asked the Minister of Health how many occupational centres for mentally handicapped children there were in 1951; and how many there are now.

At the beginning of 1951, the total number of occupation centres for all age groups was 181. Today it is 305. Most of the centres take children up to the age of 16.

Whilst appreciating that the Government have made special concessions for these centres, does the Minister think there is need for more, and, if so, what action is he proposing to take to continue the valuable trend disclosed by his reply?

The need for developing these training facilities is regarded as of exceptional urgency, and very high priority is given to the provision of occupation centres.

asked the Minister of Health (1) if he will indicate the increase or decrease in the number of doctors on medical lists in England and Wales between 1951 and the latest convenient year by number and percentage, compared with the corresponding increases or decreases in areas classed as under-doctored in 1951 between the same two dates;

(2) what was the average number of patients per doctor in England and Wales in 1951 and in each subsequent year to the latest convenient year; and what was the total population in under-doctored areas in 1951 and at the latest convenient year.

Between July, 1952, the first year for which comparable figures are available, and July, 1956, the number of doctors increased by 1,908 or 11 per cent., and the number of patients per doctor diminished from 2,436 to 2,272. I will circulate figures showing the number of patients per doctor in intervening years in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

I regret that the number of doctors now practising in areas that were classified as under-doctored in 1951 is not available: but in 1952 there were 7,596 doctors practising in areas then so classified with about 21½ million patients on their lists. By 1956, the areas classified as under-doctored had been so reduced that there were only 3,484 doctors practising in them with about 9½ million patients, a very substantial improvement.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many of the doctors practising as general practitioners in the National Health Service have a full list?

I am afraid that I should need notice of that question.

asked the Minister of Health if he will take steps to co-ordinate information as to what is happening in various parts of the country to deal with problems associated with the care of old people with a view to making this information readily available to those areas where there is a desire to make progress in respect to the care of old people.

My right hon. Friend already gathers information about the care of old people from his regional officers and other sources. He draws attention to significant developments through his annual report, circulars of guidance to local authorities, addresses to conferences and in other ways.

Does the hon. Gentleman mean that if a town which wishes to do something special for its old people communicates with his Department and seeks information, for instance, about old people's weeks and such things that focus attention on the problem of old people, information, advice and assistance will be obtained?

I am sure that principal regional officers will always be glad to help in a matter of that sort.

Does my hon. Friend think that in this, like so many other health matters, voluntary bodies should not be ignored? Does my hon. Friend not agree that the bulletin of the National Old People's, Welfare Committee, an excellent publication, gives this information to the local authorities?

I am very glad that my hon. Friend has chosen this opportunity to draw attention to the work of the National Old People's Welfare Committee.

Will the Minister circulate information about the remarkable pioneering work in this field carried out in Salford, particularly relating to old people living on their own?

asked the Minister of Health whether he has now constituted his Advisory Committee on the Health and Welfare of the Handicapped; whom he has appointed; and whether they act in a representative capacity.

Yes, Sir. The hon. Member for Lowestoft (Mr. Edward Evans) has kindly agreed to serve as Chairman, and I am circulating a list of membership in the OFFICIAL REPORT. The members act in a personal capacity.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the statement will be of great encouragement to all those concerned in the welfare of handicapped persons, and that we are all delighted at the appointment of my hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft (Mr. Edward Evans) as Chairman?

asked the Minister of Health what arrangements are now being made to deal with the situation which will be created by the proposed withdrawal of doctors from the National Health Service.

At the moment. I do not wish to add anything to the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister in answer to Questions on 12th March.

Did the right hon. Gentleman never learn as a Boy Scout to be prepared, and is it not very desirable, in view of the serious effects which will arise if this dispute is allowed to develop, that something should be prepared now to meet that contingency?

I have read that it is suggested that doctors may withdraw from the National Health Service on 2nd October. My right hon. Friend said that he would make a further statement in due course, and the hon. Gentleman could deduce that that would probably be before 2nd October.

Would the Minister convey to the leading members of the medical profession that this suggestion, in the view of most people, including many who are sympathetic to the doctors' claims, is both irresponsible and ridiculous?

asked the Minister of Health if in carrying out his special inspection of motor cars for disabled persons, he will have due regard for the extent of the disablement of each of those persons, and the importance of their duties and mileage necessarily incurred.

Yes, Sir. These are among the factors to which I will have regard.

I appreciate what my right hon. Friend has said and what he has done for disabled persons, but is he aware that at least one of these disabled persons has a double amputation above the knee and is doing tremendous public service, unpaid, which he cannot do without an efficient motor car?

I am aware of the case my hon. Friend has in mind, but, of course, the principal factor to which I must have regard is the existing state of the car in question.

asked the Minister of Health what action he has taken regarding the recommendation of the Medical Research Council that small amounts of irradiation from luminous watches, clocks and television apparatus should be reduced as far as possible.

This is being considered by a panel of experts which has been set up by the Radioactive Substances Advisory Committee.

In view of the fact that the Medical Research Council reported in June, 1956, that the small quantities of radiation received from a television set should be reduced as far as possible, should the Minister wait any longer, bearing in mind that whole families every day sit, sometimes for hours, in front of a television set, such families including expectant mothers and small children, all receiving a minute dose? The Minister says he is now going to ask another Committee why does he not stand by the June, 1956, Report?

Perhaps I had better read what the Committee had to say about television sets:

" At present radiation from this source does not constitute either a personal or a significant genetic hazard …So far as sets used by the general public are concerned, most of the radiation is normally absorbed in the apparatus itself and is insignificant at the normal viewing distances."

This is very important. It is a report dated June, 1956. The Minister is grossly deceiving the House. [Interruption. ] Certainly.

The right hon. Lady should not suggest that another hon. Member is deceiving the House.

Withdraw.

If my language has offended, I certainly withdraw it. May I read what the Report says, in its conclusions on page 81, signed by the whole Committee:

"The small amounts of irradiation from miscellaneous sources such as X-ray machines used for shoe-fitting, luminous watches and clocks, and television apparatus, should be reduced as far as possible ".

That is the advice, and the Minister is disregarding it.

The right hon. Lady in her original supplementary question gave the impression that families sitting in front of television sets were incurring grave danger. That is in contradiction to what the Report says. But, nevertheless, a Committee was set up to investigate this and other apparatus.

I must correct the Minister. I did not use that expression. I am absolutely responsible in this matter. [Interruption.] Certainly, I am. I say that they are receiving minute doses every day, and that is supported by the whole Committee. It is wrong to allow these innocent and ignorant people to suffer.

asked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been called to a statement in the Report of his Department for 1955, Part 2, that investigations show that the deterioration in the condition of the teeth of young children, noted in previous Annual Reports, continues; and what action he proposes to take.

Yes, Sir. Suggestions were made to local health authorities on methods of developing their maternity and child welfare dental services by circular issued in June, 1955. In both the local authority and the general dental service there has been a marked increase in the amount of conservative treatment for young people under 21 and for expectant mothers. The McNair Report, with its emphasis on the importance of further dental health education, is being actively considered.

Does the Minister realise that my Question refers to young children, who are dealt with in his own Report, the suggestion in his Report being that the condition of their teeth at a time when development of the jaw is taking place and when it is extremely important that teeth should be attended to was not improving? That was the suggestion which I read from the words of his Report, to which I have referred in the Question. Will not the right hon. Gentleman go into the matter to see whether more cannot be done to make full use of the dentists who are available by diluting their services by the use of dental hygienists and others who could quite well do good work under supervision?

Yes, Sir, that is certainly what I hope to do. I do not in any way dissent from what the hon. Member has said. In considering the McNair Report, I hope to be able to progress further in the right direction.

asked the Minister of Health what decision he has reached concerning completion of the Tile Hill Health Centre, Coventry, following his discussions with the deputation on 11th March last.

This scheme is being considered for inclusion in the 1957–58 programme, but I am afraid I cannot yet give a decision on it.

I am not clear from that reply whether the answer is "Yes" or "No". Is the Minister aware that we in Coventry have been trying for eight years to get this scheme and that at last everyone has reached agreement, including his Ministry? As the only thing at stake is the question of loan sanction for £;17,000, does the right hon. Gentleman not hope that we shall get a favourable reply?

When the hon. Lady brought a deputation to see me, I told her that I would consider it, together with other projects, in the light of the money I would have available. I have yet to make a decision.

asked the Minister of Health what action he is taking to implement the recommendation of the Central Health Services Council regarding the dangers of smoking.

I would refer the hon. Member to my reply to a Question by the hon. Member for Barking (Mr. Hastings) on 25th February.

Does the Minister not consider it his responsibility to carry out the recommendation that was made to him by the Central Health Services Council and do rather more than what has been quite usefully done by the Ministry of Education in a recent publication from that Department? Does he not feel that it is his duty to issue a certain amount of advice to the public?

So far, it has been the policy of my predecessor and myself to bring to the notice of the public all available information; but my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary, in an Adjournment debate, told the House that the Report of the Medical Research Council would be available shortly and that I would then reconsider my policy in the light of that Report.

Can the Minister give an assurance that after turning down all the advice which he has had on the subject so far from the Central Health Services Council and the Standing Medical Advisory Committee, he will carry out the recommendations of the Medical Research Council? He has done nothing up to now. Is he afraid of his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who has said that he does not want too many people to give up cigarette smoking?

I have just said that the Medical Research Council is about to submit a new Report, which I want to study.

asked the Minister of Health what has been the trend in the cost of prescribing under the National Health Service in January and February, 1957, as compared with previous months.

The average cost per prescription in January was about 5s. 6½d. This was almost the same as in December, and about 5d. higher than in November. An accurate figure for February is not yet available, but from a sample it is estimated that the average cost was about 1d. more than in January.

Will not the Minister consider the suggestions which have been made for some form of further independent check upon the value of the new and very expensive drugs, which, as he well knows, are coming on to the market in shoals and are of very doubtful value?

I am prepared to consider almost any proposal. As far as the price of prescriptions is concerned, I have not yet received the detailed analysis of the prescriptions for December. That will be rather important.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the medical training of doctors includes absolutely nothing to make them cost-conscious? Does he not think that efforts should be made to inculcate in the medical profession some consideration of the cost of prescriptions?

Yes. That is why my predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton (Mr. Turton), decided to set up a committee to examine the whole question of prescribing. That committee will, I hope, start work very shortly.

asked the Minister of Health to what extent and by what means he is encouraging fuel efficiency in the hospital service.

Principally by making £9 million available in the three years ending March, 1959, for the replacement of obsolete plant and equipment, and by giving guidance to hospital authorities on the best ways of using this money. Hospital authorities have also been urged to employ suitably qualified supervising engineers, to take advantage of a newly-introduced scheme for training stokers, and to make use of the National Industrial Fuel Efficiency Service.

Does my right hon. Friend think it necessary to discourage the attitude disclosed in a very facetious article in the Economistrecently which seemed to assume that the very highly skilled population of this country could not learn to look after boilers?

I did notice that article, and I regret the tone it took, because I think that we shall gain great advantage from this course for stokers.

asked the Minister of Health how many general hospital beds and maternity beds were available in general practitioner units at the end of 1956; if there were more or less than a year previously; and by how much.

This information is not yet available for 1956. At the end of 1955 the numbers of staffed beds of these kinds in England and Wales were 6,714 and 2,670, respectively, 60 and 190 more than at the end of 1954.

asked the Minister of Health what steps are taken to inform the parents and relatives of certified mental defectives detained in institutions of their right to have an independent doctor's report presented at the periodic review of certification.

There is no such statutory right, but the hospitals and the Board of Control are always ready to help relatives in making arrangements for such examinations at any time.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is the impression abroad that the hospital and institution authorities are neither as helpful nor as informative as they might be on this question, and, as the parents in this type of case in particular are usually people in need of some form of advice, can he not look into the matter and make some regular arrangements for notification of what is really a fundamental right?

I am sorry that my hon. Friend should think that the hospital authorities are not helpful, because that has not been my experience. But both I and the Parliamentary Secretary are always prepared to investigate all the individual cases which my hon. Friend sends to us.

asked the Minister of Health by what authority a person certified as a mental defective is required to be recertified after escaping from an institution; what period of time must elapse during the time they are free to necessitate certification; and what is the reason for the difference in practice in such cases and in cases where a person certified under the lunacy laws escapes.

An Order made under the Mental Deficiency Act, 1913, does not cease to have effect when a patient absconds but continues in force until the statutory period expires. Unless continued by the Board of Control, an Order expires at the end of the first, second, and, thereafter, every fifth year from the date of the Order. As regards the last part of the Question, the difference is not one of practice but of law.

Is it not a fact that, where a patient has been certified as insane and absconds and remains clear for fourteen days, the certification falls, whereas a patient who has been certified as mentally defctive can be clear for twenty years and still remain certified? Is it not fantastic?

I have told the hon. Gentleman that it is a difference of law. It is undoubtedly a matter which will be considered by the Royal Commission.

asked the Minister of Health what steps are taken to inform persons who have been certified and detained in mental hospitals under the provisions of the Lunacy Act of their legal right under Section 82 of the Act to obtain free of charge from the Board of Control copies of the certificates stating the reasons for their committal to hospital.

Action under this Section arises only upon the discharge of a person who considers himself to have been unjustly confined as a person of unsound mind, and where such cases come to the notice of the Board the documents are furnished.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, though the lady to whom my next Question refers communicated with the Lord Chancellor, my right hon. Friend's Ministry, the Board of Control and numerous other people, she still, two years after discharge, was unaware of those rights?

I will look at that matter, but I have been advised that, as soon as her complaint was brought to the notice of the Board of Control, the documents were furnished.

asked the Minister of Health if he will appoint an independent inquiry into the circumstances of removal to hospital of the former patient, who considers herself to have been unjustly certified and detained in a mental hospital, and particulars of whose case have been supplied to him by the hon. Member for Carlisle.

No, Sir. Neither I nor the Board of Control has power to investigate the circumstances under which the justice made an order for the lady's reception into mental hospital care, since such an order can be quashed or set aside only by the courts.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in this lady's certificate, a copy of which I have here, there is not one single point of medical evidence of insanity? Since one of the prominent reasons given was that she was extremely aggressive to the officers concerned, will my right hon. Friend at least give the House an assurance that it is not the policy of the Department to remove people to mental hospitals merely to cure them of aggression?

I most certainly give my hon. Friend that assurance. The lady in question has legal redress, but I have no power to conduct an inquiry.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the first reply, may I give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment?

asked the Minister of Health if he will take action to obtain amending legislation to provide for direct representation from local authorities on hospital management committees.

I do not contemplate any amending legislation of this nature, but regional hospital boards consult local health authorities and I have always been in favour of consultation with other local authorities concerned where practicable.

In view of the growing concern among local authorities in regard to this matter, will the Minister favourably consider receiving a deputation from the Borough and Urban District Councils' Association?

This matter was, of course, considered by the Guillebaud Committee, which recommended in favour of the present procedure; but I will most certainly receive a deputation.

asked the Minister of Health what progress has been made in granting the request of the hon. Member for Erith and Crayford to visit Miss Mary Betteridge, a patient in St. Margaret's Mental Hospital, Birmingham, in accordance with a request by Miss Betteridge and her foster-parents.

I would refer the hon. Member to my reply of 18th March, to which I have nothing to add.

Will the Minister make it clear whether he knows that I am to be prevented from seeing this patient? Does he not know that I am aware of the strenuous efforts which have been made to ensure that I do not see the patient? Will he be forthcoming and tell the House whether I am to see the patient or not?

I assure the hon. Member that I have made no effort to ensure that he does not see the patient in question, and I have no power to vary the decision of the medical superintendent in this respect.

Is the Minister aware that a girl in my constituency is at present on leave from the same home and that her parents have been bullied by the visitors and were actually told, "We got Mary Betteridge back. We will get your daughter back "?

I should like the hon. Member to give me particulars of the case.

asked the Minister of Health if he is aware that, owing to overcrowding at the Birmingham accident hospital, a patient recently had to wait seventeen days in the casualty ward, and developed a condition which accelerated her death; and what steps he intends to take to relieve the present congestion and avoid a recurrence of such cases.

I have asked for a full report from the regional hospital board and will write to the hon. Member.

While appreciating that Answer, I ask the right hon. Gentleman to consider carefully the evidence submitted by a surgeon at the hospital in which he said that things like this happen more often than is brought to the notice of the public. Whilst I admire the work done by this wonderful accident hospital, it would be a pity for its reputation to be blotted by accidents of this kind.

I have read that report, but I have had medical reports which say the opposite. That is why I thought it more important to call for a full report on this case.

asked the Minister of Health what progress has been made in securing suitable institutional accommodation for mentally defective children and adults in the administrative county of Essex; and approximately how many are still awaiting such accommodation.

The regional hospital board has provided 214 additional beds for mentally defective children and 148 for adults since 1948, most of which are occupied by patients from Essex. It is hoped to provide a further 214 beds for children and 88 for adults over the next three or four years. One hundred and seventy-nine children and 170 adults in Essex are at present awaiting accommodation.

Exactly how long will it be before these patients who are awaiting suitable accommodation will have their needs met?

The majority of these beds are being provided, I understand, at South Ockendon Hospital. Some of them will come into use straight away, but some will not be ready for about three years.

asked the Minister of Health how many patients are in daily attendance at the psysiotherapy department of the Birmingham General Hospital; how many are on the waiting list requiring treatment; and how long they must wait before receiving treatment.

The average daily attendance of out-patients is 400, and the average number on the waiting list is 200. Acute cases are treated at once, and other cases wait up to six weeks, but this department does not accept chronic cases.

Is it not a serious situation that there is such a large number of old people who have suffered from strokes but can get no treatment whatever unless they wait for this long period? Will the Minister take steps to effect a speeding up?

I am not quite clear what the hon. Member has in mind. Acute cases are dealt with immediately, and chronic cases are not dealt with at all at this hospital. As I think the hon. Member knows, there has been a considerable improvement since he visited the hospital and all the vacancies for physiotherapists have now been filled.

asked the Minister of Health the number of attendances which took place at the Birmingham General Hospital, outpatient and casualty departments, respectively, in 1956; what has been the approximate weekly attendance at both departments in 1957; and whether he will examine the need for improvements to enable urgent medical work to be carried out under more satisfactory conditions to both patients and medical staff.

176,859 and 141,912, respectively. The corresponding weekly figures in 1957 are 3,701 and 2,343; the board of governors is aware that the accommodation in these departments is not satisfactory. The board has in hand a series of schemes to improve the outpatient department and contemplates the erection of a new casualty department as soon as other major commitments permit.

While expressing my personal thanks to the Minister for that answer, may I ask him to consider whether the figures he has now given to the House do not reveal that this is probably the largest outpatient and casualty department in the entire country? Will he not agree that it was not built for numbers of that size and that, consequently, a serious strain is imposed on the staff, as well as inconvenience to the patients?

I think that that is probably so; I agree with the hon. Member.

asked the Minister of Health, as representing the Lord President of the Council, what information he has received from the Medical Research Council on the possibility of selective damage which the chromosomes may suffer from low levels of radiation from ionising rays; what research is being conducted on this problem by the Medical Research Council; and whether he will make a statement.

The Medical Research Council are supporting an extensive programme of research on the effects of exposure to low levels of ionising radiations. Chromosome damage, as distinct from gene mutation, appears to be induced only rarely by long continued exposure to radiation of low intensity. Research on this problem is continuing and the results will be published as they become available.

Is the implication of the Minister's answer that in certain circumstances it is possible for the chromosomes to be damaged from only low levels of radiation if long sustained? Does that not mean that we should be especially careful in protecting the public from any extra ionising rays?

I understand that the damage to chromosomes from low level radiation is extremely slight indeed. As the hon. Gentleman will realise, it is very difficult to carry out experiments on this.

Will the right hon. Gentleman publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT the names of the members of the Council who are engaged in this work?

I will see whether that can be done.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say to what extent the Medical Research Council is conducting a survey of the effects of radiation on people who are subject to a higher background of radiation solely because of where they are living?

I think that comes into the researches of the Medical Research Council, but it does not particularly follow this Question.

asked the Minister of Health, as representing the Lord President of the Council, by how much the expectation of life is reduced as a result of exposure for ten years to the maximum permissible ionising radiation to which workers in radioactive substances may be exposed.

There is very little evidence regarding the possibility that exposure to radiation may affect the expectation of life in man, and it is therefore impossible to estimate the effect in this respect of any particular dose. The present recommended maximum permissible levels have been chosen as providing a substantial margin of safety below the minimum dose known to produce any effect.

Is it not suspected, however, that ten or fifteen years' work at the maximum permitted dose would reduce the expectation of life by about eighteen months?

As the hon. Gentleman again knows, there is a great variety of medical opinion about this. I would not wish to accept that estimate as being the correct one. It could well be less.

Would the right hon. Gentleman consult his right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour about issuing regulations on this matter and state what progress has been made?

I will note that point.

asked the Minister of Health, as representing the Lord President of the Council, whether he is aware that ground bone-meal is used as an ingredient in some food for children and invalids; and what research is being conducted on the presence of radioactive strontium in cattle whose bones are so used.

I understand that treated bone-meal is used in very small quantities in some cereal foods mainly intended for infants. No measurements of the level of Strontium 90 in cattle bones have been carried out in this country, but there is evidence that the levels are comparable to those in milk.

In view of the fact that strontium is taken up in bone just as calcium is taken up in bone, is it not desirable that ground bone should not be used in any food for invalids and infants unless we know exactly whether it is safe or not? Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that the bones of sheep in Wales, in particular, are said to be very highly contaminated with radioactive strontium?

I am aware of that. Watch is being kept on this matter mainly in connection with the effect on milk. I am sure that the Medical Research Council is concerned about this and that advice will be given if necessary.

Is it not as well that the question whether or not Britain remains a great Power should not become lost in incomprehensible scientific jargon?

asked the Minister of Health, as representing the Lord President of the Council, if he will give the date and name of the medical report which states that the highest level of strontium observed in 1956 in the bones of young children in the United Kingdom was 1·3 units; and whether he will arrange for a copy of the report to be placed in the Library.

The report, which was dated September, 1956, was an Atomic Energy Research Establishment progress report entitled "Radiostrontium Fallout in Biological Materials in Britain ", and a copy was placed in the Library on 6th March. A further report was issued last month, and I am arranging for that also to be placed in the Library.

While thanking the Minister for that reply, may I ask if he will undertake to make these reports available to the general public from time to time in view of the increasing public anxiety about the level of strontium in the bones of children?

I have studied this report and I am not quite certain how valuable it would be to the general public; but I will bear the point in mind.

asked the Minister of Health, as representing the Lord President of the Council, whether he will inquire of the Medical Research Council to what extent the thermo-nuclear bombs so far exploded have resulted in a tendency to increase mutations and, in consequence, the number of deformities in the human race during the next 1.000 years.

I am advised that, while all radiation does affect human mutation rates, our present knowledge of the subject shows that compared with the radiation to which man is already exposed from all other sources, the additional amount which has been produced by the thermo-nuclear bombs so far exploded is so small that the genetic effects would be insignificant.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that scientific opinion is changing very rapidly in this direction? Has his attention been called to a Report on the Genetic Effects of Radiation by the World Health Organisation, from the Press release of which I quote as follows:

"…all man-made radiation must be regarded as harmful to man from the genetic point of view."

Whilst the harm may not be very great, at any rate as we see it at present, is it not perfectly clear that harm is bound to follow?

The hon. Member asked me to inquire of the Medical Research Council, and he will know that the Committee, in its Report last year, referred to the fact that an increase of only 1 per cent. of that from normal sources could be expected. From my further inquiries, I understand that that estimate is still reasonably accurate.

Is the right hon. Gentleman quite satisfied in always quoting from the Report of June, 1956, in view of the fact that this committee was convened in 1955 and Professor Haddow himself has been making public statements, which were repeated on the radio on Saturday, that there has now been a shift in emphasis since June, 1956?

I thought I had made that clear. I have made inquiries of the Council as to its present attitude, and it confirms that the Report still holds good.

asked the Minister of Health, as representing the Lord President of the Council, how many British research workers engaged on the study of nuclear hazards have visited Japan, under Government auspices, for the purpose of examining directly the evidence at Hiroshima and Nagasaki and of the effects of hydrogen-bomb explosions in the Pacific and in Siberia; and what liaison exists between British and Japanese research workers on the subject.

Various medical officers of the armed Services, including specialists, have been stationed in Japan since 1945 and have worked in close co-operation with the United States Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission. No other research workers have visited Japan under Government auspices, but both formal and informal liaison exists between British and Japanese workers in this, as in other, research fields.

Would it not be worth while making this liaison a little closer? Can the right hon. Gentleman explain why the Japanese Government's scientific advisers appear to have arrived at rather different conclusions from those of the scientific advisers to Her Majesty's Government and regard the dangers of nuclear hazards as a good deal greater?

The Question asked how many scientists from this country have visited Japan. My answer is that none have done so, because the United States authorities have complete information and have made all that information available to our people.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recall what is said with regard to Hiroshima and Nagasaki in page 23 of the Medical Research Council's Report, which he has been quoting in this House all the time? Further to my hon. Friend's Question, does the Minister recall that, in that Report, the Medical Research Council specifically mentions the eleven mentally defective children born of expectant mothers exposed to radiation in the Hiroshima and Nagasaki incidents?

That in no way affects the Answer I have given to the hon. Gentleman's Question.

asked the Minister of Health, as representing the Lord President of the Council, what is now the annual rate of expenditure on research on nuclear hazards; and how many scientists are working full time on the subject.

Expenditure by the Medical Research Council during the year 1956–57 on the hazards of nuclear and allied radiations is estimated at approximately £380,000. Over eighty scientists are working full time on the subject.

Considering the terrible dangers involved in this business, is it not a paltry sum for research? Is the Minister not aware that people are very suspicious about his constant references to an out-of-date Report and that there is a feeling, which has been expressed by many scientific correspondents, for example, the scientific correspondent of the Observer yesterday, that the scientific information given to Her Majesty's Government is now obsolescent and is not in accordance with the facts?

A great deal of that falls beyond the original Question, but I can tell the hon. Gentleman that the Medical Research Council has, in fact, approved in principle plans for an increased programme of work on the genetic effects of radiation.

asked the Minister of Health, as representing the Lord President of the Council, who are the members of the Medical Research Council's Committee on Protection against Ionising Radiation.

The names of the members of the Medical Research Council's advisory committees are published in their Annual Reports to Parliament. The last report was published in June, 1956 (Cmd. 9787).

In view of the fact that the right hon. Gentleman told me last week that this Committee on Protection against Ionising Radiation has, in fact, superseded the work of the Committee on Nuclear Hazards, which reported last June, and since he has assured us that it has met at frequent intervals, and he is, in fact, really hiding behind this Committee, would he publish its Report so that we can have these assurances which he keeps giving us put over the names of scientists, in public and in print?

I will see whether the names of the members of the Committee can be published.

asked the Minister of Health, as representing the Lord President of the Council, whether he will publish the opinion of the Committee on Protection against Ionising Radiation, as to the medical aspects of the policy of restraint agreed to at Bermuda in regard to future hydrogen bomb tests.

This is one of the bodies which advise the Medical Research Council. The Council's views on the hazards from test explosions were contained in its special Committee's Report of June, 1956 (Command 9780).

Is the Minister aware that Professor Haddow, a distinguished member of that Committee, said publicly last week—it has been reported on the radio—that all Governments are underestimating the risks and that if the position were examined now that Report might be rendered obsolete?

I think that the right hon. Lady had better await the debate which is taking place today. The Report did, of course, take into account the continuation of tests at the present level.

If the Government are so completely satisfied that these tests can be made without adding significantly to the danger to the world, why do they incur all the additional expense of carrying them out at Christmas Island instead of in the Thames?

That point can be more properly raised in the forthcoming debate.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what is the approximate annual cost of carrying out the work of the Trusteeship Council of the United Nations; and what is the total cost incurred up to date in sending visiting missions to Trust Territories.

The approximate annual cost of carrying out the work of the Trusteeship Council is $633,000. As for the second part of the Question, the total cost to date of sending eleven United Nations visiting missions to Trust Territories has been $518,672. As the details of this amount are lengthy, I will, with permission, circulate them in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Does my hon. Friend think that the expenditure is justified in view of the results of the missions?

Yes, because it is the Government's policy to co-operate with the United Nations in the working of the international trusteeship scheme.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs why the British delegation on the Fourth Committee of the United Nations voted against the resolution that the respective Governments administering Trusteeship Territories should report to the Trusteeship Council in March giving fixed dates for the attainment of independence by the British and French Cameroons, French Togoland, Tanganyika and Ruanda-Urundi.

I have nothing to add to the replies given on 6th March to the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Mr. Swingler) and by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies to my hon. Friend the Member for Wembley, South (Mr. Russell).

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that that was a very unhelpful answer? Is he now prepared to disregard the Charter, in which one of the basic principles is that under the system of international trusteeship we are pledged to lead these Trust Territories to independence and to fix a date when it will be attained? Is there any departure from that principle?

There is no question of departing from anything. Leadership includes responsible guidance, and the laying down of a timetable has no bearing on that whatsoever.

Would my hon. Friend not agree that resolutions of the kind referred to in the Question are harmful, though easy to pass, and that while, no doubt, they mean very little in New York, they are extremely embarrassing to the Administration of Tanganyika, and will he give an assurance that no such timetable will be agreed to unless the real interests of all three races in Tanganyika are consulted?

I think my hon. Friend has covered the point exactly. Those are considerations to be remembered.

Does the supplementary question asked by the hon. Member for Essex. South-East (Mr. Braine) indicate the real reason why the delegation voted against the resolution?

I have already answered that.

No, the hon. Gentleman has not.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what representations were made by the British delegation to the South East Asia Treaty Organisation Conference in Canberra regarding the admission of the People's Republic of China to the United Nations.

None, Sir.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that this matter has been under discussion for a very long time, that the Korean war is over now and that the war in Indo-China is over, and will he say in what circumstances and under what conditions the Government are prepared to press for the admission of China to the United Nations?

Our policy remains as it has been stated before. In this matter one has to have regard to the effect upon the United Nations, and the action which the hon. Member contemplates might well have the effect of reducing its present strength.

Are we to take it from that that it is no longer the view of the Government that the People's Government of China are entitled to be represented? We had thought for many years that that was the view of both sides of the House—both Front Benches.

Our view has certainly not changed, but the hon. Member asked me whether we would press our view upon the United Nations. The right hon. Gentleman knows as well as I do what the consequences of that action might be.

In view of the fact that the American Secretary of State—apparently, according to newspaper reports—made a very strong statement about the American point of view, are we to understand that the British point of view was allowed to go by default?

Our view remains the same. There has been no change.

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