asked the Secretary of State for Transport if he will have urgent talks with the chairman of British Rail about the concentration of repair work in the regional depots, and the work available to British Rail Engineering Limited, Crewe in the light of the accelerated redundancies.

The allocation of repair work between regional depots and British Rail Engineering Limited is a management matter for the British Railways Board.

Is the Secretary of State aware that that extraordinarily distancing reply will do nothing to satisfy the interests of those of my constituents who are now told that they will be faced with redundancies, not in tens, but in hundreds? If the right hon. Gentleman does not intend to support British Rail workshops, he should now make that plain. We cannot afford to lose work in the workshops.

It was not a distancing reply; it accurately described the proper relationship between the management of British Rail, BREL and the Government. Obviously, I would regret further job losses, and I know that the hon. Lady will be concerned about her constituents. She, like others, should also be concerned to argue the case for British Rail beyond this sector. For example, it would be pleasant for her constituents if she were unequivocally to support British Rail with regard to the Channel tunnel.

Is it not time that the news from BREL was about job creation rather than about job losses? Would not the most positive measure that the Government could take be to prepare British Rail Engineering Limited for the private sector so that, like Jaguar, it could create new jobs instead of laying people off? It might then follow in the footsteps of the Great Western Railway, which was at its greatest when it was in the private sector.

The Government cannot make any comment on privatisation. No decision has been taken on whether, when or how BREL could be privatised. The Government have a lot of other things to do at the moment. My hon. Friend should be commended for the way that he has handled the problems of ex-BREL employees in his constituency and for the work that he has created as a consequence.

The Minister will know that much of British Rail's rolling stock is in poor condition. A programme of refurbishment is precisly what BREL is good at, and it is very labour intensive. Will he, with the management of British Rail, stress the importance, in job-creation terms, of that refurbishment programme?

The hon. Gentleman is right about the importance of refurbishment, but he would want me to remind the House that the £2 billion investment programme over the next five years for British Rail includes £716 million for locomotives and rolling stock. That is a sizeable re-equipment and refurbishing programme.

asked the Secretary of State for Transport what information he has as to the number of airlines currently based in the United Kingdom.

There are about 50 United Kingdom airlines holding air transport licences.

What are the major benefits of competition in the airline industry, and what are the major obstacles to that greater competition?

Our policy towards encouraging competition in the airline industry is one of the reasons why our industry is now the largest and most efficient in the Western world outside the United States.

In answer to the second part of my hon. Friend's question, we would like to extend competition in Europe and to see British airlines able to compete more fairly for business in the United States.

When scrutinising some of the deals that smaller airlines are tying up with large American airlines will the Minister ensure that those deals do not give a foothold to major American airlines which can damage the national interest and the British airline business?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman if he is implying that any such tie-ups should be on a reciprocal basis, but we would like our airlines to be able to invest in commuter travel in the United States. It would only be on such a reciprocal basis that we would conceive of the reverse being the case.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on his robust championing of the aviation industry. Will he give a fair wind to the applications by British Caledonian for a number of new European routes being heard today? Does he agree that, through no fault of its own, British Caledonian has had a difficult year and needs every assistance that we can give it?

My hon. Friend is far too well versed in the affairs of the airline industry to expect me to make any comment about the hearing currently before the Civil Aviation Authority. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has a quasi-judicial role in relation to appeals, so he will have a role if an appeal is made. The Government's avowed policy is to encourage all sorts of competition between British airlines wishing to fly into Europe.

Will the Minister take this opportunity of congratulating Loganair, one of our domestic airlines, which this year celebrates its 25th anniversary? Will he pay tribute to the valuable service that it provides to and within the islands communities in Scotland? Does he accept that British Airways complements that service to an important extent? May we have an assurance that following privatisation the Government will not agree to any diminution in the vital lifeline services which British Airways provides for the islands communities?

I associate the Government with the first part of what the hon. Gentleman said about British Airways and Loganair.

The second part of the hon. Gentleman's question might come up in detail later in connection with lifeline services. The British Government are committed to lifeline services and to the appropriate licensing procedures associated with them.

How many of the 50 airlines fly scheduled services through Stansted, or how many have indicated a desire to do so? Can my hon. Friend confirm that the Government's policy is still the expansion of Stansted to a maximum of 7 million to 8 million passengers a year, looking to the time when there will be complementary services to the main European destinations?

Air UK is the major supplier of scheduled services through Stansted. My information is that airlines are increasingly finding it difficult to get into Gatwick and Heathrow and are looking at Stansted as an alternative. That is one reason why we took the decision last year to expand Stansted.

As American airlines have change of gauge facilities in this country, will the Minister arrange for British airlines to have similar change of gauge arrangements in the United States?

One of the matters being discussed in Washington by our officials this afternoon is the question of reciprocal arrangements and fair trade between the United States and the United Kingdom. The hon. Gentleman is right to say that the American airlines, which often are the first to complain about charges, at Heathrow airport for instance, can use their rights at Heathrow—change of gauge is one of them, and to pick people up at Heathrow, is another—which our airlines cannot do in the United States. One day that will have to be redressed.

Will my hon. Friend accept the grateful thanks of the people of the west midlands in particular for the fact that, because of his policy on competition and deregulation within the internal airline industry, shortly we are to have an international transatlantic service in the shape of Highland Express, which I am sure will go a long way towards re-establishing Birmingham as the country's industrial capital?

Highland Express is applying to the Civil Aviation Authority for the appropriate permission, so I cannot comment about any particular airline which is currently applying for licences. My right hon. Friend has a quasi-judicial role. We want to encourage the maximum number of viable airlines to fly to the United States, or anywhere else.

asked the Secretary of State for Transport when he next intends to meet the chairman of British Rail to discuss electrification of the Bradford-Leeds railway line.

The chairman is well aware that I am willing to consider any proposals for electrification where there is a sound case.

Does the Minister agree that rail passengers travelling between Bradford and Leeds are entitled to a first-class service that is fast, clean and comfortable, rather than the fifth-rate service that they now receive, which is slow, dirty and uncomfortable? When he next meets the chairman of British Rail, will he tell him that instead of subsidising sick public relations stunts, such as taking people to Sellafield on the first anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster, he would be better employed submitting electrification proposals for the Bradford-Leeds line, which would help to give passengers a better service, to combat unemployment, to expand local industry and to promote tourism?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that, during the past 12 months I have paid two visits to Bradford, both by rail. The hon. Gentleman spoke about the level of services between Leeds and Bradford and asked for a first-class service. I must tell him that responsibility for the level of local passenger services in West Yorkshire rests with the passenger transport authority.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the multimillion pound investment in new rail services, including new stations and the latest and most modern trains, that is being embarked upon by the West Yorkshire passenger transport executive? This more efficient use of resources is a clear rebuff to the forecasts of Opposition spokemen, who claimed that bus deregulation would spell the end of rail services because they would be unable to compete with buses on the most profitable routes.

My hon. Friend is perfectly correct. I am also grateful to him for his invitation to visit his constituency later this week, when I shall have the opportunity to ride on some of those buses.

If the responsibility for services rests locally, surely the Minister is not suggesting that the local community should electrify the lines? Does the Minister appreciate that electrification may well bring advantages that will enable other stations to be opened between Leeds and Bradford, including west Leeds? The benefits of through-running will be greatly appreciated by people in Pudsey and west Leeds as well as Bradford.

Electrification is a matter for British Rail to propose. British Rail proposes and Ministers dispose.

Our record of approving electrification proposals for British Rail is one that should give the hon. Gentleman some cause for complimenting the Government. Between 1974 and 1979, when the Labour Government were in office, £71 million worth of electrification was approved. Since 1979, under the Conservative Government, no less than £476 million worth of electrification has been approved. I believe that the figures speak for themselves.

In the context of the development of the Channel tunnel, does my hon. Friend agree that electrification will be an important factor in preventing the relocation of northern companies in the south-east? Will he assure us that he will consider the development in Yorkshire of a new freight terminal, possibly with free port status, to assist companies to stay in the north?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to draw attention to the considerable advantages to the north that will come from the Channel tunnel with the possibility of direct through services for both passengers and freight.

With regard to the development of freight terminals in Yorkshire, British Rail will report back to me in July with its report on the freight side, which will say where it wants those terminals.

asked the Secretary of State for Transport how much has been spent on new motorway construction in each of the past three years, at constant prices.

In the past three years, expenditure on motorway construction at constant 1985–86 prices reduced from £323 million in 1983–84 to £317 million in 1984–85 and £254 million in 1985–86, reflecting the switch to trunk road improvements, particularly bypasses. Capital investment in roads is now nearly 30 per cent. higher than in 1978–79.

Is my right hon. Friend concerned that the figure for 1985–86 showed a sharp decline compared with the two previous years? Does he agree that a much better motorway network is essential if we are to improve our industrial efficiency?

We have seen an overall increase of 30 per cent. in real terms, because that encompasses the switch to trunk roads and bypasses. However, I recognise the point that my hon. Friend has made. Without question, motorways assist the economic development, and to that extent I know that my hon. Friend will be interested to learn that I am currently reviewing the overall programme and hope to make an announcement about it in the spring.

My right hon. Friend will be aware that the M42 comes up to the boundaries of my constituency. He will also be aware that the contract for the extension to that road is shortly to be placed. Will my right hon. Friend please ensure that there is no slippage in that contract, because the traffic conditions in Measham and Ashby-de-la-Zouch—2,000 extra vehicles per day—are absolutely dreadful? Will my right hon. Friend also undertake to see whether it is possible for the contract for the next section, from Ashby to Kegworth, to be put forward ahead of time?

I bow to my hon. Friend's detailed knowledge of his constituency and its environs. I know he will be pleased that the completion of the M42 is part of our programme. I shall draw the attention of my hon. Friend the Minister with responsibility for roads to the additional points that my hon. Friend is understandably making within his constituency.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the trunk roads and bypasses programme has been a tremendous help, particularly by restoring a respectable and quiet way of living to numerous towns and villages? Nevertheless, when he reviews the programme, will he bear in mind the necessity of completing the link between the M3 and the M27? At present the two motorways are connected by a dangerous and narrow section of road, which is highly dangerous for the heavy traffic from Southampton arid Poole docks and for traffic from London.

Again, I have listened carefully to the point made by my hon. Friend about the connection between the M3 and the M27. He is right to draw attention to the fact that since 1979 we have completed 398 miles of new, all-purpose trunk roads in addition to the motorway programme. Sixty-seven bypasses have been completed and another 150 are in the programme. We can be pleased with and proud of that programme.

asked the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the latest position regarding the development of the rail link to Manchester airport.

I understand that an outline application for grant for the rail link to Manchester airport will be submitted very shortly. I welcome this progress and will ensure that the application receives immediate attention.

Is it not a little disappointing that this is taking so long? Where does responsibility lie for the next stage? Can my hon. Friend give us any idea of the date on which he expects the application to be submitted?

As far back as 28 October last year I promised to consider a section 56 grant application urgently. Apparently it is not regarded quite so urgently by the passenger transport authority, or presumably I should have received it before now. I understand that there is private sector interest in providing a rail link, either partly or wholly at its own expense, relating to the development that the private sector is prepared to undertake at the airport. That may be very good news for people in the area and for the airport.

I congratulate Manchester on getting permission for its airport connection and getting it under way, but will the Minister tell us what progress has been made in the review of a rail link to Heathrow, which I suggest is absolutely urgent?

The review of the corridor and of the transport links within it is proceeding.

Will my hon. Friend make a clear statement on behalf of the Government that his Department accepts that, if we are fully to maximise the advantages of a new airport, it must have a rail link? Given the increase in road traffic that airports bring, a rail link is an environmental necessity for a modern airport.

My hon. Friend makes an interesting point, but we have to consider horses for courses. In some cases, people travel to an airport from all directions and do not all channel down a single rail link. My hon. Friend must take that fact into account in his enthusiasm for railways to all parts of the country.

When the Minister receives the application, will he give it favourable and speedy consideration and appreciate the significance of the rail link, not only for the airport, but for the infrastructure of Manchester and the north-west?

I undertake to deal with it speedily, but until I receive it I cannot say how I shall regard it.

asked the Secretary of State for Transport how many driving test examiners are employed by his Department (a) nationally and (b) in Leicester; what qualifications are required of driving examiners; and if he will make a statement.

(a) 1,445; (b) 15. The waiting times in Leicester are below the national average. I have arranged for the information on qualifications to be placed in the Official Report.

I welcome the possible privatisation of driver testing, which would reduce waiting lists. The average waiting time for the 2 million driving tests each year is 15 weeks. Will my hon. Friend investigate urgently the possible impersonation by a number of people in driver tests? Is he aware that in the east midlands people are charging £200 to take someone else's driving test? In one case, the person failed the test—even though he had a current driving licence—then went outside the driving test centre, removed the L plates, drove away, and was eventually prosecuted and fined £300. Will my hon. Friend investigate this as a matter of urgency?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his welcome of the internal review of driving tests. We do not have fixed views on what the outcome should be. We know that it is right to see whether improvements could be made. My hon. Friend seems to have given one example of an instance when impersonation, or personation, was detected. If he has any further information on that or other cases, will he give it to us? It is not right for us to give every bit of information on how we check people who falsely take the driving test, but all information will be welcome.

What on earth possessed the Minister to bring forward the bizarre idea that, by privatising driver testing, he could increase efficiency and improve pass rates? Will driving schools offer 10 lessons at £100 or 10 lessons at £300, with a driving licence at the end of the course?

The hon. Gentleman should be aware that we try to run the driving test regime in a way that is seen to be safe, fair and honest. It is our intention to keep it that way. We want to see whether it is possible to give customers a better service and to get greater efficiency. —[Interruption.] I ask the hon. Gentleman to listen to my reply. I listened to his question. If I may, through the hon. Gentleman, I shall speak to the 1 million people a year who take the driving test. It is ludicrous that over half of them present themselves when they are likely to fail. It is ludicrous to have a waiting time of 13 weeks on average. It is sensible to see whether we can make improvements that can include delegation to the private sector.

Following is the information:

Examiners must be over 26 years old. They must have at least six years experience of driving different types of vehicles, and wide experience of driving in the three years before appointment. They must demonstrate their driving ability in a special test. After initial selection by interview, they must complete successfully an intensive residential training course, usually lasting four weeks.

asked the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Epping Forest on 23 February, Official Report, column 8, what consideration he has now given to the memorandum about the running of the London Underground submitted to him by the hon. Member for Epping Forest.

I have, as I offered, copied the memorandum to the chairman of London Underground for consideration and reply. In addition, I covered a number of these matters in my recent letter to my hon. Friend.

Although the improvement of tracks and signals must take time, may immediate attention be given to the representations of the Line Users Action Group regarding timetables, with particular reference to Epping and Debden?

I shall ensure that my hon. Friend's views are drawn to the attention of the chairman of London Underground Ltd. There were problems on the introduction of the new timetables, but I understand that they are now being satisfactorily dealt with.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there is a widespread welcome in my constituency for the increased number of trains on the District line, particularly in the rush hour, and the fact that it has been achieved at a reduced cost to the taxpayer? Will my hon. Friend, when he tries to improve the use of the Underground, continue to bear in mind the fact that a large number of women refuse to travel on the Underground after the evening rush hour?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for drawing attention to that fact. The sum of £15 million is being allocated over the next three years to London Regional Transport to help cut crime on the Underground. I hope that that will bear the sort of fruit that he and I want to see.

asked the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the ratio of air traffic controller posts to the number of flights.

This matter is the statutory responsibility of the Civil Aviation Authority. The authority's inspectorate of air traffic control ensures that there are sufficient qualified staff at all air traffic control units to handle the traffic there.

Does the Minister accept that since the last major review of air traffice control, transatlantic flights, for example, have doubled and that air movements plotted by the air traffic control centre at Prestwick have gone up by 267 per cent., while staffing levels have remained the same? Against that background, does it not seem rather odd that the Civil Aviation Authority is seeking to reduce its manpower by 10 per cent.? Will the Minister undertake that when he, or the Secretary of State, meets the chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority he will emphasise the paramount consideration of safety over any commercial considerations that it may have in trying to compete for other contracts at other airports?

The answer to the last part of the hon. Gentleman's question is yes. The Civil Aviation Authority employs air traffic controllers at a limited number of airports. One of the reasons why its payroll has been falling is that it recently lost the Liverpool contract. As the hon. Gentleman implied, as long ago as 1983 the Monopolies and Mergers Commission reported that there was under-utilisation of air traffic controllers at some airports. As a result, the CAA is trying to make better utilisation of its air traffic controllers at non-busy airports and at off-peak periods. On the hon. Gentleman's last point, I can give him a specific assurance that, despite the increase in traffic to which he referred, the number of serious risk-bearing air misses declined between 1976 and 1985 from 40 to 16.

Does my hon. Friend agree that there is an inherent conflict of interest within the Civil Aviation Authority arising from the fact that it is both the principal provider of air traffic control services on the one hand and the official investigator of air misses, which may involve those very air traffic control services, on the other? If he agrees, does he think that the problem might be resolved by privatising the CAA's air traffic control services?

The provision of air traffic control services operates in competition with at least three other organisations, There is never any question of there being any conflict of interest on safety. The answer to the question that was asked earlier about whether safety is paramount has to be yes.

Does the Minister not accept that the volume of traffic that is being controlled by the Atlantic centre at Prestwick is rising, and will continue to rise, and that to try to control aeroplanes with a reduced number of air traffic controllers is both a false and a dangerous economy? Will he express these views to the CAA so that we do not end up with an air crash and the Minister having to make a statement at the Dispatch Box to explain that the crash occurred because some poor air traffic controller had been working long hours because of the cuts, with the blame inevitably falling on that poor scapegoat instead of where it ought to fall—on those who are making the economies?

I very much hope that the hon. Gentleman is right and that air traffic into Prestwick is increasing from across the Atlantic.

No, through the Atlantic centre.

Through the Atlantic system as well, through the Prestwick control. However, the hon. Gentleman is absolutely wrong and, I have to say, almost mischievously wrong, in his implied criticism that safety is being put at risk. I have already stated categorically that during the last 10 years the air traffic control system has progressively become safer and safer. That is the policy of both the CAA and the Government. It is quite another matter to consider whether or not there is some scope for better manning during off-peak periods and also in airports that are not busy. That is all that is being proposed.

Will the Minister take to heart the very old adage that prevention is better than cure? Therefore, does he agree that by far the best course of action is to have a proper system of regulations that lay down hours of work and proper rest periods while on duty? Although an air traffic controller may not be hyperactive during a certain period, the fact that he is not doing very much may equally be a cause of fatigue. That matter ought to be looked at very seriously.

If the hon. Gentleman is saying that there should be standardised regulations throughout the country, I do not agree. At the busier airports there are already very substantial fatigue periods. Every two hours at a busy airport there is a half an hour fatigue period for air traffic controllers. I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman that standardised regulations are the answer. Airports throughout the country are very different. In some cases there will be a greater requirement for air traffic controllers. For example, as STOLport comes on stream there will be more air traffic controllers. It is a matter for the judgment of the CAA, for a start, which always puts safety at the top of its list of priorities.

asked the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on investment by Her Majesty's Government in the road infrastructure in West Sussex.

The M23 and its associated Gatwick link were completed in 1974 and 1975. Apart from a short length of the A3, the other trunk roads in West Sussex are the A23 and A27. Actual and planned expenditure since 1979 amounts to more than £70 million at 1983 prices. In addition, £18 million has been made available to the county council through transport. supplementary grants over the past five years.

I thank my hon. Friend for his great help, but does he agree that the increase in vehicle miles arid traffic in and around my constituency has been dramatic in the last few years? Is he also aware that the traffic congestion is unacceptable to my constituents? Although my hon. Friend has been down to see this for himself, will he do whatever he can to assist 'Nest Sussex county council in resolving this problem, to the betterment of my constituents and local industry?

I should like to pay tribute to my hon. Friend, not only for inviting me to meet those primary school children and to see at first hand the problems of the growing amount of local and longer-distance traffic. It is the Government's determination to put figures on the help given to county councils, rather than fresh directions, which do not. We intend to go on trying properly to meet the needs of both commercial and domestic road users. I look forward to associating myself with my hon. Friend's efforts towards that achievement for many years to come.

Does my hon. Friend agree that East Sussex is adjacent to West Sussex, and will he—[Interruption.]

Order. The question is about roads infrastructure, not adjacent to, but in, West Sussex.

Will my hon. Friend accompany me on that part of the A22 which is the London to Eastbourne road, which passes through West Sussex? If he makes that journey he will realise that great though is the need of my hon. Friend the Member for Crawley (Mr. Soames) and his constituents, the needs of my constituents are even greater.

If I am allowed, Mr. Speaker, I shall quote from my briefing, which states:

"also applies to East Sussex, if raised."

asked the Secretary of State for Transport what representations he has received about progress in the privatisation of the British Airports Authority.

Preparations for the privatisation of BAA plc are progressing well. The privatisation is planned for June-July this year.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend. What, if any, special arrangements have been made for employee shares?

The 7,200-plus employees will be involved in the issue. They will be eligible for about £100 worth of shares at no cost, at the time of flotation. In addition, the Government will provide two free shares for each share purchased by an employee up to a maximum of about £400 of free shares for £200 purchased. All employees and pensioners of BAA plc will be able to apply on a priority basis for shares at the offer price.

Have the Government learnt any lessons from the sale of British Airways, in which a great deal of public money was lost? Or has the right hon. Gentleman been reminded by the Prime Minister of a statement that she made to the House in April 1968, when she said that it would be Conservative party policy to sell off public assets at below their true value?

We certainly have learnt lessons from the successful privatisation, of British Airways. The prime lesson is that I am still trying to discover what the Opposition fear most, a further successful privatisation, or a general election.

Will my right hon. Friend advise the House how, when preparing the British Airports Authority for privatisation, he will deal with the loss-making Stansted airport? He will know that a new terminal is being built there. In a recent answer to a question from me he said that the passenger traffic at Stansted is decreasing. Will not the abolition of income from duty-free sales at the airport put BAA totally in the red for a long time ahead? Will he consider curtailing the development at Stansted to prevent that occurring?

I cannot accept certain of my hon. Friend's propositions. Like others, he will want to look forward to the detailed prospectus that will appear in advance of the privatisation of BAA, which, as I said, we are looking forward to, successfully, in June-July this year.

May I take it that in the legislation providing for the privatisation of BAA protection will be given to ensure that foreign airlines will not be able to acquire shares and form cartels which might give them some effective control over the future of BAA?

I can reassure the hon. Gentleman on that fair point. Provision will be included in the articles of association of the privatised BAA plc restricting the shareholding of any individual or of parties acting in concert to 15 per cent. of the total issued share capital. In addition, the Secretary of State will retain a special share that will give him the right to veto any proposed change in the articles of association.

asked the Secretary of State for Transport how many miles of motorway have been completed since 1979.

Two hundred and sixty-five miles of new motorway have been completed in England since April 1979.

Will my hon. Friend tell the House what major new motorway schemes are now in preparation? In particular, will he say what progress is being made in research on the extra traffic in the M4 corridor between the M25 and London as a result of the opening of the M25 and the extra traffic now being siphoned off the M3 and M40 on to the M4 coming into west London?

We said that we would review the M25 a year after it was fully opened. Obviously, our major schemes will help the M40, the M20 and the Manchester outer ring road. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State expects to open the southern turn of the junction of the M5 and M42 this Wednesday. It is important, to have not only motorways, but trunk roads and relief roads. Our increase of 30 per cent. in spending contrasts with the Labour Government, who cut new national road spending in half during their term of office.

asked the Secretary of State for Transport whether he will set up an inquiry into the provision and funding of further road safety measures for schoolchildren.

The Department is funding a detailed survey on the provision of road safety education in the United Kingdom. The subject has been considered in the interdepartmental review of road safety. We shall consider with the Department of Education and Science further appropriate action.

Is the Minister aware that the education of children in road safety is not enough and that much more money is needed for road safety measures outside schools? Is he further aware that the absence of such safety measures caused the death of a child in Anstey lane, Leicester recently and that there is a desperate need for money to enable the local authority to provide pedestrian crossings where they are needed and so that safety measures can be implemented effectively?

Yes, Sir. First, our guidelines must be right so that local authorities can put in safety measures. Secondly, it is important to have safe routes to school analysed and to have changes made. Obviously, education matters, but most important, especially for young children, is that parents and those around them chaperone them when they are below the age of seven and make sure that they are properly trained before they go out on the roads alone.

asked the Attorney-General when he next expects to meet the Director of Public Prosecutions to discuss progress with the consideration of possible prosecutions under section 2 of the Official Secrets Act in the eight currently outstanding cases.

I expect to meet the Director of Public Prosecutions shortly and to discuss with him such matters as appear at that time to be appropriate.

May I say how pleased we are to welcome back the Attorney-General in good health?

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman considering the lessons to be learnt from the catastrophic mishandling of the Wright case in Australia? As a result, will he make any further prosecutions under section 2 of the Official Secrets Act? Which of the eight are to be prosecuted and, if any, do they include Nigel West, alias Allason, who is a prospective Conservative candidate?

I am grateful to the hon. and learned Gentleman for his kind remarks, which I greatly appreciate.

I do not accept that the case in Australia was a catastrophic disaster. It concerned a principle which we are maintaining and we were right to do so. Of the eight outstanding cases, two have been convicted, two have been dropped and the rest are awaiting final consideration. I have already dealt with the decisions on the others.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend appreciate how much support there is for the principle that those who sign the Official Secrets Act and then break it, particularly for personal gain, should be pursued and prosecuted, and that anything that he and his Department do in that connection in the future will have wide support on this side of the House?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. That in a nutshell is the principle behind the case.

If that is true, as it is alleged in some of the reports about what is in Mr. Wright's book, that people from MI5 were engaged in some sort of conspiracy against the elected Government of the United Kingdom, does the Attorney-General think that that, too, is a matter of principle? What steps has he taken to ensure that that is properly investigated?

I think I can refer the right hon. Gentleman most conveniently to the answer of the then Prime Minister when he addressed the subject.

Most right hon. and hon. Gentlemen will welcome what my right hon. and learned Friend has just said. Does he agree that the operations of the secret service must remain secret and that they involve a lifelong duty of trust?

I agree entirely with my right hon. and learned Friend. I am surprised that so many Opposition Members seem unable to accept that principle.

I, too, wholeheartedly welcome the Attorney-General back to his place in the House.

What is the prime consideration in relation to prosecutions? Is it damage to national security, or is it political embarrassment? Does the Attorney-General maintain consistency in his approach to Miss Tisdall and Mr. Ponting and to others such as Mr. West, Mr. Pincher, Lord Rothschild and the security men who may have leaked information to those people? Has not section 2 of the Official Secrets Act been virtually put out to grass and replaced in practical terms as a damage limitation exercise by actions for breach of confidentiality?

I thank the right hon. and learned Gentleman for his kind remarks. He used the word prosecutions, not for the first time during my questions. In fact, the proceedings in Australia are civil proceedings. There is no way in which we can prosecute under the Official Secrets Act in another country. With regard to the action in Australia, the principle has been brought out clearly today that it is the Government's determination to establish that once a man joins a service in which he promises to keep secret for the rest of his life all that he finds, that principle should be upheld.

For the benefit of the right hon. and learned Member for Aberavon (Mr. Morris), will my right hon. and learned Friend reinforce the point that whether or not a matter is politically embarrassing, the fundamental principle to be observed is that if a person breaches trust he must be pursued by any Government as far as it is legally possible to do so?

It would be impossible for the intelligence services to carry on their business and to maintain the confidence of other intelligence services if that principle was not upheld.

asked the Attorney-General if he has yet reached any decision whether to prosecute Lord Rothschild in relation to alleged offences under the Official Secrets Act.

The police investigation to which the Solicitor-General referred on 6 February is as yet incomplete.

Before appealing in Australia, would it not be wise to find out what on earth induced Victor Rothschild to pay money for Peter Wright to come here and to introduce him to Chapman Pincher? As I suggested in an Adjournment debate on 6 February, is there not some selectivity in prosecution policy? Why go for Wright and not for Victor Rothschild?

I have made it clear that there is no question of any decision being taken about Lord Rothschild. The police inquiry is not complete and the Director of Public Prosecutions has no report. With regard to the case in Australia, the hon. Gentleman again fails to distinguish between insider and outsider books.

Is not the answer to the selectivity issue raised by the right hon. and learned Member for Aberavon (Mr. Morris) the fact that neither Mr. Chapman Pincher nor Mr. Nigel West is subject to the Official Secrets Act and thus cannot be prosecuted under it?

With one reservation, my right hon. and learned Friend is right. A person who directly repeats information from someone bound by the Act could himself be liable.

asked the Attorney-General if he is now in a position to make a statement on the Wright court case in Australia.

With permission, I shall answer this at the end of Question Time.

asked the Attorney-General what criteria the Lord Chancellor uses in recommending the appointment of High Court judges.

High Court judges are appointed by the Queen on the recommendation of the Lord Chancellor. The statutory qualification is to be a barrister of 10 years' standing, but those appointed are usually of more senior standing than that. The criteria for selection are judicial potential, ability, experience, reputation and personal integrity.

Can the Solicitor-General, from his personal recollection, think of anyone who has been promoted in one go from registrar to High Court judge?

I can think of one—or, at least, I have been prompted of one. It is unusual, but there is one. To make a general response to the question, I believe that the reputation of our judiciary is unsurpassed throughout the world. Where the constitution appears to be working well, on the whole I am averse to changing it.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that most people in this country, unlike some Opposition Members, regard our judges in the highest light? They look to them as protection against arbitrary power and they want no changes in their appointment, and certainly no political mucking about with what they do.

As usual, my hon. Friend speaks with the good sense that characterises the opinion of the vase majority of people in Britain.

Has the Solicitor-General seen the recent remarks of Judge Argyle, who last week addressed a meeting and said that those who are found guilty of crimes which result in sentences of more than 15 years should be hung—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hanged."]—hanged: it is the same argument. He also said that there are 5 million illegal immigrants in Britain. How did he manage to become a judge? Who was responsible for giving him the job? Why is it that the Government can cast aspersions on the Australian judge, yet this one seemingly attracts no comments from the Attorney-General and his mates?

The advantage of having an independent judiciary is that its members are responsible for their own opinions, if they are correctly reported. The Attorney-General is not responsible for anything that is reported to have been said by any judge.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what action he is taking to help control the devastation being caused by locusts and other pests in Africa.

Last month I committed over £1·5 million for pesticides, sprayers, vehicles and spares to combat the current desert locust upsurge in eastern Africa. I have agreed to today to provide a further ·567,000 for locust and grasshopper control in the Gambia, Mali and Sudan. This is in addition to the £3 million the Government provided last year to help to control locusts and other pests in Africa. We stand ready to provide more help if needed.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the locust and grasshopper devastation in central Africa, all the way from Senegal to Djibouti, wreaked untold damage on the fragile economies of those countries? Does he agree that although his news today is welcome, we must do all that we can to combat those serious attacks on the economies of central Africa?

I very much agree with my hon. Friend, whose remarks underline the importance of supporting the regional organisations working on the control of locusts. I was pleased to visit the desert locust control organisation a couple of weeks ago, which we support and will continue to support.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the amount of aid her Majesty's Government will be extending to Mozambique in 1988–789.

We expect to maintain a substantial aid programme to Mozambique in 1988–89. Figures will be announced in due course in the usual way. We shall also remain ready to contribute food aid and emergency relief.

Although I congratulate my hon. Friend on the imaginative programme that he has introduced for Mozambique, does he agree that Britain has some important interests in a stable Mozambique? Will he do all that he can to ensure that if any EEC food surpluses are available for that region, Mozambique has the first charge upon them?

I very much agree with my hon. Friend's first point. I hope that Mozambique will soon agree on a programme with the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, which we shall support when it happens. As for food aid, I am pleased to be able to tell my hon. Friend that following my visit to Mozambique we immediately raised the question of food aid in Brussels. A further 60,000 tonnes of cereals was agreed by the Commission on 3 March. Much of it will be provided from Zimbabwe.

Bearing in mind the fact that economic security cannot exist in the absence of military security, and having regard to the problems of Mozambique at present, do the Government have any plans to increase military aid to the front-line states and to Mozambique in particular?

Although the matter is not strictly within my terms of reference, I can confirm that we are helping with the training of the Mozambiquean armed forces, and we are also providing battalion unit training for the Zimbabwe army.

Is not a major cause of Mozambique's difficulties and need for food aid the disruptive tactics of the Republic of South Africa to the south, supporting the guerrillas within the country, who are disrupting the normal flows of supply? This happens throughout the Southern African Development Coordination Conference countries. What thoughts have my hon. Friend and his Department given to supporting those countries that are being seriously disadvantaged by the sanctions being imposed on South Africa and South Africa's retaliation?

We have continued to urge restraint on South Africa in relation to Mozambique and the other front-line states, and we have continued to urge South Africa to stick to the Nkomati accord.

I welcome the new warmth in the relationship between our country and Mozambique and the coming visit of President Chissano, but what are the Government doing about South Africa's destabilisation policies, which are destroying the very infrastructure that the Government are seeking to assist? Are we telling the South Africans that they cannot get away with arming and financing these rebels, who are surrogates of South Africa and destroying our aid efforts?

In answer to the previous questions I have already referred to the representations that we have made to the South African Government. As I was able to make clear at the meeting of SADCC in February, we are also providing more support to help the front-line states become more independent economically of South Africa.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what measures he is taking to ensure the viability of development studies and development related research in the United Kingdom.

The ODA currently provides £17 million a year for direct support of about 30 British institutions undertaking development-related research. Another £12 million is provided in grants for research by specific individuals or teams. Support for courses in development studies at British universities is provided by the Department of Education and Science through the University Grants Committee. The ODA also provides assistance to postgraduate students from overseas.

The Minister must be aware that the cuts undertaken by the Government have lacerated research in tropical development institutions and core funding of research institutes such as the institute of development studies at Sussex. Since December it has been clear that the whole future of the school of development studies at East Anglia is at risk. The Minister made a good start at this by expressing concern over the matter, but why has he not followed it through? Can he not get the Department of Education and Science to grant funding, and if he cannot, will he not come up with something from his own budget as a temporary measure to ensure that that school can survive?

The first part of the hon. Gentleman's question is nonsense. As to the second, I was concerned to learn about the proposals being discussed to reduce undergraduate training programmes in development studies at East Anglia. As the hon. Gentleman suggested, I made clear publicly how much value we place on the work of the school of development studies there. I have also made those views known to my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Education and Science and to the chairman of the University Grants Committee. I understand that discussions are continuing, and I hope that there will be a satisfactory outcome.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list the specific projects in his present programme of overseas aid that relate to women's participation in the development process.

All aid affects women. Examples of projects and programmes with a direct impact on women are given in the booklet "Women in Development", copies of which are in the Library.

Is the Minister aware that in most Third world countries it is women who do all the hard physical labour, and specific targeting of projects that would help them in training and in agricultural matters would have a direct effect on the standard of living of most difficult areas, particularly those in need of some kind of economic investment?

I agree with the emphasis that the hon. Lady places on training. Too few women are on our training programme, and we are taking that point up with the Governments of aid recipient countries.

Do we not have to be careful not to impose our own standards and mores on other countries? Will my hon. Friend give me an assurance that any pontifications that we make on this matter will be kept to a minumum, as with expressions of our attitude to the internal, domestic and social affairs of other countries?

The answer to the first part of the question is yes. The answer to the second part of the question is yes.

Is the Minister aware that one way of helping women to take part in the development process in the Third world is to enure that they have full access to information, suppliers and advice generally on family planning so that they can choose for themselves the number of children they will have and their spacing and can preserve their health and play a full part as citizens in the development process?

There is a great deal in what the hon. Gentleman said. In 1985 we spent £15·5 million on population-related activities. I believe that there is a close relationship between the success of population programmes and literacy rates among women.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what support is being provided from the aid programme to immunisation schemes in developing countries.

We support immunisation programmes through our contributions to the United Nations Children's Fund and the World Health Organisation's cold chain support unit and as part of our bilaterally funded primary health care projects.

Does my hon. Friend agree that in this modern age it is unacceptable that so many children throughout the world should suffer and die because of a lack of immunisation? Does he agree that Britain's contribution compares favourably with those of other countries? Will he give a comparison? What is my hon. Friend's opinion on how well UNICEF is carrying out its functions in that regard?

UNICEF is doing an extremely good job. That is why I was pleased that we were able in January to announce a £5 million grant for its immunisation programme. This financial year we shall contribute more than £13 million to UNICEF, which is the largest amount that we have ever contributed. We are making £164,000 available to the WHO's cold chain support unit. In addition, we hope to spend more than £10 million on bilateral health activities, many of which include immunisation.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what further projects he is considering for developing countries under the aid-trade provisions.

Thirty four capital aid projects and 37 technical co-operation proposals are currently under consideration for funding from the aid and trade provision.

Does the Minister accept that Britain alone within the OECD is one of the few countries whose proportion of aid as bilateral aid — as opposed to funding through multilateral sources—is increasing? Is that not regrettable?

I am not sure exactly what the hon. Gentleman is asking. I believe that the more significant figure is in the OECD's recent findings—80 per cent. of our aid budget goes to the poorest countries, as against an average for the OECD of 60 per cent.