asked the Minister of Power if he will state the original amount of liability for vested assets belonging to the coal mining industry; what amount has been reduced by annual repayment since vesting day what total has been borrowed by the National Coal Board since vesting day up to the latest date; and what is the total interest payment made over the same period.

The National Coal Board's original liability for vested assets was £388 million, of which £49 million was repaid by 31st December, 1963. Between 1st January, 1947, and 31st December, 1963, £833 million was advanced to the Board under Section 26 of the Coal Industry Nationalisation Act, 1946, and £221 million was repaid. In the same period the Board paid £161 million interest on vesting liabilities and £204 million interest on Exchequer advances. The Board also reimbursed the Exchequer £63 million in respect of interim income paid to former colliery owners.

Do not those staggering figures show that the National Coal Board is carrying a very heavy financial burden, and does not the Minister agree that there is an overwhelming case for reducing the rates of interest payments and the capital liabilities?

I think the figures reveal that when capital is used the interest charges should be met. There has been heavy capital investment, and so the interest charges appear large in the aggregate. I think that the coal industry has been fortunate in being able to raise its money at such comparatively advantageous rates.

asked the Minister of Power if he will give the number of coal mines closed, the number closed through exhaustion, and the number closed through uneconomic reasons, since vesting day up to the latest date.

The total number of collieries closed by the National Coal Board between 1947 and the end of 1963 was 450. I understand that of these 223 had exhausted their reserves, 170 were uneconomic and the remaining 57 were closed for other reasons such as manpower redeployment, flooding and fire.

Is the Minister aware that recently 11 collieries have been closed in my constituency and that further closures are contemplated? Will he consult the Durham Division of the National Coal Board with a view to mitigating the social and economic consequences of further closures until alternative employment is provided?

As I am sure the hon. Gentleman knows, individual colliery closures are a matter for the National Coal Board. I am assured that the Board, by careful phasing of closures, does its best to avoid heavy local unemployment and makes every effort to offer alternative jobs to men displaced. With a high level of economic activity in the country generally, and now fortunately in the North-East, I think that the Board should be able to pursue that policy without the hardship to which the hon. Gentleman has drawn attention.

Is not the Minister aware that the National Coal Board has had to run down the total manpower employed by about 200,000 in the last five years? It is, therefore, not possible for the Board to offer alternative employment. Will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider his reply to my hon. Friend and see whether he as Minister of Power can delay closures in some of these cases until his successor at the Board of Trade has been more successful than he has been in attracting alternative employment to these areas?

I think that the figures speak for themselves, because from 1959 to 1963 only about 5,000 men were redundant out of a total of more than 60,000 affected by closures. The policy which I pursued was, I think, successful, and I am sure that my successor will be equally successful.

asked the Minister of Power (1) if he will make a statement on the potentialities of the research project which has resulted in the development of the Collins Miner, a remote-controlled automatic coal-face cutter; and to what extent the research and development were financed by Her Majesty's Government;

These projects for remote control of mining processes are an important part of the National Coal Board's efforts to raise productivity and improve safety. They are being developed by the Board on its own responsibility in collaboration with manufacturers. I have no doubt that all aspects of future exploitation, including exports, are being considered.

Does the Minister agree that these machines are among the finest in the world? If he does, does he also agree that this is a great tribute to the enterprise of the men engaged in the mining industry—both management and workpeople? If it is true that they are such a success, would the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of asking the Coal Board to consider manufacturing them on a large scale, so that they can be exported for tunnelling and mining purposes throughout the world?

The answer to the last part of the supplementary question is that that is very much a matter for the Board and the manufacturers. I entirely agree with what the hon. Gentleman said about the imaginativeness of these new methods of extracting coal.

asked the Minister of Power what steps he is now taking to increase the supply of smokeless fuels in the Glasgow area at prices within the reach of pensioners and people living on low incomes.

I have nothing to add to the replies I gave to the hon. Member on 28th November and to the hon. Members for Glasgow, Craigton (Mr. Millan) and Bilston (Mr. R. Edwards) on 19th December and 6th February, respectively.

Those Answers were not very helpful. They got us no further. Elderly people, pensioners and those with low incomes who are living in smokeless zones in Glasgow are finding it very difficult to maintain adequate heating in winter owing to present prices. Will he help these people by bringing down the prices of fuels, or consulting his right hon. Friend?

Prices are dominated by the cost of production and also by competition. As I told the hon. Member before, it is not our intention to take powers to control prices as we do not think that it will help.

But will my right hon. Friend look into the question of the quality of Rexco fuel, which has been put on the market in Scotland recently and which does not come up to the required standards of the housewife?

That is not a question for my Department. Rexco is a proprietary fuel, manufactured by a private company. I have no doubt that what my hon. Friend has just said will be duly noted by the manufacturers.

But is not the hon. Gentleman aware that the solid smokeless fuel which has been available hitherto in Glasgow and in the west of Scotland generally is the solid smokeless fuel provided by the Scottish Gas Board? It is one of the products of their coal-carbonising plant. Inasmuch as these plants are being replaced by plants which are fuelled by light oil distillates, is it not his responsibility, or that of his Ministry, to ensure that new solid smokeless fuel is available to people in that area?

The hon. Member has just referred to the main factor that gave rise to the publication of the Government's White Paper on solid smokeless fuels. It would be wholly wrong for the Government or for my Department to seek to oblige the gas industry to produce a solid fuel when it is becoming increasingly uneconomic for it to do so.

asked the Minister of Power if he is aware that the Scottish Gas Board plans to replace coal carbonising plants in the west of Scotland by plants consuming light oil distillates; and what steps he is taking to ensure an adequate supply of solid smokeless fuel as the production of household coke diminishes.

Yes, Sir. The hon. Member will find the Answers to the second part of his Question in the recent White Paper, Command 2231.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is no answer there which deals with this point; otherwise this Question would not have been put? Is he aware that many people who live compulsorily in these smokeless zones have fires burning this type of fuel and only this type of fuel, and is he telling us that it is nobody's responsibility when the supply of these fuels disappears and people are left to pay very high prices for a steadily contracting supply of, to them, an essential fuel and the only fuel that can be consumed in their grates? Is he saying that there is no one with any responsibility at all in this matter?

No, Sir. I am saying, and I dealt with this in Answer to an earlier question, that it would be wrong for the Government to seek to use their powers to stop the gas industry from developing those processes which seem most economic and profitable.

I am asking whether there is anyone with any responsibility at all for the supply of essential fuels for people who are compulsorily put in the position which they are at present?

I can only refer the hon. Gentleman to the White Paper that deals with the whole of this very complicated problem. There is a wide range of choice of various smokeless fuels, solid and non-solid.

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that he was wrong in telling my hon. Friend that the answer to the latter part of his question was contained in the White Paper? Is it not a fact that the White Paper poses the problem but declines to give any answer at all but leaves it to the consumers in those areas to choose, in the main, between the non-solid smokeless fuels—oil, gas and electricity—in place of the solid smokeless fuel for which they have purchased rather expensive appliances? Have not the Government some responsibility in this matter?

I do not think that I can usefully add to the Answer that I have already given.

asked the Minister of Power if he will consult the National Coal Board regarding the desirability of a reduction in coal prices in Scotland.

asked the Minister of Power if he has had consultations recently with the Chairman of the National Coal Board about the desirability of reducing certain coal prices in selected areas; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Power if he is aware that traditional markets for coal are being lost to fuel oil in the east of Scotland adjacent to and within the Midlothian coalfield in consequence of the selective coal price increases imposed in Scotland two years ago; and if he will discuss with the Chairman of the National Coal Board the need for selective price reductions at an early date.

asked the Minister of Power if, in view of the greatly improved financial position of the coal industry in Scotland and in order to maintain the market for Great Britain's only indigenous fuel, what proposals have been put to him by the National Coal Board for a review of coal prices in Scotland.

I would refer hon. Members to my reply of 28th November to the hon. Member for Motherwell (Mr. Lawson). I know that the Board is alive to the importance of securing a proper relationship between its costs and its prices and of maintaining its competitive power and markets in Scotland and elsewhere.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consult his Parliamentary Secretary, because the high cost of smokeless fuel is due to the cost of coal, and the cost of coal in Scotland is greater than it is in England? Will he see that the cost of the raw product—coal—in the production of smokeless fuels is reduced in Scotland so that people there can buy smokeless solid fuel for the same price as in England?

I think that it would help the hon. Member if I reminded him that price changes are a matter for the National Coal Board to initiate.

But is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that these selective coal price increases were announced in this House a little over two years ago by his predecessor? They were not announced by the Coal Board but by the Minister in order to placate some of his hon. Friends immediately prior to the discussion of the Coal Industry (Borrowing Powers) Bill on that day. Is he not further aware that there have been occasions when the coal industry in Scotland has failed to get contracts for heating or for certain appliances required by public authorities? Subject to the control of Ministers, about which there was a discussion in this House only last week, does not the right hon. Gentleman realise there is now a strong case for removing some of these selective price increases? Will not the right hon. Gentleman consult the Chairman of the National Coal Board to this end?

There has been a great improvement in the fortunes of the Scottish coal industry in the last two years since selective prices came into operation, but the fact is that the Scottish coalfields are still not covering their full cost and it is still a question whether there should be a reduction in prices. This is a matter for the Coal Board to determine.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these selective price increases IA ere made two years ago and that our Scottish industries have been affected, especially the paper trade? Will he not again consider consulting the Chairman of the National Coal Board? The coal industry in Scotland is losing contracts to England because it is possible to import coal from England more cheaply than it can be bought in Scotland, owing to these selective price increases. Surely there is something wrong with that situation?

We should remember that the coal industry receives a certain amount of protection from the oil industry and that there is a ban on coal imports. These two forms of protection help the industry, and within those protective limits it should find its own competitive level.

Is the Minister aware that everyone in Scotland is convinced that the Government played a very big part in the imposition of higher prices for coal in Scotland? Since that is so, will the Government now step in and consult the Chairman of the National Coal Board with a view to reducing the prices? Is the Minister also aware that coal is our only indigenous fuel and because of the increased prices the National Cal Board, which is doing an excellent job with the help of the miners who are at present employed in the industry, lost the contracts for providing central heating in two Scottish hospitals? Does not that worry the Government, in view of the fact that the unemployment figure is so high?

The question of the hospitals is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland. On the more general issue, the House must remember that before the price increases in Scotland the English pits were subsidising the production of Scottish coal. I do not think that hon. Members on either side of the House who represent English constituencies would relish a return to that state of affairs.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some of the most profitable pits in British coalfields are situated within a stone's throw of Edinburgh and that the hospitals are not now to be fuelled by means of our indigenous fuel but by oil imported from the Middle East?

Certainly. This is part of the problem. The very profitable pits to which the hon. Gentleman referred have to subsidise those in Scotland which are still operating at a loss.

asked the Minister of Power, (1) in giving his approval to the National Coal Board's plans, involving major capital expenditure, for concentrating coal depots, what information he received on how distribution costs will be increased or reduced as a result of the change being made;

Discussions are proceeding locally between the National Coal Board, the coal trade and the railways with a view to securing maximum economy in the new distribution arrangements; but I understand that, in many cases, the National Coal Board will look to private enterprise to construct central depots. The extent to which the Board will itself be called upon to undertake major capital expenditure is not yet known.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary say what radius these new depôts are intended to cover? Is he aware that retailers on the perimeter of any of these new areas will have very much increased transport costs compared with the retailers at the centre or near the new coal depôts? Would he examine the position with a view to protecting domestic consumers of coal where prices would be put up because of added transport costs on the retailer taking coal from the new depôts as against the local depôts? Can he give an assurance that if this means an increase in the cost to the domestic consumer the local coal depôts will be retained until some other method is arrived at which will give parity of price in these areas?

I would not like to give that assurance. The question of the closure of depôts is a matter for the railways, to whom they normally belong. I would remind the hon. Gentleman that the whole purpose of this operation is to cut down the costs of coal distribution, and that this is plainly in the interests of the coal industry and of the railways.

asked the Minister of Power if he is satisfied with the progress made by the Approved Coal Merchants' Scheme towards improving their standard of service to domestic consumers; and if he will make a statement.

The progress of this scheme is a matter for the trade and the National Coal Board, but I have noted with satisfaction that members of the scheme are now responsible for the distribution of some 86 per cent. of the house coal supplies in the country.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the price of coal to the consumer increases in ratio to the lower income groups? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this was first spoken about by his predecessor as far back as 1960 and the scheme was introduced in 1962? Can we be told how many retail coal merchants there are in the country and how many of them are in this scheme?

I understand that 86 per cent. of the house coal delivered in this country is handled by members of the scheme. I should add that the National Coal Board is considering with the trade what can be done with the other 14 per cent.

asked the Minister of Power what references he has made to the Domestic Coal Consumers' Council concerning prices being charged in excess of that appropriate to the coal group; and what reports the Council has made to him on the steps being taken to establish a complaints procedure through which the domestic consumer can seek redress.

Merchants are free to fix their own retail prices, but I have no evidence that the prices being charged are excessive. The Domestic Coal Consumers' Council referred to the procedure for complaints about defective deliveries in its Annual Report for the year ended 30th June, 1963.

Surely the Minister cannot deny that the Domestic Coal Consumers' Council referred to him malpractices taking place in the sale of coal and the variation of prices compared with grades? What steps has the Minister taken, or does he intend to take, to make public what the ordinary consumer can do to ventilate grievances and seek redress against these malpractices?

A leaflet describing the complaints procedure was given very wide circulation to merchants, local authorities, women's organisations and all Members of both Houses of Parliament. I have no reason to believe that the procedures are not well enough known to members of the public, who always have a choice of complaining to their own merchant, the original supplier of the fuel, or the Domestic Coal Consumers' Council.

asked the Minister of Power if, in relation to his responsibilities for taking decisions on the nuclear power programme, he will seek information from the Government of the United States of America about the capital costs of nuclear power plant now being built in the United States of America.

asked the Minister of Power what evaluation has been made of the United States General Electric boiling water reactor for future atomic power stations in this country; and whether he intends to sanction its use by the Central Electricity Generating Board as a substitute for advanced gas-cooled reactors.

The Committee examining the future of the nuclear power programme will have taken into account any type of nuclear reactor which might prove economic in this country, and the Government will reach their decisions in the light of the Committee's advice on this and other relevant matters.

In view of the very considerable delay in the Committee making its report, does not the right hon. Gentleman think that it would be advisable for as much public information as possible to be provided about the claims being made by the General Electric Co. of America for its boiling water reactor, which it claims to be able to build for a capital cost of under £40 per kilowatt? Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that Parliament and the whole country should have as much information as possible about the relative advantages of different types of reactor?

I agree with the hon. Member. I thought that his Question was possibly tabled in the light of the publicity given to the offer of the General Electric Co. of America. I can assure him that the Atomic Energy Authority and the Government have in their possession all the information which they need regarding this and other developments in the United States.

Can we have the information as well, at some time?

I will consider that.

asked the Minister of Power what proposals he has now received from the Central Electricity Generating Board for the siting of a major power station in the Swansea area, in view of the fact that plans for such a station were prepared in March 1963.

None, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the present Tir John Power Station is no longer fully operational for 24 hours a day and that a new base load station would be an asset in this area? Is he also aware that this matter was discussed by the Chairman of the Central Electricity Generating Board in March 1963? What was the outcome of that discussion? Is the right hon. Gentleman further aware of the fact that on the proposed site the natural rock foundation has been ascertained? Lastly, would not a decision on this matter be a great help to industrial development in the next two years, since that is the time normally taken between the inception and construction of a major power station and the time when it becomes fully operational? Would this not be an excellent part of the regional development plans of his right hon. Friends?

The most important thing is that the Central Electricity Generating Board should be free to decide on the programme of its future stations and on the time of construction of each station. It is therefore proper for me to wait until the Board applies to me for consent to build a station. As for the power needs of South Wales, the Board has already announced plans for a speeding up of the completion of the Aberthaw "B" Station near Cardiff, and when it is fully operational, by 1968, it will use no fewer than three of the new 500 megawatt sets.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment as soon as possible.

asked the Minister of Power if he will give general directions in the public interest to the Electricity Council and the Gas Council not to demand repayment by householders of cash stolen from their electricity and gas meters unless satisfied that the money was stolen by the householders themselves.

No, Sir. This is a matter which is best left to the discretion of the area boards.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that the householder concerned has no say at all about the theft-resisting qualities of the meter and has no control over the frequency of the clearances of the money which is in the meter? Under those circumstances, would he not agree that it is monstrous that any householder, rich or poor, should be required to make good this loss?

My hon. and gallant Friend will bear in mind that the boards are entitled to do what they can to ensure the security of money belonging to them. I ought also to remind my hon. and gallant Friend that, if the boards are to carry the losses, those losses must ultimately be passed on to the consumer.

Is not it a strange doctrine which the Parliamentary Secretary is offering to us? Surely if the householder has put his money in the meter he has given it to the Board, and once the money is in the meter, legally it does not belong to the householder but to the board? If the money is stolen, is not it the board's loss and not the householder's, who is now supposed to pay twice? That is a monstrous suggestion.

It depends on the terms of the contract. Most boards expressly stipulate in their conditions of supply that, although money belongs to the board after being put into a meter, nevertheless the householder is to be responsible for its custody.

Does not the Parliamentary Secretary realise that both the Question and Answer are misleading? Is he aware that there have been such cases before the courts in Scotland, for instance at Paisley sheriff court, and it has been established that if the householder can prove that he is in no way responsible for the meter having been broken into, the board is responsible for the cash? Is he aware that that is on record?

I am not responsible for the decisions of the courts, and I cannot answer for them in this House. The clear point I am making is that this is a matter which is better left to the discretion of the area boards, who make every attempt to deal with the question sympathetically, particularly in cases of hardship.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary say what freedom a householder has in deciding what are the terms of the contract to which the hon. Gentleman referred?

That is not a matter for me. The terms of contracts are matters between the supplier and the consumer.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I wish to give notice that I shall endeavour to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Minister of Power what information he has regarding the relative rate of increase in productivity of the iron and steel industry in the United Kingdom compared with the European Coal and Steel Community.

I am advised that the output of crude steel per man-hour increased at an average rate of 2·8 per cent. a year in the United Kingdom and of 4·2 per cent. a year in the European Coal and Steel Community between 1957 and the second quarter of 1963. Productivity in the United Kingdom in the fourth quarter of 1963 was much higher than the average for the year as a whole and output per man-hour in that quarter was 28·5 per cent. higher than in 1957, equivalent to a rate of growth of about 4·3 per cent. a year; the corresponding figure for the Community is not available.

Is not it a fact that the progress of the United Kingdom steel industry over the last decade in terms of production and productivity has lagged badly behind all the members of E.C.S.C.? Would not the Minister agree that the reason is the restrictive general and economic policies of the Government, the inadequacy of the steel firms in respect of research and technical innovations, and the low number of qualified scientists and engineers employed?

I rather expected that the hon. Gentleman would draw the wrong deduction from the figures which I have given. The fact is that productivity expressed as a percentage is very much dependent on the degree of utilisation of capacity in the industry at any given time. A decline in demand appears to lower the rate of productivity, because men are not discharged as they might be in other industries. When there is an increase in demand, a considerably higher output is achieved by the same number of men, and so it is thoroughly misleading to make the sort of comparison which the hon. Gentleman has made.

But is not it a fact that other steel industries in E.C.S.C. have been working to a greater degree and capacity in recent years than the United Kingdom steel industry, and that one of the reasons for the low growth of productivity in this country is because we have been working at under capacity as a result of Government policies?

I have often heard it put by hon. Members opposite that there should always be a good reserve margin of capacity in the iron and steel industry of this country and, because of its existence, we have been able to improve output when more steel is required.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that if the industry were free from the threat of nationalisation it would be a good thing?

I am glad to endorse what my hon. Friend has said.

asked the Minister of Power (1) what is the estimated capacity of strip steel production in Scotland; and what is the extent of the current demand for this commodity in Scotland;

asked the Minister of Power what plans he has for the future of the strip and sheet steel industry in Scotland, as a contribution to development and growth in the areas to which special reference is made in the White Paper on Central Scotland.

Capacity for strip mill products is about 675,000 tons a year. Current demand for sheet in Scotland is between 175,000 and 200,000 tons. There is also some demand for light plate. Existing facilities are capable of considerable expansion, but no new capacity is planned at the moment.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that this is a most unsatisfactory position, and would he have a word with his right hon. Friend to see if it is possible to have another car factory transferred to Scotland, or some other industry which would use strip steel?

There is no satisfying some hon. Members opposite. They complained bitterly when there was no strip mill in Scotland, and now that one of an economically efficient size has been installed they are complaining that it is there but it is not fully utilised. If it were fully utilised we could not attract to Scotland more industrial capacity to use the products of this mill. We have always said that it would take time for the consumption of this strip mill to be built up in Scotland. In the meantime, it is open to Colvilles to send their strip to England or to compete in overseas markets.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that so long as he continues to rely, as he and his right hon. Friend have relied, upon private enterprise dealing with this difficulty, we shall continue to have this problem? Is he not aware that the strip mill was put there through Government intervention and that it has become necessary to take much more radical steps than are dreamed of at present in order that this strip mill can be fully utilised? This strip mill can be the making of Scotland industrially in the modern age, and will he not see that it is utilised?

I am glad to hear that the hon. Gentleman welcomes the establishment of this strip mill in Scotland, and that we have taken the right decision. As to the establishing of firms in Scotland to use this strip, this is a matter of industrial location, which is the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry, Trade and Regional Development and President of the Board of Trade.

asked the Minister of Power at what level of its estimated productive capacity the steel industry of Scotland has been operating in the past year.

About 65 per cent. of capacity. In the final quarter the rate was about 76 per cent.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is quite the worst performance in the whole of the United Kingdom? Would he see whether this situation arises through lack of shipbuilding orders on the Clyde, and, if so, will he again approach his rgiht hon. Friend to see if something can be done to steer shipping orders to the Clyde so that the steel works can come nearer to using its capacity?

A number of important steps have been taken during the last year to assist in the growth of Scottish industry, particularly that part using steel. I am very glad to see that these measures have been so effective that in the past quarter the rate of use was up to 76 per cent. capacity.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that two English motor car companies have established factories in Scotland and that there is a considerable demand from these companies for ancillaries, which now have to be brought all the way from the Midlands, and that if Scotsmen would show more enterprise in setting up more factories, they could use their own steel production?

asked the Minister of Power under what system he proposes to allocate rights of exploitation to oil companies prospecting in the North Sea.

I have this important matter in hand, but am not yet ready to make a statement.

Shall we know before the end of the Committee stage of the Bill?

That might depend on how long the Committee stage takes. In more practical terms, whatever system is decided on will be put into regulations under the Petroleum (Production) Act, 1934. These will be laid before Parliament. I think that it would be wrong to table regulations while the Continental Shelf Bill is still going through its Committee stage.

asked the Minister of Power whether he will, in the public interest, give general directions to gas and electricity boards that, when making connections to new houses and flats, gas and electricity meters should be put outside each dwelling to make for easier reading by officials from the boards.

No, Sir. This is a matter for the gas and electricity boards and the owners of the property.

Has the Minister read the Report of the London Electricity Consultative Council? Is he aware that there is considerable dissatisfaction in respect of the accounts as submitted now and that this would be a way of dealing with the position so that the consumer would know what he owed as well as the board making the charge? Does not he think that this should be considered?

I understand that the London proposals are being considered by the Electricity Council. I understand that both the Electricity Council and the Gas Council would welcome such arrangements if they were possible, always subject to the needs of security and economy in cost.

asked the Minister of Power when he expects to complete his inquiries on the question of the control of the price at which electricity supplied by area electricity boards is resold through privately operated meters.

My right hon. Friend has received a letter from the Electricity Council explaining why area boards have not so far used their powers under Section 29 of the Electricity Act, 1957. I am arranging for it to be included in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Would not the Parliamentary Secretary agree that there is a very strong case for this provision in the Electricity Act, 1957, to be implemented? Is he not aware that I brought this matter to his attention a year ago, with considerable support from other hon. Members, because there are occasions when the much as 100 per cent. or even 200 per cent. on the original price? Does he not believe that there is a very strong case for resale price maintenance in electricity?

I am very well aware of the interest that the hon. Gentleman and many other hon. Members have taken in this matter. I accept that it is a very serious and difficult problem and that there are abuses. I hope that he will read the letter to which I referred from the Chairman of the Electricity Council. The Council would be most willing to produce a system which would cope with these abuses, but it would be equally anxious in curing present ills not to produce even greater anomalies.

asked the Minister of Power if it is still the policy of Her Majesty's Government to encourage public authorities to use indigenous fuel in preference to imported fuel unless there are substantial economies to be gained by using the latter.

asked the Minister of Power if he will introduce legislation to ensure that he will be consulted in future when Government institutions, with a view to installing new heating systems, are considering competitive offers for the supply of fuel from oil companies and the National Coal Board.

It remains Government policy that the coal industry, which at present receives some protection, should have full opportunities of competing for such business. I do not contemplate legislation for consultation with me on individual cases.

Has the right hon. Gentleman read the report of the Adjourn ment debate on the question of the heating of two hospitals in Edinburgh, in which it was stated that the Coal Board gave guarantees of price stability over a number of years dating from now? The contract was nevertheless giver to the oil companies. There was substantial evidence of price rigging and none of the oil companies made a point of stating that it would guarantee a price when the oil was delivered in 1966–67, nor in any subsequent year. In view of these figures and the fact that this means loss of employment for 135 Scottish miners, will he not consult the Secretary of State for Scotland to get a little sense into allocating these contracts?

The matter, as the hon. Member suggested, was fully ventilated in the Adjournment debate. I do not think it would be useful to go through the whole of that debate now. This is a matter for the Secretary of State for Scotland with whom, naturally, I am always in touch.

Is it not true that the Secretary of State would not consult the right hon. Gentleman and he made no attempt to consult the Secretary of State? He admitted that.

There are a lot of things the hon. Member does not know about.

asked the Minister of Power what was the revenue from coal produced and oil refined, respectively, in Scotland in the latest complete year; what was the average number of workers employed in each of these industries; and what was the cost of importing crude oil.

In 1962 N.C.B. colliery proceeds in Scotland were £88 million; the number of workers on colliery books averaged 64,000. The value of the output of Scottish refineries in 1962 is estimated at about £37 million and the value of the crude oil imports at about £28 million. The number of employees at the oil refineries was about 2,000.

Can the right hon. Gentleman understand—or has he attempted to understand—why the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland went out of his way in the Adjournment debate last Wednesday to compliment the oil industry on its contribution to the Scottish economy but made no reference whatever to the coal industry's contribution? Is there not evidence that the coal industry has made and will make a much greater contribution to the Scottish economy than the oil industry is likely to make?

I think both industries are making important contributions. As I said earlier, I am pleased to see the improvement in the finances of the Scottish coal industry over the past two years. I should have thought the hon. Member would have welcomed the presence of oil refineries in Scotland, not only because of their direct output, but because their existence contributes to other industries in the neighbourhood. If he does not want more refineries there, I am sure that the north-east of England would be glad to have them.

asked the Minister of Education if he is satisfied that present and projected arrangements are adequate to meet the steadily increasing demand for professional engineers; and if he will make a statement.

Between 1959 and 1962, the number of full-time and sandwich students taking advanced courses in the further education institutions for which my right hon. Friend is responsible rose from 24,000 to 38,000, and he has announced an increase in the building programme for further education from £16 million in 1964–65 to £24 million in 1965–66. He is doing all he can to make known these enlarged opportunities to suitably qualified candidates. The supply of professional engineers will also of course benefit from the Government's plan for expanding the universities.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Does he not agree that in the years ahead there is likely to be a considerable shortage of professional engineers? Would he consider as a possible solution the establishment of an official register of such engineers on lines similar to those for the legal profession and the medical profession?

That is a question for my right hon. and learned Friend the Lord President of the Council.

May I suggest to the hon. Gentleman that any such register would be a disaster for the profession?

asked the Minister of Education how many teachers over 65 years of age are still teaching.

In March 1962, the latest date for which firm figures are at present available, there were 1,108 teachers over the age of 65 in maintained primary and secondary schools, 67 in grant-aided further education establishments, and 21 in teacher training colleges.

Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that this is a pitifully small figure and reflects the failure of the Minister's campaign to retain the older teachers? Would he ask his right hon. Friend to have another look at the Knox Report on the supply of teachers in Scotland, which contained a very strong recommendation that there should be a much greater financial inducement for superannuated teachers?

I am aware of that Report and of the recommendations that are made from time to time on the question of superannuation. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that my right hon. Friend is aware of these problems and is considering how best to increase this number.

Is it not a simple fact that a number of older teachers who have retired now come back part-time because they have no financial inducement to do anything else but part-time teaching? If they had their pension as of right and could earn, they could do the country a very good service at this time.

I do not contest that this may be the case in some instances, but I think that the hon. Gentleman will know that there are difficulties about making a concession to teachers in this matter of the retirement pension in isolation.

asked the Minister of Education what plans he has for increasing the number of men teachers in junior schools.

My right hon. Friend's plans for the expansion of the training colleges during the present decade, with their continued emphasis on meeting the staffing needs of the primary schools, will produce a steadily increasing output of men teachers for the junior schools. His National Advisory Council on the Training and Supply of Teachers is at present studying whether it would be desirable and practicable to train proportionately more men than at present.

Does not the Robbins Report and its acceptance by the Government alter the hesitation of the Advisory Council about recruiting and maintaining more places in training colleges for men? Is not this one of the best ways to secure a higher teacher force in view of the wastage of young women?

The problem is much more complex than that. The fact of the matter is that the teaching profession is at the moment undergoing something of a change of sex and the proportion of male teachers is rising very rapidly. The Council is therefore bound to consider what is the maximum proportion of male teachers that is desirable in the profession.

asked the Minister of Education if, in view of the growing trend for children with hearing defects to be educated in ordinary schools, he will take steps to ensure that the curricula of teachers' training colleges include a short course of lectures on the special problems involved in teaching partially deaf children.

It is the general practice in training colleges for students to be made aware of the needs of handicapped pupils and to visit a variety of schools, including special schools, during their initial training. My right hon. Friend agrees that it is important for teachers to know of these needs, but he does not think that lectures on a particular handicap should be made a compulsory part of training.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that many people think that this trend is a desirable one, but only on the condition that there are sufficient teachers who are aware of the particular difficulties of teaching children who are partially deaf? Will he look very carefully into this and perhaps consider at a later stage whether a short course of lectures might not be desirable?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for the suggestion. Already some local education authorities employ peripatetic teachers of the deaf, whose duties include advice to teachers in service. I agree with the hon. Gentleman that it is important that those teachers who have partially deaf children in their schools should be aware of the problems, particularly of the need to seek specialist advice when that is necessary.