As the remaining 10 Bills set down for Second Reading have blocking motions, with the leave of the House I shall put them together.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement about the law relating to Sunday trading in Northern Ireland.

The relevant law is contained in the Shops Act (Northern Ireland) 1946, and is similar to the law applying in England and Wales.

Does my hon. Friend agree that a law which prohibits the sale of the Bible but allows the sale of girlie magazines, which allows the sale of gin but not of condensed milk and which allows the sale of chocolate but prohibits the sale of sugar, is illogical, immoral and fortunately, rarely enforced? Should not the Shops Act (Northern Ireland) 1946 reflect the realities of life in the 1990s instead of the prejudices of the 1940s?

I accept that many elements of the Sunday trading laws are ridiculous. One can buy food for an ass but not for a cat in Northern Ireland on a Sunday. However, there is no significant political pressure for changing the trading laws on Sunday in Northern Ireland, least of all from Unionist Members of Parliament. Although we shall keep the matter under review, it would be unwise for us to do anything without seeing what happens in the rest of the country.

Does the Minister agree, as I am sure the hon. Member for Hendon, South (Mr. Marshall) does, that the real problem involves traders who for profit motives rather than community interests want to trade on the Sabbath day? Was not that problem with us long before Nehemiah was governor of Jerusalem, and is not it likely to remain? The real issue is to apply the law and maintain the sanctity of that day.

As the hon. Gentleman knows, the enforcement of the law is the responsibility of district councils in Northern Ireland, and I am sure that he will pass that message on to them.

Does the Minister agree that those anomalies refer to England and Wales as well as to Northern Ireland? When poking fun at Northern Ireland, he should also poke fun at the parts of Great Britain that come under the same laws. Will he give the House an assurance that if the Sunday trading law is considered in a Bill for the rest of Great Britain, the people of Northern Ireland will have the same opportunity of having a proper Bill and not something pushed through the House by an Order in Council which would be unacceptable in Northern Ireland?

The hon. Gentleman is aware that it is a transfered matter, so any changes will be dealt with under the transferred procedure. I assure the hon. Gentleman that I never poke fun, least of all at him.

I have very rarely been called during Northern Ireland Question Time, but the matter concerns the Shops Act 1950. The Government are continually preaching that we should abide by the law and obey it. Is it not time that the Government themselves ensured that the Shops Act 1950 was properly upheld and enforced as an Act of Parliament?

The hon. Gentleman is probably not aware that in Northern Ireland, enforcement of the law is the responsibility of the district council.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what further talks he has had with representatives of the political parties in Northern Ireland regarding the transfer of certain powers to local authorities.

I have been having discussions with the leaders of the main constitutional parties in Northern Ireland about the possibilities of transferring greater power to locally elected representatives. I have made it clear that the Government would give serious consideration to any workable proposals for more local involvement in the government of Northern Ireland if they seemed likely to command widespread acceptance.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that far too much power is exercised in Northern Ireland by Northern Ireland Ministers and that, perforce, not enough is exercised by local people in the Province? Because the transfer of powers is well understood and accepted, and because the constitutional arrangements are there to accept, does my right hon. Friend agree that now may be the time for Northern Ireland politicians to sink their differences—which we all accept have been very real—in the interests of transferring power, which would be in everyone's interest?

My hon. Friend is right in saying that Northern Ireland Ministers hold considerable power in Northern Ireland. It is within the knowledge of the House that we have been seeking to persuade locally elected politicians in Northern Ireland to accept that we might transfer some of that responsibility elsewhere. It is, inevitably, a two-way process and requires involvement in talks and consultations.

The Secretary of State intends to introduce compulsory competitive tendering in local councils in Northern Ireland. What plans does he have to prevent paramilitary involvement in those services in future?

The hon. Gentleman is right to draw attention to that particular danger, which the Government have very much in mind.

The truth is that the onus is on the Government to act. They must get off their knees and not let Dublin stymie political progress in Northern Ireland any longer by setting down conditions for such progress. Without further delay, the Government must now restore the Northern Ireland Assembly which they brought scandalously to an abrupt end in a way that was a disgrace to them. They also entered the Anglo-Irish Agreement which was a betrayal of the Ulster majority. Surely the Government should now recognise that betrayal and return powers to elected representatives in Northern Ireland.

I recognise the hon. Gentleman as a distinguished Speaker of the Assembly to which he refers. Conversations relating to the transfer of power to locally-elected representatives are covered in article 4 of the Anglo-Irish Agreement which acknowledges the possibility of such developments occurring, but the involvement of the Irish Government in such conversations, as stated in article 4, would relate to the attitudes and modalities to be expressed. The decision about the talks themselves rests wholly with the parties in Northern Ireland and with the Government.

Does the Secretary of State agree that although in certain enlightened councils in Northern Ireland, especially those on which minority parties have a substantial say, progress has been made, in the mainstream of local government sectarian practices and attitudes are still very much to the fore? That is especially true of the Belfast corporation, which should be the flagship of local government in Northern Ireland. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the committee structures have been arranged there to prevent proper participation by the minority parties and that they have been deprived of offices and proportional representation? Even this week, financial resources have been denied to community services in minority areas. In those circumstances, does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the return of functions to local government in Northern Ireland is still inappropriate and is best left to an overall agreement between the parties in due course?

It will not have escaped the attention of the hon. Gentleman that contacts between Ministers and Belfast city council have been limited in recent years. In those circumstances, it would be wrong for me to pass comment on those with whom I have not been directly in contact. The hon. Gentleman is right in saying that if we were to advance on the transfer of power, we should need to see widespread acceptance of the principles involved.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he has any plans to introduce the breathalyser into Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement.

We propose to consult on the introduction of the hand-held breathalyser for use by the Royal Ulster Constabulary.

I was interested to hear my hon. Friend's reply. What consultations did he have before reaching his decision? I accept that there has been a downward trend in drink-driving offences since the introduction of low-alcohol drinks and the campaigns run by the on-licence trade, but what is the trend in drink-related accidents? If that is also downward, is it really necessary to introduce the breathalyser in the Province?

I pay tribute to those in the drinks trade —the on-trade, vintners, off-licences and brewers—for coming together to help to support the efforts to cut casualties. In the United Kingdom as a whole, and in Northern Ireland, the trend in drink-related deaths is clearly a downwards trend, and pedestrians are benefiting just as much as drivers and their passengers. The reason for introducing the hand-held breathalyser is that it provides a screening device and only those who fail the screening test need to be taken to the roadside evidential machine. That means that the RUC will be able to process more people more quickly and so get off the road faster, which in Northern Ireland is sometimes important.

Is the Minister aware of the number of breathalysed drivers driving written-off vehicles imported from the mainland, repaired by cowboy garages and unleashed on the Northern Ireland community?

That is something which we shall want to keep under control, but with the vehicle-testing system in place, vehicle defects contribute to less than 10 per cent. of crashes, whereas road conditions contribute to about one third and driver error to 95 per cent. of crashes. I should welcome the hon. Gentleman's support in dealing with the driver error problem, which is by far the largest.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what representations he has made to the Commission of the European Community for financial assistance for the provision of a natural gas supply to Northern Ireland.

The town gas industry in Northern Ireland is virtually closed down and there seems little prospect of re-establishing a viable gas industry. However, the possibility of burning gas in power stations is being examined in the context of overall energy provision for Northern Ireland and officials of the Department of Economic Development are in touch with the European Commission.

Is the Minister aware that buried in the ground in Northern Ireland are 1,600 miles of perfectly good sound pipeline? Is he further aware that it would be comparatively easy to connect the gas supply from Great Britain—in the first instance to industry in Northern Ireland and thereafter to domestic consumers? Can the Minister say how, in the long-term, the Government can defend the exclusion of Northern Ireland from continental sources of energy?

We will, of course, accept energy at a competitive price wherever it comes from. The right hon. Gentleman is fully aware that, at its peak, gas only accounted for some 4 per cent. of energy use. To restore the infrastructure to which the right hon. Gentleman refers, which is not in perfect condition, would cost some £300 million, whereas to build Kilroot II would cost £300 million and give us 18 per cent. of our energy requirement. I am afraid that it makes no sense whatever to bring back the natural gas industry in Northern Ireland—either to the domestic or to the industrial consumer—but it is certainly worth considering whether gas can be used for electricity generation.

Will my hon. Friend accept from me, as a former director of a Northern Ireland company, that Northern Ireland industry would very much like a natural gas supply to make it more competitive with the rest of the world and to enable it to stand more on its own two feet —as will become apparent when the question tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Fylde (Mr. Jack) is answered?

What Northern Ireland industry needs is competitive energy. However beautiful natural gas may be, if it is very much more expensive than other forms of energy, it makes no sense to bring it back, and I am afraid that that is the position.

Does the Minister accept that we all wish the Province to have access to the cheapest form of energy for both domestic and industrial consumers? In the Minister's reply to the right hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Mr. Molyneaux), he referred to the comparative costs of natural gas and electricity. To put an end to the continuing debate, will he give an assurance that he will publish the basis of the answers that he has already given?' Clearly, the evidence exists. To ensure an open debate, it would be in the best interests of Northern Ireland to publish that evidence and information.

Of course, we shall publish the information about the alternatives for electricity genera-tion and energy usage in Northern Ireland. We shall be happy to do that.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how much economic assistance Northern Ireland has received (a) from Her Majesty's Government and (b) from the European Community since 1979.

Since 1978–79, the average amount by which Northern Ireland public expenditure has been financed by revenue raised in Great Britain has been approximately £1,400 million a year. Over the same period, Northern Ireland has received an annual average of some £66 million from the European Community's structural fund as well as further amounts which cannot be separately identified under, for example, the common agricultural policy.

I thank my right hon. Friend for those impressive figures on economic assistance from the British taxpayer and the European Community. To what purpose is that money put? Can my right hon. Friend reassure me that the quality of industrial investment as a result of that assistance is high? Will he take it from me that we are grateful for the support that his Department continues to give to Northern Ireland, in spite of security and political problems?

The figures that I gave are for the total public expenditure in Northern Ireland financed by Great Britain and the Community respectively. Clearly, the money is used for a wide range of purposes, including economic development, to which my hon. Friend referred and, to some degree, security and other such matters. Of course, we do our best to make sure that all economic investment is of the best quality. The House will be aware of the Government's recent proposals to improve the quality.

Can the Minister confirm that Northern Ireland Ministers believe that it is extremely important that there should be Government intervention and support, and a regional policy? How does he cope in Cabinet battles with the ideological gulf between his view and that of the Prime Minister?

Of course, we think it important that there should be support of one kind or another. As I said, the money to which I referred is used across the board, not only for economic development. If the hon. Gentleman studies the new proposals of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and of the Under-Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Wiltshire, North (Mr. Needham), who looks after economic development, he will see that we are doing our best to target the money on precise job creation projects.

Can the Minister explain to the House why the Irish Republic receives from the European Community an average of £3 million per day and why there is such a differential between that and what is paid to Northern Ireland'? Will he also explain, on the question of additionality, how much money that comes from Europe for Northern Ireland goes directly to Northern Ireland? I ask that in view of the answers that have been given to me by Ministers on those questions.

The European Commission and European Community divide the money according to objective economic criteria. Commissioner Millan and his colleagues have made it clear that that is the basis on which the money is divided for the structural funds. The gross domestic product per head in Northern Ireland is more than 75 per cent. of the average in the European Community. It is higher than that in the Republic of Ireland and higher than that for any other objective single region. That is why we do not have the same amount per head as, for example, the Republic or other countries. We are entirely within the rules of additionality laid down by the European Community.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he next intends to meet the chairman of Northern Ireland Railways to discuss service improvements.

I will continue to meet the chairman as the occasion requires. Sir Myles Humphries is retiring in June after 24 years as a chairman dedicated to improving service for customers.

I am glad that Sir Myles is dedicated to improving services—it is more than can be said for InterCity. Will the Minister tell the House what action the Northern Ireland Office is taking about the axing of the Stranraer to Euston sleeper, which is as vital for Northern Ireland as it is for the south-west of Scotland? If, as I suspect, his answer is that the Northern Ireland Office has done little or nothing on that, will he get together with the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Secretary of State for Transport, and tell British Rail to put the service back into operation immediately?

If more people had used the service, it would have been more commercial. The Department in Northern Ireland made representations to British Rail. It takes seven and a half hours to get from London to Stranraer and costs £53 second class. I have no doubt that anyone travelling with the hon. Gentleman would find that as time and distance passed they would become sleepy so there would be no need to pay the extra £20 for the sleeper. Most people who go to Northern Ireland now fly.

I welcome the views expressed and the support of the hon. Member for Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley (Mr. Foulkes), but I very much regret that, as he said, the Northern Ireland Office has failed to weigh in and support the promotion of that service. We consider that it is important to maintain it. When the Minister meets the chairman of Northern Ireland Railways will he suggest getting together with the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Secretary of State for Transport with a view to promoting the service because it could be of great economic advantage to south-west Scotland and Northern Ireland?

Perhaps I could ask the hon. Gentleman to come and see me, and we might do a joint survey on how many times hon. Members representing Northern Ireland have used the service in the past year. That would give an indication of what weight we should put behind the representations that have been made.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is the main obstacle to political progress in Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement.

We believe that the main obstacle is the absence of talks with and between the Northern Ireland political leaders about political matters. However, there is now a significant common understanding on the issues such talks might address and I am hopeful that the conditions for holding such talks may exist soon.

Does the Minister agree that while the different political parties in Northern Ireland understand each other's position, the Government's position is as clear as mud? Will the Minister come clean on the long-term policies of the Northern Ireland Office? Is he aware that the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland has confirmed in writing that his objective is devolution, but that two fellow Members in the ministerial team have been canvassing in Upper Bann for a candidate who is opposed to devolution and wants integration? When will we get consistency in the Northern Ireland Office?

The Government's position on political progress in Northern Ireland is absolutely clear. We are committed to seeking devolved institutions in Northern Ireland to allow locally elected representatives to have a greater say in the decisions that govern their constituents' lives. With regard to Upper Bann, I am told that the right hon. Gentleman is wrong yet again. His party is having some difficulty in convincing the electorate about why its members are always to be found in the voting lobbies with the socialists.

As a general principle, does the Minister agree that in entering negotiations no party should be at a disadvantage? To ensure that the Unionists are not at a disadvantage at the negotiating table would the Minister accept that the Anglo-Irish Agreement should not be operating at full belt?

I certainly accept the hon. Gentleman's first point that no one party should be at a disadvantage. With regard to his second point, he will know that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has recently made it clear that in the context of such discussions on possible future arrangements for the government of Northern Ireland, we would give serious consideration to any implication for the agreement that such arrangements might have. I can confirm that in the context of those discussions, we would also consider including any proposal for an alternative to the agreement that the Northern Ireland parties might put forward that would advance the underlying objectives that I believe we all share.

Does the Minister agree that anybody who is serious about making political progress in Northern Ireland would want to address the relationships that go to the heart of the problem and have never been satisfactorily addressed? Those relationships are within Northern Ireland, within Ireland and between Britain and Ireland. Does he agree that if the Unionists, who say that they are British, do not trust the British Government to negotiate those relationships on their behalf, either with ourselves who share the North with them or with the Irish Government who share the island, then logically they should be willing to negotiate those relationships themselves?

I think that it is common ground between the Government and all the constitutional parties in Northern Ireland that the relationships to which the hon. Gentleman refers must be addressed. That must be done first in the context of Northern Ireland, which means that the representatives of the Nationalist and Unionist traditions must sit down together, with the Government or without, to address those issues. In addressing them, other relationships will, of course, come into play.

In view of the remarks by the right hon. Member for Strangford (Mr. Taylor) and the hon. Member for Belfast, East (Mr. Robinson), does my hon. Friend agree that less charitable people than I might think that one of the main obstacles to political progress in the Province is the intransigence of some of the political parties there?

We have been seeking to address the political future of Northern Ireland, and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has devoted much time and energy to that. We have done that, recognising the legitimate concerns and aspirations of the various parties, and we have been seeking to cause arrangements to be put in place that will enable them to talk together constructively with Government about an objective that I believe is shared by the vast majority of people in Northern Ireland.

To ask the Secretary of State For Northern Ireland what proposals he is considering on extradition.

At the last meeting of the Anglo-Irish Intergovernmental Conference, Ministers had a constructive discussion of arrangements for dealing with fugitive offenders. Officials were instructed to undertake a review of the situation and to report back to a future conference. My right hon. Friend will consider all proposals arising from this review.

I thank the Minister for his reply. Does he share the confidence of the Irish Government that the 1987 extradition Act will remedy the defects of the last three cases which were before the Irish Supreme Court?

The last three cases were, of course, disappointing, but we have to accept that they were the judgments of an independent judiciary on the basis of the then law. As the hon. Gentleman acknowledges, the law has since been changed. The whole point of the study to which I referred is to consider whether the arrangements are now satisfactory for the future.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the arrangements regarding the extradition of ordinary decent criminals—[Interruption]—are working perfectly satisfactorily? However, where the person sought to be extradited is an alleged IRA criminal, the law, the courts and the Government of the Irish Republic put every obstacle in the way.

I would not entirely agree with the last part of my hon. Friend's supplementary. The phrase "ordinary decent criminals" is well understood in Northern Ireland and is in frequent use—I have become used to it myself —but it obviously came as a novelty to some hon. Members. The position in relation to terrorists has improved since 1985. That does not mean, of course, that the position is now perfect. That is why we are carrying out the study.

Surely the right hon. Gentleman understands perfectly well that after the McGimpsey case, which clarified the position in the Irish Republic, it was a foregone conclusion that any extradition requests brought under the 1965 Irish Act on extradition were bound to fail. Does he recall that when the 1987 Act was being passed in the Irish Republic the Prime Minister said that it would make matters worse than under the 1965 Act? In the light of that, what possible confidence can the right hon. Gentleman or any hon. Member have that we will get any IRA murderer extradited from the Irish Republic to face justice in this kingdom?

I do not think that there is a sound legal basis for the hon. Gentleman's assertion about the effects of the McGimpsey case judgment on extradition. In view of the legal advice that I have received, I cannot support his assertion. In terms of his general question, I can tell him that of course there have been three refusals of extradition for terrorists to which I have recently referred, but that compares with 38 refusals in the years preceding 1985 and, obviously, preceding the new legislation. Four terrorists have been returned to Northern Ireland since 1985, compared with only three in the preceding 15 years, so the position has improved. Of course we are not entirely satisfied—that is why we are having further discussions with the Government of the Republic of Ireland.

How can the Minister assure my constituents that the Irish Republic is a friendly neighbour to Northern Ireland when at this moment it is harbouring known terrorists who have killed some of my constituents? Does the Minister accept that the present extradition arrangements are the laughing stock of the world?

I do not accept that. If the hon. Gentleman has information and evidence to give to the Royal Ulster Constabulary which will assist us in catching criminals, wherever they may be on either side of the border, we shall be grateful to receive it.

Is the Minister aware that we welcome the establishment of a committee to consider the effects of extradition? We hope that it will reach a conclusion that will be acceptable to the vast majority of people within all of our islands. Have the right hon. Gentleman and the Secretary of State considered taking the initiative with other colleagues in the Government and looking again at the actual convention on the suppression of terrorism to try to limit the effects of political exemption and to make its scope much narrower and much more acceptable to the majority of fair-thinking people?

Yes, but the convention does not translate precisely into current legislation in many countries, not only the Irish Republic. It is a matter for agreement between the two countries involved. That is of the first importance. However, we shall pursue all those matters in the talks to which I have referred.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is no place in the European Community for any country that protects those who commit political crimes? Would not it be a good idea, during the Irish presidency, to suggest a change in a constitution which helps to protect those who commit such crimes?

I think that we are already adopting the best manner to achieve improvements between this country and the Irish Republic.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what recent discussions he has had with representatives of the Government of the Republic of Ireland.

I last met Ministers from the Republic of Ireland on 20 April, following the Intergovernmental Conference. The subjects discussed then included the political situation in Northern Ireland, cross-border security co-operation, arrangements for dealing with fugitive offenders, the question of confidence in the security forces and the system of justice and cross-border economic co-operation.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept the valid and constructive criticism of the Anglo-Irish Agreement that it has failed in its declared objective of bringing peace precisely because it contains no coherent strategy for the peaceful reunification of Ireland? Will he assure us that meaningful dialogue towards that end will continue between the British Government and the Government of the Irish Republic, whatever the outcome of his forthcoming discussions with Unionist leaders—including the hon. Member for Antrim, North (Rev. Ian Paisley), who is not exactly renowned for his contribution to the peace movement?

I pay tribute to the security co-operation between this Government and the Government of the Irish Republic in matter pertaining to cross-border activities. The hon. Gentleman's view of the purpose of the Anglo-Irish Agreement—at least in the gloss that he placed upon it—is novel, and not one which I share with him.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that most people on this side of the St. George's channel—and, I suspect, many on the other side—welcome the recent visit to Belfast by Prime Minister Haughey to talk to business men there and regard that sort of contact as extremely sensible and fruitful?

My hon. Friend is correct in his description of the visit of Mr. Haughey, though he came as President of the European Community to a conference which was devoted to European economic matters. The widespread view of those who took part in that conference was that his visit was worth while.

What progress has been made on the joint Anglo-Irish application for the cross-border element of the European structural fund, and when can we expect a statement about that?

We are still engaged in discussions, but progress on the outline basis has been made.

Is not it time that the Secretary of State told the House exactly what discussions have taken place with the Government of the Republic of Ireland about cross-border co-operation in relation to the terms of EC directives? May we be assured that this time we shall not lose by default through failure to have proper discussions about those matters?

I am not sure whether the hon. Gentleman is referring to structural funds or to Community regulations against which the Republic of Ireland was held to have offended and was taken to the European court. We have not yet had the conclusion of that matter. We shall wait to see the response of the Government of the Republic, but we have pressed on them that we expect them to adhere to the judgment when it emerges.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many people are unemployed in Northern Ireland.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the level of unemployment in Northern Ireland in March 1987 and March 1990.

The seasonally adjusted unemployment figures for March 1990—the latest available—show that unemployment now stands at 98,400. The corresponding figure for March 1987 was 123,500. This represents a fall of more than 20 per cent. during this period.

Does my hon. Friend agree that many of the political problems in the Province are attributable to structural weaknesses in the economy and former very high levels of unemployment? Does he agree that he has just given the House extremely good news? What was the trend in the Province in the early part of this year?

The trend in the Province in the last three months shows a proportionate decline greater than that in the rest of the United Kingdom. The growth rate of the economy in Northern Ireland is standing up extremely well. As for the future, my hon. Friend is right to say that we must improve our training to meet the economic needs of the 1990s.

Does my hon. Friend agree that in the long term the best hope of reducing the disparity between Northern Ireland and United Kingdom unemployment lies in improving the skills of the work force? What contribution is the Training and Employment Agency making to that?

The Training and Employment Agency will be crucial to our success. Its board has wide United Kingdom experience and, I am sure, will come forward with ideas about how we can best proceed. Our aim is that everyone seeking work should have a recognised vocational qualification within five years and that, by the year 2000, 60 per cent. of all those studying should have three national vocational qualifications or at least one A-level equivalent.

Each month the Department of Employment Gazette publishes unemployment figures by parliamentary constituency. If the employment situation is so good in Northern Ireland, why is unemployment in Northern Ireland constituencies so high that seven out of the highest nine unemployment figures occur in Northern Ireland constituencies?

The hon. Gentleman knows the difficulties that we face in Northern Ireland because of the problems that we have with terrorism. He should, therefore, congratulate the Government on our achieve-ments to date in having an extremely successful inward investment programme, an economy which is growing very fast and the immense changes that are taking place in the towns, cities and villages of the Province.

As unemployment will always be high because of the security situation, is it not about time that the Government thought positively about withdrawing British troops from Northern Ireland? That would be a vital contribution to the Irish situation which has to be looked at time and again. It is about time that the Government made a decision on that.

I can think of nothing that would do less for Northern Ireland's economy than if British troops were to withdraw from Northern Ireland and security there were to become less stable. The key thing to do is to bring the communities together, continue with our programme of inward investment, improve training and continue along the path that has enabled us to succeed so brilliantly up to now.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on steps being taken to improve cross-border co-operation on security with the Eire Government.

Measures to improve security co-operation, particularly in the border area, are regularly discussed at Anglo-Irish Conference meetings, most recently on 19 April. In addition, regular meetings take place at all levels between members of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the Garda Siochana. Progress has been made, but where further improvement is possible the Government are committed to securing it.

Is it not the case that the Irish police in the border area are unable effectively to tackle IRA terrorists fleeing across the border from the north having just committed terrorist crimes because those Irish policemen are unarmed? Is not the obvious solution for the Irish Government to arm the Garda in the border areas or to place units of the Irish army on the border? Has my right hon. Friend raised those issues with the Irish Government and, if so, what response did he receive?

We frequently discuss all such aspects, but those are operational matters which must be for the authorities in the Republic to decide for themselves.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her offical engagements for Thursday 10 May.

This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the growing public anger, resentment and anxiety about the waste of taxpayers' money by a number of local authorities, highlighted yet again in an article in the Daily Mail today about Ealing? Has not the time come for a full inquiry into the matter and would not the best thing to do be to establish a Special Select Committee of the House with full powers to call for persons and papers so that the true facts can be laid bare?

I have indeed seen the report to which my hon. Friend refers and, if correct, it is a shocking indictment of the extravagance and profligacy of that particular local authority. My hon. Friend will be aware of the excellent work done by the Audit Commission in identifying waste and making recommendations and it would be better if those recommendations were taken up more quickly. Nevertheless, I heard my hon. Friend's suggestion, as I am sure did my right hon. and learned Friend the Leader of the House. Bearing in mind that a large part of local authority spending comes from the taxpayer, he has a good point.

In view of his obvious desire to be of help to her, has the Prime Minister thought of putting the poll tax review into the hands of the right hon. Member for Henley (Mr. Heseltine)? After all, one volunteer is worth 10 pressed men.

My right hon. Friend the Member for Henley (Mr. Heseltine) is well aware that the most unfair system of local taxation was rates.

I hope that the right hon. Lady will reflect on the fact that the right hon. Gentleman had at least one good idea—annual elections for councils, which has been Labour party policy for some time. Does the Prime Minister recall that when local authorities were tested last week the result was a net 300 seat gain for Labour, a net 11 council gain for Labour and a major increase in vote share for Labour? On second thoughts, does she think that that is perhaps what the right hon. Member for Henley had in mind?

My right hon. Friend the Member for Henley had many good ideas in his article, which of course will be considered, along with many others in the community charge review, to see what modifications and adjustments are necessary. With regard to structural changes in local authorities, I should have thought that the right hon. Gentleman would be well aware that those could not take place in the lifetime of the present Parliament. I remind the right hon. Gentleman that my right hon. Friend the Member for Henley rightly said this morning that the present Conservative Government

"would fight and win the next general election with the community charge in place."

Will my right hon. Friend consider carefully the suggestion of our hon. Friend the Member for Corby (Mr. Powell) that a special Select Committee should be set up to examine these matters? For instance, it could take evidence on the desirability of a roof tax and explore the possibilities as to how it could be implemented. Does my right hon. Friend agree, however, that it should be specifically precluded from questioning any members of the Labour party, however distinguished, about whether they voted Conservative in the Ealing borough council election?

My right hon. Friend makes the point more powerfully than I could. The people who turned out the Ealing Labour council did a good day's work.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 10 May.

I refer the hon. Lady to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

Has the Prime Minister read the small print in Tarzan's election address, which featured so prominent-ly in The Times this morning? Did she see the reference to the "virtuous circle" of falling inflation and a reduction in interest rates? Does she agree that, with interest rates at 15 per cent. and a rise in inflation due to be announced tomorrow, she is so far removed from virtue in such matters that the best that she could hope for in a Heseltine Administration is a position as elected mayor of Dulwich?

The level of inflation that the Labour party criticises today is well below what Labour was able to achieve during the greater part of its time in office. I remind the hon. Lady that there are more jobs in this country than ever before—that is the basis of prosperity.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 10 May.

I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

Will my right hon. Friend take time today to consider the excellent local election result in Hillingdon, where the Conservatives won control? Does she agree with me that the principal reason for that victory was their proposal for a community charge of £289, compared with the Labour proposal of £366—a reduction of £77?

Yes. I congratulate my hon. Friend, and I welcome the evidence that Conservative councils not only cost less but give better services. I note that, as my hon. Friend says, there will be a substantial reduction in community charge under a Conservative council; nevertheless, Hillingdon Conservative council intends to spend an extra £1 million on schools, to devote more resources to care for the elderly and the handicapped and to cut council committees from 100 to 30.

When the Prime Minister visits Scotland later this week to pledge her full support for the poll tax in Scotland, will she also pledge her full support for the Secretary of State for Scotland as her friends on the Back Benches are insisting that he be sacked before the next election?

My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland is one of the best Secretaries of State that Scotland has ever had.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 10 May.

I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

My right hon. Friend may know that I have an interest in a certain football club. One of our sayings is that we never change a winning team. Will my right hon. Friend assure me that as she was our centre forward and captain in 1979, 1983 and 1987, she is not planning to change our winning team? Does she agree that our supporters would be dismayed if we put a reserve centre forward and captain on the field, notwithstanding the fact the Labour party has second-rate ideas, second-rate policies and, as their own supporters know, a sub-zero leader?

My hon. Friend and I share the same goal. With myself as centre forward and my hon. Friend on the right wing, we should make a winning team.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 10 May.

I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

As a major player on the world political stage for the past 11 years, the Prime Minister must surely welcome the breakdown of artificial barriers throughout Europe. As she surveys those changes, does not it strike her that the division of Ireland is an anachronism which cannot possibly work administratively, politically or economically? Would not it be the mark of real statesmanship if the Prime Minister were to dedicate her remaining time in office to solving that problem and in that way making a lasting contribution to a peaceful united Europe?

The hon. Gentleman is aware that the majority of the people of Northern Ireland have clearly expressed their wish to stay a part of the United Kingdom. So long as that is so, they will remain a part of the United Kingdom. I hope and believe that they will remain a part of the United Kingdom.

While many improvements in management and efficiency are needed in local authorities, has my right hon. Friend seen the report by PA Management Consultants which says that improvements so far have been a direct result of legislation passed by the Government? Will she confirm that it is not the policy of her Government to repeal that legislation? Does she agree that the policy of the Labour party to repeal local government legislation would be a disaster for everyone?

Yes, I agree with my hon. Friend. The provisions of the legislation meant that local authorities had to go out to competition for many services, as a result of which they got better services at lower cost. The Audit Commission has also been active in seeing what further economies can be made. I hope that its conclusions will be carried into effect.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 10 May.

I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the whole House will want to send its deepest sympathy to the family of William Cartman, the sixth British worker to be killed in the Channel tunnel, a project which seems to be costing almost a man a mile? Will she make it clear that it is entirely inadequate for the five companies of Transmanche Link to be fined only £10,000 each for the death of another worker last February? Will she assure the House and construction workers that the Government will bring forward emergency legislation to make mandatory a prison sentence on an employer who is found guilty of gross negligence following the death or serious injury of a construction worker? When will the carnage stop?

Of course we are concerned about that tragic accident. As the hon. Gentleman knows, m y right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Employment will be meeting the chief executive of Transmanche Link later this afternoon to discuss the safety of the site. Health and safety inspectors are investigating the accident, and they have taken immediate action. Two prohibition notices have been issued which have stopped the operation of the two tunnel-boring machines in the marine tunnels. It is too early to say what caused the accident. We all deeply regret it, and we send our sympathy to the bereaved relatives of the person who was killed.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 10 May.

I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

I thank my right hon. Friend for her remarks about the employees and workers in Dover engaged on the construction of the Channel tunnel. On a different subject—[HON. MEMBERS: "Speak for Dover."] —has my right hon. Friend had time during her busy day to read newspaper reports about the remarks of the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott), who seems to believe——

Order. The Prime Minister cannot take responsibility for that.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. It arises from Prime Minister's Question Time.

I must take the Business of the House first.