asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance the number of old-age pensioners receiving National Assistance grants at the latest convenient date; what was the average payment per person; and the total sum paid in 1954 to this class of persons.

At 21st December, 1954, about 1,157,000 regular weekly National Assistance grants, some covering the requirements of a household with more than one pensioner, were being paid to retirement and non-contributory old-age pensioners. According to a provisional estimate based on a recent sample inquiry, such grants to this class of persons averaged 15s. 3d. a week and totalled about £45 million in 1954.

In view of what the Minister has said, does that not mean that about one million old-age pensioners who need help most will not be receiving the increase of 7s. 6d. for a single person and 11s. for a married couple, but will be restricted to 2s. 6d. and 4s. under the new scales of the National Assistance Board?

That was adequately and fully debated in the House in December. The National Assistance scales that these people most in need will be receiving are higher than ever before in the history of this country.

That does not answer my question. Do not the figures which the hon. Gentleman has given mean that, when the new scales come into operation, this million people will get only 2s. 6d. and 4s., respectively?

That is an entirely different question. The Question on the Order Paper asks the number of old-age pensioners receiving National Assistance.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance the number of persons in receipt of National Assistance at the latest convenient date; and what was the comparable figure for 1951.

The number of regular weekly National Assistance grants current on 21st December, 1954, was 1,796,000 compared with 1,462,000 on 18th December, 1951.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how many payments were being made by the National Assistance Board at 31st December, 1954; how many were being made in supplementation of retirement, sickness, unemployment, and widow's benefits; and how many non-contributory old-age pensions were in payment as at the same date.

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

Would the Minister give the number of retirement pensioners who are being supplemented at the present time?

The number of retirement pensioners being supplemented at the present time—that is, on 21st December, 1954—is 1,001,000.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what improvements he has now decided to make in the pensions of widows receiving only 10s. a week.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will make a statement on the future position of pension for the pre-1948 widows who now only receive the 10s. per week pension.

The position of these widows is among the questions now being considered by the National Insurance Advisory Committee as part of their review of the widowhood provisions of the scheme, and my right hon. Friend must await their report.

Will the Minister try to expedite this matter? Is he not aware that the deserving but diminishing number of widows are suffering both hardship and a sense of injustice? Will he not try to get this Committee to "get a move on" in this very urgent matter?

During the course of our debates at the end of last year, my right hon. Friend indicated that pressure ought not to be put on the Committee, because of the complicated nature of this problem. I would remind the House that all comparable widows who come under the 1948 scheme get no pension at all, which indicates how complicated this matter is.

Has my hon. Friend any idea when this report will be available?

None at all.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance when he expects to receive the report from the National Insurance Advisory Committee on the position of widows and the effect of the increased contributions on the lower income groups.

My right hon. Friend received the Committee's report on the liability for contributions of persons with small incomes on 21st January, and it is now being studied. I cannot forecast a date for the receipt of the report on the position of widows.

Is it the Minister's intention that the Committee should, if pos- sible, try to find a means of dealing with this problem of the "10s. widow" and that their report should not merely seek to get rid of the trouble?

My right hon. Friend has submitted the question of the conditions of widows' pensions to the Advisory Committee in all good faith and he must now await their report.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he is aware that before old-age pensioners receive their proposed increases in pension rates in April next, there will have been increases which have been announced in the prices of various foods and services; that, due to the rise in the cost of living, applications for wage increases are now being negotiated for many trades, and that this will again increase the cost of living; and what action he proposes to take to see that the old-age pensioners do not lose in purchasing value their proposed increases due to the rise in prices of the articles and services that they normally purchase.

Parliament dealt with the question of rates of pension as recently as last month.

That answer completely evades the question. Is the Minister not aware that the old-age pensioners do not receive their increases until April, and that the latest figures in the Ministry of Labour Gazette for food, rent and rates, fuel and light have all gone up in one month, November to December, by very large amounts? There are prophecies also of increases in electricity, gas and fares. It means that these people will not be getting any increase at all. Does not the Minister think that something should be done about that?

I would not accept all the implications of the hon. Gentleman's original Question or supplementary question. If my right hon. Friend has to take into account every variation in the cost of living, it will really mean that nothing will be done at all.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he is aware that discharged prisoners are unduly penalised by reason of no stamps appearing on their cards during their imprisonment, with the result that though they may obtain work for several months after their discharge, they become ineligible for unemployment and sickness benefit; and whether he will do something to remedy this situation.

Arrangements already exist which enable prisoners to maintain their contribution records in certain cases, but the National Insurance Advisory Committee are at present engaged on a general review of all the contribution conditions for benefits and I will draw the attention of the Committee to the point raised by the hon. Member.

I thank the Minister for that reply, but will he bear in mind that the rehabilitation of discharged prisoners is difficult enough and that they are unduly penalised if, as a result of the present system, they cannot get any sickness or unemployment benefit for two years after they come out of prison? Will he see that consideration is given in all cases? I have a number of letters on this subject which I shall be pleased to send to him.

I shall be glad if the hon. Member will send me those letters. I shall call the attention of the Advisory Committee to the supplementary question, but it would be unwise for me to express any opinion before the Committee have reported.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the fact that these cards are unstamped is another point which militates against the possible employment of ex-prisoners, as it shows that they are ex-prisoners?

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance why he now refuses to commute pensions at the request of war-disabled pensioners who need capital sums.

The practice of allowing commutation was suspended in 1939. Since then, successive Ministers of Pensions decided against reviving it on the ground that experience had shown that commutation was not, in general, in the pensioners' best interests. My right hon. Friend agrees with this view.

Does not the hon. and gallant Member think that, instead of a hard-and-fast line being drawn in these cases, it might be to the advantage of the pensioner if he were given a lump sum when, for instance, he is engaged in a profitable business that requires a little more capital to develop? Will he undertake to examine each case on its merits before giving a definite ruling about every one?

It is very difficult to discriminate between one case and another. All our experience over the last 15 years points to the fact that it is not in the true interests of the pensioner to allow him to commute his pension. I have seen a lot of tragedies where a man has spent his pension, is still disabled, and has come along to ask us what we can do to help him.

Does not my hon. and gallant Friend consider that in certain cases, where a man is in business on his own account, it might be to his advantage if he had up to 20 per cent. of his pension commuted? In special cases, could not that possibility be considered?

I have considered a great many cases, but it is very difficult to agree to commutation in one case and refuse it in another. All our experience is to the effect that it is a mistake from the pensioner's point of view, and we must put the pensioner first.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what reciprocal arrangements exist between Great Britain and Western Germany under which persons entitled to pensions and insurance benefits from one country are entitled to continue to draw such benefits notwithstanding the fact that they take up residence in the other country.

None, Sir. A reciprocal agreement covering all National Insurance and Industrial Injuries benefits except unemployment benefit is under negotiation, and I hope it will be signed very shortly. Negotiations for a separate agreement on unemployment benefit are expected to begin in the near future.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement giving details of the German officers and others who have recently made a tour of British defence positions in this country; the places visited; the military and political background of these men; and details of their past Nazi Party membership and activities.

I presume the hon. Member is referring to the German officers who visited this country during the week of 10th-15th January. They visited the Admiralty and Her Majesty's ships and establishments in the Portsmouth area. During the late war, all these officers carried out the duties of regular officers serving in wartime. I will circulate their names in the OFFICIAL REPORT. None of them, to my knowledge, was a member of the Nazi Party.

Is the Minister aware that at least one of them—and, I believe, more—received high decorations from the Nazi Party for his activities?

Decorations were not uncommon in the German armed forces during the war for services in the field, any more than they were uncommon in other armed forces, but none of these generals or officers to whom the hon. Member refers was to my knowledge a member of the Nazi Party; and General Heusinger was arrested on suspicion after the Hitler Plot.

Have any of these German officers been furnished with information which has been denied to hon. Members on security grounds? [HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."] May I make my question more specific? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that only the other day the Under-Secretary of State for Air refused to disclose information about guided missiles and the condition of the Royal Air Force? Can we be assured that these German officers were not supplied with that information?

If the right hon. Gentleman wants to know exactly what type of information was supplied to these officers, and whether or not it was classified, perhaps he will be good enough to put down a Question.

Does that mean that the right hon. Gentleman does not know what the information was?

What it means is that I would rather not give the House an answer on the basis of insufficient information.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he is aware that many of the officers and advisers responsible for the organisation of the new German army proposed in the Paris agreements have Nazi and anti-democratic backgrounds; whether he will make it a condition of ratification of the agreement that Lieutenant-General Count Gerhard Schwerin, formerly a member of the planning department of the Nazi General Staff, Colonel Adolf von Kielnarasegg, General Hans Spiedel, General Maximilian von Edelstein, Major-General Rudolph von Gersdorff, General Wend von Wieterstein, Major-General Smitt von Luettwitz, General Ludwig Cruewell, Lieutenant-General Adolf Heusinger and Colonel Gerhard Panitzki, all of whom have been designated for service with the army, should be barred from holding any office because of their Nazi background.

The answer to both parts of the Question is, "No, Sir."

Is the Minister aware that in this instance, as in that referred to in the previous Question, a number of these officers did receive high orders from the Nazi Party, including the Grand Cross with Laurel Wreath and very many other Nazi decorations, for their activities on behalf of the Nazi Party? Are we now to have these Nazis in control of this German army?

The hon. Member knows that when the London and Paris agreements come into force the appointment of senior officers for the future West German armed forces will be a matter for the Federal German Government. So far as the list of names is concerned, which in any case the hon. Member has inaccurately copied out from a Communist publication, the "German Democratic Report," Colonel Kielmansegg was arrested in 1944 for complicity in the plot against Hitler; General Speidel was arrested after the 1944 plot; Major-General Gersdorff was an early member of an active and resolute group of resistants to the Nazi Party and General Heusinger was arrested by the Gestapo in 1944.

On a point of order. Is it in order for the Minister to make charges and allegations which he cannot in any way substantiate? In fact, I copied these details from the "New York Times." Is it in order for the Minister to make allegations that I copied them from any paper?

I understood the Minister to say that the hon. Member had copied these from some paper. [HON. MEMBERS: "A Communist paper."] If that is not so and the Minister is inaccurate about that, he ought to withdraw his remark.

Of course, if the hon. Gentleman assures me that he did not copy these names from the Communist newspaper in question, I naturally accept his explanation and withdraw my remark.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the Soviet Government's acceptance of the principle of internationally supervised free elections for an all-German Government, he will now propose to the Governments of the United States of America, France and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics the immediate holding of four-Power talks on Germany.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what reply he will make to the proposals concerning Germany made by the Soviet Government on 15th January.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if, in view of the fact that the Soviet Government are now prepared to consider holding free elections under international control in Germany, he will restate his own proposals for free elections in Germany.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what steps Her Majesty's Government intend to take, through diplomatic channels or otherwise, to secure the clarification of the official proposal made by the Soviet Government on 15th January.

At the Berlin Conference, just a year ago, I put forward, in agreement with the French and United States Governments, a practical plan for the holding of free elections in Germany as the essential first step in the process of German reunification in freedom. This plan provided for the necessary safeguards to ensure that these elections, held throughout the whole of Germany, should be genuinely free. Only thus could a representative all-German Government be established with which we could negotiate a peace treaty. These proposals were rejected by the Soviet Government.

While appreciating the statement made by the right hon. Gentleman at the end of his reply, may I ask him if he will take into account the fact that the Soviet statement of 15th January was said to be an official declaration of Soviet Government policy? Since it represents a substantial advance towards the Western point of view, will he not make it clear that he will be prepared to enter into serious negotiations if the Soviet Government put these proposals into an official Note?

I thought my answer was pretty lucid on that point. We delivered a Note to them on 29th November inviting them to reply to these particular points. Should they do so through the ordinary methods by which Governments communicate with each other, the procedure which we will follow will be as I have outlined.

In view of the widespread confusion which the Soviet statement undoubtedly caused in Germany, to which the Foreign Secretary himself referred, will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider his decision? Will he consider the possibility of a three-Power statement referring to the Soviet proposal in which the Western Powers ask for clarification of the Soviet Note and stress their willingness to meet the Soviet Union on German unity as soon as the Paris treaties are in force, and also pointing out that the readiness of both sides to make a compromise will be greatly increased when that has been achieved?

I should like to see that question on the Order Paper, if the hon. Gentleman does not mind. I do not necessarily dissent from it, but these are complicated matters and I do not want to give a snap answer.

May I follow up what my hon. Friend has just said? Does not the Foreign Secretary recall that in 1946 the four Allied commanders agreed to free elections in Berlin, which, if I remember rightly, worked reasonably well? Will he not make inquiries through diplomatic channels to find out whether the Russians will not now be willing to agree to conditions for all-German elections, comparable to those adopted for Berlin?

I am obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for putting that point. To the best of my recollection, those regulations were used only for the 1946 election and have not been used since. I should like to look at the point and examine it.

Would my right hon. Friend tell right hon. Gentlemen opposite why the Russians did not offer free elections when they had the chance?

For the same reasons, I suppose, that they are not offering them now.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that a good many diplomatic communications usually contain ambiguities and that if should be the purpose of diplomacy to clear them up? Is he aware that the people in Germany who are most likely to be affected are the people who regard free elections as just as important as he does, namely, the leaders of the German trade unions and the German Social Democratic Party, who are urging us to accept the Russian offer in the interests of the people of Germany?

I have said, first of all, that there is no Russian offer in those terms. If the desire of the Soviet Government is to give a reply to our Note, they can do so perfectly easily, and it will be immediately examined. I have also said that I am not going to deal with broadcast propaganda as if it were an official document.

Would the right hon. Gentleman clear up this point? A good many people seem to think that the last Note of the Soviet Government made a considerable advance on the previous statement. Is it not a fact that, in the Note of April, 1952, the Russian Government agreed to accept the principle of free elections under international supervision?

It may well be so. I am obliged to the right hon. and learned Gentleman. We sent a Note to the Russians making it quite clear that we were ready to receive their observations on this particular topic. To that we have not received any reply, save that one broadcast statement, and I think we are perfectly correct in saying that, until we receive a reply, we do not intend to deal with a broadcast statement as if it were official Government policy.

If the Foreign Secretary's purpose is to clear up ambiguities in the recent statement by the Soviet Government, which surely cannot be unconnected with the reason which my hon. Friend has given, what is the real objection to taking up the suggestion from my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition that these exchanges or negotiations with the Soviet Government should go on pari passu with the process of ratification?

I must be frank with the House. My objection is that I think that these movements are made for the express purpose of trying to hold up ratification of the agreements, and I am deeply convinced, as I think is a majority of the House, that the chances of peace will be reinforced once these agreements are ratified.

Did not the Russian spokesman at Yalta agree to free and unfettered elections in Poland, and did not the late Mr. Ernest Bevin freely admit in this House that, so far from being free, they were carried out under compulsion and threats of every kind?

My hon. Friend is right on both points.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs how far the Government's policy of bringing about the reunification of Germany is on the basis of full sovereignty.

It is the policy of Her Majesty's Government that any German Government resulting from genuinely free elections held throughout Germany should be fully sovereign.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs when he next proposes to visit Western Germany.

My right hon. Friend has no immediate plans for visiting Western Germany.

Does not the Minister think that his right hon. Friend would be well advised to go again to Western Germany in order to get acquainted with public opinion there, which is against German rearmament? If he cannot go officially, cannot he go incognito, disguised as a working man or as a minister of religion, in order to find out what the people of Germany are really thinking? They do not want conscription or rearmament.

I do not accept the implication of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. As he well knows, the freely and properly elected majority of the German Bundestag and Parliament has supported the policy of the rearmament of Western Germany, subject to safeguards, and its contribution to European defence.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what action has been taken by the British representative on the Security Council of the United Nations to place the invasion of Costa Rica on the agenda of the Security Council as a threat to peace.

None, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is the second occasion during the past 12 months on which the Security Council has been by-passed in a matter affecting a breach of international peace, and does he not think that this contrasts very unfavourably with what happened in the case of Korea? Should not the same action have been taken by Her Majesty's Government's representative to bring this matter before the Security Council?

There was no question of by-passing either the Security Council or the United Nations. Costa Rica did not appeal to the Security Council for any help, but was content to have that matter dealt with by the Organisation of American States, as is permitted, and, indeed, encouraged, by the United Nations Charter.

Does not my right hon. Friend think it a very encouraging sign that the Organisation of American States had so much success in this matter in one of the most dangerous and turbulent parts of the Western Hemisphere?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, at the forthcoming world disarmament talks, he will propose that any world disarmament convention achieved would apply to the defence forces allotted to Western Germany under the Paris Agreements in equal proportion to all other countries.

Her Majesty's Government have always maintained that any world disarmament convention should apply to all countries. One of the tasks of the Disarmament Sub-Committee, which is expected to begin meeting in London towards the end of next month, will be to reach agreement on the method of limiting armed forces and armaments all over the world.

Would not the Minister agree that the best way of settling the problem of German rearmament would be to achieve a world disarmament agreement which would limit the armed forces of all countries?

I certainly agree with the right hon. and learned Gentleman on that. Indeed, I would go further and say that that would be one of the best ways of achieving a solution to many of the other outstanding problems.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what were the reasons for supporting Spain's admission to the United Nations as a permanent observer.

Spain has not been admitted to the United Nations as a permanent observer. There is no such status. The question does not therefore arise.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the status recently given to Spain in relation to the Organisation for European Economic Co-operation; and for what reasons.

Spain is to participate fully in the work of the Ministerial Committee for Agriculture and Food, and its subordinate bodies, and is to send an observer to meetings of the Council and of certain specific Technical Committees whenever they deal with questions which might affect agriculture or food. Acceptance of these arrangements was one of the conditions on which the European Conference on the Organisation of Agricultural Markets insisted before they would agree that their work should be transferred to the Organisation for European Economic Co-operations.

Does the Minister consider that increasing the prestige of Spain and improving her status at the present time is desirable in view of the policy being pursued by the Spanish Government, particularly in relation to this country? Can the right hon. Gentleman give an undertaking that this is not the first step towards bringing Spain into the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation?

This is a Question about O.E.E.C., which has nothing to do with the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. So far as the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary is concerned, I believe that the more co-operation we can get on economic matters—on agriculture and food production—in Europe, the better.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Spain is part of Europe, and that the more we can bring her into the organisation of Europe the better?

Will the right hon. Gentleman also seek more co-operation with Spain in regard to Gibraltar and the question of human rights, in which there is no co-operation at the present time?

I think that Her Majesty's Government's views on both those matters are sufficiently well known to the Spanish Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is yet in a position to inform the House of the results of the examination of the recommendations made in the Seventh Report from the Select Committee on Estimates on the Foreign Service.

Yes, Sir. This Report has been very carefully examined and, in view of the interest of the House in this matter, my right hon. Friend is arranging for a White Paper containing the results of the examination and comments on the Report to be laid this afternoon.

May I thank my right hon. Friend for the speed with which the Foreign Secretary has acted?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he now has any further information about the disappearance of Burgess and Maclean.

I have no statement to make at present.

Does that answer mean that the Minister is likely to make a statement on the matter in the not-too-distant future? Has the Foreign Office information, which, for some dubious reason, it will not disclose, or is its Intelligence not very intelligent? Is the Minister aware that back benchers of this House often know more about these disappearances than does the Foreign Office?

The reason why I am not in a position to make any statement at the present moment is that I would not wish to make a statement based on inadequate information and insufficient researches, seeing that the investigation into these questions is still being pursued.

Has the Foreign Office studied the book published last week in which the allegation is made that both these men were notorious perverts? Can he deny that allegation?

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power how many of the recommendations of the Turner Report on Mining Subsidence have not yet been implemented; and how many of them will require legislation.

None has been carried out except those to which the Coal-Mining (Subsidence) Act, 1950, gave partial effect; and all would require legislation.

As it is now more than five years since the generally accepted recommendations of this Report were published, has the Parliamentary Secretary abandoned all hope of implementing those recommendations and helping the citizens whose interests are being undermined; and if he has not abandoned all hope, when may we expect his Department to take action to implement these five-year-old recommendations?

We never abandon all hope. The hon. Gentleman may recall that the matter has been under consideration by the Departments concerned in conjunction with the National Coal Board. That consideration has now been reported to the Ministers concerned.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power his estimate of the cost to the national exchequer of implementing in full the recommendations of the Turner Report on Mining Subsidence.

I cannot add to the answer which my right hon. Friend gave to the hon. Member on 30th November, 1953.

How long will it take, after the five years' consultation between his Department, the National Coal Board and other people concerned, to work out constructive proposals to implement the recommendations of the Turner Report? Can we have an assurance that it will not take another five years to find the money from the Treasury to assist these long-suffering local authorities and citizens?

We shall move with the utmost expedition.

What was the estimate of cost in the previous answer to which the right hon. Gentleman referred? If there was no such estimate, why cannot he make one now?

There was no estimate in the previous answer because this was considered a matter not subject to a reasonable possibility of estimate. As time goes on the possibility becomes still more speculative.

Surely it is easy to find out the cost which is imposed on local authorities by mining subsidence and which ought to be borne by the nation?

If the right hon. Gentleman, with the knowledge which he has, will consider the matter further, I am sure that he will see that what cost will arise is entirely speculative.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if he is satisfied that all coal merchants are acquainted with Article 11 of the retail coal prices order and are delivering tickets specifying grade and price of coal delivered; and what reports he has received on this subject from his enforcement officers.

I would refer the hon. Lady to the reply which I gave her on 15th November. No increase in the rate of offences under Article 11 of the Retail Coal Prices Order has been reported.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary not aware that I have already sent him letters about a good many cases on which he could take action? Has he not proceeded with regard to those cases?

All cases which the hon. Lady has referred to me have been considered. All those in which there seemed to be appropriate cause have been investigated. In no case has any evidence of infringement been obtained.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what considerations caused him to authorise the recent increase in domestic coke prices; what is the average increase; and which areas are affected by it.

The reasons were additions to the cost of transporting the coke and increases in the costs of retail distribution. The average increase is about 2s. 9d. per ton and all areas South of a line from the Wash to the Severn are affected.

Have not Her Majesty's Government recently announced their support for a policy of clean air? As coke is the principal smokeless fuel we envisage employing, and as the supply of coke from the gas boards has steadily been increasing over the last two years, does not my hon. Friend agree that we should endeavour to reduce its price and not increase it?

A reduction in the price of coke, as well as that of coal, is the constant desire of my right hon. Friend.

In addition to paying some attention to the suggestion which has just been made, will the Minister pay considerable attention to increasing the supply of coke? In my part of London, we have to wait four to eight weeks before an order can be delivered. That is much too long and causes householders a good deal of difficulty.

There is no shortage of coke. If the hon. Member will give me particulars, I shall be pleased to look into his complaint.

Would it not be better if the Parliamentary Secretary told his hon. Friend the Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro) that the right method is to approach the petrol companies who recently increased the cost of petrol, which means increased costs to the nationalised industries, with the result that prices will go up again?

No, the increases were made for a variety of different causes.

In view of the campaign for clean air and of the Government's intention in that regard, may I ask whether the Parliamentary Secretary will, firstly, consult closely with the Gas Council about the supply of coke, and, secondly, watch the prices very carefully?

My right hon. Friend has already taken that advice.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power how much coal has been imported since 1st April, 1954; what part of it has been brought from the United States of America and paid for in dollars; what are the present arrangements for paying for United States coal; and to what extent payments in sterling for United States coal and freights are retrospective.

About three million tons, of which 400,000 came from the United States and was paid for in dollars. Such imports are continuing, but a further 250,000 tons have been purchased for sterling under an agreement with the United States Government which is not retrospective.

Is my hon. Friend aware that I first suggested to him some months ago that it was possible to buy American coal and pay for it in sterling? Why, therefore, have we been obliged to pay in dollars for as much as 400,000 tons of American coal, notwithstanding the fact that there has been a continuing American surplus of bituminous coal throughout the last 18 months?

I do not think that my hon. Friend should chide me for doing what he suggested. Arrangements for imports of coal for sterling were made at the earliest possible moment.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he can state the extent to which gas mains fracture in areas where subsidence is prevalent and marked as compared with other areas.

No, Sir.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that, in areas such as Stoke-on-Trent, such fractures are at least four times as frequent as in normal areas where there is no subsidence? Can he tell the House when the considerable loss to such areas—as well as ill health and, sometimes, loss of life—will be accepted as a national responsibility and not one to be left solely to the Coal Board?

My right hon. Friend is aware of no statistics that will help the hon. Member in this connection. I can tell him, however, that the loss of life from this particular cause is not very great. There were five fatalities altogether in 1953 from this cause.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what schemes for capita] development in the Northern Gas Board area he has at present under consideration.

The Northern Gas Board's general programme of develop. ment provides for an increase of about 20 per cent. in gas supplies over the next five years.

Is my hon. Friend aware that, during the recent cold spell, gas consumers in the North of England felt that they had been swindled? Will he see that, in future, there are sufficient gas supplies during cold spells to avoid a repetition of that experience? It was a jolly old swindle on the consumers.

I am not aware of that feeling among my hon. Friend's constituents—

No. It is the whole of the North.

—but my right hon. Friend's responsibility in this matter is to approve the general programme of development by the area boards and not the particular projects with which they may be concerned. I can, however, reassure my hon. Friend to the extent that considerable fresh supplies of gas will become available from new projects now coming into operation. In addition, the Northern Board has applied for, and received, authority for an additional extension to its projects.

By next winter?

Is not the matter which the hon. Lady has raised a matter for the Gas Consultative Council, and has it been referred there?

I cannot say whether it has been referred to the Consultative Council.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that my constituents say that the gas industry ought to have been nationalised 20 years ago.