To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he has any further proposals to replace jobs lost on the closure of the North Wales hospital, Denbigh.

No final decision has been made about the closure of the North Wales hospital at Denbigh.

I was given to understand that the time scale had shortened dramatically for the closure of the hospital. In the light of that, and in the light of the overall recession and a recent statement by the chairman of the Wales tourist board that 95,000 jobs are likely to go in the tourist industry, which is a majority alternative source of employment for those who will lose their jobs at the North Wales hospital, what does the Secretary of State plan to do to replace the jobs that will be lost in a shortened time scale?

There were two aspects to the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. First, I am glad that I have been able to reassure the hon. Gentleman about the present position regarding the North Wales hospital. Secondly, Denbigh is a designated action area under the Welsh Development Agency's rural prosperity programme and I have announced extra funds for the rural initiative. I hope that we shall see increasing job opportunities in and around the Denbigh area.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on the Government's right-to-buy housing policy in Wales.

Our right-to-buy policy has been extremely successful in Wales. During the past 10 years almost 88,000 new town and local authority dwellings have been sold. The percentage of owner-occupation in Wales has risen during that time from 62 to 71 per cent., which is the highest in the United Kingdom.

Given the truly excellent figures that have been provided by my hon. Friend, does he have any other plans to enhance choice and opportunity in the Welsh housing market—for example, by introducing concepts such as flexi-ownership and rents into mortgages? If he has, does he think that the Labour party will oppose those policies and finally reluctantly accept them, just as it did with the right to buy?

As my hon. Friend may be aware, the Development Board for Rural Wales has introduced a flexi-ownership scheme that is centred at Newtown. Already about 3 per cent. of applicants have bought their homes under the new scheme. I believe that it is a worth while development of the right-to-buy scheme for those who do not have the income to be able to buy their houses outright. I only wish that I could share my hon. Friend's confidence that the Opposition believe in the right-to-buy policy. The record of Labour authorities throughout the country does not give one much hope for believing that if there were a Labour Government they would continue the policy.

May I press the Minister on the provisions of the Housing Act 1988, which allow the tenants of council houses to be paid grants under the scheme administered by the Welsh Office to enable them to buy houses in the private sector, thereby allowing council houses to be let to those on the waiting list? As only one such scheme has worked in Wales so far, to the best of my knowledge, will the hon. Gentleman say whether the Welsh Office supports the scheme? Is he optimistic that more authorities will take advantage of it?

We certainly support the scheme and the one to which the hon. Gentleman referred is being evaluated. I hope that as a result of the evaluation we can amend the scheme, if necessary, to ensure that all local authorities in Wales may take part in it.

According to a parliamentary answer that my hon. Friend gave on Friday, the council with the worst record for processing right-to-buy applications is, I am sorry to say, Cardiff city council, which has control in my constituency. On 31 March, 2,263 applications were outstanding, which was almost 30 per cent. of the all-Wales total. May I encourage my hon. Friend to take any action that will enable me to reassure my constituents that the delay is not the deliberate action of the city council and that it is providing sufficient resources to enable right-to-buy applications to be processed in decent time?

I am concerned that some councils throughout Wales have a large backlog of properties waiting to be processed for sale. If my hon. Friend or any member of the public can refer to an applicant who has waited for an excessively long period to be told that he can purchase his property, I shall be happy to take up the case with the relevant local authority.

As many thousands of families in Wales cannot afford mortgages for private houses, as the Government have almost stopped Welsh councils building new houses and as housing associations cannot cope with the level of demand, is the only advice that the Minister has for a young Welsh couple seeking a home to suggest that they go for flexi-ownership, or whatever he calls it?

No, it is not. In addition to the generous support that we are giving to Tai Cymru in the coming year—I am looking forward to 3,300 properties being, built during the year—we have, in the past few days, given nearly £1 million towards helping authorities bring back into use, for instance, flats above shops and offices. The Welsh Office is promoting a wide range of policies which will be put together in "Housing: Agenda for Action" which I am producing as a personal initiative next month.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on the progress of applications from those hospitals in Wales which have made approaches to the Welsh Office demonstrating their interest in acquiring trust status.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many applications and expressions of interest in national health service trust status he has received; and if he will make a statement.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what representations he has had for hospitals in Wales to apply for trust status.

To date, only Pembrokeshire district health authority has submitted an expression of interest and made clear its intention to apply to become a trust on 1 April 1992.

Has the Minister—evidently he has not—learnt the lessons of the Monmouth by-election which are that the people of Wales do not want hospitals to opt out and that they do not want market forces introduced into and the creeping privatisation of the health service? Has the Minister thought about those issues? If so, will he put a halt to his programme of hospitals opting out?

It is clear that the hon. Gentleman has not learnt the lesson of the Monmouth by-election—that one cannot continue to retell untrue stories to the people of Wales. No hospital in Wales may opt out of the national health service. They all remain national health service hospitals, free at the point of delivery and generally paid for out of taxation.

Generally?

The hon. Gentleman says "generally", but, of course, NHS hospitals already charge for some services, for example, prescriptions. That has always been the case. The new scheme of national health service trust hospitals will provide greater independence and flexibility for hospitals in Wales and it should be welcomed. I shall welcome any applications for trust status that may be made.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the Welsh people should not be frightened by the untruths and lies about national health service trusts which were pumped out during the Monmouth by-election? Does he agree that much of the Opposition's criticism about the trusts has related to the centre of London, which as we all know, is over-provided with hospital facilities and cannot be regarded as a measure for the rest of the country? Inevitably, when the internal market was applied, district health managers realised that they could provide the same services in the local district general hospital without sending their patients to London and they realised that the service could be provided more cheaply, more efficiently and free at the point of delivery in a hospital run by their own staff.

As usual, my hon. Friend puts his finger right on the central point of the argument. It is true that London has special problems as a result of the over-provision of teaching hospitals. I recall that in 1977 the Labour party introduced a reallocation of resources working party to move resources from London to the regions and to hospitals such as those in Wales. I congratulate my hon. Friend on recognising that important point.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the hon. Member for Alyn and Deeside (Mr. Jones) is reported as going round Wales trying to scare electors into misunderstanding the nature of hospital trusts? Does my hon. Friend think either that the hon. Gentleman is plain ignorant of what the trusts involve or that he is grubbing round for the most disreputable sort of electoral support?

I hope that it is the former, but I have my suspicions. The Labour party's attitude is also based on trying to scare people into believing that national health service hospitals will be privatised. It is clear that that is not true. All the hospitals in England that have become NHS trusts are national health service hospitals, free to the patient and paid for out of the generality of taxation.

In a vast geographical area such as north Wales where there are only three district general hospitals, is not the concept of choice of hospital almost meaningless? As the Government's plans for trusts are based on the claim that they provide a choice for the patient, is not that another example of the Government's flight from reality in Wales? The plans should be abandonded. They are a waste of everybody's time and money.

The hon. Gentleman is wrong. Patients in north Wales choose between the different hospitals already available—I hope to see an increase in patient movements between different hospitals. They also use hospitals in Cardiff and different regional treatment centres. Patients already go further afield if they want specialist treatment. I want the internal market in the health service to operate as quickly and effectively as possible. If one has such a market, competition, choice and a better quality of service result. That is the lesson that we have learnt from many years of studying free enterprise industries as opposed to nationalised industries.

Will the Minister agree to meet the hospital consultants at Nevill Hall who, last week, expressed their deep anxiety about the whole concept of trust status? They believe that the principles of the NHS are being violated as a result of the policy.

The hon. Gentleman is simply wrong. I met the consultants of that hospital on 15 May and was able to reassure many of them about the basic principles of the scheme. It is for the health authority and the unit general manager to discuss with and explain to those consultants the principles behind the reforms. If Nevill Hall chooses to take the trust option it will remain an NHS hospital. If the hon. Member for Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney (Mr. Rowlands) does not understand the difference between what happened under the nationalised industries, which provided poor service—

Free enterprise is privatisation.

One should study that analogy in terms of the quality of service provided under free enterprise. Within the state-owned NHS I want the same quality of service as that provided by free enterprise companies.

Given the nonsense that has been spouted at the Dispatch Box by the Minister, does he accept that the people of Wales are right to be frightened at having him as the Minister responsible for health? If the Minister will not listen to the fair criticism that the Labour party has made of his daft idea of hospital trusts and if he will not accept the truth from us—it has been given to him unstintingly—he should heed the advice offered by the South Wales Argus. Before the Monmouth campaign that paper said:

"This thinly-disguised policy of putting cash before patients is already starting to make political waves and we predict that the storm is still brewing."

The hon. Gentleman continues to try to misrepresent to the people of Wales the reality of the facts. No hospital will opt out of the NHS—it cannot under the Act of Parliament under which NHS trusts were established. The only money that will move around is that attached to the patient. It will be patient demand, supported by that from his doctor, which in future will ensure that we get the best quality of service—not decisions taken by management, as in the past. The money will follow the patient and that is how it should be.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what has been the percentage increase in unemployment in Wales over the last (a) six months and (b) three months.

The figures are 24 per cent. and 13 per cent.

Those figures prove, if any proof was necessary, the disastrous effect of 12 years of Tory economic policies on Wales.

indicated dissent.

Instead of shaking his head, will the Secretary of State now admit that the Tory policies of the past 12 years have led not to an economic miracle but to an economic mirage? Does he further agree that those policies have converted and continue to convert Wales from a nation of producers and manufacturers into a candy-floss service economy, ill-equipped to meet the challenges of the 1990s?

It is not often that I accuse the right hon. Gentleman of talking nonsense, but he has just done that. In March 1979, the work force in Wales was 1,140,000. Since then it has risen and the December 1990 figure was 1,194,000. In the past five years the number of long-term unemployed has reduced greatly. A great deal is happening in Wales to the good. Many businesses are reinvesting and we have a record level of inward investment.

Will my right hon. Friend reflect on the state that the Welsh economy would be in today if it were still dependent on those smokestack industries in which the Opposition are so rootedly entrenched? Is not it a fact that under the stewardship of my right hon. Friend and his predecessors, the Welsh Development Agency and other bodies have brought about the diversification of the Welsh economy, which has enabled it far better to resist the ravages of recession?

I agree with my hon. Friend and I am delighted to announce 14 marvellous projects which will be a tremendous boost for Wales. There are to be 14 new industrial projects, creating more than 700 new jobs and involving investment of more than £20 million. They are tangible evidence of the marvellous willingness and confidence of companies to invest in Wales.

Is not the Secretary of State very well aware of the serious job crisis in the communities that I represent following the closure of Thorn EMI and Hoover—neither of which is a smokestack industry? Is he further aware that we will be increasingly dependent on the development of local business, enterprise and industry? Has he recieved assurances from the major banks that they will be backing the valley businesses and communities both with overdraft facilities and, with the current crisis in interest rates, by passing on the reductions in interest rates during recent months?

I share the hon. Gentleman's concern about the position in Merthyr. I hope that he will not—he did not do so today—try to say that the Thorn EMI closure is a direct result of the recession, because it is not. Nevertheless, it is a serious blow, with serious job consequences. We shall be doing everything possible to attract new businesses to Merthyr and we shall do our bests to persuade and encourage businesses already there to grow and expand.

Like the Secretary of State, I welcome the developments by Sony, British Airways and Toyota. However, will he admit that the Government neither understand nor care that their economic policies are hurting ordinary people in Wales? Has he forgotten that unemployment in Wales has risen by a quarter during the past six months, yet the Chancellor of the Exchequer has said that that is a price worth paying? Indeed, the Secretary of State glibly said that Wales is bucking the trends. That is not good enough and he should admit his responsibility for the recession that is hurting Wales.

We in Wales cannot isolate ourselves from the recession in the United Kingdom, just as the United Kingdom cannot isolate itself from the consequences of recession in many developed countries. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will recognise that, as well as announcing major news about jobs today, I have announced 41 projects this year, involving more than £246 million of new investment. I am happy to announce today that the total amount of inward investment in Wales last year and this year has just breached the £1 billion barrier.

Will the Secretary of State note that he should reduce employment in the Welsh Office by sacking those officials who engineered what was, relatively speaking, the theft of the painting of Adelina Patti from Craig-y-nos castle in my constituency? Does not he have a moral duty to return the painting, which was sold to the National Museum of Wales for £9,000? Should not that painting be returned to Craig-y-nos castle, where it has hung for most of this century? The taking of the painting was a disgrace—it was, literally, selling off the family silver.

I am not aware of any situation other than that the painting was properly valued and properly sold.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many people in Wales are doing more than one job and are thus counted more than once in the employment figures.

Precise information on the number of people with more than one job, included in the civilian work force in employment estimates in Wales, is not available. However, the labour force survey estimated that 30,000 people in Wales had a second job in the spring of 1990.

With their new-found interest in veracity, will Ministers note that 750,000 people are counted twice in the employment figures for Britain? Moreover, many millions of people are treated as full-time workers although they are doing part-time work and others, who are unemployed, have been redefined as sick or retired.

I should have thought that the people of Wales and all hon. Members would prefer to listen to the excellent news given by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State a few months ago. He announced that so far this year the Welsh Office had supported 41 projects involving £246 million of new investment which have created nearly 3,700 new jobs and safeguarded well over 600 others. Fourteen projects were announced today. That is very good news for the people of Wales.

Does the Minister accept that those items of good news, welcome though they are, are dwarfed by the bad news that we regularly receive in our constituencies? In Caerphilly, unemployment has increased by 37 per cent. in the past 12 months. We received a hammer blow when Penallta colliery was closed as a direct result of the Government's policies. At the same time, we are seeing the more insidious seeping away of the employment provided by smaller, localised enterprises. Does not the Minister realise that the real causes of rising unemployment are high interest rates and the Government's disastrous economic policies?

The hon. Gentleman dwarfs the good news. He talked about the closure of Penallta colliery. Nobody closed more collieries than the previous Labour Government. We had the task of bringing new jobs to Wales and we have done so with energy, vigour and success.

Does my hon. Friend agree that if a person has two jobs, it does not necessarily mean that he is on low pay, as witnessed by the number of Labour Members who are also lawyers and journalists?

I agree with my hon. Friend, although perhaps I fall into that category myself; as a Member of Parliament and a Minister, I have two jobs. I must tell the hon. Member for Newport, West (Mr. Flynn), who asked the original question, that the estimate of 30,000 people in Wales with two jobs must be treated carefully, because it is based on a sample of only 3,000 households and is subject to sampling errors. Of those 30,000, 24,000 were employees, 5,000 were self-employed and 1,000 were on Government training schemes.

But still the redundancies rain down on Wales because of the Government's serious economic errors—[Interruption.]

Order. The hon. Member for Rhondda (Mr. Rogers) is a Front-Bench spokesman and should leave the calling of Back-Bench hon. Members to the Chair rather than trying to interrupt in such a disgraceful manner. He should know better.

The hon. Member for Littleborough and Saddleworth (Mr. Dickens) had only just arrived.

Will Ministers now acknowledge the seriousness and the depth of the recession in Wales? They repeatedly say, "Do not blame us—we are only the Government, we have no responsibility for the redundancies that keep raining down on the Welsh people." Since the Secretary of State took office, unemployment in Wales has increased dramatically, but neither the Minister nor his right hon. Friend has any strategy to deal with the problem.

I call Mr. Hain. I am sorry—I call Sir Wyn Roberts first.

The Government have a strategy, as the hon. Gentleman knows only too well. Our task is to bring down inflation, and we are succeeding in that task. We know that bringing down inflation will increase unemployment, but only when we have reduced inflation will the country be able to return to its path of economic growth. We have taken such steps as are necessary to allow the economy to recover and get back on to that path of growth from the end of this year, and our policy is succeeding.

I now call Mr. Peter Hain.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is better to be called twice than not at all.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make it his policy to ballot local NHS staff and surrounding communities before proceeding with any further plans for hospitals to be granted trust status.

I have made it absolutely clear that the local community and staff of a potential NHS trust will be invited to comment during the statutory three-month public consultation on each of the formal applications received.

The Secretary of State is dodging the question. Following the disclosure of the fact that his officials are discussing the question of opting out with those responsible for administering Neath, Singleton and Morrison hospitals, does he agree that there are widespread fears about the impact of trust status on patient care and job losses? Will he agree to proper one-person-one-vote ballots of all local residents or, failing that, to proper ballots, through electoral college arrangements, of the community health council, the medical staff, and staff in the hospitals—or is the Welsh Office so wedded to the dogma of the No Turning Back group that it wishes to turn its back on patient care and democratic rights?

I refer the hon. Gentleman to section 4 of the National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990, which will show him that we are talking about one health service body becoming another health service body. Trusts are defined as national health service bodies. That is a clear statement of the law—the hon. Gentleman knows that, and it is about time that he recognised it.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will give, for the latest available date, the total number of patients that have been treated at the specialist treatment centre for cataract surgery at Ysbyty Gwynedd, Bangor; and if he will separately distinguish by health authority the percentage of those patients whose residence is outside the Gwynedd health authority area.

At 31 March 1991, a total of 306 patients had received treatment at the ophthalmic treatment centre at Ysbyty Gwynedd, Bangor. The percentage of outside referrals by district health authority were: Mid Glamorgan 2·6 per cent., West Glamorgan 1·0 per cent., Gwent 0·7 per cent., South Glamorgan 0·3 per cent., Powys 2·9 per cent., giving a total of 7·5 per cent.

Will the Minister confirm that on 30 September last year 566 patients were waiting for non-urgent treatment as in-patients in Gwynedd, of whom 89 had been waiting for more than a year? At Singleton hospital in Swansea, the numbers of people who were waiting totalled 1,345 and 476 respectively. Can the Minister tell the House what he and his officials have been doing to demonstrate that it was not an utter sham that only 23 people outside Gwynedd health authority were treated at the all-Wales regional centre for cataract surgery between 1 September 1990 and the end of March this year? What does the Minister have to say about that? What monitoring did his Department undertake? Is that really an all-Wales centre? Is not that situation an absolute scandal?

The original contract with the treatment centre provided for 80 per cent. of patients to come from Gwynedd and 20 per cent. from outside. I am sorry that it has not reached the target of 20 per cent. for patients from outside Gwynedd health authority. Because of the transport arrangements between Bangor and the rest of Wales, I thought it important that we should establish another treatment centre in south Wales, at Bridgend, which will help people in that area to reach the treatment centre more quickly. I take the hon. Gentleman's point. I am keen to see the treatment centres used as much as possible, and I welcome the opportunity provided by this question to say that anyone who has a problem with receiving treatment for their cataracts, and who has waited for more than four months, is entitled to apply to go to the treatment centre.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what proposals he has to meet the chairman of South Glamorgan health authority to discuss the future status of the University hospital of Wales, Cardiff.

My right hon. Friend has no such plans.

I will give another example of the problem to which the previous question referred. While the junior Minister has been going round trying to interest the University hospital of Wales in trust status, his waiting list policy has failed to stem the inexorable rise in numbers. As for the treatment centre at the Prince of Wales hospital, Rhydlafar, in my constituency, a patient from Clwyd arrived there last week for a knee operation, but because the centre had already reached its quota of three knees from Clwyd for this financial year, that patient returned home without undergoing an operation. Does the Minister agree that that is a further scandalous example of our market-driven health service? Is it not time he resigned and made way for a Minister who really wants to see a national health service in Wales?

My interest in the NHS in Wales is exemplified by the fact that in the past two weeks I have visited all five of the hospitals which, between them, account for 50 per cent. of the waiting list. I have spoken to consultants and managers about how they may tackle the problems. The Government are interested. We spent: £5 million on the treatment initiative since 1986, and this year we have approved expenditure of £1·3 million towards the waiting list initiative, including the establishment of a fourth treatment centre. If the hon. Gentleman will write to me about the particular case that he mentioned, I will certainly investigate it. However, I cannot be expected to carry in my head the details of the 2·9 million people treated in Wales.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will widen the exemption from the study of Welsh as a second language at key stage four.

I am satisfied that the limited exemptions we proposed are adequate to meet particular local circumstances.

Does the Minister agree that if a child reaches the age of 13 and he or she does not get on with learning Welsh as a second language, has no aptitude for it or, worse, simply hates the Welsh language, it is counter-productive for the Minister to insist that such a child should continue to learn Welsh as a second language? Does the Minister agree that it is also counter-productive for the well-being and prosperity of the language itself, which we all want to see?

The hon. Gentleman's remarks about a child's aptitude for learning Welsh are surely true of any subject in the national curriculum. Is he suggesting that a child who does not show an aptitude for mathematics, English, or any other curriculum subject, should be allowed to opt out of it at the age of 13?

Will my hon. Friend say what measures he has taken to ensure an adequate supply of teachers of Welsh as a second language and as a first language?

We have taken substantial steps to ensure that there is an adequate supply of teachers. Clearly, there will be more teachers of Welsh and of subjects taught through the medium of Welsh in the coming years. Welsh is regarded and registered as a shortage subject.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is the figure for male unemployment in Wales expressed in percentage terms; and what was the comparable figure for the three previous years.

The rate was 11·2 per cent; for previous years the rates were 8·2 per cent. for 1990, 9·5 per cent. for 1989 and 12·5 per cent. for 1988.

Is it not appalling that, after 12 long years of Conservative Government, unemployment in Wales is once again rocketing? Does the Secretary of State recall that Newport was to be the flagship of Government policies? Yet Newport, East—my constituency—is now among the areas worst affected by unemployment. I assure the right hon. Gentleman that my constituents do not believe that it is worth paying that price for the follies of the Government.

If the hon. Gentleman probes the figures that I announced, and considers the long-term unemployed, about whom I was especially concerned a few years ago, he will see that in the past five years the number of long-term unemployed has fallen from 78,014 to 25,626—a steeper reduction than that in the United Kingdom as a whole. We ought to be shouting about those successes rather than preaching gloom and doom. I shall continue to sing the praises of Wales as the place to invest, whether companies are already established there or are coming to Wales for the first time.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

I shall not take a point of order now. I shall take it at the end of Question Time.

It is the end of Welsh Question time.

I shall take the point of order at the end of Question Time.

You have taken points of order during Question Time before, Mr. Speaker.

I ask the hon. Gentleman not to argue with the Chair. Sit down, please.

But you have taken points of order—

The hon. Gentleman is a Front-Bench spokesman and knows far better than that. He knows that I take points of order after questions, and I shall take his point of order then, even though I suspect that I know what it is.

To ask the Minister for the Arts if he will meet local authority leaders to discuss arts funding in London.

In consultation with ministerial colleagues, I am currently considering how arrangements for the funding of the arts in London can be improved. As part of that process, we are seeking the views of the funding agencies and other interested bodies.

Is the Minister aware that about 200,000 jobs in London are dependent on the arts, entertainment and culture, and that there is an arts crisis in the capital city, brought about by the recession, the pressure on local authorities, and the derisory 2 per cent. that Greater London Arts has been given by the Arts Council? Will the Minister make it clear to the House—he has not done so in the past—that he is prepared to meet the Association of London Authorities and the London Boroughs Association? The resolution of the arts crisis in London will determine whether he will be considered a good Minister for the Arts or someone from the Herman Goering school of culture.

I wholly disagree with the hon. Gentleman's suggestion that there is a crisis in the arts in London. Does crisis mean a time when the new Sackler gallery at the Royal Academy is about to open, as are the Sainsbury wing at the National Gallery and the Tsui gallery at the Victoria and Albert museum? The Royal Shakespeare Company is successfully back at the Barbican, and the National theatre is having an immensely successful season. If that is crisis, give me crisis. The hon. Gentleman should know, too, that there are some exciting new projects being founded in Newham—the Atherton arts centre, for example, and a short-term post at the Gill gallery.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that London is the arts capital of the world, with a fine range of theatres, concerts, operas, ballets, museums and art galleries which taken together, comprise a priceless national asset? Does he agree that it is utterly disgraceful that it should be constantly run down by Opposition Members?

I very much agree with my hon. Friend's remarks. At the moment, we are witnessing a number of very great successes in the arts world in London. Difficulties have, indeed, arisen in connection with the London boroughs grants scheme, and I regret that it took so long for a budget to be decided upon. I urged those involved to speed the process up, and I have talked about the matter with the Secretary of State for the Environment. It is, none the less, worth remembering that, despite difficulties with eight companies—the LBGS clients which may face closure—Greater London Arts is supporting 161 revenue clients and 1,000 project-funded clients, and the LBGS still supports some 114 artistic companies. Those are all signs not of crisis but of a very active arts scene in London.

I welcome the fact that, after six months of developing crisis, the Minister is at long last prepared to say that he will meet his colleagues, and meet the bodies that my hon. Friend the Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) suggested. That is a constructive move, but it has taken a long time. When the Minister meets those concerned, will he at last take it from them that there is a crisis in the arts in London, and that it is a crisis caused by his Government's poll tax, which is taking more than £3 million away from community arts in London? The Minister may not reckon that community arts are very important, but I hope that he will listen to those concerned and understand that they are indeed important. Unless the Minister addresses that problem and keeps an open mind about it, the fact that he has sat there doing nothing for six months will be to his discredit.

The hon. Gentleman exaggerates to such an extent as to make his own argument absurd. He knows that there is not a £3 million shortage or deficit in arts funding in London. In fact, there is a £400,000 shortage—a 15 per cent. reduction—this year. What arts body in London have I refused to meet in the past six months when it wished to see me about an arts problem? The answer is none. The hon. Gentleman speaks of crisis so often that he himself is suffering from crisis fatigue. His solution is to reinvent the greater London authority. He does not seem to realise that a Ken Livingstone mark 2 would have the same effect on the arts bodies as a rebirth of Dracula would have on those suffering from pernicious anaemia.

To ask the Minister for the Arts if he intends to meet the chair of Greater London Arts to discuss arts funding in London.

To ask the Minister for the Arts if he will meet the chair of Greater London Arts to discuss the state of arts services in London.

I have no further plans to meet the chair of Greater London Arts. I intend to meet Mr. Clive Priestley, the chair-designate of the London Arts Board, from time to time to discuss matters of mutual interest.

The Minister speaks as though there are no problems with the arts in London. He must know, in his heart of hearts, that that is far from the truth. He must know that the sheer deficiencies of the London boroughs grants scheme, as a scheme, have led to substantial cuts in the arts in London in recent months. He must know that the Arts Council has given only 2·5 per cent. —way below inflation—in increased funding to Greater London Arts this year. He must know that a number of arts institutions—including, for example, the Almeida and King's Head theatres in my constituency—are in serious peril as a result of the problems that we face. It is time that the Minister put his money where his mouth is and devoted extra funds to supporting the arts in London, rather than continuing—however many talks he may have—to wash his hands of the problem.

The hon. Gentleman is being less than honest and less than frank. The Almeida theatre has had its funding increased by 8 per cent. by Greater London Arts, which is indirectly funded by my office. He should know that and he should recognise it. The body that is riot increasing the theatre's funding is Islington borough council. As I have told the hon. Gentleman before, he should bring his influence to bear to ensure that Labour councillors do not simply push their arts clients over the table into the waste paper basket when there are financial difficulties—often created by the councillors themselves—in their area.

Will the Minister welcome Labour's innovative idea of a London leisure card, which will give reduced admission for Londoners to all sorts of events? The Minister has not had such an idea in all his term in office—unless he can cite one to the House now. As far as the capital of culture is concerned, he is rapidly becoming known as the Minister of farce, not arts.

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman could amuse himself greatly in a London leisure park. He would fit in very well indeed and his presence there would cause great mirth to Members on both sides of the House.

Will my right hon. Friend thank the London arts, past and present, and the Arts Council of Great Britain for coming to the rescue of those London arts bodies that have been abandoned by the London boroughs grants scheme, and will he seek an early conclusion to the abolition of that body, which is Labour run? It bodes ill for any proposed Londonwide scheme set up by the Labour party that the London boroughs grants scheme under that party and with Liberal collusion has let down the arts in London.

I very much agree with my hon. Friend's sensible and balanced comments. The Arts Council—and Greater London Arts, shortly to be replaced by the London Arts Board—are doing their stuff as regards funding arts organisations in London. I agree with him that where it has gone wrong in recent months has been with the London boroughs grants scheme and it is for precisely that reason that, in an answer to an earlier question, I said that I am discussing with ministerial colleagues whether the LBGS should continue in its present form or whether there is some better means of directing that funding to arts clients in London without creating a greater London authority mark 2—as the Labour party would, with about 20,000 civil servants, if past experience is anything to go by.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that there should be no more haemorrhaging of funds for the arts from London to the regions? [HON. MEMBERS' "No!"] I am not saying that there should not be more funds for London and the regions, but it would be quite wrong to advantage the regions to the disadvantage of Londoners as regards the arts, important though both the regions and London are.

Much as I respect my hon. Friend's determination to fight the Ealing corner, I do not agree with his general comments. London is still the best funded of all the regions on the basis of arts money per head of population, even when funding of the nationals is taken out of consideration. It is important for the Arts Council to spread the money available around to the most distant parts of the United Kingdom to encourage al sorts of art festivals in every part of the land.

To ask the Minister for the Civil Service how much of his time is spent on civil service matters.

In the past months, approximately 20 per cent., but obviously that can and would be varied in the light of any specific requirements.

With the establishment of next steps executive agencies, does my right hon. Friend spend more or less time on civil service matters?

From my point of view, with the establishment of so many next steps agencies the difference is that I make certain that I call on the agency in any part of the country that I am visiting. That gives me the opportunity to find out how for example the employment or the HMSO executive agencies are working out and to get some first-hand idea of the successes and of the continuing challenges remaining to the agencies.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take time off from his work on civil service matters to consider, wearing his other hat, the predicament of the National theatre?

Order. Not on this question.

To ask the Minister for the Civil Service how many former press officers have been vetted by the business appointments committee for subsequent employment in the last 12 months.

It is not our practice to provide detailed information of this kind about the operation of business appointment rules. Individual applications are received and treated in confidence.

Would it not be appropriate for Sir Bernard Ingham to be vetted as a former press officer—preferably with two bricks? After all, he played the role of deputy Prime Minister, undermined democratically elected Cabinet Ministers, contravened the Official Secrets Act and knows where all the bodies are buried. Is it not outrageous that he can go outside the civil service and earn vast amounts of money for those misdeeds?

I appreciate that the hon. Gentleman has a lot of fun asking such a question, but for two years Sir Bernard Ingham cannot take up any outside commercial appointment without first seeking approval and without the application being scrutinised by the advisory committee on business appointments, which is chaired by Lord Carlisle.

Is it not true that, subject to the appropriate vetting to which my right hon. Friend referred, there is every incentive to allow senior civil servants to move into industry? We need more interchange between the civil service and the private sector. One of our great national failings is that there is not enough.

I agree with my hon. Friend. There is much more interchange between the private sector and the civil service in France, permitting a much more balanced and wide-ranging career structure. Interchange is to be encouraged.

To ask the Minister for the Civil Service how he proposes to further encourage applications for the civil service fast stream from non-Oxbridge and polytechnic graduates.

It is the Government's policy to encourage the widest possible spread of applications for the fast stream. In 1990, applications were received from more than 90 degree-awarding institutions other than Oxbridge.

Can my right hon. Friend project the trend and say what proportion of the fast stream this year are likely to be non-Oxbridge?

No, I cannot do that because the first round of interviews is taking place now at colleges and polytechnics. In 1985, 42 per cent. came from Oxbridge, in 1989 the figure was 36 per cent., and last year it was 34 per cent.

The Minister is very good at giving platitudes to the House and being rude to my hon. Friends. I give him a chance to answer a question straightforwardly and, at the same time, to increase the percentage of the time that he spends on civil service matters. If only a third of successful applicants to the fast stream come from outside Oxbridge, that is unsatisfactory. Will the Minister meet representatives of the civil service trade unions to thrash out a generally agreed programme of action to correct the clear injustice being done to applicants from outside Oxbridge? I suspect that the same request also applies to question No. 43.

The hon. Gentleman accuses me of exchanging platitudes. In fact, I was exchanging statistics, but I do not think that he listened. I said that in 1990 only one third-34 per cent.—of fast-stream entrants came from Oxbridge, as opposed to 42 per cent. in 1985. So it is one third, not two thirds, so perhaps he will listen more attentively. I am always prepared to meet representatives of the civil service. If they want to discuss a matter, I should be glad to meet them. The trend of broadening the range of colleges and polytechnics from which fast stream applicants are welcomed is working satisfactorily.

To ask the Minister for the Civil Service if he will obtain a copy of "Kill the Messenger" by Sir Bernard Ingham for his office's library.

No, Sir.

To return to the question of my hon. Friend the Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks), does the Minister realise that many of my hon. Friends do not think that there is anything funny about Sir Bernard Ingham's activities during the past 12 years? What is so special about Sir Bernard Ingham's position that the two-year rule has not applied to his book? Can any other civil servant now take it as a matter of course that he or she will be entitled to go away and write a book about the heart of Government?

The hon. Gentleman is being unfair and incorrect, Sir Bernard Ingham submitted his memoirs to Sir Robin Butler as Cabinet Secretary and head of the civil service. Sir Robin Butler cleared the draft of the book, Sir Bernard Ingham made all the cuts requested and is not responsible for the Sunday Times article.

Will my right hon. Friend reconsider his reply to the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell) and find the money to buy a copy of the book? If he has any money left, will he obtain a remaindered copy of the Crossman diaries to find out how effective intrigue and political assassination were at the time of the last Labour Government?

I support my hon. Friend's remarks. Those Opposition Members who get so worked up about Sir Bernard Ingham's book would do well to refresh their minds about what happened under the Government of Lord Wilson in relation to the Crossman diaries and the memoirs of Joe Haines. As to whether I shall buy a copy of the book, my office is dedicated to efficiency and value for money, but one of my private secretaries has kindly lent me her copy.

To ask the Minister for the Civil Service whether he will ensure that promotion within the senior civil service gives due weight to experience in executive agencies and practical management skills in the future.

Yes. Management skills and experience are increasingly important for those seeking civil service posts. The opportunities for management experience provided by next steps agencies and by interchange with business at all levels will undoubtedly enhance the skills of many civil servants.

Mr. Skinner—[Interruption.] I am getting confused. Sir Michael Marshall.

A natural mistake, Mr. Speaker.

I never thought that my hon. Friend the Member for Arundel (Sir M. Marshall) would be mistaken for the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner). That is a new sort of interchange—quite different from that to which my hon. Friend referred.

Mr. Dennis Skinner.

Sir Dennis.

To ask the Minister for the Civil Service when he last discussed the question of civil service conditions of work with trade union representatives; arid if he will make a statement.

rose—[HON. MEMBERS: "Come on!"] It was the reference to "Sir Dennis" that upset me.

Being knighted does not upset me because it ain't going to happen.

First, I congratulate the hon. Member on sticking to his principles and not going to the Labour fund-raising banquet last week with all the glitterati. I agree with his thoughts about smoked salmon socialism.

rose—

Now, what is this point of order?

First, I want to say how sorry I am to have shouted at you, Mr. Speaker, in the middle of Question Time. However, 1 am sure that you understand the strength of the feelings of Welsh Opposition Members. We have only 40 minutes of Welsh questions each month and we do not have the discretion to run over by four minutes, as happened in this instance—[Interruption.]

Order. I think that the question is being addressed to me.

The Opposition are in a difficult position. When the rules on Welsh Question Time were laid down, we had a certain number of Welsh Members. In the past year or so, we have anihilated the Government by winning by-elections. There is now severe pressure on the time during which Opposition Members can participate in Welsh questions. As many of us refrain from interfering in other Question Times because we want to bring matters up during Welsh Question Time, will you, Mr. Speaker, look at the rules under which Wesh Question Time takes place with a view to extending the time?

I am well aware of the frustration of not being called at Question Time. As I said, the hon. Member for Rhondda (Mr. Rogers) is himself a Front-Bench spokesman, and I call Front-Bench Members whenever they rise. Today I called 18 Welsh Opposition Members, and I call seven Conservative Members, of whom three had questions on the Order Paper. I do not think that that balance gives the Government side an unfair advantage—indeed, rather the reverse.

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Order. I am still on my feet.

We well understand the need to continue to recognise that this is a United Kingdom Parliament. However, I am sure that you, Mr. Speaker, understand that it is offensive to those of us who have so limited an opportunity to represent the point of view of our constituents if an hon. Member comes into the Chamber, sits down and within seconds is called when those of us who have been sitting here since the start of Question Time—

Order. I cannot always take account of when hon. Members come in—

rose—

Order. I do not have eyes in the back of my head. I seek to keep a balance.

rose—

What about Dickens?

I could hardly mistake him.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

I really think that we have had enough of this. We have a guillotine today. However, as I have mentioned the hon. Member for Littleborough and Saddleworth (Mr. Dickens), I will call him.

I have been here for Northern Irish questions, for Scottish questions and for Welsh questions. As millions of pounds from England is spent on those countries, I feel entitled to come to Welsh Question Time and to scrutinise how money is spent. We pour in millions of pounds to support Wales.

rose—

Order. I think that we have had enough of this now.