If he will make a statement on the responsibilities of the Secretary of State for Wales after devolution. [78059]

After devolution the Secretary of State for Wales will be a member of the United Kingdom Cabinet, with responsibilities for ensuring that the needs and interests of Wales are taken into account in its decisions.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his brief reply. I assume it means that he will become a very junior member of a future Labour Cabinet. But will not devolution bring about a massive and unprecedented transfer of power from his office, and will not his accountability to the House, which he stressed in his reply—accountability in regard to agriculture, health, education and other matters—be minimal? How does the right hon. Gentleman feel that he will best be able to represent the interests of the people of Wales in this House, bearing in mind the limited powers that he will have?

I do not see how a representative of a party that has no Welsh representatives in the House can have the cheek to talk about power or representation.

As usual, the hon. Gentleman has made the wrong assumptions. The Secretary of State will be an important member of the Government, because the United Kingdom Cabinet will retain responsibility for all sorts of legislation affecting the people of Wales, not only in terms of England and Wales but in terms of the United Kingdom as a whole, and in wider terms. The voice of Wales will continue to be heard. What devolution will do is this: it will put decision making for people in Wales into the hands of representatives elected by the people of Wales to sit in the Assembly. I think that that will prove a very effective way of ensuring that the people of Wales are given the best possible public service, and the best possible representation from those whom they elect.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the partial responsibility of MPs, particularly Welsh MPs, for Welsh devolution and the setting up of the Welsh Assembly? I accept that my right hon. Friend's continuing membership of the Cabinet will be very valuable to the Welsh nation, but now that he has announced the date of the Assembly's first sitting, will he be kind enough to invite Welsh MPs who have not been elected to the Assembly to attend that function?

I agree that Welsh MPs, especially members of the Labour Government, have delivered to Wales an Assembly and an opportunity to be properly represented in the future. [Interruption.] I hear grumbles from those sitting on one of the Opposition Benches. I remind them that the Labour party is the real party of Wales.

I certainly accept that the relationship that develops between the Assembly and Welsh MPs will be extremely important, and that there will need to be appropriate opportunities for members of the two bodies to meet.

In his answer to the main question, the Secretary of State correctly said that he would be Secretary of State in a Union Cabinet and a Union Parliament. Does he agree that, according to that logic, Members of this Parliament should be able to question the Secretary of State on all aspects of policy, not simply reserved matters?

The hon. Gentleman should surely accept that devolution and the establishment of a Welsh Assembly will strengthen the United Kingdom and the Union, in that appropriate decisions will be made at a Welsh level, and there will be accountability on the part of those elected by the people of Wales. As for what questions are appropriate for the Secretary of State for Wales, I think that legislation and the rules of the House of Commons will determine that.

What is the answer?

It is absolutely clear in the legislation. The hon. Gentleman obviously has not been following events in the House, let alone outside it.

There can be little clarity when the Secretary of State does not know what subjects the Secretary of State should answer questions on; but on a broader matter, does not the fact that hon. Members from all parts of the UK will be required to raise the taxes that the Welsh Assembly will be responsible for administering leave something of a deficit of scrutiny? How does the right hon. Gentleman intend to rectify that and to give Members of the House, who are responsible to all electors for raising taxes, a say in how that money is spent?

Yet again, the hon. Gentleman is fighting old battles. It is typical of the Conservative party's attitude to the election. Its leader in Wales, a former hon. Member, seems to be entering that campaign to try to pull the Assembly down, rather than to make it work for the people of Wales, which should be everyone's responsibility.

The hon. Gentleman should know that many issues, including much legislation and the Welsh budget, which will be voted on by Parliament are matters for the Secretary of State, on which he will answer to the House.

On that very point, will the Secretary of State confirm that one of his main responsibilities will be to secure adequate resources for the needs of the National Assembly for Wales, not least to deliver on items such as the pledge card promises that were produced in Llandudno on health and education? Will he confirm that those pledge card promises are old promises that have already been made in London?

Will the Secretary of State confirm that, whoever is governing in the National Assembly in Cardiff, that money will be available—that it will be available not just to the Labour party, but for all the people of Wales, to be administered by the Assembly?

The pledges that have been made by the Labour party show what will be delivered by the Labour party. It is interesting to note what the right hon. Gentleman and his party stand for: separatism and dividing the United Kingdom, rather than strengthening the Union as well as the voice of the people of Wales. In terms of achieving the finances that are necessary for the Assembly and for Wales, I have full confidence in the present Secretary of State for Wales and in any future Labour Secretary of State for Wales.

I do not want to be mischievous, but I wonder whether, when he looks at his responsibilities, the Secretary of State will also look at the responsibilities of Members of Parliament? In view of what will be a big job-sharing exercise and an obvious diminution in our responsibilities, will he consider whether our salaries should be lowered?

I note that my hon. Friend may need to declare a lack of personal interest in the subject. I am sure that he does not intend to be mischievous, but I can assure him that the partnership between Members of Parliament and Members of the Assembly will be important. It is important that both Members of the Assembly and Members of Parliament work very hard to ensure that it is a positive and creative relationship. I know that many Members of Parliament, including some who were not necessarily enthusiasts for an Assembly, have already started to build such a relationship with those in their constituencies who hope to represent the same party in the Assembly.

If he will make a statement about recent job losses in Wales. [78060]

Although recent job losses in manufacturing in Wales are extremely regrettable, overall the Welsh economy continues to grow, and last year Wales had a net gain of 21,000 jobs.

Has there not been a turnaround in the number of jobs being created and lost in Wales? Is not part of the problem the fact that the Government have introduced the minimum wage and adopted the working time regulations? This afternoon, the House will hear more about regulations to be imposed in relation to family crisis leave and parental leave. Every employer and federation agrees that all those things add costs, burdens and regulations to business. They are unwelcome and will add to the problem in the Principality of a lack of employment and job opportunities.

I cannot blame the hon. Lady for being out of touch with business opinion in Wales, but she is. Business in Wales enthusiastically welcomes the Government's policies and is working in partnership with us to support our initiatives.

I am pleased to be able to announce three new schemes to assist small businesses in Wales, many of which were decimated by Tory Governments. The first is a £2 million Welsh Development Agency small loans fund. The second is a £2 million British steel industry small equity packages and loans fund. The third is a £6 million WDA and National Westminster bank venture capital fund to finance innovative developments that focus on new technology. We are supporting businesses in Wales—just as the Tories destroyed their prospects.

Is my hon. Friend aware that in the 36 months to February, unemployment in Llanelli fell by 25 per cent., and by about the same amount in neighbouring constituencies? However, in the 12 months to February, the drop has been minuscule in Llanelli, while in surrounding constituencies, including the Minister's own, there has been an increase. Does this not show that manufacturing industry is beginning to feel the pressure of recession and contraction? Will the Welsh Office make urgent representations to the Bank of England to seek a further substantial reduction in interest rates to reduce the pressure?

My right hon. Friend is correct. However, unemployment under the Labour Government has fallen to the lowest levels in living memory. At least a quarter of the world is in recession and world growth has halved. Our manufacturers are having a difficult time, but the Government are supporting them in every way possible. There was a net growth of 21,000 jobs last year, despite the fact that most of the world is in a difficult economic situation.

I am sure that the Minister is as concerned as I am by the loss of manufacturing jobs. On his recent visit to the United States of America, was the Secretary of State able to persuade a manufacturing investor to come on to the site at Ystradgynlais, where, in April, 750 people will lose their jobs at the largest manufacturing plant in my constituency? Would the Minister visit the plant with me to give some hope to employees who are reaching the end of their tether?

I have visited the plant recently, and I have been in close contact with the stewards. I have also been responsible for setting up a task force that is carrying through a nine-point action plan to provide alternative job and training opportunities. The Lucas workers suffered a grievous blow when their jobs were withdrawn at very short notice, but we are working to increase investment in the Swansea valley. We were able to announce 500 more high-tech, high quality jobs at the bottom of the valley last year. We have raised the future of the site with the owners, TRW and Lucas, in conversations in America and here.

Is my hon. Friend as surprised as I am that unemployment in Wales has at last been discovered by the Conservatives? Does he, like me, regret the fact that it was not discovered 20 years earlier? Given the prospect of job losses in west Wales, can the Minister assure us that the resources needed in Wales will be made available so that we may exploit the advantages of the welcome introduction of objective 1 status, on which the Welsh Office is to be congratulated?

My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. There is selective amnesia on the Tory Benches about the devastating impact of Tory policies on jobs and businesses in Wales. We are driving forward new job opportunities in the Swansea area. Only yesterday, the Secretary of State announced an initiative supporting Visteon in safeguarding and protecting hundreds of jobs in the area. We are also working with the Swansea Bay partnership and others to assist south-west Wales. I am confident that Wales will be able to draw down the funds that it needs under objective 1 status, which has been admirably won by the leadership of the Labour Government.

What mechanisms exist to communicate representations made to his Department concerning genetically modified crops to other Departments. [78061]

The Welsh Office maintains regular contact with other Departments that have an interest in genetically modified crops. Any issues arising from representations made on the subject are communicated to and discussed with those Departments as appropriate.

Given that the Welsh Assembly will have responsibility for agricultural matters, will the Minister clarify for the House what responsibility the Welsh Assembly will have for licensing and approving GM crops in trial sites and elsewhere? Will the Welsh Assembly have some flexibility in dealing with the matter? If so, will the Minister guarantee that the same environmental safeguards as currently apply across the UK, or even stronger ones, will apply in Wales under the Welsh Assembly?

The use of genetically modified techniques is a fast-moving science with huge potential benefits. There may be risks—which of course need careful assessment—but the Government's priority is to safeguard public health and the environment. Ensuring that the risks are properly assessed will be a United Kingdom function rather than a Welsh Assembly function.

May I draw my hon. Friend's attention to the very serious concern in my constituency about two applications—by AgrEvo UK and Pioneer Genetique SARL, in collaboration with Monsanto—to release genetically modified organisms, in relation to oilseed rape, in Monmouthshire? May I assure him that there is great concern that adequate safeguards have not been applied, and about the effect that such a release might have on biodiversity? May I assure him also that I have formally objected to the applications to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales?

I can well understand that there are concerns, and that my hon. Friend shares them. The Prime Minister has established a ministerial group to oversee developments on the subject. As a first step, the group has commissioned a thorough examination of our regulatory framework. The group will report soon.

I hope that my hon. Friend will understand that, if we are to assess the environmental impact of genetically modified crops—which are likely to become an increasingly common sight, if not in the United Kingdom, then in other countries—we have to undertake properly monitored and independently assessed field trials, to ensure that we get the best scientific knowledge.

If he will list the band D council tax rate for each local authority for 1999–2000 and the percentage increase in each case for (i) 1998–99 and (ii) 1997–98. [78062]

As the information requested is too extensive for an oral answer, I have arranged for the hon. Gentleman to be sent the details in tabular form, and for a copy to be placed in the Library.

First, will the Minister tell the House why the council tax figures for Wales were given to the press before they were given to Parliament? Will he then explain why council tax increases—which, in December, Ministers predicted would average 7.5 per cent.—turned out to be about 8.5 per cent.? Will he also explain why, on average, the increases are higher in Wales than in England? Will he also explain why—for the second year in a row under the Labour Government—the increases are more than twice the rate of inflation for everyone except those who are on council tax benefit? Whom should Labour voters blame—local councils, or Labour Ministers and the Labour Westminster Government?

The hon. Gentleman's carping is very familiar to the House. The reality is that we have seen an extremely good settlement for local government in Wales—the best for very many years. Central Government support for local government is 4.8 per cent., which is well above the rate of inflation. Government support has also allowed a record increase in service spending—15 per cent. over 3 years, and a £145 million increase in the next year alone. That is more money for schools, more money for social services—[Interruption.] I know that the hon. Gentleman does not want to hear this—it will adversely affect the Liberal Democrats' likelihood of winning any elections—but additional resources of £300 per person in Wales over the next three years come as very good news indeed.

Tax incre0ases in Wales are lower than they were last year. Moreover, tax levels in Wales are far lower than they are in England, although service spending in Wales is significantly higher. It is a good deal for Welsh local council tax payers.

Would the Minister care to comment on the formula which determines how much central Government money goes to local authorities? That formula discriminates against the poorest communities in Wales and puts authorities such as mine in Blaenau Gwent at a massive disadvantage. I accept that we inherited the formula from the previous Government, but will the Minister give a commitment to look at it again so that the poorest communities get the biggest amount of money from central Government?

I thank my hon. Friend for those comments. The Secretary of State and I met local government leaders, including those from my hon. Friend's constituency, in the past few days. Although we have agreed a formula with Welsh local government, it may well be unfair particularly towards areas such as the one represented by my hon. Friend. We agree that we need to work towards a new formula which better reflects real spending needs. Moving towards that formula is likely to take more than one year and the Secretary of State has, therefore, indicated that we need to address the anomalies to which my hon. Friend referred. Hopefully we will be able to do that in the next financial year.

Is this not just another example of Labour pandering to the rich and clobbering the poor? Does the Minister not realise that the tax cuts being given to the richest in society are being paid for by the poor of Blaenau Gwent and Holyhead, in my constituency? Why does not the Minister ensure that there is more money from central Government for local authorities instead of making the poor local taxpayers pay for tax cuts for the rich?

The formula is agreed by local government across Wales, including the hon. Gentleman's area. We have agreed that we need to reform the formula. The hon. Gentleman must accept that money does not grow on trees. If we take money from one pot for use elsewhere, that money has to be denied to existing spending priorities such as health.

On a point of order, Madam Speaker—

Order. I can take points of order only after questions and statements.

The Minister has just said that this is a good settlement for Wales. When will he join the real world? In Blaenau Gwent the council tax increase will be over 13 per cent., in Anglesey it will be 11.9 per cent., in Merthyr it will be 11.4 per cent., in Powys it will be 10.2 per cent., in Rhondda it will be 12.2 per cent. and in Wrexham it will be over 10 per cent—all this at a time when people are facing a standstill in their pay, or increases of 2 to 3 per cent.

One group who may be able to pay the council tax increases this year will be Members of the Welsh Assembly. I understand that an announcement is being made at 3.30 pm today—at the end of questions—about the rate at which Members of the Welsh Assembly will be paid. Why was that statement not made this morning so that hon. Members could have questioned the Minister about it? We now have to wait a whole month before we can scrutinise the pay of Members of the Welsh Assembly.

This is a good settlement for Wales for the reasons I have given. It allows local government to spend more money on schools and social services. It is considerably more money than was ever allowed by the Government supported by the hon. Gentleman.

What new proposals he has to improve the competitive position of the Welsh steel industry. [78063]

With the world collapse in the demand for steel the Government's commitment to the economic stability that our policies have already achieved is even more important in improving the competitiveness of the Welsh steel industry.

The recent record of the Welsh steel industry is one of the great unsung success stories of industry. More steel is being produced in Wales than ever before. There is a 25 per cent. increase in the sales of Welsh steel and nearly half of all the steel being produced in the United Kingdom is made in Wales. In spite of that, Welsh steel makers are facing hostile and unfair competition which has brought about the regrettable job losses today in Newport and west Wales. Will the Minister redouble his efforts to guarantee that the Welsh steel industry has not merely a proud, successful past but a brilliant future?

Yes, I can reassure my hon. Friend that we will do exactly that. We are working closely with British Steel to provide technology and training support and with the European Commission to tackle discriminatory dumping measures and illegal use of state aids. The British steel industry—especially the industry in Wales—is an example to the world and we want to work with it to protect its future and safeguard the jobs in it, despite a massive reduction in the demand for steel world wide.

What representations is the Welsh Office making to the Treasury to ensure that the euro does not continue to be devalued and that the Bank of England sets the interest rates that are right for British industry?

We have the lowest long-term interest rates for 40 years and mortgage rates are the lowest for 33 years. Compare that with the Tory Government's period of office, when interest rates were at record levels, the steel industry was badly hit and other businesses in Wales and throughout Britain were devastated.

May I tell my hon. Friend that Shotton steelworks is to lose 150 jobs even though it is competitive, productive, breaks all records and has a loyal work force? Can I persuade him to tell the arrogant, faceless bureaucrats of Brussels that the assisted area status that we have should not be lost? Will he remind them that in 1980 we lost 8,000 steel jobs overnight and that we have yet to rebuild our economy, so we need assisted area status to the end of the century and beyond?

I am aware that the steel industry in Shotton is grateful for my hon. Friend's continued hard work on its behalf. We are working closely with the industry to ensure that it has a positive future, and to ensure that the measures about which he complained are tackled as soon as possible.

Is the Minister aware that the Treasury proposal for an energy tax would hit the British steel industry and British Steel in particular extraordinarily hard? Recent figures suggest that the Government propose a discount of £5 million for a tax that will cost British Steel £200 million. In the light of all that has been said about the extraordinarily difficult competitive position of British Steel, will the Minister guarantee that the energy tax will not be imposed on it in that discriminatory way?

We will certainly not impose any tax, let alone an energy tax, in a discriminatory way. I am aware of the problems that high energy users, such as steel, face. For that reason, the Deputy Prime Minister is meeting to consider and consult on the matter. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor will also be consulting on it. [Interruption.]

Order. The House must come to order: it is far too noisy.

How many representations he has received on concessionary transport fares for pensioners in Wales in the last year. [78064]

How many representations he has received on concessionary transport fares for pensioners in Wales. [78065]

The Government's commitment to half bus fares for Welsh pensioners this year and free fares within two to three years has been widely welcomed throughout Wales. Following the transfer of functions, the National Assembly will be able to pursue that policy.

It is very good news for the pensioners of Wales that the Welsh Assembly, under Labour control, will introduce free concessions for travel within two to three years. May I remind my right hon. Friend that many pensioners in Labour-controlled authorities throughout Wales already enjoy half fare concessions, including those in my local authority of Rhondda Cynon Taff? What pensioners want in addition is an improvement in the quality and frequency of bus services throughout Wales. What can he do to assist those vital social bus services for the people and pensioners of Wales?

I am pleased to pay tribute to Welsh local government, particularly to the Labour authorities that push such policies forward, and to the co-operation that we have received from the Welsh Local Government Association. I am pleased to tell my hon. Friend that I have provided new funding for a massive increase in the provision of socially necessary bus services: £5 million in 1999–2000, securing 16 million bus kilometres, or in real money, 10 million bus miles. I am grateful in particular to the Under-Secretary, my hon. Friend the Member for Neath (Mr. Hain), for the way in which he has pushed the policy forward.

May I tell my right hon. Friend that the 12,000 pensioners in my constituency will welcome half-fare travel? On top of the cut in VAT on fuel, the £100 winter fuel allowance and the ending of eye test charges for pensioners, it shows that the Government are delivering for pensioners. Will he ensure that the scheme will be simple, with the minimum of form filling for pensioners, local authorities and transport operators?

I am happy to give my hon. Friend that assurance. The scheme needs to be simple and straightforward. As he said, it is another example of Labour delivering in office.

If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 31 March.

This morning, I was in Belfast together with the Taoiseach, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and leaders of all the parties in Northern Ireland.

Is the Prime Minister satisfied that the Chancellor's written reply about who leaked the Social Security Committee draft report meets the requirements for openness in the code of conduct for Ministers?

Yes, I am satisfied.

My right hon. Friend knows of the massive pressure on my constituents and the whole of the west midlands from continuing uncertainty about BMW's investment plans for the Longbridge plant. I understand that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry spoke today to Professor Milberg, the chairman and chief executive of BMW. Can my right hon. Friend update the House on the progress of those discussions?

I have received the following information. I am pleased to say that the Secretary of State and Professor Milberg have reached agreement on the level of assistance to be provided. This will now be put to BMW's management and supervisory boards for their consideration. I am informed that their next meeting will be in the week beginning 12 April. I hope that hon. Members will understand that, at this stage, I cannot say more about the details, but I am delighted that we can now look forward to BMW making Longbridge a world-class plant for the next century, and one that will achieve the highest standards of productivity and working practices.

May I first say to the Prime Minister that, across the House, we all hope that the negotiations from which he has returned in Northern Ireland are successful, and that all parts of the Belfast agreement of last year will be implemented?

Secondly, may I ask him a question about Kosovo of which I have given him notice? Everyone in the House will be moved and angered by the spectacle of thousands of helpless people driven from Kosovo. We support the announcements on aid that the Government have already made. Does he agree that we need to go further, and that, with so many appeals for donations in progress, the Government should at least match, pound for pound, the money given in all voluntary donations to the charities and aid agencies concerned?

I have literally just received the letter that the right hon. Gentleman sent me. I will certainly consider the proposal that he makes. I would point out, however, that we have already given several million pounds in help for refugees and we have just committed an additional £10 million; but, of course, I will consider his request.

I recognise that the Government have already made announcements about this matter and that the Secretary of State for International Development is to make a further statement in half an hour's time. Does he agree that it is unlikely that the help offered by the Government, or by any Government so far, anywhere in the world, will be adequate to meet the problem, and that this proposal for matching funds would have the advantage of encouraging many additional donations and channelling more money directly through the aid agencies and charities concerned? Will he assure me that he will deal with it as soon as possible?

I will, but I point out to the right hon. Gentleman that we have already made a massive commitment to aid for refugees. Indeed, we have been supporting the Kosovar refugees since early 1998. It is worth pointing out that there were 330,000 refugees before the NATO campaign ever began. There are, of course, more now. We are putting an extra £10 million into the latest relief effort. The European Commission has also provided additional money for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. There is an additional contribution from Germany, and more from the United States. Switzerland, Sweden, Turkey, Italy and Japan have all given money. We are sending more money and supplies out today to help the refugees and we shall carry on doing everything that we possibly can.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the distaste, embarrassment and resentment of the people of Scotland at the disavowal of the Scottish National party leader of the United Kingdom involvement in the defence of the people of Kosovo and of the opposition to the unacceptable face of Balkan nationalism?

The claim made by the SNP that economic sanctions would work in this situation is palpably ridiculous. No one believes that to be the case. The only alternatives are to take the action that we are taking or to leave these poor defenceless Kosovar Albanian people to the mercy of the Serb killing machine. I find it appalling that the SNP should have chosen the latter course.

The Prime Minister knows that he and our forces have the support of Liberal Democrats for the action in which NATO is currently engaged. Does he agree that the test of the effectiveness of the action will be whether the Kosovar people are able to return to their homes in safety in due course?

Yes; that is precisely right. That is why it is important that we have an independent force on the ground that can help them to do that.

Whether or not Milosevic signs up to an agreement, can the Prime Minister imagine the hundreds of thousands of frightened and dispossessed people going back to their homes unless they know and are confident that there are troops to protect them? Is not the alternative to that instability and long-term refugee camps in several neighbouring countries?

Yes, and that is why it is particularly important that we carry on the action now and intensify it. I believe that the ploy yesterday by Mr. Milosevic does not impress this country and will not impress other countries. What we have to do is intensify the attacks, and that is what is happening now, today. The attacks that have been carried out today on the actual troops repressing the people in Kosovo will inflict real damage on Milosevic's tanks, artillery and the thugs carrying out the killing and repression in Kosovo. They will keep on until he agrees to come back into line with the agreements that he made last October, ensures that people are treated in a civilised way and agrees the terms that NATO has set.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many people in Northampton and elsewhere in the midlands will have bitter memories this Easter because it is exactly a year since the floods that devastated about 4,000 homes and killed five people? Although I recognise the enormous strides made in flood defences and warnings in the past year under the leadership of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, what message does my right hon. Friend have for the people of Northampton and elsewhere who, while they want to look forward, will find that their minds are drawn back to the suffering in the past year?

A lot of steps have been taken in the past year or so to cope with the problems of floods. My right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister informs me that further discussions are to take place. We shall certainly keep my hon. Friend well informed of them.

How does the Prime Minister reconcile bombing murderers in Kosovo with releasing murderers in Northern Ireland?

We are engaged in Northern Ireland in trying to implement the Good Friday peace agreement. I would have hoped that we had the wishes of the whole House behind us on that. The idea that we can compare sitting down and trying to get the Good Friday agreement implemented with the killing of innocent civilians in Kosovo could come only from today's right-wing Conservative party.

Has my right hon. Friend had a chance to read the favourite newspaper of the Leader of the Opposition—the current issue of the Rotherham and South Yorkshire Advertiser? Its front page contains the statement "Good News Week" as 4,000 jobs are created in Rotherham and a Japanese company relocates there. Is it not a fact that this occurred during our watch, and that the message from the people of Rotherham is that a return not merely to the boom-and-bust years that destroyed their jobs, but to any form of Conservative control—council, regional or national—would be a disaster?

I regret to say that I have not yet read the Rotherham and South Yorkshire Advertiser, but I shall correct that omission later today. My hon. Friend is absolutely right; I am delighted that he mentioned boom and bust before I did. Our policies have given us the lowest interest rates for more than 30 years and have sorted out the public finances that are a contrast to the years of Conservative decline.

The Prime Minister is aware that the Liberal Democrats have welcomed and supported the Government's emphasis on further education during the past two years. That was long overdue and is much deserved. Given that the Government are putting £2,300 into every full-time training place for the new deal, how does the right hon. Gentleman explain the fact that only two thirds of that money actually arrives at the college gates and that £700 is wasted on a paper chase of contracting? Does he agree that that is a scandal and that something must be done to get the £78 million back into the colleges; and what is he going to do about it?

I gather that, on the whole, that was a supportive question. First, I will say that, in relation to the new deal money, I seem to remember that it was the Labour party that wanted the windfall tax on the utilities in order to fund the new deal, but other parties did not.

In relation to the money that is going in, I should like to look into the figures that the hon. Gentleman has given before I accept them simply because he has stated them—[Interruption.]—if he does not mind. I hope that he will agree that, of course, we want to reduce the administration as much as possible, but one of the advantages of the new deal is that it gives real quality advice to young people before they pick up whatever option is available to them. When I talk to young people about the new deal, I notice that all the things that people used to say about skivvy schemes, youth training and so on are not said about the new deal. I do not know how much of the £700 is geared to that, but I shall look into what the hon. Gentleman has said.

Will my right hon. Friend convey the thanks of my constituents in the Vale of Glamorgan and of all the people of Wales to all those who worked extremely hard to secure a massive £1.8 billion in structural funds for Wales at last week's European Council summit in Berlin? Is that not the clearest illustration that the Government's policy of constructive engagement with Europe is delivering for real people—not only in Wales, but throughout the UK? Will he contrast that with the behaviour of Opposition Members, who continue to squabble with each other over Europe, when they are not taking tea with military dictators?

I cannot think what my hon. Friend is referring to.

The objective 1 status for west Wales and the valleys is a very good deal for Wales, but the most important thing about it is that it will secure funding for the next seven years and will help regeneration in the area. We achieved the best deal that this country has had for years and years at such an economic summit—not by the idle posturing that characterised the diplomacy of the Conservative party, but by serious, constructive engagement resulting in success.

May I take the right hon. Gentleman back to the position in Kosovo? Does he agree that President Milosevic has now succeeded in expelling much—probably most—of the indigenous population from Kosovo? Will he tell the House whether it is the policy of NATO to compel President Milosevic to reverse that position and, if so, how?

Yes, of course it is our policy to do so, and that is precisely the purpose of the attacks that are being made on him.

As for the displacement of people, again I point out that that displacement was happening long before the NATO attacks ever began. It is the most muddle-headed type of thinking imaginable, when innocent people have been driven from their homes, somehow to put the blame on the one group of people trying to defend them.

Let me read to the right hon. and learned Gentleman what some of the people from Kosovo have said. Speaking only a short time ago, Mr. Havoli, in answer to the question, "Do people in Kosovo support the NATO action?" replied, "They absolutely do." Professor Isa Ximberi said:

"Everyone we have managed to be in touch with in Kosovo said their only hope was now NATO. They would be devastated if NATO now stopped without finishing the job."

Finishing the job is what we intend to do.

At this grave time, the tragedies of world war two and the absolute horror of the holocaust teach us the terrible cost of appeasing tyranny and genocide. Does my right hon. Friend share my sadness that that lesson does not appear to have been learned by the leader of the Scottish National party?

I have already said why I think those remarks were shameless. I agree with my hon. Friend that it is vital that people realise that, if we were not carrying out the NATO air strikes, the campaign that Milosevic had prepared would go unchecked. Forty thousand troops had been built up in the area over the past few months, along with 300 tanks. They were there not for a picnic, but to begin the process of ethnic cleansing, and we now know that that process began days before the NATO attacks began. The only right course for us to take is to learn the lessons of the past and not appease this dictator, but to carry on until we have brought about the proper terms of settlement.

Next Tuesday, the savings habits of millions of people will be affected by the abolition of personal equity plans and tax-exempt special savings accounts and their replacement by a scheme that is more complicated, more costly and more highly taxed. Is the Prime Minister surprised that savings in this country are now falling?

I do not accept that about individual savings accounts. They are a far simpler scheme, not least because they do not require people to hold their money for so long, which is why they have been so widely welcomed by so many people.

Three things are clear. First, the Inland Revenue says that ISAs will be more costly for savers than the current schemes. Secondly, the Prime Minister and the Chancellor have halved the most that can be saved tax free, which is, of course, a disincentive to save. Thirdly, the supermarket savings revolution that they were meant to be launching is already a flop, with Sainsbury pulling out of it—obviously "Good savings cost more at Sainsbury's" was not going to be a very attractive slogan. Should not the Government now give a last-minute reprieve to PEPs and TESSAs, before more is done to damage Britain's savings culture?

No. A host of organisations is offering ISAs. First, they are easier—money can be put in and taken out more easily than used to be possible with TESSAs and PEPs. Secondly, they will allow millions of people who were not able to save under the old PEPs and TESSAs regime to save for the first time. Thirdly, if I may say so, the savings ratio is actually increasing next year.

Well, it is 7.4 per cent. in the Treasury's current document, and it was 10.5 per cent. when the Government came to power, so it would need to increase a great deal to make up for that. The last time I asked the Prime Minister about this issue, he talked about 6 million new savers in answer to any question—I notice that we do not hear about 6 million new savers any more. Is not the truth that the Government have imposed a swingeing tax on pension funds, which is a broken promise, and that they have now abolished highly successful savings vehicles, which is a broken promise? Does the Prime Minister not understand that that damages future investment in our economy and the independence of families who want to save, and that that is a grievous mistake?

No, I do not agree with that. The right hon. Gentleman gives figures on the savings rate, but I shall tell the House the lowest savings rate in this country over the past 20 years. Under the Conservative Government, in the 1980s, the rate fell to 3 per cent—that was the position under the Conservatives. Many more people will be able to save with ISAs. The single most important thing for people in this country—which is as a result of the Government's sorting out the doubled national debt and the £28 billion borrowing requirement—is that interest rates are at their lowest level for more than 30 years. When did the Tory Government ever achieve that?

Does my right hon. Friend agree that today we should celebrate the ending of the two-tier system in the health service, the ending of GP fundholding and a return to the fundamental principle of the NHS: equal access for all? Does my right hon. Friend agree also that the problem of recruiting GPs to disadvantaged areas in Wales could be addressed by proceeding with the salaried service for doctors, which would be particularly attractive to women?

The salaried doctors scheme allows a doctor who cannot or does not wish to become a GP principal to work in general practice in a more flexible manner. My hon. Friend has campaigned on this issue for some time, and she will understand that we have made a big difference by abolishing the system whereby doctor competed against doctor and hospital competed against hospital. We have returned the national health service to the principles on which it was based.

We now know the Conservatives' plan for the national health service. They would attempt to solve health service problems by forcing more and more people to opt for private medicine. We believe that the answer to health service problems is the £21 billion that we are allocating to the NHS—which the Conservatives oppose.

Does the Prime Minister recall saying at the time of the general election that the Tory cuts in mortgage interest tax relief were a tax increase? However, in the Budget, the Chancellor called his cuts in mortgage interest tax relief a spending cut. Which is correct?

The basis on which we have calculated mortgage interest tax relief is precisely the same as under the previous Government. However, I shall be fair to the hon. Gentleman. If we were to include mortgage interest relief at source as a tax change, we would also have to count the increase in child benefit, the winter fuel allowance and the minimum income guarantee for pensioners as tax changes as well; if we did that, counting all those things not as spending, but as tax, the hon. Gentleman would be quite right: it would add up to not a £4 billion Budget giveaway, but a £6 billion Budget giveaway.

Tomorrow sees the introduction of the national minimum wage in this country. Will my right hon. Friend join me in condemning the employer in my area who told me that he opposes the national minimum wage? That employer employs three young people whom he pays £65 to £70 a week and, at this time of year, expects to work 60 hours a week. Does my right hon. Friend share my dismay at the attitude of Opposition parties who, when my hon. Friends and I sat through the night in Committee, did nothing to help the poorest paid in this country?

The minimum wage will give 2 million people in this country a pay rise and put a floor beneath their wages. We must also take into account the working families tax credit, which makes work pay and helps low-income families. It illustrates perfectly the difference between the political parties. The Conservative party proposes abolishing the working families tax credit, which would create a massive tax rise for low-income families, and abolishing the minimum wage. That would lead to the low-wage economy that the Conservatives think is the future of Britain, and we know is not.

I wonder whether the Prime Minister remembers promising that his Government would maintain high standards in public life. Is he ashamed of the actions of his Secretary of State for Health, who, since 1 May 1997, has appointed to health trusts and authorities no fewer than 228 Labour councillors? Is he aware that every year, under his Government, the national health service is putting £1.4 million into the pockets of Labour councillors, and will he apologise for that?

I certainly will not apologise for having changed the system. Everyone knows what used to happen under the Tory Government. An independent system now appoints people. I should have thought that the hon. Gentleman would want to support the vast sum of additional spending going into his constituency under this Government which it was denied under the previous Conservative Government.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his work in ensuring the retention of objective 1 European structural funds for Merseyside to support the continued regeneration of the Merseyside economy. Will he assure me that he will do his best to ensure that Merseyside receives the full additional benefit of those funds? Does he welcome the start of the work of the North West regional development agency? Will he make efforts to ensure that those European structural funds are disbursed with the agency, so that maximum strategic use is made of the moneys available for investment in Merseyside's economy?

I should point out that we got the biggest extension of objective 1 status of any country in the European Union. The continuance of that status for Merseyside is good news. The regional development agencies will start work tomorrow, and the objective 1 status will obviously play an important part in enabling the North West RDA to carry out its remit. Our purpose is to get the right balance of public and private investment into those areas so that they can attract the jobs and industry of the future.

Is the Prime Minister aware of the financial plight faced by the growing number of cystic fibrosis sufferers who are now living on into adulthood as a result of advances in medical research? Does he recall the "Health 2000" document, published by the Labour party before the previous general election, which made a commitment to abolish prescription charges for cystic fibrosis sufferers? Will he now tell the House when his Government plan to fulfil that commitment?

I am well aware of the problem to which the hon. Gentleman draws attention. We shall carry out all our commitments in "Health 2000". I point out to him and his hon. Friends that it is as a result of our actions that we have been able to give more help to people suffering from a range of complaints. We have done better than the hon. Gentleman's Government ever did.

In the same month that UNICEF and the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children have launched a new campaign for the rights of children, will my right hon. Friend join me in congratulating Basildon hospital on using £500,000 of new Government money to create separate out-patient and in-patient facilities for young children in the accident and emergency department?

Yes. I am delighted to congratulate the hospital in my hon. Friend's constituency. As a result of the new money that the Government are providing, the accident and emergency and out-patient departments of hospitals around the country will be helped. That is a result of the Government's extra investment in the health service. We are not merely getting waiting lists down, but putting into the health service the capital investment that it needs.

As the Prime Minister fritters away the golden economic inheritance—[Interruption.]

Order. The House must come to order.

How does the Prime Minister claim to have ended boom and bust and how can he look representatives of the road haulage industry in the face? I draw his attention to a fax from a road haulier in the right hon. Gentleman's constituency which I have received since the Budget. It says:

"I am now having to battle for the survival of my company which employs 18 people."

Why does the Prime Minister not do something for the road hauliers, instead of lecturing them about their industry, about which they know far more than he does?

First, I suppose that it is an advance that I have now got Tory Members using the term "boom and bust"—we have been trying for that for a long time.

Secondly, as for the "golden legacy" that we inherited from the Conservative party, it consisted of a national debt doubled, a £28 billion borrowing requirement and inflation back in the system. This Government have cured all that. As for the road haulage industry, the fuel escalator was introduced under the previous Government—by people now sitting on the Opposition Front Bench. The best news for industry is that the Government have not merely cut corporation tax, but, yes, we have at long last ended Tory boom and bust.

Madam Speaker, with permission I will make a statement on humanitarian assistance for Kosovo refugees. I will set out what we understand the latest position to be, and what our and the international response has been.

First, I want to make one point clear. I reject absolutely suggestions that we should have been prepared in advance for a movement of population on this scale. It would have been an appalling act of complicity in ethnic cleansing to set up in advance a network of camps to await the Albanian population of Kosovo. That would only have assisted Milosevic's objectives. What is now happening is a reflection of unimaginably outrageous behaviour on the part of the Serbian forces. People's anger must be directed at the Serbian aggression, and not the United Nations agencies struggling to cope with the crisis.

Our objective is clear: it is to secure a verified withdrawal of Serbian forces from Kosovo so that the refugees, including those displaced internally, can return to their homes. Meanwhile, I can assure the House that we will do all in our power to support the international effort to provide as quickly as possible shelter and food for those who have been driven over the borders.

As the House knows, there were more than 250,000 internally displaced people within Kosovo, and a further 100,000 in neighbouring countries before NATO intervened, but the situation has deteriorated sharply in recent days.

As people have seen on their television screens, more than 100,000 people—mostly women, children and elderly people—have been driven from their homes. They are very frightened. They are bringing with them stories of gross brutality and killing, which forced them to leave and often forced their menfolk to stay. The numbers in Albania are now 100,000, and the flow is continuing. In Macedonia, there were 16,000 refugees before 24 March, and another 14,500 have arrived. More are expected.

We share the concern of the House and people worldwide that the response to the crisis needs to be speeded up. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees is leading a co-ordinated international response. We are doing all we can to support UNHCR, other UN agencies, the International Red Cross and non-governmental organisations which are providing assistance in the area.

At the beginning of this week, the Prime Minister announced that we had made available up to £10 million as an initial response to the current crisis. We are using this funding to get the most urgently needed items to where they are required. This is in addition to the £3 million provided for emergency relief in Kosovo since March 1998.

The first UK emergency flight, carrying 42 tonnes of tents and blankets, arrived in Tirana early this morning, and the supplies are now being distributed. A further flight using an RAF C130 aircraft is taking more tents and blankets to Skopje today. A UK-funded flight with UNHCR emergency personnel and supplies is also leaving Amsterdam today for Tirana. We have also agreed to help airlift supplies into the region from warehouses in Europe, the middle east and north Africa.

We are identifying other ways of meeting urgent needs. We are providing emergency health kits through the World Health Organisation to cover the needs of 70,000 people for three months. We have provided £500,000 to help support the Red Cross operations in the region. We have asked NGOs working in the region to tell us their needs and have offered them logistical assistance to get into the field. We have in the last hour provided £500,000 to the World Food Programme so that it can move the food that it has to the people who are in need.

We will make further allocations over the coming days as needs become clear. To help identify these needs, we are sending an assessment and monitoring team to the region. The members of it will leave the UK this weekend, led by the head of my conflict and humanitarian affairs department.

The situation in Kosovo is a terrible tragedy—just as was the suffering inflicted in Bosnia by the same regime engaging in the same monstrous behaviour. This time, the difference is that the international community is acting militarily to halt the aggression. Everyone should be clear that the Kosovo refugees support the military action. They need urgent help with food, shelter and other emergency provisions. But they are clear that they want NATO to succeed and that they want to return to their homes. We are doing all in our power to support the UN effort and to speed up the humanitarian response. We will remain committed until we can assist with the much more welcome task of helping the refugees to return home.

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement and for letting me have a copy of it a short while ago. I was in Kosovo just a few weeks ago, and she will recognise that her comments about the desire of displaced people to return to their homes is very much what they are saying to us all. Their desire is for peace and security and to return home, and everything that we do must facilitate that.

I welcome much of the action that the right hon. Lady has now taken. With half a million displaced people—a quarter of a population of about 2 million—it is now obvious that we are dealing with a full-blown humanitarian crisis. Does she agree that the UNHCR has been doing a first-class job in dealing with the crisis to date, and continues to do so? Does she agree, and will she never tire of saying, that it is President Milosevic who is responsible for the crisis? Does she agree also that it is the children who are particularly vulnerable? I understand that many who are crossing the border are suffering from pneumonia and bronchitis. Will she ensure that the health and welfare of children will be a specific priority for us in our humanitarian response?

The air strikes began on 24 March 1999. Will the right hon. Lady say to what extent her Department had by that date already prepared an action plan to meet the refugee crisis that would inevitably follow? When was the interdepartmental Kosovo emergency task force set up and when did it first meet? What co-ordination has taken place between her Department, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Ministry of Defence in producing her Government's response? In other words, did she anticipate the flood of refugees and has her Department prepared for it?

The opening paragraph of the right hon. Lady's statement can be described only as getting in her retaliation first. She must understand that many people feel that when aeroplanes were given the green light to fly, the humanitarian relief effort should at the same time have been ready to roll. Can she tell us what co-ordination there has been between her and the aid Ministers in all the NATO countries in preparing for this effort, and when it began?

Does the right hon. Lady agree that given that the conflict is on the doorstep of Europe, this provides an opportunity for the European Union, through the European Community Humanitarian Organisation which both she and I have rightly criticised in the past, to rise to the challenge and provide focused, urgent and effective aid to the people of Kosovo? Does she think that it will?

Will the right hon. Lady say a little more about the logistical difficulties that face the relief effort? Does she believe that the UNHCR has sufficient people to co-ordinate the humanitarian relief? What specific plans are in place to overcome the logistical difficulty in getting food, blankets and medicines to people who need them?

Does the right hon. Lady agree that north-west Albania is particularly unsuitable for many of the refugees because there are many Albanian armed bands roaming around? What steps are in hand to help the Albanian Government deal with those problems? Does she envisage a role for British troops in Bosnia and in Macedonia, helping to deliver humanitarian assistance?

The right hon. Lady has said that her Department will support applications from NGOs seeking funds for their response to the crisis. What amount of her budget will she be making available in addition to the amount already allocated?

Does the right hon. Lady support the appeal for funds launched by several British charities this week? Will her Government support the initiative put to the Prime Minister this afternoon by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition—that the Government should match, pound for pound, the money raised by the generous people of Britain? Will she put politics aside and support that initiative?

The hon. Gentleman started well and rose to the occasion. He said how serious this crisis is and backed what the Government are doing, but then, of course, his remarks deteriorated. The hon. Gentleman's comment that there is something wrong with my making the very important point that everyone who is moved by this suffering has got to bear in mind the fact that they should be angry with Slobodan Milosevic, not with the UN, suggests that there is something wrong with him.

The hon. Gentleman asked all those detailed little questions about when our Department moved. We are famous throughout the world humanitarian system for being the fastest. We are providing planes, we are moving the UNHCR's own resources and we are moving resources that are not in this country. We are the fastest and we have gone the farthest. Everyone who knows in any detail about these situations knows that that is Britain's contribution.

The co-ordination between our Departments has been seamless. Our officials—many of whom have not been getting much sleep recently—are in contact all the time, and Ministers are in contact all the time. The refugees, the Albanian Prime Minister and all the people in the region are sending messages of thanks. We do not want messages of thanks, but we want to do a good job and we are ensuring that we will do that.

As the hon. Gentleman will know, the EC has made a commitment of resources and we have to make sure that they get to the people on the ground very quickly. He asked whether the UNHCR has enough people in the region. The answer is no, but we are helping to fly people in on the planes that we have already organised. He is right to say that the situation in north-west Albania is very unsuitable; people are far too near the border and they are in danger. Buses have been provided by the Italians and people are being moved away. Encampments are being set up in playing fields near the capital as we speak.

The hon. Gentleman asked whether British troops should help with the effort. We and the Ministry of Defence have agreed that it would be desirable, particularly in Macedonia, for the troops to help with the humanitarian effort. Obviously, NATO has to agree. The people of Albania are being so generous; they are taking even more people into their homes, and Albanian troops are helping, but the problem is in Macedonia and I hope that we shall be able to make progress there.

We will supply support to NGOs that are already in the region. That is the only way to get things done quickly. We do not put money into boxes in order to allocate it; we put money into pockets where it can be delivered on the ground immediately. That is how we proceed. It is up to NGOs whether they appeal for funds, but the problem is not money, but logistics. There is enough food and there are enough tents and blankets, but they are not where the people are. That job involves organisation and logistics, and we are ahead of the game.

I heard what the Leader of the Opposition said, and the Prime Minister has said that he would consider his proposal, but my instinct is that it would slow things up. That is not what we need at the moment.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on her statement and on the Government's response. As she says, the problem is logistics. Will she keep her mind open to the necessity of using resources beyond those of the NGOs? There may be situations in which service engineers and other personnel have to be used to deploy resources that are not usually used in humanitarian disasters. I ask her to co-operate with the Ministry of Defence. I am sure that she will, because I feel confident that some building will have to be done and resources will have to be shifted. Only the military can do that.

My hon. Friend is right; the problem is logistics. We are not relying on NGOs, as senior UN officials have expertise, engineers and so on. I agree that the services—who are flying out some materials—could help more, particularly in Macedonia. I know that the Ministry of Defence is in agreement, but it is a question of NATO agreeing. The services will then be able to provide the help that is needed in Macedonia. The mission will be a joint mission, involving the Ministry of Defence and my Department. We are working seamlessly together, as we are in Bosnia. We have offered a humanitarian adviser to our troops in Macedonia if we can get approval for such assistance.

It may cheer the Secretary of State to learn that the first words that I have written on my notes are to congratulate her and her Department on their speedy response to the humanitarian crisis in Kosovo. As a country, we should be proud to see such a response to such a difficult situation; a situation where women and children seem, once again, to be suffering disproportionately in modern warfare.

I do not agree with the rather sour remarks by the Opposition spokesman, the hon. Member for South-West Devon (Mr. Streeter). However, we would like confirmation that an assessment was made in the Department before the NATO offensive, in consultation with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Ministry of Defence. Will this country—bilaterally, or with the EU—support education, health and other public services in Albania, Montenegro and Macedonia to prevent civil unrest in those countries, which could be so dangerous for the stability of the region?

What plans do the Government have for keeping a register of refugees whose identity papers have been removed by the Serbs, so that they can reclaim their homes in the event of peace? Are there plans for the repatriation of Kosovar refugees once a stable peace has been secured?

I am grateful to the hon. Lady. I am proud of the people in my Department, who are the best and the fastest in the world. They work enormously hard and, at times like this, they are working all night. It is nice for the House to recognise the quality of people whom we have working in the area. We are all entitled to be proud of them.

The hon. Lady said that women and children are suffering dreadfully. That is correct, but they are desperately worried about their menfolk, following the stories of what is happening. She asked whether an assessment was made before NATO started the action. She must understand that we work with the international system and, since the election, we have put a lot of energy into trying to get the system to work better.

The UNHCR was already in Kosovo, where there were many displaced people already. We were trying to get a more efficient system, and the UNHCR is expanding its operation. However, no one can get inside the head of Slobodan Milosevic. No one could have said exactly where or when the ethnic cleansing would start, or what direction he would drive in. There are tents, blankets and food in the region, but the problem is getting those things to the people who need them. I am confident that we will do that, but we want to speed the process up. There was no lack of preparation, but no one could have predicted what that bestial behaviour would produce.

The hon. Lady suggested that we should make provision for education, health care and other public services in surrounding countries. I agree, but those countries must not take the strain. The people of Albania have been fantastically generous, and are still taking people into their homes. They have been taking the strain for a long time. We must make sure that there is provision by the international community, not by those poor countries.

The situation in Macedonia is a worry. If we can get our troops to help with the humanitarian effort, it will help the situation there. However, we need NATO agreement for that. The hon. Lady asked whether registers were being kept. That is a job for the UNHCR, not for us. It is doing that job, and statements are being taken in preparation for the International War Crimes Tribunal.

I welcome what my right hon. Friend has said about financial aid for the humanitarian crisis, but she will recognise that it is only a tiny fraction of what is spent on the war every day. Given the scale of the human tragedy that is unfolding—we see it day by day on our screen—which exceeds anything that anyone in this House can ever have experienced, is it not clear that the only organisation with the logistical and air movement capacity to deal with this matter is NATO itself?

Would it not be sensible immediately to divert the aircraft currently operated by NATO for the supply of weapons, and to take the opportunity provided by yesterday's visit to Belgrade by Mr. Primakov to cease hostilities, at least over Easter—which is very precious to the Orthodox Church—in order to save lives?

If the situation is not tackled with the organisational efficiency with which the war is being undertaken, people will die of disease and starvation, and it will not comfort anyone if Ministers are able to say, "Do not blame us; blame Milosevic". It does not matter who is to blame; lives need to be saved now, and the only way of doing that is to bring about a cessation of hostilities so that NATO can be diverted for this purpose.

Let me say to my right hon. Friend—who is an old friend—that I wish he would stop and listen to the voice of the refugees. They are saying that they support the NATO action, that they want it to be carried through, that they want help in the meantime and that they then want to return home. In all humility, let me ask whether we should not listen to them.

Some military planes are being made available to us, but they tend to be too small. They are not the best planes to move the necessary resources. It is better for us to use civilian planes of the right size. We are quite good at this; we do it a lot; and we are using military planes simply because we need to use everything that we can lay hands on. Nevertheless, it is not right.

If there were a ceasefire now, the net result would be not that fewer people were hungry, but that more people were killed in Kosovo by Slobodan Milosevic. It would help Slobodan Milosevic. Surely my right hon. Friend does not want to do that.

I wholeheartedly welcome the right hon. Lady's statement, not only on behalf of all hon. Members but, in particular, on behalf of those who, having been driven from their homes in Kosovo, are now desperate refugees in neighbouring countries. Will the right hon. Lady ensure that the voice of women will be heard in the organisation of the camps, and that they and their children will be protected, given their present vulnerability and the vulnerability that they will experience in the camps? Will she also assure us that the extra money spent by the Department will not ultimately be taken from its budget, but will be replaced by the Treasury?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman—I nearly called him my hon. Friend.

The hon. Gentleman is right. We have learned again about the situation of refugees. For the moment, we must get the camps organised, but for people living in camps for a long time, life can become very difficult. Children need to be educated, and women need to be respected. We have learned a lot, and I assure the hon. Gentleman that we will make the proper arrangements.

The £on that we have made available is in my budget. We must see how the spending goes after that—Government may have to consider other arrangements—but we have money available to deal with humanitarian disasters, and money has been allocated to Kosovo. We can afford the £10 million now, but if the crisis continues, the Government will have to consider providing further resources.

Does my right hon. Friend share my hope that the views of the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Mr. Wells) are more representative of the Opposition's stance than those of his hon. Friend the Member for South-West Devon (Mr. Streeter), whose typically snide contribution merely reminded me that it was the Conservative party that cut the international aid budget year on year, making it more difficult to do what the Department is now doing?

The flow of refugees across at least one border has slowed to a tiny trickle, presumably because supplies are not yet in place. Does my right hon. Friend know whether that is the only reason, or whether there are other difficulties that need to be resolved so that people can reach safety more quickly?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I am certain that the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Mr. Wells), the Chair of the Select Committee on International Development, is much more representative of the view of decent Tories. Yes, the Conservative party cut the aid budget. As a matter of historical record, it stood by when ethnic cleansing went on in Bosnia.

My hon. Friend is right to say that there is a problem on the border of Macedonia. There is a slow trickle of people getting across the border and a big tail of people wishing to cross. They are in a worrying situation. That is caused not by a shortage of resources, but by bureaucratic procedures on the border.

We are worried about the situation. We have been in touch with our ambassador, and he has been in touch with the Macedonian Government. We are exerting all the pressure that we can. There is divided opinion in Macedonia; that is part of the problem. That is why I am keen, if we can, to get the forces to help with the humanitarian situation, so that the public in Macedonia do not resent the refugees.

The right hon. Lady mentioned that she is making available £500,000 worth of emergency food supplies. Does she realise that that is slightly less than the cost of one cruise missile, and that more than 50 cruise missiles are being dumped on Yugoslavia every night? I recognise her commitment to the humanitarian issue, as does the whole House, and her practical good sense, but she must accept that £500 million of ordnance being dumped on Yugoslavia every 24 hours is killing people. That is nothing to do with Milosevic—he is not killing them—and it is not getting anywhere near him either. Yugoslav civilians are being killed by the NATO air offensive.

If the right hon. Lady can accept that equation, she will surely see that the sooner the bombing is halted and diplomatic initiatives take place again, the more resources, on an enormous scale, will be immediately released for the purposes that she knows how to apply so well.

I am surprised by the right hon. Gentleman; I thought that he was a better historian than that. Does he not remember appeasement? Milosevic was appeased in Bosnia, and look what happened. He is doing it again. There are times, however difficult, when we have to stand against such fascist evil. Fascism is reappearing in Europe only 50-odd years after the end of the terrible events in Germany.

The right hon. Gentleman misheard me. The £500,000 that has been made available to the World Food Programme is for logistics. It has enough food. The money is not for food; that is being provided anyway. The money has been provided so that we can move the food to the people.

NATO is not killing civilians. The very carefulness of our operations is to ensure that there is minimum damage to civilians. [Interruption.] The right hon. Gentleman may laugh, but it is the truth. He should pause and have more humility. People who are walking up mountains and who fear that their menfolk are being executed are saying, "Please carry on with the NATO action." Should he not listen to them?

Will my right hon. Friend place a high priority on ensuring that UNHCR staff are available to document the refugees in the places where those refugees are going? Milosevic is not merely stealing their identity documents, but using the period to destroy their existence in Kosovo, blowing up register offices, burning land documents and so on. That is clearly an attempt to finish off the ethnic cleansing that he has started.

It is our duty to provide such documentation. I hope that my right hon. Friend will be able to assure me that some of the work of her Department will enable that to be implemented, to ensure that Kosovars can reclaim their identity and their land.

I assure my hon. Friend that the whole purpose of the operation—and we will go on until we finish—is to drive back the military aggression and to help people to go home. We will do it. Records are being kept, and much more detailed records of the war crimes are also being taken. I am sure that there will be quite a lot of trials after the matter is settled.

The right hon. Lady will be aware that all those involved in seeking to mitigate this appalling tragedy, whether they be servants of her Department or people working for NGOs, will have the wholehearted support of the House. Can she reassure the House that she is confident that proper measures will be taken for their physical protection in the countries around Kosovo?

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman, and I am sure that all the people who are working so hard would be equally grateful. Our concern lies in northern Albania, where people are in inappropriate circumstances and where there is fighting close to the border from which they may be in danger. An operation is taking place, and the Italians have provided buses to move people to safer places. We will do all in our power to protect people engaged in humanitarian action. Across the world, more and more such people have been targeted and killed. As yet, we do not see that danger arising, but we are trying to make better arrangements for northern Albania.

How can the Secretary of State be so innocent as to come to the Dispatch Box of the House of Commons and use the word "unimaginable"? The moment American and British leaders said that ground troops would not be used and that there would be air attacks, was it not all too obvious—predictable and predicted, foreseeable and foreseen—that the Serbs would wreak the most terrible retaliatory vengeance on those whom we had left vulnerable? What does "intensification" do about ruthless machine gunners and pistol users who are crazed by what has happened to their own families 400 or 500 miles to the north?

Leaving aside the dangers of humiliating the Russians and their best intentions, why did the Government reject—apparently out of hand, although I stand to be corrected if that is not so—the proposals of the one man, the Russian Prime Minister, who could have done something? Finally, what exactly did the Prime Minister mean at Question Time when he used the phrase "to finish the job"? Which job? What does it mean?

My hon. Friend makes me very sad. Anyone who is critical of the military action should have more humility and should listen to the voices of those who are suffering. The refugees, the people in Kosovo and the Albanian Government strongly support the NATO action and are asking that we go on to finish the job. Finishing that job means reversing Serbian aggression, reaching a political settlement, putting in ground forces to make it safe—[Interruption.] That is a recognised part of the policy and it was declared long ago. It means returning people to their homes and helping people to rebuild. That is what is right. My hon. Friend is wrong.

Not a single Member would question the personal or political will of the Secretary of State, and I congratulate her on her actions. I do not know whether she made a slip of the tongue in responding to the previous question. I suspect she meant to refer to peacekeeping forces, not ground forces. Perhaps she would clarify that point.

Countries that surround Kosovo face difficulties in dealing with this huge problem. People are being stripped of every aspect of their identity, including even car number plates. There is now a citizenless class in the area. Can the United Nations, the European Union and NATO come together to make sure that people will have homes to return to? Will part of our policy be to rebuild homes?

Throughout the tragedies of Bosnia, I recall, I sat beside the hon. Lady, and we shared the view that there should have been earlier intervention to stop Milosevic. It would have been easier then, and there were mistakes in our policy. At least now we are doing what is right.

I made no slip in mentioning land forces. It was made clear in the Rambouillet talks that if autonomy was agreed, troops were already out there who could move in to keep people safe and to enforce the agreement. That was always part of the proposal. My hon. Friend the Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell) asked what finishing the job meant, so I was briefly reminding him of what had been announced.

There are no citizenless people. They are citizens of Kosovo. They have homes; they know where they come from. We hope that the action will be over soon and that they can go home. Burning their papers does not destroy their identity. They are citizens, and their legal rights will be respected. They will go home, and the international community will make sure they have help in rebuilding their homes.

May I welcome my right hon. Friend's statement, and direct her mind particularly to the problems facing the children of Kosovo? I do so without making any party political points—which have no bearing on this debate, and should not have been made in the first place. Does she agree that—according to information that the Under—Secretary of State for International Development and I were given at a recent meeting—19 of 20 children who die in war zones die not from guns or bullets, but because the health system that is so essential to keeping them alive disintegrates because of the destruction of war?

Will my right hon. Friend particularly commend the British paediatricians who, over the years, have been prepared to travel to war zones—to rebuild, to retrain and to treat children who need medical treatment? Will she ensure that her Department considers any requests that it has received from organisations supporting paediatricians, to enable the great humanitarian work by highly qualified British doctors to continue—so that they may treat some of the 19 of 20 children who might otherwise die, not from bullets, but from the displacement and destruction of war?

I am very happy to join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to British paediatricians, and to those from around the world, who go into very dangerous and difficult situations to care for children. They are some of the bravest people, and I think that we all admire and respect them.

In Kosovo—compared with, say, Rwanda—children are healthier to start with, and we have enough time. We are working with the World Health Organisation in putting in health kits, and should be able to prevent any deterioration in that situation. I am pretty confident in saying that we will be able to prevent it. Although there is a little time problem, people are being fed. Now, we have to get people under canvas, as some people have been sleeping out of doors.

My hon. Friend was absolutely right to say that we must ensure that health systems are available, but we are providing health kits to ensure that the problem does not arise. We should be able to organise it so that those children will be safe. In some conflicts in Africa, children are malnourished to start with, making the situation much more serious.

May I place on record my encouragement and support, and that of Plaid Cymru, for the right hon. Lady in the enormously important work that her Department is doing? The military operation is an enormous logistical exercise, and I join those who have said that the humanitarian exercise should be commensurate with it in seriousness, scale and commitment of resources. Will not the humanitarian exercise have to be maintained for as long as necessary—until those people are able first, to live in the places to which they have been displaced, and secondly, to return and reconstruct in Kosovo itself? It is bound to entail a very major commitment of resources. I therefore add my voice to those who have said that that commitment should in no way reduce the Department's capacity to continue its programmes elsewhere, and that additional resources will have to be provided to meet all its commitments.

I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman's support, and that of his party, for all the work that is being done. I absolutely agree with him that the humanitarian response must be as powerful, well-resourced and efficient as the military exercise. He was absolutely right to say that we have to be there for as long as necessary. We all hope that the military campaign will be successful quickly, and that, therefore, as soon as possible, we shall be helping people to go home. However, we shall stay there and be there until we can help people to go home and to reconstruct.

As I told the Select Committee Chairman, the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Mr. Wells), the £10 million that the Government have made available is available in my budget—from which we make allocations to deal with humanitarian disasters, and have made allocations to that region. However, the hon. Member for Ceredigion (Mr. Dafis) was right—if the crisis in Kosovo continues and costs more, we shall have to consider where we will get the resources from.

May I, too, offer my sincere compliments to my right hon. Friend, my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for International Development and their officials on their speedy response to these dreadful events? However, I hope that she will forgive me for introducing a possibly carping note to the debate. Does she agree that the terrible plight of the refugees, and the involvement of those remarkable officials from the grossly underfunded UNHCR, bring into stark relief the ignominious failure of the United States to honour its financial obligations to the United Nations? Is there not now an opportunity for the people on Capitol hill to make right that terrible failure?

I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Clydebank and Milngavie (Mr. Worthington) that it is essential to involve units such as the Royal Engineers, and other similar units from NATO forces, to help those refugees to have bearable lives by providing them with makeshift services as soon as possible.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. Everyone carps about funding the United Nations but, at moments like this, we need a good, well-funded and well-staffed UN. People complain that things are not moving as rapidly as they might, but that is because there has not been strong enough support for the UN in the past.

My hon. Friend made his point about United States contributions. I hope that the advertisement from six former Secretaries of State calling on the United States to pay its dues to the UN has an effect on public opinion there.

My hon. Friend talked about the Royal Engineers. It is not always best to have military people providing for civilians. It is not always appropriate for the children. It is often better to have civilians. As my hon. Friend knows, in Bosnia, because our troops are there, we have provided some resources and they are helping the refugees to return. That is a sensible use of resources because the troops are there. In general, the effort should be led by the UN, but we have particular problems in Macedonia. It would help if the military there were able to help the humanitarian effort. There might then be less doubt in Macedonia about allowing in the refugees. Where appropriate, it is good to do it.

Does the right hon. Lady agree that humanitarian aid has a real role to play? I wish to add my congratulations to her and her team for the work they have done. Can the right hon. Lady explain why there was a delay of seven days after the first bombs had been dropped before the departure of the first plane carrying humanitarian aid? The House has some concern about that.

In Question Time today, the Prime Minister referred to the role of an independent force in Kosovo. He did not say whether it would have an aggressive role to drive back Milosevic's forces from Kosovo, or a peacekeeping and humanitarian role. Perhaps the right hon. Lady will explain to the House what role that independent force would have.

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for her support for all those involved in the humanitarian effort. There is a problem about what happens when the cameras are not there. I remind the hon. Lady and the House that there were many refugees before the NATO action began. We were there as was the UNHCR. We were spending money and backing up the UNHCR. It was not that there was no food, no tents and no blankets before that flight. There was quite a lot of food and resources in Albania, but not in northern Albania. We need to bring more into the region as the flow of refugees is so big and is clearly going to continue. The hon. Lady must not think that there was nothing there before.

The hon. Lady asked about ground forces. That is not new. Part of the Rambouillet proposals was that, if there was acceptance of autonomy for Kosovo together with a peace deal and a withdrawal of the Serb forces of aggression, ground troops would go in to police the deal. They were in Macedonia waiting to move. That was part of the Paris talks. Those are the forces to which the Prime Minister referred and which I mentioned when I answered my hon. Friend the Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell).

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on her announcement today. It is widely recognised that her Department is a world leader in ensuring that prompt and appropriate humanitarian assistance reaches parts of the world where it is most needed. It is understandable that attention now is focused on providing immediate needs such as shelter, housing and health care, but will she consider ensuring that, at an early stage, trauma counselling and psychological support are made available for the refugees as they come over the border? We have seen to our regret in the past that that has not always been seen as an immediate need, but we have seen Milosevic's thugs burning villages, razing them to the ground and raping women.

We have heard about the atrocities committed. This time, may we please ensure that that support is given to people early on, not merely for their psychological well-being, but to ensure that some of the war crimes and atrocities can be documented early on, so that the perpetrators can eventually be brought to trial?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I am proud of the people in my Department and I am grateful to the House for recognising the work that they do. They are respected internationally—they are the fastest, they are very good indeed and they work very hard. My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The people arriving are very frightened and worried about members of their families whom they have left behind. This morning, I read a telegram from our ambassador in Albania, which said that women who had arrived had not been able to pick up their children, who had been put somewhere just outside the town to be safer. One can imagine the fear and worry. The stories of executions and brutality make people highly traumatised. We learned that in Bosnia—hon. Members must remember the rapes and all the women involved—and we brought in psychological support later. My hon. Friend is right and I will ensure that, as soon as we are organised, that sort of assistance is provided.

May I join my hon. Friends in congratulating the right hon. Lady's officials for responding so quickly to the huge humanitarian crisis, which involves the largest movement of refugees in Europe since the war? I have no doubt that the British people will want to be very generous in responding to the crisis. They also expect their Government to be generous. Therefore, I appeal to the right hon. Lady to respond to the request of my right hon. Friend the Member for Richmond, Yorks (Mr. Hague) that the Government should match, pound for pound, every pound that the people give to NGOs. Further to an earlier answer, how on earth would the implementation of such a scheme slow up the aid given to NGOs?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for recognising the quality of my officials. May I explain that I have £10 million now. Our word is trusted. We are hiring aeroplanes from other countries over the telephone. They are being made ready immediately on our word because we have the money, we can spend it now and we can move immediately. The problem is not money; it is getting the planes, getting the logistics right and getting everything moved into the right places. In answer to the Leader of the Opposition, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said that he would look at the proposal. I understand that the Disasters Emergency Committee is about to launch an appeal: advertisements will go in the papers and collections will be made. That will take some time and that is my point. We have to spend now and get things moving now.

We all know that, true to form, my right hon. Friend will be pressing to maximise the budget that may need to be made available to her now and later. Will she ensure that the Ministry of Defence is not allowed to purloin any part of that budget in the form of charges for aircraft that it lets her Department have, as happened on a previous occasion? Also, will she relay to representatives of the Government of Albania the deepest appreciation of Members of this House for the valiant work being done by the Albanian people in helping to resolve the crisis?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. He is right to say that, in the past, when the military made a contribution, the Overseas Development Administration was made to pay from its budget. Military costs are high—higher than hiring civilian aeroplanes. Since we formed our Government, the military has helped on a number of occasions and the Department has never been charged. One of the flights that I announced today is a military flight and we are not paying. The Ministry of Defence is contributing, so that is not happening.

I am also grateful to my hon. Friend for recognising the generosity of the people of Albania. It is a very poor country and it is recovering from a civil war. Many refugees have been flowing into Albania for a long time. People have been taking them into their homes—these are very poor people—and, even now, they are taking more. The Prime Minister of Albania sent a lovely, moving letter to our Prime Minister to thank us both for the military action and our other help. I will ensure that my hon. Friend's message is conveyed and I am sure that people will be grateful for it.

Does the right hon. Lady agree that it would be prudent at least to plan against the risk of long-term, large-scale refugee problems arising from Milosevic's present, and likely future, actions? Does she further agree that permanent refugee camps are undesirable? What steps does she propose, in concert with other countries, to facilitate the permanent resettlement of those refugees who want to be settled outside Kosovo in countries away from the frontiers of the former Yugoslavia?

I caution the right hon. and learned Gentleman that although he may not mean it to happen, Mr. Milosevic would be pleased at his suggestion. We are not planning to move people out of the region. People do not want to move out; they want to go home as fast as possible. They support the NATO action and want it to be successful. They need protecting now. We have plans to look after them now and to help them go home to reconstruct as fast as possible.

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. In the past 80 minutes, we have heard the remarkable proposition that, by the use of air power, without ground troops, populations are to be re-established in areas from which they have been cruelly driven. I know that, technically, it would be difficult to move for a debate under Standing Order No. 20, but I understand that it could be done at 7 pm despite the statement that we expect on defence. Are you prepared to hear my request? Do you accept that several of us, with very different points of view, think that it is not proper in this situation that the House of Commons should be away next week, and that, in these dire circumstances, there should be a recall of the House?

I am not in a position to deal with the second part of the hon. Gentleman's question. On the first part, he must put such requests to Madam Speaker. It is not a matter with which I can deal.

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You will recall that, last week, the House debated the Government's roads policy, with frequent mention by me and other hon. Members of detrunking existing trunk roads. A local journalist rang to tell me that the Deputy Prime Minister is to make a statement on the detrunking of the national road network tomorrow. Is it not a common courtesy that local Members be informed of such decisions by Ministers, before they are released to the press? Is it not a coincidence that the statement is to be made on the first day of the recess, thus ensuring that the Deputy Prime Minister cannot be questioned on his plans?

I heard what the hon. Gentleman had to say, but it is not a matter for the Chair. I have no knowledge of the matter that he raised.

I beg to move,

That leave be given to bring in a Bill to provide for women requiring hormone replacement therapy to pay a single prescription charge for both single and cyclical hormones, regardless of the preparation they are taking.

Hormone replacement therapy has three major benefits. It effectively treats the symptoms of the menopause. There is a likely, but not yet proven, link with reducing the risk of heart disease. The most important benefit to women's long-term health is that it effectively reduces the incidence of osteoporosis in women after the menopause.

After the menopause, all women lose calcium from their bones. For many, the loss is much more severe, resulting in osteoporosis, which is often known as brittle bone disease. The condition reduces bone density and increases the likelihood of fractures, back pain and curvature of the spine. It causes not only much pain and suffering but huge physical, psychological and social cost to sufferers and their families.

The effects on the national health service are also considerable. There are 60,000 hip fractures in the United Kingdom every year, or one every 10 minutes. Sadly, by the time that I have sat down, someone else will have fallen down and broken a hip. Eighty per cent. of hip fractures are in women over 50. Treating a fractured hip costs £4,800. That is £4,800 every 10 minutes. One in five of those who suffer a hip fracture will go on to require long-term residential nursing home care costing, on average, £19,000 a year. That is one extra nursing home place taken every hour as a result of osteoporotic hip fractures alone.

At the menopause, HRT is a logical and appropriate intervention for the prevention of osteoporosis. It is proven to reduce bone loss in women, and it can delay or even prevent the onset of osteoporosis, thus significantly reducing the risk of fragility fractures.

The Department of Health local health action sheet advises GPs to counsel women on the risks and benefits of HRT at the menopause, and lists HRT as an effective drug therapy for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. The effectiveness of HRT in preventing reductions in bone density and reducing fractures is beyond doubt.

If we are to meet our targets set out in the Department of Health Green Paper "Our Healthier Nation" for reducing the huge burden of accidents, we need to encourage more women who would benefit from HRT to use it. Current opinion holds that giving HRT for periods of up to 10 years yields significant benefits, with minimised risk. The suggestion that HRT causes women to wear lurid outfits and to act strangely in the national media are purely anecdotal.

There are different types of HRT, and different types suit different women. Women who have undergone a hysterectomy can be prescribed the single hormone oestrogen. This attracts a single prescription charge. Women who are completely past the menopause can use combined therapy with little or no side effects. This also attracts a single prescription charge. Then there is the perimenopausal group—those women who are either still, or have just finished, menstruating. The other two therapies are usually not suitable for such women, and cyclical treatment is required. If unopposed oestrogen is given to such women, there is a significant risk of endometrial cancer. Thus, they must take two different hormones—oestrogen and a progestogen—separately at different times in their cycle. Although that treatment is usually contained in one treatment pack, it attracts two prescription charges.

Many of my constituents in Dartford, and several hon. Members of the House, have approached me about that anomaly. Why, they ask, should some women, for purely medical reasons, face the double charge? My experience as a GP tells me that some people find the double charge not only inexplicable but a significant cost burden which can put them off taking the treatment altogether. Professor David Purdie, of the British Menopause Society, estimates that 50 per cent. of post-menopausal women would benefit from HRT, but that only 10 per cent. of the group are using the therapy. That means that 40 per cent. of post-menopausal women are not benefiting from a therapy which could bring them relief from their current symptoms and reduce the risk of osteoporosis in later life. Our task should be to reduce the figure of 40 per cent. as much as possible by encouraging women who decide, after discussion with their GP, that HRT is right for them to use it.

Women in the group most likely to require cyclical therapy are aged 50 to 60. Although 86 per cent. of prescriptions are issued free, women in that age group are very likely to pay for their own prescriptions. Nor is this a small problem. Figures that I have obtained from the House of Commons Library show that, of the 5.8 million prescriptions for HRT in 1997, 62 per cent. were charged as one item. That means that 38 per cent., or 2.2 million prescriptions, attracted a double charge. That is a clear disincentive, preventing a wider take-up of HRT.

"Our Healthier Nation" contained welcome initiatives for reducing fractures among the elderly. Osteoporosis is a major cause of fractures, and an important plank of any strategy to tackle it has to be a greater take-up of HRT. I welcome the Green Paper and the strategies contained in it, and I congratulate the Government, and especially the Minister for Public Health, on a document that details how we can put into practice the old adage, "Prevention is better than cure."

When more women are aware of the benefits of HRT and can decide whether it is right for them, and when the double prescription charge disincentive is removed, the incidence of osteoporosis can be reduced. That will reduce the cost to the NHS of treating osteoporosis and, more important, reduce the pain and suffering that it causes.

The Bill tackles a clear anomaly in the system, and it will go a long way towards increasing the use of HRT by those women who could benefit from it. I ask hon. Members to endorse the Bill, which will directly benefit the lives of many of their constituents.

With permission, I shall put together the motions relating to delegated legislation.