To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what plans she has to encourage more people to visit important heritage sites. [16695]

My Department, principally through the Historic Royal Palaces agency and English Heritage, is continually striving to develop its historic properties to make them more attractive and accessible to visitors.

I welcome the England's Christian heritage programme of the Department, and I urge my hon. Friend to visit St. Augustine's abbey site in Canterbury, where much national lottery fund money is being invested in the 1,400th anniversary celebrations of St. Augustine's arrival in this country. I urge my hon. Friend to stress to his officials and to English Heritage the importance, when developing a monastery site, of showing its purpose and work, from prayer to alms giving and health care, rather than simply engaging in endless portrayals of dress, life style and so on.

My hon. Friend kindly invites me to visit the museum at St. Augustine's abbey, which is to be opened on 25 May by the Archbishop of Canterbury. I should very much like to be present on that day, if that is possible. My hon. Friend asks me to make sure that the Christian element of cathedrals, churches and so on is well demonstrated. He makes an important point, which I shall draw to the attention of Sir Jocelyn Stevens.

Will the Minister set up a Thames estuary initiative? There are numerous heritage sites on the estuary in Kent and in my county of Essex which are undervisited, although they are rich in our history and heritage, especially in relation to the defence of the United Kingdom. I refer especially to the two forts in Tilbury in my constituency, one of which is owned by English Heritage while the other is managed by the local authority. They would be greatly appreciated by many visitors, both from within the United Kingdom and from north America and Australia.

The hon. Gentleman takes an admirable interest in defence matters and defence heritage matters. I shall certainly look at the two places that he mentions; if he would like to talk to me about how we might best promote them, I shall gladly meet him.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what action she is taking to encourage young people to participate in sport. [16698]

The Government's sports policy document "Sport: Raising the Game", which was published in July 1995, sets out our strategy for encouraging young people to participate in sport. It particularly emphasises the importance of maximising sporting opportunities for young people within and outside formal education. Significant progress has been made in taking forward the various initiatives in the past year and a half. I made a detailed announcement of progress to the House on 14 February.

I thank my hon. Friend for that welcome answer. We in Somerset were delighted when Huish Episcopi secondary school received a grant of nearly £50,000 for a national lottery multi-sports complex project, costing £80,000 in all. Is that not precisely the way forward, and does my hon. Friend agree that it will encourage young people in Somerset and beyond to pursue sport with excellence?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The award for a multi-game complex was welcome, and I hope that many other schools, local authorities and communities will take encouragement from the success of that application and apply. The Sports Council for England now has a £2 million bid fund to which schools and local sports clubs can apply to improve the links between local sports clubs and local schools.

Is the Minister aware of the crisis that is looming over the future of the Crystal Palace national sports centre? Is he also aware that, in relation to encouraging young people into sport, Crystal Palace has a two-pronged purpose? First, it is the only indoor training centre in London and, secondly, it is the only place in the whole of the south of England where we can have international and domestic competitions. Is he aware that there is a real worry about what has been happening to Crystal Palace and how that will affect the future of those schools that use it as a facility for pupils? The Minister should be spearheading the drive to find a way forward between Bromley council and the Sports Council.

I am aware of that concern. It is an important issue. The Sports Council is looking this minute at how best to solve the problem so that that part of England does not lack the sort of facility that Crystal Palace provides.

Given the obstacles in the way of sports being developed in as many schools as we would like, does my hon. Friend agree that the connection between sports clubs and schools is crucial, and that fresh efforts should be made to persuade schools that they should link with local clubs to open up more opportunities for young people?

I strongly agree with my hon. Friend, not least because one particular sport that we have in common, cricket, is still played in only 50 per cent. of state schools in England—a poor percentage, which I wish to see increase. My hon. Friend should draw the attention of all the schools and local clubs in his area to the benefits of the lottery for such schemes, and in particular to the £2 million challenge fund that the Sports Council has for promoting links with local schools and local sports clubs.

Does the Minister agree that the best way of encouraging young people to participate in sport is to allow as many of them as possible to watch those sports on television? Will he therefore take the opportunity to congratulate the Scottish Rugby Football Union and other rugby football unions, which have signed a long-term deal with the BBC for the benefit of the development of the sport, rather than for greed, so that matches will be shown to the widest possible audience? Is it not a matter of great regret, certainly to him and to me, that two years from now, when France meets England again at Twickenham, the match will be seen by only a small minority of the population?

I am happy to congratulate the Scottish Rugby Football Union, not only on its decision, to which the hon. Gentleman referred, but on the tremendous result on Saturday in the match against Ireland. I also congratulate the Irish and Welsh rugby football unions on a decision that showed that they had the interests of the sport at heart. None the less, I would not criticise the English Rugby Football Union for anything that it may do, because it is up to sport itself to decide what is best for sport.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what estimate she has made of the total earnings of the British film industry. [16699]

It is estimated that British films and co-productions earned £39 million at the United Kingdom box office and that UK film companies earned £495 million abroad in 1995. Now that British films and talent have won 30 nominations for the 1997 Oscars, the prospects for increased earnings are excellent.

I thank my right hon. Friend for those extremely encouraging figures. Does she agree that the large number of academy award nominations received by "The English Patient" and "Secrets and Lies" is further evidence that the British film industry is going from strength to strength, and will she join me in wishing those films and all the other British contenders every success on Oscar night?

Undoubtedly, the success to which my hon. Friend refers demonstrates the strength of the British film industry. Our studios are full, films are made here by companies from all around the world, audiences are up and investment is up. That is because we have an economy that is friendly to enterprise and to initiative and that allows people to keep the benefits of their success.

The Secretary of State will be aware of the numerous film productions in Wales in recent years, including some exciting developments in recent weeks. Is she aware that, whereas in Scotland there is a Scottish film production fund, which helps to develop indigenous film producers and to extend the range of films that can be produced in Scotland, we do not have quite the same facility available in Wales? Will she examine that matter to maximise the benefit that this promising industry can bring to the economy?

As the hon. Gentleman will be aware, I have taken an extremely serious approach to the film industry. I established the Middleton committee, which made 11 recommendations. We have acted on eight of them. The Arts Council's recent initiative with the franchise is part of that overall strategy. I shall certainly speak with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales on the matters to which the hon. Gentleman referred.

My right hon. Friend will be well aware that the British film industry's production rate is at its highest for some time, with some 127 films going into production. Does she agree that the lottery money recently allocated to the industry will encourage it? What other steps is she taking to continue this success story?

I particularly want to pay tribute to my hon. Friend for all that he has done to champion the film industry over the years. Last week, I was able to visit the British Film Commission at Berkhamsted to see its work and the archive, which has recently benefited from an additional £13 million of lottery money. We have been using a range of measures, which are set out in the Middleton report, to promote the industry further. We are now looking at the definition of a British film. Above all, what the industry needs is to be able to have the rewards of its endeavours, a flexible labour market and low non-wage labour costs. The Government's strategy, quite apart from the Department's initiatives, is delivering just that in Britain today.

Does the Secretary of State agree that one of the best British films of the past few months is "Brassed Off'? It is about a mining community where the pit has shut and the community has been destroyed as a result of the Tory Government and where the pit band is trying to find enough money to continue playing. Is it not pretty clear that a lot of people on the Wirral saw it, because they were brassed off last week?

I much appreciate the hon. Gentleman making that point. One of the things that has given me most pleasure as Secretary of State for National Heritage has been meeting many of those involved in brass bands which are now receiving lottery awards. Indeed, there have been 91 awards for brass bands; the Easington colliery band, which was the first brass band I met when I became a Minister nine years ago, now has new instruments as a result of the lottery.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage to what extent the revised criteria for national lottery grants will support the work of British charities providing emergency medical relief in the developing world, with special reference to Merlin; and if she will make a statement. [16701]

Charities based in the United Kingdom and working overseas, including Merlin, were eligible to apply for a grant from the National Lottery Charities Board under its international grants programme. In framing the priorities and policies for the programme, the board consulted British charities and voluntary organisations working overseas. Their view was that funds would be best spent in supporting long-term development to help people to help themselves, rather than on emergency provision, for which there were other sources of funding.

In view of the declining aid budget, the effect of the lottery on small charities and the fact that the requirement to plan nine months in advance makes it difficult for organisations such as Merlin—which is, as the Secretary of State said, an emergency relief organization—should not the criteria be changed to include, say, training for staff, the stockpiling of medicine and the provision of infrastructure? That would enable such organisations to qualify for lottery money, and exclude them from the nine-month criterion. Will the Secretary of State consider that proposal?

The hon. Lady will be aware that these precise decisions are matters for the charities board. I think that it will examine the £25 million of the first round to see what lessons can be learned, but I commend it on the fact that almost £500 million has been allocated in virtually 7,000 awards. I am pleased that some charities about which the hon. Lady is concerned have benefited. I believe that the Red Cross, for example, has had about 12 awards; Oxfam, too, has received an award, and I know that it hopes for a substantial award in the new round. I wish Merlin well and greatly respect its work.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what estimate she has made of the number of anglers in the United Kingdom. [16703]

The National Rivers Authority commissioned a national angling survey in 1994 which concluded that there were 3.3 million freshwater and sea anglers aged 12 and over in Great Britain.

I thank the Minister for that reply. Given that angling is clearly the most popular participatory sport in the country, why did it receive a miserly £72,500 of development money from the Sports Council last year? Why was angling not even mentioned in its list of the top 22 sports? In the light of their appalling record, will the Government give a commitment to match Labour's commitment to oblige the Sports Council to give more assistance to angling for its administration needs?

The amount that the Sports Council gives in grant to angling or any other sport is a matter for the Sports Council. However, the hon. Gentleman will be aware that £500,000 from the national lottery and £100,000 from sportsmatch have gone to angling. He will be further aware of the Government's record of improving river quality, ending the problems caused by saboteurs through the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 and reviewing predatory bird and other measures, which shows our commitment to the popular sport of angling.

Does my hon. Friend accept that country sports in general, and angling in particular, are enjoyed by a wider cross-section and by more people than any other sport in the country? Does he agree that the last thing any of them want is Government interference?

They quite like Government money from time to time. None the less, my hon. Friend is absolutely right. One of the most pleasing aspects of the past few months has been that the three bodies representing game, coarse and sea angling have come together for the first time, and the Sports Council will be keen to help.

Is the Minister aware that my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, North-East (Mr. Ainsworth) is absolutely right about the fact that anglers are furious with the Government for ignoring their legitimate claims to recognise angling as a major sport? Is it any wonder that the president of the National Federation of Anglers wrote to the Prime Minister to bemoan the fact that the Government had no policy on angling, in contrast with the Labour party, which has a clearly defined charter for angling? The NFA president concluded by stating the obvious—that anglers are coming to the view that Labour cares about angling but the Government do not. Will the Minister, at the very least, dissociate himself from those in his party who claim that Labour will ban angling after we win the general election? Furthermore, on behalf of the Government, will he match our firm commitment to the sport?

In anticipation of some major exaggeration of the contents of Labour's so-called charter for angling, I reread its few pages this morning, and I was surprised by how little it said.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the worst threat facing angling is Labour's policy to give an unrestricted right of access to riverbanks, canal banks and lakesides, which would make the management of fisheries impossible and would destroy the opportunity for anglers to enjoy their sport quietly?

My hon. Friend is right: the Labour party poses a serious threat to angling, and he has mentioned one aspect of that threat.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what representations she has received in respect of the Plymouth millennium fund. [16704]

The Millennium Commission, of which I am chairman, has received representations from the Port of Plymouth, the West Country tourist board, the Plymouth marketing bureau and five individuals on Plymouth 2000 Partnership's bid "Plymouth Waterfront—A Celebration of Discovery". The bid is still under consideration. The commission is always pleased to receive representations on a project, whether supportive or otherwise. Representations are one of the key criteria used in assessing applications for funding.

Does the Secretary of State accept that, because it reflects the area's maritime history, the Plymouth 2,000 millennium bid is most deserving? Will she ensure that it is considered in its entirety? Will she also clarify the purpose and role of individual commission members in trying to change individual bids?

The commission is looking extremely sympathetically at Plymouth's proposals. Not only the hon. Gentleman but my hon. Friends the Members for Plymouth, Drake (Dame J. Fookes) and for Plymouth, Sutton (Mr. Streeter) have spoken at length to me about the proposals. Mayflower harbour, Plymouth and the Royal William yard, Plymouth are being considered in particular. I have also had discussions with Baroness Cumberlege, the sponsor Minister, who has been extremely helpful in relation to Plymouth's cause and concerns. Sutton harbour, Plymouth, the national marine aquarium and other projects have already received substantial funding, and I hope that the Millennium Commission can add to the £4.5 million of lottery money that is already being spent on 35 awards in the Plymouth area.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if she will reintroduce section 4 grants for the tourism industry in England. [16707]

The Government have no plans to reintroduce section 4 grants in England. Tourism is a highly successful industry and is increasingly making use of many opportunities to benefit from public money. Those opportunities include challenge funding, the single regeneration budget and, in eligible areas, the European regional development fund. Moreover, the national lottery is playing a major role in financing exciting new capital projects, many of which help to encourage tourism and bring widespread benefits to communities across the country.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, like me, many hoteliers and guest house owners in my constituency remain puzzled about why those grants are payable in other parts of the United Kingdom but not in England? Is she also aware that those same constituents very much welcome the fact that, under the National Heritage Bill, funding will now be available for great examples of our national heritage, such as Eastbourne pier?

I know the concerns of my hon. Friend's constituents. If the Labour party had its way, there would of course be no coherence in what happens in the different parts of the United Kingdom, and I think that would be very much more alarming. I well recall the visit to Eastbourne pier, and the inconsistency of piers in private ownership being unable to benefit from lottery money, unlike those in charitable or local authority ownership. I am delighted to say that, last Thursday, the National Heritage Bill received Royal Assent. Therefore, my hon. Friend's pier, like other piers in the realm, will now have lottery assistance available when appropriate.

Does the Secretary of State realise that tourism is rapidly developing in industrial areas such as Lancashire and Yorkshire, and that section 4 and other grants to help the industry develop are very important for their employment prospects and for taking advantage of existing tourism facilities?

Old Labour shows its face once again. Of course a cheque from the centre is always helpful to those who apply, but the Government believe that the reason why we have had the incredible boom in the tourism industry is that we keep taxation and regulation to the minimum. We have been able to boost the many national assets which are such an attraction for people around the world. There is no doubt, however, that well over £1 billion has gone from the national lottery to many massive regeneration projects, such as the Lowry centre and redevelopment of Newcastle's Sunderland glass centre. Across the United Kingdom, city centres are being restored. Only last week, a massive £140 million was awarded to museums, and the key awards were in Manchester. I think that everyone will agree on the awards' importance and significance for the tourism industry.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what responses she has received to her strategy document "Success through Partnership: A Strategy for Tourism". [16708]

"Success through Partnership: A Strategy for Tourism", published on 5 February, has been extremely well received. It has received much positive press coverage and we have had many letters welcoming its overall comprehensive nature, its key targets and its specific points for action. Work on the action plan has already begun, both within my Department and elsewhere.

Can my right hon. Friend confirm that 1995 was a record year for British tourism and that 1996 is likely to exceed that record when the figures are finally available? Does she agree that the proceeds of the national lottery are making possible a massive increase in our tourism infrastructure, whether it is the new railway heritage museum in Swindon in my constituency or the new Tate gallery of modern art in the Bankside power station in London? In the context of the development of the south bank, can my right hon. Friend tell the House when we are likely to get a positive decision on the redevelopment of the south bank centre itself?

I can confirm my hon. Friend's comments. We have reversed a 10-year decline in our world tourism share. In 1995, earnings from overseas tourism grew by 9 per cent. in France and by 15 per cent. in Spain and Italy. In the United Kingdom, there was 26 per cent. growth, with earnings now amounting to more than £22.5 billion. That is a formidable achievement and I anticipate that next year will be even better.

The right hon. Lady forgot to mention that the Government's policy document on tourism had to be withdrawn because it was full of spelling mistakes. It turned out that those who wrote it could not even spell "Prime Minister".

The Labour party is a great believer in preaching the need for homework to everybody. I suggest that the right hon. Gentleman does his own homework a little better. So far, partnership funding has been running at about £1.41 for every £1 necessary; in other words, partnership funding has exceeded expectations. In areas where difficulties may emerge, there is the flexibility for all the lottery distributors to vary the funding required. The Sports Council, for example, will provide 90 per cent. of funding, if necessary; the arts and heritage fund also has flexibility. If money is unspent so far, it accrues interest which then goes to the good cause.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what steps she is taking to encourage private sector sponsorship of the arts. [16709]

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what discussions she has held on promoting business support for the arts. [16711]

The Government's national heritage arts sponsorship scheme, otherwise known as the pairing scheme, was established in 1984 to bring new sponsors into the arts. It continues to be a great success. To date, it has brought more than £115 million of new money into the arts and more than £37 million of awards matching more than £77 million of business sponsorship.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that reply. Is he aware that, although the North Wales music festival attracts widespread support from the private sector, it is continually looking for new sponsors? Will he join me in congratulating North Wales Blue Grass festival—[Laughter.] Opposition Members may laugh, but it is not a festival to celebrate the French victory over England at Twickenham on Saturday. Will my hon. Friend join me in congratulating North Wales Blue Grass festival on attracting sponsorship from North Wales Independent Press?

Yes, I shall certainly join my hon. Friend in doing that. This year in Wales there have been 39 awards totalling £125,000, leading to a total injection into artistic schemes of well over £250,000.

Will the Minister of State accept a joint invitation to St. Asaph's cathedral, where the North Wales music festival takes place? If he does, he will discover that the cathedral's acoustics are perfect; many of our regional orchestras play there. How can he help the festival, which is in dire need of sponsorship?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his kind invitation to the festival. I am more than willing to take it up, given that he invited me to the Liverpool Philharmonic a couple of years ago and I greatly enjoyed myself. I shall gladly consider the hon. Gentleman's point about the shortage of funds to see whether I can give advice on how to find help.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what discussions she has had with the Office of the National Lottery regarding the introduction of additional weekly national lottery draws. [16710]

None.

That is a great pity; it shows just how out of touch the Secretary of State is with the way in which people feel about the second weekly draw. Camelot could have used separate numbers for the second weekly draw, but it deliberately chose not to do so. Some 50 per cent. of people who play the lottery use the same numbers, so they are automatically dragged into the lottery. Camelot is now talking about a third weekly draw. When will the right hon. Lady get a grip on the matter? This is her last appearance as Secretary of State answering questions on national heritage, and all Opposition Members are very pleased about that, but she still has a few weeks left to get a grip on Peter Davis, the toothless Oflot watchdog, and to try to ensure that Camelot looks after the people who play the lottery, not itself.

There is no question of the lottery being anything other than extremely carefully regulated. Parliament laid down the regulator's duties: he must protect players' interests, ensure propriety and ensure that the return goes to good causes. I am delighted that the hon. Gentleman's constituency has already benefited from 13 awards of more than £1 million. In his area of London, another nine awards for well over £1 million are providing regeneration and worthwhile activities and opportunities for the young. So far, there has been no evidence of excessive participation—the average household spends about £2.40 a week, which is much less than a packet of cigarettes. There will be no further activity if it might jeopardise the good name and effectiveness of our very successful national lottery.

I partly support the idea of using a different set of numbers for the mid-week game, but does my right hon. Friend get as brassed off as I do by the moaners and whingers on the Opposition Benches who can see no good in the national lottery? We have the most successful national lottery in the world; it has raised more than £1 billion for good causes, some of which involve small rural activities that have never received grants in the past. At one stage the Opposition wanted to cap the limit on prizes, but they changed their mind when they discovered how successful the national lottery was. Is it not about time that they started to spread the good word about the national lottery and stopped moaning and complaining about it?

Good news is always bad news for the Labour party. Its attitude to the national lottery is an example of its endless meddling and tinkering. Labour Members could not bring themselves to support the national lottery on Second Reading.

We did.

No. They sat on the fence and abstained. What we are now hearing is a "united" Opposition who are only too keen to demonstrate that they all did different things—I believe that to be true, and I think that many others do too. They deeply resent Camelot because it makes a profit—they are hostile to success and want to penalise anybody who has made a profit. They said that they would cap the prizes, but now believe that that is unpopular. Most of their suggestions about the lottery look like applications for a Sports Council kite-flying prize. As for the rest of us, we thank goodness that the national lottery was introduced by this Government, that it was this Prime Minister's idea and that it is enormously benefiting the towns and cities of this country.

What action does the Secretary of State propose to take to deal with the legitimate concerns of the football pools industry about the impact of the mid-week draw on its fortunes and, in particular, on the Foundation for Sport and the Arts? Does she believe that she can save that valuable institution?

I accept the difficulty that many of the pools organisations have had, and it is important to ensure that we can support the various initiatives that they were assisting. However, at a time when £441 million has already been spent on 2,603 awards for sports, we can see that sports in this country are benefiting as never before.

Did my right hon. Friend hear any complaints about the national lottery when she visited my constituency a few Fridays ago, and met business women and some of the ladies and gentlemen who have benefited from the £2 million of lottery money and millennium money that my constituency has received in the past few years?

I enormously enjoyed my visit to my hon. Friend's constituency. I was delighted to meet carers and the group from the nursery class. Last week, I was struck to learn that, apparently, 277 playgroups have already received lottery awards, and as the figures come through, it becomes progressively more exciting to see the difference that they make. Above all, I commend my hon. Friend's youth council. Last week, we launched our "Young people make a difference" strategy, which is intended to ensure that all young people who want to volunteer can do so. There is now up to £500 million available for youth volunteering initiatives, and I also announced up to 130 posts at volunteer bureaux with youth facilitators. I believe that that will make a lasting difference to our young people and our communities, which I know will be extremely welcome to all responsible citizens.

Does the Secretary of State recognise that the football world will be deeply disappointed by her response in respect of the Football Trust? The trust's income has decreased by two thirds as a consequence of the huge success of the national lottery in raising funds; that in turn has prevented the essential safety work on football grounds that the public, fans and all those who love our national game want. Is it not clear that there are extenuating—indeed, very special—circumstances, and should she not join the Labour party in our commitment to make up that shortfall with money from the national lottery so that essential ground safety work can proceed?

As ever, Labour Members look for a cloud over every silver lining—they are desperate to look for the downside. If ever anybody had any doubt about how Labour Members would treat the national lottery, they have heard this afternoon that there would be meddling, tinkering and interference. There have been 355 lottery awards for football—never has so much gone into sport and into football in particular. Those of us with slightly longer memories than the right hon. Gentleman will recall that Euro 96 was a spectacular success and that our stadiums are among the best in the world, which had a great deal to do with the Government and the steps that we took to ensure that.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what assessment she has made of the impact of the British popular music industry on (a) British cultural life and (b) tourism. [16713]

British popular music makes an enormous contribution to the cultural life of the country. Domestic sales rose in 1996 to £1.08 billion, making ours the fourth largest music market in the world. Twenty per cent. of recordings sold worldwide contain a British element. British talent and technical expertise reach hundreds of millions of homes around the globe.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. Does she recall that, in the 1970s, many rock and pop stars left the country because of punitive taxation? Is she delighted that, under the present Conservative Government, the Spice Girls have stayed in this country, and will she congratulate the Spice Girls on winning the best single award in the Brit awards? Was she heartened, as I was, to hear that Margaret Thatcher was the original Spice Girl?

Yes.

Will the right hon. Lady request the national lottery board to keep a better sense of proportion, fairness and, to some degree, equity? How can it reconcile giving £55 million to the royal opera house in London for wealthy pleasure-seekers while refusing substantial grants to the Marie Curie Cancer Care unit, which operates hospices for dying people? The board has given 277 times more in subsidies to the opera than in grants to hospices. How can we, as Christians, given the criteria that have been set, accept the encouragement of the growth of opera houses as against hospices?

That was a very interesting question, but it does not relate to the one that is on my Order Paper. Would the Minister like to make a response?

rose—

A generous lady.

I thought that the hon. Gentleman was auditioning for next year's Brit awards, but I was going to respond anyway.

"Through the Lottery we have an opportunity to do for our towns and cities what the enlightened patronage of the Papacy and the Medicis did for the cities of Italy. We can realise Blake's dream of making England, 'an envied storehouse of intellectual riches'."

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what representations he has received on extending legal aid to cases before industrial tribunals. [16725]

A number of representations on extending the scheme to cases before industrial tribunals and other tribunals were received by the Department in response to the Lord Chancellor's Green Paper on legal aid published in May 1995.

Does my hon. Friend agree that such a course of action would merely burden the already overburdened legal aid fund, place additional burdens on industry and make job creation more difficult? Will he therefore comment on the interview in the New Statesman with Lord Irvine of Lairg?

My hon. Friend knows that our policy is to bring the legal aid budget under control—to bring an end to its demand-led, runaway nature before any thoughts of applying legal aid elsewhere can be entertained. I was therefore shocked to read the shadow Lord Chancellor's proposals to extend legal aid to industrial tribunals that appeared in the New Statesman in December. [Interruption.] I have it here and can read it if the hon. Member for Brent, South (Mr. Boateng) wants me to.

Has the Minister considered what steps he could take to provide aid, legal or otherwise, for himself and his colleagues when they consider themselves unfairly dismissed by an ungrateful but fairly discerning electorate?

We Conservatives believe in democracy. Although the hon. and learned Gentleman has served with distinction in the House, he has never been very good at predicting the future: he was wrong in 1992 and he is wrong today.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department when he last met the chief executive of the Legal Aid Board to discuss reform of the legal aid system. [16727]

I last met the chief executive of the Legal Aid Board on Wednesday 26 February 1997. We reviewed the White Paper reforms, which will cash-limit the budget, set national and regional priorities, dispense legal aid through block contracts with high-quality providers, and tighten the means test to weed out undeserving cases. Good progress is being made, but some of these reforms require primary legislation.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply, as far as it goes, but I am sure that he is aware that many of my constituents read reports in the tabloid newspapers to the effect that large sums are being paid in legal aid to undeserving people who could well afford to pay. Are there any steps that he could take now to crack down on the abuse of legal aid?

My hon. Friend is right to press me on this point. Although our reforms are right and positive results and savings from the measures that we have already taken are beginning to emerge, it remains clear that too many cases that should not get it are still receiving legal aid. Accordingly, my Department is now looking at two further areas in which I want to make more progress.

What action does the Minister propose to take to deal with the grotesque imbalance between public expenditure on civil legal aid for ordinary, hard-working, honest taxpayers, and on criminal legal aid for those who are convicted of crimes yet are required to pay nothing towards the cost of their defence? Is it not time to recognise the fact that, under the Labour Government, about 80 per cent. of households had access to civil justice, whereas under this Government that number has fallen to 49 per cent.? Is it not time to return access to the courts to the ordinary, hard-working British people?

Once again the hon. Gentleman appears to be calling for a change in the rules that will enable more people to claim and more money to be spent by the Government. He is a big-spending member of the Labour party—I do not mean just his suits. He does not seem to realise that the Government cannot spend money that they do not have. If we are to spend more, we must tax more. This is old Labour in a new suit: tax and spend.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what assessment he has made of the per capita cost of the legal aid programme relative to those for similar programmes in other EU member states. [16728]

None, but it is widely believed that our legal aid system compares favourably with any in the European Union.

I am disappointed that my hon. Friend could not provide me with the actual figures. If he could, I believe that they would show that this country is more than generous with legal aid compared with other European countries.

My hon. Friend will know that the White Paper reforms that we announced last year and the measures that I announced this afternoon will do exactly what he asks: target resources where they are most needed. It is now clear that the fact that our legal aid system is as comprehensive as any in the European Union can be added to the good news of rapidly falling unemployment compared with our European competitors, to demonstrate that life is better in a Conservative Britain.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will make a statement on his plans to control the legal aid budget. [16729]

The Government have embarked on a radical reform programme to control the legal aid budget. We are committed to taking the reforms forward through consultation and piloting, and some key changes will require legislation. My hon. Friend will have heard the additional measures that I mentioned some moments ago.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that answer. He is obviously aware of the great concern about the amount of legal aid money that is being spent on those who could afford legal representation from their own funds. Will he confirm that, when looking at the system, he will also look at the dubious circumstances in which some community law centres purport to operate? He will be aware—I have raised the matter with his Department in the past—that the Charity Commission has expressed grave concerns about some of those law centres, which, effectively, act as a front for the Opposition.

I shall now look even more closely at the law centre problem that my hon. Friend rightly raises with me. It is important to get the balance right in our legal aid reforms. We are committed to helping those who need help to gain access to justice, but we must ensure that the taxpayer is not overburdened. It is disappointing that the Labour party does not support our proposal to introduce a cash-limited legal aid budget. I described it as an expensive locomotive to which we seek to apply the brakes; I have no doubt that, under a Labour Government, it would become a runaway train.

Am I correct to assume that the Minister has just announced two completely new policy initiatives that would have the effect of denying legal aid to some of my constituents on very low incomes? What really matters, and what is winding up the public, is how it is possible for very wealthy people so to organise their private affairs and assets that their declarations to the legal aid authorities effectively amount to fraudulent applications for money and legal aid. Ministers should concentrate on those areas rather than tighten up the criteria through little sly deals that deny my constituents on low incomes proper legal representation.

I am sorry but, once again, the hon. Gentleman is badly out of date. We have already taken the measures necessary to close the door on legal aid abuse by apparently wealthy individuals. I referred earlier to the special investigations unit that we set up many months ago, which is now bearing fruit. It is beginning to work and we have closed that door. The hon. Gentleman is mistaken; not a single constituent of his with a genuine legal issue who should be supported by the taxpayer will lose out as a result of our reforms. We are closing the door on abuse on behalf of the British taxpayer.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what is his policy towards alternative dispute resolution in civil justice; and if he will make a statement. [16730]

The development of alternative dispute resolution in all its forms has broadened consumer choice in dispute resolution. ADR can provide a more appropriate way to settle many disputes where the parties do not need recourse to the coercive powers of the courts. My party is doing all that it can to encourage ADR.

Would not one method of reducing the legal aid bill be the provision of more avenues to ordinary individuals to settle disputes—such as those between neighbours or between small businesses about debts—using an adjudicator rather than going through the full courts process? Will my hon. Friend and his Department do everything possible to ensure that those avenues are more widely available?

My hon. Friend is right to raise that point. Under the Woolf proposals, it is our intention to put alternative dispute resolution at the heart of civil justice. He will be interested to know that we produced a booklet last year entitled "Resolving disputes without going to court" to alert potential litigants to the possibilities of ADR. Last May we also set up a pilot scheme based in the Central London county court for all cases in which claims exceed £3,000 and we are monitoring the results of that carefully. There is no doubt that ADR has a large part to play in the British civil justice system.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what plans his Department has to reduce the cost to public funds of those aspects of the criminal justice system for which his Department is responsible; and if he will make a statement. [16731]

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what plans his Department has to reduce the cost to public funds of those aspects of the criminal justice system for which his Department is responsible; and if he will make a statement. [16734]

A number of initiatives are under way in my Department to reduce costs. They include the radical proposals for legal aid in the White Paper entitled "Striking the Balance", steps to reduce delay in the courts, such as the introduction of plea and directions hearings in the Crown court, and a review of time limits in the magistrates courts. In taking forward those initiatives, care must be taken to balance the many conflicting interests of those involved in the criminal justice system.

Does my hon. Friend agree that my constituents would be rightly concerned that the legal aid budget doubled between 1990 and 1995 to £1.4 billion, and is due to go up yet again this year? Can he assure them that those who are in real need will get legal aid, and that we will get more value for the pounds that are spent?

My hon. Friend is right. We want to ensure that those who have genuine grievances have access to justice, but we want to get the balance right between their interests and those of the taxpayer. All our reforms are shaped to that end. I believe that they are right and that they will make a significant difference to the legal aid budget as they are rolled out.

Does my hon. Friend accept that one of the greatest uncounted costs in a criminal justice system is delay, which wastes so much of the time of witnesses and, in particular, of the police, who can ill afford it? Will he therefore welcome the consultation paper issued by my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary to consider ways of speeding up justice, including the possibility of ending the right of jury trial for some defendants?

My hon. Friend is right to draw attention to the important statement made by my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary last week. We will seek the views of people in Britain about those major, radical proposals to reform our criminal justice system. Again, it is a matter of getting the balance right. I believe that our proposals have a great deal of merit, and we look forward to the consultation process.