asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will consider the setting up of multi-agency task forces dedicated to the prevention of illegal drug importation and distribution.

We have no plans to establish a task force of this kind. There is already very close and successful co-operation between Her Majesty's Customs and Excise and the police in combating drug trafficking, through the central drugs intelligence unit and in other ways. But I shall certainly look closely at American experience of its task force programme in the course of a visit which I shall be paying to the United States in a few weeks' time.

Does my hon. Friend agree that often the major drug traffickers can be indentified only by their assets and banking transactions? Will he and his Treasury colleagues devise some formal structure to enable the Inland Revenue to share information with other agencies so that those investigating drugs and other organised crimes do not continue to operate with their hands tied behind their backs?

As my hon. Friend knows, we are considering giving the courts improved powers to confiscate the assets of those convicted of serious crimes, including, of course, drug trafficking. The availability of information about financial matters and the stage at which that information can be made available will be a key part of that process.

As there has been an increase of about 65 per cent. in the last three years in the number of registered addicts, apart from those who are not on the register, how can the hon. Gentleman be so indolent about the matter, remembering that 1,000 Customs officer posts have been got rid of in the last five years?

The hon. Gentleman falls below his normal level in what is a travesty of the situation. We have tried to ensure that the register of drug addicts is an accurate reflection of the number of people who are addicted. Indeed, we have been encouraging family doctors to notify addict numbers. It turns logic on its head if, as we seek to improve the accuracy of the register, we are criticised for the number of persons on the register, many of whom will have been addicted to drugs for some years.

As regards Customs officers, the hon. Gentleman well knows that there is all the difference in the world between manpower reductions on static checks and an increase in intelligence. For example, there has been an increase of nearly two thirds in the number of officers engaged in intelligence work on heroin. That has led to a dramatic increase in the number of seizures of drugs and convictions of drug importers.

Is my hon. Friend aware that we are approaching the season of festivals, open-air concerts and similar gatherings and that drugs are often distributed at such events? Does he agree that chief constables in areas where such festivities take place must co-ordinate their activities to deal with the problem?

I am sure that chief constables, whose duty it is to do what my hon. Friend asks, will take careful note of the commonsense point that he raises.

Given the success of the Department in sequestrating the funds of the National Union of Mineworkers, is it not time for the Government to apply the same rigours to sequestrating the funds of those who sell and ply heroin, who cause enormous misery, yet who are able to salt their money away in safe havens and who often avoid extradition from countries, such as Spain, where extradition agreements are non-existent? If the Minister agrees that it is time for a rigorous attitude to be taken, when does he intend to introduce legislation?

The hon. Gentleman's supplementary question would have been more pertinent without the rather shallow simile that he applied at the beginning. I understand that always he finds these temptations hard to resist. He has put to me the idea of improving procedures for the confiscation of assets as if that were a new thought. My right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary has been saying for 12 months now that we are working actively on finding a new power. Twelve years ago the House thought that it had solved the problem. It is clear now that it had not. We are now considering the Hodgson report. The hon. Gentleman will know — [HON. MEMBERS: "Too long".]—as should one or two of those who seem to be involved in organised barracking on an important topic—

Nonsense.

—that it is much easier to define a problem than to resolve it. We are working hard on the problem.

Will my hon. Friend do something about the internal battles which are carried on between the police and Customs and Excise in the investigation and prosecution of drug offences?

My hon. Friend has raised an important point. As far as I am aware, there is good liaison between Customs and Excise and the police. I believe that some accounts to the contrary are overdone. He may be interested to know that about six months ago the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis set up a high-level committee to further that liaison between the police and Customs and Excise. I believe that that committee is working to good effect.

Is it not right that the Government must take a major share of the blame for the substantial increase in drug addiction that has occurred every year since they came to office? The Government have reduced the number of Customs officers, allowing more cocaine and heroin to enter the country. They have failed properly to co-ordinate the activities of Customs and police officers. Most importantly, they have created the social conditions, in terms of unemployment, which have allowed drug abuse to flourish. How does the hon. Gentleman feel as the Minister who has presided over the largest ever increase in drug addiction, deaths and destruction of young people's lives?

Perhaps it was an improvement when the hon. Gentleman was saying "Nonsense" from a sedentary position instead of rising and engaging in an all-purpose rant that will not enhance his reputation in this place. However, if that helps him with the Knowsley, North reselection procedure, we shall not mind too much.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations he has received for an increase in the establishment of the Hampshire constabulary.

Last year, following a reorganisation of the force, the Hampsshire police authority applied for approval for three additional police posts. We welcome the reorganisation, but my right hon. and learned Friend was not prepared to agree to the additional posts, because further consideration was being given to recruiting civilian staff, which might release more police officers for operational duties.

Despite the exemplary dedication and professionalism of the Hampshire constabulary, the crime rate in the county, and especially in Basingstoke, has risen considerably. The media locally and nationally make much of the fact that this is due partially to existing manpower being inadequate. Does my hon. Friend agree that at the very least existing funding should be made available so that police forces can operate at full establishment level, which is not now the position? Preferably, more funds and greater establishment should be encouraged.

I am sure my hon. Friend will agree that the overall pattern of recruitment into the police force has improved markedly since 1979, with over 9,000 officers additional to establishment. The Hampshire establishment has increased by 130 police posts since 1979. However, I understand my hon. Friend's view that there should be further examination of the proposals which the Hampshire constabulary seeks to make. If it has found the opportunities for civilian recruitment, there might well be a case for re-examining what it has said.

Is my hon. Friend aware that yesterday consideration of the Controlled Drugs (Penalties) Bill, to provide tougher penalties for drug traffickers, was completed, and that during the course of that consideration my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department mentioned—

Order. The question is directed to the establishment of the Hampshire constabulary.

Indeed, Mr. Speaker. During the course of considering the Bill in Committee, my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department mentioned that one part of the Government's policy was to ensure that the police in Hampshire and elsewhere have the powers to enforce such legislation. Is my hon. Friend confident that the Hampshire police have those powers? It is no use passing laws in this place if the police are unable to enforce them.

My hon. Friend is right. It is my right hon. and learned Friend's duty to examine every police establishment to ensure that it is capable of executing its duties efficiently and economically I can assure my hon. Friend that this review of establishment takes place regularly with a view to ensuring that the legislative load can be carried on a sufficient number of shoulders.

Is the Minister aware—

Order. I remind the hon. Gentleman that the question relates to Hampshire.

Indeed, Mr. Speaker. My supplementary question is directed to Hampshire. I can include the New Forest and the little ponies as well, if you wish me to do so.

Is the Minister aware that the problem faced by the Hampshire police force must have been evident for the past 12 months? If the Hampshire police force was understaffed and undermanned, and if it seemed unlikely that it would be able to resolve all the problems facing it, why did the Minister and the Home Secretary agree to send several thousand policemen, including many from Hampshire, to the coalfields of Yorkshire and elsewhere to try to smash the National Union of Mineworkers?

I think that that is an uneconomic supplementary question, and that it should be closed.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many children have been deported or removed from the United Kingdom since 1979.

Few people under the age of 18 are either deported or removed. I regret that figures are not available to show either their number or the number who leave with their parents against whom such action has to be taken.

Is the Minister aware that large numbers of children who were born in Britain or who are British citizens are being driven out of this country because of the way in which the immigration laws operate? Is that not an absolute disgrace? Will the hon. and learned Gentleman agree to review the whole issue?

The hon. Lady is entirely wrong. All those children who were born in Britain before 1 January 1983 and who therefore automatically became British citizens — although perhaps their parents were here illegally or temporarily —could not be deported, because British citizens cannot be deported.

I remind my hon. and learned Friend that the present immigration rules are a substantial relaxation of the promise made by the Tory party in 1979. If the application of those rules were relaxed in the face of pressure, such as that put upon my hon. and learned Friend by the hon. Member for Sheffield, Brightside (Miss Maynard), there would be real resentment and anger in those areas which have had to bear the brunt of heavy immigration.

My hon. Friend has gone very wide of the question on the Order Paper. The Government have conducted a well-balanced immigration policy. For that reason, immigration was not a big issue at the last election. We can take pride in that policy. We should try to talk about these issues moderately. It is sad that the Opposition often try to make party political points out of them. We have every reason to believe that we are carrying out a well-balanced policy.

While the Minister is considering the plight of deported children, will he consider the position of the 25 unaccompanied teenagers who are confined to closed camps in Hong Kong? Will the hon. and learned Gentleman admit some of those teenagers to Britain and urge other Governments to admit the rest of them?

The right hon. Gentleman has gone wide of the question as well. We are anxiously studying the position of those people in camps in Hong Kong. At the moment, however, we are discussing our immigration rules in so far as they bear on young children and may result in their deportation. In fact, few children are deported.

Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that about a million young people, including under-age children, come to this country every year as so-called language students and that about 10 per cent. of them do not return home? What does my hon. and learned Friend propose to do about that?

I shall look into any cases that my hon. Friend brings to my attention.

I must revert to the question. I am sorry that we do not have the statistics that would enable me to give an exact answer to the hon. Member for Sheffield, Brightside (Miss Maynard), but I hope that the House has got matters into perspective. Between 1979 and 1984, only 23 persons in all were deported as dependants under section 3(5)(c) of the Immigration Act 1971. Perhaps none of them was under 18, or perhaps one or two were.

Does the Minister agree that women with children are often placed in very distressing circumstances because of the sex discrimination in our immigration laws? Before the European Court tells him to do so, will he undertake to remove sex discrimination from within the existing immigration rules?

We are talking about the power to deport children. Whatever the hon. Gentleman may be referring to, he is certainly not talking about anything which has the remotest connection with the power to deport children. He is suggesting that we should relax the immigration rules to allow young men to come here, using marriage as a device, and to go on to the labour market. That would not commend itself to the vast majority of the British people.

Does my hon. and learned Friend agree that the vast majority of immigrants, from wherever they may have come, are more than happy to be living in a free and democratic country? The Labour party is using immigrants, irrespective of colour, to gain cheap votes and to make propaganda in this House.

I repeat what I said before. It is most unfortunate when the Opposition stir up the immigration issue, because the vast majority of those who have settled here are, as my hon. Friend has said, very proud to be members of our community.

The Minister referred to a well-balanced policy. Is he seriously suggesting that it is well balanced if, in 1983, it resulted in 137 children who wanted to come into this country being detained at ports because the Minister wanted them to be removed? Is the Minister denying that, at least from time to time, both he and his Department seek to remove young children? In my constituency a six-year-old boy is under the threat of removal, not with his mother, but separately, because the Minister will not allow him to stay here while his immigration status is being resolved.

Although the Opposition always wax so eloquent about these matters, they never tell even half the story. They talk about the number of people who are deported now, but they never mention the number of people who were deported prior to 1979. One finds that the figures are very alike. They talk about the number of people removed, but they never mention the number of people removed prior to 1979. Again, the figures are very similar. I wish that the Opposition would realise that this is a sensitive issue and would tell the House the whole truth.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he intends to announce the Government's final response to the Auld committee report.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent representations he has received on the Auld report on Sunday trading.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects to be able to announce the Government's final conclusions on changes in the Shops Act 1950.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he intends to deal with the law relating to shop opening hours; and if he will make a statement.

I have consulted my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House, and he has agreed that there will be a debate on the Auld committee's report as soon as possible after Easter, in which I shall announce the Government's intentions in respect of its recommendations.

Since the report was published, we have received 528 letters about the report, of which 166 favoured its recommendations and 362 opposed them.

I do not think that any significant conclusions can be drawn from these figures.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend bear in mind, during his consideration of his response to the Auld report, that the introduction of universal Sunday trading may well result in the creation of many more part-time jobs? Will he therefore join the lobby for two other essential reforms: first, the extension of job-splitting and work-sharing schemes; and, secondly, the abolition of the wages councils?

As I wish to retain my present job, I had better not join any lobbies for the moment. However, I understand the force of my hon. Friend's question and have some sympathy with it.

We are very pleased to have news of a debate in the House of Commons. However, before that debate takes place, will my right hon. and learned Friend give thought to the alternative approach of allowing each local authority to make up its own mind about whether or not to permit Sunday trading?

I shall bear in mind what my hon. Friend has said.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the number of letters he has received and the ratio for and against Sunday trading reflect the acute anxiety of the public that complete liberalisation will destroy the traditional British Sunday?

I am not sure that I would draw that conclusion from those letters. It is always extremely dangerous to judge the effect of a proposal or the views of the country about it on the basis of such letters.

Mr. Michael Forsyth.

rose—

Yes, Mr. Rhodes James. I am sorry. I have a lousy cold.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that although many of us would welcome changes which would remove anomalies in the present law, some of us would be strongly and wholly opposed to unrestricted Sunday opening?

I respect and understand that view, but my hon. Friend will, of course, look at those parts of the Auld report which examined the possibility of partial changes and came down against them.

As such legislation as might flow from this would have the result of allowing shops in Wales to open on Sundays, and as that would be a matter of controversy, will the right hon. and learned Gentleman consider introducing into any legislation a provision such as that for the Sunday opening of public houses — a referendum of the people concerned?

I am not an enthusiast for referendums of any kind, but I shall bear in mind what the hon. Gentleman has said.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that many Conservative Members will be pleased that he is not taking too seriously the representations that he has received on the Auld report, because it is our clear view from our constituencies that the overwhelming majority of the people we represent are strongly in favour of Sunday trading and the reforms?

I am aware of the extent of that feeling as well. It is not that I am not taking the representations seriously; it is merely that I do not necessarily regard them as representative.

Is the Home Secretary aware that Labour Members have been inundated with letters from bodies such as the Lord's Day Observance Society? Now that the Government are beginning to wobble, the Home Secretary should beware of a combination of the Church and the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers.

I am sure that that is a apt warning, and, coming from the quarter that it does, I shall take it in the spirit in which it was intended.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how his Department intends to improve crime prevention.

The crime prevention unit, and the Home Office standing conference on crime prevention, which I chair, are actively engaged in the development and evaluation of a range of precise measures to prevent burglary, theft and auto crime. The results of those initiatives are disseminated to police forces and other local agencies involved in the prevention of crime.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply, but may I suggest one further immediate initiative that he can take? We are all grateful for the marvellous increase in police numbers in Britain, which the former Home Secretary instituted, but is not the time now ripe for a massive increase in the police force, as that is one of the most socially desirable increases in manpower that Britain can have?

I appreciate my hon. Friend's remarks and his tribute to our noble Friend Lord Whitelaw for his achievement in increasing police numbers since 1979. I am sure my hon. Friend will recognise that the effectiveness of the police force depends not just on numbers, but on deployment and skills applies. I am sure he will recognise that, for example, the use of civilians to allow more officers to be deployed on operational matters is also an important contribution.

Why will the Minister not be clear and straight with the House in the way in which he frequently is in other matters? He knows that the answer to the question is that the Government have no plans to improve crime prevention. They have cut back on just about every scheme designed to prevent crime in Britain that has ever been devised. It is no wonder that the crime rate is going up, and it is no wonder also that people are getting fed up with the Government's approach to law and order when it is so clearly an abysmal, dismal failure.

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman is well versed in dismal failures. However, I remind him of the range of activities that the Government have introduced. There are over 3,000 individual neighbourhood watch schemes and 200 crime prevention panels, including 60 schemes in Cumbria. The Government have a total commitment to the improvement of police establishments, conditions and pay, in order to continue the fight against crime. I regret to say that the hon. Gentleman would see that dissolve if he were in power.

Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the most important things is neighbourhood crime prevention schemes? Will he give that idea every encouragement, as that is the only way in which the police can be adequately informed, and by which people can know exactly what is happening in their areas?

My hon. Friend is quite right, and I fully support his view. It is vital that citizens, too, play their part in preventing crime.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what information he has as to the number of full and part-time civil defence staff employed in Mid-Glamorgan.

There are two full-time emergency planning staff employed by Mid-Glamorgan county council on civil defence duties.

Does my hon. Friend accept that the level of staffing that he has described in Mid-Glamorgan is quite inadequate? Although the levels in many counties, including my county of Norfolk, are higher, there must be a good case for my hon. Friend to take steps to increase the levels of civil defence staffing so that counties, including Mid-Glamorgan, can meet their obligations under the 1983 civil defence regulations.

My hon. Friend is right, but perhaps I can enhance his comments by saying that the situation in Mid-Glamorgan is little short of lamentable. That local authority seems to take absolutely no precautions to provide some civil defence protection for its citizens. I assure my hon. Friend that we shall be taking steps to see that this matter is put right, not just in Mid-Glamorgan, but in every authority where there is a deficiency.

Will the Minister confirm that the Home Office's senior civil defence organiser recently visited local authorities in Wales? What was the purpose of that visit? Did the organiser visit Mid-Glamorgan? Is the Minister aware that the whole of Wales is a nuclear-free zone? The Minister is wasting his time trying to convince local authorities in Wales to adopt such a stupid and irrelevant programme.

I appreciate the hon. Lady's views, but I should inform her that the civil defence adviser visited Mid-Glamorgan to try to persuade that authority to complete the questionnaire, as it is the only authority in England and Wales that has not yet done so. Many nuclear-free zone authorities have returned their questionnaires and intend to make some provision for civil defence. I trust that the people of Wales will enjoy some measure of protection.

Does my hon. Friend agree that a nuclear-free zone in Wales is a big joke there, and is not, and never will be, accepted? It is purely Labour party political propaganda. [HON. MEMBERS: "Reading".] Will my hon. Friend tell me about his Department's allocation for civil defence in South Glamorgan for 1985–86?

Order. The question is about Mid-Glamorgan.

I am grateful to you, Mr. Speaker, for that correction, as it enables me to say that I cannot give my hon. Friend the figure for South Glamorgan. However, I shall write to him about that. Nevertheless, I assure him that we have every intention of seeing that a proper level of civil defence preparation is put in hand. Nuclear-free zones are entirely bogus.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will take immediate steps to ensure that the classification of videos is completed without delay so that the Video Recordings Act can come into effect.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects to bring into force the Video Recordings Act 1984; and if he will make a statement.

The Video Recordings Act provides for the classification of video works under arrangements to be made by an authority to be designated by the Secretary of State. My right hon. and learned Friend proposes to designate the principal officers of the British Board of Film Censors.

Following the recent death of the president of the board, Lord Harlech, a successor is being actively sought. We hope that it will be possible for an appointment to be made very soon and for particulars of the proposed designation to be laid before Parliament shortly thereafter.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that reply. In the light, in particular, of the judge's remarks in the case of the Fox, is my hon. Friend satisfied that sufficient staff are available at the British Board of Film Censors to complete this vital work so that the designations are on the record and on the statute book?

Increased numbers of staff are being taken on by the BBFC in anticipation of designation. The video referred to in the trial of the rapist known as the Fox has already been declared obscene under the Obscene Publications Act 1959, so the availability of that video and the bringing into force of the Act are not linked.

Does my hon. Friend agree that pornography is a drug, and a very dangerous drug at that, as it rots the mind and can persuade individuals to commit great violence and cruelty against innocent people? Will he note that it was not only the judge in the Fairlie trial who linked pornography with the crime, but that many other judges in similar trials in the last 20 years have made that link?

Order. I do not think that that has a lot to do with the Video Recordings Act.

With great respect, Mr. Speaker, it was the video which was linked in the Fairlie trial with the crime committed. I am merely asking my hon. Friend to bear in mind that all these factors mean that we need action very quickly indeed.

As I said in answer to the original question, I am anxious that we should get this designation procedure completed as soon as possible.

Does the Minister not appreciate that that will not begin to solve the problem? On the one hand, "tendency to deprave and corrupt" is a difficult matter to prove in prosecutions under the Obscene Publications Act. On the other hand, juries will not convict unless a more intelligent view is taken of the need to prosecute at all in this class of case.

The hon. Gentleman referred to the Obscene Publications Act. One of the attractions of the Act is that the issue will be tried by magistrates. The content of the video is not a matter of which magistrates will usually have to take account. The question at issue will be whether the video has been certificated by the designated authority. Thereby, many of the difficulties which the hon. Gentleman has properly brought before the House are circumvented.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether there is a civil defence emergency centre in Mid Glamorgan.

There is no civil defence emergency centre in Mid-Glamorgan.

Will my hon. Friend tell the House when we should expect operational centres to be available in Mid-Glamorgan, because it is important, in the context of civil defence, that they are there for any other disasters that may take place in the county of Mid-Glamorgan?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend that this is a disastrous state of affairs. There should be eight such centres in the county of Mid-Glamorgan. We have already taken the initial steps by contacting the local authority in order to put things right.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he takes to monitor the implementation of the Civil Defence Regulations 1983 in the Principality of Wales.

The civil defence questionnaire last year to all county authorities provided a basis for the development of further monitoring. This will be achieved primarily by visits from the civil defence adviser to the Home Office, but also by questionnaires, as appropriate.

Will my hon. Friend announce minimum standards which must be reached within a set time limit within the Principality?

My hon. Friend should know that we have agreed to require all local authorities, including those in the Principality, to set down their plans for implementing the 1983 regulations by the end of this year.

In so far as the authorities are prepared to implement the civil defence regulations, will the Minister also make available to those authorities the details of what would happen in the event of the nuclear winter, which details I believe his Department is at the moment suppressing?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that we have had discussions with most of the local authority associations on various matters connected with civil defence, including that particular theory. The hypothesis of the nuclear winter has yet to be properly validated, and until it is so validated the Government cannot take a view on it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will call for reports from chief constables about how they plan to review and learn from police operations during the coal dispute.

Chief officers of police are reviewing police operations during the miners strike both individually and collectively through the Association of Chief Police Officers. These reviews will be completed as soon as possible and the Department will be keeping in touch with their progress.

Will my hon. Friend please also consider the financial aspects of policing in the different authorities?

I understand that we have a lot to learn about the way in which financial consequences can properly be accounted for and dealt with.

Now that the miners's strike has ended—even officially it seems—will the Minister reconsider his Department's decision not to have a public inquiry into the strike? May we have a full public inquiry so that people can properly examine policing methods in the last 12 months?

No, I shall not reconsider that decision. A full review of what occurred is being conducted by the Association of Chief Police Officers, and each area will receive its own report on the different aspects of the strike.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many representations he has received regarding the reform of shop hours' legislation.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given earlier today to a question from my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Waterside (Mr. Colvin).

Will my hon. Friend take into account representations by people all over the country, because opinions on the issue vary in the different regions?

Yes, Sir.

As it is likely that Sunday trading will be introduced—I am sorry to say — will my hon. Friend consider insisting that stores which are allowed to trade on a Sunday close on another day of the week?

All opinions will be considered.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement about the meeting of the Minister of State, the hon. and learned Member for Ribble Valley (Mr. Waddington) with the Divided Families Campaign on 4 February.

The Bangladesh Divided Families Campaign from Oldham requested the meeting to voice its concern that families are separated by the operation of immigration control. I listened carefully to the views expressed on this and other topics, but I had to make the point that families are separated not by the actions of the Government, but by the actions of those who choose to come here leaving their families behind.

I told the campaign that it was necessary for those claiming to be dependants to establish their entitlement and I could not set aside the requirement of the immigration rules and allow people waiting in the queue, or who had had their application refused, to come here when they had not shown their entitlement.

Is the Minister aware that the Divided Families Campaign now operates on a national basis because so many families are affected? Does the Minister accept that we are talking about the humane treatment of families, which is quite separate from other immigration matters? Is the Minister aware that he could take a decisive step to help those families if he ensured that the queue to be interviewed was shortened and if he placed more interviewing officers in Bangladesh, India and Pakistan?

Yes. The problem is intractable. There is a limit to the resources available to process entry clearance applications. I remind the hon. Gentleman that the year before last we sent an additional entry clearance officer to Dhaka. In the last two winters, two extra entry clearance officers have been helping with the preparation of appeals statements there so that entry clearance officers had more time to do the interviewing.

One must compare the situation today with that of a few years ago. Generally, queue lengths today compare favourably with the queue lengths back in 1979 and 1978. However, a real problem exists in Dhaka because so many people in the queue are reapplicants. We do our best.

How can the Minister say that these families are not divided by the action of the Government, when the document leaked to The Guardian shows that there is a conspiracy in his Department, led by him, deliberately to spin out the queues and get round the law which allows people to exercise their right to come here? By the leaking of that document, a copy of which I have, has the hon. and learned Gentleman not been shown to be deliberately pursuing a restrictive and racist policy?

It is this intemperate language which proves the point that I was making half an hour ago. It does not help when, time and time again, the right hon. Gentleman gets up at Question Time, completely misrepresents the policy being pursued and completely obscures the fact that by and large that policy has been pursued by successive Governments. The truth of the matter is that the Labour Government realised perfectly well that there was a limit on the resources that could be dedicated to the job of entry clearance in Dhaka. We have followed exactly the same policy. We have recognised that there is that same limitation. Obviously, if we cannot devote unlimited manpower to doing the job there is a limit to the rate at which people will be admitted. It is as simple as that, and the right hon. Gentleman knows it perfectly well.