If she will make a statement on the award of the Stirling prize for architecture to the Magna centre in Rotherham [10019]

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State wrote recently to Chris Wilkinson, architect on Magna, and to Stephen Feber, its chief executive, to congratulate them on winning the Stirling prize. Transforming the redundant Templeborough steelworks into a world-class science adventure centre has been a triumph not just for the architects, but for all those involved. Visitor numbers and earnings for the first six months have exceeded targets and estimates for the first year: that goes to show how the very best buildings contribute to their communities economically, socially and environmentally. I am delighted that the Millennium Commission has helped to facilitate this wonderful project, and I congratulate the Magna team once again.

As my hon. Friend said, in addition to receiving the award for architecture, this is a major regeneration initiative which creates a unique opportunity for young people to engage with science. In fact, it is the first UK science centre. However, does he agree that there is a need for the centre to collaborate with local universities, such as Sheffield university, which has a high-calibre science base? That would help attract more science-based industry to south Yorkshire, supporting the information technology industry there. Furthermore, will he ensure that south Yorkshire receives its fair share of lottery moneys, so that towns, such as Barnsley, which want to regenerate their cultural capital, will have the money to do so?

I am sure that the efforts now being made will address the problem that some areas have not been as fortunate as others in the distribution of moneys, and not before time. Until recent years, no country in the world could rival us in the way in which we locked up much of our intellectual capital in our universities, making it redundant. I am extremely glad that schemes are being encouraged to ensure that our universities reach out into our communities and work to tap the potential of those communities.

In congratulating those responsible for the Magna centre on their brilliant success, does the Minister agree that the Stirling prize and, indeed, other architecture awards have helped to raise public awareness of the need for good quality architecture? Will he encourage that through the setting up of more prizes, and will he also recognise that the introduction of the national lottery has made it possible for many of those projects to leave the drawing board and become a reality? Will he do everything to encourage that trend?

I shall do everything to encourage it as long as it does not involve additional expenditure for Department.

If she will make a statement on her targets for encouraging sport in local communities. [10020]

As the hon. Gentleman knows, the Department is committed to raise significantly year on year the average time spent on sport and physical activities by those aged six to 16. In support of that central objective, we are investing heavily in school sports facilities that will also be available to the wider community. In delivering that programme, we will ensure that school facilities are properly managed for the community as well as for schools. I recognise the problems involved in achieving that, but I am determined that we should use those assets for the wider community, and we shall pursue that.

I thank the Minister for his response. Does he agree that youth football clubs, such as Roundshaw and District Colts football club, will help the Government to achieve their targets by developing youngsters' skills and boosting their fitness and by involving the local community? Does he further agree that those targets will be much easier to reach if clubs, such as the Roundshaw and District Colts, and better-known clubs, such as Wimbledon football club, respond to the wishes of their local communities as they seek to expand?

I cannot comment on the specific cases that have been drawn to the House's attention, but I can say on behalf of football that, through the Football Foundation and the improved corporate governance of football, those involved are, first, seriously considering how to generate indigenous talent in the footballing world and, secondly, taking note of the facilities provided by the football academies that are being set up by a number of the premier and first division clubs. I welcome that, as well as the campaigns that have been run effectively to bring new sports facilities into the community, such as that by Donald Trelford of The Daily Telegraph for sports playing fields. Those campaigns are to be commended, and I hope that the Government will be able to respond to them.

I understand the need to ensure that young people have access to sports facilities, but does the Minister accept that community and amateur sports clubs offer many people post-16 a lifeline and are worthwhile places in which to partake in athletics? Unfortunately, such clubs are disappearing. Most local sports clubs, such as mine, once had three or four teams, but many of them now run only one or two. Will the Minister use his energy to ensure that more is put back into community and amateur sports clubs? Specifically, has he had discussions with the Chancellor about the consultation on the tax break that I announced—sorry, suggested—in my ten-minute Bill?

I am sure that all the authorities will be pleased to have heard my hon. Friend's announcement on what the Chancellor will say, and I am sure that the Chancellor will be waiting to hear what my hon. Friend says.

Does the Minister recognise that all his fine words are undermined by the fact that a third of primary schools reduced the amount of time for physical education during the past year, as the Select Committee on Health has shown? When the Government allow building on playing fields, such as Foster's field in Sherborne—a policy that has been savagely criticised by the very journalist whom the Minister prayed in aid in an earlier answer—are not all the Minister's fine words completely belied by the real facts?

One of the first ministerial jobs that I had when the Labour Government were elected in 1997 was as Minister with responsibility for planning, and one of the figures given to me by the civil servants was that 40 playing fields a month were being closed each month when we inherited the Administration from Conservative Members, so we want no lectures from them on investment in sports facilities or playing fields. We have brought that figure down to one and a quarter a month. If they had done what should have been done when they were in power, we would not have been left in the sorry state that we are now in.

We are looking forward to the announcement of £750 million for sport in the United Kingdom, but will that money make provision for the employment of professional ground staff? When cuts are made in a local education budget, the first to go is either the librarian or the ground staff. We have no cricket fields or proper playing fields and, when there is a flood or it is hot, health and safety regulations deem it too dangerous for children to play. No one in the community cares about ground staff, so will my right hon. Friend reflect on that point and tell us whether it will be possible to use the money that will be made available for the employment of ground staff?

My hon. Friend raises an important point relating to the links between schools and the local community. We all know that, on a Saturday afternoon, it is sometimes difficult to get the school caretaker to open changing facilities so that the local football team can use the playing fields. We must consider that issue. Sport England is engaged at the regional level in dialogue with local education authorities and local authorities to ensure that facilities are available for the community as well as for schools.

What criteria she intends to apply when considering renewal of the BBC charter. [10021]

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport will make an announcement on the criteria in due course.

In considering the criteria that will be applied, will Ministers pay particular attention to the commitment shown by the BBC to news, current affairs and serious programmes? Will the Minister confirm that it is his understanding that the BBC's obligation as our primary public service broadcaster to deliver news and current affairs is not met if those programmes are relegated to BBC Choice at 3 o'clock in the morning and that it has an obligation to ensure that they are on BBC 1 during prime time? Will he deplore the moves of BBC 1 to go down market so that it becomes some sort of tabloid channel?

The answers to the first three questions are yes, yes and yes. On the point about dumbing down, I am deeply suspicious about politicians who tell broadcasters what they should or should not put on television. Most politicians never watch the thing.

My hon. Friend will doubtless have been following carefully the proceedings on the Office of Communications Bill in the other place. He will have noticed that it and many outside commentators have been pressing for as much evenhandedness as possible in the regulatory environment between all the public service broadcasters, including the BBC. Will he therefore consider the possibility, as the shape of Ofcom develops through the legislative process, that the final backstop regulatory power in respect of the BBC should rest with Ofcom rather than with the Secretary of State?

As my right hon. Friend knows from his considerable experience, the Office of Communications Bill is about setting up Ofcom. It is certainly not about content, which will ultimately be decided by the communications Bill that we hope to publish in draft form in the new year. I am sure that, at that point, there will be adequate time and opportunity for debate on these sensitive subjects.

If she will make a statement on the effects of the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington on the promotion of tourism to the UK. [10022]

Transatlantic tourism has been badly hit as a result of the terrorist attack on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon. Airlines are reporting ticket sales down by between 20 and 30 per cent. on some key transatlantic routes. The impact on the British tourism market is severe, because transatlantic tourists typically spend £6 for every £1 spent by a domestic tourist. The fall in income could reach £2.5 billion this year, but a survey from the British Tourist Authority suggests that there will be a recovery in the second half of next year.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the BTA has estimated a fall in overseas visitor numbers of up to 25 per cent. for the final quarter of this year? Given the pressure that the industry was already under as an after-effect of the foot and mouth crisis, what practical steps are Ministers taking—other than earning air miles—to alleviate the industry's problems?

The tourism industry was hit hard in a multitude of ways by the terrorist attack on 11 September. As the August figures showed a recovery on the previous year as a result of the additional investment in marketing that the Government provided to the BTA, terrorism struck when things were getting better for transatlantic tourism. However, the BTA and all the tourism agencies have worked closely with the Government and are investing £5 million in marketing Britain to destinations in Europe and beyond to attract visitors who want to enjoy the fantastic opportunities that Britain offers.

May I remind my right hon. Friend of one of our more successful tourist venues, the Aldeburgh festival, which took place at the weekend? It is one of our major literary festivals and I am delighted to say that it was absolutely packed out. Will she congratulate all those involved in its organisation, including Michael Laskey and Naomi Jaffa, on producing such a successful event?

I thank my hon. Friend for the opportunity to give my wholehearted congratulations to all those involved in the Aldeburgh festival.

Does the Secretary of State agree that there is no historical analogy with the last great disaster in tourism to affect the United Kingdom, which happened after the American bombing of Libya and events in Chernobyl? The recovery then was led by the airline industry. Does she also agree that £5 million expenditure is peanuts? If she does not authorise a massive increase in spending through the devolved Assemblies, her Department and the tourism authorities, the industry will not recover to benefit the UK.

Having had the opportunity in New York to talk to the BTA and American tourism bodies, it is clear that marketing travel to Americans at the moment will not get New Yorkers who do not want to leave home and are afraid of flying on to planes. That is why the BTA' s strategy of marketing Britain to other countries that are part of the major market for inbound tourism is right. It welcomed the opportunity to reallocate resources, and I hope that that, coupled with its commitment, will be borne out by an increase in the number of visitors to Britain.

Does my right hon. Friend recall in her discussions with the BTA mention of one of its most successful publications linking film production to tourism? Given the increase in tourism at Alnwick castle after "Elizabeth" and in Sheffield after "The Full Monty", and given the success of the Harry Potter film, will she link both industries in the interests of both?

I understand that the BTA has been involved in the development of a promotional film making precisely the link to which my right hon. Friend refers. We have also used football to promote British tourism in addition to the normal attractions of culture and heritage. So, the BTA is looking imaginatively at ways of marketing Britain, and I hope that that will be rewarded with the success that it deserves.

My husband works for an American airline company, so the House will appreciate that I am only too aware of the effects on the promotion of English tourism caused by the tragedies on 11 September.

I welcome the hon. Lady to her new responsibilities on the Front Bench.

What proposals she has to encourage the use of the Millennium stadium for major UK events. [10023]

The hon. Member for Rayleigh (Mr. Francois) should withdraw the remark about air miles made to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. That statement was quite disgraceful.

I am grateful for that reply, but following the great success of events held in the millennium stadium, should not it now be regarded as the natural home of international and national events for England and Wales and as the premier stadium in the British Isles? When my right hon. Friend searches for an alternative to Wembley and Picketts Lock, will he examine the claims of Birmingham, Coventry and every other town in the midlands and in the rest of the United Kingdom? I hope that the process will not be rushed. It should be measured and leisurely because the millennium stable[Interruption] —the millennium stadium will be available for decades to come to host such events.

I have heard of a multi-purpose stadium, but never one that was a stable as well. I am sure that my hon. Friend knows that we have asked the International Amateur Athletics Federation to consider Sheffield for an international athletics stadium. I have been taking advice on some of the activities at Cardiff and my hon. Friend—who, as everyone knows, is an expert on rugby union—tells me that if the Welsh team aspired to the performance that the stadium demands, Wales could be even more successful than it is now.

Does the Minister believe that Britain needs a national stadium, and, if so, where should it be?

That decision will be made by the Football Association and it is with the FA now. Let me update the hon. Gentleman. I think that he knows that just before the election the FA, which had already received £120 million of lottery money, asked for another £300 million of lottery money. We brought in Patrick Carter to carry out a review; he has been responsible for the Commonwealth games financing, which he reviewed for us, and for Picketts Lock. He has done as we asked and discussions on the Carter review with the FA and Sport England are continuing. I repeat, it is an FA project and the FA takes the lead. The FA and Sport England are currently discussing Patrick Carter's report.

The House will know that although Patrick Carter's report has been paid for by the public, it has not yet been seen by the public: it remains a secret document. Is it not now clear that the Picketts Lock fiasco has so damaged Britain's reputation that any chance we had of hosting either the Olympic games or the world cup has gone for the foreseeable future? Despite squandering millions of pounds of public money, the Government's incompetence and their failure to honour undertakings given by Ministers from the Prime Minister downwards will deny British fans the chance to see the world's top athletes perform on British soil. Does the Minister agree that the last-ditch attempt to replace London with his home city as the venue for the world athletics championships was merely a shabby attempt to conceal the damage that the Government have done to our reputation in sporting circles?

I remind the House that the issue of Wembley stadium started in 1996 under the Conservative Administration, and it was not resolved under that Administration. As for Picketts Lock, as soon as Sheffield became a potential contender, under the ministerial code I was removed from any decision making. I hope that the hon. Gentleman was not implying that I was involved in that decision. Furthermore, contrary to the hon. Gentleman's comments, Patrick Carter's report was put into the public domain at 5 o'clock on the Thursday that the decision was made. Everyone has been able to read it and arrive at their own judgment, and a considerable number of people have told my Department that the right decision was made. It is not in the interests of British sport or the British sports industry for the hon. Gentleman to continue to talk down our very good facilities. Our country probably runs more international sporting events than any other European country.

What plans she has to ensure equality of access to digital television. [10024]

In the White paper "A New Future for Communications", the Government have set out tests that must be met before the analogue signal is fully switched to digital. Those conditions will ensure that everyone who currently receives analogue television will have access to digital television. To facilitate the switch to digital, the Government have just published a draft digital action plan.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many of my constituents are deeply resentful of the fact that they get S4C instead of, rather than as well as, Channel 4? They would dearly love to see many of the free to air digital channels that are now available, but partly because they are not aware of the free to air option and partly because they are fearful of taking on extra financial burdens, they are not able to get them. Is it not time that we introduced a strategy to ensure that every household has a digital tuner? Toward that end, will the Government consider giving free, free to air digital tuners to every pensioner and every household that receives a free television licence?

I take my hon. Friend's point because, of course, I live just down the road from him and have never been able to get Channel 4—good though S4C is, I might add as Minister with responsibility for broadcasting. We will ensure that everyone who can currently get the main public service channels can receive them in digital form. The switch to digital has to be an affordable option, which is the point that my hon. Friend made. I know that there are a great many people in his constituency of the Rhondda who cannot afford expensive digital equipment. As a target indicator of affordability, 95 per cent. of consumers have access to digital equipment.

The Secretary of State recently gave a welcome green light to new BBC digital stations. However, is the Minister uncomfortable with the fact that, while the entire British public are paying for them through the licence fee, only between one quarter and one third will actually be able to receive them? Does he believe that the time scale of 2006–2010 is still realistic for the digital switchover, particularly given ITV Digital's current commercial difficulties?

There were a few questions there. We will certainly continue to press the regulatory authorities to ensure that, where possible, we can turn up the juice on transmitters so that we get better quality pictures and a much wider footprint. I hope that that will happen sooner rather than later. I share the hon. Gentleman's desire to press on with that timetable. I am as determined now as ever to ensure that the switchover will take place between 2006 and 2010. We have to be a good deal more imaginative and assertive than we have been to ensure that existing broadcasters do much more to publicise the virtues of digital technology.

I do not know whether my hon. Friend is aware of the collapse just a few weeks ago of the telecommunications company Atlantic Telecom, which delivered cable television to a number of my constituents after taking over Aberdeen Cable Services. My constituents therefore arrived home from work one night to discover that they had no television at all, just a message that their service had been withdrawn.

It is important that there is adequate regulation to ensure that that kind of protection is offered. However, I do not think that we need heavy-handed regulation to do that; it ought to be much simpler. That is the purpose of the White Paper and the new communications Bill, which, hopefully, will be published in the new year. We need light-touch regulation, which should be clear and transparent to ensure that both the industry and the consumer get a good, consistent service and do not receive unpleasant surprises.

The Minister will recall the all-party support for the very effective campaign by the Royal National Institute for Deaf People for subtitling for the deaf and hard of hearing on cable and satellite TV. Before the general election, the Government gave a clear commitment and a promise to introduce that. Nothing has been heard since then. Will the Minister take this opportunity to confirm that that promise still stands, and give us an idea of when that admirable and much desired change will come into effect?

I can certainly repeat that promise. I am meeting various RNID officials. There are some difficult problems, as I am sure the hon. Gentleman knows—problems with the technology, the take-up and the affordability. I want the initiative to be taken forward as quickly as possible. No doubt the hon. Gentleman knows that we have tried to raise the threshold generally to help people with disabilities, especially blind people, to overcome those problems when they watch television or listen to the radio. It is important that we take that agenda forward.

What discussions she has held on arrangements for the security of the Commonwealth games in Manchester. [10025]

Security arrangements for the Commonwealth games are being reviewed, following the events of 11 September. They will be kept under constant review between now and the games. Greater Manchester police are in daily contact with the Commonwealth games organisers, the relevant local authorities, other emergency services and all other relevant parties in respect of security planning for next year's games. Greater Manchester police are confident that all planning is on track and will deliver a safe games for athletes, spectators, VIPs and the residents of the Greater Manchester area.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his reply. Does he agree that it is important for the games to go ahead, if possible, without terrorist incident—first, because of the obvious economic benefits to Greater Manchester and Lancashire, and secondly, to show the world that the UK, and Britain in particular, is capable of hosting a major world sporting event that requires new stadiums?

I have no doubt that that will happen. We will produce a Commonwealth games of which not only Manchester and the north-west, but the UK and the Commonwealth will be proud. I pay tribute to Charles Allen and Francis Done, the chairman and chief executive of Manchester 2002, and their team for the tremendous work that they are doing. Now that they have a robust financial structure, which was put into place on the recommendation of Patrick Carter, we can deal more effectively with issues such as 11 September. As we now have more credibility, more sponsors are coming forward. That shows that the plan undertaken by Patrick Carter and the work done by him are paying dividends in many ways.

Does the Minister accept that since 11 September the cost of policing the Commonwealth games will be higher than it would have been before, and is likely to be more than £8 million out of the budget of Greater Manchester police? Will he undertake to make representations to the Home Office and his colleagues there to ensure that the people of Greater Manchester do not bear the burden of the cost of that policing? Will he ensure that the Home Office takes on the whole of that cost, to ensure that my constituents and others across Greater Manchester do not suffer from a diminution of police resources?

No request has been received by the Department. The hon. Gentleman would not expect me to go into detail about security planning for the Commonwealth games, but from the contingency fund of £25 million that we put into the finances, we have been able to cater adequately for what the police believe would be the worst-case scenario. As regards the knock-on effect on the revenue spend of Greater Manchester police, I have no doubt that if representations were made to the Home Office, they would receive serious consideration.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his reassurance. In Manchester five years ago, we learned something of the devastation that terrorism brings when an IRA bomb exploded at the heart of our city. Although it is important to take every precaution, will my right hon. Friend join me in emphasising that next summer in Manchester there will be a warm welcome for thousands of competitors and spectators from across the world, and an opportunity for them to enjoy the competition and the friendship that these important Commonwealth games will bring?

I hope that that sentiment will be echoed on both sides of the House and in the national press, because it is certainly recognised in the north-west. There has been a tremendous take-up of tickets that are available now, and a lottery for that area will start in the next few days. Some 12,000 people have already volunteered, and people are volunteering at the rate of 200 a week. There is a real appetite for the games' success and I have no doubt that Manchester and the north-west will ensure that, contrary to what the hon. Member for South Suffolk (Mr. Yeo), the shadow spokesman, said—[Interruption.] I am having difficulty in getting his attention. He has just been critical of facilities in the UK and has run down the UK. Now, he cannot even listen and support Manchester in hosting one of the best international events to take place in 2002. His performance at the Dispatch Box is quite disgraceful.

What her response is to the findings of the regional museums and galleries taskforce. [10027]

I welcome the publication of the report of the regional museums taskforce, which contains a convincing analysis of the problems and opportunities of museums and galleries in the regions. I have asked Lord Evans of Temple Guiting for advice, by the end of the year, on ways in which Resource should begin to implement the report's recommendations on the basis of funds already allocated to it for supporting regional activities.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Has it been brought to her attention that the award-winning national fishing heritage centre in Grimsby closed its doors last week for six months because of funding difficulties? I heard the glimmers of hope that she gave in her reply, but that excellent regional museum needs help sooner rather than later.

I thank my hon. Friend for her question. It is important to recognise that 2,000 museums and galleries throughout the country are funded in large part by local authorities and in much smaller part by my Department. Lord Evans's report proposes a new relationship between regional centres of excellence and smaller, satellite museums in order to improve their contribution to education, access and social inclusion. I am sure that she will take those messages to her local museum in Cleethorpes.

Will the Secretary of State consider museums that although are not in the national top 12, for which her Department has done a much appreciated deal allowing them some support in return for free admission, are none the less national museums in the first or second division rather than the premiership? In the borough for which she and I share responsibility there is the Design museum, which is unique in the United Kingdom. Is she willing to accept representations on ways in which that tier of national museum could be assisted if it, too, were willing to take the same approach to admission fees?

I recognise the contribution that the Design museum makes to the life not just of Southwark but of London as a whole. However, I would not want to mislead the House by pretending that we are in a position to provide the necessary support to all museums and galleries to enable free entry, as is the case with those that my Department supports directly. At the beginning of next month, we shall see the completion of the programme that was introduced by my predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Smith). I hope that Members on both sides of the House will continue to make representations about the case for improving access to less recognised museums, which are often the focus of local communities and represent their own kind of excellence.

The Commonwealth games will be an important event for my constituency in Greater Manchester. Will the Minister encourage Commonwealth countries to maximise their participation by reassuring them of the safety aspects of the games?

Yes, we—

Order. The question was not about the Commonwealth games but about museums, so the Minister need not answer.

What assessment the Government have made of recommendation 70 of the report of the gambling review body on not-for-profit clubs. [10028]

We have received more than 1,500 representations about the recommendation that jackpot gaming machines should not be allowed in such clubs. We have not yet reached conclusions on this or the other recommendations in the report. However, we shall consider very sympathetically the strong points made to us that recommendation 70 would have a damaging impact on many clubs and the communities they serve.

Does the Minister agree that the way to tackle the concerns about children having access to gaming machines is not in the way proposed, because a number of clubs have membership that is exclusively for the over-18s or can make other provisions?

We have to be very careful about such judgments. As I said, I have received more than 1,500 representations from Conservative, Liberal and Labour clubs, as well as from the CIU, Miners Welfare and the Royal British Legion. Many of them cater for families, which we must acknowledge and welcome, however, we must ensure that we take the Budd report's concerns on board and also ensure that children do not have access to jackpot machines. If the Government are clear about that central question, the report's major concern will be answered. Although we have not made a decision, we are mindful that almost £250 million goes into the clubs' financial infrastructure, and to withdraw that would have serious repercussions across many communities the length and breadth of the United Kingdom.

What resources the Commission has made available to the National Audit Office for the audit of spending by the European Commission in the last 12 months. [10063]

As the Comptroller and Auditor General does not audit the European Commission's operations, under the treaties establishing the European Community, responsibility for the external audit of the European Community revenue and expenditure, including that of the Commission, rests with the European Court of Auditors. However, the CAG audits the expenditure of the money that the United Kingdom receives from the European Community budget that is spent by UK Departments and agencies. The CAG's estimate provides for the resources to discharge its responsibility.

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his response. Will he comment on the way in which the appointment of the British member of the European Court of Auditors is carried out? Does he believe that such a person should have considerable experience of audit, probably being a fully trained auditor? Does he also believe that the Comptroller and Auditor General should have a greater say in that appointment?

The situation seems to be very in-house, to put it mildly. It is a closed shop for ex-civil servants. There have been three appointments since 1977 and everyone appointed has been an ex-civil servant. The individual who is due—no doubt quite justifiably—to take the fourth appointment next December is also an ex-civil servant.

What the changes in real terms have been in stipends and other salary payments paid to (a) bishops, (b) parish priests and (c) archbishops since 1986. [100541

Between 1986 and 2001, stipends for diocesan bishops, parish priests of incumbent status and the two archbishops have increased on average by 110 per cent., 119 per cent. and 106 per cent. respectively. I am happy to say that parish priests have come off best.

That is reassuring news. The definition of a stipend in the Church is that it should allow the priest to live without financial difficulty and be able to maintain his family in a state that cannot be described as poverty or riches. However, the majority of the clergy—75 per cent.—make no investment in a home of their own, which causes difficulties in retirement, and a quarter of them have made applications to charities in the past year. Does that not suggest that the parish priest is a long way from a state of riches but dangerously close to a state of poverty?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for making that particular point.

Will the hon. Gentleman confirm that a considerable proportion of the commissioners expenditure goes towards clergy stipends and pensions? If they are to be encouraged to do more, is it not essential for them to receive the maximum return on their assets—within, of course, the code of ethics to which they subscribe?

The commissioners must indeed obtain the best possible return on their assets, because one of their responsibilities is to meet the stipends of their clergy. A great deal of time and effort is being put into clergy stipends. A document entitled "Generosity and Sacrifice", which is in the Library, lists a number of benchmarks for clergy to observe in future, and is well worth a read.

What plans the commissioners have for dealing with poverty among the clergy. [10055]

The review group on stipends, to which I just referred, has expressed a number of aspirations, one of which is to introduce an incumbent's stipend guideline equivalent—with housing included—amounting to approximately 80 per cent. of the starting salary of a head teacher of a large primary school.

Is my hon. Friend aware that according to the Church of England's own report "Generosity and Sacrifice", more than one in 10 clergy say that they struggle to pay bills every year and, indeed, regularly go into debt? As my hon. Friend the Member for Newport, West (Paul Flynn) pointed out, many fail to acquire enough money to buy a home to which to retire. Is it not time that, first, Church of England clergy had proper employment rights, and secondly, that the tied cottage concept was abolished?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for widening the issue to encompass employment rights and the tied cottage. As he may know, in addition to their stipends based on a national stipends benchmark of £16,910 from April 2001, clergy of incumbent status receive free accommodation or a housing allowance, and membership of a non-contributory pension scheme. Moreover, their working expenses should be fully reimbursed. I nevertheless congratulate my hon. Friend on having already read "Generosity and Sacrifice".

The hon. Gentleman will know that the Church Commissioners are responsible for dealing with the poverty of clergy, but does he accept that, as a landlord, they are also responsible for dealing with that of their tenants? Will he convey to them the anger, frustration and dissatisfaction caused by the September decision of their assets committee, as a result of which there is less housing for the poor in London? Is that not compatible with a doctrine that states, "We will look after our own if they are clergy, but not if they are tenants"?

I expected the hon. Gentleman to widen the question to cover the Octavia estates. I can tell him, however, that the commissioners paid £90.60 million for clergy pensions and a further £11.7 million to offset the cost of contributions payable under the new pension scheme. The Octavia Hill issue is another question for another day, but, as the hon. Gentleman knows, it is part of the Church Commissioners overall responsibility to obtain the best possible return on investments in order to put more money into the cure of souls.

What steps are being taken to ensure the safety of church records and artefacts in those buildings that are susceptible to flooding. [10056]

Church builders have always been conscious of the need to build in places that do not flood. Church records and artefacts are generally, although regrettably not always, at relatively low risk.

Is that not a complacent reply? We all remember, one year ago, photographs of the Archbishop of York paddling about the cellars of his palace in York in his wellies. Is there not a case for the Government to examine the issue further and perhaps to give the Church of England emergency funding to ensure that our national treasures, such as the bishop's palace in York, are not susceptible to flooding? I do not want to see the palace in York flooded in a few weeks time; that would be just too embarrassing.

Whether the Government should help the minster at York is, of course, a matter for the Government and not for the Second Church Estates Commissioner. However, the Parochial Registers and Records Measure 1978 places on individual parishes a duty to ensure that registers and records are not kept in places where there is at least a risk of damage from flooding.

If he will make a statement on the progress of the commissioners deliberations on alleviating the work load of bishops. [10058]

A review group has given the view that, on the evidence presented to it, bishops are very hard working, perhaps excessively so; that the pressures on them are increasing; and that they do not have lavish lifestyles. How the hard work and pressure can be alleviated is the subject of on-going consultations.

Those on-going consultations were on-going when I raised this issue before the previous general election. The hon. Gentleman will recall that there was some discussion by the commissioners of the appointment of a third archbishop. May I remind the hon. Gentleman that there is a precedent in Lichfield where, in the seventh century, there was a third archbishop? May I say that if there is going to be a third archbishop, he should be in Lichfield? May I also say that, contrary to the ideas of certain sketchwriters, I am not offering myself for that position?

The hon. Gentleman might well be aware of the phrase that he who goes in a pope comes out a cardinal. Should there be a third archbishop, the same might be said for the bishop of Lichfield.