asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications how many telephones have been installed in hotels over the last 12 months in Great Britain.

The Post Office tells me that this information is not available.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the different methods by which hotels charge costs for telephone calls? Does he realise that in calculating its charge at least one hotel simply doubles the amount? Thus, a call costing the hotel £1 is charged at £2. Is this not an unsatisfactory arrangement? Should not hotels be required to make public their pricing policy?

I am aware that hotels charge over and above the normal rates to cover certain overheads and other expenses that are incurred in making these facilities available. If my hon. Friend has a particular instance in mind, he might think of taking it up with the Regional Tourist Board or with my right hon. and learned Friend the Minister for Trade and Consumer Affairs.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications if he will make a further statement on details of the reductions in investment he has to announce following the Chancellor's statement of public expenditure retrenchment.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications if he will make a statement indicating in detail what projects will be affected as a result of the Government decision to make a cut of £30 million in the Post Office investment programme.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications if he will make a statement on his discussions with the Post Office on projected savings in capital expenditure in 1974–75.

I would refer hon. Members to the replies I gave to the hon. Member for Pontypridd (Mr. John) on 11th and 18th June.—[Vol. 857, c. 231.]

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this blanket type of cut is unsatisfactory from the point of view of planning in the Post Office? Will he tell us what possible use this will be to the British economy? Further, will its harmful effects be found mostly in increasing the waiting lists or not improving the standard of service?

The cut should be seen as part of the total amount of cuts in public expenditure. It is the total amount that has the impact on the management of the economy, not just the telecommunications and postal services.

May I ask my right hon. Friend for an assurance that any such reductions in investment will not affect telecommunications between London and North Kent, where the service is already inadequate and frustrating?

The main point to be reassured about is that the announced reduction in public expenditure will not affect the programme of modernisation that I announced on 18th April, but some plans for improving the telephone service will inevitably have to be deferred.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman about the postal side of posts and telecommunications? Is it correct that the decision has been taken to cut back on postal mechanisation? If so, how can the industry plan its long-term future if the future is to be put in jeopardy? Is he aware that the postal service is working under severe pressure and is in grave danger of complete collapse in view of the way that the Government are toying about with it?

There will be some impact on the postal mechanisation programme, but this will be largely a matter of spreading forward the time for the introduction of the new installations. As the hon. Gentleman knows, discussions have been taking place between the Post Office and the union on this issue. I have no doubt that the union is equally anxious to ensure the maximum degree of efficiency in the postal delivery service. Obviously this presupposes a growing extent of the introduction of mechanisation.

May I ask my right hon. Friend whether the capital expenditure programme of the Post Office was on schedule anyway? Are these changes in expenditure more in the nature of budgeting revisions than actual cuts?

Mechanisation has been deferred marginally because of the discussions that are still taking place between the Post Office and the Union of Post Office Workers. It is important to recognise that though the programme is spread forward over a large number of years the deferment in the earlier period can be fully absorbed within the context of the total programme.

Has not the time come for a truly radical reappraisal of capital investment by the Post Office? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that, at a time when further increases in postage are being predicted, the time has arrived for the Post Office to install central points in urban and suburban areas where people can pick up their own letters, thereby allowing our scarce numbers of postmen to be allocated to rural areas where this is not possible?

That is probably the sort of point that could be taken into consideration by the Post Office Users National Council as a result of the references both by the Post Office Board and myself on behalf of the Government.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications how many people were sharing telephones at the latest available date; and how many of them have expressed a wish to have separate instruments.

At 31st March last just over 2 million subscribers had shared telephone service. The Post Office does not keep separate statistics of those who request exclusive service.

Surely the right hon. Gentleman must realise that if the Post Office wants to create an efficient telephone service throughout the country it has not only to remove from the waiting list those who are now on it, but must also provide those who wish it with a telephone of their own. Who is holding up the provision of a greater number of telephones? Is it the Government, by refusing to grant money for investment, or is it the supplier, who is failing to meet orders from the Post Office?

It is neither. It is the fact that it takes time to match the availability of new exchange equipment for subscribers' lines to the enormous growth in demand. The Post Office shares the objectives to which the hon. Gentleman referred. It has plans for the progressive reduction of the shared service in the coming years, and eventually for its virtual elimination, but let no one kid himself that this can be done overnight.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the shared service, introduced as a result of the war, should have a firm phasing-out date and that we ought not to accept the rather glib assurances given to him—not by him—by the Post Office, which it has given to successive holders of my right hon. Friend's office and previous office?

As my hon. Friend will readily accept, were it not for the shared service scheme some of those who apply for a telephone service would not be able to have it. Many people are willing to accept the shared service in order to get some service at this stage. I emphasise that the Post Office is determined to press ahead, in conjunction with the supplying industry, as fast as it can to eliminate the need for this temporary situation.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm reports that have appeared today that, following the announcement about postal charges going up, telecommunications charges are to go up as well, with clearly a further appalling impact on the retail price index? What effect does the right hon. Gentleman expect that to have on the demand for telephones?

I am not in a position to comment on that. I have no firm proposition before me, and I am not aware that the Post Office has made any application on this matter to the Price Commission.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many elderly subscribers can just afford to have a telephone if they have a shared line and would find it extremely difficult suddenly to be told that they could no longer have a shared line? Will my right hon. Friend consider that, with a view to helping these elderly people?

My hon. Friend has touched on a particular aspect of the problem, and it is obviously the case that where people use the line only intermittently they would be prepared to share that facility with others. The fact remains, however, that the Post Office does not like that and wants to get to the point at which there is a universal exclusive service, and its investment plans are based upon that idea.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Post Office ought to have the information which he says it does not have because, before shared lines are installed, it asks people whether they are prepared to share the service, or informs them that they must share the line with someone else? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the inconvenience of having a shared line? My line was shared until Friday last. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Dearne Valley (Mr. Edwin Wainwright) for putting down this Question, because apparently it has had some effect on the engineering department. My line became exclusive last Friday, but it is a great inconvenience——

Order. This is Question Time. The hon. Member is providing interesting information but is not asking a question.

I am merely suggesting, Mr. Speaker, that this information ought to be collated by the Post Office in order to find out the kind of objections that there are to sharing a line. It is a considerable inconvenience to subscribers.

I am glad to hear that the hon. Gentleman no longer has to share his line with anybody else but, as my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Mrs. Knight) said, I suspect that there are one or two people who benefit from the reduction in cost to them of doing this. However, the fact remains that the Post Office is pressing ahead to try to bring this business of a shared line to an end.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications whether, in view of the inadequate reception of television signals in the Allesley and Holbrook areas of Coventry, he will take urgent steps to establish a relay station, appropriately sited, for its improvement.

No. If the BBC makes any proposals I will consider them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that curt and perfunctory reply will be resented by tens of thousands of Coventry residents, of all parties, who realise that the quality of their reception is inferior to that in most parts of the country? Will the right hon. Gentleman mend his ways, come to Coventry and study the problem on the spot, and then endeavour to give some satisfactory service, at last, to those who are now so disadvantaged?

In view of the many careful letters of explanation that I have exchanged with the hon. Gentleman I do not think that his observations are in any way justified. The hon. Gentleman knows that his constituents can readily help themselves in this matter either by improving their own aerial facilities or by turning to the possibility of introducing communal aerials.

In view of the number of complaints about inadequate reception, particularly in mountainous areas, valleys, and so on, may I ask whether the Government have given up all plans for putting up a geostationary satellite for relaying television programmes?

No, Sir, not altogether. This has not been rejected, but it is not a realistic proposition now. Economic factors do not seem to justify the introduction of this now in terms of the United Kingdom alone, but it is something that has by no means been excluded.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications whether he will now state the sum in default by broadcast licence evasion during the financial year to 31st March 1973; what sum he expects to recover by all revised methods now in force; and what further steps he has in mind.

About £5 million in 1972–73, compared with over £7 million the previous year. I hope that the present methods of combating evasion, coupled with increasing computer assistance with licence records, will achieve a substantial further reduction this year.

I warmly congratulate my right hon. Friend on his undoubted progress in this field, but I warn him that it is still not good enough. Does my right hon. Friend know that there are about 300,000 people in this country who are still viewing their television programmes and receiving their broadcasts free, gratis and for nothing at the expense of law-abiding citizens such as myself, who pay £14 a year for the privilege of looking in at a television set? Why cannot my right hon. Friend redouble his efforts to minimise the number of defalcations in this field?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for the publicity which his Question will no doubt have given to the desirability of everybody meeting their obligations to pay a licence fee when they are in possession of a receiving set. I need no encouragement from my hon. Friend to redouble my efforts, but I am grateful to be reassured that I shall have his support in this matter.

Has the right hon. Gentleman any evidence to suggest that this is a straight licence evasion? May it not be a protest against those politicians who appear regularly on television?

I have not recently seen the hon. Gentleman in a television programme, and I do not know when he last took part in one, but I am sure he will realise that as these figures become smaller so we get down to the hard core who are prepared to resist this even though they know that it is wrong to do so.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications if he will hold an interdepartmental inquiry into the categories of persons requiring transistorised amplified telephones other than those suffering from deafness and the extent of existing distribution of such telephones; and if he will make a statement.

No, Sir. Although the Post Office does not keep detailed records it estimates that the majority of amplifying hand sets are used by the hard of hearing. The remainder are used mainly in areas where the surrounding high noise level makes hearing difficult, for example, factories and airports.

What other steps can the right hon. Gentleman take—we know that he has sympathy in this matter—to persuade the Post Office not to seize on the excuse of a small number of not partially deaf people to charge deaf people an additional amount which people with ordinary hearing do not have to pay? Why should this section of the disabled be the only section of disablement to pay an extra charge for deafness—a charge that is not paid by ordinary people?

It is because of what have already tried to point out, namely, that other users can benefit from the introduction of the amplified sets. The hon. Member knows that local authorities and my right hon. Friend the Secretray of State for Social Services have substantial powers to help in particular cases of need. When the hon. Gentleman last raised this question, he implied that it was the last Labour Government who reduced the charge by 33⅓ per cent. In fact, it took place in July 1964, under the previous Conservative Government.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications how many metered units of telephone calls were recorded by the Post Office in the last accounting year.

The Post Office does not maintain national summaries of metered call units but it tells me that the number of such units in 1971–72 was of the order of 30,000 million.

Can my right hon. Friend categorically deny a rumour that is current in the Birmingham area, that the meters used for recording calls go up only to 100,000 and then return to nil? Is he aware that many firms and industries in the West Midlands make many overseas calls and that therefore the meter should be going round very quickly? I have been informed that of two that have been checked, one goes around one and a half times in a 13-week period, thus losing the GPO about £4,000 a year and the other, with a much bigger rate of calls, loses about £56,000, plus extra for the Inland Revenue on VAT? Will he consider this matter in preference to allowing telephone charges to go up?

There are problems such as my hon. Friend has described. The Post Office keeps a check on leases of any customers whose consumption rises to 6,000 units or more, and it is also at present conducting trials of a six-digit meter. It hopes to introduce a wider system of interim readings as well—that is, given extra computer time—during next year.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications if he will introduce legislation to amend Sections 3, 6, 7 and 8 of the Sound Broadcasting Act 1972, following details of the first contracts for commercial radio stations published by the IBA.

No, Sir.

Does the Minister agree that the published shareholdings of the first successful contractors for independent broadcasting show that there has not been one departure in either ownership or initiative from the established patterns of the Press and television conglomerates, which are already powerful over these areas? Will he tell the IBA now to abandon the principle of "to him that hath already shall be more given" and go back to the principles of competition to which the Conservative Party paid lip service in the last Election?

No, Sir, I do not think that such action would be justified by the earlier decisions that have so far been taken by the IBA. It has been very careful in its interpretation not only of the requirements of the Act but of the spirit in which it was passed.

Will the Minister look again at the suggestion that the IBA should put these licences out for auction when they have references to the applicants, since then competition would take place?

The IBA, as my hon. Friend knows, is empowered, by the terms of the legislation, to issue the licences to those whom it has selected. When the applicant has been chosen the undertakings that the applicant has made will be made known to the public. The way in which this has so far been done does not justify my taking any special action as my hon. Friend recommends.

Is the Minister aware that, on 22nd April, London Weekend Television invited its audience to participate in its "Golden Girls" competition by way of coupon in the two London evening papers and that, not satisfied with the boost to sales that that gave, the Evening Standard on 23rd April in its sports edition did not even bother to carry the coupon that had been advertised on London Weekend Television the day before? Is it not wrong that the Press should be able to get away with such behaviour?

The hon. Member is clearly raising with me matters that fall within the responsibility of the IBA.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications if he will give a general direction to the Post Office Corporation to review the organisation of the Giro, in view of administrative changes currently under consideration affecting social security payments.

No, Sir. I understand that the possible implications for Giro of the proposed tax credit scheme, which I assume my hon. Friend has in mind, are already being considered by the Post Office with the Departments concerned.

Is the Minister aware that the use of computers in the administration of social security is much more advanced in some other countries? Is the management of the Giro aware of the possibilities for extending the service which would be offered simply by the extension of family allowances to the first child, quite apart from the tax credit scheme? Is it not lamentably failing to rise to its opportunities here?

I think that it possibly is, but my hon. Friend has already given evidence to the Select Committee and I know that this has already been considered by the Department of Health and Social Security. It will probably be sensible to wait until the Committee has reported and the House has had an opportunity to consider any recommendations that it may make.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications whether he has satisfied himself that the Giro is now making a positive contribution to the finances of the Post Office: and if he will make a statement.

I would ask my hon. Friend to await the expiry of the one-year target period.

My right hon. Friend will agree that that period expires this weekend. The expiry date was set at 1st July. Since we were assured that the objective of achieving a positive contribution was to be achieved within one year of the increase in tariffs, can he assure us that, if this target has not been achieved, the reprieve granted to the Giro last year will be terminated, as it was made a firm precondition for this reprieve by his predecessor?

I reiterate that I think that it would be more sensible to wait until I have fully considered the final outcome of the year's operations and can report to Parliament.

Would the Minister not allow himself to be flustered by the noises from his hon. Friends about the Giro? Is he aware that Giro gives employment to many workers in the Merseyside area, which has suffered considerably from actions of this Government over the past three years? Will he therefore be careful in following the advice of the backwoodsmen on his own back benches?

The hon. Member is making an absolute nonsense of his own case. He would far better help his own constituents if he kept quiet on the subject.

What do you mean by that?

Mr. Grant. Question No. 13.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I do not usually ask for the protection of the Chair, because I do not need it, but if the Minister wants to come outside and explain what he meant by that last answer, we can discuss the matter and——

Order. Fortunately, that sort of invitation is not a matter for the Chair.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications what consultations he has held with the Independent Broadcasting Authority concerning his powers in relation to advertising on television.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications what consultations he has held with the Independent Broadcasting Authority concerning his powers in relation to advertising on television.

None concerning my powers, but the authority had consultations with me last year in accordance with Section 7(5) of the Television Act.

Yes, but the Minister will be aware that in the last few days some very serious allegations about the abuse of advertising time by programme companies have been made and seem to have been substantiated in the Sunday Times this week, in a report concerning profits of thousands of pounds, which may have been made illicitly. Although one is aware of his responsibilities, is the Minister satisfied that in this respect the IBA is carrying out adequately its statutory duties under the Television Act' Will he have urgent talks with the IBA about this matter? In doing so, will he press it to make regularly available the relevant data in this matter, so that this misunderstanding, if it is a misunderstanding, cannot arise in future?

I saw the Press reports last week, of course. The IBA is urgently looking into the allegations made, but it is up to it to administer Schedule 2(3) of the Television Act 1964, according to the rules that it has drawn up under the schedule. For my part, I am concerned to see that the IBA discharges its obligation, but the matter is one for the authority in the first instance.

Will the Minister particularly draw the attention of the IBA to the specific allegation about Anglia Television, that on 29th April 1972, between 10 and 11 p.m., Anglia Television transmitted over 12 minutes of advertising, which is 80 per cent. more than the amount allowed in the Television Act? Will the Minister bear in mind the fact that Anglia Television is now bidding for a radio licence in its own area? Will he tell the IBA to investigate this matter very sharply indeed?

It would be improper to pick out for separate comment an isolated instance. The hon. Gentleman will generally be aware of the desire to avoid unnatural breaks in certain programmes, for example, sporting events, which may result in the compression of advertising time within an hour separate from those programmes. But this is a matter which falls entirely within the policing responsibilities of the IBA.

If the IBA fails to fulfil its obligations, which was in some respects indicated last year by the report of the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries on the IBA, will the Minister do something about the IBA? It is becoming increasingly unsatisfactory to read detailed accounts of the way in which the IBA has failed to fulfil its obligation.

It is open to anyone to make a generalised comment. But I am anxious to ensure that the IBA carries out its statutory responsibility. Where there is a generalised Press commentary of this kind, it is well that I await a report.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what modifications of the draft European Patent Convention he intends to seek at the Munich Conference in September.

The draft European Patent Convention will be of advantage to the British inventor by enabling him to protect his invention both throughout the EEC and in other European countries by a single application. Consideration of the latest draft of the convention has not yet been completed, but at present I do not see the need for seeking more than minor technical or drafting amendments.

As the draft was drawn up without prime attention to the interests and needs of British inventors and patent holders, will my right hon. and learned Friend give an assurance that those interests will be the overriding consideration of this country's representatives at the conference?

The interests of those concerned with patents in this country involve many different matters. One of them is the nature of the system and location of the offices whereby the system is operated. The other is the nature of the rights conferred by a European patent. The negotiations leading to this convention have taken place among 21 countries. They enable a patent which is likely to be effected throughout that number of countries to be effective. That is one of the interests that British people concerned and patent holders are required to bear in mind, along with others.

Will the staff of the proposed new office conform linguistically to the proportion of patent applications sent to it?

The linguistic balance of the staff has not been finally settled because the convention itself has not been finally settled; nor can we foresee the precise linguistic pattern of applications likely to be made. The probability is that English will be playing a substantial part in that.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what observations on the Booz-Allen Report he has now received from representatives of the shipbuilding industry.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what discussions he has had with leaders of the shipbuilding industry concerning the Booz-Allen Report; and if he will make a statement.

A number of observations on the Booz-Allen Report have now been received. A meeting has already been held with the Shipbuilders and Repairers National Association and meetings, as necessary, with other interested parties will follow prior to the formulation of our long-term policy.

Bearing in mind the fact that the Government have now received the observations of both sides of the industry, will the Minister do his utmost to get a speedy Government decision? The present favourable circumstances will not obtain for ever, and it is very important to ensure that shipbuilders now go all out for orders on the world market. Does the hon. Gentleman have any information about the progress in the talks between Austin Pickersgill and Doxford?

The latter point is still under consideration in my Department. It is necessary to come to a conclusion as soon as possible. That we shall do. We gave a deadline of 15th June for the observations, and the CSEU asked for an extension of time. We have given that extension and we have only just received its observations.

Although there are certainly problems that need to be resolved in the shipyards, does not my hon. Friend agree that the general impression of the industry is that it appears that the order book is as full as it has been at any time since the war and that there are very few yards which can now give quotations for 1975 or the early part of 1976?

Yes, I agree with my hon. Friend. The present order book position is very healthy, and more healthy than for very many years.

Will the hon. Gentleman not be unduly complacent but recognise that the industry needs massive capital investment if it is to maintain its place in the world and, in particular, to ensure employment prospects in a growth industry which have the utmost impact on regional economic problems?

Yes, indeed, and it is considerations such as those which we shall take carefully into consideration in formulating long-term policy.

I share the view expressed by the hon. Member for East Stirling-shire (Mr. Douglas) about not being complacent. Would not my hon. Friend agree that we are, perhaps, at the end of a cycle in which other yards in the rest of the world are very full and that we should not be complacent?

I never sought to give any impression that we were complacent. My hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Edward Taylor) rightly said that the order book situation was more healthy than it has been for a number of years. We can be pleased about this, without being in any way complacent and taking into account the needs for investment in regard to long-term policy.

In view of the records of Governments from both sides of the House in putting public money into this industry, as it is now constructed, without achieving the capital investment required to compete with the Japanese and other foreign shipbuilders, will the Government think carefully about alternative ways of expanding investment, namely, an extension of public ownership?

The latter suggestion is probably one of the least attractive to the public or the industry. We are certainly taking into consideration the long-term needs. We hope to avoid the errors that have been made in the past, as the right hon. Gentleman acknowledges.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will set up an inquiry into the practice of companies requesting customers paying goods by cheque to have their photograph taken for purposes of security; and if he will make a statement.

I am not persuaded that there is any case for an inquiry into this practice which I understand to be in use only in the case of customers who have no acceptable means of identification.

That is not exactly the position. Will the Minister regard this as a very serious matter? Does it not concern the Minister that in this country there are companies holding thousands of photographs of people, with their names and addresses with them? Does not the Minister regard this as a gross intrusion into the personal liberty of those citizens, and will he set up the inquiry requested in the Question?

The hon. Gentleman should keep this matter in perspective. It was not regarded as requiring investigation by the Younger Committee which investigated the law and practice in relation to privacy.

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

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how much weighting is given to flight frequencies, and to the peak amount of noise in any one flight, respectively, in compiling the Noise and Number index.

The weightings in the formula are based on the findings of the Final Report of the Wilson Committee on the Problem of noise published in July 1963 (Cmnd. 2056). The NNI scale was re-examined by the Research Sub-Committee of the Noise Advisory Council in 1972. That committee did not recommend any modification of the formula, which we still consider the best available measure of annoyance caused by aircraft noise.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that this index gives a greater weight to changes in the volume of peak noise for any given place than to the number of aircraft passing by? Would he not also agree that the sheer number of flights, which at Heathrow now amounts to about 600 per day, is becoming increasingly annoying? Ought not the index to he modified now to reflect all this?

I recognise that many people regard frequency as the major irritant but I hope my hon. Friend will accept that, if we were to revise the system, we should have to have some thorough resurveying of the situation. Statistics apart, the real point is that there are a great many residents near Heathrow and Gatwick who have been encouraged to expect relief from aircraft noise with the construction of the third airport and much of their tolerance of noise has therefore diminished. This is therefore a powerful reason for going ahead with the Government's intentions.

Concern about the frequency of aircraft is an important aspect of noise considerations, and the infrequency of supersonic flights is a possible answer to critics of Concorde and that method of flying. This question arises, as do many others, from the concern about lack of Government involvement in research and development on noise. Will the Minister therefore do more to encourage manufacturers to produce quieter engines as a way out of the dilemma?

I am not sure that I follow all the tortuous derivations of the hon. Member's question, but if the manufacturers think there is a commercial market for noise suppression kits perhaps they might set the pace in producing them.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service what further discussions the Government propose to have with the North of England Development Council about the Hardman Report on the dispersal of civil servants.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service what discussions he had with bodies in the Northern Region, including the North of England Development Council, about the Hardman Report on the dispersal of civil servants.

I saw a delegation from this council before the report was published. I sent the council a copy of the report on the day of publication. If it wishes to discuss the report with me, I shall welcome it, but I have not yet received a request for this.

Dispersal to Milton Keynes and Southend is not dispersal at all, because it still leaves the majority of civil servants in the South-East. The Government should be setting a different trend. In the Northern Region only 4·8 per cent. of all jobs are in the clerical and administrative class—indisputably the lowest percentage of any English region—compared with 11·1 per cent. in the London area. Will the Minister keep this sort of thing in mind when the Government consider the Hardman Report?

Yes, I can assure the hon. Member that I shall. He is not quite accurate, however. Seven out of 10 civil servants work and live outside London and the South-East. I can assure him that the Hardman Report is a consultative document, that my door is open, and that I am willing to receive representations from any region and any area.

I thank the Minister for his courtesy in receiving representations and deputations, but may I remind him that the Hardman Report is only the latest in a series of disappointments about the dispersal of civil servants? Is he aware, for example, that the Northern Region lost 2,000 jobs, which were promised to Washington new town but went to the South-East?

I know that our decision not to proceed with the location of the PAYE centre at Washington caused disappointment in the area, but if the House agrees to the establishment of the tax credit system it is our intention to establish the computer centre for it at Washington. Perhaps I could remind the hon. Member that the city that has most civil servants outside London is Newcastle.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service what discussions have taken place, and if any further are intended, between the Government and the South-West Regional Planning Council and Cornwall County Council following receipt of the Hardman Report on the possibility of civil servants being dispersed to the South-West Development area.

Neither of these bodies has been in discussion with the Government but I am very willing to see them if they wish.

Is my hon. Friend the Minister aware that the South-West Development Area is the only development area that will not receive any Government offices under the recommendations of the Hardman Report? Is he also aware that there is one self-contained unit of modest dimensions, namely, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, which would be very well suited to meet the needs of a small town such as Bodmin or Liskeard within the South-West in the attempts of those towns to improve the job quality opportunities for the area?

I am aware of the point raised by my hon. Friend and I shall be pleased to receive representations. One of the reasons for Sir Henry Hardman's recommendation that the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board should go to Plymouth rather than farther afield is that it should remain close to its parent Department—the Home Office—which he recommended should in part go to Plymouth. However, I am ready to receive representations from any part of the South-West Development Area.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service what recent discussions he has had on the Hardman Report.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service what representations the Government have had from Scotland since the publication of the Hardman Report.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service what action he proposes over the Hardman Report; and, in particular, if he will now place the whole of the oil office in Scotland.

I have so far received only one request for a discussion from a town in England and none from Scotland. I am of course ready to consider any that are made.

Scottish Conservative Members of Parliament have asked for an urgent meeting with the Prime Minister because there is considerable resentment in Scotland that, according to the report, only 1,200 of the 30,000 jobs are suitable for Scotland. Will my hon. Friend the Minister give an absolute assurance that before a final recommendation is made on policy on the report my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland will be directly involved in the discussions?

Yes, I can. All Ministers will be involved, because the arrangements of their Departments will be affected and it would make a mockery of consultation if such involvement did not take place. It is the Government's intention to receive representations and to hear views expressed from Scotland generally, and I can give my hon. Friend the assurance for which he has asked.

Apart from the insensitivity of the report from the point of view of regional policy and the dismissal of Scotland and Wales as irrelevancies, which has caused great offence in Scotland, is the Minister aware that one of the most unsatisfactory features of the report is the section dealing with travel, where the difficulties of travel between Glasgow and London are grossly exaggerated? Will he look at that matter again before final decisions are made?

I can assure the hon. Member that I shall. As for his views about Sir Henry Hardman's use of the word "irrelevant", I suggest that the hon. Member reads it in the context in which it was written. As for travel, Sir Henry was looking at policy units and not executive blocks of work, and was concerned not so much with distance as with the frequency of communication between the bodies that are dispersed and the centre. Even after allowing for telecommunications and improved communications in other respects, about 30 per cent. of all communications at policy level in the Civil Service have to be face to face, and that is the nub of the problem.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service whether, in view of the absence of recommendations in the Hardman Report concerning dispersal of civil servants to non-urban areas, he will consider sites in Scotland for smaller Government offices leaving London in future.

It is, I confess, difficult to contemplate dispersal to non-urban areas. Under the Government's existing dispersal and new office policies, however, the assisted areas, including Scotland, are always carefully considered when decisions on locating Government work are taken. These policies will continue.

Will the Minister expand a little on that answer? Why is it difficult to consider non-urban centres when one of the problems we face today is the overcrowding of our cities? Surely this was an opportunity to move at least some of the smaller Government Departments into the small towns of this country?

In previous dispersal exercises those groups which engaged in self-contained executive work have gone and that sort of work can be dispersed away from communications centres. But it is difficult to disperse policy work to an area which is not a good communications centre. The hon. Member is concerned about research bodies. The Agricultural Research Council, for example, was recommended for Manchester because the main dispersal of that Department was to Manchester. The child has followed the parent in this matter.

Does the Minister recall that the Hardman Committee said that the report was a basis for discussion? I hope that it is in that light that the Minister will be considering many of its statements. In particular, is he not aware that whereas the report showed the opportunities for improvements in rail travel and the effect these would have on dispersal, it did not go into nearly enough detail about improvements in air travel, which is a problem that affects Scotland particularly. No forecast was made of such improvements into the 1980s. Will the Minister remedy what appears to be a defect here?

I am only too pleased to hear representations on this score. One of the attractions of Teesside is the good air communications which exist, but it is also true that it is possible to fly to Glasgow in an hour. It is not, however, a question of distance but the frequency with which the civil servants have to make the journey. I am only too pleased to listen to representations. I shall receive representations from the staff side and from the Civil Service unions.

My hon. Friend almost makes it sound as though civil servants had not discovered modern communications by telephone, and other modern methods. May I ask him, in any discussions with the civil servants, to represent London and the South-East as being an environmental disaster area and to say that the quality of life is so much better in the regions that people should be bursting to come to us?

I shall welcome representations from my hon. Friend. Perhaps he should speak to some of the civil service unions about the matter. One of the encouraging things about Hardman is that where we have dispersed over the past 10 years we have had a very successful record. On the whole, those civil servants who have gone to the regions have not regretted it.

Is the Minister aware that the Scottish Parliamentary Labour Group has discussed the Hardman Report and has come to the conclusion that if it is fully implemented it will be a real body blow to the people of Scotland? Is he aware that a representation is en route to him that we should have a meeting with him as soon as possible to put our case? I should like an assurance from him that no final decision will be taken by the Cabinet without the strong representation of the Secretary of State for Scotland being heard on the matter.

I assure the hon. Gentleman that we are prepared to listen to all representations. I am glad to know that representation is coming from his own area in Glasgow. Over 20 per cent. of all posts dispersed from London since 1963 have gone to Scotland, and the plum of the 1963 dispersal—the Post Office Savings Bank—went to Cowglen.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service when he expects to announce the Government's decision on implementing the recommendations of the Hardman Report.

The Government expect to announce decisions by the end of the year, after considering the complex questions raised by the report in the light of such arguments and views as are put to them.

Is my hon. Friend aware that North Wales is the Cinderella of the regions, remembered by successive Governments only when there is something unpleasant to be dished out, like the closing down of steelworks, and that we badly need our fair share of goodies in the form of roads and new clerical jobs?

I am very much aware of what my hon. Friend says. He has been to see me with a delegation from his local authorities. The amount of dispersal to Wales is a high proportion of the whole. I appreciate that it is to South Wales, and that the first recommendation of Hardman is that about 5,500 posts should go to South Wales. If my hon. Friend wishes to see me again with the various interests of North Wales, I shall be only too pleased to see him and hear his representations.

Is the Minister aware that his reply to the hon. Member for Roxburgh, Selkirk and Peebles (Mr. David Steel) about dispersal to non-urban areas will not be welcomed in Scotland generally? Further, is he aware that such dispersal displays a remarkable lack of imagination on behalf of the Government? Is he aware that the location of the Superannuation Office of the Atomic Energy Authority in the small burgh of Thurso happened a number of years ago and has been most successful? Will the hon. Gentleman consider that as a model for future dispersal?

I re-emphasise that during the last dispersal exercise Scotland generally received some 20 per cent. of the dispersal. I am only too pleased to receive representations. There are a great deal of closely argued factors in Hardman. If any hon. Member can persuade me that we should go beyond the Glasgow conurbations I shall be only too pleased to listen.

Does the hon. Gentleman recognise that some hon. Members are having extreme difficulty warding off criticism about the Hardman Report? Will he and his Ministry examine the communications use and recommendations in the Report and present the Government's view about communications in particular to the House?

The hon. Gentleman has stressed an important point. Hardman has been balancing, on the one hand, the gain to the regions, particularly by helping to counter the regional imbalance in the lack of clerical work for women, against less communication. He makes clear that he has made a personal judgment. This is very much a matter for Ministers to decide. We have said that we want to listen to representations. I must emphasise that my door is open and that I am willing to receive delegations from any area or from any hon. Member.

asked the Lord President of the Council what progress has been made in the inter-party talks concerning the establishment of a compulsory public register of Members' outside financial interests.

The hon. Member will appreciate that the discussions that are going forward on these matters are confidential. I will ensure that the House is informed of the outcome as soon as possible.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House frankly whether the Government are serious about the matter or whether they are just engaging in a sham exercise that no one need take seriously? If the latter is the case, we had better understand it now. Is not there increasing evidence, almost day by day, of the desperate urgency of having such a register, so that the public may be assured that the vast majority of Members are not corrupt, that they have not got outside financial interests which corrupt them, but that there are some who have, and they should be exposed?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman and the House that the Government are taking the matter extremely seriously and wish, as does the hon. Gentleman, to protect the vast majority of Members from the innuendos that are sometimes cast upon them. But, as the hon. Gentleman and the House know, it is a complicated and difficult matter. The negotiations are protracted, but I hope that very soon they can be brought to a successful conclusion, because I am certain that it is in the interests of the House that action should be taken in the near future.

asked the Lord President of the Council what steps he is taking to increase the one shilling per mile allowance for motor cars for Members of the House of Commons having regard to additional costs, caused by inflation since December 1971, including value added tax; whether he has now studied the revised Royal Automobile Club recommended mileage rates, revealing considerable increases in 1971–72; and whether he will ask the Services Committee to re-examine these matters.

I have noted the RAC recommendations on mileage allowances. So far as the rate of the Members' allowance is concerned, it is already within the terms of reference of the Committee to consider this matter.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the RAC's latest figures reveal a mileage allowance which is about 40 per cent higher than the present Members' allowance, or a mileage allowance at the rate of approximately 7p per mile? Having regard to the fact that the matter should now be reviewed, as it was last reviewed in December 1970, will not my right hon. Friend consent to other right hon. and hon. Members and myself appearing before the Services Committee in order to bring it up to date in the matter so that it may make further representations to the House?

My hon. Friend will realise that there are difficulties. It is extremely difficult to isolate the mileage allowance from other Members' allowances. It would clearly raise difficult issues at present. I do not dispute the RAC figures. The allowance we had in 1970 was slightly more generous than that for civil servants, and although it is now slightly behind I do not think that we are far out. If hon. Members feel that the 5p per mile is not enough, they are entitled to claim the additional cost of running their cars against tax as a tax allowance. To that extent, the situation is certainly by no means desperate, but if it is raised by members of the Services Committee, we shall consider it.

The Lord President has just spoken about other allowances. I should imagine that other allowances were matters for the Boyle Committee. I do not know of any others that fall under the Services Committee except the motor car allowance. Does the right hon. Gentleman have it in mind to refer to the Boyle Committee any of the inequities in the present system, such as allowances for London Members, which I think are absolutely unjust?

No, Sir. It has been the Government's view that the Boyle Committee would look at these matters once in the lifetime of a Parliament, and that we should stick to that procedure. Although the car allowances are not strictly in the same category, it would be difficult for outsiders to understand why we alter the car allowances more often than we consider other allowances.

asked the Lord President of the Council if, in the light of the inefficiencies and delays now apparent in the Parliamentary Printing Office, he will consider making alternative arrangements.

I very much regret the difficulties which hon. Members are experiencing as a result of the industrial dispute at St. Stephen's Parliamentary Press. Emergency arrangements are now in hand which will provide Parliament with essential working papers.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that we have now had no proper or reliable printing since 12th June, nearly a fortnight ago, and that that constitutes a great inconvenience? Has the Services Committee considered the matter? Will my right hon. Friend tell us the nature of the dispute, what efforts are being made to end it, and what hope there is of ending it? If I may say so with courtesy, could the Government take the matter a little more seriously?

I can promise my hon. Friend that there is no question of not taking it seriously. We certainly do take the matter seriously. What I have been endeavouring to do, with the co-operation of my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Civil Service Department, is to see that all essential papers are provided. Following my hon. Friend's statement last Thursday and the comments of right hon. and hon. Members, we have tried to bring about some improvement, particularly over the whole question of HANSARD, which I think will be welcomed by hon. Members. The dispute is a straightforward pay dispute. Negotiations are still going on. I can add nothing further to what my hon. Friend said on Thursday.

We are not getting all essential papers. Has my hon. Friend heard of the difficulty experienced by the Committee of the whole House on the Northern Ireland Constitution Bill, in that what was said by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State on Second Reading was not available to the Committee in any form? Will my right hon. Friend ensure that by Report a complete record of all the proceedings on this important constitutional Bill is available?

I can give my hon. Friend an assurance that the Committee stage reports will be available before the Report stage is taken in the House. They will have to be produced in typed form, but they will certainly be available. I am trying to ensure that the same procedure is carried out where other Bills are in Committee now and a Report stage is coming along, so that those reports are available in good time as well.