To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many representations he has received on the subject of rural post offices since 1 May; and if he will make a statement.

Seventeen such representations have been received, including a petition with 1,098 signatures.

I thank the Minister for that reply. I am not surprised that he received so many representations in one month. I have received 10,000 responses that have been directed at the Secretary of State for Social Security, to whom most reponses would be directed. Will the Minister talke to his right hon. Friend and ensure that the Secretary of State does not reduce payments through the Post Office but actively encourages those payments, because the Minister and the Secretary of State for Wales have held their posts long enough to know that post offices are essential to rural areas in my constituency and those of other hon. Members in Wales?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister gave an assurance on 18 May that pensioners and other beneficiaries may continute to collect their benefit from a post office if that is their preference. That was confirmed the following day by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Security, who explained during a debate on the matter that the new forms would make it clear that beneficiaries could collect their benefits from post offices.

Did not the question arise from the trial carried out by the Department of Social Security to see whether beneficiaries required to be paid through vouchers or credit to account? Is it not the case that the Department received an unequivocal answer from social security beneficiaries and that Conservative Members, who represent the overwhelming majority of rural areas, would have said the same in the first place?

My hon. Friend will be aware that that matter concerns my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Security. It is high time that we nailed that canard about automated credit transfer being compulsorily required.

Surely the Government must concede that they are still pressing ACT through, although perhaps not by compulsory measures. That will threaten well over half the rural post offices in Wales. Does the Minister agree that, unless the Government provide alternative work for those sub-post offices that depend on benefit claimants as a lifeline for their business, his assurances are worthless?

Government business through the Post Office has increased in recent years. My right hon. Friends and I have said that ACT is not compulsory and that the choice whether to receive payments through a post office or through a bank or building society remains with the beneficiary.

Is the Minister aware that the possibility that the Monopolies and Mergers Commission will allow newspapers to be distributed through supermarkets is another threat that is looming on the horizon for small post offices and shops? That might provide a short-term improvement in the availability of newspapers, but the long-term effect would be damaging. Does the Minister agree that that would be a further blow to the shops and post offices that are essential to the community and the quality of life in rural areas?

The Government are committed to maintaining a national network of post offices and that, of course, includes rural post offices. That does not mean to say, however, that some rural post offices may not be closed for business reasons. That is a matter for Post Office Counters Ltd.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what representations he has received about the cost to public funds of supporting single-family families in Wales: and if he will make a statement.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is the number of lone parents in Wales.

I have had several hundred letters and messages, overwhelmingly in support of what I said—especially about teenage pregnancies.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend. Has he seen the memorandum addressed to him on page 12 of today's edition of The Times? Does he agree that grandparents are not without some responsibility for the children of teenage single parents, as is the case in the United States, Italy, Germany and, I understand, France? Will he ask the Child Support Agency to extend its interest to include grandparents as well as parents?

My hon. Friend makes a valuable point. I hope that all hon. Members will agree that, wherever possible, all members of the family should help if a young lady is pregnant and in need of support from parents or others. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Security is reviewing the matter and I am sure that he, too, will look carefully at what my hon. Friend said today.

rose—

Order. As I understand it, Question 2 is linked with Question 8. Is that correct? The Secretary of State did not announce that that was the case.

If you would like me to do so, Madam Speaker, I should be happy to link the two questions.

I understand from the right hon. Gentleman's Department that the two questions are linked.

My right hon. Friend will be pleased to know that I have taken the trouble to read the remarks from his recent speech in Wales which have been so widely reported. Does he accept that I entirely agree with the gist of his remarks, which was that the fathers of such children should be made responsible for them? Does he agree, however, that less than 15 per cent. of single-parent families were single-parent families when the births were registered, and that most single mothers were cohabiting when the children were born or they are widowed or divorced women who are bringing up children on their own?

I agree with my hon. Friend that the intention of Government policy is to pursue the fathers where possible and to ask them to make a contribution. We think that they should make a financial contribution. We should like them to make other kinds of contributions to family life, but that will not always be possible. My hon. Friend asked how many single parents there were in Wales. The answer is 68,000, and I confirm that not all of them are the teenage parents on whom my hon. Friend and I primarily concentrated our remarks.

Does the Secretary of State accept that his comments on single mothers have caused great offence throughout Wales and that, on reflection, he would have done better to spend his time in Cardiff talking about other matters? Will he take it from me that single mothers especially are often the victims of the effects of 14 years of Tory Government—homelessness, unemployment, poor quality of life and poverty? It would be far better if the right hon. Gentleman targeted the issues rather than single mothers.

If the hon. Gentleman does not understand the connection between the points that I am making and the problems in which he claims to be interested, he ought to go back to the drawing board. His remarks are not surprising, coming as they do from a member of the nowhere party. Labour Members do not know what their view is on anything; they do not seem to have a view on single parenthood and what should be done to encourage people to have children in wedlock, after stable relationships have been formed. That is an important contribution to the social debate, and I hope that the hon. Gentleman will soon learn why it is important.

The Secretary of State did, indeed, address a serious problem; clearly, resentment exists on estates about alleged queue jumping. But, on more mature reflection, does not he think that he might have shown a little more compassion in his speech? If he wants to crusade, should not he crusade against the conditions and the environment on many of our estates, rather than against people who are the victims of those conditions?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman does not know that I went to the estate in question to look at the conditions there. I promised people on the estate that if they came forward with sensible plans for improvement, I would view them with a kindly eye and see whether we could help. Of course I want to attack rotten conditions on housing estates; but I also want to open a bigger debate on social conditions generally, because it is not just the Government but people—grandparents, parents and the whole of society—who should contribute to improvements.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the views of the hon. Member for Delyn (Mr. Hanson) are not shared by the hon. and learned Member for Montgomery (Mr. Carlile), who sadly is not present, and who welcomed the remarks made by my right hon. Friend? Does my right hon. Friend agree with the point made by the hon. Member for Swansea, East (Mr. Anderson) that there is resentment over social housing allocation policy? If we are to address that issue, we must consider the needs of single parents; but ultimately, we need more social housing. May I therefore direct my right hon. Friend's attention to that issue? I urge him to announce further housing for those who are socially disadvantaged and who will never be able to afford to become home owners. unlike so many people in Wales.

My hon. Friend makes an important point. I am pleased to announce that 487 dwellings, which are currently empty and not being used in the public estate, are to be brought forward for rent and sale from the NHS estate. I hope that will be widely welcomed in the House.

Will the Secretary of State now acknowledge that his attack on single mothers was ill-judged and vindictive? Does not he realise that 70 per cent. of single parents are widowed, separated or divorced? Is he aware that 90 per cent. of single parents want a job and that the problem is not just the lack of jobs but the pathetic inadequacy of the child care system? Can he explain why one in four health authority family planning clinics has been shut and the Government have refused to insist on sex education as part of the school curriculum? Why does not he use a bit of common sense instead of crude scapegoating?

Once again, the nowhere party has not listened to what I have said and is not interested in the debate. I have always made it clear that when relationships have broken down, someone has died or a partnership has been forced apart, for reasons beyond the control of any individual, I am, of course, extremely sympathetic. That was not the issue that I was opening up in my speech. I was opening up the case of teenage pregnancies where there was no intention of the father playing a proper role in the family or trying to do so. I still wish to know whether the Labour party approves or disapproves of that.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what proportion of Welsh school children are taught using Welsh as their first language; arid what assessment his Department has made on the progress of such children into further and higher education relative to those using English as their first language.

Welsh was the sole or main medium of instruction for 16 per cent. of primary school pupils in September 1991, and 15·8 per cent. of secondary pupils in Wales were attending a Welsh-speaking secondary school. as defined by the Education Reform Act 1988. Provisional analyses of the information for the 1991–92 school year shows that 33 per cent. of pupils from Welsh-speaking schools went on to further or higher education. That compares with 30 per cent. of pupils from all local education authority and grant-maintained schools in Wales.

I am sure that my right hon. Friend would agree that that shows that the Government's policy of keeping Welsh a living language has been extremely successful. What effect does he think that Labour's failure to support the Welsh Language Bill—and, indeed, the fact that Plaid Cymru has voted against it—will have on our excellent policy?

My hon. Friend will be interested to learn that all the progress in Welsh-medium education has resulted from the Education Act 1944. We sought to improve matters further through the Welsh Language Bill, which represents a considerable advance for Welsh speakers and will mean that guidelines will be prepared by the Welsh Language Board, under which local education authorities will state what provision they are making for Welsh medium education.

At some time in his busy schedule, will the Minister take time to instruct his stool pigeons who are brought forward to ask questions—

Order.

Order. I consider that somewhat unparliamentary language, and I would be glad if the hon. Gentleman would withdraw his comment. If he is going to put a question, will he do so?

I withdraw the remark, Madam Speaker.

If the hon. Gentleman's party has some responsibility for the success of the Welsh language, is not it curious that it did not support the Third Reading of the Welsh Language Bill? As for the hon. Gentleman's comments about my hon. Friends, I note that some hon. Members representing parts of the United Kingdom other than Wales are present on the Opposition Benches. Perhaps Welsh Opposition Members should table rather more questions; then they might have the same luck as my hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on the effect of defence procurement on Welsh industry.

It was estimated in 1991 that defence procurement accounted for some 4,000 jobs, or 2 per cent. of manufacturing, in Wales.

Has my right hon. Friend made any assessment of the effect on defence procurement jobs that would have resulted had the Labour party—the "caring party"—been elected at the last general election?

It was estimated at the time of the last general election—I do not believe that the Labour party has ever withdrawn the policies involved—that 115,000 jobs in defence-related industries would have been wiped out in the United Kingdom, to say nothing of the jobs lost in the Army, Navy and Air Force. We can truly say that, when it comes to jobs in Wales, the Opposition are the demolition men; we are standing up for Wales and winning new jobs for it.

Does the Secretary of State appreciate that all Opposition Members welcome defence cuts? We also recognise, however, that they have a tendency to put people out of work. The truth is that the Government have not succeeded in turning swords into ploughshares. What is more, market forces will not cure the evil; we need active intervention by the Government.

I am sad to learn that the hon. Gentleman welcomes job losses. As for his second point, he is entirely wrong: we are taking steps to try to encourage companies to diversify. We are keen to diversify both the Welsh industrial base and the product ranges of individual companies. A Ministry of Defence secondee is currently helping the Welsh Development Agency with that important task. However, we also want the country to be well defended—and that is better news for jobs than it would be under Labour.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that Wales is part of the United Kingdom's defence export industry, which creates thousands of jobs across this country? Those jobs would be destroyed if we listened to the Labour party. Does my right hon. Friend really believe that Government intervention could help, when historically it has proved very expensive and has ended up destroying jobs in many once fine companies, such as British Shipbuilders and Rover?

My hon. Friend is right: defence exports are important to Wales, as they are to the rest of the United Kingdom. Having sound defences here provides a platform from which we can export suitable products.

Is the Secretary of State aware that, over the past 10 years, 50 per cent. of the defence procurement budget has been spent in south-east England and an average of 2 per cent. in Wales? If cuts are made in Welsh military and defence establishments, will the right hon. Gentleman try to secure more investment expenditure from that budget? What is his policy in that regard?

Of course we will try to encourage Welsh companies to respond to procurement opportunities through the offer of support available from Ministry of Defence expertise, the Welsh Development Agency and elsewhere. I will battle for more jobs for Wales over the months and years ahead, in the way that I have been doing since I was appointed.

Bearing in mind that many thousands of Welsh people who work in defence-related industries, including the royal ordnance factory in Glascoed in Gwent, depend very heavily on contracts from the MOD, does the Secretary of State agree that British forces should buy and use British equipment?

Wherever possible, that is desirable. We also have to think about European Community procurement rules and value for money. I want British companies to do well, to win the competitions and supply the goods. I will not be shy in arguing for British success.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what was the incidence of premature coronary heart disease in Wales in 1980 and in the latest year for which information is available; and if he will make a statement.

There were 4,052 deaths of Welsh residents under the age of 75 from coronary heart disease in 1992, compared with 5,676 deaths in 1980.

I am sure that the whole House will approve the substantial improvement in the health of the Welsh people that those figures represent. Does my hon. Friend agree that there is a very strong correlation between premature coronary heart disease and diet? Does he further agree that there is a link between people's eating habits and what they are taught at school? If he does agree, will he make representations. as the Minister responsible for the health of the Welsh people, to the Department for Education about the place of home economics in the core curriculum to ensure that schoolchildren in Wales are taught diet and nutrition as part of that curriculum?

I am grateful for the welcome that my hon. Friend gave those figures. The work of health promotion in schools is already being undertaken by the Health Promotion Authority in Wales. I was in Rhondda on Friday, visiting one of the life education centres, and I saw how effective the authority is at promoting healthy living messages to schoolchildren, including the importance of balanced diets.

Does the Minister accept that there is a link between not only heart disease and diet but heart disease and poverty?

We acknowledge the range of factors that are combating the fight against coronary heart disease, as we do other efforts to try to meet health-gain goals throughout Wales. A range of other measures has to be taken into account, including balanced diet, more regular exercise and anti-smoking campaigns. If the hon. Gentleman had studied closely the figures that we have set and our goals, he would know that in Wales, according to various health indicators, we have started from a low base and we have to reach a higher attainment level. We have set ourselves a target of a 33 per cent. reduction in premature death from cardiovascular disease over the next 10 years.

The level of premature heart disease is still very high in Wales. Open-heart surgery was invented in Wales, where Sir Magdi Yacoub carried out much of his earlier training before moving to Harefield. In January 1984, nine and a half years ago, the then Secretary of State for Wales, now Lord Crickhowell, made a promise to increase the number of open-heart operations in Wales from 500 to more than 1,100 a year. That promise has probably got whiskers on it, as the number of operations has not yet reached 600—indeed, it is so prehistoric that a dinosaur movie called "Thoracic Park" could be made about it.

I thought that it was a representative of "Jurassic Park" posing that question. The hon. Gentleman clearly does not listen. If he had taken any opportunity to study this important matter, he would know that we have undertaken a £500 million expansion programme to increase to 800 the number of heart operations in the University hospital of Wales. Only four weeks ago, I announced from the Dispatch Box the go-ahead for a second cardiac centre at Morriston in Swansea to take the number up to 1,400.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he will convene a meeting of the strategy group of the West Wales task force.

The next meeting of the strategy group will he held in the autumn on a date yet to be decided.

Is the Minister aware that that answer is totally unsatisfactory? The last time the strategy group of the task force met was on 25 January, when the former Secretary of State for Wales, now the Secretary of State for Employment, assured the group that the new director would be in place as soon as possible, funded by the Welsh Development Agency. Is he also aware that, on 28 April, the right hon. Gentleman assured business men in my constituency that the director would be appointed in May? There is still no director for the task force. What is the Minister going to do about it?

The question of the director for the task force is being urgently considered by that task force and all the other local authorities involved. It was appropriate for them to have an input concerning the sort of director that they wanted. There is no lack of activity, however, regarding implementation of the important objectives of the task force. This year, we committed £2·5 million under the rural initiative; £250,000 under the LEADER scheme; and £3·7 million to upgrade rural and urban development activities.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what new proposals he has to reduce unemployment levels.

We intend to reduce unemployment by continuing our successful economic policies of low interest rates, a very competitive economy, low inflation, good road and rail links, good training and encouraging and promoting investment.

What is the Secretary of State's reaction to the figures that I sent him which show that, according to a new methodology used by the House of Commons Library, the unemployment percentage in Newport, West is the joint highest in Wales? What is his reaction to the fact that, last year, Newport, West witnessed the second-largest increase in unemployment in any Welsh constituency? In those circumstances, how can the Government or anyone else contemplate taking away assisted area status from Newport? Will he give an unequivocal answer this afternoon that that will not happen and that he is virgorously opposing that insane suggestion?

The hon. Gentleman will have to contain himself a little longer. As soon as the European Community has completed its review of the Government's proposals, my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade will present them to the House. I hope that that will happen soon. The hon. Gentleman should wait and see the outcome. The hon. Gentleman can be assured that I have, of course, argued a vigorous case for Wales, as he would expect me to do.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the policies of low inflation, low interest rates and a stable work force, which have been pursued by our Government, are the right prescription? Is not it time that the Opposition recognised that and supported the Government rather than carped and moaned about unemployment?

I agree that those are the right policies. My hon. Friend might like to know that, at noon today, an order was announced for 4 million new telephones worth £50 million. That is good news for jobs in Cwmcarn in Gwent where those telephones will be manufactured.

I particularly welcome that last piece of good news and the efforts undertaken by the Welsh Office to encourage further orders for the Abercarn plant. Confidence in that plant is well established and it is wise to build on it. Is the Secretary of State aware, however, that, in the past year, the pharmaceutical industries of Wales have lost more than 500 jobs? Since 1985, because of the Government's introduction of the limited list for drugs for national health service prescriptions, pharmaceutical manufacturers have moved their development and production facilities elsewhere, which has meant, of course, that jobs have gone elsewhere.

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his first remarks. I will look further at the issues of pharmaceutical investment and job transfers from Wales, which were raised in a previous Question Time. I have asked for a review of the position. I am happy to meet the interested pharmaceutical companies to see whether there is anything that the Government can do to improve the climate further so that companies stay in Wales and invest there.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that vacancies are appearing for chairmen of companies in Wales, one of which was recently snapped up by that champion of lost causes, the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Mr. Davies), although I do not recall the job being advertised? Does he agree that that may be the first sign that the Opposition are about to change their shadow Secretary of State and, possibly, have their fifth shadow Secretary of State before Christmas? Four of the shadow Secretary of State's predecessors are sitting on the Opposition Back Benches this afternoon.

My hon. Friend makes his point extremely well. I can reassure him that, if that happened, it would not lead to an increase in unemployment, because no doubt there would be a replacement for the person going.

British Aerospace at the Broughton works in my constituency has announced 250 redundancies, which would bring the total number of job losses at that great plane-making plant to more than 1,000 in just over one year. Why must such highly skilled, loyal, able and very productive plane makers lose their jobs in that way? It appears to me that the Government and the Cabinet have no strategy for Britain's manufacturing industries. Does the Secretary of State agree that, if the Government's policy continues as it appears to be doing, the United Kingdom will be denuded of a manufacturing base? What will he do to assist the plane-makers at Broughton, who are losing patience at the bleeding away of their jobs after doing everything that they have been asked to do for many years? They are the best, most loyal, most skilled and productive workers, so what will the Government do to assist them?

A productivity miracle is under way in this country—production is more than 10 per cent. up on the figures for the past year. It is desperately important that, as productivity rises that quickly—and we want it to —enough orders are won so that jobs are not lost and people can make many more products at the much better unit costs that have been established. I shall look at any proposition that the hon. Gentleman cares to put to me about the tragic situation in his constituency, because I do not like to see those job losses any more than he does. The problem is connected with cutting costs, which will mean that the company is more competitive in the future, and is obviously related to the demand for the planes. If there are ways in which the Government can help to promote more sales of planes—that is the only way to get these jobs—I am happy to do whatever is necessary and legal.

My right hon. Friend will probably not be aware that, in some cases, what is good news for reducing unemployment in Wales may be bad news for other parts of the country. He may not yet he aware that, in my constituency, Burtons Biscuits, which is a subsidiary of Associated British Foods, has a factory that has announced up to 600 redundancies, whereas it hopes to increase production at its factory in Llantarman in Wales. Will my right hon. Friend join me in doing all that he can to ensure that any of my constituents who work at the factory and wish to take up vacancies at Llantarman are able to? Will he work with his right hon. Friends in other Departments to try to change the mind of the company so that it reduces or withdraws the redundancies in my constituency?

I am happy to look at my hon. Friend's suggestion about the transfer of workers. However, there will be times when rationalisation is needed to make a business competitive. Again, the best answer is to get out there and sell more of the underlying products so that we can have more jobs overall. It is a fearfully competitive world and unfortunately it is necessary for British manufacturing to continue to lower its costs and make improvements in its processes, or there will be no jobs at all in manufacturing. That is the essential first step to grow a bigger manufacturing base.

I welcome the priority given by the Secretary of State to reduced interest rates to support the economy of Wales. Does he agree that that has come about through the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the exchange rate mechanism?

That and other factors obviously lay behind successive Chancellors' decisions on interest rates. I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman will join me in welcoming the current level of rates, which are low by European standards and are allowing the substantial recovery that we so desperately need. I hear good reports from some manufacturers about volume gains and I want to see them spread ever more widely. I want to see more British products sold in British shops.

I start by declaring my interest in a company which is registered as Quality Training Services. The people of my constituency will not thank the Secretary of State for his earlier remarks, in which he played politics with their jobs. Is he aware of the efforts that were made over the weekend to safeguard the dozens of jobs and the hundreds of training opportunities throughout south Wales which are threatened by the collapse of Commercial and Industrial Training Services Ltd. in my constituency? Is he aware that the well-known Tory quango-gatherer, Donald Walters, was chairman of the board of the failed company and that there is clear evidence of poor leadership and mismanagement?

Of course, I share the hon. Gentleman's aims of protecting jobs and ensuring that proper training is available. I have not yet conducted a proper review of the proposal that he has just put to me, but I will do so and see whether his method is the right way to approach the problem. He can rest assured that I will do what I can to protect training and jobs.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how many charter marks have been awarded since the inception of the scheme.

In 1992, the first year of the scheme, 36 charter marks were awarded to a wide range of public sector organisations which had demonstrated the highest standard of service to their customers. This year, the charter unit has received 411 applications, over 100 more than last year. Up to 100 awards will be made.

I am grateful for that answer, but does my right hon. Friend agree that the quality of charter mark applications is every bit as important as the quantity? Therefore, will he tell us whether the quality of applications has increased over the past year and. if so, whether first-class applications, such as that made by the South Tees Benefits Agency in my constituency, have contributed to that welcome fact?

I happen to know that that application is before my colleagues in the Department and it will be judged along with the rest. My hon. Friend is right. As the scheme has become better understood, there has been an increase in the quality of applications and I welcome that and congratulate those involved.

In a week that I believe marks the second anniversary of the citizens charter, will the Minister comment on the validity of the charter marks, as well as his ability to deliver openness in central Government machinery—a subject on which he produced a White paper last week—given that his integrity as a Minister has been seriously put in question by the evidence produced last week that he misled the House over the Matrix Churchill affair?

Order. I ask the hon. Lady to withdraw what she has said. No Minister misled the House.

I will withdraw the question on the Minister's integrity. However, I would like him to explain—

Order. I have asked the hon. Lady to withdraw her statement that the Minister has misled the House.

I will withdraw the statement that the Minister misled the House.

The hon. Lady asked about charter marks and I am happy to answer that question. Charter marks are welcomed widely in the public sector and are helping to represent the congratulations of the House and the British people on the high standards that are found in much of the public sector. On her latter point, I hope that the hon. Lady, who I am sure is a fair-minded person, will wait for the full evidence before making political capital out of important matters.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what representations he has received from the British Association for the Advancement of Science since the publication of the science and engineering White Paper.

I have been in regular touch with the British Association. I recently addressed a conference on science, technology and wealth creation, organised by the association's science and industry committee, and I was glad to hear the chairman of that committee, Sir Denis Rooke, give the White Paper a warm welcome.

I welcome my hon. Friend's answer. I know that he is keen to enhance the public's understanding of science and technology, a process which is central to re-establishing in the British psyche the importance of our manufacturing industries. Can I urge him to attend his summer's science festival, organised by the British Association?

The summer festival of the British Association is one of the major shop windows for science and technology, and has been very successful for a number of years. I look forward to addressing the festival on 2 September and I hope to attend every year.

Does the Chancellor share my concern that the City has yet to take on board the impact of the White Paper? Is it correct that only nine City representatives turned up at the conference referred to by the hon. Member for Falmouth and Camborne (Mr. Coe)? Does he think that more work has to be done to persuade the City of the importance of science and technology?

I share the hon. Gentleman's disappointment. The British Association took the trouble to hold the conference in the heart of the City geographically and it was dissapointing that more people did not attend. It is essential that those who have power and investment in the country understand that long-term investment will best be protected in companies that carry out research and development properly.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the British Association was one of many representational bodies to comment on his White Paper and does he agree that the vast majority of comments have been favourable? Equally, does he agree that many such bodies look forward to a distribution between defence research and development and civil research and development? Has he any comment to make about the prospects on that front?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend and believe that he is right that the White Paper has been broadly welcomed and accepted as a starting point. That is how I would answer my hon. Friend's second question. The White Paper must be seen as a starting point for further work. There is much more to do, and if the transformation that we need in our industry and society is to be achieved it will not be done overnight.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what plans he has to extend the citizens charter to the regulatory authorities.

Public regulatory authorities, like all areas of the public sector, are covered by the citizens charter.

Is the Minister aware that there is increasing concern about the fact that the regulators of the privatised utilities are acting like tin gods, whose decisions are not accountable to Parliament or challengeable by ordinary citizens except by cumbersome legal proceedings? The Ofgas decision to break up British Gas will mean higher transportation costs to areas such as Wales compared with the north-east of England near the North sea gas shelf. In other decisions, competitive access has been given a higher priority than the interests of consumers and indeed the strategic national interest. Surely a review of the role of regulators is needed. Should not they be covered by the citizens charter and be answerable to Parliament?

Before I address the nub of the hon. Gentleman's question, may I say that opening up industries to competition is in the interests of the consumer and has been the best guarantee of those interests. First, the regulators must operate within the regulatory framework laid down by Parliament. Secondly, the director-generals' performance of their statutory duties is subject to judicial review—I think the hon. Gentleman referred to that. Thirdly, the legislation requires utilities to have a licence and authorisation from the Secretary of State or a director before they can operate as utilities. Fourthly. directors are appointed by and are answerable, in broad terms, to the Secretary of State. If a director does not carry out his duties satisfactorily he can be replaced. Finally, those director-generals can also be called before a Select Committee of the House.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the regulators have done an excellent job in applying charter principles to the privatised utilities? Furthermore, does he recall that those industries have performed much better since they have been privatised and that the Labour party opposed privatisation, which has brought so many benefits to the people of this country?

My hon. Friend is entirely right and I shall give a couple of examples. British Telecom's prices have fallen by one third since 1984 and 96 per cent. of call boxes work, compared with 75 per cent. previously. British Gas prices for domestic users have fallen 13 per cent.—[HON. MEMBERS: "Water!"] There are calls of "Water" from Opposition Members—the same people who would complain if the pollution levels of our beaches and rivers were not dealt with. The money for dealing with those problems must come from somewhere and it comes from the profits and capital of the water companies.

The Minister must be aware that the real issue involves accountability for the former public utilities and the watchdogs of the utilities. Some parts of the country have been severely disadvantaged by the differential impact of the clean-up programmes, but it is not possible to request an Adjournment debate in the House on the issue because it is no longer deemed to be the responsibility of any Minister. As citizens charter Minister, will he try to find a way around that problem?

It is a matter for Madam Speaker rather than me, but I imagine that it would be perfectly possible to have an Adjournment debate about the regulators' behaviour, which is precisely the hon. Gentleman's point. Ofwat comments in the past few days on the effect of the clean-up on costs are an example of Ofwat exercising its powers and responsibilities properly.

Does not the Minister understand that the problem with Ofwat and other regulatory organisations is that they have no teeth? I and hon. Members from both sides of the House have taken cases to Ofwat, which has eventually found in favour of our constituents, and then the board—in my case Severn Trent—has said, "So what, Ofwat—nothing will happen and nothing will change." The problem is that the regulators have no teeth.

I recommend that the hon. Gentleman speak to the hon. Member for Neath (Mr. Hain), who said that the regulators had too many teeth and too much power. The regulators can change the rules under which the licence works. If they cannot come to an agreement with the utilities, the matter can be referred to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission to provide back-up support.

Have not the regulators been just a component part of what has proved to be one of the Government's greatest successes: the privatisation of state-owned industries? Have not new private sector management and entrepreneurial skills been introduced to old, monolithic industries? Is not the flotation of further British Telecom shares on the stock market the most recent example of one of the Government's greatest successes, privatisation?

My hon. Friend makes his case very well. Popular capitalism continues to be popular in this country and will be for the rest of the decade.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what proportion of market-testing exercises has led to a reduction in costs.

Information collected from Departments over the five years to 1990–91 suggests that more than 80 per cent. of market tests resulted in savings. Savings have typically been around 25 per cent. of the original cost of the activity. Even if a market test fails to bring about savings, it is likely to lead to an improvement in the quality of the service being provided.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend and I wonder whether he has seen this month's edition of the Local Government Chronicle—a newspaper which I read avidly every time I go to sleep. It mentions that competitive tendering in local government has brought greater savings in the second round of competitive tendering. Does my right hon. Friend agree that similar savings could accrue from market testing in central Government?

I am sorry that the Local Government Chronicle has such a soporific effect on my hon. Friend. The report was accurate and was also carried in the Financial Times. It also accords with evidence from Berkshire county council, which revealed that, in many cases, the savings on the second placement of a contract were greater than those on the first placement. I believe that, in future, contractors for central Government services will also bring more savings the second time the contract goes out to tender.

Has the Chancellor had a chance to read any of the recent Public Accounts Committee reports about some of the problems that the Government are confronting over managerial consultancies when it comes to market testing? Does he agree that the latter offers an unparalleled opportunity for a descent into graft and corruption on the Italian scale?

Any report by the PAC must be very carefully examined and there must be a proper response to it, but the most recent one was about a service run in-house, Forward Civil Service Catering, showing that problems can arise both in the public sector and outside it.

What advice is the Department giving organisations going through market testing on dealing with the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations, which seem to be causing us some problems?

After consultation with other Departments, my Department issued guidance on that. As a matter of fact, after a period of delay early in the process, central Government Departments are now finding that TUPE is much less of a bar to the market-testing programme. Indeed, several successful market tests have been carried out in cases in which TUPE has covered the staff and they have worked perfectly well.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what progress has been made on the Government's market-testing programme.

Market-testing programmes for the period to September 1993 are making good progress. I shall report on the outcome of these as soon as possible after the period.

The Minister has again made claims for cost savings of about 25 per cent. for market testing. Is he aware that independent research carried out by the Audit Commission and by the university of Birmingham on behalf of the Department of the Environment—research into market testing in local government—has shown cost savings of between 6 and 7 per cent., or about one quarter of what he claims for the civil service? Will he therefore tell the House on what independent research his claim is based; or, if there is no such independent research, and the claim is unreliable, will he assure the House that he will authorise independent research into the impact of market testing in the civil service—before he opens his big mouth again and makes far-fetched claims that cannot be substantiated?

The figure of 25 per cent. is an assessment of the relatively small programme in central Government to date and it simply reports the facts. I am well aware of the lnlogov report, which showed 6 or 7 per cent. savings in compulsory competitive tendering for local government. The hon. Gentleman will recall that one such local government body was Bristol city council in my constituency, where there was a good deal of trouble with its CCT and there had to be re-tendering. Many Labour local authorities resisted the process and wasted a lot of money; they did not enter into the exercise with the spirit and loyalty that the central Government civil service has shown. The hon. Gentleman would be ill-advised to use those local government figures for CCT when assessing the central Government programme.

Is not it a fact that market testing is extremely effective in the private sector and that it is a running cost, not an expense? All these myths about the inability of market testing to benefit companies or the civil service are ridiculous. We have to produce products and services that people want, at a competitive price and with the right quality, and we have to provide after-sales service. If we got all those things right, would not we beat the world?

My hon. Friend is perfectly right. What is more, as the best of the public sector can beat the private sector, it should not he frightened of the process. There have been plenty of winning in-house bids. Instead of trying to resist the whole process, through Opposition spokesmen, the public sector unions should show more confidence in their members by recognising that they will win many of the bids.

On market testing, will not the real test come on Thursday when the Government face almost inevitable defeat? Perhaps the Chancellor should direct his mind to that top priority for the Cabinet.

That seems to go a little wide of my responsibilities, but I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his characteristic ingenuity.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what plans his Department has to encourage more public services to introduce a purchaser-provider split.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for her support for extending the purchaser-provider split. It is this concept, the identification of the needs and wishes of the customer and clarity about the role and responsibility of the contractor, which underpins all our public service reforms. My Department remains committed to building on the progress made in Government agencies, the national health service, our schools and local authorities, and it is delivering better results.

Is my hon. Friend aware that left-of-centre commentators, including Professor John Stewart of the Municipal Journal of recent mention, have endorsed the purchaser-provider split as a means of improving the efficiency and effectiveness of our public services? Does he agree that it is about time that the Labour party came off the fence and endorsed it, too?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. I have not seen that entry in the Municipal Journal. Like my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Staffordshire (Mr. Fabricant), perhaps I sleep too well. The best example of such acceptance by thoughtful commentators of the left is by John Willman. Writing in the "Fabian Review" he identified three virtuous consequences of the purchaser-provider split. He said:

"First, it allows the purchaser … to become the advocate of the consumer rather than the defender of the producer … Second, it forces both sides to define the nature of the service and the quality standards which are to be provided. This locus on standards and outcomes is essential if the quality of public services is to be improved … Third and most important, it allows the purchaser to buy in services from the private sector."