asked the Secretary of State for Industry what steps he is taking to ensure that British industry is made sufficiently aware of the benefits obtainable by the use of information technology.

The Government have designated 1982 as Information Technology Year. Information Technology Year will form part of the Government's strategy to promote a wider appreciation in industry and among the general public of the opportunities offered by the new technologies. There will be a wide range of activities, including a two-day conference and exhibition at the Barbican centre in London in December 1982, which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has agreed to open.

Although I warmly appreciate the great efforts of my hon. Friend and his Department in this important area, can he give the necessary assurances to me and my constituents that all manufacturers of this kind of equipment—Mullard of Mitcham, in my constituency, and many others throughout the country—will receive the maximum possible support from the Government both by public sector purchasing and by using the public sector, particularly the Civil Service, as a showcase for the demonstration of appropriate equipment?

Yes, Sir. I can give that assurance. I visited the Mullard factory in my hon. Friend's constituency, and I pay tribute to the business, which is making many chips for the Teletext and Viewdate sets and is contributing to our efforts in that part of the industry, where we have a world lead.

Is it not paradoxical, when we are thinking about Information Technology Year, to have such a massive closedown of so many ICL plants and establishments? Will the hon. Gentleman see what can be done to bring forward the public purchasing of ICL computers and revoke the extension of the life of computers in the public service, which was recently, I believe, increased from seven to 10 years?

I can give the right hon. Gentleman that assurance. I shall look into both those points. There will be a debate about ICL in the House later this week on the Adjournment. I re-emphasise what I have said before in the House, that the British computer industry is much more than simply ICL. Many medium and small companies are increasing employment and increasing their output. The problem for the hardware companies is that throughout the world there is a shift away from hardware to software, and no company can be entirely immune.

No company can be immune, but should not the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues be giving far clearer support to the survival of ICL, rather than making that kind of equivocal statement, which will have an impact on its sales abroad, where ICL has done very well? May we have from Ministers a clear declaration of faith in ICL?

I have said at the Dispatch Box in the past, and I shall say it again this week, that the Government are very concerned about ICL's future. That is why we have provided it, as a major supplier to the Government, with a guarantee of £200 million. Whenever I have spoken about ICL, I have always emphasised that half its business is overseas and that it is one of the major exporters of hardware around the world.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry whether he is now in a position to give his observations upon the report of the Select Committee on Trade and Industry regarding the position of the Concorde programme.

I advised the Chairman of the Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds, North-West (Sir D. Kaberry), on 8 June that consideration of the report was well advanced; and that my right hon. Friend had accordingly decided that a substantive Government reply, in the form of a Command Paper, could be given to Parliament before the Summer Recess.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Will he ensure that the House has an opportunity to debate this matter before the Summer Recess? In the interval, can he confirm the Select Committee's conclusion that, however badly we do, we shall do worse than the French from a continuation of this programme? As all hope now appears to have been abandoned for selling any of these albatrosses on a commercial basis, is it not time to take another drastic look at the matter?

As my hon. Friend knows, the first point that he raised is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House, but I am sure that a debate on the issue would be interesting, to say the least. His second point, concerning the balance of expenditure between ourselves and our French partners, is one that I raised with the French Minister in January. I hope to raise the matter again with the new French Minister as soon as possible.

Is it not time that this expensive white elephant was relegated to an elephants' graveyard, since from its very inception it has not paid its way, and has simply added to the losses of British Airways?

The right hon. Gentleman would be wise to await the Command Paper and see the balance of advantage and disadvantage of costs and benefits which would arise from cancellation or continuation of the project.

Concorde has already lost many millions of pounds which are irrecoverable, but is it not a fact that supersonic air travel is here to stay, and that there is a real possibility that Concorde mark II might go forward on a co-operative basis, involving not only this country but France and the United States? Would not the Minister agree that to cancel Concorde services at this time and run the risk of our being excluded from any development of supersonic travel would be a great setback?

The Government's decision in this regard will be taken on the basis of strict adherence to the principle of value for money and pursuing the matter on the minimum costs. I am sure that there will be a supersonic successor to Concorde, but I very much doubt whether it will be in this decade.

I wish to press the matter because of the public interest in the matter. Will there be a debate on this matter before the Summer Recess? It is not sufficient to produce a Command Paper. We must have a debate at the earliest possible opportunity.

I can only say that I note what the right hon. Gentleman has said—as, I am sure, has my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry if he will give further details of the conference which will be chaired by the Under-Secretary of State for Industry, the hon. Member for Norfolk, South (Mr. MacGregor) in the Northern region later in 1981.

This conference, which will be held in Durham on 1 December, is one of a series of regional conferences which form part of the Government's business opportunities programme. The objectives are to provide a forum to bring together existing and prospective small business men and women and those who can help them, and to publicise and discuss the many practical steps that the Government have taken to help small businesses.

Is the Minister aware that 100 conferences will not make the slightest difference to the Northern region if the Government do not change their basic policies? As unemployment has increased in the region every month since this Government came to power, has it not occurred to the Government that their regional policies might be wrong? At this conference, will the Minister pay particular attention to the matter of apprentices in the North, because they are the lifeblood of the region, and the present position augurs badly for the future?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, unemployment rose heavily under the last Government, too, in the region. We debated the wider issues fairly recently. I urge the hon. Gentleman not to neglect the role that new and small businesses can play in this respect. The Government have taken many practical measures, and it is necessary that people become more aware of them. He will be glad to know that in his own region many small firms centres received about 4,000 inquiries in the first five months—double the number last year—and that one-third of them were from people wanting to start up businesses of their own. That will make a contribution.

Will the Minister act on the findings of the conference in the event of its criticising the Government?

We shall certainly listen to what people tell us about new and small businesses. There is also a good deal of evidence that the 60 measures that we have taken during the past two years to help small businesses are having their effect.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry what representations he has received about the provision of regional development agencies for those areas suffering the worst effects of unemployment in England.

My right hon. Friend has received representations, particularly from hon. Members and some Northern organisations, that a development agency be established for the North of England. More recently during the debate on the North-West region on 15 June, some hon. Members called for such a body to cover North-West England. As my right hon. Friend announced on 9 February, the Government are not pursuaded by those representations.

Is the Minister aware that in this year of technology, St. Helens is an area that was downgraded by his right hon. Friend from that of special development area to that of development area, since when unemployment has been leaping month by month? In view of the changes in technology which have brought about massive redundancies in the glass industry alone, will he and his right hon. Friend consider regrading—that is, upgrading—St. Helens to special development area again?

It is necessary that we preserve the higher status of special development area and development area for those areas which have the most persistent and difficult problems of unemployment. I am not yet persuaded that St. Helens lacks the ability to recover as quickly as other parts of the country from the present recession.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the West Midlands has already been severely damaged by the effect of regional policies, and that if further aid is extended to Northern areas, it will be again to the disadvantage of the West Midlands, where unemployment is nearly the same as in many of those areas which enjoy the advantages of regional policies?

My hon. Friend is quite correct. Of course, all these forms of aid have to be paid for, and they are paid for particularly by those who do not enjoy them. Many of those people are themselves having considerable troubles, as is the case in the West Midlands.

Is the Minister aware that the alternative to the establishment of a development agency for the North-West is a proliferation of industrial development officers appointed by a multiplicity of different local authorities? Does the Minister accept that development does not stop at municipal and county boundaries?

I am aware of that, but there is nothing to prevent local authorities from co-operating in the interests of their electors.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry whether he will review the types of activity eligible for the small business incentive package as announced in the Budget speech.

Both the loan guarantee scheme and the business start-up scheme are new schemes covering a wide range of business activities, and both will be kept under review in the light of experience.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the concept of the business start-up scheme has been widely praised, but that there has been enormous criticism of the detailed provisions, not least because there is help for manufacturing, but no help for the distribution of the manufactures produced?

The business start-up scheme is a matter for my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. My hon. Friend is right that there was a wide welcome for the scheme. The Government have responded constructively to a number of the comments made since the publication of the Finance Bill, and, as my hon. Friend will know, the Minister of State, Treasury, announced several significant changes to the scheme which have met nearly all the criticisms. The difficulty of retail distribution is to devise a definition in the Finance Bill that will avoid substantial tax abuse.

Does the Minister agree that the increased interest in the Government's help for small businesses is purely a reflection of the number of people who have been made redundant and who have nowhere else to go? Does he agree that the help that the Government are giving to small businesses has been more than offset by the general running down of the economy which has been generated by the Government's policies? Does he accept that in the end the future of many small businesses depends on the survival of big business?

Obviously, the general economy does have an effect. There is no doubt that the reaction of the small business community to a number of measures that have been taken by this Government shows that it goes much further than the hon. Gentleman suggests. A number of the financial and tax measures brought in by this Government have been particularly welcomed.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on the improvements made to the start-up scheme. However, may I ask him about the loan guarantee scheme? A percentage of it is being supplied by the banks but is being guaranteed by the Government. Could the percentage surcharge that the banks have been making on people taking out loans be reduced? It seems to me that the banks are making a percentage charge on a guaranteed percentage behind which the Government are standing?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving me the opportunity to clarify this matter. There is a great deal of misunderstanding about it. The Government's guarantee is absorbed in the total average interest rate which the banks are charging and which is roughly at the present rate for marginal lending. But the reactions so far to the loan guarantee scheme have been very favourable, with nearly £700,000 already guaranteed, divided equally between start-ups and existing businesses. Therefore, I think that we can see a constructive interest and that the rate of interest is not a significant barrier.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry what is the basis of his current regional policy of assistance for industry.

The main source of industrial jobs is entrepreneurial management and co-operative work forces working within an encouraging economic and cultural climate to serve customers at home and abroad. We are continuing to help the regions with most spare resources by a more selective and hence more effective policy of regional aid than before.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that the West Midlands qualifies under the existing rules for assisted area status? Therefore, will he either extend that or change the rules to a more hopeful and, I believe, more promising avenue, which is development on the basis of a sectoral approach?

The West Midlands has suffered over past years from the then regional policies. We have reduced the damaging impact of comprehensive industrial development certificate control. I cannot agree—my hon. Friend would not be happy if I did—that the West Midlands yet has conditions as negative as those in some other regions. It is the relativities, the comparisons between one region and another, which are at the heart of our regional policy, because we seek to concentrate help where it is most needed.

Will not the Secretary of State agree that the only entrepreneurial skill that we have seen in recent months in the West Midlands is that of shutting down factories and transferring their plants elsewhere?

When a firm has several factories, it may be best, to preserve jobs, to concentrate the existing demand on some factories and not on all. That is part of the process, alas, of becoming more competive and getting more jobs.

As unemployment in Halifax has risen by 175 per cent. since this Government took office, will the Secretary of State reconsider his decision to withdraw assisted area status from Calderdale, especially as some other areas have lower unemployment? Does not this make the Government's policy both unjust and illogical?

My colleagues and I are always willing to consider the relative case for any area.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree, however, that, unless the market is expanding, if Nissan or some other company is given regional grant to move to another area, it is often at the expense of the West Midlands and jobs there are lost? Does not my right hon. Friend also agree that regional grants often do not create more wealth? All that they do is shift one bit of prosperity to another place.

I agree with the gist of the last part of my hon. Friend's question. However, the House will realise that we import more than half the cars that our population buy in a year. Therefore, there is plenty of scope for more cars to be made here.

Will not the Secretary of State acknowledge that the Government's policy overall has been a failure and that it has affected all the regions? When will he change the policy?

I do not agree with the right hon. Gentleman. For years and years, by and large our industry has been becoming less competitive because it has been more and more overmanned and weakened by some patchy management and by restrictive labour practices. These sources of uncompetitiveness cannot be eliminated overnight. We are going through a painful transitional stage towards becoming more competive and having an increase in employment again.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry what assessment he has made for the revival of industry in the West Midlands region.

I recognise that the West Midlands has been particularly affected by the current world recession, not least because of its dependence on certain industries which have been becoming increasingly less competitive in world markets over recent years. The Government's policies are designed to help create the conditions for an economic revival, in which much will depend on the efforts of management and work forces in the region to restore the competitiveness and productivity of its industry.

Is the Minister aware of the scale of devastation which has hit the West Midlands in the last two years and which is largely due directly to Government policies? Is he aware also that people in the West Midlands, subject constantly to economic insecurity, redundancies, closures and short-time working, are waiting desperately for the Government's promises of economic revival to be turned into hard reality?

As I said, it has been due not to Government policies but to the increasingly uncompetitive nature of many West Midlands industries. I hope that the hon. Member will welcome, in terms of competitiveness, the fact that our inflation rate is getting closer to the EEC average, which is a big change from recent years, that our interest rates are below the EEC average, that wage increases are moderating and that the potential for increased productivity is now very marked for when the upturn comes. I recognise the problems of Walsall, but I hope that the hon. Gentleman will concentrate on the new jobs that are being created. I understand that more than 2,500 people a month in the Walsall travel-to-work area are now coming off the jobs register. Last month, it was nearly 3,000

Does my- hon. Friend agree that industry in the West Midlands, as elsewhere in the country, will revive as the slump ends? But could he assist this by reforming much of the tangle of employment legislation which hinders employers, especially small employers, and also, for instance, by abolishing the wages councils?

My hon. Friend is right to say that there are encouraging signs of increasing competitiveness which will stand firms in good stead as the economic recovery comes. The other matters referred to by my hon. Friend are of course for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry if he will make a statement on the operation of measures to assist industrial development in the Northern region.

The Government have recognised the special problems of the North, nearly 90 per cent. of which is an assisted area. However the best prospects for the region lie in our measures to achieve national economic recovery and the determination of production, sales and management workers to match the efficiency of their foreign competitors.

Is the Minister aware that in my constituency alone the numbers of unemployed increased by 400 last month to bring the male rate to 31·6 per cent.? That takes no account of what may be announced tomorrow. Is not that just one example among many which could be cited of the complete failure of the Government's industrial policies in the Northern region?

No, Sir. It is far more to be attributed to the mistaken policies of expansion of the steel industry which was undertaken regardless of the fact that there was no demand for the product. I have to remind the hon. Gentleman that his constituency is benefiting from a £13 million factory building programme, a £10 million derelict land clearance programme, and £1½ million rate support for lost rates because of the steel closure, and that there are 90 industrial inquiries in Consett at the moment with the potential of bringing up to 3,000 jobs. Why does not the hon. Gentleman try to talk up his constituency instead of talking it down?

The Minister should not talk such rubbish to the House.

Is it not time that the Minister of State and his colleagues responsible for industry began to admit the abyssmal failure of their policies not only in the Northern region but in all the development areas and in areas such as the West Midlands which we have always regarded as the very seed corn of British industry? Why do not the Government completely review their existing policies and do something to reduce the massive rates of unemployment in my constituency and throughout the Northern region?

Why does not the right hon. Gentleman do something to remind his constituents and others that the prerequisites for industrial success are harder work, lower labour costs and better industrial relations than our competitors? Where that is being achieved, not least with Government help, we are successful— in th steel industry and, increasingly, in the motor industry.

The house deserves a more considered answer. The Minister of State mentioned steel. In the Northern region massive job losses in shipbuilding, engineering—

Order. The hon. Gentleman must ask a question. This is not a debate.

Is the Minister of State aware that massive job losses have occurred in the steel, shipbuilding, engineering, textile and chemical industries? Is he aware that every economic indicator for the Northern region is now worse than it was when the Government came to office? Is the Minister of State aware that Britain experienced the fastest rise in unemployment in the EEC last year? Is he aware that the Northern region of Britain was worst hit? What does he intend to do to improve the situation?

I remind the hon. Gentleman that the price of creating a more efficient steel industry is the ending of overmanning. That is largely responsible for the increases in unemployment. There is more security for jobs in British Leyland, for example, where output is as high as it was 12 months ago and 30,000 fewer men are employed, than there would be in continuing to pad, subsidise and reduce the competitiveness of our industry.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the totally unsatisfactory nature of that reply I beg to give notice that I shall raise the issue on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry if he will bring forward new proposals to encourage investment in the textile industry in the East Midlands.

We already have very generous investment encouragement for all manufacturing industry, including textiles. Moreover, the textile industry in the East Midlands and elsewhere in the United Kingdom is entitled to take advantage of the various schemes of assistance which operate under the Industry Act 1972 and the Science and Technology Act 1965 subject to the published criteria.

Is the Minister aware that the policies that he has just described have completely failed? Is he aware that the textile industry in the East Midlands, not least in my constituency, is in a catastrophic state, with vast unemployment and huge amounts of short-time working? Does he have no new proposals to try to rescue the industry from its plight?

As was made clear in the debate last week, the textile industry receives more assistance through quotas and the MFA than any other industry in Britain. The industry has over 500 individual quota arrangements, and that is substantial. The Government are pledged to seek a tough successor to the present MFA. Over £2½ million in selective financial assistance and the products and process developement scheme has gone to the hosiery and knitwear industry in the East Midlands in the comparatively recent past, including help for a number of schemes in Leicester itself.

Will the Minister check the verbatim record of the recent Yorkshire Television programme on textiles, since the Minister of State said that almost all the regions affected by the textile industry decline have assisted area status? Will he publish in the record which areas are and are not assisted areas? Will he explain why his Department is withdrawing assisted area status from certain areas? Will he check the record and explain the discrepancy?

If the hon. Gentleman tables a question on that issue I shall answer it.

Given the scores of thousands of jobs lost in the textile industry in the last year, when will the Government say "Enough is enough" and agree that the present size of the industry must be maintained by Government assistance and protected from unfair imports? The Minister referred earlier to assistance schemes for the textile industry. Which schemes are still in existence and open to application?

Selective financial assistance and PPDS are still open. As was made clear in the full debate last week, and in a recent Adjournment debate, the industry receives greater protection than most others because of its particular problems. A full answer about the MFA negotiations was given by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade last week.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry if he will make a statement on official visits to the Paris Air Show.

My hon. Friend and I attended the Paris Air Show where we toured a large number of United Kingdom exhibitors, and where discussions took place with our opposite numbers in the French Government and with French officials.

Will my hon. Friend take the opportunity to congratulate the British aerospace industry on its considerable successes at that show? Will he confirm that that industry stands much more chance of providing the new profits, industrial expansion and the new jobs that the country wants than the dying industries? Will he examine the scale of charges operated by the Ministry of Defence for Service aircraft such as the Sea Harrier, which firms wish to use as demonstrators at such shows? Does he agree that the charges are rather high and anything but encouraging?

I take note of my hon. Friend's last comment. The charges are based on the usual practice. The details are for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence. I agree that the air show was a success. British aerospace companies announced orders in excess of £400 million at the show. I hope that Opposition Members will talk up the industry instead of engaging in the usual talking down.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the new denationalised British Aerospace management and work force have more confidence in its future than they have had for many years? Will he take this opportunity at the Dispatch Box to do everything that he can to talk up and wish well to the British Aerospace 146 and Short's new small 360?

It is a good thought that the prime feature of next year's Farnborough Air Show will be the introduction of both those aircraft. I agree that the privatisation of this major company is showing every sign of success. Naturally, we wish to extend that process elsewhere.

I associate the Opposition with the acknowledgement of British Aerospace's success at the Paris Air Show. Does the Minister recognise that none of those achievements and successes would have been possible without the public support and public money that the last Labour Government put in?

The 146 is an entirely commercial activity and is not related to activity by the previous Government.

We kept it going.

It is typical of the hon. Gentleman to seek to establish claims which he cannot substantiate. The fact is that the 146 is a highly successful development and the hon. Gentleman should not carp about it.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry whether he is satisfied with the progress that is being made in his programme to increase the rate of formation of new businesses and to encourage the expansion of existing small firms.

The formation and expansion of small businesses are manifestations of the enterprise of individuals responding to market opportunities and to economic and financial conditions and prospects. Our substantial efforts to improve these conditions and prospects will take time to have a noticeable effect.

While I welcome the many measures to help small businesses, may I return to the earlier criticism of the loan guarantee scheme? Is my right hon. Friend aware that the premium charge for using the scheme in Britain is 3 per cent. whereas the American scheme costs 1 per cent. and the Canadian scheme nothing?

Our scheme has three features which might not be common to all other schemes. First, we are determined not to subsidise from the taxpayer. Secondly, we are determined that those who benefit from the scheme do not have an advantage over competitors who do not. Thirdly, the combined effect of the premium and the bank rate is to produce rates of interest roughly equivalent to the rate at which banks lend now to their marginal customers.

Have not Government policies led to closures, liquidations and bankruptcies? Will the Secretary of State examine the change of policy in France, with the election of the new President, and the interventionist policies which are to be pursued there? Will he abandon his dogmatic attitude and help British industry?

We must wait for the outcome of the change of direction in France. The first evidence of that is a higher bank rate. There is a greatly increased demand, demonstrated by interest among potential starters of new businesses at the Department's offices throughout the country, running in some parts to more than four times the rate of a year ago. Bankruptcy increases seem to have peaked and the number of bankruptcies at the last count was below the level of the previous quarter.

As there appears to be no other way to collect information about the birth rate of new companies and businesses than by checking new VAT registrations, will my right hon. Friend undertake to consult industry, especially the small firm organisations, to determine how he can improve that statistical information?

My hon. Friend would rightly be quick to criticise if his suggestion, led to any more officials or information returns. While it would be nice to have that knowledge, it is not sufficiently important to generate an increase of forms or officials.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the rate of collapse of small businesses into insolvency is especially high because of the basic feature of monetarism that must restrict demand in such a way that it hits small businesses hardest?

The hon. Gentleman does not appear to realise that the Government are allowing an increase of money in the economy, although admittedly at a less fast rate than before. How much of the additional money in the economy goes into pay as opposed to new jobs rests entirely with wage demands.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry what is the present level of Government support for the paper and board industry.

To date grants of £18·04 million have been made under the paper and board industry scheme. Paper and board companies also benefit from the forms of support available to industry generally.

Does my hon. Friend agree that most paper mills have neither sought nor received massive support from the taxpayer, but that the same cannot be said in many other parts of the Common Market? What action are the Government taking to prevent State support being given in other countries, notably France and Holland, to certain companies, especially those that are in difficulties? Is that fair competition? What can be done to ensure that there is fair competition?

My hon. Friend is not entirely right to say that the paper, printing and publishing industries have not received support from Government. During the past eight years they have claimed about £114 million in regional development grants. There are two companies in Europe, one in France and one in Holland, that concern us because of possible support from their respective Governments. We have expressed our concern to the Commission in both cases.

Is my hon. Friend aware that Wirral attaches the greatest importance to the possible reopening of the Bowater plant at Ellesmere Port? Will he assure the House that everything possible is being done to encourage Consolidated Bathurst in that vital venture, which will provide a tremendous boost to the area?

I can give my hon. Friend that assurance. The Government have welcomed the interest shown by Consolidated Bathurst of Canada in reopening Bowater's Mersey mill, which closed last November. I met the president of that company on 30 April, as soon as he expressed interest in the matter. We are in close contact with the company. We are giving urgent consideration to the question of providing assistance for that project.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry what progress has been made with the schools microcomputer programme sponsored by his Department.

As I have indicated to other hon. Members, progress is good on the "micros in schools" scheme, which has been in operation since 1 June. The response to the initiative has been enthusiastic and about 300 applications are being processed at the moment.

I welcome that programme. Will my hon. Friend say what is being done to ensure that every school knows about it? There is demand for the programme, but it will succeed only if every school knows exactly what is entailed.

I have written to every hon. Member asking them to bring the availability of the scheme to the attention of their secondary schools. I have also sent them a booklet about it. I hope that they have been encouraged to draw the scheme to the attention of their secondary schools. It is an important scheme, whose purpose is to have a microcomputer in every secondary school by the end of next year. About half of our schools do not have one. My Department is providing money for the purchase of two British microcomputers for that purpose. I hope that I have the support of every hon. Member in promoting that scheme.

Does the Minister accept that, although the scheme is to be welcomed, there is a problem because of the diversification of computer equipment appearing in schools, and that in the main pupils can be taught only the engineering functions? More importantly, will he encourage schools to connect their computers to terminals and central processors to assist them with mathematical and other, more central, problems?

Some local education authorities already do that. We chose two British microcomputers, the Acorn and the 3802 made by Research Machines, because we thought it important to concentrate on two microcomputers. I know that some schools have other computers. However, we felt it important to concentrate on those of the programmes and the software. The reaction is encouraging. I hope to extend the scheme to other sorts of schools some time next year.

Will my hon. Friend say what is the Government's policy towards local authorities that had already gone ahead before the official scheme was launched? Will he ensure that they are not penalised if they wish to install additional facilities or another computer?

Until the end of this year only schools that do not have a microcomputer will by eligible for the scheme. From the new year, I intend to extend the scheme to those schools and education authorities that already have microcomputers. I re-emphasise that the scheme is one of the most important initiatives in technological education that has ever been taken. I hope that within two or three years every boy or girl leaving school at 'the age of 16 or 18 will have "hands on" experience of working with a computer, because that sort of machine will dominate not only their working life but much of their leisure activities.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry whether he has any plans for initiatives to stop the reduction of Great Britain's industrial base.

The industrial base can flourish only to the extent that it profitably satisfies customers at home and abroad. The Government have their part to play.

In view of today's report that Britain has the worst unemployment record in the Common Market, with a 70 per cent. increase during the past year, and that one reason for that is that vast areas are daily being turned into deindustrialised deserts, will the Secretary of State intervene now to ensure more public enterprise and more public investment in industry, because otherwise there will soon be no industrial base left in Britain?

There is a high unemployment rate now because for years and years, and largely encouraged by Labour Governments, we have had the worst overmanning rate in Western Europe. If we were to move towards more public rather than private enterprise, we would run into the danger of even greater overmanning, because, among the overmanners, public enterprise has a far worse record than private enterprise.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that the Government have already done a great deal to help the base of British industry by, for example, giving money to ensure that a slimmed-down British Leyland becomes more profitable, giving money to British Steel to ensure that it will be in a similar position in a year or two, and giving money to British Rail and other basic industries? Does my right hon. Friend agree that the trouble is that the Government keep apologising for doing those things, instead of taking credit for them?

The cost of doing those things, which have some good consequences, is that interest rates and taxation are likely to be higher than if we did not have to do them.

In a broadcast yesterday the Secretary of State spoke about the numbers leaving the unemployment register. Will he tell the House about those joining the register as a result of his policies? Will he also say when the much forecast upturn will take place in industry, because it appears to be as far off as it has been for many a month?

The gap between those joining the register because they have voluntarily or involuntarily left their jobs and those leaving the register because they have found new jobs has dwindled during recent months. The number of those joining the register is running at 87,000 a week, and the number of those leaving the register is running at 70,000 a week which is a smaller gap than in previous months.

Will the right hon. Gentleman explain why unemployment is increasing at its present rate?

The level of unemployment will continue to increase while more people come on to the register because they are unemployed than there are people leaving the register. Surely the right hon. Gentleman could have worked that out for himself.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry if he will report on the current state of negotiations to establish a motor vehicle manufacturing plant by Nissan.

Nissan's feasibility study team is currently in Japan examining information gathered in the United Kingdom over the past two months. The company hopes to arrive at some preliminary conclusions in July on whether to proceed with the project. We expect that a Nissan team would then visit the United Kingdom to discuss its conclusions with the Government and other interested parties.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. May I ask that it be insisted upon that a certain percentage by weight, preferably 80 per cent., of British manufactured components is included in the agreement, to ensure that the United Kingdom does not become purely an assembly plant for Japanese-produced components and to give the British component manufacturing industry a chance to survive?

My hon. Friend will be aware of the Government's keen interest to ensure the maximum domestic percentage in these matters. However, these are matters that will have to be considered in detail as we come closer to the appropriate time.

Will my hon. Friend stress to the Nissan company that the West Midlands could make a significant contribution because of its enormous component base? Will he consider the obvious advantage of having this development in the West Midlands? Regional aid would not be involved and therefore, there would be no question of public money—

Order. It seems that the hon. Gentleman is trespassing on Question 20, which has been tabled in his name. I have not called that question yet.

Components come from throughout the world including the West Midlands.

Will my hon. Friend assure the House that there will be no question of public money being directed to this project? There is already over-capacity in the motor vehicle assembly industry in Britain. What possible justification could there be for adding to it with the assistance of public funds?

My hon. Friend will be aware of the need to have equality of treatment, especially when considering inward investment, for mobile projects. However, he will realise that there is a substantial opportunity to replace the sizeable import trade in motor cars.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Opposition will want a statement before the Summer Recess on this development, if it is to take place?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House will note what the right hon. Gentleman has to say. However, I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman will be the first to agree that it is sensible to make a statement only when there is something appropriate or sensible to say. It would be inappropriate to make a statement merely because of the convenience of doing so at the end of a Session.

asked the Secretary of State for Industry if he will study the problems of industrial decline in the West Midlands; what steps he is taking to arrest this decline; and if he will make a statement.

The Government are fully aware of the problems of industry in the West Midlands. The best prospects for arresting industrial decline in the region lie in the measures being taken to put the economy as a whole on a sounder footing and on the initiative of work forces of all grades and responsibilities in restoring the competitive position of industry there.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that both Labour and Tory Governments have moved industrial operations from the West Midlands to other areas, where they have proved to be less efficient—hence the fall in productivity? Will he give particular consideration to the location of Government research centres, which are predominantly in the South-East, with a view to making some of them the nuclei for further development in the West Midlands?

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will have heard his hon. Friends pleading for more Government money to be spent to divert industry from the Midlands to the North and other parts of the United Kingdom. He will understand the difficulty that I face in keeping a sensible balance between the two. I am sure that the West Midlands is well capable of responding to the challenges that are in front of it, provided that the criterion is met of all grades of the work force meeting the challenges that are put to them.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the West Midlands is crucially dependent on British Leyland and that if BL at any time between 1975 and early 1980 had been forced to sell its subsidiary businesses, it is likely that the Rover factory at Solihull would now be profitable, under new management?

I am not sure whether my hon. Friend is right, but in any case it is water under the bridge. The position we now face is that of making BL as competitive and successful as possible in order to support the industry throughout the whole of the West Midlands.

Are we to infer from the Minister's answers this afternoon that the more successful the Government's policies are, the higher unemployment will rise?

No, Sir. That would be a childish way of viewing the matter. The more successful the Government's policies, the more people will be displaced from "non-jobs" in which they are lowering the efficiency of the operations of the firms for which they work, and the more opportunity there will be for those people to find new and productive jobs that will last.

While recognising the fact that under previous Governments great damage was done to the West Midlands by compelling industries which naturally had their base there to move out and to establish factories elsewhere, does not my hon. Friend agree that now the problems of the West Midlands are the problems of a large part of the rest of the country? They arise from underproductivity and, in the past, a great deal of indiscipline. Does not he believe that British Leyland, which we agree is the centre of the British motor industry and of West Midlands industry, is now on a firmer path to competitiveness and success?

The problems of British Leyland are illustrative of the problems of British industry as a whole. Had the standards of performance which are now being achieved in British Leyland been achieved five years ago, the whole of British industry would look different today. There is no reason why these standards could not have been achieved five years ago except perhaps, that the Government policies of the day were diametrically opposed to allowing forces to operate to force those improvements.

asked the Attorney-General how many representations he has received about the method of selection of jurors.

If, as I assume, the question relates to the selection of the jury panel then, since January 1980, there have been no representations, but five requests for information, three from journalists, one from a TV network, and one from a law teacher.

Does the Attorney-General agree that juries should be picked at random? Is the system for coroners' juries really satisfactory in the light of the recent case of Richard Campbell, who died in Ashford remand home? The coroner was reported as having demanded an all-male jury for that case. Should not the rules for coroners' juries be exactly the same as those for juries in courts of law?

The hon. Gentleman has already asked me a question about this matter. The Lord Chancellor has approved a new system for selecting potential jurors from the electoral register. It has been devised with the assistance of the Royal Statistical Society and it involves the use of random numbers. The issue of coroners' juries is being considered by the Home Office. I agree with the hon. Gentleman that it would, perhaps, be to everybody's advantage to have the same system.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend confirm that he will never allow ethnic, racial, religious, geographical or any other factors to have any influence over the selection of jurors?

The process of selection from the electoral roll will be done entirely by a system of random numbers. Selection in court is again entirely random. It takes place by a system of ballots. My hon. Friend will remember that each defendant in a criminal case still has three challenges available to him.

I am sure that the House will welcome what the Attorney-General has had to say about the progress that has been made to ensure that there is real random selection of jurors. We shall examine with some care the details of what has been announced today. How many cases of jury vetting has the right hon. and learned Gentleman approved in the past 12 months? Will that practice continue with his approval?

Since January 1980, which is more than 12 months ago, I have received applications to vet the jury panel on three occasions and I have authorised two applications.

asked the Attorney-General what facilities exist for journalists who wish to attend trials.

It is the normal practice to provide seats for the press within existing courtrooms. Where press boxes are not avilable seats are reserved in the public area. Specialised accommodation and facilities are provided as part of the standard design in all new Crown court buildings.

Is there not a case for banning journalists from certain newspapers which have done shabby deals in cheque-book journalism by offering money to witnesses and even relatives of the accused? Will the Attorney-General try not to be too influenced by recent reports that one on the worst offenders in this respects seems to be the Daily Mail, the gutter journalism of which helped to get the Tory Government elected?

I am not sure whether that sort of comment is fair or helpful. We have always taken the view that the judge has complete control over his court and that it is a matter for him to decide who should be allowed into court. That view has been held for a long time. In a recent case a photograph was taken in court. The presiding judge banned any representatives of the Quick magazine after it was discovered that it had broken the law.

In view of the wide reporting by journalists of the part played by Dr. Clift in a recent appeal, does the Attorney-General intend to consult the Home Secretary on what might be done in other cases in which Cr. Clift has given evidence?

That must be a matter entirely for my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary.