asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he takes to ensure that imported dairy products are produced in conditions as hygienic as those required in this country.

I cannot control the conditions in which imported dairy products are produced. But medical officers of health are empowered to examine them on importation or sale in this country, and to seize them if they are unfit for human consumption.

Does not this detract from the value to health of our own rather stringent regulations, which are obviously not followed in many of the countries from which we import dairy produce?

No, Sir. There is obviously a difference between what we are empowered to do and can do in our own country and what we are not empowered to do in other countries. The vast proportion of milk produced in this country goes for liquid consumption.

In view of the report in the newspapers the other day of the intention of the Milk Marketing Board to pour millions of gallons of milk down disused coal mines, is it not possible to reduce our imports?

This is a Question concerned purely with the hygienic conditions under which the milk is produced. What the hon. Member has asked is very wide of the Question.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether, in his recent conversations with the Common Market countries, he emphasised the need for parity in regulations for milk production, with particular regard to cowstalls, if competition is to be fair.

We have not yet reached the stage of discussing this sort of problem with the Six, but I have the point raised by my hon. Friend very much in mind.

If there is to be fair competition, either some of the Six will have to raise their standards of cowstall production, or we shall have to lower ours. Otherwise, the competition will be very unfair.

This is a matter which is very much in my mind. I hope that there will be a levelling up rather than a levelling down of standards.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is aware that in the last two years the first acreage payments in Yorkshire for barley, oats and mixed corn were received on 19th December, 1959, and on 19th January, 1961, respectively, but that this year the first such payments were not received until 1st March, 1962; and what action he proposes to take to restore payments to a day in December in future.

Advance deficiency payments to Yorkshire growers of barley, oats and mixed corn were completed by 25th January, 1962, except where payments required adjustment under the new incentive arrangements for barley, and these adjusted payments were made in all straightforward cases at the end of February. It was expected that the new seasonal payments arrangements for barley would involve some delay in the first year of operation, but we hope to improve on this in future by an increase in mechanisation of the payments procedure.

Is it not a fact that these payments are falling back year by year? Can my hon. Friend give me an assurance that they will fall back no further?

I have just said that we hope next year to improve on this year.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he is taking to implement the decision to allow loans to be made in appropriate cases to assist the acquisition by inshore fishermen of secondhand fishing boats.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen, South (Lady Tweedsmuir) on 15th February, 1962. I hope the necessary revision of the loan arrangements will not take too long.

In the Answer to which my hon. Friend has referred me, my hon. Friend said that it was hoped that arrangements for loans for secondhand vessels would be available "before long". How long is "before long" to be? Many months have passed since the Ministry decided that these loans should be made available to fishermen, and it is many months since the Fleck Committee reported and its recommendations were accepted. Is it not about time that the scheme was put into effect?

I know that my hon. Friend is particularly interested in this subject, and I hope that it will not be long before the final rules are worked out. He must remember that when an arrangement like this has to be worked out among the Government Departments concerned, the Treasury and the industry, it is not as simple as it probably seems.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what action he proposes to take to prevent the home-grown acreage of dried, threshed peas from falling below its present level, following the rejection of the application for a higher import duty on such peas.

There has been a marked change in the market prospects in recent years for dried peas compared with vining peas. This I would expect to be reflected in the acreages grown, and I think it would be a mistake for me to interfere with this process.

Do I gather from that reply that the Minister sees an improving market for home-grown fresh peas in future? Was that the purport of his Answer?

What I said was Chat there has been a marked change in the market prospects for dried peas compared with vining peas. This has reflected itself in the number of peas grown for vining.

While I appreciate that there has been a marked change in the demand, may I ask my right hon. Friend to bear in mind that apparently quite a few counties are affected by this and that the growing of these peas has been particularly important in relation to resistance to eelworm through over-cropping of such crops as potatoes and sugar-beet? Can my right hon. Friend explain how the Board of Trade can justify this importation on the grounds of national interest?

The main competition comes from the United States in the shape of the Alaska pea which, on account of its various qualities, is easier to process and suits the British public's taste. This pea cannot be grown at the moment in this country, but it is the type of pea required for canning. I cannot see what advantage there would be in raising the tariff on these peas, because the only effect that would have would be to put up the price to the consumer without benefit to the grower.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he expects the Ordnance Survey authorities to commence publication of the proposed new series of 2½ inch maps.

It is the Ordnance Survey's intention to publish a new series of 2½ inch maps in about two years time when the revision of the present series is completed.

I hope the hon. Gentleman will agree that it is important that full information about public rights of way should appear in this new series which, as he knows, is awaited with considerable interest. In this connection can he say, having regard to the preparatory work involved, what effect the long delay in completing the survey on rights of way under the National Parks Act, 1949, will have on the project? Secondly, will he press his right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government to have this survey completed, because it should have been completed as long ago as 1955?

The second part of the hon. Member's supplementary question goes a very long way beyond his original Question, but I can assure him that the rights of way will be shown where the relevant definitive maps have been received from local authorities.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is aware that in the last ten years the guaranteed price for homegrown wheat has fallen by 4 per centnd that of imported wheat by 10 per cent., but the price of flour has risen by 64 per cent. and the produce of bakers by 145 per cent.; and what steps he is taking to protect consumers or to help producers of wheat.

The basic facts are not quite as stated in the Question. The price of the 280 lb. sack of flour for bread making increased over the ten years between the end of 1951 and 1961 by 48s. 3d., or 84 per cent.; but the greater part of this—45s.—was due to the removal of the flour subsidy. In the same period the price of the standard 1¾ lb. loaf increased by 6d., or 100 per cent.; a further increase of ½dccurred in February: but about half of the 6dncrease was due to the removal of the subsidies: the remainder arose from the general increase in costs. Consumers benefit from competitive conditions and a wide freedom of choice. Wheat producers are protected by the guarantees under the 1947 and 1957 Agriculture Acts.

I am very grateful to my right hon. Friend for that reply, but I draw his attention to the fact that these figures have been widely quoted by a Labour peer, Lord Walston, and have therefore caused a great deal of dismay to the farming industry and others. I shall be grateful if prominence can be given to the correct figures.

I am grateful to my hon. and gallant Friend for giving me the opportunity of replying to the Question.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will now consider allowing the importation of Charollais females into this country.

No, Sir. I have nothing to add to the reply I gave the hon. Member on 6th November. 1961.

Could the Minister give the House one valid reason why this particular breed has been singled out for so much attention and prohibition of breeding in this country? There are Danish Reds, Dutch Friesians, Landrace pigs, American Polled Shorthorns, Canadian Holsteins, Polled Ayrshires—practically the lot—brought to this country for breeding, why pick on Charollais? Can he give any valid reason for this, other than that of sheltering behind the Terrington Report which, as he knows, is completely out of date?

If the hon. Member goes back over the centuries he will be able to find all sorts of breeds of cattle which have been imported to this country. I see no reason why he should say that the Terrington Report is out of date. I know his interest in this breed of cattle. He is anxious to get them established in this country. The Terrington Committee had been asked to look into the question of the importation of Charollais and advised us as a first move that we should import a number of bulls to see whether crossing them with our dairy cattle was likely to improve the standard of our dairy herds. This, I should have thought, would have pleased the hon. Member. What he is trying constantly to do is to jump beyond this and to say that before we have done this test we should straight away import females. As we have imported these bulls and they are in this country, we wish to see the result of this test before taking further decisions.

The right hon. Gentleman must have seen that the Secretary of State for Scotland was attacked from all sides by people who gave evidence to the Terrington Committee. They did not want these cattle, but the moment the bulls came to this country they demanded that they should come to Scotland. So the evidence was not worth the paper it was written on.

The fact that the Secretary of State was attacked by certain individuals does not lead me to the conclusion that the importation of Charollais bulls is out of date.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will make a statement on the infringement of fishing rights involved in the recent incident when a fishing boat near Lundy Island was fired at from the island.

Yes, Sir. The person claiming to be the owner of Lundy Island also claims an exclusive right of fishing within three miles of the coast. I have no evidence of the validity of this claim. This is a matter for the courts. I am unable therefore to acknowledge that there has been any infringement of fishing rights.

That seems a very unsatisfactory Answer. The newspaper reports alleged that the owner admits that he fired at least one of the shots, that a shot was embedded in the mast of one boat, and one of the Crown authorities had said that fishing rights belong to ordinary fishermen below medium high tide, whatever that may be. Surely the Minister has done something more than to quote to a Member of Parliament what has happened and the state of the law? Has he taken no action in regard to this illegal act of firing on what the owner might call a trespasser?

It is unsatisfactory, I agree, but it is a curious case, and the irregular use of firearms, as the hon. Member knows, is a matter for the police.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will state the number of deficient wharves on the River Hull below the 1925 Hull Corporation Act height where no permanent flood prevention work has been done and temporary sandbagging has been carried out at the ratepayers' expense; what are the names of riparian owners of these wharves; and what steps will be taken to recover the expense from the owners.

Permanent work has not yet been started on one wharf belonging to the British Transport Commission, but the Commission are doing some temporary works before the April spring tides. The question of recovering the expense of temporary sandbagging is a matter for the Hull Corporation and I understand that it is being considered by them.

What was the work required to be done and why did it take twelve months from the March, 1961, flooding to carry out flood prevention work by British Railways, who have within their power labour and material and resources to do this work at short notice? Why should it take twelve calendar months?

That is a question which should be addressed to the British Transport Commission. The important thing is that during these twelve months, approximately, we have seen all the wharves in Hull, with the exception of one, raised to the level stated in the 1925 Act.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what plans he has for expediting flood prevention work at the Barmston drain outlet into the River Hull; what is the estimated cost; and what will be the dates of commencement and completion.

A scheme for reconstructing this outfall, which is the responsibility of the Hull and East Yorkshire River Board, has been approved for grant aid by the Ministry. I am informed by the river board that the sluice gates will be ready for delivery in two months' time. Work can start as soon as a tender has been approved for the civil engineering works. I understand that tenders will shortly be submitted to the Ministry. The estimated time for completion of the work is six months at a total cost of about £36,000.

I thank the Minister for that reply and for his previous reply. Will the problem at this drain outlet of the Yorkshire Electricity Board suction and discharge be dealt with in order to stop erosion under the drain works of adjoining wharves? Will the board work be properly linked to adjoining wharves to ensure a watertight joint and no more seepage flooding out poor people's houses in this area?

I should be obliged if the hon. and gallant Member would put the first part of his supplementary question on the Order Paper, because I could not answer it straight away. In regard to joining this work to the other work, I should imagine that common-sense would ensure that this would be done so that after all this time and all this work at least people in that area will be safe "come Hull or high water".

asked the Minister of Agriculture. Fisheries and Food how many officers have been recruited to the Agricultural Advisory Service during the last 12 months; and how many vacancies in this service still exist.

During the year ended 31st March 65 officers were recruited to the advisory officer grades of the National Agricultural Advisory Service. There are at present 20 vacancies which we expect to fill in this year's competition.

While an improvement has been made, can the hon. Gentleman say whether these officers of the Ministry's Department visit the university departments of agriculture every year so that students taking agricultural courses in the universities know all about the service and have personal contact with the region?

I cannot say exactly how many visits are paid, but we have very close contact because we are anxious to fill a few vacancies among science specialists, and that is where they are to be found.

Can the hon. Gentleman assure us that those trained officers in Kenya and Nyasaland and other African territories will be given a fair chance to obtain this employment when they come back to this country?

We are very sympathetic to officers in those circumstances, but the problems of agriculture in Kenya and other overseas territories are not necessarily the same as those here, and it is to advise people in this country that we want these officers to be appointed.

The hon. Gentleman mentioned a figure of 65 for recruitment. Can he tell us what was the annual wastage?

I am afraid that I cannot give an answer without notice.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many officers in his Agricultural and Horticultural Advisory Services have qualifications and experience which enable them to give advice on marketing agricultural and horticultural produce.

County staffs of the National Agricultural Advisory Service, especially the horticultural advisory officers, are generally well qualified to advise producers on how to meet market requirements.

That was not the Question. Have they some particular experience and qualifications when they come into the service, and are they kept up-to-date in respect of marketing while they are in the service?

We appreciate that this is one of the most important parts of their work; but, of course, to meet market requirements is one thing. The actual marketing of the produce is not the responsibility of the advisory service. My predecessor conducted an inquiry into marketing and other conditions not only in this country but in other countries as well. Our officers are acquainted with this report, and I think that the hon. Gentleman would also find it interesting.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that one of the great difficulties in recent years has been that a great many of these advisory officers, who are fully qualified from an advisory point of view, have been giving advice which has resulted in the greater production of particular types of produce, especially milk, of which there is already a superabundance, and will he assure us that these officers are given some context in which to work concerning the general production policy?

The advisory officer gives advice to the individual farmer and takes into account his particular requirements. On questions particularly concerning marketing, he is prepared to help him to meet market requirements. We cannot expect him to go further than that.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has received in favour of establishing a six-mile fisheries limit off the British coast.

Representations have been made to my Department from the Association of Sea Fisheries Committees and from a joint deputation representing the English and Welsh Inshore Fishermen's Associations, Scottish inshore and herring fishermen, and the Chambers of Trade of several Yorkshire coast towns.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is very strong feeling on this matter along the Yorkshire coast? Would he agree that although the earlier balance of advantage might have been against Britain extending the limit, now that so many other nations have increased their fishery limits this argument is no longer valid? Would he be prepared to receive further representations on this matter?

I cannot accept that the argument is no longer valid. We are watching this all the time. It is a question of a balance of interests. My hon. Friend will be aware that about 10 per cent. of the fish for this country is caught by our inshore fleet around our own shores. The remaining 90 per cents caught off other shores. This is a matter of balance of advantage which we are constantly keeping in mind.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether this applies to the Isle of Lundy and whether the local artillery has adequate range?

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he has noted the increase in the quantity of beef imported from Yugoslavia in the early months of 1962 compared with previous years; and to what extent there is a risk of wholesale beef prices being so reduced as to increase unduly the liability on the taxpayer in meeting the price guarantee to the home producer.

Yes. I have noted the increase in imports of beef from Yugoslavia, but these still represent only 3 per cent. of our total beef supplies. Imports as a whole during January and February of this year were lower than in the same months last year, and in fact in these months the market price was slightly higher than we allowed for in the estimates.

Although the proportion is relatively small, is the Minister quite sure that the market will stand this importation? Is there any danger of the subsidy bill suffering as a result of this importation as it did from the importation of dumped Irish beef last year, when the bill ran up to a very high figure? What inquiries have been made about the cost of production of this beef in the country of origin? This is the old problem of ascertaining the true price in the country of production to know whether it is dumped produce. If it is dumped, will he stop it coming into this country?

This beef is imported under open general licence within the overall considerations of our imports and exports and trading policies generally. My hon. Friend asked whether this beef is dumped. As my hon. Friend knows, technically, for a product to be dumped it has to fulfil three qualifications. It has to be subsidised in the sense that it is being sold cheaper in this country than in the country of origin; it has to be materially damaging the interests of the industry concerned; and it has to be contrary to the national interest.

Will the Minister talk this over with the President of the Board of Trade? Last year we imported £5 million worth of meat from Yugoslavia, which was the exact amount of the imbalance of our trade with Yugoslavia. Is it not time that we took some action in this sort of case and stopped this meat, which we do not require, being imported into this country?

This raises a very big question well beyond the ambit of this Question—the general import policy of the Government.

Will these imports increase the amount of subsidy payable?

Who can judge what will be the effect of a certain percentage of meat on the market price? It is exceedingly hard to judge what will be the effect of any particular shipment of meat on the market price of meat.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food why it is proposed to increase the number of the non-industrial staff and to reduce the number of the industrial staff employed by the Forestry Commission in the financial year 1962–63; and if he will make a statement as to his future employment policy of employees in these two categories.

The proposed increase in the non-industrial staff is I per cent. and consists almost entirely of additional foresters. These are required to deal with an increase in the acreage under plantations. The reduction in the directly-employed industrial labour force reflects a trend which has been going on for some years due to improved techniques, mechanisation and greater productivity.

Is the Minister aware that the growing practice of taking work from regular forestry workers and giving it to private contractors is causing not only grave concern but also redundancy in certain forestry areas? These men have a splendid record of work. They live in the Commission's houses, often in very remote areas, and they deserve better treatment than this. If there is any extra money to be earned, the men employed by the Commission should certainly be entitled to it. Will the Minister give this matter serious consideration, otherwise I can see him having on his hands forestry houses stuck in the middle of forests with nobody in them.

I look to the Forestry Commission to run its enterprise in as economic a fashion as it possibly can. It has decided to sell as much of the timber standing as is practicable. It regards that as the most economic way to do it.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what further consideration has been given to the nature of the practical support to be given by Her Majesty's Government to the proposed world food programme of the Food and Agriculture Organisation.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what additional help will now be given by Her Majesty's Government to the Food and Agriculture Organisation to match the contribution that other countries have pledged themselves to make to the world food programme which was launched at the Food and Agriculture Organisation conference in Rome last November.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to what extent it is now the policy of Her Majesty's Government to support the setting up of a world food bank, as proposed by the Food and Agriculture Organisation, so that food surpluses can be diverted to underdeveloped countries and thus help countries in great need of food supplies and at the same time help to provide a sound imports policy for the United Kingdom.

I have nothing to add to my reply to the hon. Member for East Ham, North (Mr. Prentice) on 5th February, 1962.

Since this country was the first to send missionaries to many of these countries and to teach them a better way of life, would it not be well for us now to take a positive Christian attitude towards these starving people? Will the Minister consider asking farmers in this country to increase production—many of them can do so—in order that we can send the increased food to these starving people? Will he also consider sending trained advisory agricultural officers there to teach the natives a better way of farming? Surely it is better that we should teach these people how to feed themselves than leave the countries as they are at present—a breeding ground for Communism.

The Government's contribution to developing countries has doubled over the last ten years and stands at a very high figure. The hon. Member asked whether we should not do something to help them feed themselves. Advice and equipment in this respect is included in the amount of money which is devoted to this purpose. This is quite a different story from providing food for those countries, which in the interests of the Western world as a whole would obviously come from those countries which have surplus production rather than from importing countries.

In his original reply to me, to which the Minister referred, he said that this country will not have any surplus foodstuffs available. Can he maintain that attitude in view of the announcement that the Milk Marketing Board is about to dump 2 million pints of milk down disused coal mines, this being the fourth time it has done such a thing in six years? Does he think that this is morally defensible in view of the terrible degree of protein deficiency in under-developed areas which would be relieved by the supply of dried milk?

This is not a surplus production of milk inasmuch as we import a great deal of milk products into this country. Liquid skimmed milk is not a product which could be exported. The reason that this is having to go to waste is that the manufacturing capacity for liquid skimmed milk is not sufficient to cover the production in a handful of months in the flush of the year, and it would not be economic to provide it.

Apart from the strong humanitarian case for supporting the specific proposal for helping with food surpluses, will not the Minister give further consideration to this, bearing in mind that it might help our own import policy in that we could help to divert surpluses from other countries which sometimes are dumped here?

The Government's contribution to developing countries has increased from £80 million ten years ago to £160 million. This does not include foodstuffs because this is not the best help which we in this country can give to developing countries. Those countries which have committed themselves to this programme, such as Canada, the United States and Denmark, are all food-exporting countries.

If we stop cheap imports coming into this country, will not that encourage other countries to send those imports where they are more needed?

In view of the scandalous statement by the Milk Marketing Board that this milk will be dumped, may I ask the Minister what would be the cost of the machinery required to utilise this liquid milk?

It is not milk in that sense; it is skimmed milk. There is a world of difference. Already a lot of the good has been taken out of it. I should require notice before I could give the exact cost of the machinery required, but I am assured by the Milk-Marketing Board that it would be uneconomic to put in this machinery and to have it standing idle for the majority of the months of the year.

What further thought is the Minister giving to this problem? While recognising that it is not a problem for his Department alone, surely we cannot as a progressive and humanitarian nation countenance the huge wastage of valuable liquid food, which will be the subject of a Question to the Prime Minister next Thursday, without his Ministers devoting themselves to the cost of trying to turn it into useful food or even cattle feed for overseas underdeveloped countries.

My hon. Friend has always been a great exponent of the argument of handling one's affairs in an economic manner. I can only repeat that I have been told that this machinery is not there to handle the extra quantity which we get in the spring months because it is simply not economic to install it.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what action he proposes to take on the recommendations of the Plant Committee on Fowl Pest.

As I said in reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft (Mr. Prior) on 30th March, consultations will be held with representatives of all sections of the poultry industry. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and I will consider future policy in the light of those consultations. We are very grateful to Sir Arnold Plant and his committee for their thorough and comprehensive report.

Is the Minister not aware that a committee has reported and that we have had a debate in the House? There has been a recommendation for immediate action. When shall we have some action?

This Report, which took a good time to prepare—I make no complaint about that because it covers a wide field—was published about a week or so ago. This is a complex matter involving a large amount of money and affecting a considerable part of the industry. We intend to consult those parts of the industry which are interested before deciding what we shall do. There is nothing unusual in this.

If the Minister will not give a general answer, will he give a specific answer: will he step up the research into this disease?

The extent to which it would be right to step up research will depend upon the decisions taken as a result of this Report.

Is the Minister aware that the recommendations of this Report are doubly welcome because they point to some economy in the expenditure of public money? Will he learn the moral that when large sums of public money are being expended research, whether by specially appointed committees or in the form of thought by his Department, must be expeditious because in the meanwhile the money is being spent, possibly unnecessarily?

The Report recommended that a levy should be raised, beginning in April, 1963.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what inquiries he is making into support buying methods.

We are constantly reviewing means of limiting the taxpayer's liability for agricultural support within the framework of our international obligations and our obligations to home agriculture. Support buying is, of course, one method that features in our studies.

Has the Minister appointed any individual to make investigations? I am informed that certain individuals are doing this survey for the Ministry Can he give any information about when the report will be made?

There axe many technical aspects to this. It is a matter of very considerable concern. Within the Department we are seeking the advice which we consider necessary to form judgments about these matters.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will set up a committee to examine all landlord and tenant legislation as it affects farmers, and to make recommendations.

No, Sir. I am not aware of any general demand for such an inquiry.

Is the Minister not aware that tenant farmers are getting very worried because arbitrators are settling rents in accordance with the current market values which in times of land scarcity are very inflated? Will he not re-examine this question with a view to values being expressed more in terms of the economic rent to a good farmer?

Arbitrations are settled on the basis of a willing landlord letting a farm to a willing tenant. That is the test which the arbitrator applies. Rents are decided by arbitration in respect of about 3 per cent. of the farms. The fact that the rents are very high reflects the very high demand for farms at the present, and presumably reflects considerable confidence in the future of agriculture in this country.

Will not the Minister reconsider the matter in the light of the fact, which is generally known from all the property publications, that a high price is now being demanded for farms because of City speculators, who are not necessarily good farmers, investing their capital in them? This puts good tenant farmers at a disadvantage.

I do not accept that the value of any major proportion of straight farming land is affected by City speculators.

Is the Minister not aware that there is concern about this matter? Surely he has read the discussions of farming conferences. Has the N.F.Uade representations?

Of course, there is concern on the part of sitting tenants that they should not have their rents raised—I appreciate that. I have not had any representations made to me by the N.F.U.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, in view of the dangers to health and of flooding and the possible spreading of Weil's disease as a result of rats moving along uncovered water courses in urban areas, whether he will provide adequate assistance under the Land Drainage Act to urban local authorities which undertake to cover or culvert such streams and open drains.

I am always prepared to consider schemes for the control of flooding, but in so doing I can only take into account for grant-aid the cost of works required for that purpose.

Will the Minister bear in mind that in many cases where the danger of flooding is acute there is also this new menace of rat infestation? The situation in some urban areas is serious on both grounds, flooding and rat infestation. If a strong case could be made on the ground that rats are coming up the water courses, would that be taken into consideration?

Probably the hon. Member has a particular case in mind. Rat infestation is not a new menace. Rats have been with us for a long time. It may well be that a pied piper would be the most appropriate remedy. None the less, we try various measures, and we have been known to culvert water courses where this is cheaper than constructing low retaining walls. Where the problem is purely a sewerage problem, it is not the responsibility of my right hon. Friend.

Would the Minister agree that in certain parts of eastern England and the Midlands, in particular, the number of rats is rapidly increasing?

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance the latest number of employees who have contracted out of the Government pension scheme.

The number is 4,437,703.

Has the Minister noticed the fabulous rise in the profits and share prices of certain insurance companies as a result of the Government having framed such a rotten pension scheme and so many people contracting out; that, for instance, the Legal and General 5s. shares soared from £9 12s. to £39 17s. in the last three years and that insurance shares as a whole rose by no less than 31 per cent. in 1961 alone?

I have not followed the market in shares as closely as the hon. Member has done.

But the Minister's friends have.

It was one of the original purposes of the 1959 scheme that there should be a proper and further development in private and occupational pension schemes, and I am very glad that that should be so.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that a substantial shareholder in all insurance companies is the National Union of Mineworkers?

In that case, in the light of what the hon. Member for Salford. East (Mr. Frank Allaun) has said, one must congratulate the union on the excellent counsel it appears to have on investments.

Is the Minister aware that, as a result of these additions to their capital, the insurance companies now own more than half of British industry?

If the right hon. Gentleman wishes to ask questions about the share ownership of the insurance industry, he must certainly not ask them of me.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what will be the procedure in his Department after the expiry of the Income Tax year on 5th April regarding the recording of graduated contributions, and the notifications to insured persons of contributions paid; what will be the approximate number of contributors involved; and whether he will make a statement.

The Inland Revenue will send employers' P.A.Y.E returns to my Department's Central Office at Newcastle-upon-Tyne for entry of the employees' graduated contributions in their individual insurance accounts; these will be maintained on an electronic computer. When the recording process is complete, each employee shown as having paid graduated contributions will be sent a statement of account and explanatory leaflet. The number of contributors cannot be precisely forecast but is likely to be of the order of 11 million.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that interesting description of an administrative nightmare. Will he say on what ground he calls the Tory Party soft, when it has erected this elaborate machinery for fleecing millions of graduated contributors?

The charge of softness—as I am sure the hon. Member will agree—was directed only at the kindliness with which we treat him.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance, in view of the effect recent local authority rate increases will have on those in receipt of widowed mothers, widows, sickness benefit, and people in receipt of National Assistance, whether he will increase the benefit for those people.

So far as National Insurance benefits are concerned, I have nothing to add to what I said during the debate on 13th March. As the National Assistance Board normally takes full account of rates in assessing the needs of householder recipients of National Assistance, these people are in general unaffected by rate changes.

Is the Minister aware that there are many recipients, such as those drawing sickness benefit, widowed mothers, widows drawing widow's benefit and the unemployed, who just do not reach the subsistence level to entitle them to get an allowance from the National Assistance Board to help them to meet this extra increase? Will the Minister consider what is happening throughout the country concerning rate increases and the large number of people who cannot draw this money by way of the National Assistance Board? What will he do about it?

The hon. Member mentioned widowed mothers among those he listed. He will be glad to know that the real value of the widowed mother's allowance for a widowed mother with three children is 57s. 6d., or 75 per cent. greater than when the present Government came in.

Try to live on it.

Is the Minister aware that while National Assistance takes care of the poorest people and meets the rent and rate increases, recent rent and rate increases have wiped out all the benefits that he as Minister has given to those who are just above the poverty line which qualifies them for National Assistance? Will he look into this?

It is a considerable exaggeration to say that rent and rate increases, which are, of course, taken into account in the Index of Retail Prices, have done anything of the sort. But they are certainly one of the factors which one follows in keeping rates under review.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance the total of National Assistance granted in the last 12 months to cover rent; to how many recipients it was granted: and how this compares with 1956.

As I have several times explained to the House, there is no such figure as that asked for in the first part of the Question. At the end of 1961 the number of recipients of weekly National Assistance allowances who were householders for whom an allowance for rent and rates would be added to the appropriate scale rates was 1,439,000, and the average amount paid by them was 21s. 10d. per week. The comparable figures for 1956 were 1,276,000 and 14s. 2d.

Does not the increase in rents under the Rent Act account very largely for this increase in National Assistance payment? In other words, does it not mean that a very large sum of public money is going not to National Assistance recipients but into the pockets of the landlords?

That hypothesis does not stand up when one recalls that the average amount in respect of local authority tenants is 24s. 6d week as compared with the general figure of 21s. 10d. and that the figure in respect of local authority tenants has risen more in the last year than the other.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he is aware that in spite of the increase in the population of West Bromwich since November, 1961, there has been no increase in the staff of the Ministry of Pensions and National Insurance office in West Bromwich; and whether he will make a statement.

I have no reason to believe that the population of West Bromwich has altered much in the last three months. The answer to the second part of the Question is therefore. "No, Sir".

Is the Minister aware that the reason why I put down that date was to keep the Question fully in order? Is he aware that there has been a considerable increase since 1951, and that the staff has remained exactly the same to deal with this increase? Is he further aware that during one week recently the staff, very much overworked, had to work without any heat whatever in their office and with water running down the walls? Does he regard that as a satisfactory way for the staff to work?

In reply to the first part of the question, comparison of staff in post today and in 1951 is vitiated by the fact that the area covered by the office is less than it was in 1951, having been reduced as long ago as 1953. On the second part of the question, although it quite plainly does not arise out of the right hon. Gentleman's Question on the Paper, I will naturally look into it.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance by what percentage the value in real terms of retirement pensions has been increased since 1951; and what is the comparable figure for the increase in personal disposable income per head.

The latest available figures show that the increase in real terms for the single rate of retirement pensions since October, 1951, is 37 per cent.; for the married rate 32 per cent.; and for personal disposable income per head, 27 per cent.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance whether he will place in the Library a copy of the instructions issued to officers of the National Assistance Board in relation to the granting of discretionary allowances.

No, Sir, for the reasons authoritatively stated by the late Mr. Ernest Bevin on 9th December, 1943.

As the right hon. Gentleman is aware, the late Mr. Ernest Bevin has been dead for a long time and conditions are very different now. Is not he aware that he recently told the House that it was no longer possible to consider the scale rates in isolation in view of the large number of discretionary payments? Cannot we therefore know on what basis these are given?

No, Sir. If he studies what the late Mr. Bevin said, he will appreciate the good sense of a clear statement that

"the Government cannot be a party to having all the instructions and Regulations of its Departments issued in this way … If we do not interpret the Act aright, the House can challenge us. .."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 9th December, 1943; Vol. 395, c, 1243.]

As an alternative to the laying of instructions, can the Minister give a summary, for the benefit of hon. Members, of the way in which the scheme works? That would surely help.

As the hon. Members knows, we have often had an opportunity of discussing this matter in this House and upstairs. I am always willing, on those occasions, to give a full description. I very much doubt whether a written summary will be at all helpful.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what changes in the administration of the earnings rule for widowed mothers were made at the time of the 1961 increases in National Insurance benefits.

None, Sir.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that a very misleading and damaging article was published last month in the Daily Sketch, stating that the benefit increase of last April was being snatched away from many widows by the reduction in the amount that they were allowed to earn without deduction? Will he ask the Daily Sketch to correct the wrong impression that it has created, and, furthermore, suggest that it should consult his Department in future to make sure that it has its facts right?

My hon. Friend is quite right. A statement to that effect appeared in the leading article of the Daily Sketch on 5th March. On 6th March my Department drew that newspaper's attention to the inaccuracy and suggested that it would be proper, seeing that it was wrong in fact, to publish a contradiction. So far, no such contradiction has appeared.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how much money the National Assistance Board spent on publicity in 1960, and 1961; and how much it proposes to spend in 1962.

About £6,000 in 1960–61, and about £8,000 in the two following years. These figures do not take any account of the time spent by the Board's staff at all levels, other than information staff, in giving explanations of the Board's work.

I appreciate the services which the staff of the Board give in explaining the operation of the National Assistance Scheme. I also appreciate the necessity for publicising the supplementation to the present inadequate retirement pensions. But would not the Minister consider it better to raise the pension and thereby reduce considerably the number of people requiring assistance?

I do not see how that arises out of a Question asking how much money the National Assistance Board spent for this purpose.

Can the Minister indicate whether a proportion of the amount spent last year was spent in connection with the publicity campaign to restore the deficit in welfare foods consumption?

I cannot answer that question without notice. The figures that I have given relate to the general information expenditure of the Board.

In view of the increasing importance of discretionary allowances, can the Minister tell us what public information was given about the powers of local officers in relation to this matter?

I should be grateful if the hon. Member would put down a Question on that matter. A good deal of information is published. I agree with him that it is important, and I would like to get it complete before giving an answer.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will estimate the total amount to be collected by the National Health Service contributions in 1962–63.

One hundred and sixty-three million pounds.

Can the Minister tell us how much of this is attributable to the "bob-a-job" increases last year?

This is the total amount under the present Act. I cannot break it down without notice.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what would need to be added to the death grant presently payable in respect of an adult to retain the value it had when it was raised to its present level.

On the basis of the Retail Prices Index, about £2 6s.

In this case, rather than taking the cost of living index, would it not be more relevant to have a special "cost of dying" index, in order to see if we could bring this matter much more into relation with the purposes for which it was intended? The £25 is inadequate at present. Will he consider the point?

The only increase made since its origin in 1946, when it was a new benefit, was the one that I took through the House in 1957, operating in 1958. I will certainly consider the claims of this benefit as against the claims of others, from the point of view of priority, when the time comes.

asked the Minister of Power whether he will consider investigating methods which would enable gas and electricity meters to be read by one reader on behalf of the two nationalised corporations instead of by readers by the two authorities independently thus providing a saving in costs.

No, Sir. The Weir Committee on cooperation between Electricity and Gas Boards reported that joint meter reading would not be justified on grounds of efficiency and economy.

Can my hon. Friend state the number of meter readers in the two authorities concerned? Is it not bureaucratic to have two separate divisions running this system when one could do the job? Would not he agree that the London Electricity Board is making one reading a year, and would there not be ample time in which to collect the necessary information and hand it to the other authority concerned?

This very responsible Committee spent much time in studying this matter and was assisted by the advice of a firm of independent consultants. It did not take the view of my hon. Friend, that it was a case of two staffs doing a job that one could do. It took the opposite view and said that the Board should be left to organise its affairs in the best interests of efficiency and economy, and it so reported.

Does not the Minister know that in the case of local authorities information is often given by one committee to another, so that if a road is to be taken up for one purpose the gas people and the electricity people can do their work simultaneously? Does not the Minister know of the difficulty of getting into flats in London when the occupants are out all day? Would it not be in the interests of those occupants, at least—quite apart from bureaucratic interests—if one man did the two jobs at the same time?

I repeat that this Committee studied this question very thoroughly. One of its suggestions, in respect of the situation referred to by the hon. Member, was that the tenant should be allowed to send in an estimate of his consumption by postcard, or that the authorities should estimate the consumption themselves. That is being done in many cases.

asked the Minister of Power what research has been or is being carried out into more economic methods of carrying electric power lines underground; and what progress has been made.

The Electricity Council and the boards aim to reduce the cost of moving electricity underground by the use of alternative insulating materials, and by research to discover what cheaper cables and methods of installation might be suitable. I hope that the wide difference in cost may be reduced, but there is no real prospect that the use of underground cables will ever be as cheap as overhead lines, especially at high voltages.

Would not the Minister agree that if the present trend of increasing electricity consumption continues there is a serious risk that the whole countryside will become a network of pylons and overhead cables? In view of the consequent damage to amenities, is the Minister satisfied that enough effort is being put into this research, which could produce wonderful results if it were pursued to a successful conclusion?

The hon. Member has drawn our attention to a risk which we all want to avoid. I am convinced that a great deal of effort is being put into this, and I am also convinced, after having had expert advice, that it is unlikely—especially at the high grid voltages—that the cost of putting the cables underground can be brought down to anything less than about ten times the cost of overhead cables