asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what consideration is being given to improve the position of divorced women who did not pay contributions whilst married and therefore do not qualify under the present regulations for full-scale retirement pension.

A recommendation dealing with this matter is contained in the Report of the National Insurance Advisory Committee on the question of contribution conditions and credits provisions which I recently presented to Parliament (Cmd. 9854). I am at present considering this together with the other recommendations of the Committee.

Is the Minister aware that there are some very sad cases in this category, and will he, under all the circumstances, be as sympathetic as possible?

I must not prejudge any statement which I make on the recommendations as a whole, but I am bound to say that I have a good deal of sympathy with this recommendation.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will arrange to have paid to every old-age pensioner at Christmas week a bonus in the form of an extra week's pension in order, for that week, to mitigate the hardships old-age pensioners suffer from the present high cost of living.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will consider giving a bonus of £1 to old-age pensioners for Christmas to enable them to buy a little of the season's luxuries.

While I understand and sympathise with the feeling which prompts these Questions, I think the hon. Members will, on reflection, appreciate that such payments would not be appropriate to a compulsory contributory insurance scheme, and it is no doubt for that reason that the National Insurance Acts give no authority for the making of such payments.

Does the Minister realise—as I am sure he does—that there are exceptional reasons why some extenuation should be granted to old-age pensioners? One reason is that their incomes have not been equated to the high cost of living as have the incomes of other classes in the community and another reason is that they have less time than anyone else in which to enjoy their incomes.

The hon. and learned Gentleman will appreciate that the very large number of retirement pensioners in our present universal scheme covers some people who are in need and some who are very far from being in need. I think that indicates that, whatever other help is forthcoming at Christmas time, the National Insurance scheme, covering inevitably 4½ million pensioners, is not really the proper method.

Whatever the Minister might think that the National Insurance Acts are doing, is he not aware—and he must be aware—that all the year round these old-age pensioners are merely existing and not living, and that for many of them this will be their last Christmas on earth? Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that they are entitled to a little luxury during the Christmas season, and could he not find something for these pensioners who, in the past, have brought about many of the privileges which the younger people enjoy today?

I am glad to say that local and voluntary effort does a great deal at Christmas time to help those of these people who are in need. I would say to the House, with respect, that the view which has been universally taken by my predecessors, that the National Insurance scheme itself is not the proper method of doing what most of us would like to see and hope will be done for these people at Christmas time, is right.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how much it would cost to pay to every old-age pensioner a bonus of £1 a week in Christmas week.

Does not the Minister think that £5 million would be better spent in this way than on wildcat warlike schemes which merely increase the national debt, and will the right hon. Gentleman approach his colleagues in the Government with a view to seeing that this £5 million is spent in this very desirable way?

I have said what I have to say on the use of the National Insurance Scheme for this purpose. I am bound to add that I do not think the hon. and learned Gentleman's attempt to drag in extraneous matters helps very much.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what action he proposes to take to safeguard the welfare of pensioners who will be subjected to rent increases as a result of the Government's proposals.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what action he proposes to take to assist old-age pensioners, widows, and others, in view of the increase in prices of essential foods.

I would refer the hon. Members to the replies which I gave to the hon. Member for Blackburn (Mrs. Castle) and to other hon. Members on 3rd December.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what was the cost-of-living index figure on 16th November, 1954, fifteen days before it was decided pensions should be raised; what is the cost-of-living index figure now; what is the percentage increase; if he is aware that the general outlook indicates a further rise in the cost of living; and if he will consider increasing the insurance pensions.

On 16th November, 1954, the Interim Retail Prices Index stood at 144·7. On 16th October, 1956, the corresponding figure was 157·5, a percentage increase of 8·8 per cent. As regards the remainder of the Question, I would refer the hon. Member to the replies which I gave on 3rd December to the hon. Member for Blackburn (Mrs. Castle) and other hon. Members, to which I have nothing to add.

Is it not correct to say that if pensions were raised it would be largely a matter of transferring money from one section of the community to another and would, therefore, have no effect on the inflationary position? If that is so, what is the Government's reason for refusing to increase pensions in order to raise the status of these poor people to something more equivalent to that of the rest of the community?

If I were to deal with the hon. Gentleman's point about inflation, I am afraid that I should take a very long time indeed, but, on the figures for which he has asked, the cost of living over the period he selected has risen 8·8 per cent., as I told him, whereas the rate of pension has risen 23 per cent.

Will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the basis of his answer to this Question in relating it to the Index of Retail Prices? is he not aware that the Cost-of-Living Advisory Committee has made it abundantly clear that the Index of Retail Prices is not necessarily applicable to the cost of living of any particular section of the community and, furthermore, that the Index of Retail Prices definitely excludes from consideration the budgets of those who are dependent either wholly or substantially upon old-age pensions and National Assistance.

That may well be so, but I was answering a Question by the hon. Member for Wallsend (Mr. McKay), which asked for that figure.

asked the Minister of pensions and National Insurance why the money value of pensions compared with the prevailing earnings of workmen is so much greater now than in 1946; what is the difference from this angle between the two periods; and if he will consider these factors when he considers pensions in future.

I think the hon. Gentleman is under some misapprehension. I would refer him to the figures relating to this matter which I gave him on 3rd December. In any event, the level of earnings of manual workers is only one of a number of factors which has to he taken into account in connection with National Insurance retirement pensions.

Is it not correct, apart from the question of the workers themselves, that the income of the whole general community has risen tremendously since 1946, that dividends have risen by 82 per cent., national income by 80 per cent. and undistributed profits by about 190 per cent., so that the general money rise of incomes throughout the country has been extravagantly increased while pensions have been raised by only 5 per cent.? It is a scandalous position, and I am quite sure that the Government are not the friends of the aged people in the attitude which they are adopting at the present moment.

On the last part of the Question, as the hon. Gentleman knows, the real value of pensions today is better than that when his right hon. Friends raised it in 1951, and if there is any question of friendship for that section of society, our claim is considerably better than theirs. The figures which he gave rather rapidly were, I think, figures of money income. The true test is the real value, and that is what is applicable both to pensions and other matters.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will take the necessary action designed to increase scales of unemployment benefit in view of the indications that the Middle East situation will adversely affect employment and the cost of living.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if, in view of the increased unemployment likely to be caused by the oil and petrol shortage and by the general aftermath of the armed conflict in Egypt, he will consider raising unemployment benefit from its present level of £2 a week for a single person.

Differential benefit rates such as are proposed in these Questions would be contrary to the accepted basis of the National Insurance Scheme.

Would the right hon. Gentleman say which is the proper quarter in which to raise this matter, because is it not a fact that the cost of living has gone up substantially since the scales were fixed and, in view of the fear for the immediate future, surely he or someone else will do something about this important matter?

What the hon. Gentleman's Question relates to is a proposal to deal separately with the rates of unemployment benefit. If he studies the Beveridge Report he will see a clear criticism of the danger of having unemployment benefit raised above sick benefit rates, with the result that people not fit to work would be struggling down to register.

Then why cannot the Minister raise all the benefits? Does he realise that £2 a week total for old-age pensions or any other benefit leaves, in many cases, less than 2s. a day for food, and many men and women who will not go on National Assistance will go hungry in Britain this winter through no fault of their own? Cannot he therefore raise all the benefits?

The Question relates to unemployment benefit rates separately. I have already dealt with the main issue in a number of answers.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance the numbers of war disabled pensioners who will qualify for the new ageing allowance in February, 1957; and the estimated numbers of new and of expiring awards in a full year.

It is estimated that about 61,000 war disablement pensioners will qualify for the allowance in February next and that in the next full year 8,000 new awards will be made. I do not feel able, for reasons which I hope the hon. Gentlemen will understand, to give any figure for the number of awards which are likely to cease to be payable during the period mentioned.

While congratulating the Minister on the new allowance that he has made to ageing ex-Service men, may I ask him if he is aware that the annual cost of the concession is almost offset by the number of old ex-Service men who have died? That being so, will he give serious consideration to the request of B.L.E.S.M.A. and members of the all-party Committee for improvements before he actually signs the Royal Warrant making the increase?

The hon. Gentleman, who I know has followed this matter very closely, will recall that I gave the reasons last week why, after careful consideration, we thought it right to concentrate the sum of money available where the need is greatest, and that is, so far as this allowance is concerned, where the combination of age and the assessment of disablement was highest, while dealing with the problem of the most seriously disabled younger men by improvements in the comfort allowances.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will make a graduated reduction of the present qualifying age of 65 years for the new ageing allowance for war disabled pensioners to allow those who are 100 per cent., 90 per cent. or 80 per cent. disabled to qualify for the allowance at an earlier age than 65 years.

As the hon. Gentleman may be aware, I explained in answer to Questions on 3rd December why I do not think it is possible to extend further the improvements in war pension provisions which I announced on 19th November.

The Minister has given this afternoon the figure of 61,000 aging ex-Service men who will benefit. Is he aware that there are some 55,000 more who will not benefit and are disappointed that the age was not lower? The proposal made in the Question would at any rate bring the most deserving categories of 80 per cent., 90 per cent. and 100 per cent. aged ex-Service men into benefit a little sooner than 65. Will he give this matter sympathetic consideration?

I appreciate the point which the hon. Gentleman has made, but I think it will be well to recognise that the improvements in these allowances where no age factor arises are designed to give help to those most seriously disabled cases under 65 whom, I know, he has particularly in mind.

Will the Minister, in view of the fact that this will be contained in a Royal Warrant and is therefore unlikely to be discussed in this House, consider the position again before he presents the Royal Warrant, because, as his own figures show, these men are dying at a very high rate every year and to bring the age down to 60 would, I think, meet the case much more effectively than 65? Will he also consider that the man with 90 per cent. disability gets 5s. less than the man with 100 per cent. disability, and cannot he graduate it on the basis of the proportion of disablement—this would work out at 1s. 8d. at each stage—which would not leave the gap between 90 per cent. and a 100 per cent. disability?

As to the last part of the hon. Gentleman's question, I have, of course, considered while going into this matter all the various possible ways of doing it. I do not altogether like the hon. Gentleman's proposal for exact graduation, which proposes a much more elaborate system and one more apt to be upset if any change in the assessment took place. So far as the difference between 90 per cent. and 100 per cent. is concerned, the hon. Gentleman will have in mind that 100 per cent. covers a great many cases in which the disability in total is a great deal more than 100 per cent. and some preference for 100 per cent. is desirable. On the first point, I did consider this matter—I always pay attention to what the hon. Gentleman says—and I think that these proposals should go forward in the Royal Warrant as already announced.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will state, in tabular form, how many veterans of World War I are excluded from the comforts allowance, extended comforts allowance, and ageing allowance, respectively, because they have not reached the age of 65 years, giving the nature and percentage of disability in each case, and the amount of pension each such person is now entitled to.

There is no age condition for the awards of the comforts allowances, and the remaining parts of this Question do not therefore arise so far as this allowance is concerned. As regards pensioners of the 1914 War who will not qualify for the new allowance because they have not yet reached 65, I regret that information as to the precise nature of the disability and the amount of pensions and allowances in each case is not immediately available. I will, with permission, circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT the estimated number, analysed by pension assessment.

As the number of men under 65 who do not get benefit under this new scheme of the Minister's is very small, can he indicate any reason in ethics or justice why that small number of men, who were war heroes in the First World War, should be excluded from the benefit?

I disagree with the hon. and learned Gentleman in saying that the number of war disabled from the First World War who are under 65 is small. The number is, of course, substantial. I would refer the hon. and learned Gentleman to the answer which I gave a few minutes ago to his hon. Friend the Member for Itchen (Dr. King).

Will the Minister look at the question of war pensioners who will be receiving this new allowance—for which they are grateful—and are in receipt of National Assistance? As I understand it, their National Assistance grant will be decreased and they will be no better off as the result of the new award.

Proposals to deal with National Assistance disregards are quite separate and, as the hon. Gentleman knows, would require legislation.

asked the Minister of Pensions and Nations Insurance the number of disabled ex-Service men who have sufficiently recovered from pulmonary tuberculosis to be assessed at less than 20 per cent. disability.

I regret that this information is not available, bust pensions of 20 per cent, or over for pulmonary tuberculosis were re-assessed at less than 20 per cent. in 1,980 cases in the twelve months ended 30th September, 1956.

When the Minister is looking into these cases, and particularly those of men who appear to have so far recovered that their pensions are discontinued, will he have regard to the fact that it is still difficult for a man who is known to have had tuberculosis to get a job, not only outside but inside the Civil Service? If one Ministry can decide that a man has sufficiently recovered not to need a pension, surely that should not be counted against him when he is applying to other Ministries for employment?

I have a lot of sympathy with the right hon. Gentleman's point of view. I do not know whether he has any particular case in mind. Even after a pension on low assessment, under 20 per cent., has been withdrawn, the welfare officers of my Department, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, will do their best to help the men concerned with such problems as employment.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will publish the scales by which the National Assistance Board has to determine eligibility for refund of prescription charges.

The scales are those set out in the current National Assistance Regulations.

Could the Minister take any steps to make the main outline of the scales more widely known to people who feel that they are just above the borderline of these prescription charges? Could he issue a more popular form of leaflet?

My impression is that the leaflet setting out the scales is pretty clear and pretty well known. I will certainly look into the hon. Lady's proposal.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he will make vouchers available to recipients of National Assistance so as to obviate the need for refunding to them the cost of prescriptions.

I am informed by the National Assistance Board that this proposal was, on consideration, not regarded as practicable.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many hundreds of people just cannot afford to lay out the few shillings involved? To some of them, it will mean leaving their prescriptions until the day on which they draw their weekly amounts? Is it not possible to have vouchers available at post offices or surgeries on which the chemists could claim the prescription charges, rather than put the onus on to the unfortunate applicant?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman will be aware that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health has taken steps to improve the procedure for claiming reimbursement, and in particular for enabling it to be claimed on the day of payment without waiting for the day of payment of National Assistance. These are matters on which the hon. and gallant Gentleman will no doubt want to put Questions to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health.

Is the Minister aware that coal miners in an advanced state of pneumoconiosis are having to pay as much as 5s. per week for prescription charges? Will he not consider authorising the National Assistance Board to issue a regular prescription allowance for chronic invalids?

That would appear to be a matter more for my hon. Friend the Minister of Health than for myself, and certainly it has nothing to do with the Question on the Paper.

The Minister says that the proposal is impracticable. Some of us find it very difficult to understand that. Will he give us some of the reasons?

Certainly. First of all, to issue a large number of vouchers, as is proposed in the Question, to recipients of National Assistance would involve a very considerable production of paper and the production of vouchers the use of which it would be very difficult to control.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance the number of people in the Parliamentary Constituency of Lewisham, North who were, at the latest convenient date, on National Assistance; and how these figures compare with a similar date over the last five years.

I regret that separate figures are not available for the Parliamentary Constituency of Lewisham, North. The local area office of the National Assistance Board serves the whole of the borough of Lewisham, which, as the hon. Gentleman may be aware, also includes the Constituencies of Lewisham, West, and Lewisham, South.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance the number of people in the Parliamentary Constituency of Carmarthen who were, at the latest convenient stated date, on National Assistance; and how these figures compare with a similar date over the last five years.

I regret that separate figures are not available for the Parliamentary Constituency of Carmarthen, parts of which are served by no fewer than five area offices of the National Assistance Board.

If I put the five constituencies down on this Question and the previous Question, will the Minister get the reply to it?

No. The hon. Gentleman has misunderstood my answer. It is not a question of five constituencies but of five area offices of the National Assistance Board.

The Minister misunderstands my supplementary question. If I put a Question down, including the five areas which cover the five constituencies, will he give me the answer to the Question?

It is most likely that I shall be able to do so. I did not misunderstand the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. The word "constituency" crept in, for reasons which I fully understand.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he is now in a position to announce his approval of the scheme for an increase in pensions of ex-municipal gas employees submitted to him by the Gas Council.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if he will now make regulations under the Gas Act, 1948, to give ex-municipal pensioners benefits similar to those conferred on other retired local government officers by the Pensions (Increase) Act, 1956.

I cannot yet add to the answer that my right hon. Friend gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lonsdale (Sir I. Fraser) on 3rd December.

When will my hon. and learned Friend be able to add to that answer? Is he aware that there are similar people who are still pensioners of local authorities and have not been the victims of nationalisation? They have received their increase, with effect from 1st April. These people in my Question are still waiting. Will my hon. and learned Friend be able to make a statement before Christmas?

This is a most complicated matter, in which various Departments are concerned. It would be quite wrong for me, in view of the consultations which have to take place, to fix a date when I could give my hon. and gallant Friend a definite reply.

Arising out of that rather unsatisfactory reply, may I ask my hon. and learned Friend to endeavour to make this decision before the New Year, as the matter has been outstanding for very many months?

My hon. Friend says that the matter has been outstanding for a long time, but in fact the proposals reached my right hon. Friend only in October. Various parties have to be consulted, and I could not give an undertaking that a decision will be reached before Christmas.

Will the hon. and learned Gentleman consider also the question of pensioners from municipal electricity undertakings who are in the same position as pensioners mentioned in the Questions? This question has been outstanding for a long time, and these people are suffering too.

That is another question.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power, in view of the difficult oil situation arising from events in the Middle East, if he will give consideration to the introduction of price control in an effort to keep down to the minimum an increase in the cost of living.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if, in view of the recent rise in the price of petrol imposed by the petrol companies, he will now introduce price control.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power why he will not control the price of petrol.

In accordance with their undertaking, representatives of the oil companies and the retail trade consulted me before increasing their prices last week, and I found that these emergency surcharges were necessary. Similar arrangements for consultation made statutory price-control unnecessary both during the last war and after, and I hope they will make it unnecessary again.

Is the Minister aware that this Question was on the Order Paper before the savage increases in prices for petrol and oil? Since it is now obvious that the Government are not concerned with keeping down the cost of living, I apologise to the right hon. Gentleman for troubling him with this detail.

I fail to see the connection between the two points and the hon. Gentleman's Question. The fact is that I have approved certain emergency surcharges on the price of oil. I am satisfied that those emergency surcharges are not in any way being exceeded.

Is it really fair to protect the interests of the producer and the retailer while leaving the consumer exposed to the free play of the black market? What is he going to do about persons who have put themselves outside the scheme because they possess private tanks in which they can store great quantities of petrol?

As for the producers, they have incurred increased costs in securing extra quantities of oil from other sources. I think it only right that that should be reflected in the price. As to the consumer, I have no evidence that he is being subjected on any scale to a black market. The last part of the question, about petrol tanks, raises a different issue altogether.

May I ask two questions arising out of the answer? First, under what powers does my right hon. Friend control the price of petrol and associated products? Secondly, can he give the House an assurance that, having approved the increased prices for the purposes to which he has referred as an emergency measure, when the emergency is over the price will come down again?

In reply to the first part of that question, I have no power at present to control the retail prices of oil products. Under the Emergency Regulations I may assume such a power, a power I am free to exercise should I wish; but I see no reason as yet to call upon it. I am sorry, but I have forgotten the last part of the supplementary question.

I asked: when the emergency is over, will my right hon. Friend take steps to see that the prices come down?

It was made perfectly clear by the oil companies that the increases were an emergency surcharge, and they were approved on that basis. I have every reason to believe that when the emergency is over the emergency surcharge will disappear.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many people regard the extra 5d. imposed by the oil companies as a rather nasty piece of profiteering on their part?

Certainly not.

In order to clarify the position, will the right hon. Gentleman produce detailed figures to show how or to what extent this extra 5d. is really justified by the extra costs?

I take it that the hon. and gallant Member wants to see extra oil arriving in this country to make good, in part at least, the deficit in supplies from the Middle East.

But not extra profits.

In this case the extra costs incurred in getting increased quantities of oil from other sources must clearly be met. It is to cover those increased costs that the emergency surcharge has been approved.

Can my right hon. Friend say what is the actual cost of bringing oil round the Cape, or from elsewhere other than through the Canal? Does he recall that on 12th September the Leader of the Opposition said that the cost of bringing it round the Cape or from other parts of the world would be only 1d. a gallon extra?

The extra cost of bringing Middle Eastern oil round the Cape rather than through the Canal is about £2 10s. 0d. a ton. [HON. MEMBERS: "How much a gallon?"] That, however, is not the only extra cost incurred. The extra oil from the Western Hemisphere costs much more than Middle Eastern oil—

How much more?

That depends entirely on the source, and 5d. surcharge takes into account both those increased costs.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the Answer, I beg to give notice that I will try to pursue this matter later during this day's proceedings.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether, in view of the unstable political condition of Syria, he will take steps to encourage the construction of oil pipelines alternative to the ones now destroyed from Iraq through Turkish territory to Iskanderan.

The Iraq Petroleum Company has already carried out a reconnaissance of a possible pipeline route from the oilfields of Northern Iraq through Turkish territory to the Mediterranean seaboard. I understand that the results of this reconnaissance are favourable to the construction of such a pipeline. My Ministry is in close touch with the company, which is fully aware of the potential importance of this matter.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what estimate he has made of the weekly amount of petrol and oil fuel that will be saved in Scotland as a result of rationing.

The approximate weekly tonnages expected to be saved in Scotland by petrol rationing and the other restrictions I have announced are:

Pints or gallons?

Is the Minister aware that those figures show that great hardship will be inflicted on the people of Scotland as a result of his rationing proposals? Does he realise that fuel rationing is a much greater hardship to people living in rural districts in Scotland than to those in suburban districts in the south of England? Will he examine the case with a view to giving people in Scotland an extra ration?

In response to the interjections which prefaced the supplementary question, the figures I gave were weekly tonnages. In reply to the hon. Member's question, it never crossed my mind before that the Scots were less public-spirited than others who live in these islands. As a matter of fact, restrictions suffered in Scotland are not quite so severe as in the rest of the country, and not nearly so severe in regard to fuel oil.

Can the right hon. Gentleman explain why it is stated on the front of the book of coupons:

"This book is the property of His Majesty's Government."

Was it anticipated as long ago as that?

It is not quite apparent what connection there is between that question and Scotland.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what efforts he proposes to make to ensure a substantial increase in the storage capacity for crude oil in this country.

Storage capacity has increased steadily in recent years in keeping with the increase in refinery capacity. The Suez crisis has underlined the need for a still greater expansion and plans are under active consideration.

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that, whether the fuel is coming through Suez or round the Cape, one of the lessons which has to be learned is that we certainly need a vast increase in storage capacity in Britain? Will he ensure that the Chancellor does not impose credit restrictions on that development?

I certainly agree with the first part of that supplementary question, and I should have thought that my main answer made that perfectly clear.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what percentage of the total annual import of petrol to this country is for the consumption of the United States forces; and what steps are being taken to make sure that this amount is not included in the United States new allocation for Europe.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what arrangements he is making to ensure oil supplies of all kinds to United States forces in Great Britain; and whether members of those forces are rationed for oil and oil products.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what consultations he has had with the United States forces now in Britain with a view to economising in the consumption by those forces of petrol and oil obtained from British sources.

For security reasons, I am unable to give any figure for the proportion of our total supplies of petrol that are consumed annually by United States forces in the United Kingdom. Appropriate arrangements have been made to ensure their essential supplies to the United States forces, who are making significant savings in their consumption of all petroleum fuels. Members of these forces will be rationed in respect of petrol for their private cars like anyone else. As regards supplies to Europe, there is no question of any allocation by the United States.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that many of us feel, in view of the fact that the United States has shown how unwilling it was to help us in our problems in the last few weeks,—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—he should reconsider the presence of these people in this country? Will he make sure that if it is to look after its own forces—which are here to protect the United States and not necessarily us—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—the United States will do all it can to pay for this itself?

In answer to that question, may I say that nobody could have been more co-operative in this respect than the commanders of the United States forces.

Whilst recognising that the United States might have been cooperative in economising with the consumption of petroleum products for its forces in this country, is it not propitious to ask whether we are buying large quantities of American oil for dollars, and why should we supply the United States of America and its forces' requirements in this country with petrol and petroleum products bought for dollars? Why can they not bring in their own and pay for it themselves?

Withdraw.

The United States forces pay to us dollars for the oil consumed in this country.

Does not the Minister agree that the venom and spleen shown by the question of the hon. Member is quite unworthy in view of the answer that has just been given? Is he aware that we on this side of the House entirely dissociate ourselves from the sentiments expressed in this question?

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he is aware that the allocation for petrol for the Streamline taxicabs of Brighton is to be gallons per day, when their normal consumption is eight gallons per day; whether he is also aware what unemployment and dislocation this cut will cost; whether this is in proportion to cuts for taxicabs throughout the country, and especially in London; and if he will give instructions to ensure that such cuts are equally applied throughout the country.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he will increase his proposed allowance of petrol for taxicabs to at least that granted to the taxi industry during the war.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he has considered the petition from the Bradford Taxi Owners' Association relating to the supplementary allowance for hackney carriages; and what further steps he can take to meet the claims of hackney carriages.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he will suitably increase the allowance of petrol for taxis in Southampton and other ports where taxi services are an essential part of the port facilities.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what is the supplementary allowance for a London taxi and for a Leeds taxi of the same horse-power.

I have received representations on behalf of taxi services in several areas. The general question of allowances to provincial taxis is under consideration, and I will announce my decision as soon as possible.

Will my right hon. Friend tell us also why it is that London seems to be getting so much more petrol than are the provincial towns? Is he aware that, in the particular case of my own division at Brighton, the Christmas holiday season is a very valuable and important one? Does he realise that next week taxi drivers are to be sacked because no decision has been reached on the subject? Does he further realise that some of the hotels are three or four miles from the station, that the taxis have to get back to the station, and that far more petrol is being used in that way? Will he be willing to receive a deputation to discuss this matter?

Taxis, after all, are not put to quite the same use in provincial cities as in London. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why not?"] In fact, under the last scheme, the allocation made to provincial taxi services was not as great as that given in the case of London. The final allocation to provincial taxi services has yet to be made, but, in the light of my hon. Friend's comments, I certainly appreciate the urgency of the position, and I will make a decision as soon as I can.

Before the Minister commits himself to a comparison between London and the provinces, will he keep in mind the fact that many provincial taxicab drivers hold the view that they have to return empty much more often than have the London drivers, who cruise and pick up their passengers? If he is convinced, as many taxi drivers are, that they will be driven off the roads unless they get better supplementary supplies, will he undertake to this House to give these people sufficient petrol to enable them to continue to earn a living?

In answer to the first part of the hon. Member's supplementary question, the relative needs of provincial and London taxis are under consideration in an attempt to assess their needs. I have to assess these at their proper value and, in the light of this, to come to a decision. As to the second part of the hon. Member's supplementary question, I have, on various occasions, made it perfectly clear that, where livelihood is threatened, special consideration will be given. Having regard to this, as we hope, temporary or emergency rationing scheme, that is perfectly proper.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, in ports such as Southampton, where there is no alternative means of transport, the taxi services need very special consideration, since the sailings of liners and steamers are determined by the tides and not by the hours at which public transport runs?

I will certainly bear that consideration in mind in coming to my decision. I am glad to be reinforced in the view that the needs of different provincial cities do, after all, differ one from another.

Is the Minister—whose sympathetic approach to the question when we put it to him I appreciate—aware that Southampton taxi men are, up to the moment, to get nine gallons a week; that they tell me that with that allocation they can earn £7 a week, and that many of them have overheads, including the hire of their car, amounting to some £5 a week. Is he further aware that, if the present ration stays as it is, the owner-driver will be utterly destroyed and the employers of fleets of taxis will have to dismiss about 75 per cent, of their men before Christmas? Will he treat this as a matter of very real urgency, affecting the livelihood of a small but quite worthy group of men?

I do see that Southampton has claims to be treated as a special category of its own, and I will certainly give my decision with the utmost speed.

Does the Minister realise that by stating that there are special uses for taxis in London which, apparently, do not exist in the provincial towns, Birmingham and other towns which have great need of taxis will find themselves in great difficulties? What need is there for a taxi in London which does not also apply in these towns?

I think, Sir, that the right hon. Gentleman had better await my final decision on this.

Is the Minister aware, from this and allied Questions, that people's livelihoods are affected and that it is taking far too long to reach a decision; that he should come to his decision very quickly as otherwise it is not fair to the people concerned?

I will, Sir, give a decision very quickly.

Is the Minister aware that in a city such as Leeds, where there is no Underground service as there is in London, there is a very great demand for taxis? He says that the allocations have still to be given, but is he aware that the taxi drivers have already received their allocation, which is about one-third of the amount given to the taxis in London?

They have not yet received their final allocations.

Is it not clear from the number of questions asked from both sides that a great many hon. Members have had representations because most taxicab proprietors are extremely concerned about their livelihood? Will the right hon. Gentleman make a statement on this subject tomorrow so that hon. Members may be able to reassure their constituents and the taxicab proprietors will know where they stand?

I think, Sir, that I have gone as far as I can by saying that I will announce the final allocations as quickly as possible. I am afraid that I cannot add anything to that. I am appreciative of the several difficulties caused, but I would ask hon. Members to reflect that the special considerations which they have adduced in the case of quite a large number of cities do, in themselves, underline the difficulties of the problem? But, I repeat, I will reach a final decision very soon.

In considering the urgency of the problem, will my right hon. Friend take particularly into account the difficulties experienced in the non-county boroughs, such as Hove? In the case of other corporations of local authorities, the drivers can, to some extent, offset the hardship by getting a rise in fares, but in the non-county boroughs that cannot be done without a byelaw—which requires the sanction of the Home Office—and six or eight weeks may elapse before the increase can be permitted. Will he give special consideration to that aspect of the problem?

I would ask hon. Members to reflect that the longer the list of special considerations that I have to take into account, the more difficult it becomes to reach a speedy decision on this matter.

Is the Minister aware that these taxis are just as important in the provincial towns as they are in London, and that particularly in a city such as Bradford, as well as Leeds, they are essential to the communal life of the people? Will he give an assurance that he will make an early statement and allow these men to earn at least a reasonable living?

rose—

Order.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Several hon. Members were still endeavouring to catch your eye on these Questions in which there is a great deal of public concern and interest. May I therefore, through you, and with your permission, ask the Minister, in view of the public interest, if he will undertake to make a statement in the House during the current week so that we may have the opportunity to question him?

There are over 600 constituencies, and if there are specific needs for all to be urged in Question Time we shall proceed no further. There is also a Prayer tonight which, although I do not know, may be relevant to this matter.

There is a Prayer tonight, Mr. Speaker, but, as far as I know, the Minister will not be in a position to make a statement tonight because he said earlier that he would not be in a position to make a statement tomorrow. There is great public concern about this, and it is not limited to purely constituency interest. Is it not reasonable to ask the Minister to say that he will make a statement on the subject before the end of the week?

I do understand the concern there is on this subject, and I will certainly give consideration both to the need for urgent decision and to the best means of making it as widely known as possible.

rose—

Order.

On a point of order. Is it in order, Mr. Speaker, for the Minister to ignore the interest of Scotland in this matter?

That is not a point of order at all.

Further to that point of order. In view of the fact that many people are being dismissed this week because of—

Order. The hon. Member can return to this question at another opportunity.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if he is aware of the concern felt by management in Coventry that key workers will have difficulty in getting to and from their work because of the shortage of petrol; and whether petrol will therefore be made available for this essential purpose.

The basic ration should suffice for most people who cannot get to work by public transport, but I am considering what further assistance can be given to firms whose production would be adversely affected by inability of their workers to get to work.

Might I ask the Minister if he is aware that Standard Motor Company, which is in my constituency, has more than 4,000 workers going to work each day by car? This does not mean that each owns a car, but some travel with others who do. Is he further aware that the regional fuel office has said that there can be no special issue and the basic allowance must suffice? In view of what he has said, might I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he is aware that the presence of large numbers of workers will put a severe strain on public transport and that factory production will, in fact, be disrupted? Will he look at the matter again as regards Coventry?

I am in touch with the British Employers' Confederation on this, and in these consultations I shall certainly bear in mind the plight of the Standard Motor Company.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that great concern is felt by many people residing in the countryside, in my very rural constituency, who will be unable to travel to their work? Has he yet given attention to the case of an engineering firm at Wadebridge which is threatened with shut-down because its key men live at such a distance?

The Question is about Coventry. I do not see how we can bring in every constituency.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what special allocations of petrol he intends to allow in the contesting of parliamentary by-elections now pending.

Appropriate arrangements are being made in consultation with the political parties.

Will the Minister give an assurance that nothing will be done in this respect to thwart the expression of public opinion, and would he consider contacting the Conservative Central Office to arrange for the issue of a leaflet explaining why there is a shortage?

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power the approximate number of British firms now dependent on oil power.

The total number is not known, but some 1,500 firms each use for burning 500 tons or more of oil a year and together account for about 85 per cent. of all the oil so used by industry.

Whilst appreciating the Minister's difficulties, may I ask him whether his reply is not an admission that he does not really know how many firms and how many workers will be thrown idle when oil is cut by 20 per cent. on 1st January? Further, on what grounds could he reply last week that he did not think that serious unemployment was likely to result? This is a vital issue, and we are being left in the dark.

The hon. Gentleman may perhaps be unaware of the fact that a questionnaire is being sent to each of these oil-using firms. When the questionnaires are in, I think I shall be in a better position to assess more exactly the effects which the restriction may have on each one of them.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power what measures he is adopting to ensure that during the petrol shortage petrol companies are prevented from filling up the tanks of service stations that they own themselves, while leaving privately-owned garages in the neighbourhood short of petrol; and whether he will investigate cases of this kind brought to his notice.

My instructions to the oil companies requiring them to restrict deliveries to garages affect company-owned garages and independent ones in exactly the same way.

Does my right hon. Friend know that there have been complaints—I certainly have received three from widely separated parts of the country—that this practice is going on? Is he aware that this fits in with what is feared to be the line of policy which is being followed in petrol distribution, and will he look into these cases if I refer them to him?

If in these cases the private garage owners, after having explained their troubles to the oil companies, still believe that they have a grievance, I shall be very happy to look into the matter.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if he will appoint a special expert committee to survey as a matter of urgency the whole national fuel and power situation and report to him on ways and means by which the country's energy requirements can be met in greater degree from indigenous sources.

No, Sir. I agree with the hon. Member about the importance of the objective he has in mind, but I do not think it can best be pursued by appointing a committee.

Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that my Question makes what is intended as a very serious and constructive suggestion? In this connection, has he studied the statement made by the Organisation for European Economic Co-operation?

Yes, Sir, I have studied that statement; but I would not regard that statement as constituting a case for the establishment of yet another committee.

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power whether he is now in a position to forecast the extent to which coal traffic can be switched to rail or canal in order to save petrol in road transport.

No, Sir, though, as I told the hon. Member last week, a useful beginning has been made.

But could my right hon. Friend give the House some good round figures to reassure us?

When it is a matter of the future and of prophecy, good round figures are, I should have thought, most difficult things to give.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a great deal of this trouble could have been saved if the Government had not denationalised road transport, in which case it could have been done automatically?

asked the Minister of Fuel and Power if he will now state the steps he is taking to expand and advance the programme for the generation of electricity by nuclear fuels.

The future of the nuclear power programme is under urgent review, but I am not yet in a position to make a statement on it.

is the Minister aware that, whilst there has been a case for review for some months because of the technical progress which has been made, the public is now expecting something in the nature of a "crash" programme in this matter? Can he tell us to what extent availability of nuclear material is a limiting factor in the expansion of the nuclear power programme?

I am aware of the considerations which the hon. Gentleman has adduced, but I would ask him to exercise patience and await the fuller statement I hope to make on this matter?

Could the Minister tell us to what extent it is a question of the availability of fuel?

It is a question of all kinds of things. That, I am afraid, is why I am unable to make a statement today.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement on the Report of the Select Committee on the anticipation of parliamentary debates.

I have been asked to reply.

It has been necessary to sound opinion in various parts of the House, and this is continuing. I hope to give the Government's decision before very long.

Will that be before we rise for the Christmas Recess?

I cannot be absolutely certain, because I would rather have another talk with the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition first before I come to a final conclusion.

asked the Prime Minister what proposals he is making to meet President Eisenhower in the near future.

I have been asked to reply.

I would refer the hon. and gallant Gentleman to the reply given to the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Rowley Regis and Tipton (Mr. A. Henderson) last Tuesday.

If the Prime Minister's efforts to see the President before he returns from Jamaica prove unsuccessful, would it not be desirable for the Lord Privy Seal to seek a personal interview with the President? Are there not many things which he could explain to the President with greater likelihood of success than the Prime Minister or the Foreign Secretary?

I would not accept the inference from the hon. and gallant Gentleman's question, nor would I say that my right hon. Friend is making particular efforts in this direction. His object is to come back to this country at the end of his three weeks' rest. The position about a meeting with the leaders of the American nation, including the President, is a matter which must be left to the heads of the Governments concerned, as I said to the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Rowley Regis and Tipton, who asked the Question originally. Further, I should like to add that there is, I think, a very satisfactory contact which will go on this week between two very prominent American leaders, namely, the Secretary of State and the Secretary to the Treasury, and three of the major members of the British Cabinet, on N.A.T.O.; so there is no lack of contact between the United States and British Governments.

asked the Prime Minister what action he is taking in conjunction with the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs and the Minister of Defence in regard to pamphlets which are being handed by Egyptian officials to British citizens leaving Egypt asserting that atrocities have been committed by British troops in Port Said.

I have been asked to reply.

I assume that my hon. Friend is referring to the pamphlet entitled "Scribe". The House will understand that Her Majesty's Government are unable to prevent the distribution of this false and mendacious propaganda which I am sure the recipients themselves have treated with the contempt that it deserves. We are taking every possible step, through all the publicity media at our disposal, to show up the untruths and misrepresentations which this pamphlet contains.

Would my right hon. Friend confirm that the author of this document is in fact not a reputable neutral journalist at all but a man who is both ex-Nazi and ex-Communist, who is known to have betrayed many of his countrymen to the Gestapo during the war and, in fact, is a thoroughly disreputable man?

I think it is important to establish the following facts. He was, first of all, a member of the Swedish Brownshirt (Nazi) Party. He was then a volunteer photographer with the German Army in Finland. Then he was connected with an organisation known as the Red Horse League in Norway, about which I would rather not say any more. He then appears to have been invited to Russia in 1945, and was later arrested by the British authorities in our zone of Germany for masquerading as an American journalist. He was deported to Sweden. In the same year he published accounts of conversations in London with members of the British and Polish Governments, which were later shown to be wholly fictitious.

Can we be told the name of this unpleasant character?

As far as I can pronounce it, it is Per Olow Anderson.