asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he will introduce legislation to clear up in favour of the pensioner the anomaly whereby luncheon vouchers are counted as earnings for the purposes of the application of the earnings rule, although they are not counted as income for the purposes of assessing Income Tax.

No, Sir. As my hon. Friend knows, the calculation of net earnings for the purposes of benefit adjustments is for independent statutory authorities. While these authorities have ruled that payments in kind should be included, they have also ruled that particular expenses, such as fares to and from work which do not rank for Income Tax relief, should be de- ducted. My hon. Friend should not assume that the adoption of the Income Tax rules in calculating the earnings of employed pensioners would in every ease produce results more favourable to them.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, might I suggest that the object of the operation is not to apply them all but to apply those rules which would benefit the pensioner? Could not my right hon. Friend stretch a point, because it seems that the pensioner here is suffering from the double-headed penny, which is very much resented?

As I have indicated, they have some advantages, in a comparison with Income Tax, and some disadvantages. The Commissioner has ruled that earnings for National Insurance benefit purposes include payment in kind. Indeed, if we are to apply the earnings rule at all, it seems difficult to say that those who get payments in kind should have them disregarded and so be that much better off than those who do not get anything.

Surely the right hon. Gentleman will give further consideration to this? It is not only the retired people who suffer from this disability, but widows who perhaps are working in a school meal service and get a school lunch and find that this is added to their earnings and their pension is cut accordingly. It seems a great hardship that so many other people at the other end can get so much Income Tax relief on expense accounts. This really would not involve a great sum of money.

Order. We are constantly being told that supplementary questions must be shorter.

It might not involve a great deal of money, but it would involve a certain amount of unfairness between those who get benefits in kind and those who do not.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how many National Assistance Board re-establishment centres there are in Great Britain; how many men have been trained for new jobs at these centres; and how many have been admitted since the centres opened.

Three, Sir. These centres are provided under Section 16 of the National Assistance Act, 1948, for men who have been unemployed for a long time in order to fit them for re-entry into regular work. I am informed by the Board that 2,784 men passed through the centres between June, 1951 and December 1962; that 1,013 were placed in employment from the centres; and that many others are known to have obtained work shortly after leaving.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that answer. Can he now tell us the name of the third centre? In the 1960 Report we had West Hill and Henley-in-Arden. What is the name of the third centre? Finally, is the Minister aware of public perturbation about conditions in these camps? Can he assure the House that conditions are quite normal for the men and that they really are rehabilitated and their time is not wasted?

The third centre is at Brady House, Stepney, which is a non-residential re-establishment centre.

I might take up that offer.

Is there such a centre in Scotland? If not, ought not there to be one?

This is under consideration at the present time.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if he is aware that Miss C. C. Thomson, whose papers have been submitted to him, was placed in medical category A on enlistment, was subsequently downgraded to category C2 within six months of enlistment, and was retained in the service for three more years; and, in view of the fact that Miss Thomson is now suffering from Cushing's syndrome which appears to have been partly due to Service life, why he will not grant her a pension.

I am aware of the facts stated in the first part of the Question. I cannot award a pension under the Royal Warrant to Miss Thomson because the Pensions Appeal Tribunal disallowed her claim on appeal and I am bound by its decision, which is by Statute final.

Is not the Minister aware that further medical evidence was presented to him and, as he has stated to me, he is able to review these cases if the medical evidence is presented? Does not he agree that either Miss Thomson was suffering from this distressing disease when she enlisted, in which case she ought never to have been graded A 1 and deserves a pension, or she developed the disease later during her service—which is highly likely to have been attributable—in which case she ought to have been awarded a pension on this ground? Will not the right hon. Gentleman reconsider this very distressing case?

I agree that it is a distressing case, but the only kind of fresh evidence which could be considered is fresh medical evidence as opposed to a different view or opinion. I am informed that all the relevant facts were before the Tribunal at the time. It is, of course, quite possible for somebody to have the germ of a constitutional disease which cannot be diagnosed at the time of admission into the Services.

What can fresh medical evidence be except a fresh medical opinion with a different view of the case? That has been submitted to the Minister.

I do not think that is so, with respect. The opinion that was submitted was based on a tentative hypothesis.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what was the average weekly expenditure on National Assistance to recipients of assistance at offices of his Department in the County of Durham during the months of December, January and February last; and what were the comparable figures for the same months a year ago.

For the reason which I explained to the right hon. Gentleman on Monday last, it is not possible to give precisely the figures asked for. The National Assistance Board estimates, however, that regular weekly grants paid in the areas served by the Board's offices in County Durham in the months of December, January and February amounted to £168,000 as compared with£17,000 a year before.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether his colleagues in the Government are aware of those figures? If not, will he inform them about the gravity of the situation and the substantial increase in these National Assistance payments?

We are certainly aware that there has been an increase in unemployment. The right hon. Gentleman will be aware that special steps are being taken at the present time and that a Minister has been especially appointed to look after this area.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance what alterations and extensions have been made during each of the last ten years in the Schedule of the Industrial Diseases (Benefit) Act; whether he is satisfied that the present Schedule is sufficient to meet all the needs of modern industry, and in particular those industries relating to shipbuilding, shipping and fisheries; and if he will make a statement.

As there have been some 23 complex additions over the past ten years to the Schedule of prescribed diseases under the Industrial Injuries Act, I am sending the information to the hon. and learned Member. The Schedule includes all the occupational diseases which on the information at present available satisfy the tests for prescription under Section 55 (2) of the Act. If the hon. and learned Member has in mind any particular condition not so far prescribed, I will gladly study any evidence he cares to send me.

I shall send the Minister the particulars I have in mind? Does he realise that this is of tremendous importance to the industries mentioned at the end of my Question? In the statement he is proposing to send to me, will the right hon. Gentleman say when this Schedule was last examined; whether it was examined by experts, and what evidence was taken and with what result?

The Schedule is under continual examination. We have had reports from the Medical Research Council, and there is research in universities and research within industry. The Schedule is examined by the Advisory Council when submissions are made to it, and the Advisory Council can itself ask for submissions to be made to it. As the hon. and learned Gentleman will see, the last addition was made in 1961.

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance, to what extent, in agreeing or refusing to schedule certain diseases as industrial hazards, he takes into account the incidence of these diseases amongst citizens outside the occupations concerned.

To the extent that I am required to do so by Section 55 (2) of the Industrial Injuries Act, 1946.

Will the Minister look at this again? Should not he be exclusively concerned with cause and effect in industry and not with the proneness of people to contract a certain disease because they live in a smoke-polluted area? Will not he approach the question of emphysema on this basis?

This is precisely the way in which it is approached. But I am, of course, bound by the Industrial Injuries Act, and it is on those lines that I consider whether a disease should be prescribed or not.

Did not the Minister refer last week to the fact that certain people outside the mining and pottery industries are prone to emphysema, and did not he seem to use this as a reason why he was reluctant to schedule emphysema as an industrial disease? Should not the right hon. Gentleman be exclusively concerned with causations in industry?

Before scheduling a particular disease in relation to insured persons, I am bound by the Act to consider whether it ought to be treated as arising from their occupations, having regard to its causes and incidence, rather than as a risk common to everyone. I cannot do so unless I consider the incidence among the population as a whole. But that is only one consideration, which is why I said, "To the extent I am required by the Act".

asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance how many recipients of National Assistance in the Glasgow area received increased payments between 22nd December, 1962, and 2nd March, 1963; what was the total monetary increase as compared with the same period a year ago; and if he will give the corresponding figures for the whole of Scotland.

It is not clear whether the hon. Member is referring to grants by way of a single payment to meet an exceptional need or to regular weekly additions to provide for special needs of various kinds. Information about the latter is available only on an annual basis for Great Britain as a whole and not for particulars areas or particular times of the year. As the information in regard to single payments in the Glasgow area and in Scotland contains a number of figures, I will, if I may, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give one figure? Can he say how the total monetary payment during the period I indicated compares with the total amount paid out a year ago?

At the Glasgow offices it was £15,465 up to 26th February, 1963, against £11,210 for the previous period; and the Scottish figures are more or less in line.

Does not that figure show a rather shameful state of affairs, in view of the fact that during this period not only was Glasgow hit by heavy unemployment but by the coldest winter in the experience of most people? Does not it seem a shame that during that period people should obviously have received so little additional help from the National Assistance Board due to the action of the Minister?

This is certainly not due to the action of the Minister. The amounts payable are within the discretion of the Board, and these are the payments it decided were proper.

asked the Minister without Portfolio what is his general policy in regard to publicising the proposals, policies, and achievements of Her Majesty's Government.

Such publicity is the responsibility of the Government as a whole, although in my capacity as Minister co-ordinating the home information services I am always ready to advise Ministers on timing and presentation. Apart from Parliament, which is and must always be the principal forum for presenting the policies of Her Majesty's Government, I think there is no better method of giving them publicity than through the free institutions of the Press and broadcasting. I try to ensure they get all the facilities they need.

I thank my hon. Friend for that informative reply. May we assume that he will give due publicity to the massive achievements of Her Majesty's Government which are so many, so varied and so beneficial, but yet are not properly and fully appreciated? At the same time, will he continue to bear in mind and give due weight to the imaginative policies shown by the Government?

Yes, but I have to distinguish between Government information services, for which the taxpayer pays, and what the party is, and should be able to do for itself.

As the greatest achievement in Ayr at the moment is that the unemployment figure is higher than it has been since the war, will the Minister tell us whether, when issuing proposals and policies, he proposes to issue blank sheets of paper?

The Government information services can be counted on to give the facts in their proper perspective.

Why does not my right hon. Friend "hit" the hon. Gentleman hard? I would hit him hard.

To ask the Minister without Portfolio what pledges are required of journalists and accredited Lobby correspondents by Government Departments when confidential information is provided.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. This Question deals with all Government Departments and not only the Home Department; in particular the Foreign Office. Therefore, it was put down to the Prime Minister. It has now been transferred to the Minister without Portfolio. A good many hon. Members are becoming a little concerned because the Prime Minister so frequently transfers Questions to other Departments.

The hon. Gentleman has been a Member of this House for quite a long time, if I may say so, and I think he knows that the transferring of Questions is not a matter for the Chair.

None. Sir.

Will the right hon. Gentleman be a little more forthcoming? Is he not aware that journalists and lobbyists when they go to Government Departments, and even when there in conversation with Ministers, are repeatedly requested not to convey the source of their information? As that is the case, is it not outrageous that the Government should now he committing two men to prison for declining to state the source of their information?

The hon. Gentleman is raising matters somewhat wider than should be answered in terms of question and answer. I hope that we shall have an opportunity to discuss this and other matters. Meanwhile, the Press, and in particular the Lobby, have their own code of conduct which governs them in such dealings, and, as hon. Members on both sides know, they observe it.

asked the Minister without Portfolio what instructions have been given to Ministers about giving confidential information to the Press.

No special instructions have been given.

As journalists have now been compelled to reveal their sources and have been imprisoned for not doing so, will the Minister advise other Ministers in future to keep records of confidential information they may give and to publish those records if required? If he does not intend to give this advice, will he say whether he accepts the non-disclosure of confidential information as an important point of principle and approves the stand taken by the imprisoned journalists?

The hon. Gentleman raises matters somewhat wider than the Question. He is well aware that the conduct of correspondents, Ministers and hon. Members on both sides is governed by a series of understandings which are well accepted by both parties, and I see no reason to accept the advice he has offered.

Would the hon. Gentleman say whether in his opinion the recent imprisonment of two journalists is likely to have any effect on the existing practice as between the Lobby and Ministers?

No; frankly I do not think it will.

asked the Minister of Health if he will exclude from the proposed sale of land at the Women's Hospital, Showell Green Lane, Birmingham, that area cultivated for many years by the Oakwood Road Allotment Society.

The land is part of the endowments of the United Birmingham Hospitals. My right hon. Friend has no control over its disposal.

Is not my hon. Friend aware that this site has been cultivated for nearly fifty years and that it is the only land available for allotments in the area? Is he also aware that in 1959 when the allotment holders lost their natural supply of water, on an assurance that they would not be disturbed, they laid on a piped supply at the cost of £60? I know that this is an endowment, but it does belong to the Women's Hospital under the control of the Minister. Will he look again into this matter?

I note what my hon. Friend says, but I am sure that on reflection he will agree that the board of governors, as prudent trustees, should dispose of the land in a manner which will ensure obtaining the best price.

On the question of the sale of land in and around hospitals, is the hon. Gentleman aware that valuable farms and valuable horticultural land are, because of Government policy, being sold and the hospitals have to buy in the private market the fresh vegetables and fruit which hitherto they produced themselves? Would he look into this question at the same time?

I am not so aware, but if the hon. Gentleman has a particular instance, I will certainly look into it if he will provide me with details.

asked the Minister of Health if he has now concluded a new contract with Imperial Chemical Industries for the supply of the anesthetic fluothane to the hospital service; if the contract now includes a costings clause; and at what price a quarter litre bottle is now available to the hospitals.

A new contract has been made; no, Sir; it is against public policy to disclose an individual contract price.

First, if a contract has been made, how can the right hon. Gentleman say whether it is a fair one if he does not know what the costings are? Secondly, why has there been all this delay—eighteen months—since the matter was first drawn to his attention and one year since the Public Accounts Committee first probed into the matter?

There are various ways of judging the reasonableness of a price, such as by comparison with the price in the export market. I am satisfied that, with the further reduction—a substantial one—under this contract, the public is getting a reasonable bargain.

Will he again explain why there has been this delay?

asked the Minister of Health how many seriously handicapped children, resident in Derby, and in need of permanent hospital accommodation, have been on the waiting list for suitable vacancies for over 10 years, including those who have become of age since their names first went on the list.

None, so far as I am aware.

Is the Minister aware that that is not in accordance with the information which I have received to the effect that there are children who have been more than ten years on the waiting list? Does he not appreciate that this imposes very great hardship on the parents? Is it not disgraceful that they should be on the waiting list for so long?

I have looked at one or two individual cases, not I think actually from the Borough of Derby, that the right hon. Gentleman brought to my attention. If he and I might compare our information, I will do all that is in my power to help.

May I express my thanks to the Minister?

asked the Minister of Health what assurances he has given to the Royal College of Nursing about the provision of additional funds for nurse recruitment in the coming financial year; and to what extent such funds will be additional to the initial allocations made to hospital authorities.

asked the Minister of Health what assurances of additional financial provision for increased nursing staff he has given to the Royal College of Nursing, following a recent deputation from them; and if he will make a statement regarding his policy on this matter for the next financial year.

I am sending the hon. Members copies of my letter to the Royal College of Nursing. The additional spending power already allocated to Regional Boards will enable them to continue to increase nursing staff when necessary.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that the assurances he has given to the Royal College of Nursing are utterly worthless, since the allocation for nursing salaries in the coming financial year is barely 2½yer cent. greater in money terms than the amount provided last year—an allocation which led to a most painful decline in nurse recruitment? Is it not quite clear that the hospitals will not be empowered to increase their nursing establishments by any noticeable proportion in the coming year?

The hon. Member is under a misapprehension. There are no specific allocations for nursing salaries, and the additional purchasing power on constant prices and salaries in the coming year for the hospital service will enable hospitals, where additional nurses are required, to increase their numbers as they have been doing for the last eighteen months.

Would I be right in assuming that after a period of great obstinacy on the part of my right hon. Friend, having received a deputation from the Royal College of Nursing—and having been given all the evidence which that College had collected on the subject —he came to the conclusion that a great deal of what he had said before was incorrect? When my right hon. Friend sends me a copy of the letter which has been sent to the Royal College of Nursing, will be also publish in HANSARD the correspondence which took place between himself and the Royal College so that we can see whether or not the Royal College is satisfied?

I am not sure whether it would be appropriate to publish the whole of the correspondence in HANSARD—

I will ask the College.

—but I am sure that the Royal College will itself publish anything it wishes to be known. I consider that my recent meeting with the College was useful and that my letter to it put the facts in their true light.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is now in a position to make a statement about his proposed changes in the conditions of employment of nursing cadets.

Not yet.

But does not the recent report of the Confederation of Health Service Employees about the very serious shortage of trained nurses show the urgent need for establishing good conditions of employment for these pre-nursing students as quickly as possible? Could I, once again, ask the right hon. Gentleman when he hopes to make his statement to the House?

I must ask the hon. Lady to be patient a little longer.

asked the Minister of Health how many hospital management committees are making deductions from the pay of nursing cadets for attendance at educational courses on more than one day per week; and how many with nursing cadets schemes are making no such deductions.

I regret the information is not available.

Does this not show that, pending the Minister's production of his clear statement of policy about the deductions from the pay of pre-nursing students who attend educational courses for more than one day a week, there is a disparity in the treatment of these hospital cadets by different hospital committees, a disparity which my Question was intended to elicit and which the Minister is able to evade by saying that the information is not available.

As this is an interim situation, I thought that it was not reasonable to secure reports on this point from all hospital authorities.

asked the Minister of Health what progress is being made with the arrangements to build a new hospital in Boston.

A revised plan has now been agreed and the sketch plans are being prepared.

asked the Minister of Health by what proportion the expenditure of regional hospital boards on maintenance of buildings, plant and grounds and domestic repairs, renewals and replacements fell short of the total originally allocated for those purposes in 1962–63; and by what proportion the comparable allocations for 1963–64 have been increased in real terms to enable deferred maintenance of this nature to be carried out.

Separate allocations are not made for individual items of revenue expenditure.

Instead of "allocations", perhaps I should have used the expression "estimated expenditure within the total allocation." Is the Minister aware that his own Estimates for 1963–64 make it perfectly clear that hospitals have deferred maintenance to the extent of about one-sixth in the past year in order to find the money to pay nursing salaries? Is he further aware that this is the most foolish kind of economy to force on hospital authorities, because the work will have to be done sooner or later and will cost more when it is done?

All hospital authorities have the responsibility of deciding, within the money available to them—which is increasing in real terms—on what points of development they will spend it. Where they have decided to defer maintenance in order further to increase staff I have no doubt that their judgment is right. When the figures of expenditure become available from the Board's accounts later in the year, I will certainly give the hon. Gentleman the figures of expenditure.

But is not the Minister aware that the annual increase of 2½ per cent. allowed to hospital management committees is not an increase in real terms, as he said, and is creating considerable difficulties? For example, it is creating difficulties at Solihull, in Birmingham, where some wards have not been decorated for up to fifteen years. Will he look at the system of financing this sort of expenditure, because it is obviously inadequate to the needs?

The hon. Member is mistaken. This is an increase in real terms. At constant prices and salaries, it puts additional spending power into the hands of hospital authorities in addition to any that accrues from economies or increased efficiency.

asked the Minister of Health if he will take steps to ensure that all juveniles aged 15–18 years employed in the National Health Service are given day release facilities as good as the best practice in the Civil Departments of State.

They already are.

Does that mean that the complements in the executive councils and the National Health Service allow 80 per cent. of juveniles under 18 to attend classes for one day a week?

It means that the existing arrangements are in line with the normal practice in the Civil Service and elsewhere. Some young technicians and apprentices are given one day's release a week for technical training. Other young people are given one day a week for general education.

asked the Minister of Health what consideration he has given to the recommendation made to him by the General Medical Services Committee of the British Medical Association that a dispensing doctor should retain the right to continue dispensing for his patients if and when a chemist starts a business in that doctor's practice area.

I have concluded that this is contrary to the intention of the Act.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that quite a number of doctors, particularly in rural areas, are suffering a fairly hefty drop in income as a result of this? Even if it is contrary to the Act, can he not find some way of easing the pain a little?

I see the difficulty where the general practitioner has been meeting the dispensing needs of an area and when they are met in future, as is the normal case, by the pharmaceutical service. There is a period of notice, but I do not think in principle there can be any alteration in the present arrangements.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that there is much to be said for accepting the basic principle of the Service, which is that the practice of medicine should be in the hands of medical practitioners and the practice of pharmacy in the hands of pharmacists?

I agree, and that is what I referred to as the intention of the Act.

asked the Minister of Health whether he has yet reached a decision regarding the suggestion made by the hon. Member for Ayr of prohibiting manufacturers from putting new drugs on the market without prior submission to his advisory committee for authority to do so.

No, Sir. I await further advice from my Standing Medical Advisory Committee.

I know that, but would my right hon. Friend at least consider preventing the continued production or importation of any drug which is known to have been taken by a pregnant mother whose child as a result has been born deformed?

If my hon. Friend has reason to suppose that such a drug is still being imported or marketed, I should be glad to have the information, but I am sure that on such a matter I ought to act upon the advice of the Committee.

In view of the vast number of complaints he is now getting about new drugs coming on to the market without proper research having been done before sale, does not the Minister consider that he should think again about the whole question? We are now getting many complaints from constituents about side-effects of new drugs. This question is now so important that the Minister ought to take a real interest in it and ban the sale of new drugs until there has been proper research into their side-effects.

I am indeed taking a real interest in this. The hon. Member may recall that my Sub-committee advised the appointment of an expert body to review the evidence on the toxicity of new drugs, and I am awaiting further advice from that Committee.

asked the Minister of Health if he is aware that the Charing Cross Hospital use the Putney Migraine Clinic for the treatment of patients who cannot be offered treatment at Charing Cross; and if he will consider making wider use of the migraine clinic in the National Health Service.

No, Sir. Doctors in the National Health Service can offer any form of treatment they consider appropriate including that advocated by this clinic.

Why is the Minister always so persistently against the Putney Migraine Clinic? In view of the production of all these new pills for migraine under the National Health Service, would it not be a good idea to consult the clinic to see what part it can play? This clinic has done a good deal of work on investigating a cure for migraine. Is it not nonsense the way in which my right hon. Friend has persistently ignored the work of the Putney Migraine Clinic?

I am neither for nor against the Putney Migraine Clinic. All I am saying is that doctors under the National Health Service can give any form of treatment for migraine they consider appropriate, including that which the clinic advocates, of which I have every reason to think they are well aware.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is an old sore and that, whatever doctors within the National Health Service may be able to do for the treatment of migraine, they are not doing it as a body because insufficient is known about the cause of migraine? Will not the Minister encourage further research to be done by the Medical Research Council into the cause and treatment of migraine?

I do not answer for the Medical Research Council, but I have no doubt that doctors in the National Health Service are aware of the importance of the treatment of this disease and of their own responsibility to act in the best interests of their patients.

Is the Minister aware that migraine if often caused by dislocations of which both the medical men and the patients themselves are unaware, and that the right treatment is often manipulation?

I am afraid that I cannot enter into a clinical judgment.

asked the Minister of Health if he will now make available the new Mini car to ex-Service persons who have become disabled other than as a result of war-time service since discharge from Her Majesty's Forces.

No, Sir.

Why does the Ministry continue to differentiate between the war disabled and those disabled by other means? Is the Parliamentary Secretary not aware that there are people who, having served for six years in the Forces, have, after demobilisation, become disabled and are having to get to work under great difficulties? Will not the hon. Gentleman urge his right hon. Friend to have another look at this matter, for do not such cases deserve sympathetic treatment?

The hon. Member will agree that there should not be a distinction made between National Health Service patients who have served in the Forces and other National Health Service patients for whom no such distinction is made. Patients who are sufficiently disabled are eligible for the provision of power transport and receive tricycles, but it is in accord with the tradition of the social services in this country that a preference is made in respect of the war disabled.

Nevertheless, is it not a fact that a differentiation is now made? Will he not close this gap and make Mini cars available to a wide range of disabled persons?

There is a differentiation, but it is in the respect which I have explained. I think that on a moment's reflection the hon. Member will see that if, in fact, there was to be any kind of extension it is not a car as such that should be extended. One might well consider extending the eligibility of those who need this kind of transport; but that is another matter. This is a very serious matter and I do not think it can be settled on the basis the hon. Member suggests.

asked the Minister of Health how many prosecutions have been instituted against employers allowing a woman or girl to be employed within four weeks of giving birth to a child, under the Factory and Works Act, 1901, and the Public Health Act, 1936.

I regret this information is not available.

If the Government cannot discover this information, how do they know that there is a need to consolidate this legislation in terms of the Private Member's Bill which the Government support? Will the Parliamentary Secretary urge his right hon. Friend to look again at the question of providing this information before any further steps are taken in regard to this Private Member's Bill?

The information is not kept centrally. The only way to get it would to ask the local authorities which are the enforcing authorities to search their records as far back as 1901. I think that it would be rash to assume, whether or not there have been a large number of prosecutions, that women employed in factories have not secured adequate protection as a result of the legislation passed all those years ago. The hon. Lady should reflect that in asking that power should not be taken to protect women in offices and shops in the same way as women have been protected in factories, she is in effect asking us to repeal the law protecting women in factories.

Would my hon. Friend not agree that the number of prosecutions under an Act is no indication of the social worth of the piece of legislation? Would he not agree that these Acts, which take no account of a doctor's recommendation, could be improved?

Yes, indeed, and I hope that the Bill we have before the House will receive sympathetic support on that count. But I think that there has been a great deal of misunderstanding on this point. The Minister's regulations likely to be made under that Bill, if it is enacted, will take into account modern conditions and the necessity of providing for special circumstances in varying employments in the interests of all women workers.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary take note of two points; firstly, if the legislation already existing is dead in the sense that no one takes any notice of it and there are no prosecutions under it, then the new Bill cannot be said to be a consolidating Measure and it is, therefore, introducing a new principle which should be fully argued and debated in the House. Secondly, would he not agree that the Minister, in a long reply, introduced the principle of the Bill? Would the Parliamentary Secretary not agree that in the view of many hon. Members it should be a matter for trade union negotiation to establish the same kind of excellent conditions for women who are employed both during and after the period of childbirth?

We shall not make the progress demanded of me if we have supplementary questions of that length.

asked the Minister of Health what is the present gross annual pay of the average general practitioner in the National Health Service.

The latest available figure is about £3.750 for 1960–61.

Has not the Parliamentary Secretary given the gross and not the net? Is not the net nearer £2,500? Is the Minister aware that the coming discussions with the Prime Minister on the question of the Review Body's recommendations should bear in mind that those concerned are more interested in time and facilities than, perhaps, in questions of pay? Will he also bear in mind that there are very few people who are on the average and that there is need to bring down the number on the lists?

if the hon. Gentleman will look again at his Question he will see that it asks for the present gross annual pay. Therefore I did not give him any net figure. If he wants that he must put down a Question in some other form. I understand that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said last Thursday that the advice of the Review Body will be published when he makes his promised statement shortly, and I do think that we can wait until then.

When discussions take place with the profession following the announcement of Government policy on this matter, will the Minister look into the question of the method of allocating practice expenses? Is he not aware that the present method acts as a disincentive to those general practitioners who want to give proper facilities and a good standard of service to their patients?

I am afraid that I have nothing further to say. I think that it would be most unwise to say anything until my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has made his statement.

asked the Minister of Health what has been the total sum paid to doctors in respect of post-graduate education from the sum reserved; how many doctors received grants; and what is the present balance in hand for this specified purpose.

This scheme is not yet in operation.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary tell us when the scheme will be in operation? As this arose from the Report of the Royal Commission on Doctors' and Dentists' Remuneration published some eighteen months ago, when will the scheme operate, and what is he doing to facilitate it?

As the hon. Gentleman probably knows, the scheme was to start from a date to be agreed. My Department and representatives of the profession are discussing the details now, and no date has yet been settled. It is necessary, of course, to ensure that adequate courses are available.

asked the Minister of Labour what policy was adopted by Her Majesty's Government's representative at the International Labour Organisation in the recent discussions on the attitude of British banks towards trade unionism among their employees; what steps he is taking to comply with the International Labour Organisation request that be should set up an inquiry; and if he will make a statement.

At its session on 8th March, the Governing Body of the International Labour Office accepted a recommendation from its Freedom of Association Committee that the United Kingdom Government be invited to set up an inquiry. There was no discussion, but our representative said that the Govern- ment would give careful consideration to the request. The request has not yet been received.

Is the Minister aware that we on this side have for many years been urging the Minister and his predecessors to use their influence with the banks to afford normal facilities to the National Union of Bank Employees? Does he not think it a somewhat embarrassing situation when a British trade union has to take its problems to the I.L.O. to try to get the answer it cannot get in this country? Will the hon. Gentleman make it absolutely clear that when this request is received, in the formal sense, the Minister will, in fact, set up an inquiry quickly? When does he expect to be able to announce to the House the terms of reference, the number of members, and details like that?

The possibility of an inquiry is being actively considered. Until that decision has been taken, I cannot say more in answer to the hon. Gentleman's other requests. I could not agree that it is in any way embarrassing that this request should have come from the International Labour Organisation. As the hon. Gentleman knows, this is a very complicated matter and the I.L.O. considered that some sort of inquiry was necessary. The I.L.O. could have set up an inquiry itself but, instead, has given us the opportunity of doing so.

asked the Minister of Labour what percentage of the working population in north Staffordshire is unemployed at the latest date for which figures are available; and what action is being taken by his Department to prevent the further spread of redundancy.

It was 4·2 per cent. at 11th February, 1963. The March figure will be available later this week, and I will send it to the hon. Member. There are also redundancies pending, and our local officers are in touch with the firms with a view to helping the workers affected to find other employment.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that this is a very serious situation, with getting on for 10,000 workers in north Staffordshire unemployed? And we still have not felt the effect of the prospective closure of British Aluminium. What are his officers doing about bringing new industry to north Staffordshire, or trying to persuade people like British Aluminium to stay their hand instead of increasing unemployment?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, the question of bringing new industry to north Staffordshire is one for my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade. Our officers are doing everything they can to find other employment for these people.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, in addition to whatever the figure may be on paper, there much hidden unemployment? Would he, therefore, realise that the north Staffordshire position is serious and that encouragement is needed in the form of new industries and other enterprises?

I note what the hon. Gentleman says and I hope that we may see some improvement when the March figures come out this week.

asked the Lord Privy Seal with reference to the Thant plan for Congo reconciliation, what arrangements have been made to protect the person of President Tshombe; and to what extent the United Nations have made good the undertaking that he should retain a Katangan gendarmerie escort.

The United Nations agreed on 17th January that a personal guard of company strength would be authorised at Mr. Tshombe's residence. A few members of that guard would be authorised to escort him in his movements.

Can my hon. Friend say whether this undertaking by the United Nations has been fulfilled?

As far as I know, it is still in operation.

asked the Lord Privy Seal if he is aware that the Soviet Government have now officially stated through the Soviet head of cultural relations, M. Sergei Romanowski, that the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is jamming the British Broadcasting Corporation broadcasts; what recent representations and efforts have been made to end this jamming; what other countries also jam British Broadcasting Corporation broadcasts; and whether he will make a statement.

Yes, Sir. During the negotiations in January this year for the renewal of the Anglo-Soviet Cultural Agreement, Her Majesty's Government took up once more the Soviet jamming of British Broadcasting Corporation broadcasts. There was no change in the Soviet position which was that they jam only those broadcasts which they consider to be hostile and to constitute interference in their internal affairs. Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Roumania, Bulgaria and China also jam British Broadcasting Corporation broadcasts. Broadcasts in Polish and Albanian are subject to interference from jammers outside the territories of those countries. Broadcasts in German are jammed in East Germany.

Do we operate any counter-jamming?

No, Sir.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what advantage he took of the recent visits by businessmen from Scandinavian countries to establish among other matters which aspects of fisheries are common to Britain and those countries, for the purpose of correlating and expanding those common interests and British fishing.

I do not know to what visitors the hon. and learned Member refers, but in any event no such group has made any approach to my right hon. Friend.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary not aware that a number of Scandinavian people interested in the fishing industry attended at Lancaster House recently to discuss business affairs with his Ministry; that this provided a very special occasion and a very special opportunity for British businessmen and the Ministry to discuss with those Scandinavian representatives of business interests means of fostering international trade, not only between Britain and those countries in general, but between Scotland and all the other countries round the North Sea?

I am not aware of any approach to my right hon. Friend by any Scandinavian people concerning fishing interests.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will include prepared dried organic fertilisers made from sewage amongst the fertilisers which qualify for subsidy.

No, Sir. It is impracticable to pay subsidy on organic fertilisers in view of their variable plant food content and the consequent difficulty in establishing the appropriate rate of subsidy.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that his predecessor said about three years ago that research was going on into this problem? Does the hon. Gentleman not anticipate any conclusion to the research, and is he aware that the sale of this fertiliser provides a useful reduction to the rate requirement and that much more could be sold if it were not for competition from other types of subsidised fertiliser?

I appreciate the hon. Member's concern that there should be an increase in the sale of this organic substance. Indeed, I would welcome any increase that could be achieved, but, as my right hon. Friend pointed out to the hon. Member some time ago, the difficulties make it almost impracticable to give any form of subsidy when one does not know the exact content of the organic material.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs whether he will announce the share of the new rateable values to be borne by industry, commerce and householders, respectively; and what will be the percentage increase or decrease in each class compared to the current valuations.

As the Answer is long and contains a number of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Having regard to all the hullabaloo there is about local rates, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he can assure the House, within all bounds of human ingenuity, that the rate burden is now equitably spread as between industrial hereditaments, commercial hereditaments, including shops, and private dwellings, while leaving farmland derated? Has my right hon. Friend done all he possibly can to see that the burden is equitably spread over all these classes of ratepayer?

I think that I can honourably say, in answer to my hon. Friend, that looking at the distribution of the rate burden it is now on a common basis of current value and that therefore it does justice, subject always to the right of appeal, between industrial, commercial and domestic ratepayers. This tends, of course, to be confused with the quite different question of the effects, in different parts of the country, of the increase of rate-call to pay the ratepayer's share, as opposed to the massive taxpayer's share, of education and other urgently needed services. It is true, of course, that in some parts of the country where there is not large industry the share of the domestic ratepayer has tended for revaluation reasons, apart from rate-call reasons, to rise. But hon. Members need to be reminded that there are a number of parts of the country where industry is thick on the ground and where domestic ratepayers will be paying substantially less as their share than in the past.

However much the right hon. Gentleman may seek to gloss over the figures, may I ask whether he does not realise that there is massive and mounting opinion growing up against the present rating system and its injustices? What is the right hon. Gentleman going to do about that?

The present rating system is meeting the demands of the whole country for rising local authority services to which the taxpayer is contributing an increasing share. It is therefore important to recognise that if the House wishes these services to increase it must expect that taxpayers and ratepayers between them must pay. as they are now doing.

Is my right hon. Friend in a position to say whether the Government can help those areas which are particularly badly struck by the new arrangements?

My hon. Friend knows that I am seeing deputations from some of these areas whenever requested, but that the Government's decision not to use the derating power, which provided for an even steeper share in the rate burden than has occurred, has been made.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that nobody really knows what are the incidences of rates and that there has been no proper inquiry into the incidence of rates since before the war? Is he aware, therefore, that if the Government had carried out the recommendations which we on this side of the House made, and had been making for many years, for an inquiry into the rating system, these difficulties would not have arisen? When does the right hon. Gentleman hope to let us have the revised edition of the White Paper, which it was promised would be issued after the assessments had been published, showing the effect of the incidence of rating on different classes in different areas?

I hope to publish in a few weeks the figures for which the hon. Member asks. As for the first part of his supplementary question, all the figures I can gather together show that rates represent a smaller proportion of earnings than they did before the war, but this is no comfort to hon. Members in areas where the primary problem is not one of earnings but one of fixed incomes. I think that there is a problem of the trends of local authority costs to be considered, and I know that the House has the future of this very much in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will place a copy of the proceedings and evidence of the Vassall Tribunal of Inquiry in the Library of the House.

I am arranging for copies of the transcripts of the evidence taken in the public sessions of the Tribunal to be placed in the Library. The evidence taken in camera is, of course, confidential and cannot be thus made available.