asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland which political parties have agreed to attend his conference on the reform of local government in Ulster; and when and for how long that conference will be convened.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is the latest position regarding the invitations and acceptances to the intended conference on Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the arrangements for the proposed conference on constitutional reform in Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he expects to announce a date for his proposed conference on constitutional proposals for Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he will make a statement on the progress of his proposed constitutional discussions.

On 20 November I issued formal invitations to the Ulster Unionist Party, the Democratic Unionist Party, the Social Democratic and Labour Party and the Alliance Party to attend a conference to be held in Belfast. On the same day I published and laid before Parliament a working paper, Cmnd. 7763, which, in effect, provides a basis and agenda for this conference. Although I have seen and heard reports of reactions by the parties, I have not yet received any formal replies to my letters of invitation.

Accepting that all these parties expressed an interest in a greater measure of self-government during the election, does my right hon. Friend agree that there is a great deal to be discussed, such as, perhaps, the role of agriculture, or of commerce and industry, and that therefore the parties would be well advised to attend the conference for that purpose?

The Government's policy is to seek acceptable ways of restoring power to locally elected authorities in Northern Ireland. There is a great mass of detail to be discussed and there are many matters that need to be worked out between the parties. I believe in a conference at which all the parties can sit down together. After all, if such a body can be set up, as we all hope it can, these parties will all be represented on it—at least, I hope they will. I believe that the best way to make progress is for us all to get together to consider the great quantity of detailed matters that must be gone into.

rose—

Order. I propose to call first those Members whose questions are being answered.

May I place on record my agreement with the right hon. Gentleman for having called this conference and taken the first real political initiative for a long time? May I also say how sad I am—[Interruption.] Government Members do not seem to be interested in—

Order. If the hon. Gentleman will put his remarks in the form of a question, which he can easily do, everyone will be satisfied.

I put my remarks in the form of a question, but the Ulster Unionists will not let me speak. That is the reality.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his opening words, and I endorse what he said about the hon. Member for Belfast, West (Mr. Fitt), whom we have all known for many years. It must have been a sad moment for the hon. Gentleman when he felt it necessary to resign from the leadership of the party, which I think I am right in saying he founded.

My right hon. Friend has made an honourable and praiseworthy attempt to achieve the impossible, namely, to get all the parties to agree on a solution to this problem. As it appears that this attempt will be unsuccessful, should not the Government be considering their own solution, as announced in the manifesto?

The Government are determined, as I announced on 25 October, to seek ways to transfer power to elected representatives in Northern Ireland. I am sure that the right course is to discuss the problem with the people who will be exercising that power how best it can be dealt with. It seems to me, and to the Government, that a conference is the best way of doing that. We shall, of course, not lose sight of our objective, but I repeat that I very much hope that we can persuade people that a conference, at which all the parties can sit down together, is the best way forward.

I add my tribute to the initiative of the Secretary of State. Does he agree that the context of the conference must include the aspirations of the minority community in Northern Ireland towards the government of the Province as a whole? Does he further agree that it would be a great pity if the Social Democratic and Labour Party did not attend the conference?

Yes, it would be a great pity if anyone felt unable to attend. I hope that the hon. Member for Derby, North (Mr. Whitehead) and the House will recognise that in the document that was published on Tuesday the Government constantly reiterated their view that the interests of the minority community must be catered for in any new arrangements. We regard that as essential if any proposals that we put before the House are to last. I hope very much that the representatives of the minority community will come and talk to us about that matter.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that most fair-minded people will consider his White Paper to be an extremely broad and satisfactory document? It will be difficult for people on this side of the water to understand if other people are not prepared to talk about it.

I am grateful for what my hon. Friend has said. I can go further than saying that I believe that the people of the Province, too, want to see political advance. In fact, I know that they do, because when I have been there I have heard that that is what the people wish to see. Political advance and political arrangements are settled by politicians. I believe that the people of the Province look to their own political leaders to come together to seek ways of making that political advance.

Will the Secretary of State accept from me that the overwhelming majority of people of all religions and all cultures in Northern Ireland want to see political advance and that they have given no instructions to their leaders to avoid this conference? They desperately want their leaders to attend. Will he also take it from me—I say this in all sincerity—that the document that was drawn up for consultation could have been more diplomatically worded, so as to assure the minority population that their aspirations are not being excluded from any of the discussions that are about to take place? Finally, will the right hon. Gentleman take it from me that all is not lost? If the right hon. Gentleman is prepared to give an indication to the minority population, through their leaders in the SDLP, that their aspirations are not being overlooked he may still find them at the conference table.

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for what he said at the beginning of his remarks, and I take heart from what he said towards the end of them. Of course I recognise the aspirations of the minority community. So far as the internal government of Northern Ireland is concerned, Her Majesty's Government are determined to ensure that the interests of the minority community are taken care of.

As two of the parties which have been invited to this conference evidently will not accept the invitation—the Official Unionists and the SDLP—does not the right hon. Gentleman think that it would be advisable to call a conference of the elected representatives in the House so that they can discuss this matter at a proper conference as they have a mandate from the people of Northern Ireland?

As I have not had formal replies to my letters of invitation I cannot say yet how many people will or will not attend. As regards elected representatives, I agree with the hon. Gentleman that they have a major part to play. Clearly any proposition put forward by the Government will need to come to the House, and Members will then have the final say.

I add my voice to the expressions of sadness at the resignation of my hon. Friend the Member for Belfast, West (Mr. Fitt) as leader of the SDLP. I believe that that will be a tragedy not only for the party that he founded but for the community that he has served so well. Is it not a fact that my hon. Friend joins a growing band of Northern Ireland Members of Parliament who represent electors but are not invited to the talks at present constituted? In view of this growing number, will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider his strategy of the favoured four?

On the final point made by the hon. Gentleman, of course I shall consider any proposition that he wishes to put to me. I do not think that I am in a position to answer hypothetical questions about what to do if certain things happen. I repeat that I have not heard from any of the parties in answer to my formal invitation. When I have done so I shall make up my mind how best to proceed.

Does the Secretary of State accept that in view of the recent political developments in Northern Ireland the proposed conference has been rendered futile? When will he bring to the House his proposals to reform local government in Northern Ireland, and a proposal for a devolved Parliament in the Province?

The hon. Gentleman says that the conference is futile. I do not know that it is, yet. If it should transpire that nobody will come to the conference, clearly we shall have to seek other ways forward. The Government are determined to find a way forward, but are equally determined to find a way, if they possibly can, that is acceptable to the people of Northern Ireland. They are the people who matter. Somehow or other I have to discover their views and see whether they can reach an accommodation on a way forward that will not only be acceptable now but will last. That is the important thing to do.

Does not the Secretary of State realise that he will obtain the views of the Ulster people by making sure that all Ulster Members of Parliament are at this conference? Will he give an assurance that he will press ahead with the conference, irrespective of who attends it, and that he will make sure that that agreement is put before the Ulster people, who can decide whether to accept or reject it in a referendum?

That is certainly the way forward that we shall consider if the circumstances so demand. I reiterate the determination of the Government to find a way forward and to come to the House with recommendations. It is my earnest wish to come to the House knowing that what I recommend has the support of all the people of the Province.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the employment prospects for the Province.

The prospects for increased employment opportunities in Northern Ireland, as in the rest of the United Kingdom, are uncertain because of the potential impact of the widely predicted world industrial and trade recession.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there has always been very high unemployment among young people in Northern Ireland, and that this is not particularly helpful at present because they get into mischief? In view of the recent increase in MLR, will my hon. Friend take special steps to see that the jobs provided by small businesses in particular receive special emphasis?

I am well aware of my hon. Friend's concern for the young people in Northern Ireland, because he has raised this matter on previous occasions. The Government share his concern. The bank interest rate has gone up ½ per cent. less in Northern Ireland in order to assist small businesses in particular.

Can the Minister tell us the level to which unemployment is likely to rise in Northern Ireland as a result of his Government's policy? What is he doing to help the man-made fibre industry, which is essential to the wellbeing of the Province?

The last question is a matter for my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State and the hon. Gentleman should address that to him on an appropriate occasion. The first part of the hon. Member's question has slipped my memory, and I ask him to repeat it.

What effect does my hon. Friend think the ludicrous and impractical proposal for a De Lorean sports car factory will have on unemployment in Northern Ireland? Does he agree that it is a paradox that taxpayers' money should be directed into this project at the behest of one of the most notorious con men in the Western Hemisphere, when the MG car company, which has not had an industrial dispute for 30 years, has been closed down because of a lack of capital?

The De Lorean project is also the responsibility of my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary. However, the prospects in Northern Ireland for this scheme are highly attractive and have been welcomed throughout the Province. The project should provide a much-needed pool of employment.

Is the Minister aware that many of his recent utterances have totally misled hon. Members and are calculated to do great harm to the people of Northern Ireland? Is he not aware that last month 64,812 people were unemployed? That was 11·4 per cent. of the insured population and the highest October figure for 39 years. Does he agree that the uncertainty is due to the Government's policies biting deeper and deeper, month by month, with the increase in the minimum lending rate and VAT? Will the Minister tell his right hon. Friend to stand up to the Prime Minister and fight her, and to stand up for the interests of the people of Northern Ireland, who need a better industrial future?

The figures for unemployment are lower than the figures that the hon. Member quoted. Unemployment is just under 63,000, or 11·1 per cent. of the insured population. It is still too high compared with the 5·5 per cent. for the rest of the United Kingdom. That is not a matter that gives us satisfaction, but it is a persistent figure and a situation that has continued in Northern Ireland because of the underlying economic weakness, a lack of natural resources and the decline of traditional industries, such as shipbuilding, textiles and agriculture, which provided most of the employment in the Province. The hon. Member is well aware of those factors and it is precisely these that we are trying to combat with the highest investment grants in the United Kingdom. I have indicated the way in which we have been successful in attracting new investment and new manufacturing jobs to the Province. We are not at all complacent. As the hon. Member knows from the announcement that we made about the so-called cuts, we have preserved the manufacturing and construction industry from any economic measures that we have had to take.

Order. I must ask for shorter questions and shorter answers.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what are the reasons for excluding the Cookstown area from the Department of Commerce plan for industrial expansion and new factories.

Cookstown is not excluded from current plans for industrial expansion.

Does the Minister agree that in the advance notice of seven new factories sponsored by LEDU, Cookstown has been left out? Does he agree also that Cookstown has the highest incidence of unemployment in Northern Ireland next to the Strabane area, and that LEDU promised a factory at Cookstown but failed to implement that promise? Finally, will the Minister—

Order. The hon. Member has already asked three questions.

rose—

Order. No, the hon. Member has already asked enough for anyone.

We have plans for an industrial estate in Cookstown, and we have already developed a site of 22 acres. I remind the hon. Member that although unemployment in the area is running at 21·2 per cent., it is not significantly higher than in many other areas. I should be glad to meet the hon. Member to discuss this matter further.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether it is his policy that the political future of Northern Ireland is a matter for Her Majesty's Government, Parliament and the people of Northern Ireland.

Yes, Sir.

Can the Secretary of State explain the view of his noble Friend, expressed in another place this month, that there were aspirations held in Britain and further afield? If those words do not mean that the Government are allowing outside interests to colour their judgment and their policies, what exactly do they mean?

What my noble Friend said was true. There is a lot of interest in the affairs of Northern Ireland and in the whole of the United Kingdom for that matter. [Interruption.] The hon. Member asked whether it was the Government's view that the political future of Northern Ireland was a matter for the Government, Parliament and the people of Northern Ireland. The answer to that is "Yes". It is not a matter for anybody else.

I refer to the right hon. Gentleman's original answer on the Irish dimension. That was an important answer in view of statements that have been made recently. Can he confirm that at any conference that takes place with any party as a result of his initiative there will be every possibility to discuss the question of the Irish dimension, and that in any settlement put to this House and the people of Northern Ireland no limitations will be placed on co-operation between the two parts of the island of Ireland or on the aspirations of those who feel that there should be a united Ireland?

The working paper that will form the basis for the conference is about transferring responsibility for their own affairs to the people of Northern Ireland. If an elected representative body can be set up in Northern Ireland, as we all hope it can, it will have the opportunity to work out the relationship that it has with the Republic of Ireland in respect of those matters for which it has transferred responsibility. There is plenty of opportunity for this kind of discussion and for moving forward in this direction. It is our business, in conjunction with the people of Northern Ireland, to work out how we can best provide for a return of democracy to the people of Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he has any plans to meet the Prime Minister of the Irish Republic in the near future.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he expects to have further discussions with the authorities in the Republic of Ireland.

I have no present plans to meet the Irish Prime Minister, but I shall continue to have discussions with other Irish Ministers as approproiate. Dates for further meetings have not yet been decided between us.

Did my right hon. Friend notice the words used by the Taoiseach on his recent visit to the United States, when he described the activities of the Provisional IRA as "brutal and horrific gangsterism"? Will my right hon. Friend, by a meeting or otherwise, convey respectfully to the Taoiseach that this robust attitude towards the activities of the Provisional IRA, directed as much against his country as against Northern Ireland, is very welcome in the United Kingdom?

I did, indeed, note those words, and I agree with my hon. Friend. I shall certainly convey his sentiments to the Prime Minister of the Republic. All of us welcome the reminder of the threat posed by the Provisional IRA to the security of the Republic as well as to the security of the North and the growing common interest between us in eliminating terrorism wherever it occurs.

Will my right hon. Friend urge the Government of the Republic to sign, ratify and implement the European convention on the suppression of terrorism? Does he agree that that is vital to the restoration of peace?

As my hon. Friend knows, this country signed that convention without reservation some years ago. It is my belief that all countries should sign it, in an effort to eradicate the evil of terrorism throughout the world.

In view of the apparent refusal of the SDLP to join in the talks, could not the good services of the Prime Minister of the Republic be used to encourage them to do so?

I do not think that that is my business. I do not know, as yet, of such a refusal. I am still waiting for an official answer to my invitation. I repeat my belief that it is in the interest of the SDLP, as it is in the interest of everyone else in the Province, to come together with the other parties under my chairmanship and talk about how we can better govern the Province.

When the Secretary of State meets Mr. Lynch, will he remind him once again that so long as he and his Government share the aspirations of the terrorists all his fine words will have little effect?

I do not think that it is fair to say that the Prime Minister of the Republic shares the views of the terrorists about how they should advance. Nor do I think that he shares their aspirations. The hon. Gentleman will not have failed to read the article written by Gerry Adams in Time magazine, which made it clear that the aspiration of the terrorists is to bring down not only the Government of Northern Ireland but that of the Republic as well.

Will my right hon. Friend make clear to Mr. Lynch that we view security co-operation across the border as a two-way activity, and that the Irish security forces would be welcome to enter United Kingdom territory and air space in pursuit of those whom the Taoiseach has publicly recognised to be the common enemy?

Yes. In my discussions with Ministers of the Republic about improving cross-border co-operation it has been made perfectly clear that any arrangement suggested by either side should be reciprocal.

Does the Secretary of State accept that security is not only a border problem, but that these problems arise all over the Province, and particularly in the city of Belfast? Does he know that on the Cavehill Road in North Belfast this morning a Catholic church was blown almost to smithereens by extremists, who certainly would not be members of the IRA? Can the Secretary of State say what kind of security he is providing for the Catholic population in that area?

I entirely agree with the hon. Gentleman that security is a matter not only of the border but of our own internal arrangements. I was dealing with the border question because of the nature of the original question. There is a later question on the Order Paper about security in general, to which we shall come in a few moments.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take it from me that the incident referred to by the hon. Member for Belfast, West (Mr. Fitt) will be unreservedly condemned by all right-thinking people in the community? Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that when Mr. Lynch went to America his visit was littered with denials about the security policies that he had agreed with the right hon. Gentleman? Will the Secretary of State now tell us what agreements he made with Mr. Lynch at that conference?

I am glad to hear the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question. Everybody deplores violence and terrorism, from whatever source. With regard to the second part of his question, it was decided between Ministers of the Republic and ourselves that the details of the arrangements that we agreed upon would be kept secret. I think that the House will understand the obvious reasons for that. As I have said before, the Provisional IRA reads Hansard just as much as anyone else does.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he has had any recent discussions with official representatives of the United States Government relating to Northern Ireland.

I met the United States Ambassador at the end of October. We keep the United States Administration regularly informed about our policies through diplomatic channels.

Bearing in mind the imminent presidential election in the United States and the likelihood that at least one presidential candidate will try to use Northern Ireland for vote-winning purposes, and bearing in mind also that this may result in the President of the United States involving himself more than he should in the affairs of Northern Ireland, will my right hon. Friend make absolutely clear to the United States Government that Northern Ireland affairs are for the British Government and are nothing to do with politicians in America?

I think that the United States Administration understand, and accept, that the situation in Northern Ireland is a domestic matter. Only last September the United States Secretary of State said that intrusion into the Irish situation would not be wise. That is quite right. At the same time, there is no doubt that we have a job to do in informing not so much the United States Administration as a number of people in the United States of the true facts. There is misunderstanding which has resulted, over past years, in far too much money getting into the wrong hands.

Will the Secretary of State tell us the latest status of the RUC arms contract that was held up by the United States Government?

The United States Administration are carrying out a review. We have made it plain that we hope that the review will soon be concluded. Meanwhile, there has been no immediate need to place further orders. However, there will come a time when further orders will need to be placed, and we shall do so in good time. We very much hope that the review that the United States Administration are carrying out will be completed by then.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the security situation in Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the security situation.

Since I last answered questions in the House on 25 October, 10 people have died as a result of terrorist action in Northern Ireland, three of them in incidents of a sectarian nature. The Provisional IRA has continued to concentrate its attack on the security forces and prison officers. Bomb attacks on commercial premises have been at a low level, though on 10 November there was a series of attacks on such property with cassette incendiary devices. The security forces have continued their success in bringing terrorists before the courts. Since 25 October, 55 charges have been brought for terrorist offences, seven of them for murder and four for attempted murder.

Can the Secretary of State explain why there should have been a delay of 15 days in investigating the Panorama-IRA operation at Carrick-more? Why was the personal intervention of the Prime Minister necessary to arouse the interest of Scotland Yard in the matter?

There was not a delay of 15 days. Although there is a later question on the Order Paper about this, I shall deal with it now. The security and police forces in the Province started investigating at once.

As evidence has come to hand that the security of RUC intelligence activities has been breached, and that the IRA had a "plant" in the RUC reserve who supplied vital information that could have led to the murder of members of the RUC, has the right hon. Gentleman set up an inquiry into this matter? Is he satisfied that the other branches of the security forces have not been infiltrated?

As a result of inquiries that we are making, papers are before the Director of Public Prosecutions at the moment in respect of the case to which the hon. Gentleman refers.

With regard to foreign interference in Northern Ireland, will the right hon. Gentleman inform the House of the steps that have been taken by the United States Government to proceed against NORAID? What assistance are Her Majesty's Government giving to the United States Government in that regard?

I cannot answer for the precise steps that the United States Government have taken. I know that they are well aware of the need to reduce the amount of money coming from the United States for terrorist purposes. I know that they have taken certain steps. We shall be ready to give them any assistance that we can to prevent this happening.

Can the Secretary of State tell us why he has refused to disclose the nature of the financial arrangements that have evolved following the talks on security between the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and the Prime Minister of the Republic of Ireland?

These are not financial arrangements. They are matters of security which, as I have told the House on more than one occasion, it would not be prudent to disclose.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that 94 of those who were recently found guilty of terrorist offences have been given non-custodial sentences? Does he intend to take any action to impose minimum or mandatory sentences in Northern Ireland?

Sentences imposed by the courts are matters for the courts. I do not think that it would be proper for me to seek to intervene, and I do not believe that the House would regard it as correct that Ministers should seek to interfere with the courts.

Can the Secretary of State give an assessment for the year so far of the number of attacks against persons and property? Are they increasing or decreasing? Is there not some recent evidence that there has been a switching of targets back to commercial properties on rather more than the one weekend that the Secretary of State mentioned?

I published the security statistics for this year compared with previous years in the Official Report. I do not think that the conclusions drawn by the hon. Gentleman can be drawn. There is no doubt that personal attacks are concentrated on members of the security forces. I think that there is also an indication that the level of bombing is not as high as it was. However, that should not give us cause for complacency, because it may well be that the terrorists will seek to escalate their activity, particularly if there seems to be progress towards a political settlement, which is the one thing that they do not want.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what plans he has for tightening security along the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

We are maintaining and constantly adapting the efforts of the security forces in Northern Ireland engaged in overt and covert duties to meet changes in the security situation. In addition, the measures agreed with the Government of the Irish Republic on 5 October ensure greater effectiveness in our joint effort against a common enemy.

Will my right hon. Friend sanction an increase in the number and frequency of SAS and similar patrols along the border?

We are constantly looking at the most effective deployment of our forces, including the use of the SAS.

Is the Secretary of State satisfied with the work that is now being carried out by his security adviser in Northern Ireland, Sir Maurice Oldfield, who is allegedly there to co-ordinate the work of the Army and the police? Does not the right hon. Gentleman have the slightest suspicion that something may go wrong with that appointment, in view of the reported association between Sir Maurice Oldfield and Mr. Anthony Blunt?

No, I do not. Sir Maurice Oldfield's arrival in the Province as security co-ordinator has been of great help, and the work that he is doing to increase the effectiveness of the security forces is appreciated by all of us. I have no fears such as the hon. Gentleman suggests.

Has the Eire Prime Minister agreed to overflying on the Eire side of the border by British aircraft and helicopters? This is not something that can be kept secret, and the Secretary of State can answer if he so wishes.

Ministers of the Republic and I, and the Prime Minister of the Republic and my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, agreed that we would keep the details of the arrangements to ourselves. Therefore, I regret that I cannot help the hon. Gentleman.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that, no matter how much security along the border is tightened, ultimately that is no solution whatever? We are facing a political problem, and the solution must be a political one. Surely the beginning of a solution is for all the parties concerned to come together at the conference that the right hon. Gentleman has suggested.

I entirely agree with the latter part of the hon. Gentleman's question, but I must point out that no agreement between the political parties in Northern Ireland will be of the slightest interest to the terrorists. They are not interested in the improvement of democratic Government. All that they are interested in doing is trying to destroy it.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what facilities were given by public bodies for which he is responsible to the arrangement between the BBC and the Provisional IRA by which the village of Carrickmore in county Tyrone was sealed off for the purpose of making a television documentary programme.

None.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the widespread concern in this country because of the suspicion that there may have been collusion between the BBC and the Provisional IRA in arranging a televised programme? Can he assure the House that no moneys changed hands between the BBC and the Provisional IRA in order to provide that sort of facility?

I am well aware of the concern, which I share. I cannot give the hon. Gentleman a precise answer to his question because the whole incident, and precisely what happened and the events leading up to it, are still being investigated by the police.

to ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what facilities were given by the public authorities for the filming of the Provisional IRA by a BBC "Panorama" team in Carrickmore, county Tyrone.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State informed me in writing that he would take my question together with question No. 13.

Order. I noticed that the right hon. Gentleman did not group them. I thought that he did that because of the time. If the Secretary of State intended to do that, I shall call the hon. Gentleman to ask his supplementary question and allow an extra minute at the end of Prime Minister's questions to make up for the time taken now.

I am grateful to you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 22 November.

This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall be having further meetings with ministerial colleagues and others, including one with the Prime Minister of the Yemen Arab Republic. This evening I shall be attending the diplomatic reception at Buckingham Palace.

Turning my right hon. Friend's attention from the activities of Comrade Blunt to those of Comrade Robinson, may I ask whether she agrees that the activities of those who foment political strikes in this country are a cause for national concern? Will she do her best to encourage an early debate on this aspect of the nation's security?

Of course we are all worried about the number of strikes, because they cut down our prospects of trade, both at home and abroad, and they put up prices. Indeed, they are very damaging to the economy. I believe that we may have the opportunity for an economic debate some time in the near future, when perhaps that aspect can be debated, along with more strictly economic matters.

Will the Prime Minister instruct her Ministers to have the courage of their convictions when it comes to snatching milk or hijacking school buses? Why do they persist in trying to pass the buck to local authorities?

I rather thought that hon. Members in many parts of the House wished that local authorities had more control over decisions relating to matters in their own areas. We are giving them greater freedom of decision on transport and on school meals.

Bearing in mind the Prime Minister's remarks yesterday concerning her surprise that anyone with Marxist views should have been accepted to do secret work in the public service, is she now satisfied that there are not Marxist groups or individuals in the public service who are in a position to do harm to the national interest? Will she maintain continual vigilance in this regard?

We shall, of course, maintain continual vigilance. As I think I said in my speech yesterday, no system is absolutely foolproof against penetration, but we have security services to keep us warned of these things, among others.

I should like to ask the Prime Minister about mortgage interest rates. Will she tell us why she has not on this occasion intervened with the building societies to keep down their rates, as she did last time? As the Conservative manifesto clearly told us that the Government's plan would enable building societies to lower interest rates, will she tell us what has gone wrong with her financial policy?

It has occurred to me that the right hon. Gentleman might ask that question. [HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."] As the right hon. Gentleman knows, interest rates are at this level because too many people want to borrow. [Interruption.] If the Opposition do not realise that, they will never get their economics right. I recognise that the Government are borrowing too much. An interesting correlation is that when the Government borrow less—as the previous Labour Government did under the instructions of the IMF and the borrowing requirement went down—interest rates go down. I shall be delighted to have the support of the right hon. Gentleman and those who sit behind him to get down Government spending and borrowing, because interest rates will then go down.

Despite that long answer, I do not think that the right hon. Lady answered my question. The right hon. Lady's manifesto said that the Conservatives would get mortgage interest rates down because their tax cuts would help people to raise deposits for mortgages. What has gone wrong with all this business? Would the right hon. Lady care to circulate that extract from the Conservative manifesto and explain to the people of this country that she was conning them at the general election?

I did answer the right hon. Gentleman's question. It was just that he did not like my answer. If he would like more of a reply, I must tell him that the other factor in keeping up interest rates is the private sector borrowing to put up wage rates. The right hon. Gentleman must not run away with the idea that interest rates are determined only by the Government. They are determined by the activities of ordinary men and women demanding wages in excess of output and then striking and requiring companies to borrow to keep going.

Why does not the right hon. Lady admit that her policy is a ghastly failure?

Because it is not.

Will my right hon. Friend take time today to discuss with both the Archbishop of Canterbury—[HON. MEMBERS: "Reading."]—and the Archbishop of Westminster and others the serious plight of all Christians in Iran?

I need hardly stress how worried we all are about events in Iran and certain events in Islamic countries elsewhere. I hope that the whole world will demonstrate its view that these matters are no part of a civilised society.

Returning to today's meeting of the Building Societies Association, what answer will the Prime Minister give to the building societies if they remind her of her pledge, given when she was Shadow Secretary of State for the Environment, that a Conservative Government would take action to protect the mortgage rate from the market rates of interest by intervening to keep them below 9½ per cent? Will she tell them what action she will take, or will she simply tell them, as the rest of us are aware, that her show is slipping?

As I have told the right hon. Gentleman before, and as I remind him now, we fought and lost an election on that one. It was not, in fact, in the manifesto on the last occasion. If the right hon. Gentleman is asking why we do not now intervene by lending money to the building societies to keep down the mortgage interest rate, I should point out that that is a possible course of action only at the beginning of a financial year, when the money can be returned before the end of the financial year. The right hon. Gentleman always tries to run away from facts. One problem is the level of public expenditure. It would not be wise, when trying to get it down, to take action that would put it up substantially.

asked the Prime Minister whether she has any plans to visit Wokingham.

I have at present no plans to do so.

In the meanwhile, without paying a visit, will the Prime Minister satisfy herself that the land strategy of the Department of the Environment for the whole of the South-East is correct, requiring as it does the release of an additional 1,000 acres of building land in Central Berkshire? Is not the strategy to stimulate economy and activity in the North, not necessarily in the overcrowded South, so that, when we do welcome my right hon. Friend, we can show her not only our thriving built-up areas but the surrounding country areas?

I know that there has been a great deal of development in my hon. Friend's constituency and that he is naturally worried by the proposed further development revealed in the structure plan. I know, too, that he has put his views vigorously to my right hon. Friend. I confirm that the strategy is to persuade more firms to go particularly to areas in the North, but there are areas in the centres of cities that require more businesses either to stay or to open.

asked the Prime Minister if she will consider appointing a member of the House of Commons as Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary.

No, Sir.

Will the Prime Minister accept that this is a criticism not of individuals—[An HON. MEMBER: "It should be."] That is for another occasion—but of an arrangement whereby one of her principal Cabinet Ministers is not answerable to the elected House of Commons? Will she bear that in mind when making her Cabinet reshuffle, which, in view of the collapse of her economic and industrial policy, is clearly imminent?

The hon. Gentleman overlooks the fact that we have in this House an excellent Cabinet Minister answerable for foreign affairs.

Is not Lord Carrington deserving of the thanks of the whole country for his superb handling of the Rhodesian negotiations?

I warmly endorse my hon. Friend's congratulations. I hope that both sides at the Lancaster House conference will soon come to an agreement on a ceasefire, because that is the only way that we can go ahead and obviate some of the difficulties that now obtain in Zambia and in infiltration across the border into Rhodesia.

Referring precisely to those difficulties, and in view of the serious attacks that were made on Zambia yesterday and earlier this week, will the Prime Minister tell the House whether she has had any further exchanges with the President of Zambia and whether any direct representations have been made to the Southern Rhodesia authorities that they cease these wrecking attacks at this crucial stage?

Yes. I spoke to President Kaunda on the telephone a short time ago and said that at 4 o'clock this afternoon, when we have a plenary session at Lancaster House, we would be putting forward proposals for the ceasefire and asking both sides to constrain themselves—the one not to make attacks into Zambia, and the other to cease infiltration across the Zambian border into Rhodesia. If we can get those undertakings from both sides we shall have a chance of getting through to a ceasefire agreement.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 22 November.

I refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave earlier.

Will my right hon. Friend take time today to consider the implications of the miners' ballot? Does she agree that their demands create grave difficulties for many elderly people who use coal for heating, let alone threatening to price British coal out of the home market and putting their own jobs at risk as well?

I am always concerned about high wage rates. They can be justified only if we get much higher output. Otherwise, the difference is bound to result in increased prices. That would have an adverse effect on the amount of coal that people could buy or the amount of electricity that they could afford, and some of them would undoubtedly go cold. However, we cannot put up the cash limit to the National Coal Board. Beyond that, we must leave the negotiation of wages to the union and the chairman of the NCB.

Is the right hon. Lady in favour of the National Union of Mineworkers putting the issue to the ballot, or is she not? We have always gained the impression that the Prime Minister is in favour of ballots.

The hon. Gentleman already knows the answer. Yes, I am in favour of ballots. That will be part of our policy when we present the relevant Bill to the House before Christmas.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it would be wise for the National Coal Board and the National Union of Mineworkers to announce at each stage of their negotiations the implications of the pay deal for the prices of coal and electricity?

I agree with my hon. Friend that we should know the price consequences of wage deals, and preferably before they are made. If increased wages are covered by increased output, the increased wages are earned.

May I remind the right hon. Lady that when she entered 10 Downing Street for the first time as Prime Minister she said that she stood for the creation of harmony in our land? May I ask her to use her good offices to bring about a ceasefire in Leyland management's victimisation and sacking of Mr. Robinson? Is the right hon. Lady aware that Mr. Robinson represents many people who normally do not share his views, including many Tory voters at the general election? Is she also aware that they will not stand for the victimisation of a man who is merely putting a contrary view to the management?

It is not for politicians to try to take over the management of public sector industries—[Interruption.]

Order.

It is not for politicians to take over the management—

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Surely it is wrong that the Prime Minister should seek to mislead the House and the country—

Order. That cannot possibly be a point of order.

rose—

Order. We normally take points of order later in the afternoon. I ask the hon. Gentleman to wait till then.

It is not for politicians to take over the management of public sector industry. The previous Government happened to put in a very good manager at British Leyland. We must leave the management of British Leyland to him.