To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what organisation will take over the responsibilities of the Nature Conservancy Council in Wales when the council is abolished.

Subject to parliamentary approval, it is intended that, with effect from 1 April 1991, the responsibilities in Wales of the Nature Conservancy Council and Countryside Commission will be undertaken by a new statutory body, the Countryside Council for Wales.

Will not this announcement be widely welcomed throughout the Principality, as it shows the extent of the Government's commitment to the environment and conservation in Wales?

I am happy to tell my hon. Friend that the announcement was warmly and widely welcomed in Wales. It is an improvement. The two advisory committees of the Nature Conservancy Council and the Countryside Commission will be replaced by a single executive committee.

The Minister will remember that I welcomed his decision in the House on behalf of my colleagues. Will he assure the House that the Welsh and Scottish Offices will not surrender to the sort of campaigns that are being mounted in England? The future of the NCC in England is a matter for the English, but the decision is to be welcomed in Wales.

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his support. We have consulted a number of bodies. The chairman of the NCC committee for Wales and the chairman of the Countryside Commission committee for Wales both welcomed the proposal. We have had discussions with the Council for the Protection of Rural Wales and the chairmen and chief officers of the national parks and there has been a general welcome for the scheme. Matters affecting Scotland and England are the concern of my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he next expects to meet the chairman of British Rail to discuss transport infrastructure in the Principality.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he next expects to meet the chairman of British Rail to discuss British Railways' operations in Wales.

My right hon. Friend last met the chairman on 12 December. He hopes to meet the present chairman and the future chairman in the early months of 1990.

Is the Minister aware that the European Commission is prepared to pay, through grants, 75 per cent. of the cost of electrifying the north Wales main line from Crewe to Chester and to Holyhead? Does he agree that such a sum of money—perhaps £30 million—should not be turned away lightly, as the electrification of the line would be a valuable addition to the infrastructure of north Wales? If he agrees, will he do what he can to persuade the Secretary of State for Transport that, if British Rail applies for permission to electrify the line, it does not dock money equivalent to the grant for infrastructure developments elsewhere?

The electrification of the north Wales line, and any other line, is a matter for British Rail. I doubt whether the hon. Gentleman's assumption about the European regional development fund grant is correct. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport has announced that spending on railways will be about £3·7 billion during the next three years, which is 75 per cent. more in real terms than has been spent over the past three years. There does not seem to be a shortage of finance.

When my hon. Friend sees the chairman of British Rail, will he draw his attention to the continuing anxiety of people in Pembroke about the decline of rail services west of Swansea, the type of trains used and the number of trains operating on Sundays? There are now no trains west of Swansea before 3 pm on a Sunday, and that is not good enough.

We shall take up various issues with the present chairman and the new chairman of British Rail. We shall discuss services in west Wales, especially Pembrokeshire, and other areas.

When the Minister next meets the chairman of British Rail, will he take him on an unannounced journey on the Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth line so that he can witness the decimation of stations, the lack of staff and lavatory facilities, the overcrowded and miserable trains and the general air of neglect that are causing many people to complain to me about the state of that line?

The hon. and learned Gentleman paints a somewhat dismal picture of railway services in mid-Wales and, by implication, elsewhere. There has been substantial investment in the mid-Wales and Cambrian lines. We no longer hear talk of the closure of the Cambrian railway, as we did a few years ago, so things have improved. Nevertheless, I dare say that there is scope for further improvement.

When does my hon. Friend expect British Rail to be able to increase from 70 to 90 mph the maximum speed of trains on the north Wales line? Will he ensure that overcrowding in trains is reduced and safety is assured before that happens?

I am sure that British Rail will not permit a maximum of 90 mph on the north Wales line until it is absolutely safe.

Is the Minister aware that the Channel tunnel could have serious consequences for the economy of south-west Wales, especially as firms in the congested south-east might be tempted to go to the French end of the tunnel and supply the island from the continent rather than come to south Wales? Will the Secretary of State, with local authorities and British Rail, start planning a fast rail link from south-west Wales to the Channel tunnel, bypassing London?

The right hon. Gentleman is well aware that British Rail has been charged with producing a plan before the end of this year. I understand that its publication is imminent. To judge from what I know of what may be in it, I do not think that the people of Wales will be disappointed.

My constituents in Dorset might think Wales quite well served by railways. Will my hon. Friend bear it in mind that there is no direct relationship between the Government's quite proper pride in increasing capital investment on the railways and reducing the public service obligation grant which, in the case of the lines from Cardiff to Crewe and from Cardiff to Portsmouth, means that Sprinters are overworked, clapped out and, as one railwayman recently told me, being worked into the ground? Will he ensure that, in discussions about railway investment, PSO grant is recognised as separate from capital investment and essential?

I shall bear in mind what my hon. Friend said, but I assure him that my information is that new Sprinters are being introduced, or are due to be introduced, in several parts of Wales.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what discussions he has had with Community officials about the funding of infrastructure projects.

I am in constant touch with the negotiations with the European Commission on Community support frameworks. Officials of my Department are playing an active part in discussions with Commission officials on this issue.

The Secretary of State will be aware of my interest in the cross-valley link from Hafod, in the lower Swansea valley, to the Pentrechwyth bypass. Is he aware that, at last, tenders for it are to be invited this week? The assessment of infrastructure grants affects the whole of Wales. Will there be a transitional period before the new regime comes into effect? Has the right hon. Gentleman been successful in his lobbying in Brussels?

Negotiations with the Commission continue. There is considerable pressure from all member states as there is widespread European interest in the decisions taken. We have not been sastisfied with the Commission's proposals, and negotiations continue.

Will the Secretary of State come clean with the House about what has been happening in the negotiations between his Department and the European Community, following the recent statement by Bruce Milian, the responsible Commissioner, at the conference in Cardiff that there will be no further grants for highway infrastructure projects in areas such as Wales? If that is so, was that loss of grant, which will probably amount to £40 million, and was caused by his Department debarring county councils such as South Glamorgan and West Glamorgan from applying for grants, the reason why he has had to cut the capital allocation to areas such as Cardiff by £40 million in the next financial year?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman, who kindly always prefaces his questions to me by releasing them to the newspapers the morning before. One can read the nonsense in advance in the papers. What he has just said is equal nonsense. There is no link between capital expenditure in Cardiff and that in South Glamorgan. His previous allegations about Welsh Office blunders with respect to grants are also wrong. I suggest that, in future, he checks the facts before he makes press releases.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that one of our problems in Europe is that the Prime Minister is in a disturbing minority of one? Will he take her aside and tell her to stop damaging the interests of our country? Is it not the case that rather than leading Britain in Europe she is humiliating us and that the interests of Wales are also being seriously hurt?

I welcome the conversion of part of the Labour party to Europe. As the Commissioner involved in the negotiations is a former Socialist Cabinet Minister responsible for regional policy, I hope that his proposals will suit Britain in Europe.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what progress his Department has made in implementing its policy for assessment of school pupils.

The School Examinations and Assessment Council is making good progress in the development of assessment measures and advice to support the national curriculum in England and Wales.

Is the Minister satisfied with the relationship between SEAC in Wales and the Welsh joint education committee? The entire operation of assessment in Wales is organised on a part-time basis with one official who commutes. Is that satisfactory in view of discussions in the Standing Committee when I proposed a SEAC for Wales, just as we have a curriculum council for Wales?

I am satisfied that the relationship between SEAC, Welsh Office officials and the Welsh joint education committee is satisfactory. That is shown by the progress that we are making on standard assessment tasks.

Is the Minister aware that the assessment of school pupils depends in the first place on teachers having the appropriate time, facilities and funds to carry it out in classrooms? Is he further aware that morale among teachers, at least in south Wales, is low and that many teachers are looking for jobs outside the education system? What will he do about making more resources available to teachers in Wales?

Teachers have an important part to play in the assessment of pupils. Their assessment continues throughout the period when the child is at school, whereas standard assessment tasks are carried out when the child is seven, 11, 14 and 16. The teachers whom I have met in Wales are doing a marvellous job, and I believe that that is true of the majority.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the widespread anxiety among teachers, not only about the amount of time that assessment will take in classes of 30-plus, but that too much emphasis on assessment has an adverse effect on pupils and that assessment at seven is too early? Will he assure teachers on those two points?

Testing at the age of seven will be different from testing at later stages. I know that there is some anxiety about the time being devoted to assessment, but I am sure that after it is introduced the task will be eased.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what percentages of Welsh (a) full-time and (b) part-time workers are currently earning wages below 68 per cent. of the average British wage.

Information is not available in the form requested. Between 1988 and 1989 average earnings of full-time workers on adult rates in Wales increased by 9·9 per cent., a figure higher than in six of the other nine regions of the country.

Had the information been available, the Secretary of State would have discovered that Wales has fallen further down the low wages ladder and that tens of thousands of Welsh workers have been conscripted into junk jobs that pay dirt wages. Is he aware that thousands of Welsh workers once earned above-average wages whereas now they are at the bottom of the nation's average wages? Is he aware that there is a higher percentage of low-paid, male workers in Wales than anywhere else in Britain and that Dyfed has the lowest average male wages of any county in Britain? Will he answer the question put to him by my hon. Friend the Member for Alyn and Deeside (Mr. Jones)? Does he agree with the Prime Minister that clause 5 of the European social charter, which seeks fairer remuneration for workers, is of no value? Is he content for Wales to remain the low-paid capital of Britain?

The figures used in the hon. Gentleman's question were taken from a remarkable Council of Europe report which has not been endorsed by any member state.

That is not true.

The hon. Gentleman complains about the level of wages in Wales. In 1979, the average adult wage was £87 a week, whereas now it is £216 a week. That is a massive increase in real terms.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the greatest tragedy of unnecessarily high wages would be a halt in the creation of new employment? He is to be congratulated because since the general election unemployment in Wales has fallen by 70 per cent. Can he tell the House by how much unemployment in Newport has fallen in the same period?

At the time of the general election unemployment in Newport was 100 per cent. higher than it is now.

What is the right hon. Gentleman doing to persuade the Prime Minister that the European social charter will help the poorest in Wales best of all? Does he agree that the Prime Minister's stubborn style in Europe hurts the prospects of the lowest paid in Wales? Does he further agree that if we are frozen out of Europe, Britain cannot play a leading role to help the lowest paid in Wales?

I am glad to say that what is substantially improving earnings in Wales is the Government's enormous success in getting inward investment into Wales. It is probably a more successful region than any other in the European Community. I am delighted that this massive creation of good jobs in Wales is taking place. It is a great pity that, by their noise this afternoon, Labour Members show that they do not appreciate what is going on.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he last met local government associations in Wales; and what matters were discussed.

I met representatives of the Welsh counties committee and the Council of Welsh Districts at a meeting of the Welsh consultative council on local government finance on 2 November to discuss local government finance matters.

Is it not time that the Secretary of State stopped blurring the picture about what will happen in Wales when the poll tax hits us next year? Will he admit that individual poll tax payers in Wales are likely to pay an average of £200, not the figure that he has predicted over the past few weeks? Why has he been so reticent about the fact that of the 100,000 business premises in Wales, at least 70,000 will be worse off as a direct result of his business tax? Cannot he see that the Welsh people regard him as the architect of this wretched tax as much as they do the Prime Minister?

The hon. Gentleman read that out beautifully. I only hope that he rehearsed it before delivering it.

The right hon. Gentleman will read his answer.

No, I will not read the answer. The community charge in Wales will provide only 15 per cent. of all local government expenditure. As a result, community charges in Wales will be at least £100 lower per person than in either England or Scotland. It is time that the Welsh Labour party stopped being so churlish on this issue.

Does the Secretary of State accept that local authorities in Wales are grossly underfunded? People are not getting the municipal housing, social services and care for the elderly that they enjoyed 10 years ago. Does he acknowledge that next year after the introduction of the poll tax the position will be even worse?

Government grants to Wales, in terms of the statutory requirements regarding house improvements, will be unlimited in the current year. Our pursuit of such a policy for 10 years is doubtless why so many houses in the Rhondda have been improved.

Will the Secretary of State admit that the Welsh Office has hopelessly underestimated the poll tax figures? The Welsh Office says that the figure for Brecon and Radnor should be £130 per head, but the local authority treasurers say that it will be nearer £200. Does that mean that the Welsh Office accountants are not wizards but dunces?

No, Sir. What the hon. Gentleman said is not true. The increase in the total standard spending grant is sufficient to allow the average charge of £174 to be set. The expenditure demands of the local authority associations are, in my view, overstated. There is also room for efficiency savings. All councils, especially high-spending authorities, should seek to contain their budgets within affordable levels.

Has my right hon. Friend discussed the actions of councils such as the two Cardiff councils, which have given up any pretence of fixing a community charge to match their spending and instead have already determined the level of their community charge, with the result that they are now scrabbling round to find spending to soak up the revenue? According to my right hon. Friend's calculations, the charge in Cardiff should be £163, but my constituents will have to pay £250. What will he do about it?

There have been some remarkable increases. For example, this year Cardiff is planning a capital spending programme of £60 million, an increase of 35 per cent. on the previous year and the year before. Cardiff is using all its receipts and reserves for the year, with the result that recently there were some remarkable newspaper articles on the topic.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many incidents of notified discharges into rivers in Wales took place in 1988 and to date in 1989; and how many prosecutions have taken place during the same period in respect of illegal discharges.

The latest published figures, in Welsh Water's report and accounts 1988–89, show that there were 2,185 substantiated river pollution incidents in Welsh Water's area in 1988, 12 per cent. less than in 1987. During 1988, 74 prosecutions were brought by Welsh Water, resulting in 72 convictions. In the period to the end of October 1989 there have been 1,140 substantial incidents and 45 prosecutions have been brought.

When the Government are seeking to promote their green image, does the Minister consider it a scandal that the level of trade effluent discharges and untreated sewage into our rivers is increasing substantially? Will he examine the claims of the Farmers Union of Wales that discharges into rivers in my constituency are 200 per cent. greater than they were two years ago? If that is the case and consents have been given, will the Minister assure us that the consents were not given to prevent the National Rivers Authority from undertaking prosecutions in the run-up to water privatisation?

I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman is talking absolute rubbish—and populist, scaring rubbish at that. Nevertheless, I shall pass his query to the National Rivers Authority, because it has the responsibility.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on the successful privatisation of Welsh Water today. Does he agree that the privatisation of Welsh Water and the National Rivers Authority is the best guarantee of cleaner rivers in Wales?

Absolutely. My hon. Friend is quite right. At last we have separated the gamekeeper from the poacher, and we have a licensing authority that is free of the charge of polluting. I am afraid that the hon. Member for Ynys Môn (Mr. Jones) does not seem to have understood that point.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what events were organised by his Department to mark the 25th anniversary of the Welsh Office in November.

The 25th anniversary of the establishment of the Welsh Office falls on 1 April 1990. I intend to mark the anniversary in an appropriate manner and will announce my plans early in 1990.

Is the Secretary of State aware that on radio programmes in Wales commemorating the 25th anniversary of the establishment of the Secretary of State's office, which was the embryonic Welsh Office, in November 1964, two former senior officials of the Welsh Office, Mr. Richard Hall Williams and Sir Goronwy Daniel said that the major challenge now facing the Welsh Office was to get a degree of democracy into its oversight? Will he confirm that any celebrations next April will bring about that democracy, or will we be lingering behind Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia?

I find such admirable institutions as the Welsh Grand Committee, the Welsh Select Committee and the constant activities of lively Welsh Members of Parliament such as the hon. Gentleman marvellous reflections of democracy in Wales that would be envied in Lithuania and elsewhere.

Is the Secretary of State aware that during the past 10 years while his party has been in charge of the Welsh Office, income per head in Wales has fallen faster than in any other area in Britain and is now almost as low as that in Northern Ireland? Is that evidence of an economic miracle or an economic disaster?

I repeat that average wages in Wales have massively increased as has the diversity of opportunity in Wales. Wales now has a strong diversified economy which is recognised and rejoiced in by anyone who has any regard for the future of Wales.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the important advantages of a Welsh Office is that Welsh matters are debated here in the United Kingdom Parliament and not in some Mickey Mouse assembly in Cardiff? Does he agree that the hallmarks of a Conservative Welsh Office are prudence and value for money for the taxpayer? Will he ensure that any celebrations bear that in mind?

The enormous resources that have been put into regional development in recent years and the fact that domestic ratepayers in Wales will be paying only 15 per cent. of all local government expenditure are reflections of the considerable advantages for Wales of being part of the United Kingdom.

I am sure that the Secretary of State knows that the people of Wales demand their own Parliament within the United Kingdom. On reflection, which position would the Secretary of State like to hold in that Parliament?

Ambassador.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he next intends to meet the Nature Conservancy Council to discuss nature conservation in Wales.

My right hon. Friend has no present plans to meet the council.

I am surprised at the Minister's answer in view of the current controversy in Wales. Is it not the case that the Nature Conservancy Council in England is being retained to allow the English authorities to resist development pressure and that the effective abolition of the NCC in Wales means that we shall have a lower standard of protection for our national heritage than exists in England? Does the Minister agree that that is why the Council for the Protection of Rural Wales now opposes his plan for the dismemberment of the NCC? Does he acknowledge that that view is shared by every other conservation body in Wales and is endorsed by every serious politician in Wales and all but six of the NCC staff? In view of that, when the Minister gets around to meeting the NCC will he announce that he will reconsider the matter?

The hon. Gentleman has totally misled the House, I am sure not deliberately. I repeat what I said earlier which is that our proposals for Wales have received a wide welcome. I do not agree that the purpose of our new Countryside Council for Wales is to lower standards of protection for the environment. It is nothing of the kind and I can assure the hon. Gentleman that his belief is not shared by any of the people in Wales to whom I spoke, including the Council for the Protection of Rural Wales.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what assessment he has made of the impact of current interest rates on the development of small businesses in Wales.

The high inflation of previous Governments proved that high inflation is more damaging to small businesses than a period of high interest rates. I hope that the fall in inflation during the coming year will lead to lower interest rates as well as lower inflation.

The Secretary of State's complacent statement completely underestimates the crippling effects of high interest rates on small businesses and on their cash flows and investment decisions. The right hon. Gentleman is supposed to be a man of independent thinking. What independent thoughts has he about helping small businesses through this period of high interest rates?

Much help is being given through various forms of regional aid, such as the Welsh Development Agency and local authorities, to small businesses. I am delighted to say that in 1988 there was a faster rate of increase in the number of production businesses in Wales than in any other region—it was more than double the average for the United Kingdom as a whole. I am glad to say that the latest returns and applications show that that trend is continuing.

When does the right hon. Gentleman propose to make his annual speech in which he tells us what he thinks of Government economic policy? This year, will he be making it in the constituency of the hon. Member for Clwyd, North-West (Sir A. Meyer)?

I should prefer to make it in the right hon. Gentleman's constituency so that I could point out all the successes that we have had.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he last met the chairmen of community health councils in Wales; and what topics were discussed.

We have received no request from community health council chairmen to meet them, although I would be happy to do so should the need arise.

Did the Minister seek a meeting, or was he afraid that they would ask him why he was entering into a period of so-called consultation on his proposal to undermine our system of community health councils in Wales, when that proposal had already been rejected? Surely the Minister must accept that it is manifest nonsense for a council with the word "community" in its name to represent views from areas as widespread as mid-Glamorgan, Dyfed, Powys and even South Glamorgan. Will he allow community health councils to continue to represent the health interests of communities, instead of forcing them to reconcile the needs of different communities, which should be a matter for health authorities and, ultimately, the Minister?

The hon. Gentleman has rather missed the point of our proposals, which, as he knows, are out to consultation. The community health councils should be strengthened by the change because they will be able to stand up and shadow their health authorities much more effectively and deploy their assets and finances to much greater effect on behalf of patients.

Is the Minister aware that Ogwr community health council is concerned about the fact that, because of a lack of staff to attend all the intensive care beds in the Princess of Wales hospital, one patient has been sent home three times when expecting an operation for cancer of the oesophagus, and another has been sent home once for the same reason? Will he arrange for extra funding to be made available to ensure that intensive care units throughout mid-Glamorgan are fully staffed?

I shall certainly consider the particular instance that the hon. Gentleman mentioned, although I believe that the intensive treatment unit at the Princess of Wales hospital has recently been affected by sickness among its staff.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales whether he has recently discussed the electrification of main line railway services in south Wales; and if he will make a statement.

Electrification is unlikely to have any significant effect on the quality of services on the south Wales main line. Improved frequency, greater reliability and reduced overcrowding on the high-speed 125 services are the critical factors.

That was an appalling answer from the Minister. What estimate has been made of the cost of electrification of the railway line in south Wales? Is he aware that the cost of electrifying the east coast railway was overestimated? Will not the fact that our railway is not electrified serve Wales badly in 1992?

I can only repeat what the hon. Gentleman already knows-that British Rail has produced a study of the railway network in connection with the Channel tunnel. It considers that the level of demand for through-passenger services for south Wales will be insufficient to justify electrification. As for freight, it makes no difference whether traction is by diesel or electrificity.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what support he is giving to the development of water sports in Wales.

Welsh Office financial support for bodies concerned with the development of water sports in Wales is provided through the Sports Council for Wales which grant aids the relevant governing bodies and provides a national watersports centre at Plas Menai.

My hon. Friend will be aware of the excellent facilities for the promotion of water sports at the national watersports centre at Plas Menai. May I prevail on him to send a message to those concerned to look again at the financial arrangements for this excellent institution, which is used by many of my constituents and people from the north-west of England, and ensure that they have sufficient funding next year fully to exploit commercially the potential of this institution?

The attachment of my hon. Friend and his family to Plas Menai is well known to us. My hon. Friend will appreciate that the Sports Council for Wales received a grant in the current year of some £4,396,000, an increase of 6·1 per cent. over its previous grant. The council has been looking for some time at the financing of the centre at Plas Menai and the efficiency with which it carries out its work. At all times, it is looking for sponsorship and other forms of support for those sports that are not big money raisers.

To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, as representing the Church Commissioners, what is the current policy of the Church Commissioners in respect of redundant churches.

The Commissioners' policy is governed by the Pastoral Measure 1983, which provides for the future of a redundant church to be settled by a suitable alternative use, by preservation by the redundant churches fund, by care and maintenance by the Diocesan Board of Finance or by demolition. The measure lays emphasis on finding a suitable alternative use for the church, if at all possible, and that is what is most commonly achieved.

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for that courteous reply. Does he share my concern about the fate of old organs—not, I hasten to add, those attached to old clerics but those fine musical instruments which are in many redundant churches and many churches generally and which do not get adequate protection? Is he aware that such historic organs as we have would be given protected status in most other European countries? Will he ask the Church Commissioners to conduct an inventory of all the organs in their areas of responsibility so that adequate protection can be extended to them?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for the interest that he takes in not only redundant churches but the valuable fixtures in them. Under any redundancy scheme, the bishop of a diocese has the decision on the final disposal of valuable fixtures. He is advised by an expert committee with a standard code of practice. Church organs are recognised as valuable. They are nearly always preserved or sold for use in other churches or in other historic buildings.

To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, as representing the Church Commissioners, if he will make a statement about the Church Commissioners' publication programme during the current year.

The Commissioners have produced a range of publications during 1989 including their report and accounts for 1988, the 17th report of the Central Stipends Authority and a brochure on commended entries for the parsonage design award competition.

Will the Church Commissioners publish a commentary on the recent blatantly partisan declaration on poverty? Does such a commentary commend the massive increase in private giving since 1979, which shows that the parable of the good Samaritan is alive and well in Thatcherite Britain?

The declaration by the Church Action on Poverty group is not an official Church of England publication and the Commissioners have no responsibility for it. I agree with my hon. Friend that it is a robustly party political publication whose great weakness is to decry the alleged inadequacy of public expenditure while denouncing the basis of wealth creation in Britain through the social market economy which has to fund that public expenditure. My hon. Friend's point about charitable giving is well taken.

Will the Church Commissioners publish a commentary on the report which the Archbishop of Canterbury is suppressing on homosexuality among priests?

The hon. Gentleman is referring to a report that is, I understand, under consideration by the Archbishop of Canterbury. It originates from the General Synod of the Church of England and I cannot, having no direct responsibility in that area, tell the hon. Gentleman what its future will be. No doubt the inquiry, which will be registered in the official report, will elicit a response of some sort, which I shall convey to the hon. Gentleman.

To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, as representing the Church Commissioners, what financial assistance the Church Commissioners give to the cost of running (a) Lambeth palace and (b) the palace of the Bishop of Durham; what financial assistance is given to producing the speeches of prelates; and if he will make a statement.

The Church Commissioners are wholly responsible for the housing of all diocesan bishops and for the provision of supporting staff. Lambeth palace and Auckland castle are listed grade 1 buildings. The total running costs of Lambeth palace are currently 1·4 million a year, 60 per cent. of which is office expenses, including the salaries of the 34 members of the Archbishop's headquarters staff. The costs of Auckland castle are £159,000 a year.

Does my right hon. Friend believe that the Church Commissioners and Church members receive value for money from that enormous expenditure? Will he confirm that the Church Commissioners will press the Archbishop to suppress the report on homosexuality if, as is rumoured, it encourages the blessing of unions between gay and lesbian couples in church?

I have noted my hon. Friend's inquiry about the costs of running Lambeth palace and Auckland castle, the official residence of the Bishop of Durham. I hope that he will bear in mind that the Church of England bureaucracy is usually a great deal more frugal and financially efficient than the normal Civil Service bureaucracy's administration of public expenditure. On the second part of the question, I can add nothing to the reply that I have already given to a similar question.

To ask the hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed, as representing the House of Commons Commission, what percentage of the staff employed by the House on 1 November were then registered as disabled persons.

The percentage of staff of the House registered as disabled at 1 November 1989 was 0·5 per cent. That figure does not include those disabled persons who work in the House, but who are employed by the Property Services Agency.

Does my hon. Friend accept that that is an extremely low figure and that were we not exempt from the rules that apply to employers in general, we should be well below the minimum percentage of 3 per cent., which should be upheld by all employers? Will my hon. Friend tell the House what steps are being taken to increase that number substantially and quickly, not just at junior levels of employment in the House of Commons?

The Commission is not satisfied that the percentage is adequate and it is the Commission's policy to consider itself as if bound by the regulations, including the 3 per cent. quota, that apply throughout the general community. The vacancies that come up in the House are notified to local disablement resettlement officers and positive preference among candidates of equal merit is given to registered disabled people. Many advertisements for House of Commons posts make it clear that applications are welcomed from disabled people. Disablement is, of course, no bar to promotion in the House as long as the work of the post can be carried out.

To ask the hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed, as representing the House of Commons Commission, what savings the Commission would make if the House were to adopt hours of work which both started and finished earlier.

The total savings possible as a result of the House deciding to arrange its business so that it could start and finish earlier would depend on a number of factors such as the number of staff affected, the predictability of the duration of the sitting and the terms of any renegotiated conditions of service that might be necessary as a consequence. Those factors would be difficult to quantify.

Does the hon. Gentleman accept that as well as the House of Commons becoming more efficient if the hours were adjusted, it would be much cheaper to run? At present, we have to keep on the policemen, the door keepers, the catering staff and many others, often not knowing what the overtime bill will be, and all that is done to subsidise those hon. Members who work part time and who wish to keep a day job in the City or in business. Will the hon. Gentleman go back to the House of Commons Commission and find out the extent to which this House is subsidising those hon. Members?

There is a difference betwen different hours and shorter hours. If the House were simply to rearrange its hours into an earlier part of the day, there would not necessarily be as great a saving as the hon. Gentleman suggests, as the work that was done formerly in the early part of the day would still have to be carried out.

Will the hon. Gentleman disabuse the hon. Member for Nottingham, North (Mr. Allen) of the idea that the House begins work only at 2.30 pm? There are things called Standing Committees, and some of us have letters to answer. Will he also remind the hon. Gentleman of the evidence against this proposal in the experience of the late Richard Crossman, who started morning sittings which very soon collapsed?

The hon. Gentleman makes a fair point about the work that the staff of the House do, particularly during the mornings. The hon. Member for Nottingham, North (Mr. Allen) could perhaps usefully bear in mind that the printing day by day on the Order Paper of his motions about the reform of the House—whatever their merits—is likely to be costing the House about £400 a week.

Cheap at the price.

To ask the honourable Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed, as representing the House of Commons Commission, if he has received any representations from staff involved in televising the House.

No representations have been received by the Commission in relation to those staff employed by the House. I understand, however, that representations have been made to the Supervisor of Broadcasting, and they are being dealt with.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the exceedingly cramped conditions that the staff who provide the excellent televising of the House have to endure? Is he prepared to sit down and discuss with representatives of the staff concerned the possibility of extending their facilities; and will he guarantee that when—I assume that it will be when—we get around to confirming the televising of the House, additional premises and accommodation will be found for them within the Palace of Westminster?

Few staff are employed directly by the House in broadcasting, but the staff from the various agencies who work hard to provide the television pictures are indeed accommodation in temporary conditions, and should the House decide to make the experiment permanent it would be a matter for the Services Committee to determine whether any improvements were required.

To ask the Lord President of the Council if he will make a statement on his assessment of the case for reform of the procedures of the House.

Procedures are essentially a matter for the House as a whole. If the procedures appear to be failing in their purpose, we should be ready to consider change. The best forum for the initial consideration of such issues is the Procedure Committee. I, too, am always ready and willing to consider ideas for improvement.

In the light of events in eastern Europe and of the move towards real democracy in which all these countries are setting up multi-party Governments and deciding that they do not want to follow many parts of our system, will the deputy Prime Minister consider that we shall not be a real democracy until we thoroughly reform nearly all the procedures of this House? We must sit at reasonable times and make sure that all parts of the United Kingdom have a proper chance to discuss their business. We must delegate when possible and, above all, all parties, in proportion to their size in the House, must have a proper chance to have their say in all debates and procedures on the Floor of the Chamber. When can we have real democracy in Britain, given that other countries can no longer look to us for an example?

It is not my function to respond to the hon. Gentleman's general political point, but I have visited every one of the countries belonging to the Warsaw pact in recent years and heard their views about our parliamentary system, and they have a much higher degree of admiration for it than does the hon. Gentleman.

I am glad that my right hon. and learned Friend agrees that the Procedure Committee is the best forum for assessment of reform, but does he agree also that it comes forward with some excellent recommendations? Unfortunately, most of my right hon. and learned Friend's predecessors have not shown as much desire to accept its excellent recommendations as many hon. Members would have liked. Even more unfortunately, on some occasions some recommendations have not been accepted, not because they are not excellent but because the House is intensely conservative in its attitude to reform.

I have described the Procedure Committee in carefully qualified language as the best forum for the initial consideration of such ideas, but I agree that it makes proposals that deserve careful consideration. I am glad that one of the first changes made since I assumed my present responsibility was the Sessional Order which varies the provisions of Standing Order No. 13 and which provides for an additional day for private Members' Bills, in so doing going beyond what the Procedure Committee recommended or expected.

Does the Leader of the House agree that most hon. Members would agree with him that the Procedure Committee is the best forum for evidence and recommendations on those matters? In view of the speed up in institutional developments in the European Economic Community, will he also now consider the recommendations of the Procedure Committee in that respect which are surely now even more relevant than they were when the Committee began its investigation?

I certainly would have expected that question from the hon. Gentleman. The Government have already welcomed the Procedure Committee's report on matters affecting European issues. We recognise the importance of that and I shall be discussing it with my colleagues because the matter touches on many aspects of Government. We hope to respond to the Procedure Committee shortly. I agree with the hon. Gentleman about the importance of the issue that he raised.

To ask the Lord President of the Council what English and French wines are available in House of Commons refreshment rooms; and if he will make a statement.

The Dining Rooms offer at present a range of 68 French and seven English wines. The red and white House wines available in the cafeterias and bars are both French. The full range is shown on the House of Commons wine list.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend confirm the obvious—that much more French wine than English wine is sold in the House of Commons? Does he agree that that is because real English wines like elderberry, dandelion and parsnip are not available here? Will he take steps to make those English wines available in the House?

My hon. Friend's question comes from a very curious vintage. For every bottle of English wine sold in this place, some 40 bottles of French wine are sold. That is notwithstanding the fact that English wines are given special prominence on the wine list to promote their sale. In those circumstances, I do not think that I can find either the space or anything else to allow the promotion of the more exotic native brews that my hon. Friend recommends.

To ask the Lord President of the Council what changes in procedure he is bringing forward in order to make the proceedings of the House more understandable (a) to hon. and right hon. Members and (b) to the television viewer.

I have no plans at present, but I am always ready to consider such changes.

Will the Lord President consider improving the level of debates in this House by supporting the extension of a 10-minute limit on speeches and allowing Mr. Speaker to have discretion to operate that limit—excluding Front-Bench spokesmen—whenever he feels that that is appropriate in a debate? Will he also consider, as a way of improving debates, that as well as a 10-minute limit, time should be set aside—perhaps three or five minutes—for interventions when the clock would stop and hon. Members would not lose that time from their 10 minutes? At the moment many hon. Members simply read their speeches into the record. Would not my two proposals improve debates not simply for the television viewer, but for Back Benchers as well? Will the Lord President now add his weight to the proposals?

I can find more sympathy in the House for the relative simplicity of the hon. Gentleman's proposal than for the more complex arrangements that he visualises in his second proposal. It is open to the Procedure Committee to look again at the possibility of extending the scope for the 10-minute limitation. It is essentially a matter on which the views of the House as a whole must be taken into account. However, I can see the case for considering it.

Can the Leader of the House explain to right hon. and hon. Members and to the television viewer why our only opportunity to discuss the EEC budget will be from midnight tonight for about an hour and a half? Does he not believe that with the advance of television, many people will gain the impression that the attention that we give to EEC matters is a bit of a sick joke?

My hon. Friend will know that there is a question about that later on the Order Paper from which it will become clear that during the 1988–89 Session, the total amount of time devoted to European Community matters was some 90 hours. That is a very substantial allocation of time.

When the Leader of the House is considering ways in which to improve understanding of television broadcasts of our proceedings, will he bear the interests of deaf people very much in mind? I know that he is aware of the considerable pressure exerted not only by deaf people and the organisations that represent them but by Members of Parliament for subtitles to be included to make it easier for the deaf members of our communities to understand—and, we hope, enjoy—those television broadcasts. Will he consider how that might be achieved, and report back to us?

I can certainly give an affirmative answer to that question. The whole House will sympathise with the wishes of deaf people who would like to gain a better appreciation of what takes place here. As the hon. Gentleman knows, the Select Committee on Televising of Proceedings of the House is currently giving the matter active consideration. We are looking at evidence from both sides—that is, from both those who represent the deaf and those who represent the broadcasters—and we are taking the problem very seriously.

May I ask my right hon. and learned Friend not to underestimate the difficulty of persuading the broadcasting authorities to use subtitling for the deaf in any broadcasts? When I was chairman of the Conservative party and sought to persuade the BBC to allow subtitling for the deaf in party political broadcasts, the BBC opposed my suggestion bitterly, on the ground that the Labour party had made it first.

I cannot undertake to achieve an arbitral conclusion to this important question that is compatible with the legitimate aspirations of my right hon. Friend, but we are discussing it with broadcasting organisations of both kinds. Both are showing an active interest, while at the same time drawing attention to legitimate difficulties.

To ask the Lord President of the Council if he has any further statement to make with regard to providing improved facilities for visitors to the Houses of Parliament; and if he will make a statement.

Arrangements have now been agreed with the other place to enable visitors to gain access to the line of route by the Sovereign's entrance. The screening facilities in the Norman Porch are to be duplicated to speed up the process. While awaiting admittance, visitors will be allowed to shelter beneath the archway of Victoria Tower. It is hoped that these arrangements will be in operation early next year. Other possible improvements are being considered by the Catering Sub-Committee.

Ought not the Leader of the House and the sub-committee to agree that it would be a good idea to allow the thousands of people who visit the House every day to come into Westminster Hall to get out of the rain and other inclement conditions? They could wait there until called upon to move into the Central Lobby.

I might have expected the hon. Gentleman, while making a legitimate point about the lack of shelter for visitors, to acknowledge the value of the changes that we have now been able to announce. He knows that many of the existing catering facilities are already under substantial pressure, but he will be glad to learn that the Catering Sub-Committee is considering possible ways of improving the arrangements, particularly when new opportunities may be presented on completion of phase I of the new buildings.