asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on his policy towards the use of police dogs in industrial disputes and also at political meetings.

It would be contrary to normal practice to use police dogs at industrial or political gatherings.

Does the Home Secretary realise that the sending of police dogs to trade union meetings is more likely to provoke than prevent trouble? Therefore, will he consider dropping a hint to chief constables about the question, particularly in the light of last month's incident at London Airport, where police dogs actually bit a man and helped to provoke an industrial stoppage?

I do not think that further guidance to chief constables is required. A circular was issued by the Home Office in 1963 stating that:

"The Secretary of State wishes to draw attention to the special dangers of using dogs in the handling of even comparatively small crowds …".

The incident at London Airport involved British Airports Authority police, not the ordinary police, and is therefore not my responsibility but that of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. I understand that a full inquiry is going on.

Will the Home Secretary reconsider his previous reply and issue a definite, clear Government statement that under no circumstances should police dogs be used in industrial disputes, where their use is a provocation and exacerbates a situation that may already be difficult? Under such circumstances, the Government must give a clear lead.

I think that the instructions are quite clear. We believe that the circular issued by my predecessor in 1963 is absolutely right. The Commissioner has given general orders that dogs should not be used at demonstrations or political or industrial meetings.