asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what further proposals he has in order to encourage co-operation between competent farmers in order to promote greater efficiency.

The responsibility for promoting cooperatives falls primarily on the Agricultural Central Co-operative Association and the Welsh Agricultural Organisation Society, which are grant-aided. The Government subsidise, for example, certain expenditures by horticultural marketing co-operatives and farmers' machinery syndicates. The agricultural co-operative movement continues to expand and I have no further proposals in mind at the moment.

I congratulate the Minister on the steps he has taken this year to encourage co-operation. Would not he agree that the trend of incomes on the smaller acreage farms is a matter for concern? Would he consider further practical action which he must take to foster co-operation, thereby encouraging efficiency, and so reverse this trend?

I am sure there is a great future for increased co-operation and that there is a lot more yet to come. The fact is that over the last ten years the turnover of agricultural co-operative societies has increased from what was about £60 million a year to over £200 million a year, which is a more than threefold increase in ten years. That is a satisfactory improvement, but I repeat that there is certainly scope for more co-operation, particularly among small farmers.

Will the Minister confirm or deny his hon. Friend's statement regarding declining incomes on small farms? That is the crux of the question.

In 1959 there were declining incomes, particularly in the West Country which, I think, is what was being referred to by my hon. Friend. That was due to weather conditions and other adverse factors. But the net agriculture income did rise, as the hon. Gentleman knows, and there has been a £14 million-plus award this year.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what consultations he is having with the President of the Board of Trade regarding trading agreements which allow large quantities of food to be imported at prices below the cost of production.

I keep in close touch with my right hon. Friend about all trade agreements affecting food and agricultural products. My right hon. Friend has powers under the Customs Duties (Dumping and Subsidies) Act, 1957, to take action against dumped or subsidised imports which are causing or threatening material injury to producers and when it is in the national interest to do so.

Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that the 1957 Customs Duties (Dumping and Subsidies) Act is working properly? Is he aware that this year we have had barley, eggs and dairy products dumped in this country? Will he consult his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade again to see whether the existing legislation is strong enough to stand up to the dumping which is now going on and, if not, whether there should be fresh legislation to deal with it?

This is a major question to which a number of hon. Members referred and to which I also referred at some length during a recent debate on agriculture. Then these three products were considered. As my hon. Friend knows, there are applications before my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade for the imposition of anti-dumping legislation in respect of barley and dairy products. There is another Question on the Order Paper relating to eggs.

Does the Minister recall what has been mentioned before on several occasions, that the last time the Milk Marketing Board made an application, it was considered for five months before a decision was made? Surely there will be an effort to speed up things.

The present application has certainly not been before my right hon. Friend for months. I do not know the number of days, but it is not a month.

In order to preserve the spirit of the 1947 Act, does not my right hon. Friend realise the need for speedy action to prevent Exchequer grants from becoming too high?

Yes, Sir, I quite agree that it is essential that we should be enabled to act fairly speedily. The major question for my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade is that of barley, which, if I remember rightly, has been under consideration for about a fortnight. Many consultations have to take place with overseas countries, but my right hon. Friend is anxious to make an announcement as soon as possible.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many grants have been made, and what is the total cost of consolidation schemes, under the Agriculture Act, 1957.

Twelve amalgamation schemes have been formally approved at an estimated total cost in grant of £500; some £400 has been paid to date. Seventy-six further schemes which have been approved in principle carry a potential grant liability of several thousand pounds.

While welcoming the second part of my hon. Friend's answer, may I ask him if he could give more publicity to the matter of consolidation grants? Here is one matter in which we can help to make ourselves more efficient, and we hope that more farmers take advantage of it, thus enabling them to compete much better, perhaps, than at the moment.

I hardly think that publicity will make a great deal of difference here. Social and economic forces are resulting in consolidation, where it is desirable, and that has been happening for a long time. I certainly do not think that we should try to force anybody out of his home.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is aware that some dairies are applying the words Including Imported Butter to a product which contains no home-produced butter; and if he will take steps to stop this practice.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is aware that foreign and Commonwealth-produced butter is being labelled with the words Home Produced in retail shops in the United Kingdom; and if he will take steps to stop this practice.

Under the terms of the relevant marking order the phrase "Including Imported Butter" is one of the permissible descriptions for blends and mixtures of butter which consist of or contain imported butter. An Amendment to the Order can only be made after an inquiry by the appropriate Standing Committee under the Merchandise Marks Act, 1926. A question can only be referred to the Committee after an application has been received which substantially represents one of the interests involved. No such application has been received. I have received no report that foreign and Commonwealth produced butter is at present being labelled with the words "home produced". If my hon. Friend will send me details of specific cases I will gladly look into them.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this practice is going on at the moment, and that butter from the Commonwealth is being mixed with foreign butter and sold with a "Home Produced" label on it? I will certainly send him the details if he wishes.

I should be most grateful.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) whether he has considered the further evidence, submitted to him by the hon. Member for Oldham, West, of unnecessary cruelty used in the fattening of broiler chickens for table purposes; and what action he proposes to take;

The papers which the hon. Gentleman has sent me contained no facts of which I was not previously aware, and I do not consider that they call for any action on my part. It is, of course, for the courts to decide under the Protection of Animals Act, 1911, whether unnecessary suffering has been caused to any animals.

Whose business is it in this House to protect animals from cruelty? Does the right hon. Gentleman regard himself as only here to protect the farmers? Is he aware that I myself have seen the intensive rearing of chickens in admirable conditions, probably better than those outside? Is he also aware that the papers I sent to him have been supported by journalistic comments from reputable sources, which call attention to the increasing practice and the widespread cruelty? Whose business does he say it is to enforce the Protection of Animals Act, 1911? Does he not regard the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food as the person responsible for seeing that Statutes relating to animals are carried into force?

As the hon. Gentleman has said, he himself has seen animals kept in perfectly good conditions under these circumstances, and I do not believe that, in the generality of cases, that is anything but the truth. There is no reason why they should be kept in conditions which are in any way cruel, but it is not for me to enforce the Act. It is for the courts to enforce it. If anybody wishes to take action in the matter, it is open to them to do so.

Is there not evidence, both from my right hon. Friend and from the hon. Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Hale), that one cannot be unhappy and fat, and might not this also apply to calves and poultry?

The right hon. Gentleman was not looking happy a moment ago. Will he not ask his inspectors to find out whether these allegations are correct, and are not the public entitled to be informed whether such practices are prevalent, whether they are widespread and whether the law is being enforced?

My Department is perfectly content that the systems used for the rearing of these birds and calves, to which the hon. Gentleman has referred, need not necessarily create cruelty to the calves concerned.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will introduce regulations to ensure that all meat sold in retail shops is accurately marked as to quality according to the schedules of the Fatstock Marketing Corporation.

The Fatstock Marketing Corporation pays producers for fatstock by grade of carcase as do some other meat traders. The assessment of quality for retail cuts, however, depends very much on local preferences and for the government to impose nation-wide statutory regulations on quality marking in retail shops would create many difficulties.

While I appreciate the difficulties, is not the Joint Parliamentary Secretary aware of the reports from local weights and measures inspectors from many pparts of the country about the misleading labelling of meat in shops? Have there not been cases of imported meat being labelled as English, Argentine beef labelled as Scotch and Dutch pork labelled as English pork, and so on? Would he not agree that some kind of schedule is needed in order that this misleading labelling can be dealt with?

The burden of that question goes a long way from the question of grade in the original Question and is a separate issue, which I should have thought deserves investigation on its own merits. It is a fact that parts of animals do not necessarily reflect the quality of the whole animal which was of a particular grade when it was passed through the market. It does not mean that all the cuts off that animal are of the same grade when they reach the butcher's slab.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether, in drawing up regulations dealing with the sale of milk bread, he will ensure that no bread shall be able to be sold under the description of milk bread unless it contains pure milk.

I have noted the hon. Member's suggestion, but I am not at present in a position to make a statement.

Is the Minister aware that there is a good deal of interest in this matter, since the ice-cream nonsense and the mock milk business, and will he look at it again? If he cannot guarantee it to contain milk, will he guarantee it to contain bread?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, we have put out our suggestions, and there have been large numbers of comments, representative of all shades of opinion. I cannot say more than that I take the point raised by the hon. Gentleman.

Will the Minister say how much longer it will be before he makes up his mind about the bread problem, because in the meantime the public are being fobbed off with all kinds of soggy stuff?

This question specifically relates to milk bread, which, ever since before the war, has been made from skimmed milk, as opposed to whole milk. The question is one of labelling—of what the labels and the nomenclature should be on bread made from skimmed milk and that made from whole milk.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps his Department and the Hull and East Yorkshire River Board will take to ensure that all wharves on the River Hull are brought up to, and maintained at, the statutory height; and whether he will ask the river board to issue a circular letter to all wharf owners stating the requirements for their wharves to prevent flooding from both overtopping and seepage.

The Hull Corporation has powers under its Act of 1925 to require owners to raise their wharves to the level specified in the Act, and I understand that at its meeting later this month it will be considering the service of notices. While the river board has general powers to prevent flooding, these do not include any specific power to require wharves to be built up to any given height.

Is the Joint Parliamentary Secretary aware that some of these deficient wharves have been neglected for twenty or more years? Is it not high time that the river board took the problem of the River Hull seriously and impressed on all wharf owners that the flooding has to be stopped now and for all time?

There is no evidence that the river board does not take this problem seriously, any more than the Hull City Corporation, which came to this House to get special legislation some years ago. As I have said, it is taking the consequences of the recent flooding very seriously and is carrying out a detailed survey. It is having a meeting some time later this month, and I do not think I can say any more on the present occasion.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will state the causes of the flooding on the east side of the River Hull, between Scott Street Bridge and North Bridge, at the last equinoctial high water spring tide, the number of wharves in this section of the river which have been surveyed and reported to the Hull and East Yorkshire River Board for flood alleviation works, and the number of notices which are to be served on owners in this section requiring them to raise their wharves above flood level.

Flooding in this section of the River Hull was due to overtopping of two wharves. The survey of this length of the river has been completed and the corporation is being recommended to serve notices on eight wharf owners.

Can the hon. Gentleman tell me how much longer the river board is going to deal with the River Hull by these antiquated "Noah's Ark" methods of sandbags which rot away and wooden coping which is torn away by hawsers? When will the river board insist on permanent flood prevention work, with concrete walls or sheet steel piling, and no more nonsense about it?

I do not know about this new "Noah's Ark", but I do know that the improvement work carried out by this river board is generally subject to a grant from this Department. Whatever the method used, we satisfy ourselves that it is the best possible for the intended purpose before we pass it for grant. Noah's Ark did save the human race.

But nothing has been done.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how soon his Department will be in a position to approve the Mundon Wash drainage scheme; and when he anticipates that work will commence.

This is an expensive scheme. It requires not only considerable technical examination but close consideration as to the level of expenditure justifiable in improving the drainage and tidal protection of 2,350 acres of agricultural land. We are well ahead with our examination of the river board's proposals and we hope to come to a decision shortly.

Will my hon. Friend do everything possible to expedite that decision, because it is the effectiveness of the upland drainage which has made it almost impossible for these unfortunate people in Mundon Wash area to farm at all.

We appreciate the need for urgency, but, as I have said, this is not a very easy scheme.

asked the Minister of Agriculture Fisheries and Food why the acreage in England planted with trees by the Forestry Commission during 1960 was lower than any annual planting between 1953 and 1957.

The need for planting in England is much less urgent than in the upland areas of Scotland and Wales. But the area planted in England was adequate both in relation to employment needs and the amount of suitable land available which cannot be better used in agriculture.

Is it not more a matter of finance than of the amount of land available? Certainly in the Pennines areas there seems to be a lot of land available which is not suitable for farming but which would be suitable for forestry work.

I think that the hon. Member knows, by virtue of earlier talks which he has had with my Department, the difficulties of the extreme elevation and exposure in the areas to which he has referred. But it is not a question of finance. It was decided, and announced to the House some time ago, that we should have a programme of planting for 300,000 acres in Great Britain over the next ten years, and that is going forward according to plan.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what was the acreage of pit heaps and other derelict industrial land planted by the Forestry Commission, and for which the Forestry Commission paid a planting grant, respectively, during 1960.

The figures are 131 acres and 52 acres, respectively.

Is it not rather deplorable? Would it not be more satisfactory if the Forestry Commission had a section devoted to this sort of work? I know that Lancashire and Durham local authorities do very well, but would it not be 'better if the Forestry Commission undertook some responsibility for this sort of thing?

The Forestry Commission is showing an increasing interest in this work, which is not without technical difficulties. But derelict and disused spoil heaps are primarily the responsibility of the owners of the land, although such authorities as the hon. Member mentioned have shown praiseworthy interest in the matter on amenity grounds.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has received from organisations or individuals associated with agriculture and horticulture indicating their concern about the United Kingdom joining the Common Market; and if he will make a statement.

In the talks last year between the Agricultural Departments and the farmers' unions, the unions made it clear that they would not favour unconditional entry into the Common Market. I have since received letters from some organisations and private individuals. The unions are of course aware that, as I stated in the House on 12th June, it is the Government's policy that any decision to join or adhere to the Common Market must depend on satisfactory arrangements being made for our agriculture.

Were the majority of the representations against our going into the Common Market?

Certainly not. The vast majority of the letters which we have received in the Department were in the form of queries about the affect which any adherence to the Common Market might have on the production of this or that. Only a very small number of the letters which we have received came out firmly against our joining the Common Market.

Has the right hon. Gentleman conveyed to these organisations the information which he was kind enough to give me on 12th June in a written reply, namely, that the Government feel quite unable to produce a comparative study of the cost of production in the Six and in this country and that so far, therefore, they are totally without that information? Is he aware that the Economic Commission in Brussels has had that information for the last eighteen months? Will he study it if I send it to him?

In reply to the hon. Member I referred to the fact that studies of the cost of production—as opposed to profitability—are infinitely more detailed in this country than in the countries of the Six by virtue of the fact that we have an Annual Price Review and they do not.

Will my right hon. Friend tell the House what he means by the phrase "join the Common Market"? Does he mean become a full member of the European Community, or does he mean reaching some arrangement with the members of that community but not ourselves becoming a full member? The distinction is very important.

I meant that any decision to be associated in any way with the Common Market can be only on the basis of satisfactory arrangement being made for our agriculture.

In view of the Minister's statement that the majority of the letters which he received were inquiries for information, will he tell us what information he sent to the inquirers in order to enable them to judge what kind of safeguards would be satisfactory before we conditionally joined the Common Market? Does he realise that all that information has been refused to us on the ground that nobody knows it?

All I can say is that each letter was answered in the best way possible according to our lights.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he has taken to ensure that the Meat Staining and Sterilising Regulations, 1960, are being properly carried out, in order that meat condemned as unsuitable for human consumption can be clearly noticed.

The Regulations are enforced by local authorities and I am confident that they are being properly carried out.

Is the Minister aware that meat is still going into the dog meat shops unrecognisable as having been condemned as unfit for human consumption? In view of that fact, it is not possible that meat of this sort is going into other factories for the purpose of being put into commodities for human consumption?

I do not think that that can happen because the controls are very strict. As for the consumption of pet food, all meat which is not stained has been sterilised, and although it might not be to our liking and taste, it is most unlikely that it would do any harm if by chance someone got some.

In view of the number of Questions today and recently concerning the quality of food in the shops, will the Minister consider having another look in the Department at the Regulations which are designed to protect the consumer?

The hon. Member knows through correspondence that we are continually considering amendments and improvements to these regulations. But this Question deals not with human food but with pet food.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what regulations he intends to introduce to control the use of toxic chemicals in seed dressings, following his recent meeting with bird preservation societies and other interested organisations.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what conclusions he has reached about the future use of toxic cereal seed dressings, following on the survey this spring into reported cases of deaths of birds.

The Report of the survey which we have been carrying out was discussed at a meeting on 29th June with all the interested organisations. The Report shows that the widespread occurrence of deaths has been confined to springtime and that the main trouble could be obviated by not using dressings containing dieldrin, aldrin and heptachlor for spring sowings. Accordingly, it has been agreed that from 1st January next, these dressings will not be used at all for spring sown grain, and they will only be used for dressing autumn and winter wheat where there is a real danger of attack from wheat bulb fly.

While welcoming the agreement for a limited control of toxic chemicals in the spring of next year, may I ask whether the Minister appreciates that there will be considerable concern because the controls suggested are to be voluntary and apparently the controls for autumn-sown dressings are not to be enforced? In view of the importance of making sure that these controls work effectively, will he consider increasing the facilities and personnel of the Pest Infestation Control laboratories in order that they can observe what happens and make recommendations urgently, if necessary?

It has been our practice that in the first instance we try to deal with matters of this kind by voluntary agreement. This has worked exceedingly well in the past. An example is the use of arsenites for spraying potatoes, which are not now used. That was done voluntarily. All the information which we have received from this survey shows that the bulk of the deaths of birds occurs in the spring and not during the autumn. There is the problem of the wheat bulb fly which cannot be properly safeguarded against except by the use of these chemicals. We believe that these arrangements will work. If they do not work, we shall have to think again whether it will be necessary to bring in some statutory provisions, because we cannot have a continuation of the state of affairs which has existed this year. But I hope and believe that it will not be necessary to do so and that the arrangement will work. I was asked about the continuance of our survey. I believe that there is sufficient staff to continue this survey, but if there is any trouble in that respect I will look at it.

My right hon. Friend is always courteous and I do not intend to be discourteous to him, but is he not aware that all evidence so far shows that his Ministry has been woefully misinformed on the extent and gravity of the situation? Have not some of the manufacturers shown a callous disregard of the preservation of wild life? Will he look once more at the question whether these voluntary inspections and regulations work? Past history seems to show that they do not. Is he further aware that the Estimates Committee has reported to the House in very strong terms on the matter and will he carefully consider its recommendations?

Yes, Sir. I will carefully consider the Committee's recommendations. On the general issue whether these voluntary schemes have or have not worked, my information is that they have worked, and the arsenites are a very good example. My belief is that these arrangements, which have been agreed by all the parties concerned, including the representatives of the manufacturers, will work.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (1) if, in view of the present international controversy on the status of Berlin, he will now take steps immediately to restore the number of hours of broadcast time devoted by the Overseas Service of the British Broadcasting Corporation to the Eastern zone of Germany to their former level;

The B.B.C. broadcasts the same service to all parts of Germany. It lasts four hours a day, which would seem to be adequate.

In Germany itself it is not considered adequate by those studying the position in the Communist zone of that country. In view of the present Berlin crisis, does not my right hon. Friend feel that it is necessary to restore the service to the number of hours that were being broadcast some three years ago?

The number has been four hours for some three years. Before then it was rather more than four hours, and I think that six years ago it was five hours; but it is not only a matter of the length of time devoted to broadcasting. My impression is that four hours in four different bulletins a day is sufficient.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say why he has cut these broadcasts? Is not this another instance of the Government giving this overseas broadcasting a much lower priority than it deserves?

There has been no cut for the last three years, and for the years immediately prior to that it was only just over four hours a day.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what steps he is taking to publicise abroad the majority view of the British people regarding the campaign for nuclear disarmament.

The reasons for our defence policy, and the support that is given to it, are effectively made known by the Overseas Information Services.

Is there not a certain amount of information that the events at Holy Loch and the Aldermaston marches are being taken rather seriously by the politically unsophisticated in the United States of America? Is there not also a certain amount of evidence that the Peace Ballot in the 'thirties and the Oxford Union debate were also taken very seriously abroad, particularly by Nazi Germany? Will my right hon. Friend consult certain right hon. Gentlemen opposite about publicising in the United States the activities of the campaign for democratic Socialism?

I think there was a time when these campaigns were seen out of perspective in certain countries overseas. I think they are now seen in correct perspective, particularly since the speech of my right hon. and noble Friend the Foreign Secretary on 16th June.

Could my right hon. Friend say on what information he bases his statement that these things are now seen in proper perspective, because that is not the information which reaches me?

I have a steady supply of information from overseas, and I am giving my opinion based on that information.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say just how many people there are in this country who are in favour of this country using nuclear weapons first?

Not without notice. I should prefer first to take the collective view of the party opposite.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what action he is taking to increase the power of British Broadcasting Corporation transmitters broadcasting to Africa and Asia.

A new and powerful transmitter in Africa is now relaying B.B.C. programmes. Two new transmitters have just come into operation in this country, and eight more are on order. We are now considering, with the B.B.C., plans for improving the reception of their programmes in Central Africa and in Asia.

Will the Minister say how this situation arose? For some time now the content of these broadcasts has been good, but the quality of transmission has been very bad. Is he aware that even now the American Government have ten times our transmitting facilities?

The hon. Member should not forget that there has been recently, and there is now, a steady improvement in the power of the transmission of these programmes, and secondly, that there has now come into operation the most powerful transmitter in the world in the form of Berbera, which is transmitting Arabic, General Overseas and Swahili programmes.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to what extent official information is being issued from the Central Office of Information setting out the advantages of the United Kingdom joining the Common Market.

None, Sir.

Has the attention of the right hon. Gentleman been drawn to the large number of articles appearing in the provincial Press supporting joining the Common Market? Have they not been inspired by his Department?

No, Sir.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what reply has been made to the letter addressed by the National League for the Blind to the Chairman of the National Assistance Board urging increases in payments to blind persons.

I assume that the hon. Member is referring to a letter addressed by the secretary of the National League of the Blind to the Secretary of the National Assistance Board on 3rd February. A reply explaining the position was sent on 24th February. I sent the hon. Member a copy of this on 14th June.

Whilst I appreciated that reply, does not the right hon. Gentleman think that in this affluent society it is desirable that we should do more to assist those whose position is worse, particularly the blind persons in our community who are today very often having a difficult time to make ends meet? Does he not regard the advances of only 3s. 6d. for a single person and 5s. for a married couple as utterly inadequate with the cost of living as it is today?

On the latter part of that question, I would invite the attention of the hon. Member to the fact that the scale rates of National Assistance are now, in terms of purchasing power, higher than ever before. On the subject matter of his Question, he will be aware of the fact that these special differential rates for the tuberculous and the blind have lost a great deal of their significance and importance in view of the very wide use in comparable cases of the discretionary powers bestowed by this House on the Board.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will state the numbers of 1914–18 war pensioners who now receive awards of pension at 40 per cent, or more, and the numbers of such pensioners who have not yet attained the age of 65 years and, in consequence, do not receive the age allowance; and whether he will state the cost of granting the age allowance to the latter group who have suffered severe disabilities for 42 years or more.

About 96,000, of whom some 30,000 have not yet reached the age of 65. To give age allowances immediately to those aged below 65 would at present cost about £500,000 a year, on the assumption that similar provision was not made for similarly dis- abled men of the same age who suffered their disabilities in the 1939–45 war.

Is the Minister aware that, while disabled ex-Service men appreciate the splendid work he has done in the whole field of disability pensions, there are certain grievances still remaining? Having conceded five years ago the principle that limblessness becomes an increasing burden with advancing age, will he not turn again to the point of view always put to him by B.L.E.S.M.A., an all-party association, and consider stepping down the age at which he makes these allowances for limblessness available to ageing ex-Service men?

It is very much a matter of judgment where one places the point of qualification for this or for any other special allowance. I think we were right to put it at 65 when we made the decision some years ago and, since then, the only change of circumstances, as my main Answer indicated, has been that a very substantial proportion of the First World War men qualified are now of an age to draw the allowance.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will state the pension paid to an ex-private soldier of the 1914–18 war with a leg amputation more than five inches below the knee, and the pension paid to an ex-private of the 1939–45 war with an identical amputation; whether, in normal circumstances, these pensioners are fitted with identical artificial limbs; and what are the reasons for differences in compensation for identical disabilities sustained in the Service.

Forty-eight shillings and ninepence a week for the 1914–18 pensioner, and 39s. a week for the 1939–45 pensioner. The artificial limbs provided by my right hon. Friends the Health Ministers are built to meet the medical requirements of the individual and do not, of course, vary between casualties of the two wars as such.

Will my right hon. Friend continue to do anything in his power to mitigate such inferiority as there may still be in the position of the 1914–18 war pensioner in connection with the fitting of artificial limbs? Will my right hon. Friend accept that there is reason to believe that some of these cases may be having greater difficulty in the fitting of the appropriate limbs than we would wish?

Limb fitting is the responsibility of my right hon. Friends the Minister of Health and the Secretary of State for Scotland, but I will certainly see that my hon. Friend's suggestion is conveyed to them.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will state the principal considerations applied by his Department in awarding war widows' pensions; and, in particular, what regard is given to the period of nursing care and attention given by a widow to a severely disabled pensioner under circumstances which may have precluded the pensioner and his widow from making provision for their future.

My Department has to apply the provisions of the Royal Warrants and other instruments relating to war widows pensions, the principal requirement being a causal connection between the husband's service and his death. Cases where a severely disabled pensioner has been under nursing care and attention are gone into very sympathetically and with particular care to discover, if possible, evidence of such a connection, and the benefit of any reasonable doubt is of course given to the widow.

Is not there a case for looking again at the Royal Warrant as it affects widows' pensions, especially in the case of the 100 per cent. disabled man? Is the Minister aware that the widow of such a man has usually cared for him for the whole of their life together? Since he recognises the principle of my suggestion in the comfort allowance which he gives for constant attendance upon the 100 per cent. disabled man, will he not consider that, whatever may be the cause of death of such a man, his wife has a right to be considered eligible for a pension in view of the service she will have rendered during the whole of her married life in looking after her husband and the fact that she will have had no time to make any provision for her widowhood?

In the war service instruments it would be a very serious thing to break the connection between the war pension and war service. As the hon. Member knows, it is not a question of leaving such a widow without any help. The question at issue is whether a widow whose husband has died in circumstances entirely unconnected with his service should be given the priority and the preferential treatment which this House has always insisted on for war pensioners. To break that causal connection might seriously undermine that preference.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will state the numbers of 1914–18 war pensioners who died during the last twelve months, the numbers of their widows who applied for or who were invited to apply for war widow's pensions, and the number of such applications granted.

During the twelve months ended 31st March, 1961, the number of 1914–18 war disablement pensioners who died was 12,763, of whom 7,728 left widows. I regret that I have no figures of claims to, or invitations to claim, war widows' pension relating precisely to these deaths, but in the same period 1,983 widows of 1914–18 war disablement pensioners claimed, and 596 were awarded, a war widows' pension.

Does not the Minister agree that the number of cases in which the award has been made forms a very small proportion of the total, and that these matters ought to be more publicised and more fully investigated?

I do not think that it is a small proportion when we remember that we are talking of people who, at the least, have up to their deaths lived for about forty-three years after suffering their injury. In those circumstances, it is in the nature of things likely that in a good many cases death will come from a non-war cause, and I do not find the figures surprising.

Will the Minister go into this matter and let us have a more detailed report of the proportion in relation to the total number who died?

I will answer any Question the hon. Member puts down. I keep a very close eye on this situation, on which there is understandable feeling in many quarters, but, in reply to the hon. Member's question, I cannot do more than say that I will answer any further one.

May I assure the Minister that he will get that further Question?

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance, in view of the widespread dissatisfaction with the present pension provision for war widows, despite the increase which came into effect last April, in relation to present-day standards, what proposals he has for giving further assistance to war widows and, in particular, for eliminating the hardships which a widow suffers immediately following the death of a seriously disabled husband.

My information is that the new rates introduced in April have been very well received. They are, of course, the highest ever provided. The increase of the basic rate to 76s. a week for widows of private soldiers and equivalent ranks has raised them further above the level of widows' pensions provided under the social service schemes generally, and, in addition, there are the special allowances payable only to war widows. If, however, the hon. Member has any evidence of hardship in any particular case, I should be very glad to consider it.

Is the Minister aware that we appreciate his constant interest in these matters? Is he also aware that we will take an opportunity, in the very near future, of giving him chapter and verse for the dissatisfaction felt about the position of these war widows? I am sure that he will then desire to eliminate this dissatisfaction.

This is a matter which I shall always be happy to discuss.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he has now considered the case referred to him by the hon. Member for St. Helens; and whether the National Assistance Board will now reimburse the person responsible for maintaining Claude Kenyon, 139, Gladstone Street, St. Helens for the period during which he could not find suitable work on medical grounds.

The hon. Member will have received a letter from me about this case. As I explained, Mr. Kenyon's case was considered by the appeal tribunal, whose decision was of course implemented by the Board. For the reasons that I gave in my letter, no question of reimbursement arises.

Is the hon. Lady aware that this young man received no National Assistance during a period of seven years, during which time he had no work at all, and was not able to work? Has not the Minister considered the report which I sent the National Assistance Board, a copy of which I understand was sent to him? Will not he consider whether a fresh consideration can be made of this case and whether some reimbursement can be provided to the person responsible for maintaining this young man over a period of seven years?

The hon. Member is over-simplifying this case. As he is aware, these appeals decisions are not made by the Board. Over the long period referred to in the Question the applicant took the case to the National Assistance Board appeal tribunal. At that time Mr. Kenyon was considered unwilling to work. The appeal tribunal directed him to do so, and the Board carried out its instructions that he should be offered accommodation in a re-establishment centre, which it was felt would help him. He repeatedly refused the many offers made to him to attend the centre. In those circumstances, his National Assistance was stopped. More recently he obtained part-time employment and, therefore, the present decision, when he appealed for aid to the National Assistance Board, was based on his then shown willingness and endeavour to be employed.

In view of that unsatisfactory reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what provision he proposes to make to deal with the case of women whose widowed mother's allowance ends a short time before their attaining the age of 50 years, many of whom by reason of age cannot obtain employment and resort to National Assistance.

Provision is already made for widows who do not qualify for a widow's pension when their widow's allowance or widowed mother's allowance ends and who then have difficulty in finding work. Under the Family Allowances and National Insurance Act, 1956, such widows are eligible for unemployment benefit if unemployed, or sickness benefit if incapable of work.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he will arrange for salesmen and others earning bonuses and commissions on a yearly basis to average these out retrospectively on a weekly basis in order that by retrospective additions to their contributions to the graduated pensions scheme, they may qualify for higher contributions under the scheme.

No, Sir. I know of no way of doing this which would give the employer a clear and workable basis for calculating the liability.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it has always been the custom in the retail and distributive trade for managers and other sales staff—buyers, and so on—to receive a commission on sales, calculated at the end of the year, in addition to their weekly wage, and that this could be quite large and would affect their weekly or monthly salaries if it were calculated on a weekly or monthly basis? Is not the only drawback to the carrying out of the suggestion contained in my Question the fact that it would cause a little inconvenience to employers? Could not the convenience and well-being of the employees also be considered?

It would cause very great difficulty. If the hon. Lady pauses to consider what would be involved in making retrospective contributions in respect of people who may not at the material time be still in one's employ, I think that she will understand the practical difficulties which arise. I sympathise with her desire that people should be able to contribute more fully to the scheme. This shows a much more realistic view of it than those of her right hon. Friends who describe it as "a swindle".

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what consideration has been given to the recommendation contained in the Anderson Report that students over 18 years of age engaged in full-time study should be credited with National Insurance contributions during the period of such study; and what are his proposals in this respect.

The Anderson Committee did not, as stated in the Question, specifically recommend that students should be credited with National Insurance contributions. I would refer the hon. Member to paragraph 114 of its Report and to the reply in respect of the recommendation therein made which was given by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Education in answer to the hon. Member for Sunderland, North (Mr. Willey) on 11th May.

Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that students who go in for a grammar school course for A level passes are usually six or seven months over the age of 18? Since the privilege is given up to the age of 18, could it not be continued until the end of a grammar school course? Although there is a leaflet explaining the system, does the Minister appreciate that many students know nothing about this until they start work? It comes as a shock to be told that they owe for months previously. Can he devise a better method of ensuring that students know this when they become 18?

The main part in this matter, as I said in my main Answer, is for the Minister of Education, who has already answered a Question on it. From my point of view, I cannot see that it would be justifiable to give credits in this class of case at the expense of other contributors to the scheme.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what is the present number of certificates of non-participation granted by the Registrar, and the number of employees covered by them.

Up to 30th June, 32,286 certificates of non-participation covering 4,340,826 employees had been issued by the Registrar.

Is the number still rising? What estimate does the Minister now make of the total number who will be contracted out? Does he think it will be 5 million?

There is a steady trickle of applications in respect of small schemes. I am not disposed to prophesy, but I think it will be a considerable time before the figure the hon. Gentleman mentions is likely to be reached.

What effect will these figures, which are much higher than the Minister originally calculated, have on the finances of the scheme?

As the other assumptions on which the finances of the scheme were calculated were of a cautious and prudent nature, the income of the scheme overall during the current year will be about £1 million less than anticipated at the time of the 1960 Bill.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what decision he has reached on the recommendations of the National Insurance Advisory Committee in their recent Report, Command Paper No. 1384, on certain widows' benefits.

The Government are considering this recommendation and I have no statement to make about it at present.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this matter has been hanging around now for some time? I pressed it upon him in 1959 in Committee on the National Insurance Bill. He then promised to refer it to the National Insurance Advisory Committee. The Committee, owing to other preoccupations, took a very long time to make its Report. It has now made recommendations which are not revolutionary. The Minister should have arrived at a decision by now.

As the hon. Gentleman knows, I laid the Report only at the beginning of last month. If he has studied it, he will appreciate that the complexity of the subject accounts for the Advisory Committee taking a little time which, I think, entitles me to do the same.

Is the Minister aware that he has a reputation for being a slick operator?

I am surprised that the hon. Gentleman, who has a reputation for courtesy, should decide to adopt phraseology which one associates more with some of his hon. Friends.

asked the Minister of Power how much the National Coal Board borrowed from the Government in 1960 to finance capital expenditure; and how much it contemplates borrowing in 1961.

The National Coal Board's estimates of capital investment and finance are now prepared on the basis of the financial year. The recent White Paper on Government Expenditure Below the Line (Cmd. 1338) showed that net borrowing from the Exchequer was £2.2 million in 1960–61. It is expected to be £12 million in 1961–62.

Do not these figures show a marked reduction in the amount of borrowing compared with 1959–60? How far is this due to stock movements, to a reduction in stocks? Does not the picture show that certain pessimists were very wrong a year ago when this matter came before the House?

The figures indeed show a great reduction in borrowing from 1959. This is due chiefly to changes in the need for working capital of the Board, which increased very considerably in the first of the two years and decreased very considerably in the second. Many of our estimates are from time to time wrong. Mine have been generally more correct than most others.

asked the Minister of Power what application has now been made to him for financial authority to proceed with the building of a new power station on or near the Durham coalfield.

I have received no application under the Electrical (Supply) Acts for consent to build a new station on or near the Durham coalfield.

This is a very disappointing reply. Is the Minister aware that a new power station on the Durham coalfield would be of tremendous importance to the economic well-being and industrial future of the county? Will he once again consult the Generating Board and impress upon it the urgency of this matter?

I know the hon. Gentleman's concern, and I know the great concern felt in the North-East of England, about this question. I told the hon. Gentleman on 1st May that the Generating Board would take great notice of the Question he then asked me, and I have no doubt that the Board is continuing its consideration of suitable sites for power stations in the whole country.

asked the Minister of Power what plans he has for providing capital to assist the South Western Elec- tricity Board in speeding up electrification of rural areas in the West Country.

The Board's capital investment programme, which I approved last autumn, provides for the expenditure of £850,000 rural electrification in 1961–62 compared with £780,000 in the previous year. I am considering the estimates for the two following years which the Board has submitted to me. The pace of rural development depends not only on the capital available, but on the Board's decision as to how far its revenue is sufficient to meet outgoings chargeable to revenue account.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that that basis of computation under Section 13 of the 1957 Act means that the rate of rural electrification is very slow where there are very small urban receipts? Is he aware that in the South-West only 60 per cent. of farms are on mains connection, which is the lowest percentage in England and Wales, and that in the Barnstaple district it is less than 45 per cent.? Will he consider the possibility of a special injection of capital to enable the rural electrification scheme to be speeded up, possibly to be made a charge against the Annual Price Review?

I am aware of the comparatively low percentage figure in that part of the country, partly due to the fact that at vesting date the proportion of the farms connected in the South-West was lower than in other parts of the country. The injection of special finance would be inconsistent with the principles of the Electricity Act, 1957. The Board's investment expenditure proposals for last year were approved by the Government in full.

asked the Minister of Power if he will state the amount of dollars paid for oil and petrol bought by the United Kingdom during the past year.

I would refer the right hon. Member to the reply which my hon. Friend gave to the hon. and gallant Member for Down, South (Captain Orr) on 27th June.

I am not altogether able to recollect that reply. Can the Minister tell me whether any dollars at all were used?

I think the answer to that Question is "Yes", but the point of the Answer to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Down, South was that since convertibility it is not possible to give the amount of dollars paid for oil compared with other currencies.

Was the President of the Board of Trade aware of that fact when he said that it was not necessary to buy any Russian oil because we had oil running out of our ears? Did he then know how much this oil running out of our ears was costing in dollars?

Order. The right hon. Gentleman will have to address that question to the President of the Board of Trade,