To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what statutory provisions cover consultations between the electricity industry and a developer prior to new house building developments.

There is no statutory requirement for formal consultation in the relevant electricity or planning legislation.

Is my hon. Friend aware that new houses throughout the country are being built close to underground cables and overhead wires and without a guarantee of adequate supplies? That happens because there is no statutory requirement to consult the electricity industry. However, there is a statutory requirement to consult the National Rivers Authority before planning permission is granted. Will my hon. Friend say something to my constituents who are regularly plunged into darkness when the local sub-station is overloaded? Too many houses are being built without consultation with the electricity industry with the result that local electricity boards cannot cope despite all their efforts.

It is sensible for developers to consult the electricity companies before proceeding, to ensure adequacy of supply. But I assure my hon. Friend that the suppliers can levy reasonable charges on developers to recoup the cost of the necessary transmission lines and plant to service new developments. The charges do not fall on my hon. Friend's constituents.

As it is in new buildings that thermal efficiency is most advantageously applied, why is there no statutory requirement on developers to consult not only electricity suppliers but other energy suppliers to ensure that houses have the maximum energy efficiency?

The energy efficiency requirements for new houses are covered in the building regulations, which were updated and improved in April last year. They should improve the thermal efficiency of new houses by about 20 per cent.

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what is the level of proceeds of the sale of the 12 regional electricity companies.

The sale of the 12 regional electricity companies will raise some £8 billion, more than £5 billion from the sale of the shares and almost another £3 billion from the injection of debt into the companies.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the high level of those figures is significant and reflects the great success of all those involved in what was a difficult flotation? In view of that large sum, will he suggest to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer that at least some of the money could be spent advantageously on energy efficiency schemes both on their own merits and as a way of meeting global warming problems?

I agree with my hon. Friend about the success of the sale. Privatisation in itself has several advantages for energy efficiency. First, the Electricity Act 1989, under which the companies were privatised, places an obligation on them to promote energy efficiency. Secondly, the creation of competition and a downward pressure on fuel prices should substantially improve energy efficiency. My ministerial committee, set up as a result of the Government's environmental White Paper, is pursuing many other avenues of energy efficiency.

Is the Secretary of State aware that a large tranche of shares in South Wales Electricity was bought by the Welsh water authority and that, given the way things are going with the sale of the regional electricity companies, we are liable to end up with Wales plc, which cannot be a vast improvement on the monopolies that preceded privatisation?

Of course, the sale of the shares took place after the companies were put into the private sector. All the regulations were drawn up in accordance with stock exchange rules. As the hon. Gentleman knows, a golden share operates in the company. It would not be right for me to say anything further at this stage.

Even before the Government have received most of the proceeds of the sale of the regional electricity companies, we are once more being softened up by the aerial bombardment of "Star Trek" before the land invasion of the generating companies begins with the production of the pathfinder prospectus on Friday. Will the Secretary of State confirm that one thing that he has learnt from the disaster of the sale of the electricity distribution companies is that if one keeps back 40 per cent. and underprices 60 per cent., one has some hope of making up some of that underpricing two years later when one sells the remaining 40 per cent?

The hon. Gentleman is an observer of the scene, but not a wholly dispassionate one. I do not accept his strictures on the sale of the regional electricity companies. I do not accept that they were underpriced or that the sale of the generating companies will be underpriced. We shall take proper care to ensure that the price struck is fair to taxpayers and investors. Naturally, the fact that we are selling only 60 per cent. rather than 100 per cent. will have to be taken into account.

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what is the progress of the 12th round of offshore licensing.

I am delighted to say that we have received 115 applications covering 81 blocks in the 12th round of licensing. In addition, 37 companies have applied for acreage covering a further 66 blocks in the separate frontier round for the difficult areas north and west of the Shetland islands.

Will my hon. Friend welcome the co-operation between the Government and private enterprise on this venture in the North sea? What would be the effects if the interventionist policies of the Labour Opposition were put into effect in the North sea?

This is my hon. Friend's first question since his knighthood and I am sure that the whole House will wish to congratulate him. It is undoubtedly true that a stable, fiscal regime, predictable and well-established criteria for licensing and an oil and gas market that maximises private sector investment are the keys to economic success. Some of the interventionism in the oil and gas market which the Labour party has made it clear that it would deploy would be counterproductive to the success record of the 1980s continuing into the 1990s.

Our interventionist policies concerning the safety of men and women who work on rigs and platforms are far superior to those that the Government put into practice.

On the licence negotiations, must not companies satisfy the Government about the environmental impact of their work? If so, could not the Government institute some of the recommendations in Cullen at this stage of the negotiations—for example, recommendation No. 17 on page 390 of the Cullen report which talks about the need to implement safety regulations and goal-setting objectives? Why do not the Government introduce some of those recommendations now?

First, there is no question about the Government's commitment to implementing measures that will enhance safety in the North sea. The Government have been quick to respond fully to the Cullen report and to make it clear that safety is the No. 1 priority and that the recommendations will be implemented in full.

If the hon. Gentleman connects his specific point with his first point about interventionism, he will note that Lord Cullen recognised that it was vital that private sector operators should provide a safety case for each platform and should set up a safety audit and that, working with our outstanding inspectorate, they should have the assistance of the public sector to ensure that we enhance safety in the North sea.

As for environmentally sensitive blocks, the operators in the licensing round who wish to develop those quadrants must ensure that their environmental case is sound and persuade my colleagues in the Department and Ministers that that is the case.

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if he will make available the detailed evidence on which he dismissed the scientific warnings given by Professor Paul Crutzen, head of the atmospherics physics department of the Max Planck Institute in Mainz, and Dr. Abdullah Toucan of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, principal scientific adviser to King Hussein of Jordan, about the carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, sulphur dioxide, hydrocarbon and photo-chemical smog results of the war in the middle east; and if he will place his detailed technical evidence in the Library.

I did not dismiss the warnings of possible fires at Kuwaiti oil fields or criticise particular scientists, but I thought it right to make available the advice that I received on the environmental implications of such fires. That has been followed up by a study by the Meteorological Office which has been placed in the Library of the House.

Since then Saddam Hussein has set on the course of deliberately polluting the waters of the Gulf, which is a gross act of environmental terrorism, and I believe that the whole civilised world will deplore that action. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment will be making a statement about it later this afternoon.

Will the Secretary of State put the detailed evidence that he had from his Department in the Library? Is not it the case that the Government cannot say that they were not warned of the pumping of oil into the water to which the right hon. Gentleman referred? During the Consolidated Fund debate on 19 December, at column 403, I spoke for 55 minutes and gave a specific warning. Surely it is negligent of Ministers not to have taken precautions. As a senior member of the War Cabinet, will the Secretary of State consider the activities and the frivolous answers from that silly little boy, the hon. and learned Member for Grantham (Mr. Hogg), who masquerades as a Minister of State at the Foreign Office—

Order. The hon. Gentleman is spoiling his question.

I think that these matters deserve more serious treatment than the hon. Gentleman appears to be giving them. I am sure that no one has ever underestimated the possibility of serious environmental terrorism. In the case to which the hon. Gentleman referred, I made accessible the best advice available to me on the environmental consequences. The report of the Meteorological Office has been put in the Library.

It is absolutely clear that the fact that Saddam Hussein is capable of environmental terrorism of this kind—

The Government were warned, but did nothing. Why did not the Government do anything?

The Government were well aware of the threat. The fact that Saddam Hussein is capable of such environmental terrorism shows, once again, how essential it is that Kuwait should be freed from his grasp. It is because of that man that we have taken our action.

Does my right hon. Friend know whether Saddam Hussein was given such warnings and information about environmental pollution? Does he know whether Saddam Hussein submitted himself to questions on this matter in the Iraqi Parliament? What evidence exists to show that Saddam Hussein took notice of those warnings or the concern of his parliamentary colleagues?

My hon. Friend makes his point well. I add only that Saddam Hussein is well aware of the damage that he is doing to the world. That is why his actions are even more criminal than they would be if he were ignorant of such matters.

As the right hon. Gentleman represents his Department in the War Cabinet, can he tell the House what advice and consultations he and his colleagues have had with European Community Commissioners and Ministers and the United Nations Environment Programme so that the full implications of the environmental risk in the middle east is at all times in the forefront of not only politicians' minds, but those of the military?

There have been discussions and consultations among the allies, as well as wider discussions. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment will come to the House at 3.30 to make a proper statement.

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if he will evaluate the respective cost of house heating by gas, electricity and oil; and if he will make a statement.

The cost of heating a house will vary according to the size and type of dwelling, the level of insulation, the comfort level required and the type of heating and fuel used. But the weekly cost of heating an average three-bedroom house by gas, electricity and solid fuel has been estimated at f10·25, £15·50 and £12·10 respectively.

I thank my hon. Friend for those figures, which will be helpful to people seeking to find the best way in which to heat their homes. Will my hon. Friend take steps to make better information available to people who need to make such decisions as there is precious little current information about?

I agree with my hon. Friend about the need to give accurate advice on this matter. He will be pleased to know that the new home energy efficiency scheme, which gives grants to low-income households, provides advice of this nature. We also have a new campaign to give information to those improving their houses or moving house, backed up by leaflets available from my Department. I shall ensure that my hon. Friend is sent a copy.

Although these measures are welcome, will the Minister ensure that bodies selling heating appliances explain their thermal efficiency and running costs in a way that is understandable to the person buying them—because much of the official language that is used is not understandable to the purchaser?

We are pursuing the idea of an energy labelling scheme for such appliances. Clearly we should like it to be compatible with schemes being worked up in other European countries so as to promote free trade too.

Does my hon. Friend agree that, despite the new building regulations, we are still light years behind our European colleagues? Would not it be better if the Government legislated to stop the building of new houses, with single-glazed windows and inadequate insulation, so that people would have cheaper bills irrespective of whether they were for oil, gas or electricity? That would stop the present position, which is nonsensical in this modern day and age.

Our building regulations compare favourably with those of other European countries, but I agree about the need to improve the thermal efficiency of new houses. In April last year we improved the building regulations and raised standards, We shall see how that goes down generally and then consider the possibility of further improving the regulations in the next round.

Is the Minister aware that in the judgment of Sheikh Yamani the interruption of supplies of oil from Iraq and Kuwait need not have—indeed, has not had—a major impact on the world's supply of oil? Does he therefore agree that the major fluctuations in the price of oil since the start of the Gulf crisis represent exploitation of that crisis for profit by the major oil companies? Will he conduct an urgent investigation into those activities?

I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman's analysis of the oil market; but I can confirm that oil stocks remain generally high.

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what was the annual average increase in British Coal's productivity between 1961 and 1979, and between 1979 and 1989.

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what was the annual average increase in British Coal's productivity between 1961 and 1979, and between 1979 and 1989.

The average annual increase in the corporation's productivity between 1961 and 1978–79 was 2·5 per cent., and the average annual increase between 1978–79 and 1988–89 was 6·3 per cent.

Given the outstanding improvement in performance that my right hon. Friend has just described, does he agree that the single greatest constraint within which British Coal must still operate is the fact that it is in the public sector? Does he agree with the new year resolution expressed by Mr. Malcolm Edwards, commercial director of British Coal, that he will seek at the earliest opportunity the separation of the coal industry from the machinery of government so that its managers can concentrate on the interests of that industry alone?

I agree with both points. There has been a significant improvement in British Coal's productivity, for which I pay tribute to it, but that productivity must continue to improve if British Coal is to hold its own in a competitive market.

I agree that the privatisation of British Coal is a desirable objective; it is a commitment of the Government and it will be done in the next Parliament.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that, even so, in the lifetime of this Government British Coal's productivity has been almost double that of the previous two decades?

Yes, certainly. British Coal's productivity is up 85 per cent. on pre-strike levels, which is excellent progress. It recently achieved an impressive weekly record output of just over 5 tonnes per man shift.

Does the Secretary of State agree that output per man shift depends on the number employed, and that the figure has increased only because of the number of miners who have been made redundant? As to privatisation, will the Minister assure the House and people outside it that in the unwelcome event of British Coal's being privatised, existing arrangements for concessionary fuel supplies or cash in lieu will remain in force?

It is not for me to speculate about the privatisation that will occur during the next Parliament. All obligations to employees will be a proper matter for consideration at the appropriate time.

Does the Secretary of State accept that the Government are behaving in a stupid and irresponsible manner by not having a national energy plan? There is no point in increasing production if market forces are to dictate the amount of coal that the country produces. If it is left to market forces, we shall not meet the needs of the British people.

I am not sure that the hon. Gentleman is right. The best way to meet the energy requirements of the nation and of the world is to encourage diversity of supply and that is the basis of the British plan.

Does the Secretary of State accept that any further loss of contracts between British Coal and the generators after 1993 will be viewed as a very poor reward for the miners who have increased productivity in recent years? What action are the Government taking to stop the dumping of foreign coal in Britain, in the interests of not only British Coal but the nation?

The Government have done more than any other to assist the industry by giving it financial support, and for the first time ever British Coal has long-term contracts with its customers, the generators. It therefore has the best opportunity of securing further long-term contracts, and it will do so because it has the potential to be the supplier of choice. That is the best way of securing the industry's long-term future.

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if he will make a statement on North sea oil and gas developments presently under consideration by his Department.

Draft plans for 11 new or incremental oil and gas development projects in the North sea are currently under detailed consideration by my Department.

Given the extent of the developments to which the Minister referred, is his Department taking steps to ensure that contracts for the steel pipelines and production and exploration platforms required will be allocated to domestic steel mills? In particular, did the Department establish any contact with the Scottish Development Agency when it prepared its report on the future of Ravenscraig, Clydesdale and Dalzell, when the agency could have pointed out the potential contracts that would arise from the new developments?

In the marketplace, suppliers will win contracts only if they deliver top-quality products within specification and on time. The capability to undertake work for the pipeline to which the hon. Lady refers does not exist in the United Kingdom at present because of the quality and thickness of pipes required. On the positive side, I assure the hon. Lady that all three jackets under consideration for Everest, Lomond and the separate riser platform have been awarded to Highland Fabricators. Of course, we take note of the success, or otherwise, of United Kingdom suppliers in that sector.

As oil and gas sources are finite and should be conserved, can my hon. Friend the Minister comment on the Government's support and hopes for the future of converting coal into fuel oil? I refer particularly to the Point of Ayr project, which I and a number of my hon. Friends visited last Friday.

On the second point, I am sorry that I was not with my hon. Friend when he made his visit and I shall follow that up in writing. On the first point, my hon. Friend is right to refer to the importance of a sensitive and sensible policy when it comes to the depletion of oil and gas reservoirs. In that context, we pay special care to ensure that the licence rounds, which have been taking place on average every two years in the offshore oil and gas sector, reflect the need for a sensible depletion policy in the long term.

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if he will make a statement on his Department's investment in alternative sources of energy.

Energy paper 55 "Renewable Energy in the UK: The Way Forward" set out my Department's strategy for the development of renewable energy sources. My Department's provision for research and development into renewable energy for this financial year is £20·3 million. This is due to increase by 20 per cent. in the next financial year.

May I thank my hon. Friend for that answer? Would I be right in saying that, rather than simply mouthing platitudes about the need for renewable energy, his Department has provided the expenditure, which has doubled during the past 12 years, to ensure that we meet that challenge?

My hon. Friend is absolutely correct. More than simply highlighting the importance of research and development, in which we have invested, my hon. Friend will be aware that we achieved a first by establishing a marketplace, through the non-fossil fuel obligation, to allow renewable projects which are both environmentally acceptable and economically competitive to come on stream. I am sure that, like me, my hon. Friend welcomes the fact that 75 such projects were eligible in the first NFFO tranche and we hope that many more will be successful in the years to come in future tranches.

Is not the truth that, historically, the hon. Gentleman's Department has been as deeply in hock to the nuclear industry as the Department of Transport has been in hock to the road lobby? Will the Minister give us an assurance that he has now established with civil servants that they should take a serious and long-term interest in alternative sources of energy, and not sit around working out ways to sabotage research on the subject?

I reject the hon. Gentleman's last comment, but I welcome the fact that he recognises that the Government have a clear commitment to ensure that renewable energy sources come on stream and that they must be environmentally acceptable, as well as economically competitive.

What about Salter's duck?

From a sedentary position the hon. Gentleman refers to Salter's ducks. I am sure that, like me, he will welcome the fact that both parties have accepted that an independent review should be undertaken. Its findings will be carefully considered. The Government do not wish to put any hindrance in the way of renewable technology that can come on stream and is commercially competitive, as well as environmentally beneficial.

Can my hon. Friend confirm that the best way that he can further help renewables is by increasing the number of power generation projects that he sanctions in the second tranche of the non-fossil fuel obligation, especially waste incineration into energy projects, which will also help the environment?

I totally agree with my hon. Friend. I very much hope that, across the range of renewable energy technologies, many projects will come forward in the second tranche of the NFFO and that they can meet the criteria. The more projects that come forward, the more they will be welcomed by the Government.

Does the Minister agree that if we wasted less energy in Britain we would depend less on imported fuel from the Gulf and other insecure sources of supply? Will he make it a top priority to save energy, to develop alternative sources and to use coal, oil and gas produced here in Britain? To that end, will he instruct the generating companies to abandon their preposterous plans to import more oil, gas and coal and will he make them concentrate instead on energy saving rather than energy sales?

I am always pleased to agree with the hon. Gentleman when it comes to energy matters, especially on energy efficiency and energy-saving policies, and to that end I agree with the thrust of his remarks. As regards oil and gas, of course we should like increased production and we should like to ensure that we do not need to become an importer. However the reality, which I know that he accepts, is that in recent months production has had to be restrained, despite world demand for increased production before the Gulf crisis, because of the importance of safety and of ensuring that topside emergency shutdown valves are in place. Safety has been the top priority and that is the reason why production has not been at the highest possible level, as we should have liked.

Will my hon. Friend summarise the current state of the Mersey barrage project?

The Mersey Barrage Company reported to me last week. That report explained further the extensive discussions in which the company had engaged to analyse cost-benefit assessments in each Government Department as a result of meetings that it had held with those Departments. A further meeting will take place before Easter. We shall then assess the economic feasibility of the project, as well as the detailed scientific research that has accompanied it. Our aim is to give it as much support as possible, as long as it is commercially viable and meets all the important environmental criteria.

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy how many exploration and appraisal wells were drilled on the United Kingdom continental shelf in 1990.

During 1990, 224 exploration and appraisal wells were started on the United Kingdom continental shelf. This is the first time since UKCS activity began that drilling in a single year has exceeded 200 wells.

Does my hon. Friend agree that that is a remarkable figure? Can he confirm that it is the highest since North sea exploration began back in 1964, and will he also confirm that the only threat to this expansion comes from the prospect of a Labour Government, who might again start intervening in the North sea with state-run corporations and set back the magnificent achievements of 1990?

I entirely accept the thrust of my hon. Friend's argument—not least because the success that led to what he rightly described as the highest number of exploration well starts since the 1984 record of 109 is evidence of continuing confidence in the United Kingdom continental shelf. That confidence is wholly dependent on a stable fiscal regime, a comprehensive licensing regime and the opportunity for the private sector to excel where it excels best—in the marketplace for the development of oil and gas within the UKCS, and in exports. Any interventionism or return to state-owned control would be extremely damaging to that success story.

If the Minister thinks that the Tories' record in the North sea is such a wonderful success, how does he explain the fact that, last year and the year before, we were net importers of fuel?

First, we were not net importers in cash terms. Secondly, as I have already told the hon. Gentleman—I am surprised that he did not take the point in my response to his last question—safety considerations had to lead to shutdowns and to working conditions for production that were less than optimal for maximum recovery. An example is the present need to handle dead rather than live crude. It was vital that Lord Cullen's recommendations be implemented as matter of urgency, and that the all-party agreement on topside valves be put in place, even if that meant that production would not reach the levels that the hon. Gentleman would have liked. I am surprised that he does not know the answer to his own question.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that last year was the first year of about six in which this country was a net importer of energy?

Let me reinforce what I said to the hon. Member for Holborn and St. Pancras (Mr. Dobson). We were not a net importer in cash terms: furthermore, given the total activity on the UKCS, there is no doubt that we can and will increase production. Our net position will not be under threat once the essential safety work is completed. We shall then have not only high levels of production, but a safer North sea in which to operate.

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if he will make a statement on the Government's policy for energy conservation.

We continue to promote the adoption of cost-effective energy efficiency measures through a range of programmes and other services offered by the Energy Efficiency Office. A number of new initiatives, including the ministerial group on energy efficiency, were announced in the White Paper on the environment and we are now working to carry these forward.

Is the Secretary of State aware that an estimated 6·6 million households suffer from fuel poverty as a result of inefficient fuel heating systems? Does he agree that the lessons learnt from the Gulf crisis and war and the fight over oil, combined with this Government's inefficient approach to energy conservation, mean that a national programme for energy conservation and energy use is urgently required if we are to address the country's energy problems?

I agree this far with the hon. Lady—that there is a continuing need for greater energy efficiency. We estimate that about 20 per cent. of all the energy used in this country is wasted. However, we have made some progress. During the last 10 years gross domestic product has increased by 25 per cent. while our energy consumption has remained virtually unchanged. Both commercial and domestic energy efficiency are important. That is why the Government have introduced a home energy efficiency scheme. Grants are provided for basic insulation measures and advice is available for low-income households. We have built on the success of the community insulation project that led to the insulation of about 850,000 low-income homes.

To ask the Minister for the Arts what representations he has received on its financial position from Welsh National Opera.

To ask the Minister for the Arts what representations he has received about the future funding of the Welsh National Opera.

I have received a large number of representations on behalf of Welsh National Opera. Helpful discussions have taken place between the Arts Council of Great Britain, the Welsh Arts Council and the Welsh National Opera, together with a further detailed review of the company's financial position and planned touring commitments in England. I am informed that at its meeting on 30 January the Arts Council of Great Britain will consider a recommended increase in its grant to the Welsh National Opera of between £200,000 and £300,000 in 1991–92 and the two subsequent years.

Although I recognise that enhancement fund expenditure is primarily a matter for the Arts Council, does the Minister accept that when it was set up it was recognised that Ministers would be interested in how the money was spent? The Welsh National Opera's quality is appreciated far beyond the bounds of the Principality and particularly in the midlands, where its excellence is widely acknowledged. Would the Minister regard it as an infringement of the arm's-length principle if he were to add his personal approval of the Welsh National Opera's work? Is he happy about the progress of the discussions to which he alluded? I was pleased to hear that a substantial increase in the WNO's grant is being considered.

Yes, of course I am delighted to endorse the artistic quality, repertoire and singing of the Welsh National Opera. I approve and endorse the general criteria under which allocations are made from the enhancement fund. However, the individual allocations are traditionally an Arts Council responsibility. The hon. Gentleman may have forgotten that the Welsh National Opera received £175,000 from the Welsh Arts Council's part of the enhancement fund. At the Art Council's meeting next Wednesday a decision will be taken on whether to increase further the Welsh National Opera's touring grant.

I welcome the Minister's positive response and also the endorsement of the Welsh National Opera by Scotland as well as by England. Does the Minister agree that it is important that the limited budget available to the Welsh Arts Council for other aspects of the arts in Wales should not be eroded to meet the Welsh National Opera's shortfall? Does he also agree that we hope his answer means that there will be a positive outcome for the Welsh National Opera without any such erosion, which would threaten the other arts in Wales?

I do not want the other arts in Wales to be threatened. The Welsh Arts Council received about £750,000 from the enhancement fund. If it has decided that part of that money should be given to WNO, essentially for its work in Wales, that is a perfectly proper decision for it to take. I remind the hon. Gentleman that WNO is receiving a general increase of more than 8 per cent. in its grant for the year ahead and a 11·5 per cent. increase in its touring grant—in addition to the sum that the Arts Council will consider this Wednesday. On that basis, the hon. Gentleman, who has campaigned actively on this matter, should not cry foul too often.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his remarks. Will he convey the views that have been expressed this afternoon to the chairman of the Arts Council and tell him that there would be widespread disappointment not only in the Principality but throughout this country if this excellent company had to close? We all expect—[Interruption]—or at least, most outside Hayes and Harlington expect, the Arts Council to do the right thing on Wednesday.

I thank my hon. Friend for his support, which does not surprise me. I understand what he means about the widespread support for the WNO. Even the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner), who is not in his seat today, put his name to an early-day motion confirming, I think, "the brilliance of the singing and repertoire of the WNO". That shows that, although that Bench below the Gangway is empty this afternoon, the WNO's message has reached far in the land.

Many people in this country will still wonder why this subsidy from public funds is going to these organisations, wonderful though they may be. Will he tell the people of this country that he is thinking twice about the amount of money that is given to the arts from public funds—an amount that is increased per annum?

I thank my hon. Friend for his comments. Perhaps he might like to get in touch with the hon. Member for Cardiff, South and Penarth (Mr. Michael) and have a good discussion on the subject. Generally, I am told that not enough money is being given to the arts. In successive public expenditure rounds, both my predecessors managed to obtain settlements in excess of the rate of inflation.

Shame.

As in opera, it is always helpful to have someone crying "Shame" from the gallery. It reminds one that there is another voice.

I welcome the Minister's statement, which appears to resolve the Welsh National Opera crisis—that should never have been allowed to happen in the first place—and his assurance that that money will not be given at the expense of other Welsh Arts Council clients. But will he explain, first, whether his office will contribute money directly to the settlement and, secondly, whether the other companies that received a cash standstill budget or a cut of 9 per cent. in real terms—the Bristol Old Vic, the Lyric, Hammersmith, the Black Theatre Forum, the Three Choirs festival, the Eastern Orchestral Board, the Liverpool Playhouse and the Everyman theatre—will receive the same just settlement as Welsh National Opera?

I suggest that the hon. Gentleman reads an article written by Ian Brown, the drama director of the Arts Council, in last week's edition of The Stage. It is headed, "Keep Calm in a Crisis"—a message that the hon. Member might learn to advantage. He says that it is not the Arts Council's job to come to the rescue willy-nilly of every provincial theatre that gets into trouble, no matter whether it has put on the right programme for its customers or whether it is receiving local authority support. That message must be taken on board throughout the country. The settlement to WNO does not mean any direct money from my office.

I disagree with the hon. Gentleman's comment that this should never have happened in the first place. The Arts Council, rightly, has again crawled over the touring plans of WNO and has reached the conclusion that it should try to make a little more money available—a lot more money available—if that is what its council agrees on Wednesday.

To ask the Minister for the Arts when he last met members of the Scottish Arts Council to discuss funding for the arts.

I had a meeting with the chairman of the Scottish Arts Council, Sir Alan Peacock, on 11 December.

My question concerns a subject which was close to the heart of my late dear friend Norman Buchan. Will the Minister discuss with the Secretary of State for Scotland how public-sector support might be provided in respect of those crafts that will be denied support from the "Design by Scotland" agency which is to be set up in April? It should be pointed out that, south of the border, support is provided in respect of identical crafts. All that I seek is parity of support for Scots craftsmen and craftswomen.

I am very interested in which the hon. Gentleman has just said. Indeed, if he feels that crafts in Scotland are not being supported where comparable crafts in England are, and if he writes to me giving the details —and provides my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland with a copy of his letter—I shall be very happy to look into the problem with a view to finding out the reason for it.

Will my right hon. Friend, particularly in the context of these questions, reflect on a most important issue? I refer to the rolling programme of funding that was introduced by his predecessor, which received the full acclamation of the arts world. I hope that my right hon. Friend shares my view that ministerial intervention in the funding of the arts would be quite wrong, particularly in Scotland.

I am not quite sure whether my hon. Friend means that as a rebuke. He is such a kindly man that I think it hardly likely. Like him, I was, of course, delighted when my predecessor set up the rolling programme. One of the difficulties is that some of our clients do not think that the inflation expectation is realistic. Certainly the rolling programme is set in concrete for the time being, and it would be quite wrong for me to try to disturb it.

To ask the Minister for the Civil Service whether he will make a statement regarding the progress of his Department's ethnic monitoring policy.

All Departments and agencies, including my own Department, are implementing the programme for action on race, which incorporates ethnic monitoring.

Does the Minister agree, as his predecessor so clearly did, that it is unacceptable that so few people from ethnic minorities reach the higher echelons of the civil service? Will he please undertake, as his predecessor so rightly did, to make the most energetic efforts to ensure that the policy is not just something on paper—but that it is implemented?

This matter is very close to the heart of the hon. and learned Gentleman. It is true that black and Asian people are under-represented at senior level across the civil service, including my own Department. We wish to increase equality of opportunity, but, as the hon. and learned Gentleman will agree, it is most important that those who reach the higher grade should do so on the basis of merit and not because of their sex or their ethnic background. We hope that, by virtue of the programme of action that we published recently, every Department will have been reminded of the need to give ethnic minorities every possible opportunity to reach the higher grades if that is what they merit.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in the United States of America positive discrimination of the kind advocated by the hon. and learned Member for Leicester, West (Mr. Janner) has proved to be a total disaster? Does he agree that it would be quite improper, and totally against the interests of the very high-quality civil service that we have in this country, to allow promotion on any basis other than merit?

I hesitate to come between my hon. Friend, who is also a Sussex neighbour, and the hon. and learned Member for Leicester, West (Mr. Janner). Of course, my hon. Friend is right in suggesting that positive discrimination in favour of people of a particular colour or sex would be wrong. What we seek to achieve is equality of opportunity—in simple terms, that the best available person, regardless of skin colour or sex, should get to the top.

To ask the Minister for the Civil Service what representations he has had from the civil service trade unions about the problems posed by potential terrorism originating in the middle east for civil service installations in Britain.

None, Sir.

What extra money has been allocated for the defence of such installations? What help will be given to airlines? Some are reeling from the change in the number of passengers they carry, to the extent that they have had to cut back on the orange juice and second cups of tea and coffee that they give passengers for breakfast. That is the position of the airlines and it has been graphically illustrated.

I do not think that questions about the number of orange juices or cups of coffee comes under the province of my Department in any sense. Mine is a strange Department—a duet between the civil service and the arts —but it is not as strange as that. If the hon. Gentleman wishes to ask about the costs of the installations, he must refer such questions to either my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence or my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, who will make a statement in a few minutes.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it would be more convenient for the civil service, unions and Ministers if people did not drop chemicals on the Kurds, did not go to war with Iran, at a cost of 1 million Muslim lives, and did not start taking over other independent states such as Kuwait?

Although that is not within the province of my Department, I can without hesitation say yes to all my hon. Friend's propositions.

Installations in Scotland require the same protection as that given in England and Wales. I do not make this point out of parochialism. I remind the right hon. Gentleman that the appallingly dreadful terrorist organisation, the Irish Republican Army, does not carry out terrorist activities in Scotland; hence some installations there may be regarded as soft targets.

I listen with great care to the hon. Gentleman. Precautions are in place to protect civil servants, no matter where they are based in the United Kingdom, against the current threat of terrorist attack. That applies whether they are in Scotland or in England or whether the terrorist attacks are by the IRA or by other organisations.

To ask the Minister for the Civil Service if he has any plans to create more "next steps" agencies; and if he will make a statement.

The "next steps" initiative continues to make excellent progress; 34 agencies have now been established, and we expect that number to rise to 50 by this summer. By the end of the year we expect "next steps" will apply to about half the civil service.

My right hon. Friend has made great efforts to achieve this progress, whereby half the civil service will be involved in "next steps" agencies. That is welcome. Most Conservative Members would welcome management of Government services according to private sector discipline. Does my right hon. Friend recognise that it is important that many of these agencies are placed in parts of the country other than the south-east, particularly in areas where unemployment is high? Will he do all that he can to achieve that target?

I thank my hon. Friend for his opening remarks and I fully agree with the second half of his comments. We have a vigorous programme for relocating civil service departments, whether they are moving into agencies or not, in other parts of the country. I was involved in that when I was a Home Office Minister and I shall aim for its continuation while I have my present responsibilities.

When I asked the Minister a question three weeks ago, he answered me courteously, but he answered a completely different question. I ask the right hon. Gentleman to concentrate his mind and to let the House know whether he will meet representatives of the civil service unions to discuss the morale and finance problems in the present lacklustre housing market of civil servants who have been compulsorarily relocated because these "next steps" agencies have been set up.

If the hon. Member for Nottingham, North (Mr. Allen) had turned up this afternoon, I would have specifically answered that question. Of course, I should be delighted to meet leaders of the civil service trade unions at the appropriate time if they wish to see me. I have already met certain representatives of the Institution of Professionals, Managers and Specialists. I shall continue to meet such representatives at the appropriate moments when we have something to discuss.

To ask the Minister for the Civil Service if he will make a statement on progress under the Government's "next steps" agencies initiative.

I refer my hon. Friend to the answer that I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Lancashire, West (Mr. Hind).

Will any of the "next steps" agencies be relocated to Warrington or Runcorn?

At this stage, I can tell my hon. Friend only that the Liverpool passport office is trying out team-working arrangements which may lead to an increase in the number of staff at that office, that the resettlement agency, working with Knowsley council, is developing alternative hostel facilities and that Companies House has opened a satellite office in Manchester. All those developments are very close to the area in which my hon. Friend is interested and I hope that there will be further developments.

Would not "next steps" status be better for the transport section of the Crown Suppliers? Will the Minister assure me that that section will not be sold to a civil servant who has been the subject of a full investigation by the Crown Suppliers and who has been found to have committed three disciplinary offences? Can the right hon. Gentleman assure me that that person will not be allowed to buy the transport section of the Crown Suppliers?

If the hon. Gentleman cares to write to me about the matter, I shall see that it is looked into in great detail.

Will my right hon. Friend examine carefully all the agencies that we now have in south Dorset? The Admiralty research establishment is to go into the defence research agency. He should also consider the Atomic Energy Authority, the dockyards and various other developments. Will my right hon. Friend try to ensure that if the organisations are passed over to individual managements, care is taken to ensure that they do not all decide at the same time to relocate 8,000 jobs in two years from the very small Weymouth and Portsmouth area? I should be most grateful if my right hon. Friend would examine that matter carefully.

I fully understand my hon. Friend's point, and it is a good point. Naturally, he does not want a lot of employment to move out of his area quickly and all in one go. In my experience, relocation in the civil service does not exactly happen overnight. It happens over a great many years, allowing plenty of time for the local Member of Parliament to make full representations about the effect of relocation on his constituency. I hope that, with his customary assiduity, my hon. Friend would do that if there were any likelihood of all the civil service departments or agencies moving in one go.