To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will seek urgent talks with the EC Transport Commissioner with a view to improving rail links between west Wales and the continent of Europe.

My right hon. Friend has no immediate plans to meet the Transport Commissioner. Rail links with west Wales are already included in the proposed trans-European conventional rail network.

With due respect, that does not amount to very much. Do not the Secretary of State and the Minister realise that, with an increasing amount of British trade locked into the European Union and as west Wales is on the periphery of the Brussels empire, there is a real problem in trade and investment? Is the Minister aware that there are many ideas to improve the situation, such as upgrading the ports and providing ferry links with Poole and rail links through the north downs? Will he sit down with the Transport Commissioner and with representatives of Dyfed county council and the local authorities to try to solve that serious problem?

My right hon. Friend and I are most anxious to ensure that the whole of Wales, including west Wales, has first-class links with the continent for trading purposes. The right hon. Gentleman will be aware that there will be three inter-city trains a day running from south Wales to Waterloo, the international terminal, and one of those trains will serve Milford Haven. I am told that, certainly, the others will start from Swansea.

Does the Minister agree that there is an urgent need for the north downs railway line from Reading to Redhill to be upgraded to provide a direct rail link between the channel tunnel and south Wales? Since such a route would avoid congested lines through inner London, provide a direct passenger train service to Europe from Wales and put Cardiff within only four hours of Paris, will he undertake to press the case with British Rail?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that that is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that my right hon. Friend and I will ensure that that matter is given every consideration.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what plans he has to reorganise the Development Board for Rural Wales and the Welsh Development Agency.

The chairman of the Welsh Development Agency has recently announced the terms of his internal reorganisation of that agency and I have recently announced the new guidelines, which I have issued. The future of the Development Board for Rural Wales is under review.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that those announcements are most welcome? Will he give the House an assurance that the standards followed by the Welsh Development Agency and the Development Board for Rural Wales in future will be those that the Committee of Public Accounts and Parliament have the right to expect?

I strongly hope that that will be the case. I have asked the chairmen and chief executives of those agencies to take full account of the strong views of the PAC and the House of Commons and of my views. We want the highest standards. I wish to see the agencies uphold them and I trust that they will do so.

What is the point if all the work of those two bodies is negated by the actions of privatised companies, especially British Gas, where, we are told, the number of jobs in Wales is about to be reduced from 2,903 to, probably, less than 1,000 because it is pursuing a policy which is profit first and in which safety and the regional need for jobs in Wales come nowhere?

I have written to the chairman of British Gas saying that Wales offers a great deal and have urged the company to make full use of Wales for the location of its business activities. I have received a reply in which he admits that Wales is a good place in which to locate and assures me that there will still be a strong presence there. I am afraid that Wales cannot be exempt from the efficiency gains that British Gas will be making, any more than the rest of the United Kingdom can.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the concern expressed to me at the weekend by tenants of the Development Board for Rural Wales on the Ffrwgrech estate in Brecon? He will know that the development board must pursue a policy of maximising its assets, but the tenants are concerned that the whole of the estate is to be sold to an outside investor. Will my right hon. Friend tell the House that he will encourage the Development Board for Rural Wales to look first to its own tenants so that we build in rural Wales an economy in which, very often, local businesses own their own factories?

I agree with my hon. Friend that it is better if tenants buy their own freehold premises. I wish to see the development board offer those premises to the tenants, but, of course, the tenants must make a fair offer in return. We wish to raise money by selling existing assets so that we have more money to spend on new assets to create new investment and new jobs for Wales. However, I will ensure that the chairman of the DBRW is aware of my hon. Friend's remarks. Like my hon. Friend, I want tenants to be given a fair opportunity.

Will the Secretary of State give his unequivocal backing to the public statement made today by the chairman of the DBRW that the interests of economic development in rural Wales are best served by having a separate organisation, the DBRW?

I am reviewing the best way to deliver those services, so I wish to complete that review before answering that question.

Although I agree entirely with what the hon. Member for Newport, West (Mr. Flynn) said about the British Gas situation and would very much like to associate myself with his comments, if there is to be a reorganisation of the DBRW will the Secretary of State consider the rent reviews? That has been a matter of grave concern, especially in my constituency where one third or more of the units are empty simply because the rack rents asked may be reasonable in Birmingham but are not in rural Wales.

I quite agree that rents must be related to market circumstances. I have asked all the agencies with empty property to put at the top of their list the need to find tenants for those properties and, therefore, to find a market-clearing level of rent that enables those tenants to come forward. I entirely agree with the hon. Gentleman. If hon. Members have other points that they would like to be taken into account in my review of the DBRW, they have a good opportunity to do that now or in writing this week.

Notwithstanding the public admonition from the hon. Member for Uxbridge (Mr. Shersby) to the Secretary of State in his supplementary question earlier, as the senior-ranking Tory member of the Public Accounts Committee, does the Secretary of State agree that the executive reorganisation at the top of the Welsh Development Agency to which he referred in his answer is in clear breach of the undertakings given by him to the House on 19 October when he introduced the report by Sir John Caines and said that those recommendations would be accepted in full by the top management of the WDA? Does he also agree that, until the mess of that reorganisation is sorted out, it is unlikely that the WDA and the DBRW will be able to repeat the amazing sporting achievements of Colin Jackson and Steve Robinson over the past weekend?

The hon. Gentleman did not say how he thought that was out of line with the Caines report. Of course, I will consider any allegation that the hon. Gentleman wishes to make specifically on that point. The chairman has announced his reorganisation. I believe that it will deliver more service for less administrative cost, which is something I should have thought that hon. Members would welcome.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is the current level of unemployment in Clwyd.

The level in January 1994 was 16,739 unadjusted out of work or 9.1 per cent.

Is the Secretary of State aware that, in the past two weeks, 80 potential jobs have been lost from Clwyd to Merseyside and a similar number have been placed under threat by the deliberate actions of the Welsh Office in respect of the mishandling of a planning application at Mostyn in Clwyd? Will the Secretary of State please explain to the House why he took those actions and why he allowed that to happen, despite repeated warnings to the contrary?

I should be delighted to have this opportunity to put the record straight. The hon. Gentleman well knows why I took the action that I did. I had wanted the local authority to settle the issue. I thought that that was the best way forward. I thought that it would be able to take full account of the environmental objections, the jobs and the economic case.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the policies of the Government, and especially the Welsh Office, have led to a huge increase in the number of new jobs in Clwyd replacing the jobs lost in traditional industries? Would he care to pay a tribute to the work of Chwarae Teg in getting women into the work force in Clwyd, and especially in helping them with training?

I should, indeed, like to echo my hon. Friend's comments: there has been a massive expansion in investment and job opportunities.

The right hon. Gentleman wrote those comments.

No. My hon. Friend speaks for himself. He seems to know better than Labour Members what is good news in Clwyd and how much has been arrived at because of the Government's policies and the agencies that have been assisting. I hope that Labour Members will also welcome that news because, although there are still too many people out of work, there have been many major new projects, particularly in the energy field in that part of Wales, and there is much more good news to come.

It is a truly appalling figure for Clwyd, as indeed it is for the whole of Wales. We now have 10 per cent. unemployment in Wales, and under this Government we have seen the loss of 113,000 manufacturing jobs. What action does the Secretary of State advocate to tackle those critical weaknesses in British industry, which were identified in a recent Royal Society of Arts report as

"chronic underinvestment, a lack of commitment, inflexibility and the failure to focus on long term goals"?

Unemployment is falling and I look forward to further falls in the months ahead because of the economic policies that we are pursuing. It is a bit rich for Labour Members to come up with that criticism, because they have no ideas, no new money to offer and only one gag—the gag from the hon. Member for Dunfermline, East (Mr. Brown), who stops them saying anything that they want to say. What is the point of being a socialist if one cannot spend more of other people's money, or offer to spend more of other people's money? Our policies are based on labour market flexibility, encouragement for investment, low inflation and sound economic fundamentals.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on the current level of unemployment in Wales.

In January 1994, the seasonally adjusted unemployment figure was 127,500—a fall of 6,500 since January 1993 or an average fall of 500 a month.

What assessment has my right hon. Friend made of the impact of a high-spending, high-taxing Welsh assembly and the European social chapter on unemployment in Wales? Would not the Labour party's policies and those of their European cronies be disastrous for Wales and lead to a reversal of the trend in unemployment which my right hon. Friend so warmly welcomes, as I do?

I am afraid that my hon. Friend is right. An assembly that taxed more and regulated more would put businesses off going to Wales and drive out some of those already there. I understand that Labour Members are getting worried about that. They think that maybe the assembly should not have taxing powers. But surely it would have spending powers; that means that it would end up taxing more, which would be bad news for business and bad news for jobs.

With reference to the question on the Order Paper, are not the figures far too high, especially in the male sector? Does the Secretary of State recognise that part-time jobs for women will never replace the thousands of jobs lost in coal and steel? Will the Government and the Welsh Development Agency step up their efforts to bring new enterprises to Wales?

That is exactly what we are doing. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will welcome the news today, which I just heard, of up to 600 new jobs over a three-year period from the Goodings satellite television receiver venture in Mid Glamorgan. That is extremely welcome news and means that there are likely to be further falls in unemployment which I, like Labour Members, sincerely wish to see. Of course, one in 10 out of work is far too many, but our policies of low inflation, good economic growth and attraction of investment will deliver jobs.

Has my right hon. Friend estimated the impact of inward investment on unemployment in Wales? Does he believe that inward investment would be encouraged by a national minimum wage, the adoption of the social chapter and the nonsenses from Brussels which are advocated by the Opposition?

I have, indeed, looked at the figures. More than 11,000 new and safeguarded jobs in the first 10 months of this year have been attracted, as recorded by Welsh Development International, and there may have been more. Those jobs are extremely beneficial. The worry is that if the policies of the Opposition were followed, Wales would no longer be attractive for many of those companies that come, they say, because they want to benefit from being in the EC and have the added benefit of not having the same social arrangements as are enjoyed by some continental countries.

I welcome those 600 new jobs and any other new jobs which come. Does the Secretary of State realise that 2,000 jobs are about to be lost in the gas industry, and that 400 or 500 of those are in Clwyd? On the point made by the Secretary of State a moment ago with regard to Mostyn docks, does he realise that the loss of that infrastructure project will affect not only Clwyd but my county of Gwynedd? Why was it not possible for the Welsh Office to turn that around within five weeks, as in the case of Cardiff? If that had been done, would not the project be alive and would not we be looking forward to the jobs that came with it?

I should like to turn it around as quickly as possible and come to a fair decision, but I must take legal advice. There is no point in acting illegally, because the decision would be overturned in a court of law. A proper environmental assessment is needed so that a proper judgment can be reached, given the special European designation in that area. That is the problem, and why progress takes time. It must be done carefully so that people can see that it is done fairly.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what plans he has for a co-ordinated strategy for (a) energy and (b) transport for Wales.

Plans are set out in "Sustainable Development—The UK Strategy", "This Common Inheritance", annual progress reports, the 1994 Welsh Office departmental report and various policy planning guidance notes and in my right hon. Friend's announcement to the House on 3 March on strategic road plans.

May I encourage Ministers to make sure that there is a clearly separate energy and transport strategy for the Principality that fits in with the UK and European framework? Given that one of the things that would benefit both would be the transfer of freight from road to rail in Wales, will Ministers consider whether there can be an increase in subsidy for that purpose? Would not that take traffic away from the roads, increase the use of the railways, save energy, reduce pollution and reduce congestion at the same time?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that my right hon. Friend and I will make sure that the interests of Wales are fully safeguarded in the UK's consideration of the matter. It is not possible for Wales to be considered in isolation because of the obvious relativity involved.

Will my hon. Friend join me in being careful of the phrase—the cant, humbug phrase—"co-ordinated strategy" when used by the Opposition? Is that not normally a code for more state interference, more bossiness from Whitehall and less listening to what the people of Wales really want? Does he agree that, these days, proposals to build new railway lines would be open to considerable environmental objections?

My hon. Friend makes a fair point. There are enough examples in the past of left-wing and Labour Governments—including those supported by the Liberal party—trotting out plan after plan. We know full well that the one thing centralised planning is sure to do is fail.

On energy, will the Minister inform me as to what proportion of the non-fossil fuel levy goes to renewables and what proportion to nuclear?

That is a rather detailed question for which I had better provide the hon. Gentleman with a detailed answer.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what are his plans for extending the deregulation initiative to the work of his Department.

The deregulation initiative runs across Whitehall. The Welsh Office is co-operating fully.

Will my right hon. Friend ensure that he includes in his review of the regulations the appalling complexity that now seems to pervade every aspect of agricultural administration, which supposedly requires every farmer to have a double first in legal interpretation and accountancy?

I agree with the sentiments that my hon. Friend expresses. Of course, we shall work with our European partners and urge simplification and a more accessible system. Where we have powers ourselves, I shall make sure that they are properly used, as I have done in simplifying the integrated administration and control system forms recently.

Does the Secretary of State agree that, in view of what has happened in the past six to nine months in Wales, what we have is not deregulation in the Welsh Office but the Welsh Office out of control? Rather than accepting the proposals suggested by the hon. Member for Brecon and Radnor (Mr. Evans), it is about time that the Secretary of State got to grips with the unelected bodies in Wales and the corruption that pervades right through the system.

It is a grotesque calumny to say that there is corruption right through the system. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will think again before saying that and realise that such serious allegations require evidence to back them. Of course, I wish to see the high standards that he desires; I have made no secret of that. I have also set out guidelines and guidance to ensure that high standards are observed.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what plans he has made to take Welsh hospitals into the next century; and if he will make a statement.

Since 1979, £1.4 billion has been spent on improving the national health service estate in Wales: 60 major hospital schemes have been completed or are under way. I am to announce shortly details of the new capital programme. My right hon. Friend and I regularly visit hospitals throughout Wales. I look forward this coming Wednesday to launching the new magnetic resonance imaging scanner in Cardiff at the University hospital of Wales.

I hope that the Minister is aware that there is an increasing fashion among hospital administrators to locate all the facilities that they possibly can under one roof, regardless of the convenience or feelings of the local community or of the use that it makes of those facilities. Does he have any sympathy with older hospitals, much loved by their patients, which face closure as a result of that misguided policy? I should like an answer, particularly on Cardiff royal infirmary.

The interests of the community clearly ought to be considered on every occasion. The movement towards trust status, whose popularity in Wales is increasing rapidly, emphasises exactly that point. That is what we look for in every application for trust status. There must be greater benefits to the local community that the hospitals serve.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that the proposed cancer treatment centre at Glan Clwyd NHS trust hospital, which will benefit cancer sufferers throughout north Wales and beyond, will go ahead as planned, despite attempts by Opposition Members to stop the plan?

I know that my hon. Friend has been stalwart in campaigning for the new facility at Ysbyty Glan Clwyd. It is absolutely right that we should have that new cancer treatment facility in north Wales. It has been most carefully researched and the decision has been given the go-ahead. I look forward to the centre being set up as soon as possible.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will visit Ewenny, St. Bride's Major and Wick to discuss his proposals for local government reorganisation.

I have no plans to do so.

Does the Minister realise that my constituents in Ewenny, St. Bride's Major and Wick will be angry and disappointed with that reply because they believe that the continuing failure of the Welsh Office to single out that one area—where, in an Electoral Reform Society ballot with a 75 per cent. turnout, almost 90 per cent. voted in favour of staying with Bridgend—will bring democracy into disrepute and turn to ashes anything that the Government have ever said about respecting the will of the people?

I am disappointed to realise that my presence is so sorely missed in Ewenny, St. Bride's Major and Wick. We have already carefully considered the matter in the proposals that we are putting to the House. There will be the fullest opportunity to debate it in the Second Reading debate tomorrow afternoon on the Local Government (Wales) Bill. I am sure that in Committee we shall give the most careful consideration to where the three communities should be located. I must say that they appear to be much more rural in character and more appropriate to the Vale of Glamorgan.

Does the Under-Secretary of State realise that there is widespread concern throughout the length and breadth of Wales, and not only in the Vale of Glamorgan, the heads of the valleys, Meirionnydd and Montgomery, at the boundaries contained in the Local Government (Wales) Bill? The Minister referred to the Bill, which will receive its Second Reading tomorrow. May I take it from the reply that he has just given that he is prepared to be flexible? If so, will he tell us the extent to which the Government are prepared to be flexible on boundaries, should the Bill receive a Second Reading?

It is, of course, for Parliament to consider that.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he last visited Brussels; and when he next intends to visit Brussels to discuss with the Commissioner matters relating to his departmental responsibilities.

There has been no occasion for my right hon. Friend to visit Brussels since his appointment. He has, however, renewed invitations to key Commissioners to visit Wales and we hope that they will be able to do so.

I suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that that is a neglect of duty, considering that so many decisions taken in Brussels affect our communities. For example, is he aware that, during the past five years, all four pits in my constituency have closed and more than 2,000 miners' jobs have been lost? Will there be a repeat performance of the charade and farce that accompanied the first RECHAR programme, when the second programme is introduced? How much money is available under the second phase of RECHAR and will it go directly to those communities affected directly by pit closures, such as mine?

I am glad that the hon. Gentleman acknowledges that his constituency did especially well under the RECHAR programme. Merthyr has had about 10 projects with a value of £1.3 million and Wales has had about 170 projects, valued at £21 million. I am glad to be able to tell him that the RECHAR programme is one of the initiatives that will be continued and that 0.4 billion ecu will be devoted to it.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the 600 jobs that the Secretary of State announced earlier have been created to produce transceivers for the satellite industry, which are destined for the Dutch and German market? When my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State visits Brussels, will he resist all the trans-European, pan-socialist dogma which has driven business out of Germany and Holland and brought it to south Wales?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. There is no doubt about it—many companies in south Wales are operating with machinery that was once in Europe and has been drawn back to Wales because it is more productive there.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many appointments to unelected bodies in Wales are his responsibility.

My right hon. Friend is currently responsible for 798 appointments to public bodies in Wales. The quarterly list updating the details to 1 March will be available in the Library of the House shortly.

I wonder whether the Minister will give us some information. He is aware of the fight that the Conservative party put up against quangos and unelected bodies. Why have the Conservatives changed their minds? Can he give details of the political affiliations of those appointed? Can he also give due consideration to ensuring that when the chairman of Mid-Glamorgan health authority is appointed, he or she will have the political affiliation that is shared by all the Members of Parliament who represent Mid-Glamorgan?

The hon. Gentleman must realise that we do not know the political affiliations of a great many of those appointees. They are not asked that question, although they are given an opportunity to instance a position that they have held in a political party. I am sure that there a great many members of the Labour party, the Liberal party and Plaid Cymru among those 798 appointees to whom I referred in the answer.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what plans there are for the opening of the railway line between Barry and Rhoose for passenger traffic.

I understand that South Glamorgan county council is in the lead with Regional Railways in an investigation into the feasibility of introducing a limited passenger rail service on the Vale of Glamorgan line with a stop at Rhoose.

Will my right hon. Friend note the warm welcome that has been given in the Vale of Glamorgan to the announcement by the Welsh Office that grant aid is likely to be available for an improved road link between Culverhouse Cross and Cardiff Wales? Will he join me in urging the highway authority, South Glamorgan county council, to take up that offer of help? Is any grant aid likely to be available for the rail link to which my right hon. Friend alluded?

I very much appreciate my hon. Friend's kind remarks about my right hon. Friend's announcement about the road link to the airport at Rhoose. With regard to the rail link, it is possible for us to assist such a scheme if it is submitted to us as part of the strategic development scheme.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will now make it his policy to ensure an elected body for Wales.

We do not need another elected body in Wales.

We have had 15 years of Conservative Government, during which we have seen greater centralisation than ever before in the history of democracy, powers stripped away from local authorities and Conservatives appointed to quangos in Wales. The Minister of State has just told us that he is to visit Barcelona—Catalonia is the most successful economy in Europe. Is not it time that the Government learnt that the people of Wales now want their own Parliament?

I am very interested in the idea that Catalonia is the most successful economy in western Europe. I thought that Spain had an unemployment rate of about one in four of the work force. I certainly would not want such a rate for Wales and his comment shows that there is no progress in the hon. Gentleman's views.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that the whole thrust of Government policy is to ensure that decisions are made in schools by governing bodies and in hospitals by trusts and that it is not designed to try to create yet another layer of bureaucracy? Surely the unitary authority programme that we have brought forward has been warmly welcomed in Wales. There has been no drive towards creating a third layer of local government.

My hon. Friend is right. He has answered another part of the previous question, because we restore real power to people—parents and patients—and offer choices in public services which Opposition Members would deny people. That is exactly the kind of democracy that is best and closest to people. An assembly would have to take powers away from local government and that would cause rows in the Opposition camp as well.

Does not the Minister feel a sense of shame that he has to appoint about 800 people to quangos and that they are responsible for about one third of public expenditure in Wales? Should not democracy mean

"government of all the people, by all the people, for all the people"?

I believe that local councils appoint quite a lot of people to the governing bodies of schools. I think that that is perfectly healthy and it is an analogue to what I am doing on behalf of Parliament and the people of Wales, in appointing people to bodies charged by the House, often under Labour legislation, to carry out certain tasks. As for spending, by far and away the biggest part of the Welsh Office delegated budget passes directly to local government in the form of a bloc grant.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is the current level of inward investment to Wales.

In the first 10 months of the current financial year, Welsh Development International recorded 120 projects, which promise about 11,000 new and safeguarded jobs and a capital investment of £630 million.

Does not that demonstrate our economic success in a difficult world recession in a way that is not just good for Wales but good for the whole of our nation?

That was a short and accurate question and I would give a short and accurate answer—yes.

Does not the Minister accept that instead of sending the Minister of State to Barcelona he should send him to Brussels especially to intervene in the mess that the Commission has got itself in over Interreg II, as a result of which Dyfed in particular stands to lose a significant sum—possibly tens of millions of pounds—in European investment in the next six years because we are now being excluded by the Commission from the consultation process? Can he assure us that either he or the Minister of State is taking the matter up at the highest level in Brussels?

Of course I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the Welsh Office is taking the matter up in Brussels, as he would expect. My right hon. Friend the Minister of State does great work for Wales in representing us in many countries in Europe, and I hope that the hon. Member for Pembroke (Mr. Ainger) recognises that there is benefit in trade links of the type that my right hon. Friend is extending. The Under-Secretary also recently visited Brussels.

To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, representing the Church Commissioners, what assessment the Church Commissioners have made of the effect which the reduction of their contribution towards stipends will have on the number of parish clergy.

The proportion of the costs of stipends met by the Church Commissioners is estimated to decrease from 37 per cent. to about 20 per cent. by 1997 as a result of our planned reductions in diocesan stipend allocations. The extent to which that affects the number of parish clergy will depend on diocesan planning and lay giving. Our remaining support for dioceses will, however, continue to be targeted to help sustain the parochial ministry in areas of greatest need.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that any organisation in financial difficulties needs to seek to restrain its overhead costs? Can he therefore assure the House that synods, bishops and the Commissioners themselves will not be exempt from the need for stringency?

The General Synod proposes to introduce cash-limited budgeting during the next two or three years. My hon. Friend will be glad to know that the Commissioners themselves have managed to reduce their staff by 25 per cent. during the past 11 years and that increasing productivity will continue on trend.

To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, representing the Church Commissioners, what provisions are being made by the Church Commissioners to protect stipends of clergy following losses made on the property markets.

As the majority of the stipends bill is met from lay giving in parishes, any further improvement in stipend levels will largely depend on the willingness of laity to give more generously. Stipends are being increased by an average of 2.9 per cent. from this April and the majority of dioceses have recently supported a proposal for modest increases from April next year.

Why does the right hon. Gentleman think that those enormous losses were made by the Church Commissioners? Is it because of the incompetence in property speculation that the commissioners showed or is it because the Almighty has indicated his strong disapproval of property speculation? In either case, is not it unfair that priests should be expected to suffer the consequences, and that lay members should be asked to increase their contributions to cover the incompetence of the commissioners? Surely the Church Commissioners and their advisers should foot the bill.

I think that the hon. Gentleman did not hear the answer that I gave him, which is that the stipends are increasing by rather more next year than the hon. Gentleman's parliamentary salary, and probably by rather more the year after than the hon. Gentleman's parliamentary salary. So the invocation of the Divinity upon the prospects for pay in different parts of the country should take into account that He is obviously looking rather less favourably on Members of Parliament than on the clergy.

To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, representing the Church Commissioners, what plans there are to introduce an early retirement scheme for parsons; and what assessment the Church Commissioners have made of the financial consequences of such a scheme.

The pension scheme already contains a provision enabling clergy to retire with an immediate pension and retirement lump sum up to five years before the minimum normal pension age. Discussions are taking place within the Church to determine whether it would be appropriate and financially feasible to introduce a specific scheme aimed at encouraging some clergy who are close to pension age to retire early, in order to free posts for younger clergy.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his answer. Does he agree that the parsons' freehold affects the efficiency of the Church adversely, and also restricts opportunities for young and enthusiastic ordinands?

No, I do not think that I can go down that road. The parsons' freehold is not an immovable and irresistible block in the way of movement in the Church; nevertheless, I believe that it gives some genuine and, I believe, appropriate independence to clergy whose doctrine and ministry may not always be strictly in line with what parishioners want. I consider that desirable.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many members of the public visited the Public Record Office search rooms in Chancery lane during 1993.

A total number of 104,429 reader visits were made to the Public Record Office search rooms at the Chancery lane site during 1993. The census microfilm search room accounted for 76,798 of the visits, while the remaining 27,000-odd visits were to the search rooms for original documents.

The Department's plan to shift the PRO'_s facilities in their entirety to Kew will create difficulties of access for many readers who use Chancery lane. Will my hon. Friend consider keeping the Chancery lane search rooms open, perhaps as a family history centre, so that people can use the microfilm and other facilities?

No decision has yet been made about the future use of the Chancery lane site. It is the subject of a review currently being undertaken by the Public Record Office and Property Holdings. The review is expected to be completed by 30 September 1994. If my hon. Friend wishes to give me the benefit of his thoughts, I shall be very grateful.

If a member of the public searched any part of the PRO, would he find a precedent—since the English revolution of 1688—for the monstrous and unconstitutional pressure put by the Lord Chancellor on Mr. Justice Wood, the president of the employment appeals tribunal, to violate his judicial oath and deny appellants an oral hearing in order, in his own words, to save the taxpayer costs?

It is no part of my job to respond on judicial matters from the Dispatch Box; but I happen to think that if the hon. Gentleman were fully appraised of the facts, he would not have expressed himself in that way.

It is, however, part of the Minister's job to respond to questions relating to the Public Record Office itself. Will he confirm that the review that he mentioned in reply to the question from the hon. Member for Aylesbury (Mr. Lidington) includes inquiries with the intention of imposing a charge on use of the PRO? Does he not accept that his role, and that of the Lord Chancellor, is to protect ease of access and freedom of use? Are we not witnessing—in terms of the development of the PRO—not the next step, but the final step to privatisation?

There are no current plans to privatise the PRO. As for charging the public, the question of charges for access to the records is the subject of a review currently being undertaken by the PRO. An extensive market research exercise asking for the views of users has been carried out. The review is expected to be completed by 31 March; so the hon. Gentleman and the rest of the House will not have long to wait.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what plans he has to encourage the publication of the names and addresses of those appearing on court lists in respect of sex offences and subsequently being found guilty.

I have no plans to encourage the publication of the names and addresses of those convicted in the courts of sex offences.

Is my hon. Friend aware that 21 homosexual men were recently prosecuted in my local court for acts of gross indecency in a public toilet only a few minutes' walk from my house? Is he aware that all the public toilets in my constituency must now be closed at night, and that one has been taken out of use? Would not the publication of those men's names and addresses act as a deterrent?

It is not the function of the courts to publicise details of convicted persons. The press may do so when the information is given in proceedings held in open court, unless a restriction order is in force, and, as my hon. Friend should know, almost all such cases are held in open court. The only exemptions are for the victims of sexual offences and for children and young persons involved in criminal offences.

So far as sexual offences are concerned, can the Minister tell the House what stage the judicial studies programme for the training of judges in these matters has reached? Are outside speakers being taken on to deal with very serious matters, such as rape trauma syndrome?

The hon. Lady may be reassured that the matters she raises are high on the agenda of the Judicial Studies Board. Outside experts will certainly be contracted to provide the benefit of their knowledge and wisdom.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what consultations have taken place between the magistrates' associations and his Department over the Police and Magistrates' Courts Bill [Lords]; and if he will make a statement.

The Lord Chancellor and I and our officials have consulted the Magistrates' Association on many occasions in the two years since our proposals were published. We shall continue to do so.

How does the Minister reconcile the answer given to my hon. Friend the Member for Alyn and Deeside (Mr. Jones) on 31 January—Official Report, Vol. 236, column 610—in which he said that justices' clerks would be responsible to local magistrates committees, with the fact that in my area of Wakefield and Pontefract the magistrates committees will be abolished as a result of the amalgamation proposed under the Bill? How does the Minister reconcile his reply on that occasion with practicality? Will he now face reality and change the proposals in the Bill to ensure that local magistrates committees may continue?

I think that the hon. Gentleman misunderstands the situation. I am at pains to tell him that, even if there are amalgamations—for example, in his own area—they will merely create a larger administrative unit under a magistrates courts committee. There will be a magistrates courts committee consisting of locally selected magistrates, and I can repeat the assurance that the justices' clerks and their chief will be answerable to the committee, which will have the authority. It will be a locally run service, which is what the hon. Gentleman and I both want.

I am sure that my hon. Friend is aware that the magistracy in south-east and south-west London has been very concerned at suggestions that the Lord Chancellor might use his powers under this legislation to amalgamate all the courts in the area under a single administration. Can my hon. Friend assure me that no such plan will be implemented without very careful consultation? Can he assure me, in particular, that the Lord Chancellor will have to satisfy himself that amalgamation would be more cost effective than the present arrangements?

My hon. Friend should know that we are still exploring with the outer London action group the details of its proposals. My officials' next meeting with the group will be held on Wednesday. The Lord Chancellor and I are hopeful that it will be possible to find a system that delivers our objectives in restructuring the outer London service, but falls short of amalgamating committees. We are working with the service to that end.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many representations he has received from legal practitioners, the Law Society and the Bar Council regarding the freezing of legal aid rates.

The Department has to date received about 20 letters from solicitors and local law societies expressing concern about legal aid rates. The Law Society and the Bar Council are consulted when fee rates are reviewed and have expressed similar concerns.

Does the Lord Chancellor's Department realise that growing numbers of solicitors' firms are now going out of legal aid practice altogether and that this sad fact, coupled with last year's savage cuts in the green form scheme, has resulted in tens of thousands of people in Wales, England and Scotland being deprived of access to legal advice and assistance?

There is no evidence that legal aid fee rates are inadequate to allow solicitors to continue to undertake legal aid work. Since 1988–89, the proportion of solicitors' offices in England and Wales that received payment for legal aid work has increased from 68 to 82 per cent.

Is my hon. Friend aware that, if the Government were to do more to encourage private insurance in litigation cases, there would be less pressure on the legal aid fund and less need to freeze legal aid rates?

My hon. and learned Friend should know that expenditure on legal aid this year is expected to rise by 12 per cent. The Lord Chancellor announced that he will be increasing all legal aid income eligibility limits by 3.8 per cent. and the green form limit by 15 per cent. He is also abolishing the means test for ABWOR—assistance by way of representation—for mental health review tribunals. Those measures prove the Government's continuing commitment to the legal aid scheme. Legal expenses insurance certainly has a role to play, but the market must show itself willing to participate. Progress in that respect seems to be slow.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department when he expects to complete his review of the limitation law.

We are considering whether the Limitation Act 1980 should be amended to change the limitation period that applies where a plaintiff claims damages for non-accidental personal injuries. We hope to reach a conclusion by the end of the year.

Does the Minister accept that the current limitation law is out-dated and inappropriate and does not take account of, for example, the specific circumstances of people who have been subject to childhood sexual abuse and who try to take legal action in adult life? Will he assure me that the circumstances of such people will be taken into account in the current review and give me an idea of how soon the review will be completed?

The answer to the first question is yes, and the answer to the second is by the end of the year.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what is the average age of the magistrates serving on the Lichfield and Rugeley benches.

The average age of magistrates serving on the Lichfield and Rugeley benches is, in both instances, 52.

Does my hon. Friend agree that justice must not only be done but be seen to be done? Does he agree that, if it is to be seen to be done, magistrates should be drawn from all age groups and from all sociological backgrounds? What exactly are the Government doing to encourage that?

The Lord Chancellor seeks to maintain a proper balance of ages on benches. It is important that there should be young as well as older people to ensure a continuity of experience. Efforts are made to ensure that people are aware that it is open to them to apply, but only those who put themselves forward can be appointed.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what discussions he has had with the Law Society on the remuneration of solicitors in training.

None. Trainee solicitors negotiate their own terms with their employers. This is an internal matter within the profession.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the great problems being experienced by aspiring solicitors in getting grants from local authorities because such grants are discretionary? Is he further aware that, four years ago, the College of Law received two thirds of its income from local authorities but the figure has now fallen to 9 per cent? Will the hon. Gentleman consult the Department for Education to see what can be done, otherwise solicitors will be drawn from an ever narrower bunch of people in society?

If the hon. Gentleman is talking about law students rather than trainee solicitors, to whom his initial question referred, he has correctly anticipated my answer. The policy on the awarding of grants for postgraduate education is a matter for the Secretary of State for Education. However, I do consult Ministers at the Department for Education and I will bear in mind what the hon. Gentleman said.

Does my hon. Friend accept that trainee solicitors face another problem in that many study for three years for a qualification and then sometimes have a job getting on to a course for their final year in order to achieve the full qualification? Is he proposing to do anything to make more places available so that when trainee solicitors have completed three years' training, they have the opportunity to become fully qualified?

As I understand the problem, the difficulty is that grants for postgraduate qualifications—that is, the solicitors' professional examination after a degree—are discretionary; they are in the hands of local authorities. It is a matter for local authorities to decide and it lies ill in the mouths of those who argue for local authorities to have discretion to blame the Government for the way in which that discretion is used.

Does my hon. Friend agree that as the Law Society, the solicitors and all those involved in the profession are excellent, they should be responsible for making proposals to ensure that trainee solicitors can be remunerated properly while they are training?

Yes, of course. The profession has responsibilities which are concomitant with being independent and self-regulating.