asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he will have consultations with the relevant regional health authority in order to speed up a decision regarding the building of a new nucleus hospital to replace Cuckfield Hospital.

My Department is discussing preliminary proposals for this project with the South West Thames Regional Health Authority. I am not aware that there is any avoidable delay in reaching decisions.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that Cuckfield Hospital, where many wards are still in Nissen huts that were built before the last war, will soon require a large capital input if there is not to be a new nucleus hospital, but that this will not be money well spent if there is to be such a new hospital? That is the dilemma facing the authority. May we have a firm commitment from the Minister that he will get on with the working papers early next year?

I can give the hon. Gentleman a commitment that we shall proceed with the discussion of the plans not in early 1978, but now. The area health authority is discussing with the regional health authority the question of upgrading of Cuckfield and an improvement of the operating theatres as an interim measure.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he remains satisfied with the operation of the disabled housewife allowance.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what critical representations he has received concerning the housewives' non-contributory invalidity pension.

Up to 15th November, 46,000 people had claimed non-contributory invalidity pension for married women. The first payments will be made tomorrow for the week starting 17th November, although I regret that many people will have to wait before they receive their order books. While inevitably there will be criticisms of the scope of the new benefit, I am sure the House will agree that this extension of the cover provided by our income maintenance benefits is a further important advance.

Is my hon. Friend aware that all sides welcome this breakthrough in assistance to the disabled? What consultations did he have about arrangements for the new benefit, and can he say whether, when the benefit is reviewed, he will consider extending it to housewives who are disabled but who fall outside the terms of the benefit because they are able to do a little housework?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his opening remark. I consulted hon. Members on both sides of the House about the arrangements for introducing the new benefit and I was also in close contact with representatives of the Disablement Income Group. It was a rather novel consultation in that I brought my officials face to face with hon. Members in the All-Party Disablement Group and representatives of DIG. It is difficult to promise any loosening of the criteria because of the expenditure implications, but I shall bear in mind what my hon. Friend has said.

The Government deserve congratulations on this new benefit, but can my hon. Friend say how soon he expects to be able to rectify the injustice of the benefit not being available to families where the husband receives an invalidity pension or is unemployed? Is he aware that, if this injustice is not rectified, those who bear the heaviest burdens will not benefit to the full from the new allowance?

There would be further expenditure involved if we changed the nature of the new benefit. That is why I cannot promise any changes of the sort that my hon. Friend is seeking. However, the extension of the non-contributory invalidity pension to married women is an important step forward. I shall be in touch with my hon. Friend again.

Is the Minister aware that quite a number of disabled people and those advising them do not know exactly the conditions that apply to this benefit, in spite of all the efforts of his Department? Through the efforts of his Department, will he consider running short weekend training courses for voluntary bodies and the Citizens' Advice Bureaux so that they can take on board the rather complex detail of this and a number of other benefits for the disabled?

This is a new suggestion. Many of the voluntary organisations have been interested in providing information centres for disabled people. I shall gladly give sympathetic consideration to the suggestion made by the hon. Gentleman.

Further to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent, South (Mr. Ashley), how does my hon. Friend justify a situation where the wife of a disabled man can earn up to £35 a week before her husband's entitlement to invalidity benefit is affected whereas a couple who are both disabled have to face a situation where the husband's invalidity benefit is reduced because his wife receives the £10 non-contributory benefit?

It is difficult for me to comment on any particular case. I shall be delighted to give consideration to any case that my hon. Friend may wish to raise with me in writing. I have said that there will be further expenditure involved in doing more than we have been able to do so far. Introducing new benefits means excluding people as well as including people. We shall build on our present benefits for disabled people as soon as we can.

Does the hon. Gentleman accept that we now seem to be entering a phase in which we need simplification of all the benefits that are available to the disabled? Many people are muddled about their entitlement and, therefore, are not necessarily getting the full amounts to which they are entitled. Will the hon. Gentleman acknowledge that without the work of the all-party group and pressure from the Conservative Opposition he would not have succeeded in introducing the housewives' NCIP this week? We welcome it, but he would not have succeeded in introducing it without that work and pressure.

I am concerned to improve the take-up of our new benefits. There are problems for disabled people in understanding the scope and nature of some of the improvements that we have been able to make. I have said that I shall bear in mind the point made by the hon. Member for Eastleigh (Mr. Price). I mentioned that the All-Party Disablement Group was in touch with me about the arrangements for introducing the allowance. I try always to work in the closest possiblerapport with the group.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will make a statement about boarding-out allowances for foster children.

When my hon. Friend asked me to publish in theOfficial Report details of the scales of boarding-out allowances paid by each local authority, I explained in my reply to him on 30th November 1976 that the information was not available centrally. He will be pleased to know, however, that I have now decided to publish the scales and have asked my officials to collect the information. I shall write to my hon. Friend when the information is available.

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. We seem to be making some progress. I am sure that when he publishes the local authority scales he will agree that it would be much better to replace the wide variation of local scales with one national scale.

My Department has had discussions with the local authority associations, the latest being on 3rd October. Since then, they have agreed to seek the views of their members on whether they can now begin work on the sort of guidance that might be issued when the present resource constraints improve.

Will the Minister tell the House what discussions he has had with local authorities to encourage them to campaign to get their children who are in care out of local authority homes and into ordinary, normal homes? Is he aware that in Sweden, for example, 80 per cent. of such children are fostered whereas only 40 per cent. to 50 per cent. are fostered here? Will he explain that?

That is a somewhat different question. My Department is continually encouraging local authorities to expand their fostering services.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many people were awaiting admission into National Health Service hospitals at the latest date for which figures are available.

At 31st March, about 596,000.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that that is a shameful figure that reflects badly upon the National Health Service? Will he explain how he can possibly reconcile it with a recent statement to nurses and others to the effect that the Health Service is in a better state than ever before?

The hon. Gentleman did not ask me what the figures were before. In fact, the number on the waiting lists is decreasing. The March figures show a reduction of almost 11,500 compared with December 1976. Successive Governments have had to contend with high waiting lists. Even if we go back to 1951, when we had a smaller and younger population, the number on the waiting lists was getting on for 500,000. This has been a steady problem.

Why is it not possible at least to achieve some sort of equality in the waiting lists between hospitals in the same region? Is it not the case that many patients would be prepared to travel quite a long distance to a hospital to receive attention if that were necessary and if they could be treated more quickly than at the hospital nearer to their home?

That is right. We have carried out a recent study of the waiting lists, and a number of proposals for the management of waiting lists have been put forward, including precisely the one put forward by my hon. Friend. It is true that some consultants have much longer waiting lists than others. It is true that some hospitals have much longer waiting lists than others. Some regions and areas have longer waiting lists than others. This is one of the suggestions that have been made. I and the health authorities have determined that we shall reduce the level of waiting lists. We have set ourselves a target—namely, to ensure that no urgent cases wait more than a month and no non-urgent cases wait more than a year.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise the appalling situation—I am not exaggerating—at the Plymouth Eye Infirmary, which probably has the longest waiting list of any hospital in the country? Is it not a shame that people's eyesight should be slowly deteriorating because of a lack of funds and a consequent lack of ability to treat these people in the infirmary?

I cannot give an explanation in that particular case. However, the number of consultants in the Health Service is steadily increasing. It increased by 3·4 per cent. last year. The amount of money available to assist the Health Service has also increased. The health authorities are spending £9½ million this year. That sum is designed positively to reduce waiting lists. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we are being as active as we can in dealing with the problem.

There is no room for complacency in these matters, but does my right hon. Friend agree that, although there is sympathy everywhere for those suffering from non-urgent conditions, we should get this matter into perspective? Will he tell us just how much waiting time there is for any kind of acute surgical or medical condition in the National Health Service?

In the majority of cases there is little wait if the matter is urgent. That should be recognised. Most of those who are having to wait are non-urgent cases. When a case becomes urgent, it goes to the top of the list.

But is it not a fact that acute cases are waiting for investigation? Is it not a fact that under the right hon. Gentleman's Government the waiting list has increased by nearly 100,000 since 1974? Is he aware that we now have the longest waiting list of any country in Western Europe?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that the number of people on the waiting list is now decreasing. It would be nice if Opposition Members were to recognise that we are now beginning to see a decrease in the scale of the problem. That is because there has been a substantial increase recently in hospital activity. The number of in-patients treated increased by over 5½ per cent. in the 12 months to December 1976, and the number of out-patients treated increased by 8 per cent. We now have a period of increasing activity in the Health Service, which explains why the numbers on the waiting lists are coming down. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the first time the waiting list went over 500,000 was when his party was in office.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the 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 what success has been achieved with the Campaign for Access for the Disabled; and if he will make a statement.

The Silver Jubilee Committee on Improving Access for Disabled People has been pursuing a wide range of initiatives. These include letters asking for their help in the campaign to all hon. and right hon. Members, to the first citizens of local authorities throughout the United Kingdom and to a large number of organisations of and for disabled people. The committee has been heartened by the general response to its initiatives. A special "Access Week" is to be held in June next year, by which time the committee will be better able to judge the full impact of its efforts.

I congratulate my hon. Friend, but does he agree that much remains to be done to assist the disabled by, for instance, the design of post office and bank counters and telephone boxes, and access to places of entertainment and public buildings? Will he therefore regard this matter with some urgency and get all the assistance that he can from his right hon. Friends?

I entirely agree that much more needs to be done, and I know that my hon. Friend will accept that a great deal has been done in recent years to improve access. Some 60 hon. Members have responded favourably to the request for help from the Chairman of the Silver Jubilee Committee. Some hon. Members have taken positive action to publicise the campaign. I hope that more hon. Members will help, because they could do nothing better to improve the status of disabled people than helping this campaign.

Does the Minister accept that, notwithstanding all the work of the committee and all the exhortations, architects and local authorities are not producing the improvements in access for disabled people that we should like, bearing in mind, for instance, that our own interview rooms off Westminster Hall still do not provide access for the disabled? Does the hon. Gentleman accept that the only real solution is to alter the planning laws so that access for the disabled is made a statutory requirement?

I am familiar with the claims for further legislative change. The non. Member for Exeter (Mr. Hannam), as secretary of the All-Party Disablement Group in the House, will accept, however, that there have been improvements both here in the Palace of Westminster and throughout the country. I am not complacent. I am anxious to make further progress and I shall use my best endeavours to secure further improvement, with all that has been said very much in mind.

I welcome my hon. Friend's comments and the advances made in respect of public buildings, but does he not agree that the most outstanding current need concerns access to public transport?

There are many conflicting demands in this area. Some would say that the greatest single need is for improvements in personal transport. I have been in touch with British Rail and with organisations in many different parts of the economy to try to persuade them to do everything they can to help disabled people to integrate into society. As I have said before, I shall continue trying to improve the status of disabled people by improving their access to public and social buildings alike.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will make arrangements to pay the mobility allowance by post.

The mobility allowance is paid by order book which is posted to the beneficiary's address. Orders are encashable at four-weekly intervals at a post office of the beneficiary's choice. While the benefit is still being phased in, it is not economic to have an alternative method of payment: but once phasing in is further advanced, an alternative method of payment will be considered.

Is the Minister aware that that is a most unsatisfactory answer? He will know that unemployment benefit, supplementary benefit and retirement pensions can be paid by post. Why should this group of all groups be discriminated against when it may well cost individuals half or more of the weekly mobility allowance simply to get to the post office for the payment? Surely the Minister can act to do something about getting this money paid by post.

My Department is always prepared to consider the individual circumstances of disabled persons. I am not sure whether the hon. Gentleman is aware that other persons may collect the allowance on a disabled person's behalf. When we are introducing new benefits, administrative problems are inevitable. I am not prepared to accept the alternative of doing nothing just because there are problems.

How many disabled people are currently receiving mobility allowance, and how many will ultimately benefit when the scheme is fully phased in? Is my hon. Friend aware of the strong rumours that the mobility allowance is to be further substantially increased, and may we have a statement from him on that in the very near future?

Some 60,000 people are now receiving the new mobility allowance. There was a 40 per cent. increase in the amount of the allowance last week. My hon. Friend referred to rumours of a further increase. I can tell him that there will be a further statement at the earliest possible date.

I wish to revert to the original Question. If the rumours in the Press that there is to be a new scheme to provide vehicles for the disabled, based on the assignment of the mobility allowance, have any foundation, would it not be necessary to make arrangements for the money to be paid by post? One cannot envisage those concerned having to go round to the offices to collect the mobility allowance. When may we expect a statement on this new private sector scheme to help the disabled to get vehicles?

The scheme would be a partnership between public and private sectors. That is a most important point. Secondly, the right hon. Gentleman will appreciate that I cannot anticipate the terms of any statement. I hope that he will await the statement which we shall make at the earliest possible date.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services when he expects a report on the review of the work of the Supplementary Benefits Commission.

The review is making good progress and I expect to receive a report early next year. I have undertaken to publish any proposals for changes in the supplementary benefit scheme that emerge from the review so that they can be widely studied before decisions are taken.

Given the Government's desire to reduce the number of pensioners dependent on supplementary benefits, and given that the full effects of the second-pension scheme will not be felt for at least 20 years, does the right hon. Gentleman agree with the Supplementary Benefits Commission that something additional must be done in the next 20 years?

I welcome what the hon. Gentleman said. We hope that the report will come up with simplified proposals. I cannot phase the old scheme out until the new pension scheme is fully phased in, but we hope that the review will come up with proposals that the Government can study.

Will my right hon. Friend make sure that the review covers the question of the costs and possible benefits, in terms of perinatal morbidity and mortality, of paying a special diet allowance, through supplementary benefit, to claimants who are pregnant?

All supplementary benefit claimants who are able to receive the benefits will be taken into account.

Is it not typical of the waste in the system that this week the right hon. Gentleman's Department gave £5 to a man for an alarm clock—a man to whom it had given about £3,000 over the last two years—on the ground that the man, who was unemployed, had said that he could not get work because he could not wake up in the morning?

The House can judge the hon. Gentleman's attitude to the people who need benefit. We are concerned in this review to see that the millions of people, including the 3 million pensioners, who need supplementary benefit are able to get it. We want to simplify these matters, and the hon. Gentleman does not assist in that.

In the review, will my right hon. Friend carefully consider the composition and functions of the appeal tribunals, and will he give high regard to the fact that there are thousands of people who are entitled to benefits but do not claim them? What is he doing to deal with that?

On the last point, we hope that the review, by coming forward with proposals to simplify the system, will make it easier for those who are entitled to benefits to claim. We will consider my hon. Friend's first point.

Is the Minister aware that many hon. Members in all parts of the House hope that the review will take the fullest account of the oft-repeated statements of Professor Donnison, Chairman of the Supplementary Benefits Commission, that the development of the child benefit and tax credit systems is the best and most positive way of relieving the Supplementary Benefits Commission of many of its problems? Is he aware that over the last year tax allowances for single people have gone up by 24 per cent. and those for married people by 27 per cent. but that the combined child allowances have gone up by only 1·7 per cent.? Does he agree that increases in child benefit should now have the highest priority of all?

The right hon. Gentleman should recognise that the child benefit scheme equates with the tax credit system. I cannot see what the right hon. Gentleman is complaining about. The review is concerned not with future policy but with simplifying the supplementary benefit scheme. I assure the right hon. Gentleman that, alhough this is the responsibility of my Department, Professor Donnison and the Commission are being fully consulted.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he will make a statement on the financial support available to relatives caring for the frail elderly.

Invalid care allowance was introduced in July 1976. This new benefit, which is now payable at the personal rate of £10·50 a week, provides a non-means-tested source of income for men and single women of working age who are staying at home to care for a severely disabled relative who is receiving attendance allowance. In addition, Class I—employed earners—contributions are credited to beneficiaries of the invalid care allowance. My Department's leaflet "Help for Handicapped People" outlines a wide range of other benefits and services which may also be available.

Does the Minister accept that more families would care for the frail elderly in the home—which I am sure is his objective, as it is mine—if there were more provision for the care of the frail elderly on a short-term basis? I am thinking of the occasional holiday break for those who care for the frail elderly. Will the Minister consider whether it is possible to make temporary provision by the greater use of Part III accommodation?

There are many examples of short-term stay facilities being made available. If the hon. Member has any particular need in mind, I shall be glad to hear from him. He made an extremely important point. It is my job and that of my colleagues to try to lift the pressure and strain off families who are looking after disabled people.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that the invalid care allow ance should be increased substantially, because when relatives look after the elderly they take a substantial burden off society's costs? Will he consider expanding the geriatric rehabilitation services? Will he take up the matter raised by the hon. Member for Wokingham (Mr. van Straubenzee), because we should be giving people more holidays to allow them relief from caring for elderly relatives?

According to the latest figures, there has been a substantial increase in the number of holidays provided by local authorities. There is a case for increasing the invalid care allowance, but we are in a situation of infinite claims and finite resources. I am doing everything I can to build upon the considerable improvements that we have already made.

How can the Minister justify the logic in a married woman being denied the invalid care allowance when she can receive the non-contributory invalidity pension?

That is because the two benefits have different purposes. People do not always realise that benefits can be paid in combination. For example, in Scotland recently someone said that she would not be entitled to the new allowance for housewives because she was in receipt of attendance allowance. But the attendance allowance, the new housewife's benefit and the mobility allowance can be paid together, although they have different purposes.

Does the Minister agree that the financial support which provides the lifeline of day and short-term care for the frail elderly is of immense importance to elderly wives or husbands who are caring for the frail elderly? Will he see that support is made available for the ambulance service which has been stopped and which has therefore ended this important service?

In our document "The Way Forward", we have emphasised the priority that we attach to the further development of domiciliary services for the elderly and others in special need. At the same time, we have announced a research project into the needs of families who are caring for the elderly. I shall bear in mind everything that has been said today.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what is his estimate of the number of mentally handicapped adults in England currently living at home with their parents who will need alternative accommodation and care within five and 10 years, respectively; what action he is taking to meet this need; and if he will make a statement.

The figures requested by my hon. Friend are not available nationally. However, the number of residential places provided by health and local authorities is already sufficient in aggregate to meet the expected total needs over the next 10 years. What is required is not an increase in the numbers of residential places but a change in their distribution between health and local authority services and towards smaller establishments nearer to the communities which they serve, along with improved domiciliary and day services.

Will my right hon. Friend please realise that hon. Members on both sides of the House are made aware when they attend their weekly surgeries that the parents of mentally handicapped children are worried, first, about getting old and, second, about dying? They are worried that their children will not be looked after. Will my right hon. Friend make a massive effort within the community so that such parents are reassured?

I am aware of the anxieties of these parents. This is one reason why in "The Way Forward" I have asked authorities to pay particular attention to the needs of the 16 to 25year-old age group, because that is the group that is causing great concern.

Will the Secretary of State consult the voluntary organisations which help the mentally handicapped to see whether a programme can be developed whereby parents can be assisted on a wide local basis?

A great deal of work is carried out by the voluntary organisations. Excellent co-operation exists between my Department and those organisations. I doubt whether there has ever been such a close partnership as there is today. The financial assistance that we have given to the voluntary organisations is an indication of that close co-operation. The additional money made available to health and local authorities for joint planning also provides opportunities for voluntary organisations to participate.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the public expenditure cuts over the last two years have cut deeply into the capital programmes for both the mentally handicapped and the mentally ill, particularly in London? Is he further aware that the Lambeth, Southwark and Lewisham Area Health Authority has recently decided not to build a unit for the mentally ill in the constituency of his hon. Friend the Minister of State? Will he make more money available for these essential facilities?

There is no doubt that the shortage of finance has been a considerable restraint upon authorities. They will have welcomed the announcement I made in the House 10 days ago that there will be an additional £37 million for capital expenditure for health and local authorities in 1978–79. Some of that money will be used for accommodation for the mentally handicapped. There will also be some additional revenue and capital funds for local authorities.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what is the approximate total national waiting list and average waiting time for places for the elderly in hospital beds and hostels; what steps he will take to improve the shortage; and if he will make a statement.

On 31st March 1977, over 5,000 patients were on the waiting list for hospital geriatric beds. Average waiting time is not known but of the 1,415 requiring urgent admission 625 had waited more than one month; 379 of the non-urgent cases had waited more than one year. No information is available centrally about waiting lists for old people's homes.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this month an 88-year-old Salford lady was dumped in a hospital casualty ward where senior doctors spent days trying to find her a bed in a hospital or geriatric ward? Is he further aware that many GPs spend hours daily pleading for places for such elderly people and that the answer to this problem is the provision of more money and the reversing of the public expenditure cuts?

I agree with my hon. Friend. The fact that people are living so much longer creates these problems for local authorities, hospital authorities and GPs. This is one reason why the needs of the elderly are top priority within the resources available to the National Health Service and one reason also why we were able to make at least some additional resources available in the announcement I made to the House the week before last.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that even in emergency cases elderly people are being refused entry to hospitals? Does he realise that there are serious cases in my part of the world involving elderly people who have not been admitted even though they have been in considerable pain?

The fact that there are as few as 5,000 on the hospital waiting list shows that, while there are individual cases which cause hon. Members considerable concern, on the whole the hospital authorities are giving high priority to meeting needs, particularly of the frail elderly.

What consideration has my right hon. Friend given to the report on common waiting lists produced by the Health Services Board, in particular the submission by one member of the board, Mr. Bernard Dix? Does he intend to await a Royal Commission before making better liaison between provision for the elderly in Part III homes and warden-assisted geriatric wards?

The proposals that have come from the Health Services Board about common waiting lists are now open for consultation. They have gone out to organisations and the period of consultation is nearly completed. When it is over, I shall come to the House and indicate the policies that we shall pursue. Dealing with the second part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question, naturally, in the planning of resources available to health authorities we encourage maximum co-operation between social service and housing authorities.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what representations he has received about the lack of funds for psychiatric hospitals in Northumberland; and what replies he has made

Five letters have been received from hon. Members on this subject, as well as one from Northumberland Community Health Council. In my replies to these letters, sent on 21st November, I have explained the present position regarding funding of these hospitals and informed them that a meeting between senior officers of the regional and area health authorities has been arranged to discuss the matter.

Is it not the case that under the region's revenue plan for the next two years betterment funds are being steered away from the Northumberland area, so that if essential improvements are to be made in these psychiatric hospitals it can be only at the expense of the other medical services in Northumberland, despite the fact that the hospitals serve the whole region?

The hon. Gentleman has got the wrong idea, because half of the betterment funds for this year going to the Northumberland Area Health Authority have been directed towards psychiatric hospitals. In any case, the region is a receiving region under the Resource Allocation Working Party formula and is therefore likely to enjoy a growth rate of at least 2 per cent. on current forward projections for the next decade. Therefore, the second point raised by the hon. Gentleman is not true either.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many children have been given whooping cough vaccine in the current year; and how this figure compares with the previous three years.

The number of children under the age of 16 who completed courses of vaccination against whooping cough in England during 1976, the latest year for which information is available, was nearly 240,000. The corresponding figures for the three previous years were: in 1973 about 550,000, in 1974 about 440,000 and in 1975 about 245,000. I shall circulate the precise figures in theOfficial Report.

I am grateful for that answer. Does my right hon. Friend share with me the concern that public confidence in the immunisation programme against whooping cough is at an all-time low? Does he further agree that he ought to put the highest priority on restoring that public confidence lest we face an epidemic of whooping cough this winter and in future winters?

I gave to the House yesterday the advice of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, which is that whooping-cough vaccination should continue to be offered as part of the programme of routine immunisation of babies and infants. I consider that this advice is extremely important in view of the likelihood of a serious outbreak of the disease this winter. As my hon. Friend will know, the number of cases of whooping cough is rising significantly week by week.

Is it not a fact that there are now serious differences of opinion in the advice that the Secretary of State has been given by his two expert committees? Where does this lead to for parents? Is it not an urgent necessity for him to give clear advice and guidance to parents? Would it not be better to suspend the issue of this vaccine until he is quite sure about its safety?

No. I have sought the advice of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation. which has made it clear that it does not believe that the vaccine should be withdrawn. It is perfectly clear that the risk which arises as a result of children not being vaccinated is very much greater than the undefined risk of their suffering some damage as the result of vaccination. I would be acting against the advice of my expert advisers were I to take the action proposed by the hon. Gentleman.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that his decision not to give further publicity to the need for vaccination is both correct and courageous in view of the advice of the Committee on Safety of Medicines to the effect that further assessment of the whooping cough vaccine is required but that it is a grave error of judgment to delay the campaign to vaccinate against other diseases such as diphtheria? Ought he not to initiate a campaign immediately?

I have made it clear to the House and to the country that it is extremely important that parents should have their children vaccinated against poliomyelitis, diphtheria and tetanus. When I have the advice of the two committees, it is likely that I shall proceed with some sort of campaign early next year. I must, as my hon. Friend recognises, be bound by the advice that the experts give me.