asked the Secretary of State for Energy what decisions he has made regarding capital investment in coal production over the next 10 years.

The National Coal Board's future investment plans are a major concern of the current tripartite examination of the industry's future rôle and I would ask the hon. Member to await the publication of the interim report of that examination.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the National Coal Board is seeking a £500 million interest-free loan and, if so, will he confirm that before an annual subsidy of this magniture is granted it will require the approval of this House?

The NCB is not seeking an interest-free loan of the proportions referred to by the hon. Gentleman. I ask him to await the publication of the interim report. It will come out tomorrow.

Does the Secretary of State recall that before the previous administration asked this House to approve a massive investment in the coal industry they obtained from the union, under a 20-point plan, an assurance that coal miners' wages would not exceed rises in the cost of living? Will the right hon. Gentleman be obtaining any such assurance this time, and is he confident that he can hold the union to it?

That is not the basis of the tripartite examination, although many of the other matters mentioned by the hon. Gentleman will come out in the report of the examination.

Is not the situation in the coal industry now desperate? Are we not in a position where the April stocks of coal were 10 million tons lower than last year but where output per man shift is some 5 cwt less than in the comparable period last year? Now we face a claim for an additional £20 per week, which the union seems determined to press to the uttermost. How can the country have confidence in the industry when it faces these difficulties?

It is part of our policy to make sure that the coal industry has a new future and a new perspective. It is true that industrial relations and productive potential went down and suffered in other ways as a result of the policies of the previous Government. It is our aim to make sure that the industry has a new future, and that is what we are setting out to do.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy what recent discussions he has had with the Coal Merchants Federation.

My Department has close links with the Coal Merchants Federation, and matters of common interest are discussed as necessary.

Do the Government realise that the majority of the 15 million consumers of domestic coal are relatively low income families? What will the Government do to cushion the effect of the £3 per ton increase in the price of domestic coal in the autumn? Assuming that these people can still afford to buy coal after the autumn, will the hon. Gentleman have discussions with his colleagues at the Department of the Environment to ensure that public sector houses are built with flues, so that there will still be an opportunity to use domestic coal in the future?

There is constant consultation between the Department of Energy and the Department of the Environment. As for the hon. Gentleman's second point, the National Coal Board's prices to merchants will not be increased until November. However, other factors, such as increased distribution costs, may cause price increases. But distributors' profit margins are controlled by the Price Code under the counter-inflation legislation, and I was asked about the Coal Merchants Federation.

Does my hon. Friend appreciate that many middle and high income families are very sorry that they did not take his advice in the period before 1970, and that they bought oil-fired central heating and now wish that they had put in coal-fired systems?

My hon. Friend's point is a good one, and I tried to make it in a previous debate. I hope that the House takes note of it.

May I press the hon. Gentleman a little further on the matter raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Derbyshire, South-East (Mr. Rost)? Is not there a complete lack of consumer choice in the forms of heating which can be put into buildings of all types where there are no flues and where, as a result. people are forced to use oil-fired central heating simply because they can instal no other form of heating?

The hon. Gentleman does not have to convince me about that. I wish he had been as vociferous in trying to persuade his right hon. and hon. Friends when they were in Government. It is our intention to do our best to provide consumer choice.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy whether the design and construction of the deep water, pre-stressed concrete drilling platforms in the North Sea will be carried out by British consulting engineers; and whether they will be governed by the new British code of practice for concrete construction CP110, adopted by the European Concrete Committee.

Not all the structures erected in the United Kingdom sector of the North Sea will have been designed and built by British engineers. At present several of the most favoured designs have their origins abroad. However, a number of British designs are available or in the process of development and I hope they will attract orders in the future. The international character of the offshore industry means that structures may be built in accordance with several widely accepted codes, of which CP110 is one.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that many eminent British engineers have been responsible for helping to draw up the European code, which embraces not only the Common Market but Eastern and Western European countries? Is he aware that many of the countries doing this kind of work have very little more experience than we have in the behaviour of concrete under heavy water pressure? Why are we not sponsoring research, to be carried out at Government research establishments, into the behaviour of this material under these conditions?

I certainly agree that our prime concern must be for the integrity of the structures and the safety of the people who will work on them. We are considering the whole question of Government research and development. We are in consultation with British engineers and are as anxious as my hon. Friend that they should increase their contribution in this sphere.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that by sabotaging the plans of the previous Government to speed up the approval of sites for concrete platform development in Scotland, the Government have made it less likely that this work will be of British origin?

I cannot agree with the hon. Gentleman. When the Secretary of State takes his decision on Drumbuie, we shall announce our plans in this area. In the meantime, there is no evidence to support the contention that our production plans have in any way been put back as a result of our decision on Drumbuie.

Of course they have.

They have not.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy whether he will make a further statement about his policy on nationalisation of oil and gas resources in the North Sea.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy if he will make a statement on future policy on the handling of North Sea energy problems.

We are reviewing all aspects of licensing policy. A report will be made to Parliament when the review is complete.

I wonder whether the right hon. Gentleman can help us a little with that somewhat Delphic utterance? May I assume that, generally speaking, his views on this important issue correspond more closely to those of his right hon. Friends the Foreign Secretary and the Home Secretary, for instance, than to those of his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry?

My views correspond with the views of the Government.

May I ask my right hon. Friend whether there was any truth in the reports in the newspapers last week that the Government were prepared to take 80 per cent. of the profits accruing from oil and that the oil companies had agreed to that figure? Does he agree that if they have so agreed there is something wrong with that, in terms of the national interest? Will he assure the House that the Government will announce their proposals in time for a very full and forthright discussion inside the Labour Party as well as in this House, to ensure that this resource is used exclusively in the national interest?

The Government intend that resources in the North Sea and elsewhere throughout or off the shores of Britain will be used for the benefit of the British people. Certainly if nothing were done the British people would not get a proper share and benefit from the wealth of the North Sea.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell the House to which faction he belongs? Does he believe that it is correct to support a British hydrocarbon corporation with a number of multiple buying agencies to bring in the oil? Of what advantage can that be to the British taxpayer and people? From where does he propose to get the finance to carry out the operation?

The hon. Gentleman must wait for the review, which I hope will be ready within a few weeks—certainly before the House goes into recess. There are many misconceptions about public ownership or nationalisation of North Sea oil. British oil is already nationalised. That was done by the last Conservative Government but one, under the Continental Shelf Act 1964.

Will my right hon. Friend make it clear not only that North Sea oil and gas will remain under British control for the benefit of the British economy, but that we shall not be subject to any interference from the EEC or any other organisation which will impinge on British economic sovereignty?

British oil will certainly be used for the benefit of the British people. There is another question on the Order Paper relating to the EEC and I believe that that matter will come up again.

Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to make this statement as soon as he possibly can? Was his attention drawn to the statement by the chairman of one of the oil companies that delay is making it more difficult for the companies to raise finance, and that that is delaying the development of the oil?

There is not a shred of evidence that delay is causing a lessening of activity in the North Sea. We are anxious to make a statement as soon as possible, and certainly before the Summer Recess.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy by what percentage domestic electricity bills would have to increase in the autumn in order to eliminate the subsidy received by the electricity industry and the payment of interest on its capital.

I am advised by the industry that it would require a further increase of the order of 20 per cent. overall to be applied to domestic and other quarterly bills from the beginning of October to enable the area boards to break even in 1974–75.

Despite the policies of previous Governments as well as of this Government, would it not be more sen sible to concentrate the taxpayers' money on helping those who cannot afford to pay their electricity bills rather than subsidising electricity as a commodity? Will the Government give further thought to this matter?

It was not possible to correct the legacy of the last Government's restraint on electricity prices in one step.

Why not?

If the hon. Gentleman will read the report of the debate that took place on this matter he will observe that the Government are proposing to increase heating costs by one-third to the people to whom he referred. I think that he will also be aware that the official Opposition have a motion down on this matter on Thursday.

Does my hon. Friend agree that until the advent of the last Government the electricity industry prided itself on being the most efficient of the nationalised industries, that it had never asked for a subsidy, and that it would prefer to be without it today?

Yes. The electricity industry had a glorious record until the previous Government took office. It is a pity that it then started to make substantial losses. Perhaps this Government will manage to rectify the situation.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy if he will seek an early meeting with M. Spaak, EEC Director of Energy.

I have no plans to meet M. Spaak, but I recently had discussions with M. Simonet, the EEC commissioner responsible for energy matters.

In that discussion did the right hon. Gentleman point out to M. Simonet that M. Spaak, in his speech at the Financial Times conference in New York last April, made claims for Community control of North Sea oil which would be wholly unacceptable to a wide range of political opinion in this country, whether or not one is in favour of fundamental renegotiation? Did he also inquire of M. Simonet exactly what he meant when he said that United Kingdom regulations to control the export of oil would be in breach of EEC Treaty obligations?

Many interesting proposals are coming from the Commission on energy policy. M. Spaak's speech was about European energy policy, on which the Commission has drafted proposals which we have discussed. These proposals will be considered further and will no doubt come up in Brussels, with the Council of Ministers, in due course.

If the European Community proposed that North Sea oil, which is British, should become the property of the Community, and if there were majority voting, the majority would clearly vote for the oil to become Community property. Therefore, is this not a very good example illustrating that we should hang on to the Luxembourg Agreement and have the ability to use the veto at all times?

We certainly have the ability to use the veto, but it is my firm intention, and that of the Government, to make sure that British interests are properly safeguarded in these discussions.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy how many oil refineries are currently under construction in the United Kingdom; and how many more are planned between 1975 and 1980.

One refinery is under construction. I am aware of five others being planned, of which one has been given outline planning permission, and the rest are under consideration.

I thank the Minister for that reply. Is he satisfied with the number of refineries planned between now and the end of this decade, and will he confirm that capacity for this decade has been assessed correctly, with special reference to the exporting of middle distillates which is essential to the future of this country?

Within the Department we are reviewing refinery policy and we hope to be able to make a report about that review in due course.

Bearing in mind the review of refinery policy, is it the Gov ernment's intention to develop the refining capacity of this country beyond the domestic requirement, or to develop it only up to that requirement? What are my right hon. Friend's plans for additional refining capacity in Scotland?

I have already said that we are looking critically at this matter. I want to make sure that Britain has the refining capacity that it needs. With regard to Scotland, my Department is in close touch with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland, who, as my hon. Friend knows, has planning responsibilities in that country.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that a refinery may now cost the taxpayer tens of millions of pounds in investment grants, for an absolutely derisory number of jobs created? Will he consider the matter carefully and ensure that public funds are not wasted in this manner again?

I am not sure that I can accept the hon. Gentleman's comments about investment grants. The previous Conservative administration stopped investment grants, but reintroduced them in 1972. It is our intention to continue providing investment grants in the weaker economic regions.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy what proportion of the electricity industry's receipts are from the sale of off-peak electricity.

asked the Sectary of State for Energy what percentage of the electricity industry's revenue is from the sale of off-peak electricity.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy how much of the electricity industry's receipts since 1971 has been attributable to the sale of off-peak electricity.

About 5 per cent. of total revenue from sales of electricity in the three years 1st April 1971 until 31st March 1974 came from off-peak sales under domestic and other quarterly tariffs.

May I draw my hon. Friend's attention to the great anger and annoyance of many people because of the recent announcement about night storage heaters and white meters? [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear hear."] Hundreds of thousands of ordinary people think that they have been cheated and conned—

It is no use hon. Gentleman opposite cheering; the fact is that they were going to put up prices.

If the Trade Descriptions Act has technically not been broken, it has been raped in spirit. Does my hon. Friend not agree that in view of the intense feeling among people he ought to reconsider the anouncement that has been made and that the entire proposal should be abolished? Otherwise folk will have no confidence whatsoever in any future announcements by great public industries.

I am sure that my hon. Friend will agree when I say that we are well aware of the statement that he has made about the feelings of consumers of off-peak electricity. My hon. Friend will be aware that about 2 million out of 17 million consumers use the appliances that he has mentioned, and he knows that the House is to debate this matter on Thursday.

Will the hon. Gentleman accept that that complacent reply will not satisfy organisations such as Help the Aged, which are desperately disturbed by the fears which his announcement has caused among old people?

Yes, Sir, but the hon. Gentleman must be fair and agree that the Government have implemented a policy which can be of assistance to the aged. They have announced that heating charges for people on supplementary benefit will be increased by one-third from July.

Does my hon. Friend accept that once upon a time night storage tariff customers used to be valuable to the generating boards because they used off-peak capacity? Because of that, an advertising campaign, which proved a great success, was undertaken to persuade people that they could install electric central heating for a small sum per week. Is my hon. Friend now saying that the Electricity Council and the generating boards do not want night storage tariff customers? Will my hon. Friend consider the whole matter again, because there is a tremendous amount of feeling on this issue?

There is to be a debate on this topic on Thursday, but my hon. Friend should not be under any illusion about what I am saying about energy costs. I am saying that there has been a tremendous amount of miscalculation on both sides of the House about sources of energy.

Will the hon. Gentleman say what proportion of the increase in off-peak heating is directly attributable to the increased cost of coal due to increases in miners' wages?

The answer is one-third to coal and two-thirds to oil.

I accept that much of the problem was created by the Conservative administration and was disguised by them, but will my hon. Friend explain to my constituents how they are to meet this increased cost of 70 per cent., in addition to the increased rate burdens which they have had to suffer? Will my hon. Friend accept that we find it small comfort that he tells the House that the increase affects only 2 million people? For them the increase is as severe and damaging as it could possibly be.

I was not trying to give any comfort; I was trying to give my hon. Friend the facts. I repeat that this matter is to be debated on Thursday.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy what was the amount spent by the nationalised electricity industry in the last five years on advertising aimed at encouraging consumers to use cheap off-peak electricity for storage heating.

I am advised by the Electricity Council that between 1969–70 and 1973–74 the approximate annual amounts were: £1·12 million; £1·70 million; £770,000; £390,000 and £140,000.

I should declare an interest, in that I put my trust in these advertisements and completely converted to night store heaters, only to be conned like 2 million other people. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that if there had been a similar breach of trust or misrepresentation by a private organisation it would have been pilloried? Is this the unacceptable face of nationalisation, and will he, before Thursday, consider his policy on this matter?

On the first point, if the hon. Gentleman had consulted me and some of my hon. Friends we could have given him good advice on what proper central heating should be. His second question has nothing to do with nationalisation. It has an awful lot to do with the fact that the House and the country did not think out a proper energy policy in relation to cost.

Does my hon. Friend accept that no matter how incompetent the previous administration were over this nationalised industry it will not do now to say that people must accept these charges? I am afraid that it will be a great hardship to a number of people. We expect from him much more enlightenment in the administration of this industry.

I certainly take the strictures of my hon. Friend, but the question related to advertisements for night storage heaters. It still is a cheaper form of electricity—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."] Yes it is. It is cheaper than ordinary electricity. I am sure that my hon. Friend will agree that it is preferable, from the point of view of conservation, that night storage heaters should be sold in conjunction with cheap insulation.

Not all of us would accept the hon. Gentleman as a heating consultant, but would he advise his right hon. Friend that he failed earlier to answer the perfectly reasonable question of his hon. Friend the Member for Nuneaton (Mr. Huckfield), and that as a result of Government policy we shall now have a growing mistrust from the public, who once felt that an agreement had been made, respecting the interests of both sides, that special prices should be given to those who used off-peak heating, and that this has now been violated?

My qualifications as a heating consultant may be better than those of the right hon. Gentleman. He should address his second point to his right hon. Friends on the Opposition Front Bench. They agreed to the fuel cost adjustment clauses and they will have to enlighten the right hon. Gentleman in the debate on Thursday.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the contradiction in the attitude of Conservative Members, who are always lecturing the nationalised industries on the need to be commercially minded and then, apparently, deny them the right to advertise?

I could not agree with my hon. Friend more.

Is it not now becoming apparent to the hon. Gentleman and to his right hon. Friend that they would be well advised to accept the Opposition motion about off-peak heating, especially since the advice of the Patronage Secretary is that they should accept it?

That is the great dilemma that the House will face. We do not yet know what the Opposition policy is. We look forward with great interest to Thursday's debate.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy what is the average cost of the 70 per cent. rise in off-peak electricity to those households which have installed night storage heaters.

For typical households with night storage heating using about 12,000 units a year, of which 9,000 are at off-peak or night rates, the increase in their bills is expected to average about 75p a week.

As, in the main, these night storage heaters have been installed by householders with very limited means, does not a figure of that kind represent a savage blow to their weekly budgets? Is it not time that we had at least some expression of sympathy from Ministers to these people in their pressing plight?

There is no lack of sympathy. As the hon. Gentleman knows, the House is to debate this matter on Thursday.

Is it not completely hypocritical of Conservative Members to attack this decision, when it arose directly out of their plans and their arrangements? That said, however, is my hon. Friend aware that the complaints which most of us on the Government side of the House have received have come from people of limited means, who regard the change as extremely unfair?

I am glad that my hon. and learned Friend has raised the question of people of limited means. As I told the House previously, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services is trying to take care of this matter and has made announcements relative to the giving of some financial aid.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy how many representations have been received from the public in regard to the increase in night storage charges for domestic electricity heating.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy what representations he has received concerning the proposed increases in costs of electricity for night storage heaters.

I have received 333 letters from hon. Members and 416 direct from the public about the electricity price increases. The bulk of them refer to the increases in off-peak and night rates. In addition, I have seen the letter sent to the Prime Minister by the National Consumer Protection Council on 10th June covering about 3,000 letters from consumers and signed on behalf of various organisations.

Will the Minister stop appearing to be so complacent about this matter? Is he not aware that hundreds of thousands of people are facing literally unbearable increases in charges? Will he for one moment forget the debate later this week, behind which he has continued to shelter for the whole of this Question Time, and undertake to postpone any of these increases for three months pending full inquiries?

As Question Time goes on I begin to gain the impression that Opposition Members would like to forget the debate on Thursday. I do not think that the House can forget it

I hope that my hon. Friend will bear in mind that it is of little consequence either to many of us in the House or, certainly, to the people affected by this matter where he says that the blame is laid. Is he aware that the people involved place the responsibility on many of us in the House? Is he, therefore, aware that unless something is said on Thursday to change our minds, some of us will not be persuaded that we should support him and the Government?

I note what my hon. Friend has said. We shall have to wait until Thursday night.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy what plans he has for providing financial assistance for research and development of solar energy.

The United Kingdom is contributing to a programme of research on solar energy within the EEC and some research at universities is being funded by the SRC. We have no plans to increase expenditure in this area at present.

Is that not an extremely unsatisfactory answer? Everyone agrees—as I am sure the Minister does—that the demand for energy is continuing to increase? Although it appears that the Government would have people believe that the energy crisis has disappeared, the need for continued research and development of alternative forms of energy other than fossil fuels is of vital importance.

I have noted the hon. Gentleman's comments. He will be pleased to hear that the new Energy Technology Support Unit at Harwell is to carry out an independent study to see whether the Government's views on this matter are soundly based.

Will the hon. Gentleman quantify in money terms the amount of research that is being carried out?

I cannot give the hon. Gentleman the figure, because the money is not sponsored by the Department but comes through the Science Research Council. However, given notice I am sure that we could extract further information on this.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy, if he will give an estimate of the overall figure for the growth of energy consumption between 1974 and 1980 and 1985; and what is likely to be the annual performance of coal, gas, electricity and oil industries in the national programme.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy if he will give his estimates of British oil consumption by 1980, 1985 and 1990.

Estimates of United Kingdom oil and gas production and reserves were given in the Brown Book presented to Parliament last month. As regards other estimates, my Department is engaged continuously in preparing forecasts of various aspects of energy supply and demand. Many features of the present energy situation are very uncertain, so that forecasts of specific items are constantly changing and could be very misleading. I consider, therefore, that publication of estimates of either future energy consumption or of the performance of the energy industries would not he helpful.

I hope that the right hon. Gentleman realises that he is saying absolutely nothing about the Question. He must realise that fuels are to some extent interrelated in the energy market, and as North Sea oil and gas are buoyant they may have an adverse effect on the other fuels. In view of the fact that coal productivity has dropped from 47 cwt. to 42 cwt. per man shift in the past year, what will be the position of coal by 1980, and shortly after that? Will it not be overtaken by the buoyancy of North Sea oil and gas?

It is our intention to maintain coal production and, where possible, to increase it. When the interim report is published tomorrow the hon. Gentleman will be able to study it and see how we intend to do it.

When?

Before the House goes into recess it will have, on that basis, a lot of information.

I regret that the Secretary of State has failed to give a positive and definite answer to the Question before him, but does he not agree that on the basis of the material in the Brown Book recently produced by his Department, the question of the myth of self-sufficiency is disposed of? What proposals has he to deal with the question of control of production of oil in the North Sea in future years?

Control of production in the North Sea will come when Labour's policy is implemented. That policy is majority participation in operations in the North Sea. That was made absolutely clear in the manifesto and in the Queen's Speech and debates upon it.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy what percentage of British Gas proposals for converting from town to natural gas had been completed up to the most convenient date.

I am advised by British Gas that at the end of March, 76 per cent. of conversion work had been completed.

Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that this conversion has been carried out with the minimum of inconvenience to the general public and that the congratulations of the House are due to the management and employees, whether of nationalised industries or not, for the fine way in which they have done the work, and will no doubt continue to carry it out?

I am sure that the management and workers of British Gas will be most encouraged, as will be the contractors, by the hon. Gentleman's remarks.

Will the hon. Gentleman give a reassurance that the British Gas Corporation will be able to cope with conversion for those people who will want to switch from heating by night storage electricity to gas?

The hon. Gentleman is raising a quite separate issue.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy if he will give consideration to co-ordinating the retail outlets of the gas, electricity, coal and oil industries; and if he will make a statement.

The industries referred to by my hon. Friend of course operate as separate commercial entities, but I have taken note of the sentiments underlying my hon. Friend's Question, which I know are widely shared.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that good reply. However—seeing that we now have coal, gas and electricity under public ownership, and that oil and gas from the North Sea will, we hope, soon be publicly owned—would it not be a good thing to set up a coordinating service for consumers on energy matters, so as to give impartial advice to consumers on what forms of energy, heating or lighting they should choose?

I have heard that suggestion previously. I plan to have regular meetings with the leaders of the publicly-owned industries and I shall certainly have my hon. Friend's suggestion on the agenda.

Before pursuing that useful suggestion, will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that he will remove an anomaly whereby in Scotland the price of gas is 27 per cent. more than the average south of the border?

I am happy to look into the point, but I cannot give the hon. Gen tleman any assurance that it can be done as easily as he suggests.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is great public concern at the fact that these nationalised industries spend a great deal of public money in advertising their products against each other? When he is having the conversations with representatives of those industries, would it not be better to ensure that they co-ordinate their services, in order that people get the best possible service from whichever nationalised industry they are involved with?

As I have already indicated to my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdare (Mr. Evans), this is one of the aspects that I shall want to discuss with leaders of the nationalised industries.

What advice is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to give to consumers who may be tempted by the increase in off-peak electricity charges to switch to gas and incur stiff investment, only to find that gas prices go up in a year or two?

I am not sure that I understand the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, or what he is suggesting. If he is going to kick up a fuss as a result of the Government's having to adopt the fuel cost adjustment clauses that he accepted in principle, is he now saying that we should go to the Gas Corporation and say, "Put your prices up as well"?

I want to know what advice the right hon. Gentleman is to give to the customer.

We certainly know the advice which the right hon. Gentleman gave to the Electricity Council during the period of the election. That advice was that the Conservative Government had agreed on the fuel cost adjustment clause, which has resulted in the situation regarding night storage heaters.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy if he will make a statement about the progress he is making towards the formulation of a policy of energy conservation.

I hope to announce my policy shortly.

In view of the economic state of the country and the implications involved for capital expenditure, in the generating boards' next nuclear power programme, would it not serve us better if we concentrated more on energy conservation and a better utilisation of present capacity than on building the number of nuclear power stations which the electricity generating boards have in mind at present?

I cannot go into great detail on the nuclear reactor policy. As I have already told the House, we intend to make a statement about that within the next few weeks. Some of the factors mentioned by my hon. friend will, I hope, come out in that statement, but the more general point of energy efficiency and energy substitution is one to which we attach great importance.

In view of the Labour Government's total failure to reduce Britain's trade deficit, will the Secretary of State tell us whether his Department is considering introducing rationing by means other than higher prices on domestic lighting and heating and on petrol to private individuals in order to save Britain's oil import bill?

The preamble to that supplementary question shows that the Conservative Government certainly have no scruples. There are no plans to introduce rationing along the lines mentioned by the hon. Gentleman.

Will my right hon. Friend advise his right hon. Friend that one way of conserving energy would be to electrify all main-line railways in this country?

That is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment. I am sorry that I cannot go into it.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy if he is satisfied with the adequacy of the terms of compensation for farmers and others affected by mining subsidence.

I am not aware of any great dissatisfaction with the way the National Coal Board discharges its liability under the Coal-Mining (Subsidence) Act 1957.

Does the hon. Gentleman think it reasonable that losses in quantity and quality of crops, and other consequential losses should, when large-scale mining subsidence occurs, be made eligible for compensation?

The hon. Gentleman knows, I think, that an inter-departmental group is studying that matter. The subject is very complex and the Department has had to give higher priority to more pressing matters, but I hope to receive the report in the next few weeks.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy if he is satisfied with the operation of the complaints procedure as it affects gas consumers.

Yes, Sir. If consumers are dissatisfied they can consult the gas consumers' councils—independent bodies set up to look after gas consumers' interests.

Will my hon. Friend have a word with the East Midlands Gas Board? Is he aware of the details of a case concerning Mr. Aistrope, of which I have given details to his private office? The board is pursuing him for the payment of £10 on a bill of over £400. I think that he was misled, and that the Registrar of Scunthorpe County Court dismissed the case brought by the board because he, too, believed him to have been misled. Is he aware that the board is still harassing my constituent and that its members are behaving like a collection of little Hitlers, with no idea of good consumer relations? Will he give the board the biggest rocket it has ever had and tell it to "knock it off"?

As soon as I received word of the situation of my hon. Friend's constituent I asked for an immediate report, but he will recognise that since the matter is now sub judice it would be inappropriate for me to comment.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy if he will now publish a White Paper on energy supplies and fuel policy.

I am reviewing energy problems and intend to keep the House in touch with my thinking on them, but I have no immediate proposals for publishing a White Paper.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that we are very much with him in the review that he is undertaking? If he has no immediate proposals, will he tell the House whether eventually, after the review, it is his intention to produce a White Paper?

I shall certainly consider that matter.

If the Minister does produce a White Paper, will it cover all types of energy supply, and will it give some indication of the amount of resources which are required to get the different types of energy?

If I eventually publish a White Paper I would hope that it would contain that kind of information. But I hope that the House will realise that over the next few weeks I intend to make major statements about North Sea oil and gas policy and nuclear reactor policy, and it is intended to publish the interim report of the tripartite examination tomorrow.

What weight will the Secretary of State give to the possible future strategic threat to this country's oil supplies arising from the growth in the size of the Russian Navy in relation to the idea of getting more oil from the North Sea?

That is a question for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, but the hon. Gentleman can rest assured that security of supplies, in the sense that he has outlined it, is a matter which the Government have considered.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy if he will take steps to bring about a reconstruction of the shareholding of the National Nuclear Corporation on the lines recommended by the Select Committee on Science and Technology.

No, Sir. We must now concentrate on getting under way our nuclear programme, on which I hope to make a statement shortly.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree, however, that the National Nuclear Corporation is as yet simply on paper? Is there not now an opportunity to reconsider the structure of this company to increase the State participation—a course which was recommended by the Select Committee on Science and Technology, which at that time had a Conservative majority in its membership?

I am well aware of the views of the Select Committee and of my hon. Friend on this matter, but the immediate priority is for the Government to come to a decision on nuclear reactor choice and to make sure that that programme goes ahead. It may well be that in the future we shall have to consider some of the more fundamental questions that have been raised by my hon. Friend.

asked the Secretary of State for energy if he will publish a report on coal production and reserves comparable to the report on production and reserves of oil and gas in the United Kingdom, and if he will give comparative estimates of the cost of resources necessary to exploit various types of energy including nuclear energy.

The future level of coal production is a major concern of the coal industry examination, and an interim report is to be published tomorrow with a final report by the end of the summer. Reserves are not a limiting factor.

Does the Secretary of State agree that there are very great reserves of energy in the world but that it is getting more expensive, in terms of money and resources, to get them? Will tomorrow's document give some indication of the size of the new Yorkshire coalfield, which I believe to be enormous?

The report will certainly mention the reserves in the new Yorkshire coalfield. They are about 2,000 million tons, with further possibilities as exploration takes place.

What calculations have been made about the future production of coal, in the light of the possible availability of manpower, on the assumption that we have full employment over the next 10 years?

Manpower in the coal-mining industry will continue to be a problem, particularly in the low-cost coalfields of Yorkshire and Nottinghamshire. One problem in particular will be attracting men who will go into the pits and dig the coal at the coal face.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what reports have been received from the Middle East development divisions of her Department since December 1973 on aid requirements in that area; and if she will make a statement.

My Department receives a constant supply of information from Middle East Development Division in Beirut on the aid requirements of the 20 developing countries which it covers. Their needs are of many kinds but the requests for our assistance relate chiefly to the development of their natural resources, industrial potential and technology.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the technical assistance given to the Egyptian Government to help clear the Suez Canal has been warmly appreciated by the Egyptian people? Will he draw the attention of the Middle East Development Division to the fact that the new diplomatic climate there following the disengagement between Israel and Syria and between Israel and Egypt has led to a greatly changed attitude towards the West and a great welcome for anything that we can do for those countries by way of peaceful technical development?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. In Egypt we took what we thought was the right decision, and we believe that it has been widely welcomed.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what was the value of the estimated return flow to this country of amortisation and interest on old loans in 1973–74; and what is her estimate for 1974–75.

Amortisation receipts from aid loans during 1973–74 totalled £33·5 million and interest £26·7 million. Our estimates for 1974–75 are amortisation receipts of £38·8 million and interest payments totalling £28·0 million.

Is my hon. Friend aware that it has frequently been proposed that the return flow of amortisation and interest should somehow be recycled for use as fresh aid without fresh authorisation? Is he aware that the Germans have made some move in that direction? Do the present administration intend to move in the same direction?

My hon. Friend will understand that there has been a good deal of recycling already, particularly on interest payments. We accept that it is no use helping a poor country today only to hang huge debts around its necks for 25 years. That is why, in conjunction with other donor nations, we have accepted a target of 86 per cent. in grant aid to the 25 poorest countries.

asked the Minister for Overseas Development whether Her Majesty's Government will take steps designed to ensure that the United Kingdom element in any international disaster operations can be deployed to maximum effect.

We are participating fully in various international efforts, such as in the Sahel, and my right hon. Friend has reviewed the organisation of ODM in order to facilitate rapid and effective response to disaster situations. She hopes to make a statement before the Summer Recess.

I thank my hon. Friend for that statement. Is he aware that questions asked by certain members of the Select Committee on Overseas Development in Bangladesh earlier this year—questions which have been published—reveal a situation about disaster relief which is not reassuring? Will he examine the disaster relief arrangements that the United Kingdom has in Bangladesh, and perhaps draw this matter to the attention of our permanent representative at the United Nations.

I shall certainly do that. The evidence of recent disasters is that the world as a whole and individuals have not been ungenerous. The problems have arisen mainly with organisation and the speed with which relief gets to the disaster area. It is on those two points that we are concentrating our efforts.

The hon. Gentleman mentioned the Sahel. What particular measures, either separately or collectively, are Her Majesty's Government now considering for relief and rehabilitation in that area?

It would take a very long reply properly to deal with that matter. However, I can tell the hon. Gentleman that I went to Rome last week to discuss this matter with the FAO. We are doing all that we can to speed up the international operation. This is a massive international operation. Some 700,000 tons of food, alone, is going in. We are doing all we can to get it there before the rains this year. Also, we are planning for what we see as the inevitable consequences of this drought next year. We are working very closely with the FAO. Mistakes have been made, but we are doing everything that we can to ensure that they are not repeated.

Reverting to the original Question, will my hon. Friend see that the Ministry of Defence is consulted, to see what more it can do? Is my hon. Friend aware that our Armed Forces, especially the Royal Air Force, have experience in relief work that is unequalled in many other countries?

I accept that. That is the reason why the military have been very much involved in relief operations, mainly the airlifting of medical supplies and trucks both to Ethiopia and the Sahel. We have so far sent 90 trucks, and that is not a bad record. The military forces have been of immense value in these operations.

asked the Minister for Overseas Development what further consultations have been held with organisations such as Oxfam, Christian Aid, War on Want, UNICEF, Save the Children Fund, World Development Movement and other organisations dealing with the problem of world poverty; and if she will make a statement.

My right hon. Friend and I have been seeing representatives of a number of voluntary organisations in order to hear their views and discuss how we can collaborate more closely in carrying out our respective responsibilities. We have had particularly useful exchanges about joint action in emergencies.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Does he realise that the major problem facing mankind is the issue of world poverty and that as a nation we are not yet making the sort of contribution that we should? These organisations are doing a valuable job, educationally, in preparing the people of Britain to see that as a nation we make a greater contribution. While giving them general support, will my hon. Friend talk over some specific problems with them to ease the difficulties faced by some of these organisations? Will he consider the matter of rates on their gift shops, because these are educationally attractive, are doing good work, and need to be encouraged?

Certainly we shall be considering the last matter with the voluntary organisations. I have never underestimated their value. The money that they raise and spend is important, but what is more important is the fact that they should arouse public opinion, particularly for the disaster organisations. We have worked closely with them in the last three months. We shall be asking them to attend a seminar later in the year to thrash out a determined policy for closer co-operation between them.

I recognise the idealism behind many of these voluntary organisations, but is the Minister nevertheless aware that more than one of those mentioned in the Question is losing support and contributions because of the widespread belief that some of its organisers are politically motivated?

I think that the hon. Gentleman would see a political bogy man among starving children in a refugee camp in Timbuktu. I do not think that his question deserves much of a reply.