asked the Secretary of State for Wales what representations he has received from Welsh industry about the regional employment premium; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what consultation he has had with the Welsh CBI and other interested parties about the effect of the phasing out of the regional employment premium on employment prospects in Wales.

On 12th January I met a deputation from the Wales CBI to discuss the withdrawal of the regional employment premium. My right hon. Friends the Minister of State, Department of Industry and the Minister of State, Department of Employment were also present.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware of the deep concern, felt not only by the CBI and the trade union movement, about the decision to suspend the regional employment premium, which has played a major part in attracting industry to Wales? Does he agree that jobs should be the Government's priority? How does he reconcile that with the policy of taking finance out of administration and putting it into manufacturing industry when we are obsessed with establishing new administrations in Wales at present?

There is no unanimity about the effect of the premium on attracting industry to Wales. Our aim is to apply available resources more selectively so that we give the maximum help where it is needed. The temporary employment subsidy and the job creation programme, on which we are now concentrating, have played an important part in sustaining employment in Wales.

Is it not generally recognised that the principal need for a successful regional policy is continuity and predictability? Will not the withdrawal of the regional employment premium cancel any good effects of the job creation programme? Has the right hon. and learned Gentleman any strategy for dealing with the appalling level of unemployment in Wales?

The premium was never envisaged as a permanent measure—the hon. Gentleman should know the intentions of the last Conservative Government. The basis of our attack on unemployment is to concentrate available resources where firms really need them. Over the years, the value of the regional employment premium in relation to total wages has steadily diminished; hence the need to look at the whole range of assistance to industry, assistance which in Wales is very large indeed.

What representations has the right hon. and learned Gentleman received from the leaders of industry in rural areas, particularly Mid-Wales? What effect does he think that the ending of the premium will have on future employment prospects in rural areas?

If the hon. Gentleman puts down a Question about representations and who made them, I shall seek to answer it. There have been representations and that is why I met the CBI, but no one should be in any doubt of the great value of the temporary employment subsidy and the job creation programme. So far they have saved about 22,000 jobs in Wales. We are being more selective instead of spreading available resources very thinly over the bread.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that many of us are disappointed at the decision to phase out the regional employment premium because, small though it is, it provides the sort of margin that many firms need in order to operate? Will he delay the implementation of the decision because many firms in Wales face new costs and charges from the water authority from the beginning of the year, and a delay in phasing out the premium would help them considerably?

I am sorry to disappoint my hon. Friend, but it is not possible to delay the decision. An order has been made and the last payment will be made at the end of March In support of my contention that we are seeking to be more selective I can point to the fact that we intend to give the Welsh Development Agency about £2½ million in each of the next two years.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman refute the Prime Minister's statement on Thursday that the regional employment premium represented only a marginal sum? Is he aware that many industries in Wales operate on marginal balances and the ending of the premium could make the difference between their being viable and nonviable? Although the premium may not be the best way of attracting new industry to Wales, does not the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that there is a strong case for not introducing disincentives to existing industries to remain?

As I recollect, the hon. Gentleman has poured cold water on the whole range of Government support to industry. There is no denying that the value of the premium has diminished in relation to the total level of wages. Of course, if we were able to use every possible measure at the expense of other items of Government expenditure, that might be attractive to some hon. Members, but we have been told time and again of the need to cut public expenditure, and in the December measures we sought to use the available money in the best possible way.

But is there not a difference between us here? The last Conservative Government said that they would phase out the REP after discussing with industry the method and timing. However, the present Government seem to be cancelling it almost at a stroke, without any proper consultation.

I should have thought that the hon. Member should be the last to use emotive phrases such as "at a stroke". We are being pressed all the time to cut public expenditure, so we have to ensure that the level of public expenditure that we do have is used in the best possible way. Already we have seen the strengthening of sterling and the lowering of high interest rates. I should have thought that these factors would be welcomed very much by industry and would be a great help to investment.

Order. If some Questions last this long, we cannot have as long on the remainder.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales whether he will confirm that the £31 million, including £9 million for Bridgend, for hospital construction which he announced on 20th December 1976 is in terms of 1976 prices and will be protected from inflation.

These figures are expressed in terms of 1976 price levels. We intend, so far as possible, to ensure that these sums remain unchanged in real terms.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he is satisfied with the present state of the Welsh language; and if he will also make a statement.

The language is under pressure in all parts of Wales. Sustained effort will be needed if this situation is to be redressed. I am discussing with the Council for the Welsh Language ways in which, within its terms of reference, it can provide me with further advice.

What discussions has the Secretary of State had with his counterparts in Europe about the proposed EEC Language Fund? What benefits will accrue to the Welsh nation as a result of this fund?

If the hon. Member asks a specific Question about that matter, I shall answer it. We have taken a number of measures to assist the language, and we have provided material assistance during my period in office.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales when he next proposes to meet the Welsh Language Council.

I last met the Council on 22nd October 1976. I have no immediate plans for another meeting, but I shall be discussing with it the development of the useful work it has already accomplished.

Is the Secretary of State aware that during the three years of Council's existence its main recommendations have been dismissed with such contempt by the Government that the Council and its chairman would be justified in resigning en bloc, just as the late Dr. Huw T. Edwards resigned from the Council for Wales for similar reasons? Is he aware of the devastating effect of English television in Welsh homes, particularly among children and young people? Could something be done quickly to meet that threat so that at least we have some Welsh language programmes at peak viewing hours every night of the week?

I do not think that the hon. Gentleman's remarks can be sustained or that they are particularly helpful. I invited all the Council members to take up reappointment, and my recollection is that all have accepted, except for one member, who is not available for domestic reasons because she is moving. Therefore, they cannot share the kind of sentiments which the hon. Gentleman expresses. I value very much the work which the Council has done and will do for me over the coming period. We have canvassed this matter of Welsh language programmes backwards and forwards over the past few months, and I have nothing to add to what I said in my previous statement.

While everyone would deplore the decline in Welsh speaking and in knowledge of the language, at a time when the Secretary of State is giving replies which indicate that there are limitations on the material assistance he can give and that the possibility of transferring Welsh language programmes to a fourth channel is limited by money, would it not be much more sensible and more in accordance with the wishes of the Welsh people as a whole if the Secretary of State immediately desisted from the erection of road signs in Welsh in certain areas, signs which serve no purpose—except a vague propaganda purpose—and from the duplication of bureaucratic forms in Welsh? Would it not be better if all the funds which his Department offered were put towards meeting genuine education needs for the promotion and assistance of the Welsh language?

My hon. Friend has put a number of pertinent and helpful points, with some of which I would agree. I have inherited the system of sign-posting and distribution of forms that all Governments in the past followed. What is really needed is some element of consensus in Wales about where the priorities should lie. I should be grateful for some assistance in the coming months from the Welsh Council, my colleagues and the whole of Wales generally in arriving at such a consensus. When only limited resources are available, they should be put to the best use for furthering the language.

I welcome the Secretary of State's decision to renew the Welsh Language Council, which was established by my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Hendon, South (Mr. Thomas). Would he confirm that there is useful work for the Council to do and that as Secretary of State he will put that work in its way? Perhaps he would take this opportunity to confirm that it is his view that disruptive tactics, which are often used to support the Welsh cause, are in fact alienating support for the language. Is not the more constructive approach, such as that taken by the Welsh Council, infinitely more valuable?

The Council has done good work and I value its advice and the enormous amount of energy that its members put in. Discussions are going on to see how the Council can be most effectively used in the coming months. We have all suffered from disruptive tactics in Wales and I agree that they are no help to the language whatsoever.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will pay a visit to Newport.

I have no immediate plans to do so.

Would the Secretary of State appreciate that I should like him to do so, because then he would have the opportunity to meet representatives and shop stewards of the Westinghouse Company who are about to be made redundant as a result of the proposed closure of that factory, which, incidentally, is a profitable enterprise? Would he give an assurance that he will do all he can to help in this situation?

Certainly, I give that assurance. I am aware of the problem arising at Westinghouse. My hon. Friend has had some preliminary words with me, but I should like to have a further discussion with him to hear his views about the redundancies that will arise in the second half of this year and that will, so I believe, mean a loss of some 180 jobs.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what discussion he has had with the housing authorities in South Glamorgan and Gwent regarding the provision of additional housing accommodation for civil servants in connection with the needs of the Welsh Assembly, and in connection with the transfer of certain Ministry of Defence officers; and what advice he has given.

The housing demand likely to arise from dispersal has been taken into account in the structure plans for South Glamorgan and Gwent, which have been extensively discussed with the authorities concerned. Provisional calculations suggest that adequate capacity exists to meet housing needs arising from the setting up of a Welsh Assembly. It is for individual housing authorities to assess the needs in their own areas, and all the information available to the Welsh Office is at their disposal for this purpose.

Could the Minister give us as a rough guidance the approximate number of personnel involved?

It is not possible at this stage to make any details available. The basis on which we are calculating the number of jobs dispersed to Wales is that approximately half, will be provided by local recruitment and that will create a housing need. That is why we made sure that these figures were taken into account in the structure plans.

Is the Minister aware that the proposal to transfer 4,000 or 5,000 of the 264,000 defence civil servants to the Cardiff area will create great difficulty there in terms of housing and employment as well as wasting about £40 million of public money?

I disagree entirely with the hon. Gentleman. The fact that by dispersal policies we are able to create new jobs and new job opportunities for our young people to which they can apply skills for which they have so far been unable to find a place in Wales is not a tragedy but an important feature of Government 'policy. I draw attention to organisations such as the Royal Mint which have been established in Wales and have proved of inestimable value to the people employed in them.

Will my hon. Friend reject completely the sentiments expressed by the hon. Member for Carmarthen (Mr. Evans)? If there were difficulties in Cardiff in housing some of the civil servants moved there from London, there would be many constituencies in the valleys and elsewhere in Wales that would welcome these British jobs to the Principality.

I agree that it is necessary to encourage dispersal to Wales. I mentioned the Royal Mint, but there is also, of course, the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Centre at Swansea. I am staggered to hear the criticisms of the hon. Member for Carmarthen (Mr. Evans) of dispersal, especially when many people in his constituency are glad and proud to work in the licensing centre at Swansea.

Does the Minister accept that in the case of the Ministry of Defence dispersal of the 3,000 people who have indicated their intention to come to Cardiff 2,700 plan to buy their own homes? Is he aware that this will result in an enormous stimulus to the construction industry throughout South Wales?

I accept that many people who will be transferred will seek housing from the private sector. That is why I am pleased to confirm that the National Federation of Building Trades Employers has assured me that the private building industry has the capacity to meet this need.

Is not the injection of numbers on the scale proposed bound to have an enormous impact on a whole range of service industries? Is it not astonishing in these circumstances, bearing in mind the number of jobs that will be provided for Welsh people, for any Welsh party seriously to oppose such a move?

This must be one of the few occasions on which I can wholeheartedly welcome the hon. Gentleman's comments. It is staggering, as I am sure most people in Wales will agree, to hear such a suggestion from the hon. Member for Carmarthen (Mr. Evans).

My hon. Friend indicated that about half the people concerned in the dispersal would be coming into Wales. Will that sort of proportion apply to the staffing of the Welsh Assembly? Since I estimate that the Assembly will require about 2,000 people, am I to understand that about 1,000 civil servants are suddenly to pounce upon Cardiff in order to set up the Assembly? Or has my hon. Frend entangled the number of civil servants who, happily, will be coming in relation to the Ministry of Defence dispersal with those who, unhappily, will be coming in relation to the Welsh Assembly?

I am glad to correct any misapprehension I might have caused. We estimate that about a half of those filling jobs on pure dispersal will be coming into Wales and that about a half will be recruited locally. As for the Assembly, of the anticipated total of 1,300 staff a substantial number is expected to come from local recruitment.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what progress he has made in his inquiries relative to the operation of the Porthmadog Cob Toll Gate.

Further views have now been received from the solicitors acting for the toll owners and are currently under consideration.

Is the Minister aware that about six months ago he sent a helpful letter on this matter which gave hope for people in the Porthmadog and Penrhyndeudraeth area that a helpful solution would be found to the enormous traffic congestion caused by the Cob by taking away the toll? Is he aware that a delay of six months, or the continuing delay to which the Minister referred, will cause disappointment in the area where people are eager to see progress in this matter?

I can understand the need for progress, but this is a complex case which presents difficult legal issues. I cannot give a specific date for resolving these difficulties, but they are being dealt with as quickly as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what proposals he has for reforming the structure of local government in Wales.

As announced in Cmnd. 6585, the Government will ask the Welsh Assembly when established to consider and report on future local government structure in Wales.

Does the Minister accept that that answer will simply cause greater confusion and uncertainty to the staffs and authorities concerned? Does he accept that any legislation affecting the reorganisation of local government will come from his Department and be his responsibility unless the Secretary of State intends to be a mere messenger for draft Bills proposed by the Assembly?

It is clear to most hon. Members that any legislation needed to reorganise local government in Wales will depend on the views and decisions made in this Parliament. However, it is equally right and proper that, if an Assembly is to be set up, it should make its views known on this important subject, since very few people in Wales are satisfied with the present system of local government foisted on us by the Conservatives.

Will the Minister bear in mind that later this evening we shall be dealing with a Bill designed to mitigate the ill effects of water reorganisation? Is he aware also that this morning was published the report of the consultants who originally recommended reorganisation of the National Health Service but who now describe it as costly, remote and very bureaucratic? Does he not agree that the last reorganisation of local government was 10 times worse than that of the NHS? Is all this not one of the principal arguments in favour of creating a Welsh Assembly?

I think that it is perfectly true that, with or without the Welsh Assembly, it would be necessary to take another look at the existing structure of local government in Wales. I agree with my hon. Friend that many of the measures concerned with local government, water and National Health Service reorganisation were disastrous for Wales.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales when he next plans to meet the Wales TUC.

I am frequently in touch with the Wales TUC.

When the right hon. and learned Gentleman next meets the Welsh TUC, how will he explain to it the increasing unemployment—from 32,000 in October 1973 to 79,000 in October 1976—and the fact that industrial production in Wales is now below the level of the three-day working week?

I can assure the hon. Member that I am as concerned about the level of unemployment in Wales as is the Wales TUC. I keep in constant touch with the Wales TUC and I meet its members on delegations from time to time. I also discuss these matters with it.

When the right hon. and learned Gentleman next meets the Wales TUC, will he discuss with it its scheme for a legislative Assembly for Wales?

That does not arise on this Question, but I can assure the hon. Member that I know from my discussions with the Wales TUC that it certainly supports the Government measures now before the House.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will ask the Welsh Council to report on the economic and employment effects of defence establishments in each of the Welsh counties.

No, Sir. The Government are fully aware of these matters and I do not consider it necessary to ask the Welsh Council to report.

At a time when defence cuts are being made and when Plaid Cymru is advocating the advantages of even more drastic cuts on the ground that since such expenditure is low in Wales the cuts will therefore have little effect on the Welsh economy, would it not be useful to do as I suggest? Apart from the defence implications, would not such cuts as Plaid Cymru advocates have a disastrous effect on employment and the economic standards of constituencies such as Pembrokeshire and Anglesey?

The hon. Gentleman mentioned Pembrokeshire. I am not aware of any immediate redundancies in defence establishments in his constituency. The location of defence establishments is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence, but I am fully consulted on these matters.

In view of the cut-backs in defence expenditure that are taking place and the even greater cut-backs that some Opposition Members and even more Labour Members want to see in future, does the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that the transferring of defence jobs is not the best way of building employment prospects in Wales? Does he agree that the £39 million that was mentioned a short while ago would be better spent on providing manufacturing industry?

I am always interested in the arguments of the hon. Gentleman, and I should like him and his hon. Friends at their convenience to particularise where in Wales they would like to see defence cuts, whether they be in Aberporth, in Pendine, in the constituency of the hon. Member for Merioneth (Mr. Thomas), in Anglesey, or elsewhere. I want to see varied employment for the people of Wales. For far too long we have been unduly dependent on heavy industry. They are important industries, but it is a part of Government policy to ensure that major establishments are decentralised to Wales. I am proud of the part that I have played in ensuring that some of them come to Wales.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what representations he has received about the dispersal of Government Departments to Cardiff and the job opportunities that would be created in South Wales as a result.

The dispersal of Government Departments will bring important economic and social benefits to South Wales. This has been emphasised to me in the course of visits to several areas. I believe that opinion in Wales is strongly in favour of the policy of dispersal to which the Government remain firmly committed.

Will the Under-Secretary of State confirm that the democratically elected councils of South-East Wales have consistently advocated the dispersal of Government Departments to that area in the interests of stimulating the economy and providing jobs? Does he accept that the political opposition comes from a tiny minority that has no standing in the area?

I am quite astonished at the number of occasions today on which I am able to agree with Conservative Members. I have spoken to many of my constituents who work in organisations that were dispersed under various Governments and they have expressed nothing but complete satisfaction and pleasure to me and the hope that the system will continue. I confirm that the local authorities in the area are appreciative of dispersal policies.

Does the Minister agree that the abrupt removal of the regional employment premium, which will cost Cardiff firms about £3 million a year, will make it all the more essential that the new jobs in the Ministry of Defence should come to Cardiff as originally planned?

Whatever may happen to REP or any other form of regional aid, I think it is for the benefit of the United Kingdom as a whole, and especially for development areas such as Wales, that we continue with our dispersal policies.

Does my hon. Friend realise that although there are those on the Labour Benches who would like to see cut-backs in defence expenditure, there is very little support in Wales for a separate Welsh Army, a separate Welsh Navy and a separate Welsh Air Force, which is the policy of Plaid Cymru?

In general terms I agree with my hon. Friend, but I suggest that there are three nationalist Members of Parliament who in a separate Wales would he three prospective heads for the armed forces of Wales.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what total sum of money for rate support was available in the last year before reorganisation of water services to reduce the impact of water and sewerage charges in Wales; what would be the equivalent thereof at current prices: and by what amount the present rate in the £ would be reduced were such a sum to be applied thereto.

I regret that this information is not available and could only be obtained at a disproportionate cost.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there is sufficient evidence to suggest that in Wales we have been paying through the nose, as it were, for water? Does he accept that it is high time that we had a Bill to remedy the situation? Will he ensure that we get a speedy conclusion to the Bill that will be before the House this afternoon so as to ensure a partial solution?

I shall be playing some part in the business of the House this afternoon, Mr. Speaker, if I am fortunate enough to catch your eye, and it is my hope to ensure that the Bill that the House will be discussing will bring a measure of fairness to water charges not only in Wales but throughout England and Wales. I hope that the Bill will have a speedy passage.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that on Second Reading of the Water Charges Equalisation Bill there will be substantial support from my right hon. and hon. Friends and that, if the Government fail to get their Bill through, that will be a unique tribute to the incompetence of their own managers?

I am glad that the tributes I have paid to certain Conservative Members will receive their reward this evening.

In spite of our great sympathy, understanding and so on for our Welsh colleagues and friends, will my hon. Friend take it from me that he will not get any more money from London to solve their problems?

With deep respect for my right hon. Friend. I stood at the Dispatch Box before the Christmas Recess defending the Government's decision on the rate support grant that significantly increased the moneys available to London. I did so because I thought it was right that Government money should be used to meet needs wherever they arose, in Wales, England, or the South-West.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry if he will state the total of expenditure to date incurred by the Organising Committee of British Aerospace; and if he will break down that total to show how much has been spent upon: (a) taxable emoluments of members of the committee, (b) non-taxable emoluments of members of the committee, (c) other salaries and expenses, (d) office rent and allied expenses, (e) hospitality, food and drink, and (f) travel.

I have nothing to add to my reply to the hon. Member for Hastings (Mr. Warren) on 20th January.

Why not?

Because I consider it was a very good and reasonable reply.

Does that mean that yet again a Minister of the Department of Industry is refusing to answer Questions about a large sum of public money that has been spent by the Organising Committee? Will he continue to refuse to answer my hon. Friend's sensible Question?

I do not think that the hon. Gentleman has seen the answer that I gave. In fact, I gave a reasonable breakdown of the expenses incurred by the Organising Committee. If the hon. Gentleman has not seen that answer, or if he does not understand a particular category, why does he not table his own Question?

asked the Secretary of State for Industry when he next plans to meet the leaders of the CBI.

My right hon Friend the Secretary of State expects to meet CBI representatives at the next NEDC meeting on 2nd February.

Will my hon. Friend ask his right hon. Friend to plead with the CBI to acquiesce in the Government's proposals on planning agreements? Is he aware that there is great suspicion on the Labour Benches that the Government have been nobbled on this issue? Will he confirm that the Department wants planning agreements and that there is no conspiracy in the Department of Industry against the open government that would come from them?

I take my hon. Friend's point and I acknowledge his persistent concern about planning agreements. It is a concern that is entirely shared by the Department of Industry. All the Ministers in the Department of Industry are anxious to see as many planning agreements as possible concluded as rapidly as possible. Urgent talks have been going ahead and have been continuing for some time about the desirability of bringing planning agreements to some sort of established conclusion. There is no doubt that the Department and the Government are disappointed by the lack of progress so far.

When the Secretary of State meets the CBI, the Bullock Committee will have reported. Will he, as the sponsoring Minister with responsibility for a great many major industries, undertake to discuss the report from a practical point of view? Does he accept that he has a responsibility to ensure that damage is not done to British industry in the pursuit of theoretically praiseworthy objectives that, practically, are very hard to achieve?

I am disappointed that the CBI and other employer organisations have taken a rigid attitude to the advance information about the Bullock Committee's proposals. Surely it would have been much more constructive if they had recognised that there is a movement not only in this country but throughout Europe towards enabling working men and women to play a much greater part in decisions that affect their everyday lives, and that the notion that only a tiny section of the population should be able to make decisions in industry is a view that is being eroded. I hope that industry will take a much more constructive part and adopt a much more constructive attitude towards the extension of industrial democracy.

Will my hon. Friend discuss with his right hon. Friend some of the possible Government responses to the suggestions made last week by Lord Plowden as a means of improving some of the relationships and the understanding between Government, Parliament and industry?

I shall bring my right hon. Friend's attention to the point that my hon. Friend has made.

In the context of the forthcoming meeting, will the hon. Gentleman indicate whether it is the view of the Department that the current levels of profitability of industry and commerce are now satisfactory?

I know that the hon. Gentleman does not expect me to produce a thumbnail judgment at the Dispatch Box. This is a matter that we are constantly reviewing. One of the rewarding signs about the general situation in industry is that the most recent Department of Industry survey indicated that there would be an increase in investment of between 10 per cent. and 15 per cent. The hon. Gentleman may draw his own conclusions from that.

Is not the Minister aware that the Bullock Report has very little to do with industrial democracy? Is it not, therefore, of no surprise that the view of the CBI and of many other people in industry of the Bullock Report and its impartiality has everything to do with the composition of the team that wrote the report and its terms of reference? Is it not ludicrous to expect a committee comprising Jack Jones and Clive Jenkins among others to produce an impartial report? It is just about as impartial as asking a penguin whether he will give up swimming.

The House is used to the dramatic observations of the hon. Gentleman and the nonsense he churns out. If the Bullock Committee has not been concerned with industrial democracy, it has been labouring under a grave misapprehension over the past few months when it has been working hard receiving evidence from organisations, the views of a large number of which the hon. Gentleman would strongly support, and those organisations must also have been labouring under a misapprehension. The Bullock Report is an important and major step forward in the discussion and development of industrial democracy. If the hon. Gentleman and his companions on the Opposition Benches continue to hide their heads in the sand about industrial democracy, it is their affair, but the working men and women of the country look forward to the development of industrial democracy on which the Bullock Committee reported.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service whether he is satisfied with the increase in Civil Service numbers in 1975 by 51,199 to 745.120; what plans he has to reduce numbers in the Civil Service; and whether he will announce specific targets for this.

I am never satisfied when Civil Service manpower shows an increase, but I am, however, convinced that the strength of the Civil Service is reasonable in the light of the work which it is given to do.

In the light of the strike action that has been threatened, will the Minister say exactly how he proposes to achieve the savings he has mentioned? To what extent does he agree with the report in the Sunday Times yesterday that the devolution Bill, if passed, is likely to lead to a growth in the number of civil servants and public sector employees far larger than the Government have yet admitted?

The industrial action to which the hon. Gentleman referred has been called off. I should perhaps explain that the Explanatory and Financial Memorandum to the Scotland and Wales Bill makes clear that the Bill does not materially affect the manpower requirements of public bodies outside the Civil Service. Any plans by the new administration after devolution to alter the level of service provided will have to be set against its other priorities.

What is the latest Government estimate in figures of the extra number of civil servants needed for the Scottish Assembly?

I have nothing to add to the statistics provided in the Explanatory and Financial Memorandum.

Is the Minister aware of the deep resentment in Scotland at the reduction in the number of civil servants to an extent that has meant the closure of the Civil Service College in Edinburgh? Will he give a commitment to civil servants in Scotland in terms of the Hardman Report and guarantee that there will be dispersal to Scotland, particularly in view of the unemployment figure for Scotland of 180,000 to be announced tomorrow?

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for posing that supplementary question, because it provides me with an opportunity of reaffirming the Labour Government's commitment to dispersing civil servants to Glasgow. The figure quoted recently of £1,000 million public expenditure as the cost involved in dispersing civil servants I can say categorically is a myth. The guarantee that the people of Scotland have of Civil Service dispersal is that the Labour Government believe in the economic well-being of Scotland.

And fairies.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service if he will make a statement about the cuts in Civil Service expenditure announced on 15th December by the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

As my right hon. Friend announced on 15th December, there will be reductions amounting to £30 million in the costs of the Civil Service in 1977–78 and £10 million in 1978–79. The savings for 1977–78 are being achieved through a close scrutiny of the financial Estimates for that year. Consideration will be given to the savings proposed for 1978–79 when that year's Estimates are scrutinised.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the grave concern that uncertainty is causing in the Civil Service? Will he please give an assurance that there will be full consultations with the trade unions on expenditure cuts? Will he also say whether there will be any redundancies and, if so, where, and whether, as has been suggested, there will be any delay in dispersal as a result of the cuts?

The moratorium on Government capital building projects will inevitably involve minor delays in individual proposals for the dispersal of Departments, but that question is under close consideration and I hope in the foreseeable future to make a statement. The Government are concerned that consultation with the Civil Service unions shall proceed on a close and continuing basis.

In considering the targets for reduced Civil Service expenditure, has the ministerial or departmental eye lighted on the number of professional people, such as architects, engineers and statisticians, employed in the Civil Service and the possibility of their work being undertaken on a consultancy basis by private firms?

Yes, but I think even the hon. Gentleman would accept that that would not of itself result in public expenditure savings. Whether by ministerial or departmental eye, every aspect of expenditure on Government administration is under constant surveillance.

asked the Minister for the Civil Service if he is satisfied with existing arrangements between the Central Office of Information and advertising agencies engaged on Government business; and if he will make a statement about inquiries he is making about dealings between such advertising agencies and companies supplying Press production materials.

Yes, Sir. I apologise for the length of this reply.

Will the Minister tell me whether it is even longer than the others?

It is a Civil Service reply.

I have, as my hon. Friend knows, expanded the membership of my Advisory Committee on Advertising and have proposed some changes in its terms of reference to enable me to consult it more generally on practices within the advertising industry. It will retain its first responsibility for advising on the selection of agencies for specific campaigns. There have been Press reports of allegations of irregular dealings be- tween advertising agencies engaged on Government campaigns and companies producing Press advertising material. These have been referred to the police and I am informed that they have been unable to establish evidence that corruption of the sort alleged has, in fact, occurred. I am entirely satisfied that no Government employees, who play no part in the placing of such sub-contracts, could have been involved in any such alleged irregularity and that, furthermore, COI's policy on the issue of subcontracting has been made abundantly clear to advertising agencies

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for the statement, the length of which is justified because the matter has raised so much concern outside the House. May I reassure my hon. Friend that management and trade unions in the printing industry, which I represent, fully accept his assurance that there has been no malpractice and warmly welcome his inquiries?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his kind remarks.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that the Government are the largest single advertiser and that most advertising agencies survive only because of the public expenditure so involved?

I accept that the Government are major advertisers, and it is here that much Government expenditure is incurred. That is precisely the reason for my statement.

asked the Lord President of the Council if he will make a statement on statements in the House by Ministers after EEC Council meetings.

I am glad to say that oral statements after Council meetings have been made more frequently since my statement on 4th August—five in the last two months of the year, compared with six in the first half.

I applaud the speed with which the Foreign Secretary made his statement last week, which I am sure is the right pattern. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the biggest offenders in not making statements are Treasury Ministers? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that unless statements are made the House of Commons is being kept in the dark and the Executive is once more bypassing the House? Does the right hon. Gentleman further agree that last year out of 54 meetings only 11 were the subject of statements in the House of Commons? If the other 43 meetings were so inconclusive, would not Ministers do better by getting on with their jobs here?

I do not wish to draw any invidious distinctions between one Department and another. I accept the hon. Gentleman's figure that 11 oral statements were made, but the hon. Gentleman must agree that the figures that I gave show that the frequency of making such statements is improving. I think that we should sustain that improvement, although the House must agree that some discretion must be left about when statements are made.

asked the Lord President of the Council whether he will propose an extension of the weekly time available for answering Prime Minister's questions.

Prime Minister's Question Time has been referred to the Sessional Committee on Procedure. I think we should await its consideration of the matter.

As I asked the original Question, may I by way of a supplementary question ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he would let us more into his own thinking on this matter? Does he agree that it is necessary for any Prime Minister to show his mettle at Question Time? The present incumbent of the post is not showing his mettle but is flannelling. How can the Lord President suggest to his Prime Ministerial colleague that he improves his performance?

I repudiate all the criticisms of the way in which the Prime Minister has dealt with Questions asked by the hon. Gentleman. As the Prime Minister responded in the way that he did to the suggestion that the matter should be referred to the Procedure Committee, I am sure that it is much the best course for the House to allow that to happen.

Will my right hon. Friend resist any temptation to extend Prime Minister's Question Time on Tuesdays and Thursdays, because the only effect of that would be a lot more rubbish than we get now from the Opposition?

A little extra time might ensure a few more Questions from my hon. Friend. That is one of the advantages that I see. A previous Procedure Committee suggested more time for Prime Minister's Questions but that was not accepted by previous Prime Ministers, and it has not so far been accepted by the present one. I suggest that, the House having again referred the matter to the Procedure Committee, the best course is to await what it suggests.

Will the right hon. Gentleman try to get the Prime Minister to answer the Questions that are put to him? That would be much more to his credit and to the benefit of the House and the country.

asked the Lord President of the Council how many representations he received before the introduction of the Scotland and Wales Bill that the Government's proposals for devolution in Wales and in Scotland should be contained in separate Bills.

Eight, Sir.

Will the hon. Gentleman interpret from that small number the depth of feeling in the country and the House that it is most inappropriate that the Government's devolution proposals for Wales and Scotland should be dealt with in the same Bill? Will he understand that there are different considerations applying to Wales and Scotland, and even at this late hour introduce a separate Bill, please, for Wales?

I am suspicious of the hon. Gentleman's suggestions to improve the consideration of a Bill to which he is so devotedly opposed. I note that these suggestions tend to come from those who, rightly or wrongly, are opposed to the principle of the Bill. We believe that it is practicable to put both schemes within one Bill without doubling its time in Parliament. We believe, too, that it is proper that that should be done. Those eight representations were out of the 442 that we received before the Bill was published.

Will the hon. Gentleman accept that the eight representations to which he referred should not be taken as the quantity of the judgment of the nation in this matter? Does he accept that the nation looks to this House, this House of representatives, to reach judgments on this matter? Will he also accept the strong feeling of many of us that this is a totally irrelevant measure that is totally devoid of real interest to the country at large, facing as we do a grave economic crisis?

I am aware of the varying opinions held on this matter in the House, as I have listened to them at great length during the proceedings on the Bill. The hon. Gentleman ought to bear in mind that recently the House decided by a fairly clear vote to retain Wales in the Bill.

Will the hon. Gentleman accept that, because the Bill combines the proposed arrangements for Scotland and Wales in one document and a separate arrangement is being prepared for each, it is already clear that the House will get into difficulties in dealing adequately with the arrangements for Scotland and Wales? Would not it be easier for the House to cope if the arrangements for Scotland and Wales were separate?

With respect to the right hon. Gentleman, who knows the provisions of the Bill, it is clear that, where there are certain provisions that are common to both countries, the Bill can be discussed with those in mind. Where there are real differences within the schemes, these are set out separately within the Bill. It should be practicable for the House to deal adequately with those, giving full attention to the interests of Wales and Scotland, provided that it has the will to do so. I hope that all hon. Members will co-operate to make sure that that is done.

As there are probably more people of Welsh origin on Merseyside and in Liverpool in particular than there are in Swansea, and probably more people of Irish origin there than are in Dublin, and as we also have a sprinkling of Lancastrians, does my hon. Friend see the future of Merseyside in a Bill of any kind? Should we have UDI, too?

I enjoyed my hon. Friend's tour of the sprinkling of nationalities around the United Kingdom. I know that there are a few Scots in his constituency. They were the only ones that he omitted.