asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he is aware of the difficulty to applicants for disability pensions for total blindness caused traumatically, for disseminated sclerosis, for Parkinson's disease, for gastric and duodenal ulcers, and for tuberculosis, and other seriously disabling afflictions incurred during war service by men previously physically fit because, owing to differing medical views as to the origin of these afflictions, it is almost impossible to discharge the onus of proof; and what steps he proposes to take.

No, Sir. Out of about 360,000 pensions for the last world war 75,000 are in payment for the disabilities mentioned by the hon. Member, and I can assure him that cases are dealt with as generously as possible.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not understand that he has had from me and from other hon. Members case after case of men who joined the forces physically fit and have been discharged totally and permanently crippled by illnesses of this kind and have been told that they failed to discharge the onus upon them of establishing that the illnesses were due to war service? As there is no way of knowing this and as discharge of the onus of proof depends entirely upon the whim of individual doctors and their views, will the right hon. Gentleman look into the matter, which is important?

I am sure the hon. Gentleman will realise that the position of these applicants is safeguarded by the fact that we have established the pensions appeals tribunals and that from them appeals lie to the High Court on these difficult disease questions. Within the rulings given by the High Court the Ministry of Pensions and National Insurance interprets the rules as generously as it possibly can.

Will my right hon. Friend consider this matter a little bit more? I know of cases in which correspondence with the Ministry of Pensions has lasted for two years. There are cases about which nobody is ever satisfied, certainly the case of which I am thinking. It was quite impossible for the Ministry to satisfy me on that case, and still less the person concerned, although it tried very hard.

Of course, I am always prepared and anxious to look into any individual case that any hon. Member cares to send me, but I believe that the arrangements we have in force are the best that it is possible to devise in the interests of the people concerned.

Although the right hon. Gentleman says that he will look into any individual case, is it not a fact that his reply invariably is that he has no power to interfere with decisions of the Pensions Appeal Tribunal? Is it not also the case that appeal to the High Court lies only on questions of law and not of fact? If there were an appeal on fact, the position would be different?

On questions relating to diseases such as Parkinson's disease and disseminated sclerosis, we are bound by rulings of the High Court, which has gone very carefully into the whole aspect of this question.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance the reasons for the fall during 1954 of 2,000 in the number of supplementary allowances to war disability pensioners.

Some 6,600 new awards of the main supplementary allowances were made during 1954, but about 5,400 allowances were terminated because of changes in the pensioners' circumstances and about 3,200 ceased owing to deaths. The ratio of the supplementary allowances in payment to the total number of disablement pensioners remained about the same.

Does this represent an average reduction in the amount over a period of years?

I should have to look into that, but the hon. Member will be reassured to see that the number of new grants exceeds the number of terminations.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how many of the 12,000 war pensioners whose pensions were discontinued during 1954, have appealed, or are in process of appealing, against the decision of his Department.

I regret that this information is not available.

Does this indicate a return of the old, bad practice followed after the 1914–18 war when pensioners were sent before tribunals to have their pensions cut down? Twelve thousand pensions discontinued during 1954 seems rather a big figure.

I am glad to say that about 2,000 of the terminations were due to the complete recovery of the individuals concerned. The remainder occurred in the ordinary course of events which means, as the hon. Members knows, that in cases where the disablement is assessed at less than 20 per cent., terminal awards are made, or, alternatively, there is a gratuity.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he will set up a Departmental committee to consider and report on anomalies arising out of the administration of the National Insurance Acts.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what proposals he has for examining and dealing with the various anomalies in the administration of the National Insurance Acts.

I do not know precisely what the hon. Members have in mind when they refer to "anomalies" but, as I explained in the debate on the Address on 14th June, I have referred a number of questions relating to the operation of the Acts to the National Insurance Advisory Committee for examination and advice.

Is not the Minister aware that the anomalies to which we refer are contained in the thousands of letters he has written to hon. Members of this House, saying that he regrets that he cannot interfere in what appear to be appropriate cases because the Act or the Regulations do not give him power to do so. Ought not this very wide range of subjects to come under consideration by the Committee?

It is because reviews have been promised on a number of occasions that the National Insurance Advisory Committee is now looking into five very large groups of questions in connection with this scheme. The hon. Member will have an opportunity, when that review is completed, of suggesting any further points which he wants us to look into. There is very little doubt that legislation amending the scheme will follow upon the reports of the Advisory Committee.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman recall the numbers of anomalies that have been brought to his notice on various occasions? Perhaps he remembers the last debate of about three weeks ago, when I asked him about an ineducable child for which there was no family allowance? He was sympathetic about that, and I think he was sympathetic to many others. All that my hon. Friend is asking for is a short amending Bill, of which I think the right hon. Gentleman has given a half-promise on many occasions.

The question of handicapped children does not come under the National Insurance Scheme but under the Family Allowances Act, and legislation is promised and will be presented in due course to deal with that point.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he is aware that the high cost of living has placed large numbers of old-age pensioners below the poverty line; and what are his plans to relieve their position.

No, Sir. Retirement pensions went up in April to rates higher in real value than ever before. If any pensioner is in need, he can, of course, apply to the National Assistance Board for supplementation.

Does not the Minister realise that this arises from new circumstances due to the increase in the cost of living, and that it ought not to be beyond the wit even of the present Government to make some attempt to relieve these people? Can the Minister do nothing about it?

Since the new rates of pensions and of National Assistance were recommended and put before the House in December last, the cost of living has risen by rather less than one per cent.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how far the recent increase of 4s. per week for a married couple in the supplementary allowances payable by the National Assistance Board was based upon detailed computations made by the Board and by his Department in which the special needs of pensioners only were taken into consideration; how far it was based upon the cost-of-living index; and whether he will place all relevant documents in the Library of the House.

The Board informs me that it took into consideration all available information which seemed to have a bearing on the requirements of pensioners and other people receiving assistance. Since National Assistance started in July, 1948, the Interim Index of Retail Prices has risen by 36 per cent., whereas the scale rate for a married couple has been increased by 57 per cent. On each occasion when draft regulations containing proposals for increased scales have been submitted, they have been accompanied by an explanatory memorandum which I have presented to Parliament as a White Paper.

Do I understand that the right hon. Gentleman is telling the House that the Board has a method of computation of the cost of living which does not rely on the cost-of-living index but on calculations of its own, and that the right hon. Gentleman is not prepared to disclose to hon. Members what the basis of that computation is, or to place figures in the Library so that they can be checked?

No Government has ever stated how the National Assistance Board calculates the requirements upon which its scales are founded, and that goes for the Socialist Government, as indeed it does for this Government. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why not start?"] When hon. Members say "Why not start?", the short answer is that the Board thinks it would be quite impossible to compile a notional cost-of-living index which would meet the needs and requirements of the many different classes of persons for whom it has to provide.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance, in view of the necessity of encouraging the employment, without regard to age, of all who can give effective service and wish to do so, if he will give consideration as soon as possible to raising from £2 to £3 per week the earning limit of pensioners.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to the hon. Member for Edinburgh, West (Sir I. Clark Hutchison) on 20th June.

Is the Minister aware that the Conservative Party, in its Election manifesto, said it would encourage people to go on working voluntarily after reaching retirement age? What plans have the Government made for encouraging people to go on working after reaching retirement age, and what more effective way of doing it is there than by raising the earnings limit?

We do encourage people to go on working beyond retirement age by giving very substantial increments to the pensions to those who defer retirement beyond the minimum age. So far as the earnings rule is concerned, I would remind the hon. Member of the danger that, if the earnings limit was raised too far, it would lead to large numbers of people who are now working full-time retiring on pension and supplementing their pensions by part-time earnings.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether, in view of the difficulties experienced by discharged prisoners in obtaining employment on discharge owing to the fact that their cards are unstamped, he will make arrangements to enable prisoners to maintain their contributions and have their cards stamped while serving a prison sentence.

I have drawn the attention of the National Insurance Advisory Committee to the matter in conjunction with their general review of the contribution conditions for National Insurance benefits.

Does not the Minister recall that his Parliamentary Secretary told me that six months ago? Does he not think it is time that something was done, because it is difficult enough to deal with the rehabilitation of these discharged prisoners and this is an additional and most regrettable handicap for a person who, on discharge, wants to earn an honest living but finds himself under a handicap because of an administrative rule? Cannot the Minister do something about it?

It is really something rather more than an administrative rule. Blank spaces on National Insurance cards are due most commonly to periods of sickness or exemption from National Insurance due to low income. Anybody is free at any time, if they are so pleased and can afford it, to place class 3 stamps on their cards at non-employed rates.

Is it too much to ask the Government that the State itself might be responsible for providing these stamps for a discharged prisoner, because, otherwise, they would only be carrying on the punishment of imprisonment beyond the time when the man comes out of prison? If he goes to an employer, the fact that he has no stamps on his card discloses that he has been in prison. Surely it would not cost much for the State to put these stamps on the cards.

This matter has been before the National Insurance Advisory Committee, and I should be very unwise to express any opinion on that proposal.

Will the right hon. Gentleman put the suggestion to the Committee?

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how many widows in receipt of the basic widows' pension of 10s. per week have to pay the new rate of insurance contribution; and how many now receive an additional National Assistance allowance in order to meet the increased contribution.

I regret that the figure asked for in the first part of the Question is not available, but a widow receiving National Assistance would ordinarily not be paying contributions, and the question of making special additions to National Assistance allowances would not arise.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will now take steps to ensure that widows of the First World War are placed on the same footing as widows of the Second World War as regards eligibility for pensions.

In February, 1946, widows of the 1914 war were, broadly speaking, placed on the same footing as regards eligibility for pension as widows of the 1939 war, if the husband's death took place after 2nd September, 1939. The question of carrying eligibility further back than this date has been considered by previous Governments since the war but found to be impracticable. I cannot hold out any expectation of re-opening the matter at this stage.

Does not that answer mean that the older widows are still treated worse than the younger widows, and is it not a terrible anomaly that widows of the First World War should be treated worse than widows of the Second World War? Will the Minister take steps to remove that anomaly?

No; what my Answer means is that to re-open cases in which death occurred before 2nd September, 1939, would raise a great many hopes which would subsequently be doomed to be disappointed on account of the difficulty, after this lapse of time, of proving that a man's death was due to service in the First World War.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how many widows in Accrington are drawing pensions at the 10s. per week rate.

I regret that this information is not available.

Can the Minister devise some machinery for giving hon. Members this information, because we are receiving correspondence about it and it would be useful if hon. Members had an idea of the size of this exceptional problem?

The reason why I cannot give the figures for particular places is based on the fact that our records are kept centrally. There are about 155,000 of these 10s. widows altogether, and if Accrington is an average sort of place, and if the hon. Gentleman divides that number by the number of constituencies represented in this House, he will get an approximate idea.

Does the Minister recall that, during a recent debate, he was asked by hon. Members on both sides of the House to expedite consideration of the position of these 10s. widows, and was also asked if he would communicate the views of the House to the National Insurance Advisory Committee? Has he done that?

There is a subsequent Question on the Order Paper dealing with that matter. This Question is limited to the 10s. widows in Accrington.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he can now say when he expects the Report of the National Insurance Advisory Committee on the subject of the 10s. widows pension.

This subject is part of a wider review which the Advisory Committee has been asked to make of all the dependency provisions of the National Insurance Scheme. I do not anticipate that their Report will be available before the Summer Recess.

Perhaps I may ask this as a supplementary to my Question about the Accrington widows. The Minister will recall that he has been asked time after time to do this. It is perfectly simple. He can ask the National Insurance Advisory Committee to give priority to this matter. Every hon. Member, on both sides I think, receives letters from representatives of this particular category of widow. Can I ask the right hon. Gentleman to be a little sympathetic and to do this immediately?

This problem of the 10s. widow is part of the very large question of the set-up of widows' benefits which we adopted in 1946. The Advisory Committee is looking into it. I think it is very important that it should not be hustled or hurried over its Report, particularly as there is no hardship at the present time amongst this class of widow. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] A much smaller proportion of 10s. widows has to seek National Assistance than has any other class of National Insurance beneficiaries. About 75 per cent. to 80 per cent. of these widows are in full employment and earning good wages.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he is now in a position to give a reply to Sheringham, Norfolk, fishermen, who, in a letter forwarded to him by the honourable Member for North Norfolk last February, complained of being disallowed unemployment benefit and placed in the seasonal workers' class, because of inability to go whelk fishing in the winter months owing to the firing from the Weybourne School of Gunnery.

I hope to be able to reply to the hon. Member shortly.

Does the Minster appreciate that this matter has been hanging fire for a long time? Is he not aware that the fishermen in Sheringham were prevented from following their lawful occupations by the action of the War Office, and will be attend to it?

The case of these fishermen is before the Commissioner at the present time, and I hope to inform the hon. Member of the result very shortly. Like him, I am a little disappointed that we have not had a decision sooner.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he will consider amending Section 30, Regulation 2, of the National Insurance (Overlapping Benefits) Regulation, 1948, Statutory Instrument, 1948, No. 2711, so that a person over 70 years of age, who having been at work and who has been paying his Industrial Benefit contribution will not find that his retirement pension becomes forfeit because he happened to be injured at work.

No, Sir. The rules about the non-duplication of benefits were very carefully considered when the National Insurance Schemes were introduced, and I am not aware of any justification for their alteration upon this point.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how many full-time welfare officers were employed by his Department at the date of the merger; and what number of such officers are now employed to deal exclusively with the problems of war pensioners and their dependants.

At the date of the merger, 83 full-time war pensions welfare officers were employed by my Department. There are now 71 such officers employed to deal exclusively with the problems of war pensioners and their dependants.

Would the right hon. Gentleman ensure that this magnificent service to the war pensioners is maintained at the fullest possible strength? It is the one human link between the Ministry and the people it serves. Will he assure the House that there will be no cutting down of welfare?

Yes, Sir. I am quite determined that the welfare services of my Ministry will be fully maintained. The small decline in the number of welfare officers is due mainly to the fact that, as a much wider network of offices is now available to the war pensioners, they can get information much more easily than before the merger of the Ministries.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if his Advisory Committee has reached any further conclusions on the treatment for insurance purposes of self-employed people and people with small incomes.

The National Insurance Advisory Committee's Report on the liability for contributions of persons with small incomes was laid before the House in April, and its recommendations have since been embodied in legislation. I hope for further advice about the treatment of part-time workers whose total income is small when, as I recently asked the Committee to do, it has reviewed the contribution position of part-time workers in general. The insurance of self-employed persons is not, as such, before the Committee.

Does that answer mean that the question of the insurance of self-employed persons is not to be laid before the Committee at all? Secondly, when may we expect the Report on the part-time workers?

With regard to the latter part of the Question, I could not say exactly when we shall get the Report on the part-time workers. So far as the self-employed are concerned, the hon. Gentleman will, I hope, recall that the National Insurance Act of 1954 did give the self-employed persons a much fairer and squarer deal, both as to contributions and benefits, than they had ever had before. If the hon. Member has any further suggestions to make about self-employed persons under the Scheme, I shall be happy to take them into consideration.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what consultations he has had with the Gas Council in the past 12 months concerning the appointment of full-time medical staffs by the area boards; and what progress has been made towards a comprehensive medical service for the gas industry.

My Department and the Ministry of Labour medical inspectors of factories are in close touch with the gas industry. Nine of the twelve gas boards now have full-time medical officers and two have appointed medical consultants.

I thank the Minister for what he has done to help forward the Gas Council and the gas boards towards the establishment of a medical service, but is he satisfied that there is in existence a medical service for the gas workers which is as comprehensive as possible?

In the technical form in which the hon. Member has put it, that Question is actually a matter for the Minister of Labour, but I am satisfied that very considerable progress has been made. The only gas board that has not a full-time consultant or medical officer is the Wales Gas Board, where, for geographical reasons—the separation by mountains and so on—the Board thinks it better to reply on local practitioners. I think that the Board is right in this.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power his estimate of the annual cost of putting into effect the proposals contained in the Turner Report on Mining Subsidence.

I cannot at present add to the previous answers which the hon. Member has been given on this subject, but this whole problem is now being re-examined.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the previous answers were totally unsatisfactory and almost completely sterile? In fact, no estimate was given. Is the Minister unable to add to what the Turner Committee did in 1949, when it made an estimate of what the victims of mining subsidence were suffering financially? Cannot we have an estimate today to show the measure of the problem which the Minister has to solve?

As the hon. Member knows, this is an exceedingly complicated problem, and I have said that it is being examined.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what consultations he has had with the National Coal Board on the proposals contained in the Turner Report on Mining Subsidence; and what was the date of his latest meeting with the Board's representatives.

Consultations have been going on for some weeks and are not yet finished.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power how much additional coal has been allocated to the carbonising industries for the next two years, compared with 1954; and how much additional coke is expected to be produced thereby.

Allocations are on a six-monthly basis, and for this summer the carbonising industries have been allocated 3 million tons more than dispatches in the summer of last year: this should produce nearly 1½ million tons more coke.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if he will consider extending the period of time in which house coal can be purchased at summer prices in view of delivery delays resulting from the recent rail strike.

I appreciate my hon. Friend's intention, but the summer prices scheme already extends until the late autumn, so that there is still time for deliveries to be made at rates favourable to the consumer.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what arrangements are being made about the shipment of coal which is to be imported into Britain.

All such arrangements are made by the National Coal Board through commercial channels.

Can my right hon. Friend give an assurance that none of the shipments will be the subject of any fifty-fifty agreement or any other flag discrimination by the country of sale?

With regard to the commercial purchases of coal, that is certainly the case, but, as my hon. Friend knows, there was a special arrangement by which American coal was obtained for sterling under an agreement with the American Government, and in this case a different condition obtained.

In which case there will be no possibility of flag discrimination whatsoever in this case?

Not with regard to the commercial purchasing of coal.

Cannot the difficulties be surmounted by not importing coal at all? If the Minister wants to know how to avoid importing coal, I can tell him about it afterwards.

Are not British shipping interests suffering because of the import of coal from the United States and ought not the Minister to make representations on behalf of British shipping?

That is a different matter which falls within the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power the approximate cost of importing 12 million tons of coal during 1955 as compared with the total cost of coal imports during 1954.

Up to about £80 million compared with £17 million last year.

Does that not mean that this is a very serious burden which the householders have to bear? Could the Minister not say how much the price of coal will have to be increased in order to pay for these imports?

There is another Question on that subject.

Is not the shortage of coal typical of every other nationalised industry—worse service at increased cost to the unfortunate public?

Could the Minister explain why we are apparently continuing to export coal at a lower price than the price which is paid for imported coal, and will he not consider restricting exports in order to reduce imports and therefore save some money?

There is a Question on that subject later.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power (1) the amount of coal to be allocated to each householder in Birmingham from the period 1st May to 30th October; how far he estimates that supplies of coal will be available to meet the allocation to all registered applicants; and when he will be in a position to indicate the prospects for next winter;

(2) if the present level of coal stocks in Birmingham compared with the figure 12 months ago.

Allocations of house coal in Birmingham are about the same this summer as they have been for some years past, and no change is expected next winter. Information about stocks held by industrial and other consumers is not available, but on 18th June stocks of house coal in merchants' yards stood at 9,700 tons compared with 3,200 tons a year ago.

How does the Minister square this position with the statement made in the "Coal Merchant and Shipper" on Saturday last, that in the West Midlands stocks at depôts are almost non-existent? In view of the serious position last winter in Birmingham, can the Minister say how we are to meet the situation in the coming winter, even if old-age pensioners are making unprecedented demands at this time of the year?

I think the position is that the situation is changing rapidly both because of the disturbances due to the railway strike and the efforts being made to put the situation right.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what the coal stocks are in London at present; and how they compare with the corresponding date last year.

Stocks of coal, anthracite and boiler fuel at merchants' depôts in London amounted to 81,500 tons at 18th June, 1955, compared with 100,000 tons a year ago.

Is not this a very serious diminution in stocks in London? What is the Minister doing about it?

This diminution of stocks in London—I would not at the moment call it a serious diminution—is due quite simply to the fact that we had a devastating railway strike a few weeks ago. The Coal Board, in consultation with the merchants, is now engaged in redistributing the stocks in the country so as to bring up the stocks in the southern region, which, naturally, suffered most when the railway strike took place.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what changes he proposes to authorise in the domestic coal price structure, as a result of losses of £2 per ton that the National Coal Board will incur on all the imports of 12 million tons of coal this year.

The National Coal Board consider their price structure as a whole and consult the consumers' councils when material changes are proposed. Proposals will shortly be considered by the councils and I would not authorise any changes in domestic prices before considering their views.

In view of the fact that the deficit of the National Coal Board is now rising at the rate of approximately £750,000 per week, and has been for some months past, on account of coal imports and other factors, would not my right hon. Friend consider expediting the announcement of the new prices, notably in connection with households?

That is primarily a matter for the National Coal Board, but I can say that the councils are considering the matter this week.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he will give a general direction to the National Coal Board to sell its coal in future in the United Kingdom at world prices.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power (1) whether he will give a general direction to the National Coal Board that, pending other arrangements for the financing of coal imports, losses on imported coal shall not be taken into account in the exercise of the Board's duty under Section 1 (4) ( c ) of the Coal Industry Nationalisation Act, 1946, to meet outgoings out of revenue on an average of good and bad years;

(2) whether he will take over responsibility for coal imports, after consultation with the National Coal Board, regarding the quantity required to meet deficiencies in internal supply and the prices at which the coal shall be offered for sale.

It is the policy of the National Coal Board to base their prices on the average costs incurred in making supplies available in accordance with the first section of the Coal Industry Nationalisation Act, 1946. I believe this to be in accordance with the national interest at the present time, and I therefore do not propose to give general directions as the hon. Members suggest, nor to alter the arrangements under which coal is imported.

In view particularly of the right hon. Gentleman's answer to the previous Question, is that not an extraordinary statement to make? How can the right hon. Gentleman expect us to have a sane national fuel policy if one of the fuels is artificially kept below world prices; and, as industrialists and even householders daily have to make decisions upon which type of fuel burning appliance they will install, how can they do this sensibly if one of the fuels is at an uneconomic price?

I do not think that is quite true. I would like to draw the hon. Gentleman's attention to the fact that since it is the policy of the National Coal Board to average coal prices, it also follows, and, indeed, is the fact that there are some million tons or so of coal production in this country which show a loss as big as the loss on imported coal.

Does the Minister's reply to my Question mean that the enormous loss on imported coal is to be borne by the mine workers, or is it to be borne by the domestic coal consumers, or both? As the Minister is answering two of my Questions, may I also ask whether this should not be accepted as a matter of national responsibility to be borne on central taxation?

This amount will inevitably be borne in the end by the coal consumers of the country, and certainly not by the mine workers. I think it would be wrong that the taxpayer should subsidise the coal industry.

Is it not about time that the National Coal Board should charge to the industry the full economic price for industrial coal? Is not the practice of selling coal below the world price and below the cost of production the main cause of the present trouble in the coal industry?

That is an argument for higher prices of coal.

Could the right hon. Gentleman say what is the difference between the price charged for coal exported and the home price?

I could not state the exact difference, but the National Coal Board loses about £2 a ton on coal imported and gains about £1 a ton on coal exported.

Does not the Minister think there is a case for higher prices for industrial coal? Why should the Coal Board sell coal below the economic price?

The Coal Board is basing its prices, in the case of both the steel industry and the British Electricity Authority, on exactly the same principles.

In view of the very keen competition in world markets, will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the absolute necessity of keeping down the cost of coal to industrial users?

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he will make a statement on the progress of conversion of coal to oil firing at power stations and dual firing; how much coal will thereby be saved this year and in 1956 and 1957; and what steps he has taken to assure adequacy of oil fuel supplies for this programme, and how much extra oil fuel is involved.

The Central Electricity Authority has recently announced a long term contract with one oil company and other negotiations are still in progress. Deliveries of oil will begin towards the end of this year, and it is hoped that half a million tons of coal may be saved in 1956 and up to 4 million tons in 1957. By 1960 the use of 5 million tons of oil in about 16 power stations should be saving about 8 million tons of coal. I am satisfied that these additional supplies will be available.

Would my right hon. Friend confirm that a number of oil companies tendered for this important contract from the British Electricity Authority, and that the contract was placed with the lowest tenderer, notwithstanding the fact that it was an American concern? In those circumstances, will my right hon. Friend confirm that there is no price ring operating among the oil companies?

There certainly was evidence of strong competition, and the Central Electricity Authority did what it thought best for itself.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether, in view of imports of 12 million tons of foreign coal this year, he will give emergency advice to industry, householders and merchants in regard to increased efficiency in coal burning, substitution of oil fuel for coal, and summer stocking of coal, in an effort to alleviate hardship and loss next winter.

I welcome this opportunity of emphasising the urgent need of increased fuel efficiency, both in industry and elsewhere, and the advantage to the nation of increasing the use of oil in place of coal, but I hope to make a fuller statement on these matters at an early date.

Would my right hon. Friend bear in mind that every week that goes by sees an increasing number of coal-consuming plants installed by British industry generally? Is it not urgently necessary that they be given guidance to switch to oil in the same way as the major coal consumer in the country, the Central Electricity Authority, is already switching in a large way?

This is being gone into in a technical way by the National Industrial Fuel Efficiency Service all the time, but fundamentally it must be a matter for each consumer to decide in the light of his own particular requirements.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power (1) how it is intended to finance the capital programme of the National Coal Board over the next five years; and how the Board's account stands at present with his Department and the banks; and

(2) what is the estimated capital expenditure by the Coal Board on major productive schemes over the next five years.

The Board's future capital expenditure programme is at present under review but is expected to include expenditure of about £100 million a year on collieries and associated activities. It will be financed as hitherto from the Board's internal resources and by advances from me which now amount to approximately £200 million. No borrowings have been made from the banks.

Does not the Minister think that this is a rather unsatisfactory method of financing a very large capital programme? Would he not consider having some examination made of the methods of providing capital for all the nationalised industries so that some comparison could be made between them and we can see how the amount placed to the coal industry compares with that to atomic energy, for instance, or to other comparable industries?

I will see whether such a statement could be prepared.

Would it not be a good idea, before embarking on additional capital expenditure, to know whether we shall get a return on our capital? Is it not a fact that we are getting into an awful muddle in the coal industry and that something ought to be done about it?

I would point out to my hon. Friend that in the original plan for coal it was always understood that about two-thirds of all the capital expenditure under that plan would be necessary to make up for the running out of facilities, which is inevitable in an extractive industry.

Would the Minister explain how it is that we have been spending large sums on capital re-equipment for years without adequate results?

In fairness to the coal industry, it must be remembered that the sinking of new mines takes up to ten years and major reconstructions of pits takes between five and eight years. The results which we are now getting therefore depend fundamentally on the capital expenditure on major reconstructions which took place seven or eight years ago. We have increased the rate of capital expenditure nearly three-fold since we came into office, but we shall not get the benefit of that until a number of years have passed.

Is the Minister aware that output at the face and overall output in 1954 continued to increase and that one of the main problems in the industry is lack of manpower?

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what further consideration he has given to reducing or terminating coal exports.

Commitments have been made to foreign customers for this year but exports are expected to be about 2 million tons less than in 1954. The level of exports for next year is being considered in the light of coal production and consumption trends.

While I welcome the right hon. Gentleman's partial conversion to what I have been advocating for some time—namely, cutting down coal exports—may I ask him whether he will go just a little further and take note of the fact that we are importing about 12 million tons of coal and are going to export this year about 10 million tons of coal? Why not set the one against the other and cut down coal imports to the extent of having to import only 2 million tons?

The Coal Board have to enter into commitments with their foreign customers a considerable time in advance, usually in the late summer or early autumn. Hitherto the policy has been to continue to export, while at the same time importing our marginal requirements, in the interests of the coal industry as a long-term exporter. We have to reconsider that in the light of the very active business conditions and rising consumption of coal in this country, and that we intend to do.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make it abundantly clear that it is of the highest importance for our survival as a great industrial nation that we should continue to maintain our coal exports to the coal markets and that some day we may need them very badly?

I agree with that. At the same time, we have to balance it against the price which has to be paid, and at present the price is heavy.

Would not this problem easily be solved if the coal industry could produce as much as it did under private enterprise?

The answer is that for at least a generation the coal industry in this country has been a problem industry. Before the war the problem was that it had a superabundance of coal and not enough markets. The problem today is that the demand is immense and that it cannot produce enough coal.

Is it not also the case that the British coal industry today is producing between 35 and 45 million tons a year more than it produced in the last year under private enterprise?

Yes, that is perfectly true, but, of course, that, too, is an unfair comparison, because we are dealing with an industry which had been contracted in its manpower at the end of a long war.

Is the Minister not aware that in 1930 230,000 mine workers were signing on at the employment exchanges? Will he inform his hon. Friends about the true condition of this industry?

I think we should do very much better not to dwell so much on the past but all to work together to get this great national industry into proper form.

asked the Minister of Supply if he will make a statement giving details of the present position and future prospects in respect to the development of helicopters for passenger and goods transport services in this country; and what progress has been made in the experiments designed to reduce noise.

As the answer is rather long, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is the Minister aware that a prominent feature of aviation day yesterday in Moscow was the twinengined helicopters? Can the Minister say whether we have any such machines of which we could now make use for troops and equipment and, if not, why we are so far behind?

I would ask the hon. Member to study the answer which will appear in HANSARD.

asked the Minister of Supply what steps he took to ascertain the views of the engineering industry before it was decided to transfer his responsibilities for that industry to the President of the Board of Trade.

Before the decision was taken my right hon. Friend the former Minister of Supply met and discussed the proposed transfer with a group of some twenty leading industrialists representing a cross-section of the engineering industries, and also with the Presidents of the Confederation of Shipbuilding and Engineering Unions and of the Amalgamated Engineering Union.

Is it not a fact that these people were only informed of the Government's proposal and were not consulted, in that they were not asked what their opinions were? Is it not a fact that they simply received information as to the Government's decision?

No. I am very glad to be able to inform the right hon. Gentleman that they were consulted and asked for their views. It was as a result of the views which they then expressed that the decision was taken.

We were told that these views were very much divided, were we not?

That is correct. There was a division of view, but the majority was in favour.

asked the Minister of Supply what is the definition of the light-metal industry which is to remain his responsibility after the other recently-announced changes in responsibility have taken place.

The Ministry of Supply will continue to exercise the responsibilities for aluminium, magnesium and titanium in all stages beyond that of primary metal which it has at present.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how much longer he intends to continue the present arrangements for marketing home-produced eggs.

A producers' marketing scheme is likely to be formally submitted shortly and my right hon. Friend does not anticipate making major changes in the present interim arrangements for the time being.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Public Accounts Committee has once again stigmatised these arrangements as unsatisfactory? How much longer is his right hon. Friend to flout this Committee?

I do not think that is a fair description of the Report of the Public Accounts Committee. It said that the packer is placed in a relatively sheltered position and expressed the hope that the introduction of a permanent arrangement would soon be forthcoming. We are expecting the submission of the suggested arrangement shortly. Then action will be taken to make permanent arrangements.

Surely the hon. Gentleman agrees that the Public Accounts Committee said that it cannot regard as satisfactory a scheme in which virtually all the financial risks are run by the Exchequer? Why does he complain when I say that the Public Accounts Committee regards those arrangements as unsatisfactory?

The hon. Member knows perfectly well that half the eggs which go to the packing stations have to be treated as sales to a wholesaler on a normal commercial basis. On that part of the scheme the packers bear the same risks as other wholesalers.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that somebody ought to speak up for the Public Accounts Committee and that repeatedly it has said that these arrangements are unsatisfactory and that they are unfair to the Exchequer? When is his right hon. Friend going to do something about it?

The hon. Member may be perfectly satisfied that my right hon. Friend will take full account of the Report of the Public Accounts Committee and, if need be, will stand up for it.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the amount of the subsidy on imported meat for the year 1954–55.

The estimated trading deficit in 1954–55 on imported meat was £5.8 million.

Can the hon. Gentleman explain why a few months ago his right hon. Friend said the losses would be not nearly £6 million but nearly £100,000? What has happened to create this loss of well over £5 million in the last few months?

The hon. Member is aware that because of the great supplies we have had from our home producers we have had to sell off imported meat at a lower price than otherwise would be the case.

Is it not obvious that when my right hon. Friend made the remark referred to he was thinking of the amount of subsidy which would have to have been given under the Government of the party opposite?

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the amount of the subsidy on pigs for pork and bacon for the year 1954–55.

The estimated amount of the subsidy on pigs for pork and bacon for the year 1954–55 is £56.9 million.

Can the hon. Gentleman say what the anticipated profits will be on imported bacon over the same period?

I should like notice of that question.

asked the Minister of Health if he will now take steps to ensure that old-age pensioners are given free transport to hospitals where they receive necessary treatment and back to their homes.

No, Sir. Where an ambulance is necessary for medical reasons it is provided free. Any others who cannot afford the fare to hospital by public transport can already get help after assessment by the National Assistance Board.

Does the Minister realise that this has an important bearing on the health of old age-pensioners and, indeed, on the national economy, because the provision of ambulances costs far more than the 2d. or 4d. old-age pensioners would have to pay for public transport; but it means a great deal to old-age pensioners? Will she look at the question again?

Medical necessity and not age has long been the criterion. That was agreed by the other party when in power, and we see no reason to dissent from it. Medical necessity should be the criterion in providing public transport and not age.

I regret to have to say that, having regard to the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I shall raise this matter in another way at the earliest possible opportunity.

asked the Minister of Health whether, having regard to the reduction in the number of students coming forward to qualify as ophthalmic opticians and the increase in unqualified optical services being offered by itinerant quack opticians, he will take early steps to prepare a Bill for the registration of opticians, based on the report of the Crook Committee; and if he will introduce such legislation in the present Session of Parliament.

asked the Minister of Health when he will introduce a Bill for the registration of opticians.

My right hon. Friend is afraid that legislation on this subject must wait until Parliamentary time is available, and he cannot say when this will be.

Is the hon. Lady aware that sales of spectacles in chain stores have been increasing very sharply recently and in absolute contrast to what happened in 1948 after the introduction of the National Health Service, when such sales dwindled practically to nil, and that this matter is causing great concern among hospital workers? Can she give the House an assurance that the declaration of the Minister when he took office that he did not want to be a Minister noted for introducing legislation is not the reason for not going ahead with this very important matter?

No, I can assure the hon. Member that the reply I have given is an accurate one. Certainly, a large measure of agreement has been reached in discussions with the professional bodies. We have every intention of introducing necessary legislation when Parliamentary time can be found.

Is the hon. Lady not aware of the very serious difficulties which arise in the medical profession due to the lack of registered opticians? Can the Minister not urge more vigorously that the small amount of time which would be needed to present a Bill should be given?

Issues affecting professional bodies very rarely take up a small amount of time, but I can assure the hon. Member that we are aware of representations of the professions and they know of our intention to introduce legislation as soon as we can.

Whilst not agreeing with the last statement of the hon. Lady, may I ask if she can give an undertaking that this important legislation will be introduced immediately after the Recess, as she will agree that the work of opticians is of vital importance, to the people and legislation is very much overdue?

I am afraid I cannot give the assurance as to date beyond what I have already said.