asked the Minister of Supply the estimated production of mustard gas in the United Kingdom for the year 1954; how many storage depots exist; and whether production is being maintained at an adequate rate.

It would not be in the public interest to disclose the information for which the hon. Member asks.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that if the information has not been disclosed, the mustard gas has, and that it has been causing some alarm to the people of Cambridgeshire rather than the people of Siberia; and in those circumstances does not he think that those people who have sustained injury should have some explanation giving the reason?

I think I understand the incident to which the hon. Member has referred. He really should address Questions about that to the Secretary of State for Air.

asked the Minister of Supply whether, in view of the importance of helicopters for inter-city travel, he will make a statement giving details of experiments taking place and progress made in those designed to reduce the noise from helicopter engines.

Important work is being done in this field, in conjunction with the Ministry of Transport and Civil Aviation and the aircraft and aero-engine firms concerned. We were considerably encouraged by the demonstration of one form of silencer at the South Bank on 24th January. The problems to be surmounted are, however, great. I propose, with permission, to circulate in the Official Report a more detailed statement of the work in hand.

While thanking the right hon. and learned Gentleman for that statement, may I ask him whether he will bear in mind that even if it is possible to apply silencers and do away with any noise, there will be some critics who will complain about the uncanny silence of the helicopter?

asked the Minister of Supply to what extent the new rifle for use in the British Forces will be manufactured in Britain on exactly the same pattern as the Belgian Fabrique Nationale rifle; and whether the system of continental or British measurements will be used in its manufacture.

Rifles produced in the United Kingdom will be made on the same pattern as the Belgian rifle. They will be manufactured to inch drawings, for the reasons stated by the then Minister of Supply on 7th May, 1954.

Since they are to be manufactured on inch drawings and not on metric drawings, is not it clear that the parts will not be interchangeable with the Belgian rifle still manufactured in Belgium, and does not this do away with much of the argument in favour of standardisation advanced a year ago by the Government?

I understand that many of the parts will be interchangeable.

Is not it clear that not all of them will be interchangeable and that we were told that the great advantage was that they would all be interchangeable?

The argument about standardisation was always addressed to standardisation with Canada and the Commonwealth countries.

Will the Minister explain why this further alteration and modification was effected, because it has undoubtedly caused great delay, and if it enables standardisation in one direction it would clearly prevent it in another? It seems inexplicable.

If the right hon. Gentleman will look again at the statement of 7th May, he will see the reasons fully set out.

asked the Minister of Supply how many Belgian Fabrique Nationale rifles have been procured; and how many have been ordered from Belgium.

In all, 14,400 of these rifles have been ordered and 4,600 delivered.

Can the right hon. and learned Gentleman say why, if the Belgians are not having to modify their rifle, we are having to modify ours? If the need for this new rifle is so urgent, as was stated over a year ago, why have we not gone ahead with orders there instead of playing about in this country as we have done?

We thought it was better to wait until troop trials had taken place.

Has the right hon. and learned Gentleman read the Government's White Paper on defence? If he has, having regard to its contents, will he tell us what these rifles are likely to be use for?

I hope the hon. Member has read the White Paper with the same attention as I have. Obviously our Armed Forces have to be armed with some conventional weapons.

Can the Minister tell us plainly now why the troop trials he has just mentioned were not undertaken immediately this Government came into office, why they have not yet been undertaken, and why production could not have been begun immediately after those troop trials, which should have taken place three years ago?

The right hon. Member should put down a Question to the Secretary of State for War regarding the timing of troop trials.

Has not the real trouble been that the previous Minister was so busy denationalising steel that he shilly-shallied and hesitated in taking decisions for over three years both about rifles and aircraft? Is not the best thing that has happened to the Ministry of Supply since 1951 that the Minister has left it?

asked the Minister of Supply the nature and number of the modifications intended to extend the performance beyond that originally conceived which have been made to the Swift fighter, the Hunter fighter, the Valiant bomber, the Victor bomber, and the Vulcan bomber, respectively, since October, 1951.

With regard to the V bombers, a number of modifications has been introduced since October, 1951, designed to extend their performance beyond that originally conceived. None of these has delayed production. It would certainly not be in the public interest to disclose their nature. With regard to the Hunter and Swift, there have been no such modifications of any significance since October, 1951.

How can the Minister say that if modifications are introduced to extend the performance beyond that originally intended that does not cause any delay in production, because obviously it must; and is not he aware that the firm building the Hunter has built a special workshop to deal with the modifications sent through by his Ministry?

With regard to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, the modifications in the case of the V bombers have been introduced at such a stage of the production process that they have not delayed production. In reply to the second part, I repeat that no modifications of any significance have been introduced for the Hunter and the Swift to extend their performance beyond that originally conceived. That does not mean that there have not had to be modifications, both for safety reasons and in order to bring up their performance to that originally conceived.

Was not the Minister's first answer completely misleading, and was there not a major modification after October, 1951, to the dive brakes, which was decided upon after many of the aircraft had been produced? Why was it that the modification was delayed until so many of these aircraft were standing on the aerodrome?

My answer was not misleading. I was asked whether there had been any modifications intended to extend the performance beyond that originally conceived. It was that Question which I answered. If the hon. Gentleman wants to put down another Question on another point, I will answer it.

Is it not clear that the Hunter had a number of modifications made to enable it to fire with four guns instead of two? Was that not intended to extend its performance beyond that originally conceived?

The date I gave was October, 1951. The decision about the four Aden guns was taken before October, 1951.

asked the Minister of Supply when it was first realised by his Department that the Swift fighter Marks 1 to 3 would never be able to fulfil the rôle for which they were required; and what has been the total expenditure on the Swift in research, development, and purchase of aeroplanes for delivery to the Royal Air Force.

It was decided earlier this month that these Marks could not be brought to a standard acceptable for operational use by the Royal Air Force. Expenditure to date on research, development and production on all Marks of the Swift totals about£20 million.

Is it not clear that there has been an appalling waste of money by the Government on the Swift—£20 million? Is it not also clear that an efficiently conducted Ministry would have realised much longer ago than one month that these Marks would not have come up to the standard required of them, and that an efficient Ministry would have realised that two years ago?

As to the amount of money spent on the Swift project, the Swift was ordered off the drawing board by the previous Administration—a calculated risk which, in the circumstances, I think they were right to take. As to the question whether the three Marks concerned should have been abandoned earlier, I think that is a matter we can easily debate later this week.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that a very large part of the£20 million spent was usefully expended in that it has led to considerable technical and scientific advances in aviation generally, whereas no part of the£30 million spent on groundnuts did anyone any good at all?

Would the right hon. and learned Gentleman be kind enough to tell us, as difficulties have been experienced with the Swift, how it comes about that spokesmen on behalf of the Government have promised in, I believe, 1952 and 1953, that they would be in squadron use? Would the Minister explain the reasons why those promises were given?

Certainly; because it was hoped up to a recent date that improvements would be made. The first representative Mark 4 did not fly until May, 1953.

Can the right hon. and learned Gentleman assure us that during the coming debates he will give us a full explanation why these quite intolerable delays have taken place in these aircraft? Will he give us a full explanation?

An honest one—

Oh.

Certainly.

asked the Minister of Supply when super-priority for fighter aircraft which he announced on 5th March, 1952, was extended to bombers; and whether he will make a statement.

On a point of order. May I draw attention to the fact that originally this Question was put to the Prime Minister and, without my consent, it has been transferred to the Minister of Supply? It therefore needs to be amended to agree with the facts and ought to read "which the Prime Minister announced on 5th March, 1952" and not the Minister of Supply.

I am grateful to the hon. Member for his correction. The super-priority scheme has included Canberra and Valiant bombers from its inception and was extended to the Victor and Vulcan in December, 1952.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that he has made a very grave statement? The Prime Minister informed the House that super-priority was being given to fighter aircraft. If the Minister will look at Hansard for 5th March, 1952, he will find that statement and, at no time from that date onwards, has any statement been made that super-priority was being extended to bombers, although there was an obscure reference by the Secretary of State for Air in the House of Lords in April, 1952.

In his statement, the Prime Minister was dealing with the fighter defences of this country. With regard to the question of super-priority to bombers, the hon. Member is perfectly correct; the Secretary of State did state that fact in another place on 3rdApril, 1952.

asked the Minister of Supply the total sums paid through his Department to aircraft companies for the last three years for which figures are available, in the form of payments against development and production contracts, respectively.

The expenditure on the production of airframes and aeroengines and spares therefor, in the three years from April, 1951, to March, 1954, was£84 million,£1295 million and£161 million, respectively. It is not the practice to give details of expenditure on research and development.

Is it not the case that there are vast subsidies of public money concealed in these figures? Is it not time there was a public inquiry into this enormous expenditure for so little return?

I do not believe the hon. Member is right in the last part of his supplementary question. As to concealed subsidies, the answer I have given deals with the Question which was asked.

Does it include the cost of bombers at£400,000 each which are now obsolete?

It includes the cost of all aero-engines, airframes and spares in the relevant years.

Does the figure include the cost of aero-engines, airframes and spares which have been delivered?

Yes, Sir, the production.

The actually delivered article?

No, Sir, there are certain sums paid on account, but I should like to see the figures to see whether there is any difference between them.

No rifles and no aircraft.

asked the Minister of Health what steps he is taking to stem the decline in recruitment of dentists for the National Health Service.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Wythenshawe (Mrs. Hill) on 6th December. I am not yet quite ready to announce the full membership of the Committee, but Sir Arnold McNair has consented to act as Chairman.

Will my right hon. Friend give further consideration to the question whether there is adequate assistance to dental students in the purchase of dental equipment? Do I understand that it costs£125 and that this might be a deterrent to the starting of studies?

If it is a deterrent in the way my hon. Friend suggests, it would certainly come within the terms of reference.

asked the Minister of Health what consideration has been given to providing chiropody treatment for elderly people; and with what result.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam (Mr. Sharpies) on 21st February.

I have read the answer, and I think it is most unsatisfactory. Will the Parliamentary Secretary ask her right hon. Friend to have another look at this matter, bearing in mind that foot troubles can quickly cripple people, whereas proper treatment can give a new lease of life? What financial assistance is given by the Government to local authorities who have introduced this system of treatment?

At present, the only local authorities who run the system are those which provided this service before 1948 and which were allowed to continue. There has not been an extension since then. My right hon. Friend studies all the problems in the Health Service, but it is a matter of priority, and other overriding priorities have prevented this additional financial obligation being undertaken.

Most unsatisfactory.

asked the Minister of Health if he will make a statement in respect to the experiments being made in the fluoridation of water; and what progress has been made.

Fluoridation in three selected areas in England and Wales is expected to start during the summer.

As this is a most important matter, can the hon. Lady not give a little more detail? How many local authorities are going to make a start, and how many experiments are being held?

The study areas have already been announced and are Anglesey, Darlington and Watford, in England and Wales, and Kilmarnock, in Scotland. The reason it takes some time to bring them into operation is that special equipment has to be provided, and the local authorities are now inviting tenders.

Is a list available, which we could see or have placed in the Library, of the fluorine content of water so far as it is available at present, particularly for the major local authorities?

I will look into the hon. Member's request.

asked the Minister of Health whether he has noted that exactly similar preparations of some drugs, particularly penicillin, are manufactured by different chemical firms and stocked by dispensing chemists; that these preparations have different names; and whether he will authorise dispensing chemists to dispense an exact equivalent, irrespective of the name on the prescription.

My right hon. Friend is aware of the position, but he would not feel justified in authorising chemists to dispense preparations other than those prescribed. The matter is primarily one for the prescriber.

Is the hon. Lady aware that, certainly so far as oral and stable suspensions of penicillin are concerned, there are four or five which are exactly alike and certainly identical in their therapeutic effects? Is she aware that this may mean that a child suffering from pneumonia cannot get anything to help it for a day or a night or a day and a night when a similar preparation is available for it? What does the Parliamentary Secretary think ought to be done in such a case?

Under the present code of the chemists, it would be quite unethical for a chemist to transpose one preparation for another that was ordered by the medical practitioner. In a case of that kind, there is certainly no reason why the chemist could not telephone the doctor and ask whether he would agree to change to the comparable preparation.

Would the Parliamentary Secretary and her right hon. Friend go further and make representations to the appropriate sub-committee of the British Medical Association to give this matter full consideration?

It is a much wider problem than appears in this one item; it is against the professional code of the chemist. The National Health Service Acts do not authorise a chemist to substitute another preparation for one which is ordered and I do not think that generally my right hon. Friend could advise such a procedure.

asked the Minister of Health on what basis the Distinction (Merit) Award is given to consultants in the National Health Service over and above their salaries; and why the identity of the doctors granted these awards from public funds is not published.

The committee set up to recommend awards is required by its terms of reference to base its recommendations on professional distinction. In my view, publication of names would not be in the best interests of the National Health Service.

As the grants are paid from public funds, what possible objection is there to publishing the names of the recipients?

The objection, surely, is that if it were known which consultants got class A, class B and class C awards, patients might think that, according to which consultant was looking after them, they were getting different forms of treatment. That would not be the case, because other factors than clinical ability are taken into account. That view, I think, has always been held by my predecessors, and I believe it to be right.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that doctors of the highest distinction in the employ of the Medical Research Council are not eligible for Distinction (Merit) Awards in the same way as consultants in the National Health Service; and whether he will take steps to provide for such, or similar, grants to be made in order to remove this anomaly.

Subject to rules of which I am sending my hon. Friend a copy, doctors employed by the Medical Research Council are eligible for distinction awards if they hold honorary consultant appointments in the National Health Service. Apart from this, their remuneration is a matter for the Lord President.

asked the Minister of Health how many occupational centres for mentally defective children are open in Wales; and how many are projected.

Six are open; a further three are known to be proposed by local health authorities.

Where it is not possible to serve an area by occupational centres, what encouragement is given to the local authority to provide home treatment?

Generally, this is a matter for the local authority under educational arrangements and not so fully under our arrangements, but if the hon. Lady puts a Question on the Order Paper I will look into the position in Flintshire, with which I am sure she is particularly concerned.

asked the Minister of Health what progress has been made with the Oakwood Park Colony for mental defectives at Conway.

Adaptations costing£62,000, to provide accommodation for 184 patients and the necessary staff, began on 17th December last and are expected to be completed by December next.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what proportion of the accommodation is for children and what proportion is for adults?

Not without notice. In the end it is intended to accommodate up to 500 or 600, but perhaps I can write and let the hon. Lady know what proportion of that number will be children.

asked the Minister of Health whether, in view of the growing numbers of unemployed among British doctors, he will consult the Secretary of State for the Colonies regarding their being engaged in the service of Colonial Governments.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies and I already consult as necessary on the needs of the Colonial Governments for medical staff, and vacancies are, of course, publicly advertised in all appropriate cases. As regards medical manpower generally, the hon. Member will be aware of the terms of reference of the Committee whose establishment I announced a week ago.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are 200 applications for each vacant job today in the United Kingdom? I she further aware that there are some 61,000 people per doctor in Nigeria and that things are worse in the Cameroons, where there is one doctor for every 71,000 of the population? Would the right hon. Gentleman ginger up matters and set up a working party to investigate the question of seconding doctors to the Colonies, particularly to West Africa?

All posts are advertised and any doctor can apply. It is not within my competence—and I hope that the hon. Member does not seek to imply it—to direct doctors to go to any particular area. As to general matters of medical manpower, as the hon. Member knows, I have set up a committee.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that people in the Colonies think that the present scheme is not working? Will he not consider some financial inducement, perhaps a settlement scheme, to induce doctors to go out to the Colonies?

The problem is largely one for the Secretary of State for the Colonies, and I will certainly bring to his notice the suggestion which the hon. Member has made.

asked the Minister of Health (1) why the committee to inquire into the number of doctors likely to be engaged in medical practice in the future contains three members who have been associated with health administration in Scotland, eight members who have been associated with health administration in England, and no members who have been associated with health administration in Wales; and if he will make a statement;

The members of this Committee have been appointed solely on their personal qualifications and not as representatives of particular areas or interests. I am confident that they will take full account of any points special to Wales, and that the interests of the Welsh health services which, through the Welsh Board of Health, are my direct responsibility, will not be prejudiced in any way.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, however these men have been appointed to the Committee, in fact it contains three men who have been connected with Scottish health administration and a large number who have been associated with English health administration? Is he aware that this is regarded in Wales, by people who are not nationalists, as a singularly tactless and unnecessary affront to Welsh opinion?

As regards the first part of the supplementary question, any high-level committee, particularly one dealing with medical matters, would be bound to have a large number of Scots upon it. As far as the Welsh point of view is concerned, it is true, of course, that this matter has not been dealt with in any way upon a regional basis. Wales is one of the 14 regions in England and Wales and the Committee is so small that I do not think it practical to add to it.

Did the right hon. Gentleman consult the Minister for Welsh Affairs? If not, why not?

Yes, Sir. All these proposals are notified to my colleagues, including the Home Secretary.

asked the Minister of Health how many people have died during the last year as a result of accidental coal-gas poisoning; and how many such non-fatal accidents have been reported.

The provisional figure of deaths registered in the 12 months ended 30th September, 1954 is 669. The information asked for in the second part of the Question is not available.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is considerable public anxiety at the increasing number of this type of accident? Has he any suggestions to make on the provision of adequate safeguards in respect of coal-gas?

Any question that is directed to the cause of these unhappy accidents is one naturally for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Fuel and Power.

asked the Minister of Health (1) how many disabled persons have been supplied with motor cars since the responsibility for their supply was transferred to his Department;

In total 91 cars have been issued, 76 of which were provided for pensioners who were not double amputation cases.

Is the Minister satisfied that he has now sufficient cars to meet the real needs of these men? Have there been any cars ordered and supplied from the makers since the merger between the two Ministries, and are they still granted only to ex-Service amputees and patients?

The qualifications have not altered since the previous arrangements or, indeed, since the previous Government were in office. The main point is that all applications which qualify have been met, although sometimes there is a delay of not more than a week or two before delivery.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give the figures for ex-Service men and for National Health cases?

All these cars are for ex-Service men.

asked the Minister of Health why, in view of the independent medical report from a leading specialist, the mental deficiency order under which Kathleen Bradley, St. Margaret's Hospital, Great Barr, Birmingham, has for many years been detained, though at present allowed out on full licence, has not been discharged.

I understand that this case was recently considered by the board of control, who decided that the patient was still in need of the protection afforded by the order.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this unfortunate woman has been detained more than twenty-one years and there does appear to be evidence at least to suggest that she should never have been detained? Is that to be reviewed? At the same time, may I take the opportunity of asking if the Minister is quite satisfied that, pending the report of the Royal Commission, everything possible is being done to ensure that there are not individual cases of injustice or detention without just cause?

The individual case is due for review before 31st March by the Board on the reports of the visiting justices. It is for the visiting justices, if they so wish, to hear evidence or any representations from the hon. Member or anyone else who would like to make them. On the general point, of course, I cannot give a categorical assurance. All I can say is that, to the best of my belief, that is so. I would be most anxious to investigate any case brought to my notice.

asked the Minister of Health when new boiler equipment will be supplied to St. Michael's Hospital, Lichfield.

I hope that this equipment will be renewed as part of a general scheme for improving the heating services which is under discussion with the regional hospital board.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on 15th April last the Parliamentary Secretary said that the delay, which even at that date had taken place, was due to the need to clarify the intentions of the board in relation to this hospital? A year has gone by and the committee concerned feels frustrated at the lack of action by the Ministry in this matter.

I am afraid I cannot accept the criticism implied, because there has been considerable discussion as to whether the scheme proposed by the board was or was not over-elaborate. What I hope will be the end of the matter is that an early discussion has been arranged and, I hope, early action will follow.

asked the Minister of Health the number of persons on the waiting list of the Birmingham Region for orthopaedic operations as at the last convenient date; and at the same date for each of the previous four years.

Separate figures for orthopaedic operations are not available, but, with permission, I will circulate figures of those awaiting orthopaedic treatment in the Official Report.

asked the Minister of Health what new instructions he has now issued as the result of his investigations into the various methods of identifying babies in maternity hospitals; and if he will make a statement.

I am glad to have this chance of giving the result of my inquiries. The most common and satisfactory system seems to be to attach a bracelet (or two bracelets) to the baby at birth (or to both mother and baby), with a corresponding label for the cot. The sewing of a marked tape round the wrist seems both simple and effective in the great majority of cases. Recent errors seem to be due, not to defective arrangements, but to a failure to carry them out properly. More elaborate arrangements would have no advantages, and indeed might increase the possibilities of error; the important point is that hospital staffs should be most careful in first making out the bracelet and label and in subsequently checking them from time to time. These points have been brought to the attention of the hospitals concerned through discussion at meetings between my officers and those of hospital boards.

Since the Minister seems to have decided that the bracelet method is the best would he say whether it is now being treated as standard in all hospitals? Can he also decide on the particular kind of bracelet method which should be standardised, so that nurses on moving from one hospital to another are familiar with the type of bracelet that is used?

It is the general practice here and abroad, but it has not been laid down as absolutely standard. The problems that have arisen so far have been because nobody looked at the bracelet, and not because the bracelet was not there. Clearly, we could festoon babies with bracelets, but if nobody looked at them the difficulty could still arise.

Is there any reason why the practice should not be uniform in all hospitals? Why this wide variety of methods that is at present employed, which puts a premium on mistakes?

I should not have thought that that was so. There are different variations, but nearly all hospitals in this country have one or other variant of the bracelet method.

asked the Minister of Health if he is aware that in mental hospitals, management committees are still required to keep their expenditure on provisions within the 1948 limit of 2s. 5d. per person per diet day; and if he will state, for July, 1951, and January, 1955, respectively, the sum required to purchase the amount of similar provisions which could be purchased for 2s. 5d. in July, 1948.

As I have previously explained, there is no fixed diet allowance for mental hospitals, and it is for hospital management committees to determine how best to spend the sums allocated to them by the regional boards. The second part of the Question, therefore, is not relevant.

Is the Minister aware that I have a copy of a letter from a regional hospital board which makes precisely the restriction which I noted in the Question, and that that restriction of 2s. 5d. per diet day has to my knowledge been in operation in that region for the last four years? Is the right hon. Gentleman further aware that, since the costs of basic foods have increased by 50 per cent. over the period concerned, in terms of 1948 this means a figure of 1s. 8d. per diet day now? Will the Minister look into this question, because it is brought about by shortage of money and is causing considerable difficulty and there is not sufficient food for patients?

I suppose, if one puts one's mind to it, one could get more inaccuracies into a Supplementary Question, but it would be extremely difficult. The figure of 2s. 5d. relates to the costing returns for 1953–54. The earliest return is for 1950–51 when, as far as one can make out, the comparable figure would be, not 2s. 5d., but 1s.9d. There are no records before 1951 to apply back to 1948, but, if there were, the figure would no doubt have been lower still.

Is the Minister aware that there is a growing awareness in the hospital service that the standard of catering and the costs of provision in mental hospitals and mental deficiency hospitals are too low? Will he use what influence he can—perhaps, in the form of a circular—to bring this matter to the attention of regional hospitals and management committees?

That is another matter but one with which I have a good deal of sympathy. I will look into the hon. Member's suggestion.

asked the Minister of Health if he is aware that some regional hospital boards have schemes of major capital development ready for immediate implementation or sufficiently advanced to permit work to commence during the coming financial year; and, in view of this, if he will reconsider his decision to delay the expansion of hospital building and modernisation until the year 1956–57.

I know of no major hospital building scheme outside the existing 1955–56 programme that is ready for immediate starting. If any of those for which I have recently asked Boards to bring plans to completion are ready to start before 1956–57 I will consider whether it is possible to fit them into the 1955–56 programme.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that our pleasure on this side of the House at the fact that he has at last managed to extract some more money from the Chancellor is somewhat mitigated by the fact that it is in the form of a post-dated cheque? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a scheme in the region with which I am associated which we could put to contract straight away but that it has been turned down by his Ministry?

None of the schemes for Clare Hall, West Herts and so on, which I am sure the hon. Gentleman has in mind, have gone to tender and, therefore, they are not ready for immediate starting. If satisfactory tenders are obtained for 1956–57, and if, as I have said in my answer, they are ready to start, I will look into the question whether we can get them into the 1955–56 programme.

asked the Minister of Health how far the number of mental nurses, engaged to date, meets the normal requirements of our mental hospitals.

There is still a shortage which has been estimated at about 10,000.

What steps are proposed to be taken to stimulate recruitment for mental nursing?

There are several schemes in operation at the moment. First, the increased capital expenditure on the mental treatment side will provide better accommodation, which will help tremendously in recruiting. We hope that good results will be obtained from the publicity plans this year. They include an exhibition which is being run by the Ministry to arouse interest in mental nursing. Several pioneer schemes are also being undertaken under the auspices of the General Nursing Council in connection with joint training schemes.

Is the hon. Lady aware that if something is not done very quickly we shall have no nurses at all soon in our mental hospitals? We in Birmingham are very short-staffed. Is she aware that nurses are continually leaving and that something must be done soon?

We share the hon. Member's concern. The figures are going up, although slowly, and we welcome any support for these campaigns to endeavour to persuade people to come forward and join the mental nursing services.

asked the Minister of Health what proportion in capital cost of the new hospital building programme recently announced by him will be in Wales; and what is his estimate of the number of extra beds to be provided in Wales and England, respectively.

Until I have received and considered the proposals of all hospital boards, I cannot say what proportion of the new building programme will consist of Welsh projects.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that some very important areas have been omitted from the scheme, about which he will be receiving representations?

I am sure that there are. I have said many times that the lists which I have put forward are not in any way exhaustive.

asked the Minister of Health what steps he has taken to satisfy himself that the present salary scales are sufficiently attractive to encourage young doctors to enter hospital service rather than enter general practice.

The salaries of hospital medical staff are a matter for the Medical Whitley Council in the first instance; but I know that the need to keep a proper balance in recruitment was an important factor in the agreement on increased salaries reached by the Council a year ago.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the difficulties which are experienced by many hospitals in the provinces in obtaining and recruiting junior medical staff?

Indeed I am. It would be a mistake, however, to link those difficulties entirely with problems of pay. In many cases they arise because the hospitals are remote or unattractive in themselves. As far as pay is concerned, the agreement last year did a good deal to restore the balance which was upset by the Danckwerts award.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it would be a very great pity indeed if the provision of practitioners for the countryside were in any way jeopardised? Is he aware that there are still many rural areas under-doctored?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Minister of Health why there is no provision for new hospital accommodation, excepting for the projected mental hospital, in the area of the West Midland Regional Hospital Board in his new programme.

asked the Minister of Health why, in the new programme, plans for the construction of hospitals other than for mental purposes were not included for the Birmingham region.

I made it clear at the time that the list of projects I gave on 9th February was not comprehensive, and on receipt of proposals from hospitals boards I shall consider what other projects can be included.

Earlier this afternoon the Minister conceded to me that there was a very long delay in settling one relatively ordinary matter of bringing a hospital up to date? Is he aware, broadly speaking, that the public is very concerned about the omission of provision of new hospitals in the Midlands, and even taking the pre-war situation into consideration, does he realise that the Midlands have always been short of hospitals compared with older industrial areas?

Apart from the mental hospital to which reference is made in the Question, I specifically indicated a new general hospital at Coventry, which is of great importance in this particular area. I cannot give the final answer about many large projects in the Midlands or anywhere else until the regional board's proposals are in front of me.

asked the Minister of Health what plans for improved hospital accommodation in Dudley and Stour- bridge are contemplated; and whether he will make a statement.

Five schemes, costing in all more than£15,000, for improvements at three hospitals in the Dudley and Stourbridge group, are included in the regional hospital board's programme. The board also has under consideration a proposal for a major scheme for an out-patient and casualty department at Corbett Hospital, but I cannot say at present when this scheme is likely to start.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in Stourbridge we are all very disappointed because nothing has been done to get on with the erection of the out-patient and casualty departments at the Corbett Hospital? Will he do something to speed this up, because it serves a very wide area and the need is getting desperate?

I am very conscious of the need there, and I am sure the regional board will give this particular scheme substantial priority, but whether it will be high enough to figure in the first part of the regional board's list is something I do not know yet until I see its proposals.

Trade unionists in the area—and this is a heavy industry area—are very much concerned about this matter and already the right hon. Gentleman has had representations from the Dudley and Stourbridge Trades Council on the matter. Will the right hon. Gentleman give weight to the opinion of trade unions?

Yes, Sir, I will be very glad to do so.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether residents of the Republic of Ireland are excluded from benefits of the National Insurance Act by his regulations under Section 29 of that Act.

No, Sir.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance why increased rent allowances are being paid by the National Assistance Board on be half of five tenants in a tenement, of which he knows the name, when more than 30 certificates of disrepair have been issued in respect of identical flats in the same block; and what steps he is taking to ensure that further public money is not disbursed to landlords who do not comply with the conditions of the Housing Repairs and Rents Act, 1954.

The decision on the amount of assistance to be granted in a particular case is by statute a. matter for the Board and their officers, and I have no power to intervene. I am however informed by the Board that it is satisfied that, in the circumstances of the cases referred to, the decision to increase the allowance for rent was justified.

Is the Minister aware that every tenant in this block who asked for a certificate of disrepair was issued with one, and that in these five cases of old and sick people the reason certificates were not issued was that they were not applied for? How can the Minister justify the payment of this increased allowance to the landlords in respect of property which is manifestly not entitled to an increase under the Act?

As I have said, this is a matter under the statute for the Board, and the Board informed me that it was satisfied that, in the circumstances of the cases referred to, a decision to increase the allowance was justified. It does not necessarily follow that all the flats in a block are in a similar state of repair or disrepair at any given moment, and I would remind the hon. Lady that the National Assistance Board has for more than 20 years been dealing with the difficult question of what is the permissible rent under the Rent Restrictions Acts, and doing it, I think, to the general satisfaction.

Is the Minister aware that these certificates of disrepair were issued in respect of the condition of the lavatories and the staircases and the shared washhouses in this tenement block, and that, therefore, there can be no question that these five flats are in any different condition from those in respect of which no increases are being paid? Is the Minister able to point out to the Board that in all the cases where tenants are paying their own rent in this block, not one is paying an increased rent, and that it is only when the money is coming from Government funds that the landlord is getting the increase?

I will certainly convey to the Board the information given me by the hon. Lady, and I will invite the Board to take it into consideration.

Whilst appreciating that the National Assistance Board has wide experience in these matters, surely the Minister is not condoning any step in which the Board is voting public money for anything which is not legally due?

By no means, but I was pointing out that the Board has been confronted with this problem of controlled and permissible rents and increases in rent during the whole of its existence.

Are we to understand that the first time these facts were brought to the notice of the Minister was when my hon. Friend pointed them out to him?

The information conveyed in the supplementary questions is new to me, but the facts as stated in the hon. Lady's original Question have been known to me for some time.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he is aware of the concern that is felt in South Wales at the increasing number of cases in which coroner's courts have found that the death of coalminers was due to, or accelerated by, silicosis or pneumoconiosis and in which the medical boards make contrary decisions; and whether he will consider the setting up of a competent body to investigate and report on the criteria used by the boards in arriving at their decisions.

I am aware that for some time concern has been felt in South Wales on this matter. I have had discussions with my right hon. and gallant Friend the Home Secretary and his predecessor about it. A circular was issued to coroners in October, 1954, drawing attention to the importance of employing experienced pathologists in cases of this kind. I think we must wait and see the effect of this circular before considering any further steps.