To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what are his future plans for local government in Wales. [31444]

The work has already begun. The Local Government (Wales) Act 1994 is yet another form of the real devolution that the Government practise in the shape of the 22 new unitary authorities in Wales. We are taking local government closer to the people of Wales than it has ever been before.

Has my hon. Friend noted that all Labour Members who represent Welsh seats have withdrawn their questions? Does he agree that they are either entirely satisfied with the Government's performance in Wales or they are trying to score cheap political points at the expense of their constituents?

In relation to local government in Wales, is my hon. Friend aware of the disgraceful way in which local councillors are allocating themselves increased allowances? In Mid Glamorgan, allowances went up by 400 per cent. Is that not outrageous? Will my hon. Friend take steps to prevent the new chief officers, who are about to be appointed, from following the same path?

Yes, I have noticed that there are no Welsh Opposition Members present. They are scoring yet more cheap points. It is typical of the Labour party in Wales—if it does not like the game, it will take the ball home. It is amazing that, when the Leader of the Opposition issues his orders to Welsh Labour Members, Welsh Liberal Democrat Members and Plaid Cymru Members also obey those orders.

My hon. Friend warns of the dangers of the gravy train in Wales, but I fear that the situation is worse than she suggested. The gravy train was not halted following the intervention of the leader of the Opposition, who told Mid Glamorgan Labour councillors to cut their allowances. They lowered the increase in their allowances from the proposed 400 per cent. to 200 per cent. I can think of many people in Mid Glamorgan and the rest of Wales who would like to receive a 200 per cent. increase.

When I spoke to the Association of District Councils' conference in Eastbourne recently, I made the point about the gravy train for officers and chief officers. I called on councils in Wales to stop the gravy train before it started for all new officers. I can assure my hon. Friend that the staff commission is looking closely at the mater, and we understand that two councils have been persuaded to change their minds.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the Labour party wants not only local government but regional government? Can my hon. Friend explain why it wants another tier of government?

More jobs for the boys.

It could perhaps be that. Can my hon. Friend explain why Labour Members want more tiers of government when they are not prepared to attend the Chamber? Have not they insulted their constituents by ignoring their interests today?

I hesitate to do Labour Members' jobs for them. If they had turned up here today, they could have tried to explain their policies better. Out of all the complaints that we hear about what the Government are doing—not least in the Principality of Wales—the one thing we do not hear is that the problems could be solved by imposing another layer of government and bureaucracy. The Government are involved in the redevelopment of south Cardiff which, it is reliably estimated, will bring 20,000 new jobs to south Wales. The Opposition want to create the ultimate quango—more jobs for the boyos.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is his estimate of the total value of infrastructure investment in Wales since 1979. [31447]

Of the £13 billion capital spending by the Welsh Office and local authorities in Wales since 1979, more than £2 billion was spent on trunk roads and motorways, and £1.7 billion was spent on capital investment in the national health service.

May I take this opportunity to congratulate my right hon. Friend on his appointment, not only to the Cabinet, but to the Privy Council earlier today? I congratulate him on joining a long and distinguished list of Secretaries of State for Wales who have represented constituencies east of Offa's dyke and wish him every success in his time in the Principality.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that inward investment has been an outstanding success in Wales and has had much to do with the fact that prosperity in the Principality has risen and unemployment fallen by a significant amount in recent years? Is it now time for him to consider the grant aid available to encourage firms to relocate in Wales? I should like to cite the example of Bluebird Toys, which had to make 300 of my constituents unemployed when it moved to the valleys of Wales. As my right hon. Friend is new to the Department, I hope that he will feel able to study that policy and that he will try to concentrate on inward investment from other parts of Europe and the rest of the world rather than from other parts of the United Kingdom.

I am most grateful to my hon. Friend for his welcome. Really, he is echoing the hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent (Mr. Smith) who said in the Western Mail this morning:

"I want to totally disassociate myself from all the Welsh politicians who opposed the appointment of Mr. Hague on the basis that he is English".

Unfortunately, the hon. Gentleman is not here to repeat that statement in the Chamber.

I understand my hon. Friend's concern, but I hope that he will also recognise that Wales has had particular problems. Inward investment has greatly assisted the recovery of the Welsh economy. Although it has 5 per cent. of the United Kingdom population, Wales has enjoyed a share of inward investment into the UK of between 10 per cent. and 20 per cent. for some years. That is one of the factors that has led to unemployment in Wales falling to the United Kingdom average for the first time since the 1920s, which is a considerable achievement on the part of the Government and of my predecessors, and it illustrates that the policies that we have been pursuing in Wales, as in the rest of the United Kingdom, have been working. It is a great shame that Opposition Members have not joined us today to discuss these matters and to ask questions on behalf of their constituents.

I wish my right hon. Friend every success in his important new job. Will he bear in mind the effect on the future prosperity of Wales of the European Union which, as he will know, is called Undeb Ewropiaidd in the national language? In particular, will he bear in mind the threat of the part-time workers' directive, which has been imposed on this country against our wishes? More important, will he bear in mind the 40-hour-week directive, which is likely to apply to Wales and the rest of the United Kingdom following a European Court decision? When safeguarding the interests of Wales, will he bear very much in mind the serious impact on investment in Wales of those Euro-measures which are being forced on industry and commerce there against the Government's wishes?

I shall certainly bear in mind the European dimension, as my hon. Friend encourages me to do. It is important for the growth of the economy in Wales that we continue with policies that encourage enterprise and facilitate the growth of businesses. We do not want them to be over-regulated and the Government's policies, for instance in not following the rest of the European Community into the social chapter, are important to the future of business in Wales and the rest of the United Kingdom. My hon. Friend has raised a number of matters and I shall discuss them with my right hon. Friends in the Government.

Like my hon. Friend the Member for Swindon (Mr. Coombs), I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his appointment. I moved from Yorkshire to contest a seat in Wales; I have grown to know Wales well and appreciate a considerable welcome there, so I hope that my right hon. Friend will not be put off by the failure to attend today of all the Opposition Members who represent Wales. There is certainly no racism on these Benches, least of all against people from Yorkshire.

May I ask my right hon. Friend to visit the Vale of Glamorgan, as did his predecessors, at an early opportunity so that he can see for himself the benefits of Conservative policies in attracting infrastructure investment, particularly to my constituency?

Yes. I am most grateful to my hon. Friend for his additional words of welcome. I shall certainly visit Vale of Glamorgan at the earliest opportunity to see what is happening there. I hope that I shall be able to take an early opportunity, there and elsewhere in Wales, to emphasise the Government's success in ensuring that infrastructure spending on Wales is kept at an appropriate level. Since 1979, more than £2 billion has been spent on the construction and improvement of the M4 motorway and trunk roads in Wales.

The hon. Member for Cynon Valley (Mrs. Clwyd) has not joined us today, but she contacted my office this morning to say which question she wanted to ask before she was ordered to withdraw it. She wanted to ask about road infrastructure and when we would announce the preferred route for the A465. Although she has not come here today to represent her constituents, I want to make it clear that comments and responses from a wide range of public organisations and the general public have been considered, and I shall announce the preferred route on Wednesday.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many (a) in-patients and (b) out-patients were treated in NHS hospitals in Wales in the most recent year for which figures are available; and what these figures were in 1979. [31449]

The NHS in Wales saw 633,000 new outpatients and treated 739,000 inpatients and day cases in 1994–95, compared with 429,000 and 381,000 respectively in 1979. Those are increases of 48 per cent. and 94 per cent. respectively. These data were compiled and collated by officials of Her Majesty's Government of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Does my hon. Friend agree that those figures show a great improvement in the national health service in Wales since the present Government took office? Will he confirm that the increase in the number of patients being treated has been faster since the national health service reforms were introduced?

My hon. Friend is absolutely correct. The increase reflects the reforms in the national health service, the greater sums of money being spent on the NHS and the effective way in which that money is being spent on more doctors and nurses. I draw my hon. Friend's attention to the patients charter for Wales—the NHS performance targets—a copy of which can be found in the Library. My hon. Friend may be interested to note that that publication is available in Welsh for Welsh speakers and in English for English speakers. I am considering producing next year an illustrated version for the Opposition.

Because of the tremendous record of improvement in the health service in Wales, may I reassure my right hon. Friend that he will be courteously received by most people wherever he goes in Wales and that he will be warmly welcomed if he listens, as I am sure he will, to people's legitimate concerns? May I urge him to disregard totally the abrogation of duty by Labour Members, who claim that they represent the views of the people of Wales—who cherish no such resentment against my right hon. Friend? Meanwhile, will my hon. Friend assure me that the progress already made in the health service in Wales will continue for the foreseeable future?

My right hon. Friend is wise, as always. During the past 16 years, the national health service has been as safe in his hands as it has been in the hands of every Conservative Government since the war.

My right hon. Friend's assessment of the nature of the Welsh people and the welcome that they will give is correct. Indeed, they welcomed my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales only last Friday when he visited a hospital in Gwent where, sadly, there were people who had been injured in a coach crash in Raglan. He went there to show sympathy for those who had been injured in the crash and to show that the national health service is the highest priority of Her Majesty's Government in Wales. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State was welcomed in Gwent that day and I have every confidence that he will be welcomed everywhere else he goes in Wales.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement about inward investment into Wales. [31458]

Inward investment into Wales has helped, alongside the growth of indigenous industry, to create a diverse and dynamic economy. The 280 overseas-owned manufacturing companies in Wales employ almost 68,000 people, a vivid testament to the value of inward investment to Wales.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his appointment. He is following a line of distinguished Members of Parliament for English constituencies who have been Secretary of State for Wales, starting, of course, with my immediate predecessor, the right hon. and noble—and distinguished—Lord Thomas of Gwydir.

My right hon. Friend will, I am sure, wish to pay tribute to the work of his two immediate predecessors, who are responsible for the very substantial inward investment into Wales. Does he agree that one reason for that massive inward investment is that we in the United Kingdom boast a low rate of corporate tax and that a tax-raising Welsh assembly would lose that benefit overnight? Has not inward investment into Wales been encouraged by the fact that we have not signed up to the social chapter and do not have a minimum wage? Is he aware that the leader of the new Labour party—

Get on with it.

If the hon. Member for Thurrock (Mr. Mackinlay) had been here for question No. 5, I would not have had to take so long.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the leader of new Labour, speaking to the British people in the Financial Times this morning, admitted in the pink 'un that a high national minimum wage would cost jobs? Does that not show that a minimum wage would lose jobs in Wales and discourage inward investment? Is it not significant that the Labour party is frit this afternoon and does not have the guts to turn up and put its policies forward?

There are more than a million people in Essex; we want an Essex Question Time.

The hon. Member for Thurrock (Mr. Mackinlay) should not ask for an Essex Question Time when he is sitting in the Chamber but withdrew the question that he had tabled. That takes the prize for bizarre behaviour even in this place.

My hon. Friend is quite right. His comments are most perceptive. My predecessors did outstanding work for Wales and it is partly due to them that inward investment into Wales has been so successful, created so many jobs and helped to create a new climate of enterprise and successful business. He is also right that, also partly responsible for that success is the Government's pursuit of policies of low taxation, deregulation, not adopting the social chapter and not having a minimum wage, which would, it will be widely agreed, destroy jobs and reduce investment and job opportunities in Wales as in the rest of the United Kingdom. As my hon. Friend knows, that has often been pointed out by members of the Labour party as well as by Conservative Members.

There is no doubt that inward investment has helped transform Wales; it has become a country with a rich and diverse industrial base, an impressive exports record, enviable labour relations success and a track record of attracting the best in the world. That, however, is not the whole story for the future. Indigenous companies employ the majority of the manufacturing work force in Wales and we want to encourage them, too. Their success, as well as the continued success of inward investment, will be one of my priorities in the coming years.

I, also, congratulate my right hon. Friend on his most welcome appointment. Although the Labour party seems to think that he is too young, that perhaps says a great deal about what it thinks of people of 35 or so and under—it clearly has no respect for such people's abilities. Perhaps my right hon. Friend should think of himself as the most welcome new inward investment into Wales.

In his short time in the job—

He has never had a real job.

That is good coming from an hon. Member who used to work for NALGO—not a lot going on.

Will my right hon. Friend say whether, in his short time in the job so far, he has discovered why the Labour party is so opposed to the policies that have brought the promised £4.5 billion of inward investment, why it has repeatedly opposed the policies of his predecessors and why it has been wrong so often? Could the explanation of Labour Members' absence today be that they are so embarrassed about being wrong so many times and so embarrassed that the economy is doing so well because of the Government's policies that they have nothing to say and would rather stay away? Frankly, I would rather that they stayed away all the time.

I thank my hon. Friend for his additional words of welcome and for what he said about young people. Although they have not taken the opportunity to speak today, I wonder what signal Opposition Members think they are sending to young people across Britain, including Wales, when they criticise the appointment of a young person to any office. It is an extremely destructive signal, which we should wholly reject, and which usually comes from such people as the hon. Member for Thurrock, who is probably getting on a bit. It should not be up to him to suggest—

He has more hair than the Secretary of State.

The hon. Gentleman may have more hair than me—

Rubbish.

In a shock revelation, we have just learnt that he does not have that much. It is no more for him to suggest that I am too young to do my job than it is for me to suggest that he is too old to do his, although his inability to rise to his feet today suggests that he might be getting into that condition.

My hon. Friend the Member for Harrow, West (Mr. Hughes) asked about the puzzle of the Labour party's attitude towards success in Wales. I use the word "success" in its broadest sense, to mean not only investment into Wales but the recovery of the Welsh economy and the bringing down of unemployment to the United Kingdom level for the first time in 70 years. The puzzle is Labour's attitude—the preference to denigrate anything that succeeds and to criticise anything, whether it be in business or the actions of Government, that brings success to Wales. It would have been nice today to have been able to get from the Labour party an explanation of that attitude, which must be rooted in dogma. It is certainly based on very old-fashioned politics—it is something that we can still associate with excessive public expenditure and the desire to impose excessive taxation and an excessive number of layers of government on people, all of which seem to be the policy of the Welsh Labour party.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many jobs have been (a) created and (b) safeguarded since 1992. [31691]

In Wales, between 1 January 1992 and 27 June 1995, offers of regional selective assistance have been accepted which are forecast by the companies concerned to create 23,850 new jobs and safeguard 14,561 existing jobs.

I believe that today is my right hon. Friend's 65th birthday. I am sure that the House will want to wish him well and to take this opportunity to mark the fact that his service in the House since 1970 for the people of Conwy has been an example that cannot be emulated by Opposition Members.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. What a shame it is that Labour Members from Wales are not here to hear the good news, not about my birthday, but about the offers in connection with jobs created and safeguarded.

Will my hon. Friend give me an assurance that we shall not take economic success in Wales for granted, but seek to improve on our record and continue to look outwards to the rest of Britain, Europe and elsewhere to attract more investment and more jobs for Wales? Will my hon. Friend assure me that we shall not emulate the Labour party, which is inward-looking and seeks to give top priority to the creation of a Welsh assembly? If what we have seen happening here today is any sign of what would happen when an assembly was established in Wales, God help us all.

My right hon. Friend puts it well. A Welsh assembly would be the ultimate quango—jobs for the boyos. Opposition Members do not turn up here, so what is so marvellous about setting up that ultimate quango simply to feather-bed the ones who cannot get elected to this place—the second or third tier of Labour candidates in Wales?

My right hon. Friend is too modest. I feel that his birthday and all that he has done in the House and on behalf of the people of Wales is good news. Yes, it is a shame that Opposition Members—Labour, Liberal and Plaid Cymru—boycott the Chamber in such a childish way. It is a shame that they do not hear the good news about all the continuing economic success in Wales—the good news that, as the UK is leading Europe out of the recession, Wales is leading the UK, which is in no small part due to the policies of the Government.

However, I can certainly reassure my right hon. Friend that we are not content to sit back on our record, good though it is. Year after year, we usually manage to achieve a greater proportion of inward investment in Wales than would be justified merely on the basis of our share of the population of the United Kingdom. We continue to go deeper and deeper into other countries to sell Welsh goods and investment in Wales. My right hon. Friend will be pleased to know that the most recent new development was a Welsh Office trade mission that recently returned from Dallas—Wales has gone deep in the heart of Texas. I look forward to that being yet another successful mission in the ever-increasing programme there.

I must thank my right hon. Friend for the fact that, since he left the Government last year, he has carried on doing his best for the Principality—as when he recently visited Taiwan on behalf of Welsh interests. We are most grateful to him for his efforts.

Would my hon. Friend be surprised if, after this pathetic performance by the Opposition, they complained about a one-sided Question Time?

Many Conservative Members have no objection to trade missions going to the heart of Dallas and Texas, but we do object when trade missions from the Welsh Development Agency come to the heart of Cornwall and try to poach jobs from existing firms. Will my hon. Friend say how many of the jobs created in Wales that he mentioned in his answer are actually jobs redeployed from other parts of the United Kingdom, especially Cornwall? Will he have a word with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, whom I heartily congratulate on his appointment, so that the Welsh Office considers with all seriousness the activities of the Welsh Development Agency and the way in which, in unfair competition, it takes away jobs from other parts of the United Kingdom, especially the south-west of England?

My hon. Friend raises an important point. The last thing that we would want to happen is that any inward investment into Wales should come about as a result of unfair competition with other parts of the United Kingdom or wherever. We look as closely as possible at all applications, to try to ensure—

Order. I should be obliged if the Minister would address the Chair.

Madam Speaker, I assure you and my hon. Friend that we examine all applications as carefully as possible to try to ensure that all the projects provide additional economic activity and additional jobs. It is in no interest of Wales merely to poach jobs from across the border.

We want taxpayers' money to be spent effectively and wisely in creating additional jobs. Be they in the west of England, the midlands or wherever, I can give my hon. Friends the assurance that we will always continue to do that.

On the first part of my hon. Friend's question, I have to agree that the childish demonstration that we have seen from Labour Members today is pathetic. My hon. Friend might be interested to know that the national newspaper of Wales, the Western Mail, conducted a survey recently which showed that English Members of Parliament were better questioners at Welsh Question Time than Welsh Labour Members of Parliament. Their lack of turnout today has only served to keep that ratio in favour of English Members. We can only speculate. Is their behaviour the result of a lack of care and compassion among Welsh Labour Members in representing their constituents or is it sheer laziness?

To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, representing the Church Commissioners, what assessment the Commission has made of whether its current level of support to the Church is sustainable.[31461]

The commissioners have taken independent actuarial and other professional advice. A peak distribution in 1993 of more than 7 per cent. as a percentage of their assets, to meet increased expenditure commitments on clergy benefits, was reduced to 6 per cent. in 1994, but this is still an unsustainably high level. Action to bring distribution levels down further continues, but at a pace which is manageable for the Church of England as a whole.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer and for the clarity of the 1994 annual report and accounts. Does he agree that it contained some alarming information, including, in particular, both the fact that the level of expenditure of £153.4 million is deemed to be unsustainable and the £8.4 million deficit—the highest deficit in the history of the Church Commissioners? Will my right hon. Friend also take it into account that the cost of pensions is now 50 per cent. higher than the cost of stipends, whereas they were about the same 10 years ago? Will he come up with a realistic plan in next year's annual report to detail what will be the effects if that level of expenditure continues and to take some action to curtail it?

As I think that my hon. Friend will have heard in the first part of my answer, it is recognised that the Church Commissioners have been distributing more than it is proper or reasonable to do over a long period. That is due entirely to the extraordinary increase in both the standard and the take-up of pensions, which have to have priority. It is for that reason that offsetting action has been proposed. The Church of England as a whole accepts that there should be a contributory pension scheme for future pensions so as to make a cut-off point in the responsibility of the Church Commissioners for current pensioners.

Will the right hon. Gentleman join me in congratulating those people in the Church in my constituency who have worked hard to increase the support that the Church gives to some of the most disadvantaged within the community? Can he assure me that if funds are cut, it will not be the most disadvantaged who suffer?

Yes, I can certainly give the hon. Gentleman that assurance. Cuts in Church Commissioners' funds to dioceses are focused on the prosperous, well-to-do dioceses. The wind is tempered to the shorn lamb of dioceses such as that to which the hon. Gentleman refers. He will be glad to know that the shortfall in the Church Commission contribution to dioceses has already been made good by the willingness of church-goers to put their hands deeper into their pocket to make up the difference.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that, like many other church-goers, I spend a disproportionately large amount of my income on matters that are not essential and that if we were challenged effectively by the Church to make a larger contribution from our incomes to the support of that most important of all institutions, the Church, we would do a great deal better? Does he further agree that that will require a radical reassessment of the way in which the Church of England is run, because parishes which respond to the request to give more money will undoubtedly want to have a larger say in how the Church is run?

I take my hon. Friend's point. People probably do not realise how much support is still generated by the Church of England, and by Christian churches generally in Britain. The Archbishop of Canterbury recently pointed out that a quarter of the British population—many millions of people—went to church last Christmas day. The average donation to a typical church collection plate on Sundays is between £3.50 and £5, but I believe that the amount would increase sharply if people knew that a need existed. Now that such a need is becoming clear, I think that giving by folk in the pews will indeed rise substantially.

To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, representing the Church Commissioners, what new proposals he has to improve the return on Church investments. [31462]

The total return on the commissioners' investments in 1994 was 4.8 per cent., which compares well with the minus 3.9 per cent. shown by a recognised independent benchmark that measures the performance of a large number of pension funds. The commissioners' consultant actuaries continue to advise on asset allocation strategy.

Would not the commissioners have more money at their disposal if they had not lost £800 million in property speculation? What safeguards have been built in for the protection of the clergy, particularly in terms of their pensions? Is not that £800 million loss a clear sign that the Lord does not approve of property speculation? When will the Church Commissioners remember the saying:

"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God"?

Have they not damned their eternal souls through their actions—rather like Conservative Members?

I am delighted that the hon. Gentleman has dipped into the familiar territory of New Testament parables and other utterances. He will recall alternative words from the scriptures about making a friend to oneself of the mammon of unrighteousness—they were said by the founder of the Christian religion—and about developing talents: the man with one or two talents who increased the number to 10 was commended. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will approve of the fact that the Church of England has developed its talents substantially.

What about property?

If the hon. Gentleman has glanced at the annual report of the Church Commissioners—I arranged for it to be sent to him—he will have noted that most investment and pension funds are dominated by stock exchange investments, and could not avoid the decline in values of equities and gilts. In 1994, the total return on Church Commissioners' property holdings was £205 million; if the same amount had instead been invested in equities during that year, the return would have been a loss of £61 million. The emphasis on what the hon. Gentleman calls property speculation in the commissioners' portfolio has saved them from the big chasm that opened up before investors in equities and the like.

I declare an interest, in that many members of my family have served or are serving as Church of England clergymen.

Will my right hon. Friend tell me a little more about how the pensions are protected, how they are calculated and whether that is affected by the return on investments? Will there be enough money to pay pensions to clergymen in the future, and what action will be taken to ensure that that is the case?

I can assure my hon. Friend that there are ample funds to meet all actuarially computed pension obligations to those who have already retired and those still in service with retirement pensions in prospect. Because of uncertainty about the long-term future, however, steps will soon be taken to introduce a contributory fund for future pension beneficiaries, making the overall package for all Church of England pensioners completely secure.

To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, representing the Church Commissioners, what representations the commissioners have received concerning the future of St. Ethelburga's church in London; and if he will make a statement. [31463]

The church was declared redundant on 22 June 1994 and is now in the ownership of the diocese of London while its future is considered. The Bishop of London has held a competition for schemes to deal with the remains of the building and its site, the result of which was announced in June. No ensuing recommendations have yet been made to the Church Commissioners.

We are discussing the smallest and oldest church in London, which was blown up by the IRA. Would it not be a tribute to the victims of the IRA in the City if that church were fully and faithfully restored? Is that not better than the proposal to place a glass front before its ruins?

As I think the hon. Gentleman might have known, one of the suggestions made by the so-called Templeman Commission favoured the sale of the St. Ethelburga's site for secular development. That goes to the other extreme of what might be done and has been turned down. What is proposed now is that there should be a memorial on the site for those who died in the City bombs, and that there should be a space provided for Christian worship and prayer, and vestry facilities for the office of St. Helen's, Bishopsgate; in the round, a memorial, worship facilities and administrative offices for a church. That probably goes a long way towards meeting what he would wish for this historic site.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will make a statement on delays in the processing of immigration and asylum appeals. [31465]

My Department aims to keep waiting times in all cases to a minimum. Steps have been taken to combat the particular increase in waiting times in London resulting from the concentration there of asylum cases.

I am sure that the Minister will accept that a huge backlog of cases has built up and that waiting times are unacceptable. Is he aware that the Refugee Legal Centre has had to withdraw from all regions except London and the south-east because it simply cannot cope with the numbers involved, and that the United Kingdom Immigrants Advisory Service is under enormous pressure? What provision will be made to help organisations such as those, so that asylum seekers have the proper representation that they need at appeals? Will he take this opportunity to deny that his Government are thinking of taking away rights to oral appeal for some asylum seekers?

I think that I should oblige with the denial, but on the more general part of the question, the hon. Gentleman is right to draw the House's attention to the real concerns—of which I am very much aware—that exist, especially in London and the south-east. Various measures are being taken. In some cases, the appellate authority does not allocate a specific date, but offers an early hearing date if another case is adjourned or withdrawn. More flexible listing has been introduced. If the parties agree, appeals can be transferred to centres where waiting times are shorter. The pool of adjudicators is being increased and courtroom accommodation is being expanded, but I am as far as I could be from being complacent about those matters.

Will my hon. Friend look at accommodation for asylum seekers? A couple of years ago, a whole year's supply of new housing in Ealing was taken up by asylum seekers and others, so my constituents are concerned that those matters be expedited. Does he have any plans to use barracks for asylum seekers? May we have some clarification on his plans for that matter?

I have no plans, personally, for using barracks for asylum seekers. I am not sure whether the House would consider that that was appropriate, but I draw its attention to the fact that, under the 1993 asylum appeals procedure rules, formal time limits apply to asylum appeals and no time limits apply to immigration appeals.

Does the Minister believe that he receives adequate co-operation from the other Government Departments involved in appeals? The delays are unacceptable, and on many occasions it seems as though the Home Office or the Foreign Office is holding up the Minister's Department in going ahead with the appeal.

One strives to get the best possible co-operation. An increase in the number of asylum applications received by the Home Office has inevitably resulted in an increase in appeals. Following an interdepartmental initiative, extra resources are being made available to both Departments to speed up the disposal of work.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what comparison he has made between legal aid arrangements in the United Kingdom and in other EU countries. [31466]

From the comparisons that we have made, I believe that our legal aid scheme is the most generous in the European Community. Generally, United Kingdom citizens have the same access to legal aid in a European Community country as a citizen of that country.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. It is excellent news that citizens of this country have access to the most generous legal aid support. Does my hon. Friend agree that the time has come to reassess exactly how legal aid is delivered? The legal aid bill is rising year after year, and we must ensure that those who genuinely need legal aid receive it, while those who do not, do not.

I am looking forward to reading Hansard tomorrow because my hon. Friend could not have put it better. There can be no question but that our legal aid system is generous and that enormous amounts of money are devoted to it. The issue is whether legal aid is going to the right people, and that is the thrust of my hon. Friend's question. The Green Paper provides an opportunity for the most radical review of legal aid in the past 50 years, and we should take that opportunity.

One of the problems with the £1.4 billion of taxpayers' money that is spent on legal aid is that a lot of it goes to relatively few people—many of whom, just like those on the Treasury Bench, come from the belly of the banking establishment. In other words, the Tory Government are handing large sums of money to people such as Roger Levitt and their other Tory friends in the City—I will throw in the Maxwells who have benefited as well, just in case the Minister mentions them. He should pay some attention to the document produced by the Labour party in the past few days, in which we suggest that the £1.4 billion should go to deserving people—many of whom do not qualify for legal aid—rather than to the fat cats.

My hon. Friend could not have put it better.

The hon. Gentleman could not have put it more typically. A consultation document entitled "Legal Aid for the Apparently Wealthy" was released some time ago and I gave as much publicity to it as I could. I do not recall any response from Bolsover to that paper.

As a result of wide consultation, the Lord Chancellor announced in April that he would tighten up legal aid means assessment for the apparently wealthy. His proposals include a special unit to investigate unusually complex cases and the confiscation of undeclared assets.

Does my hon. Friend realise that the issue of legal aid has united the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) and me? There is widespread disquiet about the way that the legal aid fund is operated, and my hon. Friend may have seen the article in Saturday's Daily Mail about a child who has received legal aid on the basis of a quite flippant argument. Will my hon. Friend please look at the operation of the Legal Aid Board, which seems to waste public money? Will he recognise that, in civil cases, a legal aid certificate is the most important way of screwing a large sum of money out of the other party?

My hon. Friend has always been very clear and very consistent in his criticism of the legal aid system. I remind him and the House that the legal aid Green Paper, which is now available for consultation, represents the widest and most radical opportunity for reform of legal aid, and I look forward to receiving my hon. Friend's reply.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many cases have been placed before legal aid appeal committees in each of the past five years. [31467]

In the categories for which figures are available for each of the last five years, the number of appeals to the Legal Aid Board in round numbers to the nearest thousand were 25,000, 26,000, 34,000, 47,000 and 53,000 respectively.

Is not the fact that the number of appeal tribunals has doubled over the past five years indicative of concerns that not necessarily poor people are being excluded from our system of justice because they do not qualify for legal aid? As my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) rightly explained, rich individuals can afford by some unknown means to pay lawyers to ensure that they receive legal aid. Is it not time to address those issues?

It is time for us all to address those issues, which is why the Green Paper is before the House. The main reason for the sudden jump in the number of appeals to which the hon. Gentleman referred was the board's introduction of a quality management system designed to secure greater consistency of approach in the application of existing criteria on legal merits. That led to a higher number of refusals and therefore appeals.

Has not the current legal aid system far too many characteristics typical of providing outdoor relief for the legal classes? If legal aid funding is to be increased, would it not be far better to invest money in simpler and faster justice for people?

Despite all the criticisms, it must surely remain a benign and civilised intention to assist poor people and people of modest means with their legal difficulties. Complaints are made about the legal aid system but in general its operation remains generous and helpful.

rose—

The hon. Gentleman should declare his interest.

My interest as a legal practitioner is well known, but that does not blind me for one moment to a question of concern to hon. Members in all parts of the House. Is not justice delayed justice denied? Does that not apply to the activities of the Legal Aid Board as well as to the courts? Is it not time that the Parliamentary Secretary investigated why so many applications to the board and so many appeals from its decisions take so long as to cause manifest injustice to applicants? Is it not time that the Parliamentary Secretary examined that matter? Will he take on board the case of young Emma Van de Velde, a dyslexic whose appeal against the finding that she was not entitled to special help took the board so long to process that the time limit for the appeal was passed before the board finally sanctioned that help? Should not the consumer of legal services come before the bureaucrats who run the Legal Aid Board?

The hon. Gentleman asked me to agree that the old adage can be affirmed, that justice delayed is justice denied. I oblige him, for that is certainly true. The House and the wider interested community are witnessing uniquely the convergence of the Green Paper on legal aid and Lord Woolf' s paper on access to justice. The whole civil legal system is available for our criticism and for radical improvement. We should not lose that opportunity.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what proposals he has for the reform of civil justice and the civil courts. [31468]

Last year, the Lord Chancellor appointed Lord Woolf to conduct a comprehensive review of the civil justice system. He has now presented his interim report. The Lord Chancellor has warmly welcomed that report and is considering how best to give effect to those developing ideas.

The Parliamentary Secretary will be aware that the Woolf report is generally welcomed. Nothing less than a huge and radical reform of the civil justice system is required. How will the Parliamentary Secretary gather opinions from the public on Lord Woolf' s proposals? What is the timetable? Can the interim proposals proceed apace where there is general agreement, so that justice can be more quickly delivered in our civil courts?

The Lord Chancellor's general view is that we must keep moving. There is no time to spend, spare or waste. In view of the wide-ranging review and consultations undertaken by Lord Woolf, the Lord Chancellor does not intend to undertake further public consultation. However, the power to make the necessary amendments rests with the County Court Rule Committee—which, as part of its consideration of the matter, will consult interested parties.

I welcome the proposals for the reform of the civil courts, and congratulate the Minister on the introduction of conditional fees, which will open up civil litigation to many more litigants who cannot afford it now. May I, as a solicitor, nevertheless urge on my hon. Friend the fact that there needs to be an independent Bar capable of providing objective advice both in relation to civil litigation and, perhaps even more importantly, in relation to criminal litigation?

It has never been remotely on my agenda—nor has the idea ever passed my lips in the House of Commons—to deny the need for an independent Bar, which has been a respected part of our English institutions for long years.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will make a statement on the reforms of the legal aid provisions. [31469]

The consultation period for the Green Paper "Legal Aid—Targeting Need" ends on 31 August. The Government will decide what further action to take in the light of the responses to that consultation.

I am grateful for the Minister's response. Will he also take into consideration the point that I have raised with him about a letter from a constituent who has been denied legal aid because of her husband's savings? The funds and incomes of spouses are supposed to be separate nowadays; so will the Minister assure me that wives will not be disallowed legal aid because of their husbands' incomes or savings?

I can promise the hon. Gentleman that I shall take his point into account and that I shall write him a letter, but I cannot promise that it will necessarily contain exactly what he wants.