asked the Secretary of State for Wales what representations he has received regarding the Welsh Development Agency Bill.

One from the Wales TUC emphasising the importance to Wales of the proposals for a development agency and regretting the delaying tactics adopted by some hon. Members opposite.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that the Welsh Council has also regretted possible manœuvres to delay the passage of the Bill? Will he give us some assurance—now that the Bill is being dealt with in another place—that we shall try to get it on to the statute book as soon as possible, because there is great resentment in Wales that it should be subject to a party manœuvre in this House due to the shortage of parliamentary time?

In my view there is a nearly unanimous welcome in Wales for this important Bill. Having regard to the urgency of the situation and the problems facing us in Wales, it is imperative that the Bill receives Royal Assent at the earliest possible opportunity.

Will the Secretary of State State find time to debate the Bill on the Floor of the House after the Whitsun Recess? Does he intend to make the development agency subordinate to the proposed Assembly, and to surrender to the Assembly some of the extensive powers that are given to him under the Bill?

The question of allocating time for the Bill to be debated on the Floor of the House is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House, but I am sure that he will do what he can to satisfy Conservative Members. Perhaps the hon. Member for Pembroke (Mr. Edwards) can assure me that we can get the Bill by the end of July, taking into account the time that he and his colleagues will require to debate issues properly in Committee. That is my aim. The functions of the Assembly will be announced much later.

Is it possible for the Minister to tell us how much money, if any, will be forthcoming from EEC funds during the next few years to help the establishment of the Welsh Development Agency?

I am sure that there are other Questions on the Order Paper on this subject. We in Wales shall not be backward in ensuring that we get the moneys due to us from EEC funds.

Is the Secretary of State aware of the absolute scorn in Wales at the hypocrisy of the Conservative Party in advocating more powers for the Welsh Grand Committee yet obstructing this important Bill going there? Is he aware that not only the trade unions but the CBI in Wales and the development corporations support this agency coming to fruition? Will he give an assurance that, if the Bill can be got through this Session, it will come into operation at an early date in the next few months?

The hon. Gentleman is completely right to refer to the scorn which is manifest from one end of the Principality of Wales to the other concerning the activities of Conservative Members. It is obvious to all hon. Members that belatedly the Conservatives have recognised that they are in a tiny minority in Wales opposed to the Bill. I am still waiting for the assurance that I shall get my Bill by the end of July. I assure the hon. Member for Caernarvon (Mr. Wigley) that it will be our wish to get—[Interruption.] I wish that the hon. Member for Yarmouth (Mr. Fell) would pipe down. It is our wish to get the Bill into operation at the earliest possible time.

How is it possible for the right hon. and learned Gentleman to be so ignorant of the procedures of the House as to ask my hon. Friend the Member for Pembroke (Mr. Edwards) for an assurance that the Conservative Party will allow the Bill to go through before a certain time? It is pure ignorance.

The hon. Gentleman can never teach any hon. Member the quality of ignorance or talk about pomposity. He knows nothing. — [Interruption.] I hope that the hon. Gentleman will contain himself. He is irrepressible.

Order. I hope that we can get on and not have these personal exchanges.

The hon. Gentleman knows nothing of the delaying tactics of his hon. Friends over a Bill that is regarded in Wales as being of the utmost importance.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what steps he took to consult residents along the route affected before giving his consent to use of the "Dragon" route through the village of Gwernaffield by traffic during the summer months in order to relieve congestion in Mold.

Clwyd County Council was consulted as the body responsible for local interests and as the local highway authority for the roads which form the "Dragon" route.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there has been a very bad breakdown of the procedure of democratic consultations and that the inhabitants of these hitherto peaceful villages are to have their calm and safety rudely shattered, without having had any opportunity of expressing their views? Will he give an undertaking that he will conduct the earliest possible review of the working of this route and that if it is found to be objectionable on environmental grounds he will terminate the experiment as soon as possible?

I am aware of the hon. Gentleman's worries about this matter. I assure him that this is an experiment for only a six-month period, that the route is based on one drawn up and advised upon by the local police, and that a little amount of traffic on only one or two weekends is involved.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what estimates his Department has made of the effects upon Wales of a British withdrawal from the EEC.

I have already made clear my view that withdrawal would involve an unacceptable risk to the prosperity of Wales.

That is an extraordinary answer. I asked the Secretary of State what estimates his Department had made. However, will the right hon. and learned Gentleman say what indications he has received from employers, firms and farmers of the numbers they might expect to employ in the event of British withdrawal from the Common Market? Will he confirm that no production quotas or similar restrictions could be imposed by the European Coal and Steel Community, except under Article 58, which requires the unanimous approval of all member Governments?

The hon. Gentleman is referring to what I regard as a wholly hypothetical situation. I am satisfied that it is in the interests of Wales that we remain in the Community. That is a wholly different question from joining the Community. The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right about Article 58. The decision can be taken only by the Council of Ministers, and the hon. Gentleman obviously knows of the unanimity rule.

Is the Secretary of State satisfied that Welsh agriculture, and especially livestock farmers, will do better once we are full members of the EEC and that the common agricultural policy will be of benefit to Welsh producers?

We have been anxious to ensure that there are changes in the common agricultural policy. The need for those changes has now been recognised throughout Europe. In his discussions in Brussels my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has ensured that Welsh agriculture is fully protected, and I am sure that he will continue to do so.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that in the run-up to the referendum it is important that we get away from the politics of fear in discussing whether we should remain in the Common Market or withdraw? Before we joined, people said that it would be disastrous if we did not join. Now it is said that it would be disastrous if we left. As regards employment, the balance of payments, inflation and a number of other matters, our membership in the early years has been disastrous for Wales.

My hon. Friend will not expect me wholly to agree with what he has said on this point. It is important that we establish the facts and that the discussion should be carried on on a rational basis, as it is now being carried on in Wales.

Will the Secretary of State take this opportunity of correcting the wrong impression given by his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry over the weekend? Will he tell the people of Wales that if we have lost jobs in Wales recently it is because of the world recession and possibly the loss of business confidence induced by his right hon. Friend?

The hon. Gentleman should address such questions to my right hon. Friend. I am not aware of any jobs having been lost in Wales as a result of our membership of the Community. What we are all suffering from is a worldwide recession. Leaving or staying in the Community will not solve our problems. Whether we are in the Community or outside, we must solve our problems within this island ourselves.

I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdare (Mr. Evans) that we must avoid the politics of fear. We must concentrate on the politics of truth in our approach to the referendum. Will my right hon. and learned Friend confirm that virtually every industry and firm in Wales believes that our industrial future and job prospects are more assured within the Market than outside? Will he also confirm that grants from the regional fund are additional to national regional policies? That is very important in Wales, which is virtually wholly a development area. Will he further confirm that the General Secretary of the Iron and Steel Trades Confederation, Sir Dai Davies, has said clearly that we can solve the steel problem better within the Community than outside it?

May I clarify the steel situation? There has been no Community proposal to cut back steel production. There is no question of the Community's imposing any cut-backs in British steel without the approval of the Council of Ministers. Therefore, one is dealing with a wholly hypothetical situation.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make representations to secure the right of Welsh national teams in all sports to compete separately in all major international events.

The rules about international competition in any sport are matters for the international sports federations concerned. I see no reason for intervening.

Is the Minister aware of the growing demand in Wales for full national status in sport? Is he aware that it would be highly desirable to remove the obstacles which now deny the right of Welsh teams to compete in major international events and to ensure for them the kind of freedom they would have if Wales had her own Parliament? Will the hon. Gentleman and his right hon. and learned Friend make representations to those British bodies, which are also English bodies, in control of sport in these countries so that they cease their opposition to allowing Wales the right and freedom to compete?

I know that the hon. Gentleman is President of the Welsh Amateur Weightlifters' Association. I had the privilege of seeing the Chinese People's Republic lifting against Wales, and I saw Wales do very well in Cardiff.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the Welsh international rugby team has carried the Welsh dragon even more successfully than the party led by the hon. Member for Carmarthen (Mr. Evans)?

Yes, Sir, and I think that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister would agree.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what was the Welsh share of allocations to the United Kingdom in 1974 by the EEC Social Fund; and what was the number and volume of applications to the fund submitted or approved by the Welsh Office.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales whether he will make a statement about the assistance received in Wales from the European Social Fund.

Social fund allocations for Wales amounted to £2·7 million in 1973 and £3·4 million in 1974. These sums were equivalent to 11 per cent. and 13 per cent. respectively of the United Kingdom totals. Responsibility for the submission of schemes rests with the Department of Employment.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware of the statement by one of the fund's administrators that they had had no applications to deal with any specific Welsh problems since our entry, that any of the sums received in 1973 and 1974 resulted from schemes undertaken on our entry and that Wales had been desperately slow in making use of the fund? If that is true, is it not deplorable bearing in mind the number of recent redundancies?

There has been nothing deplorable in this area. I do not wish to comment on newspaper reports about what a recent visitor to Wales said, but the inference to be drawn from those reports is wholly misleading. I understand that the Commission has issued a statement making it clear that it has no criticism of any kind to make of the Welsh Office, the Department of Employment or any other bodies referred to last week. I think that that tale had better be put to rest once and for all.

Whatever allegations there have been—and I accept that the person concerned was immediately repudiated by the Commission on the matter—will my right hon. and learned Friend give an assurance that if there is a positive "Yes" vote on 5th June he will fully publicise the fund and seek financial assistance from it for the benefit of Wales?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for what he has said. I think he will appreciate the significance of the figures. Our allocation in 1974 was 13 per cent. Of the United Kingdom total although we have only 4·5 per cent. of the United Kingdom's employment. We have done very well. Whatever funds we receive come through Government agencies. They are matched pound for pound by the Government. I think we can be very proud of what has been achieved. We shall continue on the same basis.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman give an assurance that if we stay in the EEC after the referendum he and his colleagues will take every possible step to ensure that links between the proposed Welsh National Assembly and European bodies are maximised so that Wales will get the maximum possible benefit from this fund and others within the EEC?

I do not know where the hon. Gentleman stands on the EEC issue, but he was conspicuous by his absence when we divided on the issue two weeks ago. It is too early for me to say anything in advance about the functions of the Assembly. I assure the hon. Gentleman that we shall do our utmost to ensure that we continue to obtain for Wales as large a share as possible of any funds that are going.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend join me in deploring the fact that an administrator from the EEC should join in the referendum campaign? Is it not tantamount to civil servants in this country joining in our domestic General Election campaigns?

The Commission's statement to which I have just referred is a sufficient indication of the views that are held of these reports, which were thoroughly inaccurate and misleading.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what representations he has received concerning the Community Land Bill and the proposed Land Authority for Wales.

My right hon. and learned Friend has received representations from a number of local authorities and other organisations including church representatives.

Does the Minister have no sympathy for the churches and charitable institutions which have a valid objection to having their premises confiscated at existing use value? Does he have no sympathy with the housebuilders' federation, which says that the effect of the Bill will be to damage the house building programme? Does he have no sympathy with the National Farmers' Union and the Civic Trust?

My sympathies are expected to extend widely this afternoon. Welsh Ministers have every sympathy for churches in Wales, and the Government recognise that for the churches there may be some special problems. I repeat the undertaking which was given by my right hon. and learned Friend during the debate on Second Reading of the Community Land Bill that we shall see to what extent within the principles of the legislation some of the difficulties can be overcome. I know that the hon. Member for Conway (Mr. Roberts) has recently put his name to more than 30 amendments relating to Welsh aspects of the Bill, and he will have an opportunity to pursue his points in Committee.

Surely everyone must recognise that in the end exemption from development tax will come for religious authorities. To resolve their uncertainties, the sooner an announcement to that effect is made the better.

My right hon. and learned Friend gave an undertaking on Second Reading which I have repeated.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on the progress that is being made on the implementation of the Beswick Report in relation to the Heads of the Valleys.

Real progress is being made in implementing the measures outlined in Lord Beswick's report for tackling the problems of the Ebbw Vale area. I am directly involved in this task through the special working group of key representatives of the Departments and authorities concerned, and the British Steel Corporation.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that although a difficult struggle has been going on in the Ebbw Vale area for the acceptance of the Beswick timetable, new proposals have been made by the British Steel Corporation which are totally unacceptable in that area? Will he join us in pressing his colleagues in the Government that if the talks break down today or lead to deadlock the Government will intervene, as Ebbw Vale will suffer sufficiently under the Beswick timetable without being asked to suffer more?

I am deeply aware of the problems in Ebbw Vale. I was there this weekend chairing a joint meeting of all the interested parties, and I or my officials are there regularly. Discussions are proceeding within the industry on the BSC proposals—which are only proposals—and a meeting is taking place today between the BSC and the unions.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman give a categorical assurance that there will be no redundancies until alternative employment is provided for the men involved?

The hon. Gentleman is fully aware that that is what I am seeking to do. I have outlined a programme to the community for the clearing of land, the preparation of sites, the provision of infrastructure by way of water and sewerage and the building of advance factories to provide the alternative employment which I passionately regard as being of such importance in this area.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend also bear in mind that a sharp rundown at Shotton would have serious repercussions not only in Clwyd but throughout the whole of North Wales where unemployment is at an unacceptably high level? Will he and his right hon. Friends give careful consideration to the substantial and impressive document recently produced by Clwyd County Council and other bodies in the area which provides certain alternatives which should be carefully considered by my right hon. and learned Friend and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry?

As my right hon. Friend is fully aware, any rundown in any part of the steel industry would create major problems. That is why I can give my right hon. Friend the assurance that documents or representations emanating from any part of the steel industry will be carefully considered by the Government.

Will the Minister say what is the estimated number of workers in Wales in the steel industry who will be made redundant within the next 12 months?

It is not possible to give such an estimate. Discussions are taking place today about certain proposals from the British Steel Corporation. We are also conducting a strategic review into the long-term proposals of the British steel industry. The hon. Gentleman will know the serious problems of production and the fall in the market throughout the steel industry, in particular in the strip mill division.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will pay an official visit to Pwllheli at an early date.

I have no present plans to do so.

If the Secretary of State were to visit Pwllheli he would be made aware of an unemployment rate for men of almost 15 per cent. Is he aware that unemployment has worsened in the past few weeks because of the closure of an engineering factory employing 50 people, a closure which was totally unnecessary and which could have been prevented had the powers of the Welsh Development Agency been in existence? Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman seek to co-operate with his right hon. Friends in the Department of Industry to see whether the Government can intervene to bring this factory back to life and bring vital employment back to an area which is so destitute of it?

I am aware of the problems which concern the hon. Gentleman's constituency among others. I do not wish to comment on a particular case, but the hon. Gentleman knows well what has happened recently. I understand that there are a number of interests involved. Should anyone involved in this matter make application to the Department of Industry for selective financial assistance, any such application would be looked at urgently and sympathetically. I am sure the hon. Gentleman will recall that, having regard to the problems in his area, I announced in the Welsh Grand Committee a short time ago the proposed building of two factories of 5,000 sq. ft. at Pwllheli.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry if he will make a statement on current and expected levels of investment in the engineering industry.

Capital expenditure by the engineering, shipbuilding and metal goods group of industries was £798 million in 1974, representing an increase in volume of 12 per cent. on 1973. The investment intentions inquiry carried out in November-December 1974, results of which were published in Trade and Industry on 30th January, indicated a significant fall in 1975. A more up-to-date assessment will be available when the results of the next investment intentions inquiry are published on 9th June.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that a number of investigations outside his Department indicate the likelihood of a continuing fall in levels of investment? In view of the importance of profitability in terms of investment, will he persuade his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to use his undoubted influence in the Cabinet to overcome the obduracy of the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection and to secure the early scrapping of the Price Code, and to use his undoubted influence to secure the rejection of the suggestion by Mr. Jack Jones of a prices freeze?

I can confirm what the hon. Gentleman said in the first part of his question. I cannot confirm that many of the investigations which are now being carried out indicate such a fall. As regards the second part of the hon. Gentleman's question, I do not think that is solely a matter for me. It is very much a question for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection. The suggestions made by the hon. Gentleman strike me as being likely to lead on to further inflation rather than to curb it at present.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry when he will be announcing his detailed proposals for the implementation of the Ryder Report on British Leyland.

I must ask the hon. Gentleman to await the Second Reading debate on the British Leyland Bill, which has been arranged for Wednesday 21st May.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Parliament is being asked in the debate on Wednesday to give its approval for finance for one of the largest single commercial investments that have ever been made in the public sector, without being provided with any information on the prospective return on that investment? Does the Secretary of State propose during—or preferably before—the debate to give Parliament this necessary information? Without it, Parliament is being asked to arrive at a decision while totally in the dark as to the crucial basis of the return.

I appreciate the point that the hon. Gentleman is making. Certainly when a Government get involved in industrial matters they confront the question of how much can be disclosed without damage to the firm concerned. That is a point arising from another point of view put by the hon. Gentleman in Committee on the Industry Bill. I would not claim that every bit of relevant information can be made available. However, we shall do our best. If there are pieces of information that the hon. Gentleman would like which have not been published I shall consider them again, but it is difficult, when the Government are brought into these areas, to find an absolutely satisfactory answer immediately to these difficult questions.

Pending his further statement, does my right hon. Friend agree that the future of British Leyland is a vital national interest? Further, does he agree that if, however improbably, the Brussels Commission were to try to interfere with the implementation of the Ryder Report, Her Majesty's Government would have the power to veto such interference through the Council of Ministers?

I must not enter into matters of legal interpretation, but my understanding of the provisions of the treaty is that the Council of Ministers would have to be unanimous to override a decision made by the Commission. Therefore, the United Kingdom Government alone would not have the power to do what my hon. Friend thinks.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that there is concern—I carefully put it no higher than that—in sections of British manufacturing industry at what the Prime Minister had admitted to be the pre-emption of such an enormous amount of our available resources by a leading unit in one industry alone? Will he undertake, in the debate on Wednesday or before, to put this vast expenditure into the context of the overall needs of the whole of the manufacturing sector?

I think that what the hon. Gentleman says has a great deal of force. Given the fact that we have been investing at roughly half the rate of our major industrial competitors across the whole area of manufacturing industry, it is clear that if we seek to correct that deficiency in one company, however large, we are greatly accelerating investment in it and questions will be raised about other areas. However, a lot of the money that will be spent by British Leyland will go into other British manufacturing firms. For example, I hope that Alfred Herbert, which makes machine tools, will benefit from the British Leyland development programme. Thus we hope that by correcting this deficiency over the years the whole expenditure will help to reinforce other sections of industry.

Following on from that, will the right hon. Gentleman say whether a full assessment has been made, in making this investment in British Leyland in what may not be a profitable venture, of the impact on the profitable exports which could have been made by contractors who will now find their order books full of British Leyland work?

The concept that there is always alternative profitable employment if only we can chop out what is unprofitable is a little theoretical. People do not easily move from one type of venture to another. Therefore, we must look at these matters in the light of what is practicable. One thing that I am sure of is that this country cannot survive unless we are able to make our own competitive motorcars rather than seeing a huge inrush of motorcars coming in increasing numbers from abroad. The best assessment that could be made has been made. The hon. Gentleman will know that the Government do not pick their own timetable in matters of industrial rescue. There are cases which may be dictated by factors outside their own control.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry if he will make a statement on the European Parliament's report on the IBM company's domination in Europe, so far as his policy towards its recommendations are concerned.

I take it that the Question relates to the recent report on data pro cessing prepared for the Economic and Social Committee of the EEC. That report makes recommendations for Community action, and it is for the European Commission to decide whether to put forward proposals to the Council of Ministers based on those recommendations.

I am sure my right hon. Friend will be aware that for two years the committee has been vetting sharp practices by IBM in relating one company's production to another. Does he agree that a couple of things we could possibly do would be to approach ICL to see whether we could develop a proper computer strategy within Europe, whatever happens on 5th June, and to have a Green Paper setting out our thinking on the whole area of the electronics industry?

As to a study of the electronics industry, that is something that has concerned the Government. Due to the active and strong support which my hon. Friend has endorsed over the years for ICL, only 38 per cent. of the United Kingdom market is held by IBM whereas in the EEC as a whole it has 60 per cent. ICL's competitive performance in the United Kingdom is much stronger than in Europe; it has 32 per cent. of the market compared with IBM's 38 per cent. That is a satisfactory performance by ICL. I should be reluctant for political reasons to drive ICL into any arrangements which did not appear to make commercial sense to it. As my hon. Friend says, these international corporations can survive in or out of the Community.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us of Her Majesty's Government's attitude to the recently-announced formation of the Minneapolis Honeywell-Bull and CII Company in France, which puts United States-dominated companies in first and second places in the British and European computer industries?

I thought that this question might arise. I am told that the Honeywell-Bull arrangements in France will not affect the United Kingdom, but clearly there is a powerful American domination in computers which makes it all the more sensible that we should continue with the policy adopted by both successive Governments of supporting ICL, which has made it as good a company as it now is.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry when he next expects to meet the Chairman of the British Steel Corporation.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry when he next plans to meet the Chairman of the British Steel Corporation.

I met the chairman on 28th April and am still awaiting a reply to my request dated 6th May for a meeting with the Board of BSC and the unions.

Is it not high time that the Secretary of State stopped using the Chairman of the British Steel Corporation as a whipping boy and turned the Government's attention to the vital question of deciding what is to be the investment programme of the corporation, particularly as it concerns Scotland and Wales? Does not the right hon. Gentleman accept that the recent saga bodes ill for the future of the aerospace and shipbuilding industries?

I do not accept what the hon. Gentleman has said. When the statements printed in the papers were brought to my attention and anxiety was expressed by the unions, I invited Sir Monty Finniston to come to see me. At the meeting I asked him to consider carefully whether the statements were correct or whether he had been misreported. I put some important matters of public policy to him in a letter. I had a response to the letter, in which he confirmed the truth of the Press reports and gave comments on the matters which I had raised with him. I asked the unions to look at these same problems and suggested a tripartite meeting after he had met the unions. I believe that that was a perfectly reasonable thing to do. I believe that the board of any nationalised industry must recognise that it has to have a good working relationship with its own workers, that matters concerning jobs should be discussed with the unions and that the Government are bound inevitably to be concerned, even if only because of the investment implications.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the concern of ours in Scotland is because most of the closure proposals are concentrated in areas of already high unemployment? Can he say whether he and the Government support the proposals which have been put forward by the board for work-sharing as opposed to plant-sharing if this appears to be the best way of holding the labour force together in present difficult times?

On the first point, the hon. Gentleman is quite right: there is great anxiety in Scotland, though the anxiety is not confined to that area.

Does not the Secretary of State agree that the limitations on the size of any corporation within the European Coal and Steel Community rule out any large-scale expansion of the Scottish Steel industry unless there is a Scottish steel corporation as a completely separate body? Does he not accept that the opposition to the establishment of such an organisation arises from the fact that the Scottish steel industry would prove to be a very formidable competitor of the English steel industry? Will he comment on the fact that an order for 20,000 tons of steel which could have been made at Cambuslang has been transferred to Scunthorpe?

Order. We have passed 3.10 p.m. I hope that the rest of this Question will be taken quite quickly.

The hon. Lady's point about a separate corporation for Scotland is well known, but it has not met with support among steel workers.

Yes, it has.

The hon. Lady must allow me to give my interpretation. My own belief is that the main strength of those who work in the steel industry lies in their working together within the unions concerned and that it would weaken rather than strengthen this if they were to be divided. I am with the hon. Lady 100 per cent. as regards the question of management devolution further from the centre to the point to where the steel is made.

Does my right hon. Friend agree with me that there is very deep feeling throughout all the steel workers regarding possible lay-offs and that, for instance, at a meeting last night of no fewer than 2,500 people in Sheffield this feeling was being voiced all round the hall in personal conversations? Does he agree with me that at this moment a lobby of Parliament is about to take place and there is to be a demonstration here by people who are deeply concerned about the chairmanship of the British Steel Corporation, who are worrying themselves to death about the lay-offs that are about to come and who therefore want to know exactly what the position is?

I can confirm what my hon. Friend said about Sheffield because I was at the meeting to which he referred. There is a great deal of anxiety about redundancy. I make no apology to the House for being as concerned as the steel workers about their jobs. I think that is quite right. I am taking the opportunity this afternoon of meeting the people who have come to London to voice their anxieties. My belief is that this matter must be discussed between the corporation and the unions and that it must then move quickly to a proper tripartite examination of the matter between the unions, the corporation and the Government.

The Secretary of State referred to the importance of good relations between management and all those who work in the steel industry. Does he feel that at this very delicate time between management and unions, his addressing public meetings of people coming to London will do anything to help the situation? Finally, in view of the comments of the Secretary of State for Employment, will he confirm that there is still collective Cabinet responsibility for the steel industry?

The day that Ministers are afraid of meeting their own constituents, Parliament will perish and die. The hon. Gentleman has no business to say to a Member or a Minister that he should not meet people who have come to meet their representatives to express their anxieties. There is just as much anxiety among management in the steel plants throughout the country as there is among the people who are working as skilled and unskilled workers.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service if he satisfied with the work done by the Pay Research Unit in comparing pay in the Civil Service with pay and conditions obtaining outside.

Yes, Sir. I am entirely satisfied with the Pay Research Unit's work, which is to identify by objective studies comparable work outside the Civil Service and to report the facts about pay and conditions attaching to it.

In view of the secrecy surrounding both the composition of this body and the scope of its work, how can the Minister convince the House that this body truly is independent? How can he be sure that the comparisons are valid, bearing in mind that civil servants' rates are now out of line with industry, that it is very hard to get the sack in the Civil Service and that the Civil Service is the only employer in England which has inflation-proof pensions?

As I indicated to the hon. Member in the reply which I gave to a Written Question of his on 12th May, there is no conspiracy or secrecy surrounding the composition of the Civil Service Pay Research Unit. In fact, the names of the individuals who comprise the Pay Research Unit are published in the Civil Service Year Book. As for the pay facts which emerge from the deliberations and work of the Pay Research Unit, the Priestley Commission in 1956 laid it down as a general principle that civil servants were entitled to fair comparisons with the rates of pay and salaries enjoyed by workers in the private sector. All that the Civil Service Pay Research Unit seeks to do is to establish those rates of pay and make that information and analysis available for Ministers. It is Ministers who make decisions about the rates of pay of civil servants.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is general acceptance and a welcome of the findings of the Pay Research Unit and the way in which it operates and that there is no dispute on this matter between the staff side and the official side? However, is he aware that the abrupt decision to cancel the 1976 census gives rise to strains between the two sides? Would he care to comment on the fact that no consultations apparently took place before this decision was taken?

I well appreciate my hon. Friend's interest in the question of Civil Service conditions and the right of consultation. Naturally, as the Minister responsible for Civil Service pay and conditions I would expect all my ministerial colleagues to observe consultation in all matters.

Will my hon. Friend accept that this pay agreement lies within the terms of the social contract? Is he aware that there are many civil servants and public servants in various parts of the country who recognize that this agreement demonstrates that this is the first Government for many years who have played fair with civil and public servants?

I am obliged by the comments of my hon. Friend in his recognition that in regard to the Pay Research Unit the Government have honoured the principle of fair comparisons. I think it is right and proper that this Government should do so.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service how many civil servants are currently employed in Yorkshire and Humberside; and how this compares with the other economic regions of England.

At 1st April 1975 there were approximately 23,500 non-industrial civil servants employed in Yorkshire and Humberside. This is about 5½ per cent. of the total employed in economic planning regions in England. I will publish details in the Official Report.

I am obliged to my hon. Friend for that information. Is he aware that there is still very great concern and anxiety in Sheffield about the location of the Health and Safety Commission and parts of the Manpower Services Commission? Can he give any information about progress and discussions on these very important matters?

As the House will recognise, my hon. Friend has shown a consistent and almost monthly interest in the question of the location of the Manpower Services Commission and the Health and Safety Commission. I am mindful of his consistency in this matter, and I will convey his concern and interest in the question to my ministerial colleagues.

asked the Lord President of the Council what proposals he has to improve working conditions for Members.

As my hon. Friend will be aware, a Select Committee, under the chairmanship of the hon. Member for Wokingham (Mr. van Straubenzee) is at present considering the general question of support facilities for back benchers. The first report of that Committee was published today, and I shall, with colleagues, be giving urgent consideration to its recommendations.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is great concern at the way in which this House is run, the way in which business is organised and the tremendous amount of legislation pouring out from Ministers, necessitating for a large number of full-time Members in this House I exclude those on the benches opposite who are not full-time — an 80- to 90-hour week? That does not include weekend work. This is having a tremendous toll on Members' life and health. Does not my right hon. Friend think that it is high time we had a complete reorganisation of the way in which the House is run and the way business is handled? Will he see that the overhaul takes place immediately?

The large volume of legislation this Session flows from the manifesto on which my hon. Friend and I fought the last election.

Yes, a five-year programme—not a one-year programme.

I hope my hon. Friend will see to it that it is a rive-year programme. Certainly I agree that the time has come when the House must take a radical look at the way in which we do our business. I hope to make a proposal to the House later this Session.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that hon. Members who find their work here too much for them could easily apply for the Chiltern Hundreds?

No, Sir. I believe genuinely that there is a feeling that the time has come when we must look at the way we carry out our business. We now have the great complication of European legislation, and any modern Government, of either party, intervene to a great extent, and increasingly—[HON. MEMBERS: "Too much."] Perhaps too much, but those are the facts of life, and I think that Parliament itself has not kept up with this trend. I feel, therefore, that the time has come when we must look at this is a radical way.

When my right hon. Friend is considering working conditions in this building, will he be good enough to consider the conditions for the staff and the hours they work? In particular, will he consider the conditions in which the police work, and to that end pay a visit to the small and inadequate mess room at St. Stephen's and inquire why the police still have no ventilation in the one room which is available to them?

Yes, Sir, I have been doing some of this investigation lately. For example, the doorkeepers may not know it, but I visited their dormitory recently to see the conditions in which they have to exist in this place. It is one of the consequences of the way in which we do our business that we impose great burdens on the staff, and I often think that we are not sufficiently grateful to the staff of the House for the way in which they serve us.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take it that, apart from the noise going on at the moment, the Norman Shaw building offers excellent facilities for Members, and will he now consider the possibility of converting the other Norman Shaw building and scrapping once and for all the grandiose and ridiculous new parliamentary building project which was approved during the last Parliament?

I think that it will be possible to make a statement to the House on that and related matters in the very near future.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the workings of the Boyle Committee also have a bearing on the working conditions of many Members, and may we have some assurance about the way it is proceeding and when it is likely to report? Second, will my right hon. Friend write to the editor of The Times to tell him that the report which he published on 28th April saying that Members of Parliament were against raising their salaries is wholly erroneous?

I do not write to the editor of The Times. On the other matter, I hope that the Boyle Committee will be able to submit a report to the Prime Minister in the month of June.

If I were allowed a comment on this matter, I think that I should say that far too often I find a lot of hon. Members in rude health.

asked the Lord President of the Council if he will now answer Questions relating to the salary and conditions of House of Commons staff.

No, Sir. But I understand that Mr. Speaker will arrange for this information to be published.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is a need to relate all these salaries in the establishment in order to avoid some of the absurdities and ambiguities which now exist whereby chauffeurs receive £4,500 with overtime, Members of Parliament receive the same with or without overtime, clerks in the Library receive up to £6,100 and a number of officials can pick up a cool £10,000 a year?

Since the statement of principles in 1970, the salaries paid to staff of the House have been kept broadly in line with those of the Home Civil Service.

Can my right hon. Friend say why he cannot divulge this information, since it is possible for a Member to go into the Library of the House and ask the library research staff to produce the information? Does he not agree that it is very important to recognise how badly off Members are compared with the officials who run this establishment? Can he say how many people have free board and lodgings here—or, at least, free lodgings—as compared with Members who have to scrap and scrape around in second- and third-class hotels?

I cannot answer the last part of that supplementary question. The technical answer to the first part is that the responsibility lies with the Commissioners appointed under the House of Commons (Offices) Act 1812, and I am not one of the Commissioners. However, the constitution of the Commissioners is included in the terms of reference of the committee under the chairmanship of my right hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough (Mr. Bottomley). That is the technical reason why I cannot answer this Question. There is the other reason that it would not be desirable to have the salaries of individual officers of the House discussed on the Floor of the House. As I have said, Mr. Speaker has agreed to publish the figures.