What assessment she has made of the likely effect on London's Olympic bid of the UK's not returning the Parthenon sculptures to Greece in time for the 2004 Athens Olympics.␣[122076]

I know that the House will want to welcome my new ministerial colleague, the Minister for the Arts, my right hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Yardley (Estelle Morris), and the fact that my right hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Central (Mr. Caborn) has directed his energy to an increased portfolio, taking on tourism as well.

And licensing.

And licensing. How could I forget? [Interruption.] Freudian. With reference to the question from my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon (Mr. Dismore), I have made no such assessment.

Bearing in mind the fact that the new Acropolis museum is under construction, with a completion date in 2004, is it not about time, after 200 years, that the Parthenon sculptures were returned to their rightful home, to put the icing on the cake for the Athens Olympics in 2004? Would it not create a great deal of good will towards our own Olympic bid if we were seen to be supporting the Athens Olympic games in such a generous way?

I know that my hon. Friend has been a long-term advocate of the position set out in his question. However, it is important that we keep quite separate the issue of the Parthenon marbles and the issue of the lobbying, in due course, in support of bringing the Olympics to London in 2012. The two issues are unconnected. As my hon. Friend knows, the responsibility in law for the Parthenon marbles lies with the British Museum and the British Museum trustees.

Is the Secretary of State worried that Britain's position as the custodian of the Parthenon marbles may be undermined by the surprising remark from the Secretary of State for Education and Skills that he would not mind if there was a falling away in the study of ancient Greek and other languages? Was that not a philistine and a surprising thing to say?

I have plenty else to worry about and do not need to add that to my list.

Does my right hon. Friend agree not only that it would be an enormous act of vision, generosity and cultural co-operation to return the Parthenon marbles to Athens for the Olympics in 2004, but that if those millions of visitors go to Athens in 2004 and see an accusing empty gallery where the Parthenon sculptures should be, great opprobrium will be earned by the British Government if they have not made some move before then to return the marbles to Athens?

The museum, although planned, is not yet built, and although the site has been cleared, the foundation stone has not yet been laid. My hon. Friend is aware that the chairman of the trustees of the British Museum and the director of the British Museum have had discussions with their Greek counterparts about this matter. The position in law remains clear: the custodianship of the 30 per cent. or so of the marbles that are in the British Museum sits with the trustees of the British Museum, and they have no intention of returning them to Greece on a permanent basis or on loan.

As the Member of Parliament whose main constituency county town is, sadly, associated with the misappropriated Parthenon marbles—Elgin is the town to which I refer—may I impress on the Minister the need to return those artefacts? Is she not aware of the statement by the Greek Minister of Culture, Mr. Evangelos Venizelos, that ownership of the marbles is no longer the key issue, and that he proposes that the marbles be returned to Athens on loan? Is it not now the right time to do the right thing and return the Parthenon marbles to Greece?

I, too, have had discussions with the Greek Culture Minister. The hon. Gentleman must accept what I have already said: this is not a matter for Government. The statutory responsibility for the marbles resides with the British Museum and the trustees of the British Museum. They have made the position clear.

Given that the Tate now has four different museums and the Imperial War Museum has three, the globalisation of museums and art galleries already exists. Why could we not have a British Museum in Athens that would hold some of the sculptures, to resolve the tensions between us?

As my hon. Friend knows, that proposition has already been put on the table and in due course will no doubt be considered. He will also know that the British Museum is proposing an investment of about £2 million in what it describes as a virtual display of the Parthenon marbles, ensuring that wherever fragments are located in the world, they are available to see. The British Museum sees its position in international culture in a particular way; as the global museum offering free access to visitors not only from the United Kingdom, but from around the world. That is an important element of its conclusion that the Parthenon marbles, legally acquired, should remain there.

What recent (a) representations and (b) discussions she has had on the Licensing Bill.␣[122079]

I welcome my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) back to his place. My ministerial colleagues probably wish that he had had a longer period of recovery, but it is good to see him back.

Will the Minister consider the Lords amendments regarding the licensing of acoustic groups that play in pubs? If 50 to 100 people gather to watch a football match on a wide screen in a pub, they make a lot of noise and the referee's whistle can be heard clearly down the street; if there are two people in a pub listening to a boy with a tin whistle, a licence will be required. Is that not nonsense?

I answered that question during the discussion of amendments last week. No representations have been made with regard to regulating the showing of football matches in public places; neither the police nor anyone else has made such a representation. So it is not correct to draw a parallel between that and what we are trying to achieve with our modernisation of the licensing laws in this country.

My right hon. Friend will be aware that Ireland has had an unhappy experience with relaxing alcohol licensing and is now considering reversing the decision, which led to a surge in alcohol consumption in that country. Will my right hon. Friend consult his Irish counterparts and look at the experience there?

I do not know about meeting my Irish counterpart, but I was in Dublin the weekend before last at the special Olympics and I did not see any of the activities to which my hon. Friend referred. Five areas underpin the modernisation of licensing in this country; crime, disorder, public nuisance, safety and the protection of children. We have looked at the experiences worldwide, which have underpinned our modernisation.

In last Tuesday's debate on the Licensing Bill, and again a few moments ago, the Minister denied having received any representation from the Association of Chief Police Officers regarding its wish to license the showing of televised sporting events on wide screens in pubs. ACPO has now confirmed to us that an exchange of e-mails with the Minister's officials took place on this issue last year. Was the Minister told about this? If not, will he question his officials? If he was, does he wish at this late stage to put the record straight?

I did not know that those representations had been made, but I take the hon. Gentleman's word. I have not seen those representations and I will ask my officials to let me see them.

I welcome my right hon. Friend to his new responsibilities. Will he reflect further on the Bill—despite all the good that is in it—and ask himself whether there is not some inconsistency between the large-scale transmission of sports events or pop concerts not requiring a licence and the requirement for the smallest kind of live music event to be licensed? Is not the way forward not to abolish the two in the bar rule but to modernise it and come up with new de minimis arrangements that would permit harmless small-scale acoustic entertainment to escape the net of local authority licensing?

What we have been trying to do in the Bill is to provide greater access to music in public places, and in particular in licensed premises. We are introducing a single licence for liquor and entertainment, with a modest fee, and incorporating six licensing authorities into one. That, underpinned by the principles that I have just outlined, will give live music in public places a tremendous lift. That is the intention of the Bill, and that is what we believe will happen.

What discussions she has had with the Scottish Executive regarding the 2012 Olympic bid.␣[122081]

I discussed the London bid to host the Olympics and Paralympics in 2012 with Scottish colleagues at the sports cabinet earlier this year, and they were supportive of our intentions. That is the body that brings together the four home country Ministers with responsibility for sport. My officials have also had various discussions with their Scottish Executive counterparts. This is an important issue, and in order to build on the cross-party support, as well as support in the other home countries, it is my intention to arrange regular briefings for representatives from Opposition Front Benches, to keep them abreast of developments.

Given that Scotland has some of the best football fans in the country, and some world-class stadiums, will the Secretary of State ensure that the nations and regions of the country are involved in the bid, so that sports such as football can be played north of the border in the Olympics?

Yes, of course, and I have said on a number of occasions that it is my great hope that, right across the United Kingdom, there is support for the Olympic bid, and there will be participation in building local facilities and ensuring that the bid, which we hope will bring the games to London, will truly reflect the sporting ambition of the whole of the UK.

As hon. Members will be aware, I am stepping down from the Front Bench today after six years, three of them in this brief, which I have much enjoyed—although, subject to the approval of the House, I hope to have an important role to play in the scrutiny of the forthcoming gambling Bill.

First, I wish the hon. Gentleman well in his next enterprise and thank him for his support for the Olympic bid over the past few months.

The Secretary of State will of course be aware that the vast majority of the cost of the London Olympics will come out of national UK lottery funding, which will undoubtedly have an impact on the charities that lottery money supports. In her discussions with the Scottish Executive, has she made an assessment of the cost to Scottish charities if the London bid is successful?

The answer is yes. We have received from the lottery regulator an assessment of the impact on good cause income of introducing the dedicated Olympic game. In the first six years, up to 2009, the impact will be slight, at around 4 per cent. of lottery income. After that, depending on the success of the Olympic game, the impact may be greater, and may extend to about 12 per cent. of good cause income. Yes, all the lottery distributors, including those relating to the devolved Administrations, are aware of the situation, but I should underline the fact that this bid involves the whole UK. The lottery is a UK lottery and all are aware of that. Support for the bid echoes right around the UK.

How school sports facilities will benefit from the Olympic bid. [122084]

We want the whole of sport, including school sport, to benefit from the focus on, and the energy generated by, our bid for the Olympic games. Should we win that bid—as I hope that we shall—more state of the art facilities will be available for use by children, which will complement the new and refurbished facilities already being developed through the investment of some £500 million of New Opportunities Fund lottery money. Just over 2,000 individual schemes will be coming on-stream in about three to four months' time.

As all London taxpayers will be obliged to contribute to the cost of the Olympic games, will the Minister ensure that consideration is given to upgrading the sporting facilities in schools in outer London boroughs such as Havering? Many competing teams, especially from smaller countries, would benefit from training in smaller facilities such as those provided in schools. And of course, such a development would also be of lasting benefit to the schools.

That is absolutely true, but the point is not predicated simply on the Olympic bid. Since this Government took office in 1997, we have tried to focus on investment in sports facilities, particularly through schools, and in the communities. That approach will continue in years to come. It is very important that we continue with such investment; indeed, some £750 million is currently being invested. The Olympic games bid provides a platform through which one can argue forcefully for the role of sport in our wider communities. I agree entirely with the hon. Lady—we need to continue with that argument, including in respect of schools in her own constituency.

I recognise the importance of the Olympic bid and of ensuring that, as the Minister said, we have the necessary facilities in schools, but will he make sure that schools in outposts in Lancashire get their fair share of money and their sporting facilities upgraded?

Very much so, and through the allocation of the New Opportunities Fund we have tried to remove some of the competition. We have also asked local authorities to look strategically at how they will develop sports facilities. As my hon. Friend knows, we have just revised PPG17—planning policy guidance note 17—which now requests that all local authorities make a needs assessment. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will make an announcement at a sports summit that we are holding on 14 July, and we are developing a Domesday book that will, for the first time, provide a complete inventory of all of the sports facilities in this country. So we are making some significant advances in how we develop sports facilities—in both the public and private sectors.

But does the Minister accept that school sports will benefit from the Olympics only if the schools have playing fields to play on? Despite the Government's clear pledge in the Labour party sports manifesto to stop the sale of such fields, the latest figures from the National Playing Fields Association show that the number of applications to build on playing fields rose to 1,325 last year. Does the Minister agree with the NPFA's director, who said that these figures are disastrous and show that we have a Government who have lost their way?

I do not agree with the NPFA's comments and I shall give an example of why. The school on which the NPFA's director descended with the BBC and Sky TV on Friday—its headmaster was not very pleased about that—has just secured an £11.6 million deal with the local authority and a builder. It will have a modern, state-of-the-art school building; a new all-weather hockey and football pitch; a new five-court sports hall; a new hard-court multi-games area consisting of five tennis courts that can also be used for netball, basketball and five-aside football; and a new school gymnasium. A far greater number of young people, both from the school and from the wider community, will use those facilities. It is about time some people stopped living in the past and joined the modern age.

One of the key drivers promoting education and sport has been the specialist schools programme in sports colleges. I greatly agree with my right hon. Friend's point about improving facilities. Unlike under the previous Government, schools now have the capital to make improvements. However, will there be liaison between the Minister's Department and the Department for Education and Skills, so that we can build on the specialist sports colleges and ensure that the schools can gain access to facilities for the Olympic bid?

Very much so, and as I said, I hope that the Olympic bid will bring this country's focus on to sport. As we roll out the 400 sports colleges, about seven secondary schools and 20 primary schools are linked in with them, along with 3,000 school sports co-ordinators. I remind the House that that means a teacher—backed by another teacher—having two to three days off a week to devote solely to sport. It is part of a commitment to give every child from the age of five to 16 two hours of quality physical activity or sport every week. That is a real commitment to ensuring that young people are not only well educated but fit: we believe that the two things go hand in hand. The Olympics will help us to deliver that and involve young people. I do not believe that this country has made such an investment in sport, in respect of individuals or facilities, for many years.

We all hope that the next generation of schoolchildren will be inspired by the Olympic bid, and I know that the Minister shares my view on that. We all want to work on an all-party basis with the new bid leader, now that the name has been announced, but does the Minister not recognise that many of us and our constituents are rather concerned that the Government were unable to find a British bid leader who would work full-time on the project? Would not a British leader have inspired schoolchildren more? Does the Minister accept that it is inconceivable that the French, Spanish or Americans would have failed to appoint one of their own nationals as a bid leader?

I do not accept that. Let us consider the England football team, tennis players, or swimming— Bill Sweetenham is the senior swimming coach, for example. Sport is international. What we have done is secure the best person for the job, and I am sure that the hon. Gentleman would agree with that. East London is probably the most cosmopolitan area in the world, so I do not believe that nationality means anything. I hope that the whole House and everyone in the nation will get behind the Olympic bid led by Barbara Cassani—a first-class person who has been here for 19 years, whose kids were born here and whose husband is English. Quite honestly, I do not think that we could have secured a better person to head the bid. It is a break with the past. Some people in the Olympic organisation said that they expected a Lord or someone in a grey suit to lead the bid, and the break with tradition has shocked some people. However, we now have someone leading the bid who is dynamic, who knows the business and has proved that she can bring her past achievements to the Olympic bid.

What assessment she has made of the impact of international terrorism on numbers of tourists visiting England; and if she will make a statement. [122087]

Overseas visitor numbers fell by 4 per cent. in the three months to April, but recent evidence suggests that the inbound market is now recovering. I can tell the hon. Gentleman that the problem was not only due to international terrorism: severe acute respiratory syndrome and the aftermath of the Iraq war were other factors. VisitBritain is working with the industry on campaigns to continue to promote Britain around the world as a safe and attractive tourist destination.

I certainly share the sentiments expressed in the Minister's concluding remarks, but is not England curiously badly placed to deal with the risk to the international tourism market? The last figures that I have with me show a spending of £3.77 per head of population on Scottish tourism promotion; £4.03 for Wales; and 20p for England. Is it not time to defend more effectively one of the most successful brands and proudest nations in the international tourism market?

If the hon. Gentleman had continued with the figures he would have shown that the spend power is £220 per head in respect of coming to England; 80 per cent. of the return on inward bound tourism is effectively inside England. We can argue the economics, but it needs to be said clearly that, although there is a perception of risk out there, quite honestly Britain—and England—are probably the safest destinations in western Europe. That needs to be said loud and clear to a lot of people. It is good to see the figures improving. BAA's figures show that in May there was a 2 per cent. increase in traffic against the same period last year. We are seeing a slight rise in the market and confidence is coming back, which is to be welcomed.

I wonder whether my right hon. Friend is aware that visitor numbers at St. Paul's cathedral will be well down this year. St. Paul's feels that that is due to a reduction in the market from Japan and America. However, my right hon. Friend will be delighted to learn that passenger numbers on the Worth valley railway in my constituency are up this year. That indicates that the fall in visitor numbers at St. Paul's has something to do with international terrorism and other things. Will the Department do everything in its power to encourage back some of those visitors?

The answer to that, obviously, is yes.

Team trains.

Yes, team trains to Keighley.

The Government responded to 11 September with a modest injection of cash for tourism promotion and have subsequently formed VisitBritain, but is the Minister satisfied that it has enough resources at its disposal? Is not tourism a very competitive international market? Is it not worth £75 billion a year to Britain? Does the Minister not think that VisitBritain needs to have at its disposal the resources that our international competitors have? Will he deal with the excellent point made by the hon. Member for Mid-Worcestershire (Mr. Luff) about the continuing anomaly between the funding of English tourism and that in Scotland and Wales?

One of the hon. Gentleman's points may be true, in the sense that when the split came with Wales and Scotland and they set up their development agencies, English tourism was left in the Department of Trade and Industry. Recently, we have ensured that tourism comes into the mainstream economic development of the English regions. That is why we brought into play the regional development agencies, which are seen as a major part of the development—[Interruption.] if the hon. Member for Mid-Worcestershire (Mr. Luff) will listen I will tell him what we are doing. The RDAs are now seen as a major part of the development of the economies of each of the English regions. Indeed, the former chairman of the South West of England regional development agency, Sir Michael Lickiss, is playing a major role in the development of tourism in England and the United Kingdom. I think that tourism will probably play a greater part in the development of the English regions than it has in the past.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his new brief. Since 1997, we have had a Scotsman, a Lancastrian and a Welshman promoting British tourism, and it is great to see a true Yorkshireman in that post. I hope that he will remember that Britain's greatest break is in Yorkshire and that he will come during the summer and learn first hand from the Yorkshire tourist board how it has tried to redress the balance in getting international visitors to come to Yorkshire to see England's greatest county. I hope that he will take the opportunity to learn from Yorkshire.

Occasionally, missionaries have to be sent out of Yorkshire to other parts of the UK. Last weekend, I had a fantastic time in the Lake district. The sun shone all the time. It is probably one of the most beautiful places in the world, but as my hon. Friend said Yorkshire is a fantastic region.

It is a county.

I call it a region, if the hon. Gentleman does not mind. Scarborough is a wonderful place to visit, too. It has had fantastic success over the past two or three years in attracting visitors.

We, too, congratulate the Minister on his new responsibilities, but does it not say something about the priority that the Government attach to tourism that, following the botched reshuffle, the job has simply been tacked on to the end of his existing responsibilities?

The hon. Gentleman makes an important point about the skills of the industry, which are of concern to the nine regional development agencies. We hope to make an announcement in the autumn about the sector skills council.

What stolen Iraqi cultural objects have been recovered since 19 May; and if she will make a statement. [122088]

The Coalition Provisional Authority, with the support of expert officials nominated by my Department, is assessing the scale of looting from Iraq's museums and cultural sites. As I made clear at our last Question Time, however, it will be some time before a full inventory of stolen and recovered Iraqi cultural artefacts is completed. The amnesty conducted by United States forces has had some positive results since 19 May, with several key pieces, including the Warka vase, being returned to the Iraq museum.

I thank the Secretary of State for that answer, and I welcome the assessment being made in respect of the full inventory. Can my right hon. Friend confirm that, as Neil MacGregor, head of the British Museum, is reported as saying in Glasgow's The Herald, there appears to have been informed and planned looting and that 32 of the most prized artefacts are still missing? Can she respond to the eminent archaeologist, Dan Cruickshank, who has expressed alarm at the part-reopening of Baghdad museum on 3 July? Will the museum and the artefacts on display there be safe?

It seems that losses arose in three ways. First, a number of artefacts were taken away before the Gulf war and have not yet been returned. Secondly, artefacts were removed from the museum by the regime, and efforts are being made to locate them; some were taken to banks, but others have not yet been identified. Thirdly, there seems to be some evidence of systematic criminal theft, and, as I have made clear, some artefacts were removed by looting.

I appreciate that, for obvious reasons, the right hon. Lady cannot have complete control over the issue, but she said that before the war 90 per cent. of the artefacts were taken away for safe-keeping. As two months have passed since the end of the war, the 90 per cent. of artefacts that have not been returned must have been looted, or taken by the now illegal regime. Surely it is possible to make a firm estimate of what has been saved and what has been lost—hopefully, in relation to the latter, only temporarily rather than permanently.

I have some sympathy with the hon. Gentleman's frustration, but when museum staff were in this country a few weeks ago they made it clear that compiling the comprehensive inventory of what had happened to the artefacts would take time. They wanted to ensure that they had time to do that, which will obviously have a bearing on when the museum reopens.

Does the Secretary of State share my concern that, out of sight of the media, archaeological sites across Iraq are at risk of looting as long as the security situation remains so desperately poor? Will she support calls by experts in the field to improve customs controls to stop material being smuggled out of Iraq and to instruct visiting journalists and military personnel in Iraq not to buy archaeological souvenirs?

Yes, I share the hon. Gentleman's concerns about the reports of continued looting. Consistent with the security situation, my officials, who are in various centres in Iraq, are making every effort to visit sites. After our last oral questions, I was able to place a letter of reassurance in the Library, following the allegations about the defacing of the Ziggurat at Ur. We have a partial report on the damage caused by looting, and we shall continue to update and improve such reports.

What plans she has to visit Lichfield to discuss support for theatres in the city.&bland;[122089]

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State tells me that she will visit Lichfield tomorrow as part of a regional visit to the west midlands. She looks forward to opening the Lichfield Garrick arts centre and the festival that will take place over the summer.

May I welcome the right hon. Lady back to the Front Bench? Members on both sides of the House are glad to see her there.

The hon. Gentleman spoilt that at the end, but never mind. I thank him for his generous comments.

May I also welcome my right hon. Friend back to the Front Bench? I am tempted to ask the Secretary of State to go via Leicester on her way to Lichfield tomorrow, to discuss the problems of the Leicester Haymarket theatre, but I know that you, Mr. Speaker, would rule me out of order if I were to do so.

I know that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is looking forward to talking to my hon. Friend shortly. Of course I take those points. When public money is spent on theatres, it is important that everyone with an interest has a chance to express a view, but it is a cause for celebration that the increase in theatre funding has been so substantial during the past year. It is now £70 million—£25 million more than the previous year. My hon. Friend asks about who is consulted, but if the extra resources were not going in it would not matter who was consulted—no one would have any money. I take his point, but I am sure that he will join me in welcoming the extra resources being given to this very important part of our national heritage.

What assessment the Commission has made in its inquiry into the 2003 local election pilots of the scope for fraud in postal voting.␣[122037]

The Electoral Commission's report on the 33 all-postal voting pilot schemes that ran at the May local government elections in England will be submitted to the Government on 31 July. It will consider, among other issues, the scope for fraud and the implications for security.

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that response, and I am sure that hon. Members on both sides of the House will deplore any examples of postal vote fraud that come to light. Does he agree that, in households with a dominant member, houses in multiple occupation and blocks of flats, the scope for fraud is such that perhaps we should not be going down the route of all postal vote elections?

The hon. Gentleman, no doubt, is reflecting on the fact that the turnout at the local election in May was only 28 per cent. in his constituency. It is entirely appropriate that we should look at ways to encourage postal voting and other forms of voting. Each of the statutory orders giving effect to the pilot schemes included a requirement that returning officers should inform the commission and prosecuting authorities of any possible offence. The commission is now liaising with local authorities involved in pilot schemes to identify any substantial allegation of fraud or malpractice. The commission is also in contact with the Crown Prosecution Service and local police forces.

If he will make a statement on the level of income from collections the Church of England has received in each of the last four years.␣[122053]

The total direct giving by members through standing order, payroll giving and cash in the last four years for which data are available—1998 to 2001—amounted to £244 million, £253 million, £268 million and £282 million.

I welcome that reply, which is obviously good news for the Church of England, but does the hon. Gentleman share my concern that the grave anxiety about the appointment of bishops might lead to a fall in church attendance and future church collections? Has he given some thought to how that could be overcome?

I am happy to reply—certainly in respect of giving. The 2001 figure that I gave increases by £52 million if tax recovered is added to the equation, and parochial church councils have received a further £149 million of restricted money. The Church welcomes that increase, but I am not entirely sure that it can be related to the appointment of bishops.

On the appointment of bishops, will my hon. Friend take a view on the murky political campaign that is being conducted to overturn the appointment of the Bishop of Reading, which has been approved by Her Majesty the Queen?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for pointing that out. I am sure that she is perfectly aware, as is the House, that the appointment of suffragan bishops falls within the purview of the Acts of 1534 and 1898. Once the sovereign has approved the appointment under the 1574 Act, the archbishop is legally obliged, in the absence of any lawful impediment, to proceed to consecrate the suffragan.

Given the increased call on the Church's collection income to meet the demands of the parish assessment or quota, how can anyone—a regular giver or otherwise—obtain information that enables them to make sensible comparisons between the performance of one diocese and another in terms of delivering on financial management, property management and other aspects that lead to increased costs?

The hon. Gentleman makes a valid point on how we relate and compare the costs of different dioceses. I am sure that he will wish to bear in mind the fact that, each year, the Church must find £800 million for its upkeep. Although we are content to see giving increasing, the problems remain enormous. The Church Commissioners are considering the type of analysis that he is calling for within the domain for which they are responsible.

What representations the Commissioners have made in the course of the review by the Department of Trade and Industry of employment rights for atypical workers. [122054]

My hon. Friend will recall from previous answers that I have given to the House that the Archbishops Council responded to the Department of Trade and Industry's discussion paper at the end of last year. I have placed a copy of it in the Library.

May I express the hope that the Government will recognise that ministers of religion and other clergy should be included in employment legislation? Does he accept that that is only the first stage and that they should also be included in anti-discrimination legislation? Does he share my view that all those ministers and clergy who are subject to discrimination on grounds of their sex, race or sexual orientation deserve our support and, most especially, the Bishop of Reading?

The position of the Bishop of Reading runs as a thread through our Question Time. However, I shall refer to the specific question, which is about the employment rights of the clergy. I assure my hon. Friend that the convocations in the House of Laity will put forward a paper on this subject at the July sessions of the General Synod. The Church is considering carefully the issue of human rights within the Church and employment rights. It is opposed entirely to discrimination of any sort and, in particular, to the discrimination of the sort to which my hon. Friend refers.

I agree with the hon. Members for Monmouth (Mr. Edwards) and for Reading, East (Jane Griffiths) and assume, for the purposes of this question, that a bishop can be considered to be an atypical worker, so will the hon. Gentleman underline the point that Bishop John's skill as a theologian and his capacity for spiritual leadership should be the guiding criteria in favour of his appointment? His personal proclivities in terms of sexual orientation are no concern of anyone.

As I indicated earlier, the appointment of a suffragan bishop falls within the Acts of Parliament of 1534 and 1898, and none of those Acts refers to the matters that the hon. Gentleman has mentioned. The appointment has been approved by the sovereign under those Acts, and the archbishop is legally obliged—in the absence of any lawful impediment—to proceed to the consecration of the suffragan.

On the matter of employment rights, the Commissioners have given the impression of proceeding at the slowest possible pace and in a manner that is somewhat grudging. Will my hon. Friend tell me whether that impression is rightly or wrongly based?

I am happy to assure my hon. Friend that it is wrongly based. I thought that he would have taken comfort from the fact that the convocations in the House of Laity will put forward an interim report at the July sessions of the General Synod. I am sure that he will also be comforted by the fact that there has been an initial meeting with Amicus. Therefore, the Church is not being tardy; in my view, it has been quite sprightly.

What assessment the Church Commissioners have made of the implications of the Human Rights Act 1998 for the recruitment of clergy in the Church of England. [122055]

It would fall to the Archbishops Council to make such an assessment. I understand that it has not yet done so.

Will the hon. Gentleman report back to the Church Commissioners that a great deal of concerted opinion has been expressed in the House during Question Time that the appointment of the Bishop of Reading was good and should certainly be allowed to proceed? Will he report that any indication that the Church of England discriminates on the ground of sexual orientation when appointing bishops would be against the best interests of the Church itself?

The proceedings of our House on Church business are widely read in and outside the Church, and I am sure that the Commissioners and the wider Church will note the hon. Gentleman's views with great care. As I indicated earlier, all steps that have been taken on the appointment of a suffragan bishop in this case are within the laws of the land, and I have no doubt that a consecration will go ahead.

What the estimated cost is of the forthcoming review of local government boundaries in the north-west. [122056]

The reviews will be undertaken by the boundary committee for England, which is a statutory committee of the commission. The committee has not estimated the cost of carrying out a review in the north-west alone. However, for budgetary purposes, it was estimated that costs of around £6.2 million would be incurred by conducting local government reviews of three regions.

I think that £6.2 million is an underestimate of the true costs and that we need local government reorganisation like we need a hole in the head. Will the electoral committee examine the opportunity costs of the reorganisation of England into three regional assembly areas, bearing in mind that councillors and senior officers will be poring over local government maps—not concentrating on service delivery but examining the reconfiguration of local government maps? That is a complete waste of time.

The legislative framework for the matter is quite sophisticated. The boundary committee received a direction from the Deputy Prime Minister and will report to him. Therefore, policy on the issue is not a matter for the Speaker's Committee or the Electoral Commission, and questions should be addressed to the Deputy Prime Minister.

How many libraries are funded by the Church Commissioners in (a) the south and (b) the north of England. [122057]

The Commissioners fund small collections in the house of every diocesan bishop, but the great majority of their financial responsibility is represented by Lambeth palace library, a major collection of national significance.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the other major church collection of national significance is the York Minster library? Is he aware that the First Church Estates Commissioner, Andreas Whittam Smith, is currently examining how best to conserve the documentary heritage of the Church's national institutions, including Lambeth palace library? Will my hon. Friend meet Mr. Whittam Smith to discuss a proposal that I put to him that it might be wise if the terms of reference for the study of Lambeth palace library were broadened to include York Minster library?

My hon. Friend will know that the Ecclesiastical Commissioners Act 1866 gave our predecessors the power to maintain Lambeth palace library. Following the Church Commissioners Measure 1947, the library and the power to maintain it were vested in the Church Commissioners. My hon. Friend is also aware—I have read his comments in the York Evening Press—that York Minster library is the property of the dean and chapter. I am aware that he has been in touch with the First Church Estates Commissioner about the reference of the review that we are holding on documentary heritage. I shall be glad to take up my hon. Friend's suggestion and speak to the First Church Estates Commissioner about the matter.

While considering Church funding of libraries, are the Commissioners fully seized of the importance of the internet to increase accessibility to Church matters, especially for young people? Will they consider promoting the use of the internet through their library service?

The Church has an extensive internet system of its own that is quite widely used. We would, of course, welcome greater use of it. I am sorry that the hon. Member for Lichfield (Michael Fabricant) is not in the Chamber. I am also going to Lichfield this weekend, where I will visit the library as well as the festival. I may see the Secretary of State en route.

What discussions the Committee has had with the Electoral Commission about the level of comprehension among voters of the electoral systems of the (a) devolved Administrations and (b) proposed English regional assemblies. [122058]

The Electoral Commission commented briefly on public comprehension of the voting system for the National Assembly for Wales and the Scottish Parliament in research reports published in December 2002. The issue is also addressed in the ICM research report on the May 2003 Scottish Parliament elections, published by the commission earlier this month. The electoral system to be used for any regional assemblies has still to be decided.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that answer. In the reports, did the Electoral Commission give credence to the opinion put about by supporters of first past the post that the general public are too thick to understand the electoral system used for the Welsh Assembly and Scottish Parliament? Surely the fact that they are bright enough to understand it and use it well, and that it produces a fair result, is a good recommendation that it should be used for English regional assemblies.

The commission's reports "Scotland Votes?" and "Wales Votes?", published last year, considered public attitudes to voting systems at the 1999 elections. They indicated that understanding the voting system was a factor affecting the decision on whether to vote in a small percentage in cases. The commission's statutory reports on the 2003 elections in Scotland and Wales will again make use of public opinion research to measure voter comprehension of electoral systems.