HL Deb 22 June 1990 vol 520 cc1229-45

3.7 p.m.

The Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Northern Ireland Office (Lord Skelmersdale) rose to move. That the draft order laid before the House on 16th May be approved.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, the draft order is one of a series of routine financial orders for Northern Ireland which come before the House each year. It authorises the expenditure of £2,496 million. This amount, when added to the £1,817 million voted on account for 1990–91 by your Lordships on 12th March, gives a total voted cash provision for Northern Ireland departments of £4,313 million for this financial year. This is within a public expenditure total for those departments of some £5,289 million. Your Lordships may wish to refer to the Northern Ireland 1990–91 Estimates booklet, which gives full details of the sums sought, and which is available from the Printed Paper Office.

It is appropriate that I should give a little explanation of those Estimates. I shall begin with the Department of Agriculture. The net provision sought in the two agriculture Votes amounted to some £144 million.

In Vote 1 some £35 million is for those national agricultural and fisheries support measures which apply throughout the United Kingdom. In addition to certain pre-funded market support schemes under the common agricultural policy, the Vote includes nearly £20 million for capital and other grants to assist structural improvements. These include grants to farmers for a range of effluent treatment, conservation and improvement works. A further £15 million is to provide support for farming in the less favoured areas, by means of headage payments on hill cattle and sheep.

Vote 2, covering local support measures, seeks provision of some £108 million in respect of the regional agriculture, fisheries and forestry services and support measures. Main elements of the Vote include some £46 million for agricultural, scientific and veterinary services. These include the agricultural and veterinary inspectorates, research and development work and the agricultural colleges, all of which make important contributions to the Province's agriculture industry. Some £27 million is for arterial drainage, fisheries and forestry programmes; and £11 million for the agricultural development programme.

I now turn to the Department of Economic Development. In Vote 1, some £111 million is sought to enable the Industrial Development Board to carry out its important industrial development activities. Your Lordships will be aware that IDB has had a number of recent successes in attracting good quality inward investment to the Province, and the Government continue to attach a high priority to strengthening the Northern Ireland economy through such measures. That is reflected in a number of indicators of sustained economic recovery in the Province. Output continues to rise, especially in manufacturing industry, which recorded an increase of almost 90 per cent. in 1989. The corresponding increase for the United Kingdom as a whole was about 5 per cent. At the same time, private service sector employment expanded, with welcome increases in 1989 in retail distribution and in hotels and catering. Unemployment in Northern Ireland continues to fall. In May 1990 unemployment in the Province stood at 97,700 or 14 per cent. of the workforce. That compares to a rate of 15.3 per cent. in May 1989 and is the lowest number unemployed since July 1982.

In Vote 2, some £143 million is sought to provide assistance to the aircraft and shipbuilding industries. That is primarily related to the privatisation of Short Brothers and Harland and Wolff. The House will recall that, under the terms of the agreement for the sale of Shorts to Bombardier, the Government offered Shorts a substantial package of grant aid over four to five years towards new capital investment, product development and training In 1990–91, £35 million is available to Shorts for this programme. A further £12 million is provided to meet losses and other costs associated with aircraft sales financing, obligations entered into by the company before its sale, responsibility for which has been retained by the Department of Economic Development. Similarly, under the terms of the Harland and Wolff privatisation, some £70.2 million is provided this year to assist the new company with restructuring, the cost of completing existing contracts and the building of the new Suezmax tankers, five of which are now on order.

Also in Vote 2, some £36 million is for the Local Enterprise Development Unit, Northern Ireland's small Business Agency. This represents the highest level of financial support ever for the agency and underlines the Government's commitment to helping small firms in Northern Ireland.

Vote 3 of the Department of Economic Development covers expenditure by the new Training and Employment Agency. It has a budget of some £166 million, and undertakes a wide range of activities, including the youth training programme, the action for community employment scheme, the job training programme and the manpower training scheme. The creation of the agency marks a very real advance in the way in which training and employment programmes are delivered. It will promote training as a central part of the Government's strategy to assist economic growth and increase the competitiveness of Northern Ireland firms and the workforce.

Your Lordships will have observed that the Department of the Environment has four Votes. As regards Vote 1, which covers roads, transport and ports, the sum of £162 million is sought. About £135 million of this is for the roads programme, the greater part of which is required to finance the operation and maintenance of the Province's roads system and to enable new construction and improvement works to be undertaken. Preparatory work continues on the Belfast cross harbour road and rail bridges project, with a view to starting construction in 1991.

Vote 2 covers the important area of housing, for which £185 million is required, mainly to provide finance to the Northern Ireland Housing Executive and to the voluntary housing movement. When net borrowing by the housing executive to fund its capital programme is taken into account, the Government's net public expenditure allocation for housing will be some £243 million in 1990–91. Supplemented by rental income and capital receipts, this will mean that gross expenditure on housing should be almost £506 million.

During the 1980s Northern Ireland enjoyed a high level of expenditure on housing and a good deal of progress has been made on reducing the high levels of unfitness. For example, dwelling unfitness levels fell from 14.1 per cent. in 1979 to 8.4 per cent. in 1987. On top of this improvement in housing conditions, progress has also been made on housing need. The size of the Northern Ireland Housing Executive's urgent waiting list has been reduced by more than 50 per cent. since 1981 and, in the private sector, new house building has averaged over 7,000 starts in each of the last six years. In the last 10 years, the number of households in the Province increased by 100,000. That is welcome evidence of the success of the private and public sector housing efforts. Substantial resources will continue to be made available to the housing programme and government continue to regard housing as an important public expenditure programme in Northern Ireland.

Vote 4 includes £33 million for urban regeneration measures, aimed primarily at improving the economic health and environment of areas suffering from urban dereliction, which, despite the successes that I have just mentioned, still continues in parts, although obviously at a considerably lower level.

I now turn to the Estimates for the Department of Education, where a total of £997 million is sought. The schools sector, in Vote 1, accounts for 60 per cent. of this total. The provision includes an additional £22 million for 1990–91 to maintain the impetus on the recently introduced package of education reform in Northern Ireland. This is part of a total of £83 million which has been set aside for the reforms in the period up to 1992–93. These resources will ensure that schools and teachers are properly prepared and have the necessary facilities to implement the reforms.

Also included in Vote 1 is provision for the salaries and related costs of 18,888 full-time equivalent teaching posts in the current year, totalling £384 million. This will maintain the planned overall pupil/teacher ratio at the present level of some 18.3 per cent. In addition, £54 million is sought for lecturers in institutions of further education which will allow for 30 additional lecturing posts from next September.

Expenditure by the five education and library boards will amount to £314 million in the current year, on the day-to-day operation of the education service in Northern Ireland. The House will note that this is an increase of 9 per cent. over 1989–90 and includes special additions of £7 million for the maintenance of buildings and £3 million to improve standards of provision in the classroom. The sum of £45 million is also sought for education and library boards' capital provision.

In Vote 2, some £16 million is sought for expenditure on Northern Ireland's two universities, on the Open University and on teacher training. Grants to universities and awards to students are based on the principle of maintaining parity of provision with Great Britain. This provision also includes an extra £5.8 million for the student loans scheme, the arrangements for which will be in line with those in England and Wales.

The next set of Votes relates to the Department of Health and Social Services, for which department I have special responsibility. Total net provision of £940 million is sought for health and personal social services —£928 million in Vote 1 and £12 million in Vote 3—to maintain and improve the standard of the Province's health and personal social services. Within that total £758 million is for the health and social services boards to cover current expenditure, while £45 million is required to maintain a substantial programme of capital works and over £195 million is sought for the family practitioner services. Overall, public expenditure on the health and personal social services programme in 1990–91 will, for the first time, exceed £1 billion.

Vote 4 seeks £932 million for social security benefits. That figure includes £423 million for income support, £166 million for housing benefit and £14 million for payments into the social fund. The balance—some £329 million—is for family and non-contributory benefits.

Finally, I should like to draw your Lordships' attention to the Department of Finance and Personnel Vote 3, in which £1.25 million is sought for community relations purposes. When expenditure by the Department of Education is taken into account, it is planned to spend about £4 million on community relations projects in 1990–91. That figure includes £1.5 million to encourage cross-community contact; some £300,000 for the new community relations council, established in January to encourage and support those working to improve community relations; some £600,000 for a new programme to encourage district councils to promote improved community relations; and £1.4 million for the cultural traditions programme. The importance of improving community relations in Northern Ireland will, I am sure, be readily acknowledged and supported by the House.

I hope that the House has found that summary of the main components of the Estimates to be helpful. Nevertheless, it is inevitable that your Lordships will wish to ask questions which I look forward to answering in due course. In the meantime, I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 16th May be approved.—(Lord Skelmersdale.)

Lord Prys-Davies

My Lords, the debate is in a sense, as the Minister said, a routine debate; but, nevertheless, we are approving for Northern Ireland an important order which authorises the expenditure of £2.496 billion of public funds on services in the Province during the financial year 1990–91. I thank the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, for his full explanation of the main components of the order, although one cannot go along with the Government's underlying optimism about the state of the Northern Ireland economy.

This afternoon I wish to focus my comments on three matters. First, I want to speak about the disadvantaged in the city of Belfast, the capital city. I gladly acknowledge that in parts of the city, in particular in the city centre, there is evidence that some of the Government's policies are working. I also acknowledge that there is a widespread spirit of expectation that the Laganside development, again in the city centre, will be a success. However, there is another side to the coin. Many districts in the capital city are suffering from a kind of malnutrition, if I may use that word in this context. That is why I welcome the doubling of the funds allocated to the Making Belfast Work programme launched two years ago in support of the Belfast initiative programme which began in 1986.

Both programmes are targeted at the most disadvantaged areas in Belfast and bring benefit to both communities. I should like to take this opportunity to thank the Northern Ireland Office and the Minister for the detailed arrangements that were made for my visit to the Province last Easter, at my request. I was much impressed by what I saw and heard of the programme, Making Belfast Work. I spelt a few hours in the company of one of the action team members in West Belfast. It seemed to me that here was a team working efficiently; it was not afraid of adopting, when necessary, a radical approach to resolve a local issue. The team leader himself was building up a bank of invaluable experience. Obviously here was the right man for the job.

Yet what troubled me was that after three years on the job he would be transferred. This seems to me to be a serious matter. When a key officer in a small team is transferred, is there not a likelihood that the effectiveness of the team will be adversely affected? Is there not a likelihood that there would be an interruption in communications and in the work that the team has been carrying out? May there be confusion? I wonder whether the Minister would care to comment on the thrust of those questions. When an obviously successful team is at work in such a situation, should not its commitments be extended to a term of at least five years?

It would be difficult to isolate the social problems of the deprived districts of Belfast from consideration of the problems facing the 13 to 18 year-olds in the city. It seems to me that much needs to be done for the youth services in Belfast. Of course there are the problems common to any big Western city—alcohol abuse, poor attendance at schools. vandalism, homelessness. But additionally in Belfast there is the entrenched high unemployment, the lack of employment opportunities; punishment from the paramilitaries; and, from what I am told, even punishment from law enforcement agencies, with all that that implies.

I believe that it is pregnant with significance that the overwhelming number of youth leaders in Belfast to whom I spoke confessed to a sense of frustration at the difficulty of obtaining more support. Many of them voiced withering criticism. I should also mention that this criticism emerged in the last annual report of the West Belfast Parent Youth Support Group and also in the last report of the Youth Action Northern Ireland. Thus the conclusions that I have drawn are not merely impressionistic conclusions after speaking to some youth leaders; they are borne out by those two reports.

I recall that the youth service is being refocused under the guidance of the newly created Youth Council of Northern Ireland. I see from the education vote that a sum of just under £2 million has been allotted to the youth service for the current financial year. I may have got my sums wrong; I may have misunderstood the table, but this figure is £250,000 above the provision made for the service 12 months ago. Nevertheless it is £50,000 below the outturn for 1988–1989. If I have that correct, I am bound to ask how the provision of the youth services can be maintained, let alone improved, although it is widely recognised that it is vital that they should be improved. Clearly the new youth council has a positive role to play. The education and library board and the employment and training agencies also have an important role to play. I wonder whether the Government intend to leave it to those organisations to pursue their objectives as best they can, or whether the Government themselves propose to take any action to ensure joint action or a more fully co-ordinated action between these authorities. Alternatively, is it the case that the Government are satisfied that one of the agencies will take the lead?

Having spent a little time on some of the problems of Belfast, I now wish to turn to the small towns, villages and hamlets in the rural areas of the Province. I believe that debates in another place have made it clear that there is worry and concern at the failure to channel more investment to develop the small towns and villages. Here is yet another problem. However, I am particularly encouraged by the provision of this token £1,000 in the Agriculture Vote for the purpose of identifying the needs of deprived rural areas and the means of assisting them. I very much welcome that small item in the Agriculture Vote.

It would be helpful if the Minister could tell us more about that item. I understand that an interdepartmental committee on rural development has been established. Can the Minister give us a definition of the areas which are considered by that committee? Is the committee considering how the district councils could do more to encourage development if they had additional powers, or if they had more funds at their disposal? Or is it confined—or has it confined itself—to a consideration of what more can be done in the context of the Government's policies for agriculture?

Drawing on my experience of rural Wales where I was brought up, I am conscious of the valuable contribution made by the Rural Development Board for Rural Wales which was set up in 1976 in the face of solid opposition by Whitehall departments. I am therefore prompted to ask whether the interdepartmental committee is considering whether the various strands of development can be co-ordinated by Stormont, or whether there is a need for a co-ordinating body, whether it be a statutory or a non-statutory body.

I now wish to discuss the economy of Northern Ireland generally. There is common consensus that the economic problems facing Northern Ireland are the most intractable in the United Kingdom. The latest assessment from the Northern Ireland Economic Council published in April forms no basis for optimism and certainly not for the optimism that was voiced by the Minister. A gloomy study was recently published by the Northern Ireland Economic Research Council. That council argues in favour of a deliberate policy of encouraging people to leave the Province. The research council recommends that the migration, which is currently about 7,000 a year, should be increased to 12,000 this year and to 17,000 each year thereafter until 1995. It recommends that people should leave for Swindon, Hamburg or elsewhere in Europe. That is the proposal.

Sadly, one accepts that there are currently far too many redundant shipyard workers and factory workers in the Province, and many of them may remain unemployed for some years to come. However, I assume that the Minister will be glad to take advantage of this opportunity to say that the Government totally reject the defeatism which is buried in the proposal of the research council and the suggestion that there should be a policy of exporting the children of the unemployed of Northern Ireland from the Province.

At the end of April the Department of Economic Development published a document entitled Competing in the 1990s: the Key to Growth In the words of the Minister for the economy the document sets out what he describes as the Government's new approach. The approach places emphasis on the need for a strong public and private sector partnership and the need to deepen and widen training and innovation. Those are the problems which are common to most, if not all, firms in the Province. Therefore we on these Benches fully endorse the new objectives—the new approach. However, perhaps the Minister will explain to the House why it is that after 11 years the Government have still not created a climate in which those problems can be resolved and those objectives can flourish. I wonder whether the Minister can point to clear and tangible evidence and not simply paper commitments or assertions that the Government, the department and the development agencies are fully committed to the new approach.

Success will also depend in great part on the ability of the Province to attract inward investment from the rest of the United Kingdom, from Europe and beyond. That, so it seems to us, requires the political stability which is missing. Political instability in Northern Ireland is persuading many potential investors that Northern Ireland is not just beyond the English Channel or the Irish Sea; it is, for many investors, far away, beyond an ocean. What is wanted above all is political stability.

We have all followed the shrewd, persistent and delicate efforts of the Secretary of State to bring the leaders of the constitutional parties to a conference table. People of good will everywhere welcome and fully support the efforts and the mission of the Secretary of State. It would appear that he has satisfied himself that there is now common ground between the parties and that an inter-party conference is not likely to blow up. If the political leaders can, during the coming months, come to a conference table and work out an agreed formula of reconciliation and peace that would be a dramatic change, holding out the prospect of a beneficial and lasting result for the Province.

3.39 p.m.

Lord Fitt

My Lords, I had expected other Members of your Lordships' House to intervene in this debate. Sitting here this afternoon I cannot help but contrast the atmosphere and the circumstances in which such an appropriation order is debated with the atmosphere in the Northern Ireland Parliament and the Assembly, of which I was a Member for a number of years. When an appropriation order was debated there every single Member of that Parliament or Assembly had something to contribute. They were aware of all the circumstances that prevailed in their constituencies, of the representations that had been made to them and of what they regarded as priorities. On many occasions the appropriation debate would spill over from one day to the next because so much interest and enthusiasm was shown by all the elected representatives at the Stormont Parliament and the Assembly.

Let us contrast that with the atmosphere here today. I do not blame the House for that atmosphere. If the Northern Ireland politicians and the two communities and their leaders cannot negotiate and bring about a set of circumstances in which it would be possible to debate appropriation orders in a locally based parliament, I do not think that the Government or either of the major political parties can be blamed for that.

The reason the appropriation order is being debated here this afternoon is that there is no political forum that engages the support of both communities in Northern Ireland. I am sorry that that the situation. I wish it were otherwise, but I cannot express the same degree of optimism that has just been expressed by my noble friend as to the outcome of the present negotiations of the Secretary of State, Mr. Brooke. I dearly wish that they would come to a successful conclusion, but I am cautious about the outcome. For all kinds of reasons in this tercentenary year of the Battle of the Boyne and all the other things that have happened in Irish history, there are great big mountains to be climbed before any negotiations can be successful.

As I do not have representations made to me as I would if I were an elected representative, I have to depend on what involvement I still maintain with Northern Ireland. I have just said to my noble friend beside me that I admire the tenacity of my noble friend Lord Prys-Davies and the enthusiasm with which he still freely concerns himself in the affairs of Northern Ireland. I am certain that, over a period of years, many other people with no Northern Ireland background would not have displayed the same enthusiasm.

In introducing the debate, the Minister said that over £5,000 million is spent on the upkeep of Northern Ireland. That is a tremendous sum of money for the Government to spend on the Province. It is approaching the total expenditure in the Republic of Ireland, which is a much larger area with a much larger population. I expressed amazement last year when trying to comprehend the amount of money involved, but there is now another £30 million or £40 million added to it.

In the run-up to the debate, I have tried to keep in touch as much as possible with affairs in Northern Ireland which are of interest to the people living there. Those everyday affairs guarantee the circumstances in which people live. I have already told the Minister of representations that were made to me by many people in the Antrim area about the Moyle Hospital. It may not seem much to people here. Indeed, the Moyle Hospital issue is about as relevant here as the Sea of Tranquillity, but if the debate were to take place in Northern Ireland we could discuss the issue for hours on end. It appears that the Department of Health and Social Services—in other words, government policy—is to close the Moyle Hospital and to transfer all its facilities to a new hospital in Country Antrim.

People who have been involved with the Moyle Hospital for many years, as well as eminent doctors representing medical opinion throughout Northern Ireland and in the Antrim area in particular, are bitterly opposed to the projected closure of the hospital. They have formed an action committee and have examined every facet of the hospital's existence and possible closure. That committee sent to the Minister, as well as to me and no doubt to Northern Ireland MPs, its conclusions on the hospital's possible closure. From what I have heard—I have spoken to a number of people about this matter—there has not been one single voice dissenting from the conclusions of that committee for retention of the hospital.

It appears that on receipt of the conclusions drawn up by that action committee the matter was referred to the Northern Health and Social Services Board in Ballymena. I believe—but possibly the information has been exaggerated—that the brochure was presented in such detail and the arguments were so constructive that the Northern Health and Social Services Board decided to set up a sub-committee to examine the information contained in that document.

I am not too sure whether the members of that sub-committee are civil servants or people from the board itself. I do not know how long it will take the committee to deliberate and arrive at a conclusion with regard to the contents of that report, but I ask the Minister whether he can possibly expedite its findings.

I should like to thank the Minister for answering some questions raised during our last appropriation debate. He replied to me in writing and I was then able to retail that information to those who had questioned me. Normally in this House the Minister who speaks for Northern Ireland represents the agricultural industry. I have no hesitation in saying, given my political background and the area in which I lived in Belfast, that I have absolutely no clues about the agricultural industry; nor am I terribly anxious to obtain any. However, the Minister is in charge of health and social services in Northern Ireland and I put this point to him. In view of the concern which has been expressed in relation to the possible closure of that hospital, it may become necessary for him to meet a deputation of all those involved in the compilation of the report. It would be a courtesy for him to meet those people, either here or in Belfast. I do not believe that the Minister would lose anything by listening to the concerns expressed by those personally involved.

Noble Lords will remember the debate that recently took place on education reforms in Northern Ireland. With a few reservations, we were 98 per cent. in support. Both Houses of Parliament were in support of those reforms. But they have not been implemented in the way they were hyped up. The main factor in selling those reforms in the education Act was that greater responsibilities were given to parents in relation to the education of their children. That was the way that they were sold by the education department in Northern Ireland and as such they were accepted by the population. But it has not worked out that way.

This past week I have seen a repeat of the representations that were made to me 35 years ago when I was a local councillor in Northern Ireland. Every year when the 11-plus examination was taking place all the parents of children who had failed their examination came to me. They told me that their children were budding Einsteins and the reason that they had not been successful in their 11-plus examination was that some form of discrimination had taken place. I understand that. In such a situation parents are very emotionally involved.

A repeat of those scenes is now taking place, although not in exactly similar circumstances. There are now four qualifications for entry into a grammar school. The first will cause no difficulty because those who pass with a grade 1 will gain admission. For those with grades 2 and 3 there will be slight doubts. Those with grade 4 will be totally rejected.

It appears that under the new legislation grammar schools can draw up their own criteria which is given to the Education and Libraries Board in Belfast. I believe that it is available to parents. However, the parents who spoke to me were unaware of that. If they had been aware they would have known the criteria involved and the possibilities of their children entering a particular grammar school.

This morning I spoke to a representative of a grammar school. He said that its criteria is readily available and that parents should read it. However, as the facts stand today the school would like to accept an additional 20 pupils but it does not have the space to do so. Therefore, those children must travel far away from their home to attend a different school. Their brothers or sisters may have gained admission to a grammar school, but they must take a different bus in the morning to go to a different school. I and the people to whom I have spoken believe that, where it is possible, brothers and sisters who have passed the examination with grade 1 or grade 2 should be given the opportunity to attend the same school. The fact that they cannot is determined by the number of places given by the education authority to the various schools.

During the past week I have spoken to many anxious parents. They were told that they would be given greater parental responsibility as regards sending their children to a school of their choice. However, they now find that they are unable to do so. An important part of the debates on educational reform which took place in this House and in another place concerned the climate of opinion in schools which were trying to break away from the religious and sectarian aspect. More schools in Belfast are trying to integrate and to abandon the bigoted divisions which exist in Northern Ireland. Parents want their children to attend such schools but discover that because of the lack of places they cannot do so. Today I must telephone a parent to tell her that the people to whom I spoke this morning realise that she is right in wanting her child to attend a particular school but that because of the lack of places she cannot do so. That is a most important aspect about which the Minister should be made aware.

It should be made clear to parents that they have the right to appeal against a school's decision not to admit their child, and that the appeal will be sent to the Education and Libraries Board. However, I advise them not to depend too much on the appeal. The only criterion at which the board will look will be whether the school has lived up to its legal requirements. If it has, there is nothing further to be done. That is a big issue for parents deciding the future of their children.

The Minister has been complimentary and has paid tribute to the Local Enterprise Development Unit. I have done so for many years in both Houses of Parliament. It is one of the best agencies to be set up by the Government. The fact that this year it is to be given £36 million is an indication that the Government recognise its worth. It is only a small unit but it has produced almost 6,000 jobs. I know some of the people who work for the unit. They do not do so because it is a job, but because for them it is a vocation. Those people are dedicated to Northern Ireland and trying to create as many jobs as possible.

The other issue is the waiting lists in hospitals, in particular the City Hospital and the Ulster Hospital in Belfast. The waiting list for the Ulster Hospital has increased by over 100 per cent. from last year. A waiting list for any hospital is a commentary on the sad circumstances of those whose names are on it. A waiting list in a hospital represents pain, isolation and fear. The more that we can do away with waiting lists, the more that we shall be doing away with such statistics.

All Northern Ireland MPs have spoken about electricity in Northern Ireland. I shall not go into the issue in great detail. I know that the Kilroot power station is to be completed in the near future. It will generate most of the electricity in Northern Ireland. I believe that I can put into words something that has not been said before which may be of interest to people in Britain. With the green attitudes now being evinced by both major political parties, there is great concern about sulphur emitted from the burning of coal. With EC recommendations and regulations it appears that the Government will now take that issue into consideration. I have been told that the high sulphur content of emissions from English coal from English coal mines is in conflict with the environmental process. That coal is at present being burned in the power station in Kilroot and at another power station in Northern Ireland. I have also heard that it would be cheaper to import coal which has less sulphuric content from either Australia or South Africa. It would therefore be more in line with environmental decisions that are about to be taken.

However, importing coal from South Africa or Australia could lead to even further erosion of the mining industry in Great Britain. I believe that the coalmining industry in Great Britain has suffered tragically over the past few years. One must look for a very good reason for importing coal, whether or not the argument that I have just advanced is true.

I now refer to the pipeline to take the gas found in the Morecambe field into Northern Ireland or Ireland. I believe that there are no political reasons for pumping it into the North or South. Energy does not provide political reasons. The gas, whether made available to the North or South and irrespective of where the pipeline emerges, would be a tremendous advantage to the people of Ireland.

I conclude these few remarks on a rather sombre note. We have deliberately excluded the question of security from the debates. That will be debated later. We have debated every other facet of life in Northern Ireland. Yet security is by far and away the issue that most confronts the Government in Northern Ireland, as has been said in another place.

I listened to Radio 4 one morning last week. I heard the story of yet another peace line being erected in Duncairn Gardens in Belfast. That is a constituency that I used to represent in the Northern Ireland Parliament. The peace line is being erected to keep people from the Protestant side coming into conflict with people on the Catholic side; and the reverse. At a time when the Berlin Wall is coming down—I believe the last stones were removed only this morning—and when divisions are crumbling all over Europe, there does not seem to have been any marked effect on Northern Ireland. There are now 13 peace walls in the city of Belfast keeping the religious communities apart. That is a very sad commentary. The politicians of Northern Ireland, who Are elected by the people, should take into account that only by negotiating a means by which people are enabled to live together will the peace walls come down.

I could not conclude without mentioning another point. It will be said, "Do not say it. It is a sensitive issue. It may harm Anglo-Irish relations" and "Do pour oil on troubled waters". I and most other responsible people will have said, in view of the events that have taken place over the years but particularly during the past fortnight, that the extradition arrangements between Ireland and Britain are deplorable. Every excuse that can be dragged up has been used to explain why IRA and terrorist personnel have been freed by Dublin courts and why extradition has been refused. One reason was that the paperwork had not arrived on time. All that this means is that innocent men, women and children in this country and in Germany are being murdered by the IRA.

There will be a further opportunity to debate this subject, but a marker should be put down. I read in the press this morning that the Secretary of State, in answer to questions yesterday, said that a committee was being set up in Northern Ireland, through the agency of the Anglo-Irish Agreement, to discuss extradition arrangements. After 21 years of mayhem, murder and tragedy in Northern Ireland, a committee is being set up to discuss extradition. I do not believe that we need a committee to discuss this topic. The urgency is so great that people in power in the Republic and in Britain should immediately determine that extradition will no longer be a barrier to bringing murderers before the courts and achieving justice in these islands.

4.2 p.m.

Lord Skelmersdale

My Lords, in spite of only two speeches this afternoon, as I forecast at the beginning of this short debate a whole myriad of questions have been raised, which I will do my best to answer. There will inevitably be one or two on which I shall have to write to one noble Lord or the other.

Perhaps I may say to the noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, that it would be silly and idle to pretend that everything in the Northern Ireland garden is beautiful. In the words of the noble Lord, malnutrition in the Northern Ireland social, political and economic scene does exist. I was delighted to hear him praise the Belfast action teams. I, too, believe that they are a great force for good, reconciliation and change in the first city of Northern Ireland.

On 14th June the Government announced that the Belfast action teams' lifespan was being extended beyond the three years originally intended. The action team staff are normally appointed, as the noble Lord is aware, for three years. There have recently been changes in personnel, but there is no evidence that that has led to any adverse impact on the important work being carried out by the teams. While I believe that the success of the initiative is due to the team approach and does not depend on individual personalities, I note the concern of the noble Lord and will watch carefully what happens on that front in the future.

The noble Lord also welcomed the Department of Economic Development's document, Competing in the 1990s: the Key to Growth but gave the impression that it was not enough and that he wanted evidence of commitment. Again, I welcome the noble Lord's support for this strategy document which takes as its central theme the improvement of the competitiveness of the Northern Ireland economy. The document makes clear that the Government's objectives in the key policy areas of industrial development, enterprise and training will be achieved through the more detailed plans of the department's agencies.

The Industrial Development Board is currently finalising its new medium-term strategy and the Training and Employment Agency, the creation of which we debated only recently, will be producing its first corporate plan. Both will take account of the objectives set out in the new strategy. The strategy will also guide the Local Enterprise Development Unit and the Technology Board for Northern Ireland in the revision of their plans. Taken together, these will have a strong practical impact on the Northern Ireland economy.

I remind the noble Lord that the inherent difficulties have lasted for many years and are hardly likely to be solved in a mere 11 years. The whole tenor of my opening speech was that this Government are tackling the economic and social problems slowly and surely; but tackling them they most certainly are.

The noble Lord moved on to the youth service in Northern Ireland. He will recall that the Government carried out a major review of the youth service and published a policy document in September 1987. Since then great progress has been made, culminating in the passing of the Youth Service (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 and the setting up of the Youth Council in February 1990. It is considered that that action will ensure effective co-ordination of this service. I believe that it is too early to say—it is now June and February was not long ago—whether it will need a fillip but, again, I note the noble Lord's interest in this area and I undertake to investigate the matter further; perhaps in a year or so when we will be able to see to what extent it has been doing a good job.

Freedom of choice is of paramount concern to the Government. That freedom includes the right to seek to work and live in any part of the United Kingdom, elsewhere in the European Community, or further afield. It is no part of Government policy to seek to infringe that right. Equally, it is no part of our policy to seek to encourage migration from Northern Ireland. As I pointed out in my opening remarks, the Government continue to seek ways of strengthening Northern Ireland's economy and there are some encouraging signs of success.

The noble Lord also expressed interest in rural development. I am grateful for his expression of thanks in regard to the recent visit he paid to the Province where he had a whirlwind tour of a rural area. No doubt his point emanates to an extent from that. The Government recognise the need for more co-ordinated action towards social and economic development in the most deprived rural areas in Northern Ireland. The noble Lord is therefore absolutely right to be concerned. To that end in January 1990 the Secretary of State set up an Inter-departmental Committee on Rural Development, to which the noble Lord referred. The committee is taking an over-view of government policies in these disadvantaged areas to ensure maximum impact of existing expenditure; sensitivity to the identified needs in separate areas; and improved co-ordination at local level in the application of main line departmental programmes. Opportunities for further action will be reviewed in the light of the committee's findings.

District councils play a vital role in local rural development initiatives. In fact, I would describe them as the first line in those initiatives. The inter-departmental committee has been in close contact with individual councils and with the Society of District Council Chief Executives. The Government recognise that the involvement of councils is very important and they are being encouraged to play their full part in this area. The Government also recognise the need to co-ordinate action by the various interests. That is one of the reasons why the committee was set up. It is also one of the main questions which it is currently addressing.

I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Fitt, for giving me prior warning that he would raise the subject of the Moyle Hospital Action Committee. I am not sure whether he is aware that I have already responded to the report made by that committee. It argues the case for the retention of acute medical services at the hospital in future even after the new Antrim Hospital comes into full operation. I welcome the acceptance that this must lead to some change in the present pattern of services.

The argument is about what changes have to be made. I am able to tell the noble Lord that the Northern Health and Social Services Board has set up a committee to investigate this particularly knotty problem. It is expected to report back to the board in about November. I remind the noble Lord that the northern board's action plan for the current year has made it clear that there will be no changes in services at the Moyle Hospital, at least until the new hospital is operational.

The noble Lord, Lord Fitt, also mentioned waiting lists. I am not sure whether he was here this morning when my noble friend Lady Blatch talked about putting into perspective the various problems of the health service. She spoke at some length about balanced thinking on that subject. As regards Northern Ireland, waiting lists and waiting times should be seen in the context of the higher usage of hospital services traditionally made by the population of Northern Ireland. The hospital admission rate is about 20 per cent. higher than in England. The department for which I am responsible has taken a number of steps to tackle the problem including improvements in waiting list information. The situation is not unlike that in England.

The noble Lord will also be aware that this year I made extra money available to regional medical services for reducing the waiting list, particularly in the field of orthopaedic surgery. I watch the signs and signals very carefully to see what I can do to help. I believe that the proper management of waiting lists would have a great effect.

The noble Lord also spoke about education. He made the point that under the new transport arrangements parents have a statutory right to express a choice of secondary school for their children. For their part schools must admit all pupils who apply to them provided—and it is an important proviso—that there is room in the schools. If a school has more applications than places it must select which pupils to admit on the basis of published criteria. That is the position in which we have found ourselves this year. About 1,600 more pupils applied to grammar schools than there were places available. Therefore, it was inevitable that a significant number of pupils who expressed a preference for a grammar school were not admitted. A number of secondary intermediate schools were also over-subscribed and again not all pupils who applied could be admitted.

The noble Lord mentioned appeals, which I agree are most important. If parents feel that their child has not been admitted to a school because the school has not correctly applied its admissions criteria they can appeal to an independent appeal tribunal. Those tribunals are being established by education and library boards, but they are not answerable to those boards. Their decisions are binding. If an appeal is upheld then the pupil must be admitted to the school concerned. As regards the advertising of this appeal procedure, I shall look to see what can be done in Northern Ireland either through the newspapers or by some other means.

The noble Lord, Lord Fitt, also mentioned the Kilroot 2 power station and the effect it will have on the local environment. He suggested various ways of overcoming the problem, such as the importation of cheaper coal from elsewhere in the world and the possibility of extending the gas pipeline to Northern Ireland. I accept that those are options, but if we powered Kilroot 2 by coal the amount of sulphur dioxide and so on released into the atmosphere would increase.

The noble Lord was right when he said that the Government announced in 1988 that phase 2 would be completed as a dual coal-oil fired station. Preliminary planning and design work has been proceeding. However, recent discussions with the Scottish electricity supply companies have suggested an option which the noble Lord did not mention. It might be possible to construct an interconnector between Scotland and Northern Ireland to provide power more cheaply than it could be provided by a new power station. It is clearly right to explore that possibility before going ahead with major construction work at Kilroot. The Government and Northern Ireland Electricity are examining the matter urgently and it should be possible to reach a decision within the next few months.

This debate has taken place against a background of a nudging forward of the possibility of political development. Like both noble Lords I believe that it is in the interests of the people of Northern Ireland that the political parties should take advantage of the opportunity that may now exist to engage in genuine political dialogue. The Government most certainly want to involve local elected representatives more fully in the business of governing Northern Ireland. For the first time in several years we are in with a chance of pursuing that aim. I shall convey the good wishes of both noble Lords to my right honourable friend, who of course is working conscientiously as he always does to that end.

For what it is worth, my judgment is that Unionists, the SDLP and the other parties now want to make progress. It is in their interests to seek agreement on how political power and authority can be exercised by locally elected representatives and on how wider relationships are managed. Whether history will repeat itself I cannot say, but some noble Lords may know that rather more than 20 years ago my job in Zambia was Zambianised. It would be a nice thought if my job in Northern Ireland could be Ulsterised. I am afraid the reality is that we are some way from that point, although it remains a possibility.

We have had a wide-ranging and interesting debate as is usual when we consider Northern Ireland appropriation orders. I take the point of the noble Lord, Lord Fitt, that it is only because of the interregnum in cross-party political organisation in Northern Ireland that we do it at all. I hope that there will come a time in the not too distant future when we shall not be doing it. In the meantime I hope that I have given sufficient explanations to those noble Lords who have asked questions on the order and I trust that the House will be content to approve it.

On Question, Motion agreed to.