§ 41. Sir J. Edenasked the Minister of Technology if he will give the total cost so far of the Gas Council's conversion programme to natural gas and the proportion this represents of the original estimate.
§ 37 and 38. Mr. Donald Williamsasked the Minister of Technology (1) whether the estimate submitted to him by the Gas Council of the cost of conversion of customers' appliances to burn natural gas has been revised in the light of the extensive follow-up campaign that has been necessary;
§ (2) what was the total expenditure by the Gas Council on the conversion programme of natural gas in 1968–69, and the estimated expenditure each year for the next five years.
§ 39. Mr. Pounderasked the Minister of Technology what is the latest estimate of the total cost of the Gas Council's programme of conversion to natural gas; what proportion of this programme has been completed; and at what cost.
§ 49. Mr. Patrick McNair-Wilsonasked the Minister of Technology what is the Gas Council's estimated total investment in conversion to natural gas for each of the next five years expressed as a proportion of total capital expenditure.
§ Mr. Harold Lever£31½ million to 31st March 1969, including £24½ million in 1968–69. This includes costs of setting up the programme and is 8 per cent of the original estimate made in 1966 of total expenditure of £400 million, which included provision for a call-back service. Since 1966 both costs and numbers expected to be converted have increased. I am currently discussing with the industry their capital development and conversion expenditure over the next five years, and am not in a position to give a revised estimate of the total cost.
§ Sir J. EdenHave the figures in the estimate for the cost of call-back gone up since the original programme was conceived?
§ Mr. McNair-WilsonNone the less, can the right hon. Gentleman confirm that the cost of the programme is likely to be very much more than was originally planned? Is this the right moment for the Gas Council to be spending even more money diversifying further into the oil business at this stage?
§ Mr. LeverI find it difficult to understand what diversification into the oil business, since a relatively trifling sum is involved, has to do with the question. If the hon. Gentleman asserts with confindence that the programme will cost more than was originally intended—
§ Mr. McNair-WilsonI am asking.
§ Mr. LeverIf the hon. Gentleman asks me that question, I can only tell him that I am not yet in a position to give the answer. However, there is no reason as yet to have the alarm or excitement which the hon. Gentleman generates.
§ Mr. SheldonIs my right hon. Friend aware that, although the conversions done by the gas board have been reasonably satisfactory, what is causing a great deal of trouble is some of the sub-contracting? Perhaps it would be worth while expanding the size of the work force involved so that it will be up to gas board standards and not those of some of the sub-contractors.
§ Mr. LeverWe are anxious to maintain the highest standard of sub-contracting work as well as to expand our own force dealing with this matter, precisely because of the total volume of work requiring attention. But my hon. Friend will recall that in the Gas Bill we make special provisions for encouraging the highest supervision of standards of work in the case of sub-contractors.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder, Private notice Question. Mr. Corfield.
§ Mr. BarnettOn a point of order. Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter in the Adjournment debate on Thursday.