asked the Paymaster-General, in view of the continuing danger caused by disused mines and quarries being left unfilled and the waste of land caused thereby, if he will now take steps to remedy this by seeking powers to restore the relevant land to its pristine flatness and usefulness.

No, Sir. I have no reason to suppose that the present law regarding fencing is inadequate to protect the public from danger or that new powers to enforce the restoration of the land would be justified.

Does the Paymaster-General not realise that this is a very wide question and involves grave danger to children all over the country? These dumps occupy many acres which could be used for productive purposes, particularly the Dancing Cairns Quarry, about which I have had considerable correspondence with the Ministry and which has been the scene of many deaths. Will the right hon. Gentleman take power to get rid of this danger to children and adults all over the country, and in particular at Dancing Cairns, Aberdeen?

No, Sir. 1 think that adequate powers were conferred on the Government by this House in the legislation of 1954.

asked the Paymaster-General if he will make a statement on the most recent developments in the technique of producing gas from oil.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my hon. Friend to the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Neal) on 9th February.

Although I know of the Answer to which the right hon. Gentleman has referred, is he aware that gas from oil developments are going on at a very great pace? Is he sure that there are economies in this business which justify the change-over from coal to oil? Is he satisfied that the Gas Council is doing the right thing in these developments, in view of the fact that we have an indigenous source of fuel which is probably cheaper in the long run?

The hon. Member is raising a rather larger question than arises from his original Question. He refers in his Question to the technique by which we are investigating, and I am sure rightly investigating, this matter, but whether we should use this particular process is another matter.

asked the Paymaster-General what progress has been made in the investigation of the high-pressure method of producing gas from inferior fuels.

asked the Paymaster-General if he will report on the progress made in the process of extracting oil from coal.

I would refer the hon. Members to the Answer given to my hon. Friend the Member for Pollok (Mr. George) on 16th April.

Is the Minister aware that at the present time the Gas Council is trying to make up its mind whether it will use liquid methane, gas from oil, or high-pressure gas from inferior coal? Is the Minister further aware that we are interested in the possibilities of the economic production of gas from inferior coal?

I can assure the hon. Member that my noble Friend is extremely interested in the possibilities of producing either gas or oil, or both, from inferior coals. All these various experi- ments are very much linked with one another.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the process of extracting oil from coal is being carried out successfully in South Africa? Surely the same thing could be done here.

That is rather a large assumption. One must have regard to the types of coal and to the conditions and also to the question whether it is an economic process as well as a technically feasible process.

What does the right hon. Gentleman mean by saying that the Ministry is interested in carrying out experiments in the production of oil from coal? Is he aware that these experiments have been conducted over the past forty years, were known to us at the Ministry of Mines as long ago as 1924 and have been continued ever since? There are almost 200 processes, some of which are in operation. Has he heard of low-temperature carbonisation and the production of oil from coal in this and other countries? What does the Minister mean by announcing that he has appointed a committee to engage in research into a matter into which there has been any amount of research over the years?

The right hon. Gentleman has great experience of this and knows that while it is possible to make oil from coal it is another matter to make it on an economic basis.

The right hon. Gentleman has something to learn.

asked the Paymaster-General whether he is aware that the Central Electricity Generating Board is considering taking first-class agricultural land near Chichester for the purpose of a power station; and what is now the Government's policy in regard to the use of the best class of agricultural land in this country for this purpose.

As regards the first part of the Question, I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (Mr. Gough) on 14th April. The Government's policy is to ensure that good agricultural land is not taken for development where less good land would serve the purpose.

Whilst realising the increasing necessity for these nuclear power stations throughout the country, may I ask whether my right hon. Friend is of the opinion that the time has now come when it is absolutely unavoidable that the best agricultural land should be used for this purpose?

In certain cases, I am afraid that may be so, but I should like to assure my hon. Friend and all others concerned that, in deciding whether or not to give consent to the construction of a power station, my noble Friend takes very careful account of the nature of the agricultural land involved.

Does the Paymaster-General consult the Minister of Agriculture before permitting land to be used in this way?

Certainly; before my noble Friend gives consent he consults the Minister of Agriculture.

asked the Paymaster-General (1) if he will make a statement on the Government's policy regarding substitution of imported liquid methane for coal in gas manufacture;

(2) what progress has been made on the reconstruction or new building of tankers for the transportation of liquid methane for the British gas industry.

I cannot yet add anything to the reply given to the right hon. Member on 11th March.

Will the Minister be good enough to answer the Question which I put down on 11th March? It is similar to this Question and no reply was forthcoming.

I think that the situation is as it was then, which is why the right hon. Gentleman has had the same Answer. We have had one trial shipment of liquid methane, but this is a novel and interesting experiment and we must obtain the results of the experiment before we determine what to do with the process.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the Question which I asked on 11th March about how many additional tankers are to be built or reconstructed for the transport of liquid methane to the British gas industry?

We do not know how many to build until we know whether it will work or not.

Do I understand that no instructions have been given in American yards for the reconstruction of tankers or the building of new tankers for the carriage of liquid methane?

That is certainly true. I am glad to deny any such rumours.

Is the Minister aware that in the Press this morning there were statements that there have been special discussions between the Minister and the Gas Council on this issue? Is his noble Friend in favour of or against this policy?

I think that the headline to which the hon. Member refers was a little more general in character, assuming that we are referring to the same newspaper. Certainly, my noble Friend is in consultation with the gas industry and the National Coal Board about the general question of the fuel used for making gas, but we are very much in the experimental stage of the use of liquid methane and no one can begin to assess the economic advantages or disadvantages of this process to the country as a whole until we have more technical knowledge.

But in due course his noble Friend will make up his mind on the problem, I take it?

That is my noble Friend's responsibility.

asked the Paymaster-General what is the amount of coal equivalent of a full cargo of liquid methane carried by the "Methane Pioneer"; and approximately how many round trips the ship can make in a year.

About 5,000 tons and 7½ round trips.

When does the Minister feel that his noble Friend will be able to tell the House what precisely is to be the future policy in relation to the use of liquid methane in substitution for coal in the gas industry?

When we have had three or four more trial voyages in order to be quite clear as to the technical possibilities, and when we have had a chance to assess the economic advantages one way or the other. It will be quite a long process.

Is it intended entirely to base the gas industry on imported products?

No. The policy of the gas industry is to base its production of gas on those products which will enable it to give the cheapest possible gas to the consumer.

Will the Minister be good enough to convey to the Gas Council the importance which we on this side of the House at least attach to this whole experiment which is taking place and that, by and large, we regard the substitution of an imported fuel for an indigenous fuel as not a very good thing to do?

The Gas Council has been doing extremely good work on this. I am sure that the Council will take very careful note of what the right hon. Gentleman has said.

In working out an economic comparison between gas and coal, will the Government also take into account the cost of redundancy in closing the mines?

Yes. In considering what policy the Government should follow, that is one of the things which we certainly have in mind.

asked the Paymaster-General if he will state the latest available figure for the output of steel ingots and pig iron in the North-Eastern area; and what proportion of total capacity for that area this output represented.

In the five weeks up to 4th April output of steel ingots and metal for casting in the North-Eastern area averaged 61,800 tons and that of pig iron 42,000 tons a week. These outputs represent 65 and 60 per cent. of capacity, respectively.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these figures represent no improvement in. the steel production figures of the North-East coast, taken together? Are the Government still of the opinion that there is nothing they can do about it?

In the last week or two we have done a good deal about it.

Can the Minister say what the Government have done and when we might expect an increase these figures?

The answer to the first question lies in the Budget debate. The answer to the second question lies in the future.

asked the Paymaster-General what recommendations the Iron and Steel Board has made to him to ensure for the future, by agreement with major home users, a greater regularity of demand for iron and steel products in order to avoid extreme fluctuations of employment within the industry.

As I informed the hon. Member on 2nd February, consultation between my noble Friend and the Iron and Steel Board must be on a confidential basis if it is to be fully effective.

Will not the right hon. Gentleman agree that under consistent Government policy much could be done along these lines? Is there any reason why the House should not know about the steps taken?

It is one thing to have a consistent Government policy and another thing to have consistent circumstances in which to develop that policy. Any Government must try to adapt its policy to the economic situation at a particular time.

asked the Paymaster-General, in view of the national importance of sustained production of steel, if he will discuss with the nationalised industries for which he is responsible the co-ordination of their purchasing and stocking policy so as to make the demand for steel products more even over longer periods.

Machinery already exists for the co-ordination of policy between these industries.

Will the Minister agree that constructive discussions between the Minister and the nationalised industries on these points are preferable to speeches by Treasury Ministers attacking their policies in public?

I think that the speech of my hon. and learned Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, which has so annoyed the hon. Member, was much preferable to the hon. Member's speeches.

asked the Paymaster-General what general direction he has given to the National Coal Board concerning the disposal of its farms; and whether he will make a statement.

None, Sir. It is for the National Coal Board to decide the arrangements for disposing of any of its farms.

asked the Paymaster-General to what extent he estimates that the consumption of coal for the production of electricity in Scotland will be increased during the next twelve months.

I regret that I have received no estimates which I could give my hon. and gallant Friend.

May we assume, therefore, that there is good hope that these electricity undertakings will take an increasing quantity of coal in future?

Coal consumption at the power stations in Scotland has increased in the last three years, and I see no reason to suppose that that will not continue.

asked the Paymaster-General if he will carry out a special investigation into the damage caused by opencast mining and small mining to highways of all types and the ways and means of diminishing these effects.

No, Sir. I have no evidence that such an investigation is needed.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the devastation and disturbance of highways that has gone on for some time in some areas—I could draw his attention to some particularly notorious examples in North Staffordshire? Will he consult the National Coal Board on this matter, because this is a powerful argument for cutting down opencast mining to the absolute minimum?

The question of damage by subsidence is covered by the Act of 1957, but damage done by lorries using the highways is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation.

asked the Paymaster-General if, in view of the existing stocks of opencast coal, he will give general directions to reduce the output by closure of excavations or the termination of existing contracts.

No, Sir.

I was unaware that the Paymaster-General was such an expert in the use of monosyllables. Will he impart some information to the House? Can he deny that half the annual production of opencast coal is lying on the ground? Can he further deny that every ton of opencast coal which is sold means that a ton of deep-mined coal is displaced from the market, which adds 20s. a ton to the cost? When will this economic madness come to an end?

I am sorry that my replies are so short, but the nature of the replies depends on the nature of the Questions. I shall be glad to give any information for which the hon. Member asks. In the second part of his supplementary question, he neglects the fact that the production of opencast coal is very profitable to the Coal Board.

asked the Paymaster-General how many lives were lost in the coal mines of Great Britain in the years 1938 to 1947 and 1948 to 1957 respectively; and what were the percentages of such fatalities to the number of men employed.

7,354 lives were lost in the coal mining industry during the period 1938 to 1947 and 4,200 during the period 1948 to 1957. These figures represented, respectively, 0·1 per cent. and 0·06 per cent. per annum of the total number of men employed in the industry.

asked the Paymaster-General how many explosions took place involving more than five deaths in the mines of Great Britain in the years 1938 to 1947 and 1948 to 1957, respectively.

Twenty-two and twelve, respectively.

Is not this a very powerful argument against the agitation going on at present against nationalisation? Do not these figures prove that since nationalisation there has been a tremendous improvement in the figures for loss of life and explosion in the mines of Great Britain?

No, they do not. I rather anticipated that supplementary question. Between 1938 and 1947, taking the percentage of persons employed, the drop was from 0.11 to 0·08, and from 1948 to 1957 the drop was from 0·06 to 0·05. As we get lower down it is of course more difficult to effect improvements, but this is not a matter in which we should have controversy about the political situation in the coal industry.

Does not the total of 7,354 as against 4,200 in the later period prove conclusively that there has been an improvement?

It does not prove anything of the sort. The figures are only meaningful in relation to the number employed.

asked the Paymaster-General if he will state the quantity and categories of undistributed coal stocks in Scotland with comparable figures for a year ago.

Total undistributed stocks compared with a year ago were 442,000 tons as against 308,000 tons. I will, with permission, circulate details of the categories of coal in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that adeqaute steps are being taken to consume these stocks and not to allow them to mount?

Consumption of coal is not, I am afraid, a matter entirely within the responsibility of Her Majesty's Government, but I am sure that the National Coal Board is doing all it can.

asked the Paymaster-General what general direction he will give the National Coal Board to speed up the distribution of coal during the summer months.

asked the Paymaster-General, in view of the need in the national interest of preventing the accumulation of excessive coal stocks, if he will give a general directive to the National Coal Board to accelerate the distribution of coal stocks before the winter.

A general direction to the National Coal Board in this matter would not be appropriate. Speed of distribution in the summer months depends on the demand from merchants and consumers, and differentiation between summer and winter prices is designed to give them the necessary incentive to stock coal during the summer.

Are we to assume from that reply that there is going to be a reduction in prices over the summer months? Will the right hon. Gentleman consider advising the Coal Board to do what any businessman or shopkeeper would do in similar circumstances when he finds himself overstocked, namely, to sell off at bargain prices?

On the second point, I am sure that the nationalised industry needs no such obvious advice. On the first point, I would say, "Wait and see."

asked the Paymaster-General whether he will take powers by regulation to ensure that the reduced summer prices for coal are passed on to the consumer.

My noble Friend has no power to make such regulations.

The Question asked whether the right hon. Gentleman will take power; otherwise, whatever price the Coal Board might fix for coal in the summer there is no guarantee at all that private merchants will pass that on to the consumer. Can the right hon. Gentleman do something about it?

These powers previously existed by Defence Regulation, and my noble Friend would certainly not contemplate restoring the Defence Regulations. It is in the interests of the Coal Board and the consumers to get this working effectively.

When the right hon. Gentleman told my hon. Friend the Member for Brixton (Mr. Lipton) that he must "Wait and see" whether the Coal Board is to reduce prices, was he aware that the Coal Board has already indicated that it proposes to reduce the summer price by £1 a ton to the coal distribution trade? Now that the Minister has taken away his own responsibility in this matter that £1 a ton may or may not be passed on as an advantage to consumers. What benefit will it be to the National Coal Board in distributing stocks if it reduces prices and there is no guarantee that the distributors will do the same?

Without accepting the premise of that question, I am bound to say that I consulted the Coal Board this morning and it assured me that no such announcement has been made.

Will the Minister answer the second part of the Question about whether the distributors will pass on any of the price reduction given to them by the National Coal Board?

That must be a hypothetical question.

asked the Paymaster-General whether he has considered the proposals made to him by the National Union of Mineworkers for a national fuel policy; what are his observations; and if he will specify his reply to the request for a greater reduction of opencast mining production.

asked the Paymaster-General what proposals he has received from the National Union of Mineworkers to restrict the import of oil into the United Kingdom, and/or the reduction of opencast mining; and what reply he has sent.

On 27th February, my noble Friend received from the National Union of Mineworkers proposals for a national fuel policy. In a full reply sent on 5th March, he indicated that because of the need for an abundant, cheap and efficient supply of fuel for British industry he could not accept the proposition that oil should be taxed or otherwise restricted in order to compel a greater use of coal. He also stated that the substantial cuts in opencast production already announced for 1959 went as far as possible without breaking contracts.

Will the Minister consider issuing a directive to the National Coal Board to stock more than 22 million tons of coal in order to stop further closures of deep mines? Secondly, is it not time, especially in this era of coal stocking, that we came to a phased agreement to stop opencast mining altogether?

I am not aware of any proposals for further closures of mines. We must leave it to the National Coal Board to decide whether it wishes to stock more or how it wishes to handle this situation.

On the second question, I have already informed the House that a steady rundown of opencast production is envisaged.

In view of the fact that this problem is affecting not only this country but many countries in Western Europe, might it not be injurious to our industry if we took only such action as that being advocated, with entire disregard of conditions overseas?

We will certainly bear in mind our international interests in the trade in fuel.

Is the Minister aware that for the first thirteen weeks of this year the consumption of coal was 4 million tons less than in the corresponding thirteen weeks of last year, whereas the consumption of oil has risen? If production is to meet demand, are there not bound to be further closures? Is it not time that the Government departed from its complacency and faced this serious problem?

It is primarily a problem to be faced by the producers of coal. The Government's policy is quite clear.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply to my Question and those of my hon. Friends, I give notice that I will raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.

asked the Paymaster-General what general directions have been given to the National Coal Board regarding the devotion of part of its capital investment to further developments in the use of coal for by-product purposes.

None, Sir.

This is astonishing. Has the Ministry no interest in this matter? Are we to understand that when the Ministry agrees about the capital investment by the National Coal Board it issues no direction whatever? Can the National Coal Board do as it pleases? Is he aware that unless something drastic is done very soon about the production of by-products from inferior coal there is very little future for the coal industry of this country?

If the right hon. Gentleman will look again at the Act, with which I should have thought he was familiar, he will find that it is not a question of general direction at all but that in framing programmes for capital outlay the Board shall act on lines settled from time to time with the approval of the Minister.

asked the Paymaster-General what general directions he intends to give to the National Coal Board with regard to avoiding closure of further pits.

None, Sir.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise how disappointing is his Answer? Is he satisfied that the National Coal Board is adopting a sufficiently aggressive sales policy?

I think that the National Coal Board is doing extremely well in trying to dispose of its coal. I am not aware of any proposal for any further closures, other than those already announced.

Is not the Minister interested in the possible closure of pits? Does the Ministry leave it entirely to the National Coal Board? Does it never enter into consultations with the National Coal Board on what is a matter of social and human interest and, indeed, national interest? Are we to understand from some of the replies given by the right hon. Gentleman that it is the purpose and definite policy of the Government to destroy the nationalised industry?

The fact is that the Government's powers are limited by the Statute, of which the right hon. Gentleman seems to be singularly forgetful.

Does it not appear from the Questions asked today from the other side of the House that in the opinion of hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite the National Coal Board is a sort of glorified employment agency and little else?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he is incorrect in assuming that when the Bill was being passed through the House in 1946 it was ever anticipated that the Ministry would divest itself of any responsibility? The Ministry has a responsibility to the industry and to the country.

The responsibility of the Ministry clearly cannot conflict with the basic responsibility of the National Coal Board, laid down at the beginning of the Act, to provide an adequate supply of coal at the appropriate prices.

asked the Minister of Supply whether he is aware that the packaging facilities at the Remploy factory, Coventry, include damp and dust proof rooms to meet Ministry specifications, but that at the moment these are not being used; and, as it is in the interests of both Government and taxpayer that Remploy should be kept as near self-supporting as possible, if he will consider what orders can be given to use the facilities available.

My right hon. Friend is aware of the facilities at the Remploy factory at Coventry. Suitable work is placed with that factory by the Ministry of Supply whenever practicable, but the volume of such work available has fallen considerably during the last few years.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that that does not get us anywhere? Are there no Government packaging contracts that can be sent there? Does not the Parliamentary Secretary agree that it is the height of financial stupidity to have these facilities in the factory at Coventry and not send work there so that they can be used? What is he going to do about it, as well as being aware of the position?

I have already said that the volume of orders is falling constantly, but, in addition to the special facilities employed at Remploy factories, these facilities have been repeated in private industry. I assure the hon. Lady that wherever possible preference is given to Remploy.

Will the hon. Gentleman answer this question? Is he aware that the average number of employees in Coventry for the past five years has been 71, that we have at the moment 59 there, and that there are eight men waiting to go in? What is he going to do about giving the factory work so that these eight men can be taken in?

We shall do anything we possibly can to help in that direction.

asked the Minister of Supply to what extent scientific research into space can be undertaken with the equipment he is developing for the Royal Air Force.

asked the Minister of Supply what present consideration is being given by his Department to proposals to use the Blue Streak ballistic rocket to help launch an earth Space satellite; and to what extent his Department plan to work in co-operation with other Commonwealth countries in space research.

The United Kingdom missile programme could, with some adaptation, give an initial launcher in aid of a space research programme, but of itself could provide neither the satellites nor the instruments needed to attack the important scientific problems involved in space research. The Government are at present considering the question of a British space research project using earth satellites in the light of advice from the Advisory Council on Scientific Policy. A statement will be made as soon as possible. The Government have in mind the scope which such a project would provide for co-operation with appropriate Commonwealth countries, but discussions can most profitably take place when the scale and nature of any British effort have been decided on.

When the Government are considering the next step in this matter, will they bear in mind the danger of losing our youngest and brightest scientists to the United States unless they are given from time to time an opportunity of scientific research, even if it involves using equipment which was originally designed for a specific military purpose?

Yes, Sir. I agree that that is a most important consideration.

When may we expect a decision on this project? Is it not causing the Minister some concern, as my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr. de Freitas) suggests, that the many skilled scientists who are newly entering the field of rocketry are leaving because they are feeling somewhat frustrated that the Government are not taking a strong enough line on this?

I have indicated that the statement will be made quite soon.

Did I understand the Minister correctly to say that the Commonwealth countries will he consulted after he had reached a decision about the scope of the programme? Would it not be better to consult them before that?

The hon. Gentleman's understanding is right. I think it is proper to consult them only after any particular plan has been decided upon.

Have we not many problems confronting us on terra firma without going elsewhere? Could not the Government use their own energy and ability, whatever they have got of it, to solve some domestic problems? Why bother about this problem?

I think the right hon. Gentleman is inclined to anticipate the statement. I think that he should await what is to be said.

asked the Minister of Supply (1) as he has only invited tenders for 650,000 pairs of the 1,250,000 pairs of surplus boots sent to him for disposal by the War Department, what it is proposed to do with the other 600,000 pairs;

(2) how many of the 1,250,000 pairs of surplus boots were ordered since 1st January, 1954; how many have been manufactured since that date; and what is the condition of the surplus boots for disposal;

(3) what was the cost to public funds of the 1,250,000 pairs of surplus boots now for disposal; to which countries they may be sold; which parts of the British Commonwealth are included; and what safeguards there are to ensure the boots do not find their way to the home market.

Of the remaining 600,000 pairs, only 150,000 have yet been made available by the War Department. In any case we must await the outcome of tendering for the 650,000 pairs before deciding how to dispose of the rest.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War said in a reply to the hon. Member on 10th December last that the original cost of the total number of boots referred to by the hon. Member was about £2 million and that they had all been in stock for at least eight years. The condition of all boots declared to me as surplus for disposal is described as "unused". Tenders have been invited subject to an undertaking that the boots will be sold only overseas. It will be a condition of sale that the boots shall be so exported and tenderers are required to give an undertaking to this effect and to satisfy the Ministry of Supply that the undertaking is being complied with.

How does the hon. Gentleman square up what he has just said with the Answer which he gave me on 23rd March, when he said:

"…these boots were ordered a very long time ago and have been held in stock for a great length of time. It is almost impossible now to say who ordered them, or indeed, I should imagine, what was paid for them."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 23rd March, 1959; Vol. 602, c. 902.]

Could not that cost of £2 million have been given in that Answer?

May I ask him further whether it is not a fact that most of these boots were ordered after 1955, as is revealed by the Committee on Public Accounts? Will he therefore tell his right hon. Friend and the Secretary of State for War that all this wriggling will not prevent me going on asking Questions until it is clearly revealed that a wilful waste of public money has taken place and that it is time the guilty were penalised for it and not shielded?

When I gave that reply on 23rd March, I was aware that the boots had been in stock for a great length of time, but I thought that when the hon. Member put that Question down he was asking specifically for me to name somebody who had ordered them. The Ministry of Supply buys only on specific demand from the Service Departments. The last demand for general service boots for the Army was made in mid-1955. This order, as finally amended, amounted to 340,000 pairs of boots for delivery up to early 1957. Apart from 11,400 pairs for the Air Ministry, no more have been ordered.

Will my hon. Friend give the hon. Gentleman opposite at least one boot since he has shown himself to be such an adept at putting his foot in it?

That is more than the hon. and gallant Gentleman could do.

asked the Minister of Supply whether he will make a statement concerning the future use of the Royal Ordnance Factory, Llanishen, Cardiff; and, in particular, what representations he has received from the Cardiff City Council.

The part of the factory which is not being retained in operation as a Royal Ordnance Factory has been advertised and my right hon. Friend has received a number of inquiries. The Cardiff City Council has represented that the factory should be disposed of to one major industrial concern, and not piecemeal.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary give an assurance that this excellent factory space will not be disposed of without consultation with the local authority, which wants a substantial industrial concern that can absorb the skilled labour now unemployed in the city?

I do not know whether I can go as far as the hon. Gentleman asks me to do, but I can say that I am very much in agreement with the terms of a letter which the Cardiff City Council sent to my right hon. Friend. I shall use every effort to dispose of this factory with a view to achieving exactly what the hon Gentleman appears to have in mind.

Thank you very much.

asked the Minister of Supply for what reasons he proposes to amalgamate machine shop 58 and the light gun factory in the Royal Ordnance Factory, Woolwich.

This amalgamation is part of the scheme of reorganisation foreshadowed in the announcement made by my right hon. Friend in April, 1958, to transform the Royal Ordnance Factory, Woolwich into a smaller and more economical unit. Both these shops, for which there is no longer enough of their traditional work, will continue to be utilised, although Shop C.58 will now be employed on work of a different kind.

Is the Minister aware that C.58 is generally regarded as the best-equipped and most efficient shop in the Arsenal and that both shops are now working overtime, and that this amalgamation conflicts with the original idea of geographical centralisation in the Arsenal? Will he look at this matter again to ensure that he is not making a mistake?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that I have looked into this matter in great detail. Indeed, I have been to Woolwich to inspect the shops in question, and consultations have taken place, both at factory level and within my Department. I assure him that this is a question of good industrial management and organisation. It is not quite true to assert that Shop C.58 can go on in the future exactly as it has done in the past. We must keep pace with the reorganisation, phased as it is, and I assure the hon. Gentleman that only good can come out of this reorganisation.

asked the Minister of Supply if he will reconsider the compensation claim of Miss Edith Rowley, about whom the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme has written to him, submitting a medical report, in respect of the consequences of an accident in a Royal Ordnance factory on 9th July, 1943.

I will certainly consider what scope there may be for reviewing this case further. I am writing to the hon. Member about it.

Will the hon. Gentleman assure me that he will consider this case with his advisers rather more carefully than was done previously? Is he aware that I submitted a report from a distinguished consultant of the North Staffs. Infirmary saying that Miss Rowley never fully recovered from the 1943 accident, and that on 19th March he sent me a letter saying:

"The Treasury… suggest that, if Miss Rowley is dissatisfied with the assessment of her condition, she should write to the National Insurance officer and give her reasons, and ask him to confirm that the benefit awarded"—

that is, for a later accident:

"is related to her entire disability including any residual effects of the earlier accident in 1943."

Is not the Treasury aware that this earlier accident cannot be taken into account by the Ministry of Pensions because it occurred before the Industrial Injuries Act was passed? Will not the hon. Gentleman therefore consider this case rather more compassionately and rather more accurately?

I have read the detailed medical report sent to me by the hon. Member, and I must say that it contains a great deal with which I am impressed. There, are, however, other Government Departments involved—as, indeed, he has just indicated—and I cannot answer for them. But I have given an undertaking to look at the matter again, and I hope that the hon. Gentleman will await my letter and not press me further now.

asked the Minister of Supply what long-range sea reconnaissance aircraft are on order for the Royal Air Force.

The Shackleton 3 is the maritime reconnaissance aircraft currently on order for the Royal Air Force. Deliveries are almost complete. Earlier marks are being progressively modernised to an equivalent standard.

Is not this admission that there is no aircraft on order other than the Shackleton a very serious one? Can the Minister say, at least, that existing types of aircraft, such as the Britannia could be modified to meet Coastal Command requirements when the Shackletons themselves are given up?

I should like notice of the second part of the hon. Gentleman's Question.

As to the first part, I can only say that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Air is responsible for Air Ministry requirements and that I am not.

asked the Minister of Supply what conclusions he has reached after studying the recommendations of the Supersonic Transport Aircraft Committee; and what action he now proposes to take.

This important matter is still under consideration and I am not yet in a position to make any statement.

Will my right hon. Friend give very special consideration to the decision of the United States to enter supersonic flight by the 1970s and to the possibility of intermediate stage aircraft being uneconomic by the time they are produced?

Clearly, any United States plans would be very relevant to the decision.

Has the Minister noticed that a large number of informed people have expressed surprise at the moderate character of the recommendations made in regard to the mach numbers? Even if the Report cannot be published, cannot the right hon. Gentleman give some public indication as to why these recommendations were, comparatively, so modest?

I would hope that when it came to making a statement, and a decision on the Report, the reasons for the decision—and, indeed, the reasons for the recommendations—would be made public.

But can the Minister say when the decision will be made? Unless we get into the business quickly we might as well keep out of it altogether.

I should like to make a decision as soon as possible consistent with the importance of the question.

asked the Minister of Supply what arrangements he proposes to make for honourable Members to visit the microbiological research station at Porton.

The Parliamentary and Scientific Committee has accepted an invitation to visit this Establishment on 29th of this month. Places are available for honourable Members who are not members of the Committee.

Can the Minister tell the House how many hon. Members will attend? Is it not a fact that the majority of the members of the Parliamentary and Scientific Committee are not hon. Members, and that it is very unfair, when a large party is going, that very few hon. Members should be allotted places?

I think that the size of the party is 30, 25 being members of the Parliamentary and Scientific Committee. How many of the 25 are hon. Members I do not know, but there are, in addition five places available to hon. Members who do not happen to be members of the Committee.

As I have asked very many Questions over a large number of years of a large number of Ministers on this subject, will the Minister give a guarantee that I will get a place?

I am quite sure that the hon. Gentleman will know that the Parliamentary and Scientific Committee, through its chairman, will give most sympathetic consideration to his request.

asked the Minister of Health (1) how many appointments of anaesthetist registrars exist in respect of Iver Cottage Hospital, Buckinghamshire; what remuneration has been paid in respect of them since 1st January, 1956; and on how many occasions the services of the persons holding these appointments have been called upon;

(2) what was the cost of converting part of Iver Cottage Hospital, Buckinghamshire, into a children's hospital; when this was done; and how many children have since been admitted;

(3) whether he will arrange for the Iver Cottage Hospital, Buckinghamshire, to be restored to use as a local hospital, and preferably as a maternity hospital.

One general practitioner attends twice weekly as part-time anaesthetics registrar and for other duties, his remuneration for anaesthetics being inseparable from that for his other work. In 1952, £1,158 was spent on part of the building intended to be used for children, of whom twenty-one have been admitted. The regional hospital board has reluctantly reached the conclusion that the difficulties of staff recruitment prevent the further use of the building as a hospital, and it is consulting local interests about its closure. Its intention is that it should be adapted as a preliminary training school for nurses for the hospital group.

May. I say that the adaptation of this place for use as a children's hospital occurred in 1952 and that 21 children have since been admitted. If that is the correct date, does not my hon. Friend think that it would be a good idea to try to use the building for the purpose for which it was designed rather than to spend more money on adapting it for yet another use? Will he also bear in mind that this hospital was built as a local hospital, with money collected locally, before the hospitals were nationalised under the Health Act?

Yes, Sir, but my hon. Friend should not conclude that because the admission of children has been disappointing the hospital has not been in use. There has been a considerable outpatient admission, although the last inpatient was admitted in June, 1957. The Board has been trying to recruit more staff, which is the basis of its difficulties, in consultation with the parish council and with the co-operation of the local Press. The Board was very reluctant to close the hospital while any hope of success remained.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is now in a position to make a statement in connection with the progress of the new hospital at Boston.

The accommodation to be provided at the new hospital has been decided, and an architectural competition for its design will be held shortly. An assessor to judge the entries has been appointed, and the precise conditions of the competition will shortly be discussed with him.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend indicate in terms what he means by "shortly"?

"Shortly" means, as it implies, quickly, and as soon as possible in all the circumstances of this case.

asked the Minister of Health when a decision will be made concerning the siting of the proposed new hospital for North Tees-side.

I understand that the Newcastle Regional Hospital Board will be submitting a proposal shortly to my right hon. and learned Friend.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary do nothing to speed this up, as there is a good deal of concern locally about which of two places this hospital will be sited at and it is holding up certain other planning proposals in the area?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, the new North Tees-side hospital was announced as recently as last December. On his second point that uncertainties about the site are perhaps holding up the whole scheme, I do not entirely agree with him, because the Regional Board is proceeding with its schedules of accommodation for the new hospital, which I am told will be equally applicable whichever of the two sites, for both of which it has obtained planning consent, may in the end be approved.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary consider that there are very severe waiting lists in this area, to some extent owing to the increase of population, and will he do what he can to speed this matter up?

I will certainly do that, and that is a consideration which I imagine that the Board also must have very much in mind.

asked the Minister of Health if he will state the position respecting the claim for a responsibility allowance for group pharmacists in the hospital service.

No such claim has been made.

asked the Minister of Health if he will now make a statement on the staffing of hospital pharmaceutical departments.

Following a Report I have received from the Standing Pharmaceutical Advisory Committee, I am about to send to hospital authorities further advice on the organisation of pharmaceutical departments so as to make the best use of the available trained manpower.

Can the Minister say how long these negotiations may go on, because it is some time since they were started and it is about time some conclusion was reached on this very important matter?

I am proposing to issue a memorandum based on the Committee's report on the 28th of this month.

asked the Minister of Health if he will state the salary scale for clerical workers in the hospital service at the age of 32 years and that of a male assistant in dispensing of a similar age and holding the certificate of the Society of Apothecaries.

Assuming in each case service in the National Health Service since age 21, a male clerk at present at age 32 would receive £489, £545 or £573 per annum depending on the work he is doing and his grade prior to the recent regrading operation; an assistant in dispensing would receive £530 per annum and may in respect of certain responsibilities be entitled to additional allowances up to a maximum of £70.

Does not the right hon. and learned Gentleman think that by comparison the salary scales of these pharmacists are very low? Will he do something about this?

The salary scales for these two respective callings are matters for the appropriate Whitley Councils. I would only add that the number of assistants in dispensing in the National Health Service has increased very substantially from the inception of the National Health Service up to the present day. This is some indication, at any rate, that the employment and conditions thereof are not altogether unattractive.

asked the Minister of Health what steps he proposes to take to ensure that only properly trained chiropodists take part in the National Health Service: and whether he will make a statement on his recent consultations with interested parties on this matter.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Wythensha we (Mrs. Hill) on 13th April.