asked the Secretary of State for Wales by what amount unemployment in Wales has increased since May 1979; what is the current total of unemployed; and if he will make a statement.

Before I answer the hon. Gentleman's question, I should say that I understand that the right hon. Member for Rhondda (Mr. Alec Jones) is in hospital. I am sure that all hon. Members wish him a speedy recovery from his illness. I express that wish on behalf of these Benches, and I welcome the hon. Member for Carmarthen (Dr. Thomas) to the Opposition Front Bench for the first time.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman accept that those figures are now very menacing? Is he prepared to introduce any new urgent measures to halt the runaway rise in unemployment? Given that we have already lost 7,000 steel jobs this year, does the right hon. Gentleman accept that fierce resentment was experienced in my constituency when it was discovered that another 1,000 steel jobs were to go at BSC Shotton? What will he do in order to pump new jobs into my stricken area?

The right hon. Member for Swansea, West (Mr. Williams) knows that dramatic moves will not create jobs overnight. Indeed, the right hon. Member for Rhondda made that same point at the conclusion of an article in today's issue of the Western Mail. As the hon. Gentleman knows, his area has been given the maximum incentives possible under regional policy. There has been a major construction programme. Only today, I announced additional expenditure of £720,000 on urban programme projects. Of that sum, £176,000 additional expenditure has been approved for authorities in North-East Wales. That is one of many components in the package of measures that we are introducing. I understand the hon. Gentleman's concern about the BSC's plan. However, he will know that for some time coking coal has been piling up in the area, and, therefore, the announcement was not entirely unexpected.

Despite the world recession, are not some industries showing signs of growth? Does not the best hope for Wales lie in attracting those industries? If we wish to promote Wales, would it not be of enormous help if the Labour Party were to associate itself with my right hon. Friend's efforts to portray Wales as an area that is ready to accept change, however painful the consequences?

I am sure that my hon. Friend is right. Indeed, he may have observed that there are representatives of six American companies in Wales. They are looking at specific sites and contemplating investment. They have made it clear that membership of the European Community is a major factor. No greater damage could be done to Wales than if people were to believe the threat that Britain might leave the European Community. The other major handicap is the image that is presented of Wales as an area of decline and industrial disruption.

I thank the Secretary of State for his good wishes, and I associate this side of the House with the good wishes that he expressed to my right hon. Friend the Member for Rhondda (Mr. Jones). We wish him a speedy recovery.

I notice the language that the right hon. Gentleman uses. I also note that when the Labour Party produced a party political broadcast about 10 days ago on unemployment it contained not one single sentence to suggest how it would tackle the problem, which is perhaps hardly surprising when the Leader of the Opposition saw unemployment in his constituency increase from 3·9 per cent. to 13·3 per cent. when his party was in Government.

rose—

Order. There are several questions on unemployment this afternoon. We shall therefore move on.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what is the latest information he has on the net income of Welsh hill farmers; if he proposes to take any further measures to assist them; and if he will make a statement.

In reply to a question from my hon. Friend the Member for Banff (Mr. Myles), my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food announced on 28 November 1980 that, subject to parliamentary approval, the rates of hill livestock compensatory allowances would be increased by £7·50 for hill cows and 75p for hardy hill ewes. This takes fully into account conditions in the hill farming sector in Wales and elsewhere in the United Kingdom and represents a further indication of the Government's intention to maintain the hill livestock industry, which is of vital importance to the social structure of our hill areas in Wales.

While the increases in hill livestock compensatory allowances are welcome and the benefits of the sheepmeat regime are beginning to be reflected in firmer sheep prices, will my right hon. Friend pay particular attention to the long-term decline in the profitability of hill beef? Does he accept that that is reflected in the worsening ratio of cattle to sheep in Wales, which has gone from one in 16 in 1973 to one in 20 in 1980?

I understand my hon. Friend's concern. The beef breeding herd is still declining. Numbers are down 3 per cent. from June 1979 to June 1980. However, I believe that the recent increase in the hill livestock compensatory cattle rate and the introduction of the beef suckler premium will provide greater incentive to beef producers to maintain breeding herds and thus arrest the decline. Both steps show the Government's determination to assist that important sector of British agriculture.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the hill farmer is dependent on the guaranteed deficiency payments for fat lamb? Is he satisfied with the present sheepmeat regime? What are his views on the clawback rule?

I am sure that the new sheepmeat regime represents a major step forward and opens up a brighter prospect for sheep producers in Wales. Discussions are still continuing with the Commission and other member States in an attempt to alleviate the effect of clawback on the variable premium on our export trade. As the hon. Gentleman will be aware, special arrangements have been introduced to deal with exports to third countries, and others have been introduced to deal with some of the immediate problems. We shall continue working to iron out the inevitable flaws that are present in a new scheme of that kind.

May I also associate my party with the good wishes sent to the right hon. Member for Rhondda (Mr. Jones)? Will the Secretary of State consider the variable premium for beef to ascertain whether it is adequate in view of the way that the market has been performing this year? Will he ensure that the level of variable premium set by the Government is adequate to compensate farmers?

I shall consider the matter. The producers' returns have been supported by substantial payments under the beef premium scheme, which is £42 million in the United Kingdom, of which £1·6 million has been paid in Wales this year to date.

Does the Minister accept that there is little doubt that a further upward adjustment of hill livestock compensatory allowances will be needed two-thirds of the way through next year? Does he further accept that, unfortunately, the damage has already been done and assistance can be given only through a substantial cash injection, although the redundancies and the depopulation have taken place and we cannot rectify that?

I certainly give no indication to the House that we can expect a further increase during the year. The fact that we have made those substantial increases in the past couple of years is an indication of support. Farmers in Wales will receive about £23 million in the coming year, compared with £19·7 million in 1980 and £14·6 million in 1979.

I hope that we shall move on more quickly, with shorter questions and answers.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he, or one of his Ministers, will visit Woodham's Scrapyard, Barry, to examine the remaining steam engines still there with a view to providing finance to preservation societies for their purchase.

I understand that a working party from the National Railway Museum, accompanied by my hon. Friend, recently visited Woodham Brothers' scrapyard to establish whether any of the engines might warrant preservation or provide spare parts. A visit by a Welsh Office Minister would serve no useful purpose because we have no funds to make available to railway preservation societies. However, the National Museum of Wales owns nine steam engines. It recently purchased a heavy goods engine from Woodham Brothers.

Nevertheless, will my hon. Friend discuss with the Wales Tourist Board, in view of the importance of railway preservation to tourism in Wales, what further help it might be able to give—not necessarily cash help—towards the preservation of those engines? Will he also discuss with the Department of Employment how the use of the youth opportunities programme could be amalgamated with efforts of groups such as the Barry Steam Locomotive Action Group, not only to help to preserve the engines but to create jobs for young people in that part of Wales?

I shall certainly draw the attention of the board and the Department of Employment to my hon. Friend's remarks. However, I believe that assistance to the organisations concerned could be available from the National Heritage Fund trustees.

I thank the Minister for his frankness about the likely limitations of his intervention, but is he none the less aware that it is the sole surviving substantial collection of British-made steam engines in the world? Will he bear in mind that the issue is simply that of preserving the collection from the cutter's torch so that renovation can follow at a substantially later date? Will he further investigate the possibility of intervention by the youth opportunities programme, which would lead to employment opportunities in an area of high unemployment and contribute to safeguarding that important aspect of our national heritage?

Order. The hon. Member should not argue a case when seeking to ask a question.

The working party that I referred to has decided to arrange expert examination of the engines next spring, when they will be classified into those with potential for being restored to working order, those with potential for spares and those fit only for scrap. Meanwhile, Woodham Brothers has undertaken not to cut up any more engines for scrap before 1982.

Will my hon. Friend also bear in mind that many of those locomotives are a fascinating reminder of the extent of British achievement in the age of steam?

I shall certainly bear that in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what representations he has received on the Government's observations upon the first report from the Committee on Welsh Affairs on "The Role of the Welsh Office and Associated Bodies in Developing Employment Opportunities in Wales"; and if he will make a statement.

I have seen and heard a variety of comment but have received no formal representations.

Does the Minister realise that the bodies that have submitted evidence—the Wales TUC, the Wales CBI, the Council for the Principality and the Welsh Counties Committee—will be disappointed at the negative response to the positive suggestions made in the Select Committee report? Will he accept that it is the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Wales who are selling Wales short by such a poor response to a good document and not the people who demonstrate when the Prime Minister comes to Wales protected by 1,000 policemen, but who are accused of doing so?

I can understand that the hon. Gentleman is not pleased with the response. We shall have the opportunity to debate it.

When?

After Christmas. As the hon. Gentleman knows, the Select Committee demanded substantial additional sums of public expenditure without attempting to cost them in any way. Nor did it fully work out the implications of the programme for the rest of the United Kingdom. The Government of the day are bound to take those considerations into account.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is not Rent-a-mob in Cardiff but the steel workers of Wales who can give effect to one of the most important recommendations in the Select Committee's report—namely, that steel making should remain in Wales—and that they can do so by proving their record within the next six months?

An important lesson was learnt at the end of last week. Only a handful of people turned out to scream in the streets of Cardiff. At the same time, the chairman of the British Steel Corporation has made it clear that he wishes to preserve Llanwern and Port Talbot because of the effectiveness of running slim line at those two plants. That is the way forward, not the screaming hooliganism of 500 or 600 people in the streets of Cardiff.

Is the Secretary of State suggesting that more people must come out on to the streets? Is that his proposition? As he has turned down the Select Committee's criticism on the failure to have any contingency plan when the 11,000 redundancies were declared, what contingency plan has he now got to meet the possibility that MacGregor has indicated that Llanwern and Port Talbot could be at risk in six months? Does he intend to sit like a hypnotised rabbit, as he did before, waiting for these dangers, or has he any plan except the passive attitude that he and the Prime Minister have continually adopted towards Wales?

I note that the hon. Gentleman is doing everything that he can to incite disruption in the steelworks in Wales. I also noted with a good deal of interest the remarks by Mr. MacGregor on television on Friday that the one thing that would finally ensure the closure of any individual plant would be if industrial disruption occurred and wrecked its performance. I can think of no worse service to the steel workers or the people of Wales than the kind of incitement to which the hon. Gentleman has given cause.

Does not the Secretary of State realise that an important opportunity has been missed? Is he not aware that the frustration that was generated in Wales by his contemptuous dismissal of the first report makes more difficult the work of those of us who are genuinely trying to keep protest on a constitutional basis in Wales? It is no use the right hon. Gentleman saying that it is incitement if we alert him to the danger that exists. Does not his entirely negative response confirm that the Committee was, as we feared, set up as a sop to the people of Wales and was not intended to be a real challenge to the Welsh Office? When may we have a debate as a matter of urgency, not at some general time "after Christmas"?

The right hon. Gentleman is wrong in saying that we contemptuously dismissed the report. We agreed with about one-third of the conclusions in the report, or they have already been implemented or overtaken by events. Undoubtedly, the members of the Committee seemed to visualise a rainbow with a crock of gold at the end, presumably from England, because there is nowhere else from which the resources could come. There must be a limit to the resources that the Government can inject into any part of the United Kingdom. The Government, in their first two years, are spending over £300 million on job creation schemes of one kind or another in Wales.

asked the Secretary of Wales what representations he has made to the chairman of the British Steel Corporation to ensure that in preparing his corporate plan he takes account of the consequences for coal and other related industries if Port Talbot or Llanwern steel plants were to close.

I am sure that the chairman of the British Steel Corporation is well aware of the possible impact of any reductions in steel-making capacity on coal and other industries in South Wales.

Is the Secretary of State for State aware that in Wales over the weekend it was suggested that the MacGregor plan was a deliberate attempt to escalate unrest and uncertainty within the industry and to create strike action to give the BSC the excuse that it needs to liquidate the corporation? Does he still share the opinion of TINA—that there is no alternative? Is he aware that in Wales he is now referred to as Nick the Ripper, the industrial rapist of Wales?

I note with more respect than I have for any comment made by the hon. Gentleman the comment made by Mr. John Foley, one of the leaders of the steel industry in Wales, who on Friday said that the plan will mean that Wales will remain one of the great steel-producing areas of Western Europe and that the industrial base has been protected. It should be of some importance to the hon. Gentleman that if the plan goes through many coal mines and jobs in coal mining in Wales will be preserved. Indeed, there will be an increased take in coal if the plan goes through at Llanwern.

Contrary to the views expressed by the hon. Member for Ogmore (Mr. Powell), did not many of the trade union leaders who were quoted over the weekend express relief that the proposals were not more damaging than had been expected.?

It is too early to make a final assessment of the proposals put forward by the chairman on Friday. Ministers will be meeting the chairman later this week to discuss the plan in detail. The Government have not reached any formal conclusions on it. If the plan goes through on the present basis, Wales will remain a major steel-producing area. The chairman appears to be showing that he recognises the contribution in terms of increased efficiency that has been made at Llanwern and Port Talbot and is seeking to build on that early success.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the corporate plan includes a devastating reorganisation of the Velindre plant, which is related to Port Talbot, and that the proposal has been received with incredulity having regard to the high efficiency and the low costs of that plant? Will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that no decision is taken on this matter until full consultations have been held with those concerned?

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry has already told the House that it is unlikely that the Government will be announcing any conclusions on the plan until the end of January. Conservative Members have in the past few days argued that time should be given for consideration of the implications of the plan, but the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues seem to want to rush into debate before we have had time to read the plan in detail.

Is not this a unique opportunity for the House to stress the almost unhoped-for possibility of saving a large portion of the Welsh steel-making capacity if only we can transcend party quarrels and encourage both sides of the industry to get on with the job?

The central feature that emerges from the corporate plan is the chairman's determination to restore the BSC's place in the market, to win back its market share and to sell more steel. We should be getting enthusiastic support for that constructive approach from the Opposition Benches and not snide criticisms trying to score cheap political points.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman recognise that within the MacGregor massacre there are 1,700 reasons why West Glamorgan county as a whole should be regraded as a special development area? Will he represent this now to his right hon. Friend and restore to the county the means whereby its future prosperity can be assured?

I recognise that any changes that result from the BSC plan will require urgent further reconsideration of the development area status of the affected part of Wales.

Will the Secretary of State accept that, while we are glad that Margam and Llanwern were not axed, we note that they have been given only six months in which to secure their survival? Does he realise that the 5,000 redundancies that were announced are an acceptable further blow to an already tottering Welsh economy? Is he aware that the 20 per cent. increase in the value of sterling under the Government has been a major factor in the loss of home and export markets and that the BSC has not been helped by the recent mini-Budget, because the extra national insurance contributions for employers and employees can have only a deflationary effect and add to the domestic recession, while the 2 per cent. cut in interest rates has not helped sterling and has been yet another example of the Government's doing too little far too late?

Every comment that the right hon. Gentleman has uttered seems to be self-contradictory. He is arguing, apparently, that there should not have been an increase in the national insurance surcharge. But if that had not been done we would have had a higher public sector borrowing requirement and it would have been even more difficult to bring down interest rates. One lesson that we all ought to have learnt in recent years is that it is not within the power of Governments effectively to control the exchange rate.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on the second survey of "Operating Conditions in Europe Experienced by United States-owned Companies: Wales" (the Maynard report), published in September 1980.

This survey gives a very encouraging picture of American companies' experiences in Wales in terms of productivity, labour relations and other factors. Its message needs to be widely publicised.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that one of the summaries of the report was that labour relations in Wales were better than was expected? Will he urge the Wales TUC and Labour Members to make sure that that reputation is not impaired? Will he particularly urge Labour Members not to engage in party politics in the House just for the sake of cheap headlines but, particularly in the next six months, to give support, rather than criticism, to the Government and the BSC in the hope that more jobs will be saved rather than lost?

My hon. Friend is right. The consultants said:

"Industrial relations without exception are much more constructive than might be imagined from many reports in the media."

Is the Secretary of State aware that numerous major American multinational companies, such as Standard Telephones, Monsanto Chemicals and Black Clauson, have been settled happily in Newport for many years and enjoy good industrial relations? Is he aware that what we need from the Government is extra money for the preparation of new sites so that we can encourage more firms to come to our area?

I confirm what the hon. Gentleman says about the record of those companies. A number of significant overseas companies are looking at the possibility of setting up new plants in his area. I hope that before long we shall have some further good news for him.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he has any further plans to give financial aid to the Development Board for Rural Wales; and if he will make a statement.

The Government's expenditure plans include provision of about £6 million a year at 1979 survey prices for the Development Board for Rural Wales, as stated in Cmnd. 7841. I expect the board's resources for 1981–82 to total £8·2 million at November 1980 prices. As the House will be aware, the Industry Bill provides for the board's financial limit to rise from £40 million to £100 million.

Is the Secretary of State aware that in many parts of rural Wales the unemployment rate is higher than in other parts of Wales? For example, in Cardigan, Llandysul and Lampeter it is 18 per cent. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that Government policies are having disastrous effects on the Welsh people and the nation? What plans has he to try to alleviate that position?

As part of the programme being financed by the funds that I have announced, there is a substantial factory building programme in the areas to which the hon. Gentleman referred and in other parts of rural Wales. The board is having considerable success, even during these difficult times, in filling those new factories.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the gratitude of the people of eastern Mid-Wales to the board for its efforts in helping us to ride out the recession? Is he aware that in Mid-Wales, in the Newtown and Welshpool area, our rate of unemployment is far below the national average? Will he assure the House that he will continue an injection of money to help the board, and Dr. Skewis in particular, to carry out its industrious work?

I confirm that we shall continue to support the board. The fact that the Industry Bill is raising the finance limit is an indication of that support. Because the area is so attractive for people to work in and. particularly, for small units to start up in, I have no doubt that the board will continue to have success.

Will the Secretary of State tell us how the level of his funding for the board compares with the level in the year before he took office?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, there is a reduction from the year before we took office. We have broadly maintained the expenditure provided by the previous Government in the PESC survey. In the previous year the Labour Government found an underspend in another Department and boosted the money for the board. We have maintained in broad terms the long-term expenditure plans set out by the previous Government.

Would it not have been more equitable and honourable if the whole of rural Wales had been included within the perimeters of the DBRW rather than a specialised and arbitrary three-fifths? If the whole of rural Wales had been included, the Government would have accepted at least one extra recommendation of the Welsh Select Committee after its long deliberations.

The decision, arbitrary or otherwise, was taken by my predecessor, the right hon. and learned Member for Aberavon (Mr. Morris), who set up the board with its present boundaries. I thought that it would be wrong, at a time of limited resources, to spread the work of the board more widely because that would reduce the effectiveness of what it can do in the area for which it is responsible.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what further progress he has made in considering the proposal from the Wales TUC for a research study into the feasibility of setting up a resource centre.

I am arranging to make a grant of £40,000 available to the Wales TUC to assist with this study, and parliamentary approval will be sought in the spring Supplementary Estimate for the regional industrial development (Wales) Vote.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the proposal was a most interesting suggestion from the Wales TUC, which deserves every commendation? Will the Welsh CBI be asked to co-operate in some way?

I congratulate the Wales TUC on its constructive suggestion. In these difficult times it seemed to be a proposal which deserved a response, and I am glad that we have been able to make funds available. The study is also likely to get support from the Welsh Development Agency. It is a feasibility study, not a long-term programme. We shall have to see what the results are. I do not answer for the CBI.

We welcome the Government's response, even though it is particularly belated, to the setting up of a resource centre. Unfortunately, during the nine months that have elapsed since the TUC first mentioned the proposal to the Welsh Select Committee—

Order. Even Front Bench spokesmen must ask questions and not make statements.

Is the Secretary of State aware that during the nine months since the proposal was first mooted by the Wales TUC unemployment in Wales has escalated by nearly 40,000?

Of course I am aware of the unemployment figures, but they make the scheme more, not less, desirable. I am glad that we have been able to find the resources for the study to go ahead. I note that the Wales TUC has given a far less grudging response than has the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he has had any recent discussions with the chairman of the British Steel Corporation concerning reorganisation proposals.

I have had discussions with Mr. MacGregor on a number of occasions recently, and his officials and mine keep regularly in touch.

The Secretary of State cannot afford to be complacent when another 5,000 steel jobs in Wales have gone. Does he appreciate that Llanwern and Port Talbot have merely been reprieved, not saved? What the Government should be doing now is reflating the economy and discarding their outdated witch-doctor economic theories.

Llanwern and Port Talbot have been reprieved—if that is the right word—because of their performance in recent months and their response to slim line. I understand that the chairman is saying that their future survival will depend on the continuing competitiveness and success of their operations.

Is the Secretary of State aware, particularly in view of his cheap and snide remarks earlier about my right hon. Friend the Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Foot), that if the plans go forward there will be in the Blaenau-Gwent area an escalation of unemployment from the present 17·1 per cent. to over 21 per cent.? Does he not agree that that would be totally unacceptable? What does he propose to do about it?

I do not think that it is cheap or snide to remind the House that when the Leader of the Opposition, who is the Member of Parliament for the area, was in Government unemployment rose from 3·9 per cent. to 13·3 per cent. in his constituency. That shows that there are no cheap and simple solutions to the problems. The right hon. Gentleman failed to find them, and I do not pretend that they can be found overnight. There is a massive programme to attract industry to the area, and it is meeting with some success, despite the bad image that so many people put about.

Will the right hon. Gentleman stop hiding behind Mr. Ian MacGregor and the Secretary of State for Industry and tell us precisely what his role is in discussions, what input the Welsh Office has to the BSC strategy, and whether he will be involved this week in the ministerial discussions?

The first meeting that Mr. MacGregor is having with the Government to discuss his corporate plan is on Wednesday, when he is meeting my right hon. Friends the Secretary of State for Industry, the Secretary of State for Employment and the Secretary of State for Scotland and me to present the plan in detail. That is the first meeting. I shall be at it.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales how many cervical screening tests have been carried out for women in Wales during the period October 1979 to October 1980; and if he will list the age groups for whom this facility is available.

Statistics on cervical cytology tests are collected annually. A total of 126,150 tests were carried out for women in Wales during 1979. Tests are not restricted to particular age groups, but the present policy is that routine screening for cervical cancer should be offered to women older than 35 and those who have had three or more pregnancies.

I am grateful to the Minister for that reply. Is he aware of the recent "TV Eye" programme which dealt with the subject and laid great stress on the fact that women in a much lower age range than he has just mentioned are seemingly more at risk? Will he encourage the extension of such testing to that age range and dismiss any suggestion that the service should be curtailed or even wound up?

The hon. Gentleman is right in that the standard mortality figures suggest that cancer of the cervix is an increasing problem. Screening gives the opportunity to arrest the disease at an early stage. The present policy is to offer routine screening to women who are thought to be at high risk. The risk categories will be examined when the committee on gynaecological cytology has reported. Over half the tests carried out are for women under 35. The present screening policy will be reviewed in the light of the committee's recommendations.

Is the Minister aware that, according to the latest medical statistics, more positive results are being shown in women under 35 than women over 35, yet general medical practitioners are not paid for carrying out the examination on women under 35?

The first step is to examine the present policy on screening in the light of the committee's conclusions. Then we can see what changes, if any, need to be made.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will give an assurance that the rate support grant distribution formula in Wales for 1981–82 will give adequate weighting to the additional cost of maintaining services in rural areas, particularly those with very sparse population.

I shall be announcing the Welsh rate support grant settlement to the Welsh Consultative Council on Local Government Finance tomorrow, and it would not be appropriate for me to announce details in advance of that meeting.

Is the Secretary of State aware that over the past four years the county of Gwynedd has lost £4 million in the needs element of the rate support grant, the biggest proportionate loss of any county in Wales? That has squeezed very hard the level of services in Gwynedd and has forced the county to cut out any waste that could be cut out. Will the right hon. Gentleman bear that in mind in the rate support grant to be announced tomorrow and give an assurance that there will not be a squeeze that leads to even further reductions in services or an unacceptable increase in the rate level?

What I can assure the hon. Gentleman is that the grant-related expenditure assessments have been made in full consultation with the Welsh Counties Committee and the Council for the Principality, and all these factors have been taken into account.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in Gwynedd certain staff savings have been made, which are to be welcomed, and the position is now such that old people's homes may well have to be closed? Will he pay particular attention to the problems of rural areas in North-West Wales and make sure that such closures can be averted if possible?

I am making a statement on these matters tomorrow, and I cannot anticipate what I shall say then.

Will the right hon. Gentleman comment on the prophecy made by the financial adviser to the Welsh Counties Committee that, on the basis of the figures for the rate support grant determination that were widely forecast in the press this weekend, the domestic rate in Wales will rise by 30 per cent. and the non-domestic rate will rise by 22 per cent.? As the rate support grant position is so important to those of us in Wales, shall we have an opportunity to question the right hon. Gentleman in the House before the recess?

The right hon. Gentleman has apparently not been listening. I have just said that I shall make a statement in the House tomorrow, so he will have the opportunity to ask questions. Forecasts of rates are worthless, because the rates will depend entirely on the individual decisions of local authorities.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he has any plans to visit West Glamorgan to examine at first hand the present industrial situation in that area.

I have at present no plans to do so.

When the right hon. Gentleman does visit West Glamorgan and meets some of the new industrialists in the valleys, particularly the Lliw Valley and Pontardawe Valley, he will be told of their concern about the future as a result of the downgrading of development area status. Having regard to the Velindre announcement, will he now reconsider urgently designating the whole of West Glamorgan as a special development area?

I simply repeat what I told the hon. Member for Neath (Mr. Coleman) earlier. We have said that we shall keep these questions under review. Clearly, as the situation may change in that area, further thought must be given to the representations that have been made.

Is the Secretary of State aware that, as a result of the British Steel Corporation reorganisation plans for tinplate, unemployment in Llanelli could well rise to 15 per cent.? How much higher does it have to go before the right hon. Gentleman gives us back development area status and special development area status, which he took away?

I have already said twice this afternoon that the changes taking place in that area will have to be considered and that the Government will review the development area status of the areas most affected by the changes.

How does the Secretary of State explain the fact that, with half the unemployment in West Glamorgan concentrated in Swansea and with the percentage of unemployment being only 1½ per cent. below that of Port Talbot, which is a special development area, Swansea not only is not a special development area but is not even a development area? Indeed, it is ranked in the lowest tier—an intermediate area.

The right hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well, because he was present at a meeting when these issues were discussed with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry, that the changes in development area status were made when those were not the figures. We have said that if the position changes permanently we shall reconsider the grading. I have already given three undertakings this afternoon that that is exactly what we shall do.

But these gradings have been considered, reviewed and monitored since July of last year. Will the Secretary of State go further and say that because of the disproportionate effect of the corporate proposals on West Glamorgan—which has roughly half of the total Welsh job losses—he will be geared to making an immediate announcement if, by the end of January, the Government endorse the recommendations of Mr. MacGregor?

The corporate plan was presented only on Friday and has not yet been considered by the Government. The details of the plan and its consequences for regional policy are matters that the Government will be considering urgently in the coming weeks.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Secretary of State for Wales—unwittingly, perhaps—misled the House—

Order. Will the hon. Gentleman wait 10 minutes and raise his point of order at the end of Question Time?

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. At Question Time, on the very important subject of the report of the Select Committee on Welsh Affairs on the matter of unemployment in Wales, the Secretary of State indicated the likelihood of an early debate in the House after Christmas. In fact, a letter which I received today from the Leader of the House states:

"There is little prospect of timetabling a debate on the Floor of the House in the first few weeks after the recess",

The hon. Member for Caernarvon (Mr. Wigley) will not expect me to comment any further on his point of order other than to say that I was generous and that I realised that he wanted to get his point on the record.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he is satisfied with the priority accorded to industrial archaeology within the framework of the national heritage.

Yes, Sir. The claims of industrial archaeology are given careful consideration by those concerned with the protection and preservation of the national heritage, who include the Secretary of State for the Environment, the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Secretary of State for Wales.

Will my hon. Friend tell the House to what extent the National Heritage Fund is available for industrial archaeology in general and for relic preservation in particular? Will he recognise the value of the efforts of thousands of volunteers who are standing ready and willing to get to work on restoring, for example, the steam engines at Barry in South Wales, if they can be saved from the scrapyard?

Yes, I acknowledge and pay tribute to the many thousands of people who help in this way. The National Heritage Memorial Fund was established to provide financial assistance for the acquisition, maintenance and preservation of land, buildings and objects of outstanding historic or other interest. That includes items of industrial archaeology.

Is the Minister aware of the dramatic work that is being carried out at present by the Wales Tourist Board, the National Coal Board and the National Museum of Wales to open the big pit, as it is called, in Blaenavon in Gwent as an industrial attraction for tourists? Will he, in discussion with his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales, give such support as he can to this important venture in our industrial heritage?

I am well aware of the many initiatives which have been taken in recent years, and also in recent months, to develop and preserve these areas and interests of outstanding national importance. The hon. Member's views will be conveyed to those who are interested.

Will the Minister pay tribute to the Ministry of Defence and the Royal Navy for preserving so well much of the naval industrial architecture in the Gosport and Portsmouth areas against the day when it will be possible to open up the area as more of a tourist centre?

My hon. Friend's question underlines the policy that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster wishes to pursue of taking museums and areas of outstanding interest into the region so that they can attract a great deal of tourist interest. In addition to the one that my hon. Friend has mentioned, I suggest that there is a great recognition of the work which has just been done at RNAS Yeovilton, and the expansion and opening of the Mountbatten museum earlier this year.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what steps he is taking to increase the appreciation of films.

The British Film Institute is the instrument by which the Government promote film as an art form, and I have already announced that I am proposing an increase in its grant from £5,750,000 in the current financial year to £6,400,000 in 1981–82, which is an increase of 11 per cent. I have also agreed to give The Guardian lecture on "The place of film and television in the Arts" at the National Film Theatre on 3 February 1981. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will come to the lecture.

The last part of the Minister's answer is a contribution to my concern about the film industry. Is he aware that the cinema still attracts more people than any other entertainment, that its general standards continue to be low and that the Government's contribution, in spite of the increase which has been given, is negligible? Does he agree that two circuits dominate the market and that this is not only unhealthy but contributes to the present state of affairs? Will the Minister for the Arts support the Monopolies and Mergers Commission in investigating the position in order that independent producers and independent cinemas can play a much larger and more effective role?

Matters concerning the commercial side of the industry are not for me; they are for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade. I am responsible for the film in so far as it is an art form. I entirely agree with the hon. Gentleman that it is an extremely important art form, not least because it attracts so many young people. That is why we have managed, by arrangement with the British Film Institute, to increase the grant for film production by £¼ million this year.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it would encourage a greater appreciation of films as an art form if he could encourage the television organisations to show their better films slightly earlier in the evening? At the hours at which they are shown at present, no one who does an honest day's work is up to see them.

My hon. Friend speaks for himself. For most hon. Members, their time for watching television is late in the evening. It depends whether one is a lark or a nightingale.

Is the Minister aware that, while there is this division in Whitehall between one aspect of film production and another, it behoves him not just to make sure that there is more money for the British Film Institute but to make sure that there are jobs in the industry for people when they come out of the training course? Will he have urgent talks with the Home Office to see whether he can do something about getting a real contribution from the television industry for the showing of films?

One of the difficulties is that the responsibilities for the various aspects of film and television are split between different Departments. I shall have words with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department. Meanwhile, I shall do all I can, as I am doing, to support the film as an art form, which is my responsibility.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will make a statement about his duties in the field of informatics and telematics.

My right hon. Friend has at present no specific duties in this area. However, our responsibilities for the British Library and the public library service give us a strong interest in developments in information storage and retrieval.

Does the Minister recall that when his right hon. Friend came to the Select Committee he said that he might be a very good lead Minister in these matters? Can he give us any guarantee that the expertise which exists in the British Library in these matters will be put to the full use of the Government and the new Minister in charge of these matters? When does the Chancellor's Department intend to reply to the Select Committee's report on these matters?

I am aware of the dialogue and the exchanges which took place when my right hon. Friend appeared before the Select Committee. That report is still being considered, in consultation with my other right hon. Friends who have interests in this area. The British Library is well aware of its responsibilities. My office is discussing with it some of the implications of the Select Committee's report, and the library advisory council will also be looking at the role of the British Library.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how many authors are expected to benefit during the first full year of operation of the public lending right scheme; and what is the average amount expected to be paid to each.

For planning purposes, it is estimated that up to 50,000 authors may register an entitlement for PLR during the first year. It is impossible to say what the average entitlement is likely to be since it will depend upon the eventual number of eligible authors, the number of times their books have been borrowed and the amount available in the central fund for distribution.

Does my right hon. Friend remember that when I last asked a question on this general subject, in June of this year, he was able to announce that he was cutting the administrative cost of the public lending right by about one-half? Is he aware that many of us think that about £⅓ million is still too much? Is there any chance of a repeat performance from him?

We have cut the adminstrative cost right down to the bone, but we are always willing to look to see whether there can be further economies before the scheme is laid before Parliament, which will be early in the Session, I hope shortly after we return from the Christmas Recess.

I declare an interest as an original supporter of the Public Lending Right Act 1979, as my right hon. Friend knows. Will he recognise that the awards to authors from the scheme will be extremely meagre and that either the scheme ought to be entirely re&-vamped or he should review the position, if he is seriously interested in authors having a real reward for their sales?

I disagree entirely with my hon. Friend. The scheme represents a major breakthrough in principle and the recognition of a right in authors. That we cannot devote a large sum of money to it is regrettable, but I believe that the authors will benefit. What is important is that the right has at long last been recognised.