Appropriation (No. 2) (Northern Ireland) Order 1986

HL Deb 30 June 1986 vol 477 cc646-64

7.3 p.m.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Northern Ireland Office (Lord Lyell)

My Lords. I beg to move that the Draft Appropriation (No. 2) (Northern Ireland) Order 1986 laid before your Lordships' House on 7th May be approved. The order is being made under Paragraph 1 of Schedule 1 to the Northern Ireland Act 1974.

The order provides the balance of the money necessary this financial year for the services provided by Northern Ireland departments and certain other public bodies. On 20th March this year your Lordships approved a total sum on account of £1.365 million. This evening I am seeking the balance of £1,840 million making up a total estimate for 1986–87 of £3,205 million. The Estimates Volume, which gives full details of projected expenditure, is available from the Printed Paper Office and your Lordships who have been studying these matters will have it before you.

In addition to the total I have just mentioned the draft order also appropriates the sum of £104,154.01. This sum is to cover excess expenditure in the 1984–85 financial year by the Department of Economic Development in Class II Vote 6, which we call "Administration and Miscellaneous Services". The Committee of Public Accounts has examined this excess vote and it raised no objection to it being voted. Details of the excess expenditure are set out in the "Statement of Excess " pamphlet which has also been placed in the Printed Paper Office, for your Lordship's convenience.

We see that recent developments in the general economic situation in Northern Ireland include elements of good and bad news. On the positive side the level of inflation, at around 3 per cent. per annum, for the United Kingdom as a whole is at its lowest level for many years. In addition, interest rates continue to decline.

On the other hand, unemployment in the Province remains unacceptably high at approximately 21.5 per cent. This remains the worst figure for any region of the United Kingdom. While the news of the closure of the Rothmans factory at Carrickfergus was a further blow, the success of the Harland and Wolff-led consortium in winning the Ministry of Defence contract for the first auxiliary oiler replenishment vessel, was most welcome news. I shall say more about this when I come to the appropriate estimate.

Unemployment does however remain the paramount economic problem in Northern Ireland. The estimates before your Lordships reflect increases in public expenditure as part of Government's commitment both to the creation of viable jobs, and to the support of those who are unemployed. The Government continue to spend more per head of the population in Northern Ireland than anywhere else in the United Kingdom. Public expenditure alone, however, is not necessarily the answer; rather, our aim is to create an environment in which private enterprise and initiative can thrive in order to encourage the creation of self-sustaining, long-term employment. Your Lordships will be aware that there have been encouraging results in this area from the small business development unit, what we call LEDU, in Northern Ireland.

In the order we find that Class I of the main estimates covers agriculture, which is particularly dear to my heart. Your Lordships are being asked to approve a total provision of some £75 million. This is made up of £16 million for agricultural education, research and development; some £12 million for direct agricultural support mainly through the continuation of the programme of special aids for Northern Ireland; £28 million for administration and miscellaneous services, which cover among other things advisory and veterinary services; £13 million for drainage, and finally £5 million for forestry. The year 1985 was—I put it tactfully—horrendous for our farming community and the Government's ability to retain Northern Ireland's programmes of special aids such as the milk consumer subsidy; the aid to pig and poultry meat plants and egg packing stations and the schemes for grassland improvement and beef development are therefore all the more important to this sector and the province itself.

The Northern Ireland Agricultural Development Programme, which is a European Community measure of great significance in improving the viability of certain farms, is presently under review. I hope that the European Commission will come forward shortly with a revised scheme.

Class II Votes 1 and 2 cover the estimates of the Industrial Development Board with a total provision of some £112 million. Of that amount some £25 million in Vote 1 is for industrial support and regeneration and £87 million in Vote 2 for general support to industry. Ninety five per cent. of this general support is earmarked for industrial development loans and grants to help firms expand, diversify or generally improve their competitiveness.

In Vote 3, miscellaneous support services, some £17 million of the £77.3 million is sought for the Local Enterprise Development Unit, to which I referred earlier—the very successful small business agency for Northern Ireland. LEDU has recently formulated its corporate plan for 1986–89, which aims to ensure the agency builds on its past success and offers an even greater comprehensive 'one stop shop' facility for the small business sector in Northern Ireland.

Noble Lords will also note the provision of £37 million for Belfast Shipbuilders, Harland and Wolff. None of this provision, of course, is for the AOR order which the company recently won from the MoD on a wholly unsubsidised basis. The provision, instead, reflects not only the seemingly unending difficulties of merchant shipbuilding worldwide but also the Government's recognition of the importance of the company to the Province's economy as the second largest manufacturing employer. I should like to congratulate Harland and Wolff for having won the MoD contract for the design and building of the first auxiliary oiler replenishment vessel. Your Lordships may be aware that Harland and Wolff, which was the lead firm in a consortium which includes Yarrow Shipbuilders and YARD, won the competition on commercial and technical merit. The company chairman, Mr. John Parker, is to be highly commended for his skill and determination in putting together the successful consortium bid, but of course he would be the first to admit that he is the leader of a large and very successful team. The company's move into unsubsidised naval work represents a real challenge to all at Harland and Wolff. It is now up to the workforce to justify the Government's confidence in placing this important contract in Belfast.

Moving to Vote 5 (functioning of the labour market), of the £96 million sought, £31 million is required for the youth training programme, £27 million for industrial training and some £34.5 million for employment services and community projects. As I stressed in my opening remarks, unemployment remains the paramount economic problem in the Province. Evidence of the Government's determination to tackle this issue is provided by some new measures designed to help the long-term unemployed. These will be introduced from 1st July 1986—and that is as near as tomorrow. In Northern Ireland there are some 60,000 people who have been unemployed for more than one year. Each one of these will be invited to attend an in-depth counselling interview.

These interviews will provide a positive contract with the local job market. They will give the unemployed an opportunity to consider the full range of the Government's employment services and also to discuss the scope for self-employment, voluntary work and other possibilities. One of the options on offer will be a place on a restart course. Many people who have been unemployed for a considerable time may have lost the will, the motivation or indeed the capacity to seek work. With this in mind, we are introducing a new one-week restart course. The aim of this course will be to help long-term unemployed people to assess their potential and aptitudes, to learn more about opportunities open to them and to review their basic working skills and their confidence, and to help them With the techniques of finding and applying for a job. I hope that everyone invited for interview at the job market will make the most of the opportunities and that the measures will be welcomed as a very positive and genuine attempt to help those who have been out of work for a considerable period of time.

In the final vote in Class II, which is Vote 6, £26.8 million is sought to cover the running costs of the Department of Economic Development, including the trading standards service and grant to the General Consumer Council for Northern Ireland.

The two votes in Class III provide for the Government's assistance to the gas industry and subsidies to the Northern Ireland electricity service. The total provision amounts to some £75 million, of which £30 million has been allocated to the gas industry and £45 million to the electricity subsidy. The latter figure was calculated prior to the recent substantial fall in oil prices. If current levels prevail through-out 1986–87 the requirement for subsidy would be significantly reduced, but, given the volatility of oil prices, we think it would have been premature to anticipate this outcome.

Work on the conversion of Kilroot power station from oil to dual coal/oil firing is now under way. The Northern Ireland electricty service is also continuing with the preliminary planning of a possible new power station required in the 1990s and fuelled by indigenous lignite. In parallel with this work, the Government are examining the scope for private sector involvement in the ownership and operation of a lignite power station. A decision on who will build any new power station will not be taken until later this year.

Class IV makes provision for the Province's roads and transport. Of the £123.7 million being appropriated for these services, £97.5 million has been allocated to the roads programme and the balance of £26.2 million to transport.

Class V covers housing; and this has benefited from year-on-year increases in public expenditure in recent years. This is one of the points raised by the noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, and that is a point I shall be reiterating later. These increases have enabled much improvement to be made in the supply and condition of housing in Northern Ireland. The results of the 1984 Northern Ireland house condition survey, published during 1985, confirmed the progress made since 1979. This process has been facilitated by capital receipts from sales of houses to sitting tenants and indirectly by aid from the European Community under the urban renewal regulation. The increases in housing expenditure have, moreover, also involved deliberate decisions to divert public expenditure resources away from other programmes in Northern Ireland. A combination of factors has, however, affected the overall level of resources that will be available to the housing programme in this financial year.

First, the Housing Executive's capital receipts from its very successful house sales scheme have begun to decline. Total capital receipts in 1986–87 are now projected to be some £14 million below the level we previously estimated. Secondly, the additional resources provided from the European Community peaked in 1985–86 and will eventually disappear in 1988–89. Thirdly, pressures have built up in other programmes which have been squeezed in recent years to support the housing programme: some of these pressures have now had to be accommodated. As a result, it has not been possible to maintain gross spending on housing at the levels of recent years. Total expenditure on housing should gross around £530 million, of which about £487 million will be spent by the Housing Executive. This figure will include over £64 million on new house building, £64 million on improving the public sector housing stock and over £58 million on maintenance. Provision is also sought for expenditure of £54 million on renovation grants for private dwellings.

The provision for housing associations will facilitate gross expenditure this year of some £41 million, of which £27 million has been allocated to general housing association work to fund the completion of work on the ground and an annual programme of about 900 new starts. The remaining £14 million will finance the co-ownership scheme, which continues to play a decisive role in encouraging new private housebuilding and facilitating those aspiring to owner-occupation. Two million pounds of this allocation has been earmarked for the pilot extension of the scheme into the second-hand housing market which was announced last summer following a review of the scheme. The provision being made for housing in Northern Ireland will enable a substantial programme to be mounted, and demonstrates the Government's continuing commitment to tackling the housing problems, which we acknowledge still exist in Northern Ireland.

Clause VI, Vote 1, provides £78. million for the Province's water and sewerage services. Of that amount approximately £24.5 million will be on new works, and particular emphasis is being given to four large sewerage schemes, three in Belfast and one in North Antrim.

Expenditure on education, libraries and arts is contained in Class VIII of the Estimates and totals over £680 million. The bulk of this expenditure (£528 million) is detailed in Votes 1 and 4 and covers expenditure on, among other things, teachers' salaries and the grants to the education and library boards. The recurrent grants to the boards in Vote 4, out of which are met the running costs of controlled and maintained schools, represent an increase of over 4 per cent. compared to 1985–86.

In Vote 2, £115.6 million is sought for higher and further education and teacher training. This allows for the continued funding of the two Northern Ireland universities on the principle of parity with comparable institutions in Great Britain. The funds requested reflect the targeted improvements in cost-effectiveness which the Government believe are necessary, but specific additional resources are being made available to enhance provision in the science and technology field, particularly in relation to computing which is an area where both the local universities have considerable strengths.

The balance of education expenditure, £33.1 million, is sought under Vote 3 to maintain public support for the arts, museums, and youth and sports bodies at broadly the same level as in 1985–86 and to permit initiatives to enhance Northern Ireland's cultural profile, particularly in the United States of America.

Class IX provides for health and personal social services, and a net total of £673 million is sought to maintain and further develop the existing services. The largest single element within this total is the revenue expenditure of the Health and Social Services Boards, estimated at £550 million. This represents an increase of 6 per cent. in cash terms over last year. From this provision the boards will be expected, through programmes of cost improvement and efficiency savings, to meet all pay and price increases and to make some urgent and essential improvements in services.

Under Class X a total of some £794 million is sought for social security expenditure. Vote 1 provides a supplement of £52.3 million from the Consolidated Fund to the National Insurance Fund. Votes 2 and 3 provide a total of £685 million to cover non-contributory and family benefits, comprising 53 per cent. of total social security benefit expenditure, the remainder of which is met from the National Insurance Fund. In Vote 4, £56.2 million is sought for departmental administration and miscellaneous services.

And, finally, in Class XI a total provision of some £31 million is sought, £26 million of which is for the Department of Finance and Personnel for the services it provides for all government departments. The balance is to meet the running costs of the Exchequer and Audit Department, the Northern Ireland Assembly and the Northern Ireland Commissioner for Complaints and Administration. This estimate was prepared before the Government took the decision to dissolve the Northern Ireland Assembly, which is why I mentioned that body in this group.

I have in these opening remarks tried to mention the main features of the Estimates covered by the draft order before us. I shall listen with great interest to the debate and try to respond to as many points as possible. I am very grateful to those of your Lordships who have been kind enough to warn me of the topics you intend to raise. I hope to deal with them satisfactorily later. With that, I commend the order to the House, My Lords, I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 7th May be approved.—(Lord Lyell.)

Lord Prys-Davies

My Lords, a third of the time allotted for the discussion of these three orders has already been taken up and I shall not follow the precedent established by the Minister of commenting in detail on all the votes in the appropriation order. Within a few minutes of starting his speech the Minister reminded the House once again that the Government continue to spend more government money per head of population in Northern Ireland than anywhere else in the United Kingdom. Of course that is correct, but it begs the question: what should be Northern Ireland's fair share of expenditure in comparison with expenditure by the Government on other parts of the United Kingdom, bearing in mind that they all start from a different base level? I am sure that what the people would say, and say correctly, to the Government is that the differential in expenditure for which the Government take credit comes nowhere near the greater differential in need.

Our task in replying to the Government's request for the supply of funds is made easier by the recent publication of the Northern Ireland Economic Council's assessment for the 12 months ahead and, regrettably, it is a sad assessment. The council is dismayed by the evidence of a worsening of the economic situation which it claims could lead to a spiral of further economic depression and to further violence. If that assessment is true, it far outweighs the good news which the Minister has brought to the House this evening. We wish to know whether the Government accept the assessment of the economic council or do they challenge it? At Question Time about six weeks ago it appeared to me that the Minister was inclined to dismiss the report far too easily, but it may well be that we took him by surprise on that occasion.

It is well worth reminding ourselves that the economic council calls not only for more vigorous action by the Government, but for the spending of money in a number of specific sectors. It presses for the restoration of money for the housing programme; and I shall return to that. I am sure that my noble friend Lord Graham of Edmonton will also refer to it. It calls for more expenditure on major works of school buildings, for the reduction of the cost of electricity in Northern Ireland to the United Kingdom average, for guarantees to inward investors that they will not lose out financially from unrest in the Province, and for the stepping up of marketing help for industry.

Listening to the noble Lord the Minister, it appeared to me that the Government have no intention of responding favourably to any of these recommendations, but if I am wrong, I shall be very happy to be corrected. It is worrying that, notwithstanding the efforts of the industrial development board, new inward investment is at a low level. Do the Government propose to review the inducements which the board can offer to inward investments, or does the board itself have plans of its own for making more effective its capacity to capture a greater share of overseas investment?

We welcome the proposed increased expenditure on industrial and employment training schemes, which were referred to by the noble Lord, Lord Lyell, this evening, because they offer at least the hope of employment one day in the distant future. But whether in work or out of work, people require homes. That is the basis of the good life. We on these Benches are highly critical that the income of the Northern Ireland Housing Executive is to be so substantially reduced during the current year. Of course there has been progress on the housing front since 1979, and we acknowledge that progress. But the Government seem to have failed to appreciate that so much remains to be done in the housing sector. Housing unfitness is still twice as high in Northern Ireland as it is in the rest of the United Kingdom. There are 50,000 homes unfit for human habitation in the Province and 100,000 in need of serious repair. Meanwhile, the waiting list continues to grow, and today there are 24,500 on it.

But possibly the most damaging indictment of the Government's decision to reduce the housing executive's budget by £44 million is that, having agreed in December 1983 to a new housing strategy, having agreed targets with the housing executive, and having encouraged the industry to gear up to meet the agreed strategy, the Government now slam on the brakes. It may well be, as the Minister has told the House, that the continuing expenditure is still substantial, but that is a relative term, and the fact remains that it is reduced expenditure. I think that my noble friend Lord Graham will reinforce the criticism which I have levelled at the Government's approach to the budget of the housing executive. There will be many repercussions, and it is estimated that at least 5,000 of the 24,000 jobs in the construction industry will now be put at risk. In a Province where unemployment is among the highest in Europe, what do the Government hope to achieve by this reduction? The Minister justified the reduction on the basis that the Government require the money to spend more on law and order and on economic development. There are grounds for believing that poor housing conditions can also contribute to the problems of law and order.

We say very simply that the Government's case for reducing the housing budget is not accepted on these Benches. We invite the Government to come clean and recognise that they have made a huge mistake in reducing the housing executive's budget.

Having given a high priority to the requirements of the housing executive, I must now move on. There is in the Province one industry which is as old as the Province itself. I refer to agriculture. Agriculture in Northern Ireland is the industry which still employs the largest number of people, accounting for 11 per cent. of the total working population. But there is also concern about this, the oldest of its industries. It is a concern which does not spring merely from the consequences of the bad weather of 1985, although obviously those consequences are very worrying, as the Minister has acknowledged this evening. No, the major anxiety arises not out of the misfortunes of a single year in the calendar but from the transformation of agricultural production from dearth to surplus.

Can the Minister give the House an indication of what he thinks will be the conditions five years from now under which the Ulster farmer will be tilling his soil? How much land now under cultivation in Northern Ireland will go out of cultivation in 10 years' time? How will the anticipated changes be handled without doing irreparable damage to the rural communities of Northern Ireland? The Minister referred in his speech to the research and development expenditure of the department. I was not able to follow him in detail, but I should like to know how many research projects financed by the department are to be decommissioned over the next few years. Meanwhile, are there any real prospects of the Government being able to negotiate with Brussels special terms for the Northern Ireland farmer? Or is it the case that Brussels may be willing but the Treasury is without the inclination to seek favourable terms for the industry?

I turn now to another ancient feature of the Ulster scene. I refer to the Irish language which is probably as old as Northern Ireland agriculture. Once again I have looked in vain for a specific Irish language provision in the appropriations. Yet there is growing interest in parts of the Province in the renaissance of the Irish language, reflecting possibly the growing interest in the revival of the Gaelic language in Scotland and the Welsh language in Wales, and to which the Scottish Office and Welsh Office respectively are responding.

I read in the newspapers that two of the district councils are planning to appoint a full time officer to promote the Irish language and the culture associated with that language. If this expenditure is not provided for in the appropriations, presumably it will be at the expense of some other item of expenditure. It would be helpful if the Minister can indicate to the House what action the department proposes to take in support of the Irish language. For example, if the department were to spend £50 per annum per Irish language speaker, what would that expenditure amount to? But perhaps more important still, will the Minister tell the House whether the Government have a coherent policy to encourage the use of the Irish language? If they have such a policy, will he outline to the House the main features of that policy?

In our last appropriations debate I asked the Minister whether and to what extent the Province has been suffering from depopulation. Since then we have seen the valuable study on demographic trends in Northern Ireland published by the Northern Ireland Economic Council. It seemed to me that the signals from Northern Ireland are reassuring; but the council reminded us that the last full enumeration of the population was held 15 years ago and that we are today, in 1986, without an accurate account of the size of the Northern Ireland population. That is an interesting, if not an astounding, finding. The council asks a fair question whether the good administration of the Province can wait until 1992–93 when accurate population numbers are again available.

I have taken up the time allotted to me. Clearly, immense economic problems are still facing Northern Ireland and additional money could solve many of the problems. But the political problems facing the Province are of course of much greater magnitude and cannot be solved by the most generous of appropriations. Nevertheless an appropriation order could assist in creating improved conditions for political initiative. Measured against that background—and it is my judgment that that is the true background against which we must measure the appropriations order—the single most disappointing weakness of the order is probably its failure to provide an adequate budget for the housing executive.

Lord Hampton

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Lyell, for introducing this order. I propose to raise general points, and in the main leave detailed inquiries into the finances to others. To some extent they seem to be a recommendation for the medicine as before.

In recent days I have felt considerable gloom about affairs in Northern Ireland, where bigotry and a lack of desire for reconciliation seemed to be the dominating factors. But since then two events have taken place that can, I believe, cheer our hearts. First, there was the brave visit to the Province by Prince Andrew and Miss Sarah Ferguson. The people there welcomed them warmly, and while it is true that they did not visit Republican areas, the obvious enthusiasm that was shown and the pleasure that was experienced were a refreshing contrast to the talk of possible civil war that has recently been in the air.

Secondly—and I believe very importantly—there has been the so-called "Belfast declaration" by an inter-Church group of Christian leaders in Northern Ireland, and many distinguished names are mentioned. There has been so much controversy between Catholics and Protestants that it is a very pleasant contrast to read such simple, direct and helpful words. It only seems surprising that so little notice of this publication has been taken on the mainland. Perhaps I may repeat some short extracts. The first is: We believe that for us obedience to Christ is more important than Nationalism of Unionism". Secondly: While Unionists have a right to be British and Nationalists to be Irish, we reject the lie that justice can be achieved by the use of violence. We are interdependent and we must accommodate each other. Bigotry, discrimination, intimidation and distortion of the truth should have no place in our relationships". Following these two comments, I should like to put three questions to the Minister. First, what steps are being taken to convince so-called "Unionists" that action by many of their supporters over recent weeks has done more to harm the Union than 17 years of IRA activity; and to make them realise that feeling in Great Britain over the treatment of some RUC officers, no more than doing their duty, has sickened public opinion over here? On the other hand, can the Minister say how many American Irish there are in the United States, and what steps are being taken to convince them that they are not living in the 1840s today, and that they are doing untold harm for the peace and happiness of Ireland as a whole by continuing support for the IRA?

Thirdly, what steps are being taken to convince the SDLP that it should have a more positive policy following the signing of the agreement and that its refusal to take part in the Assembly procedure played a significant part in the need for its, at least present, dissolution?

I refer now to an item under Class XI of the order before us, referring to the Assembly. How will the figure be adjusted to allow for the fact that it is desirable that there should be minimum difficulty in restarting the Assembly before too long if, as we hope, it can be reconstituted?

Finally, what support are the Government prepared to offer the Alliance Party of Northern Ireland, which is the only non-sectarian party, which has been striving gallantly for reconciliation, and which has been subjected to much criticism and contempt? I ask also in what way we on the mainland, and particularly in Westminster, can get across that we respect the position of the many decent people in the Province and admire the courage of those leaders genuinely seeking a better future?

I hope that the message will filter quietly through that we applaud the following further statement from the declaration: It is also our responsibility to recognise that such injustices as are now experienced by one or other communities in Northern Ireland do not warrant any attempt by either to make government unworkable". They continue: We declare that it is the responsibility of every Christian to work for just structures in society and to seek to rectify unjust acts of any kind on the part of government or society". Together with good wishes from Great Britain must go the clear message that the future of Northern Ireland is in the hands of its own people. Great courage and unity of purpose will be necessary, and we shall be powerless to stop the people of Ulster from suffering severely if the thugs and hoodlums are not checked. I believe that both the opportunity and the need are great.

Lord Blease

My Lords, I had not intended to take part in this debate but I have had second thoughts. However, I intend to be brief. First, I join in welcoming the matters raised by my noble friend Lord Prys-Davies. Also, I take this opportunity of thanking the Minister for his courtesy in writing to me some time ago about this appropriation order. He has kept me in touch, as he usually does, with the general tone and happenings of what is taking place in relation to finance and supply.

I have several times before made my views known about the ineffectiveness of the procedural arrangements, and about the rubber stamp way in which appropriation debates concerning Northern Ireland are undertaken. I make it clear that that is in no way the fault of the noble Lord the Minister or of our Front Bench spokesman, my noble friend Lord Prys-Davies. Indeed, I feel sure that my noble friend Lord Fitt would readily join me in thanking the noble Lord the Minister, my noble friend Lord Prys-Davies, the noble Lord, Lord Hampton, and others who have continually taken a concerned, compassionate and constructive interest in the affairs of Northern Ireland.

My main reason in speaking this evening is that this could be the last occasion on which this House will be invited to consider the present procedural arrangements for dealing with the important matters of finance and supply in Northern Ireland. I understand that there could be consultations and discussions to deal with the newly-devised way in which administrative and parliamentary matters concerning Northern Ireland will be dealt with.

I hope that whatever may emerge in the future, the constructive and responsible voice of the elected Northern Ireland representatives will soon be heard in Westminster, taking its rightful and full part in the parliamentary affairs of the United Kingdom, in the interests of the people of Northern Ireland.

7.45 p.m.

Lord Fitt

My Lords, like my noble friend Lord Blease I had not intended to take any part in this debate, but I shall make what will possibly be the briefest intervention I have ever made in speaking to a an appropriation order.

The events of last week and of the week before in Northern Ireland, and in the South last week, do not give any grounds for great optimism. The fact that this appropriation order did not receive the attention it should have received from the elected representatives in another place creates an atmosphere that Northern Ireland could very well do without. However, I wish to ask the Minister a few questions.

The Minister said that of the 125,000 or 130,000 unemployed people in Northern Ireland, 60,000 of them have been unemployed for more than one year. I know from experience that that is the understatement of the year. Of that total of 60,000 people, many thousands have been unemployed for five, 10, 15 or 20 years. The Minister said that the hopes of those people taking up employment will be assessed. How long will it take for that assessment to be made? How many extra people will be employed to carry out that assessment?

I do not believe it would be any exaggeration to say that in the case of people who have been unemployed for five, 10, 15 or 20 years, it will be very difficult to place them in any type of work. When the Labour Government left office in 1979, there were 61,000 people unemployed. Now there are 125,000 or 130,000 unemployed. It will be no easy task to rehabilitate those people and to find them employment.

Yesterday morning, the Bishop of Down and Connor, Dr. Cahal Daly, who I believe is a very eminent spokesman in the ecclesiastical field, was speaking in St. Peter's Church, which is now to be a mini-cathedral. He made an impassioned plea to the Government to consider very seriously the total and absolute demolition of the Divis Flats. The Government must recognise that they can no longer carry out minor repairs in an attempt to rehabilitate those flats. The Divis Flats are in my old constituency as a former Member of another place. In the atmosphere that was then prevailing, I remember well that the people in that area, who were being moved under slum clearance programmes, were very happy to take up residence in the whole Divis complex rather than be shifted away from the particular district in which they were born and bred.

In the years that have elapsed since then, it has been proved conclusively that the Divis Flats complex is a total and absolute disaster, as has been the case in many other major cities throughout the United Kingdom. The appeal made yesterday by Bishop Cahal Daly for the Government to consider very seriously the total demolition of the Divis Flats should be heeded, because the longer they exist the more the concern that will be created in that area.

My penultimate question concerns the expenditure on hospitals in Northern Ireland. I have had many representations made to me about Cushendall cottage hospital. It appears that it is the Government's intention to close that little hospital. That hospital has existed for many years in the Glens of Antrim, which is an area that can be subjected to extremes of weather. There have been times during hard winters when it has been impossible for weeks on end to negotiate the roads out of that hospital. It has been very necessary to help that little hospital, situated as it is in Cushendall. The Minister may say that the new tower block in Belfast will be capable of looking after the needs of all the people of Antrim, Down and Belfast, but the Cushendall hospital has served its little community very well for a number of years. There would be great concern if the Government continued with their proposal to close it down.

Finally, I refer to the great deal of trumpeting and publicity—in which I have not had a great deal of faith—concerning the expected American financial contribution to the Anglo-Irish Agreement. First, we heard that it was going to be millions upon millions of dollars, and then over a period of weeks it was drastically cut down until the final figure was 250 million dollars over a period of five years—50 million dollars a year.

Can the Minister tell the House whether there is any sign that the money is forthcoming and will be made available in Northern Ireland, and where it is to be spent? We understand that representations have been made for it to be spent in the rural areas. Well, there is a great deal of poverty in the City of Derry and in Belfast, outside the poverty which exists in the rural areas. If the Americans are going to keep lending their support to the Anglo-Irish Agreement—I will not go into that in any great detail as it is something on which I have considerable doubts—that money which it is claimed is to be in support of the Anglo-Irish Agreement should be made readily available at the earliest opportunity.

Lord Lyell

My Lords, as always, we are very grateful for the close attention paid by all your Lordships to my impassioned remarks at the start of this debate. We have bi-annual or perhaps tri-annual debates on the Estimates for Northern Ireland, and it provides us with an opportunity to discuss any major points of concern in the Province as well as many others, which I shall come to later, including the Cushendall cottage hospital. I am pleased that the noble Lord, Lord Fitt, takes on board that perhaps he, too, has been snowed-up there in winter, but we shall possibly hear about that another day.

I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, for informing me of some of the topics that he intended to raise. I hope to be able to give some replies this evening. The noble Lord commenced by referring to the gloomy prospects in the latest Northern Ireland Economic Council report. There is, of course, more than one dimension to economic progress, and as I stressed in my opening remarks there are one or two encouraging signs. Output in manufacturing has grown in the range of 2 per cent. to 3 per cent. per annum in the four years since 1981.

Secondly, the level of employment has grown—I admit, slowly—since 1983, but I stressed, and I continue to do so, that unemployment remains unacceptably high. Most of the growth of unemployment occurred during the period 1979–82, but since then there has been a period of relative stability of around 20 per cent. (I think it is 21.5 per cent.) although it is still too high. However, I add one small detail. The prospects for reducing this figure are not altogether encouraging because the demographic trends point to a rising labour force. However, as I shall be able to stress later, unemployment in Northern Ireland remains a top priority and is reflected by the high levels of spending per head on the social and economic programmes which appear in the Estimates before us this evening.

The noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, referred—not in great detail, but with considerable vigour and strength, which is quite right—to the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, the restoration of the housing programme and the budget. The noble Lord spoke about the letter from Sir Charles Carter, to which he rightly referred in Question Time. I said then that I hoped to be able to give some reply this evening. One of the seven points covered in that letter accompanying the latest Northern Ireland Economic Council report dealt with the levels of new housebuilding and renovation which, of course, are determined primarily by the level of public expenditure which we allocate to the Northern Ireland Housing Executive. I covered this, but only generally, in my opening remarks, and I dwelt possibly at some length on the factors which affect the levels of resources that we have in Northern Ireland and which we allocated to the Housing Executive in previous years and this year.

I hope that the noble Lord will find from my earlier remarks the reassurance that housing is still a high priority programme and that our commitment to it remains firm. However, I add this point. Public expenditure allocation to the housing programme this year is some £350 million, which exceeds, in real terms, the allocation in any year before 1984–85. The Government recognise the severity of the economic and other problems which face the Province. I stress to the noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, and to the noble Lords, Lord Fitt, Lord Blease and Lord Hampton, the size and the balance of the Northern Ireland public expenditure programme. This is formulated, and we take account of the particular needs of the Province.

The noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, also referred to electricity tariffs, and this was one of the other points covered in Sir Charles Carter's letter accompanying the NIEC report. I think that Sir Charles suggested that the cost of electricity should be linked to the UK average rather than the UK highest regional level, which is the current scale. Perhaps the noble Lord and other noble Lords will accept that the linkage to the highest charge in England and Wales has already provided significant benefits to the consumers of electricity in the Province, but if we brought that subsidy to the average rather than the highest level in the UK that would mean the taxpayer supporting the electricity charges for the Province at a level below that applicable in many parts of England and Wales. I take that, but I certainly stress the earlier point that we accord a very high priority to industry in the Province; but this would be squeezing the subsidy just a little too high.

The noble Lord also referred to inward investments. The Northern Ireland Economic Council suggested the development of effective insurance guarantees to inward investors. The letter and the report did not necessarily help us with what the insurance guarantee would be. Indeed, nor were we entirely clear on how the scheme could work effectively. It would be difficult to identify the extent by which the performance of a company would be affected by local unrest as opposed to normal trading conditions and commerce in the Province. That would need to be a subjective view. However we have asked the NIEC staff to outline a proposal in detail so that we consider this further.

The noble Lord also asked about inducements to inward investors. The financial incentives available to the IDB to help attract inward investment are kept under constant review and have very close scrutiny by my honourable friend in another place. The Government recognise the need to ensure that these incentives remain competitive and attractive. To take one example, the corporation tax relief grant has not necessarily proved to be affective, and we are examining it to see whether its attractiveness can be improved.

The noble Lord also put three questions on a subject which is particularly dear to my heart—agriculture. If we take the future of farming in the Province over the next five years, it would be unrealistic and dishonest to predict a trouble-free future. That applies to farmers, like myself, in Scotland, farmers in England and Wales, and, I believe your Lordships will accept, farmers throughout the Community. Your Lordships will be well aware of the difficulties of excess production throughout Europe and of changing consumer demands. The Ulster farmer accepts that he cannot be immune from these changes. In referring to farmers, I mean the whole agricultural industry in Ulster, which goes beyond the percentage of the population mentioned by the noble Lord of, I believe, just under a further 3 per cent. involved in food processing. I take this opportunity of saying how efficient they are, too. I have been at close quarters with them in export markets and they are second to none in food production as well as being the top quality there is in Northern Ireland. I assure the noble Lord that the Government continue to recognise the prime importance of agriculture to Northern Ireland, and we remain committed to the maintenance of a prosperous and efficient industry.

The noble Lord asked about research and development in connection with agriculture. It is part of the overall United Kingdom R & D effort, but it is weighted particularly toward the needs of Northern Ireland industry. This is of necessity because of the climate, heavily livestock-oriented, but I think that the question of adequate need in this particular area is somewhat difficult to quantify.

I stress to the noble Lord that the estimates that we are debating include over £7½ million for activities in research and development, which maintains the level of the previous year, and certainly we have no plans to reduce it. I am afraid that I am not able to enter into particular details. Though I am aware of some details that have come across my desk, I have not necessarily costed them immediately, and it is a question of balancing, as the noble Lord will, I hope, accept.

So far as concerns special treatment from the EC for Northern Ireland producers, we already receive special treatment from the European Community in a number of areas. In my opening remarks I suggested that we are waiting for the Commission to come forward with a revised agricultural development programme which replaces the measure which has been of considerable benefit to producers in Northern Ireland's less favoured areas over the last five years. I assure your Lordships that we are making every effort to bring to the notice of the commission the problems that affect us in Northern Ireland.

The noble Lord raised the question of the Irish language. We fully recognise the importance of the Irish language and culture in education and related activities in Northern Ireland. The curriculum in schools is not dictated or indeed controlled by the Government or the Department of Education in Northern Ireland, but is a matter for the school authorities and for head teachers. I understand that Irish is studied by over 20,000 pupils in secondary schools in Northern Ireland. In specific instances the right of parents to have their children educated through the medium of the Irish language has been recognised by the department. The noble Lord asked for a simple arithmetical term. I am not too sure about the number of teachers or other persons who might be in further education or vocational training and who also wish to learn Irish, but certainly there are 20,000 pupils in Northern Ireland's secondary schools who are studying Irish, and that gives some idea of the scale of the commitment that we have to the Irish language.

The noble Lord, Lord Hampton, was kind and warned me of various points that he would be raising. Indeed, there are four serious points that he brought forward. He asked me how we would convince the Unionists that many of their actions have not helped their image on this side of the water. I certainly accept his point and agree with him about the great harm that is done to the image of Northern Ireland both here and abroad by violence and intimidation. What has worried us very much is violence toward the police. The people of Northern Ireland, indeed, all of us everywhere in the United Kingdom, have good cause to be very proud of the men and women of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, both the reserves and those who serve full time. They have proved time and again to be fair and impartial upholders of the law, but as we have seen during the last few months, some of the so-called Unionists and Loyalists have turned on the brave police officers to whom we all owe so much. Police officers have been cold shouldered by their communities and regrettably have been physically attacked in their homes.

We are hopeful that this particular problem is now abating. The period from March to the middle of May saw over 380 attacks on police officers in their homes and on their persons, but since 21st May I understand that none has been recorded. I hope that this signifies a change of heart among the less responsible elements of the Unionist population and is indeed a recognition that they cannot enforce their will by violence.

The noble Lord, Lord Hampton, also asked me about Americans who claim Irish ancestry. I am given to understand that there are up to 40 million persons in the population of the United States who claim Irish ancestry, but I stress that the great majority of them are horrified by violence, even though they may support Irish unity. We are giving the dissemination of accurate information about Northern Ireland a very high priority. Very considerable efforts are directed toward communicating the facts about Northern Ireland abroad, particularly in the United States, which is the primary focus for IRA propaganda and fund raising. We work closely with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and our embassy in Washing-ton and with other diplomatic posts in the United States and elsewhere. I stress to your Lordships that my right honourable and honourable colleagues make regular visits to the United States—and they have made visits elsewhere in recent months—during which they back up particular efforts with political meetings and interviews in the media.

My right honourable friend the Secretary of State returned last month from a short trip to Washington and New York and I think that your Lordships will be aware of the favourable publicity that was generated by his visit there and to other parts of the United States. My right honourable and honourable colleagues and officials take every opportunity of visits by distinguished Americans to brief them fairly and impartially, we hope, on the problems of Northern Ireland.

The noble Lord, Lord Hampton, raised one more query about convincing the SDLP that they should have a more positive policy following the signing of the agreement. We understand that the leader of the SDLP, the honourable Member for Foyle, reiterated in another place on 19th June the willingness of the SDLP to sit down and discuss devolution without preconditions. We believe that dialogue between parties, and, above all, between parties and government, is the only possible way forward for democratic life in Northern Ireland.

In reply to the noble Lord, Lord Hampton. I also want to pay a very full tribute to the role which the Alliance Party played in the work of the former Northern Ireland Assembly. In passing I shall reiterate the tribute that I paid to the noble Lord. Lord Dunleath—who warned me that sadly he would not be able to be with us tonight—for the part he has played both in the Northern Ireland Assembly and in your Lordships' House. I think that certainly in your Lordships' House he personifies the strength of the Alliance Party. Many of the reports of the Assembly reflected the very hard work put in by Members of the Alliance Party and of course the other parties in ensuring that local views and interests were fully taken into account by the Government. I was forced, indeed I was happy, to take into account the strong views put by the Assembly's Agriculture Committee. Again, the noble Lord, Lord Dunleath, used to come and put his views forcefully and succinctly. I pay tribute to the role that the Alliance Party has played throughout as a force for reason and moderation in Northern Ireland.

The noble Lord, Lord Hampton, asked how we here on the mainland, particularly in your Lordships' House and in another place, could support the many decent people in Northern Ireland who want to see a better future. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State, my honourable colleagues and I make clear on every single occasion our admiration and respect for the resilience that has been shown (and continues to be shown) by everyone in Northern Ireland through the long years of terrorism and trouble. I think that those sentiments of admiration and respect are shared not only by your Lordships but, above all, by the majority of people in Great Britain.

Of course, your Lordships will be aware that sympathy and verbal support are simply not enough. We have tried to foster internal political progress, but sadly our efforts have met with fairly limited success. It is against that background that the Government reached an agreement with the Government of the Republic which we believe can help to relieve some of the pressures which are being faced in Northern Ireland. I think that the best way in which we in your Lordships' House can show our respect and concern for the law-abiding people in Northern Ireland is to reassure them about the effects of the agreement that we signed.

First of all, it does not give the Republic joint authority in the running of Northern Ireland. We retain full power to make decisions. Nor does it set us on the road to a united Ireland. If the majority eventually decide that it wants a united Ireland, the Government will respect its wish, but we know that that decision is not likely to be taken for many years, if indeed ever. I stress that so long as a majority of the people of Northern Ireland wants the country to remain part of the United Kingdom, the Government are committed to the union.

The noble Lord, Lord Hampton, also asked about the Assembly. I do not think we can speculate on the use that would be made of any savings that might arise, but I would assure the noble Lord that certainly money will be available should a new Assembly be possible. I hope that my reply has covered all the points raised by the noble Lords, Lord Prys-Davies and Lord Hampton.

The noble Lord, Lord Blease, quite rightly raised the question of how we are dealing with Northern Ireland affairs this evening. I am afraid that I have to stress, as always, that this is a matter for the usual channels, but certainly I feel constrained, just as he does, in trying to fit what is a very important debate into the limits of your Lordships' time. But certainly I shall push on, and I hope that he will accept this. I stress the noble Lord's support and his plea for the democratic representatives in another place to carry out the work for which we all understand that they were elected. Only good can come from that.

The noble Lord, Lord Fitt, raised four points. One concerned unemployment. I have stressed that we consider it to be a serious problem; above all that applies to long-term unemployment. But there are job opportunities for everybody and, above all, for the long-term unemployed. Last year over 31,000 jobs were filled and 16,000 people were placed in various types of training. I stressed earlier counselling for the long-term unemployed, and those are the persons to whom the noble Lord referred. I hope that our renewed efforts will be recognised by the noble Lord and accepted by what we hope will be the many beneficiaries of the process. That is one of the range of services which we hope will be available through the job market and counselling programme. It is designed to renew contact for those who may have lost touch with what is available. As I stressed in my opening remarks, it is above all to foster once again the confidence of those people that they have qualities that are sought after. That will be the basis of our job counselling.

The noble Lord raised the question of United States funds. As he will know, nothing is yet decided. Fascinating figures are being bandied around, but we shall have to wait until the Senate finally concludes its deliberations. I shall have to write to the noble Lord on the question of the Divis Flats and the Cushendall Cottage Hospital. I hope that he has not been snowed in there too often.

I apologise for the rush. I hope that I have covered most of the points raised in this important debate. If I have missed anything, I shall write to noble Lords. I am grateful to noble Lords who have written to me. I commend the order to your Lordships.

On Question, Motion agreed to.