asked the Paymaster-General in view of the rising demand for sheet and strip steel by the steel-using exporting industries, what plans the steel industry has for erecting new sheet and strip mills.

I am informed by the Iron and Steel Board that plans in hand for the development of existing wide strip mills are designed to provide by 1960 an annual sheet output of over three quarters of a million tons more than in 1956. Plans for the provision of further sheet and strip capacity after 1960 are under discussion between the Board and the industry.

As the demands of the sheet steel-using industries are rising, and look like going on rising for the next few years, and as we do not want to be dependent upon imports of dollar sheet steel, would my right hon. Friend press the Iron and Steel Board to make its plans for a new sheet mill in 1960, if possible?

My Answer showed that the plans do provide for a substantial expansion in strip mill capacity, but, for the details, I would ask my hon. Friend to await publication of the Report of the Iron and Steel Board, which is expected shortly.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the new plans will make us independent of imports of United States steel?

I think it would be better to await publication of the plans before going into more detail at this moment.

asked the Paymaster-General whether a decision has yet been reached on the siting of new atomic power plants; and what safeguards he has in mind to preserve the amenities of the countryside.

My hon. Friend will be aware of the Government decision that, for the present, nuclear power stations should be sited away from centres of population, and I cannot yet say how long it will be before sufficient experience has been gained to enable this decision to be reconsidered. Meanwhile, my noble Friend will continue to do everything possible to avoid any unnecessary damage to the amenities of the countryside.

Will my right hon. Friend and his noble Friend bear in mind the great beauty of the Lake District and do what they can to avoid despoiling it in any way?

Most certainly. I have recently visited the Central Electricity Authority and seen something of the way in which it sets about preserving the amenities of the country as far as possible. I am very impressed by the care with which it goes into these matters.

Will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that when local inquiries take place, witnesses provided by the Ministry of Power will be able to answer questions affecting other Ministries involved in such matters as have been raised by the hon. Baronet the Member for Morecambe and Lonsdale (Sir I. Fraser), in sharp contradistinction to what happened at the Bradwell inquiry?

I have not heard such complaints about that inquiry, but if the hon. Member will send me details I shall be glad to look into them.

asked the Paymaster-General by how much the price of industrial fuel oil had increased, per gallon between 1947 and the recent ending of rationing; how much the price of domestic coke has increased per hundredweight since 1947; and if, by way of comparison, he will express these price increases on a percentage basis.

Industrial fuel oil by 5¼d. per gallon, or 65 per cent. Wholesale, and domestic coke by 5s. 6d. a cwt., or 130 per cent. retail.

Does not this illustrate how costs in the coal industry have gone up compared with other prices? Is it not a fact that costs in the coal industry have gone up by five times compared with the industry's pre-war costs? Is not this the largest increase of any industry? Surely the coal industry should try to absorb these increased costs, as have agriculture and other industries.

Oh.

The fact is that, on the average, the retail price of coal has risen since 1947 by over 100 per cent., which must be one of the highest items in the Cost of Living Index.

asked the Paymaster-General his plans for developing the use of peat as a fuel.

Experiments on the development of peat as a fuel are being actively continued at Gardrum Moss in Stirlingshire in collaboration with the Department of Agriculture for Scotland, as part of the wider programme of peat development under the guidance of the Scottish Peat Committee. It is hoped that sufficient information will be available later this year to enable a decision to be taken about the future course of this project.

Is it not time that the Minister came to a firm decision about the development of peat, abundant supplies of which are available in Scotland? Is he aware that if peat were obtained for use as fuel a large amount of agricultural land could be developed?

As experiments are going on into the use of peat as fuel, it seems a good deal wiser to wait until those experiments are completed.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the country is much more interested in his plans for developing an increased output of coal, if necessary with the assistance of a few Hungarians?

I think the country is interested in the development of all forms of energy.

asked the Paymaster-General if his attention has been drawn to the evidence concerning the bad quality of coal delivered by retailers and incorrect pricing of deliveries and to the complaints of housewives on these matters; and if he will take steps to empower inspectors of weights and measures throughout Great Britain to inspect for grade and price, as well as for weight.

I have received no evidence to suggest that overcharging through upgrading quality is so widespread as to make it necessary for all weights and measures inspectors to be given additional powers of inspection.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there has been quite a number of prosecutions for this very thing? In view of the fact that the weights and measures inspectors of Glasgow and Bradford have power to inspect for grade and price as well as for weight, what reason is there to prevent weights and measures inspectors all over Britain from doing that? If they can do it in Glasgow and Bradford, why cannot they do it elsewhere?

Certainly, there have been a number of prosecutions, and most of them were instituted by my Department. There is a problem here, because if we were to inspect for quality and price the inspectors would have to be given power under the Defence Regulations of entry on to private premises. That is something which I do not think we should extend lightly. It has been extended in certain areas, to which the hon. Lady referred, but if she has evidence of the necessity in particular areas for a similar extension, I should be glad to consider it.

asked the Paymaster-General whether, in order to achieve a measure of stabilisation of coal prices, he will give a general direction to the National Coal Board to ensure that industrial purchasers in all cases pay the full economic price for the particular grades of coal demanded.

The same pricing principles apply to all coal sold by the National Coal Board irrespective of the user.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that answer has been given several times in this House but that it gets us no further so far as the steel industry is concerned? Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House what price per ton the steel industry now pays for coking coal, and the difference between the price it pays and the economic cost of production of that coal?

The fact that the same answer has been given to many Questions by the hon. Member on this point means that it is the true answer in each case. Without notice, I could not give the exact price for various coking coals, but I can assure the hon. Member that an economic price is certainly charged to the industry.

Is it not true that coal is being sold to British industry at 30s. or 40s. a ton below the European price? Is it not high time that private industry paid the economic price and was no longer subsidised by the National Coal Board?

In so far as there is a subsidy, it is more to the domestic consumer than to industry, because the subsidy arises mainly on imported coal, which is sold below the imported price, and the majority of that goes to the domestic consumer.

Does the right hon. Gentleman deny that the price of coal for industry in this country is below the European price?

I certainly do not deny that, but the fact that a product is cheaper in this country than elsewhere does not necessarily mean that it is subsidised.

asked the Paymaster-General on how many occasions the price of Group 2 domestic coal has been raised in the West of England since nationalisation; by how much on each occasion; and what was the major contributory factor on each occasion.

Since the Answer contains a number of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

My right hon. Friend will realise that it is with the greatest reluctance that I agree to his circulating the details in the OFFICIAL REPORT, but does he not agree that the time has come when we should face the re-organisation of the coal industry? There is grave and widespread doubt in the country whether the industry, on its present nationalised basis, can render an essential contribution to the country's welfare. Will my right hon. Friend agree that the crux of the whole position is that this dangerous and quite self-defeating process of demanding more for doing less, if continued, can only bring disaster to the industry and the country?

My hon. Friend has raised as questions some very important issues which are really too wide to go into in answer to supplementary questions.

As the Question referred to the domestic price of coal and the hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Peyton) suggested some re-organisation, may I ask if the right hon. Gentleman is aware that we on this side of the House will be very happy to see a re-organisation of the distributive trade in the coal industry?

asked the Paymaster-General whether he will give an estimate of the proportion of the increase in the price of domestic coal since 1945 which is attributable to higher freight charges.

For Yeovil, nearly one-quarter on Group 4 coal.

I had an impression that a former Minister of Fuel and Power set up a Committee to inquire into that. That examination is still going on.

While one expects the two figures to go together, does not my right hon. Friend think this proportion is really excessive? Will he draw the attention of the Board and the Transport Commission to this fact so that they can produce a more sensible solution?

It is a little difficult to follow the argument of my hon. Friend. The point is that of the increases in coal prices which have taken place in his area about one-quarter has been due to increased freight charges. I think it would be very difficult to draw any useful conclusions from that without going into considerable detail.

asked the Paymaster-General (1) whether he will place in the Library of the House the record of the proceedings between the Domestic Coal Consumers' Council and the Industrial Coal Consumers' Council prior to their agreement to an increase in the price of coal;

It is for the Councils themselves to decide whether or not to disclose their proceedings. I am informed, however, that both the Industrial and the Domestic Councils have always kept their proceedings private on the grounds that frank discussion might otherwise be inhibited.

Would my right hon. Friend bear in mind that I do not think, nor do a lot of other people, that the Domestic Coal Consumers' Council is technically sufficiently well informed to advise the National Coal Board on whether there should be an increase of price or not? Is my right hon. Friend aware that, in the opinion of most people, the Domestic Coal Consumers' Council and the Industrial Consumers' Council had no more opportunity of restraining the National Coal Board from increasing prices than Adam had of refusing the advances made by Eve?

I think both Councils as at present constituted are well suited to represent the point of view of the industrial consumer and the domestic consumer, but if my hon. Friend has any suggestions to make as to improving the representation, I am sure my noble Friend would be glad to consider them.

asked the Paymaster-General (1) by how much per ton the retail price of Group 2 house coal has increased since 1947 in South Wales; what percentage increase in cost this represents; what steps he now proposes to prevent further burdens on consumers in the South Wales area; and if he will make a statement;

Group 2 house coal is not sold in. South Wales, but for Group 3 the increase since 1947 has been about 90s. per ton, or 125 per cent.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that Questions such as this, particularly coming from South Wales, are used by his hon. Friends only to cover up the fact that what they are hearing about this week is not the price of coal but the implementation of the Rent Act?

I think the right hon. Gentleman is quite wrong in that. I am sure that my hon. Friends who have these Questions on the Order Paper are concerned, as I am sure the whole House and the country are concerned, about the recent substantial rise in the price of coal.

Arising out of the Questions and my right hon. Friend's reply, may I ask whether it is not a fact that one miner in fourteen is now taking an unofficial day off each week as compared with one in twenty-five a year ago? Is not this due to the new bonus shift system, and did not Mr. Arthur Horner pledge the honour of his union that absenteeism would not increase? Is not this costing the country 500,000 tons of coal a week?

I could not accept my hon. and gallant Friend's figures as being accurate, but this is a very important matter. There is no doubt that since the abolition of the bonus shift conditions output has taken a nasty fall. This is bound to give rise to much concern. I saw that at the recent conference of the National Union of Mineworkers Mr. Arthur Horner said that when the Board agreed to abolish the bonus shift system the union had staked its honour that the miners would not take advantage of the concession. He said that it was too early to judge the tendency, and I agree that it is too early to judge, but I know that leading members of the National Union of Mineworkers are very determined about this and that they and the Board together are determined to do all they can to ensure that we do not lose production, because it would be very bad for the nation if we did.

Would not the Minister agree that, in the circumstances, since the end of the war, and bearing in mind the experience of the miners between the wars, the leaders of the National Union of Mineworkers have shown a real sense of national responsibility?

The leaders of the mineworkers are doing an extremely good job in trying to persuade the members of their union on various important points. I think we all wish them success in their efforts.

While accepting my right hon. Friend's statement that the National Union of Mineworkers is concerned, can he tell the House whether any concern is being shown by the National Coal Board about this matter?

Of course.

Is the Minister aware that only the, nationalised industries stabilised their prices in 1956 and 1957, while private enterprise increased its prices? Is he further aware that the steel industry put up its prices by 6 per cent. in January and that there was not one voice from the Government side of the House in opposition? Is it not about time that they gave the nationalised boards a square deal instead of blaming them for the faults of private enterprise?

The hon. Member is mistaken. A very wide range of private industry carried out the same stabilisation.

While appreciating the difficulties of the coal industry, may I ask whether my right hon. Friend does not agree that this problem has to be viewed with particular urgency because the repercussions of an increase in the price of coal are necessarily so widespread and have such an effect on so many people and industries throughout the country?

I quite agree with that.

asked the Paymaster-General what arrangements will be made to prevent further increases in the retail price of coal which will arise from increased freight rates consequent upon the recently authorised increase in coal prices; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Paymaster-General what part of the price increase of 6s. 6d. per ton in the pithead price of coal on 1st July, 1957, yielding £66 million in additional revenue to the National Coal Board in the full year, is designed to make provision for capital development requirements and to what extent for reimbursement of National Coal Board losses on current account or prospective losses; and what steps he is now taking to prevent further increases in the price of coal to the consumer, following the British Transport Commission's increase of 10 per cent. in rail freights consequent upon the 6s. 6d. per ton increase in coal prices.

The recent coal price increase was intended to cover increases in costs falling on the National Coal Board during the current year and to provide a small revenue surplus. On present estimates, the increase should provide a similar surplus in 1958, and any revenue surplus which may be earned in either year will directly reduce the advances from the Minister for capital purposes.

Is not my right hon. Friend particularly disturbed by this dog-chasingits-tail policy? Does he not think that some extraordinary remedy or approach is needed? Could he not arrange for the Minister of Power and the Minister of Transport, together with the heads of the National Coal Board and British transport industry, to get together and consider the whole problem?

I doubt whether much could be achieved by mutual price cutting between the two nationalised boards because, except as far as they can be reduced by greater efficiency, the increased costs must eventually be carried by the consumer, be he a consumer of transport or a consumer of coal.

:My right hon. Friend used the words "greater efficiency". Can he say what contribution was made by greater efficiency towards reducing the increased costs of the National Coal Board? Is it not a fact that the whole of the £66 million revenue from increased prices, which the Board is levying for the current year, has been put on the backs of the consumers and that no regard has been paid to increase in efficiency? Will he not approach the members of the National Coal Board and try to knock out of their heads some of this cost-plus mentality?

I do not know what my hon. Friend means by the "cost-plus mentality". A large proportion of the increase in coal costs arises from decisions of this House in the Mines and Quarries Act and the Coal Mining (Subsidence) Bill. I suppose that of the remaining increased costs, wages are the largest element. The only way in which one can mitigate that is by increasing productivity. It is a matter for very great concern that despite increased mechanisation and increased investment, and owing to poorer attendances and sometimes more disputes, production in 1956 has not risen by comparison with that in 1951. I think that is the basis of the matter.

Is it not the case that the series of Questions we have just had are an attack upon the miners' wages? Is it not the case that unless miners are paid good wages and enjoy good conditions fewer men will go into the pits and, as a consequence, coal will be substantially dearer?

I think the right hon. Gentleman is wrong. I do not think there is any question of an attack upon the level of mineworkers' wages. I agree with what he said about that. My hon. Friends are concerned—and I share their concern—about the fact that productivity has not been rising as it should.

asked the Paymaster-General what estimate he has made of the effects of further increased prices for house coal after 1st July, 1957, upon demand next winter from house-holders; what changes he now proposes to make in the allocation of 34 cwts. of coal to each house-holder in the South and 50 cwts. in the North; and whether house coal supplies, excluding imports, are adequate to meet the estimate he has made of demand.

We cannot assume that the price increases recently announced will materially affect demand next winter, and, therefore, no change in the domestic allocations is contemplated at present on that account. Supplies of large coal will not be adequate to meet estimated demand without help from imports, but the small sizes are in better supply and should be used wherever possible.

Notwithstanding my right hon. Friend's refutation of the dear coal policy, is it not a fact that coal for the domestic consumer, particularly in the South of England, is extraordinarily dear? Is he aware that those living on relatively modest incomes are today faced with a situation in which they cannot afford to buy the ration? As coal is now rationed by price, why keep all this clumsy abracadabra of bureaucracy in being for a shortage that no longer exists?

On all the evidence that we have, it is fairly clear that, taking the country as a whole, the demand for domestic coal is still higher than the prospective supply. In those circumstances, I do not see how, at the moment, we can remove rationing, though my noble Friend is very anxious to do so as soon as possible.

In view of the reply that the Minister has given to his hon. Friend the Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro), will he tell the House what is the average pithead price of coal at the moment, and what is the difference between the pithead price and the price after bringing it into the south of England? Further, will he organise a visit of some of his hon. Friends to the pits in the industrial area so that they can go down the mines and see the conditions in which these people are expected to work in a basic industry which his hon. Friends are criticising so much?

I should be glad to organise a visit of that character for hon. Members on either side of the House. As regards the cost of coal, it is, of course, dearer in the South. The further regions are from the pithead the greater the effect of rising transport charges is felt in those regions.

asked the Paymaster-General by how much the retail price of Group 2 house coal, in terms of money and percentage, has risen in Burton-on-Trent since 1st January, 1947.

About 99s. a ton, or 150 per cent.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that the recurrent increases in the price of coal are the prime factor in the inflationary spiral? Is he aware that these recurrent increases press most hardly on the fixed income groups, such as old-age pensioners and retirement pensioners? Is he further aware that these people in my constituency are distressed in mind and in purse, and will he consult his right hon. Friends the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance to see if it is possible to alleviate the hardship inflicted on these people by these increases by an immediate increase in pension, or by some scheme of concession?

Supplementary questions today have been of an inordinate length. If hon. Members would ask their questions succinctly, we could get on much quicker.

The Question whether rising prices cause inflation or inflation causes rising prices is one to leave, I think, to economists, but I will certainly repeat that the recent increase in the price of coal is a matter of very serious concern to industry, to the domestic consumer and to people on fixed incomes. But I must ask my hon. Friend to address any questions about pensions to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Pensions.

asked the Paymaster-General, in view of the 6s. 6d. a ton pithead increase in coal announced on 1st July, 1957, and the 10 per cent. increase in rail freights, what will be the increase in retail prices for house coal in Devonshire.

The increases in retail prices in Devon on 1st July, 1957, varied from 5s. a ton for Group 7 coal to 11s. 8d. a ton for Group 1. The proposed increase in rail freights will increase retail prices of all grades of coal in Devon by about 5s.

In view of that deplorable statement, does not my right hon. Friend think that he should make immediate representations to the Chairman of the National Coal Board with a view to re-introducing the bonus shift conditions?

No. I think that negotiations between the National Coal Board and the National Union of Mineworkers on wages and conditions of employment are matters to be left to the discretion of the National Coal Board. But I can assure my hon. Friend that the National Coal Board weighed very carefully indeed the conflicting elements in the decision before agreeing to this abolition of the bonus shift conditions. I would refer again to what the leaders of the National Union of Mineworkers have said; that they regard themselves as having made a pledge. I hope very much that they prove that in practice they can carry it out.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say by how much rents have increased in Devonshire in the past two weeks?

I think that, with adequate notice, my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government could do so.

asked the Paymaster-General by how much the price of Group 2 house-hold coal has increased in the home counties and in south-east Essex, in particular, since nationalisation; and how many increases in price have been made during this period.

In London by about 106s. a ton, and in south-east Essex by 114s. The number of price increases has been 31 and 34.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say by how much less those prices might be increased if he could abolish the unfair system under which the National Coal Board has to bear the loss on imported coal?

The loss on imported coal amounts to about 1s. 6d. per ton, speaking without reference to the book. The loss on imported coal is certainly a large item in the National Coal Board accounts, but the argument as to whether or not that should be borne by the Coal Board or by the taxpayer is much too big an argument for discussion at Question Time.

asked the Paymaster-General, by how much the retail price of Group 2 house coal delivered to Bournemouth has increased since 1947; and what percentage of this increase is due to transportation costs.

About 123s., of which about 20 per cent. has been due to railway freight increases.

Now that railway freight costs will probably go up as a result of the recent coal price increase, can my right hon. Friend say when the next increase in the price of coal will take place as a result of the increased cost of transport?

As I explained in answer to an earlier Question, the effect of the coal price increase is not likely to add more than ¼ per cent. to the delivered cost of coal to the consumer, so I think the effect of these two things one against the other can sometimes be exaggerated.

In order to get this increase in the price of coal into perspective, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the cost of other things has gone up, including Kidderminster carpets, which are now about four times the pre-war price?

If the hon. Member will look at the statistics and the price indices he will find that, compared with 1949, the price of coal has risen a good deal more than has the price of carpets.

A Kidderminster carpet is always cheap at the price.

asked the Paymaster-General what grades of domestic house coal are delivered to Bournemouth; and how many of these were available at cheap summer prices.

As the responsibility for distributing the various qualities of house coal to merchants in different parts of the country is the National Coal Board's, I am asking the Chairman to provide my hon. Friend with this information.

Mr. Emrys Hughes.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I direct your attention to Questions on the Order Paper relating to Group 2 coal which appears to be sold all over Britain, according to those Questions, whereas in fact Group 2 coal represents only 10 per cent. of the whole output of the pits?

That is not even near a point of order.

asked the Paymaster-General the estimated total extra charge to industry brought about by the increased coal prices; and what approximate improvement in the efficiency of fuel utilisation by industry would offset the financial effect of the extra charge.

About £29 million, including the direct effect on costs of electricity, gas and coke supplied to industry. It would be necessary to reduce industrial consumption of fuel, excluding oil, by 5 or 6 per cent. to offset this extra charge.

Would not the paymaster-General agree that industry, if it made a real effort, could largely counteract the alleged inflationary effect of increased coal prices by fuel efficiency?

Admittedly, it could use fuel much more efficiently. What the country needs is much more fuel efficiency and not more expensive coal.

Would not my right hon. Friend and the House agree that the difficulties which the country is facing are not primarily a criticism on the mining industry but are a criticism of successive Governments for failing to halt inflation?

Once again, I would say that the effect of rising prices on inflation and of inflation on rising prices is a complicated question.

asked the Paymaster-General what is his estimate, on the basis of figures supplied to him for the Ministry of Power Statistical Digest, of the present approximate consumption of coal per annum in respect of the free allowance to miners, together with the value thereof.

Two million tons in 1956 worth about £9 million. In addition, about 3 million tons, worth about £13½ million, were supplied at concessionary prices.

As every time the price of coal goes up the miners are, in effect, getting an increase in wages—that is, the miners who have free coal—and in view of the public feeling on this matter—[HON. MEMBERS: "Where?"]—has not the time arrived for the issue of free coal to miners to be reviewed, and would not my right hon. Friend issue a directive to the National Coal Board that, since the value of the free coal is £23 million a year, the total amount of free coal issued should not exceed £23 million a year for the future?

The figures show that the free coal is worth £9 million a year and that £13½ million worth is supplied at concessionary prices. It is, of course, quite true that when the retail price of coal rises the value of this concessionary coal goes up, but really all this is part and parcel of the general wages negotiations, and it would be quite wrong for my noble Friend to interfere with wage negotiations.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that if the hon. Member for Twickenham (Mr. Gresham Cooke) had his way he would create more industrial strife, secure a much lower output of coal and land the nation in an infinitely worse position than it is in now? Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us how many free miles are driven in motor cars supplied by the motor car manufacturers to their employees to enable them to do their jobs effectively?

I do not think that that was at all the purpose or the effect of my hon. Friend's Question. In view of the great public interest which is taken in this matter, it is right that these questions should be asked and answered.

asked the Paymaster-General what proportion of the pithead costs of coal is represented by wages.

Sixty per cent. in 1956.

In view of the fact that this is an extractive and not a manufacturing industry and that about 200 mines produce coal at more than average cost, could the right hon. Gentleman tell us how it is possible to stabilise prices except by a great expansion of the investment programme so that these high-cost mines can be closed down?

There are many factors involved in the way in which we can stabilise the price of coal, and reference is made to those in subsequent questions on the Order Paper today.

Can my right hon. Friend clarify the public mind by saying to what extent the Government are responsible for the level of wages in the industry?

The Government have no responsibility for the level of wages in the mining industry. That is a matter for the National Coal Board and the National Union of Mineworkers.

asked the Paymaster-General how much imported coal was sold on the British market in the twelve months ended 30th June, 1957; what losses were incurred on this resale, both aggregate and average per ton; and what proportion of the permitted increase of 6s. 6d. per ton will be used in defraying such losses.

3·7 million tons of coal were sold at a loss of £14 million, or 75s. per ton in the twelve months ended 30th June. The permitted increase of 6s. 6d. per ton for the selling price of coal was to provide for increased costs of home production.

I was hoping to ask another supplementary on the previous Question. Turning to this Question, how long is this national scandal of coal imports to be allowed to continue? Has my right hon. Friend and the Minister of Power any policy for eliminating coal imports in the future, thus relieving the heavy burden which is being placed upon the consumer by the losses incurred on resale of imported coal?

My hon. Friend uses strong language, and I do not know whether it contributes anything to a solution of what is a difficult and technical problem. The proportion of large coal being mined is falling with modern mining methods. The National Coal Board hopes to mitigate that decline with more modern machinery, which it is now trying to introduce, but if the proportion of large coal, which is the type the domestic market requires, continues to fall, and if people still want the same amount of large coal, it will be impossible to eliminate imports. This problem is being and must be tackled from two points of view—first of all, to try to stop the decline in the proportion of large coal and, secondly, to try to increase the use of smaller coals, an effort to which my hon. Friend has himself contributed a very great deal.

Does not the hon. Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro) talk a great deal of nonsense? How can the National Coal Board either carry out its modernisation projects or get rid of imports as long as it is forced to charge a price far below the economic level?

I do not always agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro), nor do I often agree with the right hon. Member for Battersea, North (Mr. Jay), but if, as it appears, the right hon. Gentleman is advocating a deliberate policy of dearer coal, I certainly do not agree with him.

Mr. Nabarro.

I wanted to say that that was the best thing my right hon. Friend has said today. Question No. 17.

asked the Paymaster-General how much the annual production of coal has increased since 1951; and if he will express the increase on a percentage basis.

Total coal production in 1956 was virtually identical with that of 1951.

Is the Paymaster-General aware that this compares with an increase in wages of 30 per cent. and capital investment of over £350 million? Is he aware how desperate pensioners and those living on fixed incomes are feeling when they see this lack of productivity? It is that lack of productivity, and not because they wish to see less wages paid to the miners, that is making those people desperate over the rise in the price of coal.

I think it is a very serious matter that, despite the increased investment in the industry, coal production was virtually stationary between 1951 and 1956. The fact is that the increase in output per man shift was outweighed by longer holidays, by increased absenteeism and by higher disputes losses, although there was a rise in the total labour force. In the first five months of 1957, we have seen what results can be obtained from this increased mechanisation, and I hope that after the present transitional period following upon the abolition of the bonus shift condition is over we shall see a resumption of the very encouraging trend of the first five months of this year.

Would it not be possible for the right hon. Gentleman to run a small class for a number of his hon. Friends in order to teach them some of the facts about coal production? Is it not the case that output per manshift has increased and that, therefore, productivity has increased and that the amount of manpower in the pits is a variable factor? Is it not also the case that just so soon as all these Questions and Answers are published in the newspapers in the mining areas they are likely to lead to more difficulties and not less?

I am at the disposal of the House to provide information to hon. and right hon. Gentlemen on both sides, and it appears that there is a good deal of inquiry being made from both sides. I think that I should repeat once again these facts. Between 1951 and 1956, despite a slightly increased labour force, despite increased investment—and despite an increase in the output per man shift, I quite agree—we did not get any increase in output per man year, which is the vital figure: but in the first five months of 1957 we saw what could be done; I believe that in the next few months we shall see a return to that.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of us regret the poor wages that were paid to miners in years gone by, but welcome the payment of adequate wages now, and would greatly welcome a further increase in wages if it were commensurate with an increase in output?

I think that there will be general agreement with that proposition.

In order to be fair to all concerned, would the right hon. Gentleman explain to the House that the fall in output per man year was due to the fact that last year, for the first time, miners had a fortnight's holiday, and state whether he or any hon. Member opposite objects to miners having two weeks' holiday with pay? Further, will he arrange for those of his hon. Friends behind him who put these Questions a visit to the coalfields so that they may be informed of the miners' views?

I have referred to both of those points; to the fact that the miners had a fortnight's paid holiday, and to the pleasure with which I would arrange such a visit.

asked the Paymaster-General what contribution is currently being made to overall coal production by opencast working; and how production from this source compares with the position in previous years.

In the first 27 weeks of this year 6,885,000 tons of coal were produced at opencast sites. This is the highest recorded output for that period of the year and represents over 5½ per cent. of total supplies.

:Is it not clear from that reply that opencast coal production is making a very notable contribution to our overall coal supplies as well as producing at a much lower cost than deep-mined coal? Can my right hon. Friend, therefore, explain why it was that last month the National Coal Board in the North-East issued instructions to opencast producers to restrict production because of inadequate storage space? Would not my right hon. Friend agree that this reveals a most extraordinary lack of foresight? Is he aware that while my constituents are all in favour of high wages in industry for high production, the one thing they will not excuse is inefficiency?

In recent months the continued good weather and the failure of industrial consumption to rise has meant that our stocks of coal are at record levels, and certainly from time to time this has given rise to stocking difficulties, as it is bound to do. I am not aware of the particular case to which my hon. Friend has referred, but if he will send me details I shall be glad to look into it.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is the Government's failure to plan our exports and to permit the Coal Board to export adequately that has left us with such huge stocks?

The problem of exports is not to plan them but to sell them.

asked the Paymaster-General the approximate quantity, and the estimated value, of the coal saved in the nationalised gas and electricity industries due to increased efficiency of fuel utilisation, since vesting date in each case.

For gas nearly 10 million tons, worth some £40 million, and for electricity about 35 million tons, worth some £120 million.

Would the right hon. Gentleman not agree that this is an example by nationalised industries which the whole of British industry might well follow?

I agree that this is an excellent performance, but there are plenty of excellent performances in private industry also.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many definite proposals for grant under the Silo Subsidies Act have been made; how many have been agreed; and what is the total amount of the grants.

No central records have been maintained of the number of proposals for grant which have been made under the Agriculture (Silo Subsidies) Act, 1956, but by 31st May, 9,305 proposals in the United Kingdom have been approved, the total amount of grant payable being £1,422,522.

Will my right hon. Friend say whether he is satisfied with this progress? Will he also say whether he thinks West Country farmers in particular are taking advantage of the provisions of this excellent Act, and whether he thinks that our bill for imported feedingstuffs will be any less this year?

Yes, I am very satisfied with the overall response to this scheme. I think that, on the whole, there has been a very satisfactory response from the West Country, and I am hopeful that in the long run it will have a good effect on restricting our necessary in ports of feedingstuffs.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think that if some of these Government grants and subsidies were diverted to the coal industry it might help that industry?

I prefer to keep them all under my own control.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is being done to dispose of the old potato crops dumped at the many farms throughout the country and for which his Department has spent so much money in buying up such crops.

Potatoes bought by the Potato Marketing Board under the guarantee arrangements as surplus to requirements for human consumption are being disposed of as rapidly as possible for feeding to livestock. I am informed that substantial quantities have been processed into animal feedingstuffs. The 1956 crop was, however, so abundant that it will not be possible to use all of it.

In view of that surplus in the potato crop last year, and the publicity given to the matter, would it not be well to liberate those stocks altogether and even to offer them to hospitals and places like that to get rid of them beneficially, instead of letting them lie on the farms to go rotten and be of no use whatever?

The trouble is that the demand is very inelastic, and, judging by experience, it is extremely difficult to encourage demand even by reductions in prices. Late as it is now in the season, I think that there are only very small quantities, if any, available on the farms still fit for human consumption.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what are the up-to-date figures of the cost of providing an adequate diet for representative groups of the community in Scotland.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to him on 8th July.

In view of the fact that the National Food Survey and the 1955 Report of the Department of Health for Scotland show appreciable differences between the standard of nutrition of the people in Scotland and the standard of nutrition of the people in England and Wales, ought there not to be social indices of the kind which the Nutrition Committee of the British Medical Association published in 1953?

I am sympathetic to the hon. Gentleman's views on this matter, but I really believe that the best service I can render is to do my best, as I am doing now, to get the National Food Survey figures out quicker than they have been got out in the past. We are making steady progress, and I hope that the full report for 1955 will be out in a few weeks.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he proposes to take to control the traffic in unweaned calves and the conditions under which such calves are transported in the United Kingdom.

There are no regulations governing the sale of unweaned calves. The Transit of Animals Orders, made under the Diseases of Animals Act, contain very detailed regulations governing the conditions to be observed when livestock, including calves, are transported in this country. These are enforced by local authorities and the police. As at present advised, I am doubtful whether there is any need for further regulations, but if hon. Members have any particular points in mind and will let me know. I will gladly consider them.

Has the attention of the Minister been drawn to a recent report in the national Press stating that in one instance 98 young calves were transported nearly 300 miles in one cattle truck in indescribable conditions? Does he not consider some action ought to be taken to prevent cruelty of this kind?

I agree that every possible action should be taken to prevent cruelty. That incident, I believe, was not a recent one but occurred last year.

Last month.

No. I think that that incident to which the right hon. and learned Gentleman referred—certainly if it is the one I am thinking of—occurred last year. Enforcement action is a matter for the local authorities.

Does my right hon. Friend not agree that one of the features which is most unsatisfactory is the manner of the provision of milk for the calves to drink en route? It seems that calves are expected to drink as adults drink instead of being helped with sucking instruments, which are on the market, and the use of which would improve matters enormously.

I will look into the matter my hon. and gallant Friend has mentioned.

In view of the representations which are being made, will the right hon. Gentleman consider whether further regulations are necessary?

I have the matter under consideration all the time. As I am at present advised, I cannot see what additional regulations we could usefully make, but if and when additional regulations may be useful I shall certainly consider making them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the movement of these very young calves to market always involves a great deal of cruelty? Why should they not be slaughtered on the farms and moved as carcasses?

The difficulty in general, as I think the hon. and learned Gentleman will agree, is with the slaughtering facilities. We want to ensure that they really are humane, and they can be better controlled at the slaughterhouses.

rose—

On a point of order. I think, Mr. Speaker, the Minister was ans—wering with the Question of my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Rowley Regis and Tipton (Mr. A. Henderson) my Question No. 51—

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what are his regulations governing the sale of unweaned calves and the conditions under which such calves are transported, and what steps are taken to enforce them.

The right hon. Gentleman did not say he was going to reply to the hon. Gentleman's Question and the Question of the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Rowley Regis and Tipton (Mr. A. Henderson) together, or, if he did, I did not hear him say so, I was going to call the hon. Gentleman's Question separately.

In considering the transport of unweaned calves, would the Minister be good enough to ask his inspectors to have a look at the West Country and West Wales, where, I am advised, there are certain collective hideouts where people trafficking in unweaned calves collect the calves and then transport them to London in conditions which, to say the least, are deplorable? I do ask the Minister to direct his attention and that of his officials to that matter.

I must apologise to the hon. Member for Oldbury and Halesowen (Mr. Moyle) for omitting to ask permission to answer his Question at the same time as I answered the Question of the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Rowley Regis and Tipton (Mr. A. Henderson). I will certainly look into the matter which the hon. Gentleman the Member for Oldbury and Halesowen has raised. I attach very great weight to his opinions in these matters.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will now approve the construction of an abattoir in Sunderland.

The proposal of the Sunderland Corporation to build a slaughterhouse has my support, but a loan for its construction cannot be sanctioned at present. In the meantime, the Corporation is proceeding with the preparation of working plans and specifications.

While I am obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for his support, may I ask him, in view of the fact that the conditions in the slaughterhouse in Sunderland have been officially described as quite deplorable, to see if he could push this business through? We have waited a very long time, and it is really time we had a new abattoir.

I will give it as high priority as I can.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he has yet considered the claims of fishermen for gear damaged by Russian vessels; and what action he proposes to take.

These claims have been examined and my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs is transmitting them to the appropriate Soviet authorities.

In view of the fact that there has as yet been no reply from the Russian authorities to the representations made by the Foreign Office on behalf of Scottish fishermen, will my right hon. Friend see that those claims which he has mentioned are transmitted with a sense of urgency?

They are on their way at the present time.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is aware of the failure of his campaign to prevent the increase of rabbits in agricultural areas through the carelessness of a few people who have neglected to destroy the few rabbits on their land; and what action he proposes to take in the limited time still available to him before the rabbit again becomes an expensive and wasteful pest.