To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will discuss with Welsh local government organisations the level of representation the planned unitary authorities should have on health authorities; and if he will make a statement.

I have no plans to alter the present arrangements.

How does the Minister square last week's appointment of Mrs. Lynette George to the chair of Derwen health trust in Dyfed with the Welsh Office's recent pronouncement that membership of quangos would be open to all and that there would be wide and extensive advertisement of appointments? Does he accept that the appointment was not advertised in the local newspaper that serves Dyfed, Powys and South Gwynedd and that Mrs. George is the wife of a previous Tory parliamentary candidate in Ceredigion? Does he also accept that the process is a complete sham and is wholly unacceptable to the people of Wales, who are not so easily fooled?

I am surprised at the hon. Gentleman. He should be aware that there is extensive advertising for all public appointments in Wales and that that has resulted in many people putting their name forward for our register of such appointments. I resent his implication about that particular appointment, not least because Mrs. George is well acquainted with health matters and is presently a member of the national health service trust for Ceredigion.

Does my hon. Friend agree that it will be easier to deal with that question when the Opposition have resolved their differences about the future shape of local government and, in particular, the dispute about the boundary between Cardiff and the Vale of Glamorgan, about which my constituents are extremely concerned?

I know from my hon. Friend about his constituents' opposition to the proposal. I am also aware, as I think he is, of the way in which the imperialist ambitions of South Glamorgan are hotly resented by the Labour parties in Cardiff and the Vale of Glamorgan. I have sympathy for the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Mr. Davies), who has continuing difficulties in obtaining agreement among his comrades.

The Minister must be cuckoo if he thinks that merely asking people to put their names forward for authorities introduces an element of democracy into the system in Wales. What matters is not the people who put their names forward but the selection of the people who are appointed, and that selection will remain in the hands of Ministers. There is no democratic accountability or relationship with the new local authorities that have been set up, so will the Minister accept that we do not like his system and wish that the people appointed were more accountable?

Accountability never stops because my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State remains answerable at the Dispatch Box to all hon. Members for his actions, including appointments and the activities of those appointed. We welcome recommendations and suggestions from everyone so that we have the broadest choice and my right hon. Friend always tries to appoint the best person to every post.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what plans he has to safeguard Welsh interests on the proposed reform of student unions.

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the interests of students at Welsh institutions will be fully safeguarded.

Is the Minister aware that the excellent newspaper Gair Rhydd which, by the way, features the Secretary of State prominently in this week's edition, will be endangered and will probably have to close as a result of the proposals? What proposals does the Minister have to safeguard the important work of Welsh student unions, which translate so much into Welsh so that there can be equality between the two languages in Welsh institutions? How does the Minister propose that that work will be done in future?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the Education Bill does not prevent students or student associations from undertaking any activities, including those that he described. There is no reason why such activities should cease. Students should consider different methods if the Bill prevents them from using such funding. For instance, activities could be funded from personal subscription, fund raising by students or sponsorship from the private funds of universities or colleges, as well as from public funds.

Does the Minister agree that the development of Welsh language courses in colleges in Wales is not a core activity, as defined by the Bill? Does he believe that it will add to the financial burdens of the majority of the 130,000 students in Wales and that the reforms will totally ignore the special characteristics of Welsh further and higher education and will plunge Welsh student unions into administrative chaos?

I do not agree, because our proposals will not reduce the resources provided for universities and colleges, which will continue to decide for themselves the total funding that they make available for their student unions. Clause 22 allows for flexibility in different parts of the United Kingdom. That will permit variations to reflect any differing circumstances, including those in Wales.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what was the value of grants from his Department to voluntary organisations in each of the last three years.

The latest available figures at outturn prices for direct and indirect grants are £144·9 million for 1990–91, £182·2 million for 1991–92 and £213·7 million for 1992–93.

Is not that a cost-effective form of public expenditure? By how much has it increased since 1979? How many organisations receive those grants?

I share my hon. Friend's impression of the cost-effectiveness involved. I seem to recollect that during the past financial year, more than 420 voluntary organisations have been assisted in that way and that since the Government came to power, support for voluntary organisations has increased threefold.

The Minister will be aware that many voluntary organisations, which run village halls and other community centres in Wales, were disappointed last year when no money was made available under the usual scheme. Does he propose to reinstate that scheme for the present year, so that many excellent local facilities can be properly resourced?

We try to consider all applications for financial assistance. I remind the hon. Gentleman that during the two-year period, we set aside £2·5 million for the community revival strategy and that, under the strategic development scheme, voluntary organisations will attract 16 per cent. of the total, which is almost £6·5 million.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what measures he will adopt to create jobs and to bring down unemployment.

Low interest rates, the promotion of Wales as a great manufacturing and service centre and low inflation underpin our policies to promote Wales vigorously and get unemployment down, and they are working—in the past month alone, there were 1,800 more people back in work.

With the massive number of 127,000 jobless Welsh people, will the Secretary of State pledge that the Government will protect national and constituency interests in the aerospace industry, bearing in mind the outstanding GATT negotiations and the airbus project? Will he step up his efforts for manufacturing jobs and attack single-parent families less? Will he also work harder to tackle unemployment and engage less in Cabinet intrigue?

I am promoting Wales vigorously—far more vigorously than are Opposition Members. As a result, a lot of investment is coming to this country and our national policies are working, at a time when unemployment is rising on the continent of Europe.

When my right hon. Friend visited Pilkington Optronics in my constituency last Monday, did he get the impression that it was a company bristling with optimism and ideas? Does not that augur well for the future of manufacturing in Wales, which has been helped not least by my right hon. Friend's decision to give the green light to the Rhuddlan bypass?

I agree with my hon. Friend and I am grateful for his kind comments about the bypass scheme. I saw Pilkington Optronics and I saw other companies there at the leading edge of technology, with extremely good manufacturing activities, going for the best in the world and making sure that they win the markets accordingly.

In regard to the proposed reorganisation of local government in Wales, does the Secretary of State appreciate that many employees in that service are apprehensive about their future employment prospects? Bearing in mind the tremendous service that local government has given to Wales for so many years, will the Secretary of State give an assurance to those employees today that their future is secure?

I can assure the vast majority of people working in local government in Wales that their futures are safe. Their employers will need them even after the change of responsibilities and the introduction of the unitary councils. The vast majority are providing services to the public and they will be as needed in three or four years' time as they are today. However, if there is waste and bureaucracy, we hope that that will be sorted out during the transfer to unitary status. Sensible councils will plan ahead so that they do not need to sack people but can use natural wastage to make the necessary adjustments.

Has not the Welsh economy benefited from the inward investment that has taken place because of the low corporate tax regime that the Government have encouraged, because the Government refused to leave the European Community, as advocated by the Labour party in 1983, and because they refused to sign up to federalism and the social chapter, as it advocated in 1992?

I agree that our low income tax rates and our low corporation tax rates have been important in attracting investors to Wales and other parts of the United Kingdom. What is more, were there ever to be the type of assembly that Opposition Members seek, with powers to impose extra taxes, laws and regulations on Wales, that would drive those investors away. That is why we do not want such an assembly. We want Wales to be open for business and winning in the world.

It seems that we have a developing tradition of English Members of Parliament who become Secretary of State for Wales being overcome by their own hype. I do not think that any of us in Wales would share the present Secretary of State's views that he made much of a contribution to the marvellous victory that we had on Saturday over Scotland.

Order. If I heard correctly, I understood the hon. Gentleman, in his earlier remarks, to accuse the Secretary of State of being dishonest. I believe that he did so and I should be very grateful if he would amend that comment.

I did not accuse the Secretary of State of being dishonest. If I have done so, I withdraw the remark and apologise.

I am much obliged.

I am obliged to you, Madam Speaker. The text of my remarks will show clearly that I was praising the rugby players for their victory. The victory was theirs and theirs alone, although the whole of Wales takes great delight in their success. It is my job to lead the Welsh team in the industrial and commercial area to equivalent success.

What about jobs?

It was a long question, which included rugby as well as jobs. Of course I saw that some unfortunate job losses were announced over the past month. I also saw many job gains announced. I am pleased to say that the gains outstripped the losses and that unemployment fell. I saw the Royal Opera house announcement, the Calsonic announcement, the Greenberg Glass announcement, the Europressings announcement, the Cardiff Carbides announcement and many others. We need many more such announcements and I will press on to get many more. If there are areas of especial trouble, Welsh Office assistance will, of course, be there in especial quantities.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many people in Wales are currently in employment; and if he will make a statement.

The current civilian work force in September 1993, the latest date for which we have figures, was 1,119,000 people.

Does my right hon. Friend share my view that the Development Board for Rural Wales has played a key role in defending jobs within its area? Has he noticed, however, that there appears to be a growing disparity between the board's performance in the Montgomeryshire area, where it is based, and its performance in some other parts of Wales, such as my constituency? Has not the time now come for the board to consider moving its headquarters further south?

I am sure that the board wants to help all the areas for which it is responsible. Its members will see our exchanges today and I trust that it will redouble its efforts in my hon. Friend's constituency. Where the board sites its office is, of course, a matter for it. Again, its members will see my hon. Friend's remarks. Meanwhile, it is a fact that strikes, inflation and interest rates are down, while productivity, output and jobs numbers are up—[Interruption.] Although Opposition Members do not like that, it is the key to our recovery.

Given the recent announcement that 600 jobs will be lost at BP Chemicals at Baglan, coming on top of the imminent loss of hundreds of jobs at Freemans Cigars, will the Secretary of State now reconsider the Government's decision to downgrade Port Talbot and Neath from development status?

Assistance will still be available for various programmes in that area. We came to our best judgment at the time and we got an extremely good deal for Wales—a deal on which Wales can go forward and prosper.

Is not the Government's job in the Principality not directly to seek to increase the number of people in work, but to work to build the right economic framework and climate in which businesses may flourish, something which the Welsh Office has been so successful in doing in recent years?

I agree that the main thing that helps to create jobs is the right economic climate, which is why in all my answers today I have stressed that inflation is down and that productivity is up—the right conditions under which business can trade successfully. There is a job for the Government as well. They need, for example, to pay money to clear the land and to lead regeneration schemes to deal with areas that have been damaged, especially by large nationalised industries. It is the Government's job vigorously to promote Wales as a place in which people can manufacture profitably, as many are discovering for themselves.

Does the Secretary of State agree that, although the scissors effect worked very well on Saturday, the economic scissors effect—by which part-time jobs in service industries are up in Wales while full-time jobs in manufacturing are going inexorably down—is doing to the Welsh economy what the Prime Minister is supposed to want to do to him?

The hon. Gentleman is as wrong in his quotation from the Prime Minister as he is in his general remarks on the Welsh economy. Rather than making a good debating point, he cheapens himself by his remarks. Many extra jobs are being created in Wales as a result of our initiatives and those of private investors and they are by no means all part-time jobs or jobs offering lower wages. On my recent tours, I have seen extremely good full-time jobs for men as well as women being added, involving a high degree of skill and good wages.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on the future of the dairy industry in Wales.

Dairy farming will continue to make a significant contribution to total agricultural output in Wales. The changes being made in marketing arrangements following the passage of the Agriculture Act 1993 will help to ensure that.

May I make an effort to investigate a little further the Minister of State's platitude? Does he accept that the future of dairy farming in rural Wales will be extremely bleak unless the Milk Marque co-operative is brought into being soon? Will he undertake to make every effort to ensure that it is operating by not later than 1 April? Will he assure the House that not only he but the Secretary of State are committed to the future support of farmers throughout rural Wales?

Of course we are committed to the future support of farmers throughout rural Wales, especially those in the dairy industry. Of course we are all disappointed that the negotiations, which could have involved a vesting day of 1 April, have clearly shown that that cannot be achieved on that date. Meanwhile, the current arrangements will continue.

Will the Minister confirm that there will be a meeting next Monday between the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and Milk Marque to discuss that issue? Will he give an assurance that there will be representation from the Welsh Office at that meeting and that it will press for as early as possible a vesting date to remove the uncertainty of the matter? Is he aware that every month that goes by until the matter is resolved means a real loss to the income of dairy farmers?

I can confirm that there will be a meeting next Monday and, as my right hon. Friend has responsibility for agriculture in Wales, he will be one of the Ministers involved in determining the Milk Marketing Board's scheme of organisation. Given my right hon. Friend's quasi-judicial role, the hon. Member will know that the decision cannot be pre-judged and that, of course, I must refrain from making any detailed comments on matters related to those negotiations.

The Minister should come clean on the matter. It is a question not of the negotiations having failed, but of the Government vetoing the proposals that were put to them by Milk Marque. I hope that the Minister will acknowledge that he understands the deeply damaging nature of the decision to reject Milk Marque's proposals. Is not it the case that the Government know that that decision and the decision to cut £25 million from hill livestock compensatory allowances will undermine confidence in the future of agriculture, but that they are proceeding anyway because, in their view, public sector intervention in any industry is ideologically unacceptable?

On that last point, I assure the hon. Gentleman that total support is up, despite the reduction in HLCAs. He has clearly misunderstood what I said. No one has been talking of rejecting the Milk Marketing Board's scheme. Nor did I say that the negotiations have failed. In fact, I said clearly that negotiations were to be resumed on 24 January, next Monday. It is important that whatever new arrangement is made should be in accordance with the Agriculture Act 1993. It is in the best interests of producers, consumers and dairy farming as a whole that we should have the right and proper arrangements.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what funding has been earmarked in 1994–95 for the removal of toxic waste deposits from former industrial sites in Wales.

Approximately £12 million.

Is the Minister aware that throughout industrial Wales many people are forced to live alongside sites that contain industrial toxic waste? Is he further aware that many of those sites, such as that at Coedely in my constituency, resulted from the activities of the National Coal Board and British Coal, yet the same directors who are running down British Coal, who are closing mines and who closed the mine at Coedely and others will be allowed to pick the cherries of the industry without having to pick up the cost of the filthy tips? The cost of putting them right will fall on hard-pressed local authorities such as Mid-Glamorgan. When will the Minister stand up for the people of Wales and ensure that money is made available to remove this filth from our landscape?

As I have said, approximately £12 million is available for such measures in the current year. I understand that the specific case of Coedely is a matter for the Welsh Development Agency, for the hon. Gentleman's local authority of Taff Ely borough council and for Mid-Glamorgan county council, which are giving it the most serious consideration and are ensuring that appropriate arrangements are in hand. I remind him that, under the first programme for the valleys, 2,600 acres throughout the valleys of south Wales have been cleared—a record which can compare with the best in Europe.

What steps has the Welsh Office taken to identify contaminated land across Wales?

The Welsh Office is keenly interested in this matter. It has already conducted two reviews and the matter will continue to receive its closest attention.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is his estimate of the number of people in Wales currently waiting for a disabled facilities grant; and how many have waited for more than two years.

The figures are not held centrally because it is a local authority-administered scheme.

Will the Secretary of State collect those figures and, when he does so, will he accept that it is not appropriate for elderly people to be discharged from hospital only to find that they must wait two or sometimes three years for a shower or a stairlift to be installed in their property? Will he review his policy, under which he transferred the only mandatory housing grant from the supplementary credit allowance to the basic credit allowance system? The sooner he does so, the better community care will be.

What an indictment of Labour local government in Wales. I give it more discretion and more money, yet the hon. Gentleman says that it does not meet its targets. The targets are very clear. Someone who applies for such a grant should receive it within six months of a proper application being submitted. I shall give the hon. Gentleman some idea of the amount of money that is involved: in 1992–93, £26 million was made available to local authorities, but they spent less than £10 million under this heading, which is the only statutory requirement in the £26 million block. That is their expression of priorities. They are letting down disabled people in Wales and it is time that they did a better job. For next year, I am increasing the amount of money that I make available for disabled facilities and schemes by £6·6 million and I hope that local government will be with me and will put its money where the hon. Gentleman's mouth is.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what are his environmental priorities for 1994.

A little change of tone now, Madam Speaker. I see that the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes) is pleased that I am answering this question personally—he wants my personal attention for these important policies.

I was pleased to hear that the last two of the Secretary of State's priorities related to the subject of wind power, which is a controversial matter in Wales. As 10 million homes could be partially powered by wind power by the end of the century and as 200,000 homes are already powered—

Especially in Southwark.

Calm down.

The hon. Gentleman delivered, almost with a straight face, a question about wind power which, for the Liberal party, is quite an achievement. After all, the Liberals are experts on that.

The Secretary of State included in his priorities avoiding dereliction and positive planning policies. Is he aware of the anger and anxiety in Morriston about the potential long-term pollution dangers from Cwmrhydyceirw quarry which stem directly from the original planning permission in respect of which the Welsh Office overrode very strong objections from Swansea city council, which was the planning authority? Will he therefore accept responsibility now for what has happened and be ready to compensate Swansea city council if it were to decide to rescind that planning permission and also give the council money to make good the damage that has been caused?

I should like to send a written answer to the hon. Gentleman because it is a serious question. I believe that I need to research the facts more before I give a straight answer.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what representations he has received concerning the future of the Wales office of the British Geological Survey at Aberystwyth.

My right hon. Friend and I have received a number of representations expressing concern at the proposed closure of the survey's district office at Aberystwyth.

Does the Minister recognise that the Wales office of the British Geological Survey is a significant component in the infrastructure of Wales as it provides important information to local authorities, to developers and to the Welsh Office—when it chooses to ask for it? Does he accept that it is vital for economic development in Wales as it provides information on matters such as energy and mineral extraction? Does he also recognise that it will be impossible to provide that service properly if the archive that is presently located at Aberystwyth is removed from Wales together with the interpretive expertise at that office? Does he recognise that the removal of that office should not be an option? Should not the Welsh Office properly intervene to ensure that the office survives and can develop in future?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that the office at Aberystwyth is part of the British Geological Survey, whose parent council is the Natural Environment Research Council, which is the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. I have made inquiries with my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy and he will provide me with further information. I am due to see the hon. Member for Ceredigion and Pembroke, North (Mr. Dafis), who will, I am sure, bring his representations very much to my notice. Meanwhile, I assure him that the mapping needs of Wales will continue to be met by the survey. I understand that those employed at Aberystwyth will, for the most part, be transferred to the centre at Nottingham.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what provision he is making for the Arts Council for Wales for 1994–95; and if he will make a statement.

Subject to parliamentary approval, the council will receive grant in aid of £13·541 million in 1994–95. That is 4 per cent. above provision in the current year.

Did my right hon. Friend see the gloomy prognostications of a mythical Member of the House, who was described in The Western Mail as being the Member for Caernarfon and Ceredigion and Pembroke, North? Will my right hon. Friend underline and appreciate how much of a welcome there is in Wales for the positive announcement that he has just made in place of that mistaken gloom?

I am happy to do so. My hon. Friend is correct. The story about a reduction in the Arts Council for Wales grant was totally untrue. As I have said, there will be a 4 per cent. increase. I see the hon. Member for Caernarfon (Mr. Wigley) brandishing a headline about the Welsh national opera company. I am pleased to tell him that the Arts Council for Wales element of grant will increase by 2 per cent. next year.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many manufacturing jobs there were in the valleys initiative districts in (a) 1987 and (b) at the latest available date.

The census of employment shows that there were 62,300 people employed in manufacturing jobs in the programme for the valleys area in 1987, and 57,400 in 1991, the latest year for which census of employment data are available.

Does not the Minister's reply give the lie to the way in which the Secretary of State is talking up what has been happening in the valleys? It is a devastating indictment of the Government's policy that full-time adult male jobs, predominantly in manufacturing, for which people might earn about £300 a week are being replaced by part-time jobs for which one is lucky to receive £100 a week. There will be a devastating future for the valleys if the policy continues.

The hon. Gentleman is wrong and I am surprised at what he says. During that period, the valleys fared better than Great Britain as a whole. There was an 11 per cent. fall in manufacturing employment between 1988 and 1992 in the programme for the valleys area, but in Great Britain, over the same period, the fall was 14 per cent. That is a fair measure of the value of the programme for the valleys.

To ask the Attorney-General if he will make a statement on the latest position regarding the case against Mr. Nadir.

The Crown is ready to proceed. Mr. Nadir should return to this country forthwith.

He should indeed, but in view of all the allegations that have been made about the Nadir case, has not the time come for an independent inquiry into all aspects of the case? Of course, such an inquiry would examine the very close relationship between the Tory party and Mr. Nadir. Will the Solicitor-General try to persuade the Prime Minister to ensure that all the moneys that have been donated by Mr. Nadir to the Tory party will be refunded to the creditors? Surely that is the least that the Law Officers should be doing.

This is very old hat. Calls for an inquiry have been made time and again. An inquiry was fixed. A date was fixed in October for a trial at the Central Criminal court which Mr. Nadir should have attended. He did not attend. He should put his arguments in front of a British jury and let them determine the issue. A British jury should be the inquirers in this issue.

As the Serious Fraud Office wrongly and improperly got hold of all the defence papers in the Nadir case and had a chance to peruse them, is there any chance that Mr. Nadir could have a fair trial?

The view that the Serious Fraud Office got hold of all Mr. Nadir's private and personal papers is totally misconceived. This matter has been dealt with by my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General in correspondence with the previous solicitors of Mr. Nadir. There were just a number of papers. They were extracted at an early stage. When Mr. Nadir comes back to this country, the issue will be put in front of the trial judge by the Crown. There really is no excuse for Mr. Nadir staying away.

To ask the Attorney-General what are his priorities for the discharge of his duties to enforce the criminal law during 1994.

The Attorney-General's priority is to continue to work with the Director of Public Prosecution and the Serious Fraud Office to ensure the robust and effective prosecution of criminal offences by the prosecuting authorities.

Given the provisional findings of the district auditor with regard to Westminster city council last week, the allegations about Wandsworth and, for that matter, the findings with regard to Tameside, will the Solicitor-General undertake that it will be a priority for his Department to investigate whether, in addition to any breach of the law that is currently being investigated by the auditor, there has been a criminal conspiracy in any of those places wrongly to spend public money for party political ends?

The hon. Gentleman should be slow to equate provisional findings with fact. The auditor made it plain that he was minded to find certain things, subject to the respondents being given an opportunity to show otherwise. They will be given that opportunity and will have the possibility of explaining to the district auditor that their behaviour was lawful. It would be wrong to speculate about the outcome. As to the hon. Gentleman's specific request, if he has evidence of a criminal offence, he should place it before the police and the matter will be rigorously pursued.

My hon. and learned Friend will be aware of the difficulties which were identified and reported in the newspapers over the weekend about an important and large drugs case. Can he give some reassurance that there is the necessary co-ordination of activities between the police, the Law Officers and Customs and Excise? In so far as there is a case to be brought, can he be wary of those siren voices which say that indictments must be made in relation to seizures at port of entry? It is extremely important in many instances to allow such consignments to go to their destinations so that we can track down and bring to trial the big boys in such deals?

This case was dealt with properly. All decisions were taken by Customs and Excise, which is an independent prosecuting authority. The Attorney-General's limited role in the case was entirely proper and in response to an approach from defence counsel. The decision to drop the case against Mr. Charrington was taken by the commissioners of Customs and Excise. Two defendants are to be retried in June. Hon. Members may wish to be circumspect about their comments, bearing in mind the fact that those two cases are sub judice.

Is the Solicitor-General satisfied that the Attorney-General was told all the facts concerning Mr. Charrington? Who was present at the meeting of defence and prosecution counsel, which the Attorney-General chaired? Can the Solicitor-General assist the House as to why a local news agency was urged not to publicise details of the story?

I am not responsible, nor is my right hon. and learned Friend, for reports in local newspapers. I can assure the right hon. and learned Gentleman that the matter was properly investigated. As I said, there was a meeting which was requested by counsel for Mr. Charrington. That meeting was chaired by the Attorney-General, and counsel for the prosecution and I were present. The matter was dealt with properly. As I said, the prosecution was taken by Customs and Excise. That Department took all the material decisions about the conduct of the case.

To ask the Attorney-General when he has been consulted on prosecutions in the Lloyd's insurance market.

The Attorney-General has not been consulted about any such prosecutions. He has given instructions that I should deal with any matter in connection with Lloyd's which arises in his Departments.

Does the Minister agree that in Lloyd's recently there has been well-documented evidence of insider trading, criminal activity and fraud, and that the Government have treated the whole corruption of the Lloyd's insurance market with a cavalier disregard which contrasts with the way in which they pursue ordinary citizens who may top up their social security benefits with a bit of part-time gardening or something similar? Are there not two standards—one for the rich and one for the poor?

The hon. Gentleman addresses me as a Minister. I am a Law Officer of the Crown and I have duties in respect of the public interest which other Ministers do not have.

Does my hon. and learned Friend agree that it is extremely important for all hon. Members to consider carefully what they say about Lloyd's insurance market? Clearly, untoward things have gone on in Lloyd's during the past year or two, but there is a particular responsibility on the hon. Member for Neath (Mr. Hain) to check his facts before he makes wild allegations. Shortly after the general election, the hon. Gentleman released to the press a list of a number of seats where hon. Members were, he said, names at Lloyd's. That list included my parliamentary seat, because the hon. Gentleman had riot noticed that my predecessor had retired. I am not a name at Lloyd's and the hon. Gentleman, despite being made aware of that fact, has refused to apologise either to me or to my predecessor, Sir Peter Blaker.

The hon. Member for Neath apparently is not very well informed, but there is not much that is new about that.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what proportion of the total aid programme is devoted to population activities.

About £28·6 million or 1·55 per cent. of the total aid programme was identified as being spent directly on population activities in the calendar year 1992. There is, in addition, much spent through the multilateral institutions.

The Government stated in the United Kingdom report to the International Conference on Development and Population that development assistance "remains too low". What steps is my right hon. Friend taking to increase resources and, more importantly, to encourage new donor agencies, particularly in the European Union, where countries have not previously contributed aid in that area?

The Government continue to encourage the mobilisation of additional resources for population in all suitable international forums, which must include the European Community. My hon. Friend referred to the conference on population, which is in Cairo this year. That provides opportunities for reminding and encouraging greater commitment to population issues.

Does not the Minister think that the people of sub-Saharan Africa, where the population doubles every 25 years, have the same right to choose the size of their families as do the people of Italy, where the population doubles every 3,500 years?

The hon. Gentleman is aware that we want policies which encourage people to reach decisions by choice, not by chance. The purpose of all our policies is to give people, and women in particular, the right information and assistance to come to their own decisions about the size of their families.

Is my hon. Friend aware that last November the United States State Department established a global action committee? Is he further aware that one of that committee's objectives is to give full access to contraception for all people across the globe by 2000? Does my hon. Friend share that objective and, if so, what percentage of the ODA budget should be allocated towards such a programme?

We are always loth to adopt specific targets, but we certainly share the objective which my hon. Friend is encouraging. It is significant to remind my hon. Friend that British ODA aid for population has increased by about 60 per cent. during the past four years.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what will be the main change in direction in the use of the resources available for overseas aid in the year 1994–95.

The priority objectives for the aid programme for 1994–95 were set out in the speech of my right hon. and noble Friend the Minister for Overseas Development at Chatham House on 18 October 1993, copies of which have been placed in the Library of the House.

In that speech, the Minister for Overseas Development said that the poorest nations were unable to benefit fully under the Trinidad terms and that there was a need to extend and improve those terms. In the year ahead, do the Government intend to do that for the poorest and most needy nations in the world?

This is an area of policy in the world in which Britain has always led. We launched the terms in 1990. Eighteen countries, including 13 in Africa, have so far benefited. We have also relieved developing countries of £1 billion of aid debt burden. We are continuing to examine debt relief in conjunction with the Paris club.

Does my hon. Friend agree that both the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer have committed themselves to the Trinidad terms and argued strongly at the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting and the World bank meeting in Washington for not only the Trinidad terms but the extended Trinidad terms, to which the Government are also committed?

I heartily endorse what my hon. Friend has said. The British Government, and in particular the two members of the Government to whom my hon. Friend referred, can take the fullest possible credit for the Trinidad terms. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister launched the Trinidad terms himself. I agree with the sentiments expressed by my hon. Friend.

If everything in the garden is so lovely, will the Minister explain why only last week we had an announcement of 47 redundancies of scientific personnel at Chatham? Does he accept that is a direct result of the real cut in overseas aid by the Government, including a cut confirmed in the last Budget? Given that 47 people are to lose their jobs and that some of the poorest countries in the world benefit from their crucial scientific research, where is the Government's strategy for any development for the poorest of this universe?

I cannot accept that the job losses at Chatham are a direct result of some suggestion that the Government's aid programme is not substantially increasing. It has increased by 10 per cent. in real terms in the past six years. Of course, there will be redeployment within the aid budget and I suspect that that is what is happening at Chatham. I or my right hon. and noble Friend will write to the hon. Gentleman to give him further briefing on that.

Has my hon. Friend had the opportunity to read UNICEF's latest report on the state of the world's children? It reminds us that, while much progress has been made, disease still claims some 8 million children's lives each year. That is far more than famine or warfare. Will his priorities include the UNICEF priority of the elimination of disease, especially diarrhoea and pneumonia in children?

The British aid programme is concerned with the elimination of disease, with particular emphasis on assistance to the poorest countries.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment he has made of the implications of the current position with the general agreement on tariffs and trade for the United Kingdom programme of development assistance.

We welcome the successful outcome of the Uruguay round, which potentially can do more than anything else to boost economic growth in the developing world.

What plans does the Minister or his Department have to examine the position of countries which it is forecast will not do well out of the GATT agreement? I am thinking in particular of African countries south of the Sahara. Is not that something which his Department should examine urgently in conjunction with the Minister's European counterparts? What will he do to make sure that our aid and trade policies complement and do not contradict each other?

The conclusion of the Uruguay round is of benefit to the world as a whole. It is not a zero sum gain. Everyone could benefit from it, including developing countries. However, the hon. Lady has touched on a point that was anticipated. In the short term, some developing countries that are net food importers will have difficulties. The Uruguay round anticipated that difficulty and the agreement includes provisions to assist those countries. The important thing for the developing world is that it will have better market access to the prosperous countries of the world and will face lower protection in those countries in domestic agricultural products, which is what the poor world wants to export to us.

Is not it the case that, as a result of GATT, developing countries will be able to increase their exports to the extent that the revenue that they will receive therefrom is greater than the aid programmes of the entire western world and Japan put together? Is not that important, because it will allow those countries to get away from the begging-bowl mentality so favoured by Opposition Members?

I agree with my hon. Friend. Various studies have concluded that the developing world earns three times as much from trade as it does from aid and that third-world countries will benefit to the tune of some $78 billion per annum once the effects of the agreement have worked through.