. I would remind the hon. Member that any person in difficulties can apply to the National Assistance Board for supplementary help.

In regard to Question 30, is not the proposal there suggested one which is in the national interest, because the people will be employed and thus contribute towards their own benefits? Does the right hon. Lady realise, in relation to the other Questions, that the figure of 26s. first recommended by Lord Beveridge—[HON. MEMBERS: "No, 24s."]—was in fact out of date by the time the scheme was launched and is it not now time that a revision was made?

In regard to Question 30, I think that perhaps the hon. Member was not in the House when I said I was considering this matter.

When the right hon. Lady is considering the matter, will she bear in mind the advantage of doing something simultaneously to increase the incentive to remain at work when considering the increase in the casual earnings limit, so as to preserve the present balance between those who decide to remain at work and those who decide to retire?

asked the Minister of National Insurance under what Sections of the National Insurance Act, 1948, or Regulations made thereunder, the National Assistance Board are entitled to order their staff to receive or deal with applicants at their homes.

The board's officers are civil servants whose terms and conditions of service do not depend on any particular provisions of the National Assistance Acts and regulations made thereunder.

Will my right hon. Friend be prepared to receive a small deputation from the staff concerned with a view to getting this troublesome matter settled?

I am very surprised that my hon. Friend should ask that question. There have been no complaints from the staff. I feel very strongly—and I have said this before in the House—that the National Assistance Act should be administered humanely. All we have asked of the staff is that, in the case of an emergency which calls for the applicant to go to the house of the official, the applicant who goes for assistance or information shall be treated humanely and courteously. I would remind my hon. Friend that of the 2,500 officers asked to do this since 1948, only 169 have been called upon and no one has complained.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there has been persistent failure to reach agreement in the Departmental Whitley Council as to the conditions under which this obligation should be fulfilled? May I ask her again to try to reach agreement with the staff, so that this service, which all members of the staff are anxious to render, shall be given with the utmost good will?

asked the Minister of National Insurance to what extent the National Assistance Board take account of the home circumstances of officers upon whom the obligation has been imposed of receiving or dealing with applicants at their homes.

The Board are not aware of any particular difficulty but they are, I understand, prepared to take account of individual circumstances on representation by any officer concerned.

asked the Minister of National Insurance the number of retired pensioners in Wales and the number in receipt of supplementary pensions.

There are 226,000 retirement pensioners in Wales of whom some 61,000 are receiving supplementary allowances from the National Assistance Board.

asked the Minister of National Insurance whether she will consider making a general allowance for clothing for all retired pensioners in receipt of supplementary assistance.

As I informed the hon. Member for Hitchin (Mr. Fisher) in reply to a Question on 5th February, the regulations governing National Assistance only provide for payment of clothing allowances where there is exceptional need. There is, therefore, no power to make an automatic allowance for this purpose as my hon. Friend suggests.

May I ask my right hon. Friend whether she will consider an alteration of these regulations, in view of the fact that the very circumstance of these people drawing National Assistance reveals that they are in need and that the case in general is at least made out?

I think my hon. Friend will agree that the officers are exercising a wide discretion when I tell him that last year there were 132,000 grants at a cost of £490,643.

Will my right hon. Friend consider especially the case of the single pensioner living alone? Is it not a tragic fact that many of them are unable to purchase any clothing, or household or bed linen? Does not my right hon. Friend think that some special consideration should be given to them?

asked the Minister of National Insurance under what circumstances, in view of the increasing cost of living, there will be a revision in the basic rates of National Assistance.

Any alteration in the scales for National Assistance is a matter for the National Assistance Board in the first instance. They have the matter under constant review, but I cannot say in what circumstances they might decide to put forward new proposals.

Will the Minister bear in mind, in view of the increasing cost of living, that a day will shortly come when a man and wife without other resources will no longer be able to live on 43s. 6d. per week, excluding rent?

asked the Minister of National Insurance why Mrs. H. F. Ford, Blandford, Dorset, is unable to be legally represented before a local tribunal in her appeal.

As I have explained in correspondence with the hon. Member, legal representation of claimants before local tribunals under the National Insurance Act is precluded by a regulation. This regulation was made on the advice of the National Insurance Advisory Committee, who, after considering numerous representations, took the view that the proceedings should be kept as informal as possible.

Is the Minister aware of the embarrassment caused to this lady, who was appearing before the tribunal for the first time, while the tribunal were quite accustomed to these matters? Could not some alteration be made in the Act so that she could be legally represented at all levels?

My experience is that women are often more fluent than men.

Is there anything that would preclude the hon. Member for Dorset, North (Mr. Crouch), from accompanying his constituent?

No, provided that he is not a barrister.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what arrangements he has made to ensure that emergency stocks of coal are held to meet the needs of invalids possessing a doctor's certificate.

The first claim on the coal supplies in any area is always given to anyone who satisfies the local fuel overseer, either by medical certificate or otherwise, that he is in real need of coal. These arrangements have worked extremely well, and I think there is no need for any change.

While I quite understand that these arrangements are supposed to work well, might I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will not agree that recent correspondence which I have had with his Department shows that there is a wide gap between theory and practice? May I urge him to look into how these arrangements work in order to ensure that no sick person in need of coal goes without it?

I am always ready to look at any special case. I have made inquiries into many special cases and have always found that the arrangements have in fact worked well.

Has the Minister's attention been called to the case of Mrs. Vernon of Birmingham, who last Friday told the magistrate that she had been in bed for a fortnight and had been unable to obtain any coal?

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell me if she had sent a message to the local fuel overseer?

Does my right hon. Friend agree that coal merchants themselves have, through illness of their staff and not because of shortages, not been able to deliver the coal and that in fact it has not been the Ministry that has been at fault?

Is the Minister aware of the case of Mrs. Sirriter, of Leahouse Road, Birmingham, aged 71, who has been in considerable distress, without coal, although she sent a doctor's note when applying for the extra supply? Does the Minister realise that this is a good scheme on paper but that it is not working in practice?

No, I realise nothing of the kind. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will send me the evidence that these ladies applied to the local fuel overseer and did not receive the coal.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that so far as hon. Members on this side of the House who represent Birmingham are concerned, every case that has been submitted to the local fuel overseer has been dealt with favourably and sympathetically? Will my right hon. Friend take some action to see that Members who raise matters like this shall submit the evidence on which they raise them?

Is the Minister aware that in the case of one of my constituents, of which I have now sent him particulars, the correct formalities were exactly complied with but that it took the local fuel office eight days to send her the required form to fill in?

I will certainly look into that case when I receive the particulars from the hon. Member.

They were sent a fortnight ago.

On a point of order. Since the Minister knows quite well——

That is not a point of order; it is a supplementary question. I had decided that we would move on to the next Question.

On a point of order. In view of the totally unsatisfactory answer given by the Minister, I beg to give notice that J shall raise this matter on the Adjournment at an early date.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power how many acres in Shropshire it is expected will be used for opencast coal mining in the next five years; where this land is situated; and what percentage has been used for agricultural purposes since 1939.

The acreage which will be required for the opencast working of coal in Shropshire during the next five years largely depends on the results of future prospecting. I regret, therefore, that I am not able to make any estimate.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether all these activities, past, present and future, have the specific approval of the Minister of Agriculture?

Yes, Sir. We always work in the closest co-operation.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power in view of the coal shortage this winter, what plans he is now making for the winter of 1951–52 to ensure a sufficient coal reserve for the event of a hard winter.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he is aware that the amount of coal at present available for domestic consumption is less than 30 million tons per annum, compared with over 40 million tons in 1938; and what steps he is taking to increase the amount available for domestic consumption.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what special provision he is making this year to ensure that the horticulturists who have to have heated greenhouses will be enabled to obtain the essential fuel supplies.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he can state the policy of His Majesty's Government in regard to coal exports from the United Kingdom during the nine months, April to December, 1951; and how the total projected coal exports for 1951 will compare with the figure of 17 million tons exported during 1950.

The question of the supplies of coal to be allocated to exports, to inland consumers and to the building up of adequate winter stocks is now under consideration. I regret that I cannot today anticipate the decisions which will be made.

In view of the fact that the right hon. Gentleman is the authority through whom both imports and exports pass, could he tell us when he will be able to tell the House what fuel stocks he anticipates holding at the beginning of next winter.

Yes. I will tell the House when the decision has been made.

Is the Minister aware that in the last few weeks local coal merchants have frequently been without sufficient coal to meet the domestic ration, and what immediate steps have been taken to prevent those circumstances from arising again?

I believe that coal merchants have not been without sufficient coal to make deliveries but they have been greatly impeded in some weeks by sickness among their workers, as my hon. Friend the Member for Bermondsey (Mr. Mellish) has said.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he is aware that the South-Western Electricity Board are refusing to buy home grown timber transmission poles, on the ground that they are only interested in imported red fir; and whether he will include in the allocation of poles to the British Electricity Authority a proportion of home-grown timber poles.

The South-Western Electricity Board have not refused to buy home-grown transmission poles since none have been offered. The Board's inquiries have been for imported red fir, where they are available, since they have a much longer life. The allocation of poles to users is already made on the basis of merchants' stocks, which include imported and home-grown poles, and it would not be practicable to stipulate what proportion of home-grown poles the electricity boards should take.

Would the Minister be surprised to know that the South-Western Electricity Board were, in fact, recently offered home-grown poles which were absolutely satisfactory and that they replied in writing saying they were only buying imported red fir poles?

Yes, Sir. If the hon. Member will send the information, I will look into it. My information is that none were offered. There are, in fact, only 100 home-grown poles in the merchants' stocks.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what was the average cost of electricity supplied to domestic and industrial consumers before nationalisation; and what it is now.

The average revenue per unit sold for lighting, heating and cooking (including supplies to shops, offices, hotels and so on) was 1.391Id. in 1947 and 1.504d. in 1949. The average revenue per unit sold for power was 0.907d, in 1947 and 0.940d. in 1949.

May I ask whether this increase in costs is much lower than the average increase in costs in industry?