To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what was the total expenditure by local education authorities in Wales during 1992–93 on discretionary grants; how many students benefited; and what are the corresponding estimates for 1993–94.

Local authority expenditure on discretionary student awards amounted to £16·8 million in 1991–92. Provisional information suggests that in the academic year 1991–92, some 14,800 students received discretionary awards from authorities in Wales. This is the latest year for which the information is available.

The Minister will realise that, because of the stringent expenditure limits imposed by the Welsh Office, many local authorities in Wales have made severe cuts in discretionary grants. In Dyfed, where my constituency is, there has been a 50 per cent. cut, which means £700,000 less in discretionary grants this year. I am sure that everyone agrees that education and training have a critical role to play in the recovery of the Welsh economy. In its report, "Wales 2010", issued last week, the Institute of Welsh Affairs placed education and training at the centre of its strategy. What does the Welsh Office intend to do about cuts in discretionary grants that will deprive hundreds of people in Dyfed and thousands of people across Wales of the support that they need to follow courses in further education?

I am sorry to hear that Dyfed is proposing such a cut. The grants are discretionary, which means that local authorities have the power but not the duty, so it is, no use blaming the Welsh Office—the hon. Gentleman should blame the local authorities. I am particularly sad about Dyfed, as in 1991–92 it allocated £2·9 million towards discretionary awards—the highest level of any county in Wales. I hope that those responsible will change their minds.

Will my right hon. Friend assist the House by putting the answer to the question in the context of the numbers of people who now undergo further and higher education? How has that figure changed over the past 10 years and what are the present prospects?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. There has been a substantial increase in higher education. Student numbers have risen 20 per cent. in the past three years. We expect an increase of 10 per cent. in the number of further education students this year, on top of an increase of 55 per cent. since 1988–89.

Does the Minister accept that he has given complacent answers to the questions posed? Is he aware that thousands of young men and women in Wales have been denied further and higher education, as a direct result of the cuts that he has imposed on Welsh local education authorities, and parents and teachers in Wales are sick and tired of the Government's arrogant refusal to listen to anyone involved in education, whether on the subject of testing or on the teaching of English? Does he accept that education in Wales relies heavily on stability and resources and when will he give them to the Welsh people?

The hon. Gentleman, as ever, seeks to blame the Government. We are talking about discretionary grants, which are allocated at the discretion of the local authorities. We have increased the amount of revenue support available to local authorities. Their largest bill is for teachers' salaries and the increase there has been pegged at 1·5 per cent. Local authorities have a responsibility for our young people and I urge them, particularly the Labour local authorities in Wales, to consider the matter further.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what steps he is taking to ensure that there is active support from hospital trusts and directly managed units for care of diabetics via community care.

Social services departments are responsible for assessing diabetic needs in discussion with the NHS and doctors; this is being guided by the relevant health gain protocol, a copy of which I hope that the hon. Gentleman has received.

In view of the St. Vincent declaration to which the Government are a signatory, how does the Minister intend to assess the extent to which diabetics will enjoy a reduction in the number of complications, such as eye complications, as a result of the declaration, given that hospitals in Wales do not possess the means to collect the data to establish whether the targets have been or will be reached? Will he make sure that the data are collected and put in the hands of the district hospitals?

I can tell the hon. Gentleman that much important work is being done in this area following the setting up of the working party, which I regard as a most important source for informing health authorities and others as they devise their local strategies for health. As I hope that the hon. Gentleman knows, we have set targets under the protocol for a reduction by the year 2002 of one half in diabetic gangrene, one third in end stage renal failure and one third in new blindness.

Does my hon. Friend agree that it is absolutely right that the trusts should make the decisions concerning their areas instead of being told what to do by people in Cathays Park or Gwydyr house in Whitehall?

I can fully reassure my hon. Friend that the changes in the national health service have brought about exactly what he seeks. Now there are clear-cut responsibilities. It is not Cathays Park but the health authorities which are the strategic planners, and the trusts, of which there are increasing numbers in Wales, are providing exactly the sort of health care that the people of Wales need.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how Wales's representatives on the European Committee of the Regions will be selected or elected.

Final decisions will be taken once the Maastricht treaty has been ratified.

I find that answer rather puzzling as I was under the impression that at least four Members on the Opposition side of the House knew how these people are to be selected or elected. When will the Secretary of State lift the veil of secrecy over this issue and allow the House and the 3 million inhabitants of Wales to know what that little cabal apparently already knows?

Whatever the official Opposition may seek to imply, Wales is a pluralist democracy and I am determined to ensure that our representation on the Committee of the Regions will reflect that. I hope that at some stage the official Opposition will make it clear whether they still broadly support the treaty signed at Maastricht. Since I entered politics, I have seen six major U-turns by the Labour party on Europe, and I believe that that party is going to adopt six different positions on the Maastricht treaty this week. That is incredible. It is about time the Opposition were serious about Europe.

In the name of a pluralist and open democracy, will the Secretary of State tell us whether he has any form of written agreement with the Welsh nationalist party? Does he realise that if he continues to deny the existence of such an agreement he calls into question the integrity of the Leader of Plaid Cymru?

I have always made it clear that I do have an agreement in writing with the Leader of Plaid Cymru. In return, perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will tell us whether he intends to support the treaty of Maastricht this week—

Order. That is going wide of the question.

When considering the Committee of the Regions we need to know whether the right hon. Gentleman still agrees with his original words—that the Labour party was broadly in support of the treaty signed at Maastricht.

Is it not the case that under the secret deal cobbled up by the Labour party with the local government associations in London, Wales would have only two seats out of the 24, compared with the three or four that are now likely to come to Wales? Labour's amendment to the European Communities (Amendment) Bill contained no guarantee whatever that those seats would be distributed to any but one party, or that they would be distributed geographically in Wales; nor was there a guarantee of any reporting-back mechanism. Is it not time that the Labour party gave up fighting yesterday's battle, which it lost so badly, and started arguing positively for the good of Wales in Europe?

I agree with the Leader of the Plaid Cymru [Interruption.]

Order. The House must come to order.

I hope that Labour's Front-Bench spokesmen will cease such behaviour. I completely agree with you, Madam Speaker, that it does not enhance respect for the House to have Labour Front-Bench spokesmen behaving in such a manner. I am extremely pleased to inform the House that the regional development section of the European Community Economic and Social Committee will visit south Wales next month to hold one of its regular formal meetings. That meeting in Cardiff, will be hosted by the Welsh Office and it will be the first time in many years that the Committee has left Brussels. I shall be delighted to welcome it to Wales.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that by supporting the Committee of the Regions the Opposition are showing a degree of double standards because they support the Maastricht treaty in its entirety instead of—

Order. The hon. Gentleman must resume his seat. I have had enough of Members going wide of the question.

I wish to put a simple question to the Secretary of State. Bearing in mind that the Committee of the Regions is not a parliamentary committee, does he regard it as relevant that at the last general election the Liberal Democrats won 60,000 more votes in Wales than Plaid Cymru?

That is, of course, a factor to be taken into account, as is the factor that the Liberal Democrats' representation in the House came down from three to one. The only reason why the hon. and learned Gentleman is leader of the Welsh Liberal Democrats in the House is that he is the only one left.

We are all wondering why the Secretary of State is so determined to avoid giving straight answers to straight questions on this. It is clear that his personal preference is for the posts to be filled by unfettered patronage, but that preference has been overridden by a decision of the House. Will he therefore confirm that he will comply fully with the spirit of that decision? Since our Welsh representatives will now be drawn from local government and will represent Welsh local government interests, does he agree that local government itself should decide on its own representatives? Does he understand that any veto, trickery or gerrymandering by him will be completely unacceptable?

I have already given a straight answer to the question posed by the right hon. Member for Islwyn (Mr. Kinnock). I said that I have a written agreement with the Leader of Plaid Cymru, which I shall honour. I understand that this week there is to be a great unveiling of new proposals for a Welsh assembly with fund-raising and legislative powers. It is disgraceful that the hon. Gentleman did not mention that in the House although he had an opportunity to do so. The sooner he comes clean in the House rather than retiring to Llandudno for some party political occasion, the more I shall respect him. He has to decide how he will vote on Thursday. Will he support his right hon. Friend? Does he still support the Maastricht treaty? If not, there can never be a Committee of the Regions and that would be a great shame for Wales.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what steps he has taken to enhance the quality of research in the higher education sector in Wales; and if he will make a statement.

We have asked the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales to work with the higher education institutions in Wales to raise the quality of research. We have made an additional £2·9 million available in 1993–94, to enable the council to make a start on the task and to assist the former public sector institutions to establish research departments.

I welcome my right hon. Friend's statement, but can he tell us the total amount available for research into higher education in Wales?

Yes, it is about £35 million, which is rather more than the higher education sector secured from the Universities Funding Council last year. I am sure that my hon. Friend will agree that it is vital for the future well-being of the Welsh economy that we should concentrate on research and innovation and seek to apply it from the higher education sector to industry and business in Wales.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many planning decisions by Welsh planning authorities he has called in during the last two years; and if he will make a statement.

Twelve.

Given that no planning permission has been revoked by the Welsh Office in the past two years, is it not time to confirm the view of many senior planning officers in Wales that they are not being given sufficient monitoring and assistance by the Welsh Office as they try to uphold the structure plans? When is the Welsh Office likely to introduce an element of flexibility into rural planning so that villages are allowed to grow naturally and not die?

Revocation is a seldom-used power. Normally we would expect planning decisions to be made properly by local planning authorities. That is why the power is so seldom used. I assure the hon. Gentleman that we look for an appropriate approach in all structure plans to cover rural areas.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the decision of our right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales to allow Radnorshire district council to decide the wind farm project at Bryntitli near Rhayader in my constituency has been warmly welcomed by my constituents? Is it not a further illustration of the fact that local democracy demands that, within the overall planning framework, decisions of that nature should be decided at local level?

I am happy to acknowledge my hon. Friend's warm welcome for our right hon. Friend's decision.

Why do the Welsh Office and the Secretary of State so persistently overrule local planning authorities, as they did over Browning Ferris, which was a despicable decision after a contrary unanimous decision by Newport borough council? Will the Minister reconsider the Welsh Office's attitude to such matters—which are better decided locally, as his hon. Friend the Member for Brecon and Radnor (Mr. Evans) has just advised him?

A the hon. Gentleman knows, that matter was considered fully and I cannot make any further comment.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what progress is being made in Wales in meeting the targets set out in the patients charter.

We are achieving the waiting times guarantees set out in the patients charter and have made considerable progress towards meeting the other standards set in it.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that waiting times for a first out-patient appointment are just as important as those after seeing a consultant? Will he consider setting a target for such appointments?

That is a very good point. I am happy to be able to say that from April next year we are prepared to set a target of two years from referral by general practitioners —[Interruption.] We are talking about the total number of cases. A target of two years from referral by the GP will apply to all cases, but that will not affect the target of one month for urgent treatment.

If the Minister thinks that the patients charter is working; can he explain why there are approximately 1 million people on hospital waiting lists in the United Kingdom and why they are increasing by 1,000 per week? To deal with the problems of waiting lists, can he tell me how much of the £8 million promised for a hospital in Blaenau Gwent during the late 1980s has been spent?

The latter point is.a matter for the health authority locally. The charter for patients in Wales is backed up by record resources. I give the hon. Gentleman one simple statistic. When we came into power in 1979, gross expenditure per capita on the NHS in Wales was £171. In this financial year, that has increased to £713 per capita—a rate of increase far higher than the rate of inflation. We are now targeting that record level of expenditure on the patients so as to improve patient care. That is what the patients charter in Wales is all about.

Does the Secretary of State agree that little progress will be made on the patients charter if things carry on as they have been for the past month in the Prince of Wales orthopaedic hospital in my constituency, where the number of orthopaedic operations carried out since 1 April is 50 per cent. down on last year, where last week alone eight knee and hip joint replacement operations were cancelled, and where a new operating theatre—constructed following lobbying by me and the medical profession in the area and with great support from the Under-Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Cardiff, North (Mr. Jones)—has been used only twice in the six weeks since it was handed over by the builders? With that rate of progress, the patients charter can be forgotten for orthopaedic operations in the Cardiff area for a very long time to come.

I accept that the hon. Gentleman is making constituency points from the Front Bench. The South Glamorgan health authority has made very good progress in cutting the in-patient waiting list. Since October 1991, the total in-patient list has come down by 27 per cent., and the percentage of people waiting more than one year for non-urgent in-patient treatment has fallen by 33 per cent. The hon. Gentleman implicitly criticises all the local staff who are doing such a marvellous job in achieving those targets.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what steps he has taken to ensure that national education and training targets will be met; and if he will make a statement.

We have made it clear to education, training and employer organisations throughout Wales that we attach great importance to the national education and training targets. We have taken a number of measures in consultation with the training and enterprise councils and other partners to secure an ambitious rate of progress towards their achievement.

Will my right hon. Friend be more specific about the role of TECs and colleges in achieving those targets?

Certainly. We have invited the TECs in Wales to form local strategic groups and to fix provisional local targets and planned joint action. We have also asked the Further Education Funding Council for Wales to encourage colleges to work very closely with the TECs to develop those local targets and strategies for achieving them.

The Minister will know that North-East Clwyd TEC has decided, instead of spending its money on training, to spend it on plush new offices with armchairs and first-class restaurants for itself and its staff. At the same time, I am continually getting complaints from still unemployed ex-Brymbo steel workers that training has not been up to the standard that was expected. It is high time the Minister brought those TECs under control and told them to spend the money where it should be spent on training.

The TECs are very well resourced. Certainly, they are better resourced than they were last year as far as training is concerned. I have no objection personally to the provision of good capital facilities for training and enterprise councils and for further education colleges as those colleges have been starved of funds under the local education authorities in years gone by. We have a lot of capital investment to do before our facilities reach the right level in Wales.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what recent representations he has had from angling organisations in Wales.

Several.

I thank the Secretary of State for that comprehensive reply. Among those representations, did he receive complaints from angling associations about the proposals of the National Rivers Authority to make good the shortfall in Government grant, which in 1996 will drop from 54 to 30 per cent? If the proposals are implemented, the local waters of Wales will be put out of the reach of Welsh anglers. Will the right hon. Gentleman ask the NRA to look for other sources of funding, rather than looking to the anglers of Wales?

I am aware of the NRA's proposals to raise additional revenue by making a charge on fisheries' owners. The NRA is responsible for the allocation of resources between its regions. No proposals have yet been submitted to Ministers. I am aware that the NRA has put forward some proposals to conserve salmon and sea trout stocks in the NRA's Welsh region. We are considering the objections that we have received to those proposals.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what are the latest figures for Government spending on training and further education in Wales.

The resources available for training and further education in Wales in 1993–94 total almost £290 million. A further £6·2 million for learning for work, business start-up and training and enterprise council challenge was announced in the Budget on 16 March.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that comprehensive and carefully researched answer. What progress has been made in meeting the youth training guarantee?

Meeting the youth training guarantee is a high priority and resources have been made available for that. Last September, 1,550 young people were awaiting placements under that scheme. I am glad to tell the House that, as of April, the number had dropped to 260.

Will the Minister answer the parliamentary question that I have tabled three times during the past six weeks: will TEC budgets for 1993–94 be increased or decreased? Will there be an increase, as there should be, or will there be a cut of 8 to 10 per cent., as most of the TEC's believe will happen?

I have already explained to the hon. Gentleman that we will not announce the individual TEC budgets because the TECs are in negotiation with training providers. We shall make the budgets known in about October, when those negotiations have been completed. We are providing £146·7 million for training and enterprise support this year and the TECs come within that budget. I assure the hon. Gentleman, as I have done before in reply to another of his questions, that the TECs will be well provided for.

Can my right hon. Friend confirm that there will be a real improvement in the capital budgets of further education colleges, following many years of neglect by local education authorities under the control of the Labour party? I refer especially to Llandrillo college in my constituency, which has had to use Portakabins for many years.

I am aware of the deficiencies in our further education colleges, including Llandrillo. I am delighted to say that we are making £13·9 million of capital available for the improvement of further education colleges—following, as my hon. Friend said, years of neglect by Labour local education authorities.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make it his policy to increase the support provided by the Welsh Office for voluntary organisations in Wales.

Substantial sums of taxpayers' money continue to be provided and the Government intend to maintain their commitment to a flourishing voluntary sector in Wales.

In other words, the Minister will not give any more money to the voluntary sector in Wales. Does not he realise that essential to the health of the community is a strong partnership between local authorities and voluntary organisations, especially youth organisations? That is being undermined because of the mean and petty cuts in the finance made available to local authorities by the Welsh Office. If, because they have to pull back to their statutory responsibilities, local authorities are unable to fund voluntary organisations, the Secretary of State for Wales should provide far more to make up the shortfall. Will the Minister give an undertaking that he will do that?

I can simply refute the hon. Gentleman's allegations by reminding him that we have increased funding for the voluntary sector by one third in the past five years and threefold during the lifetime of this Government.

Recently, I wrote to the Secretary of State about funding for the Powys mental health project, which is in the voluntary sector. Is the Minister aware of widespread concern in rural Wales about increasing depressive illness and even suicide among farmers? Will he examine seriously the possibility of funding projects such as the Powys mental health project, which can, through the voluntary sector, be of such great assistance to farmers facing psychiatric illness?

Yes, I am more than happy to consider the specific project to which the hon. and learned Gentleman referred. I seek to reassure him by saying that, in general, funding of the mental handicap strategy in Wales for the current financial year has increased by 15 per cent.

The Minister will be aware that a number of people in the voluntary sector are becoming active in assisting those with a drug dependency. There have been problems in my constituency recently, as I am sure the Minister is aware. The local branch of Llangefni drugs council within Gwynedd drugs council is seeking funding to develop services for people who have a drug dependency. Will the Minister sympathetically consider its funding application?

Yes, I will consider that particular application also. On 1 April, the Welsh Office issued a circular to all Welsh county councils reminding them what is involved in support for alcohol and drug dependency services. I draw the hon. Gentleman's attention to the action point that local authorities should plan for continuity of services for alcohol and drug misusers under the new community care arrangements. As a priority, they should ensure that the implementation of social care plans properly reflects the needs of those groups. In general, funding for care in the community has increased by more than £8 million.

The Secretary of State is getting something of a reputation for being demob happy. Given the complacency of the Under-Secretary of State's answer, it is clear that he, too, does not think that he has much of a future at the Welsh Office. Does not the Under-Secretary understand that the voluntary sector depends heavily on local government support? As a result of this year's cuts in local government funding, the voluntary sector, together with vital public services, is having to pay a heavy cost for the Government's failures. Instead of berating and undermining local councils, why do not the Under-Secretary and the Secretary of State get their act together, go to Brussels and make sure that the £75 million of finance that was allocated to Wales this year by the EC —but which has not been taken up—is brought back to Wales, used by local government and allocated to those voluntary sectors that desperately need that money?

Again and again, the hon. Gentleman blindly ignores the facts. Community care was to be £28 million this year, but has been increased to £36 million. That is the extent of the increase. If anyone is demob happy, it is the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Mr. Davies), who is the third shadow Secretary of State for Wales in the current Parliament—and I guess that the Scottish puppet master is already trawling for the fourth.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what percentage of the employed Welsh work force are working non-standard hours.

There is no single or standard agreed definition of "standard" hours, but the 1991 census shows that 21 per cent. of Welsh residents in employment worked fewer than 31 hours a week.

That figure renders as complete fiction the Secretary of State's claim that he has increased the number of jobs in Wales, because tens of thousands of people in the Welsh work force are counted twice and sometimes three times. Did the Secretary of State notice that in the recent elections, the Conservative party managed to secure only 32 county councillors out of a possible 500 in Wales? That makes the present Secretary of State about as popular as Ceausescu in Romania in December 1990. Will not the Secretary of State confess that there has been no Welsh recovery but that a reasonably paid, highly skilled work force has been turned into a low-wage, low-skill sweat shop?

I heard no expressions of approval following the hon. Gentleman's remarks, which were pretty disgraceful. Any Opposition Member who says that there has been no recovery in Wales and expects to be taken seriously is living in cloud cuckoo land.

To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, as representing the Church Commissioners what assessment the Church Commissioners have made of the damage done to Church of England property by the recent terrorist bomb in the City of London; and if he will make a statement.

The Church Commissioners have made no assessment, as the future of these buildings—at least initially—is not within their jurisdiction. However, they naturally regret the damage to churches caused by the bomb. I understand that the diocese of London, local clergy and other interested parties will be making such an assessment in due course in the light of professional advice.

Many people who care about the architecture and history of the City of London are particularly concerned about the damage done to St. Ethelburga's church. Can my right hon. Friend assure the House that the Church Commissioners, rather than, as has been reported, trying to sell off the site to make a quick profit, will seek ways of organising an appeal to ensure that the church is fully restored?

I assure my hon. Friend that there is no question of the Church Commissioners' trying to sell off the site to make a quick profit, interested though we are in making profits on our property for the benefit of the clergy and their dependants. The disposal of the site and the determination of its future, however, are matters for the diocese and the parochial church council. If they decide that they want to launch an appeal and to develop the site as part of a pastoral reorganisation, the Church Commissioners will have some jurisdiction and will do everything possible to help.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that, however important the Church's view on the destruction of its property may be, it has a more important message to deliver—that killing and injuring people, as the IRA has done, is entirely unacceptable? Does he agree that the Church should be encouraged at every opportunity to make it clear to the IRA that there is only a difference of degree between what it does in the City of London and what others are currently doing in the former Yugoslavia?

I entirely support what the hon. Gentleman has said. He will recall, as I do, the many vivid photographs of churches and other buildings in London burning after the attacks of the totalitarian Hitler regime in the last war. Terrorists are totalitarian, and their attacks on London will be as abortive and ineffectual as Hitler's attacks.

To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, as representing the Church Commissioners by what percentage in real terms rents for Church lands were changed in the years 1987 to 1992.

The average gross rent per acre in respect of the Church Commissioners' agricultural land increased by 6·5 per cent., from £56·84 in 1987 to £60·53 in 1992. That compared to an increase in the retail prices index of 34·8 per cent. over the same period, representing a reduction of 28 per cent. in real terms.

Does that figure include a premium charged by the Church to allow its tenants to permit the tormenting of dumb animals on their land in the name of sport by allowing fox hunting and deer hunting? Is not the right hon. Gentleman embarrassed that at the international whaling conference and elsewhere, Britain has been criticised by Japan and Norway for allowing hunting on our land? Does not that undermine entirely—

Order. If the hon. Gentleman tried to catch my eye during questions on the whaling statement, he might be successful, but it is unfortunate that he should move now to the discussion of a subject that is not at all related to his original question.

To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, as representating the Church Commissioners what plans there are for further publication; by the Church Commissioners.

The Church Commissioners' annual report and accounts for 1992 are to be published in June, and the 1993 report of the Church Commissioners as central stipend authority will be published in the autumn. The commissioners produce leaflets on a variety of subjects from time to time.

Might the Church Commissioners produce a leaflet on the arguments in favour of women priests, as many people in the House and outside it wish to see women become fully ordained priests of the Church of England? Does my right hon. Friend agree that the uncertainty that is created by the current delay is not good for the Church of England or for those who either support or oppose the measure and that the sooner the matter is determined the better it will be for everyone?

I take careful note of what my hon. Friend says, as, no doubt, will colleagues from all parties here and in the other place who serve on the Ecclesiastical Committee, which is to meet later this afternoon and which is now the only possible source of delay. My hon. Friend can be assured that the Ecclesiastical Committee will present to the House for his benefit a comprehensive summary of the arguments for and against the ordination of women, I believe with an endorsement to the effect that the measure is expedient.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what guidance has been issued to courts regarding the consideration to be given to the welfare of children in divorce proceedings.

May I acknowledge the hon. Gentleman's expertise in this subject and tell him that the Judicial Studies Board organises training courses for both district judges and specialist circuit judges at which the needs of children are thoroughly discussed? Eminent child psychiatrists, paediatricians, court welfare officers, social workers and academics play important roles in briefing judges on this vital topic, alongside guidance from the Department of Health on the Children Act 1989.

I thank the Minister for that answer. Does he agree, however, that, given that one in four children have parents who are likely to divorce before those children reach the age of 16, it is high time that his Department introduced proposals to implement the Law Commission's report aimed at putting children first in divorce proceedings? Are the costs of conciliation the reason for the delay? If so, does the Minister agree that the social, emotional and financial costs of a failure to act to help children are greater than the costs of implementation?

It was, is and will continue to be the policy of the Lord Chancellor's Department that the child's welfare is the paramount consideration. Many of us have sympathy for the parting parents, but the children are the paramount priority and the Department is well seized of that fact.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will make a statement about the future of Stockton-on-Tees county court.

The Lord Chancellor is currently undertaking wide consultation on the proposed closure of Stockton-on-Tees county court. No final decision will be made on the future of the court until the results of that consultation are known.

Given that, last week, the Local Government Commission made the welcome recommendation that county Cleveland should be abolished and replaced with unitary authorities, will my hon. Friend delay making any final decision on Stockton-on-Tees county court until the new unitary authorities are decided upon, as one of them will be Stockton-on-Tees and as there will be a consequent reversal of the policy of centralising all facilities in Middlesbrough?

My hon. Friend is as vigorous as ever in his pursuit of his constituency interests. He will not draw me into making any comment about Cleveland, however—nor do I think that he would want me to. The point that he made may be relevant to the consultation that is in progress, but it is not for me to prejudge its outcome and I am sure that the House would not expect me to do so.

Is the Minister aware of the concern—not only in Stockton-on-Tees county court but in other county courts up and down the country—about reports over the weekend of the Government's intention to privatise the court services? Is he further aware that that concern is widespread, bearing in mind that disastrous impact of privatisation on other aspects of the justice system that we have witnessed over recent weeks and months? When does the Minister intend to make a statement to the House about that and what proposals will he introduce to ensure that the confidentiality and best interests of the consumers of legal services are properly safeguarded?

The hon. Gentleman is right to lay out the priorities as he did in the conclusion of his question; it is the consumers and users whose interests must be considered as the most important. I am aware of certain press comment during the weekend along the lines that the hon. Gentleman mentioned, but it is not always from sources of the greatest possible fidelity, as I am sure he will know from his own experience, as I do from mine. Consideration has been given to the court service becoming an agency under the next steps arrangements. Such thoughts are current and are being very carefully deliberated on.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what assessment he has made of the effect of changes in legal aid eligibility arrangements upon the number of women seeking injunctions to restrain a violent partner.

Almost half of all households are now eligible for civil legal aid. A woman seeking an injunction against a violent partner would have her means assessed separately from those of her partner and for this reason may be more likely to qualify than the overall eligibility figure suggests.

May I tell the Minister of a constituent of mine whose violent partner was pestering her but who could not get an injunction because, although she had low earnings, she just fell outside the new legal aid limit? The police told her that they were limited in their actions because they did not have an injunction to enforce. Is not this a serious loophole in the new legal aid limit? Does not that mean that many women at risk of assault will be without court protection? What will the Government do about that?

I do not think that the House would expect me to comment on an individual case. Civil legal aid is available, with a contribution, to up to 48 per cent. of households and very generous allowances are made in the determination of disposable income. The amended regulations provide that, from 12 April, attendance allowance, disability living allowance, constant attendance allowance paid as an increase to a disablement pension and any payment out of the social fund will be disregarded in the calculation of disposable income for advice and assistance. If the hon. Gentleman wrote to me about the case in point, I would gladly receive his letter.

Will my hon. Friend tell the House by how much expenditure on legal aid has risen since 1979? Am I right in saying that it has increased 10-fold since then?

In 1979, legal aid covered about 900,000 participants and that figure has now gone up to 3·1 million. In the past four years, the cost of legal aid has doubled and it now stands at £1·1 billion. Contrary to all that is being said about legal aid being cut, it is set to go on rising significantly over the next three years, and the number of participants receiving legal aid is set to rise from 3·1 million to 4 million.

Is the Minister aware that the position of women who have been subjected to violence and have had to come before the courts was brought home with stark and appealing directness at the Conservative party conference in Scotland by that courageous woman—who was described as "Judy"—who highlighted the difficulties that people in those circumstances face? Did the Minister notice in particular what she said about the desirability of having a female member on each appeal court Bench? Will he give some help on that?

I should like to reflect on the second and rather specific point raised by the hon. Gentleman. As to the first point about women's vulnerability in court, the Lord Chancellor and I are sympathetic towards that matter, as we are towards the vulnerability of children in court and in cases involving their parents. A court can be a hostile, unnatural, awesome and frightening place for people who have experienced fear and trouble already. The process must be made more congenial to people and every sympathy for their needs must be shown.

Does the Minister agree that the eligibility alterations have affected one class of women above all others—women who are working wives and mothers and who have a separate income, which now means that they are not able to obtain legal aid? Very often, children are involved. Will the Minister for once accept that people are being hurt by his Department and his Government?

No one should imagine for a minute that the Lord Chancellor and I considered the recently necessary application of discipline to the legal aid budget with any joy; rather, we did so with a very heavy heart. Nevertheless, the cost of legal aid is set to go on rising. It is available in civil cases to 48 per cent. of the community, and there is no upper limit in criminal cases. As a spokesman in the House of Lords said, our system of legal aid remains almost certainly one of the most generous in the world—that was said by a spokesman for the Labour party.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department when the Lord Chancellor intends to introduce legislation to implement Law Commission report No. 174, "Privity of Contract and Estate".

As I announced in my answer to my hon. Friend the Member for High Peak (Mr. Hendry), on 31 March, Official Report, column 198, the Government have decided, after careful consideration, to implement the Law Commission's recommendations for future leases but not for existing leases. The necessary legislation will be introduced as soon as there is a suitable legislative opportunity, but I cannot predict when such an opportunity will occur.

Does my hon. Friend agree that it would be impractical to legislate retrospectively? However, in framing any amendments to the law, will he consult all those involved, especially the professionals who advise on property matters, so that the people who have unwittingly been made bankrupt in these perplexing cases will not be subject to that particular law in the future?

I am extremely grateful to my hon. Friend for his question. He is right to say, and he understands, that it is the careful judgment of the Government that these measures cannot be retrospective. However, the consultation that he urges is valuable; there is a need for it, and he will be pleased to learn that the process has already begun.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will make a further statement on changes in the legal aid scheme.

Changes to the permanent payment on account scheme for barristers came into effect on 1 April. Changes to the financial conditions for legal aid came into effect on 12 April. Standard fees are to be introduced in the magistrates courts on 1 June.

Further to the inadequate reply that the Minister gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Leyton (Mr. Cohen), is he aware that reported cases of domestic violence in London have increased by 1,000 per cent. in eight years and that for the victims of domestic violence legal representation is very much a case of the difference between life and death? If evidence is brought before the Minister or the Lord Chancellor to show that justice has been denied because of the increase in payment being required of the Department, will he reverse the savage cuts?

I would not be able to reverse the decision even if I wanted to because it was a decision taken by the House with a majority of 49 votes. The hon. Gentleman asked whether the Lord Chancellor and I are receptive to evidence. The answer is, of course we are.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what progress is being made in extending rights of audience to solicitors in the higher courts; and if he will make a statement.

The Law Society submitted its formal application for extended rights of audience in November 1992. The Lord Chancellor and the four designated judges will be in a position to reach a decision on the application when they receive the advice of the Advisory Committee on Legal Education and Conduct and of the Director General of Fair Trading later in the summer.

My hon. Friend will be aware that there is widespread concern about the savings that have had to be made by the Lord Chancellor's Department in relation to legal aid. There is also great concern about the committee's slow progress in extending solicitors' rights which, in the circumstances, would clearly lead to a substantial financial saving. There have been recent reports that the Government legal service and Crown Prosecution Service's lawyers are not to be recommended to receive the extended rights of audience in the higher courts. Will my hon. Friend consider those proposals carefully because, in the circumstances, there is clearly an unanswerable case for solicitors to be granted those rights?

I take my hon. Friend's question in exactly the spirit in which it was put. The mechanism for determining wider rights of audience is extremely complicated, not least because the House, in its wisdom, chose to make a complex mechanism when it passed the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990. I think that there will be progress fairly soon, but I am bound to say that it will not be quick enough to satisfy my hon. Friend.

Can the Minister explain exactly what is meant by wider rights of audience? Has it got something to do with the Lord Chancellor trotting off to Cyprus to see Asil Nadir? It seems like a shady business to me. A man hands over £440,000 to the Tory party and a member of the Cabinet goes to Cyprus to have some private discussions. Would that apply to anybody else in Britain?

Order. The hon. Gentleman must resume his seat. That is not at all relevant. Does the Minister wish to answer?

I did not want the afternoon to come to an end without Asil Nadir getting in somewhere. The hon. Gentleman will be pleased, but not surprised, to know that Mr. Nadir's legal aid certificate has been frozen.