asked the Secretary of State for Wales how many education authorities in Wales have complained to him that their school building programme is being held up because of present cost limits.

Several local education authorities have reported difficulties in obtaining suitable tenders in respect of the 1972–73 starts programme. However, only four authorities had projects which were delayed beyond 31st March 1973 and a place is available for these in the current programme.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend take this opportunity to put the matter into perspective and make it clear that the very welcome expansion in the provision of school places which has taken place under the present Government is not being held up by such difficulties as these?

Yes, Sir. I certainly welcome the opportunity. The school building programme for 1972–73 was the largest ever, amounting to over £20 million. It included 98 major projects, but only six failed to start because of difficulties concerning tenders.

Does the reason adduced in the Question form any part of the reason for the alleged hold-up in the completion of the Hafod school in Swansea? Will the Secretary of State give every assistance to Swansea City Council in having the school completed as soon as possible so that my constituents' children may have the benefit of education there?

The only hold-up to a school in Swansea as a result of cost limits was to the Olchfa secondary school extensions. As I have said, a place is available for them in the current programme. Cost limits have been raised again recently.

While putting the matter in perspective, will the Secretary of State give details of the schools and the number of pupils affected in the four schemes that were postponed?

I can certainly give details. Perhaps I may write to the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales whether he will make a statement on the effects of the Chancellor's public expenditure cuts in the trunk roads programme for Wales.

It may be necessary to slow down the preparation of a few schemes, but the overall effect on my trunk roads programme in 1974–75 should be relatively small.

Will the Secretary of State confirm or otherwise what a Welsh Office spokesman is quoted as having said, that the whole road programme, including the M4 and the A470 from Cardiff to Merthyr, would be reviewed and that specific economies would be submitted? Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman state positively that the commitment to complete the M4 by the end of 1976 still stands, and that there will be no financial or public expenditure argument against carrying on with the completion of the Cardiff-Merthyr trunk road scheme?

I am very happy to tell the hon. Gentleman that the construction of the M4 will not be affected by the measures. The preparation of the remaining stages of the Cardiff-Merthyr trunk road will not be affected and is going ahead as quickly as possible.

As the prosperity of Welsh industry is particularly dependent on the improvement of the road system, will my right hon. and learned Friend try to ensure that as far as possible any cuts are designed so as not to affect the industrial parts of Wales?

Obviously, I must find places to make some cuts in my programme for 1974–75. I expect that there will be a cut of about £1 million from the trunk roads programme. The total cuts will be about £2½ million out of a programme of well over £70 million.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the cuts could he very serious? Can he be more specific as to the major roads that will be affected by them? Is he aware, for example, of the urgent need to improve the A55 in North Wales? Are this important road and future development plans to be affected by these serious cuts?

It is too early to say what schemes will be affected, but I do not expect that there will be any effect on schemes that have been stated to be priority schemes.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend confirm that, unlike the right hon. Member for Birmingham, Stechford (Mr. Roy Jenkins), who believes that no new motorways should be started until those under construction are completed, he regards a continuing motorway programme as being of high priority and that he will press on with the M4?

Yes, Sir.

The Secretary of State will remember that last December, in their White Paper on Public Expenditure, the Government stated the expenditure on roads in Wales in 1974–75 to be £71·2 million. How soon can he tell us how near to that figure, or how far from it, expenditure in that year is expected to be?

The£71·2 million is the proposed expenditure, and there will be a reduction during that year of £2½ million.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what cuts in public expenditure are to be made in Wales in each of the years 1973–74 and 1974–75 as a result of the proposed cuts announced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer on 21st May.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what is the estimated cut in public expenditure in Wales for the current year and the year 1974–75.

I refer the hon. Members to my reply of 25th May to my hon. Friend the Member for Oswestry (Mr. Biffen).—[Vol. 857, c. 217–218.]

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman explain the need for the public expenditure cuts?

The need for the cuts was adequately explained to the House by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman give us some idea of the effect that the cuts will have on locally determined schemes which bear so heavily on the quality of life of our community? Secondly, will he give us some assurance that they will in no way affect the aid—for example, accommodation and equipment—which is provided for disabled people?

Quite a large part of the saving of £7½ million will be borne by miscellaneous local services. The hon. Gentleman will know that in recent years there has been a considerable increase in expenditure. There has been an increase from £63 million in 1971–72 to a projected £75 million in 1975–76 and £79 million in 1976–77. That will be partly in the locally determined sector but will include some rephasing of expenditure which will fall within other sectors not immediately related to housing.

Are not the daily announcements of new jobs and the expansion of Welsh firms sufficient justification for the Government's economic policy and for the cuts necessary to enable that policy to continue?

Yes.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales how many new jobs for men were created in the Shotton exchange area in 1972 and to date this year, respectively.

In 1972, projects approved in the Shotton travel-to-work area promised about 360 male jobs; no firm figures are as yet available for 1973.

That is alarmingly minute. Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that to attract more jobs into East Flintshire it will be necessary to improve road communications? In that area there are frustrating traffic jams almost every day. Is not the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that residents, workers and tourists are suffering from maddening delays at Queen's Ferry? Will he give a firm guarantee that no economy axe will fall upon the project at the Queen's Ferry roundabout? Surely he agrees that that is the root of Deeside's traffic jam problems.

I fully accept the importance of good road communications if jobs are to be attracted. I have no doubt that that matter will feature in the task force report which the hon. Gentleman knows is in process of being finalised. I am sure he will welcome what is being done already in Flintshire. There is a major improvement of the A550 at Drome Corner, which is in the firm programme. In England the recent proposals to extend the M56 westwards will benefit North-East Wales. The hon. Gentleman will know that consulting engineers are now carrying out a feasibility study for an improvement scheme at the Queen's Ferry roundabout. We must await the result of that study.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales when the draft orders under Sections 7 and 9 of the Highways Act 1959 relating to the Aberdulais-Glynneath section of the new trunk road between Hirwaun and Llandarcy are likely to be published.

In the summer of 1974.

I am grateful to the right hon. and learned Gentleman for that answer. Is he aware that the construction of this road will considerably ameliorate the difficulties being experienced in the village of Resolven because of the passage of heavy vehicles used for industrial purposes?

Yes, I understand the importance of the road. The preparation of the scheme is proceeding as quickly as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what are the intentions of his office towards the investigation of the environmental position at Maendy and Brofiscun quarries.

I have had this matter under review for a considerable time. A continuing programme of invesgation and monitoring has been carried out. On the basis on an extensive series of tests, the best advice available to me is that there is no evidence to suggest any immediate public health hazard from the situation at these quarries. There is no danger of contamination of public water supplies. As regards possible contamination of the food chain I am also advised that the evidence does not indicate any immediate hazards. Only this morning I have received the results of tests carried out last Friday of milk from four Maendy farms. The public analyst's department of Glamorgan County Council has reported that these milk samples are free from polychlorinated biphenyls. I recognise that there is public concern in this matter and investigations will continue into all aspects of it.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that the public are by now thoroughly dissatisfied not only with the results of the tests carried out by the Welsh Office but with the methods used by the Welsh Office in obtaining the results? Does he not realise that what is called for is a speedy, complete and integrated investigation of the two tips involved by Government Departments, including the Department of the Environment and the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food? The right hon. and learned Gentleman's answer falls a long way short of such an integrated investigation.

I deny emphatically that the Welsh Office has been complacent. Tipping stopped in these two quarries in 1970. There had been uncontrolled tipping, apart from the planning agreement, for five years. Since then my office has been concerned to ensure that there is no danger to public health.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that, according to information given to me by several local authorities, one of the major problems is the treatment and disposal of industrial and domestic waste? As that problem is related closely to the Question, may I ask whether it would not be opportune to have a departmental or some other form of inquiry into the whole problem?

I do not think that the situation calls for an inquiry at the moment in respect of these two quarries. Monitoring is continuing. There is a full interdepartmental investigation. The hon. Gentleman will appreciate that since we have been in office we have passed an Act which deals with the problem he has mentioned.

I acknowledge that the Secretary of State must accept the advice of his experts. I recall, however, that my hon. Friend the Member for Pontypridd (Mr. John) has asked at least 12 Questions about the quarries over a period of two years. Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that the public unease in the community, due to the publicity given to the presence of poisons, is such that he should take immediate steps to seal off the quarry? We should not gamble in any way with a possible future risk. We have received a very grave warning. A terrible responsibility would be placed on the right hon. and learned Gentleman if in future it was discovered that people had suffered as a result of toxic substances.

I entirely agree with the right hon. Gentleman, and of course a responsibility rests on me. I hope the House will accept that, if I felt that there was a danger to public health, I would not hesitate to take such action as lies within my means. But the right hon. Gentleman knows—I have had a lot of correspondence with his hon. Friend the Member for Pontypridd (Mr. John)—that the fear was about PCB. I have given the House the results of tests which indicate that some of the fears which have been expressed are without foundation. These tests and investigations will continue.

When will the investigations to which the right hon. and learned Gentleman has referred be concluded? In order to allay the considerable public concern which exists in Pontypridd and, indeed, throughout Wales about this matter, will the right hon. and learned Gentleman undertake to publish a report of these investigations so that we may debate the matter in full in due course?

Yes, Sir. I am perfectly happy that the results of all the investigations should be made public. I am happy to give full information to any right hon. or hon. Member. I will consider whether a report should be published.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what provision he has made for future improvements to the industrial and social infrastructure of Wales.

The continuing aim of Government policies is to bring about further improvements in the industrial and social infrastructure of Wales. Expenditure on this is estimated to rise to about £480 million in 1974–75 as compared with £430 million in 1971–72.

May I test the right hon. and learned Gentleman's memory and his credibility? Does he recall that, immediately after the General Election, when the Government were bringing Wales to the verge of ruin by abandoning realistic regional development policies which they have since restored, he and his colleagues put a great deal of emphasis on the value of infrastructural improvement? What has persuaded the right hon. and learned Gentleman since that we do not need £7½ million worth of additional infrastructural improvements, although he has given figures showing that the Government are willing to increase enormously the amount of money they spend to keep the pot boiling in Wales? Against the background of abandoning the regional employment premium as well, the two things together deal an unnecessary and unwarranted blow against the Welsh economy.

That is another example of the way the hon. Gentleman exaggerates his case. He has obviously not taken in the fact that in my answer I mentioned that the expenditure on infrastructure is expected to rise about £480 million in 1974–75 compared with £430 million in 1971–72. That is one of the reasons—there are others—why Wales is showing signs of recovery which were not apparent in 1970.

Does not my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the provision of adequate freight and passenger rail services may be as vital as the provision of other infrastructural services? Will he take full account of this fact in consultation with other members of the Government on the future of rail services in Wales?

All methods of communication are of great importance in Wales.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman realise that an adequate rail structure is vital to the Welsh economy, particularly the industrial parts of South Wales? Will he, therefore, undertake to press the Government to see that Regulation 1192 of 1969 of the EEC, relating to transport policy, under which British Rail could benefit by 15 classes of financial aid which could help provide the kind of services we need in Wales, is accepted and operated in Wales?

All matters which affect the continuation and the improvement of the infrastructure in Wales are looked at with great care by me and other members of the Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what estimate he has made of the employment problems that will arise in Cardiff from the proposed closure of East Moors works.

I have received and studied the interim report by the task force. As I have already told hon. Members, the Government's views will be announced as soon as possible after the final report is available.

While Cardiff is an intermediate development area, it has a greater unemployment rate than many development areas. Would not my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the proposed closure of East Moors steelworks gives a strong case for granting Cardiff full development area status?

As my hon. Friend knows, the status of assisted areas was reviewed last year and the Government decided to make no change affecting Cardiff. But I am fully aware of the importance attached to development area status by Cardiff. The task force has received substantial evidence on this and will no doubt take it into account when making its recommendations.

In view of the deep anxiety in Cardiff, with its present heavy unemployment problem and the threat of mounting figures, will the right hon. and learned Gentleman reconsider his attitude towards a debate on the future of the steel industry in Wales being held in the Welsh Grand Committee? He is reluctant to allow us to discuss this matter. Will he now give an undertaking that we can discuss it at the next meeting of the Welsh Grand Committee?

The subject for the Welsh Grand Committee is organised through the usual channels. As the right hon. Gentleman knows, both this House and the Welsh Grand Committee have had many opportunities to discuss the problems of the steel industry and, indeed, the unemployment problem in Wales.

That is just not good enough. Wales is faced with a very major problem, and, since 29 of the 36 Members for Wales sit on this side of the House, surely the right hon. and learned Gentleman will agree that we must have an opportunity to discuss this major issue at the next meeting of the Welsh Grand Committee.

I do not think that negotiations for the subject of the next meeting of the Welsh Grand Committee can appropriately be conducted at Question Time.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales how many were on the waiting list of the general surgical department of the Newport and East Monmouth group on the appointment of a locum consultant general surgeon who has now been given a notice of termination of employment; what is the present waiting list of this department; and whether the present locum appointment can be extended until the appointment of a permanent consultant surgeon in 1975.

When the locum was appointed on 1st January 1970, the waiting lists for in-patient and out-patient treatment stood respectively at 1,121 and 711. On 31st March 1973, the latest date for which figures are available, the figures were 1,905 and 613. I understand that the Welsh Hospital Board does not propose to extend the temporary consultant appointment.

What possible justification can there be for not extending the appointment when, as the Ministry of State frankly concedes, the numbers on the waiting lists are mounting? What possible justification can there be for hundreds of people in my constituency to have to wait months or years because of the parsimony in refusing either to extend the existing locum appointment or to permit another locum to come along until a firm appointment is made? Is there no consideration or compassion for the hundreds of people on the waiting lists? Will not the hon. Gentleman look at this matter again?

I say at once that there is great consideration and great compassion, and I am the first to admit that the length of the lists in South-East Wales is longer than it should be. It has been long for a considerable time; I have the figures with me. But that, of course, does not make the position any better. An additional permanent consultancy post in general surgery was filled at Newport last August, and a further new post is approved for 1975, while a new consultancy post in anaesthetics is hoped to be filled later this year. I hope that these steps will help.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales when he now expects that the M4 motorway will reach the borders of Carmarthenshire.

The Pontardulais bypass, which is the only part of the M4 currently planned for Carmarthenshire, should be completed by mid-1976. The South Wales stretch as a whole will be completed as rapidly as possible subject to the carrying through of statutory procedure.

Is the Secretary of State aware that his assurances will be welcomed but that to some extent in South-West Wales there is still a certain amount of confusion? Can he tell us whether by 1976 there will be a continuous motorway link between London and the Pontardulais bypass?

I have said frequently that I want the motorway to be finished to Pontardulais by 1976. This depends on the outcome of public inquiries. Obviously I can make no promise in view of the many public objections which have been raised.

Is the Secretary of State detracting from previous assurances given in this House that the M4 will have reached Pontardulais by 1976?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, I have repeatedly said that it is in my programme to finish this motorway by 1976. I must observe the procedures laid down by the statute and I have to hold public inquiries on the four sections west of Coryton. I have undertaken not to take my decisions on these separately. It has also been necessary to reopen one of these inquiries twice.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will take steps designed to ensure the maximum co-operation in Wales between the existing local authorities and the newly elected local authorities, and assist with arrangements to make available adequate premises for the accommodation of the newly elected authorities and their officers.

I agree with my hon. Friend that the existing and newly elected councils should co-operate, particularly in the provision of accommodation. But I have no powers to enforce co-operation.

Can my hon. Friend say whether any of the new authorities arc having joint consultations with existing authorities?

That is probably true but I cannot give my hon. Friend any details. If he would like to have them, I can get in touch with him.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the new county of Gwynedd faces serious difficulty in providing not permanent accommodation for its council and staff but even the absolute minimum necessity of temporary accommodation? Will he impress upon his right hon. and learned Friend the need for him to reconsider his recent refusal even to meet a deputation from the council to discuss details of the extremely difficult situation in which it is now placed?

I note what the right hon. Gentleman says in the first part of his question and I feel sure that my right hon. and learned Friend has heard what he said in the second part.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what consultations he has had with the county borough of Newport concerning the future of the home improvement grant scheme; and if he will make a statement.

The borough council has sent me a copy of the report of the independent inspector appointed by it to look into the operation of the home improvement grant scheme in its area and of the housing committee's recommendations on the report. The day-to-day handling of improvement grants is a matter for the local authority, to which I am content to leave it.

Does the Minister appreciate the difficulties which have faced the Newport Corporation in having to work to a limited time scale in the face of such demand? Does he not feel that related to this is the high incidence of poor workmanship which I exposed in the St. Julian area through the columns of the South Wales Argus? Does he further appreciate that the National Federation of Building Trades Employers should be trying to expose this situation and not to hide it?

The hon. Gentleman has also exposed his feelings in two letters to the Welsh Office. I will only say that the inspector's report deals with this matter. I would like to congratulate the Newport Borough Council on the inspired way in which it has tried to carry out this scheme, even though it has had some difficulties.

Does not the Minister agree that in general the limits imposed on improvement grants are still unrealistic and that it is time to raise the maximum of £2,000? Is it not also necessary to extend the time during which this facility is available from the Government?

I have no statement to make on that subject today.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement concerning the implementation of Her Majesty's Government's policies towards Mid-Wales.

The Government intend to continue with the policy of concentrating development in the growth towns. I am considering the details of this policy in the light of the Welsh Council's Report on Mid-Wales.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman undertake not to use that report as an alibi for further delay? Does he not agree that the report is the most insipid and uninspired effort of the Welsh Council to date and that the recommendation it made that no decision should be taken about the establishment of a development body in Mid-Wales until the effects of the 1972 Industry Act are known is patently false in that up to 1970 there had been a full experiment over a wide range of assistance schemes?

I am in the process of considering and studying the Welsh Council Report on Mid-Wales. It is too early for me to give my considered views on it but my initial reaction is that my views will differ from those of the hon. Gentleman.

Will the Secretary of State stop paying lip service to the growth policy? He has been saying these things for three years and has not yet acted. Will he start implementing some of the policies?

If the hon. Gentleman considers the whole of Mid-Wales, he will see that our policy is showing good results.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how much financial grant has been given to industries to move out of the Greater London Council area in each of the last five years.

I regret that this information could not be provided without disproportionate effort.

Is not the Minister aware that this information is of great importance to London? In view of the vast sums of public money that have been given to industry to move out, we should have these figures. Is he aware of today's report by the London Chamber of Commerce which expresses deep concern at the continued loss of employment in the London area? Can he say what discussions he is having with the GLC and the London boroughs in an attempt to rectify this? Will he say what surveys his Department carries out when grants are given? Is he aware that there is a growing feeling in London that grants encouraging industry to move out have become a racket, a deliberate attempt by firms to get these grants with no concern for the areas they are leaving or those into which they are moving? What work is being done on this?

The view which the hon. Gentleman has just expressed is one which will not be shared by those of his hon. Friends representing assisted areas. The purpose of our policy is to get firms to locate in areas of high unemployment away from places where there is congestion. My right hon. Friend the Minister for Industrial Development has agreed to meet a delegation from the GLC and the London Boroughs Association. That meeting will take place shortly. We must have a sense of perspective about this. The unemployment rate in London is almost half the national average. Another 7,000 vacancies were announced this month and there are over 73,000 vacancies at present.

Is it not a fact that there is a steady diminution in employment opportunities in the London area and that London is becoming a distress area and will have to be treated in exactly the same way as other distress areas in other parts of the country?

I can only say that, if the hon. Gentleman believes that, he will believe anything.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what steps he is taking with other EEC countries to counter United States flag discrimination in the context of the forthcoming GATT negotiations.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what steps he is taking to counter flag discrimination in the context of the forthcoming GATT negotiations.

Which, if any, shipping problems should be brought into the forthcoming multilateral trade negotiations will require very careful consideration. There will of course be discussions within the Community on the matters to be raised in these negotiations.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend say whether this matter was raised in the GATT council at the end of May? Will he give an undertaking that he will urge upon our European partners that we should put up a united front concerning serious discrimination?

I can assure my hon. Friend that we regard it as a matter which we should urge upon a number of different people in a number of different forums. It was raised at the GATT council meeting last month but not dealt with successfully. It has been deferred to the council meeting in June.

Will the Minister accept that there is a feeling in the United Kingdom shipbuilding industry that the Americans are unduly subsidising certain categories of ships, particularly liquefied natural gas carriers, sometimes to the tune of 25 per cent.? In the light of the Booz-Allen Report on the shipbuilding industry showing an extensive market for this category of ship, will the right hon. and learned Gentleman consider having discussions between the United States and the United Kingdom Governments to see what can be done to ensure that some share of this type of shipbuilding goes to United Kingdom yards?

Where matters of this kind are likely to result in any significant damage to the interests of this country or to producers in this country, we take the matter up with the Government concerned. I will certainly take account of the point raised by the hon. Gentleman.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware of the report that at one stage the Common Market Commission had approved a condition restricting to Common Market ships the export of certain surplus butter? Is he satisfied that the Common Market Commission, as distinct from the member countries, is totally opposed to flag discrimination?

The point raised by my hon. Friend is a different question, but our views on the practices to which he refers have been made known to the European Community and to the Commission. Further discussion of them has, as I say, been deferred until the next meeting of the GATT council.

Are we to take it from what the Minister has said that there will be discussion with the Common Market authorities before the Government make clear their attitude to the recommendations, or implied recommendations, of the Booz-Allen Report?

No. The right hon. Gentleman is seeking to enlarge one aspect of the matter raised by his hon. Friend. The Booz-Allen Report deals with a much wider range of matters. It has already been the subject of discussion and Questions in this House. The question raised by my hon. Friend is a narrow one and different from that.

Is there a Common Market shipping policy? If not, may we have an assurance that if the Common Market moves towards such a policy there will be no discrimination against countries like Norway, which has a great shipping fleet, and others of our old EFTA friends?

The evolution of a Common Market shipping policy has not yet taken place. We will bear in mind my hon. Friend's concern with the possibility of discrimination against Norway in this as in other matters.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many pits are scheduled for closure due to coal exhaustion over the next two years; what is the weekly tonnage involved; and if he will make a statement on the action his Department is taking to provide jobs for the men who will be made redundant.

I understand from the National Coal Board that the number of collieries to be closed because of exhaustion of coal during the first half of 1973–74 is likely to be seven, involving a weekly tonnage of about 23,000 tons. The board cannot forecast beyond that period. Action taken by the Government to meet the problems of those who become redundant includes the Coal Industry Act 1973, the proposed improved terms which I recently announced for the Redundant Mineworkers' Payments Scheme, the Industry Act and the provision of further Government factories.

Is the Minister aware that the latter part of his answer causes laughter in the industry because there have been no results? Are pits to be closed for economic reasons? Is the Minister aware of the growing anger throughout the mining industry at the lack of information from the Government about what is to happen? In view of the energy crisis which is bound to occur in the next 10 or 15 years, will the Government make a statement about what will be done for the coal mining industry?

The hon. Gentleman surely knows that the Redundant Mineworkers' Payments Scheme is very much welcomed by the miners and all concerned in the industry. Future closures will depend on the results of the examination of individual collieries by the National Coal Board and the unions in accordance with the new colliery review procedure. It is up to the miners and those engaged in the industry to justify the continuation of pits.

In view of the growing concern about oil supplies, will my hon. Friend confirm that the National Coal Board is doing its utmost to make explorations throughout the country to see what new pits can be opened to increase the supply of coal in the coming decade?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. A lot of work has been done with exactly that objective.

Is the Minister specifically discussing with the National Coal Board the sinking of new pits? Do he and the Secretary of State intend to meet the national executive committee of the National Union of Mineworkers soon to discuss energy policy?

Yes, I give the hon. gentleman an assurance on both those points. There have been and are discussions with the National Coal Board about the sinking of new pits, and a meeting is to take place with the National Union of Mineworkers to discuss energy policy.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a further statement on the progress of his talks with industry and the trade unions about the regional employment premium.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a further statement on his discussions with the CBI and the TUC on the regional employment premium.

Consultations with both sides of industry have begun. A meeting with the TUC was held last week.

Are these talks exclusively about the phasing out of REP or do they cover the whole range of labour subsidies or labour taxes in the assisted areas?

There is an opportunity for anyone to express views on REP in the discussions about phasing out.

In view of the support of the CBI and the TUC for the regional employment premium, will not the Government have the courage or the good sense to change their mind or at least consider the case for a payroll subsidy for development areas? Will the Minister make a statement?

The Government will have the good sense to wait until the consultations have taken place and to take note of all the views expressed. We are meeting the CBI next week.

Will my hon. Friend also assure the House that the Government will have the good sense to recognise that the incidence of REP might mean the continuance of jobs, but in some cases, according to recent studies such as the Cambridge study, at fantastically high cost?

I assure my hon. Friend that these factors will be taken into consideration by the Government.

Why are only the TUC and the CBI involved in these discussions? Is it not a matter of tremendous importance to all the development areas? Will the Minister consult representatives from the development areas before taking away a subsidy which, according to the Cambridge study, provides between 20,000 and 50,000 extra jobs a year?

That is a matter which the hon. Gentleman should put to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many directors of British companies are resident in the Cayman Islands.

The answer is not obtainable except at undue expense.

Is the Minister aware that it is not so important for a person to reside in the Cayman Islands as to have part of his salary channelled there? Can he give the House any information about that form of tax evasion? In particular, will he say how many of the Lonrho directors, including Sir Basil Smallpeice, have part of their directors' fees channelled into an account in the Cayman Islands? Will that activity be covered by the inquiry into the Lonrho affair, and will the figures obtained be published so that the country may be aware of these almost criminal activities at a time when the Government are asking the ordinary worker to restrain his wage demands in the national interest?

The hon. Gentleman makes several imputations. As he knows, the affairs of the Lonrho Company are to be investigated, and the investigators will have power to investigate the affairs of the subsidiaries as well as of the main company. The hon. Gentleman will also know that the tax affairs of individuals cannot be discussed on the Floor of the House. He will remember that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer told the House that the Inland Revenue is making and will make full investigation into the tax position of any taxpayer. In the course of doing so it looks at the use or abuse of any devices. My right hon. Friend has also told the House that he is considering what further action is necessary on that front.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend bear in mind that the scandalous state of affairs which existed in the Lonrho Company could readily be avoided in the future by the House passing legislation to require a residential qualification before any part of a company director's salary or emoluments could be paid in the Cayman Islands or in any other tax haven, and that that is the proper recourse which I hope he will apply in any amending company legislation?

I take note of what my hon. Friend says. The impact of taxation and the way in which it should be assessed and collected are more matters for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer than for me. He has said that he is considering whether further action is necessary on this or associated matters. I will certainly bear in mind what my hon. Friend says in the context of our consideration of company legislation.

Has the right hon. and learned Gentleman seen the statistics which suggest that there are more bank accounts in the Cayman Islands than there are blades of grass? Will he make a wider investigation, not just into the single affair before him but into the whole question of what is happening in the banking industry in the Cayman Islands?

I am not able to speak for the blades of grass in the Cayman Islands but I assure the hon. Gentleman that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has in mind any tax implications that may arise from matters of this kind.

Will the Minister say whether the Lonrho revelations came as a surprise to the Government? If they did not come as a surprise to the Government, why did the Government accept for so long the unacceptable face of capitalism revealed by the Lonrho affair?

The right hon. Gentleman when he was in office seemed to have found no difficulty in accepting a whole range of unacceptable faces of various kinds. In fact the present Government are concerned to establish the proposition that the democratic capitalist form of society is that which is most likely to ensure the continued prosperity of the people of this country. It is because we are concerned to ensure that form of society rather than to cast it into some neo-Socialist or neo-Communist society of the kind favoured by the right hon. Gentleman that we are alert to ensure that the capitalist system is working fairly and effectively. That is our prime concern because it is on that system that the prosperity of the country depends.

rose——

Order. Questions to the Attorney-General.

asked the Attorney-General what is his policy regarding giving advice to magistrates on matrimonial cases.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave to her on 23rd March 1971. Since then my noble and learned Friend, on 11th June 1971, addressed the Magistrates' Association on the jurisdiction of magistrates' courts in family matters, which is a subject to which he continues to attach much importance.—[Vol. 814, c. 85.]

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that since supplementary benefit has been much more accessible to divorced and deserted wives, there has been a marked reluctance by the courts to award or to enforce maintenance payments? Should not courts be made aware that this puts deserted or divorced wives at a great disadvantage? If such a wife receives supplementary benefit and then starts to earn, she loses supplementary benefit, whereas if she received maintenance payments this would not be the case.

I will look at the matter to which my hon. Friend refers. If she could give me specific details, I would be interested to receive them.

When do the Government expect to have in their hands the Finer Report?

That does not arise from this Question, but I can answer the hon. Gentleman by saying that I do not know.

asked the Attorney-General whether he is satisfied with the regulations regarding access to the Land Registry; and whether he will make a statement.

The Law Commission is considering this matter and until it reports I must reserve judgment.

Despite that answer, I wonder whether my right hon. and learned Friend can say why in the past, and indeed at present, the Land Registry should be so confidential whereas the Companies Register is relatively open. Does he agree that the situation in England differs substantially from that which obtains in Scotland? Is he aware that there is concern that confidentiality of the Land Register enables owners to let and sublet their premises for disreputable purposes? Will he assure the House that the present procedure does not impede the police in the progress of their inquiries into disreputable activities?

Scotland does not have a system of land registry similar to that which exists in this country but has a system which involves registration of deeds. Land registration applies to less than half the properties in the country. The contents of the register have been kept confidential with access limited to certain people because they set out many private matters, including the credit reputation of particular persons, the mortgages they may hold and the bankruptcies they may have sustained, all of which go to a person's credit and are private matters. Therefore, it is for consideration whether this should be given access to by anybody who wishes to look at a particular registration. The Law Commission is looking into this matter among others.

The Attorney-General said that less than half the land is subject to registration. Can he assure the House that his choice of words does not mean that he has any less enthusiasm for the task of bringing all land under registration than had the Labour Government who commenced the policy?

The Law Commission was given this task to consider and published a working paper in September 1970; it is expected to give a final report covering all aspects of land registration. Among these aspects will be whether it should be right for people to be be able to see what bankruptcies the property owners have sustained, or what mortgages they have. This is a complex matter which goes into various wide fields affecting the law of privacy, if there is such a thing.

asked the Attorney-General what is the practice regarding meetings on an official level between members of the judiciary and potential litigants.

asked the Attorney-General what is the practice relating to members of the judiciary meeting potential litigants for official purposes.

It would be highly improper for a judge to discuss the circumstances of a particular case outside his court with any litigant or any person who had litigation in view, and if he did have such discussions, whether intentionally or accidentally, he would be disqualified from sitting in that case. But it is plainly desirable that those who have an interest in the work of the courts, whether as professional advisers or potential litigants, should be able to make constructive suggestions which may help to improve the service which the courts provide. If this process can be assisted by representative bodies meeting members of the judiciary from time to time, there is nothing to prevent it; and facilities already exist in the Commercial Court Users Liaison Committee and other bodies to provide for such contacts with the judges concerned.

Does the Attorney-General consider it conducive to the operation of the National Industrial Relations Court, having regard to the widespread suspicion that already exists among trade unionists concerning the operation of that court, for Sir John Donaldson to have met representatives of the engineering employers to discuss the operation of the Act? Does he think that that is likely to create in the minds of the trade unions a belief that justice will be done in that court?

Sir John Donaldson, when he first opened the court, made clear that the court was to provide a service and the court considered that it was engaged in a service industry, in the same way as the Commercial Court which asks for constructive suggestions and for dealings between the court and those who appear as litigants or their professional advisers. That applies to the working of the court and involves consultation with those who use the court, not in a particular case but in terms of the procedure and practice which should be followed so that the court can provide a useful and proper service.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the very distinguished judge, Sir John Donaldson equally would welcome constructive suggestions from and discussions with his opposite numbers on the trade union side?

I agree with my right hon. and learned Friend. It has been the practice in the Commercial Court to ask for suggestions from everybody concerned since they may be useful and helpful.

Has not the whole point been missed? When the court was first established, Sir John Donaldson made it clear that in particular cases there could be informal discussions in view of the informal nature of the court. But that is not what is happening. What is happening is that the representatives of the Engineering Employers' Federation met Sir John Donaldson, the judge, to discuss amendments to the Act. Is it not the job of this House and of the Government to determine the nature of the Act and not the job of the judge, who should be responsible only for implementing it? Does it not underline the point made by the trade unions that this is a political court with a political judge who is interfering in political matters?

It is not a political court and Sir John is not a political judge. It is grossly unfair of the hon. Member to accuse Sir John Donaldson in that way. Sir John made it clear when he opened the court that he would welcome informed and constructive criticism from any and all quarters, and this is what he has been seeking so that the court shall be able to operate in a way which suits the proper parties to any particular litigation before that court. It has been the practice followed in the Commercial Court and it is a practice which should be followed in the Industrial Relations Court. I entirely refute the hon. Member's suggestion about this learned judge.

Does not the Attorney-General agree that justice manifestly must be seen to be done and that in the circumstances which now exist—circumstances which are quite different from those which apply in the Commercial Court—it is questionable whether a judge of the Industrial Relations Court should see parties on one side only when he does not see the other side at all?

The Engineering Employers' Federation did not make any proposals and has not put forward any proposed amendments to the Industrial Relations Act. The meeting was about the working of the Act as it now is. It was for that purpose that the employers' representatives saw the judge on that date.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the replies, I beg to give notice that I shall seek an early opportunity to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Attorney-General how many times in the past two years his Department has investigated the actions, decisions or comments of a magistrate during a court case in Wales.

Six times.

Does not the Attorney-General agree that any extension of the stipendiary magistracy in Wales should be viewed with disfavour? Does he agree, further, that there is no lack of genuine impartiality in Wales and that any magistrate who in future disobeys or disregards his oath of allegiance ought to be removed from office?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman about the duties of magistrates and the proper carrying out of them. There have been six cases, only one of which involved a stipendiary magistrate. The other five involved ordinary lay magistrates. But it is essential that magistrates, who do not have to take appointments as magistrates, should carry out their duties in accordance with their oaths.

Is the Attorney-General aware that at present we have two standards of justice in Wales and that these politically biased magistrates, to the right hon. and learned Gentleman's own knowledge, have on at least six occasions shown favour to people which would not be shown to English-speaking Welsh people? Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman take action to ensure that where magistrates are plainly motivated by personal bias they should be removed from the bench?

On each of the previous five occasions, my noble and learned Friend the Lord Chancellor made inquiries and sought and received assurances from the magistrates concerned. In respect of the last case on 17th May 1973—the Caernarvon case, of which the right hon. Gentleman will be aware—my noble and learned Friend asked the chairman of the bench for an explanation, and he is still pursuing his inquiries.