If he will make a statement on the future of funding for smaller theatres. [87197]

It is for the Arts Council and regional arts boards to take decisions on funding for individual organisations, and to formulate policy for individual art forms, including those relating to smaller theatres. I have made it clear to the Arts Council that there is considerable concern about the condition of regional theatre across the country, which needs to be recognised and addressed.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make the same clear to local authorities that contribute to funding small theatres such as the Studio in Beckenham, which is supported by the people who live in deprived wards in my constituency, and which is threatened by the Lib-Lab pact that runs Bromley? Does he agree that in addition to regional theatres, smaller theatres need community support if they are to continue to exist. Is he concerned that cuts in capital funding will threaten the existence of those theatres?

The hon. Lady is right to point to the support that local authorities give to small theatres. Indeed, 14 per cent. of all funding for theatres comes from local government. As regards the Studio, the co-leader of Bromley council, Councillor Chris Maines—a Liberal Democrat, I believe—has said:

"The Studio is too small to be viable and not a lot of people get to see what is put on there…We cannot justify the subsidy Studio gets from the Council."

I thank the Secretary of State for his statement on the future of regional theatre. Will he congratulate the Octagon theatre, Bolton, and, in particular, SCOT—the campaign to support the theatre—which hopes to guarantee continued production from October by raising a large sum of money? Will he agree to the request contained in a petition from the Friends of the Octagon, requesting him to meet representatives of the theatre to discuss their concerns?

I recall discussing the Octagon theatre with my hon. Friend and others, and I warmly congratulate those who have raised substantial funds for the theatre. I would be happy to meet representatives of the Octagon and of other theatres in the north-west of England. I have asked the Arts Council, as part of the funding agreement for the coming year, to review the subsidised provision of producing theatre and the associated infrastructure in the regions of England. I want the Arts Council to pay real attention to those issues.

May I return the right hon. Gentleman to the question from my hon. Friend the Member for Beckenham (Mrs. Lait), which he effectively dodged with a sensible sideswipe at the Liberal Democrats? On capital funding, is he aware of growing concern that, following the 30 per cent. cut in the Arts Council lottery fund and the overall cut in spending on the arts, less money will be available for capital projects in theatres, many of which urgently need refurbishment and restoration if they are to stay open at all? What can he do to dispel the impression that neither he nor the Arts Council care much about smaller regional theatres?

I fear that the hon. Gentleman is getting capital and revenue mixed up. The Studio in Beckenham is a capital lottery-funded project, and lottery funds have been made available. Our Government changed the lottery, by means of the National Lottery Act 1998, to ensure that lottery funds can be used to support people and activities, not just bricks and mortar. By doing so, we did something that the hon. Gentleman's Government never did.

What steps he is taking to encourage schools to play competitive sporting fixtures against other local schools. [87198]

It is important that we give young people the opportunity to take part in competitive team games, not only within their own schools but against other schools as well. Intra-school and inter-school competitive activities are already included as one of the criteria schools have to meet to be awarded a sports mark. However, competitive games need to be given an even higher profile, and we have asked Sport England to ensure that arranging inter-school competitive fixtures is a key part of the job description of the new active schools co-ordinators.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his answer. The initiative is welcome, particularly as competitive sport in schools declined by about 70 per cent. during the previous Government's period in office. May I draw my right hon. Friend's attention to cricket, a game meant to be one of our major national sports, but which is hardly played in state schools? There are many reasons for that: teacher time, the state of pitches, poor coaching and the fact that schools close for about a third of the cricket season. Will the Secretary of State ensure that competitive cricket in schools is an essential feature of his initiative?

I can indeed give my hon. Friend that assurance. Cricket, along with football, rugby of both codes, athletics, swimming and tennis will be part of that initiative for the active schools co-ordinators to promote inter-school competition.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not understand that giving 14 to 16-year-olds an opt-out from competitive team sport often simply means that in practice they will not do any sport or physical education? Has he heard Denise Lewis's comment:

"To take the competitive element out of sport seems ludicrous"?

I suspect that what protests there have been have resulted from direct and deliberate misrepresentation by Conservative Members. I refer the hon. Gentleman to the comments of David Moorcroft, the chief executive of UK Athletics, who said:

"Setting a new target of two hours of PE in school per week for every child is a real breakthrough. It is right that young people who prefer activities like athletics should be free to spend more time on them as they get older. The result will be children doing more sport and PE in schools".

What steps his Department is taking to improve safety and spectator comfort at cricket grounds. [87199]

The Government are determined that spectators of all sports should be able to enjoy the action in safety and comfort. In April, I announced new roles for both Sport England and the Football Licensing Authority in our drive to modernise sports grounds throughout the country. Sport England is to fund a £10 million improvement scheme in the next four years to help top rugby league and rugby union teams and the major cricket counties to improve safety at their grounds. In addition, the Football Licensing Authority will be reconstituted as the sports grounds safety authority and will have an advisory role on safety issues associated with all sports that use outdoor sports stadiums, including cricket. I am sure that my hon Friend will agree that these are welcome developments.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Does he agree that the best way to improve spectator comfort at cricket grounds would be to improve the England cricket team, since there is little more depressing than having to watch a succession of England batsmen returning to the pavilion, whether one is watching in safety and comfort or not?

Mental comfort might indeed be improved by greater success, but our lads tried their best—it is just that on that occasion their best was not good enough. I hope that the recent changes that have been announced, in particular Nasser Hussain's captaincy, will help to restore the fortunes of English cricket, which is dear to the hearts of all of us in this House.

What steps his Department is taking to tackle racism in sport. [87200]

Racism is a blight that impacts on all sports. Last year the football task force published its report "Eliminating Racism from Football". I subsequently asked the football authorities to consider how they could implement the recommendations. This has been a good start, but we must ensure that the problem is tackled by all sports. To that end I have written to the governing bodies of cricket, tennis, athletics, rugby union and rugby league to ask them how the problems can be addressed within their sports. Once I have all their proposals, I intend to call a meeting with those governing bodies, the Commission for Racial Equality and the Local Government Association to discuss new initiatives to combat the evil of racism in sport.

I thank my hon. Friend for his reply and congratulate the Government on their swift action to try to stamp out the insidious practice of racist chanting, particularly at football matches. Does my hon. Friend agree that in future he needs to inform football clubs before the start of the new football season—and the stewards employed by those clubs—of the changes that will come into practice in the near future?

Yes, I do indeed agree. The relevant legislation is before the other place, which demonstrates how swift we were to act on the recommendations of the football task force that racist chants by an individual should become an offence, as is the case with collective chanting. All the football clubs have made good progress in dealing with racism and hooliganism inside their grounds, but this campaign must be continuous. Slogans placed in programmes and around the perimeters of grounds about keeping racism out are not of themselves sufficient. The campaigns must be proactive. The House can be assured that the Government will continue to have discussions with and use our influence to put pressure on the governing bodies. They take the issue seriously, but we want to help them to drive out the cancer of racism from sport.

Does the Minister share the view that the England cricket selectors are themselves failing adequately to recognise the talents of non-white players? If he does, with what speed does he expect progress to be made in that matter?

The hon. Gentleman raises a most interesting point. One of the lessons that we must learn from the world cup is the enormous fervour and enthusiasm for cricket among our Asian communities. As I have said before, English cricket will be transformed, as English football was transformed, the more that the ethnic minorities in our country become involved in those sports. For example, the appointment of Nasser Hussain is a good step forward. The cricket authority—the England and Wales Cricket Board—is aware of the need to do far more in the Asian communities to scout for talent, to nurture that talent and to get it through the county structures and into the English team. I know that I can always count on the support of the hon. Gentleman in campaigns of that sort.

What assessment he has made of the prospects for England's bid to host the 2006 world cup; and if he will make a statement. [87201]

I am firmly optimistic about our chances of success. England's bid has always been strong but, in the light of recent events, it is gathering even more momentum and strength; for example, through the highly successful visit to England last month of representatives of world football, who were received by His Royal Highness Prince Charles at Highgrove and by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister in Downing street. The representatives also enjoyed the fantastic spectacle of the Wembley cup final.

As my hon. Friend knows, the Football Association announced today that Manchester United football club does not have to take part in next season's FA cup. As a lifelong supporter of Birmingham City, and a fan of Worcester City, I am not used to supporting such a successful team. Can my hon. Friend enlighten the House as to the justification for that decision by the FA?

Manchester United's exemption from next season's FA cup is a one-off exceptional proposal, in exceptional circumstances. There are two reasons for that. The first is that England has an unenviable reputation for looking down on new, major tournaments. We refused to enter the world cup when it was first organised, and we refused to enter the European cup when it began-my own club, Chelsea, which won the championship in 1954–55, was refused the privilege of being the first club to go into Europe. No one can say that those decisions were right; they were wrong and we cannot make the same mistake again. We cannot afford to be wrong about a new world club championship in the year 2000.

The whole House will know that the Minister brings his personal energy to the world cup bid with all the animation of Roland Rat, but what is he doing about—[Interruption.] I hope that the Minister is more successful in sport, and that he takes a leaf out of Roland Rat's book because Roland Rat was rather successful at TV-am.

One thing I can tell the hon. Gentleman is that I will not rat on England's chances of securing the world cup in 2006, and I hope that he will not either, because I have been obliged to him and his hon. Friend the Member for West Suffolk (Mr. Spring) for their support for that campaign.

May I assure my hon. Friend that all those who are interested in football in this country are fully behind him? We congratulate him and the team who are fighting for the 2006 games and welcome his comments about the stadium. However, the issue is not merely the new stadium at Wembley, but the transport infrastructure. Can he assure us that that infrastructure will be able to meet demand far better than the current, quite appalling, system?

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's comments about the 2006 campaign. We are asking all football supporters-not only Manchester United supporters, but all those who might like to have played Manchester United in the early rounds of the FA cup-to accept that Manchester United's exclusion from next year's FA cup, if it decides to accept the offer presented by the FA, is a one-off that is being done in the wider interests of English football. Football fans are just as capable of recognising national effort and national interest as anyone else in this country, and I know that they will do so.

If he will make a statement on the financing of the British film industry. [87202]

The Government's objective is to create the conditions for the growth of a self-sustaining, commercial film industry through the tax incentives introduced in 1997, through collaboration with the industry on the film policy review and the film finance forum, and through targeted support for the development and production of British films. We are also establishing a new body—the Film Council—which will have the specific task of helping the industry to develop sustainable financial structures.

The much trumpeted tax breaks to which the Minister refers have not benefited one film that has been made in this country. Does she agree that the remarks made to The Independent in March by the Secretary of State are quite silly? He described the tax breaks as

"a really significant step in getting more British films made, and attracting more overseas film-makers here to use our facilities and our craftsmen and actors".

I can only say that that is not what the well respected company Ernst and Young has to say. It has said that, because of the tax incentive it has been able to move into film financing, with an initial £30 million slate of British movies. Tax deals on completed films are providing new money for producers to put into their next film. That is a direct result of the action taken by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his first Budget.

Is my hon. Friend the Minister aware of the huge success of "Notting Hill" in the United States? Does she share with British movie makers their great pleasure at the fact that, in contrast to a survey a couple of years ago, a survey following that film shows an increase in appreciation of and demand for British films in the United States? Given the presence of our Los Angeles film office, does not my hon. Friend believe—in contrast to the doom and gloom that we have just heard—that investors have every reason to feel encouraged about supporting British films, both across the Atlantic and at home?

I thank my right hon. Friend for that well-timed question and take this opportunity to pay tribute to him, as many of our achievements are the result of the excellent work that he did as Minister for Film and Tourism. A great deal has been achieved for British films with Government support over the past two years. We intend to build on that progress, and the definition of what constitutes a British film will be amended next month so that more films made in this country can qualify for tax breaks. The Government want to ensure that we give tax breaks only to those films that are really British. There is obviously support for British films around the world.

Given the relative size of the British film industry, the disproportionate number of Oscars that British films and actors win and the fact that the City of London is the world's leading financial centre, what prevents us from marrying together those national talents and assets?

The right hon. Gentleman may not be aware that the Government have established the film finance forum—an independent think tank that is working to provide guidance and to encourage and assist with the industry's structural development in order to create the types of commercial undertakings in which the City will feel able to invest. In short, the forum is a bridge between the film industry and the main investment sectors. As a result of its activities, Ernst and Young began to get interested in funding British movies and, as I said earlier, has produced a £30 million slate for them. That is a great tribute to what the Government have done for British films.

What steps he plans to take to ensure that broadcasters improve reception of television and radio in Wales. [87203]

The BBC and the broadcasting regulators are responsible for the transmission of television and radio services. The topography of Wales has long presented problems to broadcasters. With the aid of an extensive network of local relay stations, analogue television and radio broadcasters have now achieved near universal coverage in Wales. Digital broadcasters face similar problems in providing television and radio services to Welsh viewers. The BBC, the Independent Television Commission and the Radio Authority are now working with my Department to improve digital television and radio coverage.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that reply. He is correct to say that the Welsh topography presents broadcasters with particular difficulties. What assurances can he give in that regard? Although digital television might provide an answer, current coverage remains patchy. Is it not essential to ensure that broadcasters improve coverage, which currently reaches no more than 70 per cent. of the Welsh population?

We are considering that issue seriously with the broadcasters and the broadcast regulators. There are 230 local relay stations in Wales, and some 98.3 per cent. of Welsh people can receive analogue television transmissions. However, the situation could still be improved and we are looking at all the possibilities in that area.

Does the Secretary of State not accept that, although the people to whom he referred may receive a television picture, the quality of the signal may be infinitely inferior to those emanating from other stations, mainly situated in England? Given that everyone living in Wales will be affected by decisions taken by the National Assembly on education, health and housing, do they not have a right to top-quality television and radio reception for news items about those subjects?

It is indeed our wish that as many people as possible, both in Wales and elsewhere in the United Kingdom, get the best possible quality picture and coverage. The quality and the provenance of the programmes that people can see really matters to them. We are considering that issue and we will consult closely with our colleagues in the new Welsh Assembly about any matters concerning Wales.

The Secretary of State is correct to say that the topography of Wales affects broadcasting signals, as it does in Scotland and in other parts of the United Kingdom. Does he accept that universal coverage will cost a huge amount of money—a sum that is disproportionate to the numbers of people who deserve to see those programmes? When will the Government get off the fence and accept that there is no middle way regarding the funding of the BBC? When the current licence period ends, will the Government not have to consider in advance allowing advertising, sponsorship or both on some or all BBC channels in order to assist with the expansion of British broadcasting?

I have to say to the hon. Gentleman that the first part of his question is right. A difficult balance must be struck between cost and quality of picture, and we are working on that. However, I cannot agree with the latter part of his question. As he knows, we have asked Gavyn Davies and the panel that we appointed to report on the immediate future funding of the BBC. I suspect that I will take more cognisance of what Mr. Davies has to say than I will of the hon. Gentleman.

What recent representations he has received from sporting bodies which will be affected by the proposed ban on tobacco advertising. [87205]

The full task force has met three times and since January, I and the other members of the task force have had 10 meetings with representatives from the sports that are seeking our help. That close contact has identified the significant problems facing the sports in replacing tobacco money. They are all vying for sponsorship money in a crowded marketplace. We shall assist them in repositioning themselves in the marketplace and support them in building new commercial relationships that can be sustained.

But what estimate have the Government made of the impact on the nation's health of the policy of providing a dispensation to snooker and formula one? If they estimate that the damage will not be very great, and certainly insufficient to question the very policy of providing that dispensation in the first place, why cannot the dispensation simply be extended to the 65 sports that are now facing financial difficulty and, in some cases, oblivion?

It is a bit rich for a member of the Opposition to start talking about the damage caused to sports or to people's health by the use of tobacco. The previous Government never did anything about that issue. The right hon. Member for South-West Surrey (Mrs. Bottomley) refused to ban tobacco advertising or sponsorship. We have done so, and we shall be commended for that. The hon. Gentleman knows that all sports will be required to end tobacco sponsorship by 2003. The only exemption will be for those sports that compete in three countries on two continents and have a substantial proportion of sponsorship—over £2.5 million—from tobacco.

A million from Bernie.

That will, undoubtedly, apply to formula one and, perhaps, to snooker, if it can prove—

A million from Bernie.

Order. There is a parrot in here.

I had a parrot—an African parrot called Chunky. He was considerably more articulate and beautiful than the hon. Gentleman. An apology to parrots is probably in order.

How many schools he estimates will benefit in the first year of the national lottery-funded out-of-school hours activities. [87207]

The programme, for which the new opportunities fund has allocated £205 million, opened for applications at the end of March, and the first grants under the programme will be announced in the autumn. It is therefore too early to say how many schools will benefit this year. However, we expect that by 2001 the new opportunities fund will have funded regular out-of-school-hours activities in at least half of all secondary schools, a quarter of all primary schools and half of all special schools. That breaks down as approximately 10,000 schools in the UK. In addition, by 2002, the fund will have committed funds to summer school projects which will provide summer school places for an extra 250,000 pupils.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that welcome announcement. I have visited such clubs, as I am sure have all hon. Members. I recently visited Bridges in Brownsover in my constituency, which is a first class club, where all the children are benefiting significantly from the opportunity to socialise and learn with other children, and their parents have the security of knowing that their children are safe and in a proper environment both before and after school. Will my right hon. Friend ensure that such opportunities will be made available across the country, and that the new opportunities fund will be asked to provide good quality information to all education authorities on how to access that fund?

Yes; I can give my hon. Friend that assurance. Indeed, such information has already been sent to all parts of the United Kingdom. Under the directions that we have established for the new opportunities fund, we have insisted that it ensures a fair geographical spread of the moneys that it makes available.

If a revised sponsorship target for the millennium dome has been set following the achievement of the original target. [87227]

Some £160 million of sponsorship has been committed to the millennium experience. That is more sponsorship than has ever been raised for any single event in the United Kingdom.

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. Will she join me in congratulating the New Millennium Experience Company on meeting its target, but assure me that she will keep up the pressure so that it maximises its sponsorship potential? Will she publish in the House of Commons Library a list of every moaning minnie on the Opposition Benches who carped and whinged his or her way through last year, saying that the millennium experience company would not reach its target, but who now have had the grace to apologise and congratulate the company? I suspect that it will be rather a short list.

I thank my hon. Friend for that observation. He is of course right that the faint hearts on the Opposition Benches said that the company would never reach the sponsorship level that we had set. We do not intend to issue a revised sponsorship target, although we are finding that more and more people want to contribute to what will be the most spectacular event in the world marking the millennium.

In her list of moaning minnies, will the hon. Lady please put at the top the right hon. Members for Hartlepool (Mr. Mandelson) and for Sedgefield (Mr. Blair) and her other colleagues who for nine months, particularly in opposition, thoroughly and professionally rubbished the millennium company and all its work, so greatly damaging sponsorship? I am delighted that on this, as on many things, they changed their tune on 1 May 1997. They should not try to rewrite history as well.

The right hon. Lady should not subject us to such nonsense. As she knows only too well, this Government decided to take the project forward. Indeed, I take this opportunity to remind the House that if the Conservative party had had its way, the dome would have been pulled down at the end of the millennium year. We intend that the dome is put to good use afterwards.

Has that sponsorship diminished the amount of money going to other artistic projects?

I assure the right hon. Gentleman that there is no evidence of that; increasingly we are finding that people want to be associated with the project. Sponsors who have so far supported the project include BT, Manpower, Tesco, BSkyB, Marks and Spencer, Boots the Chemists, McDonald's, Ford, the Corporation of London and BA—the list goes on and on. I assure the right hon. Gentleman that there is no evidence that that sponsorship has reduced support for other projects.

How many temporary and permanent jobs he estimates will be created through the millennium dome. [87228]

During the dome's year of operation 5,000 full-time jobs will be created. Of those, 2,000 will be employed directly by the New Millennium Experience Company and 3,000 will be employed by service providers, such as caterers and security services. NMEC's recruitment drive was announced on 10 June.

Is my hon. Friend aware that Ridings International in my constituency secured 14 jobs by winning a £2 million contract to provide 50 miles of steel cable, which holds up the dome? I think that it is safe to say that without Doncaster, the dome would droop. In view of that invaluable contribution, will she ensure that companies which help to erect the dome are included in the opening celebrations?

I thank Ridings International for its very significant contribution. My hon. Friend is quite right—without it, goodness knows what would happen to the dome, because that company's steel cables are holding it up. We are anxious that as many people as possible who have participated in this project should be included in the opening celebrations. We are carefully considering who we can include, and we shall take very careful note of my hon. Friend's suggestion.

I am sure that the Minister would agree that central to the success of the millennium dome and the millennium experience must be a London Underground connection to it. As she believes in joined-up government, will she tell the House when the whole length of the Jubilee line extension will be open?

I cannot give the hon. Gentleman an exact date, but I can assure him that it is a subject of much discussion between my Department and the other Departments involved. I assure him that the Jubilee line extension will be finished on time.

May I ask the Minister to withdraw her remarks about Conservative Members' attitude to the dome? She knows perfectly well that we have continued to support the project. It is not our fault that 90 per cent. of the population believe that it is a waste of money. Whose fault is that?

The hon. Gentleman's ability to score own goals gets better and better. I remind him that, under the previous Government, in which he served, there would have been no after-use of the site; they planned to pull the dome down. The hon. Gentleman knows only too well that the Deputy Prime Minister has received several bids for ideas to use the dome in a way that will serve the national interest after the millennium year. We intend that to happen, which contrasts starkly with the Conservative party's woeful attitude.

What assessment he has made of the extra visitors and spending in (a) London and (b) the United Kingdom next year as a result of the millennium dome. [87229]

The British Tourist Authority has estimated the number of overseas visitors to the UK in 2000 as 27.5 million. Of those, the New Millennium Experience Company foresees that 2.5 million will visit the dome. The BTA has also suggested that as a direct result of the millennium experience, an additional £300 million to £500 million of overseas tourist revenue will be brought into the UK economy. The "halo" effect could double that figure. The BTA has further estimated that 10,000 to 15,000 new tourist-related jobs will be created. That is excellent news for the whole of the UK.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on that and I share his enthusiasm for what will happen at the dome and all that will follow from that. However, is he aware that in constituencies such as mine—neighbouring Lewisham—some concerns exist arising from those wonderful forecasts? Will he undertake to look at the plans for a passenger transport interchange at Lewisham, which will enable much speedier transfers between the docklands light railway, train services and buses between Lewisham and the dome? That proposal would, I suggest, bring a lasting benefit to local people, help all the visitors and help to ensure that Lewisham does not become a giant dome car park.

Of course I understand my hon. Friend's concerns about what might happen if proper provision is not made. It is absolutely essential to ensure that good quality, reliable public transport services are available to everyone who wishes to travel to the dome. I will bring the specific points that my hon. Friend raises to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister.

It is all very well overseas visitors coming and using an interchange at Lewisham, but how are my constituents from the Vale of York meant to visit the dome? What special arrangements and special fares will be made available for those travelling from the north of England?

The hon. Lady will be aware of the National Express package, which has already been announced. It will offer transport from anywhere in the United Kingdom to the dome, including entrance to it, for £29 per person. She will be aware also of the special rates for family groups of up to five people, which have already been announced. The hon. Lady may be aware of the discussions that are under way with other transport operators to ensure that other means of getting to the dome from all parts of the United Kingdom are available at affordable rates.

What progress has been made in reforming the procedures of the House since May 1997. [87237]

The procedure for the scrutiny of European Union legislation has been overhauled. New mechanisms for pre-legislative scrutiny are in operation. That is probably the most significant reform that we have introduced. Certain old-fashioned aspects of conduct in the Chamber have been updated. We are experimenting with sitting hours, and I look forward to the autumn when we begin to experiment with sittings in Westminster Hall.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. Does she agree with me that while many of the changes, particularly those relating to behaviour in the Chamber, are important, pre-legislative scrutiny will lead to better legislation on behalf of our constituents? As a result, we shall be able truly to consider proposals in a more balanced light and, if necessary, bring about changes.

Yes, I agree entirely with my hon. Friend. I believe that that process will be conducive to fundamental changes leading to more efficient and orderly management of the House, as well as substantial improvement to what is in many ways our prime purpose in being here. The Committees have worked on four draft Bills so far and a joint Committee has been established on the draft local government organisation and standards Bill. The draft freedom of information Bill is before the Public Administration Committee and another Select Committee in the Lords. I entirely share my hon. Friend's view that all these measures will lead to an improvement in the quality of legislation.

Was not one reform where the Government hoped to make progress that of injecting greater certainty into the parliamentary calendar? As the date of the summer recess is still shrouded in uncertainty, does the right hon. Lady propose to give further attention to that matter?

As I have just said, making the parliamentary calendar more predictable was certainly one of the aims, but that is only a knock-on and beneficial consequence of our fundamental aim, which is to have good scrutiny of legislation. Although we have made progress on pre-legislative scrutiny in Committee, there are other aspects of management of the House's affairs where perhaps we have not yet made quite so much progress. The right hon. Gentleman will recognise that with both Kosovo and Northern Ireland, this has been an exceptional year.

Will my right hon. Friend look seriously at the way in which the American legislature deals with giving individual members independent and accurate advice on legislation? If we were to have the equivalent of the general accounting office available to the House, Members would be able to assess the accuracy of the information that they were being given by Government Departments and by Her Majesty's loyal Opposition, and do something about it. That might be a distinct improvement.

My hon. Friend makes an extremely important, serious and interesting point. What she says is to some degree the direction in which the House has been going, with the increase in numbers of staff who are available to hon. Members, with the precise purpose of ensuring that those Members carry out their role more effectively. My hon. Friend's underlying point about a fresh facility for the House is one not merely for me but one that may come under discussion in the years ahead in the House of Commons Commission and other such bodies.

Following the right hon. Lady's previous answers, does she agree that one of the most important recommendations from the Modernisation Committee, which she chairs, relates to the management of business in the House? I understand that 14 Bills have been the subject of agreed programme motions. Unfortunately, we have still had a number of guillotine motions. Does the right hon. Lady agree that the former are preferable to the latter? What efforts will she make to try to ensure that measures are implemented in the next few months to make certain that we have more agreed programme motions?

Discuss.

An essay, I think.

What representations she has received on the White Paper on the reform of the House of Lords. [87238]

The Government have received a range of representations on their plans to reform the House of Lords. There have also been debates on the White Paper in the House and the other place. Proposals on the second stage of reform are currently the responsibility of the royal commission chaired by Lord Wakeham.

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. In the representations that he has received, what degree of recognition has there been that a reformed House of Lords will be a more independent House of Lords? Can he confirm that one of the main aims for the second Chamber is to achieve a more even political balance, including a strong representation from regions of the United Kingdom, rather than the massive majority control to which the Conservatives have clung for centuries?

My hon. Friend will know, first, that it is the view of colleagues that no party should have an absolute majority in the reformed upper House, and secondly, that the Prime Minister is the first Prime Minister to give up powers by ensuring that an independent appointments system is in place for the new year's honours 2000, to provide a better political balance.

I note what the hon. Gentleman says, but can he give the House a guarantee that when the Government's reforms of the House of Lords are complete, it will not simply become a fallback repository to reward Tony's donors, now that the position of Director-General of the BBC is no longer available for that purpose?

The hon. Gentleman should remember the history of various Prime Ministers and their appointments. He would do well to scrutinise the record of his own colleagues. As I said, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is the first Prime Minister to reduce his powers in that regard.

If she will make a statement on the preparedness of the key sectors of the UK public infrastructure for the millennium bug. [87239]

What progress is being made on the state of readiness of the national infrastructure in preparation for the millennium date change. [87240]

All key sectors of the infrastructure have independent assessment programmes in place, ensuring that the UK should have one of the most objective and comprehensive pictures of readiness in the world. The outcomes of the latest assessments will be made public at the next meeting of the national infrastructure forum on Tuesday 13 July.

I thank my right hon. Friend for her answer, but may I press her further with regard to the water services? Many constituents have expressed to me their concern that after the millennium partying, the continuation of services should be assured so that they can flush their loo and have a cup of tea. Can my right hon. Friend tell the House what arrangements she has put in place to ensure that there is a continuation of services and to reassure my constituents, many of whom do not have enough knowledge about the millennium bug and are understandably worried?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising the matter. People should know how well their electricity and water supplier is doing as we get nearer to the millennium. We expect further reporting on 13 July and more detail about the huge amount of work that has been undertaken. I am glad to be able to tell my hon. Friend that as recently as 10 June, Ofwat, which is the responsible body for the water industry, reported that it had been assessed as 100 per cent. blue—in other words, its preparations have been completed, so people should be able to flush the toilet or have a cup of tea, as they wish.

Although the independent assessment of the preparedness of key sectors of the national infrastructure is welcome and provides possibly the most comprehensive and objective review of readiness anywhere in the world, this is not a one-off event. Monitoring and preparation must take place right up to 31 December. What further steps does my right hon. Friend have in mind?

My hon. Friend is entirely right to say that monitoring must take place right up to the millennium date change. We anticipate that further work will need to continue beyond that, because, as he may know, people in some sectors are concerned about the leap year date. We therefore expect and anticipate that people will go on working and developing their programmes and, in particular, that people will plan for continuity of service, should any unforeseen disruption occur.

Can the right hon. Lady assure my Leicestershire constituents that the effort to cope with the millennium bug has not been centred just on London and the south, and that real efforts have been made in the midlands?

Yes, I can assure the hon. Gentleman that work has been going on throughout the country. If he contacts the Government office for the east midlands, his local authority and his local chamber of commerce, he will find that they will be able to give him some information about the work being undertaken. I believe that the Prime Minister's adviser on this matter is of the view that more work has been done on this project than on any single issue since the end of the second world war.

The right hon. Lady will be aware that the best test is to forward-wind computers to see what happens, in simulation, when the date changes. Does she know what percentage of firms has done that test?

No, I cannot give the hon. Gentleman that detail. The whole purpose of the assessment and work that Action 2000 has done is to report on as many companies as possible in as much detail as possible, where testing has been carried out and independent assessments made, and publication of that work will continue. The hon. Gentleman will find much of that information readily available on web sites.

What assessment she has made of the effectiveness of the current procedures for early-day motions. 187241]

As part of the preparation for the weekly business statement I, together with the President of the Council, review recent early-day motions. I have not made a wider assessment of the effectiveness of that procedure.

I am grateful for that answer. Although many of our constituents do not entirely understand the status of early-day motions as a form of licensed parliamentary graffiti, and setting aside those hon. Members who simply want to curry favour with their local football teams, is there not a case for early-day motions that attract substantial support from hon. Members having some mechanism by which they can be debated in the Chamber, because they clearly represent a body of Back-Bench concern?

I am not sure whether I entirely agree with that point, although I accept the need for more opportunities for Back-Bench debate. I look forward to the Westminster Hall Committee experiment in the autumn, when hon. Members will have the opportunity to press and raise local and regional issues.

Although I share the view of the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome (Mr. Heath) that early-day motions are an important means by which to express opinion and concern about a range of issues, does the Minister agree that, at least in one area of public policy, they are used—and, I venture to suggest, have been for some years—simply because it is now 14 years and 100 days since the last Question Time was exclusively devoted to European Union matters? In view of the important fact that we have since had three EU treaties that impact on this country, will the Government seriously consider the reinstitution of that important means by which the legislature can hold the Executive to account?

Early-day motions can be an opportunity to raise European issues. The hon. Gentleman will know, if he checks the record, that in May the European Union and Europe were mentioned on 207 occasions in the Chamber. I know that he took a passing interest in that.