asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance on what grounds he has refused to date the pension awarded to Mr. E. Clarke, 70, Ryle Street, Walsall, from the date of Mr. Clarke's disability.

The reason is that under the relevant Order in Council, as the hon. and learned Member was informed on 12th March, the normal practice which has existed since 1920 is that war pensions are awarded as from date of application.

Will not the hon. Gentleman set himself a good example in answering Questions, which we are all glad to see him doing, by looking a bit further into this case to see whether there are not some exceptional circumstances which warrant a departure from the normal rule? Is there not a case for reconsidering the whole of this rather harsh rule, which has the effect that when a man is a bit slow in pressing his own claims, perhaps for some very good reason, he is prejudiced for the rest of his life?

The rule is not necessarily harsh. It has been accepted as sound by Governments of all parties for thirty-seven years. The reason is basically administrative. All cases are taken on their merits, but if the hon. and learned Gentleman knows of any reason why this particular case should be treated as an exception, I hope he will let us have it.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he will state the average rent allowance being received by recipients of National Assistance in the week ended 12th April, 1958, and how this compares with a similar date in April, 1951; and what was the annual rent allowance paid in the financial years ended 5th April, 1951, and 1958, respectively.

The National Assistance Board informs me that the information asked for is not available. I would, however, refer the hon. Member to the information given in the Board's Annual Report for 1951, which shows that the average rent including rates (or in the case of owner-occupiers rates and an allowance for repairs and mortgage interest) of householders receiving assistance in November, 1951, was 10s. 11d. a week. The corresponding figure for November, 1957, was 16s.

Can the Minister say the reason, or will he ascertain the reason, why the National Assistance Board cannot give this information? Surely the Board must know in the course of a financial year just how much National Assistance is allocated for a specific purpose, and surely it is able to compare one year with the next? If the Minister has not this information, will he take steps to get it so that the House may have it?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that what information is and is not available on the subject has been quite lengthily discussed in the House, and I think he himself has taken part in the discussion. I have nothing whatever to add.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he will arrange for all old-age pensioners to recover from the National Assistance Board, on production of their rent books, the weekly increases in their rents which have applied since 6th April last.

No, Sir. Eligibility for National Assistance depends upon need assessed in accordance with the scales approved by Parliament and not upon receipt of a contributory National Insurance retirement pension, which is, of course, payable without any test of means.

Does not the Minister think it rather immoral to expect these old-age pensioners to have two rent increases in less than twelve months—in some instances, to my own knowledge, amounting to as much as 25s. a week—while the Chancellor of the Exchequer, by reducing the Profits Tax, is giving extra to those who receive dividends? Is it not unfair to place this extra financial burden on the old-age pensioners while giving it back to the Surtax payers, who in any case had it last year?

I am not going to debate the Budget with the hon. Gentleman at Question Time. On the suggestion embodied in his Question, it seems quite impossible to commend the proposition that the taxpayer, through the National Assistance system, should provide an additional payment to people without any test of their needs whatever, including people in all conditions of life. That is the hon. Gentleman's proposal, and I do not accept it.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance the numbers of 1914–18 war-disabled pensioners who are pensioned at the 40 per cent. or higher rate for wounds and ailments, respectively, the average age of each group, and the numbers of each group who qualify for the age allowance.

As at 31st December, 1957, there were 115,600 pensioners of the 1914–18 war whose disability was assessed at 40 per cent. or over. I regret that the rest of the information asked for is not available.

Could the Minister say what percentage of these disabled are receiving the age allowance?

I think that the hon. Gentleman has tabled a Question on this subject for Written Answer today.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance the weekly rates of disability pensions awarded to unmarried ex-privates of the 1914–18 and 1939–45 wars, respectively, for amputation of a leg exceeding five inches below the knee, and for the loss of vision of one eye; what are the reasons for the differences; and whether he will state the weekly values of the pensions awarded to unmarried ex-captains for the same disabilities.

For the amputation referred to, the rates in respect of the 1914–18 and 1939–45 wars are 42s. 6d. and 34s. a week, respectively, for ex-privates and £173 and £138 8s. a year, respectively, for ex-captains. For loss of vision of one eye, the corresponding rates are 42s. 6d., 25s. 6d., £173 and £103 16s. The reason for the differences is that when the Schedule of Injuries was reviewed in 1947 by the Expert Committee presided over by Judge Hancock, 1914 war pensioners who had higher assessments than the Committee considered appropriate for these injuries were allowed to retain their existing rights, whilst those with lower assessments were given the benefit of the Committee's recommendations.

Does not the Minister think it remarkable that, with the price of everything going up, the price of limbs must go down as compared with the First World War? Cannot he say why I, with an amputation more than five inches below the knee, should be receiving several shillings a week more than a man who received the same injury in the Second World War? Cannot this question be reconsidered in the light of the fact that it is obviously unfair to penalise men who fought in the Second World War as against those who fought in the First World War?

The reason was very well given by the hon. Gentleman when he was Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Pensions shortly after the time of this decision. He made it clear that what was done was to provide that where, as a result of the Hancock Committee, assessments were put up, injured men of both wars were to get the benefit of it; and that where, as a result of the Hancock review, in one or two cases the assessment was reduced, no reduction was to be made in the already existing rights of the men of the previous war. The hon. Gentleman commended that decision at that time, if I may say so, very properly.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance the number of deaths amongst married war-disabled pensioners during the past year, and the number of war widows' pensions awarded in respect of those deaths.

During 1957 there ere, I am sorry to say, 9,547 deaths of married war disablement pensioners. I regret that I have no figures of awards of war widows' pensions relating to these deaths, but 1,690 war widows' pensions were awarded during the year.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance when he expects to issue regulations to provide for an automatic right of appeal from the local appeal tribunals to the Commissioner under the National Insurance Act, and to introduce legislation to give a similar right under the Industrial Injuries Act.

Draft Regulations providing for an unrestricted right of appeal from decisions of local tribunals to the National Insurance Commissioner have been submitted to the National Insurance Advisory Committee and are now being considered by them. As regards the second part of the Question, I have no statement to make about legislation, but I do not think there is any chance of it this Session.

While welcoming the first half of the Minister's reply with regard to the National Insurance Act, may I ask whether he would not agree that if the recommendation of the Franks Committee is implemented in respect of the National Insurance Act it would be logical to implement it in respect of the Industrial Injuries Act as quickly as possible? As a Bill on this matter need only be short and uncontroversial, could he not use his influence with his right hon. Friend to see whether it could be brought forward during this Session?

There is no question of not implementing the recommendation. As the hon. Gentleman knows, on the National Insurance side this can be done by regulation, which is what we are doing, while on the Industrial Injuries side legislation is required to amend the original Industrial Injuries Act. I think that the hon. Gentleman, for all his knowledge of the subject, somewhat underrates its complexity if he thinks that legislation on this and connected topics of Industrial Injury adjudication would necessarily be very simple.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what proposals he is considering to amend the system of National Assistance appeals so as to provide a further right of appeal against decisions of the local tribunals.

None, Sir. I accept the view of the Committee on Administrative Tribunals and Enquiries as set out in paragraphs 181 and 182 of its Report.

But did not the same Committee, earlier in its Report, say that it is desirable that there should be appeals from a lower court to a higher court or appellate tribunal? Does not the Minister think that the National Assistance Tribunal qualifies under this heading? Are there not about 151 different tribunals in different parts of the country which give perhaps different decisions on points connected with the Act, and should there not be an appeal to a national tribunal in these cases?

No. The general recommendation of the Franks Committee, to which the hon. Gentleman referred, was expressly excluded by the Committee itself, in the paragraph that I have quoted, from application to these tribunals. The decision which has been already announced is completely in line with the recommendation of the Franks Committee; and it may interest the House to know that when the original suggestion to provide an appeal from these Tribunals was made during the passing of the National Assistance Act over ten years ago, the right hon. Member for Llanelly (Mr. J. Griffiths) took the same view as the Franks Committee has since taken.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what proposals he is considering to amend the provisions of the Industrial Injuries Act relating to appeals on medical questions, so as to provide a further right of appeal in appropriate cases against decisions of the Medical Appeal Tribunals.

This is a matter which requires legislation, and I have no statement to make about it at present.

Would the Minister bear in mind that the principle which applies to National Assistance applies in this case? This, again, is an instance where several regional tribunals are giving different decisions, leading very often to a sense of injustice. Would not this procedure be improved by providing an appeal to a national tribunal or some other body from the M.A.T. decisions? May we take it from the Minister's reply that he has not closed his mind to the possibility of a change?

No. The position of the Medical Appeal Tribunals is entirely different from that of the National Assistance Appeal Tribunals. There is a much stronger case for appeal from the Medical Appeal Tribunals, but to provide it would require legislation, as I have indicated in my Answer.

Is the Minister's difficulty that of getting draftsmen and drafting the legislation, or does he anticipate delay in this House? If the answer to the latter part of the question is in the affirmative, I assure him that we on this side will do all we can to facilitate the passing of legislation.

I am glad to note the right hon. Gentleman's assurance, but, with his knowledge of the subject, he will appreciate that amendment of the adjudication system of the Industrial Injuries Act is a complex business. The more one goes into it, the more complicated it appears.

asked the Paymaster-General what directions he has given to the National Coal Board to increase the export of coal and coke in view of the large stocks of coal in the country.

None, Sir. The Board is already making every effort to increase exports.

Does the Minister think that these efforts are effective? Is he aware that in Europe—which is one of the traditional markets for British coal—European importers at present have contracts with America amounting to over 38 million tons per year? Some of these contracts were made as recently as October, November and even January of this year. Surely that is not a very satisfactory position.

The fact is that coal is now very much in a buyer's market in Europe, and German and Belgian producers are meeting considerable difficulty in disposing of their output. But the National Coal Board is making a great effort in this matter. It has been able to improve exports to Spain and the Argentine.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that since the war such British coal as has been sold in Western Europe has been sold at a substantial premium—about £1 to £2 a ton—above home market prices? Is not one of the answers to this problem to reduce the price of British coal offered in Western Europe to lower prices and thereby re-create the huge market that we have lost?

I think my hon. Friend has omitted to notice the very large fall in Atlantic freight rates in coal, which are the main cause of the change in the situation.

In view of the importance of this matter, not only to our industry but our economy, I shall seek to raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible opportunity.

asked the Paymaster-General whether he will arrange for the cessation of coal rationing by 30th June of this year in view of the present stocks of coal and coke in the country.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to Questions on this subject on 31st March.

That was a negative sort of reply. Is it not a fact that continuing rationing at this time is against Conservative principles when we have our present surplus? Is it not also a fact that rationing at present, especially with regard to low grade fuels, is keeping those fuels at an artificially high price? If the Minister can get rid of rationing it may be possible to reduce the price of coal in some circumstances.

I can assure my hon. Friend that no one is keener than my noble Friend the Minister to get rid of rationing of household coal as soon as possible, but, although stocks of coal generally are high, stocks of household coal are lower than they were last year.

Is there not now a strong case for handing over the distribution of coal in toto to the National Coal Board?

I see no case arising from these questions and answers.

Would it be very invidious to raise the price of coal a small fraction so that the price mechanism shall take over the distribution of coal, as has been done by the Conservative Government in so many other fields? Then we could get rid of the allocation of rationing.

That is a rather hypothetical question.

asked the Paymaster-General if, in the national interest, he will give a general direction to the National Coal Board to co-ordinate its charges for coal to the publicly owned electricity and gas industries with those for similar grades of fuel sold to other industries generally.

No, Sir. The price adjustments made by the National Coal Board on 17th March last took account of prospective supplies of the scarcer coals, particularly large and graded coals. I do not consider that the prices charged to the public utilities and to other industries are out of balance.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the general industrial user of small coal has had a reduction in price but that the electricity supply industry in particular, which is the largest user of small coal, has not had this reduction? Is this not unfair to the electricity supply industry? Would it not be helpful to the general fuel policy to have such a reduction, which would give a bias in favour of the use of indigenous fuels?

The purpose of the recent changes was to discourage the use of large coal by industry generally. As the electricity industry is not a user of large coal, it did not come within the scheme. The scheme was designed to put up the price of large coal to industry and at the same time to reduce the price of small coal in order to encourage the use of smaller coal without putting a larger cost burden on industry.

asked the Paymaster-General how many Hungarians are now resident in hostels or elsewhere who are under training for work in the coal-mining industry.

One hundred and thirty-one, Sir.

In giving that figure, is the right hon. Gentleman distinguishing between those who are under training and those who are considered to have been trained or who are untrainable? If so, what is the former figure?

This is the number of men under training. I gather that there are another 41 who are seeking employment in other industries.

Is the cost of their maintenance and training still borne by the National Coal Board?

As far as I am aware, yes.

asked the Paymaster-General what is the Government's estimate of the level of employment in the coal-mining industry generally, and also with particular reference to the West Midlands Division; and what is the present level of redundancy both generally and in the West Midlands Division.

On 5th April, the number of men on colliery books was 705,800, and in the West Midlands 58,600. The National Coal Board informs me that, although the level of manpower is declining, there is no actual redundancy at present either generally or in the West Midlands.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, amongst those who are taking an interest in the future of the Warwickshire field, there is cause for anxiety because of the gradual build-up of small and, apparently, unsaleable industrial coal? Has he any observations to make on this situation?

Not arising from this Question. If the hon. Member will put down a Question to that effect, I shall be glad to try to answer it.

asked the Paymaster-General what is the manpower target in the coal industry consequent upon the policy of selective recruitment.

The manpower requirements of the coal industry are assessed by the National Coal Board in the light of circumstances from time to time. Manpower targets in the longer term were stated in "Investing in Coal", which contained the Board's revised Plan for Coal, and I understand that the Board has the Plan under review at the present time.

Surely the Paymaster-General is not informing the House that this policy is seriously being embarked upon without a revised output target? As he well knows, men must be related to tons of coal. Unless there is a manpower ceiling, how can he calculate the optimum of production in 1958?

I was referring to the long-term trend. The position is that the National Coal Board is reviewing the long-term plan for coal production, and if it wishes to propose any significant changes in the plan it will need the Minister's consent under Section 3 of the nationalisation Act.

asked the Paymaster-General, having regard to the fall of approximately 2,100,000 tons in deep-mined coal production during the first twelve weeks of 1958, compared with the equivalent period in 1957, and notwithstanding much higher man-power at 711,100 average weekly during 1958 to date, what revised estimate he has now made of deep-mined coal production for the year 1958.

It is too early to assess the likely level of deep-mined coal production in the current year. The total number of men employed at 5th April was 5,200 less than a year ago. The figures of output for recent weeks do suggest some degree of improvement over the poor results of January and February.

Is it not a fact that, based on the period in 1958 to date, the reduction in coal production for the whole year would show a figure of the order of 8 million tons compared with last year, which is a very large figure? Will my right hon. Friend not give the House an assurance that this will not lead to any general shortage of industrial or domestic coal or coal for transportation purposes?

That is clearly a hypothetical question, depending entirely upon whether current production trends continue and what happens to the trend of demand.

asked the Paymaster-General, having regard to the cessation of Saturday working at overtime rates in the pits and of American large-coal imports formerly sold at a loss of more than £2 per ton, what estimate he has made of the total saving thus accruing to the National Coal Board during the summer of 1958, with a view to reducing, from 1st April, 1958, the prices of house coal; and whether he will reduce the prices of house coal forthwith.

Any savings which may accrue from stopping imports and Saturday working must be considered in relation to other factors operating to worsen the Board's financial position. Arrangements for reduced summer prices, for house coal, on lines similar to those in previous years, are in hand.

Is it not a fact that, for the last six years, the excuse for putting up the price of house coal has been continuously the loss on the resale of American coal to the domestic market, coupled with the high cost of Saturday working? Now that these factors have been entirely eliminated, would it not be a measure of justice to the householder that he should have a reduction in the price of his coal?

I am sure that the National Coal Board, in recommending any future changes in the price of coal, will take into account the savings it will make; but the National Coal Board will have to put them on one side of the balance sheet against any extra costs that might arise at the same time.

Has the Paymaster-General observed the conflict between the advice which is being tendered to him by two hon. Members who are supporters of his, in that whereas the hon. Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro) asked that the price of house coal should be reduced, the noble Lord the Member for Dorset, South (Viscount Hinchingbrooke) a minute or so ago advised the Government that, where there is a surplus and a buyer's market, it is the traditional Conservative policy to put up the price? Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us which is the true Conservative view?

That is why I described the questions of my hon. Friends as being of a hypothetical nature.

Is this not another argument for ending the rationing of house coal as soon as possible?

My noble Friend is anxious to remove the rationing of house coal as soon as possible, but we must have regard to the supply situation, particularly in the light of our declared policy of avoiding further imports of coal, a policy which, I am sure, my hon. Friend would strongly support.

Has my right hon. Friend noted that the supplementary question from the noble Lord the Member for Dorset, South (Viscount Hinchingbrooke) referred to a surplus of small coals, which may be used only for industrial purposes and on which we want the price reduced still more in order to dispose of them, and that my question related to house coal, which is an entirely different proposition? The hon. Member for Nelson and Colne (Mr. S. Silverman) is entirely wrong.

asked the Paymaster-General whether he will make a statement, including disposal and potential export arrangements, in regard to the current surplus of small coals, and the tonnages involved.

The National Coal Board is taking every possible step to adjust the balance of production in favour of the larger sizes. Undistributed stocks, mainly of small coal, accumulated last year to a level of 8½ million tons which is not excessive in the light of the lessons of the past. The Board is exporting small coals wherever the openings exist, but is meeting with severe competition both from American and Polish coals.

My right hon. Friend referred earlier to the drop in North Atlantic freight rates. Is he aware that the price of British small coal sold for industrial use in Western Europe is still higher than American prices at the same ports? Is this not due to the fact that the National Coal Board is still demanding much too high a premium on coals which it is offering in Western Europe?

I do not think that the National Coal Board is demanding or receiving much in the way of a premium at the moment. If I recollect correctly, freight rates on the North Atlantic have fallen from £6 to £1 a ton. Polish coal, which may be produced on a different economic basis to our own, is becoming a serious economic factor.

Can the right hon. Gentleman confirm the statement, which I have read in at least one newspaper and which brings back an echo of the 1930s, that Polish coal which is exported to countries in Europe in competition with our own is being subsidised?

I should like notice of that. One of the problems is knowing when coal produced under a complete system of State enterprise is or is not subsidised.

asked the Paymaster-General what are the total stocks of coke and smokeless fuel; and what general directions he has given to the Gas Council and the National Coal Board respecting the output of these fuels.

Producers' stocks of coke and smokeless fuel at 22nd March amounted to about 4½ million tons. My noble Friend has given no general directions to the Gas Council and the National Coal Board respecting the output of these fuels. The industries concerned relate their production to current and future demand, and action to reduce production of coke is currently in hand.

How long does the Paymaster-General think that it will take to reduce these stocks to normal proportions? A fantastic situation prevailed a few weeks ago, when coke was being manufactured from foreign coal.

I should like notice of the point about the manufacture of coke from foreign coal. If it was going on, I am sure it was on a very small scale indeed. The question of how to reduce coke stocks generally is one to which the National Coal Board is giving much attention, and its action in slowing down production should enable it to deal with this problem. It is, however, better to be embarrassed by too much coal and coke than by too little.

asked the Paymaster-General if, in view of the high stocks and the uncertain state of the market, he will give a general direction to the National Coal Board to reduce the output of opencast coal.

No, Sir.

Has the Paymaster-General received from a number of local authorities in the Midlands protests about opencast coal mining and expressions of their desire not to have their areas further devastated? What equity is there in continuing opencast coal mining if miners are to be thrown out of work?

I have already said in answer to an earlier Question that there is no general redundancy in the industry. We must not be led astray by the temporary substantial supply of small coal to think that this is a situation which will continue indefinitely. With the expansion of industry, for which hon. Members opposite so continuously press, greater demands will undoubtedly be made on our coal supplies and coal stocks.

asked the Paymaster-General how many electricity generating stations with dual-firing apparatus are now using oil; when they will revert to coal burning; and what tonnage they will consume.

One station with dual-firing apparatus is now burning oil exclusively and six others are operating partly on oil. In present circumstances, coal could not be substituted for any of this oil without involving the electricity authorities in breach of contract. The oil firing programme has, however, already been reduced and, as my hon. Friend told the hon. Member on 10th February, this will enable power stations to use up to 3 million tons more coal per annum in the nineteen-sixties.

In view of the unbalanced fuel policy, does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that it would be in the national interest if these power stations were to consume more of the inferior coal than at the present time?

They are taking oil supplies under contract and, as the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Blyth (Mr. Robens) himself said in a recent debate he would agree, oil contracts entered into must be observed and it would be quite wrong to try to get out of contracts honourably entered into.

Is there any escape clause in relation to these contracts?

These are contracts between the Generating Board and the oil industry, not between the Government and the oil industry. As I have said, my information is that we could not substitute more coal for any of this oil without breach of contracts.

Is it not in the national interest to get competition between types of fuel for power stations?

Yes, I think it is most important.

asked the Paymaster-General when the promised White Paper on capital investment in the coal industry will be available.

The White Paper on Capital Investment in the Coal, Gas and Electricity Industries was published last Tuesday.

asked the Paymaster-General if he will give a general direction to the National Coal Board substantially to increase its production of briquettes.

No, Sir. The Board informs me that it is already making as many briquettes of the traditional kind as can be sold, and it is pressing forward with the development of superior types.

Would it not be possible for the railway industry to consume more traditional briquettes? I understand that a very large number of the traditional type of briquettes are consumed in Canada. Could not this policy be followed in the United Kingdom?

The railways are being very helpful about this. Their consumption has been rising; it went up from 670,000 tons in 1956 to 836,000 tons last year, and it is at present running at the rate of 1¼ million tons a year. I think that is a most helpful contribution. As to possible demand in Canada, I will convey that question to the Board.

Is the Board taking steps, in view of the clean air campaign and smokeless zones, to produce smokeless briquettes, particularly from anthracite?

Yes, it is doing a very extensive amount of research and development work on various types of briquettes.

asked the Paymaster-General why the Committee of Investigation into possible improved co-operation between the electricity and gas industries has only been empowered to consider the performance of statutory functions and the administration of services of a like kind, in spite of a previous Ministerial statement that it should be empowered also to consider alleged unnecessary advertising, hire purchase, capital investment, the economies of meter reading and the sale of appliances; and to what extent this represents a considered change in the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

There has been no change in Government policy. The Committee has been set up to consider how by co-operation between the gas and electricity industries the administration of services of a like kind provided by them to the public might be improved. In carrying out its inquiries, the Committee is free to consider any of the subjects mentioned by the hon. Gentleman in so far as it regards them as relevant.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not consider that there was a marked conflict between the statement made by his noble Friend in another place and the statement made by his hon. Friend in this House? Would it not be valuable to the working of Parliament if Ministers said the same thing in both Houses?

Having examined those statements, I cannot see any conflict between them.

asked the Paymaster-General if he will state the output of steel, in ingot tons, for the month of March, 1958; and if he will indicate what percentage of total capacity this represents.

The output of steel in March averaged 432,300 ingot tons a week, and is estimated to have been about 95 per cent. of capacity.

asked the Minister of Supply what study he is making of the relative advantages in operations, maintenance, and supply of solid and liquid fuel for missiles to be used by the Royal Air Force.

The subject mentioned is one of continuous study.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that most experts in the Service regard the liquid fuel missile such as Thor as inefficient, and will he press on with the study of the virtues or otherwise of solid fuel for this purpose?

The study of the virtues of solid fuel missiles is being pressed on, but I think the fact remains that, certainly as far as large missiles are concerned, the techniques of the solid fuel are not as fully developed as those of liquid fuels.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that it is because they are not so fully developed that I am asking him to press on with research into this and to work closely with the Americans rather than be landed with liquid fuel missiles?

The techniques and the study are being pressed on, and they are being pressed on in co-operation with the Americans.

asked the Minister of Supply how many and which transport aircraft are on order for the Royal Air Force.

20 Britannias and 46 Beverleys.

Has the Minister no information as to what is to be the successor to the Beverley aircraft?

There is a further Question on the Paper on that question.

Is my right hon. Friend saying there is no small transport aircraft being built or designed for the Royal Air Force to replace the Viking and other types in use?

That is quite a different question. The question I was answering was what orders have been entered into. I have no requirement for the aircraft mentioned.

asked the Minister of Supply (1) what alternative use he intends for the Royal Ordnance factory, Cardiff; and whether he will make a statement;

asked the Minister of Supply whether he will make a further statement on the Royal Ordnance factories.

I have completed a further review of capacity in the Royal Ordnance factories in the light of the latest estimates of Service requirements, and I have been forced to the conclusion that the factory at Cardiff must be closed, except for a portion which is engaged on special work, and that there must be some contraction at Nottingham and Woolwich.

In view of that very serious statement, may I ask whether the Minister is aware that there is plenty of non-military constructive work to which the skilled labour could be turned by his own Department? Is he aware that he has no right just to wash his hands of these people who have served the nation for so long in his Department?

I hope I am not washing my hands of any of the implications of what, I admit, is a quite serious problem. The fact none the less remains that there is not the same shortage of civilian goods as there was in the war.

Is the right hon. Gentleman's statement an interim or a final statement? Has the future of further Royal Ordnance factories seriously been reviewed? Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether he has fully and exhaustively considered the possibility of putting civilian work in the Royal Ordnance factories?

Clearly, no statement can be a final statement because no statement can cover all time, but I have just completed the review, and clearly it would be unreasonable to undertake any further review within a short period.

Will those who are transferred be offered the same rates of pay?

Those established employees who avail themselves of offers of other Government employment will, I think I am right in saying, have equivalent rates of pay.

Will the Minister bear in mind that employment is already becoming difficult in other spheres in Cardiff and that it is his responsibility to provide non-military work, with which his Department is dealing—atomic work? These men can be engaged at once if he will give some urgent attention to the matter.

I am aware that the rate of unemployment in Cardiff is somewhat higher than elsewhere, but there is, as a matter of fact, civilian atomic work being done in the Cardiff factory.

In deciding which factory is to close, may I ask whether any consideration is given to the employment situation in the immediate vicinity of the factory? Will not the closing of some of these factories add to an existing severe unemployment problem?

Regard is had to the general level of employment in the locality affected. That was done in this case, but in this instance, as in many other instances, the technical and financial grounds on which the decision was made were of very great weight.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman recall that seven weeks ago today, in response to a specific Question, he stood at the Dispatch Box and told the House that the facts did not warrant the suggestion that the Royal Ordnance factory at Cardiff was to be closed? Does he realise that he has laid himself open to the charge, which has been freely made in Cardiff, that he misled the House of Commons deliberately and waited until the House had risen and then made his statement?

Order. I think the hon. Member should put his question without making any personal imputation.

Further to that point, Mr. Speaker. What I am saying is that it has been represented to the hon. Members representing Cardiff that the Minister deliberately misled the House in giving an answer to the effect that the Royal Ordnance factory was not being closed down.

What I said seven weeks ago was that the facts as they then stood did not lead to the conclusion that the Cardiff factory was to be closed. The hon. Member was informed by letter that a review of the whole of the Royal Ordnance factory capacity was then being undertaken. It was not then completed. Clearly, the conclusion emerged only after the conclusion of the study.

Would it not have been more in accordance with the usual behaviour of Ministers if hon. Members had been told that there was a possibility that this Royal Ordance factory was to be closed down, in view of the fact that my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, West (Mr. G. Thomas) and I had seen the Minister and his Parliamentary Secretary on at least four or five occasions over the last six months and that we had no indication until we received a letter during the Easter Recess?

I endeavour as soon as possible to inform hon. Members involved about any decision affecting closures, but I think it right that the workpeople in the factory should be notified first. They were notified first in this instance, and when they were notified there were letters in the post to the Members of Parliament representing the area affected.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the Minister's reply, I propose to raise the matter at the first possible opportunity.

asked the Minister of Supply what amount of work his Department is doing for the Atomic Energy Authority; and to what extent he anticipates any of his Department's Royal Ordnance factories' dormant capacity being taken up for atomic energy work in the future.

My Department is doing a substantial and increasing amount of work for the Atomic Energy Authority, mainly in the Royal Ordnance factories. It is unlikely, however, that the available work of this type will occupy a high proportion of Royal Ordnance factory capacity.

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that he has given sufficient emphasis to the new development, and can he say to what extent he has had consultations with the Atomic Energy Authority or the consortium responsible for the building of atomic power stations and so on?

I have had consultations both with the Atomic Energy Authority and with my noble friend the Minister of Power.

asked the Minister of Supply what progress he has made in obtaining overseas orders for the Royal Ordnance factories; to what extent he anticipates checking the rundown of production; and whether he will now make a comprehensive statement about the future.

The Royal Ordnance factories have for several years been engaged on overseas orders and they are continually looking for more. The overseas market for the kind of weapons which the Royal Ordnance factories are equipped to produce is not, however, expanding.

Can we take it from that reply that the Minister has failed completely to deal with overseas orders? What are the possibilities of developing the Royal Ordnance factories in new fields such as missiles and, perhaps, powered bombs?

The hon. Gentleman may take it from my answer that overseas orders are being fed into the Royal Ordnance factories, but he ought also to take it that the world demand for conventional arms has undergone very much the same course as the British demand; in other words, it was very high in the years following the Korean War but it has subsided since.

What about missiles?

Missiles are very far removed from the original Question.

asked the Minister of Supply if he has now completed reviewing the number of items which have to be fitted to an aircraft, mainly for security reasons, following release by the airframe manufacturer; and to what extent he has effected a reduction.

Only a very small proportion of airborne equipment is fitted by the Service following delivery, and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Air is examining proposals for certain further reductions.

Is not one of the difficulties facing the airframe manufacturer that the Service does not know specifically what rôle the aircraft will play? Is it not the case that if more definite information, especially about armament, could be given to the aircraft manufacturer many of these Service-fit items could be fitted by the airframe manufacturer and thus more speedy progress made in developing the aircraft?

I think the hon. Gentleman is attaching to this Question greater importance than it deserves. Although the general requirements and general purposes of an aircraft are known, the objects for which an individual aircraft may be used are normally uncertain until the last minute, and it is to cope with those uncertainties that the Service inserts what are called Service-fit items.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware of the widespread concern in the city of Manchester arising from his failure to reappoint Alderman R. E. Thomas, J.P., to serve on the Manchester Regional Hospital Board; and whether he will state the reasons which led him to make this decision.

I am aware that there has been some local comment on this change. Its object was to widen the opportunity of service on the Board both in respect of persons and areas.

Is the Minister aware that the sacking of this widely respected and highly experienced Health Service administrator is regarded as a piece of political spite?

I strongly dissent both from the term "sacking", quite wrongly used by the hon. Member, and from his innuendo about politics. The fact is that members of these boards are appointed under the Statute for a three-year term and are eligible for re-appointment. There is thus an annual opportunity for considering the composition of the board and balancing the desirability of continuity against the desirability of introducing fresh blood. Alderman Thomas had served since 1950, and there is certainly no reflection at all on him in this decision.

Will the Minister bear in mind that Alderman Thomas is a man of comparative youth and that his non-appointment, if the Minister prefers that term, was greeted with incredulity by all his colleagues on the Board? Has the Minister any idea of the politics of Alderman Thomas' successor?

Politics are not a matter taken into account in this context. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] Certainly not. Surely not even the hon. Gentleman could suggest that the politics of the party to which he belongs are underrepresented on this board. He well knows that both the Labour Party and the trade unions are strongly represented. [Interruption.] I am asked how I know. It is because I have some knowledge of the way in which the minds of right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite work, and I looked into the matter.

Since the Minister has already told us that politics do not enter into it, how does he know all these facts about politics?

Since it seems to have escaped the right hon. Gentleman, the reason was that I knew the way in which his mind and the minds of his hon. Friends work and I looked into the matter.

In view of the very unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I give notice that I shall raise the matter again.

asked the Minister of Health to state the position regarding the building of a new out-patients' department at Wembley Hospital.

A revised scheme is being considered by the Board of Governors of Charing Cross Hospital in consultation with the North West Metropolitan Regional Hospital Board and it is now hoped that the work will start this year.

asked the Minister of Health if he will now make his promised statement on the senior registrar problem.

asked the Minister of Health whether he will make a statement following his discussions with the Joint Consultants Committee.

I apologise for the length of this Answer. The Joint Consultants Committee and I have agreed to set up a joint working party to study, in the light of experience of the hospital service since 1948 and of all other relevant considerations, the principles on which the medical staffing structure in the hospital service should be organised.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware how glad I am to have a reply on this question at the eighth time of asking? Is he further aware that the interim arrangements which he has announced may be a satisfactory solution to the short-term problem, but that the only tolerable solution to the long-term problem is a considerable expansion of consultant posts? Why is it necessary to set up a working party to come to that very obvious conclusion?

The hon. Member must have regard to the fact that we have to look at the number of consultant posts which are desirable in the light of the staffing structure, and also of the economic context. I hope that we shall get a quick and valuable report from this working party, and I prefer to wait for that.

May I welcome my right hon. Friend's constructive solution to this very intractable and complex problem, without prejudice, as he says, to the recommendations of the working party? Will he note that it is not commonly accepted that the only long-term solution is an expansion of the consultant force, since the economics of the service to the public and the location of the consultants in relation to the public demand that those factors must be examined most carefully?

I will certainly bear in mind those valuable and constructive suggestions.

After waiting many months and continually pressing the Minister for an answer on this subject, as my hon. Friend said, all that the Minister has said today is that the matter is to be postponed once more, and that the anxiety of these senior registrars is to continue for an indefinite period. Is he aware that these men are being offered excellent opportunities in the United States of America and that if there is to be another postponement, we shall lose some of the best doctors in the country?

From the right hon. Lady's purported precis of my Answer. I am afraid that either she did not hear or did not understand what I said. If she will be good enough to read it, she will find that there is a great deal more for the senior registrars than she has said.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware of the difficulty in providing hospital accommodation in the East Suffolk area in respect of acute cases of mental defect among young persons and children; and, in view of the fact that this matter has been repeatedly brought to his attention by the hon. Member for Lowestoft, if he will take urgent action to provide such additional accommodation as will relieve the distress caused by the shortage of permanent residential accommodation.

I am aware of the position in East Suffolk. A considerable number of new beds have been provided, and further important developments are proposed.

Is the Minister aware of the very grave disability of some of the parents of children such as these who cannot possibly be adequately looked after at home? Is he not aware that, in the last case which I represented to him, the mother of the child was herself a cripple and could not lift the child and that they have been waiting for a place now for two years? Will he take urgent action to secure more accommodation for acute cases in East Anglia?

Progress has been made since 1948. The regional board, as the hon. Member will know, has provided about 260 new beds for mental defectives. As he knows, there is also a comprehensive scheme for development of the Little Plumpstead Hospital which should make a significant contribution.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give us some idea of when the development will take place?

The development will take place between this financial year and that of 1962–63, but I cannot identify precise years at present.

asked the Minister of Health what is the size of the Committee on Merit Awards to Consultants of which Lord Moran is the chairman; and how many of its members are psychiatrists.

Fourteen, besides the Chairman and the lay Vice-Chairman. None is a psychiatrist.

Without necessarily drawing the conclusion that the abysmally low number of merit awards to psychiatrists is connected with their non-representation on the Committee, does not the Minister agree that this important specialty should be represented on the Committee? If the Royal College of Physicians is unwilling to nominate a psychiatrist, will the Minister instruct the Committee to seek nominations from the Royal Medico Psychological Association?

No, Sir. In this matter I follow the recommendations of the Spens Report, that the members of the awards committee should be appointed from nominations made by the Royal Colleges, the Scottish Royal Corporations, the Medical Research Council and the universities. The nominations of those bodies are in personal capacities and not representative of specialties.

Can the Minister state whether his answer means that the Chairman has the same view of psychiatrists as he has of general practitioners?

I cannot answer for the personal views of the Chairman, but I think that it would be very unwise for the House to read any such implication into my answer.

asked the Minister of Health if he has any further statement to make regarding the Russian vaccine for multiple sclerosis; and in particular what observations have been made as to the toxicity of this vaccine.

Not yet but inquiries are being pursued.

Is the Minister aware that a certain amount of recent research has been carried out, I believe in Belfast, which associates this vaccine with rabies and that this has given rise to a very great deal of anxiety in the minds of the public? Will he endeavour as soon as possible to put himself in a position to make some statement about it? What he has already done has given great satisfaction to the public, but the public feel anxious about the danger which may result from the use of this vaccine.

Yes, Sir. I am obliged to the hon. Gentleman. With regard to the composition of the vaccine, I can say at once—this has recently been established—that it is made from the brains of rats or mice infected with the rabies virus. No further evidence is available as to the safety of the vaccine in treatment, but research is going on, as the hon. Gentleman is aware, and I am in consultation with the Medical Research Council about it.

As a Question of this kind was put to the Minister very many weeks ago and he assured us then that he was looking into the matter, why has it taken him such a long time? He must recognise that during this time many patients suffering from disseminated sclerosis have been waiting hopefully for some statement from him.

I assure the right hon. Lady that I have not been inactive in that matter. I was asked to look into the New Zealand question, which I have done. No evidence of the efficacy of the vaccine is available from there. I am seeking information from the Russians through the appropriate channels. Therefore, my position is at present that I can agree to the release of small private imports of this vaccine but the patients' doctors in those cases have to agree to accept responsibility for the treatment.

Will the Minister be as dilatory about this matter as he was about the poliomyelitis vaccine? Is it not the case that the New Zealand Government have already made claims, whether established or not, that this particular vaccine has been used successfully? Is it not further the case that the Russians have published a paper giving a complete analysis of the vaccine? Why is it that, although I made inquiries of his Ministry several months ago, the matter has been allowed to drag on and has not been given the attention which the urgency of ate case demands?

The hon. Member's supplementary question was as full of inaccuracy as of innuendo. This matter is being pursued in the specific ways I indicated. It would be quite wrong, in order to win the congratulations of the hon. Member, to expedite this matter to the possible danger of the British public, and I will not do so.