asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what response he has received to his circular to local authorities designed to control obscene or indecent advertising of films.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Croydon, South (Sir R. Thompson) on 13th May.—[Vol. 817, c. 606.]

I am grateful for that reply. Does my right hon. Friend accept that many people inside and outside this House who are neither prudes nor censorship lobbyists think that obscene and indecent displays in public places are becoming a serious menace? Will my right hon. Friend assure us that curbing these displays will be a top priority of the Home Office, in co-operation with local authorities, and that, if necessary, changes in the law will be introduced?

I accept that there is concern about this practice. That is why I issued my circular. However, dealing with obscene or indecent advertising is for the local authorities, and they have the legal power to do it. They are not answerable to me. It is their responsibility. The purpose of my circular was to make clear to the public and to local authorities the powers that local authorities have.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that constituents of mine in Manchester are concerned about the subjection of their children to obscene publicity of this kind and to obscene displays in shop windows? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the protection of children must be the main consideration in any action that he takes?

I accept that there is a great deal of concern of that kind. But the Question deals with the advertising of films. As I said, this is a matter for the local authorities. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman and his constituents ought to make representations to the local authority.

In view of the permissive nature of my right hon. Friend's circular, will he say that he will not delay ensuring that local authorities act on it, and that he will back up his circular with stronger implications to local authorities if there appears to be any unwillingness on their part to act?

It would be difficult for me to do that. Where local authorities have legal powers, it is not for me to tell them how to carry them out. That is for the people who elect them.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what progress he has made in the development of community project participation as a type of non-custodial penalty.

Does the hon. and learned Gentleman acknowledge that community service is a far more satisfactory alternative than sheer custodiality for very many offenders? Has the hon. and learned Gentleman any estimate of the proportion of first offenders currently in prison who could be more satisfactorily dealt with in this way, and will he say for how many of them such schemes are planned for operation in the next five years?

I cannot at the moment give an estimate of the kind for which the hon. Gentleman asks. The idea of community service in principle is extremely attractive. That is why we have set up a working party to look at the practical difficulties involved.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what initiatives the Government will now be taking to help improve morale in the Fire Service arising from their discussions with the fire authorities.

If I am right in thinking that the hon. Member has in mind the recommendations in the Holroyd Report about communications and relationships within the service and local consultative machinery, the answer is that I have not yet had the views of all the organisations concerned.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the direct relationship between wages and morale in the Fire Service? Is he aware also that firemen are decidedly apprehensive about the future purchasing power of the Fire Service wages if we enter the E.E.C. and become involved in the higher food prices which are inherent in the acceptance of the common agricultural policy? Can the right hon. Gentleman give a firm assurance that, if prices increase because of Britain's entry into Europe, Fire Service wages will also be increased?

The hon. Gentleman is trying to trap me into going a little beyond the scope of the Question. There has been a recent pay settlement, and we have established the Cunningham Committee which is looking at the relative position of firemen. I think that we must await the report of that body.

As the Holroyd Report was received about a year ago, is it not taking a long time to get discussions completed?

It takes more than one to make a discussion. I am still awaiting the views of people for whose comments I have asked.

asked the Secretary of state for the Home Department whether he is satisfied with the operation of Section 3 of the Race Relations Act, 1968, as it relates to the joint stock banks; and if he will make a statement.

I have no reason for supposing that this Section has given rise to difficulties, but if my hon. Friend has information to support that there is cause for disquiet, perhaps he would let me know.

Will my right hon. Friend tell us whether he has ever had a cheque cashed by a coloured cashier? Is he aware that yesterday I visited 12 banks and that in only one was a coloured face to be seen, and that was not in Barclay's D.C.O.? Will he encourage the other banks to follow the example of the National Westminster by issuing clear guidance for their staff that the Race Relations Act is to be fulfilled not only to the letter but in spirit?

The need to fulfil the Act to the letter and in spirit is recognised by the banks. I am not aware of examples where they are not doing so. A number of coloured staff are employed in branches in London. I cannot recall seeing one, but I think that I have. I think that the banks are doing a good job in this respect. I know that they intend to do so. I should be glad to consider any examples falling short of that.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will consider introducing legislation governing the standards and conditions of premises used for dog breeding.

My right hon. Friend is not persuaded that the introduction of legislation for this purpose is necessary.

Is my hon. and learned Friend aware of the anxiety about this problem felt nationally, and particularly in Cornwall, from both the public health and the animal welfare aspect? Does he agree that it is both logical and desirable to have legislation parallel to that for dog boarding kennels?

I am aware of the publicity in the Press on this matter concerning a kennel in Cornwall. Any case of cruelty or neglect in breeding establishments or elsewhere is covered by the Protection of Animals Act, 1911.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware of the growing concern about the care and treatment of animals generally and the astonishment at the leniency with which the most wicked crimes are often treated by the courts? Is it not time for a Home Office inquiry into all animal welfare?

It would be improper for me to comment on the individual sentence in any individual case, but the home Office is responsible for maximum penalties which are available to the courts. I did not know that there was any problem, but I will willingly look into it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proposals he has designed to lessen fire damage to property in Great Britain in view of the damage to the economy resulting from the present level of destruction.

Protection of property against fire is primarily a matter for owners and their insurers. Help from fire authorities is freely available, and legislation directed to the protection of life contributes to the protection of property. The Home Office will continue to encourage and co-ordinate publicity, covering all aspects of fire safety, whether undertaken by central and local government insurance interests or other bodies.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in the first three months of this year fire losses were 25 per cent. greater than last year? Is this not a burden on our economy? Will he consult our right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer and point out that it would be very helpful if 100 per cent. of the cost of specific fire-fighting equipment could be written off by companies as they so wished, and not just in the development areas?

I think that I am right in saying that provision is included in the Budget which will help in this matter when it becomes effective. Apart from that, we are preparing a voluntary code of practice for these matters. However, primarily people must be responsible for taking their own precautions, and the insurance companies are normally pretty hot on making sure that they do so.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will establish the Home Office forensic laboratories in Peterlee.

Peterlee is one of a number of possible sites under consideration for a new forensic science laboratory to serve the North-East.

I thank the hon. and learned Gentleman for that encouraging reply. Is he aware of the unique advantage enjoyed by Peterlee New Town in having a computer-based science centre, a project approved by the last Government and confirmed by this Government? Is he also aware that the project is in a state of development where Government assistance, in the shape of the transference of Government Departments, is now essential if it is to continue to develop?

I am aware that the Peterlee Development Corporation is seeking to build up Peterlee as a scientific centre, and the Government support it in that endeavour. This is one reason for our looking at Peterlee as a possible site for the forensic science laboratory.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what studies have been carried out to ascertain the effects of prison life upon young children.

The Home Office Research Unit has made a study of the immediate effect of the imprisonment of women upon their children left in the community. The number of children brought into prison is so small, and the period for which they remain is so short, that a study of the effect which the experience has upon them would be a very long-term project.

I accept that the intention behind the proposal for keeping young children in prison with their mothers for a longer period, if necessary, is entirely compassionate. Does the hon. and learned Gentleman agree that we are working in the dark concerning the long-term effects upon young children? Will he, even at this late stage in the proposal for the new Holloway, consider alternative methods of dealing with women offenders with pre-school children?

I accept that we have no research evidence to show the effect on a young child of spending a part of his time in prison with his mother. All I should say—I have been over this ground many times before—is that there will always be a proportion of women offenders for whom prison is probably the only possible punishment. In those circumstances, the Government think it right to press ahead with the rebuilding of Holloway, as was proposed by the previous Administration.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will now make a statement on an increase in salaries for probation officers.

The employers' side of the Joint Negotiating Committee for the Probation Service, with the agreement of the Government, has offered increased salaries for main grade officers with effect for one year from 1st April, 1971. There would be a general increase in the basic scale ranging from 8 to 8½ per cent. and a special annual allowance of £70 payable beyond the fourth point of that scale. Additionally, a long-service increment of £72 would be payable after 10 years on the maximum of the scale, making £2,150 a year in all. The employers were also prepared to offer a common starting salary of £1,500 for professionally trained entrants, although this would involve smaller percentage increases at certain points on the basic scale. I understand that the staff side representatives would have been prepared to conclude an agreement on this basis at a future meeting of the Joint Negotiating Committee. But the recent Annual Conference of the National Association of Probation Officers passed a vote of no confidence calling upon them to resign.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Does he agree that a strong probation service is a vital factor in the Government's plans to tackle crime? Many probation officers regard this offer as sadly inadequate. In view of the importance of a strong probation service, will my right hon. Friend consider setting up an independent inquiry into the conditions and pay of the probation service?

This offer was designed with that point very much in view—namely, the need to make a special increase in the strength of the probation service. I believe that, if accepted, it would have had that effect. It is, in a sense, analogous with the settlement with the police which included a two-part settlement: a basic increase equivalent to the general increase in wages and salaries and a subsequential increase to deal with special problems, particularly wastage.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I believe that he is trying to help probation officers? But surely there must be something wrong when people dedicated to the probation service know that, by moving to the local authority and doing a similar job, they can get a tremendous increase in salary? Is not the right hon. Gentleman putting a premium on the loyalty of these people? Will he take the matter back to the Cabinet and tell his colleagues that if he does not do something about it, far from an increase in the numbers of probation officers, there will be fewer at the end of the year?

I do not believe that that will happen. Recruitment has been going well recently. As I said, staff side representatives would have been prepared to conclude an agreement on this basis.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that while, on the face of it, this has been a reasonable offer, if he wants to get the strength of the probation service up from about 3,200 to nearer 5,000, in view of its manifold responsibilities and to meet the claims of Seebohm, he will have to take a wider look at the matter, possibly on the lines recommended by my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham, South (Mr. Fowler)?

I should not have recommended the settlement unless I believed that it would carry out the policy which the Government announced, and to which we are committed, of expanding the size and strength of the service.

Is it much good the Home Secretary's calling in aid the negotiating committee if it has been sacked by its annual conference? Does not that reveal a depth of feeling perhaps unknown to the right hon. Gentleman when he made the original proposals? Will not he respond to the expression of opinion on both sides of the House that he should take the matter into consideration again himself? Does he propose to impose the settlement now, or are there any further steps he intends to take to try to get some acceptance among the staff?

We must for the moment await what the staff side intends to do. There was the negotiation about which I have spoken, and the staff side representatives were prepared to conclude an agreement. I do not yet know what it intends to do at the next negotiating committee.

Must the Home Secretary wait until he sees what the staff side will do? Is not the primary responsibility his? As he is obviously aware of the dissatisfaction which the staff side feels, because it has sacked its negotiating committee, will he say whether he is ready, in advance of the proposals from the staff side, to consider alternative and better arrangements?

The responsibility for making offers rests with the employers' side. I agree with the offer which it put forward and think that it is right in the circumstances. I understood that it was accepted by the representatives. I am sorry that that has led to the present situation. It is right to wait and see the form taken by the new situation.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is satisfied that magistrates' courts are complying fully with the provisions of the Criminal Justice Act, 1967, relating to bail; and if he will make a statement.

This is a matter on which my right hon. Friend is consulting the organisations concerned with magistrates' courts.

Is the hon. and learned Gentleman aware that Section 18(7) of the Criminal Justice Act requires that where bail is refused the court should inform unrepresented defendants of their right to appeal to a judge in chambers, and that by the same Section the court must give written notice of the grounds of refusal to an unrepresented defendant? In view of the report which has recently been published by Mr. Zander, there is ground for believing that courts are not complying with those requirements. Will the Under-Secretary look into the question very carefully, as a matter of great urgency, bearing in mind the way in which these factors impinge upon our civil liberties?

I am aware of the provisions of Section 18 of the 1967 Act, which the hon. Gentleman correctly stated. It is as a result of the evidence brought forward by Mr. Zander that my right hon. Friend is consulting the organisations concerned to see whether those provisions are being properly implemented.

Will my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary bear in mind when considering the matter that in the past two years large numbers of cases have come before the courts of persons who have committed offences whilst on bail? When making his representations to the magistrates, will he bear in mind the considerable difficulties they have in deciding whether to grant bail in particular circumstances?

The decision whether to grant bail in particular circumstances must be a matter for the individual court. The matter on which I said that my right hon. Friend was consulting the organisations concerned with the magistrates' courts was the implementation of subsections (7) and (8) Section 18 of the 1967 Act.

What percentage of those persons not given bail are afterwards acquitted or, of those found guilty, are not sentenced to imprisonment?

I cannot without notice give the exact proportion. I know that the figure of those not eventually sent to prison is substantial, but there are many reasons why they may have been refused bail in the first place. We are looking into the whole question of bail, and are in particular considering the possibility of a bail hostel.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if, when he is giving consideration to releasing prisoners on parole who have been convicted of robbery or robbery with violence involving large sums of money, he will regard the amount of restitution to be made by the prisoners as a predominant factor in deciding whether or not to grant parole.

This is a factor taken into account by both the Parole Board and myself. Its importance has to be assessed in the circumstances of each case.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that such crimes are very carefully planned, even on a scientific basis, and that if those who have been sentenced have to take probably only a third of their punishment in prison they may regard that as a good incentive for further crime?

Questions of granting parole are extremely difficult. In the short time in which I have been at the Home Office, nothing has given me more concern than individual cases of granting parole. Therefore, I cannot agree that restitution should be a predominant factor, though I agree that it is one of the factors which should always be taken into account.

Is there any prospect of the engaging habit spreading by which a prisoner who has been convicted of robbery of a large sum of money has it sent to him in prison so that it may be intercepted by the authorities?

I have not heard of that. I will look into it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has received the memorandum from the Howard League for Penal Reform on conditions at Ashford and other remand centres; and what action he is taking to improve the situation.

The answer to the first part of the Question is Yes, Sir. The answer to the second part is that, as regards Ashford, overcrowding has been relieved by the use of accommodation at Latchmere House, and as regards the general issue, administrative measures are in hand to reduce the number of persons remanded in custody and the length of time for which they are so detained.

Is it the case that the number of prisoners remanded in custody and the length of time for which they are detained have been increasing? What measures does the hon. and learned Gentleman propose to reduce the numbers of people detained on remand and the length of time they are detained, and to improve the accommodation supplied for them?

There is no doubt that there is substantial overcrowding in remand centres. I accept that that is part of the general picture of prison overcrowding. We have sent a circular to all clerks to the court suggesting arrangements whereby, when a person is remanded for reports to be made, the prison can inform the court immediately they have been made, so that he can perhaps be brought back at an earlier date than the date to which he was remanded, or he can be remanded in custody for reports with a clause saying that he can receive bail the moment the reports have been completed. As I said just now, we are also looking at the question of a bail hostel.

Does the hon. and learned Gentleman agree that much overcrowding in remand centres is caused by the long delay during which young people are kept in custody? I know that at Latchmere House one youngster has been kept in custody for five months awaiting trial. This adds to the problem of overcrowding.

The delay in the hearing of criminal trials is the major cause of the length of time people spend in custody awaiting trial. It is hoped that the Courts Act, which was recently passed, will help to improve this situation. My noble Friend the Lord Chancellor has certain building programmes under way to provide more courts in the London area.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department by what percentage indictable crime in the area covered by the Brixton Police Station has risen or fallen in 1970 compared with 1969; and how this compares with the Metropolitan Police area as a whole.

Compared with 1969, the number of indictable offences known to the police in 1970 for the area covered by the Brixton police station decreased by 8·1 per cent. The corresponding figure for the Metropolitan Police District as a whole was a decrease of 0·1 per cent.

Does not that encouraging downward trend, which follows a 5 per cent. decrease last year, show that Brixton is a much more law-abiding place than many people will admit? Does not it also show what can be achieved by good community relations in which all sections of the public take an active part?

Like the hon. Gentleman, I welcome the reduction of crime in Brixton, and I concede that, on the face of it, it appears to show what he suggests. The police in the area, as in the rest of the country, are doing excellent work in their fight against crime. It is encouraging to see figures of reducing crime such as we have seen in Brixton.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will seek to make it statutorily compulsory for caravans to be fitted with two gallon water carbon dioxide fire extinguishers.

My right hon. Friend does not think that this would be justifiable.

Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that a considerable body of opinion feels that it is not only justifiable but essential, because caravans are notoriously bad risks, and while it takes only five minutes for a caravan fire to become uncontrollable, the average time taken throughout the country for fire brigades to reach caravan sites is 10 minutes? Therefore, prompt and effective action is vital, especially as the site fire-fighting facilities recommended in the model standards are neither adequate nor mandatory?

I am aware of the facts my hon. Friend gives. It is important that there should be adequate fire-fighting facilities on the sites. We think that that is a better way to tackle the problem than statutorily to require the individual caravan to have a fire-fighting appliance. I should add that the provision of adequate fire-fighting facilities on site is one of the conditions attached to licences under the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act, 1960.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that the United Kingdom Immigrants Advisory Service have passed a resolution to give confidential help to immigrants who entered or remained in the United Kingdom illegally and wish to regularise their position; and what action he proposes to take in the matter.

People whose presence here is illegal because, having been admitted lawfully, they overstay their leave have rights of appeal under the Immigration Appeals Act, 1969 and it is a legitimate function of U.K.I.A.S. to assist them. This is not the case where the initial entry itself was unlawful. I am ensuring that this distinction is clear to U.K.I.A.S., in relation to the use of public funds.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his reply. Will he make it plain to the Immigrants Advisory Service that were it to give confidential advice to those whose initial entry into the country was illegal, it might put itself in a position of being accessory to the offence of being an illegal immigrant?

I am in correspondence with the Chairman on this matter and I do not anticipate any difficulty in reaching agreement.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is satisfied with the operation of the Firearms Act, 1968, especially in relation to the penalties being imposed for the carrying of a loaded shotgun in a public place and the possession of a shotgun without a certificate; and if he will make a statement.

The operation of the Act is under review; but, subject to the limits prescribed by law, it is for the court to decide what penalty to impose in a particular case.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that although penalties under the Act are extreme and in some cases can result in a term of imprisonment of up to five years and a fine, quite often courts impose only a derisory fine of, say £2 or £3? If the Act is to have a chance to work, does he not agree that a word of advice from him to the courts on the implementation of these penalties would be a good thing?

The circumstances in which somebody can possess a shotgun without a certificate can vary enormously. Therefore, it is inevitable that the sentences imposed will vary a great deal. It is for a court to decide in a particular case, and in the light of the circumstances, the appropriate penalty, but I have no doubt that note will be taken of what my hon. Friend said.

Is the Home Secretary aware that the point made by the hon. Member for Harborough (Mr. Farr) is causing grave concern since it is felt that the Act is not working because the proper penalties are not being enforced? Would he be prepared to look at the facts to see how easy it is to come by a shotgun or any other offensive weapon? Is there not need for a review to examine whether there should be much more stringent laws relating to a person being able to get hold of a weapon and carrying it about in order to threaten civilians?

It is for Parliament to prescribe the maximum penalties and for the court to decide the particular penalty. We should not take upon ourselves the decision as to what sentence is to be imposed in a paricular case. The operation of the Act is at present under review, and I will ensure that what has been said today will be fully taken into account in the course of that review.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what research is being conducted by his Department into the compilation of dossiers of personal information to further the apprehension of criminals.

The police national computer project will provide an index to the criminal names files held at criminal record offices. Research is being undertaken to see whether the content of those files—for example, details of convictions—and other police information can usefully be put on a computer. No new personal dossiers are being compiled or are contemplated.

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for giving me that detailed information. Could he tell the House whether this will be one of the matters to be considered by the inquiry which has been set up to look into the allegation of leaks of confidential information from Government Departments?

Yes. Once the information is on the computer it will be much easier to guarantee the security of the information.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what changes he proposes to seek to make in the Immigration Bill as a result of the most recent Ministerial meeting in Brussels in connection with the United Kingdom's application to join the European Economic Community.

None, Sir.

Is it not odd that, as well as the muddle over patriality and non-patriality in the present Immigration Bill, right in the middle of negotiations on the Common Market, which must fundamentally affect Britain's immigration laws, the Government have nothing to say about this matter?

If it were necessary to say something, it would be said, but these negotiations are still in process. My information is that if we were to accept the whole provisions of the Treaty of Rome unamended in this regard, it would not necessarily cause any amendment of the Immigration Bill.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his last statement is the subject of considerable argument and that there is evidence that if we were to accept the full provisions of the Treaty of Rome, the regulations and the directives, particularly those affecting immigrant families, it would be necessary to amend the Bill? Could we have an authoritative statement from the Home Secretary setting out in which circumstances he believes amendment of the present Bill to be unnecessary?

As I said, the provisions of the Treaty of Rome, which I have studied, say nothing that will mean any amendment of the Bill.

The Home Secretary is a man we respect, but he cannot ride off a simple statement of that sort. Is he not aware that there is considerable argument about this matter and about the whole basis of the Act, which rests on the exclusion of immigrant families in certain circumstances, and the fact that they may not come here except for limited periods is undermined by the provisions of the Treaty of Rome? Are we not entitled to a better explanation from the right hon. Gentleman of how he reconciles these differences?

I can do no more than give the House my own considered view, having considered the matter carefully, that the obligations of the Treaty would not involve amendment of the Bill.

Is my right hon. Friend not right in maintaining that position since, apart from the response of the member countries of the Community as it is now, or as it will be when enlarged, the control of immigration into each country is entirely a matter for domestic legislation?

I do not think that I shall argue detailed points in question and answer—we have plenty of scope for that elsewhere. I repeat that, having gone into the point, the information I have given to the House this afternoon is to the best of my knowledge correct.

How does the Home Secretary reconcile his last statement with Article 1 of the Treaty which provides that any national of a member State, irrespective of his place of permanent residence, shall be entitled to take up and carry on a wage-paid occupation in the territory of any member State?

It is possible to carry that out within the terms of the Bill.

It is not.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proposals he now has to amend the Shops Act.

None at present, Sir.

Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that as the law stands this is a nonsense and that we urgently need a new shops Bill? Could he say when there will be a Bill before the House on this matter?

The Government will follow the progress made by private Members' legislation on this subject. While the Government are generally in favour of flexibility on shops' hours, they recognise that proposals for change arouse controversy and concern.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what investigation is being made about the death of Stephen McCarthy, an escapee from a borstal institution.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reply. Is he aware that in cases such as this it would be far better to have an independent open inquiry?

This case was referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions, who is a wholly independent person.

Is the Home Secretary aware that the case has now been referred to the Parliamentary Commissioner for investigation of further aspects? Is he also aware that tonight I am meeting the Southwark coroner to discuss another aspect of the case and that if my hon. Friend had consulted me about this matter it might have saved a little time?

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will institute a public inquiry into the case of James Hanratty, who was convicted and hanged for the alleged murder of Michael Gregston on 22nd August, 1961.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will now order a public inquiry into the circumstances of the trial and conviction of James Hanratty for murder.

I cannot at present add to the reply which I gave to a Question on 6th May by the hon. Member for Derby, North (Mr. Whitehead).—[Vol. 816, c. 424.]

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is considerable disquiet, both inside and outside the House, about a possible miscarriage of justice in this case? Does he not think that, in the light of the evidence advanced in recent weeks, there is such an element of doubt about the guilt or otherwise of James Hanratty as to justify a public inquiry? Will he say when he is likely to make up his mind whether a public inquiry will take place?

Certainly. "As soon as possible" is the answer. This is a matter that gives rise to considerable public concern and that is why I want to get the full facts before coming to a conclusion. This is a complicated matter. I am having a full analysis made of the latest publication on this subject and I shall then have to determine whether it brings out any new factors not previously known. I cannot make a decision on that until I have been fully advised—[An HON. MEMBER: "By whom?"] By my advisers, of course. There are voluminous documents which I shall have to study, and, until I have examined all the advice I cannot reach a conclusion, but I will do so as soon as I can.

Is the Home Secretary not aware that a full investigation is wanted by many hon. Members on both sides of the House, so as to get at the facts by power of subpoena? Those facts will not be established by study of the documents in the possession of the Home Office, nor by the statement and allegations of conspiracy, and confession of Mr. Peter Alphon. What is necessary is a public inquiry, with power of subpoena.

This has been considered many times in the past. My duty is to decide whether anything new has emerged which calls for a new inquiry. I cannot decide that until a full analysis is made of the book, which has several hundred pages, and until substantial research has been done. I cannot come to a conclusion until I have the full facts.

The mother of the boy concerned is a constituent of mine in that she resides in my constituency. Will the Home Secretary give us an analysis of the people who have asked him for an inquiry? It is important for all of us in the North of England to know the facts. My right hon. Friend has had comprehensive representations from a large number of people for an inquiry, and we should welcome knowledge on the subject.

As I said, this case has been considered by my predecessors. I approach it afresh. I am determined to get possession of all the available facts and come to a conclusion on that basis.

I am sure that the Home Secretary will approach this matter with a great sense of responsibility, as Home Secretaries always do. In the light of what has happened, I think that he should take as much time as he needs to consider it, but if he reaches a conclusion that there should be a fresh public inquiry, I, speaking from my past study of the case, should not want to dissent from that merely because a different conclusion was reached earlier.

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for what he says.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible opportunity.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department in considering appointments to the com- mittee to review the licensing laws, what inquiries he made as to the qualifications of potential members for assessing the views of regular customers at their local pub.

I had this consideration much in mind in issuing invitations.

Will my right hon. Friend tell us whether these people do know what goes on in the ordinary good old British pub and not just in the flashy joints? It is a big mistake that there should be no representative from the licensing trade.

I considered this, and I thought it wrong to have representation of any particular interest, be it the brewing or the drinking interest.

Does not the Home Secretary know that the composition of this committee is regarded as a joke by everyone in the licensing trade? What are the qualifications of this variegated assortment of people who know nothing at all about the licensing laws?

I thought they were rather a good selection. Certainly many of them, like the Home Secretary, have some knowledge of the effects of the licensing laws. The expert and interested bodies in the licensing trade will have a full and complete opportunity to put their views before the Committee.

Will the Home Secretary assure the House that the interests of the licensees, who form one of the most long-suffering sections of the public, will be fully protected?

Yes, Sir, I am sure they will be. The whole point is that they should have a full opportunity, as they will have, of stating their views in detail to the Committee.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what reports he has received from the Metropolitan Commissioner of Police concerning traffic problems in North Ealing; and if he will make a statement.

The police are continuing to do all they can to deal with the problem of heavy lorries in residential streets about which my hon. Friend wrote to the hon. Member last October.

Is the hon. and learned Gentleman aware that there is not much improvement, and that the traffic problem in the Perivale, Greenford and part of Northolt are becoming extremely serious? Will he again get in touch with the Commissioner of Police and ask him to assist the local police in tackling this grievous problem and so ease the minds of many of my constituents who are seriously perturbed about it?

I am sure the police wilt do all they can to ease the problem. Any question of traffic regulation is of course a matter for the local authority. The duty of the police is to carry out the law, and I am sure they are doing all they can to enforce the law as it exists.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will place in the Library a copy of the public speech made on 5th May at The Guardian dinner in London on the European Economic Community.

asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of the public speech he made in London on 5th May concerning the European Economic Community.

I have been asked to reply.

Vouz avez, avez-vows? [Laughter.]

Order. I cannot hear the hon. Member.

Est-ce que—

Order. The hon. Member should try again, in another language.

I accept your Ruling, Mr. Speaker. I was trying to explain to the House, particularly to those hon. Members who are pro-European, that as a result of the Prime Minister's meeting with M. Pompidou last night—[HON. MEMBERS: "Question."] I am merely asking whether the Prime Minister took any French lessons before he met M. Pompidou in Paris.

I think my right hon. Friend is fully briefed on every aspect of the problem.

Did not the Prime Minister say that we should enter the European Economic Community with clear eyes and without self-deception? While it might be apparent to some of us that the long-term advantages of getting into the Common Market might be quite considerable, the short-term price we have to pay might be completely unacceptable. Will the right hon. Gentleman take good care that the Prime Minister will spell out in detail the short-term price we are bound to have to pay?

It is surely one of the great problems with succeeding negotions that the short-term factors are very different from the long-term factors. In the economic field, the long-term factors are probably predominant, but it has been quite evident in debates in the House that both the long-term and the short-term considerations must be watched.

Will the right hon. Gentleman, while congratulating my hon. Friend on his French, which is about as good as the Prime Minister's and better than mine, in relation to the speech made by the Prime Minister at The Guardian dinner, give an assurance that in the talks now proceeding in Paris the Prime Minister will not enter into any commitment about nuclear pooling or about any special bilateral defence relationship with France, or hint that this may be part of an ultimate deal? This is of fundamental importance to the House's attitude to this question.

As these talks are now taking place, as the agenda is confidential and as my right hon. Friend will be making a full statement to the House when he returns, it would be quite wrong for me to answer that supplementary question.

Of course the agenda is confidential, and of course the talks are confidential until the Prime Minister makes a statement to the House, but this point has been raised many times in the House and we are now confused by the amount of Press briefing on this question. Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the House is entitled to an assurance that there will be no commitment on this highly controversial question before there has been a report to the House by the Prime Minister and before he can get the authority of the House, which he will not get from this side of the House, to make such an offer?

As the right hon. Gentleman says, this matter has often been raised in the House and my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is clearly well aware of it.

If my right hon. Friend did take French lessons before going to Paris, may we learn the name of his teacher so that we may avoid drinking from the same obviously British source?

Is it the commonly held Government view that, as expressed by the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, assuming we join the Common Market, in the short term there will be a savage downturn in our trade? Will he clarify the position for the House and the country?

My right hon. Friend did not use that language or anything like it. I answered this point earlier when I said that there are short-term and long-term factors in this whole equation, some pluses and some minuses. We must weigh up the totality.

asked the Prime Minister if he will seek to make a further official visit to the United Nations.

I have been asked to reply.

Is not the Prime Minister concerned to arrest the decline in British prestige at the United Nations occasioned by the Government's policies on South Africa and immigration? If the question arises of the British seat in the Security Council, may we not find that we have too many enemies and too few friends?

I do not accept either of the premises in that supplementary question. I do not agree that our prestige in the United Nations is falling. I certainly do not agree that our permanent membership of the Security Council is in question.

asked the Prime Minister if he has now decided to make an official visit to the West Midlands with particular reference to Birmingham.

I have been asked to reply.

Is the Deputy Prime Minister aware that the unemployment situation in Birmingham has now reached desperate proportions, and is he aware that while there was a decline in the national figures as given today, the figures for Birmingham announced yesterday showed an increase? Is he further aware that for the national picture this shows, when seasonally adjusted, a very clear upward trend? What measures do the Government intend to take to halt this decline and to produce a situation in which increasing numbers of job opportunities are made available?

Of course the figures give rise to concern. I believe that the wholly unemployed percentage in Birmingham is still below the national average. On the whole question of unemployment, the measures taken by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor in the Budget will have a significant effect.

Would my right hon. Friend bear in mind that, in the Midlands, it is not only a question of Birmingham being affected by an exceptionally high rate of unemployment compared with their traditional rates, but also the dormitory constituencies around Birmingham, such as Bromsgrove and South Worcestershire, and others, housing many thousands of motor workers, and that the turgid conditions of the motor industry today urgently require attention?

Yes, Sir. The best cures for these matters are to carry out the measures in the Budget, to deal with the problems of wage inflation and to deal with labour relations.

How would the right hon. Gentleman balance the likely effects of the Budget measures upon Birmingham's unprecedentedly high level of unemployment, compared with measures under consideration by his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry?

The effect of the Budget on particular unemployment figures, as the right hon. Gentleman knows very well, is not exactly predictable and takes a good while to become apparent—particularly when many of the Budget measures have not yet come into operation.

The right hon. Gentleman did not begin to answer the question. The Budget measures were merely a promise. The question was related to the measures under consideration by his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry.

It was a question which I thought my right hon. Friend answered very effectively a day or two ago.

asked the Prime Minister what communciation he has received from the North-West Industrial Development Association concerning the unemployment situation in the North-West; and what reply he has sent.

I have been asked to reply.

Why does the right hon. Gentleman refuse the request of the North-West Industrial Development Association to meet the Prime Minister so that it can put to him its request for intermediate area status for the area? In view of the fact that all these unemployment figures show that the number out of work in the Greater Manchester area has risen yet again, that the number of wholly unemployed in the North-West is up yet again and that the number of unfilled vacancies is down yet again, how can the Prime Minister be so callous and complacent?

As my right hon. Friend explained on an earlier occasion, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry have recently been in touch with the Association, and its views are, therefore, well known to the Prime Minister.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of us on this side of the House see little sense in turning more and more chunks of the country into either development areas or intermediate areas and that we believe that the Government are making the most valuable contribution by improving the environment and improving communications?

I take note of what my hon. and learned Friend says.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that one of the factors in this matter is that public investment in the North-West is far lower than in the rest of the country, on average? Will he seek to assist this—the local election results will assist to some extent—by giving the North-West the same rights and grants for clearing derelict land as are given to Scotland and Wales?

This assistance is pretty extensive and there are special provisions for areas of particular difficulty. As to the amount of public investment in that particular area in relation to the population, I should want to check the figures before accepting that premise.

Would my right hon. Friend bear in mind the need for multipurpose capital investment in the infrastructure of the North-West, particularly reclamation of the Dee and the More-cambe Bay barrage?

Public investment in infrastructure of a multi-purpose character is one of the most important factors.

At Irlam in my constituency, where we face grave redundancies, there is no development area or intermediate area grant at all. On that basis alone, would it not be right for the Government to meet the development council from the North-West?

As my right hon. Friend has explained, the views of the council are well known to him through his colleagues, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that the main problem in Lancashire is to attract new industry, particularly from the South of England? Is he not aware that the shocking industrial relations of Merseyside reflect on the whole of the North-West, and could not publicity be given to other areas, such as Bolton, where industrial relations are extremely good and where we have the best quality of workers in the world?

The solution to all these problems rests in stimulating more investment in the economy generally, and the Government's courses to that end are the Budget proposals of my right hon. Friend and the attack on the problem of cost inflation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, especially on Merseyside, one of the worst aspects is the number of teenagers who have never worked yet? While the Government may, for electoral purposes, have wiped off Merseyside, nobody is entitled to wipe off the people of Merseyside as far as work in concerned.

That is not the intention of any Government. I must repeat that the way to tackle the problem of unemployment, locally and nationally, is fundamentally to get economic expansion, which depends on dealing with cost inflation, on dealing with industrial relations, and on carrying through the Budget proposals.

asked the Prime Minister which Minister is responsible for the dissemination of information about the United Kingdom's possible accession to the European Economic Community.

I have been asked to reply.

Has the right hon. Gentleman noticed the curious coincidence that the print order of Government fact sheets on the Common Market is being quadrupled at the same time as public support has diminished almost to vanishing point? Would he identify cause and effect in this situation? Has the print order gone up because the public are so disenchanted, or are the public so disenchanted because they are learning more about the Common Market?

The reason for publishing fact sheets is to give the maximum information to the public about a matter which, as the House would agree, is of fundamental importance.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that since my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster is doing such a magnificent job in the negotiations, it might be worth while to augment his efforts by allowing him a Minister of State, a junior Minister, to tour the countryside to explain how well he is doing in Europe?

My right hon. Friend will doubtless consider that suggestion, too.

Assuming that whichever Minister is responsible for this is bilingual, would the right hon. Gentleman arrange to place in the Library or to circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a copy of the highly important text of the broadcast by President Pompidou a couple of nights ago in the French original and in the best Foreign Office or Home Office translation into English? In this, would he give some guidance to the House, which is so far very deficient, whether the translation of President Pompidou's word "rupture"—[Laughter.] In case you could not hear me, Mr. Speaker, in English, "rupture"—

Rapture, careless, rapture.

The hon. Gentleman must make his own arrangements with his own surgeon in these matters. [Laughter.] May I continue my question? Will the right hon. Gentleman place this in the Library in French and in an authoritative version in English, giving the Government's translation of this word, which reads in French "rupture"—and which I understand is translated into English as "rupture"—of relations between Britain and New Zealand, which is apparently a condition of future negotiations? Since the B.B.C. in one translation said that it was "disruption", which is not the English translation of the French word, the second time did not translate it at all and the third time correctly translated it as "break", may we have the Government's view of what President Pompidou was saying?

The right hon. Gentleman has raised an important point; I will consider doing that. Bilingualism is not a characteristic of all Ministers, certainly not of Home Secretaries. I follow the precedent of the late Sir Winston Churchill, who began one speech with the words, "Prenez garde: je vais parler Francais."

rose—

The hon. Member is going to speak in Italian.

The language of the Vatican is Latin, not Italian. Would it not be more to the point if the Leader of the Opposition, in any language of his choosing—French, English or anything else—gave the country some indication of where he stands on this vital issue?

I sometimes wonder whether that problem could be elucidated even by the resources of the Vatican.

rose—

Answer.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his interest in these matters. Since he heard me say—I said it on television last week and I have said it in this House many times—that I want to get into the Common Market if the terms are right, and I am waiting to see whether the terms are right, would he say whether he disagrees with that, or whether he does not take the view that he would like to get in the Common Market if the terms are right?

There is no mystery about that. Of course I want to get into the Common Market if the terms are right.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I refer to Questions Nos. 21 and 45 on the Order Paper? Is it not the practice that when hon. Members decide to table Questions affecting the constituencies of other hon. Members they should at least do them the courtesy of informing them in advance?

I think that that is the convention.