asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on the future of the Llandough hospital.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what discussions he has had concerning the proposed closures at the Llandough hospital.

Far from being closed or contracted, Llandough hospital is being expanded at a total cost of about £7 million. Its future is therefore assured.

I am grateful for that reply and the note of hope that the Under-Secretary included in his answer. Does he accept that if the pneumoconiosis unit closes that will be an appalling blow to the medical and social services in Wales and to the morale of the Welsh people? Will he undertake to ensure that the Secretary of State will fight at Cabinet level for the maintenance of the unit, and if he is unsuccessful in that fight, as he is responsible for both the health and education services, will he guarantee to make available additional resources to secure the future of the unit?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman that the unit has a long and distinguished history and that it has done valuable work. I remind him that it is the responsibility of the Medical Research Council, which set up a sub-committee to examine the workings of the unit. My right hon. Friend's responsibility is limited in the sense that the land and the buildings for the unit are leased from him, but the Medical Research Council is the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science.

Is the Under-Secretary aware that as long ago as 1943 Llandough hospital became associated with the treatment of pneumonconiotic miners? Is he aware that as a result of that the Government of the day brought pneumonconiosis into the schedule of compensatable illnesses and diseases? Was he consulted by the Medical Research Council when it made this proposal, and if so, what did he say? What will he do to prevent the council from closing the unit, which is vital to the south Wales mining community?

No decision has yet been taken to close the unit. We have a proposal from a sub-committee of the Medical Research Council, which is to be considered by the council in October. The hon. Gentleman may be interested to know that there are 11 beds associated with the unit's work, and the South Glamorgan authority has made it clear that those beds will continue in use.

Is it not a fact that some years ago strong undertakings were given to develop the hospital, which until recently was in my constituency, as a district general hospital with greatly enhanced facilities? Will my hon. Friend take that into account'' Are the undertakings being fulfilled, since the hospital is admirably sited to cater for the hospital needs of the people in the Vale of Glamorgan and the western parts of the city of Cardiff?

I am happy to assure my hon. Friend that we are planning for the development of a 90-bed obstetric unit with associated work, some of which is already in progress, to extend the catering, pharmaceutical, X-ray and residential facilities of the hospital at a cost of more than £7 million. It will probably be the biggest development in south Glamorgan since the building of the University hospital of Wales. The obstetric unit is intended to replace that at St. David's.

Does the Minister accept that he cannot get away so easily from his Department's responsibility for science and research policy in Wales? Why, if the Medical Research Council and the science board are not prepared to fund the essential pneumoconiosis research in the present unit, does not his Department fund the research on the customer-contractor principle, which it has failed lamentably to do over the years?

The hon. Gentleman must agree that the progress and direction of research is a matter for the Medical Research Council, not for me or my right hon. Friend. As to the financing of the unit, he will know from the exchange between my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and the right hon. Member for Islwyn (Mr. Kinnock) on 28 June about the funding of the Medical Research Council that in 1979–80 it received £54·4 million, and in the current year it has received £117·2 million.

Is not this much-loved hospital, which provides a vital service to our mining communities, worthy today of a ministerial vote of confidence? Will the Minister undertake to tell the Medical Research Council that hon. Members do not wish the unit to be closed?

The hon. Gentleman was clearly not listening to what I said. I talked about a £7 million development of the hospital. I have also told the House about the pneumoconiosis unit. The proposal advanced by the sub-committee is still at an early stage, in that it will be considered by the Medical Research Council in October.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what plans he now has to issue a consultation paper on transport infrastructure.

I assume that the hon. Member is referring to the consultation paper on local choice in public transport. This was issued on 12 July, and a copy has been sent to the hon. Gentleman.

The Minister will realise that public discussion about the railway infrastructure in Wales is a good thing. Does he also realise that for the Green Paper to be given proper consideration in the Principality it must be seen that proper financial considerations are laid down for any changes? Will he assure the House and Welsh local authorities that that will be the case, and that any changes made as a result of the Green Paper and the consultation period will be more than changes for the sake of possible cuts being seen to be made by local authorities rather than by central Government?

The hon. Gentleman raises a very important point, and I can give him a broad assurance in response. We shall welcome views on the detailed financial arrangements. It is a genuine consultation paper. In determining the overall grant required we must take into account the existing public service obligation grant for that service. It is intended that the effect of those suggestions should be financially neutral, so that no change in the effective level of Exchequer support is implied by them.

People throughout mid-Wales are anxious about the future of the Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth railway line and of the Cambrian coast line. Will the Minister assure the House that those two lines are regarded as an essential part of the infrastructure of transport in Wales and that neither line will be closed or made the subject of what is euphemistically called bus-for-rail substitution?

There are at present no proposals for the closure—

That is not answering the question.

With respect, I shall answer the question in my way. There are no proposals for the closure of any lines. Of course, I cannot give an assurance into the long-distance future. Change takes place inevitably, but I can assure the House that there are no proposals to close any railway lines in Wales.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there will be much satisfaction in Wales at the transfer of greater control of local transport problems to county councils?

I am sure that my hon. Friend is right. As I have already stressed, it is a consultation paper and we wish to discuss with the local authorities greater opportunities for local democratic choice.

Does the Minister appreciate that the Government's proposals as a whole are a recipe for anarchy on our roads and will result in higher fares and reduced services? Is this not yet another example of the Government's privatisation measures, where the vultures are on the sidelines ready to feed from the choice pickings of public industry? Will not the old, the very young, the poor and the sick suffer yet again?

No, I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman's conclusions. Experience shows that where greater choice and competition are introduced the public get better service, not worse.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will undertake not to cut local authorities' capital spending during the year 1984–85.

Discussions on local authority capital spending in 1984–85 are continuing within the framework of the Welsh Consultative Council on Local Government Finance.

I thank the Secretary of State for that reply, but I would be grateful if he will now say whether he will oppose any Cabinet move to impose any capital moratorium on local authorities in Wales, where it is blatantly obvious that the construction industry is already suffering from the imposition of VAT on building alterations and the phasing out of industrial building allowances? Cuts in capital expenditure would constitute a fatal blow for thousands of employees in the building industry—the largest industry in Wales.

I have already indicated to the Welsh Grand Committee my concern that, far from being cut, capital programmes are running ahead of plans. We are discussing with local authorities the best way of dealing with this situation.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that local authority expenditure is part of total identifiable public expenditure and that, therefore, the Government have a duty to control it? Does he also accept that, more than anything else, local authorities need continuity and an understanding of what will happen in the future, particularly in the housing sector, in so far as that can be ascertained?

I understand the need for continuity. As my hon. Friend said, that is an important part of our total public spending programme, and we have spelt out our long-term plans for that programme. We must consider seriously substantial overspending in any particular area.

Housing has been the easy target for Government cuts since 1979. Will the Secretary of State now assure the House that the housing crisis will not be worsened by yet again forcing housing to bear the main burden of the current proposed cuts?

We are talking about a possible overspend on housing expenditure programmes and, therefore, whether it is necessary to restrain those programmes from running ahead of spending. We are not talking about cutting them from the levels that have been spelt out previously.

Is the Secretary of State not aware that building and construction firms throughout Wales, particularly in Gwynedd, from where I have received representations, are petrified that we are about to see yet another cycle of stop-go-stop, thus making it impossible to plan ahead in terms of investment and employment? Will the Secretary of State now think seriously about how to get a more coherent form of planning capital expenditure with local authorities so that we can avoid these problems?

The builders must remember that any problem at present arises from the fact that we are running ahead of our plans, and that they have work on their books which they are carrying through to the end of this financial year. They may be concerned about not getting further additional work on top, but they have substantial work under existing spending programmes.

From the hesitant, fencing replies that we have heard, we fear the worst. Will the right hon. Gentleman commit himself to fighting in the Cabinet against any imposition of cuts?

I have made it perfectly clear that I am concerned about the fact that we are running ahead of our spending targets, and I am discussing with local government the best way of dealing with that.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what is his latest assessment of the effects of the miners' strike on the economy of South Wales.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what discussions he has had with the chairman of the National Coal Board regarding the effect of the miners' strike on the industrial and commercial economy in Wales.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if, when he next meets the chairman of the Welsh Confederation of British Industry, if he will discuss the effects of the miners' strike on the Welsh economy.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what is his latest assessment of the effects of the coal strike on the Welsh economy and on industrial production in the Principality; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what is his latest assessment of the effect of the coal miners' strike on the steel industry in Wales.

While reports indicate that there is no widespread impact on Welsh industry generally and the British Steel Corporation is continuing to take steps to ensure that steel production is maintained, those in employment in Wales will recognise the threat to jobs that a continuation of this damaging strike entails.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

I shall take it now, exceptionally.

I tabled question No. 7, and I object to it being couple with question No. 4 when it is not directly related to it. My question asks the Secretary of State if he has met the chairman of the National Coal Board.

The hon. Gentleman knows that I have no responsibility for the way in which Ministers group questions. It is not a matter for me.

Further to that point or order—

Order. I have nothing more to say.

rose—

Order. It is not a matter for me. It is a matter for the Minister.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is apparent that the only people likely to gain from this senseless strike are oil tanker crews and nuclear power constructors, and that the worst losers will be those engaged in the coal and coal-associated industries?

All these questions are about the effect of the strike on the economy of Wales. I agree that the strike can do nothing but damage to jobs in other industries and people not directly affected by it. It is deplorable that a strike involving about 200,000 people in two industries should have such threatening consequences for so very many more in a host of other industries.

I realise now why the Secretary of State wanted to group my question with these others. It is clear that he has not yet met the chairman of the National Coal Board. For five months now I have been asking him when he intends to meet the chairman. I wonder whether he was invited to the senior Cabinet meetings today to discuss the strike. The impact of the strike on Wales, especially when it comes to 120 or 130 lorries travelling from Port Talbot to Llanwern and the danger that they cause in the middle lane of the motorway when other motorists are trying to leave the motorway is such that it is time that the Secretary of State took some action, went to the chairman of the National Coal Board and convinced him that the miners have won the strike. Why do they not get round a table and settle it, because there is only one matter in dispute?

It is quite clear that the miners have not won the strike. The Government are determined that violence and intimidation shall not triumph. I can tell the hon. Gentleman that I was present at the meetings this morning and that one of the matters discussed was that the windows of 32 of the lorries carrying coal from Port Talbot this morning were smashed by strikers. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will join me in condemning that disgraceful violence.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that those miners on strike must realise that it is their industrial action that has driven up interest rates, that it is their industrial action that is damaging Welsh industry and that it is they who are destroying other Welsh people's jobs? Does he also agree that, by kow-towing to Scargill, Opposition Members are aiding and abetting this destruction of jobs and that they, too, are job wreckers?

I agree entirely, and I hope that Opposition Members will heed the warnings of the chairman of the British Steel Corporation, who said that this strike threatened the whole recovery to which BSC employees had contributed so much.

In view of the splendid achievements at Llanwern and Port Talbot, would it not be a great tragedy if what had been achieved was damaged by the long continuance of this strike? Is not the future progress of the steel works in South Wales of infinite importance to the coal mining industry in South Wales?

My hon. Friend is quite correct. The chairman of the BSC pointed out that there were 20 United Kingdom pits which could produce the qualities of coking coal needed in steel production. As he said, it seems an unbelievable policy deliberately to try to drive steel out of business when that would only cut the demand for coal permanently, leading to even greater damage to job prospects in the coal industry than the strike has caused already.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is unforgivable that the Leader of the Opposition, a Welsh Member, should show such little concern for the great achievements of those in the steel industry at Port Talbot and Llanwern and should instead align himself with a demagogue, by losing his self control, ripping up a speech and showing greater concern for the job wreckers than for those who have achieved so much in the steel industry?

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Order. I suspect that I know what the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Mr. Davies) is going to say and I should like to say it first. We do not want speeches at Question Time.

I was not going to say that.

I agree that it is deplorable that the Leader of the Opposition should apparently associate himself with a political strike which must be gravely damaging to jobs in industry generally.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman understand that the Leader of the Opposition—together with every sensible person in this country—wants to see the dispute brought to an end under the proper procedures agreed under "Plan for Coal"? Does the right hon. Gentleman understand that his Government's breach of those procedures has led to the current serious situation? Before he rushes in with a reply, will he recall that he gave me some misleading replies three weeks ago and had to send me a letter of apology, which I received this morning? Apparently, we must go on educating him. We want a proper, negotiated settlement of the dispute, and the right hon. Gentleman ought to be doing something at least to try to achieve that.

I confirm that I wrote to the right hon. Gentleman and apologised for the fact that when I referred to Labour Governments I had forgotten that his career as a Minister had been so remarkably brief. I had not appreciated how much he wished to dissociate himself from the record of Labour Governments since he was elected to the House.

If the Secretary of State and Conservative Members are so concerned about the health of the steel industry, why do they not put pressure on the Prime Minister to settle the coal dispute?

I must make it clear that no one in the Government will put any pressure on the management of the NCB that would allow decisions about the future of that industry and the viability of pits to be dictated by a political demagogue or anyone else.

If, as a result of the damage being done to the Welsh economy by the mining and docks disputes, the Government declare a state of emergency, will the Secretary of State ensure that troops are not used against miners in south Wales?

No such decisions have been taken, but I can tell the hon. Gentleman that the Government will carry out their obligations to the country as a whole and will take whatever steps may be needed.

Will my right hon. Friend give the House an assurance that, in view of the extreme intimidation and distress undergone by so many moderate miners in the dispute, and in view of the enormous courage shown by those miners, the Government have no plans to try to persuade the NCB to bring the dispute to a speedy conclusion that negates the essential principles on which the board is standing?

I confirm that that is exactly the position. It would be intolerable if the NCB's hands were tied when it had to decide whether pits had a future. It must not be bullied and bounced into that by inexcusable violence and intimidation.

Rather than adopting a sneering, hard-line approach, the right hon. Gentleman should be encouraging the Prime Minister to effect conciliation. Is it not in the Government's power to resolve the dispute speedily and to ensure a successful outcome to the dispute in this week's talks?

Mr. Scargill has refused to discuss the inclusion of the word "beneficial" when considering whether a pit has a future. If we cannot discuss whether a pit has a "beneficial" future, we are hardly in a position to talk seriously about conciliation.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what estimate he has made of the amount of derelict land in Wales.

The latest estimate by the Welsh Development Agency is that there are currently around 13,000 hectares of derelict land in Wales.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the local authorities have submitted their priority schemes to the Welsh Development Agency and that they amount to more than £100 million? Is he further aware that if we carry on with the reduced budget levels it will take nearly 15 years to deal with those priority schemes? Will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that the agency does not make land reclamation something of a Cinderella programme?

There is no question of making land reclamation a Cinderella. The Welsh Development Agency has to assess its priorities. Expenditure in the current year, including expenditure on the land reclamation scheme that will probably take place in Cardiff, is likely to be of the order of £10·5 million, which is about the same level as it has been for the past year or two.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales what extra plans he has to help dairy farmers in the county of Dyfed; and if he will make a statement.

Dairy farmers in Dyfed, as elsewhere, will be helped by the measures we have already announced. The reserve set aside for hardship cases and the outgoers scheme will all help to ameliorate the effects of quotas on those most affected. In addition, dairy farmers in Dyfed will benefit from the extension of the less-favoured area.

I am sure that the Secretary of State is well aware of the fact that many dairy farmers in Wales are in financial difficulties. As he is in charge of Welsh agriculture, may I seek to persuade him once again to go to Brussels to ensure that those dairy farmers are adequately compensated? Given that he went to Brussels to make sure of a good deal for the sheep farmers in Wales, can he tell the House and the Welsh agriculture industry why he should discriminate against the dairy industry?

As I pointed out in the Welsh Grand Committee, I learnt some lessons from that visit to Brussels. As the hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well, we have set aside 2·5 per cent. of quota to deal with hardship cases, and later this week the House will debate the rules under which that quota will be administered. That will be the appropriate time for discussing the matter in further detail.

Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that applications for consideration as special cases will be processed rapidly? Will he ensure that if the local panels are inundated they will be increased or enlarged?

Claim forms will be issued to every dairy producer as soon as possible after the necessary regulations have been approved by the House. As I have said, those regulations are to be debated later this week. There will then be only five weeks in which those who consider themselves eligible can put in a claim. We intend to proceed with all possible haste and to have three panels within the Principality dealing with the claims as they come in.

In considering milk quotas, why has the right hon. Gentleman not been prepared to address himself to the problems of the specialist dairy rearing sector? Many of that sector's members face virtual immediate bankruptcy, so why are they to receive no relief from the Government at this difficult time?

I have, of course, seen the letter that the hon. and learned Gentleman wrote on the subject, and, indeed, he mentioned the subject on Wednesday in the Welsh Grand Committee. We have acknowleged that there will be knock-on effects elsewhere in the industry, and that was one of the factors that we had to take into account when setting the total level of quota distribution and the scale of the leavers' scheme. We have no special measure with which to deal with the particular problems of those in the specialist dairy rearing sector.

When will the Secretary of State realise that farmers throughout Wales are badly affected by the quota system and that that has ramifications for other industries and communities? Will he bear in mind that there is a feeling throughout the farming industry that this could well be the thin edge of the wedge, and that other farm products such as cereals may be next on the list?

Of course, as a Member of Parliament for Dyfed, I fully appreciate the effect of quotas and the damaging consequences for individuals. That is why we have listened carefully to the representations made. and why we are making several changes in the regulations to be debated in the House this week. I wish that the hon. Gentleman would make his position clear. When referring to the other products, is he arguing that there should be no cutback on the surpluses and the present expenditure an the CAP, or is he characteristically trying to have it both ways, and to get credit from the farmers while urging savings on the CAP?

asked the Secretary of Stale for Wales how many people, unadjusted and inclusive of school leavers, are unemployed in Wales; and by what percentage unemployment has increased since May 1979.

Last month there were 162,941 unemployed claimants in Wales. In May 1979 the estimated number of claimants was 77,177. That represents an increase of 111·1 per cent.

Does not the prospect of water rationing in south Wales point to lay-offs and job losses? Why has the right hon. Gentleman been so laggardly and lackadaisical in his approach to the completion of the Wye-Usk water transfer scheme?

I am glad that on this occassion the hon. Member for Alyn and Deeside (Mr. Jones) is not so lost for words that he is unable to ask a supplementary question. I had hoped that he would welcome the fall in the number of unemployed by 5,858 since he last asked a similar question. We have made ample capital provision available to the Welsh water authority. It takes its own decisions on the planning of its capital programme.

What contribution to the long-term and short-term employment prospects in Wales has been made by the Leader of the Opposition in his outright support of the miners' leader who seeks to destroy simultaneously the coal and steel industries in Wales?

I find it profoundly shocking that the leader of a major political party should associate himself with violence and intimidation and with a strike that can only do grave damage to jobs and add to unemployment.

Is the Secretary of State not abusing the miners and failing to answer the Opposition's demands about the impact of water rationing that is about to come to south-east Wales? Will the Secretary of State acknowledge his personal culpability for failing to monitor works that could have been completed in south-east Wales, but for his neglect? Is the Secretary of State proud of having made an industrial waste out of south-east Wales? Is he about to add to his accolade by making southeast Wales into a Sahara?

We have spent about £75 million on improving the facilities for transporting water to the industrial areas of south-east Wales. I have no doubt that a water shortage would cause inconvenience, but it will create nothing like the damage and consequences caused by the strike which the hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends are encouraging.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales whether he is satisfied that the Welsh educational system is providing the most desirable mix of well-qualified recruits to enable information technology companies to grow in Wales; and what consultations he plans with the employers and educational institutions most involved in this issue.

I have had widespread consultations with employers and educational institutions and will continue to do so.

What specific steps have been taken to encourage the development of suitable courses in Wales?

In the advanced further education pool for specific information technology courses in 1983–84, £100,000 was made available to support four courses offering 30 degree places and 30 sub-degree places at higher education institutions in Wales. That figure was increased in 1984–85. In the non-advanced further education area, support grants are being introduced in 1985–86 to encourage the development of information technology courses.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales if he will estimate the number of jobs in Wales currently provided by overseas companies.

The most recent estimates indicate that foreign-owned companies in Wales employ some 42,000 people.

I welcome that answer and the considerable progress that my right hon. Friend has been able to achieve in attracting jobs from outside companies. Is he aware of the concern about the future of WlNvest?Can he make a statement about its future?

Some time ago the Government announced that they were reviewing their inward investment operations. Officials have prepared a report, which has not yet been considered by Ministers. When it has been considered we shall have something to say about it. WINvest has done, and is doing, valuable work and has dealt with a large number of applications in recent months.

Surely the publicity about water rationing cannot be an attractive proposition to overseas companies coming to Wales. Will the Secretary of State give a categorical assurance that he will make a statement to the House before the recess about water rationing and its impact on industry in Wales?

If I think that there is anything to report to the House, further to what I have already told hon. Members, I shall consider doing so. Far more damaging for the prospects of inward investment than any temporary water shortage is the damage being done by the industrial disputes with which the Leader of the Opposition has associated himself.

asked the Secretary of State for Wales how many council houses have been sold to sitting tenants in Wales since May 1979.

A total of 36,885 council dwellings were sold to sitting tenants in Wales between May 1979 and 31 March 1984. In addition, 1,796 dwellings were sold by the Cwmbran development corporation and Mid Wales Development.

What effect does my hon. Friend think the Housing and Building Control Act 1984 will have on council house sales in Wales?

I am glad to tell my hon. Friend that it will have a promotional effect when it comes into force in August. It extends the right to buy to groups of tenants who do not benefit under the current arrangements. It increases the maximum discount to 60 per cent. and introduces the right to buy on a shared ownership basis. This will give even more people the opportunity to enjoy the basic security and satisfaction of home ownership.

Does the Minister appreciate that the building and construction industry is concerned not so much with the sale of council houses as with the threat of a moratorium on local authority capital projects? Is he aware that Mr. Michael Manser, president of the Royal Institute of Building Architects, points out in a letter to me today that such a move would be highly detrimental to the industry and would increase unemployment.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has already dealt with that matter during Question Time today. Last Wednesday I made a statement about the issue in the Welsh Grand Committee. We hope that about £200 million will be spent on housing in Wales during the current year.

asked the hon. Member for Wokingham, as representing the Church Commissioners, what proportion of the Church Commissioners' expenditure last year went to ministerial pay, including national insurance contributions and pensions and housing for the clergy.

Ninety per cent.

That is a high figure, and I recognise that little expenditure of the Church Commissioners is on bureaucracy and administration. In the light of the appalling damage done to the south transept of York Minster, can my hon. Friend confirm that the Church Commissioners will use their good offices to ensure that our fine, ecclesiastical architectural heritage is properly insured against—if this is not too inappropriate a phrase—acts of God?

Order. That question did not have a great deal to do with pensions, housing and ministerial pay of the clergy.

I am glad to say that the percentage of expenditure on administration is 6 per cent., which I think is acceptable. The Church Commissioners are not responsible for the sort of insurance mentioned by my hon. Friend. Any incumbent who now contemplates inviting the Bishop of Durham to preach will probably wish to look carefully at his insurance.

Has my hon. Friend seen an article in today's Daily Telegraph, entitled "Pay vicars by what their flock will produce", and relating to a report from the Institute of Economic Affairs? Does that idea have some sympathy and support within the Church Commissioners? Obviously, market forces may be helpful. The clergy, for instance, could publish figures about any increases in membership and this would directly affect their final salary.

I do not read the Daily Telegraph, but the article has been drawn to my attention. The essence of modern financing in the Church of England is that it is very much a responsibility of the laity. Therefore, I do not think that it is worth exploring the idea of paying clergy by results alone.

In the context of the resources of the Church of England, can my hon. Friend give any encouragement to those of my constituents who would like a Church of England secondary school in Solihull?

I cannot answer the question on behalf of the Church Commissioners, because it is not their responsibility. If, personally, I can assist my hon. Friend in any way, :[hope that he will write to me.

asked the hon. Member for Wokingham, as representing the Church Commissioners, what information the Commissioners now have concerning the current position and the future prospects for the building of the redundant church of St. Alban's, Teddington.

The London diocese has reported to the Commissioners that it has been unable to find a suitable alternative use for the redundant building. The alternative courses for consideration under the relevant statute are demolition of the building or preservation by the redundant churches fund.

Is there any prospect of the redundant churches fund finding the necessary money, as it would now cost more than £300,000 to make St. Alban's safe and sound? The expert advice was that the only viable way to produce such a fund would be through an office block, which was not wanted by those living nearby and, in any case, had been prevented by local authority decisions. Do the Commissioners accept that, in the end, demolition is the only likely course?

I must be careful not to prejudge the issue in any way. The Commissioners must study the matter and take advice from their statutory advisers. There are two possible courses of action, and I cannot for one moment forecast which will be chosen.

asked the hon. Member for Wokingham, as representing the Church Commissioners, what percentage of clergy stipends for the latest year for which figures are available were paid by direct lay giving compared with 10, 20 and 30 years ago; what cash figures are involved; and if he will make a statement.

As the answer contains a number of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the Official Report. However, I can tell my hon. Friend that the proportion of lay giving for clergy stipends has risen from 25 per cent. in 1963–64 to 43 per cent. in 1983–84.

Are not those figures remarkable? Does my hon. Friend consider that the laity get value for money? If so, how does he measure that value?

The figures are, I admit, remarkable. The proportion of giving by the laity will, so far as can be foreseen, continue to rise, particularly as standards rise in terms of pensions, stipends and housing. I would not want to enter into speculation as to how one measures those.

The Commission and the laity are to be congratulated on raising the pay of the clergy. Does the hon. Gentleman consider that the current level of pay is either fair or adequate?

It is a substantial improvement on anything in the past, taken in conjunction with housing—with house, rents and outgoings being totally free, as they should be — but there is always room for improvement, and it is that which the laity is seeking to achieve.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the increase in the proportion paid by the laity is extremely gratifying? Is he aware that although some of us are frequent critics of the clergy, and of the higher clergy, we believe, nevertheless, that they do wonderful work for the pay they receive?

That is right, and I am certain that financial consideration is the last thing that motivates the clergy.

Does my hon. Friend attribute this remarkable turnround to more covenanting throughout the country and perhaps to the fact that the laity now has knowledge of where the money is going?

I should like to think that the educative process undertaken by the Church Commissioners, in particular, is bearing fruit because, as my hon. Friend says, it is now possible for the laity to be far better informed than before. The use of covenanting is an important part of the process.

rose—

If I call the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) to ask a supplementary question, will he do me a favour and stick to the subject please?

It will make a novel change if hon. Members stick to the subject, Mr. Speaker.

Order.

I am not quite done, Mr. Speaker.

On the whole, there is not much competition. My observation is that members of all churches have taken a balanced view of the matter and that, in particular, they have an abhorrence and horror of the kind of intimidation that they have been witnessing.

asked the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State answering in respect of the Arts what help the Government intend to give to the trustees of the Victoria and Albert museum to deal with the state of physical deterioration in the museum's buildings.

The Victoria and Albert museum is receving a substantial share of the resources for the national museums' and galleries' building and maintenance programme in the current year. Provision for future years is being reviewed as part of the 1984 public expenditure survey.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that the present state of repair of the Victoria and Albert building has been classified by the Property Services Agency as desperate, that it will cost more than £25 million to put right and that, under the present financing arrangements, there is no way in which the trustees can raise that money without generous help from the taxpayer?

There is no question but that the answer to the latter part of my hon. Friend's question is yes — the taxpayer will have to help in this matter. Recently, the chairman of the trustees and the trustees met my right hon. and learned Friend the Chief Secretary. I know that the trustees are putting figures of £25 million or £26 million on the cost of what needs to be done. The seriousness of the position is well known to my right hon. and noble Friend the Minister for the Arts.

It is well known that the Victoria and Albert museum trustees wish to impose some form of charges for admission to the museum. Will the hon. Gentleman confirm that the British museum is actively considering admission charges? What sort of early warning mechanism is the Office of Arts and Libraries operating whereby it can say exactly which museums and art galleries are proposing to impose charges?

It is entirely up to the trustees of particular museums to come forward with schemes, if they choose to do so.

Does the Under-Secretary of State not realise that to a large extent those museums have been given the green light by the Office of the Minister for the Arts? Does the hon. Gentleman recall that the last time the Government tried to impose charges they were clobbered? That was done under the present Prime Minister. Will the hon. Gentleman remind the Prime Minister that we will not tolerate a retreat to private enterprise on this issue?

The policy has been the same for a number of years — if the trustees of collections have wanted to come forward with schemes, my right hon. and noble Friend the Minister for the Arts and his predecessors have agreed to look at the proposals.

asked the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State answering in respect of the Arts if the Minister for the Arts will assess the consequences for the future of the Royal Shakespeare theatre at Stratford-on-Avon of the proposed construction of a radio transmitter at Bearley.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment is currently awaiting the inspector's report following the public local inquiry into this proposal. I can, however, assure my hon. Friend that the views of the Royal Shakespeare company and others who have expressed concern and were represented at the public inquiry will be fully taken into account by my right hon. Friend before a decision is made.

I urge my hon. Friend to take seriously the considered statements by the joint artistic directors and the general manager of the Royal Shakespeare theatre that the effect of radio frequency interference and the proposed transmitter on computerised sound and lighting, box office systems and other sensitive electronic equipment at the theatre would mean that closure of the theatre was inevitable? Will my hon. Friend urge his right hon. and hon. Friends at the Department of the Environment to prevent the BBC and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office from perpetrating an act of vandalism which they and everyone else would come very much to regret?

I assure my hon. Friend that those considerations will be taken fully into account by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State.

What co-ordination exists between Government Department, to ensure that artistic considerations are properly supported when they go before inspectors at such inquiries?

I do not believe that any special arrangements are needed. Evidence that is relevant to such a planning inquiry will, of course, be put before that inquiry and before my right hon. Friend.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the proposed transmitter was roundly condemned on the BBC programme, "Start the Week", which came from Stratford this morning? Is my hon. Friend also aware that, in the interests of not only the Royal Shakespeare theatre but many people in south Warwickshire, he would be doing the country a great service if he persuaded the BBC and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office not to engage in what my hon. Friend the Member for Stratford-on-Avon (Mr. Howarth) rightly called "an act of vandalism"?

As this is a planning matter, I can go no further than to say that these matters will be drawn to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State.

asked the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State answering in respect of the Arts whether Her Majesty's Government will take steps to encourage the theatre in the east midlands.

My noble Friend is concerned to encourage theatre and other arts throughout the country, within the resources available.

Do the resources available include the so-called "Glory of the Garden" development policy and, if so, will the Minister confirm that Leicester's brillaint but hard-pressed Haymarket theatre will qualify for both aspects of the grant—that to which it is entitled as of right and that which it will receive because it has always succeeded in raising a substantial proportion of what it needs from sources other than the Arts Council?

As the hon. and learned Gentleman is doubtless aware, the Haymarket receives a substantial sum from the Arts Council—£323,000 at present—and, as I understand it, there is no proposal in the strategy document to change the relationship between the Arts Council and the Haymarket theatre.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the opera house at Buxton, which is also used as a theatre, has been renovated in recent years? Is he further aware that the Buxton festival is now one of the most important regional festivals in Europe and that it has been starved of funds by the Arts Council? Accordingly, will my hon. Friend ask the chairman of the Arts Council to ensure that adequate funds are made available to the Buxton festival so that it can continue to put on world-class performances?

It is not for me or my noble Friend to make representations on behalf of particular companies. Companies must make their own representations to the Arts Council, whose duty it is to make the decisions.

asked the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State answering in respect of the Arts what was the average public subsidy for each ticket sold for performances of opera and ballet in the United Kingdom in each of the last three years; and if he will make a statement.

Figures from the Arts Council for the years 1980–81 to 1982–83 are £14·7, £15 and £19 for opera, and £4·9, £6·1 and £6·5 for dance. Decisions about individual levels of subsidy are of course for the Arts Council, and not my noble Friend.

As one who opposes the subsidising of any goods or services, may I ask my hon. Friend to tell the House what the logic is of subsidising the rich in that way?

I believe that it is well understood in the House that it is impossible to maintain a major opera company without public subsidy. I hope my hon. Friend will welcome the fact that the new policy of the opera house is to make up to 40 per cent. of its tickets available at lower prices than in the past.

Is it the Government's intention to subsidise the Duccio "Crucifixion", which Manchester is trying to keep in this country?

My noble Friend has today announced an extension of a month in the stop order on the picture attributed to Duccio, but it is for the national heritage memorial fund to decide whether to make further funds available.

asked the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State answering in respect of the Arts when the Minister for the Arts last met the chairman of the Welsh Arts Council; and what subjects were discussed.

My noble Friend regularly meets the chairman of the Arts Council of Great Britain about matters of current concern. He does not have formal meetings on a regular basis with the chairman of the Welsh Arts Council, although informal meetings do take place.

Does the Minister feel it appropriate to have a meeting with the chairman of the Welsh Arts Council in view of the difficulty that it has had with the development plan currently under consideration, because drama in Wales, particularly among small companies, will be hit hard by lack of resources? Will he seriously consider, with the chairman of the Welsh Arts Council, the availability of adequate resources to meet the needs of a bilingual community, and one which includes many areas of scattered population?

The considerations which the hon. Member mentions at the end of his question are taken into account by the Welsh Arts Council. I shall draw the hon. Gentleman's request for a meeting to my noble Friend's attention.

asked the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State answering in respect of the Arts what funds have been made available by the Arts Council to the 7:84, Temba and CAST theatre companies in the last year.

In 1983–84 the subsidies received by these three companies were £89,100, £69,300 and £45,540 respectively.

Is it not a fact that, because of the representations made by various Ministers, the Arts Council has clearly, in its document "Glory of the Garden", set out to eliminate political theatre? Do not the figures that the Minister has given relate to political theatre? Would the Minister care to comment on the instructions issued by Westminster city council, which show clearly that it is placing political limitations on theatre grants, as it has said that it will not give grants to any theatre that does not come up to the political standards that it has set?

The answer to the second question is, no, as that is not a matter for me. The answer to the first question is that the hon. Gentleman has, not uncharacteristically, shot himself in the foot. He has explained to us on many occasions how one could not stop political theatre in this country unless one were to stop the production of Shakespeare.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. My point of order concerns Welsh Question Time, and the linking of six questions on the coal industry—that is 4, 7, 10, 11, 15 and 19. Although these were taken together, only three supplementary questions were taken, and therefore the debate on the coal industry was severely curtailed and it was impossible to hear all the opinions of the House. When the Secretary of State, or any other Minister, says at the beginning of answering a question that "with permission" he will group questions together, whose permission is he seeking, as the hon. Member for Ogmore (Mr. Powell) refused to give that permission?

Order. It is a courtesy to the House when a Minister says "with permission". It is entirely up to the Minister how questions are grouped. I think that the hon. Member will readily understand that if I called everyone who wished to speak on every question we would get through very few questions. I am concerned to ensure that as many hon. Members as possible have their questions reached.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. You will recall that I raised with you on Thursday and again on Friday morning the question of—

Order. I shall stop the hon. Gentleman there because I have written to him about this matter, and he should await my letter before he raises this point of order again.