When the Wales monitoring sub-group on compensatory payments for miners' respiratory diseases and vibration white finger last met; and what information on payments was provided to him at that meeting. [187919]

The Wales monitoring group met on Monday to discuss progress on miners' compensation claims. A total of £437 million has been paid to miners and their widows under the two compensation schemes. In my hon. Friend's constituency, £6.4 million has been paid for chest diseases and £1.9 million for vibration white finger. That is a total of £8.4 million in compensation.

I thank my hon. Friend for his sterling work in helping to ensure that miners and the widows and families of deceased miners receive all that they are due under the scheme. However, what unscrupulous advantage is being taken of the scheme by third parties, who take fees out of the compensation claims to the great disbenefit of miners and their families, who are entitled to that money?

There have been instances of lawyers seeking to take money from miners and their widows after successfully obtaining compensation. The Law Society takes such matters seriously and, as a result of Government intervention, lawyers have paid back £60,000 to miners and their widows. The bigger problem, to which my hon. Friend has referred, is claims farmers—companies such as Industrial Diseases Compensation Ltd. As I said in the House on 9 June, those people are nothing but parasites who prey on elderly and vulnerable people. My message to them today is the same as it was then: the money is not yours; give it back to the miners and their widows.

Although progress has been made on settling claims from miners and miners' families, there are still problems with surface workers who have worked in dusty and dangerous conditions, and miners who spent part of their working lives in small mines that were not covered by the National Coal Board. Will the Under-Secretary devote all his efforts to ensuring that those cases, too, are resolved?

The solicitors have supplied information to the Department of Trade and Industry in support of claims for surface workers, but officials at the DTI feel that they need more information, especially about lead claims, if the matter is to be progressed. I hope that it will go before the judge at the hearing in October. The matter was discussed in the Wales monitoring group earlier this week, and I am conscious of the concerns of hon. Members of all parties about the matter.

On the subject of third parties and parasites, will the Under-Secretary confirm that if the Liberals' policies to axe the DTI budget went ahead, there would be no money for compensation payments—

Order. I call Adam Price.

It has been estimated that, at the current rate of progress, the last case in the compensation scheme will not be settled until 2013—a full 15 years after the original judgment. Does the Minister believe that that is an acceptable timetable? Was the need for additional resources to speed up processing raised with him at the monitoring group meeting?

I recognise that that is a serious issue. The scheme closed at the end of March. So far, 25,000 claims have been settled in Wales but more than 92,000 have been registered in total. In the four months before the scheme closed, 30,000 new claimants came forward. I hope that the discussions that are continuing between the solicitors' claimants group and the DTI to ascertain whether matters can be speeded up are successful. If so, the matter will go before the judge and I hope that, subsequently, we will run a scheme under which miners will have the option of either obtaining a fast-track decision or continuing to pursue their claim under the longer process. We are conscious of the need to ensure that resources are given to tackle the matter.

What recent discussions he has had with the Education Minister in the National Assembly for Wales about the education maintenance allowance. [187920]

We meet regularly.

Did the Secretary of State explain to the Education Minister how the people of Wales should understand that rather illogical position? On the one hand, the Government wish to bribe young people who are not motivated to remain in education to stay on at school through the payment of education maintenance allowance; on the other, they deter anybody but the richest children from going to university by introducing top-up fees, which may mean that students leave university with debts of perhaps £30,000. What is the logic of that?

I am not sure whether the hon. Gentleman thinks it better for youngsters to leave school at the age of 16. The pilots have shown that the staying-on rate has been increased by up to 6 per cent., and I would have thought that he would welcome the possibility of achieving a more highly skilled, and therefore more competitive, society in Wales, and of giving those youngsters more opportunities. On student finance, the hon. Gentleman will know that the Tory policy announced recently will result in students being plunged into massive debt. Graduates on low earnings could end up with a debt of £60,000 as a result of having a £10,000 loan. That would be the consequence of that punitive Tory policy.

The figures show that there has been a decline of 1.3 per cent. in the number of university applications among under-21year-olds in Wales between last year and this year. Does the Minister accept that that is hardly a recommendation for his Government's student funding proposals for higher education? Crucially, will he give us a more direct answer than the one he gave to the hon. Member for Blaby (Mr. Robathan) when he tried to explain away the evident contradiction involved in financially incentivising under-18-year-olds to stay on in education while charging over-18-year-olds tens of thousands of pounds to continue in higher education?

The truth is that our policy is to encourage 16 to 19-year-olds to stay on in education in schools or colleges. That is in the interest of Wales. Our higher education policy will bring back grants of up to £2,700, which will benefit many thousands of students in Wales and provide a big incentive for people to go to university. We will also put in place a fair system for people to repay loans and fees over their working lifetime if they can afford to, and if they are in work.

May I begin by paying tribute to Fusilier Stephen Jones, who lost his life in Iraq serving with the Royal Welch Fusiliers? I know that the Secretary of State will do everything he can to ensure that the Royal Welch Fusiliers' cap badge and traditions remain at this difficult time; they are doing a fantastic job. Our thoughts should be with the family of Fusilier Jones at this sad time.

Neath Port Talbot college has indeed hit a difficult time over the past year. However, it is now bringing its balances into line and moving forward, having made the necessary efficiency savings, which the new principal, Mark Darcy, is driving through with my support. The hon. Gentleman knows, however, that if his party were to come to power and he were to become Secretary of State for Wales, we would see massive cuts in education maintenance allowances and all the other provision and support that this Government have made for higher and further education students. That would be the consequence of the £1 billion cut in the Welsh budget planned by the Tories for the first two years of their term of office.

I suggest that the Secretary of State focuses on his own policies rather than making up ours. Will he tell the House why Coleg Gwent is predicting that it will end the year with a deficit that threatens more than 30 jobs?

Again, the efficiency savings being made by Coleg Gwent, some of which have been extremely painful, have been designed to bring the college's finances into balance. The truth is that further education is now getting record investment under Labour; the numbers of students in further education has been rising and the number of courses has been improving. We regard the role of FE colleges as essential and will continue to fund them generously, in contrast to the Tories, who plan to cut budgets right across the board.

Thirteen out of 25 educational institutions in Wales are in debt to the tune of £3.5 million, so the money is not getting through. Seventy-five per cent. of college incomes come from Education and Learning Wales. Does the Secretary of State support the changes to ELWa that Rhodri Morgan has just brought about?

I do. The decision to bring ELWa into a much more effective system of organisation was badly overdue, because it had been responsible for a number of failures. The improvements that both the First Minister and the Education Minister are introducing, in discussion with ELWa, will help to improve that situation. What the hon. Gentleman has to explain to the people of Wales, however, is how they would be short-changed under Tory plans to cut the Welsh budget by £1 billion in the first two years of a Conservative Government.

Will the Minister reconsider the answer that he just gave? He said that what was happening at Coleg Gwent relates to efficiency savings, but we all know that it involves sackings and the closure of two important departments—engineering and catering—in one of the most deprived communities in Wales, Blaenau Gwent.

I am well aware of my hon. Friend's concerns. He has spoken to me in detail about them and we have made representations in support. I want to see Gwent college continuing to provide a range of vocational opportunities, including in engineering, as will be the case. It is absolutely vital that whatever new plans the college management put in place provide for those much needed opportunities, which he rightly identifies.

Plaid Cymru welcomes the education maintenance allowance, and I am sure that the Secretary of State will join me in congratulating the young people of Wales on achieving such fantastic GCSE results, which put them at the threshold of further and higher education. Will he clarify what future those young people will have in 2006, both as regards top-up tuition fees and the changes in relation to A-levels and university entrance, which were announced in England yesterday by the Secretary of State for Education and Skills? This is a good opportunity to clarify what will happen in Wales to those young people now receiving this allowance.

I am grateful that the hon. Gentleman's party supports the Government's policy, in one respect at least, of paying up to £30 a week to encourage youngsters to stay on in school and further education in Wales. That will help us to overcome one of the lowest rates of participation among 16-year-olds in the entire industrialised world. In respect of the review being introduced by the Secretary of State for Education and Skills on university admissions, a Welsh representative will be a member of the working party that takes that policy forward. The matter is out to consultation, and I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will join me in seeking to achieve a much more sensible way for students leaving school to find an opportunity to go to university than the hectic last-minute procedures that necessarily apply at the moment.

What discussions he has had with his National Assembly colleagues concerning the impact of the spending review on capital funding projects in education in Wales. [187921]

Under our Labour Government's spending review, Wales has had a generational step change in funding, and a huge investment in our future. The Assembly's budget will rise to almost £13.5 billion a year by 2007–08, and its capital budget will rise to almost £1.2 billion, massively enhancing the Assembly's ability to fund educational capital projects.

I welcome my right hon. Friend's reply, but does he agree that such investment needs to be sustained, so that the children of Wales can be taught in an environment that they and their teachers should expect in the 21st century?

Yes, I agree with my hon. Friend. That is why, under the Chancellor's spending plans, which were announced only recently, we will see education capital budgets in Wales rising from around £100 million a year to £139 million a year over the next few years. That sustained investment will continue under Labour but would be at risk under the Tories. Indeed, in her constituency of Conwy, the replacement of three secondary schools, Ysgol John Bright in Llandudno, Ysgol Aberconwy and Ysgol Dyffryn Conwy, has recently been completed, and primary schools have all been modernised. That is an example of success in her constituency under Labour.

When the Secretary of State next meets his colleagues in the Assembly, will he also discuss the spending review in relation to any decisions that may be taken by the Ministry of Defence, and the impact that that will have on the red dragon project and the economy of Wales?

Order. That is not within the terms of the question.

What discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the deployment of additional community support officers and community wardens in Wales. [187922]

My right hon. Friend and I regularly meet ministerial colleagues to discuss matters affecting Wales. Currently, 122 community support officers are on patrol in Wales. An additional 46 officers have been secured for the four Welsh forces in the third round of Home Office funding.

I thank my hon. Friend for his reply. He will know that community support officers are at the cutting edge, in Wales and elsewhere, of the fight against crime and antisocial behaviour. I welcome the fact that, before long, there will be 57 community support officers in Gwent alone. Does he agree, however, that to sustain that kind of support and intervention, continuing high levels of public expenditure are needed?

Certainly, investment in fighting crime is important, and this Government are committed to that, with increases not just in community support officers but in police numbers. We are working closely in partnership with local government, too. In my hon. Friend's borough, which he and I jointly represent, I am sure that he will welcome the newly elected Labour council's decision to employ safety wardens, who will promote community safety and help to tackle crime in support of the work being done by the police. It is further evidence of Labour's commitment to overcome the problems of crime that we face in society.

Is my hon. Friend aware that in Newport Chief Superintendent Price is deploying individuals police officers to each ward to build a relationship with the local community? They will be supported by uniformed community support officers to give local residents additional reassurance, and to deter anyone minded to indulge in antisocial behaviour. Chief Superintendent Price is leading by example, being regularly out on the beat himself. Will my hon. Friend commend that strategy?

I certainly will. I met Chief Superintendent Price only last week. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has said that people do not just want to see the bobby on the beat; they want a strong, organised, uniformed presence back on our streets. I commend the commitment of Gwent police to the introduction of police ward managers, which will mean 66 extra bobbies on the beat. That, I think, will be welcomed throughout the country.

Does my hon. Friend agree that community support officers could work very effectively with the youth service in trying to combat the problems of under-age drinking? It is a particular nuisance in my constituency, where a tremendous amount of litter, debris and glass is being left on the village green and playing fields. Could not an approach involving partnership and co-operation help to solve the problem?

It could indeed. We are living in a time when there is a culture of binge drinking among young people, and for both social and health reasons it is important to tackle that. We need to collaborate with a whole spectrum of organisations, including the police, the health service, youth services and local authorities. The joined-up government that we need is taking place in Wales, where work is being done in partnership with—in particular—our colleagues in the Welsh Assembly.

What discussions he has had with the First Secretary on compensation to farmers for fallen sheep. [187923]

No compensation is available to farmers for fallen sheep in Wales. However, a national fallen stock scheme has been set up to provide farmers with a means of disposing of their fallen stock. The scheme is due to be launched in autumn this year.

The Minister will know that there are currently 25 outlets for disposal of fallen sheep in Wales, but does he also know that 20 of them are run by hunts? If the Hunting Bill is passed tonight, only five will be left. What will be the extra cost to farmers?

I take the hon. Gentleman's point. In setting up the national scheme, we seek to tackle the problems throughout the country. Issues will arise from whatever the House decides later, but there is a free vote and I do not want to prejudge the result.

Does the Minister agree with the farming unions in Wales that imposing a flat rate on the disposal of fallen stock would be far fairer than penalising those who live in more problematic, less accessible areas? What evaluation have the Government made of the huge likely increase in predation of lambs as a direct result of the ignorant move made by the Government today?[Interruption.]

I must ask the House to come to order. The Chamber is very noisy. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] Perhaps those who are cheering me will be quieter.

I take the hon. Gentleman's first point. Discussions have taken place, and the introduction of the national scheme this autumn is a result of joint efforts by Government and the farming industry. There will of course be transitional financial support during the first three years, which will help farmers who are currently having a difficult time.

What plans he has to help disabled people in Wales. [187924]

Across Wales and England we are improving access for disabled people to services generally, and in particular conditions at work. From 1 October, employers and service providers will have new duties under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 to remove inequalities.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Is he aware of the proposal to cut classes in Cardiff for disabled people—namely, adults with physical disabilities, acquired-brain injuries and mental health problems, and the hearing-impaired? Should those cuts not be reversed, and is it not an absolute disgrace that that is the first action of the newly elected Liberal Democrat council?

I must say that I was horrified to hear of those cuts, and I agree that it is shameful that the Liberal Democrats have implemented that policy, especially given that their manifesto document, published this week, states:

"The Liberal Democrats would implement policies to deal with the pressing needs of the many disabled people living in our communities."

Having carefully considered the circumstances of people with disabilities in Wales, can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House what input he and his Department have had into the debate within government about the creation of a single equality Act?

We of course made that contribution and discussed the matter with colleagues. The hon. Gentleman will know of the legislation that, subject to pre-legislative scrutiny and consultation, will introduce new rights for disabled people. I hope that he will support it.

On the cuts in disabled services mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, North (Julie Morgan), is my right hon. Friend aware that they will also affect Rookwood hospital, in my constituency? Is it not particularly pernicious that the cuts were announced only in late July, yet the budgets for the courses ran from April? Does that not show that, when the Liberal Democrats actually get into power, they cannot be trusted?

It certainly shows that one cannot trust the Liberal Democrats, whether they are campaigning to get into power or in power. Indeed, as I understand it, the service at Rookwood hospital to which my hon. Friend refers has helped for 30 years to rehabilitate disabled people. The fact that it is now being jeopardised by a Liberal Democrat council should give everybody pause for thought when considering voting Liberal Democrat in any elections to come.

What recent discussions he has had with the chief constable of South Wales police on antisocial behaviour. [187925]

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I have regular discussions with the chief constables of all four Welsh police forces. The Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 provides a wide range of tools to tackle antisocial behaviour. The Government are determined that people should be able to live their lives free from intimidation and harassment.

I wonder whether the Minister noticed the recent comments of the chief constable of South Wales police, which seem to suggest that she is very hesitant about using all the powers now available to her to deal with antisocial behaviour. Will the Minister explain to her that the people of Maerdy and Treherbert are sick and tired of young people marauding around the town, and that they want the police to take every step available to them under these powers?

The chief constable of South Wales police was right to highlight the wide range of powers in place to tackle antisocial behaviour. The Government are determined to crack down on those who make life a misery for working people. In March of this year the third set of powers in the 2003 Act came into force, thereby giving the police greater scope for combating antisocial behaviour. I have a simple message for the authorities about those new powers. Now that they have them, there is no excuse: use them. They have the tools—they should now do the job.

I echo the sentiments expressed by my hon. Friend the Member for Rhondda (Chris Bryant), but I also commend the new chief constable for agreeing to attend a series of autumn meetings on antisocial behaviour in my constituency, at which, I am convinced, the message that these powers must be used will be rammed home. I ask the Minister to pay tribute to the work of the boys' and girls' clubs of Wales, which play an important role in tackling the scourge of antisocial behaviour by providing youngsters with responsible spare-time leisure activities. Will he receive a delegation to discuss their work?

I would be happy to meet such a delegation. It is important that we engage with young people in order to overcome the problem of antisocial behaviour in our communities, and I am pleased that police forces and local authorities are now actively promoting the use of antisocial behaviour orders. Indeed, in the year to 31 March there has been a 171 per cent. rise in the number of ASBOs issued, which is to be welcomed. As I said earlier, the tools are now there for the authorities to do the job. We expect them to use them, and to tackle the antisocial behaviour that is a plague in our society.

What recent discussions he has had with the First Minister of the National Assembly for Wales on devolving further powers to the Assembly. [187926]

The First Minister and I have regular bilaterals to discuss a number of issues, including the report of the Richard commission and the devolution of further powers to Wales.

What is the current thinking of the First Minister on the devolution of further powers to Wales, and is it the same as the right hon. Gentleman's?

The answer is yes, and we are committed to a practical route map for better governance in Wales and increased and enhanced powers for the National Assembly for Wales, through consultation, as agreed unanimously at our Welsh Labour conference on Saturday by 300 delegates. That contrasts with the policy of the chair of the Welsh Conservative party, who wants the Assembly stripped of power, no doubt in preparation for a future under planet Redwood, which would see Wales being dragged back and powers taken back to the Tories.

If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 15 September.

This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others, and in addition to my duties in the House I will have further such meetings later today.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in my constituency there is a high number of pensioner households? What does he plan to do to help those pensioners, and in particular the one in four single women pensioners who live in poverty?

We have a number of different measures that will help single women in retirement in particular. First, there is the extra money that we are giving through the pension credit; then there is the £200 fuel allowance; there is also the free television licence for those over 75; and there is the state second pension, which will help about 20 million low-income earners to get a better retirement income. We have continued to put a substantial amount—about £10 billion a year extra—into pensions, but we will not, as the Conservatives want us to, abolish the state second pension; and we will not abolish the pension credit, because it is helping many people to get relief from poverty.

The justice gap is the difference between the number of crimes recorded and the number that result in the criminal being brought to justice. The Home Secretary says that this is the key measure of the effectiveness of the criminal justice system and a crucial indicator of success in reducing crime. What has happened to the justice gap since the Prime Minister took office?

The most effective measure of crime is the crime survey. Let me point out that, as opposed to the Conservatives, under whose tenure of office crime doubled, it has fallen 30 per cent. under us. The level of detection and conviction is important, but I understand from the Home Secretary that there has been an improvement of some 50,000 in the past year.

The Prime Minister is paid to discharge his constitutional responsibilities, and they include answering questions at the Dispatch Box. Now let me give him the answer that he was not prepared to give. I will tell him what has happened to the justice gap since he took office: it has got wider. Recorded crime is up by 825,000, but the number of cautions and convictions is down by 42,000, so under this Government there are more crimes but fewer criminals are being caught and convicted.

First, let me revert to the so-called "justice gap" for a moment. It is the case that during the time in which the Conservatives governed, crime doubled. It is also the case that, in the British crime survey, crime has fallen by 30 per cent. It is further the case that there are record numbers of police and they are now being supplemented by community support officers. This party in government has a better record on crime than the right hon. and learned Gentleman and his party ever had.

The question I asked was about the number of people claiming, which has gone up by 120,000. This week, the head of the Prime Minister's own antisocial behaviour unit said:

"I can think of countless families who are drinking or drug using with the money … the Government is giving them."

"become more complicated and the tax burden"

First, let me correct the right hon. and learned Gentleman on incapacity benefit. It is true, of course, that the number of people claiming incapacity benefit trebled under the Conservatives. There are still many people on incapacity benefit today who came on to it before 1997. The question is how many are coming on to the benefit each year now as opposed to 1997—and the numbers have declined by 30 per cent. I agree that there is still a lot more to do, which is precisely why we want to tighten up the gateway of people coming on to incapacity benefit. Let us be quite clear, however, that for a long period under the Conservatives incapacity benefit was the result of the way they shunted people off unemployment benefit to make sure that they never appeared in the official figures. So we will take no lessons from the Tories on incapacity benefit.

Let me remind the Prime Minister about the question that I asked him. It was about the views of his former chief economic adviser, who said that the regulatory and tax burden had gone up. Let me give the Prime Minister a hint: his former chief economic adviser is right, which is why for the first time ever our national income per head is lower than that of the Republic of Ireland.

I have to return to the original point on the economy. Let me make it clear that the burden of tax is less than it was under most of the years of the previous Conservative Government, but it is true that we have increased national insurance to fund improvements in the national health service. We are proud of doing that; it is the right thing to do. It means that, for the first time, instead of health waiting lists going up—they were 400,000 under the Conservatives—they are 300,000 down under us.

The economy.

No, the economy was the issue before it. What was the last one? [HON. MEMBERS: "Hospital cleanliness."] Yes, that was it. The right hon. and learned Gentleman is right that that is a major issue. We accept that, which is why we are investing about £300 million extra in hospital cleanliness over the next couple of years. However, that real issue should not detract from the Government's record on the health service, where waiting lists have fallen, people are able to get access to health care far quicker and there have been record increases in the number of doctors and nurses. I agree that there is still more to do and that hospital cleanliness is one example of that. However, cutting investment in the national health service—we should remember that the right hon. and learned Gentleman voted against all the extra investment for the NHS—is not the answer.

The problem of hospital cleanliness is rather an important one, and if the Prime Minister concentrated on answering the questions that I am putting to him, it would not have slipped his mind.

First, the additional money that we are putting in will make a difference, and its effectiveness will be measured. The Leader of the Opposition talks about MRSA levels, but the proper computation of those levels has been available only under this Government. It is correct to say that we have more to do on this issue, but I do not believe that the answer is to get rid of Government targets. We are putting record investment into the health service and it is important that we demand outputs for it. That should not interfere with clinical judgment, but if we are putting the money in, it is important that we get the results out. That is what we are doing.

I asked the Prime Minister to take specific action today to deal with this dreadful problem, but yet again all we have had from him is more talk. Crime is up, incapacity benefit is out of control, tax is rising, hospital infections are spreading and there is a crisis in pensions, but the Prime Minister's message to the people of this country is that his priority is to ban fox hunting. When will he get to grips with the problems that people really care about?

The right hon. and learned Gentleman finally got to his point at the end. When people look at this Government's record, they will see a record on the economy that is strong, with the lowest rates of interest, inflation and unemployment for more than 25 or 30 years. They will see record levels of employment, rising living standards and record school results. The British crime survey shows not only that crime is falling but that we have record numbers of police. In respect of the NHS and education, people can see that the investment is working. This country is stronger, fairer and more prosperous than it was seven years ago, and I believe that that is one reason why people reject the Conservatives.

Will my right hon. Friend review the application of the double jeopardy rule to our soldiers serving abroad? Surely it cannot be right for soldiers whose commanding officer has dismissed as unfounded the serious criminal charges that they faced to have those charges resurrected by the civilian authorities?

The House will accept that we have to investigate allegations of abuse and, if necessary, prosecute them. We would also be subject to criticism if we did not do that but merely said that we would not take up the issue. I want to make one thing clear to my hon. Friend: the vast bulk of British soldiers in Iraq and elsewhere around the world do a magnificent job. They do not mistreat prisoners, but treat the local communities extremely well, which is why they are so popular as peacekeepers. Even so, where there is mistreatment, I am afraid that we have to investigate it.

I am sure that the Prime Minister and the House are well aware of the outstanding contribution that the Gurkhas have made to the British armed forces over many generations. A relatively small number overall of Gurkha soldiers who complete their service in our armed forces here seek British citizenship. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that their right to be accorded citizenship is long overdue?

As I think I said a week or two ago, we are examining this issue very carefully. I hope that we will be able to make an announcement in the next few weeks, but obviously we understand the strength of the case that is being made.

As the UK chairman of the Gurkhas pointed out to me earlier this week, many of those who are seeking British citizenship would be a positive asset to our country both socially and economically, as they were in the armed forces. The Prime Minister is right to praise our armed forces, not only for the combat tasks they undertake but for their hurricane relief support work and their work saving lives during the floods in Cornwall this summer. Would not it be a great morale boost for the Gurkhas and for the armed forces as a whole if this much respected and decorated regiment were to be acknowledged in that way?

Let me take the opportunity to pay tribute to the Gurkhas on my own and the whole House's behalf for the fantastic work that they do. They are an integral part of the British Army, and we are proud to have them with us. I reassure the right hon. Gentleman that the issue is not just the Gurkhas themselves, because the strength of that case is clear, but we simply have to examine what the consequences might be of agreeing to that case. We are doing that, and I shall be able to make an announcement in the next few weeks.

In February, Stephan Pakerra, a 14-year-old Leicester schoolboy, was brutally murdered by a 17-year-old with a claw hammer and a knife. There were more than 50 injuries to his body. The parents of the victim believe that the perpetrator of that savage attack was influenced by the video game "Manhunt". Later today, there will be a meeting in Westminster to discuss video games and their effect on children. Will the Prime Minister ask the Home Secretary whether he will commission new research to look at a connection between video games and crimes of violence? Will he meet a delegation of concerned parents about the issue?

I am obviously happy to meet any of my hon. Friend's constituents or people concerned about this issue, and the Home Secretary will have heard what my hon. Friend has just said. I offer my deepest sympathy to the family of my hon. Friend's constituent. I can also say, from what I have been told about this game, that it is obviously in no way suitable for children. In fact, the sale of the game to a person under 18 should be illegal. Responsible adults should have the right to watch and choose what games they play and films they see, but children need to be protected. We have Europe's strongest system for controlling the sale of computer games that are not suitable for children. It is run by the Video Standards Council, which applies the familiar British Board of Film Classification rating system. Given the prevalence of these games, however, this issue is worth looking at closely, and I shall certainly discuss with the Home Secretary how we can take matters forward.

Yesterday, the Prime Minister quite rightly told us that the planet was in danger and that we must generate much more power from renewable sources, yet Talisman Energy, which wants to develop the world's largest wind farm in the Moray firth, says that the greatest single threat to the viability of that project is the charges being proposed by Ofgem and the National Grid Company. Can the Prime Minister explain why it should cost £20 per kilowatt to connect to the grid in the north of Scotland, whereas anyone can be subsidised by £9 per kilowatt if they want a wind farm in central London—[Interruption.] Though not the Prime Minister's hot air, perhaps. Will the Prime Minister intervene to join up the thinking of his Government on those matters?

We are committed to increasing the amount of renewable energy. Obviously, wind will be a substantial source of that, particularly off shore. I do not know about the particular position that the hon. Gentleman asked about, and I can certainly look into it. I have to say that the Government's commitment over the past few years to renewable energy makes it clear that we are increasing the proportion of our energy needs that is met by renewables. We are making a substantial investment and will continue to do so.

May I take my right hon. Friend to the Government's alcohol strategy and to the important speech that he gave earlier in the year about binge drinking? This morning, my noble Friend Lord Mitchell and I hosted the launch of the charity NOFAS UK—the National Organisation on Fetal Alcohol Syndrome—and its video for schools. Will my right hon. Friend lend his support to the video's message that if pregnant women binge-drink there is a serious danger to their children in the future? In particular, will he lend his support to the incorporation of the issue in the forthcoming public health White Paper?

On the specific issue of foetal alcohol syndrome, we know that excessive drinking may affect the brain of a developing foetus. The evidence is absolutely clear, and I am sure that responsible women who are pregnant will take account of it. The forthcoming public health White Paper will build on the progress that we have made with the alcohol strategy. It will deal with this as a matter of public health, but, in addition, strong measures are now in place in relation to binge drinking and antisocial behaviour. As the Under-Secretary of State for Wales was saying a few minutes ago, the powers to deal with that exist, and we urge the police and local authorities to use them. On the specific issue of public health, we will deal more with it shortly when the Government's White Paper comes.

The Prime Minister kindly met me earlier in the year to discuss the growing problem caused locally by Travellers buying greenbelt land and illegally developing it. However, the Government's recent response—the 28-day temporary stop notice—is widely seen as a fudge, because all it does is postpone the problem and thereafter our inadequate planning laws kick in. Will the Prime Minister recognise that the Government's indecision on the issue is now causing increasing anger and threatens the peace and harmony of many local communities, for all concerned? Will he now re-examine my private Member's Bill, which proposed a fair solution to the problem and had good cross-party support, but was blocked by the Government without explanation?

As I think I said to the hon. Gentleman when we met in February, I am basically sympathetic to the points that he makes. As he knows, we are undertaking a policy review on the position of Gypsies and Travellers, which we will publish shortly. My understanding is that the 28-day delay allows the local authority to take prompt action. I know that he disagrees with that and thinks that we need additional legal powers. I am happy to look at the question again and discuss it with my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister, but we think that the powers are valid—as I think my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, the hon. Member for Pontefract and Castleford (Yvette Cooper) said to the hon. Gentleman when we met. I entirely agree that it is a major issue in certain communities—I know that from my own constituency—and it is important that the powers are in place to deal with it effectively. I will go back and have a look at the issue again, but it is worth pointing out that we have strengthened the law, and the advice we are receiving—although I will check it carefully —is that the law is sufficiently strong to enable us to deal with the problem. I understand that it is an issue in some areas and I will look into it carefully myself.

This Sunday sees the first significant extension of open access land in England under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. My right hon. Friend will be aware that the establishment of a legal right to roam fulfils a Labour ambition that goes back many generations. Will he today send a message of solidarity and celebration to those who will gather in the Peak district in my constituency this weekend to celebrate the right to roam?

As my hon. Friend rightly points out, the Act introduced a major new right for which people have campaigned for more than a century. By the end of December 2005, walkers will have new rights of access to some 3,200 sq miles of open country and registered common land in England. It is important to realise that the Act and the countryside code strike a proper balance between the rights of walkers and those of landowners. I hope and believe that matters can be resolved sensibly, so that people have access to more of our countryside, which they have wanted for many years, without interfering with the proper use of the land by its owners.

Yesterday, the Prime Minister told other countries to take seriously the threat of climate change, so why does he have a domestic energy policy that makes no sense and that will desecrate large areas of our country with unreliable wind turbines, which will not solve the problem? At the same time, nuclear power, which does make a positive contribution, will be allowed to wither away without replacement. Will he close the familiar gap between what he says and what he does, and get a domestic energy policy that measures up to the scale of his environmental rhetoric?

It was this Government who played a major part in negotiating the Kyoto protocol, and we have also reduced greenhouse gas emissions. Renewable energy, far from being an accidental part of our strategy, is a vital part of our ability to meet our targets for greenhouse gas emissions, and I am sorry if the right hon. Gentleman is against it. We made it clear in the White Paper that we have not shut the door on nuclear power, but until the issues of cost and public concern about safety can be met there is simply not the consent to go ahead with it. That is why it is important that we continue to invest in new technologies, such as renewable energy. It is a perfectly coherent policy to say that we will reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and renewable energy and greater energy efficiency are good ways to achieve that.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the arrest and detention in Jerusalem of my constituent, Hajira Qureshi, a student of mathematics at Cambridge university? No charges have been brought against Ms Qureshi or her two companions, yet they were subject to a raid of their hotel room at 3 am and were strip-searched. Will my right hon. Friend make representations to the Israeli authorities and protest about that unprovoked attack on British citizens?

According to the Foreign Secretary, we are following that up, but of course I understand my hon. Friend's concern. We are aware that three British nationals were arrested by Israeli authorities; they have been seen by our consular authorities who are providing all the assistance they can. I understand that they were subsequently released from custody. We have raised the matter with the chief of police in Jerusalem and we shall continue to pursue it with the Israeli authorities. At this stage, that is all I can say to my hon. Friend.

Although the Isle of Wight is one of Britain's prime tomato producers, it is hard to find island tomatoes in local supermarkets, yet I can buy mangetout from Sierra Leone. It costs the same to get a beef carcase to a wholesaler from Argentina as it does from parts of Britain. What is the Prime Minister doing to cut food miles?

For some reason, the mangetout section has been left out of my brief and I apologise for that. To be absolutely frank, I do not know, so I shall have to write to the hon. Gentleman on the subject—but I am sure that we are doing something.

If he will make a statement on the impact of cross-departmental working on the Government since 1997.

All Departments work closely together to ensure the co-ordination of policy. Cross-departmental working and its impact is most noticeable in areas such as crime and asylum and in relation to public health, where we need to bring a whole series of Departments together to work in a constructive and cooperative way.

The Prime Minister will know that Nottingham, North, especially its outer estates, is one of the poorest UK constituencies, but excellent cross-departmental working has helped to tackle some of the problems—the new deal, Sure Start and the building schools for the future programme. However, there are now 36 funding streams coming into Nottingham, North and 20 organisations involved in regeneration. Will the Prime Minister take a personal interest in trying to cut through and clarify the plethora of bodies and initials, which confuse local people, so that regeneration can be done not to, but with, the people who are its subject?

The point my hon. Friend raises is correct. Indeed, I am already taking an interest in, and have held several meetings on, the subject. Most people recognise that the money going into communities through the new deal, Sure Start and elsewhere is making a real difference to some of the poorest communities in our country, but it is true that there is a plethora of funding streams, which causes unnecessary difficulty and bureaucracy. The new local area agreements, which merge various funding streams locally to support the delivery of agreed outcomes, will be taken forward. I hope that in that area, too, we can learn from experience to ensure that people are accountable for the money we spend while also ensuring that they get it more effectively and quickly than they do at the moment. I would say one final thing to my hon. Friend: the other day, when I was in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough (Sir Stuart Bell), I saw the work that inner-city regeneration is doing with not just the support of local people but their active involvement, and that is a programme of which we can be very proud.

On the topic of urban regeneration, is the Prime Minister aware that in my constituency there are proposals to close three urban post offices? In two of those areas, the nearest post office is more than a mile away, and in one of the areas there are plans to build hundreds more houses, all of which will increase car journeys, yet only yesterday the Prime Minister said that he was concerned about the emission of poisonous gases into the atmosphere. How does he square his policy of closing post offices with his alleged concern for the environment?

It is not that we have a policy of closing post offices. The hon. Gentleman will know that, under the previous Government, about 3,000 post offices closed. Post offices have continued to close under this Government, because their business and financial viability is being altered as a result of more people getting their benefit not through the post office but through their bank account. We have set aside several hundred million pounds to support rural post offices, but in the end we cannot support every post office, no matter what its financial viability is. That is why we have substantial investment going in, but there is no point in kidding people; unless we double or treble that investment we cannot keep every post office open.

May I inform my right hon. Friend that, this week, we will be celebrating the fact that the 1,000th home on the Middle Park estate in Eltham will be improved under the decent homes programme? Although we are justifiably proud of our investment in decent homes, there still remains a problem in my area with young families who cannot find affordable homes. Those people have grown up in houses that were built by Labour, and they look to Labour to provide for them and their families. May I appeal to my right hon. Friend to allow local authorities once again to build council houses using their investment allowance?

First, the point that my hon. Friend raises is correct. There is obviously a real issue to do particularly with younger people wanting to get their feet on the rungs of housing ownership and being unable to do so, and we hope that we can address that over the next few weeks. There is also a need for greater social housing, and we are putting additional resources—billions of pounds—into that. He is also right in saying that there has been a substantial reduction in the number of social homes that do not meet the decency minimum threshold, and we have reduced that by 1.6 million homes in this country over the past few years, but we will put more investment and resource into it. I agree that one part of that must be social housing, which can come from a variety of sources. Over the next few years, we are supporting housing for up to 12,000 key workers in London. That will make a substantial difference not just to housing but to the quality of people who can come into our public services.