asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what percentage increase he envisages in the totality of expenditure on local personal services for chronically sick and disabled persons in the year 1971–72 compared with 1970–71; and if he will make a statement.

There are difficulties in providing figures from accounts for 1970–71 and forecasts for 1971–72 and I will write to the hon. Member as soon as possible. Meantime, I refer him to my hon. Friend's reply to him on 22nd March, and add that loan sanction for building and engineering work on homes and centres for the physically handicapped will amount to £3 million in England in 1971–72. Loan sanction given for building, engineering and all other related purposes on such premises amounted to £2·7 million in 970–71.—[Vol. 814. c. 64.]

Is the Secretary of State aware that there is continuing and widespread misunderstanding of the financial arrangements which have been made? Is he further aware that there are still local authorities claiming that they cannot possibly meet their responsibilities under the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act, 1970, on the basis of these financial arrangements? Does he agree that there is now an urgent need for clear and concise guidance for local authorities on this vitally important question of finance?

There is a very big backlog to catch up in work for the chronically sick, handicapped and disabled. Help will come to them from many sources, including national insurance benefits, on which I made an announcement last week; the hospital services, where expenditure is rising; and local government, where the rate support grant has provided more expenditure for this purpose. In real terms, the basic figure of expenditure for these services will rise by 12½ per cent. in the current year, which is a notable increase, in addition to increases, not identifiable at the moment for the mentally handicapped, and for housing and health and hospital purposes.

Is it possible for local authorities to mobilise the assistance of voluntary bodies in the coming years?

The country is already benefiting from a huge range of work by voluntary bodies which Government and local authorities alike are anxious to increase.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the Wandsworth Borough Council has not made any allocation in its budget for the implementation of the Act? Will he draw the council's attention to the fact that finance is available and that it is the duty of the local authority to make known the will of Parliament in this matter so that national legislation shall not be rendered null and void at local level?

I hesitate to stigmatise an Act which was passed with such good will, but the fact is that the Act carried with it no finance whatsoever. A further fact is that local authorities all over the country, including Wandsworth, were spending large sums of money for this purpose before the Act, and are spending it now.

The right hon. Gentleman has a deserved reputation for humanity and will be well aware of the hopes raised among disabled by the Act. Is it possible for his Department to seek reports from local authorities in a year's time to see what divergence exists between the rules they are applying for the provision of such things as telephones, and other assistance under the Act?

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for her introduction, but hon. Members must take responsibility if expectations are prematurely and excessively aroused about an Act which, as I say, had no finance connected with it. I will certainly consider the suggestion in the second part of the hon. Lady's supplementary question.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what is his estimate of the total number of chronically sick and disabled persons covered by provisions of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act, 1970.

Different Sections of the Act apply to different and overlapping groups, and I am not clear that a single estimate would be meaningful. I should in any case wish to complete my study of the report of the survey of handicapped and impaired adults living at home before attempting to form any estimate.

Has the Minister seen the results of the very important surveys carried out recently by the Central Coun- cil for the Disabled? Does he agree that we must know who the disabled are and where they live, and that official surveys will be no substitute for ascertaining that information?

The House and the country will be much better able to judge when we publish—I hope by the end of this month or early next—the survey set in hand by our predecessors. But I should hate people to think that help from local authorities depended on registration. All sorts of people who are not registered are getting help.

In answer to a previous Question which was tied up with this, the right hon. Gentleman said that there was no finance available. He and the House know that the fact that it was a Private Member's Bill precluded that. Surely there is nothing to stop him raising the finance if he wants to, and surely the House will give him complete freedom so to do. Will he not do that so that we can meet the objectives of this Question and the previous Question?

The hon. Gentleman is behind hand in his command of the facts. The Government provided extra money in the rate support grant for the purposes of this Act.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will undertake discussions with the London borough of Hackney into the provision made by this borough for the homeless.

It would be premature for my right hon. Friend to arrange any such discussions before he has received and considered the report of the Working Party announced to the House on 18th March.—[Vol. 813, c. 386.]

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that, in contrast with virtually every other London borough, the London Borough of Hackney reduced its provision for the homeless by no less than £40,000 for the year 1969–70? Does he not consider that this is deserving of inquiry? Furthermore, is it not absolutely wrong to herd together hundreds of homeless people into one block of flats, as has been done at Duncan House in Hackney?

I refer first to the last part of the question. The hon. Gentleman knows that the council are endeavouring to replace Duncan House with small family units. On reductions in expenditure, I understand that Hackney is to spend nearly £400,000 next year for 80 units to replace premises in redevelopment areas and for a further 30 new units.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what discussions he has had with the London borough of Hackney concerning inadequate heating for retired people living in the borough, and particularly to local authority dwellings, having regard to the increase of hypothermia in inner London.

None, Sir; but last November my Department drew the attention of all local authorities to the need to bear in mind the health risks of inadequate heating and the precautionary measures that might be taken to deal with them.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that reply. Is not there a need for intensive research to be undertaken by the Government into the problem of inadequate heating, especially for the elderly? Does not he consider that this ought to be put in hand now so that effective provision can be made in time for next winter?

Hypothermia is strictly a medical condition, and research with the appropriate bodies is going on continually. Precautionary measures to obviate the hazard of hypothermia have been in hand for some time and are regularly reviewed and pursued.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what financial help is given by his Department to disabled people who wish to purchase a four-wheeled vehicle to replace a three-wheeled vehicle which has been supplied by his Department.

Anyone who has been supplied with a three-wheeled vehicle may give it up and have instead a grant, up to a maximum of £90, towards the cost of modifying the foot controls of a car for operation by hand.

With respect, that is not the question that I asked the hon. Gentleman. I asked a question about people who, by their own efforts, wish to purchase a four-wheeled vehicle to replace a vehicle that has been supplied by the right hon. Gentleman's Department. As he must know, many people feel a lack a safety when driving tricycles. Also, there is no provision whatever for their family to travel with them. Surely when disabled people—we all know that they face many problems—by their own efforts wish to purchase a four-wheeled vehicle, the Government should acknowledge that effort and make some financial contribution towards the maintenance and running costs of such a vehicle.

The hon. Gentleman knows that if an individual is entitled—and some are, both war pensioners and certain limited National Health Service patients—to a four-wheeled vehicle, he can get assistance to purchase the particular model he requires. As for the subsidy of a four-wheeled family motoring vehicle for individuals who would qualify for three-wheelers, we could not extend our range of services to that at present.

Is it worth while for the Department to continue to supply three-wheeled vehicles?

A three-wheeled vehicle is indispensable for certain categories of disability. It has special provision for carrying invalid chairs within it, special light steering, and for some categories it is the only sort of vehicle that they could use.

Is it not a fact that when a person purchases a four-wheeled vehicle and gives up a tricycle which he has already, the amount of grant that he gets for that four-wheeled vehicle is less than he got for the three-wheeler? If that is so, would the Minister look at this anomaly and remedy it?

I will certainly consider that point.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will now give an estimate of the number of people who are not claiming the social security benefits to which they are entitled.

If the hon. Member is referring to supplementary benefits, no firm estimate is possible. But there is reason to believe that, so far as the elderly are concerned, the number who are not claiming the supplementary pension to which they are entitled is now well below what it was before the introduction of the supplementary benefits scheme in 1966.

Is it not deplorable that so little thought has been given to people who can claim rightful benefit that no estimates of the figures can be made? Would the Minister consider setting up a committee to investigate the problem of those who can claim the rightful benefit, on the same lines as those on which he has already set up a committee to investigate the problem of those who make fraudulent claims?

We know enough to be very disquieted about the low proportions of people taking up many of the benefits. But we are starting a massive take-up campaign this very month.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services by how much he estimates the basic retirement pension would have to be increased in the autumn to take account of inflation since the last increase was made; and what would be the total cost involved assuming that all other benefits were similarly treated.

By less than the increases announced last week, the total cost of which is estimated at £560 million.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept the National Institute's estimate that by early 1972 the increase that the pensioners will get in September of this year will be eroded to the position that the pensioners are no better off than they were in 1965 and that there will still be 18 months to go before the next increase is given? In view of these facts and assertions, will the right hon. Gentleman assure us that there will be an annual review of pensions rather than a biennial review?

The hon. Gentleman's party put into a Statute a requirement of a two-year review, from which they would not have been able to depart. I do not see how anyone can be sure of the value of the pension as far ahead as a year from now. But I am confident that the pension, by the end of September, will be worth more than it was when it was last raised.

Would my right hon. Friend accept congratulations from this side of the House on increasing old-age pensions in general, on bringing forward the dates on which they will be increased this year, and on making the largest increase in old-age pensions in history?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. Both sides of the House want to do the best that is practicable for pensioners.

The right hon. Gentleman has laid the blame on the Labour Party because it instituted only a two-year review, but is he aware that when the two-year review was instituted, prices were not rising to the extent that they now are?

When the previous Government wanted two years to increase pensions, as opposed to our 22 months, prices were rising at over 6 per cent. a year.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that none of the tendencies postulated by the hon. Member for Fife, West (Mr. William Hamilton) would be realised if the Government dealt decisively and drastically with the appalling inflation resulting from the policies of the last Government and that, if he stabilises prices, with his colleagues, old-age pensioners will be the first to benefit?

Yes, Sir. I believe that excessive wage claims are a way by which many of the present wage earners are stabbing the pensioners in the back.

By how much will the supplementary pension be reduced when this increase in retirement pension is granted in September?

That was all announced last Wednesday. The supplementary pensioner will receive as much between November, 1969 and September, 1971 as the retirement pensioner gets.

asked the Secretary of State for the Social Services how many letters asking for an increase in retirement pensions have now been received by his Department since 18th June.

This information is not available.

What will happen to the nearly three million people in receipt of supplementary benefit when the pension increase is implemented? Are we to see a repetition of the "fiddle" we had on previous occasions, including under the last Government, with old folk having an increase, on one hand, and losing their supplementary benefit, on the other? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that nothing causes more ill feeling, bitterness and disappointment among old people?

The argument is well known to the House that the poorest, namely, those on supplementary benefit, have an increase on account every year, that is, in intervening years between the biennial review of pensions. That is the way in which both Governments have protected the worst off from the effects of inflation.

When answering the letters, will the right hon. Gentleman point out to the pensioners that it is a certain class of people who pay for the increases, the same class whom earlier today the right hon. Gentleman described as stabbing the pensioners in the back?

The hon. Gentleman would be wrong if he did not connect excessive wage claims with the inflation that hits the pensioner. I am sure that most of the workers involved do not realise what they are doing, but it is sheer humbug when some trade union leaders lead campaigns to help the pensioner when at the same time they are stoking up excessive wage claims.

Does my right hon. Friend recognise that one of the most popular features of the package he announced last week was the relaxation of the earnings rule, which enables pensioners to help themselves?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his ill-tempered and bad-mannered replies merely reveal that he has something to hide in his attitude to the old people?

I would have hoped for a better attack than that from a Celtic romantic like the right hon. Gentleman.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services by how much the pension payable to retirement pensioners in November, 1969 has decreased in purchasing power, to the latest convenient date; and if he will make a statement.

As measured by the General Index of Retail Prices, the purchasing power of retirement pensions fell between November, 1969 and February, 1971 by £0·48 for a single person and £0·78 for a married couple at November, 1969 prices. The hon. Member will no doubt have noted the statement I made on 31st March.—[Vol. 814, c. 1499–1514.]

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree, in view of that erosion, that either the pension increase should be paid now instead of in September, or it should be paid retrospectively? Does he agree that the pension should be reviewed annually, to ensure that pensions keep pace with the cost of living?

No, Sir, and I hope that we need not take for granted the immediate past or present rate of inflation. I am sure that it is helpful for the pensioner to be able to count in general on something like a two-year review of pensions.

Is it not a fact that even if the rate of inflation during the period since September, 1969 continued until 20th September next, which it will not, the £1-a-week increase in the single rate of pension is still 50 per cent. more than the rate of inflation since September, 1969?

My hon. Friend spoilt his case by the last figure. It will be better than the rate of inflation, but I should not like to give a figure for how much it will be better.

The right hon. Gentleman spoke earlier of the workers stabbing the pensioners in the back. Is he aware that it was his Government who dismantled the Consumer Council, resulting in 6,000 price increases; that it was his Government who dismantled the transport subsidies, resulting in higher fares; and that in all their many other measures it is his Government who are responsible for the present inflation?

No, Sir. The hon. Gentleman has got his economic forces and the scale of the matter completely wrong. It is overwhelmingly the excessive wage claims, unaccompanied by increases in output, that are damaging the pensioners.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services to whom data from the 1971 Census can be sold; and whether he will make a statement.

Provided the data are subject to the conditions stated in my reply to the hon. Member on 23rd February, they can be sold to anyone able and willing to buy them. They are not sold otherwise.—[Vol. 812, c. 303–4.]

I am grateful to the Secretary of State for that information. As I am sure he is aware, information from the 1960 Census was sold. How can he honestly maintain that, if this information is to be available on a basis of 100-metre squares, it can be confidential? Therefore, does he not agree that people who wish to preserve the confidentiality and privacy of their personal information would be well advised to risk the £50 fine and not to fill out the form?

The hon. Gentleman staggers me by his irresponsibility. He has been assured that the information in the Census is not sold in any form that would allow of individual information to be available. The statistical tabulations are what is called, technically, disaggregated. I propose to set a minimum limit of size upon areas for which tabulations may be sold to meet the point which the hon. Gentleman raises. The hon. Gentleman behaves and speaks as if there were some malign intention behind what his own Government practised.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that there is a considerable amount of disquiet in general in the country about this? Although repudiating the exaggerated language used by the hon. Member for Nuneaton (Mr. Leslie Huckfield), may I ask whether my right hon. Friend will try to assure the public that there is no danger that any individual or individual street could be identified?

I find my hon. Friend's method of putting this point entirely acceptable, because he is not suggesting a conspiracy by Government, as was the hon. Member for Nuneaton.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many computer databanks are operated by his Department; and who has access to their terminals.

My Department has only one computer system whose databank is accessible by computer terminals. This is the computer at Reading used for payment of short-term national insurance benefits; its terminals are installed in certain local offices of my Department and of the Department of Employment, mainly in the London area, and only designated staff of these offices dealing with payment of short-term benefits have access to them.

I again thank the Secretary of State for the information. I am particularly glad that he has given some assurance on the basis of what information will be sold. Does he accept that another of the jobs for which his Department's data bank facilities will he used is the 1971 Census? As it is well known in the computer industry that pretty well any safeguard or code can be broken in under two hours, how can he possibly maintain that information given at this Census will be private and confidential?

Given ill-will, malevolent intent and actual felony, any information can be got at. The hon. Gentleman is suggesting that all three will be involved in attacking any information.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many nurses in the National Health Service in England and Wales have written contracts of service that give approval to doing work in private medical practice; and what is the average percentage of both.

This information is not readily available.

is not such an answer most unsatisfactory, as there have been many discussions in the House about fees paid in relation to contracts split up by consultants? Will the Secretary of State give an assurance for the benefit of the House that he will look into the matter and let us have the information available so that the House can make some judgment or assessment?

No, Sir.

In view of the chronic shortage of nurses in the National Health Service, will the Secretary of State discourage nurses from entering private practice by encouraging adequate remuneration and good conditions of employment within the National Health Service?

I have done that.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) what facilities there are in Watford for having urgent prescriptions dispensed after the normal closing hours for chemists;

Executive councils can arrange for selected pharmacies to remain open for limited periods after normal closing hours in order to dispense National Health Service prescriptions and for other pharmacies to display notices indicating their location. This is done in Watford. In addition, many chemists are willing to dispense at any time prescriptions marked "urgent" by a doctor. Doctors are normally aware which chemists are so willing and executive councils have been advised to supply lists of them to the police. There are eight such chemists in Watford.

Is the Under-Secretary aware that a death and a near-death occurred in Watford because when the doctor in each case had written an urgent prescription after hours no one in Watford, not even the hospitals, knew of a chemist which was open, and this resulted in a tragedy in one case? Will the Minister adopt the suggestion contained in Question 13 so as to preclude the possibility of such tragedies occurring in future?

I am obliged to the hon. Gentleman for writing to me on this subject. I wish to express my deep regret at the shocking death to which he referred. I will certainly look into all the circumstances surrounding these cases. I hope that he will note that there are chemists, the existence of which should be more widely known in Watford, which were and are open at these times.

Will my hon. Friend look further into this problem, because it is not only outside normal hours that we are beginning to have trouble? In the Birmingham district the greatest difficulty is being experienced in getting chemists' shops set up on outlying estates. Will my hon. Friend have talks with the pharmaceutical bodies to see what can be done to get these facilities established in these areas?

I should be glad if my hon. Friend would send me details of any cases he has in mind. Executive councils have facilities for encouraging and helping pharmacists to set up in areas which do not have large centres of population.

Has the Under-Secretary any evidence of a growing practice of people striking items out from doctors' prescriptions because of the cost of the items? If this happens in any case or in many cases, is it not a very serious matter?

That is a very much wider question. If the hon. Gentleman will write to me about any such cases, I will certainly look into them. I have no such evidence myself.

Is the Under-Secretary aware that in rural areas the problem of the scarcity of chemists is reaching serious proportions? Will he investigate the possibilities of having more mobile chemists in rural and suburban areas who can arrange to be in certain places to fill prescriptions at a certain time each week? This would be of great help in country areas where pensioners, for example, have to travel great distances and pay high fares to get prescriptions filled.

I note the suggestion contained in the latter part of the supplementary question. If the hon. Gentleman will specify the rural areas he had in mind in putting the first part of his supplementary question, I will certainly look into the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what criteria are used to judge whether a medical group practice in a rural area qualifies for grant for the building of a medical centre containing consulting rooms and ancillary offices.

There are no rigid criteria governing the provision of health centres in rural areas: each case is considered on its merits, including the needs of the patients and the organisation generally of medical services in the area. I shall write to my hon. Friend about the particular case which I understand he has in mind.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that reply, but will he not agree that in some rural areas it is particularly difficult for the small number of doctors, who cover quite a large area, with not all that many patients, to find the necessary finance to set up these worth-while and necessary centres? In this connection, I refer to such places at Tideswell in my constitu- ency. Will he do what he can to encourage this development and see what can be done to make the load easier

I note my hon. Friend's suggestion, and I shall write to him about the Tideswell case which he specified.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he will now review the level of supplementary benefit payable to the severely disabled who are retirement pensioners and in need of additional warmth and nutrition.

No, Sir. The Supplementary Benefits Commission has discretionary powers to increase the weekly rate of supplementary benefit above the ordinary requirements level when a person has a special need.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that, and it may well be the case, but is it not true, nevertheless, that people who are severely disabled, perhaps having had a double amputation, have great need for extra warmth, but that in many cases this cannot be forthcoming because the cost is excessive? Will he look into such cases for me?

At the suggestion of the Supplmentary Benefits Commission, we increased the money available for the Commission to provide extra cash to those with special heating needs. I hope that my hon. Friend and any other hon. Members who are concerned will let me know of any severely disabled persons whose heating requirements are not being met by the Supplementary Benefits Commission.

In view of the very small number of severely disabled persons receiving exceptional need grant for heating, and in view of the still pathetically meagre amount of the grant, will the right hon. Gentleman institute a heating allowance of at least 50p a week as of right for all the severely disabled for the six months of autumn and winter each year?

The discretionary power given to the Supplementary Benefits Commission is, surely, just what is needed for individuals whose requirements, housing and other conditions vary from case to case. The hon. Gentleman asks for a 50p allowance. It has been increased to permit a 75p allowance per week throughout the year, when necessary.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many local authorities have organised in-service training for health visitors and domiciliary midwives in family planning methods; and how many hospitals give family planning advice to mothers at their post-natal examination or during the lying-in period.

The information is not held centrally.

That is a very disappointing reply. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman must be as concerned as are most responsible people about the number of unwanted and unplanned babies being born each year. Does he not think that, if he were to follow the suggestion advanced in my Question, midwives and health visitors could take a great deal of the responsibility for this work from doctors, provided that they were suitably trained, and does he not consider that it is a gross neglect of his duty not to ensure that hospitals carry out this work at a time when mothers are most receptive to this kind of information? Will he now act upon that suggestion?

The hon. Lady knows that hospitals do give advice in these cases. We are planning to issue further guidance to hospitals on the development of their family planning services. We give a good deal of money, either through local authority grants or through help to the Family Planning Association, to encourage training in family planning techniques.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services when he expects to publish a White Paper on the mentally handicapped; and what steps he is taking at present to improve overcrowding, dietary levels, and the provision of personal clothing in hospitals for the mentally handicapped.

I have confirmed the request made by my predecessor to regional hospital boards to effect in all hospitals for the mentally handicapped a wide range of improvements including those referred to by the hon. Member. Additional money has been provided, and guidance on these particular matters has been issued or is under consideration. I expect to issue a general policy document within the next two to three months.

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for that answer. I am sure that he appreciates the urgency of issuing a general policy document, since morale among the staff of hospitals of this kind is of crucial importance. May we take it that he will bring forward that document at the earliest possible moment?

Yes, Sir.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind also the problem of the mentally handicapped who are not in hospital and whose need is as great as, if not greater than, the need of those who have the fortune to be in hospital?

The Government have very much in mind the pressure on parents and relatives who are looking after mentally handicapped persons at home and who are not yet receiving the full range of services to which, ideally, they should have access. This will be covered in the policy guidance, and it is all part of the field for which we have provided extra money.

Will the document which the right hon. Gentleman is to issue be substantially the same as that which he found on his desk when he took office'? In view of the need for discussion on the restructuring of the Health Service, on the second consultative document which is due to come out, will he make a statement about how this is to be co-ordinated with the general provisions of the rest of the Health Service, apart from the mentally handicapped?

The principles of the document will be much the same as in that which I found. With no disrespect to my predecessor, who initiated most valuable action in relation to the mentally handicapped, I should say that the great difference will be that we have found extra money, both for the local authorities and for the hospital service, for help to the mentally handicapped.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what is his estimate of the total number of people awaiting admission to hospitals within the Birmingham Regional Hospital Board area.

About 61,000 on 31st December, 1970.

That is a devastating answer which will cause dismay throughout the Midlands, even allowing for the fact that many of them are not emergency cases. Will the right hon. Gentleman look into one matter for me? Is he satisfied that, over the past 20 years, the Birmingham Regional Hospital Board has had its fair share of available capital resources?

I should need notice to go into the record in that respect, but I note that the Birmingham Regional Hospital Board is spending a much larger sum this year than it spent in previous years. The waiting list is, I fear, only just about the national average.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a widespread and understandable belief that one can jump the queue by paying a fee for a consultation and thereby get priority for a National Health Service bed? Will he make a full inquiry into this state of affairs?

This Government, like the last Government, encourage private practice for a moderate proportion of National Health Service beds. Hon. Members should recognise that in the Birmingham region about 1½ per cent. of the beds are available for private patients. I do not propose to discourage this practice. I have a report about alleged irregularities, which I am about to study.

Can my right hon. Friend confirm that a considerable number of people on the waiting list, especially children waiting for E.N.T. treatment, find their waiting difficulties exacerbated as a result of the Labour Government's closure of Moseley Hall Hospital, about which they were warned by the then Opposition?

I am sure that, if my hon. Friend says so, there is something in it, but I have no knowledge of that at the moment.

In view of the serious and alarming figures which the right hon. Gentleman has given, will he have a report not only on the Birmingham area but extended nationally to see that this sort of thing is not going on in other parts of the country?

The hon. Lady need not be hypocritical about it. [HON. MEMBERS: "Withdraw!"] Not for a moment will I withdraw. The hon. Lady gives the impression that the waiting lists are worse than they were under her Government. The waiting lists are a disgrace, and this Government propose to do something about them.

We are not at this moment protesting about the length of the waiting lists. We are asking the right hon. Gentleman whether he realises that the present occupancy of private beds is a crying scandal in the Birmingham area.

If there are irregularities, they will be reported to me in the report which I am about to read. I do not accept that private beds as such are in any way a scandal.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what is the expected completion date of the outpatient facilities at Peterlee Health Centre; and if he will make a statement.

Present estimates are that the facilities may be complete by spring, 1972. It has, after all, not proved possible to co-ordinate their completion with that of the in-patient accommodation at Ryhope Hospital, but the Newcastle Regional Hospital Board will make arrangements for out-patient services now available at Leeholme Hospital to be maintained there or elsewhere until the new premises are ready at Peterlee Health Centre.

I detect a certain caginess in that reply. Does the Minister agree that it is of the utmost importance that the completion of out-patient facilities at Peterlee be timed to coincide with the closure of Leeholme Hospital? Is he aware that many of my constituents view with the gravest concern and suspicion the delay being experienced? Will he bring pressure to bear to see that the co-ordination which he mentioned is kept to by the authorities concerned?

I share the hon. Gentleman's disappointment that co-ordination has not been possible between the old hospital and the new health centre, but, as I reassured him, we shall make quite certain that, parallel facilities will be available, at least until the new heath centre is complete.