asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will undertake a review of communications in Wales in the light of British Rail's investment plans for the Principality.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport has ministerial responsibility for railways, but I keep the communication needs of Wales continually under review and am in regular consultation with my right hon. Friend.

In the light of that reply, will my hon. Friend make it plain that while many thousands of jobs in Wales are not on the railways, they depend on the maintenance of a rail network in Wales? Will he also make it plain that the rail network is seriously threatened by ASLEF's actions? Will he appeal, and ask the Opposition to appeal, to as many drivers as possible to turn up for work to save the railways and jobs in Wales?

My hon. Friend is right. The strike could have a devastating effect on Welsh railways. The dreaded teredo worm in the Barmouth viaduct could be of scant importance when compared with the threat of this strike. I appeal to all hon. Members to use their influence as best they can so that this pointless strike is ended quickly.

Does the Minister agree that some of us are a little puzzled by the reference to British Rail's investment plans in Wales, as the electrification of main lines has been put into cold storage because of the Government's rethink and as several valley and rural lines have been threatened by the Government's lack of investment in the railways?

My right hon. Friend is awaiting British Rail's proposals for the electrification of those lines that are potentially profitable. Everything depends on our Welsh railways being run at a high level of productivity and efficiency.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what criteria he uses, and what advice he seeks, in making appointments to nominated public positions in Wales which are within his authority to fill.

I consult very widely with individuals and organisations to seek people who will provide public bodies in Wales with the range of knowledge, experience and ability that they require.

Does the Secretary of State recall that the previous Conservative Government replaced the chairman of Gwynedd area health authority with the Conservative chairman of the Conway constituency? Is he aware that there is widespread dismay in Gwynedd at the recent replacement of Mr. Idris Davies, especially as he stood up to the Welsh Office about the delay with the Bangor hospital? Is he further aware that the present appointment smacks once again of political appointment and that the people of Gwynedd are fed up with it?

The new chairman of that authority has been a member of it for the past eight years and a deputy chairman for several years. There can, therefore, be no question about her contribution to the authority. In the light of the speech of the hon. Member for Merioneth (Mr. Thomas) in the most recent sitting of the Welsh Grand Committee, the hon. Gentleman's suggestion smacks of a new sexist policy from Plaid Cymru.

When my right hon. Friend makes appointments, will he consider from time to time retired officers from Her Majesty's Forces, including officers from the famous Welsh regiments? Is he aware that many of them have great leadership qualities and wide experience of command both at home and abroad?

I consult widely and invite all types of organisations and individuals to submit names, as we need the names of as many qualified people as possible. No doubt some of them will be retired serving officers. As it happens, I have just approved the appointment of a retired officer from a Welsh regiment, which will be announced shortly.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is widespread anxiety in Gwynedd that those who have been appointed recently to the national park committee have clear Conservative interests but perhaps no clear conservation interests?

The appointments that I have made since becoming Secretary of State show that in the wide range of organisations concerned I have by no means confined my appointments to Conservatives. Indeed, I was strongly attacked and criticised at the Conservative conference last month for not doing so. I defended my record on the ground that it was right to appoint the best candidates irrespective of their political colour.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what are the latest figures of the number of people who are unemployed in Wales, Mid-Glamorgan and Aberdare; and how many of these have been unemployed for more than two years and one year, respectively.

On 15 April 1982, the latest date for which such figures are available, unemployment totalled 171,349, 32,815 and 3,814 respectively, of whom 21,473, 4,413 and 572 had been unemployed for more than two years and 59,658, 11,452 and 1,423 had been unemployed for more than one year.

In view of the announcements that 900 jobs will be lost at Hitachi-GEC in the Aberdare area and that 1,200 jobs are to go at BP and 300 at Panteg, and since it looks as though Nissan-Datsun will not be coming to Wales, will the Government reconsider the policies that they have been pursuing, which have led to these increases in unemployment? Will the Minister also restore to my constituency the special development area status, the removal of which has adversely affected the maintenance of existing manufacturing jobs as well as the attraction of new ones to the valley.

I warned the House in a debate, I believe, in May that major redundancies might be coming. Nevertheless, the number of redundancies has fallen quarter by quarter, and the increase in unemployment in Wales has been less than in any other region in the United Kingdom. Indeed, it was the only region in which the number out of work fell in the last month.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that there is not a shred of evidence of any upturn in manufacturing output in our constituencies, not only in terms of the production of goods, but in sales and marketing? Does he agree that that confirms the depressing CBI report on manufacturing? As he has not commented on the fact that the Nissan project seems to be disappearing into the distance, what new initiatives will he take to create new jobs and to bring new firms to the valley constituencies? Is he aware that not one new firm has come to Merthyr in the past three years?

Current economic factors make it clear that the level of imports is still too high. That results, of course, from the striking loss of competitiveness in the late 1970s and early 1980s. It is therefore vital that we continue to improve competitiveness. Industrial disputes such as that on the railways clearly will not help.

We welcome the return of the Secretary of State after his illness, but is he aware that in the short time that he has been absent, taking account of the job losses mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdare (Mr. Evans), Wales has lost more than 3,000 jobs—that is in the past two weeks? Does the Secretary of State recall that in a recent debate he listed a number of factories that were coming to Wales? Does he realise that we have lost an equivalent number of jobs in those two weeks? Is it not time that he produced the balance sheet so that we can see whether any progress is being made in providing employment, for our people? Does he accept that unemployment, particularly long-term unemployment, is becoming more serious every day that he remains in office?

I in no way underestimate the problems. Nevertheless, Wales was the only region in the United Kingdom in which, despite the influx of school leavers, the number of people out of work fell. The number of redundancies is sharply down on last year and has been falling quarter by quarter, even with the recent very unwelcome announcements that I foreshadowed in the debate to which the right hon. Gentleman referred. I repeat that last year we attracted a record number of new projects for Wales, more than was ever achieved under the Labour Government, and for this year the figures are almost 50 per cent. higher.

rose—

Order. Questions Nos. 6 and 8 both raise this matter again.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will study the feasibility of a Dee barrage as a method of producing energy and providing a land bridge from North Wales to Merseyside.

We have no plans for further studies at present.

Will the Minister reconsider that decision, particularly in view of the great economic benefits that would accrue from such a land bridge and barrage on the Dee? Will he also consider asking Bangor and Liverpool universities to undertake a joint study of the environmental implications of such a project?

The reports in 1971 and 1974 considered schemes to provide a road crossing and an additional water supply, and the tidal energy potential of the Dee was discussed in a report in 1980. None of those amounts to a convincing case for a barrage. As regards the provision of a land bridge, any barrage would need to be situated too far north to make ready use of the existing road network and would require substantial new investment in road links.

Is my hon. Friend aware that although many of the arguments of the early 1970s are no longer valid, the argument for an additional crossing is stronger than ever? Will he consider that on its merits?

Certainly the North-East Clwyd traffic study published in 1980 concluded that traffic flows at the Queensferry crossing will have reached critical levels at peak periods in the early 1990s. This is a matter for the local authority and I understand that further studies are taking place.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what is the value of the grants allocated to Wales from the European regional development fund in each of the past three years.

Grant commitments for 1979, 1980 and 1981 were £21·7 million, £32·5 million and £24·8 million respectively.

Will my hon. Friend tell us whether funds come to Wales from other EEC sources? If so, what is the total amount of EEC help to Wales?

My hon. Friend is right. There are, of course, grants from other sources. The total of grants and aid to Wales is now £968 million. Moreover, that is not all, as there are sources of aid which cannot be disaggregated regionally. If those were taken into account, the total might be well over £1,000 million.

To balance those figures of grants and assistance from membership of the EEC, does the Minister agree with the Financial Secretary that between January 1973 and June 1981 membership of the EEC cost Britain a net sum of £3,166 million? Is he aware that that works out at £1 million per day? How much of that was contributed by the people of Wales, and what on earth have we received in return?

I am surprised to hear the right hon. Gentleman denigrating our membership of the EEC, in view of the considerable benefits that Wales has received in inward investment and in jobs resulting from that.

Would it not be better for the Government to invest in Wales in the first instance than to pay huge sums to the Common Market, a tiny proportion of which is then clawed back and a part of that is then handed out to Wales as some kind of charity contribution?

As the hon. Gentleman surely knows, the very good figures for grants and aid from the EEC do not compare in magnitude with the total of Government grants and aid to Wales. The hon. Gentleman should certainly know that, as his own constituency has greatly benefited. In fact, of course, it is the inward investment that comes to Wales as a result of our membership of the EEC that is so very important.

Is the Minister aware of the report in the Western Mail, today of the social work undertaken by Mr. Peter Halstead of the Polytechnic of Wales? That report shows that the European regional fund has had only a minimal impact on areas such as Wales, and that 100 times more money is spent on items such as milk and wheat? Does the Minister agree that the Government should be pressing for many more funds to go to regional aid than in other directions?

Increased assistance would, of course, be welcome, but it is always easy to say that the answer to all our problems is to throw more money at them. I am not sure that that is always the case. I believe that the best use should be made of available resources.

Is there not considerable confusion by the Opposition on this matter? Does my hon. Friend agree that in terms of budgetary contributions Wales does very well on the whole, in that it receives more than its fair share? Does my hon. Friend further agree that the real argument is for inward investment and a larger share of the home market?

My hon. Friend is right. The European market consists of about 270 million people. The most telling fact is that the proportion of our exports to Europe has risen from 30 to 43 per cent. of the total.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales how many people were unemployed in Wales in June 1980 and 1982, respectively; and how many jobs have been created in the same period.

Seasonally adjusted, and excluding school leavers, the figures were 96,100 and 162,000 respectively. It is not possible to provide comprehensive estimates of jobs created in both the public and private sectors.

Does the Secretary of State recall that, following the British Steel Corporation's slimline operation at Llanwern, he promised on 1 April 1980 a package of aid to Newport that would provide 2,000 jobs? Is he aware that so far fewer than 1,000 of them have materialised? On the second stage of development that was also promised, the Secretary of State is showing all the eloquence of a Trappist monk. Is he aware that the people of Newport are fed up with the Government because jobs are not being provided, and that they want something more than fairy stories?

The hon. Gentleman refers to fairy stories. Special funds amounting to about £59 million in cash terms have been made available for the Port Talbot and Llanwern areas under the special arrangements to which the hon. Gentleman referred. In the Llanwern area about 820,000 sq ft of factory space will be available by the end of this financial year, with about 682,000 sq ft within the Newport travel-to-work area. I do not consider those figures to be fairy stories. There is a continuing programme of development, and the Welsh Development Agency is continuing that programme in the current year. It will be spending £6 million or £7 million in the area this year on top of what has already been spent—and that does not include the contribution of the Cwmbran development corporation. The truth is that very few parts in the whole of Britain have received such substantial financial backing as the hon. Gentleman's constituency. It has received a great deal more than it ever received under a Labour Government.

Will the Minister comment on the Cinderella sector of employment in Wales—the construction industry—where one man is out of work for every two men in work? What effect does the Minister think this will have on the young trained people in the carpentry, plumbing and bricklaying trades in Wales?

Clearly, the greater the industrial activity the better. I have no doubt that a great deal of employment is being provided by the construction programme to which I have just referred. The total construction programme now being undertaken by the Welsh Office, including the massive programme of hospital, road and factory building, is by far the largest capital programme ever to be undertaken in the Principality.

As the Secretary of State is unable to provide the figures for the number of jobs created in the private and public sectors, will he confirm that the number of people in employment in Wales has fallen by 127,000 since he became Secretary of State for Wales? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that that figure confirms that the Government have destroyed more jobs in three years than were created during 21 years of regional policies under successive Governments? Since the right hon. Gentleman was so reticent about Nissan on an earlier question, will he now say whether he sees any prospect of Nissan coming to Wales?

Representatives of the company are to visit this country later this month. My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Industry was recently in Japan and had discussions with Nissan. He has no information to confirm the speculative press reports that Nissan has decided not to go ahead with the project. Discussions are continuing about the project, but it will be for the company to decide, in the light of its assessment, whether to go ahead and, if so, on what scale and at what location.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he is satisfied with the present level of financial aid given to Wales from the EEC funds; and if he will make a statement.

I regard the commitment of nearly £1 billion in identifiable European aid since accession as a very valuable contribution to the development of the Principality. My Department will continue to take every opportunity to ensure that Wales continues to derive the maximum benefit from the available Community aids.

I thank the Secretary of State for that reply. However, does he agree that if Wales is to survive and grow power must be devolved from Westminster to Wales, and that Wales must remain a member of the EEC?

I entirely share the hon. Gentleman's view on membership of the EEC. As regards devolution, we probably have different views on the method to be adopted. It is clear that under this Government there has been a further extension of responsibilities to the Welsh Office, including the major responsibility for local government. That is the way forward. It is certainly the way chosen by the people of Wales by an overwhelming majority in the referendum.

As only £276,000 of the recent £15 million regional development grant package for Wales was allocated to Gwynedd, will the Secretary of State say why Gwynedd is missing out on these funds? Is it because Gwynedd is not submitting suitable applications, or is it because the Welsh Office is turning them down?

I have not looked at Gwynedd, but I have had the same sort of complaint from other counties. In the cases that I have looked at the counties have not put forward sufficient projects, or projects of the right quality. I emphasise the desirability of counties examining the possibilities that are open to them. The Welsh Office will give them every possible encouragement in preparing schemes in the best possible way. If applications to the Commission are likely to succeed, we shall put them forward.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales by what amount and by what percentage unemployment in Wales has risen since May 1979; and if he will make a statement.

Between May 1979 and June 1982 unemployment, seasonally adjusted and excluding school leavers, increased by 80,600, or 99 per cent.

Does the right hon. Gentleman understand that Olives paper mills at Greenfield made 100 men and women redundant soon after his meeting there, when hopes were expressed that the mill would stay in business? Why was the grant offered by his Department so low? As regards Nissan, was, or is, Shotton on the short list of possible sites?

I do not know what view Nissan has taken about sites.

Is it not a shocking indictment of the Government that unemployment should have doubled in three years? Does the right hon. Gentleman hope that by the next election unemployment will have been reduced to its level when the Government took office? Is there not need for a change in the economic policies that have added to the recession and created unemployment in many of the valleys of South Wales?

I regret that unemployment under successive Governments has risen over the past 15 or 20 years and that the figure more than doubled under the previous Labour Government. Through improvements in competitiveness and productivity we shall regain our position. There is no simple and easy answer. Although matters are serious, and especially serious in Wales, I am glad that unemployment has risen less there than in any other region of the United Kingdom.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he has now had discussions with the British Steel Corporation on the future of the Panteg steelworks; and whether he will make a statement.

I have been in touch with the chairman, and he has explained the corporation's reasons leading to the decision announced last week to reduce manpower levels at the plant. The decision is one for the commercial judgment of the corporation.

Is the Seretary of State aware that Sir Charles Villiers, accompanied by Mr. MacGregor, gave confident predictions to the Seclect Committee two years ago claiming that £150 million invested in stainless steel provided assurances for the future of Panteg? In view of the clear managerial blunders at the top, which are revealed by this decision to reduce the numbers by 300 in an area of almost chronic unemployment, does the Secretary of State not think that instead of adopting a supine position he should be ordering an inquiry into why such massive investment should now be—we are told—absolutely useless? How can the Secretary of State expect to gain the co-operation of work forces when decisions such as this are taken by managements? How can reliance be placed upon people who give assurances one year and tear them up the next?

I have checked on the assurances that Sir Charles Villiers gave to the Select Committee. I cannot be responsible for what he said. His answer was in response to a question from the hon. Member about hiving off. Sir Charles made it clear that the BSC, having invested £140 million in the stainless steel operation, wished to continue making stainless steel and that Panteg had an essential role in that operation. The present chairman of the British Steel Corporation has written to the hon. Gentleman pointing out the present state of the European market, the lack of demand and the enormous over-capacity. This is on a European and world-wide basis. As he says:

"In these serious market conditions, it would not he sensible to prophesy beyond the short term. To that extent it would be irresponsible of me to make promises or offer indefinite guarantees as to the life of the Panteg works or the jobs available within that operation."

Will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House, in the light of the disaster that has overtaken the Panteg works in particular, and Gwent in general, that he will prevent any further pandering to sectional interests in the steel industry which is to Britain's detriment, especially in respect of the cold-rolled narrow steel strip market? Will he take steps to ensure that the same fate does not befall Whitehead's works, which is bigger and more efficient than any other in the country and our best producer of cold-rolled narrow strip?

No one within the company or on the Government Benches can give guarantees about employment levels in any commercial organisation. The Government are fully committed to securing the best possible defence of the British steel industry's interests in regard to the United States action and actions being taken in the EEC. The European Commission and the Government are objecting to the United States countervailing duties on United Kingdom steel with all possible force. The company is considering the legal position. Both the company and the Government will continue to defend robustly the interests of the British steel industry in international markets.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what action he proposes to counter the effects on West Glamorgan of the proposed redundancies at BP Chemicals, Baglan Bay.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will take steps to alleviate the problems resulting from the proposed redundancies at BP Chemicals in Barry and Baglan Bay; and what effect these redundancies will have on unemployment in South, Mid and West Glamorgan.

I regret the redundancies announced at BP, which will add to current difficulties in the areas affected. However, a wide range of measures are already being undertaken in these areas to attract and develop industry and employment and these will continue.

Does the Secretary of State expect to introduce any new measures as a result of these decisions? The right hon. Gentleman must recall that when the decision was made in July 1979 to downgrade many areas in Wales this was Presumably done on the basis that they no longer needed help and could be self-sustaining. Since that time, male unemployment in the Swansea area has increased two and a half times. Now there is this further blow at Baglan Bay. What further evidence does the Secretary of State need before he takes new measures?

The unemployment that results from this decision by BP will be spread widely over a considerable area. I do not believe that it will have an effect on unemployment levels such that would lead one to consider a substantial change in regional development area decisions at present. However, in the light of the announcement, I shall be discussing with the Welsh Development Agency its programme for the area. I shall be considering whether any further action is necessary. I am in the closest touch with the company about its project for the river works and the necessary works to ensure the continuing operation of the Baglan site.

Will the Secretary of State come clean on the issue? The right hon. Gentleman talks about new measures to be introduced in Wales and in the area that we are discussing. He has also referred to the fact that redundancies fell last month. Yet attention has been drawn to 3,000 redundancies occurring in one week. What new measures does the right hon. Gentleman intend to introduce to combat the escalation of redundancies throughout Mid-Glamorgan and South Wales?

We have ensured, in the wider Port Talbot area, that about 880,000 sq ft of factory space will be available by the end of 1982–83 and that some other substantial construction will take place in the current year. We shall continue with that programme. I am also delighted that Councillor Tyssul Lewis, the lord mayor of Swansea and leader of the council, has given a firm rebuttal to the comments of the hon. Member for Swansea, East (Mr. Anderson) on the enterprise zone. He has said that the hon. Gentleman is wrong and that the enterprise zone is

"a real bargain. Ogmore MP Mr. Ray Powell need have no worries. The Swansea enterprise zone is proving the enterprise zone idea to be highly credible".

Do not the redundancies at Baglan Bay undermine the Government's argument that regional aid must be based on travel-to-work areas? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, although the plant is in a special development area, the work on the jetty that will be required to secure the future of the plant is in the Neath river, which is outside the special development area? Will he examine this matter again? The right hon. Gentleman took away from Neath river area the special development area status that it formerly enjoyed.

There is to be a meeting later this week on this matter with my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary. However, I can tell the hon. Gentleman that most of the expenditure on the project to which he has referred will take place within the SDA boundary. The small part falling within the estuary area is not, in any case, eligible for rural development grant. I think that the hon. Gentleman has the wrong information. The company has been and is in close touch with the Department of Industry on this problem.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement about the operation of the urban development grants scheme in Wales.

The aim is that urban development grant should become available in Wales in 1983–84. It will assist urban development projects worked up jointly by local authorities and the private sector, in which the private sector is taking a significant share. An explanatory circular has been sent to all Welsh local authorities asking them to submit schemes by 30 September.

Can my hon. Friend give an undertaking that local authorities will forward such schemes and take an active part in promoting them? Can he also give an undertaking that the schemes will not be held up by unnecessary bureaucratic red tape?

I can give no undertaking that local authorities will take up the schemes. I attended a conference in Cardiff, at which local authorities seemed to be enthusiastic, so I expect that there will be a good take-up. I assure my hon. Friend that my officials will give all the help and advice that they can, and I hope to be able to announce my decision within three months of the closing date for applications.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he is satisfied with the progress being made in the removal of pollution from beaches and bays of the Principality.

The Welsh water authority has a programme of works in hand to reduce pollution. The position in the Swansea Bay area has been particularly closely monitored since 1974, and there is no evidence of any significant change since then. Nevertheless, the timing of discharges from the Mumbles sewage outfall has already been improved, and some £1·2 million of further work will start next year.

Would the Minister care to tell us how many years it will be before Swansea Bay has the hygiene standards and disease reputation of the Bay of Naples?

I have just told the hon. Gentleman of the improvements that we have in mind and, as I know the Bay of Naples, I can tell him that Swansea Bay will never be as bad as the Bay of Naples.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what representations he has had from the Welsh Consultative Council on Local Government Finance.

The Welsh Consultative Council on Local Government Finance, which I normally chair, meets regularly throughout the year to consider all financial and related matters affecting local government. The Welsh local authority associations' representatives ensure that I am fully aware of their views on all these matters.

Are the local authorities in Wales expected, in the current financial year, to reduce their budgets by £57 million? Does this not represent about 4·8 per cent. of expenditure? How does this compare with the so-called overspend in England and Scotland? What effect is this likely to have on local authority manpower in Wales and, above all, on the services for the people in Wales?

The budgets at present show a total planned expenditure of £57 million, or 4·8 per cent., in excess of the rate support grant provision. I have told the local authorities that we are not prepared to accept overspending on that level and I have asked them to review their budgets and to submit revised budgets by 16 July. When I have those revised budgets, I shall consider whether any further action is necessary. My decision on grant witholding, if any is required, will be taken in the light of that re-submission, although I have made it clear that I shall protect those authorities that have not contributed to the expenditure excess.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales how many houses were completed in Wales in each of the past three years; and what is his estimate of the number likely to be completed in 1982.

The total number of houses completed in Wales in 1981 was 8,936, compared with 10,349 in 1980 and 11,265 in 1979. It is not possible to make a reliable estimate of the total number likely to be completed by the end of 1982, but there were 1,804 completions in the first quarter.

There has been an obvious and progressive decline in house building in Wales under this Government. How many people have been registered as homeless with the local authorities in Wales in each of the past three years? How does the Government's policy of compulsorily selling council houses help to alleviate the problem of homelessness, which is rapidly worsening in Wales?

The hon. Gentleman has asked me for the number of homeless people, but that requires a completely different set of figures. I shall be happy to supply him with the information if he tables a question to that effect. The hon. Gentleman knows that the sale of council houses makes no difference whatsoever to the total housing stock available. If secure tenants who bought their homes had not done so, they would have remained in those houses as tenants. I am particularly glad that as many as 14 per cent. of council tenants in Wales have applied to take up the right to buy, and that 28 per cent. of those who have applied have completed their purchases and are now owner-occupiers.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the Secretary of State's lengthy answers and the fact that not all the questions have been answered, might it be possible to consider giving a full hour to Welsh Questions in future?

Not today.

asked the hon. Member for Wokingham, as representing the Church Commissioners, if he will make a statement on the conditions of service of beneficed clergymen.

For the year from 1 April 1983, the Church Commissioners, as central stipends authority, have recommended a national minimum stipend for incumbents of £6,050 per annum. In addition to his stipend, an incumbent is provided with a house free from rent, rates, repairs and insurance.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply and congratulate him, and those whom he represents in this matter, on the improvement that that represents. Will he assure me that the heavy cost involved in that improvement will not be a bar to additional future recruitment? Is he aware that, in a job that involves heavy expenses, despite these improvements, many clergymen are hard up and have to take a second job, let rooms in their houses or send their wives to work, or do all these things, to make money? Is he further aware that this is a difficulty that hampers the full performance of a clergyman's important job?

I am obliged to my hon. Friend. His words will give much encouragement to those concerned. I have never heard any discussion on the subject of recruitment limited by considerations of payment. The proportion of the moneys that we are discussing in terms of stipends now being produced by the laity increases each year and will be an increasing burden which I am sure the laity will willingly accept. Expenses are essentially a matter for the parish concerned, but the Church Commissioners' lead has always been that the legitimate expenses of a man in office should be paid by those whom he looks after in the parish.

In view of the improvements in the pay of clergy, can my hon. Friend tell me whether sufficient provision has now been made for the pensions of the widows of clergymen?

I hesitate to use the word "sufficient", but I can faithfully report great improvement. A widow receives half her husband's entitlement. There are provisions if her income is below a certain minimum level and for helping with housing. There are discussions this week in the General Synod about measures designed to improve the proportion of the pension for a wife who is widowed while her husband is in service or afterwards.

asked the the right hon. Member for Middlesbrough, as representing the House of Commons commission, if the Commission will make it its practice to adopt the ususal Select Committee format for its reports and publish will them the evidence, including memoranda, it receives and its minutes of proceedings.

No, Sir.

Will the Commission publish the correspondence and memoranda that it has received from right hon. and hon. Members, the Treasury and any other party regarding the request to the Treasury and Civil Service Committee to pay £75,000 a year for work that needs to be done on the review of the economy, so that the House can be reassured that the Commission is adequately discharging its responsibility to the House and is not protecting the Treasury from the proper review of its policies by a Committee of the House?

This is a matter that cannot be handled by a question and answer. The Secretary of the Commission has sent a letter to my hon. Friend, and I suggest that he follows the matter up by answering that correspondence.

I appreciate what my right hon. Friend says and I agree that this is a matter that cannot be handled by question and answer. However, why has the Commission been frightened to have its annual report debated for three successive years? As the Commission contains the Leader and the Shadow Leader of the House, it can hardly be claimed that time could not be made available. It is simply sheer fright that causes the Commission not to wish itself to be debated on the Floor of the House.

Personally, I should welcome a debate on the report, but this has never been pursued by hon. Members on either side.

It will be.

The right hon. Gentleman will appreciate the difficulty, both of the Commission and hon. Members, when the Commission apparently reaches conclusions on evidence submitted by Government Departments which is not available to hon. Members giving evidence in the Commission, whereas evidence from hon. Members is available to Government Departments. Is this not a gross neglect of the Commission's duties to the House?

With respect, it is not. The Commission has to handle matters of a delicate and personal nature which concern those employed in the House. If we started to discuss matters of that kind, it would do harm to those involved.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when he proposes to implement the Rayner recommendations on the future of the Victoria and Albert and Science museums.

As I told my Friend the hon. Member for Brighouse and Spenborough (Mr. Waller) on 27 May, the Government have accepted the recommendation of the Rayner scrutiny that the Victoria and Albert and Science museums should cease to be departmental museums. We shall be seeking an early opportunity to introduce legislation to establish separate bodies of trustees to manage and control each museum. Decisions on the other recommendations will be taken after the consultations are over.

Will my right hon. Friend give an assurance that he will not abandon the theatre museum project, which is based in the Victoria and Albert museum, because it would be a tragedy not to remain committed to it, even if we cannot go ahead in the immediate future?

I shall certainly consider what my hon. Friend has said. We are holding widespread consultations on this matter, and the views of hon. Members will be very welcome.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that if the theatre museum were allowed to charge for admission it would not be a drain on public funds? Could not the project go ahead on those lines?

One of the suggestions in the Rayner scrutiny is that the museum should be self-supporting. The Government are also considering that. I shall bear in mind my hon. Friend's point.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the implementation of these proposals might pave the way towards the sensible introduction of charging, as Rayner suggests?

The Government have decided that it would be wrong to prejudge any proposals that the future trustees may put forward. Certainly I should not wish to impose charges against the trustees' wishes. If they come forward with sensible suggestions, the Government will consider them on their merits.

Does the Minister agree that one of the problems of implementing the unacceptable face of the Rayner report—the proposal that there should be charges for viewing all, or part, of the collections in those museums—is that it will resurrect one of the previous Conservative Government's most bankrupt and discredited policies? We had hoped that he would be civilised enough to realise that if museums charge for admission, those whom we most want to encourage will be discouraged.

It is very nice to welcome the hon. Gentleman to his new position, but, with great respect, his first question does not show a realisation of the facts. Charges are already made in large portions of our museums. Local museums have been able to charge for years, and outstations and special exhibitions in the national museums have charged for many years, under both Governments.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when the register for public lending rights will be open for authors to register their books.

On 1 September.

As it is understood that several European countries are to introduce similar public lending rights schemes, will my right hon. Friend consider extending our scheme on a reciprocal basis, so that British authors can benefit?

The only country in Europe that I know of that has a similar scheme is West Germany. We shall readily examine whether it is possible to have a reciprocal arrangement with West Germany. The question raises many difficult legal issues, but I am having it examined.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science, pursuant to his answer to the hon.

This was organised by a group of private individuals. I sent them a message of support, attended the press conference they organised on the day and a number of other events.

While that is clearly a welcome and auspicious beginning, will the Minister consider throwing even more weight, and possibly even some money, behind next year's effort? Does he not agree that if we can afford a goose ecologist in the Falkland Islands, it might be a good idea to have a centrally funded National Arts Day coordinator in Britain?

If there is genuine public demand for that, there is much sense in what the hon. Gentleman says. On the other hand, if the whole thing is a waste of time it would be a mistake to encourage it any further.

Was not National Arts Day a gigantic flop that failed to have any impact? If it cannot be better run, would it not be better to drop it?

It should be better run or dropped. I am not criticising the organisers, but it should either be more centrally organised and have some impact, or it should be abandoned. I should welcome views on the matter and hope to discuss the matter with some of the organisers in the near future.

On reflection, does my right hon. Friend agree that National Arts Day did for the arts what Larry Grayson has done for rugby football? Will he give an undertaking not to become involved in National Arts Day unless it is better organised? Is my right hon. Friend aware that few hon. Members, including the Conservative Party arts and heritage committee, had any knowledge of National Arts Day?

I sense that in some quarters of the House National Arts Day was not regarded as a howling success. I shall bear that in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what grants have been made to the Royal Academy during the last five years.

I announced in May the Government's decision to contribute £250,000 to the Royal Academy's appeal fund in the course of the next year or so. No other direct Government grant has been paid to the Royal Academy during the past five years.

Is it not true that throughout its long and glorious history the Royal Academy has rightly prided itself on being independent of the Government? Will my right hon. Friend confirm that this year's grant is a onceand-for-all grant? Will he use his good offices to try to encourage private finance—whether from industry, commerce or other sources—into this great national institution?

Yes, Sir. The whole point of the Royal Academy is that it is independent. It has launched an appeal fund for £6 million. I understand that nearly a quarter of that amount—or perhaps a little more—has been raised, and I wish the Royal Academy every success. The Government help in other ways, such as with the indemnity insurance scheme. However, the Royal Academy rightly prides itself on 200 years of independence.

I am not clear about the consequences of the Minister's replies to question No. 25 and this question. Does he propose that some members of the Royal Academy should now be appointed by the Government, or that some of the trustees of the Victoria and Albert and Science museums—if they are set up—should be elected by their staff?

With the greatest respect, the hon. Gentleman has got the two questions slightly mixed up. There is no question of the Government wishing to interfere in any way with the running or organisation of the Royal Academy.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what is the present level of funding for the theatre in London.

Relevant expenditure by the Arts Council was just under £9 million in 1981–82.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that reply. Is he aware that there is great satisfaction about the fact that the Old Vic looks as though it will receive a new lease of life without recourse to Exchequer funds? However, is my right hon. Friend satisfied that the other bidders for the theatre's management had a proper chance to succeed in their bids?

In this case, it was a matter for the Charity Commissioners to decide. It is their job to guide the trustees as to which offer should be accepted. That is for them to decide and it is not for the Government to intervene. I share my hon. Friend's view that it is important that the Old Vic should reopen. I am very glad that that is to happen.

Has the Minister seen the memorandum issued by the Economic Secretary to the Treasury on 29 June in reply to the third report of the Education, Science and Arts Committee, concerning VAT and the theatre, in which he completely fails to understand the impact that doubling VAT has had on the theatre? If the Economic Secretary is not aware of the problems, will the Minister bring himself to explain to the hon. Gentleman what VAT has meant to the theatre?

I had a chance to see the letter that my hon. Friend the Economic Secretary wrote to the Committee, and I understand the disappointment felt in some parts of the House. The Government clearly explained why, collectively, they did not consider that the case for exempting the arts from VAT had been made. The problems of the commercial theatre go much wider than VAT and involve such matters as travel disruption, parking and the cost of eating out. There are many issues that are even more important than VAT.

Having regard to the answer to the Select Committee on Education, Science and Arts, in which exemption of VAT on theatre tickets was refused, and in which it was stated that it was better to fund theatres directly, will my right hon. Friend say what would be the difference between the present direct funding level and the cost to the Treasury of relief of VAT on theatre tickets?

I could not give an accurate answer without notice, but relief from VAT would apply indiscriminately across the board, whereas grants from public funds can be channelled to activities that are thought to be most deserving of support. I quite understand the feelings of disappointment in many parts of the House.

Was the rejection of the Select Committee's report made before or after consideration of the present parlous state of the theatre, particularly in London? If it was the former, does the Minister accept that many of us believe that that was an ill-informed decision, and that if it was the latter, it was a stupid and philistine one?

Whichever answer I give I shall fail to satisfy the hon. Gentleman. The Government have been considering the Select Committee's report for some time and all relevant factors were taken into account.