asked the Minister of Health what progress has been made in arranging with selected local authorities for experiments in the fluoridation of water supplies.

Exploratory discussions are proceeding.

In view of the fact that the Minister of Health said on 3rd December that all the recommendations had been accepted, cannot the hon. Lady say when these discussions will be completed, because they seem to be taking a long time?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we are not trying to delay or hold up this matter in any way, but many detailed investigations have to take place in regard to relevant areas before a decision is finally taken.

But did this investigation not start many years ago, as far back as 1948–49, and ought there not to be some definite results now?

That was more in the nature of an inquiry than the detailed experiment in an area.

Were not inquiries made into an experiment carried out in America, and what is the result of those inquiries?

This was based on the report of the mission that went to America.

asked the Minister of Health what consideration he has given to the fluoridation of water supplies in industrial areas.

Before any area is selected for fluoridation the nature of its industries will be taken into account.

Will the Minister bear in mind that in Stoke-on-Trent, and in places like Salford and Manchester, we are already condemned to inhale a good deal of fluorine compounds and the last thing in the world that we want is to have more fluorine compounds in the water?

That is one of the very important points which are under consideration.

asked the Minister of Health if he will arrange for the setting up of an artificial limb-fitting centre at Carlisle to serve the needs of Cumberland.

asked the Minister of Health if he will consider the establishment of an artificial limb-fitting centre at Carlisle as a measure of decentralisation.

I am considering this, but I am not sure that the amount of work would justify the additional money and manpower involved.

Will the Minister reconsider this matter, and will he bear in mind that the present arrangement causes considerable hardship in West Cumberland, where many of our limbless people have to travel long distances to Newcastle? If he can do something, it will be greatly appreciated.

I am aware of the position. It does involve long and extremely difficult journeys from the Carlisle area to the Newcastle area, but the difficulty is that there are only about nine or 10 limb cases a week, and it is difficult to conceive a limb-fitting centre for a number of that sort. But I am considering this matter.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the limbless are very concerned about the facilities being given in out-of-the-way areas, that the old Ministry of Pensions was only a Cinderella Department, and that his Department is the blue-eyed boy of the Treasury? Could he not press for something to be done, and if he cannot get a regular centre open, could there not be one opened on one or two days a week?

One of the sentences in that supplementary question would seem to be in conflict with some of the later Questions on the Order Paper. I am very much aware of the interest which B.L.E.S.M.A. has taken in the suggestion of a centre at Carlisle, and I am bearing its representations in mind.

asked the Minister of Health if he is now in a position to state the result of the inquiries he has made into the recent case of typhoid germs being discovered in tinned food.

Inquiries are still proceeding and I am not yet in a position to make a full statement of the results. No case of typhoid attributable to this source has been notified.

Could the Minister tell us at this stage if, in fact, this milk was processed in accordance with what was advertised on the labels?

I cannot at the moment. There is a complication, as I am sure the hon. Member realises, in that inquiries into this matter are being made in Ireland. I have to await the results of the local health authority investigations there. I will inform the hon. Member privately as soon as the investigation is complete, and he might like to put down a Question.

asked the Minister of Health why the Lancashire Executive Council has been instructed by his Department to cut its staff from 130 to 129½.

This is an involved and rather absurd story but in fact no such instruction have been given.

But is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I have in my hand a copy of a letter from his Department to the clerk of the Lancashire Executive Council dated 19th February, calling for this cut? Is he aware that this policy of Mau Mau mutilation as far as the hospital and health services are concerned is causing great distress in the area, and would he advise the Lancashire Executive Council whether the cut is to be made vertically or horizontally, and what is to be done with the other half?

I was so fascinated by the hon. Lady's Question that I sent for all the papers and read them, including the letter she has referred to. What happened was that it was agreed a couple of years ago to make a reduction of six in the Executive Council establishment, which it was thought to stand at 135½, the half being a part-time member of the staff. That reduced the number to 129½, and when Lancashire wished for 130 someone in my Department, with admirable dogged devotion to duty, pointed that out in the letter which the hon. Lady quoted. It has since been discovered that the original allocation was 136, and, therefore, the reduction of six has now been made. So the position is that the reduction has been achieved, the Lancashire Executive Council has now got its establishment and everybody is happy, including the half-man who never was.

asked the Minister of Health what representations he has made to the North-West Region Hospital Board with regard to the reduction of maternity accommodation in the area.

In addition to the circular of August, 1951, which I have already sent to the hon. Member, this and all other boards were asked in September last to review their arrangements in areas where the proportion of hospital confinements is high to see whether accommodation could be better used to meet more urgent needs.

Would the right hon. Gentleman tell the House if this means that there is now a new policy in his Department with regard to maternity accommodation, and is he taking deliberate steps to reduce the number of cases in which mothers can have their babies in hospitals? If that is so, is he aware that it will cause profound fury among the womenfolk of the country, and will he please reverse his decision?

I am sorry, but that is just not the position. In September last year I drew attention to a circular dated August, 1951, sent out by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Middles-brough, East (Mr. Marquand) which stated that in general, in the ordinary areas, the sort of target should be 50–50. As far as Blackburn is concerned, as the hon. Lady knows, the percentage of confinements was running last year at 77 per cent., which is an extremely high figure. The decision about Springfield was taken, I understand, as a result of a review by the hospital management committee in January, 1953, before I drew the attention of boards to the previous circular. The hon. Lady knows—and this is most important—that Springfield, which was an unsatisfactory maternity home of 20 beds, is now housing 30 of the chronic sick and is playing a splendid part in the National Health Service. There has been no change of policy beyond the circular sent out by my Socialist predecessor.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that even with the 77 per cent, figure operating in Blackburn there are cases which I brought to his attention and the attention of the House where mothers urgently needing to have their babies in hospital have not been given a bed because it was a second child, or for some other reason? There is a stringency operating, and the regional hospital board pointed out last month that the Minister was urging restrictions on maternity beds. Will he review that policy?

Of course, I shall be happy to look carefully into any cases and I have two which the hon. Lady brought to my attention, but there is no new policy on this matter. I think that the position of Blackburn is that for the first child the mother is automatically accepted, and I believe she is, too, for the fifth. In all other cases mothers are accepted where the home conditions are unsatisfactory or where complications are expected.

asked the Minister of Health, in view of the increasing use of manufactured powdered milk in the place of fresh milk in the Dartford group of hospitals, what precautions are taken to ensure that all powdered milk is suitable for human consumption.

Powdered milk is manufactured under high standards of safety and is used by the Dartford group of hospitals only in bulk cooking. I am advised that there is no reason to suppose that it is not safe for human consumption.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Kent county analyst has been active in condemning samples of powdered milk, and it would be of some comfort to the people concerned with hospitals if it were known that a similar precaution was taken with some of the powdered milk in the Dartford group of hospitals?

Perhaps the hon. Member will have a word with me as to what is in his mind. I am fairly confident that none of them refers to the Dartford group of hospitals.

They have not been submitted yet.

As far as the powdered milk manufacture there is concerned, if the milk is dried by the roller process it is absolutely safe in all forms, even raw, and if any other processes are approximately less safe, anything wrong would be completely destroyed in the cooking.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say if this milk was home-produced or imported?

I should like notice of that question.

asked the Minister of Health what proportion of the fully-trained mental nurses on the staff of hos- pitals and institutions are over the minimum retirement age for superannuation purposes.

I regret that this information is not available.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman feel that it would be worth while to try to make some inquiries about this matter, because it would much influence our judgment upon the seriousness of the shortage of mental nurses, as there is a general understanding that a 'high proportion of the fully-qualified mental nurses have very nearly, or have already, reached ordinary retirement age?

It means a separate inquiry of each of the employing authorities. Perhaps we can leave the matter this way, that if the hon. Gentleman convinces me that there will be any real value in such an inquiry taking place, I will make one.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware of complaints that out-patients at hospitals often are kept waiting unduly long by consultants arriving late for their appointments; and whether he will issue instructions to remedy this.

I am aware that there are complaints from time to time and, of course, in the event of any serious alleged mismanagement I am always prepared to look into it. But generally I regard these matters as primarily for the hospital authorities themselves to manage.

But does not the Minister agree that the hospital authorities would be loth to have any bad feeling between themselves and the consultants, and consequently they take no action although they grumble privately? Would not the right hon. Gentleman look further into this matter, because it is no use hospitals having appointments systems if the consultants do not keep to them?

As I told the House last week, I am looking into this matter to see if we can collect any useful information which we might send in the form of a circular to the hospitals.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that what normally happens is that patients are summoned at least a quarter of an hour before the first can be seen by the consultant if he arrives on time, and that they always arrive a quarter of an hour before they are summoned, so that there is a minimum delay of half an hour before any can possibly be seen?

From his great experience, the hon. Gentleman knows that there are a number of other complications as well. To mention one, some of the places—this is an excellent thing and I am not criticising it—are so pleasant and attractive, and the canteen is so delightful, that many patients arrive early and treat the place as a club.

Is not the root of the trouble that the consultant is also in private practice?

asked the Minister of Health whether he will advise the regional hospital boards to see that all out-patients' departments in children's hospitals are adequately supplied with furniture and decorations designed to interest children.

It is quite common practice for hospitals to do this already, so far as their resources allow, and I feel that it is essentially a thing to be left to the hospital authorities' good sense to look after it.

asked the Minister of Health how many cases of excessive prescribing by medical practitioners have been reported to him each year since the National Health Service commenced; and in how many of these cases was action taken.

Prima facie evidence of excessive prescribing was reported to my right hon. Friend in respect of 300 doctors in 1950–51, 263 in 1952, 320 in 1953. Of these, 852 were visited by his medical officers and substantial reductions of cost resulted thereafter. The prescribing of 17 was referred in accordance with Regulations to the local medical committee. So far, in nine cases sums ranging from £25 to £250 have been withheld from the doctors' remuneration.

What was the proportion of cases in which no action was taken?

In about 80 per cent, of the cases after investigation it was thought that there was no evidence of excessive prescribing; in the case of the remaining 20 per cent., 17 were referred out of 852 investigated, and in nine of those action was taken—about 1 per cent.

Could the Minister say whether they are intending here in England to follow the excellent example, in this case, of Scotland in setting up an area average for prescribing in order to encourage doctors to check between one and another?

That matter must be looked at when we have caught up with the general prescribing.

asked the Minister of Health his estimate of the increased expenditure incurred by the regional hospital boards in the financial year 1952–53 in respect of salaries of nursing staffs.

About £4½ million over the corresponding figure for 1951–52.

As the cost of salaries is about 60 per cent, of the cost of the hospital service, does not this suggest that an additional £13 million for the entire Health Service will only be sufficient to keep pace with the rise in salaries and other costs?

As a matter of fact, there is quite a substantial offset from board and lodging charges. I am not sure if the right hon. Gentleman put the right year down in his Question, but the figures I have given are for the financial year 1952–53. They were, therefore, fully taken into account as a known commitment in the financial year 1953–54.

asked the Minister of Health by how much the money spent for capital purposes by regional hospital boards in the years 1952–53 and 1953–54 taken together fell short of the amount so spent in the financial years 1950–51 and 1951–52 taken together.

I expect that the figure will be about half a million pounds.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the figures which he gave me previously for allocations suggested a shortfall in the same period of no less than £2,600,000, and how is it possible to say that the expenditure was almost the same while the allocations were so widely divergent, unless it be explained by the action of his predecessor in failing to use the money which we provided for building hospitals?

On the contrary, it is explained by the action of the right hon. Gentleman, who has fallen into his own pit. It is one thing—and it may look quite impressive—to put allocations into an Estimate and to underspend them considerably, as the right hon. Gentleman did. It is another thing to do as my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House and I have done, to give accurate figures, as far as possible, and to spend fully up to them. That explains substantially the difference between the allocations. If the right hon. Gentleman will look at his own Question, however, it asked for the money spent. The difference in the money spent is only £500,000.

Yes, but is it not true that the money allocated for 1951–52 could only have been spent by his predecessor and could not have been spent during my term of office?

The underspending of the larger part of the allocations made for 1951–52 was in respect of the term of office of the right hon. Gentleman.

May I ask my right hon. Friend if he is aware that the North-East coast makes a magnificent contribution to the general welfare and productive effort of the nation? [HON. MEMBERS: "Wrong Question."] No, I do not think I am referring to the wrong Question. May I say to the Minister that I think it is about time we had our fair share of what is going?

asked the Minister of Health the financial allocation to the Leeds hospital board for the last financial year, the current financial year, and for the next financial year.

As the reply contains a number of figures I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say in advance of my seeing the figures whether there is any truth in the statement of the chairman of the board, which I have here? It is:

"We cannot find any money for development …We are having to economise to the uttermost and use up any reserves we have to carry on during the next 12 months."

The figures are higher for this year. It is true that I have sought, and am still seeking, for all possible economies in the National Health Service. It is right to say, because it is relevant to many Questions on the Order Paper today, that it is virtually impossible, for a variety of reasons, to look at a figure for one year and a figure for another year and say that the difference represents the extra amount available for the hospital services. One can only do that if one knows the assumptions—and they run into dozens— which have been made by the Minister in framing the Estimates.

asked the Minister of Health the sum allocated to the Birmingham Regional Board for the present year and for the past three years.

As the reply contains a number of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is the Minister aware, however, that the Stoke-on-Trent Hospital Management Committee is dependent upon the Birmingham Regional Board for its funds, including money for capital expenditure; for improvements and renovations, that the management committee is short of money and that there is a very real need for further capital sums? Has the right hon. Gentleman now considered whether it may not be desirable to change the system and see that these sums do not come through the region at all but come directly from the Ministry, so that we can look after our own accountancy and bring our own grievances to the Minister's notice?

The hon. Member's Question relates, of course, to the Birmingham Regional Board and not to the Stoke-on-Trent Hospital Management Committee. If he has any points to make on that subject, perhaps he will put a Question on the Order Paper or bring them otherwise to my notice. The other question involves the difficult matter of major financial policy and that is perhaps the first matter of all that is under the purview of the Guillebaud Committee at the present time.

Why is it so difficult to give the figures for the four years now? Why say that they will be circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT? Surely the Minister can mention the totals for four years without undue mental strain?

I can certainly do it. There are four years of allocation and three years of expenditure, but in addition to that—and this is part of the answer which I gave to the hon. Member for Leeds, West (Mr. Pannell)—it is wholly misleading to give figures in that way. I have, therefore, tried to help to some extent by providing notes which will be circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT SO as to explain the figures in the list.

asked the Minister of Health if he is aware that the total revenue and capital allocations for the Newcastle region and teaching hospital were £2,800,000 less on a population 'basis than the average amount spent by, the country as a whole on the hospital (Service; and if he will take steps to readjust the position.

I do not think that a population basis would be an equitable method of distributing the sums available for hospital running costs, but it is taken fully into account in distributing the sums available for hospital capital works.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this is not the view taken by the regional hospital board, and that the board is seeking to send a deputation to the Minister to repudiate emphatically that we should have less on a population basis for our hospital services than other parts of the country? Is it not time that my right hon. Friend paid a little more attention to the north-east and gave us what we are entitled to have?

That argument does not appear to me wholly logical because, by definition, maintenance and running costs are given to establish and keep going the services and hospitals which are already there—

But we have not enough hospitals.

It would clearly be impossible to have maintenance costs on a population basis, but I fully recognise that there is a case for taking population into account in respect of capital allocations. Indeed, capital allocations are made as to 95 per cent, on population and 5 per cent, on special needs. Newcastle, in the financial year 1954–55, as a result of that allocation, received £50,000, or 12 per cent, more than would have been received on a population basis alone.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there are more nurses nursing in London hospitals than there are in the north regional hospitals? Why should we have fewer nurses nursing our patients than there are in the hospitals in the south? Will my right hon. Friend look into that aspect? Is he also aware that the regional hospital board is not satisfied even with his additional allocation to it?

asked the Minister of Health the reasons for his cut of nearly £1 million in the estimates of the Newcastle Regional Hospital Board for 1954–55.

The total sum available for 1954–55 to meet the running costs of hospital boards was less than the total amount requested in the boards' estimates, and the allocation to this board represents what is in my view a fair share of that total.

Is the Minister aware that the very minute increase in the funds available for next year compared with this year will be quite inadequate for the hospital board to improve its standards and keep pace with the rise of pay and prices which it will have to meet? Will he reconsider this, otherwise we shall be in a worse position in the north-east compared with other parts of the country?

There again we are in the sort of difficulty that I indicated earlier because the figures do not indicate, for example, what provision has been made and kept back for any Whitley awards that may arise. It is virtually impossible to make comparisons figure by figure and year by year in the hospital service, but I do not deny that the regional hospital boards will have to work very closely to the Estimates I am laying in detail before the House.

In view of the special requirements of the north-eastern area— the rapidly increasing population, heavy incidence of industrial injury, heavy incidence of tuberculosis and so on—will the right hon. Gentleman watch with special care to see that no beds are closed in that region? The hospital board is really afraid, as it has said, that the right hop. Gentleman is making some change in policy by this small allocation.

I am certainly not making any change in policy in this matter. I think that if the figures I gave the House a few weeks ago are studied, that becomes quite clear. As a matter of fact, the percentage increase over the last few years in the Newcastle region has-been substantially higher—I will not say than that of any other part of the country, 'but a long way above the average.

asked the Minister of Health how many of the proposed additional hospital beds in the Newcastle hospital region will be removed from the development programme as a result of the cut in the financial estimates for 1954–55.

Firm provision has been made by the board for 263 extra beds during 1954–55. Final decision on the remaining beds, which total 138, has not yet been taken.

Are not those beds for which firm provision had been made now in jeopardy because of the cut in estimates? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the very grave need for additional 'beds in the north-east? Is he further aware that the whole of the plans of the regional board will have to go into cold storage if it cannot get more funds?

No, I am assured that the answer which I gave is accurate, and the firm provision for the 263 beds stands. It is, of course, true that this region, like every other region, would like to do more. I should be more than ready for them to do more if it could be done within the allocation. But, as I have said, beyond the 263 beds there are 138 beds which will have to be considered in the light of the allocation.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. What defence have we against a loquacious Minister who makes such long answers? We have only reached Question 37, and have nearly reached the end of Question Time.

That is not a point of order.

Will my right hon. Friend say what grant would have to be made to the Medical Research Council in order to allow hon. Members to draft shorter supplementary questions to which the Minister can make shorter answers?

When he was in the north-east the Minister agreed that there was a very severe shortage of beds; will he look into the matter again in order to get the north-east up to an equal strength with the rest of the country in regard to the number of beds?

If the hon. Member studies the answer which I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Tynemouth (Miss Ward), he will see that special attention is paid to Newcastle in regard to capital.

asked the Minister of Health if he is aware that the revenue funds made available for the Newcastle Regional Hospital Board for 1954–55 represent an increase of only £ per cent, over the current year; and whether he will review the matter in view of the need for more hospital beds in the region.

The answer to the first part of the Question is "Yes," but the sum allocated to the board for hospital running costs in 1954–55 represents, in my view, a fair share of the total sum available, and its capital allocation takes account of the region's need for hospital beds.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that he might have saved some time by answering the last three Questions together? Do they not also show how urgent the problem of the north-east is?

asked the Minister of Health how many regional hospital boards will have to close beds as a consequence of insufficient allocation of funds in the coming financial year.

I am not aware of any, except that in one locality the regional board, as I told the House last week, is considering with the hospital management committee concerned the possibility of closing two units which are in any event not fully used.

Will the Minister agree that the closing of any beds would be most regrettable, and will he undertake that, if there is any danger of it, he will come to this House with a Supplementary Estimate?

No, I could not possibly give that undertaking. These matters should be, and are at present being, discussed between regional boards and hospital management committees. I have said that I am only aware of one locality; there may well be others, but so far they have not come to my notice at the Ministry.

asked the Minister of Health whether he will permit consultants who are engaged on a full-time salaried basis, to make domiciliary visits when requested, and receive payment on the same scale as now applies to consultants working part-time.

Under the arrangements agreed in 1949, additional payment may not be made for domiciliary consultations by whole-time officers. Any alteration of this provision would be a matter for the Medical Whitley Council.

Whilst recognising what the Minister has said to be quite true, may I ask whether he is aware, however, that these men working full-time on consultant service have no perquisites and no allowances, and that on average their income is somewhat less than the income not only of part-time men but of general practitioners nowadays? Will not the right hon. Gentleman do something to see that their status is recognised?

I recognise the justice of a good deal, if not necessarily agreeing with all, of what the hon. Member has said. He will realise that part of these complications arise out of an agreement negotiated in 1949 and part indeed by the ordinary operation of the Income Tax laws of this country relating to whole-time appointments. It is precisely these kinds of matters—and I take note of what the hon. Member has said—that will come before the Whitley Council.

May I express the hope that the right hon. Gentleman will not solve the problem by converting all the full-time salaried staff to part-time, because that might be the consequence of my hon. Friend's suggestion?

There are varied trends and different views in different regions of the country in relation to this matter.

Is the Minister aware that 1 put this Question down because people like myself recognise the very excellent work that is done by these full-time men but the last thing that we want is to reduce the status of the part-time people?

I recognise that, but do not let us pretend that the standard of conduct or anything else is higher or lower among part-time men or full-time men. They are all members of the same profession.

asked the Minister of Health the number of mentally defective children in each of the Welsh counties and county boroughs in which no local provision is made for their training.

As the answer is in the form of a table I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Though the number of children concerned may be small, does not the hon. Lady agree that the present position is most unsatisfactory when in 10 counties in Wales and in one of the four county boroughs there is no local provision at all for the training of these children, and parents have sometimes to wait for years before places can be found in institutions outside their own counties where these children can be trained?

I appreciate what the hon. Lady says, and I know that she recognises that the real difficulty is the small number of children spread over large areas. There are 260 children in the 10 counties and not more than 50 are living in one area, but we are trying to encourage reasonable and responsible developments to meet the situation.

asked the Minister of Health his policy on projected hospital capital works which are to be financed from non-Exchequer funds.

Yes, Sir. The position has been reviewed and I am glad to say that it is no longer necessary for me to require that capital expenditure from non-Exchequer funds should count against capital allocations made to hospital boards. It will, of course, still be necessary for me to scrutinise proposals to incur such expenditure by reference to any Exchequer maintenance expenditure that may be involved, the effect on the development of the hospital concerned and the needs of the hospital service.

Does my right hon. Friend appreciate that this reply will give the greatest possible pleasure and relief to every hospital and regional board and authority in the country because of the privilege of once more being allowed to spend money which is, after all, their own? Could he give any indication of what will be the total amount involved in the course of one complete financial year?

I cannot quote the exact figure. It depends to a great extent upon the class into which the applications that come forward will fall. As I indicated in my answer, it will clearly be much easier on general grounds to approve capital expenditure which may not increase, and may even save, maintenance costs in future, rather than capital expenditure which may carry a heavy maintenance burden in future years.

As the statement of the Minister is singularly obscure, may I ask if it is now the intention that funds which originally belonged to the voluntary and teaching hospitals, and which were to be put into a special classification for research, experiment and amenities for patients, are to be raided for those forms of expenditure directed by the Treasury?

No, Sir, there is no such suggestion. There is no intention, of course, of raiding the capital of the Hospital Endowment Fund, but there are three sources from which hospitals have money. The first is the endowments of teaching hospitals, the second the comparatively small amount issued annually as income from the Hospital Endowment Fund to non-teaching hospitals and the third is gifts which they may have accumulated since the Act came into force under the provisions made by the right hon. Member, including such possibility, for example, as the use of funds made available by the King Edward Hospital Fund, or anything like that. But there is no intention at all of raiding the capital of the Hospital Endowment Fund.

As the situation still is very obscure, may I be allowed to ask what changes the right hon. Gentleman proposes to make? At the moment these funds are available only for the amenities of patients and the other uses I have described. What changes precisely does the right hon. Gentleman propose to make?

No, that is not so. The only funds that are available in that sense are those covered by the second category to which I have referred. The moneys for this sort of expenditure will be those coming in either the first or the third of the categories I have indicated. They have, in fact, been used from time to time but, as my predecessors know, it has always been insisted, as a matter of Government policy, that any moneys so used for capital investment shall count against the total allocated to the Ministry of Health and sub-allocated to the regions. It is that provision which has been removed.

asked the Minister of Health what steps his Department has taken, or will take, to see that employment as a State registered nurse is offered to Nurse Capon, either in the Eastern Area Hospital Region or elsewhere, following her appeal to the Eastern Area Committee which upheld the action of the Ipswich Management Hospital Committee in quashing her summary dismissal in July, 1953, and terminating her engagement in the normal way.

I understand that about two months ago the regional board told this lady about vacancies for staff nurses under a certain management committee in their area, but that so far she has not applied for a post there.

Will my right hon. Friend give an assurance that this nurse —whose case has been given a great deal of publicity—if she applies for a post in a hospital nearer her home than the one referred to, will receive fair and just consideration?

I obviously cannot undertake on behalf of someone else to give a post, but I am certain that the matter will receive full consideration.

asked the Minister of Health when he proposes to start his investigation into the administration of the Plymouth, South Devon and East Corn wall Hospital Management Committee.

I propose to await the result of the discussions between the committee and the regional hospital board.

Would it not have been better for the right hon. Gentleman to await the result of these discussions instead of making the reflection he made on the management committee last week, and suggesting that there should be an investigation? Why did he not carry out the proposals for an investigation, as the management committee would like nothing more?

I think that if the hon. Member studies the first half of my answer to the supplementary question last week, he will find that his supplementary question today answers itself.

asked the Minister of Health on what date it was decided to increase the allocation from the regional hospital board to the Plymouth, South Devon and East Cornwall Hospital Management Committee by £15,000; and how far this amount falls short of the total required to cover the extra costs for salaries and other increments which the management committee will be called upon to cover in 1954–55.

I understand that the board notified an allocation to the committee of £915,795 for 1954–55 on 15th February, and informed the committee on 22nd February that a supplementary allocation of £10,250 would be made to meet the full-year cost of opening an extension ward at Devonport Hospital. The total allocation is intended to cover necessary extra costs next year, regard being had also to the feasibility of economies in the running of the services.

Is it not a fact that the Plymouth management committee has already made proposals for economies but that the allocation made to it by the regional hospital board does not take into account the increased burden of extra wage costs and other costs to which I have referred in the Question and that, therefore, the allocation means that the Plymouth management committee will be forced to close down its maternity homes?

I do not think that that follows. It is perfectly true that the hospital management committee suggested economies since the allocation and I am most grateful to it, but the two sides, it seems to me, are nearer together. I hope that they will come nearer still.

TO ask the Secretary of State for the Home De partment whether he will now make a statement on the coming into operation of the Visiting Forces Act.

TO ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is now able to state when the provisions of the Visiting Forces Act, 1952, will be brought into operation.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the Visiting Forces Act, 1952, will be put into effect.

I will, with permission, answer these Questions.

It is the intention of the Government to bring the Visiting Forces Act, 1952, into operation in the near future. For this purpose three Orders in Council must be made and must all come into force at the same time. These Orders in Council are, first, an Order under Section 19 (2) appointing the date on which the Act shall come into operation. Secondly, an Order in Council under Section 1 (2) designating the foreign countries to which the Act is to apply—the Act applies automatically to the Commonwealth countries as soon as it is brought into force. Thirdly, an Order in Council under Section 8 applying to members of visiting forces, with the necessary adaptations, certain provisions of the law relating to the home Forces.

The Act requires that no recommendation shall be made to Her Majesty in Council to make an Order under Section 8 unless a draft thereof has been laid before Parliament and approved by a Resolution of each House. A draft Order will be laid before Parliament in a few days, and if and when this draft has been approved, this Order, and the Orders under Section 19 (2) and Section 1 (2) of the Act, will be made to take effect simultaneously. It is the Government's intention to designate in the Section 1 (2) Order only those foreign countries which have ratified the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation Status of Forces Agreement.

I am informed that in the countries which have ratified the Agreement no further legislation is needed to enable effect to be given to the Agreement, except that in the United States legislation is pending to implement the provisions of Article VIII, which deals with claims against members of visiting forces. The United States Embassy has, however, given an assurance that the United States Government, in ratifying the Status of Forces Agreement, have undertaken to meet the claims for reimbursement submitted to them under Article VIII of that Agreement.

I should also like to take this opportunity of stating that the draft Order in Council will not apply Sections 144 and 145 of the Army Act to members of visiting forces. One effect of this will be that, where an affiliation order is made by a United Kingdom court against a member of a visiting force, it will be enforceable, if payment is not made, by the ordinary process of the law. I hope, however, that payments will be secured without the necessity for enforcement proceedings in the courts, and I shall remain in close touch with the American authorities on this matter. I shall also seek to make satisfactory arrangements with the authorities of any other visiting force if this becomes necessary.

May I ask whether all the N.A.T.O. countries have in fact ratified the Agreement?

Not all of them. About half-a-dozen have, and they will be shown in the Order when it is laid.

On a point of order. May I be informed of the urgency which required this answer to be read now? Could it not perfectly well have been printed in HANSARD tomorrow?

That is not a matter for me. I was quite unaware of what the answer was to be.

May I explain? When I was answering Questions a week ago I mentioned that this matter would be introduced, and the right hon. Member for South Shields (Mr. Ede) asked me specially if I would make a statement for the convenience of the House.

That is the answer to the hon. Member for Croydon, East (Sir H. Williams).

Do we understand the right hon. and learned Gentleman to say that this is being done on the assurance of the American Administration that they will secure legislation in Congress or that they will act before this legislation is passed? With the best will in the world on the part of the American Administration, can we rely on an assurance that they will get legislation passed or that they can act without such legislation?

I am afraid I have not made it clear to the right hon. Gentleman, and I am sorry. There are two points to be considered. For all the Act, except that concerned with civil claims, no legislation is necessary and Mr. Bedell Smith made a statement to the Senate Committee to that effect. With regard to the civil claims part, legislation has been introduced but is not passed, and until it is we have an authorisation that the United States will stand behind the defendant in any such claim.

Would the Minister be good enough to clarify two points? When the Bill was being discussed he gave an assurance that if this status was given to American and other N.A.T.O. troops in this country, there would be reciprocal provisions for British troops in other countries. Is he satisfied that these provisions for British troops operate in the United States? Secondly, are we to understand that maintenance and affiliation orders against American troops may now be enforceable, either in America or here, by the act of the American Government?

As to the first part of the question, I am satisfied that, save in the point I mentioned to the right hon. and learned Gentleman, the N.A.T.O. Agreement has been adopted as the law of the other countries and, therefore, reciprocity exists. On the second point, our processes of law apply within territorial limits. There is nothing in our law which allows enforcement of an affiliation order against someone outside the territorial limits, and there is no change in that direction.

May I ask the right hon. and learned Gentleman whether the Order which he will lay will relate to all these countries, or whether there should not be separate Orders, because the question of how far there is reciprocity, how far arrangements are satisfactory in other countries may differ a great deal, and the Order being unamendable, it would be convenient to have separate Orders for separate countries?

I considered that very carefully. I have not the draft Order before me but I think it covers five or six countries. I think it would be convenient, and would not make any difficulty, to deal with these together. But, of course, as each country ratifies the Agreement there will be a special Order for that country in the future. I think that meets the situation very conveniently.