asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether a scheme has yet been submitted to him by apple and pear producers in the United Kingdom to permit the more orderly and successful marketing of their crops, including the setting of a minimum standard below which no apples or pears would be offered in the primary markets, and to make provision for the raising of funds for publicity; and whether he will make a statement.

No, Sir. I have not yet received any such proposals. I know that many growers are interested in this possibility, and if they decided to submit a scheme, I can assure my hon. Friend that it will be sympathetically considered by the Government in accordance with the procedure laid down in the Agricultural Marketing Act.

Is my right hon. Friend aware—as I think he has indicated—that there is great interest in improved methods of marketing in the industry and that possibly one of the reasons why he has not yet received schemes is that there is doubt about what would or might constitute the minimum essentials in the Agricultural Marketing Act? If my right hon. Friend could indicate his views, this would greatly help the industry to try to reach some sort of agreement on the schemes which might be put forward.

I do not accept that it is lack of knowledge or of thinking on the part of the Government which is holding matters up, but I would certainly be glad to enter into any conversations that might help. As my hon. Friend will appreciate, it would be wrong for me to say anything in anticipation of the well-known procedure under the Agricultural Marketing Act.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many local authorities now collect and process kitchen waste for animal feeding; and what advice his Department gives with regard to such schemes.

I understand that twelve local authorities collect and process kitchen waste for animal feeding. The Department is always glad to give technical information and advice to any local authority seeking it but the final arrangements are the responsibility of the local authority concerned.

In view of the importance to the national economy of making the best use of all our resources and also the public health advantages of this method of disposing of waste, will the Minister study the experience of boroughs which are carrying out these processes, particularly the Borough of Tottenham, which is still producing "Tottenham Pudding" effectively and usefully, to see what the difficulties and the advantages are and to give positive advice to local authorities to encourage them to follow Tottenham's example?

I certainly agree that a number of local authorities are doing valuable work. At the same time, however, I should like to take this opportunity of warning everybody of the need to keep unboiled food waste away from farm animals because of the disease risk.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will make regulations so that the seller of milk bread which does not contain milk must disclose this fact.

I am at present considering the whole question of the use of the description milk bread. I have already circulated draft regulations and received a number of representations on them. I shall want to consider these carefully before arriving at a final decision.

In considering this matter, will the Minister recognise that on this occasion the producers and the consumers have come out early enough in pressing upon the Minister the importance of the maintenance of standards and that, if something is described as milk, it should be milk as we understand it in ordinary parlance?

A number of representations have been made to me and the point that the hon. Member has made is one of them. I will consider them all before making a final announcement.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he expects to receive from the Horticultural Marketing Council its views on the possibility of establishing an auction system based on that prevailing in the Netherlands.

The Horticultural Marketing Council will, I understand, be considering the whole question this week. I shall be interested to know their views in due course. But, as I told the hon. Member in reply to his Question last week, more information is needed before any conclusions can be reached on whether the Dutch auction system could be generally applied with advantage in this country.

Is it not time that the Ministry gave direct advice to the Council? Does not the Ministry now have very good evidence that this system helps both the consumers and the producers?

It helps in certain Continental countries. I know that the hon. Gentleman will have read the most interesting Departmental Report. I am not convinced, however, that what is right in one country would necessarily suit this country. There are many differences. Our grading is nowhere near as advanced as in Holland, for example. In addition, the growers in this country are not concentrated in small areas to the same extent as in Holland. There are many different factors, but, as stated in the Report, it is well worth considering whether a pilot scheme should be carried out.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations have been made to him by the Australian Government concerning the proposed import of Charollais cattle from France into the United Kingdom.

None, Sir.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how much of the fall in egg prices he attributes to the import of eggs from Poland and Roumania.

As my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade said on 20th April producers' organisations have applied for anti-dumping duty on these imports. This application is now being examined and the effect on prices is, of course, an important part of the case. I have been having urgent consultations with my right hon. Friend who is also in touch with the Polish and Roumanian authorities.

My right hon. Friend will, I think, recognise that producers are deeply concerned at the delay in applying anti-dumping legislation concerning these imports. Will he undertake to consult his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade to see whether, in future, these powers can be applied far more speedily?

As matters stand, a good deal has to be proved before antidumping legislation can be invoked. I do not accept that my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade has acted with other than speed on this occasion. As I have said, however, I am in the closest touch with my right hon. Friend and I hope that it will not be long before a conclusion can be reached.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, whilst these discussions are going on, Roumanian eggs are pouring in at very low prices and breaking the market? Can he devise a quicker method of dealing with a problem such as this?

The only method available to us under existing legislation is anti-dumping measures.

Will my right hon. Friend consider revising that anti-dumping legislation to permit of quicker methods?

No. I am not yet convinced that the anti-dumping legislation is not effective.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he has now concluded his consultations with local authorities about the future of common land; and if he will make a statement.

I have received and am considering the comments of the local authority and other interests which were consulted, but I am not yet in a position to make a statement.

Has there not been considerable delay in this matter? Cannot the Government say when they propose to introduce legislation on the subject?

I wish that I could, but this matter involves complex questions of law, history and land use. I am anxious to proceed as quickly as possible, but I want to try to get the right answer. This is a complex matter. It is not that I am trying to hold back, but it takes a good deal of time to try to solve these problems.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in most cases, land that is called common land is not land held in common but land in which the rights belong to certain commoners? Will my right hon. Friend ensure that no firm action is taken by the Government without consulting representative commoners in each case?

Interested parties have been consulted all along the line, but it becomes difficult to consult commoners before there is registration by which we can know who are the commoners with the interests involved.

In view of the Answers given this afternoon by the right hon. Gentleman and his Parliamentary Secretary, can the Minister tell us the last date on which he reached any decision?

Ten sixty-six.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food at what stage in the discussions of the National Farmers' Union and the Milk Marketing Board on the new two-tier price of milk system his Department will take part; what proposals he will put forward; and whether individuals or other bodies will be able to put forward proposals.

The Farmers' Unions and the Milk Marketing Boards in the United Kingdom are setting up a committee to examine this question and have invited the Agricultural Departments to appoint representatives. I have no specific proposals to put forward. The last part of the Question is a matter for the committee. The Departmental representatives will be prepared to contribute fully to the examination and discussion of this question.

Is the Minister aware, even though he has not come to a decision on the subject, that while some forms of differential prices would be welcomed by small producers, individual quotas would be a body-blow to their marginal existence? Will the Minister ensure that the views of small producers producing, say, 50 or 60 gallons a day are obtained from suitable organisations, such as the district committees of the agricultural executive committees, before a decision is reached?

I am aware that many different views and opinions are held on this subject and that the hon. Member himself holds some. It is excellent that this important subject should be dis-discussed in public and given the consideration which it is at last getting. I am hopeful that the Committee will come forward with proposals which will be beneficial to the dairy industry.

Since, in this matter, the Minister has passed the buck to the National Farmers' Union and the Milk Marketing Board, will not he take account of the suggestion by my hon. Friend that other organisations and bodies over which the right hon. Gentleman has control should be able to give evidence about the small producers?

Yes, Sir. There should be no difficulty about evidence being given before the Committee. I have no doubt that the Committee will be anxious to collect opinions from many and various organisations. I certainly would be glad to have them.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the Minister's reply, I give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the estimated extra cost to the agricultural industry arising from the Budget proposals regarding fuel oil; and what plans he has for the recoupment of these extra costs by the industry.

The extra cost is estimated to be about £2 million in a full year. The extra cost will be taken into account in the ordinary way at the 1962 Annual Review.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the income of the farming community, both farmers and workers, is far from keeping pace with that of the remainder of the community, as pointed out only last week by the President of the National Farmers' Union? Has it finally been decided by the Government—if they have made one decision at least—that the industry should be sacrificed?

The Price Review, which took place only a short time ago, was agreed with the industry. Of course, a Price Review cannot prejudice a general change in the taxation position, which occurs from time to time in the Budget and not necessarily one way only. It can change either way. In this case, the agricultural industry will not be bearing more than its fair share of the duty and it will be doing this with all other users.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that his reply will be unwelcome in counties such as Norfolk? It is all very well to say that the matter will be taken into consideration at the next Price Review, but that is ten months away. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this proposal has caused great concern in Norfolk and that farmers and horticulturists are critical of this action? Will not the hon. Gentleman ask his right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchquer to have another look at this proposal, which will be very hard in its effect upon agriculture and horticulture?

Any upward change in taxation or excise duty is unwelcome, but we must not exaggerate the effect of this tax upon any industry. The hon. Member will remember that there is a well-recognised procedure for holding a special review when cost changes of a substantial nature occur during the year, and we will bear that in mind. The present changes to which the hon. Member has referred certainly do not amount to the sort of change which comes within the purview of the special review procedure.

Is it not true that my right hon. Friend has been encouraging horticulturists throughout the country by way of grants to heat their greenhouses by oil? Does not he think that this tax goes against the encouragement which he has been giving in the past two years?

Once again, it is a mistake to exaggerate this small change. Admittedly, horticulturists do not stand to get the benefit from changes in a Price Review. The National Farmers' Union has approached my right hon. Friend about this, and I believe that he is arranging to meet the union shortly.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he has agreed to the request of the National Sheep Breeders' Association that he should call a conference of county council representatives to consider present anomalies in the sheep dipping regulations which now vary between one county and another.

My Department will be glad to discuss this question with the interests concerned.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on that decision. Will this meeting with the county council representatives be held before the end of May so that any changes in dipping regulations can be made effective for this season?

I will certainly do my best to see that that happens.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he has considered the representations he has received on the Food Standard Committee's Report on Bread and Flour; and what action he will now take.

I know the hon. Member's interest in this important question, but I must remind him that there are a large number of recommendations in the Report and the representations I have received raise many complicated issues. I shall make a statement as soon as I have had time to consider them.

While not being surprised at the Minister's typically indecisive reply, may I ask him when the Government will do something about ensuring that decent bread, instead of the present unsatisfactory product, is available for the long-suffering public? Has he not had more than two months in which to consider the representations that he has received and, after many years, is it not time that something happened?

I have nothing to add to what I have said to the hon. Gentleman on the numerous occasions that he has tabled Questions on this matter in the recent past.

Does the right hon. Gentleman understand that some of us appreciate his caution, because it is obvious that as long as he is cautious he will not make any mistakes?

The right hon. Gentleman should know.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the proposed discharge of liquid and gaseous radioactive waste into the River Blackwater from the Bradwell nuclear power station; and what expert advice he has received on the effect of this discharge on the oysters and other marine life in the estuary.

The proposed discharges of liquid and gaseous radioactive waste have been described in detail in a circular letter of 16th January to the local authorities concerned.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that that Answer is quite contradictory to the evidence given by expert marine biologists at the public inquiry, even though at that time the C.E.A. pretended that there would not be any radioactivity in the effluent but that it would only be hot chlorinated water from the cooling system? Why should the Authority get away with such a gross breach of faith to the public? Will the hon. Gentleman look at this matter again?

I do not think that it is a gross breach of faith at all, but I will certainly consider any evidence that the hon. Gentleman sends me. I am advised by our scientists that no harm is likely to come to the oysters, which is what the hon. Gentleman asked me.

Has the hon. Gentleman seen the comments made at last week's meeting of the Kent and Essex Sea Fisheries Committee, which knows a good deal more about oysters than he does and thinks that they will be harmed?

I am prepared to believe that a lot of people know more about oysters than I do. I, for one, do not like them, but I am here to protect them and I am advised that they are not likely to come to any harm as a result of what is proposed here.

"I weep for you…".

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how many filmed programmes are now available for the teaching of English by television overseas.

Five.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is an enormous future market in programmes of this kind? Does he realise that it is not only that the programmes are in the English language but that the content and presentation are British which gives us a great opportunity? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we have made a very slow start, and will he give more priority to this matter?

I concur in the first part of the hon. Gentleman's remarks. We are, however, in an experimental phase. A number of films have been made—five for the British Council and a number for the B.B.C. We are not yet satisfied that the proper technique has been evolved for the teaching of English as a foreign language, but once this experimental phase is over and the lines are laid down, I agree with the hon. Gentleman that we may go ahead.

While agreeing with the right hon. Gentleman that, having seen some of these programmes, they are bad, may I ask him whether he is aware that this has been going on for many months and that the Americans are making great strides in this field?

The American films are for home consumption for immigrant populations. We are aware of them. It is important, however, to get this investigation phase properly done before we launch out into something larger.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what is the proposed cost of the overseas information services in 1961–62; and how much is attributable to the British Council, the British Broadcasting Corporation's external services, and the Foreign, Commonwealth and Colonial Information Services, respectively.

£20·2 million. £6·4 million of this will be for the British Council, £7·0 million for the B.B.C.'s external services and monitoring, and £3·6 million, £2·4 million and £07 million for the Foreign, Commonwealth and Colonial Offices' Overseas information work respectively. A statement explaining this appreciable increase in estimated expenditure, together with detailed figures, is given as Table VI in the Financial Secretary's Memorandum on the Estimates.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the increase in the scale of these activities will be welcome but that, compared with the need and opportunity, we are still not doing nearly enough in this field? Will he consider particularly the fact that the amount of B.B.C. broadcasting is still being constantly overtaken by other countries? Will the right hon. Gentleman consider issuing a White Paper to set out the overall policy and direction behind the information services, which is not very clear at the moment?

First, it is true that, of the increase of about £2 million, about £1 million goes to the British Council, about £700,000 to the Commonwealth Relations Office and about £300,000 to the B.B.C. In answer to the hon. Gentleman's second point, I am sure that he agrees that it is not only quantity but quality as well which matters and that the B.B.C.'s reputation for objectivity is of immense value. Thirdly, I will consider the point that the hon. Gentleman has made.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is the danger of a certain hiatus when a Colony attains independence? Will he pay particular attention to that point?

Particular attention is being paid to it, and it lies behind some of the changes in these Estimates.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what representations he has received regarding National Assistance Board scales for blind persons.

I have received a few letters, almost all in general and similar terms, suggesting that whenever assistance rates go up the differential between the special scale for blind persons and the ordinary scale should also be increased. I would refer the hon. Member to what I said on this subject during the debate on the National Assistance Regulations on 1st December.

Will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the two most reasonable requests made by the National League of the Blind? Is he aware of the very deep dissatisfaction among the 55,000 blind people receiving National Assistance that they, whose needs are greatest, have been receiving only 3s. 6d. a week since 3rd April compared with 7s. 6d. a week for retirement pensioners and that their special allowance has not been raised at all?

With regard to the hon. Gentleman's comparison with retirement pensioners, he will be well aware that those receiving this rate of National Assistance, and, indeed, all those receiving the general rates, have benefited from the 1959 increase which did not apply to National Insurance benefits. Therefore, it is not a fair comparison.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he is now in a position to make a statement about the disposal of the United Kingdom share of the balance of the assets under Article 16 of the Peace Treaty with Japan and of any further sum which has become available under Article 14.

Yes, Sir. We have received a further £196,000 under Article 16, including £24,000 due to members of the Colonial Forces, and a further £22,000 under Article 14.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that the statement he has just made brings this matter, which first came before the House ten years ago, to a very satisfactory conclusion, on which I know that the Far Eastern prisoners of war would like to express their gratitude to the Minister and to the officials of the old Ministry of Pensions and of the present Ministry for all the hard work they have done? May I ask my right hon. Friend if he will let me know, in round figures, the total amount that has been received for the benefit of the Far Eastern prisoners of war from the Japanese assets under the articles of the Treaty, and from the Burma-Siam Railway?

I can do better than that, and give my hon. Friend the precise figure, which is £4,816,473 15s. 9d.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he will consider issuing a simple leaflet on, and giving more publicity to, the system of refunds of charges under the National Health Service.

Yes, Sir. The special leaflet, of which I told the House on 27th February, has been widely available since the beginning of this month. On the other steps being taken to secure proper publicity about this, I will write to my hon. Friend.

Can my right hon. Friend say exactly where this special leaflet is obtainable?

Certainly; it is available at all the offices of the National Assistance Board, and also at Citizens' Advice Bureaux, Old People's Welfare Committees and other local bodies, as well as in doctors' surgeries and in chemists' shops.

Will the Minister watch this matter very carefully? Is he aware that on neither side of the House is there any real satisfaction that a solution has been found to this matter, and that there are widespread misgivings whether people who may be entitled to refunds will in fact get them? I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman will fulfil the wishes of the House if he will watch the matter carefully.

I fully share the hon. Gentleman's desire on this matter and so does my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health, who is, of course, responsible for the complementary steps being taken by way of information in doctors' surgeries, on the prescription form, and so on.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that no matter how much publicity he may give to the idea of reclaiming charges that are imposed, the charges will nevertheless remain mean, despicable and indefensible?

I think the hon. Gentleman has got it rather wrong.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that to my knowledge three days ago, a doctor with a large practice in my constituency said that he was not aware of the increased scope of these benefits under National Health scales, and will he consult his right hon. Friend the Minister of Health to ensure that all doctors have this leaflet and are asked to display it in their surgeries?

I am not at all clear what increased benefits my hon. Friend is talking about. So far as this particular doctor is concerned, if either my hon. Friend or the doctor himself would get in touch with the local office of the National Assistance Board, a supply of this leaflet can certainly be made available to him. So far as the other matter is concerned, that is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance why the claims to unemployment benefit of certain workers, of whom details have been sent to him and who are out of employment because of the ship-repairing dispute on Merseyside, have been disallowed.

Because the local tribunal has ruled that payment of unemployment benefit to the men concerned would be contrary to the provisions of Section 13 of the National Insurance Act, 1946. I am writing to my hon. Friend about this case.

Does not my right hon. Friend think that it is a rather extraordinary situation that men who are in no way parties to the dispute but who, because of it, and through no fault of their own, are out of work should be denied unemployment benefit? Will he look into the matter again to see if something cannot be done to help these people?

It is not for me to comment on the decision of independent statutory authorities from whom, of course, as my hon. Friend is aware, an appeal lies, if it is desired to take it, to the National Insurance Commissioners. I would add, however, that it appears that the local tribunal took the view that in this case, which involves a demarcation dispute, my hon. Friend's constituents were directly interested in the result of that demarcation dispute. It is not for me to comment, but that is the reason, I understand, which weighed with the tribunal.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance why Mr. A. J. Ferdinand, 19, Templer Avenue, Chadwell-St.-Mary, Essex, is not receiving a 100 per cent. disability pension.

Because the complaint from which this gentleman suffers was not caused by his war service but aggravated thereby, the assessment of his disablement for war pensions purposes is based on the extent of such aggravation. As the hon. Member is aware, it is open to Mr. Ferdinand to appeal against his assessment to the Pensions Appeal Tribunal.

Is it not a fact that this man is totally disabled as a result of sickness contracted on Army service? Is it not a fact that when he was assessed at 40 per cent. disability, he was only 40 per cent. disabled, but, as everybody knew, his sickness was of a progressive nature, and bound to get worse? Now he is totally disabled as a result of the sickness contracted during his Army service. Why should he not receive a 100 per cent. disability pension without having to appeal to anybody?

As I told the hon. Gentleman in our correspondence, until 27th May this man has a right of appeal against his current assessment to an independent pensions appeal tribunal. It is very much better that this question should be thrashed out before an independent appeal tribunal rather than on the Floor of the House.

asked the Minister of Power, in view of his responsibility for promoting economy and efficiency in the consumption of fuel and power, what consideration he has given to the effect of the recent decision in the chemical industry to undertake hydrogen production from light oils instead of from coke as is done at present.

The objectives referred to by the Son. Member are best achieved by leaving consumers free to Choose the materials best suited to their particular needs.

Is the Minister aware that a recent decision by Imperial Chemical Industries is likely to cost the National Coal Board a market for 600,000 tons of coal? Has the Minister had any consultation with either of these two parties, and is he, in particular, satisfied that the National Coal Board went to the limit in trying to retain this important market?

The hon. Member must not confuse the use of coal as a source of power with the use of coal as an industrial raw material. The change in this case affects coal as an industrial raw material, and my right hon. Friend would not wish to dictate to a private company what its industrial raw materials should be.

asked the Minister of Power what proportion of the National Coal Board's total outlay is devoted to research and development; and what general direction he has given to the Board to increase such outlay.

In 1961, about 0·6 per cent. of the Board's recent total expenditure. I do not consider a general direction would be appropriate.

Is the Minister aware that this figure is ludicrously low and far lower than that obtaining in manufacturing industry? Will he have a look at the comparable figures for the chemical industry, where the proportion spent on scientific research represents 4·8 per cent. of the net output of the industry? What talks is he having with the Minister for Science on this important matter?

The proportion is lower than that for manufacturing industry generally, and that I readily admit, but a comparison of the expenditure on research between extractive and manufacturing industries is extremely difficult. The National Coal Board has increased is total expenditure on research from £3·3 million in 1959 to £5 million in 1961, and it is very ready to increase it further if new possibilities of promise can be identified. My right hon. Friend is in consultation constantly with the Minister for Science on the question of research.

asked the Minister of Power what is the amount of liquid methane imported into the United Kingdom since the 1st January, 1961; and what has been the cost to his Department.

The answers are "None" and "Nothing". The cost of the earlier experimental imports was borne by the Gas Council.

May I take it from that reply that the complete cessation of imports of liquid gas will continue, or am I to understand that we are really awaiting a report by the Minister on the imports that have already taken place?

The hon. Member must not assume that imports of liquid methane will not at some time be resumed, but at the moment the position is as he has stated, and my right hon. Friend is awaiting final proposals from the Gas Council.

Will it be possible to have the report on the implications of this within the next few months?

There is no report in existence in regard to these proceedings, but my right hon. Friend promised to come to the House after he had had final proposals from the Gas Council, which he still awaits.

asked the Minister of Power what capital developments in the gas industry he has authorised to be undertaken in the Normanton constituency.

The North Eastern Gas Board's investment this year in the hon. Member's constituency will be chiefly in mains, services, and meters.

Will it be at all possible, and will the Minister look into the possibility of installing a Lurgi gas plant, and so far as capital expenditure is concerned, may I ask him if he will have some investigation into the redevelopment of Rothwell, so that there could be proper showrooms and offices?

In answer to the first part of the hon. Member's supplementary question, as he is well aware, two Lurgi plants are now being built, and some experience of the operation of these plants must be obtained over a fairly long period before consideration of extending their use can be entertained. With regard to the second part of his supplementary question, I am aware that some development is contemplated in Rothwell, and I assume that the hon. Gentleman is referring to the provision of new showrooms. The Consultative Council has drawn the attention of the Board to this new development, and it is prepared to reconsider the matter in the light of this new development.

asked the Minister of Power how soon he expects that the Bradwell nuclear power station will be in operation; what is the present expectation of effective life of this power station; and what the total cost of construction, including widening of roads, purchase of land, compensation, erection of pylons, and all other relevant expenditure, is now likely to be; what percentage of the nation's requirement of electric power will be met from this source; and, approximately, what effect this additional supply will have on the price of electricity to the consumer.

The Bradwell station is expected to be in full operation by the middle of 1962. Its life cannot at present be accurately predicted as there is little experience of operating nuclear power stations; for accountancy purposes a life of twenty years has been assumed. The cost of the items named, plus the nuclear fuel charge, is likely to be about £58 million. The capacity at Bradwell will represent about 1 per cent. of the generating capacity in England and Wales. This station alone will not have any significant effect on electricity tariffs.

Do not those figures tend to show that this estuary has been spoilt and is to be polluted for the sake of material benefits which may prove largely illusory? Does the hon. Gentleman realise that the present Minister's predecessor took the decision to allow this project after a public inquiry from which the C.E.A. concealed a number of relevant facts, including one mentioned in an earlier Question today?

I cannot entertain the suggestion of the hon. Member that the C.E.G.B. would at any time conceal relevant facts.

It was the C.E.A. then.

As to the derival of material benefits from this installation, I am sure this country will derive material benefits. The situation is that the demand for electricity is rising so fast that in fifteen to twenty years it will not be possible to meet it from conventional fuels. Increasing supplies of nuclear power will be needed to achieve technological progress in industry, and to ensure that this country is kept in the van of progress we must continue to erect nuclear projects at the rate of one per annum.

asked the Minister of Power what interest rates are assumed in his calculation that electric power will be generated as cheaply in nuclear power stations as in stations fired by fossil fuels by the year 1967; and by what year he estimates parity would be reached if interest rates were lowered by 1, 2 and 3 per cent., respectively.

Nuclear power for base load generation is not expected to become competitive with conventional generation until about 1970. The interest rate assumed by the Generating Board in calculating the future costs of electricity is 5½ per cent. Other things being equal, a reduction of 3 per cent. in the rate of interest might advance the date of parity by about two years.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary say why he disagrees with the estimate of Sir John Cockcroft that parity should be achieved on the present basis and present interest rates by 1967? Secondly, do not the figures he has given in the last part of his Answer show that the archaic methods of calculating amortisation of capital on high interest rates are delaying the coming of cheap energy to this country?

I would not personally dream of dissenting from what Sir John Cockcroft said, but we are working on the best advice available to the Government in estimating for 1970. As to the second part of the hon. Member's supplementary question, on high interest rates, his proposal would infer the granting of a subsidy by the Government to this industry, which has the highest natural increase in demand of any in the country, and that proposal is wholly unacceptable

asked the Minister of Aviation if he will make a statement on the progress made in the development of city centre to city centre helicopter passenger services in the United Kingdom; and what are the prospects for London in this connection.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Bosworth (Mr. Wyatt) on 20th February.

In view of the optimistic Report of the Inter-Departmental Helicopter Committee in 1951 and the progress made with helicopters in other countries, is it not most unsatisfactory that practically nothing has been done here in the past ten years? In view of the fact that we cannot enter the space race or send a man to the moon, would it not be some consolation if we could have at least an inter-city service between Manchester and London? Can we not see some enterprise from the Government in this vitally important matter?

I think we must accept that it will be some time before we can have an economic inter-city helicopter service. I am aware of the services there are abroad, but almost all of them are very heavily subsidised.

Can the hon. Gentleman say what is holding up this development and when a decision will be taken on the use of the Fairey Rotodyne and what assistance is being given B.E.A. to operate this service?

Nothing is holding up progress. On the Rotodyne I have nothing to add to the reply which my right hon. Friend gave to the hon. Member on 6th March.

If nothing is holding up progress, how can the hon. Gentleman explain why nothing has happened?

Quite a deal is happening.

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

asked the Minister of Aviation whether he proposes to order for military purposes any aircraft capable of vertical take-off and landing; and if he will make a statement.

I have nothing to add to the replies which I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Sir A. V. Harvey) on 14th November last and to my hon. Friend the Member for Belfast, East (Mr. McMaster) on 20th February.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that vertical take-off and landing is now a development which is entirely practicable? Does he realise that it can be applied to civilian aircraft up to a certain capacity? Will not he agree that this development would be encouraged if he were to place a military order or two? Will he agree, also, that it would have a tremendous effect in reducing the congestion with which we are faced at present at London Airport and other airports in the country?

That vertical take-off is practicable, there can be no doubt. I think it is a tribute to the British firms concerned which have shown the way. We have developed two experimental types, and we are negotiating in the case of one of them, the Hawker P 1127, the possibility of developing it jointly with the Germans.

Will my right hon. Friend take steps to make available more planes such as the SC 1, as there can hardly be a military requirement until sufficient vertical take-off and landing aircraft are available for a full and fair evaluation to be made by the Army of this important and easily dispersible type of support fighter or reconnaissance plane?

Two experimental planes of the SC 1 type have been developed, but one thing which would cause a setback to vertical take-off would be for the Ministry of Aviation or anyone else to start developing and actually producing large numbers of planes for which in fact there is no demand.

Is not this a field in which this country has taken the lead in inventiveness and skill? Does the Minister mean that there is no military requirement for this revolutionary plane?

No, I do not say that. I said we were developing the Hawker P 1127 and seeking to do that in co-operation with our allies in Europe.

asked the Minister of Aviation what is the nature and extent of the alterations being carried out at Turnhouse Airport; and when the airport will again be operational.

The main works being carried out are strengthening of the runway and aircraft apron; improved runway lighting and extension of the terminal building. The airport should reopen at the beginning of August.

Is the Minister not aware that since Turnhouse Airport was closed at the beginning of this month there has been little evidence of realisation of urgency to get this work done? In view of the spectacular increase in the volume of air traffic between London and Edinburgh, and particularly in view of development of tourist traffic in Scotland, will the hon. Gentleman undertake to see that this work is kept in progress during all the daylight hours of the next few weeks?

We shall certainly proceed with the work as fast as possible. I understand it will be carried out within the scheduled time.

asked the Minister of Aviation what is the present position in relation to the disposal of the remaining land within the perimeter of Southampton Airport; and, in view of the proposal to withdraw the services from the airport on 30th April, if he will make a statement.

The former owners of the northern extension have withdrawn their offer and the land has been offered to the Southampton Corporation.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for the arrangements he has made for the continuance of skeleton services at the airport. May I ask whether he will use his good offices to expedite agreement on the purchase of this remaining small plot of land so that arrangements for the continuation of operations by the new owners of Southampton airport may be pushed forward?

In this regard I think that the initiative now rests with the Southampton Corporation.

asked the Minister of Aviation whether he will publish the report of his investigation into the near miss in the London Airport area on 21st February between Canadian and Egyptian jet air liners.

Neither of the aircraft was registered in the United Kingdom and in accordance with normal practice I have given the national authorities concerned an opportunity to consider the results of the investigation before deciding whether they should be published.

Will the Minister bear in mind that it is very important to maintain public confidence in this country in the safety of the approaches to London Airport? In view of the report of the Cairns Committee, would not it be advisable to publish this information as soon as possible?

I think that probably is so. I share the view of the hon. Gentleman. Nevertheless it is a normal international practice, and a right one, supported by the Cairns Committee, that where foreign registered aircraft are involved the countries concerned should be given an opportunity to comment first.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that once again we have had a near miss at London Airport and that, of course, this is a disturbing element in air travel? Can he say that he is satisfied with the system of control under which aircraft are brought to ground at London Airport?

Yes, Sir. I am satisfied with the system and, perhaps what is more important, it is quite clear that the pilots are satisfied with the system. They all pay very high tribute to the standard of operations in the London Traffic Control Area.

asked the Minister of Aviation what salaries he has fixed for the members of the Air Transport Licensing Board.

Chairman £5,000, Deputy-Chairman £2,750, Board members fifteen guineas a session.

In view of the amount paid to the Chairman of another public corporation, has there been any protest from this Chairman that he is not getting the rate for the job?

No.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is a point of view that this is not enough to pay the Chairman of this important Board in order to get the right man for the job, in view of the fact that no pension is offered? Is he further aware that, to make this an equally satisfactory position, there should be pension rights equivalent to those of the national air corporations?

Call for the Chancellor.

I am anxious that the right man should be appointed. I take into account any representations made to me. I think it is a reasonable amount to pay for this post.

But there is no pension.

asked the Minister of Aviation if he is now in a position to make a statement on the formation of a National Flying Trust for the promotion of gliding and light aeroplane flying.

Yes, Sir. Following recommendations from the Standing Joint Committee on Private Flying, the Society of British Aircraft Constructors and Shell-Mex and B.P. Ltd. have set up a fund of £100,000 to be subscribed over a period of three years. The purpose of the fund will be to make low-interest loans to flying and gliding clubs for the purchase of equipment and other essential needs, and at the end of the three years the position will be reviewed in the light of the experience gained.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply, which will be welcomed by all interested in private flying. May I ask him two questions? First, would loans under this trust be made available only to British aircraft or to foreign aircraft as well? Secondly, can he give an assurance to the House that his Ministry will back this by helping in providing more aerodromes, otherwise the scheme will be impracticable? May I ask, particularly, whether he will help by providing Fairoaks for private flying and Croydon for business flying?

My hon. Friend's second supplementary question raises a wider point. Perhaps he will put down a Question, if he wishes to ask about particular aerodromes. The purpose of a loan is a matter between those who administer the trust and the private flying clubs. I should have thought that as the Society of British Aircraft Constructors is so prominent in the fund, there might be a certain disposition for British aircraft to have preference in this matter, although I understand that nothing of that kind is laid down.

asked the Minister of Health if he is satisfied, in view of the small number of applications to mental health review tribunals, that patients detained in hospital are generally aware of the existence of the tribunals; and what steps he will take to ensure that such patients are informed of their right to apply to the tribunals for discharge.

Hospitals and mental nursing homes have been asked to give detained patients and their nearest relatives a statement of their rights, and a series of leaflets is supplied for this purpose. I have no reason to doubt that the request is being complied with.

Nevertheless, would not the Minister agree that the number of eighty-six applications up to the middle of last month is very much smaller than anybody envisaged at the time of the passage of the Mental Health Act? Is the right hon. Gentleman quite satisfied that patients know about these tribunals?

I do not think the small number until recently is significant, because, up to the end of April, as the hon. Member will realise, it was only a very limited number of patients who had the right to apply. We shall get a much better idea of how this is working from now onwards.

asked the Minister of Health if he is aware that many hospitals have done little or nothing to implement the recommendations of the Platt Report on Children in Hospital, which were accepted by him; whether he has now collated the replies sent to him by hospital authorities on this subject; and what further steps he proposes to take.

The replies have been collated and I intend to publish a summary in my Annual Report. I am satisfied that the Platt Report has been thoroughly studied and that its major recommendations have been widely accepted. Implementation of some depends on new building and staffing. I shall pursue these matters with individual hospital authorities as occasion offers.

Would not the Minister agree that the implementation of these recommendations has been disappointingly slow and that very few hospitals have even introduced a system of unrestricted visiting, but that those which have done so have found it thoroughly satisfactory for the parents and children concerned? Will he press forward with trying to get the fullest implementation of these very humane and reasonable recommendations?

Yes, indeed, and I entirely agree with what the hon. Member says about unrestricted visiting. But I think that the most effective way to follow up the Report is individually in the light of individual returns.

Would the Minister consider publishing a list of those hospitals which allow unrestricted visiting and those which allow the mother to attend hospital with a child under five years of age?

The numbers are very large and I do not know whether it would be a good idea to burden the OFFICIAL REPORT with them. Perhaps the hon. Member and I could look at them.

asked the Minister of Health whether he will amend the scales of pay for pre-nursing students in order to enable them to receive the same pay increase as was awarded to nurses from 1st December last.

Yes, Sir. Increases in the maximum rates of pay are being authorised with effect from 1st April, 1961.

I thank the Minister for that reply. May I ask whether he will go a little further, in order to encourage these pre-nursing students to feel that they are a potential part of the nursing profession, by back-dating their increase to December, 1960, in order to coincide with the date of the commencement of the most recent increase in nurses' salaries?

I entirely agree that this is a very important source of recruitment for nursing. But the adjustment of pay for nursing cadets has never been at the same time as the adjustment of pay for nurses. In fact, on the present occasion the interval is shorter.

But there is no reason why it should not be.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House how the new pay scales were arrived at, and whether they were negotiated through the Whitley machine?

They are the application of the pay scales negotiated for nurses.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that the Executive Council of the National Health Service for the County Borough of Leicester has expressed full sympathy with the resolutions adopted by the Cumberland and Burton-on-Trent Executive Councils protesting against the increase in prescription charges; and whether he is taking steps to comply with the proposals of these councils.

I am aware of the Executive Council's views, but the House has taken its decision on this matter.

Is the fact that the House has taken a decision, which is an appalling one, going to prevent the Minister from putting right what is obviously wrong? Is he aware that people are greatly disturbed about these charges, and that many people find that the whole thing is virtually impossible from their point of view because of their financial position?

I believe that this policy is as widely supported in the country as it is in the House.

Is it not a fact that the London Executive Council has also protested to the Minister about these prescription charges? Would he care to tell the House how many executive councils have protested, and what attention he will pay to these responsible bodies which are very closely concerned with the problem?

I am seeing a deputation from the executive councils in the near future.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Blackburn Executive Council also sent him a protest concerning this matter? Will he take up the suggestion of my hon. Friend the Member for St. Pancras, North (Mr. K. Robinson) and publish the list of all those which have protested?

This Question refers to a specific Executive Council.