asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will arrange for the earnings exemption limit for pensioners to be raised from £2 to £2 10s. a week.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will now take steps to permit old-age pensioners to earn £3 per week instead of £2 per week as heretofore.

I have nothing to add to the reply which I gave on 6th February to the hon. and gallant Members for Brixton (Lieut.-Colonel Lipton) and Berwick and East Lothian (Major Anstruther-Gray).

Would the Minister not agree that this limit is now unduly low and that it penalises thrift, creates great hardship and ought to be increased?

I think the hon. Member will agree that having asked the advice of the Advisory Committee, having secured that Committee's willingness to give the matter priority, it would be very wrong for me to comment.

Has my right hon. Friend obtained an impression, both from speeches in the House and views expressed outside, that many people would like to see this matter dealt with with great urgency?

Yes. I am sure that this is a matter which commends itself to a great many people.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how many cases of metal fume fever among welders have been brought to his notice; and whether he will schedule lung hazards due to welding as a prescribed disease.

The answer to the first part of the Question is "None, Sir." As to the second, I am not aware of any lung hazards due to welding not already covered by the Act which would satisfy the statutory conditions for pre-cription.

If the Minister receives information and evidence that there is serious risk that some forms of welding do cause fibrosis of the lungs, will he consider taking action?

As I think the hon. Member appreciates, if fibrosis of the lungs results from the process of welding, a claim can already be put in under the existing law in respect of pneumoconiosis. That is why in my answer I referred, perhaps obliquely, to the fact that risks which welders run are already covered in a number of directions.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he is aware of the industrial hazards that may be associated with the process of welding; and whether he will institute research into these hazards, and particularly into the composition of the electrode coatings.

Yes, Sir. But as this matter is being given attention by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour and National Service's Factory Inspectorate, I do not think that I should at present be justified in duplicating the research work being done.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that there are special hazards if the coatings of the electrodes contain metal such as cadmium, which may well be prescribed or has been pre-cribed lately, and in view of the specific dangers would he not at least try to get all the information possible for his Department?

From the hon. Member's supplementary question, I think he appreciates that certain aspects of cadmium poisoning have been prescribed in accordance with the Answer I gave a few days ago. On the main issue, the matter is being very fully investigated by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour and National Service. The hon. Member will appreciate that it is difficult to draw a hard-and-fast line between research for the purposes of prevention and research for the purposes of prescription.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he will analyse the certificate of incapacity in his Annual Digest of Statistics so that, in addition to the information already given, there will be an analysis of incapacity according to occupation.

For sickness benefits, this digest has included analyses by occupation which were specially prepared for the year 1951, and arrangements have been made which will, I hope, enable similar analyses to be provided for some future years. For industrial accidents and prescribed occupational diseases, analyses by industry, which seem to be generally more useful than analyses by occupation, are included in the Digest.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he will meet an all-party deputation of Members of Parliament to discuss the financial difficulties confronting old-age pensioners and others in receipt of State pensions.

Certainly, Sir. The hon. Member is, however, I am sure, aware that State pensioners in the sense of retired public servants are not within my responsibility.

Yes. I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reply, and I shall be very pleased to get an all-party deputation of Members who, I hope, will be able to persuade him to do something for these pensioners.

I shall always be glad to see the hon. Gentleman, either alone or accompanied.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance (1) what further plans he has for improving the financial position of old-age pensioners, war disabled and other pensioners;

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what proposals he has for increasing the purchasing power of the basic retirement pension above its 1946 level.

I have no statement to make on these subjects today.

When the deputation waits upon the Minister, and in the interim period, will he give consideration to the Chancellor's statement that the cost of food alone rose twice as fast last year as in the previous year, as it is on food, in the main, that the old-age pensioners spend their limited incomes? Will the right hon. Gentleman, therefore, give real consideration, between now and the time of receiving the deputation, to increasing these pensions?

I shall, of course, consider anything that is said either by the Chancellor or by the hon. Gentleman.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that several times recently he has told us that the purchasing power of the pensioners is the same as it was in 1946? Does he not think that pensioners ought to share in any improvements in the standard of living that have taken place since then? What is the Government's policy for them?

That is another question.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what further consideration he has given to increasing the basic rate of war disability pensions.

I am aware of and am studying the representations made to my predecessor.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that when the last increase was made the holder of a disability pension got 5s. a week or less as a result of that increase? Will he also bear in mind that his predecessor gave a promise, when he received a deputation on the subject on 30th November last, that he would bring its representations to the notice of his colleagues in the Government? Is the right hon. Gentleman on speaking terms with his colleagues on this subject?

The reply to the first part of the hon. and gallant Gentleman's supplementary question, is that of course he will appreciate that that increase, which came into effect in February, 1955, was the largest increase in the basic rate ever made. As regards the second part of the hon. and gallant Gentleman's supplementary question, I can assure him that in this Government that which he rightly fears in consequence of his experience with the last one is not the situation.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will now specify what steps he has taken and upon what evidence he has acted in arriving at his decision to make no improvement in the pensions of the 10s. widows; and if he will now reconsider the plight of these widows, most of whom are in need of assistance.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance (1) if, having regard to the recent Report of the National Insurance Advisory Committee, he will now amend the regulations regarding the payment of widows' pensions by replacing the present 10 years of marriage condition by a three years of marriage condition;

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether, in considering the recommendations of the National Insurance Advisory Committee, he will give priority to improving the pensions of 10s. widows.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance, in view of the fact that the Report of the National Insurance Advisory Committee makes no recommendation for an increase of pension of the 10s. widows, on the ground that there was no power to do so under the terms of reference, what action he now intends to take to increase these pensions.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether, in the light of the Report of the National Insurance Advisory Committee, he will take steps to meet the needs of a class of pensioner in respect of whom no recommendation is made, namely, the 10s. widows.

The position of these widows is one of the matters dealt with in the Report of the National Insurance Advisory Committee, which I laid before Parliament on 3rd February. All the matters contained in the Report are under consideration.

Does the Minister agree that other classes in the community have received increases in their incomes to enable them to cope with the increased cost of living? Will he, therefore, state why these poor 10s. widows should be singled out for invidious treatment?

I do not want, as the hon. and learned Gentleman, I think, will have gathered from my original Answer, to be led into comments on individual aspects of this matter until the whole matter has been properly considered. Surely the House will understand that?

Will the right hon. Gentleman speed up consideration of this Report, and give an assurance to the House that the Government will bring forward legislation as speedily as possible, in view of the dissatisfaction and disquiet on this question throughout the country?

I will certainly try to consider this very important and somewhat complicated Report as speedily as I can, but I think that I must come to the point of decision on it before even talking of legislation.

On 14th November, in answer to a question of mine, my right hon. Friend's predecessor said:

"I hope that when the Report appears the difficulties will be fully resolved."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 14th November, 1955; Vol. 546, c. 22.]

I think I should be out of order if I did anything to make a Member of another place uncomfortable.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a 10s. widow in my constituency, of whom I have sent him particulars, is able to do only part-time work for £2 5s. a week, and yet is refused increased pension or National Assistance? Does he really believe that anybody today can live on £2 5s. a week, when rent, fuel and clothing are at their present prices?

I shall certainly look into that case, as the hon. Lady has been good enough to send particulars of it to me, but I would rather not comment on it until I have done so.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will now reduce to three years the qualifying period for pension for widows who remarry.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he is now in a position to state the Government's attitude to the Report of the National Insurance Advisory Committee on Widows' Benefits.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if, having considered the recommendations of the National Insurance Advisory Committee, he will now make proposals for increasing the allowances of the widowed mother, and the widow in receipt of 10s. pension; and if he will introduce the necessary legislation with all speed.

Recommendations on these subjects are contained in the recent Report of the National Insurance Advisory Committee. I have no statement to make at present.

In reply to an earlier Question about increases in the earnings limit from £2 to £2 10s. a week, the right hon. Gentleman indicated that he was going to accept the advice of the National Insurance Advisory Committee on that point. Is he going to accept the advice of the same Committee on this point?

I think that the hon. Gentleman misunderstood my Answer. I said, with regard to the other Report, that I was considering it. I gave no indication of my views upon it. Therefore, the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question on this Question is, I think, founded on a false hypothesis.

Since the National Insurance Advisory Committee's remit expressly excluded the Committee from considering the level of benefit of the 10s. pension, will the right hon. Gentleman undertake, when considering this Report, that he will also consider raising the level of this scandalously inadequate pension?

As the hon. Gentleman rightly says, the National Insurance Advisory Committee takes the view that the actual level of benefit is outside its terms of reference, but I am sure he knows that paragraphs 55 to 68 of the Report deal with very important aspects of the position of those ladies, which clearly must affect any decision on the rate.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he is aware that widows who have forfeited the 10s. pension on remarriage receive no pension at all if they are widowed a second time less than ten years afterwards; and if he will make a statement.

The 10s. widow's pension is paid in respect of insurance under the former Contributory Pensions Acts, and title to it can only arise in respect of widowhood following on a marriage contracted before the repeal of those Acts in July, 1948. Women widowed since that date are eligible for the appropriate widowhood benefits of the new scheme under the conditions of that scheme. The fact that the second marriage had not lasted ten years would not prevent the payment of widow's allowance or widowed mother's allowance and would prevent the payment of widow's pension only in some cases.

Is the Minister aware that in these cases to which he refers—and they amount to quite a number of cases —the widows who are twice bereaved are usually elderly, which means that though they have qualified once for pension they are disqualified merely because additional contributions have not been paid and that they are, therefore, being treated abominably? Will he not agree that such widows are being treated worse than any other class of widows, and look into that matter to see if something can be done for them speedily?

The hon. Gentleman seems to be under a misapprehension. The pension right in respect of the original marriage is forfeited not by default of contribution but as a result of remarriage, and, therefore, such a widow is in precisely the same position as any other widow under the new scheme.

Can the Minister answer this question? A woman in receipt of pension marries, and then her marriage is annulled. She is not divorced: her marriage is annulled. Does that bring her into the position she was in before, or does the fact that she was married cause her to lose her pension completely?

I think that the right hon. Gentleman will sympathise with me if I ask to have notice of that one.

In the case of a widow in receipt of a 10s. pension who remarries, the 10s. pension ceases. If her second husband dies before the marriage has lasted ten years there is no pension at all, not even the 10s. pension. Will the Minister put that right?

The hon. Gentleman will appreciate, if he has read the Report of the National Insurance Advisory Committee, that one of the Committee's recommendations in respect of reducing the qualifying period of marriage from ten to three years would deal with a good many of the points that he has in mind.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance in what year the widow's pension of 10s. was first introduced; and what is its equivalent purchasing power in terms of 1956 prices.

The answer to the first part of the Question is January, 1926, and to the second, 17s. 10d.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will remove the restrictions on the amounts which may be earned by widows without diminution of their pensions, pending his decisions on other matters affecting widow pensioners.

No, Sir. These rules are now being examined by the National Insurance Advisory Committee in conjunction with other earnings rules and I must await their Report.

Is it not a fact that the objections which have sometimes been stated to the alteration of the earnings rule in other cases would appear to have no validity in the case of widow pensioners?

It may well be that different principles may apply in such cases. That is the sort of point on which the advice of the National Insurance Advisory Committee would be most useful.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance, in view of the introduction of a new Pensions (Increases) Act to cover people who were employed in Government service, he will take steps to improve the position of the non-contributory pensioners, many of whom have small incomes obtained through private pensions schemes and thrift.

Under the National Insurance Act, 1946, these pensions will not be issued to anyone who reaches 70 after 30th September, 1961. They are clearly of a transitional character and are paid by the National Assistance Board, which supplements them where necessary. In these circumstances, I do not think it is necessary to introduce legislation to increases these pensions.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Prime Minister did not make any reference to these pensions being only of a temporary character? Is he aware that the Prime Minister said at Bradford that all people living on small fixed incomes were having a very hard time and that some action would be taken in support of them? May I ask my right hon. Friend not to eliminate the non-contributory pensioners, because I think that that is quite the wrong thing to do?

I know my hon. Friend's views. I can only add that the decision that this should be of a transitional nature was taken under the Act a good many years ago, and that in fact these pensions, which are administered by the National Assistance Board, supplemented where necessary by the Board and sometimes paid on the same order as supplementary assistance, are very closely connected with assistance.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power (1) what he estimates will be the total inland energy requirements of the nation in 1965, expressed in coal equivalents; and how these requirements will be divided between the main category of consumers;

On the assumptions of rapid and continuous economic growth and continued progress in fuel efficiency, inland fuel requirements in 1965 might exceed 300 million tons of coal equivalent a year, of which half might be needed by industry and a quarter by households.

Could my right hon. Friend give a little more information as to how these coal demands will be met in view of the rather pessimistic information that has come out in recent reports?

In suggesting that we should look to coal for 75 per cent. of our requirements, I was giving a conservative estimate. My desire is to increase the output of coal as far as possible. I should like to make it perfectly clear that in so far as we cannot do that we are dependent on imported fuel, that is, oil.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what financial inducements he is now considering to persuade domestic users to install fuel-saving heating appliances.

I am not persuaded that special financial assistance, beyond that provided for in the Clean Air Bill, would at present lead to any significant saving in the domestic use of solid fuel.

Does the Minister support the policy of removing Purchase Tax on appliances which save fuel? If that is the case, will he direct the Chancellor's attention to the fact that there is a very high level of Purchase Tax on the domestic heat pump, an apparatus which will produce three or four units of useful energy for one equivalent unit of electrical energy employed? Will he tell the Chancellor that the tax is having a very serious effect on the production of the apparatus?

I should like to have notice of that question. I am not aware that solid fuel appliances are subject to Purchase Tax.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what recent instructions he has given to his fuel overseers as to the advice which they tender to persons complaining about the quality of coal supplied to them.

Local fuel overseers have standing instructions to advise householders to make their complaints to their merchants between whom and the National Coal Board there is an established procedure for dealing with such complaints.

Is the Minister aware that I receive an increasing number of complaints about the poor quality of coal supplied by coal merchants in North London? Does he not agree that it is desirable that the remedies open to members of the public should be known as widely as possible?

Surely the remedies lie, first, in the relation of the customer to the retailer and, beyond that, of the retailer to the supplier.

Does my right hon. Friend not think it is time that domestic coal users were taken from under the wing of the fuel overseer and were allowed to buy their coal wherever they wish? Is not that the only way in which they can obtain the quality they want?

I should be delighted if I were in a position to abolish the rationing of domestic coal, but I hardly think that the supply and demand position is propitious.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what percentage of underground conveyors in the coal mines are equipped with non-inflammable belting; and when he expects the change-over from rubber belting to be completed.

The National Coal Board estimates that by the end of last year about 45 per cent. of the total length of conveyor belting used below ground was fire resistant. I cannot say when the change-over will be completed because in certain conditions there are practical difficulties in using fire-resistant belting which have still to be overcome.

Is the Minister aware that the change-over has now been proceeding for over four years, and bearing in mind the disastrous underground fires that have taken place as a result of the use of rubber belting, would he take steps to remove any possible bottle-necks in manufacture and distribution, and expedite the use of non-inflammable belting in all mines in the United Kingdom?

In so far as I can, certainly, Sir.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what will be the extent of the loss on the sale of coal imported from the dollar area during the present coal year.

Of the order of £16 million.

Is the Minister prepared to introduce the necessary legislation for this burden to fall on the Exchequer and not on the National Coal Board?

The burden does not fall on the National Coal Board. The burden falls on the consumer. I see no reason why the Exchequer should subsidise the consumer.

Does not my hon. Friend's Question illustrate the absurdity of a situation in which the Coal Board is selling industrial coal to industry in this country at below the economic price? Why should the Coal Board go on subsidising private industry, and will the Minister seriously consider inviting the Board to raise the price of industrial coal to the economic level?

There is no distinction between industrial coal and domestic coal. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh"] The same principles apply to both, and the requirement that the Coal Board shall make ends meet covers all kinds of coal.

Is the Minister aware that while I agree with what he says, and I was not questioning that, I was asking him why there should be a distinction between what industry pays for coal abroad and what it pays in this country?

To obviate that distinction would mean raising the price of coal by between £2 10s. and £2 15s. a ton. I consider that an increase of this magnitude would be so devastating and upsetting in its effects as to be entirely impracticable and unthinkable.

Is it not then rather remarkable that the Coal Board should be selling coal to British industry at £2 10s. a ton less than the economic price?

If the Coal Board were, in deference to the right hon. Gentleman's question, to raise the price of coal by between £2 10s. to £2 15s. a ton, it would be making a gigantic surplus, which would be in contradiction to the present Statute.

Is the Minister aware that the loss on imported coal appears in the balance sheet of the National Coal Board?

The National Coal Board suffers no losses in respect of the import of coal, provided that the average cost is reflected in the domestic prices, and that is the case at present.

Is it not true that until now the Socialist Party has been arguing that the nationalised industries should be used as Government agencies for reducing the cost of living to the consumer?

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power approximately how much new capital has been invested in the coal industry since 1945.

Capital expenditure between 1947 and 1955 was about £460 million, half of it financed by borrowing.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if he will provide a detailed annual analysis, since nationalisation, area by area, of the improvements per man year in coal production arising from capital investment; and of earnings and voluntary absenteeism.

With permission, I will circulate a table in the OFFICIAL REPORT. But I would ask my hon. Friend when she studies the table to bear in mind that no valid conclusions can be drawn from a simple comparison of capital expenditure and output per man in any particular year, for much of the expenditure is on projects that take time to complete and can show results only after some years.

May I thank my right hon. Friend for his undertaking, which at any rate makes progress in letting the country know what advantages we may obtain in increased coal production by the capital expenditure involved? I think it is a very good idea to go forward with this matter.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what consultations he has had with the Central Electricity Authority about reduction in their boards' capital expenditure.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what progress has been made in his review of the planned capital expenditure of the Central Electricity Authority in conformity with the present economic policy of the Government.

In recent discussions with the Authority, I asked them to let me know the effects of a further reduction of capital expenditure in the financial year 1956–57, additional to that proposed in response to my predecessor's request to them last year, and I am now considering their report.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of the area electricity boards are making extremely heavy cuts at present in their rural electrification programmes which, they state, are due to Government policy?

I should like to give a clear assurance that in any re-phasing or reduction in the capital expenditure of the Central Electricity Authority, no disproportionate effect will be felt by rural electrification.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say clearly whether or not it is the Government's policy that rural electrification shall be cut down?

It is the policy of the Government to alleviate the general load on the economy. In the light of that policy, I cannot promise that rural electrification will be completely exempted, but I will give the very firmest promise that there will be no disproportionate cut.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that it was last July that the Chancellor of the Exchequer made his important statement on the rearrangement of economic policy? Is he aware that for the last seven months my hon. Friends and myself have been trying to find out what contribution is to be made by the Central Electricity Authority? Can my right hon. Friend say why the chairman of the Authority put into print in the newspapers last week that he proposed to save £8 million out of his programme whereas the Minister is not in a position to give such information to the House?

All I can say in reply to my right hon. Friend——

Honourable.

I am clearly anticipating events to come. I should like to make it clear that there has been no decision with regard to the capital expenditure of the Central Electricity Authority in the year 1956–57.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what progress has been made to date in the laying of a subterranean cross-Channel electricity cable to link certain power installations of the Central Electricity Authority with those of Electricité de France; and whether he will state prospects for a permanent installation to exchange marginal peak load needs.

I am informed that the experimental work both in this country and in France has now been virtually completed. The technical experts are preparing a report which it is hoped will be submitted to the respective electricity authorities this summer.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what part of the moneys authorised by him in respect of new investment and borrowing powers for the nationalised electrical industry during 1955–56 is to be used for such commercial and sales promotional activities as appliance stocks and sales, including television and radio sets and other retail trading excluding generating, distribution and sale of electricity.

For hire purchase less than 2 per cent. of total capital requirements, and negligible amounts for the other activities mentioned.

Yes, Sir, but would my right hon. Friend apply himself to the problem of the nationalised electricity industry now devoting increasing sums of money year by year to purely sales promotional activities of all these accessories and appliances? Why should the Treasury guarantee capital for enterprises of that kind, which are only at the expense of the area boards' private enterprise competitors?

My hon. Friend must not assume that I am not applying my mind to the problems of the Central Electricity Authority. Indeed, it may interest him to know that I am granting no new finance to the Central Electricity Authority for hire-purchase purposes for the financial year 1956 to 1957.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what discussions he is having with the Central Electricity Authority and the area electricity boards on the recommendations of the Herbert Committee; and if he will make a statement.

I have asked the Authority and each board to let me have by the end of this month their views on the recommendations dealing with the statutory structure of the industry and certain other matters of national policy, and later to supplement these views with any observations they may wish to make on other aspects of the Report.

May I put two points to the right hon. Gentleman? In view of the publication of this controversial report, does the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is desirable that industry should not be left too long in suspense as to the intentions of the Government? Secondly, will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that if he proposes changes he will take into consultation all the bodies and interests concerned, particularly the employees in the industry?

I am in entire agreement with the first part of the question. I recognise that the fact of this report means great uncertainty for the industry, and I am most anxious to clear away that uncertainty as quickly as possible. With regard to the second part of the question, I have already given an assurance that I will take into account the views expressed.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what success has been achieved in the exploration of natural gas in Great Britain; and whether he will make a statement.

At Cousland in Midlothian and Heathfield in Sussex, where the presence of gas has been known for many years, the trial wells have not so far yielded gas in quantities sufficient for commercial production. Two wells in Ashdown Forest have similarly yielded only small quantities of gas. Attention is at present being concentrated chiefly on Yorkshire where work has begun on a deep well at Hunmanby, north-west of Bridlington.

Is the search for natural gas being intensified?

The programme set out for itself by the Gas Council was a five-year programme. Since only between two and three years have elapsed, it is premature to draw final conclusions.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power to what extent oil is being used to make up the deficiency between coal production and demand.

In 1955 total inland consumption of fuel amounted to 250 million tons of coal equivalent. Of this over 214 million tons was met by coal and nearly a million by hydro-electricity. The deficiency of 35 million tons was met by oil.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if, in view of the publication of the Pensions (Increase) Bill proposing an improvement in the pensions of various classes of public servants, he will make a statement on a comparable improvement in pension schemes taken over under the Electricity Act, 1947, and the Gas Act, 1948.

Responsibility for reviewing pension schemes and initiating any changes rests with the boards.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his predecessor gave me an assurance in this House that the rates of pensions of electricity and gas pensioners are being looked at, and is not his present answer a contradiction of the answer I received in this House from his predecessor?

I cannot be aware of what my predecessor has said on that—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh"] I understand it was said privately, which is a different matter. However, as I understand the position, the Central Electricity Authority has submitted proposals adjusting pensions in the light of the Pensions (Increase) Act, 1952. Those are now before me and, in due course, I shall give judgment, but that has nothing to do with the new Pensions (Increase) Bill.

In the light of that answer, can I expect from the right hon. Gentleman a statement on this important matter quite soon?

No, Sir. The responsibility for initiating any pensions changes rests entirely with the boards. I have responsibility for approving changes submitted by them, but the initiation must rest with them.

Why is it that the Minister of Transport has power in certain circumstances to make regulations? Am I to understand that my right hon. Friend has not got similar powers? If not, will he seek them, in view of the Prime Minister's speech at Bradford about the small fixed income groups?

I am not answerable for the Minister or Ministry of Transport. I can only speak from my own limitations.

asked the Minister of Supply whether he will take steps to assist British aircraft manufacturers to acquire the silencer for jet aircraft produced by the Boeing Airplane Company; and if he will make a statement.

So far as I am aware, the Boeing silencer follows the design of a silencer developed by Rolls-Royce under contract with the Ministry of Supply. Flight tests of the Rolls-Royce silencer will start shortly; meanwhile, details of the Rolls-Royce design have been made available to other firms in the British aircraft industry.

While I thank my hon. Friend for his Answer, may I ask him to encourage manufacturers of jet aircraft to fit the Rolls-Royce silencer, as that will give a great deal of satisfaction to those who live around London Airport?

It is a complicated design matter, but all firms are fully aware of the importance of trying to reduce the noise of aircraft by every means at their disposal.

asked the Minister of Supply on what basis, whether on cost-plus or otherwise, his Department allocates contracts for the development and production of guided missiles.

The Ministry of Supply makes fixed-price contracts whenever possible but contracts for development are usually paid for on the basis of ascertained cost, plus a sum calculated to give a reasonable return on the capital employed.

As very little of the capital employed is contributed by outside shareholders and most of it has accumulated from previous Government contracts or has been borrowed on the basis of Government contracts awarded, and as production seems to be in inverse ratio to the profits now made, will not the hon. Gentleman agree that there is a case for looking into the matter again?

I do not agree with the statements made by the hon. Gentleman in his supplementary question. Capital should be serviced, and the rates at which it is serviced in these contracts are extremely reasonable.

asked the Minister of Supply whether, in view of recently-announced profits of firms engaged in the manufacture of aircraft and guided missiles for his Department, he is satisfied that the margin of profit allowed for individual contracts are reasonable; and if he will make a statement.

The total published profits of a firm are not necessarily a guide to the profit earned on its Government work. Where competitive tenders cannot be invited, profit margins on Ministry contracts are negotiated in accordance with well-established principles designed to give a reasonable return on capital employed.

As the profits of one firm engaged largely upon Government contracts have risen from £656,000 in 1951 to £2,159,000 in 1955, and those of another have risen from £6 million to £15 million over the same period, is the hon. Gentleman really of the opinion that the rewards are reasonable? Will he not look into the formula used in giving profits?

The formula which is used has been examined by the Public Accounts Committee and approved by it in its 1953–54 Report. With regard to the second of the two companies referred to, I would point out that the figures of Canadian Income Tax paid by the firm and published by it show that a very substantial part of its profit was earned in Canada.

Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied that the production of operational aircraft is commensurate with the size of the profits?

Yes, Sir, reasonably so.

In considering the formula, will my hon. Friend bear in mind that gross profit figures unrelated to turnover and capital are most misleading?

Yes, Sir. One must distinguish between profit expressed as a percentage of issued capital and profit expressed as a percentage of production, for they are two very different things.

asked the Minister of Supply what progress has been made in the Government-sponsored design of an aircraft for British Overseas Airways Corporation long-range routes in the 1964–66 era.

An outline specification for such an aircraft has been prepared by the Ministry of Supply in collaboration with British Overseas Airways Corporation, and manufacturers have been invited to submit design studies for consideration.

Are we to take it that the Bristol project, which until recently we understood was to be in conjunction with American firms, is now to be an all-British effort? If that is the case, will the hon. Gentleman accept the statement that every hon. Member in the House would wish such an undertaking well?

I believe that that is so, judging from the announcement published by the Bristol Aeroplane Company, which is at present being studied by my right hon. Friend.