asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what plans he has to introduce legislation to cover latent cases excluded from any payment by way of Industrial Injuries or Workmen's Compensation Acts.

None, Sir. Previous study by successive administrations disclosed major practical problems. A further study is however proceeding with the co-operation of the Trades Union Congress.

I am pleased to hear that there is another study proceeding, and I am also pleased to know that the TUC has been invited to assist. I hope that the NUM can help in this matter. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that it represents no more than about 50,000 people in all, many of whom are seriously injured and do not get a penny by way of compensation? I hope that the hon. Gentleman will not adopt the attitude that apparently has been adopted previously whereby it appears to the man in question that all that is happening is that the passage of time is disposing of the whole problem.

I assure the hon. Gentleman that there is no lack of good will here. It is a very complicated and difficult problem which successive Administrations have tackled. We are grateful for the co-operation of the TUC in the matter, and I hope that we shall find a satisfactory solution.

rose——

Order. I must point out that long supplementary questions mean that I have to rule out others.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what recommendations he has made to regional hospital boards about facilities for out-patient abortions.

My Department has asked regional hospital boards to keep their gynaecological and abortion services under close review and develop them as necessary to the extent that resources permit. I intend to wait for the report of Mrs. Justice Lane's Committee before considering what further guidance is needed.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that in many areas, Birmingham especially, abortions of any type are extremely difficult to obtain because of the almost mediæval attitude of gynaecologists? Does not he accept that out-patient or lunch-time abortions can save a great deal of valuable money and bed space? Will not he give a clear direction to all hospital boards to increase the provision of out-patient abortion facilities?

No, Sir. While there are some hospitals which are undertaking abortions on an out-patient basis, and assessing the results, the medical profession is not fully assured that the techniques are safe for general application.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many local authorities have supplied him with figures which enable him to calculate the percentage increase in consultations in local birth control centres when an entirely free service has been provided; and what are these percentage increases.

I regret that this information is not yet available.

Is my hon. Friend aware that in Camden, where a free service has been introduced this year, first attendances have gone up by 27 per cent., which shows the value of a truly free service as regards supplies as well as advice?

The Camden service, I understand, has not yet been working a full year, which is one reason why I cannot give a categorical answer. But if the experience of Kingston upon Hull, which has had a free service since 1966, is any indication, large increases in the use made of the facilities may be expected.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many complaints he has received concerning the turning down of applications for attendance allowance.

Up to 27th June, the latest date for which figures are available, over 23,000 people had written concerning the rejection of a claim to attendance allowance and review action had been initiated.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that under this scheme many hopes have been raised only to be dashed when claims have been rejected? There have been numerous tragic cases in my constituency which I have brought to the right hon. Gentleman's notice. He in turn has indicated that he intends to broaden the scope of the scheme over the next two years. Will he, therefore, cut the time scale in order to help this needy section of the community?

The House will want to get this matter in proportion. Only a year ago no such households received any benefit at all. Now 78,000 households are receiving benefit, as opposed to the 50,000 which was all that the Government expected on the information available. We are carrying through extensions over the next 2¼ years but, as has been explained a number of times, I cannot undertake to shorten the time scale.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Attendance Allowance Board is doing a remarkable job in a new sphere? In due course we shall want to hear of its experience and what it is learning while doing this job. Secondly, does he agree that in any system with which we try to help those in the greatest need there will always be marginal cases which fall just outside that category who will feel resentment over it? That is the nature of the kind of system we are trying to work.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for referring to the services of the Attendance Allowance Board, which is staffed by the most devoted people, and on an honorary basis. Of the 23,000 people who have complained and for whom a review has been initiated, over 9,000 have been awarded the allowance.

While recognising that there is an administrative problem in extending the eligibility criteria for attendance allowances, which extension might mean that a number of these cases will be accepted, not rejected, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman is satisfied with a situation in which we shall have to wait until 1975–76 before all the extension allowances are paid? Is the Minister telling us that it is impossible to speed that up? Will he have another look at it?

I fear that, despite intense anxiety on the part of my hon. Friends and myself and of the civil servants concerned to speed this up, it would not be justifiable to promise an acceleration. However, we will continue to keep the possibilities under careful review

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he has made an estimate of the likely annual claims to his Department as a result of brucellosis being scheduled as an industrial disease.

No, Sir. There is no sound basis on which such an estimate could be made. The incidence of the disease was looked into by the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council to which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State referred the question whether the disease should be prescribed. In its report the Council said that estimates of the number of persons affected by the disease vary widely, there being no comprehensive information about its prevalence.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the decision to make brucellosis a scheduled industrial disease is very welcome? I am sure he will agree that the National Union of Agricultural Workers and the TUC must take great credit for the evidence they submitted to the Advisory Council. Will he assure the House that there will be proper diagnostic procedures for trying to diagnose the disease amongst people who think they are suffering from it?

I will gladly look into that matter. I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for the tribute he paid to all those who have made this possible. The new arrangements will come into effect at the end of this month.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will now establish a system of retainer payments for nurses and midwives comparable to the one by which he seeks to retain the services of women doctors after marriage.

I doubt whether the system as it stands would be appropriate to nurses and midwives. The Committee on Nursing under the Chairmanship of Professor Asa Briggs will no doubt be considering whether existing arrangements for attracting married nurses back into active practice need to be supplemented.

Will the hon. Gentleman probe this matter further? Our State Registered Nurses are superb and second to none in the whole world and we are losing a tremendous number. Of 60 who passed through a London teaching hospital recently, only one is still nursing. Will he therefore put pressure on the committee and seek to report to the House at an early date?

I do not think the Briggs Committee needs any pressure. It will certainly be reporting before very long. I should point out that the number of qualified women nurses and midwives employed on a part-time basis in hospitals in England and Wales is increasing steadily. At the end of September, 1971, they represented 42 per cent. of the total women qualified staff. The difficulty is getting them at the right places at the right times.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what estimates he has made of the total cost of abolishing prescription charges to children aged 16 years when the school leaving age is raised to 16 years.

Information for such an estimate is not available.

Why has the Minister made the decision that prescription charges shall not be free? Is it not an established practice in this country that people who are too old or not old enough to work shall have free prescriptions? When the school leaving age went up from 14 to 15, prescription charges exemption went up. Why should the exemption not now go up to 16 years?

We did not make the decision. The Labour Administration made the decision for the cut-off at this point. The cut-off is rational. It is related to health and medical needs, not to any other consideration.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services when he now expects to complete his review of the operation of the Social Security Act, 1971 as it affects the payment of supplementary benefit in industrial disputes; and if he will make a statement.

The provisions of Section 2 of the Social Security Act, 1971, for recovering post-dispute payments of supplementary benefit are working satisfactorily. I have no statement to make about the review, which is continuing, of payments during disputes.

Why is this review taking so long? Now we know that the strike subsidy is running at £14 million a year, surely it is clear that the 1971 Act is in need of revision. Will my right hon. Friend assure the House that we are not dragging out feet in this matter to avoid scaring Mr. Vic Feather from signing some declaration of intent? If so, surely the game is not worth the candle.

My hon. Friend legitimately commands a considerable audience outside this House on this subject. I do not think he would wish to mislead that audience. Multiplying the first quarter's figures by four and the first half's figures by two is not necessarily an accurate prognostication of the cost to public funds. The Government are taking time over this important subject because the danger of making things worse, not better, on a whole range of aspects is one which the whole House would wish to avoid.

Is the right hon. Gentlemen aware that the philosophy behind this campaign of starving the workers out belong to the last century? Will he advise his hon. Friend that this kind of campaign is seriously damaging industrial relations?

The whole House has great respect for the hon. Gentleman, but he is on a thoroughly bad point. It is a legitimate matter of public interest, which both Front Benches in turn have recognised, to get the right balance between support for families against hardship and the incentive to strike.

Would not the best way of reducing payments of supplementary benefit to the dependants of strikers be to seek to reduce the number of days lost through strikes, which are running at four times the rate per year under this Government than under the Labour Government, by scrapping the Industrial Relations Act, which is poisoning industrial relations? Secondly, is it not time that the Secretary of State stood up to the Department of Employment and insisted that the recommendations of the Donovan Commission should be accepted by which people who are at present unjustly denied unemployment benefit by the operation of the grade and class provision were taken off supplementary benefit and given the unemployment benefit to which they are entitled?

The country will have noted that in several situations when it was being bullied by unjustified strikes the Opposition supported them.

On a point of order. In view of my right hon. Friend's reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services when he expects to reach a decision on the proposal of the British Medical Association that he should set up an inquiry into the use and abuse of barbiturates and other sedative drugs; and if he will make a statement.

The suggestion by the British Medical Association was that detailed research studies should be instituted into the epidemiology, use and abuse of barbiturates and other sedative drugs. It will take some time to determine, having regard to work already done or in progress, what further studies are required and how they could best be designed and carried out.

Is there not prima facie evidence that the abuse of barbiturates is on the way up?

I cannot give an immediate answer to that question. The Government have consulted the medical profession about the possibilities of further medical self-discipline on this issue. It is in response to its reply that further studies are needed that I have given my reply to the hon. Gentleman today.

Will the Secretary of State bear in mind that 20 million prescriptions a year for barbiturates are being given by doctors and that these can be and are becoming dependent drugs for both young and middle-aged people? Is he satisfied that advising doctors to prescribe carefully is sufficient to deal with this acknowledged problem?

No, I am not satisfied. Discussions are in progress with the medical profession and we are awaiting the results of studies into the pattern of prescribing which are in hand.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how much money his Department has spent in each of the last three years for which figures are available on publicity informing persons of their entitlement to social security benefits; and in what ways and proportions these figures were allocated.

The figure for 1971–72 was £399,400 of which 77 per cent. was spent on family income supplement, 12 per cent. on attendance allowance and 9 per cent. on pensions for the over-80's. I will, with permission, circulate figures for the two earlier years in the Official Report.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that reply. Does he appreciate that there is a need for a continuing, sustained publicity campaign to warn people of their entitlement, the more so when one realises the many new benefits which have been brought into existence during the last two years?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for drawing attention to that. We intend to continue the publicity arrangements, but perhaps I may remind the House that for the largest bulk of people, namely, retirement pensioners, in most cases the initiative for the claim is taken by the Department and does not have to be taken by the individual himself.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what is the average waiting period in the Manchester Regional Hospital Board area for an operation after a patient has been placed on the priority waiting list.

Waiting times for admission vary according to the specialty and the circumstances of the individual case. An average figure for the region would, therefore, have little meaning, but of cases admitted to the two main hospitals in Oldham in the first quarter of this year, just under 60 per cent. had been waiting for less than two months. Urgent cases are, of course, admitted without delay.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that one of my constituents waited for admission for well over a year after being placed on the priority list? There is a widespread feeling that that situation is not untypical of the whole country and that it is caused by greedy doctors who are determined to supplement their incomes by using National Health Service facilities and to whom the Hippocratic oath seems to mean as little as the Prime Minister's election promises mean to him?

The first and factual part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question merits careful investigation and I should be grateful if he would send me a note about the priority case having had to wait for 12 months. It is not typical of Oldham. We recognise that waiting lists are too long, and we are taking steps to see whether we can reduce them.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services when he expects the report of the Working Party on the Dental Services; and whether he will make a statement.

The working party has much ground to cover and I cannot yet forecast a date for a final report; but I have told the working party that I will at any time consider any interim recommendations it may wish to make.

Would the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that the dental service is in a state of decay, that an increasing number of dentists are opting out of National Health Service to take up part-time or full-time private practice, and that there is a shortage of manpower and woman power in the dental service? Has he read the two reports which show that the dental health of the nation is in decline and that 25 per cent. of the children who are now five years old will require dentures of one kind or another by the time they are 20?

It is by no means new that the dental health of this country gives grave cause for worry. I do not accept the hon. Lady's diagnosis, but I have been sufficiently worried to embark on a deep and searching examination, with the British Dental Association, into what our policy should be in the near future to improve dental treatment of the public.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the hon. Lady is right, and that the dental service is not only in decay but has crumbled, particularly in those cases which require difficult treatment, namely the old, the infirm, children, and the disabled, who create problems for the dentist? He sees them at a financial loss to himself.

It is true that there is a problem in that in some areas some dentists will not give the more complex treatment under the National Health Service. That is one of the main subjects on the agenda for discussion between the Government and the British Dental Association. But my hon. Friend is wrong to support the hon. Lady's general proposition, because all the statistics of treatment show that the dental service is improving, though not improving nearly fast enough.

Does the right hon. Gentleman still hold to the view which he expressed in this House some months ago, namely, that increasing dental charges gives people an incentive to take care of their teeth?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Service what steps are now being taken to provide insurance coverage to National Health Service nurses whilst on duty in ambulances.

Proposals for a new code of injury allowances for payment to or in respect of nurses and others employed in the National Health Service who are permanently incapacitated or who die as a result of accidents on duty are under consideration by the Joint Superannuation Consultative Committee.

What is the hon. Gentleman going to do about the case of which I sent him full details involving my constituent, Mrs. Enid Wells, who is a staff nurse at St. Cross Hospital? She went on a mission to another hospital with a six-year-old boy, the ambulance overturned in a road accident and she was seriously injured. All that we have received from the hon. Gentleman's Department is a letter saying that there is no insurance coverage and that it is up to individual nurses to take out their own insurance. Is not this a most scandalous state of affairs, and one which the hon. Gentleman should look into immediately?

I think the hon. Gentleman knows, from the letter which I wrote to him on 5th July, that we admit that the present arrangements are not satisfactory. He will also know that there are possibilities and facilities for ex gratia payments in special cases. But I would rather not comment in detail on what measures may be applied to a particular individual.

Has not a scandalous situation been revealed by the case which my hon. Friend has brought to the attention of the House? May we be told what is to be done, and when?

I think the right hon. Lady knows that in the Superannuation Act, 1972, we have taken power to remedy the situation, but the precise details of the provisions—which may well be retrospective in their application—are still a matter for consultation and it would not be proper to divulge what arrangements are to be made.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that we are reaching a dangerous situation in the employment of both State Registered Nurses and midwives? Often a State Registered Nurse goes on to become a midwife, and very often, in either capacity, she has to travel in busy areas. Indeed, she is sometimes subjected to risks of a kind for which many other industrial workers would be paid danger money. Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that there is a need for a comprehensive review of the entire situation?

I think the hon. Gentleman knows that when, in the case of injury or illness, it is expected that the patient will recover and resume duty, the normal sick pay arrangements apply. The problem arises in the case of death or permanent injury. We admit that there are gaps, and we hope that they will be more than adequately covered by the new proposals.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he can now state by what date he expects to make a statement on the replies he has received from local authorities on their implementation of Section 1 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act, 1970.

As stated in my reply to hon. Members on 13th June, I expect to report to the House before the Summer Recess.—[Vol. 838, c. 1249–50.]

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the impressive progress made by many local authorities in implementing Section 1 of the 1970 Act shows that an increase in Exchequer support is urgently necessary if local authorities are to save taxpayers' money? Will he make a statement at the earliest possible date and agree to give publicity to the best that local authorities are doing in implementing this Section of the Act?

I intend to give the House full information as soon as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services when he expects to receive the report of the Finer Committee; and what action he will take in the meantime to improve the conditions of one-parent families.

I understand that the committee hopes to complete its report early in 1973. Special provision has already been made for one-parent families in the family income supplement scheme and is included in the proposed scheme of rent rebates and allowances under the Housing Finance Bill. Otherwise I cannot anticipate the committee's recommendations.

Bearing in mind that these are usually the most desperately poor families, would the right hon. Gentleman consider doing more to help them pending the report of this committee, which is a long way ahead?

With the best will in the world, it is difficult to see exactly what we can do. The committee was set up because the then Government—and we understand their need—wanted to know what best could be done for this group of families. A recent report published by my Department comparing the situation of one-parent and two-parent families showed that at the relevant date one-parent households were not notably worse off than two-parent households.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will now take immediate action to improve the pay and conditions of junior hospital doctors.

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister informed the House on 23rd June of the Government's readiness to accept the Doctors' and Dentists' Review Body's recent recommendations, which include average salary increases for junior hospital doctors of between 7½ per cent. and 14½ per cent. Aspects of their conditions of service are regularly discussed between the Health Departments and representatives of the professions, including representatives of junior doctors, and I would expect the improvement there has been over recent years to continue.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the appalling conditions that exist for junior hospital doctors, particularly in Yorkshire? Doubtless the right hon. Gentleman is aware of the document "More in Sorrow", which is a survey of the Sheffield Regional Board. He must be aware of the appallingly low pay and very long hours, and the terrible conditions under which some of these unfortunate young people have to work. The lives of many thousands of people are at stake in the hands of young hospital doctors. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that their fight back is hindered by the fact that they are inhibited because they are fearful of victimisation if they fight their own case? What will the Minister do about it—and do quickly?

As for the extra duty allowances and the minimum time off, I am reviewing the working of arrangements in consultation with the professions and hospital authorities. But the report to which the hon. Gentleman refers goes out of its way to say that many of the grievances of junior doctors should best be dealt with by approaches by them to their hospital authorities.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) what was the bed-occupancy rate for the maternity unit at the Herts and Essex Hospital for the last five quarters, taken respectively as a percentage of maternity beds occupied out of the total of 36, and the corresponding percentage of 30 beds, being the residual complement after omitting six beds reserved for emergency use and separated from the main unit;

Although six beds are on a different floor, they are available for use when required and are not reserved for emergency use. The relevant bed occupancy rates are therefore those for the 36 beds and I will with permission circulate them in the OFFICIAL REPORT. These rates constituted one of the many factors I considered, before reaching my decision.

Is not the bed occupancy rate which was used and quoted at the time of the decision to close this maternity unit the lowest occupancy rate of the quarters preceding it and following it? As to the other factors, will my right hon. Friend agree that there has been an increase in deliveries and that there is a very keen and substantial local demand for these facilities in Bishops Stortford?

Occupancy rates were only one of the factors which I had to take into account. My right hon. and learned Friend will be aware that there is now strong medical opinion that there is need for a concentration of special services for maternal care and delivery. Owing to my right hon. and learned Friend's persistent support of this local service, there will continue to be antenatal and post-natal facilities in Bishops Stortford.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if, with a view to alleviating hardship to disabled persons, he will give a general direction to the Supplementary Benefits Commission to disregard the first £2 of an invalidity pension; and if he will make a statement.

No, Sir. It would not be appropriate to apply a disregard to a benefit which is part of the basic provisions of the national insurance scheme.

But bearing in mind that disabled persons enjoy the £2 disregard, should not recipients of the invalidity pension who are chronically disabled be entitled to the same advantage? Would the Minister further consider that many of these recipients are incapacitated and off work for a much longer period than even some of the disabled? Ought that not to entitle them to the advantage of the £2 disregard?

I think that the hon. Gentleman is referring to the special arrangements which have existed for a long time now in the war pension scheme and industrial injuries scheme. But the fact is that under the existing arrangements with the Supplementary Benefits Commission the special needs of the disabled can be and are taken into account.

Is there not already a disregard for quite a large number of national insurance benefits which the Minister implied by his first reply could not be disregarded? Will he take into account that extra expenditure is involved by invalidity pensioners and those who suffer a disability, not least due to the fact that many of them may lose their right to free prescriptions as the result of the receipt of the invalidity allowance and invalidity pension?

There is not a main disregard, as the hon. Gentleman well knows, within the national insurance scheme. There are special arrangements for industrial injuries and war pensions. But the Supplementary Benefits Commission has power, which it exercises where appropriate, to meet the special additional needs of the disabled. There is no doubt that the Commission will continue to exercise this power.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what steps he intends to take to remedy the health risk presented by the chimney of the Great Western Road Hospital in Gloucester.

I have no reason to believe that such a risk exists. However steps have been taken to reduce the emissions of black smoke which I believe to have given rise to local concern.

Is my hon. Friend aware that while emissions of black smoke of more than a permitted quantity have very recently been observed from these chimneys, it would appear to be almost impossible not only to prosecute a National Health Service hospital under the Clean Air Act but also to get his Department to consider itself as other than an accused proprietor, instead of as a body hearing complaints as an alternative to a criminal prosecution? Is my hon. Friend equally aware that many people find it incongruous that while one Government Department is striving to abate pollution another Government Department appears to be condoning it?

My hon. Friend will be glad to hear that the local hospital authority and the Deputy Regional Engineer of the South-Western Regional Hospital Board are to meet the public health inspector this very day for further discussions.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he is satisfied with the availability of physical medicine under the National Health Service; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what improvements he intends to recommend towards the establishment of a comprehensive rehabilitation service for the physically and mentally handicapped arising out of the report by the subcommittee of the Standing Medical Advisory Committee under the chairmanship of Sir Ronald Tunbridge.

I welcome the interest in rehabilitation but the subject is complex as well as very important and has been relatively neglected for years. The recommendations in the recently published report by a sub-committee of the Standing Medical Advisory Committee range widely over the health and other relevant services. I am anxious to see what can be done now and in the long term to improve all aspects of existing provision, but the many issues referred to in the report will need careful study before policies can be clearly defined. I plan to visit a number of the hospitals with good rehabilitation facilities to inform myself at first hand of the best current practice.

I thank the Minister for that answer. In his study of this problem, would he bear in mind the very grave situation at the Derby Royal Infirmary, where we have an average waiting list of over three months before working people can have any access to physiotherapy or rehabilitation? Is the Minister further aware that the dedicated and overworked staff of that hospital have had their morale somewhat damaged by the knowledge that there is no plan for a building which would give them better facilities over the next 10 years?

I fear that the experience of the inhabitants of Derby about rehabilitation is not unique. There is a grave area of national need for improvement. I am intensely aware of the importance of improvement over a whole range of services.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this is a matter of concern on both sides of the House? When physiotherapy treatment is needed, it is needed urgently. Will my right hon. Friend give higher priority to the training of more doctors and staff in this speciality?

Yes. It is not only physiotherapists and doctors—though they are very important—but a whole range of interacting services and skills which are needed. I ask my hon. Friend to be assured that the Government take the improvement of these rehabilitation services as an important priority.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Tunbridge Report said quite clearly that physical medicine need not be a speciality required for rehabilitation? What was said in Tunbridge was that any consultant with an interest in rehabilitation should be considered for appointment in leading a team of all disciplines to assist in rehabilitation.

I am sure that rehabilitation has implications for almost all medical disciplines and nursing and I am about to embark upon discussions with the professions on the implications of Tunbridge.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether, in the light of opposition to its operation, he will now cease to implement the proposals of the Salmon Report.

No, Sir.

If my hon. Friend had his ear a little closer to the ground he would appreciate that his reply shows a very complacent attitude and that the implementation of the Salmon recommendations is opposed not only by hospital management committees but by large numbers of doctors, nurses and consultants, and I speak particularly of the nurses in Macclesfield. Does he not feel that far too hard a line is drawn between clinical and administrative grades in nursing in the report and does he not feel that it will result in far too many chiefs and not enough Indians?

A number of representations on the subject have been received but none from nursing organisations. We cannot accept that a gap is opened up between administrative and clinical practice. The two are more closely integrated under the Salmon proposals.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if, in view of the representations to him by blind people at Chichester, he will review the level of recommended provision of welfare officers responsible for blind people living at home and make recommendations to local authorities accordingly.

In consultation with the appropriate bodies we are currently reviewing the pattern of social services for the blind, including staffing. We will be giving guidance to local authorities when we have completed the review.

Is the Under-Secretary aware that there has been some unevenness in provision since the introduction of the new Act and that as a result many specialist workers have been denied the job they were trained to do? It is important that these workers should be allowed to take up the duties for the blind. Will the Minister see that special training is reintroduced and ensure that the Act is not abused by certain authorities in this regard?

We are conscious of and sensitive to the representations which the hon. Member brought out in his supplementary question. The problems have arisen as a result of reorganisation under the Local Authority Social Services Act. We are keeping the matter under close review.

In reply to my earlier Question the Minister gave me no answer on the point of increasing Exchequer support to local authorities so that they can improve their services to the blind, the deaf and the dumb, as well as to others who are permanently and substantially handicapped. Will the Secretary of State attempt to persuade the Chancellor of the Exchequer on this deeply important matter?

The hon. Member knows that massive increases in Exchequer funds have been made available precisely to this sector, to the extent of 25 per cent. in real terms in the present and the preceding financial years.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether it is his policy to maintain the war preference element for all war-disabled pensioners and to take full account of the effects of inflation on money values.

The Government are committed to an annual review of war pensions and allowances in the light of changes in the cost of living. The war pensions preferences are being maintained in the increased rates payable in October to war disablement pensioners and war widows.

Is it not the case that only about 27 per cent. of the most disabled have their preferences kept in line with the cost of living? Is there not a case for introducing an all-embracing service allowance to cover the other 73 per cent. of war pensioners?

The preferences are being maintained but they are being concentrated on the most severely disabled and on the war widows, as is shown by the fact that all the main allowances for the severely disabled and war widows were increased last year or this year, and in many cases in both years.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what he estimates to be the change in real terms in income distribution produced by his social service measures since June, 1970.

I regret that reliable estimates are not available owing to the variety of factors involved.

Is the Under-Secretary aware that, as a result of the Govern- ment's fiscal and welfare measures so far the best estimates show that skilled workers on average are now 80p per week better off while those in business and the professions on incomes over £5,000 a year are perhaps some £36 a week better off? Is not this business man's order of priorities the reason why the Secretary of State could recently offer the Pre-school Playgroups Association only a pathetically inadequate £45,000 for the immense aim of helping to break the family cycle of deprivation?

The Government are much more interested in practical measures to help the elderly, the disabled and the widows than in abstract theory about equality and envy.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he will now publish the rules governing the activities of investigators of his Department inquiring into abuse of welfare benefits by cohabiting women, in view of the fact that purported extracts from those rules were published in the Spectator of 17th June, 1972.

No, Sir. The extracts were incomplete, and I deplore their publication. I do not intend to make it any easier to avoid detection by more extensive publication.

Since my right hon. Friend's Department invariably accepts the verdicts of its inspectors, and since those verdicts are often successfully appealed against, should not those whose lives are being investigated know the criteria upon which those verdicts are arrived at?

This is a difficult area. I have been worried by one or two cases of which there have been reports recently. While some people may be subject to unfair deprivation of help from the Supplementary Benefits Commission, there is no doubt that there is quite a measure of abuse in these matters. I have to try to reconcile the public and the personal interest and I have to make sure, with the Chairman of the Commission who is responsible in the first case, that the procedures are being carried out precisely.

asked the Prime Minister if he is satisfied with the co-ordination between the Department of Trade and Industry, the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence in making the preparations for the European Space Conference on 11th-12th July, which will decide whether or not to participate in the post-Apollo project with the Americans.

Yes, Sir.

That is inconceivable. What is the Prime Minister's version of the events which led up to the postponement of the European Space Conference at the 59th minute of the 11th hour?

The fact that other countries did not want to hold it.

Has the Prime Minister received the unanimous representations made by the British aerospace industry on the question and does he think they are consistent with the advice given to him on the subject by his civil servants?

Ministers do not discuss advice given to them by civil servants. The position is that the Americans expressed a preference for a European approach to the post-Apollo project, and it must be settled, therefore, by a European conference.

Will the Prime Minister publish a White Paper on the project, as large sums of money and a large number of skilled people are required? Before this country is committed by the Government to a space programme of this kind in these circumstances the public will want to be satisfied that this should be the priority for these scarce resources when there are many other schemes to which they might be applied.

The right hon. Gentleman is correct and I think that most European countries take that view. That is why they are examining the project with great care. They have had to ask for the information from the Americans. The first calculation is that for the United Kingdom it would involve a cost of about £20 million. That is a very large sum. But as the American project has now changed its nature considerably since the first invitation was made——

We were too late.

The hon. Member must not say that it was because Europe was too late. The plain fact is that the American concept has completely changed, and President Nixon has made clear to his own Congress his reasons for this. Europe now must decide whether to take part in the new concept, which is one of almost entirely orthodox technology as far as Europe is concerned.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will request the Boyle Committee to re-investigate the salaries of the chairmen of the nationalised boards and the higher paid civil servants; and whether he will propose to this committee an increase in the salaries of these public servants, due to the expected rise in the cost of living resulting from the floating of the £ sterling.

No, Sir.

I thank the Prime Minister for that expected reply. The next time that he appeals to trade unionists for wage restraint will he point out to them that as the average worker is receiving £31 a week, it is a little immoral for anyone, be they Members of Parliament, company directors or even Ministers of the Crown with thousands of acres and hundreds of thousands of pounds, to say that the worker is greedy to ask for a decent wage increase?

The supplementary question is not related to the Question on the Order Paper, which concerns the review boards for civil servants, chairmen and boards of the nationalised industries, the armed services and certain of the judiciary.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that concern on this matter is not confined to one side of the House, that many of use feel that the timing of the award was particularly unfortunate, and that a post-dating to say, 1st January, 1973 would have done much to provide a positive contribution to wage and salary restraint, and might have avoided a great deal of the resentment and misunderstanding?

I am sorry to disagree with my hon. Friend, but I do not believe that to be the case, and I must honestly say so. The timing of the review boards' awards is a matter for the boards themselves. They were set up by the Government, and existed under previous Administrations, in an endeavour to find an independent way to deal with this very difficult problem. All previous Administrations have accepted that, unless there were exceptional circumstances, the findings of a board would be accepted as a whole. The Government did that in the case of Members of Parliament, Ministers, and those associated with the House, and it was accepted by Parliament as the right thing to do. I therefore think that it was the right thing to do in the case of the group referred to in the Question and of the doctors. I do not believe that postponing the award for six months, after there had been an earlier staging over three years, would have made that much difference.

Having regard to the concluding words and tone of the Prime Minister's reply to my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham, North (Mr.Arthur Lewis), would the right hon. Gentleman consider in future replying to questions by hon. Members without these petulant outbursts? In view of the importance of the meeting which he is to hold tomorrow, will he reconsider those last few words which he threw at my hon. Friend?

I was pointing out to the hon. Gentleman his constant misleading of the public outside and those in trade unions by giving false figures. Talk of a £4,000 increase, which was not the review board's award, and of an 18 per cent. increase, as if it were an award for one year like most trade union awards, is completely untrue. The General Council of the TUC, which had discussions with me a week ago, has not raised the question at all, because I believe that the trade union leaders fully understand the position.

asked the Prime Minister whether the public speech made by the Secretary of State for Education on 23rd June to the Annual Conference of the Association of Education Committees on educational matters represents Government policy.

asked the Prime Minister if the public speech of the Secretary of State for Education and Science to the Conservative National Advisory Committee on Education in London on 24th June, 1972, on educational policies represents the policy of the Government.

My right hon. Friend's purpose in these two speeches was not to announce decisions but to set out the issues and choices in the future allocation of resources for the education service. It is the Government's policy to encourage public discussion of these important issues whenever possible.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Is not the significance of the speech referred to in my Question that it constitutes a major contribution to open government, because my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science discussed in it the options and priorities open to the education service? May we see her example copied by other Ministers?

I understand that the speech was greatly appreciated by the Association, because it set out very clearly the forecast of various kinds of expenditure on the different options now available in the education service. I believe that in advance of the public expenditure White Papers this performs a very useful service. The answer to the last part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question is that the technique has already been adopted in taxation by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, as it has been in research and development, in health matters by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services, and in other matters by other Ministers.

Will the Prime Minister consider the possibility of each Department publishing a Green Paper on the respective priorities within it, in line with the speech made by the Secretary of State for Education and Science, which was very much appreciated, about the allocation of resources as between nursery education and further education? It would be a very useful exercise if all Departments would publish their own Green Papers to foster public discussion.

I agree with the hon. Gentleman. We have been considering this for all Government Departments, but the opportunity does not occur in the life of a Department at exactly the same moment for each one. There will be certain points on which policy decisions must be taken earlier, though it is very useful to give the public the options and choices and to state what expenditure will be involved in each.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that, even granted a greater measure of educational efficiency, it is implicit in the figures which my right hon. Friend gave in her speech that education will have to take a somewhat larger share of public expenditure in future, particularly if we are to achieve a better balance between pre- and post-school education?

As I think my hon. Friend knows—he has probably read the speech in full—my right hon. Friend gave the extent to which educational expenditure had increased and indicated that there would be great demands on Government expenditure for further developments. Her point was, I think, that obviously not all those developments could be carried out at the same time, and she indicated that a great emphasis should be given to younger children. The need for this had been shown by a number of recent inquiries.

Does the Prime Minister concede that we should be very careful in looking in terms of priorities at the extension of the Open University to take 18-plus pupils, which was not within the general concept of that institution when it was formed?

That is a point which is new to me, because, as the hon. Gentleman says, that was not the purpose of the Open University when it was set up. Nevertheless, it could well be looked at, and I will certainly arrange for that to be done.

On the question of the Open University, is the Prime Minister aware that a figure of about 700 or 800 has been put into the 18-years category? Is he aware that this side of the House is very pleased that the Open University has been maintained? It is proving a tremendous success, but there is anxiety, both within it and more widely in universities, as shown by the resolution of the Association of University Teachers, that it will be used to economise on what would be the required expansion of more traditional universities?

I have seen that anxiety expressed. One of the purposes of my right hon. Friend's speech was to point out the various implications of continuing the Robbins principles as they were originally set out in the Commission's Report, on various assumptions about university entry, and the impact of those on Government expenditure. That was one of the issues about which my right hon. Friend wanted to have public discussion.

asked the Prime Minister if he has agreed to the request of the Trades Union Congress General Purposes Committee for an urgent meeting on matters of mutual concern.

Yes, Sir. I met the General Council of the TUC a week ago on 4th July.

In view of the prompt and unqualified acceptance yesterday by industrial leaders of the right hon. Gentleman's invitation to join the tripartite working party, and presumably his anxiety for a similar response tomorrow from the TUC, will the Prime Minister indicate what grounds trade unions have for expecting that such a future relationship will always be conducted on a voluntary basis, given his Government's crucial departure from the principle of voluntarism in industrial relations?

I do not believe that those two things are comparable. This was not a point which was made to me by the General Council of the TUC. If Parliament passes legislation, as it has done, it applies to all citizens, including those in the trade union movement. What I emphasised to the General Council was that as a Government we wanted free, voluntary negotiations to continue in wage bargaining, and that I always understood that that was a principle to which the trade unions themselves attached great importance. The General Council agreed with that, and I hope therefore that it will feel able tomorrow to accept my invitation.

Is there not a long history of fruitful co-operation between Conservative Governments and the trade union movement? Is not the trade union movement full of patriotic people who want the good of this country, and is it not therefore in the interests of the country that fruitful discussions should now take place between the Government and the representatives of the trade union movement to try to see that the economy proceeds on sound lines for the benefit of everyone?

Yes, Sir. There has been a considerable number of meetings between the General Council, the Economic Committee and the General Purposes Committee of the TUC with myself and my colleagues over the past two years. These have been valuable. The House knows of the invitation which I gave to the TUC last Wednesday, which it is considering further tomorrow. Its main purpose in coming to see me was to discuss the Industrial Relations Act. I expressed the Government's view on that in the debate in the House on Monday of last week, and I discussed with the General Council again the position which I have set out.

If the right hon. Gentleman has not yet discussed with TUC representatives the effect of the devaluation of the £ on the rising cost of living as a result of the inevitable increase in import prices, will he now explain to it and to us how the Government expect to meet that situation?

I discussed the floating of the £ with the General Council—and the events which had led up to that—and the Council appreciated that one cannot say at this period of time what the course of floating will be. It showed no signs of wishing to exaggerate the consequence on prices of the floating of the £.