To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what dealings he has had with the Zoological Society of London concerning the proposed closure of the London zoo.

My right hon. and learned Friend and I have discussed with the Zoological Society of London the consequences of the society's decision to close London zoo. We confirmed that no more Government money can he given to the zoo. However, we remain willing to relieve the society of some of its obligations as leaseholders of the Regent's park site.

Does my hon. Friend agree that when the zoo's lease comes to an end in two years' time, future plans must be based on a conservation theme which takes into account the interests of the community? Does he also agree that the donation of £1 million by the Emir of Kuwait was a life-saving gift, which has given the zoo tune to plan for its immediate future?

Yes, the gift from Kuwait was extremely welcome. I gather that the report in the press about that money originated from a fellow of the Zoological Society and has nothing to do with the Government of Kuwait.

As a member of the council of the society for the past few months, may I ask whether the Minister appreciates that all other capital city zoos, with a major significant interest in conservation, depend upon and receive public funds? Unless that central, public funding is provided and guaranteed, London zoo will inevitably close, even despite generous gestures from Britain or abroad. Will the Minister reconsider such a guarantee, especially as the Government appeared to enter into obligations as a result of the decisions reached at Rio?

The position on the renewal of the lease is absolutely clear and we have made a commitment. The important work on conservation is funded separately, through the Universities Funding Council, and I understand that that work will continue as part of London university's programme. That work is not at issue. Of course I recognise the importance of the work done at the zoo, particularly the scientific work, but the zoo's council has had to face up to the reality of a fall in the number of people who wish to visit the zoo.

Is my hon. Friend aware that for 160 years countless thousands of animals have had to live a miserable existence in that zoo—the equivalent of life imprisonment? Is it not time to shut not only London zoo, but every other zoo?

I recognise the great strength of feeling on this issue, but if my hon. Friend, like me, has visited zoos from time to time I am sure that he realises that there is a great difference between the zoos of today and those of 20 years ago or, indeed, the Victorian era.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what proposals he has to extend the use of and support for minority British languages.

The Broadcasting Act 1990 makes provision for ensuring that Welsh speakers continue to have access to a substantial proportion of radio and television programmes in Welsh. The Act also provides for the financing of television programmes in Scottish Gaelic, and I understand that there are plans for a large increase in the number of hours of such television programmes to be broadcast next year in Scotland. My right hon. Friends and I see no need to bring forward further proposals in this area.

Will the Government build on their creditable record in that area by fully recognising the immense cultural value of those beautiful languages, which contain the inherited experience, wit and wisdom of hundreds of generations of British people? By doing that and recognising the great value of those living treasures, the Minister might be thanked in the words, "Breith Buidheachas", "Diolch gnfawr iawn", or "Dea's Mure gut is Padraig".

Yes, Madam Speaker.

Is my hon. Friend aware that my right hon. Friend the Minister of State, Welsh Office, has been described by the former president of Plaid Cymru, the former Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy, now Lord Elis Thomas of Nant Conwy, as having done more for the Welsh language than anyone else this century?

Yes, and I am grateful to my hon. Friend. The Government's commitment is clear, not least through the introduction of the Welsh Language Bill.

The Minister will be aware of the initiative in Northern Ireland schools, with Government support, to foster the teaching and expand the use of Gaelic in Northern Ireland. Will he now undertake to see what his Department can do to assist that process on television and radio programmes in Northern Ireland?

The hon. Gentleman is quite right. It is primarily a matter for my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, but a few pilot programmes are now being shown on television in Northern Ireland. I understand that the BBC is considering its position and Ulster Television undertook to provide some Irish programming as part of its franchise bid.

Is good English now a minority language? If my hon. Friend sees the preservation of the English language as part of his job to preserve our cultural heritage, will he have a word with those who hire and fire media personnel in television and radio so that they, too, may be imbued with the same conviction and spirit?

My hon. Friend hits on an important issue. The importance of dialect in the English language is close to my heart. I may be the only Member of Parliament—certainly the only Member of this House—who was required to sing a song in his local dialect the day after election to this House.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will make a statement on the promotion of tourism in Greater London.

London is one of this country's most important destinations for both domestic and overseas visitors. It is the role of the tourism industry, with support from the English tourist board and the London tourist board, to work to maximise the capital's visitor potential. The British Tourist Authority features London strongly in its overseas promotion.

Does the Minister recognise that London's important position as a tourist centre is increasingly threatened by foreign competition and the inadequate infrastructure in London. especially the inadequate level and performance of public transport? What will he and his colleagues do to rectify that position so that London does not continue to lose out to other European cities in today's highly competitive tourist market?

I was delighted to note that the new chairman of the London tourist board, whom I congratulate on his appointment, had made that one of his priorities—as, indeed, it is one of mine. To illustrate the good faith involved, I should add that I have already discussed with my hon. Friend the Minister for Transport in London a number of the problems facing the capital, particularly those connected with tourism and including those affecting the constituency of the hon. Member for Greenwich (Mr. Raynsford). I await my hon. Friend's advice before proceeding to a meeting with Greenwich borough council.

With regard to the promotion of tourism in Greater London and in the rest of the United Kingdom, will Her Majesty's Government resist the ridiculous proposal from Brussels to abolish British national tourist offices in countries such as the United States and Japan and replace them with European tourist offices? That is blatantly inconsistent with the principle of subsidiarity.

I am glad to be able to reassure my hon. Friend that I know of no such proposals. It is true that the European Community seeks to increase its competence in such matters; the subject was debated vigorously at a recent Council of Ministers meeting in Luxembourg, which I attended. I believe that the Community has a role to play in speaking about tourism issues—after all, by the year 2000 tourism will be one of the greatest industries in Europe—but it is also important to recognise that those who run the industry and individual businesses, whether stately homes or bed-and-breakfast establishments, will determine the future of tourism.

The Minister is being dangerously complacent in the face of a significant fall in the number of tourists visiting Britain, which has hit London especially badly. Those are the facts.

Heaven forbid that we should pursue the policies which are current in some of those places. The hon. Gentleman's figures are entirely wrong. Only last month, I was delighted to be able to comment on the increase in the number of tourists visiting this country from overseas in the first quarter of the year: that was most encouraging, and a significant reversal of last year's trends.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the substantial increase in investment in London Regional Transport—£3,500 million over the next three years—will give a considerable boost to tourism? Is that not very much better than the peanuts spent by the late and unlamented Greater London council?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. I well remember the years during which the GLC cut its capital expenditure dramatically in order to subsidise fares. The move took very few people off the roads, and caused mayhem for regular travellers.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what official visits he has paid to theatres in the county of Cumbria in the last two months.

Unfortunately, none. But I will be happy to consider invitations to theatres in Cumbria as part of any future visit that I make to the region.

Does the Minister agree that the Blue Box theatre in Keswick in my constituency is now one of the finest theatres in the United Kingdom? Would he be prepared to approach representatives of the sports and arts councils, to ask them to look sympathetically on the application for a grant of £500,000 to build a new theatre to replace the old one, on the side of Lake Derwentwater?

I shall be delighted to draw the hon. Gentleman's concern to the Foundation for Sport and the Arts. I know that the Blue Box theatre has made an application for a grant of £500,000. The theatre is undoubtedly a much-enjoyed as well as a high-quality theatre; its only problem is that, if it moves again, it will fall down—hence the need for a new theatre. I am glad that the Department of the Environment has agreed that the theatre can be replaced, and I very much hope that the scheme will be successful and swiftly implemented, so that we can ensure that it is accessible to the vast majority of those in the north-west who wish to visit it—including the hon. Gentleman's constituents.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what initiatives his Department is taking to increase participation and to raise standards in sport.

It is an overall aim of our policy for sport to encourage participation and raise standards. The Sports Council works with local authorities, sports governing bodies and others to promote a wide range of sporting activities at local level. The council also supports a range of initiatives to enable participants to raise their performance level.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that the backing that the Government are rightly giving the Manchester Olympic bid is especially welcomed in the north-west, particularly in my constituency of Blackpool, South? Not only will it encourage greater participation, and the highest standards in sport—standards so well personified by Mr. Nigel Mansell, who achieved a splendid victory yesterday—but when it succeeds, it will greatly boost the hotel trade in the region, and in my constituency in particular.

I am glad that my hon. Friend mentioned Nigel Mansell, whose great achievements the House has recognised. He is, of course, a great racing driver, but the extraordinary success of the engineering industry in the United Kingdom in producing so many of the cars which have transformed formula 1 racing is also most impressive.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the role of the voluntary sector, and particularly of unpaid sports coaches and school teachers in their spare time, in improving participation in sport is important? Does he share the concern that many voluntary sports clubs feel about the level of funding, and especially the burden of the business rate? Will he join me in the delegation going to see the Treastury about corporation tax and will he give his full support to exemption from corporation tax for the British Olympic Association so as to ensure that the money raised by voluntary effort for the Olympics can be spent on that and not given back to the Government?

I probably have enough problems without adding to them, so I will leave the hon. Lady to make her own representations. There has been a substantial increase in Government support for sport—up nearly 30 per cent. to the Sports Council in real terms in the lifetime of this Government.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what plans the Government are making for Industrial Heritage Year 1993.

The English tourist board, which receives funding from my Department, has designated 1993 as Industrial Heritage Year, as a means of more widely promoting the tourism potential of our industrial heritage.

I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for that reply. He may be aware that more than 100 years ago my constituency was the centre of paper production in this country, but that very little of that remains today. Will he and the Department work through next year with English Heritage, with local authorities and with private bodies to encourage such schemes so as to preserve our industrial heritage for future generations?

Yes, and I am grateful to my hon. Friend. The idea of Industrial Heritage Year, besides nurturing the industries of the future, is to ensure that there are reminders of the great industries of the past—reminders in the form of a partnership, with significant assistance from English Heritage, with Government funding, and with many local interests, resulting in a genuine commitment which goes wider than merely public bodies. That will ensure that vital parts of our industrial heritage are preserved.

Does the Minister agree that Industrial Heritage Year must be rather more than just a means of attracting tourists? Does he agree that it can show the richness of our past industries, making that more relevant to what is happening today and ensuring that people understand that what happened in the past can be achieved again—if the necessary assistance is forthcoming.

It is certainly very important that Industrial Heritage Year should stand on its own merits and not just be related to tourism, although that is an important aspect. We should all have the opportunity to go and see the sort of conditions in which people used to work. In my former, similar job I had the chance to go to a museum dedicated to showing the sort of conditions in which people used to manufacture needles. It is extremely salutary for those of us who sometimes complain about our lot to see the sort of conditions that people had to endure then. That is particularly relevant to young people.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend accept that the national railway museum, on the committee of which I have the honour to serve, is the jewel in the crown of industrial archaeology in this country? Will he therefore take an early opportunity to visit the museum? Will he explain why the arena of railway preservation, which was previously under the auspices of the Minister with responsibility for the arts appears to have been transferred to the Department of Transport? Has that to do with transport policy?

I was unaware that that part of my empire had slipped away. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for drawing it to my attention. Both the museum and my hon. Friend are valued parts of our national heritage.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will make a statement on his responsibilities for sport.

The Government's priorities for sport were set out in the policy document "Sport and Active Recreation", published in December 1991.

Does the Secretary of State accept that he has made a good start with association football, especially by relaxing the all-seater stadium requirements for third and fourth division clubs, following the Taylor report? Does he accept that some clubs in the higher divisions are running into real problems in meeting the Taylor timetable? That applies especially to clubs submitting plans for modern stadiums or adapting their existing grounds and finding great problems at local and Department of the Environment level. Will he urge the Secretary of State for the Environment to look sympathetically at those cases, or will he extend the timetable beyond August 1994?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. He knows that before announcing a decision on the Taylor report I consulted widely in the House, especially with the members of the all-party parliamentary football group. That all-party group shows what can be achieved when partisanship is laid on one side and we are able genuinely to co-operate. I appreciate that we set a tough timetable, but I did not think that it was right, especially in the light of the tremendous efforts made by some clubs to comply, to allow the timetable to slip. The additional funds from the sale of television rights to the premier league should allow much more work to be done. Football Trust moneys will continue to be available to the new first division. I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's real concern that clubs sometimes feel hard done by when they are put under pressure by the wider community to improve facilities and then, when they have proposals to do so, planning authorities raise all kinds of objections. That should be taken seriously, and I would welcome a meeting with the all-party group to discuss it.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend appreciate that the sport really needs a better standard of behaviour, better manners and better etiquette? In that context, will be study carefully the splendid example set by the Parliamentary Golfing Society?

My hon. Friend has certainly scored a hole in one with that. It is very unfortunate, as I had to say during the recent European championships, that a small minority of fans in England of our national game let everyone else down. That is untypical of the behaviour of fans generally. I have been to many different sporting events, both before and after being appointed to this job, and it is clear to me that most British sports fans behave impeccably, are well informed, enjoy the game and do not in any sense behave badly.

Will the Secretary of State acknowledge that part of his responsibility is to ensure that people have equal access and equal opportunities in sport? I speak from experience as a chess player and a cricketer. However, I was a very bad cricketer because I was never allowed to play in mixed teams. Does he agree that improving access to sporting opportunities, especially for girls and young women, is an important part of his responsibility if we are to regain a place of excellence in sporting achievements?

I agree with the hon. Lady. She will be glad to know that, since 1987, it has been a condition of all Sports Council grants to mixed sports organisations that the recipients provide equal opportunities for men and women. I shall widen the issue a little by saying that I am also concerned about access to sport by disabled people. I am sure that the House will know that, as well as supporting the main Olympics in Spain, my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary will be going to the Paralympics in Spain as a way of showing our endorsement and encouragement of the tremendous achievement of disabled athletes.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what plans the Government have to encourage excellence in tennis proficiency in the United Kingdom; and if he will make a statement.

Promoting excellence is a Government priority for sport. The Sports Council, which my Department funds, supports a range of performance and excellence initiatives which benefit tennis along with other sports.

Does my hon. Friend agree that Wimbledon is the greatest tennis tournament in the world and that Jeremy Bates ran his little legs off this year, to come within one match point of getting into the quarter finals? However, where are the champions? In recent memory, we have had only three, and they have all been ladies—Angela Mortimer, Ann Jones and Virginia Wade. What are we doing to encourage champions, because Champions like Nigel Mansell are good for British commerce, trade and industry?

Jeremy Bates did a magnificent job, but let us not forget Chris Wilkinson or Mark Petchey, or Miles Maclagan, who became the first Briton in 18 years to reach the semi-finals of the boys' juniors. In the ladies' singles, Shirli-Ann Siddall, who is only 17, won in her debut game at Wimbledon and, as a result, climbed 200 places in the world rankings in four weeks. Wimbledon last year provided £12 million for the Lawn Tennis Association, which was 56 per cent. of its income. The LTA is spending that income wisely—for example, with its Rover juniors tennis initiative. There are now 70 young people aged between 10 and 14 on that scheme and from September a further 90 aged between 10 and 16 will be on it. There are also seven boys and four girls at the LTA's school at Bisham Abbey.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage whether he will discuss with the chairman of the Sports Council the future funding of sport.

The funding of sport is one of many issues which I have already discussed with the chairman of the Sports Council, and I look forward to continuing to meet him regularly.

As a former Chief Secretary, will my right hon. and learned Friend consider marking his term of office by becoming the one Minister with responsibility for sport who asked less of the British taxpayer than his predecessors? On that basis, when can we expect money from the national lottery, and is my right hon. and learned Friend encouraging more business participation in sport? Furthermore, will he consider asking some of those sportsmen and sportswomen at the top of their sport, who have made enormous sums from prize money and wages, to give something back to help those at the grassroots, from when they came?

There is a great deal in what my hon. Friend says. Relevant to the last question is the fact that Cliff Richard has been doing a tremendous amount of work, with his own resources, to encourage youngsters to play excellent tennis. I should like to see more people doing such things. We reckon that private sector sponsorship now provides £200 million of resources a year to sport. Government money should be used to tease out more private sector commitment. My hon. Friend will be aware that we have been able to get more business sponsorship of the arts by an incentive scheme whereby some Government money goes to those organisations that raise business sponsorship. I am delighted to say that we shall be announcing shortly a £3 million business sponsorship scheme for sport, which is designed to get even more private sector money into sport.

When the Minister has a word with the Sports Council, will he consider the problems faced by people organising fell racing and orienteering events in the north of England because both North West Water and the Forestry Commission seem to be increasing, or imposing for the first time, charges for the use of their land? That causes considerable concern, particularly as there is a danger that it will push fell racing back on to public rights of way—where there can be no charges—which will increase the problems of erosion.

I confess that that is not an issue with which I am familiar, not being much into fell racing myself, as will be obvious. However, I appreciate that it is an important sport for a number of people, and if the hon. Gentleman will be kind enough to write to me about it, I shall look into what he says.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that my hon. Friend the Member for Littleborough and Saddleworth (Mr. Dickens) is no small champion himself when he looks for champions? Does he agree also that sport in schools is not getting the support that it deserves and that many children are missing out? Does he accept the recommendation of the previous Select Committee on Education, Science and Arts that teachers who coach sport after school hours should be paid for so doing?

My hon. Friend knows that we have been expanding the after-school coaching scheme. I shall not become involved in industrial relations negotiations about whether people should be paid. It is important that sport should be recognised within the national curriculum. As my hon. Friend knows, it is recognised now for children up to 14, and by 1995 it will be recognised for children up to 16. That will be important and necessary in producing champions and ensuring that everyone reaches a certain level of fitness and enjoys participation in sport.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will make a statement on his request to the United Kingdom art trade to co-operate in the event of any objects, including icons, from Czechoslovakia, other eastern European countries or the Commonwealth of Independent States appearing at auction houses in Britain.

In response to our request to members of the United Kingdom art trade to co-operate should any items be offered for sale which would appear to have come from eastern Europe, we were asked to obtain further details, including photographs, of any particular items which might have been stolen in order to assist in identification. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office has been asked to write to our embassies in eastern Europe requesting that approaches should be made to the relevant authorities for this information and responses are awaited.

Is it not poignantly ironic that, having survived 40 years of communism in Czechoslovakia and 70 years of Stalinsim in Russia, many of the most beautiful carvings and icons are in greater danger than ever before? Is the Minister aware that distinguished colleagues of his who are members of the parliamentary all-party heritage group found ourselves locked up in a rural church in Bohemia, having been suspected of pilfering? We then discovered that this was all about valuable items that find their way to the London and Frankfurt art markets.

I was aware of that, and I wish to add something to the hon. Gentleman's point. He is right. Last night, having returned from Silverstone, I sat down to watch the "Europe Express" programme on Channel 4, which dealt with precisely the problem to which he referred. Reference was made to the problem in Bulgaria, where I understand there is a new generation of grave robbers who are assisted by magnetic metal detectors. This is a most serious issue. It is the consequence of open borders, and we shall do all that we can to prevent looting. I understand that about 20,000 Czechoslovakian pictures and icons have been stolen from churches. I am sorry about the inconvenience that was experienced by the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues, but I am sure that he will recognise that it was a good thing that the problem was recognised by the authorities. We shall do all that we can to assist at this end as, I know, will the United Kingdom art market.

Having been locked in the said church with the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell), I add my plea to his. Would my hon. Friend like to consider setting up an international art loss register rather like the national register that has been set up by the United Kingdom?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his suggestion. I should be glad to hear more about the expedition of which he was a member. There may be lessons to be learnt by many countries in the European Community.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage how many of the items listed by Queen Victoria as state property remain in public ownership; and where are the others.

I understand that there are no grounds for believing that any of the items listed have left the royal collection.

I am pleased that the Minister acknowledges that there is a list, as put forward by Suzy Menkes, the eminent writer on the royal family. Will he assure the House that the jewels are the property of the state? Is it not about time that we had a new inventory? If not, what is to stop royalty—after all, they have a reputation for rapacity—making off with, for example, the Crown jewels?

Or offering them to the hon. Gentleman for evening wear. I am sorry to disappoint him, but there is no reason to think that the jewels are state property—

Yes, they are.

Absolutely not.

They are.

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman should be answering the question, not asking it. The electorate will have a view on that. There is no reason to think that the jewels are state property; they are royal property. The hon. Gentleman has made a mistake.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what estimates he has made of the proceeds from the reintroduction of a national lottery.

It is too early to say. We intend that it should be a great success, raising hundreds of millions of pounds for good causes.

I welcome that answer, which appears to downgrade the idea that there might be £1 billion a year for good causes, £1 billion for prizes and £1 billion for costs. Would not a realistic estimate of the amount available help to diminish some of the wild exaggerations that have been behind some of the calls for support for the national lottery?

It is because I have no wish to add to that exaggeration that as yet I have no wish to put a figure on the lottery. If it has the right statutory backing—which I hope and believe the House should give it—and if it is properly run, it will have the scope not only to provide a great deal of interest and innocent amusement for a whole range of people but to raise a large amount to benefit causes that would never benefit to such a degree through conventional public expenditure. That will be good. I hope that when we introduce the necessary Bill it will have the support of the whole House.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster whether he will enable British representatives to put forward specific expenditure proposals for the new elements of the proposed global climate observation system to the World Meteorological Organisation meeting next year; and whether they will be met by additions to the science budget.

The joint scientific and technical committee for the global climate observing system has been charged by its international parent bodies with making specific costed proposals. We, like other Government Departments, look forward to considering those detailed proposals and discussing them at the intergovernmental co-ordinating committee planned for next spring.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reply. Will he confirm that he recognises the importance of such international collaboration projects, the need for a commitment forward planning where more than one Government is involved and the need for the money to be found outwith his existing budget?

Before answering the hon. Gentleman, I wish to say how unfamiliar it is during questions on science to face an Opposition without the hon. Member for Motherwell, South (Dr. Bray), who has made a great contribution to these matters.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will issue a progress report on the moves to contract out and market test central Government services.

Our discussions with Departments continue to make progress. As promised in the White Paper "Competing for Quality", I look forward to publishing later this year the targets set by Departments and agencies for testing new areas of activity in the market, to see whether alternative sources give better service and value for money for the customer and the taxpayer.

As the objective of the policy is to improve the quality of public services by the Government buying them in through either the public or the private sector—whichever does it better—will my right hon. Friend make absolutely certain that all Government Departments set the most demanding targets to ensure real competitive benefits?

My hon. Friend is right about the policy's objectives. I am glad to say that there appears to be increasing cross-party support for it. In an important speech, Jeremy Beecham—who is a distinguished Labour local authority leader, although he has made other criticisms of the Government—said that the purchase-supplier split has

"caused a re-examination of performance, with general beneficial results."

Will the Minister encourage his colleagues to apply the same criteria to spending by the royal family?

I do not think that the hon. Gentleman expects a reply to that slightly frivolous question.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will make a statement on the change in Government spending on scientific research since 1979.

The science budget was £324·5 million in 1979–80 and is £1,050 million in 1992–93. That represents an increase of 25 per cent. in real terms since 1979 after making appropriate adjustments for changes in funding responsibilities during the period.

I welcome the fact that the Government spend a greater percentage of gross domestic product on civil research than is spent in Japan or in the United Slates. Is my right hon. Friend happy that the quality of the research is adequate as well?

My hon. Friend draws attention to the important point that we should look at the ouput from the investment in science and technology just as much as we look at the financial and other inputs into it. The academic output of British science—the quality to which my hon. Friend refers—appears to be in good health. During the 1980s, Britain remained second only to the United States in the number of papers published and in the number of citations of those papers.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what improvements have taken place in public services as a result of the implementation of the citizens charter.

I will give the House three recent examples out of many. Comparative tables of school performance will be published for the first time this autumn. Guaranteed admission times for hip and knee replacements and cataract operations will be reduced to 18 months from 1 April 1993. British Rail is publishing monthly performance figures—line by line—for the first time.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the patients charter is working well in Bolton where the health authority succeeded in abolishing the two-year waiting list before the charter deadline? Is not today's announcement of a trust status application from Bolton general hospital further good news for patients in Bolton?

It is good news. Bolton health authority has had a good record of achieving its charter standards. It beat the target of having no waiting for more than two years by some months and it has in place the named nurse system for patient care. I confirm what my hon. Friend says. The seeking of trust status will help to carry that further forward.

Will the Minister comment on the fact that parents are increasingly finding it difficult to find dentists who are prepared to take children on to their books, not only because of the fees situation but generally as a result of payment methods? That is especially so when children have particular problems with their teeth, given that the payments bear no relationship to the treatment needed. Will the right hon. Gentleman intervene with his colleagues at the Department of Health to see whether there is a way to sort out that problem?

I think that the hon. Gentleman is wrong. The new dental contracts for the first time specifically removed the incentive to do more filling and were concerned with the whole dental care of the patient. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health and hon. Members of all parties are well aware of the background to the dispute. I imagine that no one wants a completely open-ended commitment regardless of the recommendations of the Doctors and Dentists Remuneration Review Body.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the patients charter is to be extended to general practitioners and that that will lead to an improvement in the health service on offer to patients, which patients will welcome?

My hon. Friend is right. It is the objective of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health to carry the charter principles forward into primary care, which is very sensible. The great majority of contacts between patients and the national health service take place in the primary care format. I know that many GPs—the committee of general practitioners—have welcomed those steps and the offer of discussion with my right hon. Friend.

It is important for the charter that any moves to contract out and market test central Government services are open to public scrutiny and it is especially important that the Comptroller and Auditor General should have complete access to examine any value-formoney proposals that the Government have. Does the Chancellor agree?

I am aware of the suggestion made by some of the civil service unions for an umpire of the level playing field in this matter. The Comptroller and Auditor General has access to the accounts after the event and, if any contracting out did not show good value for money, he would doubtless have something to say about it.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will make a statement on the level of private sector research and development in Britain.

The latest information is that the level of private sector research and development was some £8·1 billion in the United Kingdom in 1990, up about 13 per cent. in real terms since 1985.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the independent scoreboard of research and development data, which is so often quoted by the Opposition, has recorded an increase in business research and development for 1990–91? Is that not an excellent record of performance, bearing in mind the difficult economic circumstances of the past two years?

My hon. Friend is right. It was an encouraging indicator that, despite the first year of recession, private sector firms have not cut research, if we are to believe the independent scoreboard. I hope that that shows that there has been an underlying sea change in the attitude of our industrial firms to the importance of R and D for the long term.

Does the Minister agree that, when comparing like with like among those firms—apart from the pharmaceutical industry—there is a major lag between spending by British companies and that of their industrial competitors overseas? Does the Minister see any chance of closing that gap if we fail to provide the incentives to firms to increase their industrial research and development that are provided in other countries, particularly the United States?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, the picture is mixed. Some of the leading firms in Britain do better than their counterparts. For example, GEC at 7·2 per cent. is lower than Siemens at 10·8 per cent., but higher than Philips at 6·8 per cent. As one would expect, the percentage for Glaxo is very high. It is not a universal picture. However, it is encouraging that British firms have been increasing their position and, to some extent, catching up with their rivals abroad, as they need to do.

Is my right hon. Friend now confident that the United Kingdom is getting its fair share of the very sizeable research contracts in the EEC system, particularly, for example, in high definition television?

We get almost our just return from the EC expenditure on research and development—and perhaps a little bit better than that. It will be one of our objectives during our presidency to ensure that the quality of assessment and management of that increasingly large programme is improved further. It is very important, and of increasing importance, particularly in the near-to-industry area of research in this country.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what initiatives he proposes to take to encourage a switch from military to civilian research and development; and if he will make a statement.

The defence research and development programme is directed to the future equipment needs of the armed forces. The interface between military and civil R and D is an issue in which I shall take a close interest—for example, in the context of the Government's White Paper on science and technology.

Does the Minister accept that Britain's high level of investment in military rather than civilian research and development means that this country has often lacked a competitive edge? Will he have a word with the Secretary of State for Defence to ensure that major defence establishments such as Farnborough begin to move into civilian research and development, away from military research and development, to give us that competitive edge?

The hon. Gentleman should not overlook the substantial contribution made by the defence industries, for example, to the balance of payments. Those firms make an important contribution to the economy. With regard to the hon. Gentleman's point about Farnborough and other institutions within the Ministry of Defence research framework, the establishment of the Defence Research Agency has provided an opportunity to review the position and we will consider it again in the White Paper. The DRA will be able to consider the possibilities for diversification in the way suggested by the hon. Gentleman.

Does not the Defence Research Agency already carry out work for non-governmental customers? Is not there much scope in that regard?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The DRA has inherited a wide-ranging and complex set of businesses and there are many sites. It is considering what it has been given and I am sure that it will take advantage of the opportunities such as those to which my hon. Friend referred.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will make it his policy to ensure that none of the service standards specified in the charters published to date are relaxed or withdrawn during the lifetime of this Parliament.

In the 19 follow-up charters published to date, we have, for the first time, clear standards which tell customers the level of service that they can expect. Those standards will be regularly reviewed so that we get a continuous improvement in the quality of public services within a tax bill that the nation can afford.

Does the process of continual review allow the Government to abandon or water down any commitments in the charters that they find difficult to meet? The Library's reference sheet on charters mentions the Department of Employment charter to establish minimum wages and protect them through regulation—a wages inspectorate charter. Will that remain unchanged throughout the lifetime of this Parliament?

The hon. Gentleman asks two questions, one about the review process for charters and their targets and standards, and the other about the policy of the Department of Employment, and that is obviously a matter for it. On the review process for charters, there will be an annual review, if not more frequently, of the targets, standards and performance indicators that have been set for the different branches of the public service under the citizens charter. Government Departments will, of course, be in the lead in their sectors, but the charter unit and the Office of Public Service and Science, which is headed by my right hon. Friend, will obviously play an important part in that.

Will my hon. Friend ensure that he monitors not only national charters but local government charters to ensure that they are not just words but actions that are carried out and that, where they are inadequate, as is often the case, they are strengthened?

In the case of services that are delivered by local authorities, obviously a different attitude to review has to be followed. In short, ultimate responsibility for enforcing the standards that are set in local government charters has to lie with the local electorate. We have to recognise that fact. However, there is a central Government role, which is limited to ensuring, first, that citizens have the information that they need about the performance of local authorities and, secondly, that, wherever possible, citizens and local authorities are able to take advantage of choice between competing providers of services.

On charters, will the Minister begin to redress the disgraceful exclusion of the homeless from citizens' rights by adopting CHAR's citizens charter for the homeless?

We are obviously very interested in any suggestions for improving and extending the quality and range of our charter effort. I will certainly look at what the hon. Lady has said.

Does my hon. Friend agree that, given the wide differences in the performance of local authorities, the Audit Commission's initiative to have comparative performance indicators for local authorities should enable local authorities to improve the service that they deliver?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. That is what I meant when I said that one of the roles of central Government can be to ensure that information is available so that citizens can make appropriate judgments about the performance of local authorities. The Audit Commission's initiative is very welcome. It stems from Government legislation, and it will have an important effect on the quality and circumstances of local government services.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will make a statement about the income and expenditure of the benevolent fund which specifically relates to intestacy proceeds.

The Duchy of Lancaster benevolent fund was set up to provide income to be used for charitable and benevolent purposes primarily in the county palatine. The income from the fund is applied to such purposes.

At the previous Duchy of Lancaster questions, the Chancellor told me that all—all—the proceeds from repossessions on intestacy, rather than going to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, went to the benevolent fund. It is in Hansard. He said "all". I ask the right hon. Gentleman to look at that. That does not accord with the duchy's own accounts. After interest, it still amounts to a substantial little earner for the privy purse. The Chancellor may quibble over the figures, but will he seriously look at the issue and stop unjust repossessions in the duchy?

I made the matter clear—

To me.

I made the matter clear to my hon. Friend the Member for Lancaster (Dame E. Kellett-Bowman), who perhaps knows rather more about such matters. I distinctly remember saying that the costs of the magistracy were taken from them—nothing from the bona vacantia payments goes to the privy purse. Eventually, the hon. Gentleman may understand that point.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the envious attitude of Londonders towards the excellent charities in Lancashire which accrue from that ancient custom and law is much to be deplored? Will he ensure that the likes of the hon. Member for Leyton (Mr. Cohen), who do not care two hoots for Lancashire and know little about it, do not plunder the funds, many of which go to my constituency?

I take it that the only rational outcome, if there is one, of the questioning of the hon. Member for Leyton (Mr. Cohen) will be that Lancashire will lose the funds and they will go to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. That may be what the hon. Gentleman wants, but I cannot believe that it would be popular in the county palatine, where many good causes are financed by the fund. The hon. Gentleman, in his desire to attack the royal family on the matter, still does not understand that none of the moneys go to the privy purse.

Will the Minister not accept that there is considerable concern about the affair in the county of Lancashire—both the county palatine and the shire county? Will he undertake to publish in full what the income is and what payments have been made of it so that the people of Lancashire know exactly what is happening with the fund?

The concern stems from the fact that hon. Gentlemen, principally the hon. Member for Leyton, have managed so to confuse themselves that they may have confused the hon. Member for Burnley (Mr. Pike), who may like to know that the accounts are placed in the Library every year, where he can read them.