asked the Minister of Power what action is being taken by his Department, by way of research and practical application, to reduce to a minimum the danger of coal gas explosions in British coal mines.

The Safety in Mines Research Establishment is investigating all aspects of explosions in mines and the means of avoiding or suppressing them. Her Majesty's Inspectors also keep in close touch with current research. They co-operate with the mining industry in order to see that full advantage is taken both of the latest developments and also of the extensive knowledge of proper precautions built up by mining experience and past research.

While thanking the Minister for that reply, may I ask whether he is aware that we would all pay tribute to the efforts entered into by the Ministry and by the National Coal Board towards safety in our pits; but is he further aware that nothing causes greater apprehension among the mining community than the succession of explosions such as we have had in recent times both in the British coalfield and on the Continent? In view of this, will he endeavour to promote more intensified research into the causes of coal gas explosions, particularly by way of wider extension of scientific research and investigation?

I will certainly pay great attention to what the hon. Member says. Indeed, I see substantial reasons for the anxieties which he has expressed. As he knows, I have asked for a public inquiry into the recent explosion at Hapton Valley, and I am going to have a special report on the Tower explosion. I will certainly bear in mind the general remarks the hon. Member has made to see whether there is anything further which can be done.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider, when he studies these reports, following the example of some of his predecessors, who called, in the areas concerned, conferences of managements and representatives of the workmen, so that the lessons to be learned and the problems thrown up by these explosions can be fully considered and certain steps taken to try to prevent them?

I will certainly consider what the right hon. Gentleman says.

asked the Minister of Power when he intends ending completely the operations of opencast coal mining.

The Board has no plans at present for bringing its opencast operations to an end, and I do not think I should be justified in asking it to do so.

Why not? Is not the Minister aware that when these mechanical monsters move into the areas concerned they create chaos and despair, that old people's nerves are affected because of the blastings and detonations, which sometimes go on all night, that students' chances of successful progress are jeopardised because they cannot study in the evenings, that property values slump in the immediate vicinity of the workings, and that, over and above all this, there is dirt and there is despoliation of the countryside? Is he aware that our area has recently been surveyed with a view to asking for autho- risation? I give notice to the Minister that we are going to oppose it by all means at our disposal.

I ask the hon. Member to bear in mind that some coal could not be worked except by opencast methods, and that profitable opencast operations can in fact help to maintain the market for coal, and I myself feel that the Board should remain free to work coal by opencast methods as long as there are not overriding objections on agricultural, amenity, or general social grounds. That is why I have given my permission in the cases to which the hon. Member has referred.

asked the Minister of Power why he has recently authorised the working of eight new opencast mining sites; what will be their annual output; and what his intentions are regarding further authorisations in the future.

Since last November I have authorised nine sites which will produce a total of nearly 1,900,000 tons of coal, over varying periods of up to about five years, including about 800,000 tons from a site in Derbyshire which is being worked to ensure the safety of a neighbouring mine. I authorised these sites under the Opencast Coal Act and in accordance with the policy I announced to the House of Commons last October. Future applications for authorisation will be considered on their merits.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the opencast executive of the National Coal Board has been extensively surveying and prospecting in Yorkshire and that a number of local authorities have already been consulted? Is he aware that my local authority, Barnsley, and neighbouring authorities are strongly opposed to opencast operations coming into the area again? Is the right hon. Gentleman further aware that if he goes ahead with authorisation in Yorkshire we shall have to canalise the opposition of mineworkers, farmers and local authorities and make sure that sites are not started?

The hon. Member's supplementary question did not sound as if he wanted to receive information but intended to give it.

Would my right hon. Friend give an assurance that he will not confirm any compulsory orders for opencast sites in Yorkshire, which surely is the most important part of this problem?

I would like separate notice of that question.

asked the Minister of Power if he will state the estimated tonnage of coal that the National Coal Board intends to produce from opencast coal mines for the years 1962, 1963, 1964, and 1965.

I told the House last October that the Government had agreed that the National Coal Board should postpone the rundown of opencast output. Estimated output in 1962 is a million tons or so below last year's level of about 8½ million tons, but I cannot yet give further figures.

Does not the Minister realise that this coal was got only when an emergency arose immediately after the war and that the public thinks that it ought now to stay where it is until a further emergency comes along? In any case, will he take due note of what happens when opencast sites are worked in close proximity to housing estates, when the housewife has to wash furniture and clothes day after day and night shift workers cannot sleep because of the terrible noise of explosions? Will the Minister make certain that opencast working does not occur near housing estates?

I agree that there are a number of inconveniences connected with opencast working, but I do not think that the public generally takes the view that the hon. Gentleman does, because the public generally is anxious to have anthracite and anthracite is in short supply. Most of the sites which I have recently authorised will produce anthracite, which would be in even shorter supply if I had not authorised those sites.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that he will grant authorisations for opencast mining only if the sole purpose is to produce anthracite? Will he reconsider his original decision for a run-down in view of the fact that there seems to be an acceleration in the number of pit closures and the need to make alternative employment available? Will he also bear in mind that we still have millions of tons of coal in stock?

I cannot give an undertaking that only anthracite will be mined. Other coals are in short supply, and I think that the Board should have the right, unless there are overriding objections against it, to work coal as cheaply as possible.

In view of the very unsatisfactory nature of the replies which the Minister has given about opencast mining, I beg to give notice that I intend to raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.

The hon. Gentleman must confine notice to a particular answer, otherwise I get into difficulties with the rules. May I take it that his notice relates to Question No. 19?

Yes, Mr. Speaker.

asked the Minister of Power why the price of coal in the North West is to be increased by £1 a ton next November, compared with 10s. per ton for the rest of England and Wales.

The National Coal Board thought a special increase of 6s. a ton was necessary on coals in the North West to offset the heavy losses on production in its North Western Division.

Is it not intolerable to penalise the consumers of the North-West in this way because they happen to live in an area where the pits are older and less economic than elsewhere, particularly in view of the fact that the North-West consumers import at least two-thirds of their needs from the newer pits elsewhere and are still being charged an extra 6s. on imports? Is this not contrary to the whole purpose of nationalisation? [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] Is it not destroying the principle of nationalisation which was intended to give a national product at a national price?

Even after taking the importation of the relatively cheaper-produced coal into account, the 6s. special increase will not yield as much as the deficit in this coalfield last year. I feel, for the reasons that I have expressed in correspondence with the Domestic Coal Consumers' Council, that the National Coal Board was right to make special selective increases in the areas where its production is most expensive.

Has my right hon. Friend perceived a resolution which was sent to him by the Domestic Coal Consumers' Council on the 21st February objecting to this principle of regional increases in the price of coal, and would he now declare to the House that he has abandoned the hallowed practice since nationalisation of general coal price increases to enable the Board as a whole to pay its way, taking year with year, in favour of regional price increases to support each region paying its way, taking year with year?

Not only have I perceived the resolution, but I referred to it in answer to the hon. Member for Blackburn (Mrs. Castle). I drew attention to the correspondence in which I had argued with the Domestic Coal Consumers' Council that it was right for the Board to make the selective price increases in order to reduce the burden placed by Scottish and North-West losses on the general finances of the National Coal Board.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we view with apprehension the differential price system that is now operating, which we think is the forerunner of autonomous districts, contrary to previous statements? Does the Minister not consider that this differential price system will price Scotland, Lancashire and South Wales out of the market?

Perhaps it would be helpful if I drew attention to the "Plan for Coal", published in 1950, when the party opposite was governing in this country, in which it was stated that

"internal subsidies from one coalfield to another would be reduced to the greatest possible extent."

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an undertaking that his assurance concerning the National Coal Board's intention to introduce selective prices to districts will not be a first step towards district agreements, and is he going to be logical about it and charge different prices from one pit to another?

If the right hon. Gentleman is referring to district wage agreements, I gave an undertaking in July, 1960, which I will willingly repeat now.

asked the Minister of Power whether he will reverse the policy of charging increased selective coal prices in the Aberdeen area in view of the fact that 90 per cent. of supplies are obtained from English pits, and have been so obtained since 1880.

asked the Minister of Power if he is aware that the selective additional increase of 10s. a ton on house coal in Aberdeen operates there in a way which, having regard to transport charges and other local features, inflicts undue hardship on the citizens of that city; and if he will now take steps to have that increase withdrawn.

The pricing of coal in particular areas is a matter for the National Coal Board. As my hon. Friend knows, her suggestion for dealing with the pricing of coal in Aberdeen has been passed to the Chairman of the Board for his consideration.

While it is in my right hon. Friend's power to have consultations with the National Coal Board on all these matters, may I ask whether he has recommended to the Board that the separate price zone area, 59A, should apply to the Aberdeen area? Secondly, can my right hon. Friend say whether he had consultations with the Coal Board in January when industrial users were allowed to obtain coal supplies from English pits at prevailing prices? Could my right hon. Friend, therefore, give his opinion why industrial users should have preference but domestic consumers should not?

I am sorry that the hon. and learned Member for Aberdeen, North (Mr. Hector Hughes) is not here to ask a fiery supplementary question and I hope that he will be soon recovered. In answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen, South (Lady Tweedsmuir), she will know that arrangements for domestic and commercial coal supplies and their sales are substantially different, and whether there should be fragmentation of the North of Scotland zone 59 to allow different prices to be charged in Aberdeen compared with the rest of the North of Scotland is very much a matter which the National Coal Board itself should decide. As I have told my hon. Friend, I have referred her point to the Chairman of the Board and no doubt he will give an answer in due course.

I am sure that all of us would wish to be associated with the good wishes which the Minister has expressed for the complete recovery of my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Aberdeen, North (Mr. Hector Hughes). May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he has had consultations with his colleagues who are interested in legislation to promote the establishment of new industries in some of these areas? Has the right hon. Gentleman borne in mind, and will he bear in mind, that some of these selective increases, apart from our objections in the mining industry, will make it difficult for industry to come to an area where the price of coal will be higher?

That is one of the matters which the Coal Board took into consideration and which I put before it, but the Board still felt that the reasons for making these selective increases were quite unanswerable.

asked the Minister of Power what representations he has received from distributors in Scotland about the increased charges for domestic coal.

When I was considering the Board's proposals I had two meetings with the Chamber of Coal Traders, which represents distributors in all parts of Great Britain. I have since received letters from merchants' associations in Scotland to which replies will be sent shortly.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is no great satisfaction to us to learn that coal traders in England and Wales were fixing the price of domestic coal in Scotland? What representations has the Minister since received from coal traders in Scotland? I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the Coal Board, together with the traders, have been trying to fight a competitive war against oil in the matter of fuel consumption in Scotland. How will not only an increase but a selective increase of 10s. help?

The hon. Member asked what bodies have made representations. They are the Coal Merchants' Association of Scotland Ltd., the North-East of Scotland Coal Merchants' Association, and the Northern Co-operative Society Ltd., Aberdeen. I am well aware that the coal traders were most upset by this increase, but I still feel, having heard what it said, that the Coal Board was right.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Aberdeen Chamber of Commerce also made representations on this issue? Did he express any view to the Chairman of the Coal Board about development areas, such as the north-east of Scotland, that where industrial users apparently have a privilege in this respect domestic coal users should also have it?

The Chairman of the Coal Board was well aware of the particular difficulties which selective increases in places like Scotland would impose, but he still felt that it was right—and I agree that it was right—that they should take place.

Is the Minister aware that feeling is growing considerably in Scotland that the Chairman of the National Coal Board knows nothing about the problems of the mining areas and of coal consumption in Scotland?

asked the Minister of Power what consultations took place between the Chairman of the National Coal Board and himself prior to coal price increases; to what areas such increases are to apply; for what reason these areas were selected; and, having regard to financial losses forward of the National Coal Board, what estimate he has made of loss reduction or profits' earning as a result of the coal price increases, and the revenue yield of the latter, in the Board's current financial year ending 31st December, 1962.

During my regular meetings with the Chairman, I have discussed prices both generally and in relation to the recommendations of the Domestic Coal Consumers' Council. All parts of the United Kingdom are affected by the increases in house coal, but there are additional increases in Scotland and the North West where heavy losses have been incurred. The increases on industrial and house coals taken together should yield about £25 million during this year.

Will my right hon. Friend now be quite unequivocal in answering whether he is abandoning the principle of the Coal Board paying its way overall, taking year with year, and substituting for that principle a system whereby every region is required to pay its way, taking year with year? If the second assumption is correct, does he expect Scotland to pay its way, and the North West and South Wales to pay their way? What is his policy now?

No, Sir. I make the confident prophecy that, when I make a statement about the National Coal Board's obligations in the future five years under the recent White Paper, it will be about obligations which relate to the National Coal Board. That does not at all mean that the National Coal Board should not be free to try to reduce the burden on its total finances by making selective price increases where the losses are greatest.

asked the Minister of Power what representations he has received from the Colville Group on the subject of the selective coal prices now to be charged to them.

The company has drawn my attention to the substantial increase in costs caused by the rise in coal prices last January, and says it could make considerable savings if it were allowed to import coal from the United States.

Is the Minister aware that in reply to a previous Question he suggested that our share of steel production would improve when the hot strip mill was functioning at Ravenscraig? Is he also aware that the cold strip mill is already functioning at Gartcosh but that one of the tragedies is that the President of the Board of Trade has not yet been able to bring in industry to use the cold strip? Is he not also aware that these selective coal prices are not only making Colvilles and others wish to import coal, but are preventing other industries from coming to use the strip steel? Does not the Minister realise that there should be co-ordination between his Department and the Board of Trade if there is to be any hope for these areas?

The hon. Lady will readily recognise that the coal price increase for Colvilles and other steel producers could only have been avoided if the National Coal Board was prepared to carry on its operations at a greater loss than it will do in the future. I do not think that in the present state of the National Coal Board's finances I could possibly ask it to do so.

Can the Minister tell us on this side whether he has had any consultation with the President of the Board of Trade concerning alternative industry and with the Minister of Labour concerning the high unemployment figures? Is he aware that about 20,000 fewer men are working in the coal-mining industry as compared with a few years ago and that this is a serious matter for those of us who are interested in the well-being of our country, which is something in which the Government do not seem to have any interest?

The hon. Lady knows quite well that I appreciate the problems that exist. I certainly assure her that I am in constant touch with both my right hon. Friends about these problems. I hope that it will be possible to solve them.

asked the Minister of Power in the exercise of his statutory duty to promote economy in the fuel and power industries, what estimate he made of the additional annual cost to the electricity industry in Scotland of the selective coal price increases now to be charged;

asked the Minister of Power in the exercise of his statutory duty to promote economy in the fuel and power industries, what estimate he made of the additional annual cost to the gas industry in Scotland of the selective coal price increases now to be charged.

The selective increases in the price of industrial coals in Scotland came into effect on 1st January last. Their extra cost in Scotland was estimated at rather more than £1½ million for the electricity industry and at about £1 million for the gas industry.

Is the Minister telling us that the electricity industry in Scotland has to find another £1½ million? How does he expect Scottish industry to recover? How does he expect the Board of Trade to encourage or persuade other industries to come from England to Scotland if by these selective prices he makes it impossible for them to do so?

I must point out to the hon. Member that there is no easy way out of these problems of the National Coal Board. It is clearly only possible to relieve the gas and electricity industries of the extra charges that I have announced by offering supplies at well below the economic cost of producing them. In the present position of the National Coal Board, that is not a practicable step to take.

When the Minister talks about the economic cost of production, does he mean the economic cost in Britain, in Ayrshire or in Scotland? Is there any co-ordination at all in this miserable Government? Is the Minister aware that in the debate to which he referred, and which is still continuing, we have been told that the Government are doing everything they can to promote and develop industry in Scotland? Is he aware that he is doing everything he can to prevent it?

The National Coal Board must have regard to the economic costs of producing the coal which the gas and electricity industries in Scotland want. The National Coal Board made a loss in Scotland last year of £19 million. Altogether, the accumulated loss is greater than the whole of the Board's loss since nationalisation and it would not be practicable for the Board to provide those coals at considerably lower than the economic cost of obtaining them.

Is the Minister aware that the Gas Council told the Select Committee that it would try to do some self-financing and obtain a better market for gas? Does he not think that this policy will affect the gas industry? Will it not ensure that to produce cheaper gas, the Gas Council will want to import further methane, to the detriment of the coal industry?

I certainly do not think that it would be right for me to upset the plans of the Gas Council by forcing the Coal Board to allow the Gas Council to have coal at far less than its economic cost of production.

asked the Minister of Power whether he has prepared a scheme for the importation of United States coal next winter.

No, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that if the policy of closing down the pits continues and there is a rising demand due to industrial expansion it is very likely that there might be a shortage of coal and that importation of coal will be required? Is it not true—can the right hon. Gentleman deny it—that he has already had discussions with the National Coal Board on the possibility of importation?

I will be perfectly frank with the right hon. Gentleman. Discussions are now taking place. First, I think that it would be right for him to remember that productivity—I am very glad to say this, and I have said it before—in the industry is increasing and, therefore, it is certainly not true that merely because pits are closing down there will be a shortage of coal. The conversations between my Department and the National Coal Board are in relation to the White Paper on the Financial and Economic Obligations of the Nationalised Industries, and obviously the question of the part that imports, if any, have to play is relevant to that general examination.

I suspected that conversations relating to the possible importation of coal were taking place. Can we have an assurance from the right hon. Gentleman that before any definitive action has been taken the House will have an opportunity of debating this subject?

I have already promised to give to the House of Commons a statement on the result of the review now taking place with the National Coal Board.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that he can repeat that initial negative reply if we decide to go into the European Coal and Steel Community?

The negative reply was given to the Question on the Order Paper, namely, whether I had prepared a scheme. The answer is that I have not prepared one.

asked the Minister of Power whether he proposes to give a general direction to the National Coal Board to decentralise the coal industry by the creation of autonomous boards in Scotland, Lancashire, and elsewhere throughout the coalfields.

asked the Minister of Power what proposals he has for legislation to set up a separate Scottish Coal Board.

The answer is, "No."

In view of the statements made by spokesmen on behalf of the National Coal Board relating to Scotland in particular and indicating that if Scotland does not pay its way it will be required to "go it alone", can we have an assurance from the right hon. Gentleman that the decision to adopt decentralisation or to provide an autonomous coal board in various areas or in a particular area will be a decision of the Minister which can be debated in this House and not be left to the sole prerogative of the National Coal Board?

I think I am right in saying that there can be no question of decentralisation without legislation and, therefore, the Minister would naturally be responsible. If the right hon. Gentleman was referring to the alleged statement made by Lord Robens, I would draw attention to the fact that Lord Robens had certainly not suggested that Scotland should "go it alone", but he was suggesting that Scottish problems were not caused by central control and also that Scotland's problems would not easily be solved by local autonomy.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this statement to which he has referred is causing widespread anxiety in Scotland, and can we have a definite assurance that he will not discriminate against the Scottish coal industry in any way?

Tempted as I am to seek protection from questions from the hon. Member for South Ayrshire (Mr. Emrys Hughes) by accepting the proposal that has been made to me, I think it right to take a more robust view of my responsibilities. I have therefore told him and the right hon. Gentleman that I do not propose to give this general direction that they have raised in their Questions.

If my right hon. Friend has not given the general direction which is under discussion, can he tell the House what consultations he has had and what general direction he has given about not applying selective price increases? Surely the two do not marry up. Either we treat the United Kingdom as a whole or as regions. Does he not realise that a great many people in Scotland do not see why they should have to pay the penalty under an arrangement which really applies to the United Kingdom?

I beg to differ from my hon. Friend. I do not think that it is at all the same question whether Scotland should be an autonomous area as the question in her mind—which is whether the consumers in Scotland should should have to pay a rather higher differential price for their coal. I think that they are two different questions. I have discussed the second question with the National Coal Board, as my hon. Friend knows. In answer to this question, I have no intention or proposal to give general direction on the other matter.

Would not selective prices for Scotland, Lancashire and Wales put up the cost of the manufacture of steel and the production of gas, and would not this bring about pressure by the steel owners for the importation of coal and force the gas industry to bring in more methane than is contemplated in the present plan?

This goes rather wider than the two Questions put down.

asked the Minister of Power what reduction in coal stocks, undistributed, at 1st May, 1962, took place compared with undistributed stocks one year earlier; what financial effect such reduction had upon the finances of the National Coal Board; and what estimate he has made of the Board's financial loss forward, cumulative to 31st March, 1962, compared with the figure of more than £90 million at 31st December, 1961.

On 21st April, 1962, the National Coal Board's undistributed coal stocks were 4 million tons less than they were a year earlier. The stocklift and all other relevant factors are estimated to have reduced the Board's working capital requirements over the year to 31st March, 1962, by £11 million. I cannot give any estimate of the accumulated deficit at 31st March, 1962, in advance of the Board's half-yearly statistical statement, which will show the outturn for the first quarter of 1962.

Did my right hon. Friend observe that Lord Robens said recently that he expected the National Coal Board to pay its way this year? Is not that a very important statement?

To break even.

I am sorry. I stand corrected. Would my right hon. Friend confirm that his anticipation is that there will be no continuing loss by the Board overall? Will he further tell the House why Lord Robens makes this statement in advance of he himself making a statement to the House? Why is my right hon. Friend allowing the Chairman of the National Coal Board to lead him along by the nose? Are we not the important people in this matter?

The Chairman of the Coal Board made the statement that he hoped that the industry would break even because he is responsible for running the industry. I confidently hope that he will be right in his view.

Mr. Nabarro.

But are we not—

Order. I felt obliged to call the hon. Member for the next Question. The House will observe that we have taken a little short of half an hour to cover twelve Questions.

asked the Minister of Power what share of total United Kingdom coal output was raised in Scotland in 1948 and 1961; and what was the percentage increase or decrease in output in both areas, respectively.

The share of the country's output raised in Scotland was 12 per cent. in 1948 and 9½ per cent. in 1961. Between 1948 and 1961, the decreases in Scotland and Great Britain were 25½ per cent. and 8½ per cent., respectively.

Does not the Minister realise the seriousness with which Scotland regards this diminution of Scotland's part in the total mining industry of the country and fears that its competitive position will be further worsened by the selective price increases about which he has heard so much this afternoon? Does he realise that it is quite wrong for him to say that the Coal Board took account of the social consequences of these selective price increases, since, in fact, Lord Robens has gone out of his way to say that he does not accept the social consequences of the policy he is carrying out? In the circumstances, will the Minister look again at this matter and consider whether the social consequences are more important than the economic consequences?

I understand the serious view which those who live in Scotland and those who represent mining constituencies in Scotland take of this matter, but I take a serious view of my own responsibility, which, I understand, is to help the National Coal Board to break even and pay its way. Therefore, I must share the National Coal Board's objective of trying, as I have said several times this afternoon, to reduce the burden of the greatest losses on its finances.

asked the Minister of Power if he will make a statement on the proposals of the National Coal Board for closing approximately half the collieries at present operating in Scotland within the next five years.

The closure of 18 collieries in Scotland in 1962 has already been announced. I understand that the Board is now surveying the prospects of all collieries in Scotland. Any proposals it has for further closures will be announced after discussion with the unions in accordance with the usual practice.

Does the Minister realise that the statement by Lord Robens at the Gleneagles Hotel is one which has far reaching consequences for the future industrial prospects of Scotland and has caused great concern, particularly in the mining communities of Scotland? Will he, therefore, urge the Government to accept The financial obligations of the uneconomic pits until such time as the President of the Board of Trade has made provision for alternative employment in the areas affected?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade is doing his utmost to bring new industry to Scotland. I understand that this was the subject of a recent debate in the Scottish Grand Committee. But it seems to me that it will be a benefit to us all if the kind of review which has been taking place in Fife were extended, as Lord Robens says it is being extended, to the whole of Scotland so that we may see exactly where the Scottish coal industry is at present.

asked the Minister of Power if he will give a general direction to the National Coal Board to stop further closures in Scotland of those collieries which are to be closed for purely commercial reasons until such time as alternative sources of employment are available.

No, Sir. I expect the mining industry itself will be able to absorb most of the miners that may be displaced by future closures.

Is the Minister aware that the National Coal Board is unable to give any such assurance? Is he further aware that in Central West Fife, in particular, notice has already been given that almost every pit in that area, involving 3,000 men, will be closed within the next five years? Up to now, under the Local Employment Act, we have had slightly more than 1,000 jobs, most of them for women. Could the right hon. Gentleman say which he regards as the more important—to get the industry on to a sound commercial basis, or the social consequences of these closures?

I draw the hon. Gentleman's attention to the fact that this is not a new policy. Ever since nationalisation, the Board has carried out a considerable closures programme, both in Scotland and elsewhere, as pits ceased to be economic or as the reserves were exhausted. In fact, unemployment among Scottish miners is extremely low at present. It is certainly my right hon. Friend's intention to bring new industry to Fife and to other parts of Scotland. However, the Coal Board has already announced that it will offer jobs in mining—not, I am afraid, all in Scotland, but in mining—to those who are displaced by pit closures in Scotland.

Is the Minister aware that that is no answer to the problem of the Scottish miners? It is no consolation to them to know that they must uproot themselves from Fife. They have already been sent from the West of Scotland to Fife and now they have to go to the Midlands or elsewhere to get another job. When the Minister quotes 1·6 per cent. unemployment among miners in Scotland, the simple explanation is that they have cleared out and have gone either to England or overseas.

No. The real answer—I entirely agree with the hon. Member—is the bringing of new industry to Scotland. As he knows, that is not my responsibility, but a great deal of new industry has been brought to Scotland and I hope that the process will continue.

asked the Minister of Power what consultations the Chairman of the National Coal Board had with him before making his statement at Gleneagles Hotel on future policy in regard to Scottish coalmining.

The Chairman and I did not discuss the speech he made at Gleneagles, but we have frequent discussions on matters affecting the coal industry.

Is the Minister aware that the statement made by the Chairman of the National Coal Board at the Gleneagles Hotel indicated not merely a desire to balance his accounts but that the £19 million loss in the Scottish coalfields had to be made good in Scotland? Does not that indicate that Lord Robens is looking at the problem from the point of view not of nationalisation but of regionalisation? If so, should not he have consulted the Minister responsible before he made a statement of that nature?

No, Sir. I knew Lord Robens' views perfectly well. He does not expect that the selective increases recently announced for Scotland will wipe out the whole of the Scottish loss. What he is anxious about is that Scotland itself should help to bear the burden—

Why?

—of the extremely large loss, much larger than the total loss of the Board since nationalisation, which the Board bears in Scotland.

With regard to future policy, will my right hon. Friend agree that the National Coal Board has followed the golden rule set by all nationalised industry, which is to inflict gigantic losses on the taxpayer and to give the consumer a worse service at increased cost?

The policy of the chairman of the Board is directed to the objectives which my hon. and gallant Friend has in mind—to try to improve the quality of service and to reduce the losses.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there has been deep consternation about the speech of the chairman in Scotland? We all realise that pits which have exhausted their reserves are bound to close, but the Chair- man said that uneconomic pits would have to close and that the Board could not carry the social consequences. Are we to take it that the Government's policy is that there should be no help on this problem and that men will have to be unemployed?

I think that the Board has made clear in the past that it is determined to do its utmost to see that other employment is available for those displaced from coal mining. I think that the present figures for Scotland bear this out. The general level of unemployment is about 3½ per cent., and the level of unemployed miners in Scotland is only about 1½ per cent. I therefore suggest that it would be quite wrong to condemn the Board in advance for what might not take place.

The Chairman said in his speech that there would be redundancies. It is not a question of transference. It is the redundancy problem about which everyone is worried. The Chairman said that, unless the Government paid for it, the Board could not carry the social consequences. Can the Minister tell us, in view of that statement, what will be the future of the miners in the affected districts?

I have a Question on redundancies to answer. I repeat that my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade is doing his best to bring new industry to the areas which will be affected by future coal mine closures.

asked the Minister of Power what proposals he has for reforming the Iron and Steel Board, with a view to the United Kingdom signing the European Coal and Steel Community Treaty.

I have no proposals at present.

Would my right hon. Friend not agree that the policy of price control is bringing the steel industry to a very low level? Would it not be better if he moved towards the more flexible system which the European Coal and Steel Community is using, as a preparation to joining?

If we joined the European Coal and Steel Community the question would arise whether the Iron and Steel Board should continue to exercise powers under the 1953 Act and, in particular, its power to fix maximum prices. The other power which would be greatly in question would be the right to veto investment projects, and these matters would have to be considered when the time came.

Has the right hon. Gentleman observed that the European Coal and Steel Community has now informed the Belgian Government that they will not be permitted to adopt what is described as a semi-nationalisation scheme but must conform with what it regards as free competition throughout the whole area? Does that mean that if we enter the European Community we shall be barred from operating, under any Government, our own organisation?

That and other questions will have to be considered very carefully if we join the Community.

asked the Minister of Power (1) at what level of its estimated productive capacity the steel industry of Scotland is currently operating;

It is estimated that the Scottish steel industry is at present working at about 60 per cent. of capacity. The Scottish share of Great Britain's crude steel production in 1948 was 15·2 per cent., and 10·6 per cent. in 1961. There was an increase in production between these years of 48·5 per cent. in Great Britain and 3·9 per cent. in Scotland.

Do not those figures reveal a mast disturbing situation in Scotland, inasmuch as what is, perhaps, the most vital industry for all Scotland is so much worse affected there than it is in the rest of the country? Will the Minister reconsider again the imposition of a coal price policy which will make it enormously more difficult for the Scottish steel industry to maintain its position in relation to the rest of the country?

When answering the hon. Gentleman two years ago, my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary estimated that the figure in 1962 would be 11 per cent. I hope very much that that figure will still be reached in 1962. The real trouble here is that the heavier steel products in Scotland have been harder hit by present difficulties, whereas in the strip mills there is fairly high activity. I hope that when the Ravenscraig hot strip mill comes into production the position will improve.

May I remind the Minister again that he has just imposed, or has been associated with imposing, a price policy on Scotland which will make the prospect of Scotland recovering much more difficult than before? Has he considered this?

Certainly I considered it, but the cost of coal is only one of a number of factors which are relevant in this connection.

asked the Minister of Power what was Scotland's share of Great Britain's industrial fuel oil consumption in 1948 and in 1961; and what was the percentage increase or decrease in such fuel oil consumption over the period in Great Britain and Scotland, respectively.

Liquid fuels burnt by the larger industrial consumers in Scotland represented 6·5 per cent. of the corresponding total consumption in Great Britain in 1948 and 8·4 per cent. in 1961. The annual average increase over the period was 15·3 per cent. in Scotland and 13 per cent. in Great Britain.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that this increase in industrial fuel oil consumption must be bearing very heavily on Scottish coal mining, and does he think it fair that the cost of the increase should be borne by the men in the industry? Has he no policy to soften the impact of the increased oil consumption on coal mining?

While it is perfectly true that the increase has been greater proportionately in Scotland than elsewhere, the consumption of liquid fuel in Scotland in 1948, at the beginning of the period the hon. Gentleman chose, was extremely low, and I frankly feel that the increase in consumption of liquid fuels is very much to the benefit of Scotland.

Is the Minister suggesting that it has been for the benefit of the coal mining industry and the men and women employed in it? Has he nothing to offer to soften the effect of this change on the industry?

There is another Question down about the refining industry in Scotland which, perhaps, will be relevant to this question. The other point is that, important as the coal milling industry is in Scotland, it is not the only industry, and this increase has, presumably, been generally to the benefit of Scottish industry as a Whole.

asked the Minister of Power what was Scotland's share of total gas production in Great Britain in 1948 and in 1961; and what was the percentage increase or decrease over the period of gas output in both areas respectively.

Scotland's share of the town gas available in Great Britain was 7 per cent. in 1961 and 8·5 per cent. in 1948. 0·3 per cent. less gas was available in 1961 than in 1948 in Scotland; 20 per cent. more in Great Britain as a whole.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether this change was due to industry going over to oil, as the right hon. Gentleman indicated in a previous answer, Whether the Scottish Gas Board is not getting the capital which it needs, or whether this is another indication of how Scotland's economy is lagging behind that of England and Wales? If so, is not this another indication that the Minister and the Government should not leave the ques- tion of Scotland's economy to the Chairman of the National Coal Board but should deal with it themselves?

Certainly the question of investment is extremely important. Whereas Scotland's proportion of total investment in earlier years was 8 per cent., last year it increased to over 12½ per cent. As the hon. Gentleman knows, the first stage of the Lurgi plant was brought into operation in 1960–61. I hope that the result of this investment and new plant will be to improve the Scottish position.

Will not the right hon. Gentleman agree that, despite this capital investment, the increase in price to the gas and electricity industries and to other industries in Scotland will make it much more difficult for Scotland to improve its economy?

The hon. Gentleman and one of his hon. Friends have a Question on the Order Paper about the effect of the coal price increase on the gas and electricity industries.

asked the Minister of Power what proportion of the total throughput of oil refineries in Great Britain came from refineries in Scotland in 1948 and in 1961; and what was the percentage increase or decrease in throughput over the period in Great Britain and in Scotland respectively.

The Scottish share of the total throughput of oil refineries in Great Britain was 16·6 per cent. in 1948, and 6·9 per cent. in 1961. The annual average increase over the period was 12·4 per cent. in Scotland and 20·2 per cent. in Great Britain.

If the Minister can give us no assurance about the Scottish position with regard to older industries like the coal industry, can he not at least tell us what power or influence he has to say that newer industries, like the oil refining industry, will bring more than a fair share of their capacity to Scotland as distinct from what has been happening since 1948?

I am left in considerable doubt as to whether the hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends want me to increase or reduce this proportion. Although throughput in Scotland is lower than it is in the rest of Great Britain, it has in fact increased substantially from 750,000 tons to nearly 34½ million tons. Scottish refineries provide most of the total Scottish demand for refined products and for raw materials for the petroleum-chemical industry there.

But when it comes to the question of the expansion of oil refinery capacity in future, will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that Scotland gets more than a fair share of it, since she has had less than her fair share in the past both with regard to that industry and with regard to older industries?

asked the Minister of Health whether he will see that the new hospitals to be built in Liverpool are fully air-conditioned and reasonably sound-proof against noise outside.

Good ventilation and protection against outside noise will be important considerations, but full air-conditioning throughout is not regarded as necessary.

Is not this a penny-wise pound-foolish policy for our noisy and besmogged towns? Would not my hon. Friend agree that nothing is mare expensive than modernising a building after it is built, whereas it is comparatively cheap to air-condition and denoise, if that is the right word, a building if it is planned from the start? Should we not be thinking in terms of the twenty-first rather than the twentieth century?

With the Hospital Plan, we hope that we are. Certainly considerable importance is attached to the elimination of noise. Full air-conditioning is not always necessary. It may be necessary in part, but it is not necessary throughout a hospital.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that it was discovered in the United States that some types of air conditioning contributed to the spread of infection through a hospital? Will the hon. Lady take good care that any installations in this country do not give rise to this type of hazard?

I was not aware of that. The climate is, of course, very different in the United States. I am glad, however, that the hon. Member has made the point, and I will see that note is taken of it.

asked the Minister of Health what deductions for board and lodging and uniform are made from the salaries of staff nurses, sisters, matrons and doctors, respectively, when resident in hospital.

The figures are £180, £205, from £265 to £360, and from £155 to £430 a year.

Does not that reply mean that staff nurses are having as much deducted from their small salaries for board and lodging as are the doctors and that sisters and matrons are having more deducted? Does not this make it even more imperative that the low salaries of nurses should be increased immediately to adjust this further example of unfair discrimination against these hard-working and under-paid people?

The hon. Lady has not, perhaps, taken in all the figures which I had to give her so quickly. It is true that a staff nurse may pay a little more for board and lodging and uniform than does the house doctor on the lowest part of the scale, but the scale for doctors increases considerably. In any event, the conditions which apply are not comparable.

Is it not intolerable also that the nurses should have any deductions at all made in respect of the laundering and maintenance of their uniform, something which they have to wear for the sake of the patients and not for their own sake? Is not this simply another example of the mean, miserly way in which the Government treat them?

This was agreed on the Whitley Council from 1948.

asked the Minister of Health why, in his plan for hospitals, he is only providing for 2·9 acute beds per 1,000 population in the eastern region.

The plan provides for 380 additional acute beds in the East Anglian region by 1975. In this and other regions proposals based on local needs and circumstances result in somewhat less than the normal maximum of 3·3 per 1,000.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in East Anglia we feel that, while we have been behind before, we are even more behind to the extent of 15 per cent. on the new plan? Did my right hon. Friend, in arriving at the plan, take into account the population, because those who need hospitals most are the young and the old, and in East Anglia the young and the old are above the average for the country whereas the middle group is below it? Surely our hospitals ought to be at a higher rate than they are?

The prospective composition of the population in 1975 was taken into account in drawing up the plan. I must remind my hon. and gallant Friend that the figure of 3·3 per thousand is a national maximum, and the fact that the provision in a particular area works out at somewhat less than that is no evidence that it is not sufficient in the circumstances of the region.

In view of this Question and a number of other Questions which have appeared on the Order Paper, does not the right hon. Gentleman think it high time we debated the general principles of the Hospital Plan, and will he have a word with the Leader of the House to see whether he can arrange an early debate?

Will my right hon. Friend study some recent figures which have just come into my possession if I send them to him?

Yes, Sir; gladly.