asked the Secretary of State for Wales whether he will now publish an economic plan for Wales as a guideline for the work of the Welsh Development Agency and other bodies concerned with the economic development of Wales.

I refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave him on 21st June. The information they require is already available to these bodies.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that a report to come out next Wednesday from the Development Corporation is likely to make his reply look pedestrian and totally unresponsive to the needs of Wales? Is he aware of the general demand in Wales for a national economic development plan, manifested in evidence to his Office by such bodies as the Town and Country Planning Association and the South Glamorgan County Council? Does he realise that if we are to attract investment from overseas we must have a strategic industrial development plan of this sort? Does not his answer mean that he is stubborn, ignorant or impotent in this matter?

I shall not trade insults with the hon. Gentleman. I hope that the House will accept that I try not to be ignorant or stupid, or to be what the hon. Gentleman suggested with his third adjective. There has been some disputation in the Press about the publication of plans. I have less confidence in plans that the hon. Gentleman does. I had cause to examine the plan put up by the Welsh National Party in the early part of this year. I think that in the course of my replies that plan—certainly the first one put forward—was completely demolished.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend accept that there is already a planning structure and a planning necessity at local authority level? What basis of realism can there be for the local authority plans unless there is an attempt at least to co-ordinate them on an all-Wales basis?

I accept what my hon. Friend says. The local authorities are getting on with their structure plans. I am told that any grandiose plan at this stage would be unnecessary for the purpose of preparing plans and would hold up the process upon which the authorities are engaged. But obviously one is constantly updating not plans but policies. Hence the special development area status for North-West Wales, development area status for part of South-East Wales, the setting up of two major agencies, and the special plans we have made for Ebbw Vale. We are considering the problem of North-East Wales in the light of the Courtaulds closure.

Why on earth should anyone want an economic plan from this Government when all they have done so far is to produce empty factories, falling production, rising unemployment and fewer resources for the social services?

The hon. Gentleman is aware how miserably and lamentably his Government fell down in 1973. When factories were urgently needed in Wales, they cut factory building. We have doubled the number of factories built in Wales.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he has any plans to bring part of the Severn-Trent Water Authority area in Wales under the jurisdiction of the Welsh National Water Department Authority; and if he will make a statement.

No. A water strategy for England and Wales, the need for which was amply demonstrated during the summer drought, requires a unified river basin management system. The present boundaries between the Welsh National Water Development Authority and the Severn-Trent Water Authority secure this.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the Mid-Wales area is the best water catchment area in the whole of Britain, and that the Welsh National Water Development Authority has been at a financial disadvantage since its inception, because the Mid-Wales area is not under its jurisdiction?

It is true that part of Powys, the old Montgomery area, is under the Severn-Trent Water Authority, but that is because it is the upper catchment area of the River Severn, and the experience of all those who have had anything to do with water supply in recent years shows that one cannot have effective and efficient control over water supplies or sewerage and sewage disposal without a unified river basin management system.

Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the lessons of the drought was the interdependence of the water authorities in England and Wales and the need for a rather more centralised structure, for which the Government are pressing?

I agree that that was one of the most valuable lessons. I hope that we shall all learn that the only means of combating such a period of drought is to secure the maximum co-operation between the water authorities but to let the responsibilites of the separate authorities depend upon the unified river basins.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a visit to North-East Wales.

I have no immediate plans to do so.

Is the Secretary of State aware that if he were to come to Mold next Friday he would find hon. Members from Clwyd and Merseyside grappling with the appalling problems of unemployment caused by the failure of his Government to tackle inflation in good time? Does not this co-operation between Clwyd and Merseyside make nonsense of the priority accorded by the Government to the setting up of a Welsh Assembly, which will make no contribution whatever to solving the urgent problems of Wales?

I shall reserve to a later stage my comments on the last part of the hon. Gentleman's question. I regret that I cannot be in Mold next Friday, because I shall be in my own constituency. But I always recognise the value of co-operation in dealing with unemployment problems. I am sure that even the hon. Gentleman would not blame this Government for the recent decision of Courtaulds.

Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman accept that many of us were disappointed that he was unable to visit Clwyd last week because of his engagement with the publication of the Scotland and Wales Bill? Will he assure the House that he will visit Clwyd in the very near future and that, before doing so, he will read the recent economic review published by the county council, which estimates a job need of at least 40,000 in the next 10 years? When he next comes to Clwyd, will he also take the opportunity of talking to some of the redundant workers in milk processing in my constituency?

I do not know how far the hon. Gentleman is familiar with the problems of Clwyd, for the greater part of which he is not the Member. I assure him that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State keeps me in close touch with the major problems of Clwyd. I regret that I was unable to carry out an engagement there last week, but, as the hon. Gentleman kindly said, I was engaged with the publication of the devolution Bill, the importance of which I am sure he appreciates.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what estimate he has made of the annual salary and cost of individual Members of the Welsh Assembly.

I refer the hon. Member to the Explanatory and Financial Memorandum to the Scotland and Wales Bill. I will in due course fix the initial salaries and allowances, but it will be for the Assembly itself to take the final decision.

In view of the fact that, in addition to the Members of the Assembly, who according to the preamble to the Bill will cost £2½ million a year, there will be the necessity for 1,300 civil servants at a cost of £10 million a year, will the Secretary of State now withdraw his oft-repeated statement that devolution does not mean an extra tier of government?

The hon. Gentleman knows full well that this is not an extra tier but is the existing tier of government. It is the whole range of responsibilities which are now being carried out by the nominated bodies in Wales. We never hear Tories attacking them. The Tory Party knows that it is a permanent minority party in Wales. The nominated bodies are the means whereby the Tory Party seeks to perpetuate its control over Wales, in or out of office. We know that so far no Tory Prime Minister has appointed a Secretary of State for Wales from among Welsh Members.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend come back to the original Question instead of scattering fire at targets which are not in existence? Is it not a fact that the cost of each Assembly man, together with the support that he gets, is now declared to be £31,250, which means that 80 Assembly men will receive £2½ million by way of salary and support? Is it not also a fact that it will cost £7,692 for every one of the 1,300 civil servants who are to be appointed at a total cost of £10 million? How can the Secretary of State expect local authorities throughout Wales to reduce their expenditure at a time when he is embarking upon an extravaganza which is repellent to the overwhelming majority of the people of Wales?

I am sure that my hon. Friend will develop those points at length in the course of the devolution debates. This is the price of democracy. Whatever Government are in power in Westminster, I want to ensure that there is democratic government in Wales.

Will the Secretary of State draw the attention of his hon. Friend the Member for Pontypool (Mr. Abse) and the hon. Member for Conway (Mr. Roberts) to Clause 86 of the Bill, which empowers the Assembly to dissolve nominated bodies in Wales? Will he calculate the benefit and the cost saving from so doing and indicate that a 2 per cent. improvement in efficiency in the spending of the block allocation would more than repay the costs of the Assembly?

These matters must be put in the right perspective. If we were to have better control over some of the nominated bodies in Wales—indeed, more democratic control, which is what I am after—I am sure that it would lead to better, more efficient and economical government.

Is it not a fact that we shall continue to have nominated bodies, the only difference being that they will be nominated by the Assembly rather than by the Secretary of State?

If the hon. Gentleman will study the Bill, he will find a power to enable the Assembly—I sincerely hope that it will use it—to take it upon itself—

indicated dissent.

There is no reason for the hon. Gentleman to shake his head—to subsume the responsibilities of many of these bodies. That is what I want to see in Wales.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales by what date he expects the Water Equalisation Bill to affect the payments made by consumers in Wales.

Subject to the will of Parliament, I hope that the Bill will reach the statute book in time to affect domestic consumers' bills in Wales in the next financial year.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the Bill will receive the warmest of welcomes in Wales? Charges for water have been a sore point for some time. I appreciate the difficulties involved. However, will my hon. Friend press for a greater degree of equalisation than is envisaged in the consultative document which was published earlier this year?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his welcome for the Bill. I am sure that it will be welcomed by domestic water consumers in Wales. The present system of equalisation will, by its very nature, run out in time. That is why we propose to ask the new central body to envisage a more permanent system of equalisation charges affecting Wales.

Will the Under-Secretary tell us—if not today, at least when the Bill is brought forward— whether the greater benefit to be obtained by charging an economic rate for the export of water from the Welsh National Water Development Authority's area to areas in the Midlands of England will be made available to the Authority?

I know that the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues are great ones for wanting to charge for water. The majority view in this House and in Wales is that we need to secure fairness between water consumers in Wales and in England. The charging policy advocated by the hon. Gentleman is a positive disincentive to building urgently needed reservoirs in Wales and in other parts of the United Kingdom.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what effect the closure of the cardiac surgical unit at Sully Hospital has had on the waiting period for patients requiring cardiac surgery; and if he will make a statement.

Following closure of the Sully cardiac surgery unit there was an initial increase in the waiting list, subsequently aggravated by infection problems in the University Hospital of Wales' operating theatres. This year there has been a steady reduction in the number of people waiting for operations. Already this year some 300 operations have been performed at the University Hospital, and the waiting list is little more than half the corresponding figure last year.

Is the Minister aware that, whatever the merits or demerits of the long-term proposal to close the cardiac unit at the Sully Hospital, the step that was taken some time ago was premature and ill advised? Is he further aware that, in the view of many consultants, had the unit been kept at Sully many patients would not have had to wait so long or otherwise have had to be sent to London at great expense?

The hon. Gentleman's right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Hendon, South (Mr. Thomas), the then Secretary of State for Wales, sanctioned this change in November 1970. In 1974 the University Hospital carried out 261 operations. So far this year there have been 298 operations. Both these totals are more than in any of the last five years at Sully.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on the impact of the rate support grant on Welsh local authorities.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what is the level of rate support grant which will be made to each county in Wales for the year 1977–78.

In common with local authorities generally, the percentage of expenditure of Welsh local authorities met by RSG will be lower next year. The impact on the ratepayer will depend on decisions taken by individual authorities, but generally speaking the average impact on the Welsh domestic ratepayer should be less in cash terms than in England. The share of the needs element of RSG to Welsh authorities as a whole next year will not change significantly and the differential in the domestic element in favour of Wales is to be retained. Information which will enable a provisional assessment of the amount of RSG needs element to be made is being sent to authorities today.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman basing that statement largely on domestic support continuing at the same rate? Is it not a fact that the burden falling on local authorities from reduced Government grants will in every Welsh county be above the national average of 15 per cent., that for four Welsh counties it is likely to be over 20 per cent., and that for the unfortunate citizens of Dyfed the burden is forecast at 24 per cent.? Why is it that once again Wales seems to be doing so badly?

Wales is not doing badly. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will want to study this matter. It is a tough settlement. The average rate bill in England will increase by about £15 and in Wales by about £11. The absolute increases in rate bills are likely to be smaller than average in Wales. Our share of the needs element remains roughly the same. The differential in our favour in respect of the domestic element is unchanged. No one can seriously say that this element discriminates against the Welsh ratepayer.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman calculate the likely reduction in the levels of social and educational services offered by Welsh counties as a result of the RSG settlement? How many day centre places for the mentally ill will be lost, how many nursery places will be lost, how many road improvements will not be undertaken and how many jobs in local authorities in Wales will be lost as a result of the settlement?

I am the first to concede that this is a tough settlement. However, it is for the local authorities to decide a number of these issues for themselves. The hon. Gentleman should know that the total amount of Government support in his own county of Gwynedd—that is the total amount of all Government grants —is running at 76 per cent. That is an indication of the support that his area is receiving. I repeat that the totality of the needs element for the whole of Wales will be about the same as it was this year.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that through the coming months many of us will be receiving furious letters from our constituents about rate increases? Is he further aware that many of us, even on the Opposition Benches, would be prepared to defend the Government's decision to reduce the rate support grant if only the Government would come clean and be frank and honest? If the right hon. and learned Gentleman continues to make the sort of reply that he has just made, the task of those who have to try to explain the facts of life to constituents will be rendered quite impossible.

I always listen carefully to what the hon. Gentleman has to say, and I trust that he will do me the same courtesy and read what I have just said about the totality of the assistance, the overall position in Wales, and the domestic element. I think that the hon. Gentleman used the word "honest". I hope that he is not suggesting in any way that I have given a wrong impression. When he reads what I have said, I am sure that he will come to the conclusion that I have not given an unreasonable answer but have put the position fairly and squarely as I see it.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that many councils are now waiting with concern for the transport supplementary grant figures? Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman give us some assurance that the figure for Wales will be at least as high as last year and adjusted for inflation —namely, at least £25 million with at least £3 million for the county of Gwynedd?

My recollection and understanding is that Wales has done rather well in the TSG. I hope to announce the figures in the early part of next week.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what representations he has received on the subject of local authority direct labour building operations; and if he will make a statement.

We have received representations both for and against the greater use of direct labour organisations from various sources, including local authorities, bodies representing the building and construction industry and individuals. It was announced in the Gracious Speech that legislation will be introduced this Session to remove unnecessary restrictions on the powers of local authorities to undertake construction work by direct labour.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the degree of hostility that the Government's proposals will evince among ratepayers, who will have to bear the burden of the losses of these uncompetitive departments, as well as among private builders and their employees? Will he give an undertaking that any extension of direct labour organisations will mean that the accounts for direct labour will be on the same basis as for commercial undertakings?

I well understand the hon. Gentleman's hostility to this proposal. The Government will encourage efficient direct labour organisations. It is also the Government's intention that full and fair comparisons between direct labour organisations and private industry will be possible.

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that although local authorities and direct labour undertakings have to find work for their employees, many smaller building undertakings have a much more formidable task? They also have staffs and employees. Will the hon. Gentleman take account of the needs of those employees as well as the needs of builders and other employers?

The Government are concerned to protect the jobs of workers in the private enterprise construction industry as well as to protect the jobs of workers in direct labour organisations.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that much of the increase in local government staffing since reorganisation has been due to an intake of direct labour? Does he agree that an increase in direct labour will mean an additional burden for the ratepayer to bear?

No, I do not accept that an increase in direct labour organisations means a direct increase in any burden on the ratepayer. I recommend that the hon. Gentleman reads the words of my right hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Construction where he indicated that the criteria of the Bill would be tougher than recommended by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountants.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales whether he will consult employers about the standards of literacy and numeracy required of school leavers.

The Confederation of British Industry is participating in the current round of informal discussions which I and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science are holding. Employers in Wales will have ample opportunity to make known their views on standards of literacy and numeracy as on other aspects of education as the national debate proceeds.

I do not accept the unfounded and exaggerated criticisms of our schools, but does the hon. Gentleman agree that many employers regard the standard of school leavers as one of their major problems? In the interests of the children, will the hon. Gentleman ensure that employers are consulted widely not only through the CBI but through other employer organisations?

I can give the assurance that everyone who is interested in the education service will be widely consulted.

When my hon. Friend consults employers, will he ask them to define numeracy and literacy? Will he also ask others to define these terms? If he does so, he may find some interesting answers. We are told that standards of education have declined, but will my hon. Friend examine O-level and CSE Grade 1 results over the past 10 years? If they are taken as a measure, he will find that standards have improved.

I agree with my hon. Friend's latter point. Standards in some directions have improved considerably. It would be difficult to make precise definitions. I say to my hon. Friend and everyone else that the Department is not being defensive. We admit that there are problems. However, the problems vary, and it is our aim to find out where they lie. We shall do so in collaboration with all those who take part in the education survey.

Is it not a fact that in Wales 30 per cent. of the children leave school without O-levels and CSEs, as against 20 per cent. in England? Does the hon. Gentleman know why that is so?

I think that in this instance the hon. Gentleman has his statistics wrong. In fact, there is no valid statistical evidence to justify some of the wilder allegations now being made.

Will the hon. Gentleman draw the attention of the CBI in Wales to the appallingly low figures for training and apprenticeships for young people in Wales, and press it, in the interests of the standard of education of Welsh employees, to ensure that greater time is made available for day release courses for employees in Wales?

I think that the point is well made. We are also undertaking research in Wales in respect of a further survey of reading standards both in English and in Welsh. Testing is likely to take place in 1978. It will cost about £18,000.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that from figures supplied by him and his right hon. Friend in the Department of Education and Science it is nevertheless clear that the number of O-level passes in Wales represents a lower percentage than that in England? How does the hon. Gentleman explain that?

The hon. Gentleman throws statistics across the Floor of the House. I can tell him that about one-fifth of our pupils are securing the former pass grade at O-level and a further 36 per cent. achieve other GCE and CSE grades.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what proposals he has for improving communications in North Wales.

We propose to concentrate resources on the improvement of the A55 as soon as possible and will continue to support local authorities in maintaining a basic network of public transport services.

Is my hon. Friend aware that good communications are absolutely crucial for industrial and commercial purposes? Will he say, first, when my right hon. and learned Friend is likely to pronounce on the prolonged public inquiry that took place on the Colcon route and, secondly, can he confirm that the work on the new road span over the Britannia Bridge is likely to continue on schedule?

The work on the bridge is likely to continue on schedule. Work should begin next year and should take £10 million of resources over a period of years. I have to tell my right hon. Friend that the inspector's report on the Colcon route has to be carefully considered. I am aware of the desire for an early decision. That makes it even more important to consider the report fully before we give such a decision.

Will the hon. Gentleman at long last get a move on with the Caernarvon inner relief road scheme, the lack of which is causing untold embarrassment and dereliction in the town, and is creating a hideous sight in what is a major tourist centre? Is he aware that the people there are getting so fed up that they could not tolerate another summer under these conditions?

The Department has already spent in excess of £1 million on this scheme. The hon. Member should be pleased to know that the construction of the Twthill school replacement is expected to start early in 1977.

Is the Minister aware—I am sure that he is—that it is not possible to travel from North Wales to South Wales by rail without crossing the border into England? What plans has he to improve rail and road communications between North and South Wales?

My right hon. and learned Friend looks at this aspect of our affairs with keen devotion. So do I. If the hon. Member has any views or complaints about the train service, he might usefully in the first instance direct those views to the Transport Users Consultative Committee.

Will the hon. Gentleman care to read his brief for Question No. 5, which was not answered, and then ask himself whether the Government have got the balance right as between the construction of advance factories which stand empty to this day and roads which urgently require to be built?

I would like to take the opportunity provided by that question to say that about 12 miles of dual carriageway have already been provided on the A.55, much of the funding going to the constituency of the hon. Member for Flint, West (Sir A. Meyer). We plan a further 45 miles, costing about £150 million.

Will the Minister confirm that his right hon. and learned Friend has received the inspector's report on the Colcon inquiry? Will he also confirm that the report will be published, before or after the Secretary of State has taken a final decision?

I can confirm that the report has been received. It is being studied.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry if he is satisfied with the current rate of profitability of industrial companies.

No. but I expect a substantial improvement as exports and output grow.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that inflation has distorted the profit figures of British companies and that proper inflation accounting will show that many sectors contain what can only be described as "convalescent ducks"? Will he and his colleagues divert the money and the energy that they are giving at the moment to the so-called regeneration of British industry and work instead with the Chancellor to create a climate in which British companies can be profitable and thus allow reinvestment to take place?

That question shows how utterly out of touch with the realities of the industrial situation the Opposition are. The industrial regeneration policy is welcomed by industry. It is needed by industry. Such things as the accelerated projects scheme and industry schemes are helping industry to modernise and become more profitable. I wish that the Opposition would find out what is going on.

Does my hon. Friend agree that it is of the utmost importance that the profitability of industry is used for the good of the whole community? Does he further agree that the best way of doing this is by extending public ownership, and not reducing it? In view of this will he ask his right hon. Friends the Secretary of State for Energy and the Prime Minister to deny categorically rumours, which are causing grave concern, to the effect that the Government are on the point of surrendering their public shares in British Petroleum just because of the demands of the vultures in the IMF?

I shall draw the comments of my hon. Friend to the attention of my right hon. Friends. We need profitable private and public sectors in industry, both viable and able to stand on their own feet.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry what is his policy regarding the conclusion of the recent NEDO report that the arm's-length relationship between Government and nationalised industries has failed; and if he will take action to promote greater consensus on and less interference in the management of those industries for which he is responsible.

The hon. Member should await the publication of the White Paper mentioned by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister in reply to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Bedwellty (Mr. Kinnock) on 18th November.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that perhaps the time has come for a new approach to the relationship between Government and nationalised industries? In particular, is it not time to encourage greater autonomy in the industrial management and planning of those industries in return for greater accountability of their performance to Government and other interests?

I certainly believe it is appropriate for the Government to reexamine their relationship with publicly-owned industries, so that, on the one hand, they can operate effectively as commercial concerns and, on the other, the accountability to Parliament and to the owners of these industries shall be greater. We need to improve on the record of the Tory Party when it was in power.

Will my hon. Friend ensure that a close relationship is maintained between the managers of the nationalised industries and the Government? Far from there being less contact, does my hon. Friend not agree that there ought to be more? Will my hon. Friend confirm that he will not follow the reported comments of Lord Ryder, who apparently said that he will operate the National Enterprise Board only in conjunction with what the Conservative Party will approve? Will he also confirm that he will not operate that procedure in the context of the other nationalised industries?

I can assure my hon. Friend that the National Enterprise Board has been established to carry out the industrial policies of this Labour Government, as embodied in the manifesto from which the NEB was created. Since the Tory Party voted against the creation of the NEB, its views on the matter are irrelevant.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry if it remains his policy not to fund any new civil aircraft projects at the factories of BAC, HSA and Scottish Aviation whilst they remain in private ownership.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry if it remains his determination to refuse launching aid to civil aircraft projects advanced by HSA or BAC whilst those companies remain in the private sector of the economy.

No such policy has been announced.

With respect to the Minister, may I say that his reply is rather at variance with that which we heard in the debate? Is he aware that I would like to be sure that there is no refusal?

Since we have had no approaches, there could be no refusal. Where I have had approaches, in the case of the HS146 and the BAC 1–11, I made available £6½ million of Government money, which the Opposition disliked so much that they shouted me down when I announced it.

Does the hon. Member not recall the rather hysterical reply which he made in the last of our debates last Session on the Aircraft and Shipbuilding Industries Bill? Does he not understand that this has been widely interpreted, inside and outside the House, as the Minister saying that under no circumstances would he give Government support to any major new civil project until the industry was nationalised? Is that his policy?

What I have made clear is that the days of the begging bowl have come to an end for the aircraft and shipbuilding industries in this country. We seek to place these industries into public ownership so that the large sums of money made available by the Bill can be used for new projects in the aircraft industry and to help in the shipbuilding and ship repairing industries. The hon. Gentleman had better make up his mind. If he is an exponent of private enterprise he ought to tell the House whether he believes that private enterprise should be helped out with a Government contribution to the begging bowl.

Is my hon. Friend aware that at Scottish Aviation there is complete unanimity in all sections of the industry that the only hope for survival is public ownership? Will my hon. Friend suggest to the Tory Party that the best thing it can do in these circumstances is to tell its friends in the House of Lords that it is time for them, too, to understand that?

It is well known that the long-term future of Scottish Aviation depends upon the rapid enactment of the Aircraft and Shipbuilding Industries Bill. Of course, the Tory Party does not care about these things at all.

As the Minister uses Question Time to ask questions of the Opposition rather than to answer them, may I ask him whether he is aware that there is no incompatibility between a healthy free enterprise system making sufficient profits—

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I should have thought that the hon. Member for Chingford (Mr. Tebbit) was asking a second supplementary question. Is that in order, and is it desirable, anyway?

It is well within the discretion of the Chair.

Is the Minister aware that there is no incompatibility between a healthy free enterprise system making adequate profits and co-operating with the Government in launching major projects? That is done in every country in the world.

The hon. Gentleman places a curious interpretation on the word "co-operation". By "co-operation", he means Government funding. It is well known to us that the Tory Party believes that the aircraft industry should operate on the basis of private profit produced by Government money. We believe that the industry should be in public ownership, so that the taxpayer shall have a proper return from his investment.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service whether he has plans to reactivate the Civil Service Pay Research Unit.

As I explained to the hon. Member on 2nd August, the unit, now with a substantially reduced complement, is engaged on certain duties of a care and maintenance nature. There are at present no plans to reactivate the work the unit undertook before the suspension of pay research in the Civil Service. This will depend on the future development of national pay policy.

I find that a very unsatisfactory reply. Is not the Minister deeply disturbed at the prospect of 1977 being yet another year in which Civil Service pensions will rise by between 15 per cent. and 20 per cent. while the pay of people in work will rise by only 3 per cent.? Does he not think that the time has come when, as with private sector occupational pensions, a limit must be placed on the extent to which Civil Service pensions may rise each year?

I should perhaps explain to the hon. Gentleman that the Pay Research Unit establishes the facts about salaries, pensions and conditions in the private sector and that it is on those facts that negotiations between the unions and the Government take place.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service whether it is still the intention of the Government that Civil Service jobs shall be dispersed to the Blackpool area; and how many jobs are involved.

Yes. The dispersal from London of 980 posts of the Department of Health and Social Security is proceeding. Over 140 posts have been moved so far and the remainder are expected to move by 1979–80.

I welcome that reply. Will the Minister confirm that the arguments for this move have not changed in any way since the Government announced their decision in 1974?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that the Government remain firmly committed to the policy arising from the Hardman Committee's recommendations.

Is my hon. Friend aware that, whatever case can be made out for Blackpool, an overwhelming case can be made out for dispersing some of the Government posts not yet allocated to areas such as Skelmersdale? Will my hon. Friend confirm that consideration is being given to this matter? There are some outstandingly large departments still to be transferred, and as Skelmersdale is greatly in need I hope that he will confirm that we shall get one.

I have noted the determined manner in which my hon. Friend has put forward the claim of Skelmersdale for the dispersal of Civil Service departments. If my hon. Friend looks at the Government's policy, not only on dispersing Civil Service departments from London but on establishing new Civil Service departments, he will see that we are determined to locate them in assisted areas throughout the country such as Skelmersdale.

In addition to bearing in mind the regional considerations, will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that Civil Service departments must serve the public? If they are too far from the main concentrations of people, they may fail to do their job—for example, having the public sector department of the Inland Revenue in Wales and most of the people affected by it in London?

The Civil Service will bear in mind its obligation to serve the public.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service what progress is being made with the dispersal of Government Departments to South Yorkshire and particularly to Sheffield.

As my hon. Friend knows, the headquarters of the Manpower Services Commission, together with the headquarters of the Training Services Agency and the Employment Service Agency, is to be located at Sheffield. As a result, some 1,500 posts will be established there. I understand that a small group will be moved in 1977 and that it is expected the main dispersal will begin in 1979.

I welcome the information given in that answer. As the very important Safety in Mines Research Establishment is already located in Sheffield, what are the prospects of moving a section of the Health and Safety Commission to Sheffield?

I shall bring that view to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment.

Is there any co-ordination? As the Trent Regional Health Authority, which was supposed to have moved to a location near Nottingham and Derby, was not moved, why is extra consideration being given to Sheffield?

I can assure my hon. Friend that it is not a question of preferring one area to another. The decision on the matter to which he has referred is primarily for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services.

As these jobs are winging their way to Yorkshire, Sheffield and Blackpool, may I ask my hon. Friend to drop a few off in the West Midlands —an area which has never gained from the dispersal of civil servants, apart from the prospect held out by the ill-fated wealth tax Bill? If we do not have a wealth tax, we shall have no jobs.

My hon. Friend has identified a fact of life about the dispersal of the Civil Service The Government are committed, under the Hardman Committee's recommendations, to dispersing 31,000 Civil Service jobs from London and the South-East to assisted areas. At the time that the decisions were announced, Birmingham was not an assisted area.

How many extra civil servants must be employed to organise all this dispersal?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that the organisation of the dispersal of the Civil Service is well within the competence and present manpower ceilings of the Civil Service Department.

asked the Lord President of the Council how many representations he has received over the past six months on the subject of the Government's proposals on devolution; and if he will make a statement.

39, Sir.

Will my hon. Friend make a special appeal to those Tories who are thinking about defying their party's three-line Whip against the devolution Bill that they should follow their own consciences in this matter, and also the wishes of the vast majority of Scottish people, by voting for the Bill instead of meekly submitting to the diktats of that great champion of individual liberty, the iron lady with the wooden head?

Hon. Members opposite will have listened to what my hon. Friend said, but obviously there are difficulties among them on the question of devolution, which may be epitomised by the fact that no Opposition Front Bench spokesman is present for these Questions.

In view of the new-found interest in democratic expression of opinion among Government supporters, will the hon. Gentleman say whether he, too, intends to impose a three-line Whip containing a conscience clause? Is he aware that there is great disappointment that the Bill which has just been published does not go further than the abysmal earlier White Papers?

The first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Patronage Secretary. On the second part, no one expects people like nationalists, who are dedicated to breaking up the United Kingdom, to have any sympathy for proposals which not only give genuine devolution to Scotland and Wales but will in the end strengthen the unity of the United Kingdom.

asked the Lord President of the Council what plans he has to introduce legislation for devolution to the English regions.

A consultative document will be published on 9th December seeking views on whether there is a need for change in Government arrangements in England, and what form this might take.

Will the hon. Gentleman ask the Lord President of the Council to assure us that he will find time for the White Paper to be debated in the House during the debates on the devolution Bill? If the Minister accepts the principle that for the United Kingdom to remain united each part of the kingdom must be treated equally, is it not very important that they should be debated simultaneously?

The consultative document will be available before next week's debate on the Scotland and Wales Bill. I have no doubt that it will be in order for hon. Members then to refer to the consultative document and any matter affecting England which our proposals throw up. I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House will take into account the hon. Gentleman's representations about having a separate debate.

Does not my hon. Friend realise that we are getting into a devil of a mess with all this legislation? Looming over us is the question of direct elections to the European Parliament by 1978. How will we find time for all these matters? Perhaps in the interests of sanity we should at least drop that proposal, for I am becoming increasingly sure that one of the reasons for manifestations of nationalism is the fact that people are resorting to this form of protest because they are overwhelmed by Governments of all shapes and sizes introducing legislation on all these matters.

My hon. Friend has raised matters which are not within my responsibility. The devolution proposals are, in essence, very much a way of strengthening the United Kingdom, not of appeasing nationalists.

asked the Lord President of the Council why the Government have decided to place advertising with the Morning Star newspaper.

In the past the Morning Star was not considered for Government advertising because it did not produce independently audited circulation figures upon which its cost effectiveness could be judged. It has now done so and will in future be considered in the normal way and on the same basis as every other national newspaper.

Is it not curious that the Government have decided to place an advertisement in the Morning Star, as more than one-third of its circulation is sold abroad as a form of concealed subsidy for the Communist Party of Great Britain?

It is not the only newspaper that sells abroad. What the hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends are really arguing is that Government advertising should be withheld from those newspapers whose policies we dislike. If the Government were to operate such a policy there would be some suicidal management in Fleet Street tonight, led by the Sun, the Daily Express, the Daily Mail, the Daily Telegraph, and so on.

Is the hon. Gentleman saying that, if the National Front were to produce a daily newspaper with audited figures, the Government would advertise in that newspaper also?

The Government advertise in the Daily Telegraph. There is no reason why any morning newspaper that supplies the figures should not be considered. I quote what was said in the House on an earlier occasion:

"Government advertising has always been placed wholly on a commercial basis. The Morning Star will be considered for such advertising when, like every other national newspaper, it provides independently certified circulation figures and analysis of readership." —[Official Report, 24th March 1971; Vol. 814, c. 137–8.]

asked the Lord President of the Council at what stage of the legislative process he intends to consider the introduction of a referendum on devolution.

The Scotland and Wales Bill is now before Parliament. The Government could not accept proposals for referenda which would delay its passage, but if proposals are made by the House for referenda at a later stage the Government will give them careful consideration.

Is the Minister of State aware that many of those who do not believe that Scotland belongs to England nevertheless believe that the Government's proposals are motivated more by political than by constitutional considerations? Does he accept that there would be a deal more sympathy for the Government's proposals if they genuinely sought to discover the views of the people of Scotland and Wales on the fundamental question of a desire for devolution before presenting legislation to the House backed merely by phrases such as those uttered by his hon. Friend the Member for West Stirlingshire (Mr. Canavan) just now?

Obviously, a question of judgment is involved in terms of what the people of Scotland and Wales want. Our view is that the people of Scotland and Wales want these proposals, and we were elected on a manifesto which included them.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there is on the Order Paper a reasoned amendment calling for a referendum at this stage in Scotland and Wales, so that the people of Wales, in particular, can have the opportunity of registering a view that is already reflected in opinion polls, namely, that they want nothing to do with the Bill? Therefore, if the Minister really wants to enable the people of Wales to say what they want, at this stage, before it is too late, will he make it quite clear that the Government are ready to allow a free vote in the House so that Members can vote and decide whether the Bill should or should not include a clause dealing with a referendum?

The latter part of my hon. Friend's question is not for me. The earlier part of his question is concerned with whether the proposals are desired in Scotland and Wales. The party of which both my hon. Friend and I are members fought an election on a manifesto that contained those proposals, and the Government see no reason to depart from them.

Does the Minister's open mind on the question of referenda in connection with devolution extend to the English?

The Government will consider proposals at a later stage. All these matters can be aired then.

Will the Minister of State clarify whether hon. Members such as the hon. Members for West Lothian (Mr. Dalyell) and Pontypool (Mr. Abse) were aware of the manifesto on which they fought the last election? Does he accept that a growing number of people in Scotland want independence as a logical step, and would brook no delay at this stage if a referendum were to be held to stop an Assembly from being set up? Will he guarantee that if there is a referendum we shall have separate questions for each constitutent part of the United Kingdom?

Questions of detail about referenda are better left until we consider the matter. Talking about manifesto commitments, I wonder whether the hon. Lady will confirm whether people who voted for the Scottish National Party knew that they would be in alliance with the House of Lords to frustrate the Aircraft and Shipbuilding Industries Bill and cause great difficulties for the working people of Scotland.

Is it not curious that the Scottish National Party, which claims to speak for the people of Scotland, is terrified of the idea of an honest referendum? Is my hon. Friend aware that many of us believe that we gave certain pledges in the manifesto and that any referendum —I want one—should be held after the Bill is through, so that we know what is being voted for? Thirdly, does he agree that for Scotland the referendum must be on two questions—first, on the question of devolution and, secondly, on the question of independence, so that we can test the pretensions of the Scottish National Party?

I have carefully noted what my hon. Friend said. He has expounded this view carefully before. I cannot go further than saying that the Government will consider these proposals at a later stage.

Does the Minister of State agree that devolution includes not only devolution downwards to Scotland and Wales but also upwards to the European Parliament? If we are to have a referendum on devolution downwards, may we equally have one on devolution upwards to the European Parliament?

The hon. Gentleman will correct me if I am wrong, but I have a faint recollection that we had a referendum on that matter some time ago. I am sure that he will read the Bill with care. Perhaps it will satisfy him a little to know that there are no proposals in the Bill for devolution upwards.

asked the Lord President of the Council if he will ensure that the legislation for devolution includes provision for elections to the Assemblies by a proportional representation method.

No, Sir.

Is the Minister of State aware that proportional representation was not only the unanimous recommendation of the Kilbrandon Committee but is also the subject of Early-Day Motion No. 26, which has drawn signatories from all parties in the House? Will he say whether the Government have an equally open mind to the possibility of proportional representation in the Welsh and Scottish Assemblies as they have to a referendum?

The Government's view is that our present electoral system as it is used for the House of Commons and for local government is simple to operate and easily understood, and that it provides for clear and direct accountability of the Member to his constituents. Any change in our electoral arrangement would have to take account of the consequences for the House of Commons and local government, as well as for the proposed Scottish Assembly.

Is the Minister aware that the Government are proposing a Scottish Assembly with 150 Members, which would be almost double the membership of the New Zealand Parliament which covers all the functions of government in New Zealand? Will the Government reconsider the size of the Scottish Assembly, so that we may have one that will not create unnecessary extra membership and unnecessary extra cost for the electorate?

The Government gave very careful thought to the size of the Assembly. However, the Government's proposals involve a real transfer of power to the Assembly and it is therefore important that there is an adequate number of Members from which an Administration and an effective Opposition can be drawn. International comparisons are often misleading. The hon. Member should think much more carefully about strengthening the Conservative Party's proposals, which everybody realises are quite insufficient.

Does my hon. Friend agree that if we had a system of proportional representation it could lead to a position in which the leaders of parties would have too much say in the selection of candidates, and it would not be left to local committees? In this way people such as myself and many Opposition Members would never get into the House of Commons.

My hon. Friend raises a very important matter. This indicates how careful we must be before making any changes.

Is the Minister of State aware that any proposals for legislative Assemblies under the Government's Bill is not devolution in a meaningful sense, because they do not deal with Supply or taxation? Any proposals for devolution which do not deal with these key crunch issues are a charade.

If I understand the hon. Gentleman correctly, he says that the Bill does not go far enough. I hope that he will reflect on that in the Division Lobbies on the Second Reading of the Bill.

Is the Minister aware that, unless we have proportional representation in the Scottish Assembly, his own party is unlikely to have very much representation in it?

What seems to be the flirting of the Scottish National Party with proportional representation portrays a lack of confidence in its ability to win elections under the present system.