To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage when she last met representatives of the voluntary sector to discuss volunteering [33658]

Since taking over responsibility for volunteering, I have been meeting a range of people to discuss volunteering, both in the key national voluntary organisations and in local volunteer bureaux. We have a strong tradition of volunteering in the United Kingdom. It is an enormously worthwhile activity, enabling individuals of all ages to contribute positively to the communities in which they live. I am looking forward to building on that important tradition to encourage more varied and challenging opportunities for volunteering, especially among the young.

I welcome my right hon. Friend's answer. Will she join me in supporting the splendid work of the cadet movement, which brings discipline, commitment and leadership to many young people throughout the country? I welcome the fact that the national lottery has dispensed grants to 14 cadet units to enable them to improve their training centres. Does my right hon. Friend have any advice to offer other cadet units that are seeking funding in that way?

I share my hon. Friend's endorsement of the cadet movement and of the volunteers who devote so much time to bringing up the next generation and encouraging young people to take a responsible role in society. Involvement in worthwhile activities is one of the best ways of building the citizens of the next century and there is no doubt that the national lottery is making many more opportunities available.

Does the Secretary of State agree that a great deal more drive and coherence is needed in the promotion of volunteering? Will she issue guidance to local authorities to encourage them to think strategically about the involvement of volunteers across the range of their responsibilities? Will she also do all that she can to ensure that local authorities have the resources available to them to support volunteers and to promote good practice?

Something like 23 million people—or one in two adults—are involved in volunteering each year. I believe that there is great untapped potential and I shall certainly take up the hon. Gentleman's ideas in carrying forward my new responsibilities. I intend to chair the interministerial group on volunteering and part of its work will be to ensure that local authorities are fully committed to the use of a maximum number of volunteers where appropriate.

Has my right hon. Friend inherited the commitment made by the Home Secretary that every young person who wishes it shall have an opportunity to volunteer? If she has, will she assure us that she is going flat out to make that possible? Will she also tell the House whether she is making progress in negotiations about benefit entitlements to young people which often make it difficult for them to become involved in volunteering?

There are a great number of factors involved in promoting volunteering, particularly among the young. Discussions about benefit matters and with schools must be part of that work. I was enormously impressed by Volunteers Week this year. I was delighted that 108 Members of Parliament accepted the Women's Royal Voluntary Service challenge to learn more about its work. I believe that there is further potential and we must make good the commitment to encourage young people to become involved in volunteering and to make it a habit for life.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what recent discussions she has had with the bodies dispensing national lottery moneys. [33659]

I have regular meetings with the chairmen of the English and United Kingdom distributing bodies.

Is the Secretary of State aware that she has been extremely reticent in coming to the House to explain how much money the Millennium Commission will spend in Greenwich? Will she now tell the House and the people of Greenwich and of London as a whole how much money will be spent, in what way and who will be involved in making the decisions?

I look forward to being able to come to the House to make a further statement to inform colleagues of the details of the Millennium Commission's progress. The funding packages are highly complex and I much appreciate the co-operation of the Labour party and of Greenwich borough council in ensuring that we make progress swiftly and effectively by sorting out the details. I can tell the House how much money has been spent by the national lottery in the hon. Lady's constituency: in Lewisham, 29 awards have been made, amounting to more than £3 million. The lottery is a phenomenal success.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the foremost arts festival in England, the Lichfield festival., begins at the end of this week and will last for 10 days? Is she further aware of how grateful the festival is for the recent award of more than £68,000 for stage and display equipment?

I am delighted to share my hon. Friend's endorsement the Lichfield festival and I especially commend the artistic director, Paul Spicer and the dean and chapter of Lichfield cathedral. The festival brings more people into contact with the Church and brings people together by providing an outlet for creative activities. That £68,000 is only one of 1,245 arts awards, which amount to £483 million since the start of the national lottery.

Does the Secretary of State recognise that, although we support the proposed exhibition at Greenwich and we want it to succeed, we feel uncomfortable when we read regular briefings from Sir Peter Levene about the Millennium Commission' activities, but we cannot have full statements in the House? Can the Secretary of State explain why Greenwich borough council is still being excluded from the deliberations when it wants the event to be a success and to make a positive contribution to the raising of private sector funding? Is it the case, as has been suggested in the newspapers, that the life of the Millennium Commission will be extended by one year to give it an extra £250 million to cover the eventual costs of the exhibition? Finally—[Interruption.] I make no apology for asking a further question because this is the first opportunity that we have had to ask these important questions and the House is entitled to know. Is it true that funding for regional exhibitions is being reduced to vire resources to the national exhibition at Greenwich?

The right hon. Gentleman, like other hon. Members, wants more information about the festival at Greenwich and I hope that I shall be able to write to hon. Members in my role as chairman of the Millennium Commission before the recess. As the right hon. Gentleman will know, a Labour party nominee, Michael Montague, sits on the Millennium Commission and, on all occasions, we have sought to avoid any party political issues. I recognise and accept the collaboration of the Opposition. We are seeking to stage the largest event of its sort anywhere in the world and, inevitably, the financial negotiations are highly complex. The commission took the view that £200 million was an appropriate amount for it to put into the festival. When it became clear that the business case required more funding, we sought the co-operation of the private sector.

Can my right hon. Friend confirm that she has no intention of extending lottery funding to replace the Government's funding of education and health, which is in contrast with the report in June's edition of "Lottery Monitor" which says that the Labour party is considering doing so?

I can, indeed, reassure my hon. Friend on that point. It is well understood that the Opposition's proposals would betray the principles of additionality. They would betray those who benefit from the lottery as they would increase the operating costs, and they would betray the 30,000 or so retailers who earn about £8,000 a year from their lottery outlet.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what support is available for choirs from (a) her Department and (b) the national lottery. [33660]

My Department's funding for the arts in England—including choir—is channelled through the Arts Council of England and the regional arts boards. Choirs are eligible to apply for lottery funding. So far, 13 awards totalling £373,000 have been made by the Arts Councils of England and Wales.

My colleagues are inciting me to sing this question, but I shall resist the temptation. Is the Minister aware that Welsh choirs play an important role in their local communities and do a great deal of important charitable work? Neath is a centre of excellence for male-voice choirs and the Minister would be welcome to attend any of their performances and would be given a warm Welsh welcome. May I invite him to Cor Cochion Caerdydd's performance next Wednesday in the Jubilee Room? The fact that it is translated as the Welsh "Reds Choir" may mean that he will find himself otherwise engaged.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his kind invitation. I know from our previous discussion of the close interest that he takes in the half a dozen choirs in the Neath area. The fact that the Arts Council of Wales has made some eight lottery awards to choirs shows how much it values them. Indeed, the whole country does. There are now some 100 male-voice choirs in Wales, of which it is encouraging to know that some two thirds have been started in the past 40 years.

I suspect, Madam Speaker, that you would rule me out of order if I were to burst into song. Does my hon. Friend accept that thousands of people throughout the country in all walks of life derive great pleasure from singing with choral societies, as I do with the Royal Choral Society? Does he recognise that, although choirs can attract audiences sufficient to meet their costs for carol concerts and performances such as the Messiah, it is much more difficult for them to put on many other wonderful choral works unless they have financial assistance from the sources that he mentioned?

Yes. My hon. Friend is right about the great popularity of choirs. Some 250,000 people regularly sing in choirs. On my hon. Friend's wish to give choirs more money, there are the lottery boards that I have already mentioned—five in England and eight in Wales—and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will shortly publish a document on the arts, which will make funds to amateur organisations that we wish to support even more easily come by.

Does the Minister know that St. John's methodist chapel, Connah's Quay, has a very good choir, and that it is mixed to boot? Does he know how I might obtain £100,000 for the chapel, which needs to be modernised and refurbished? Will he receive a deputation, or advise how that amount of money can be obtained from the lottery?

Yes. I remember the wonderful introduction that the hon. Gentleman gave me to the Liverpool Philharmonic a couple of years ago. If he can do as well with that chapel, I should be glad to meet any deputation that he cares to bring to me.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what steps her Department is taking to promote tourism in the Isle of Thanet. [33661]

I welcomed the opportunity to visit the Isle of Thanet to reopen the Dreamland amusement park at Margate. This development is an excellent example of public and private sector partnership working to revitalise seaside resorts.

The people of Margate were extremely grateful that my right hon. Friend found time to give up a Sunday to open the new Dreamland complex. As she is aware, new Dreamland—unlike new Labour—is a stunning reality. She has also seen the need for more investment in Margate seafront to reinstate Margate as one of the country's premier family seaside resorts. Today a submission has been made for the regeneration of Margate sea front, both to my right hon. Friend and the national heritage memorial fund. I appreciate that she cannot write a cheque this afternoon, but will she ensure that the submission gets sympathetic consideration?

My hon. Friend knows full well that I am a great believer in the British seaside holiday—[Interruption.] It is vital to the tourism industry which is, of course, denigrated by Labour Members, who are reckless in their attitude to the employment implications of the tourism industry. About 50 per cent. of the tourism spend in the domestic market is on seaside holidays, so the jeers and denigration of the Labour party bode ill for people in the seaside holiday industry. I will certainly give encouragement and cheers to my hon. Friend's approach of seeking further investment in a wonderful seaside town, which he represents so admirably.

I hope that the Secretary of State will do all that she can to encourage tourism in Thanet and I hope that the English tourist board will do the same because it is important. How is it, then, that Mr. David Quarmby, whom the right hon. Lady has just appointed as chairman of the English tourist board and the British Tourist Authority, will work only three days a week—one and a half days on each board—for which he will get £54,000 a year? Could this be the same Mr. David Quarmby who got £900,000 from Sainsbury following the management reshuffle when he quit? I do not know what he will be able to do for tourism; no doubt he could take us on a guided tour around some interesting bank accounts.

New Labour never ceases to carp about the Government. New Labour so hates success and so hates profit that it would turn over the national lottery because it so despises the phenomenal success of Camelot. New Labour resents the fact that we have a chairman of the British Tourist Authority and of the English tourist board who is a person of authority and distinction, and who will lead the industry, which is likely to be responsible for 40 per cent. of new jobs, amounting to 1 million, in the next 10 years. Labour is interested only in the politics of envy, of misery and of denigration. Once again, that bodes ill for the tourism industry, but the industry knows that it is safe with this Government.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what proposals she has to encourage tourism in London. [33662]

I want to improve the promotion overseas of London as a world city and as the gateway to Britain. This year, we have provided an additional £1.5 million for the "Focus London" campaign.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the way in which London helped to host Euro 96 demonstrates that it is a first-class tourist city and underlines the strength of Britain's case for hosting the world cup in 2006? Does she also agree that the case for London has been weakened by the irresponsible action of unions on London underground who seem oblivious to the hardship they cause and the jobs that they put at risk?

I welcome the opportunity warmly to commend all those involved in Euro 96. It has been a phenomenal success and Britain has regained its reputation for being able to host world sporting events. I most certainly hope that that may lead to the World cup and many other international events coming here. I commend all those who participated, the arts events, the tourism industry and the security arrangements. Euro 96 has been a great source of joy and pleasure to many, and especially to all those who support football.

Is the Minister aware that we agree with what she said about Euro 96? It was a great success. However, is she aware that in the other 50 weeks of the year, what puts people off London is the flea-bitten, rat-trap hotels around King's Cross, Victoria, Paddington and other places? One of the problems is that the country has no statutory grading of small hotels or minimum standards such as many other countries have. As long as the right hon. Lady leaves the matter to the free-market economy—most of the cheaper hotels have gone over to providing accommodation for the homeless—she will display massive neglect in terms of doing something about health and hygiene standards, and prices, at small hotels in London.

The hon. Gentleman is right to focus on the importance of value for money and good standards in hotels in London in particular, and across the country. That is why so much work has gone into the preparation of the crown scheme in collaboration with the motoring industry's validation system. Work is also under way to encourage planning permission for hotels, particularly in London, and it is important that local authorities grant those permissions. A welcome number of new hotels have started in London and there has been a great deal more investment, but I am pleased to have Labour's support in driving up standards in the hotel sector. The excellent Mr. David Quarmby is certainly making that a priority as he takes on his new responsibilities.

Would not tourism in London be encouraged if far greater use were made of the River Thames, not only by tourists visiting London, but in future, by tourists visiting the millennium site in Greenwich and, above all, the historic town of Gravesend?

The opportunity for tourists to visit not only the centre of London, which is the gateway to Britain, but other parts of the country, including Gravesend, will undoubtedly be most welcome. However, I must take the opportunity to focus our minds on the phenomenal investment on the banks of Thames as a result of the national lottery. They include the developments at Bankside, the £50 million new Tate gallery, the Globe theatre, the Maritime hall at the Maritime museum and many other projects. There is now an unprecedented level of investment in London's cultural infrastructure.

For the record, let me remind the Secretary of State that we welcome the appointment of Mr. David Quarmby to the British Tourist Authority and English tourist board. She was quite wrong to suggest otherwise. Is she aware that, far from feeling safe in the Government's hands, the tourism industry feels ignored and neglected by her Department? As she has complimented the Football Association on the success of Euro 96, may I join her in extending those compliments and plaudits on behalf of the Opposition? Can we take it that the Government will support the FA's intention to bid for the world cup soccer championships to be held in London? Will the Government support that bid?

Undoubtedly, the Government will support that in every possible way. There have been most constructive and productive relationships in respect of Euro 96. The different agencies, local authorities, the Football Association, the security services, the arts organisations and the tourism industry worked together with a great deal of planning and wonderful results, and it would be a great triumph and a great day for Britain if we were to host the world cup.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage how many good causes have been awarded funds from the national lottery in (a) Milton Keynes and (b) Buckinghamshire. [33663]

Nineteen national lottery awards, totalling more than £20.6 million, have been awarded to projects in Milton Keynes. Forty-nine projects in Buckinghamshire have received lottery funds totalling more than £23.3 million.

That shows a proper sense of priority between Milton Keynes and the rest of Buckinghamshire. May I particularly welcome the grant of something over £19 million in capital grant to build the new theatre in Milton Keynes, which has been planned for many years and for which there is a great demand? It represents a clear answer to those who say that all the money goes to London. Most of us live outside London and enjoy facilities outside London. The sums available are a testament to the work of Camelot, which I congratulate on behalf of the citizens of Milton Keynes on running the lottery to such good effect.

I entirely share my hon. Friend's pleasure at the leisure centre going to Milton Keynes, and I shall ensure that his comments about Camelot are passed on to it.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if she will make a statement on the role of her Department in the promotion of the British popular music industry. [33664]

The British music industry is enormously successful, nationally and world wide, adding to the enjoyment of music of all types. I meet representatives of the industry regularly.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that Britain leads the world in the pop music industry, which generates more than £1 billion of export earnings every year without a penny of Government subsidy? Does she agree that, although it is too often dismissed by music snobs, it is a great British success story?

I endorse my hon. Friend's remarks. The industry is extremely successful. It employs about 50,000 people and, as he says, is a major export earner. The net surplus on overseas trade in 1993 was £571 million—similar to the net overseas earnings of the steel industry. Its success is widely recognised. How pleased we all were that George Martin received a knighthood in the recent honours list.

Does the right hon. Lady agree that one of the best ways to encourage popular music is to ensure the continuation of the BBC's Radio 1, which encourages new talent and plays live popular music unlike any other radio station in the country? Will she therefore make it absolutely clear that she will always refuse any attempt to privatise Radio 1?

I am astonished to hear the hon. Gentleman's question because, of course, since the Conservative party has been in power, Radio 5 has been launched to join Radio 1, Radio 2, Radio 3 and Radio 4. I am a little taken aback by his comments but delighted to endorse Radio 1's role, which, as he rightly said, is significant in promoting the pop industry, especially by offering opportunities to new performers.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what plans she has for an academy of sport. [33665]

We announced our intention to establish a British academy of sport in the sports policy statement, "Sport: Raising the Game" in July 1995. Following the Sports Council's recent consultation exercise, the council will shortly be issuing the prospectus for bids to establish the academy.

In the light of the great success in every respect of Euro 96, does my hon. Friend believe that an academy of sport will ensure future sporting triumphs? What sporting events are likely to be covered by it? Will he consider very carefully Basildon, Southend and Redbridge as sites for future sporting academies?

I join my hon. Friend in congratulating all those who were responsible for Euro 96. I was particularly pleased that Mr. Terry Venables and the English team received the award for fair play last night. The British academy will be more concerned with the athletes who go there, hut, of course, all sports will be able to apply to attend and I imagine that pretty well every sport will do so. I saw that Basildon and Redbridge had put forward bids and I wish them all the luck that they need in being successful.

Although I agree with the Minister about the success of Euro 96, is not the best possible recruitment ground for future sporting talent enabling as many young people as possible to see sport at its best, which probably means seeing it on the major television channels? Given that the key reason why Euro 96 was such a national success was the fact that 27 million people saw the semi-final on terrestrial channels, how do the Government propose to change policy so that the pattern of recent years, in which, recurrently, coverage of major events has been built up by terrestrial channels then sold to minority channels that few people can view, is substantially reversed?

If the hon. Gentleman is present for the Report stage of the Broadcasting Bill, which starts in the House in about half an hour, and sticks it out until the end of the day, he will no doubt hear the Government's answer to that very important question.

What progress has been made on creating an academy of cricket? Cricket, of course, is our prime summer sport, rather than what has been going on in the past few weeks. The MCC made progress under the chairmanship of Dennis Silk, but the idea was then dropped. What initiatives has my hon. Friend taken on this matter? Does he support the idea of an academy of cricket?

We see a three-tier structure of the academies, with the British academy of sport at its peak, a number of regional institutes of sport, and academies of individual sports, of which the academy of cricket will be one. I have had various discussions with Dennis Silk and other members of the Test and County Cricket Board about an academy for cricket, but it must be a matter for the sport itself. If such an academy were to be set up, it would receive my enthusiastic support.

Is the Minister aware that there is great relief in the sporting world that the Sports Council's consultation on the academy of sport has come to an end? He will be aware that the consultation revealed overwhelming support for the Labour party's approach—for a headquarters site with an enhanced regional network, as he just said. It is pleasing to note that, in recent weeks, the Minister has moved away from his original support for a huge one-off green-field site, as outlined in his article in The Daily Telegraph on 5 December 1995, and has come around to the opinion that we outlined. Now that the consultation has been completed, will he proceed with all speed in concert with all interested sporting bodies to ensure that our talented sports people get the academy that they richly deserve?

If the hon. Gentleman refreshes his memory by reading the document of 14 July 1995, he will see half a dozen mentions of regional institutes of sport linked to the British academy. That was always my intention, and it is exactly what will happen. On his second point, we will be issuing a prospectus in the next few weeks.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what plans she has to encourage tourism in the south-east of England. [33666]

My Department's support for tourism is channelled through the statutory British Tourist Authority and the English tourist board. Through the ETB, support is made available to the 11 non-statutory regional tourist hoards, including the South-East England tourist board.

My hon. Friend will know that I represent part of the Medway towns, which are steeped in history and have many tourist attractions, from Rochester's Norman castle and cathedral to the Dickens festival which is held several times a year. In Gillingham and Chatham, we have the historic dockyard and the Royal Engineers museum. All these are looking to provide additional attractions, particularly the dockyard. When the national heritage memorial fund is looking at its application for lottery funding, will my hon. Friend bear it in mind that this particularly important group of ancient monuments needs more attractions to add to the already attractive prospects of the Royal National Lifeboat Institution museum, the ropery and others?

Yes. Chatham probably has more historic buildings than any other town in Europe, and I will draw my hon. Friend's remarks to the attention of the appropriate distributor bodies for lottery funds so that they can consider whether to help.

Is the Minister aware of the many reputable language schools that succeed in bringing hundreds of thousands of young tourists to the south-east every year? Is he also aware of their demands for regulation of the industry to prevent fly-by-night operations which often bring large and unsupervised groups of very young children into the city?

I am aware of the two serious points raised by the hon. Lady, and I shall draw them to the attention of the English tourist board and the British Tourist Authority.

I was very pleased to hear my hon. Friend say that he is aware that Chatham dockyard probably has the largest number of historic buildings on one site in the south-east. Will he note that these buildings in the historic end of Chatham dockyard are all listed and that, consequently, we would not permit anybody to let them fall into disrepair? However, we shall need more money to help us to keep them up to date.

I thank my hon. Friend for saying that. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has visited the sites to which he refers. I know that my right hon. Friend will be doing everything she properly can to ensure that the lottery distributor of funds and the tourist boards consider his plea.

To ask the secretary of state for National Heritage when she last met the Director General of the National Lottery to discuss the work of the scratchcard lottery and if she will make a statement. [33667]

My right hon Friend last met the Director General of the National Lottery Mr. Peter Davis, on 9 May to discuss a range of issues of issues relating to the national lottery.

During the discussions did the Secretary of state refer to the apparent anomalies associate with the sale of lottery tickets to under-age people? Does that apply to scratchcards? I have here a copy of national lottery's code of conduct, which is vague about the sale of scratchcards. It is Camelot's responsibility to ensure that they are not sold to under-age children. Will the Minister impress on the Office of the National Lottery and the national lottery people that they must make it clearer how the code of conduct applies to scratchcards and that Camelot should be diligent in ensuring that scratchcards are not sold to under-age children?

The hon. Gentleman makes an extremely important point and I will certainly draw his remarks to the attention of both the director general of Oflot and Camelot. Scratchcards should not be sold to under-age children and Camelot has closed down one retailer for doing so, but I will reinforce the hon. Gentleman's plea to the appropriate bodies.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on Oflot's tough action to avoid its scratchcards being sold to people who are under age. Is it not important to realise that scratchcards are not a monopoly business for the national lottery and Camelot? A large number of companies and organisations are in that business and it would be wrong to blame all the problems of scratchcards on one company.

My hon. Friend is right. Sales of scratchcards have fallen from a peak of about 40 million just over a year ago to 17 million. Only about 14 per cent. of people who buy lottery tickets buy scratchcards as opposed to 60 per cent. who play the main game. My hon. Friend is right to say that the national lottery does not have a monopoly on scratchcards.

Does the Minister accept that shooting an admiral to encourage the others is not sufficient protection for the young? When he next meets the director general, will he ask him for a systematic monitoring process that can be reported on?

I take the matter extremely seriously, as I told the hon. Member for Normanton (Mr. O'Brien). In the 10 months until April this year, Oflot undertook no fewer than seven inquiries into the running of scratchcards; those showed no reasons for deep concern. None the less, I agree that under-age children should not be served, and Oflot and Camelot should do everything they can to ensure that that rule is obeyed.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what recent discussions she has had with the British Tourist Authority about promoting Britain as a holiday destination. [33669]

I met the new chairman of the BTA shortly after his appointment, along with staff of the BTA, and discussed the current plan for promoting Britain. We are giving high priority to developing the fast-growing markets of the far east.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that these small, overcrowded islands with their unique concentration of culture and historical heritage will need to look not to numbers of visitors alone but to the high-spending, more lucrative, long-haul market? What success are we having in attracting tourists from the far east and what plans are there to increase their number?

I recognise the force of my hon. Friend's arguments. The recent visit that I led to Japan with 30 tourist organisations was extremely successful. In Japan, it is well understood that the amount raised from visitors to Britain is larger than that from any other sector—more than £550 million last year. Recognising the economic significance of the tourist industry is of great importance. I commended the close working of the British Council—there is enormous interest in British cultural activities overseas—with the BTA. When the three work together, there is huge potential for Britain, particularly in those markets where at present only a small fraction of the population have even a passport.

Does the Secretary of State recognise the importance of developing tourism in the regions—the north-west and Lancashire in particular? Will her Department continue to give the support that the Minister for Sport has given to regional airports such as Manchester airport, so that people can fly directly to those airports and need not go via London airport?

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. Some 50 per cent. of visitors do come to London first, but most—and a growing number—also want to spend time outside the capital. One of the successes of Euro 96 was the fact that many visitors were able to see the magnificent cities that we have all over the country. I shall certainly continue to press the case for more direct routes.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department for what reason it is necessary to seek the voting intentions of justices of the peace, without anonymity, prior to the next general election; and if he will make a statement. [33687]

All those who apply to be appointed justices of the peace are asked to indicate their political affiliation in order to ensure that benches are balanced in that respect. The information is confidential to advisory committees, clerks to justices and my Department. Local surveys of the political affiliation of existing justices are sometimes carried out to establish current political affiliations.

I accept the need for a bench that reflects the social and political complexion of the country. After justices are appointed, however, surely it is inappropriate and intrusive, as well as dangerous from a judicial point of view, to inquire how they intend to vote at the next general election. Does the Minister agree that it is inappropriate for justices to make such declarations to clerks, and will he reconsider the practice in relation to existing justices?

There is no intention of reviewing the practice, which has continued for generations under Lord Chancellors and Prime Ministers of different persuasions. The hon. Gentleman may be interested to learn that, at the last count, 31 colleagues on his own bench supported the Conservative party and 36 did not. I cannot see what his beef is all about.

Will my hon. Friend assure the House that, if a JP reveals himself to be a member of the hang 'em, flog 'em and disembowel 'em school of politics, he should not be barred from serving as a JP?

The most important thing is the quality of justice dispensed by local benches, and I think that most of us feel that the quality of justice in this country is extremely high. It should come as no surprise to any Member of Parliament if the majority of JPs are Conservative supporters: after all, we know that Conservatives are actively involved in voluntary organisations up and down the country because we care about our country and our local communities.

Can the Minister give us a lucid explanation of the correlation between voting intention and the capacity to return a fair verdict? Will similar inquiries be made about which football club magistrates support, or whether they are freemasons, Oddfellows or farmers? What other matters are now to be inquired into?

As I said earlier, the practice of inquiring about the potential affiliations of potential JPs has been going on for generations. What I do not know is whether it took place under the last Liberal Government. That was such a long time ago that I suspect that records are no longer kept.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what is the mechanism for liaison between his Department and the Crown Office m Edinburgh. [33688]

The Lord Chancellor's Department and the Crown Office consult each other as necessary where they share an interest.

I gave notice of this question to the Lord Chancellor this morning. I meant no offence to the Parliamentary Secretary. Lord Mackay knows a good deal about the Scottish situation and about Lockerbie, and is a senior member of the Cabinet.

We are grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving us notice of his supplementary question, which Lord Mackay shared with me this morning.

Can my hon. Friend inform the House whether the liaison between the Crown Office in Edinburgh and his Department would be affected in any way if there were a Scottish Parliament with tax-raising powers? The Labour party is now in such confusion between its Front Bench, its Back Benches and all other parts of the party about the matter that it is important to know the answer to that question.

My hon. Friend is on to a good point. The liaison between my office and the Crown Office in Edinburgh would clearly be confused if there were a tax-raising Scottish Parliament. I wonder whether the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell), who tabled the question, will continue to persevere with probing his colleagues about the West Lothian question, to which we have had no satisfactory response.

On the very serious question of Lockerbie and leaving aside party political scoring, does the Lord Chancellor agree with the oral statement made by the Prime Minister in this place three months ago in response to a question of mine that such a trial will take place in Scotland at the High Court?

The hon. Gentleman is concerned about the last exchange, but he should read the question on the Order Paper: it is about consultation between my Department and the Crown Office in Edinburgh. On the hon. Gentleman's substantive question, I know of no knowledge to the contrary.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what action he is taking to reduce spending on the legal aid fund. [33689]

My right hon. and noble Friend the Lord Chancellor expects shortly to announce his proposals for reform of the legal aid scheme. It would not be appropriate for me to pre-empt that announcement. We are already taking steps to control the costs of the legal aid scheme, such as measures to investigate the means of apparently wealthy applicants and the introduction of graduated fees in the Crown court. The White Paper proposals will take us further.

Does my hon. Friend share my constituents' concern that a man who was dying of cancer and had his life saved by the excellent national health service against all the odds should seek to use public funds to sue the very doctors who saved his life rather than allowing those funds to be used in the health service?

I share my hon. Friend's concern, as do most British taxpayers. My hon. Friend is a champion of the interests of the British taxpayer in relation to legal aid. He will be encouraged to know that under our proposals, to be issued tomorrow, we intend to take positive, radical measures to crack down on the weak and trivial cases which are making all too frequent an appearance in the local newspapers. My hon. Friend will be interested to know that, when I heard about the case that he has mentioned, I asked the chief executive of the Legal Aid Board to come to see me on Wednesday to explain how on earth legal aid could be made available in such a case.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many people were eligible for legal aid in 1979; and what is the current figure. [33690]

We estimate that in civil cases 74 per cent. of households qualified for legal aid in 1979. The figure for civil legal aid today is 48 per cent. There has been no reduction in the number of people eligible for criminal legal aid since 1979.

Is it not appalling that the number of households eligible for legal aid should drop from more than three quarters in 1979 to less than half now? Is it not an incontestable fact that the only people who can get legal aid now are those on the breadline and that the income cut-off is £7,400? Is it not a case of justice denied when the only people who can get access to the courts are those whose wallets or purses are fat enough?

I believe that the hon. Gentleman lives on a different planet from me. Although the number of households eligible may well have fallen in the past 17 years, that is partly a reflection of rising living standards. The hon. Gentleman will be interested to know that acts of assistance have risen from 1.9 million to 3.5 million today. Legal aid funding has risen in the past five years to £1.4 billion. The hon. Gentleman clearly believes that that is not enough. If £1.4 billion is not enough, it is incumbent on him and his party to tell us today how much we should spend and where the money should come from.

Is my hon. Friend aware that, far from being concerned about restrictions on legal aid, my constituents are concerned about its generosity, particularly in civil cases? Does he share my amazement that this country should grant civil legal aid to someone deported as an illegal immigrant who wishes to pursue a civil case in the courts of this country?

Once again, my hon. Friend is on to a good point, which we will talk about in more detail tomorrow when the White Paper is issued. He should know that every working person in this country contributes £60 a year to the legal aid fund. I think that is enough. If the Opposition do not, they should tell us how much it should be.

Given the ever-increasing cost of the legal aid fund to the public and the ever-reducing number of the public who are able to benefit from it, when will Conservative Members and their Government stop hitting the hard-pressed litigant, who happens to be funded by the public, and start dealing with the restrictive practices of the legal profession? Why do we hear so much about the litigant and so little about the lawyer? When will the Government tackle the restrictive practices in the legal profession, because if they do not, we will?

Even I think that that is a bit rich coming from someone who makes his living out of the restrictive practices of the legal profession. The hon. Gentleman has failed to tell us whether a budget of £1.4 billion is enough. He says no, so how much more should be spent, and where will it come from?

Does not my hon. Friend's figure of £1.4 billion suggest that litigation is one of the fastest growing industries in Britain? Is it not growing much too fast onward and upward? Surely it is self-evident that, if people want to have a divorce, they should not have it at the expense of their fellow taxpayers. We are getting much too much like the Americans and it is time that something was done about it.

I have a great deal of sympathy with that question. If we have a free market it is not for us to say who should or should not litigate, but we can control the extent to which the British taxpayer funds such litigation. We will bring forward legal aid reforms tomorrow to ensure that the British taxpayer gets more bang for his buck.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will arrange for legal aid to be extended to industrial tribunals. [33691]

We have no plans to extend legal aid to industrial tribunals.

Does the Minister understand how important industrial tribunal cases are? Does he understand that it is wrong that there are no circumstances in which any litigant in any industrial tribunal case can get legal aid, even though the Government have rightly moved wrongful dismissal cases up to £25,000 to tribunals at the request of the litigant and even though there are no upper limits on compensation for sex, race or disability discrimination cases? Will he please have another look at the matter and consider whether those cases should not be included for proper legal aid help?

Thousands of cases each year come before the industrial tribunals, and I believe that most of them are informal, well run and produce the sort of justice that we want to see. Once again, an Opposition Member has stood up in the House and called for more public expenditure. It really begins to stick in the throat when Labour Members call for more public spending in the House and then rush out to the television cameras to say that under a Labour Government there would be no more spending and no more taxes. Which is it?

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how much was paid out of the legal aid fund in green form costs in each year since 1992; and if he will make a statement. [33692]

Between 1991–92 and 1995–96, the gross cost to the legal aid fund in respect of green form advice for each year was as follows: —£100 million; £125 million; £147 million; £141 million; and £145 million. Over the same period, total legal aid payments have risen by £688 million from £1,097 million to £1,784 million.

I am grateful to the Minister for such a detailed reply. May I impress on him the need to ensure that those people who do benefit from green form legal aid, advice and assistance continue to do so in any forthcoming review of legal aid? The people who bring that type of work to solicitors are very often the most needy in society, and are definitely unable to afford to pay for work privately. May I impress on the Minister the need to ensure that this core necessity remains?

At last a sensible and reasonable question from an Opposition Member. I can give the hon. Gentleman the assurance that he seeks. There will be a radical reform of the legal aid scheme under the proposals to be announced tomorrow but, whatever we do, we will ensure that those who really need access to justice and cannot afford it will be adequately catered for under the new regime.

How confident is my hon. Friend that the green form scheme is not being used to lure ordinary members of the public into a legal morass, more for the solicitor's benefit than for that of our constituents?

My hon. Friend makes an interesting point. He will be interested to know, as I was this morning, that the Law Society has come out against our legal aid reform plans, even though it does not yet know what they are. The Government are increasingly able to be guided by the principle that, if the Law Society is against it, it is pretty firm evidence that we are on the right track.