asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he is aware of the hardship imposed on those widows who, as the law now stands, are not entitled to any pension; and what steps he plans to take to remove this hardship.

The widowhood provisions of the National Insurance Acts are being reviewed by the National Insurance Advisory Committee, and I must await their Report. I would remind the hon. Member of the help which the National Assistance Board can provide in cases of need.

While thanking the Minister for that reply, may I ask him whether the inquiry which is taking place is directed to increasing the pensions of the 10s. widows, and will it do anything to enable them to cope with the rising cost of living?

As the hon. and learned Gentleman probably recalls, we had a considerable debate during the passage of the National Insurance Bill before Christmas on these widowhood provisions, and, I think with the general approval of the House, I announced that I was referring them to the Advisory Committee. This is a very big subject, and I think we shall all await with interest the Report of the Committee on the new provisions which were embodied in 1948.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what report he has received from the National Insurance Advisory Committee relating to the pension of widows receiving only 10s. a week.

I regret that I cannot add to the reply give to the hon. and gallant Member on 31st January.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that delay in dealing with this matter is becoming something of a public scandal? Last December he gave an undertaking that the position of these widows would be reviewed. When will it be reviewed and when will something be done for this small but deserving class of pensioners?

It is now under review by the National Insurance Advisory Committee. That is an eminent body representing both sides of industry as well as other independent people. It reviewed maternity provisions during the lifetime of the preceding Government and took between a year to 15 months to produce its Report. I cannot hold out any hope that it will report on this matter in the near future. It is a matter of importance and the Committee should be given adequate time to investigate it.

In handing this matter to the Committee, did the Minister emphasise its urgency and the need for a report as soon as possible?

We are all agreed that we should like to see the report as soon as practicable, but I am sure we all want to get a good scheme for these widows' pensions for the future; we must give very careful thought to any major alteration of the great Insurance Scheme upon which we embarked in 1948.

In view of the completely unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will take steps to bring the needs test for the non-contributory pension and the assumed rates of interest on the capital resources of applicants into line with present conditions.

I would refer the hon. Member to my reply to the hon. Member for Accrington (Mr. H. Hynd) on 21st February.

Has the right hon. Gentleman overlooked the fact that his party made a pledge to do this very thing in a pamphlet bearing the misleading title of "The Right Road for Britain"? When may we expect the right hon. Gentleman to honour that pledge?

The proposal, as I think the hon. Member is aware, was embodied in the Conservative election manifesto for the 1950 General Election but not repeated in its manifesto for the 1951 General Election. I am extremely surprised to find that the hon. Gentleman, whom I have always regarded as rather progressive, has now only got as far as the Conservative Party had got in 1950.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that he gave a pledge at the Conservative Party Conference at Margate about the small income groups, and will he also bear in mind that I am expecting that pledge to be implemented before very long?

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he will introduce legislation to provide an optional pension of 10s. a week without retirement conditions and without payment of contributions, other than for industrial injuries, for persons insured for five years before 5th July, 1948.

No, Sir.

Has the right hon. Gentleman overlooked the fact that in a pamphlet issued by his party in 1950 a promise was made to do this very thing? Is it now the doctrine of the Conservative Party that the latest catalogue supersedes all previous ones?

By all means; and I repeat my surprise that the hon. Gentleman should be lumbering along four years behind the Conservative Party.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he will assess casual earnings of retirement and widow pensioners on a monthly instead of the present weekly basis.

No, Sir. I do not think that it would be practicable to alter the weekly basis of the earnings rule.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman being very tiresome in giving this insipid and feeble answer to a Question which asks when the Conservative Party is going to honour pledges made five years ago?

As the hon. Gentleman will recall, we lost the 1950 General Election and were, therefore, not put in a position where we should have to redeem the pledges given on that occasion. The hon. Gentleman will, of course, be in exactly the same position as regards the coming General Election as we were in 1950.

Did not the financial position of the country also deteriorate a good deal in 1950 and 1951?

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance on what date an increase in the permitted earnings rule for retirement pensions is to come into effect.

I have no such proposal in mind at the moment.

Will my right hon. Friend say whether the matter has been referred to the National Insurance Advisory Committee, or whether the decision is one for him and the Government?

This matter of the earnings rule has not been referred to the National Insurance Advisory Committee. The Phillips Report referred to it and the Phillips Committee was unanimous in suggesting that the present rule should be maintained unaltered. We are to have a debate, I believe, on the Phillips Report, when hon. Members on all sides can put their views.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that in the Midlands region we have 51,000 vacancies for jobs at present and many of these vacancies would be filled by old-age pensioners were it not for the somewhat restrictive operation of the present earnings rule?

There is a good deal to be said on both sides of this question.

Hurrah! That is a satisfactory admission at any rate.

However, I would ask my hon. Friend the Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro) not to lose sight of the main objective, which is that people shall stay in work past the minimum retiring age and earn a pension sufficiently large to keep them out of the range of National Assistance for the rest of their days.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance the numbers of war pensions welfare officers employed by his Department at the date of the merger and the latest available date; and the numbers of welfare officers at the date of the merger who are still engaged in those duties.

At the date of the merger 85 war pensions welfare officers were employed by my Department. There are now 76 officers acting as welfare officers, of whom two are employed part-time. Of the officers in post at the date of the merger, 55 are still employed as welfare officers.

Is the Minister aware it is felt that many of the welfare officers who were with the Department at the time of the merger have gone and that this means that there is a diminution in the welfare work? His figures show that there is a reduction in the number of welfare officers. Can he explain whether this reduction is temporary, or whether he intends to make appointments to fill the vacancies?

The reduction is perfectly normal. Since the merger, war pensioners have been able to make their inquiries of a far more widely spread network of offices than they could before the merger. It is therefore not necessary to have as many welfare officers today as two years ago.

Does the Minister mean to say that a counter clerk can do the job that used to be done by welfare officers who had personal contacts with the pensioners, as was most important?

We found that a great many war pensioners make inquiries at our local offices. Those inquiries previously needed a visit from the welfare officer.

Is it a fact that the former very excellent welfare service is losing its identity in this larger organisation?

I should completely deny that and challenge anyone to show that since the merger there has been any deterioration whatsoever in the service we are giving to the war disabled.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how many of the 677 staff, referred to in Command Paper No. 9400 as being the figure of reduction, are accounted for by way of transfer to the Ministry of Health on duties performed by the Ministry of Pensions before the merger; and how many by way of transfer to the National Assistance Board.

None, Sir.

Can the Minister then explain where these reductions have taken place and whether they affect the personal relationship between the war pensions side of his work and the individual pensioners?

The reduction in the numbers employed by my Ministry is due partly to normal wastage and partly to a reduction by the discharge of 580 casual staff who had been engaged in issuing tokens for milk and other welfare foods to children and expectant mothers under the agency arrangements on behalf of the Ministry of Food.

A very satisfactory answer.

Thank you.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether, in the case of Mr. John T. Thomson, of 1 South Baffin Street, Dundee, he will order a fresh investigation of his application for a pension in the light of the new medical evidence which has been drawn to his attention by the hon. Member for Dundee, East.

As the hon. Member knows, this application was decided by the independent Pensions Appeal Tribunal. The further representations have been carefully considered by my senior medical officers, but I am advised that they do not disclose any ground for reopening the case.

While appreciating the action the Minister has already taken in this case, and being aware of his legal position, is the right hon. Gentleman telling the House that it is impossible for him to take fresh action in the light of this new medical evidence which has considerable validity?

Of course, the case could be reopened if there was any deterioration in condition or any new medical evidence. But I think that these individual cases are much better dealt with by consultation; perhaps the hon. Member would care to discuss the matter with my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how many books with the new scale of allowances have been issued to old-age pensioners up to the latest convenient date; and in how many cases the increases are restricted to 2s. 6d. for single pensioners and 4s. for married couples.

I assume that the hon. Member is referring to the review of Assistance allowances consequent upon the new Assistance Regulations approved in December. About one million cases have been reviewed, and increases in excess of the sums mentioned by the hon. Member were given in about 40,000 cases.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman evading the Question? Does he not appreciate that the information which has been sought in the past few weeks is how many old-age pensioners will not get 7s. 6d. and 11s., but 2s. 6d. and 4s.? Can he deny that 700,000 single old-age pensioners will not get 7s. 6d. but only 2s. 6d.?

I am afraid that I cannot affirm or deny any such figures, because the only figures we have of the number of pensioners receiving particular amounts of Assistance are those discovered by taking a sample of 2½per cent. in the first week of November each year. Therefore, we cannot tell what will be the number of persons on Assistance getting a particular amount of increase under the old-age pensions provisions during the coming months.

Does the Minister not recollect that in a written answer on 21st February he said that 700,000 single persons whose Assistance rate had been increased by 2s. 6d. a week would not have their total incomes increased by the new pension rates? Why is he so hesitant about giving details of the very shabby treatment of old-age pensioners?

That Question is not quite the same as that on the Order Paper. If the hon. Member would care to meet me or the Parliamentary Secretary, we will try to explain the practical difficulty in supplying the figures for which he has asked.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how many hospitals and hospital beds are under the control of his Department today as compared with the number under the control of the Ministry of Pensions before the merger.

There are no hospitals or hospital beds under the control of my Department; this function was transferred to my right hon. Friends the Minister of Health and the Secretary of State for Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the present estimated strength, in manpower and equipment, of military and paramilitary forces in East Germany; and at what date East German rearmament began.

The rearmament of Eastern Germany began in October, 1948. It is estimated that by July, 1954, the military and para-military forces totalled about 95,000 men. Further details of this rearmament were given in Command Paper No. 9213, published last July. Present information does not differ materially from that given in the White Paper, except that it is now estimated that the naval forces have been increased by about 50 per cent.

Since it is quite clear from that reply that East German rearmament began well before any question of the West German contribution to our common defence even arose, and secondly, that a formidable and growing military machine now exists in the Eastern Zone, would not the Minister agree that the continuing sanctimonious protests about the danger of German rearmament now being indulged in by the Communists and their fellow-traveller echoes here are nauseatingly phoney?

Yes, Sir. I think that is putting it mildly.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) what replies have been received from the Soviet authorities to the protests made concerning the kidnapping in West Berlin of Dr. Truschnowitsch on 13th April, 1954;

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs when the case of the kidnapping of Dr. Alexander Truschnowitsch by Soviet agents on 13th April, 1954, was referred to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights; and what further action he intends to take in this matter.

The only reply so far received is contained in a communication of 22nd April, in which the Soviet Commandant repeated the statement broadcast by East Berlin Radio that Dr. Truschnowitsch had voluntarily given himself up to the East German authorities. This assertion is not consonant with the evidence. I am satisfied that no useful purpose would be served by trying to pursue this matter through the United Nations. The Human Rights Commission discusses general problems of human rights and isnot empowered to consider individual cases. Nor is there any effective action which the General Assembly could take in this matter. Further action can, I think, best be taken direct with the Soviet authorities, and I am considering instructing the British Commandant in Berlin to raise this question again with the Soviet Commandant.

While I welcome the last part of that reply, may I ask my hon. Friend to consider publishing in full in a White Paper the activities in connection with this quite unexplained crime? Is my hon. Friend aware that, from the point of view of public opinion, it is most undesirable to allow these disgraceful occurrences to disappear into obscruity without their being challenged, and challenged frequently?

I will look into the question of a White Paper. In answer to the last point, I hope that these questions and answers will remove any doubts about the matter. This is still very much in the forefront.

Is not it a fact that we have already protested three times by sending three Notes to the Russian authorities on this case and that no satisfactory reply—in fact I believe no reply at all—has been received? What purpose will be served by sending further notes of protest? Does my hon. Friend hope to get a satisfactory reply from the Russian authorities by sending a note of that nature?

There is nothing like keeping on trying.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that West German shipyards are constructing ships exceeding the permitted size and speed; and what steps the Allied Security Board are taking to prevent them.

The answer to the first part of the Question is "No," Sir. The second part of the Question therefore does not arise.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether or not it is a fact that three ships beyond the permitted size and speed were constructed in the Lürssens shipyard; that protests were made, and that eventually the ships were taken over by the Royal Navy? Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether three further ships have now been laid down which also exceed the permitted limits?

No, Sir. The hon. Gentleman is wrong. As regards ships other than those with military features, the Allied High Commission is able under Article II of Regulation No. 7 to keep a check on

"… the construction or conversion of any ship designed to exceed 100 gross registered tons or 12 knots speed."

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what instructions were given to the United Kingdom representatives on the Coal Committee of the Economic Commission for Europe in connection with pressing for the publication of the report on the price of oil in Western Europe.

The decision to publish had the full support of Her Majesty's Government.

Is the Minister aware that the attitude taken by the Government's representatives on this Committee was really a most ambiguous one? While welcoming the report, could not they also have deplored the fact shown in it that£300 million a year has been made in profit on Middle East oil? Is not the Minister in agreement that we ought to have positive effort from the Government to bring down the price of petrol in this country?

I would refer the hon. Member to the Adjournment debate on 18th March.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what further progress has been made towards the conclusion of an Austrian treaty.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the new proposals of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, he will now make renewed efforts to conclude a peace treaty for Austria.

Her Majesty's Government have still received no clarification from the Soviet Government of their position in reply to Her Majesty's Government's Note of 29th November. As the House is aware, there has recently been an exchange of views in Moscow between the Soviet Foreign Minister and the Austrian Ambassador. These exchanges, of which we have been informed by the Austrian Government, were the subject of statements by the Soviet Government on 11th March and by the Austrian Government on 16th March. I am arranging for copies of these statements to be placed in the Library of the House.

Is not it clear from these exchanges that the only possible difference between the Russians and the Western Powers now on the Austrian Treaty is the question of guarantees against a possible German Anschluss? Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Government would be prepared to enter into a conference with a view to signing the Treaty and giving quadripartite guarantees against an Anschluss?

There would be no purpose in entering into a conference to deal with the question of an Anschluss which is already prohibited specifically in an Article under the Austrian State Treaty.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the proposals made by the Government at the Berlin Conference on the Austrian Treaty still hold good, and whether the Government intend to stand fast on the question of an Austrian peace treaty until after the completion of ratification of the Paris Agreements?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for the first part of his supplementary question. The position of Her Majesty's Government remains as stated at the Berlin Conference on the Austrian State Treaty. As to the question of a conference before ratification of the Paris Agreements, I see no useful purpose whatever in holding such a conference until the Soviet Government have clarified their position. So far all they have done is to offer further prevarication.

Is not it a fact that all the original Soviet objections to the outstanding clauses of the Treaty have been met, and that all that is required now is a little goodwill on the part of the Soviet Union in the signing of the Treaty?

My hon. Friend is perfectly correct. All that is required now is a Soviet signature to the Treaty which they themselves brought to the Berlin Conference.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in how many cases during the past year applications for visas made by United States citizens desiring to visit this country have been refused; and, in case of refusals, what reasons have been given to the applicants.

United States citizens do not require visas for travel to the United Kingdom. The visa requirement was abolished by the last Government in November, 1948.

Will the hon. Gentleman bring this to the notice of the American Government and ask whether they might not be as courteous in representations made to them by British subjects desiring to enter America as we are about American citizens desirous of entering this country?

That certainly would be very nice, but it is the opposite of what the right hon. Gentleman asked me about.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is satisfied that the movement, guaranteed under the Geneva Agreement, of refugees, including Catholics, Buddhists, and other religious denominations from Viet-Minh to Viet-Nam, is proceeding satisfactorily.

Since the cessation of hostilities in Viet-Nam over half a million refugees have left the Viet-Minh zone in the north for the south. Many others would probably like to follow their example and Her Majesty's Government are not satisfied that the Viet-Minh authorities are adequately fulfilling their obligations under the Geneva Agreement to permit and assist and movement of would-be refugees. The International Supervisory Commission for Viet-Nam are, however, doing their best to remedy this situation. Their Chairman recently told the Press that the Commission were determined to ensure that all those wishing to leave North Viet-Nam would be able to exercise their right of option.

As my right hon. Friend is doubtless aware, is it not a fact that the period during which these persons can be moved ends within a month from now? In view of the failure of the Viet-Minh to work in accordance with the agreement, is it not possible to extend the period during which these persons can be transferred?

I will certainly consider that, but, of course, it is laid down in the Geneva Agreements that the time limit for the transfer of refugees expires on 18th May this year. However, I will consider my hon. Friend's suggestion.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to what extent the 1951 resolution of the United Nations General Assembly placing an embargo on the supply of strategic materials to the People's Republic of China still remains operative.

This Resolution is still in force

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether, at the time that it imposed the embargo, it was the intention of the General Assembly to continue it until there was a final political settlement in Korea?

I think that the right hon. and learned Gentleman will know more than I do about the intentions of the General Assembly during his period of office.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) the means by which nuclear bombs can be tested other than by an explosion;

In the debate on 14th March, my right hon. Friend said in dealing with the question of test explosions of nuclear weapons:

"We cannot exclude the possibility of experiments being carried out now without explosions."

As even a small amount of radioactivity might be released, may I ask the Minister of State whether, instead of waiting until July when the conference of scientists is to take place at Geneva, he would consider utilising the World Meteorological Organisation, of which both Russia and the United States are members, and which has a very fine record of world co-operation, for the purpose of checking the contents of the world's atmosphere through its physicists and then pooling that information, as is done with weather forecasts?

I will consider the right hon. and learned Gentleman's suggestion, but, as I think he knows, a great deal of research is going on in this country at the moment—a matter which will be alluded to in tomorrow's debate—by medical authorities, including the World Medical Research Council.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the fact that development can, to a certain extent, go on without test explosions is no reason for failing to press for the abolition of these explosions, which would be the one practical means towards making a start for some sort of international agreement limiting this form of arms?

I think that the right hon. Gentleman would also agree that it would be very dangerous if the people of this country should fall into a false sense of security, which might easily result from an abolition of tests, without, at the same time, being able to ensure that our potential enemies were unable to perfect or improve existing designs of nuclear weapons.

Is it not a fact that, in any event, the restricted release of radioactive material to which my right hon. Friend referred in connection with warlike purposes is infinitely less than the amount which we are at present discharging by developing atomic power for purely peaceful purposes?

I think that this is all getting a little too scientific for a Foreign Office Minister.

Since the tactical aspects are quite as important as the scientific aspects, will the Minister not consider my right hon. and learned Friend's suggestion that the World Meteorological Organisation might take into consideration the whole matter of testing for radiation in the atmosphere?

I said that I would. I was merely describing very briefly—what I hope will be fully discussed tomorrow—what is being done.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what consideration the Government have given to the suggestion made by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition in the debate a little time ago for having a meeting of international scientists from both sides to investigate what are the consequences of these explosions?

I think that had better be left to be thrashed out in the debate tomorrow. For the moment, I will only say that I think this matter must be dealt with through Governments and not left to international scientists.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the latest scientific evidence, he will make proposals for a ban on all experimental atomic explosions.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will now give the result of his inquiry into the possibility of banning further experimental nuclear explosions, haying regard to the danger of such explosions to the human race.

I would refer the hon. Gentlemen to the statement made on this subject by my right hon. Friend in the debate on 14th March. I would only add that the aim of Her Majesty's Government is to reach agreement upon a balanced and comprehensive disarmament programme which would include the abolition of all nuclear weapons and thus eliminate such test explosions.

As it is only atomic explosions which produce dangerous radiation effects at long distance; as such explosions are not necessary for purposes of research, as the Minister has just admitted, and as such explosions can be monitored without difficulty, will not the right hon. Gentleman agree that there is an overwhelming case for banning such explosions?

No, Sir, as was explained by my right hon. Friend, and as I have just endeavoured to explain in answer to the hon. Gentleman's right hon. Friends.

While agreeing with the right hon. Gentleman's expressed intention to obtain the maximum amount of disarmament in the widest possible field, is not this a peculiarly suitable case for a beginning, in that these explosions can be tested and checked, no matter where they take place? Will the right hon. Gentleman not follow up his right hon. Friend's suggestion that he would look into the possibility of obtaining agreement to stop these explosions in the near future?

My right hon. Friend never said that he would agree to stop these test explosions in the near future. Certainly not. What he said was that the non-existence of test explosions did not mean that the nations possessed of nuclear weapons were not improving and perfecting them simply because they were not actually having explosions.

Surely, the right hon. Gentleman is rather dealing with irrelevancies. The point raised was whether or not the atmosphere was being endangered by nuclear explosions. The fact that research can go on without endangering human life does not alter the fact that, if they are going on, we may be in danger. According to the hon. Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro), we are being endangered by tests carried out for peaceful means as well. We may be killed by the hon. Member for Kidderminster! Surely, it is worth inquiring into that?

At the risk of contradicting my hon. Friend the Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro), I will say that my scientific advice at the moment is that there is no danger to human life or to the reproduction of the human animal from any explosions which have so far taken place.

Are we really to conclude from what the Minister of State says that the opinion of the Government is that they are against the banning of these test explosions as a first step unless we can go much further in the way of disarmament because it might produce a sense of false security in this country? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that if that is the position, the British people will have no sense of security, false or true, in the ability of the Government to protect their interests?

The right hon. Gentleman is making a travesty of my argument. What I said was that the Government wished, and are striving for at every session at Lancaster House, to ensure a balanced and comprehensive disarmament programme that will eliminate all nuclear weapons.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the proposal by the Government of India for a standstill agreement of tests, which was remitted to the special committee of the General Assembly, has been considered at Lancaster House?

I am not allowed to divulge what is and what is not being considered at Lancaster House. We are governed by the strictest rules of secrecy, and I cannot divulge any part of our business.

Does the hon. Member for Leeds, South-East (Mr. D. Healey) propose that there should be a ban on other persons making these atomic explosions? What could be more dangerous in this country than to ban test explosions?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if, notwithstanding the United States Atomic Energy Act of 1954, Her Majesty's Government will press the United States Government for the fullest information as to the genetic effects on human beings of radioactivity resulting from thermo-nuclear tests to be made available in this country.

The provisions of the United States Atomic Energy Act of 1954 relating to health and safety refer primarily to work in the civil field. Most of the information concerning the possible genetic effects arising from nuclear tests is not secret, and there is already close collaboration between British and American research workers and constant exchange of information in this field.

Are we to understand from that reply that the Minister of State recognises that there is all the difference in the world between the secrecy involved in making and designing nuclear weapons and scientific knowledge as to the effects of nuclear explosions? May we take it that in the interests of humanity and peace Her Majesty's Government are pressing the United States Government for all available information as to the effects of nuclear explosions upon the human race?

We are already receiving a great deal of information from the United States Government about the effects of these explosions, and under the agreement which we are now negotiating we hope to receive even more.

Will the Government ask British scientists to give their evidence upon the subject and publish it?

That is a different question from the one on the Order Paper.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will propose the calling of a special meeting of the General Assembly of the United Nations to discuss the effects of hydrogen bomb tests on the world's atmosphere and to set up an international study group to examine and report on the genetic and other consequences of these tests.

No, Sir; my right hon. Friend does not consider that a debate in the United Nations General Assembly at the present time would advance our knowledge of these scientific questions. But he does not exclude exchanges of views with such other countries as may be ready and able to make a useful contribution.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a number of British scientists, including Professor Waddington, in "The Times" the other day, have supported the plea of the American Federation of Scientists for a United Nations inquiry into this matter? Is he aware that we are now reaching a position in which British and American scientists are warning us that this danger is real and immediate and are, by implication, accusing Governments of concealing the facts?

The hon. Lady talks as if no research work were going on into this problem whatever but, as I have said—and the debate tomorrow will bring out the fact far more fully—a great deal of work is going on on both sides of the Atlantic, and a great deal of information is being exchanged.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that he will want to make a much better reply to tomorrow's debate than that?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs which Governments and authorities are parties to the final declaration of the Geneva Conference on the problem of restoring peace in Indo-China.

The final declaration of the Geneva Conference is not a treaty or signed agreement, but is in the nature of a resolution by the conference as a whole. There are no parties to it in the strict sense. The respective attitudes of the members of the Geneva Conference towards the declaration, as stated at the final session, are set out in Command 9239.

Regardless of the question whether or not this is a treaty, can the right hon. Gentleman say whether Her Majesty's Government stand by the terms of that declaration and intend to uphold them?

Yes. Her Majesty's Government not only stand by the terms of that declaration but have entered into the Manila Treaty in order to support them.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what consultations were held between Her Majesty's Government and the United States Government before publication of the Yalta Conference papers.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the nature of his representations to the Government of the United States of America about the publication of the documents relating to the Yalta Conference.

I have nothing to add to the reply which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister gave on 17th March to a Question by the right hon. and learned Member for Rowley Regis and Tipton (Mr. A. Henderson).

Is my right hon. Friend aware that those people who regard the United States of America with the respect and affection due to a great and generous ally have been very shocked at the action of the State Department? Will he make it clear to the United States Government that although future publication of similar documents, such as the reports of the Potsdam and Casablanca Conferences, might enhance the reputation of those representing Her Majesty's Government at those conferences, they will have most undesirable international repercussions in so far as they will inhibit candid conversations at future high-level meetings, and might even make it impossible to arrange them?

I think that the Government's view in this matter has been fully stated to the House by the Prime Minister, and also to the United States Government by the Foreign Secretary.

Is the Minister aware that, far from being shocked at the publication of these statements, some of us strongly regret the anti-American sentiment now being shown against the United States Government for publishing documents which it is in the interests of people all over the world to read?

I am relieved and delighted to hear that the hon. Member is shocked by anti-American sentiment.

asked the Secretary for Foreign Affairs in which countries increased expenditure on overseas information services has been effected during the current financial year.

There has been expansion in the following areas

Does my hon. Friend agree that this welcome expansion is really essential for the conduct of the cold war and that if these essential overseas services are to function properly they must not be starved of the equally essential funds?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if he will make a statement giving the latest details of the coal situation.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power by how much coal consumption in Great Britain exceeded coalmining output during the first 11 weeks in 1955, excluding exports and imports of coal; and by how much coal output in Great Britain declined during that period of 11 weeks compared with the equivalent period in 1954.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if he will make a statement on the supply of domestic fuel in the city of Dundee.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he is aware that a shortage of coal is developing in the London area; what are the present stocks of coal in London depots; and what steps he is taking to ensure that Londoners will have sufficient coal supplies during the next few weeks.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if he is aware of the hardship caused to domestic users in the Oldbury and Halesowen constituency by the shortage of coal; and what action he is taking in the matter.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what arrangements he will make to expedite the delivery of coal to suppliers in Walsall.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he will make a full statement on the past and present coal supply position in Shrewsbury.

London house coal stocks are still well above the average for this time of year and the additional supplies that I mentioned in the House last week have improved the position in the country generally. Industrial stocks are generally sufficient, and special action has been taken to help gas works in two or three towns. Power station stocks are at a safe level and there have been no power cuts. Output of our own coal increased last year until the winter, when it started to decline. In the first 10 weeks of 1955 it was 1·1 million tons less than in the corresponding period of 1954 and 3·5 million tons less than current inland consumption. It was, therefore, fortunate that last summer we made arrangements for large imports to come in throughout the winter months; and the House will see that these imports have played an essential part in maintaining our fuel supplies during this long winter.

In view of what the right hon. Gentleman has said, how can he explain the fact that of the 390 coal distributing depots in London a large percentage are completely without coal; the remainder have only a few tons left, and the official statement is that they are very much worse off now than they were at this time last year?

I cannot agree with that. At this time of year it is normal for merchants to rely primarily upon current supplies.

In consideration of the fact that production has declined so far this year, and notwithstanding our importing 4 million tons this year, is it not the fact that in order to sustain an increasing level of general industrial production during the next 12 months we may have to import as much as 10 million tons? In those circumstances would it not be propitious for my right hon. Friend to renew his efforts to impress upon the whole of British industry the urgent need for using coal with much greater efficiency?

I very much agree with the concluding remarks of my hon. Friend, without necessarily following the detailed calculations which he made earlier on. With regard to production, it is necessary to be scrupulously fair. Forty per cent. of the decrease in production this year has been in respect of opencast and not deep-mined coal, and almost half the reduction in output from deep mines has been due to a difference in the onset of holidays, especially in Scotland. Nevertheless, it is true that output has been disappointing, and I am very glad that the last two weeks have shown a pronounced upward improvement.

Will the Minister now reply to that part of my Question— included in his general answer—which asked what are the stocks of coal in London? My information is the same as that of my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Mr. Dodds), namely, that there is a very great shortage. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in respect of Coalite, for instance, there is a waiting period of over eight weeks; that one cannot now get coke in London; that coal is in very short supply, and that a number of people in South-West London have cellars completely empty of coal, coke or Coalite? That being so, how can he be so complacent about the position?

The question of Coalite is an entirely special one. It is a special fuel, and there are only relatively small supplies of it. The main difficulty in London is that of distributing both coal and coke, and, as I explained last week, that is a difficulty which always arises at the end of a long cold spell. Merchants not only in London but in all parts of the country have been working during this last weekend to make up the arrears.

May I ask two questions of the Minister? First, can he give the House some idea of the volume of distributed stocks which he expects to exist at the end of the coal winter, that is, at the end of April? Secondly, in view of the large scale on which imports of coal have been taking place, is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that it is wise to continue to export so much despite the fact that it involves importing coal at a high price?

I could not give the House the exact figure of what I expect distributed stocks to be at the end of April. Stocks are 2 million tons lower than at this time last year, but, of course, they are considerably higher than during most of the years when the last Government were in office. Regarding the question of exports, while I recognise the point made by the right hon. Gentleman, he must also be aware of the desirability of keeping a foot, so to speak, in our traditional export markets in the interests of the industry.

Would not the Minister agree that many of our fuel problems would be solved if only we could get more coal from our own mines?

Sign him on.

Is the Minister aware that under the Labour Government we did not import 4 million tons of coal—

What about 1947?

We did not import 4 million tons of coal. [Interruption.] Is the Minister aware that had the Labour Government at that time imported 4 million tons of coal the hon. Gentleman would perhaps have been in a more excitable mood than he is today? May I press the Minister further on this question of exports; would he give some idea of the net loss per ton sustained by having to export while importing so much?

Normally the Coal Board loses £2 per ton on coal imports.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Minister did not answer my Question No. 57.

Do I understand that my right hon. Friend answered my Question? I listened carefully to his answer but I did not hear the name of Shrewsbury mentioned.

Do I understand that Question No. 52 was answered with the others? I did not hear Dundee mentioned.

It was included in the general reply.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if he will lift present restrictions so that domestic consumers can purchase coal from any merchant.

I regret that this is not possible at present.

Is the Minister aware that many merchants, particularly in London, have informed their registered customers that they cannot deliver orders for as long as four weeks and that unless a temporary relaxation of present arrangements is made large numbers of people have no hope whatever of getting any coal at all? Will he therefore consider a temporary relaxation to help such people?

It was with that object that I made the statement that I did last week.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he will introduce a coal rationing system with a minimum ration instead of an allocation system which is a maximum allocation.

I should be reluctant to make any change such as that proposed by my hon. Friend which would make more elaborate our present administrative arrangements.

Can my right hon. Friend assure me that the people in my constituency who are entitled to it could have the total allocation by the end of the summer months?

I will write to my hon. Friend.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that production and productivity are often increased by allowing the law of supply and demand to operate in the original market? Why is it not possible now, in the present state of coal production, to allow not only a consumer to change his coal merchant, but the merchant to change his mine, or source of supply?

Fundamentally the reason is that, unless there is a system of ration books or some method of that kind, the only way to enforce the restrictions on coal deliveries—which are, unfortunately, still necessary because production is not sufficient to enable rationing to be abolished—is for the merchant to keep records. We cannot, therefore allow consumers to change their merchant frequently, otherwise the records would get into a state of complete confusion. I have, however, moved in the direction desired by my hon. Friends by increasing from one month to four the period during which consumers can change their merchant.

Is not there something very unsatisfactory about the present system if, as is quite obvious, the Minister has been given completely inaccurate information about the position of coal stocks in London, Shrewsbury and all over the country? Will not the right hon. Gentleman examine the system to see that at least he gives accurate information to the House?

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if he will set up a committee of inquiry into the frequent causes of fractured gas mains, which have resulted in many incidents of gas poisoning with fatal results during the past few months.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave on 14th March to a similar Question by the hon. Lady the Member for Leeds, North-East (Miss Bacon).

In view of the many deaths arising from these tragic circumstances, would not public opinion best be served by having an inquiry by an independent committee?

I think that we had better await the technical inquiry being made at the present time.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether there is any means of detecting small quantities of gas escaping from fractured mains apart from the smell?

No, Sir. The Gas Industry has given a good deal of thought to this problem but has not yet found a solution to it.

asked the hon. Member for Finchley, as representing the Church Commissioners, what plans the Commissioners have for protecting the value of church property by making loans to leaseholders to enable repairs and improvements to be made to houses which would otherwise fall into decay.

None. Leases granted by the Commissioners normally place the responsibility for repairs on lessees. As regards improvements the Housing Repairs and Rents Acts, 1954, enables a lessee whose lease has more than 15 years to run to apply to his local authority for a grant, and the Commissioners would always be willing to advise a lessee in this matter.

asked the hon. Member for Finchley, as representing the Church Commissioners, what steps are being taken to prevent the disposal of un expired leases of Church Commission property to persons unable to maintain the fabric according to the terms of the original lease.

Where the terms of a lease require the Commissioners' consent to an assignment, they take steps to ensure that the assignee will be able to keep the property in good condition. Where there is no such condition in an old lease the Commissioners can do nothing.

Does not that reply indicate a certain helplessness on the part of the Commissioners? Will not they try to do something more useful than merely advising people to go to the local authorities? Have they no business sense or social sense?'

The lady referred to in the Question is a lessee and not a weekly tenant. In this case we are dealing with the building society which pays the ground rent.

Is the hon. Member quite right in stating that the Commissioners can do nothing? Surely they can serve a schedule of dilapidations and, if necessary, go to the court, ask for possession, become landlords themselves and carry out the repairs?

Yes, the Commissioners could do that. But I think the hon. Member for Paddington, North (Mr. Parkin) wanted more. He wanted us to deal direct with the leaseholder.

asked the hon. Member for Finchley, as representing the Church Commissioners, what help the Commissioners are able to offer to a widow in Paddington, whose name and address have been supplied to them, to enable urgent necessary repairs, costing several hundred pounds, to be carried out to the house of which she is the leaseholder and which she cannot pay for out of her combined family income of£6 10s. per week.

In this case the ground rent payable to the Commissioners is £7 per year, and the lease has 33 years to run. The Commissioners could not undertake repairs which are not their responsibility but those of a lessee who bought a lease with full knowledge of her obligations.

It is all very well talking about "full knowledge of her obligations," but have not we here a perfectly good property which will fall to pieces over the next 33 years because the Church Commissioners have no more sense than to let it get into the hands of such lessees and without giving any assistance in keeping it in repair?

I will make further inquiries, but as landlords I do not see what we can do in the matter at present, beyond seeing what the building society which has lent the money on the lease is prepared to do.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that if the Commissioners cannot be a little more co-operative and helpful they will be as unpopular as their predecessors in title, the Paddington Estates, who allowed the property to get into the state that it was?

These people are not tenants. They are leaseholders, and this lease has 33 years to run. It is quite a different position from that of a weekly tenant.