asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he is aware that many Aberdeen old age pensioners live in the newly developed housing estates of Northfield and Mastrick; that these estates are hilly and remote from the pensions office in the City of Aberdeen; that it is difficult and expensive to old age pensioners to travel to and fro to collect their pensions; and if he will provide facilities for old age pensioners to collect their pensions in Northfield and Mastrick accordingly.

There have been very few complaints from retirement pensioners in these areas. At Northfield, I understand that two days ago a new sub-post office replaced the temporary counter service which for the last four months has enabled pensioners to cash their orders locally. As my right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General indicated in his reply on 15th June, he hopes to invite applications for the sub-postmastership at Mastrick early next month.

Does the Minister realise that old-age pensions were granted on the implied condition that they would be paid to pensioners at places reasonably near their homes; and as the present situation in these two districts is imposing expense and injustice on these old-age pensioners, what does the Minister propose to do to recompense them?

As my answer pointed out, there will be a new sub-post office available very shortly in each of these two suburbs of Aberdeen. In the meantime, any pensioner can, of course, authorise a friend or relative to draw his pension for him.

Does not the Minister realise that these pensioners have been already put to expense out of their small pensions, which is very unjust and unfair, and can he say what compensation or recompense it is proposed to make to them?

No, Sir. Places are always available in the shopping centres where pensions can be drawn, and I am quite sure that a number of good Samaritans who are prepared to help these people can be found in Aberdeen, as, indeed, elsewhere.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will now take steps to ensure that old-age pensioners will be given free transport from their homes to the places where they receive their pensions and back to their homes.

No, Sir. If through infirmity a pensioner cannot call at the nearest post office to draw his pension, he can nominate someone to do this for him.

Does the Minister not realise that these pensions were fixed when conditions were different and that new conditions have been introduced by the present Government increasing the cost of fuel and transport? Therefore, there is a real case for old-age pensioners being given free transport.

I hesitate to draw the right hon. and learned Gentleman's attention to the fact that the Conservative Government increased pensions very substantially as from about 24th April.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how many old-age pensioners in receipt of National Assistance allowances did not have their incomes increased by 7s. 6d. for single pensioners and 11s. for couples when the basic pension was increased in April; and the saving in payments by the National Assistance Board when the new basic scales became operative.

The answer to the first part of the Question is about one million. The estimated saving in Assistance over a full year, after taking account of all the changes this year in both insurance benefits and Assistance, is about £13 million.

Would the Minister not agree that the figure he has just given gives some idea of the meanness of the present Government, in that one million old-age pensioners, the poorest of the community, have been denied this increase? Would he not also agree that the saving of the National Assistance Board has been achieved at the expense of putting up National Insurance contributions by 1s. a week to the workers and employers?

No, Sir, I cannot agree to any of that. [An HON. MEMBER: "Why not?"] I would remind the hon. Gentleman that all pensioners have derived benefit from the increases made this year, and that when the Socialist Government carried out a similar operation in 1946, some 600,000 pensioners got no increase at all.

Is not the Minister aware that certain persons were net losers, because when they received the increase in their old-age pensions their National Assistance was reduced?

I cannot agree that anybody has been a net loser as the result of the combined operation carried out this year. If the right hon. Gentleman knows any case, perhaps he will send me particulars of it.

Can my right hon. Friend give the number of people who received the maximum benefit of the recent increases?

The number is approximately 3¼ million.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will reappoint his Central Advisory Committee on War Pensioners' Problems.

The Central Advisory Committee is still in existence, and I look forward to its continued assistance. Following the General Election, there will need to be one or two changes in that part of its membership drawn from this House.

Will the Minister arrange that there shall be representatives of the Scottish Office and of the Ministry of Health on the Committee in order that the whole of the problems of the disabled ex-Service men can be considered, as responsibility is divided between those Ministries?

I think the hon. Gentleman is aware that the composition of the Committee is fixed by statute and that legislation would be required to effect any alteration. I will, however, look at the suggestion he has made.

Can the right hon. Gentleman suggest to the Minister of Health that he also should have an advisory committee to deal with ex-Service men's problems, as his own Ministry now has?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman would put that question down to the Minister of Health.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will give immediate consideration to the problems of the ageing war pensioners of 1914–18 war and announce his findings early this Session.

I am always ready to consider individual cases where the war disability has worsened, but I cannot hold out any expectation of a change in the basis of the war pensions scheme so as to vary assessments according to age.

Could not the Minister stretch the regulations for the benefit of the aged war disabled? For instance, could he stretch the regulation that applies to comforts, so that the aged war pensioners will benefit?

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman would agree that we stretch the regulations as far as possible in the interests of the war disabled, and that the administration is extremely sympathetic.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance to state, at the most convenient date, the number of persons in receipt of disability pensions due to war service and the number who are in receipt of constant attendance and hardship allowance, respectively; and if he will give the corresponding figures for the two previous years.

Since a number of figures are involved, I will, with permission, circulate them in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

While I appreciate that, will not the right hon. Gentleman have a look at this matter of the constant attendance allowance and these two major allowances, because there is a feeling that too few pensioners are in receipt of these benefits, which are intended for the worst class of case? Will he bear in mind that many of these pensioners' problems seem to get more acute and need more consideration?

No doubt the hon. Gentleman will study the figures when they are circulated. The number receiving an

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will ease the qualifications of 20 years' minimum employment in a card room and 50 per cent. disability before compensation can be paid to those suffering from byssinosis in the cotton industry.

These are among the questions that are being considered by the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council who are at present reviewing the provision made for Byssinosis under the National Insurance (Industrial Injuries) Acts.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance why Mr. D. B. Lamb, 5, Sunny Bank Road, Edgerton, Huddersfield, was disqualified from receiving sickness benefit from 1st October, 1954, to 24th November, 1954, although his doctor and his wife had been advised by the local office of his Department that he would not be so disqualified.

I am glad to be able to inform the hon. Member that payment has now been made to Mr. Lamb in respect of the period in question. I regret the delay.

While I appreciate what the Minister has said and am informed that my constituent has received a cheque—although without a covering letter—may I ask whether it was absolutely necessary for Mr. Lamb to undergo the strain of the very lengthy and somewhat harassing procedure of unsuccessful appeal

allowance for the lower standard of occupation is about the same proportion today as it was about two years ago, and the proportion in regard to constant attendance is somewhat greater.

Following are the figures:

before amends could be made for this error?

Yes, Sir. Anyone with a knowledge of the work of the Public Accounts Committee will know that it is very unwise for a Minister to interfere while a case is sub judice.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance under what circumstances and for what reasons a person otherwise entitled to sickness benefit is disqualified from receiving it whilst temporarily abroad under doctor's orders for the purposes of recuperation.

Section 29 (1) ( a ) of the National Insurance Act, 1946, provides that, in general, an insured person shall be disqualified for receiving benefit for any period when he is absent from Great Britain. This provision is modified in the case of sickness benefit by regulations which provide that the disqualification shall not apply to a person whose absence abroad was for the specific purpose of being treated for incapacity which commenced before he left Great Britain.

Is it correct that if a patient is sent abroad on doctor's orders on a sea voyage and there is a doctor on the ship in attendance, the patient is entitled to his sickness benefit, but if, as in the case referred to in my previous Question, he goes on a cargo boat and there is no doctor in attendance, he is disqualified from sickness benefit? Is there not some anomaly that should be looked into?

That may well be the case, but the line has to be drawn somewhere. It has to be drawn so that the Minister can say with certainty whether the conditions for the receipt of benefit are being fulfilled.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance the number of persons in the North Midland Region who have been receiving sickness benefit for six months or longer and have been referred for medical examination by his Department during the past 12 months.

I regret that this information is not available.

The Minister says that he cannot obtain this information. Cases have come to my knowledge where the references for medical examination by his Department are causing apprehension to the long-term sickness cases. Surely he can get the information.

There is, of course, no longer a distinction between cases of sickness which have lasted for more than six months and those which have lasted for less. Figures are therefore not available on that basis. I can give the hon. Gentleman global figures of references in particular periods, if he would care to have them. I should be happy to discuss any particular case with the hon. Gentleman if he has a particular case in mind.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance by what authority a claimant who has appealed to the National Insurance Commissioner is not allowed to appear in person or to be represented at the hearing of his appeal; and whether he will amend his regulations so as to remedy this state of affairs.

The statutory regulations provide that the National Insurance Commissioner shall grant a request for an oral hearing unless, after considering the record of the case and the reasons put forward in the request for a hearing, he is satisfied that the appeal can properly be determined without a hearing. The claimant will always have had an opportunity of a hearing before the local appeal tribunal, and I think it is best to leave the Commissioner with his present discretion.

Is it not contrary to the generally accepted principles of British justice that the National Insurance Commissioner, from whom there is no appeal to a court of law, should have the right to decide, not merely to arrive at his decision in private, but also to refuse to allow the appellant to appear before him and plead his case?

The existing practice regarding the discretion left to the Commissioner whether there should be an oral hearing or not springs from a decision of the Liberal Government in 1911, when unemployment insurance was first introduced. I would also refer the hon. Gentleman to the findings of the Donoughmore Committee on Ministerial Powers in 1934, which said: There is no natural right to an oral hearing.

Should we not improve on what was done in 1911?

This point might well be discussed by the committee which in their Election Manifesto the Government promised to set up, and which was mentioned in the Gracious Speech.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance on what basis the earnings limit for old-age pensioners was increased from 20s. to 40s. per week; and if he will now take steps to increase the earnings limit to a figure which may be deemed appropriate today.

I cannot add to what was said in Parliament at the time as to the basis of the change made by the 1951 Act. As regards the second part of the Question, I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to the hon. Member for Edinburgh, West (Sir I. Clark Hutchison) on 20th June.

While appreciating that to remove the earnings limit altogether would militate against our efforts to persuade people to work voluntarily beyond retirement, is it not a fact that reasons similar to those which prompted the Administration a few years ago to increase the limit from 20s. to 40s. now appear to call for some modest increase today?

The increase in the cost of living.

I am sure we all regret that it is no longer possible to put a Question to the right hon. Lady the Member for Warrington (Dr. Summerskill) about her motives for making this change in 1951, but I must draw my hon. Friend's attention to the findings of the Phillips Committee on this point and say that it is one which obviously will fall to be considered when we come to undertake the non-statutory review of the National Insurance Scheme.

Are we to understand from the right hon. Gentleman's constant reference to the events of 1911 and thereabouts that he does not consider it his duty to apply any independent considerations to any of these problems?

Would my right hon. Friend have regard to current circumstances? Is he aware that in the Midlands area around Birmingham, which is only one of 13 areas in the country, there are 52,000 vacancies for employment at present and that many of these would be filled by old-age pensioners were it not for the operation of this pernicious rule respecting their earnings?

I am sure my hon. Friend knows that the purpose of the rule is to encourage people to stay in full-time employment rather than to retire on pension and seek half-time employment. We have the findings of the Phillips Committee, which went very carefully into this matter, but, as I have said, the whole matter will fall to be considered, along with a great many other points of principle, in the non-statutory review of the Scheme.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he will propose alterations to the present regulations governing the payment of non-contributory old-age pensions in view of the inadequacy of present scales of benefit.

No, Sir; I see no reason for departing from the policy followed in this matter by all recent Governments. These pensions are paid by the National Assistance Board which supplements them when necessary.

Will the Minister not look at this matter afresh, with other matters? Does he not realise that a pensioner over 70 years of age, perhaps receiving about 34s. a week, is able to get only 2s. extra on the basis of the non-contributory pension and that many of them do not want to go to the Assistance Board for supplementation?

The hon. Member says that many of them do not want to go to the National Assistance Board, but all these non-contributory pensions are paid by the National Assistance Board, which is, therefore, in touch with each individual who is receiving a pension of this character. The non-contributory pension is an obsolescent type, the grant of which will, broadly, come to an end in 1961. I think it would be unreasonable, therefore, to make any alteration in the conditions affecting the drawing of the pension by those at present entitled to it.

As the Minister admits that this is in any case a steadily reducing charge, is not that a good reason for something fresh to be done about it?

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what consideration has now been given to the Report of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe which alleges that the oil companies are charging unreasonably high prices; and what action is contemplated to deal with this problem.

This study was undertaken by the Secretariat of E.C.E. on their own initiative and has not been endorsed by Governments. Her Majesty's Government have examined it carefully but do not consider that further action is warranted. In their opinion the forces of world competition are more likely than Government intervention to ensure the proper pricing of oil.

Does the right hon. Gentleman mean that this Report has been studied and that the Government think there is no truth whatever in the assertion that oil and petrol are too expensive? Will he get up and say that the Government are fully satisfied with the situation and protect the oil racketeers?

No, Sir, but there are implications in this Report which have been very much misunderstood, more particularly by the right hon. Member for Ipswich (Mr. Stokes), who gave the impression that the price of crude oil was only about £1 a ton in the Middle East——

That is not the Report.

—whereas if the Report is carefully read it will be seen that, although it gives an impression that the net profit was applied entirely to the oil companies, in fact 50 per cent. of it was paid to the Middle Eastern Governments, and therefore the real cost of the oil to the companies is not £1 a ton but almost £3 a ton.

That is all very well. May I ask the Minister whether he is aware that crude oil from the bowels of the earth in the Middle East costs only £1 a ton into the tanker, whereas it is £3 10s. more from Texas into the tankers in the Gulf of Mexico? I am perfectly well aware that the royalties are now shared, but even so the profits made by the oil companies in the Middle East are more than double those made by the oil companies in America.

I am glad the right hon. Gentlemen has now put himself right on this point. The impression which he gave was that the cost of oil in the Middle East was £1 a ton, whereas in fact it was £3 a ton. The right hon. Gentleman was therefore only 200 per cent. out, a rather slender margin for him.

The Minister wilfully misunderstands me. What I said was that the cost of oil into the tanker in the Middle East was £1 per ton. That price then becomes £4 10s. a ton. I agree that under the new arrangements the royalty owners—in other words, the countries concerned—get 50 per cent. of the profits. That is perfectly true. There is still £3 10s. a ton to be divided between the two of them, and the half which the oil company gets is still a great deal more than any American oil company gets.

In any case the right hon. Gentleman also gave the impression that this country got no advantage from the import of oil from the Middle East, whereas in fact crude oil imported into this country from the Middle East is obtained at £2 a ton less than that from the United States.

Will the right hon. Gentleman, instead of misrepresenting my right hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich (Mr. Stokes), tell the House what he has to conceal on this question? In view of the prima facie indictment of the oil companies in this Report and in view of a whole series of independent comments, such as those of the "Economist," saying that Gulf prices are now totally irrelevant to conditions in this country, will the right hon. Gentleman not at least have an independent inquiry into this subject so that we can know what are the facts?

I think the right hon. Gentleman is being very unfair when he talks about a prima facie indictment of the oil companies based on exactly the kind of misunderstanding that I have mentioned, which is 200 per cent. wrong.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what experiments have been made by his research officers in the use of methane gas derived from sewage purification for heating or lighting in England and Wales; and to what extent such experiments have proved successful.

Such uses of methane gas are already well known, but the collection of the gas appears to be an economic proposition only in works dealing with populations of 50,000 people or more.

Have not some of the results been very discordant? Would not the right hon. Gentleman think it perhaps right to have an inquiry on this subject, or at least to issue a memorandum, as its importance seems to be increasing?

I will consider that.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what letters he has received objecting to the proposals of the North West Electricity Board to erect masts, wires and overhead cables in Borrowdale; and what reply he has sent.

The North Western Electricity Board has now announced that it will lay underground the whole of the new line as far as Rosthwaite, including the circuit of Derwentwater. The Board has stated that the remaining section of the Borrowdale line is receiving further examination.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this pronouncement has been received with general acclamation and that we would like to congratulate the North Western Electricity Board on its change of mind and its decision to preserve the beauty of Borrowdale?

As the effect of this very welcome decision will be to protect an area of great national importance, could the right hon. Gentleman tell us how the cost will be borne? Will it be spread over all the undertakings of the Electricity Authority? If there is any difficulty, could he have a word with the Chancellor of the Exchequer about using the National Land Fund for a purpose of this kind?

I do not think that I need bother my right hon. Friend on this occasion, because when I received a letter from the National Parks Commission I sent an officer to the Lake District. He walked over the route of the line and, following discussions with the North West Electricity Board, the present course was adopted. It has been stated that on this occasion there will be no increase in the cost of electricity to people who are to be connected as a result.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he is yet in a position to state the policy of the Government in relation to the recommendations of the Turner Committee on Mining Subsidence.

I have nothing to add to the reply which my hon. Friend gave the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Mr. Swingler) on 13th June.

If the Government cannot find time for legislation during the present Session, can they at least find time to make up their minds on this subject? They have had five years in which to do so. When shall we have a statement of Government policy on this matter?

I explained early in the life of the last Parliament that, owing to the economic position left to us by our predecessors, we were not in a position to take action.

Is the Minister aware that the recommendations referring to agricultural land do not appear to require legislation? Will he take action as Minister by direction to the National Coal Board to implement those recommendations?

I will examine that point.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power in how many areas property is being extensively damaged by subsidence due to coalmining; and what is the total number of houses at present damaged.

Damage is caused through subsidence in most coal-mining areas. According to statistics for 1954, which are the latest available, the number of houses damaged was just over 12,000.

People living in these houses would greatly appreciate it if they could get better recompense for damage done, but does the Minister realise that they would far prefer not to have any damage done at all? Would he say what is the policy of the Coal Board in new developments in pits—whether the fact that damage may take place extensively to property is taken into consideration before development?

Yes, Sir. Of course, mining Members know that solid packing is a remedy for this, but it is not applicable in all cases and, in fact, is not usually applicable. All the 12,000 cases have been fully compensated by the National Coal Board.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the disastrous policy of opencast coalmining will add to this subsidence on a colossal scale in years to come?

Is the Minister also aware that, in addition to the damage to houses and other forms of property, the local authorities responsible in the mining areas have to meet an ever-increasing bill for damaged public services, sewers, mains and all kinds of things underground, which is a burden on the local rates that they ought not to be carrying at all?

Yes, but the last Government thought the most urgent part of the problem was dealing with small private houses.

Will the Minister again take into consideration what my hon. Friend has said and at least make an inquiry into how much it would cost the Exchequer to bear the cost, on national funds, of putting right damage caused by subsidence?

Yes, we are examining that, but when the right hon. Gentleman brought in his Bill, he departed from the Turner Committee's Report and thereby created a rather new situation.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he is aware of the dismay caused in the Osgoldcross rural district by the proposal to close down the local fuel office; and whether he will accept the counter proposals of the rural district council that the office be continued for the convenience of the public and at no cost to the taxpayers.

When the time comes to consider this question, I shall take full account of the views of the council.

Will the right hon. Gentleman also take into account the views of seven local parish councils which have been protesting against the proposal? Will he accept from me the statement that the local authorities really know what are the best local services? Will he accept the advice of some of his colleagues that the gentleman in Whitehall does not always know best?

We have already abolished about 700 of these local fuel offices without, I think, any substantial diminution in the value of the service to the public, but at a very considerable saving to the Exchequer. We have to deal with several thousands of parish councils, and I think we shall be able to deal with this one in a reasonable way.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if he is satisfied that the arrangements that have been made for the supply of domestic coal to Birmingham for next winter will be adequate; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if he is satisfied that there will be adequate supplies of domestic coal in Barry next winter; and if he will make a statement.

As I advised the House on 20th June, all possible steps are being taken to build up adequate supplies of coal for next winter, but it is too early to make any statement on the prospects for any one type of consumer.

Is the Minister aware that right up to date in Birmingham there has been practically no stocking-up by merchants, and even before the railway strike they were planning on the basis of only 20 cwt. in the summer? Is not that an alarming situation in Birmingham? Will the right hon. Gentleman examine the matter and give a reassuring statement in the very near future?

The fact is that we cannot have an unofficial stoppage in the Yorkshire coalfield which loses one million tons of coal and, thereafter, a railway strike which disrupts distribution of coal throughout the country without there being a disturbance to stocks of coal afterwards. A great deal of work has to be done by the National Coal Board, merchants and distributors to put that situation right. It will be got right, but some time will elapse before it is got right.

Whilst thanking my right hon. Friend for his last assurance, may I ask him to direct particular attention to the possibility of avoiding any shortage in schools, such as occurred in one or two instances in Barry last winter?

Most certainly, but my hon. Friend will remember that we picked up the difficulty in a school in his constituency some weeks before he did.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if he will give a general direction to the National Coal Board to improve their arrangements for the supply of suitable grades of coal for domestic consumption and making known to householders what grades are available.

No, Sir. These matters fall within the responsibility of the National Coal Board and the coal merchants.

Why cannot the Minister take some steps to enable householders to have some choice in the coal which is being delivered? Why should they be compelled to accept some of the shoddy stuff that is being sent to them? Why cannot the right hon. Gentleman issue instructions that there should be some list by which the various grades of coal can be known?

I am surprised that the hon. Member should be so critical of the work of the National Coal Board, which is doing its very best in this matter.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power the present level of coal stocks in Scotland compared with the figure 12 months ago.

Distributed stocks at 11th June totalled 962,000 tons, compared with 1,043,000 tons a year ago.

Is my right hon. Friend confident that he will be able to maintain adequate stocks for the winter?

I said something about that earlier, and I explained the amount of work that has to be done as a result of the railway strike and the Yorkshire unofficial coal stoppage. Taking that into consideration, the stocks in Scotland at the moment, compared with those of a year ago, are not unsatisfactory.

Is the Minister aware that his answers to many of these Questions seem to confirm the prophecy made by "Cross Bencher" in yesterday's "Sunday Express"?

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power the number of Her Majesty's Inspectors for Mines in the East Midlands Division; and to what extent the number of inspectors in the division is below establishment.

Sixteen and five, respectively.

What steps is the Minister taking to remedy this very unsatisfactory situation and to bring the number of inspectors up to proper establishment?

We have recently increased the salaries of the inspectorate and are taking other steps. I am rather concerned at the increase of accidents in the East Midlands Division, and I am making special inquiries into that matter.

Can my right hon. Friend tell us at what date he began to be aware of this very tragic increase in fatalities during recent months?

I was assisted in that matter by a letter from my hon. Friend, as well as by the Question.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power the approximate total tonnage of coal which will be imported during the year 1955.

At present rates, about 12 million tons.

Is the Minister aware that the anticipated £25 million lost on this imported coal will completely distort the accounts of the National Coal Board and result in a completely disproportionate increase in the cost of coal to industry and to domestic consumers, quite apart from the effect on the cost of living? Does he not therefore think that, as this coal is imported on Government account, the loss should be borne on Government account?

No, Sir. I think that if the National Coal Board is unable to meet the demands of the country it is reasonable that coal should be imported in the way it is being imported.

Does the right hon. Gentleman propose to apply the same principle to farmers? Are they to pay for all the corn they cannot grow? Surely it is a ridiculous principle?

Is it not a fact that the National Coal Board has a responsibility under the Statute of 1946 to provide an abundance of coal at economic prices? If it cannot do that, why should it not bear the whole cost of importing coal?

In order to put the matter in its right perspective, would the Minister give reasons why the National Coal Board and the miners are not able to produce sufficient coal, particularly in view of the fact that output per man-shift is at a record high level?

It would require a long time to go into that problem.

Has the National Coal Board now to bear this enormous sum of money for imports? Would the Minister agree, then, that the Coal Board may take every step to conserve the coal it is producing, which would be sufficient if a proper fuel policy were applied by the Government?

I think that the Coal Board does that—indeed, it has a good record—and also the Government's measures with regard to the National Fuel Efficiency Service are being very successful.

If the Coal Board has to pay for the importation of coal, is it not entitled to ration manufacturers who are wastefully using this coal day after day?

No, Sir. We cannot have a system of authoritarian rationing of every industrial consumer simply because of the difficulties of our coal position. Let it be remembered that the cost of this ultimately is borne not by the Coal Board, but by the consumer.

asked the Minister of Supply what directions have been given by him under the Iron and Steel Act, 1953, to the Iron and Steel Board to prevent iron and steel companies participating in price rings, such as the recent identical quotations to various local authorities for the delivery and erection of structural steel.

None, Sir. As regards structural steel, I would refer the right hon. Gentleman to the reply given to the hon. Member for Stockton-on-Tees (Mr. Chetwynd) on 20th June.

Is the Minister aware that these identical quotations contain items for delivery and erection of structural steel? If the Minister is not taking any action, does that not mean that he is giving silent approval to this practice of identical quotations to local authorities?

The supply of structural steel for buildings is not within the responsibility of the Iron and Steel Board and is being investigated by the Monopolies Commission, which is the right way to do it.

Would the Minister agree that it was within the responsibility of the old Iron and Steel Corporation?

I would be very loth to agree with that. I do not think it was so.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that under nationalisation the Tory Minister was able to intervene to put up prices of steel against the advice of the chairman of the nationalised board? If the Government could intervene then to put up prices, why are they so reluctant to intervene now to keep them down?

The prices of steel products which come under the Iron and Steel Board are fixed by the independent statutory body at a reasonable level, and a level which is much below the levels of competing countries. As to the position under nationalisation, I find it hard to believe, even if he had the power, that a Minister would order different units of the nationalised industry to quote different prices for identical products.

asked the Minister of Supply whether he is aware that at the Le Bourget Air Display on Sunday 19th June, 1955, the speeds and ceilings of the Victor and Vulcan aircraft were announced; and how much of this information is still restricted.

I am aware that unofficial estimates of the performance of the aircraft were announced. The correct figures are secret, but my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Air informed the House on 10th March that the Vulcan and the Victor have already flown in development flights at over 50,000 feet, within a small fraction of the speed of sound.

Was this information correct or not? If it was correct, quite clearly there has been a serious leakage of vital information. If it is not correct, somebody is being hoodwinked.

The figures were taken from a French publication. As I have said that the correct figures are secret, clearly I cannot say whether these figures are correct. There was, however, nothing to prevent any commentator from making an estimate of this kind based on the information already given to the House, which I have quoted.

Is it not strange that this information, however limited in character, was given in France but was not available in this country? Can that be explained?

I do not quite understand what the right hon. Gentleman means about its not being available. It was published in the French paper; an estimate was made by a French paper. As I said, the correct figures are secret, and will remain secret.

In view of the fact that the announcement by the Under-Secretary of State indicated that the speed of these aircraft was within a fraction of the speed of sound and the statement made in Paris was, therefore, not materially inaccurate, would the Minister not consider revising the rules with regard to secrecy in relation to these aircraft, performances of which are published very accurately in many magazines in this and in other countries, and make a statement giving the performances in detail, because they are extremely satisfactory and this might have a quite useful political effect if it were done?

I am grateful to the right hon. and learned Gentleman for pointing out that the performance of these aircraft is very encouraging. It is our policy to try to give the House as much information as we can, as my hon. Friend has done, but if we went beyond that and gave the information, it would assist other people more than this country.

Will the Minister give an assurance that this information was not supplied by the Air Ministry? As everybody knows, these figures are fantastically high, and it might suit the Government's policy to put out figures, not to deceive the Russians, but to deceive the British public and, of course, to deceive hon. Members on the benches opposite?

I do not think that that question really calls for a serious answer. That is not the sort of policy in which any Government of this country would indulge.

asked the Minister of Supply why his tender form, No. 5533, calls for delivery of 525,000 yards of calico over a period of three months, which limits the number of mills able to submit offers.

A delivery period of three months was necessary to meet the War Office's requirement. Tenders have been received from 29 of the 31 firms invited.

In the event of some of these tenders being for less than the full amount, will they nevertheless be considered in the allocation of the total?

Yes, certainly.

asked the Minister of Supply in what circumstances he authorises the purchase of imported cotton cloth, when similar material can be produced in this country.

No purchase of imported cotton cloth has been made by the Ministry of Supply during the past few years. My Department is fully conscious of the importance to the home industry of Government orders.

Would my right hon. Friend add to that assurance the assurance that, in the event of the tenders referred to in Question 32 not reaching the total figure required in the limited time stated, he will not include purchases of some imported material?

That seems to be a hypothetical question, particularly as 29 of the 31 firms invited to tender have tendered.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is aware of the difficulties experienced by the fishing industry in the distribution of fish from the ports to the consumers; and what are his plans to solve these difficulties and improve the distribution of fish.

Supplies of fish are plentiful in the shops and I am not aware that the fishing industry is experiencing distributive difficulties.

Will not the Minister address his mind to the real injustice which is indicated in the Question: namely, that all ports are not treated equally and that that is an injustice not only to the ports but to the consumers, and particularly to the fishing industry in the North-East of Scotland? Will he consult his right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport with a view to instituting either a flat rate or an extension of the tapering rates at present in force with a view to obviating these difficulties?

I am not aware of any injustice such as the hon. and learned Member indicates, but I certainly will consider what he has said.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what progress has been made by the Interdepartmental Committee on Slaughterhouses; and when the necessary information is likely to be available.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Norfolk, Central (Sir F. Medlicott), on 20th June.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that last October we were told that this information would be available at the turn of the year and that in April he told me it would be ready in two months' time, which has now passed? Can he not now say when this long-delayed information will be available?

Yes. I have indicated the fresh complications that arose after I had expressed the hope that the Report would be available early this year. The reply I gave recently to my hon. Friend the Member for Norfolk, Central was to the effect that I expected the Report to be available next month, and that is about the two months I mentioned.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food why he has delayed announcing the membership of the Pigs and Bacon Reorganisation Commission which was set up in March and the Chairman of which was appointed in April.

The Secretary of State for Scotland and I expect to complete our appointments to the Commission very shortly.

Why do the right hon. Gentleman and the Secretary of State not get a move on in view of the very grave problems facing pig producers at the moment? The Government have brought the problems on the pig producers and should get the Commission going.

I cannot accept the hon. Gentleman's allegation that the Government have brought these difficulties on the pig producers. The Commission has a very important job to carry out, and that is why I am so anxious to ensure that we have on it men of the very highest calibre who can spare the considerable amount of time that will be required for this inquiry. I can assure the hon. Gentleman I am not wasting a single day.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many of the persons who have been invited to accept this duty have refused?

No, but I expect no difficulty whatever in satisfactorily completing the appointments to the Commission.

asked the Minister of Health the number of borderline cases of war pensioners applying for motor cars that have been rejected in the years 1951, 1952, 1953, and 1954, respectively.

As these cases cannot be defined, I regret I am not able to supply this information.

Could the Minister then supply this information? Are all the 2,000 cars that were provided under the Labour Government still available to ex-Service men? If any of them have become unavailable owing to mechanical defects, have they been replaced? How many cars have this Government themselves provided?

The limit of the number has remained where it has always been, the figure of 2,000 which the hon. Member mentioned. I gave detailed figures of the supply in HANSARD a month or two ago. Perhaps the hon. Member would put that question down, when I will give him the latest information we have.

Will my right hon. Friend reconsider the whole policy of supplying these glorified bath-chairs for disabled people? Would it not be better and cheaper to supply them with a normal type of car properly adapted?

There is another Question on the Paper a little later more closely concerned with that matter.

asked the Minister of Health the number of cars for disabled persons provided by his Department in the last 12 months to the most recent convenient date for computation and in the corresponding three previous annual periods, showing the numbers allotted to persons disabled by war injuries and the numbers allotted to persons disabled by industrial and other injuries.

Cars, as distinct from invalid tricycles, are supplied only to disabled war pensioners, and 82 were supplied during the year ending 31st May, 1955. The numbers issued in the corresponding periods from 1952 to 1954 were 247, 96 and 73, respectively.

I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman is aware of the need for extending this service to other seriously disabled people. In view of the very small number that were issued and the very large number which remain unallocated, would the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the Government's policy and whether these cars could be supplied to people on the basis of the severity of their disability without regard to the origin of the disability?

It has always been accepted that cars should be allocated to disabled war pensioners, and that distinction has always been maintained. The numbers were naturally higher in the earlier years of the scheme when claims were first made. As far as I know, the number of cars we have is adequate to meet that need on the present basis.

Are these cars solo cars or are they cars in which passengers can be taken? I ask because I have had a number of cases brought to my notice of these war-disabled men who have solo cars and who cannot drive with their families. The other conveyance, the tricycle, is also a solo vehicle. It would seem that there is a case here to be looked at, to see whether vehicles could be supplied which will accommodate three or four persons so that the family of a disabled man who has one can go with him. There is a circular outstanding saying that these cars are not allowed for use by any other members of a man's family. Would my right hon. Friend look at that question at the same time?

I know of these points. I think it is fairer to the hon. Member who has Question 43 down to take them on that Question.

asked the Minister of Health whether he will consider in suitable cases providing two-seated invalid motors in which the man's wife can ride with him.