asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she has yet completed her examination of the role and status of student unions; and if she will make a statement.

Discussions with the parties mainly concerned are not yet complete. At present a number of different proposals have emerged but there is little common agreement.

I thank the Secretary of State for her reply. If the right hon. Lady agrees that it is important that good relations are maintained between the student unions and all areas of higher education, does she agree that it was rather unfortunate that her former Undersecretary of State made statements at the end of October in Abingdon about the leadership of the National Union of Students, calling it irresponsible and hypocritical? Does she think that that is unlikely to give the background to the discussions that she needs?

I have nothing but praise for my former Under-Secretary of State.

Will my right hon. Friend consider making political organisations within student unions self-financing on the basis of individual subscriptions from the members? This is an area in which there is widespread public concern, and I ask my right hon. Friend to consider the matter seriously.

There was a suggestion in the consultative document that certain subscriptions might be on a voluntary basis. That met with a very mixed response, but it is a possible suggestion.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will give advice to local authorities on the computerised storage of personal information about teachers and pupils.

Not at present.

Does the Secretary of State think that it is time that she consulted not only representatives of local authorities but the teachers' unions? When she does so, will she bear in mind that there are some very strong objections by parents and teachers to surrendering personal information without sufficient safeguards that do not really exist for maintaining the confidentiality of information?

The hon. Gentleman's question is a little premature. The Local Authorities Management Services and Computer Committee has not completed its consideration of the findings of a feasibility study by using a computer for storing information on pupils and teachers. However, it has already published some notes for the guidance of local authorities on computer privacy.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she will now approve a commencement date for the building of a new school to replace Prestwick Oak Lodge School for educationally subnormal children.

This project will be considered for inclusion in the Design List 1973–74, which is due to be announced in the spring of next year.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many children in my constituency, and in the area adjoining the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Bury and Radcliffe (Mr. Fidler). who are waiting for places at a special school cannot at the moment find a place at the present building at Prestwick? The pressure will be further aggravated by the siting of a junior hostel in Whitefield in the near future. Can my hon. Friend give a further indication than that which he has been able to give so far?

I have seen the correspondence which my hon. Friend has had with my predecessor. I know the personal interest which my hon. Friend has taken in this school. In fact, he has visited it. My Department is well aware of the shortcomings of the existing premises, but we have not received any proposals from the Lancashire authority for the inclusion of projects in the 1972–73 preliminary list. When and if we do, I can assure my hon. Friend that my noble Friend Lord Belstead and I will give the matter the most sympathetic consideration.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will issue guidance to local authorities regarding the holding of 11-plus selection examinations in spring, 1973 where proposals for secondary education are being contested by a large section of the local ratepayers.

Until proposals for changes of character of existing schools have been approved local education authorities have a responsibility to operate them without such changes. The details of any selection procedures required are the responsibility of the local education authorities but those procedures must be effective.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Birmingham has not made any arrangements for an 11-plus examination to be held for junior school leavers next year, even though her decision with regard to the Birmingham Education Committee's comprehensive plans cannot possibly be known by then? Will she not step in to avoid the educational chaos which seems highly likely to develop in Birmingham?

Again, I think that it might be a little too soon to do that. I have made it clear that Birmingham must run the schools as they are until permission is given to change their character. The period for objections to Birmingham's proposals does not expire until about 13th January, and it seems most unlikely that a decision would follow soon after that because it is a very big plan and big plans of that kind take several months to examine. The objections themselves will take several months to examine.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that, notwithstanding what the hon. Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Mrs. Knight) has said, the present city council of Birmingham was elected on a massive mandate to abolish the obscene 11-plus examination, that it is fully supported in this proposal by the National Union of Teachers and the National Association of Schoolmasters, and that, while there may well be argument about the details of reorganisation which the right hon. Lady will wish to take into account, nevertheless, to an overwhelming extent, the parents of Birmingham do not want to tolerate this offensive examination a moment longer?

Birmingham, like any other local education authority, is just as much subject to the law as I am, and the law under Section 13, with provision for objections, must be followed.

Will my right hon. Friend look at the very serious point which has been raised and is widely believed in Birmingham—that the local education authority, in instructing the chief education officer to make no arrangements for junior schools leaving examinations next year, is in contravention of Section 13(5) of the Education Act, 1944, as amended?

I do not believe that it is yet in contravention of the Act. That is my advice. I hope I have made it clear that the schools must continue as they are until permission has been given to change them. The Birmingham education authority issued the notices wrongly in the first instance and did not display them properly. It has re-issued them, and that factor itself has given rise to considerable delay.

What is the right hon. Lady's view about the 11-plus selection examination? Is she for or against it?

I have no personal view.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will now make a statement about her proposals for the expansion of nursery education.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she will now withdraw Circular 8/60.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what plans she has for the expansion of nursery education; and if she will make a statement.

I am not yet ready to make an announcement. Full details of the Government's new priorities in the education service will be given to Parliament in due course.

But does the right hon. Lady not think it high time that she unveiled the promise that she made at the Tory Party conference in October? Will she give an assurance that she will not go back on that undertaking? Can she in the meantime explain why there has been an under-spending of £785,000 on the urban aid programme, which could well be used to provide more nursery classes in priority areas?

I cannot answer on the urban aid programme, which comes under the Home Office. I can only tell the hon. Lady that we have used up our full quota on nursery school places. I have approved an extra 13,124 nursery school places under that programme in England and Wales, which is the larger part of the nursery places provided under the urban aid programme. I assure the hon. Lady that I shall not go back on my promise to introduce a programme of nursery education on the education budget.

Although my right hon. Friend is not responsible for the urban aid programme, is she in a position to say whether, in making their bids for the next phase of the programme, local authorities did or did not show marked preference for more emphasis on nursery education and pre-school provision?

I think that they put in for quite a number of extra nursery school places but I could not give my hon. Friend the exact priorities without a specific Question to that effect. But there will be more places under the latest urban aid programme.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will seek powers to enable her to finance courses in petroleum technology at postgraduate level.

The recurrent grants provided by my right hon. Friend through the University Grants Committee can be used, and are already used, to finance postgraduate courses in subjects which are associated with the petroleum industry.

The hon. Gentleman has not answered the Question. Does not he agree that with the advent of North Sea oil there is a need to consider allocating greater financial resources for the provision of graduate courses in petroleum technology? Will he bear in mind the areas where the oil is found? For example, if any consideration is given in the allocation of financial resources, will he give consideration to Heriot Watt University in Midlothian?

I know that the hon. Gentleman takes great interest in this subject, and I assure him that the Department considers it to be of the greatest importance to the country. The meeting of the needs for new requirements, however, is not a matter for us but for the universities themselves. The Heriot Watt Institute of Offshore Technology has got off to a very good start, thanks to a private grant, and we shall continue our interest in the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she is satisfied with the operation of the Arts Council; and if she will make a statement.

Yes, Sir.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there was great pleasure on both sides of the House when, following a letter from one of his predecessors, the Arts Council gave a grant to the National Youth Orchestra? Will he now dispel any suggestion that the Arts Council is biased against workingclass culture and send it a similar letter requesting a grant to the National Youth Brass Band?

The allocation of individual grants is a matter for the Arts Council. My noble Friend the Paymaster-General cannot do it. He is like Bagehot's constitutional sovereign. He has the right to be consulted, the right to encourage and the right to warn, but not, himself, to make grants. But I am able to say that he and I are of the view that "culture" should be widely interpreted, and we believe that brass bands give great enjoyment and provide opportunities for participation to a large number of people, and that in its own way a brass band can make as big a contribution to our culture as the Amadeus String Quartet.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if, with a view to ending the practice of selling bogus degrees and other qualifications, she will seek powers to require all educational establishments catering for students beyond the minimum school leaving age to be accredited to the National Council for the Accreditation of Correspondence Colleges, or a similar organisation.

No, Sir: there would be difficulties about any kind of legislation. I am considering how I can best make information more widely available about United Kingdom degrees and other recognised qualifications. At present the Department gives guidance on the validity of specific qualifications when asked.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Robbins Committee of about 10 years ago was adamant that legislation was needed? May I remind her that there are such scandals as the case where someone was given a certificate of competence in estate agency and valuation matters and it turned out to be in the name of someone's cat?

It is easier to pose the problem than to find the precise workable legislative solution.

Shoot the cat.

Some of us might say, "Shoot the people" as well. We are working on this problem. If there were an easy solution, we would have already found it.

I agree with what the hon. Member for Merton and Morden (Miss Fookes) has said, and I appreciate the difficulty of framing legislation to deal with the problem. May I remind the right hon. Lady that at the moment there are at least 27 degree mills in this country, and about 200 abroad? They are used by people here, and this often causes acute embarrassment to foreign students? For example, Sussex University is constantly being embarrassed by the Sussex College of Technology, one of the organisations which sells these degrees. The problem is increasing all the time and action is needed quickly to try to protect people from these malpractices.

I agree with the hon. Lady. The problem arises when there is a certificate that looks as if it gives a degree comparable with a degree given by another institution of a similar name. It would be very difficult to get at all these institutions by legislation. The moment we took action against one, another would spring up giving not degrees but associateships, fellowships or licenciateships. I doubt whether, if we named them all, we would ever catch up with others that would then spring up. It must be remembered that there are a number of respectable professional bodies which give a series of letters, not always by examination but often warranted by the experience of the person, which stand very high in the eyes of people here and abroad.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will set up a further inquiry into the intelligence quotients of those who leave school at or before the age of 16.

No, Sir.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that merely raising the minimum school-leaving age to 16 will not by itself stop the waste of the national pool of ability, because the Crowther Report and others since have found that a third of the top 10 per cent. by IQ rating leave school at that age anyway? What alternative plans has she that will definitely stop this drastic under-achievement, which neither the nation nor those concerned can afford?

The survey given publicity in the Crowther Report was not an IQ survey, and I know of no purely IQ survey. It was a test of ability of National Service recruits, conducted through the Army's own tests of ability. Since that time—[Interruption.] The hon. Gentleman will know that IQ is not the only measure of ability. For that reason I was a little surprised by his Question. The Government have taken steps to raise the school-leaving age to 16, and I hope that many other young people who wish to do so will continue their education in colleges of further education and through the many facilities available.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will set up an inquiry to report as a matter of urgency on the level and arrangement of students' grants and of parental contributions.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she will now undertake a review of student grants.

Arrangements have been settled for the triennium beginning with the academic year 1971–72 and I see no need for an inquiry now.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that many students—perhaps the vast majority—fear that there will be no real increase in grants before 1974–75? In view of recent price increases and those which are obviously forthcoming, will not the Government, if they act in a mean way, be guilty of a harsh injustice affecting not only students but many parents who pay contributions?

We negotiated the grants for the triennium and the total sum of £76 million was made available. Those round the negotiating table, including representatives of vice-chancellors, students and local authorities, as well as of central Government, decided to allocate that sum in the proportion—this is for provincial universities—of an increase of 13·1 per cent. for the year 1971–72, 3—5 per cent. for 1972–73, and 4·5 per cent. for 1973–74. That was the decision made, and I believe that it should stand.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that accommodation charges in university halls of residence are now exceeding the notional accommodation element in student grants by over £50 annually? Is this not causing real hardship to many students, and should there not be an immediate increase in grants?

The accommodation charges in universities and polytechnics vary widely. The figure in the grant takes an average of those charges. By doing so there will be some above and some below, but there is an extra amount of about £100, I believe, in the grant, which can be used either to make up the shortfall or, as the students wish, for other purposes.

Has my right hon. Friend any estimate of the proportion of students who may not be receiving the appropriate parental contribution? Before the recent increase I believe there was an estimate of about 1 in 5.

I cannot confirm the previous estimate, and there is no current estimate. In 1972–73 we expect student grants to cost about £120 million. The assessed parental contribution should be of the order of £35 million. We have no knowledge of how much of that is actually paid.

Can the right hon. Lady say whether it is her intention to continue with parental contributions and the related means test for ever and anon, or at least for the foreseeable future? What studies has her Department made to see whether the means test could eventually be incorporated within the Government's income tax credit scheme?

I doubt very much whether it could be incorporated in that scheme, but the hon. Gentleman will no doubt raise the point when the matter is debated. The value of the parental contribution rises as the numbers of students increase, as does the cost of student grants. It would be very expensive to abolish the contribution, costing £35 million this year and possibly £40 million or so next year and the year after. I have no plans to spend that amount on abolishing the contribution.

Will the right hop. Lady look at some of the anomalies which have arisen in the grant system? May I bring one to her attention, namely, that when young girl students get married and pass out of their parents' legal control the parents are still expected to make contributions to the grant?

As my hon. Friend will see, there is probably a good reason for that. If by getting married the young girl saved her parents' contribution, it might be rather a popular thing to do. [Laughter.] A young married woman student is paid the same rate of grant as other students unless she lives at home with her husband who is not a student.

Is the right hon. Lady telling the House the full story about the negotiations over student grants? Is it not true that the vice-chancellors and principals of polytechnics wrote to her on 28th May, 1971, saying that if the present level of student grants were proceeded with there would be trouble over students meeting board and lodging charges before the end of the three-year period? Will she confirm that this is true and, following the advice of the vice-chancellors and principals, conduct an inquiry?

We have received a letter from the vice-chancellors. It is very easy for anyone to demand an increase for which he does not have to pay. Most of us remain of the opinion that a settlement of £76 million for the triennium was not ungenerous.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when she last met representatives of teaching staff employed in the Inner London Education Area to discuss matters for which she is responsible.

There have been teachers from Inner London on deputations which have come to see me, but I have not met them separately.

I note that reply. Is the right hon. Lady aware that thousands of teachers are away from school today protesting against her deplorable action in deliberately stopping the negotiations on 20th October? Is she aware that this action, following so quickly after the savage cuts which she imposed on the minor works programme in London, has done more to destroy the morale of London teachers than any other action in recent years? Will she give an assurance to this House and to the thousands of teachers who will be here today that she is prepared to send back to the Burnham Committee the whole question of the London allowance, that she will abide by that Committee's decision and will in no way attempt to interfere with the negotiations, as she has done in the past?

During the Chequers talks, negotiations in Burnham were suspended. When the Chequers talks broke down I immediately saw the Chairman of Burnham, the local education authorities and the teachers. They decided to meet on that day, and an offer was made which was accepted by one of the committees of Burnham, namely the college of education teachers but not by the others. The minor works programme for London is calculated on a formula related to the number of children in the schools—

That is totally irrelevant.

It is not totally irrelevant to a rational person. The number of children in the centres of cities is falling as families are moving outside to the suburbs and counties. Therefore, the minor works programme for the counties has gone up because the counties have more children.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that one solution would be for the teachers' London weighting allowance to be on the same basis as that which operates in local government and the Civil Service, that is, inner London weighting and outer London weighting?

That course of action is open to the management panel of Burnham if it wishes to make that kind of offer. The Burnham system is exactly the same as that which was introduced and operated by the Labour Government. I have followed it precisely. The formula is calculated by reference to that which was created in 1967 by the National Board for Prices and Incomes. Some have the same London allowance for the whole of the greater London area, as do the teachers. Others choose to have the allowance in two tiers. If the management panel wishes to negotiate in two tiers, it has the majority voice on that issue with the local authorities.

Will the right hon. Lady deny that on or before 20th October, before the talks had broken down, she made a specific request to the London authorities on the Burnham Committee not to put their offer—as had been promised—on that date? If she made that request, will she explain how it came within the terms of reference of the Government's statement of 26th September, which would have allowed the London weighting to go up by £104 before being affected by the freeze?

Through my representatives on Burnham, I asked the committee not to make an offer—[HON. MEMBERS: "Disgraceful."]—there is nothing new about this—while the Chequers talks were in progress, as did Ministers in other Departments which were concerned with current negotiations. It was reasonable to do that when we were negotiating with the unions, the teachers being represented on the body that was holding voluntary negotiations. Those talks broke down on the Thursday night. On the Friday morning I saw the Chairman of Burnham, the local authorities and the teachers. They had a meeting on that day, so the undertaking to meet after that day was in fact honoured.

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

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what action she intends taking on the Quirk Report on speech therapy.

The committee's report was made jointly to my right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Social Services, for Scotland, for Wales and myself. It touches on the interests of many authorities, organisations and professions, either as employers, users or colleagues of speech therapists. My right hon. Friends and I have therefore arranged for the interested bodies to be consulted immediately so that we can take their views into account in reaching decisions on the recommendations of the report.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the profession faces a number of difficulties which must be remedied rapidly? Pay is inadequate, research facilities are inadequate and divided control of one minute profession between four Departments is absurd.

Unification of speech therapy services under the proposed area health authorities is one of the recommendations of the Quirk Committee. I assure my hon. Friend that we shall be consulting on all the proposals made by that committee.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that speech therapists are scarce, underpaid and grossly neglected by the Government? When does she propose to get a move on.

I agree that speech thereapists are scarce. There are 800 speech therapists, and the committee recommended an increase in the number, and a broader-based training. These matters are being considered now.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what guidance she has given to local education authorities about the provision of school transport pending the report of the special working party.

None, Sir. The local education authorities are well aware of their duties and powers in relation to school transport.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that Worcestershire County Council has discontinued a school bus previously provided in Bromsgrove under its discretionary powers? Does she agree that local education authorities should try not to make matters worse while we are awaiting the report of the working party on school transport?

That is a matter between the hon. Gentleman and his local education authority. I am sure that he makes very powerful representations. As he has pointed out, local education authorities have discretion, and I must not interfere in the way in which they exercise it.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she is satisfied with the co-ordination between Lord Mancroft and Lord Goodman over the arrangements for the Fanfare for Europe; and if she will make a statement.

Yes, Sir. Both Lord Goodman and Lord Mancroft worked closely together to ensure an extensive and varied programme of events over the country as a whole catering for a wide variety of tastes in both the cultural and sporting spheres.

In view of the mounting public amazement at the curious expenditure of this public money in the midst of an economic freeze, will my right hon. Friend tell us what she is doing to monitor the expenditure which is carried on her Vote? Secondly, in view of the vote last night, will she apply for money for a Fanfare for the Commonwealth?

My hon. Friend will have to put the latter part of his supplementary question to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The Government have allocated £350,000 towards the cost of events for Fanfare for Europe, subject in due course to parliamentary approval of the Supplementary Estimates.

Will the right hon. Lady explain what the activities of these two noble Lords have to do with either education or science?

Both of them are very distinguished in almost all spheres.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many proposals she has received from local education authorities since June, 1970, to convert selective secondary schools to non-selective secondary schools; and how many she has rejected.

The Department's statistics do not distinguish between proposals relating to comprehensive schools development and other proposals relating to secondary schools. Of about 2,300 proposals related to secondary schools, I have rejected 101.

Having failed to discourage local education authorities from submitting plans for comprehensive schools, why is the right hon. Lady in several cases insisting on the retention of selective schools in otherwise comprehensive areas, so sabotaging the efforts of Labour and Conservative councils to get rid of 11-plus selection?

Usually because there is a large volume of objection to the local education authority proposals which is catered for in the legislative provisions, or because the physical or curriculum arrangements do not appear to be satisfactory.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what proposals she has to increase the supply of teachers specially qualified to teach educationally subnormal children.

As the hon. Member will know from the reply to his Question on 15th November, the numbers of students taking three-year courses of initial training for teachers of mentally handicapped children are in fact increasing. My Department is planning further expansion of such provision.

That is a typically complacent reply from the Department about this seriously neglected sector of education. Is the right hon. Lady aware that of the teachers who are teaching ESN children—which is what the Question is about—only 22 per cent. are qualified and that within the last four years there has been an annual increase of only 13 teachers attending these courses? Is it not abundantly clear that a Plowden-type major investigation into the education of ESN children is long overdue?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that the Department is not in the least complacent about this important section of the educational service, and attaches a great deal of importance to it. There are 400 places available in 17 colleges for three-year courses of initial training for teachers of mentally handicapped children. The intake to those courses in September, 1972, was only 358. Nevertheless, negotiations have been in progress with five other colleges of education with a view to providing a further 100 places in September, 1973. We have encountered some difficulties over this and are now pursuing other means of increasing the number of places.

Could not places which have not been filled perhaps be quite easily filled if a shorter course of three years were offered to those who already have a good deal of practical experience?

As my right hon. and learned Friend will know, teachers of educationally sub-normal children are not required to have special qualifications, but as a transitional arrangement, following the transfer of the responsibilities for this form of education from the DHSS to my Department, holders of the Diploma of the Training Council for Teachers of the Mentally Handicapped can take one-year conversion courses. In 1971–72, 464 teachers took one-year courses as opposed to three-year courses.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she will make a statement on the Government's policy towards residential and working accommodation for students at polytechnics.

Resources are allocated for polytechnic buildings on the basis of the expected increase in student numbers and the proposals submitted by individual local education authorities. The further education major building programme which is due to start in 1974–75 includes some £32 million for polytechnics, of which about £5 million is intended for residential accommodation.

I welcome the news of this increase in public expenditure, but does not the hon. Gentleman agree that polytechnics have a long way to go before they overcome the acute inadequacies in their working and residential accommodation compared with most other universities? Will he note that when, in places like Portsmouth, dramatic plans are announced about increasing the number of students at polytechnics, it can have grave consequences not only for students who are working in overcrowded conditions, but for the local community in terms of driving up land prices and aggravating an already bad housing shortage? Will he instruct those responsible to watch this aspect of the problem.

I assure the hon. Gentleman that I, personally, am very concerned about the position of polytechnics and agree that a great deal needs to be done. Next week I shall be attending the designation of the North London Polytechnic. With regard to the college in Portsmouth, in which I know the hon. Gentleman takes a great interest, we have allocated £2,400,000 for building in the two years 1973–75; and, in addition, the building programme provides accommodation for 500 residential places. These figures reflect my Department's awareness of Portsmouth's particular needs. As for the last point made by the hon. Gentleman, I shall bring it to the notice of the appropriate people.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will give urgent consideration to restoring the minor works allocation to its 1971–72 level, in order that the Inner London Education Authority and other education authorities in older urban areas can prevent further deterioration in standards in old and ageing schools.

School rolls in Inner London and many other large cities will be static or declining in the mid-1970s and their reduced minor works allocations for 1974–75 reflect this. I have allocated about £6·5 million in the major building programmes for 1972–75 for the replacement of 47 old primary schools in inner London.

Does the right hon. Lady appreciate that in dealing with the older urban areas it is no use equating the subject with the movement of population? The minor works allocation for the inner London area in 1974–75 is half the figure that it was up to 1971–72, and in terms of what work can be done for the money it is probably under a quarter. In the inner London area there are still 300 Victorian primary schools, many of which still have outside, unheated toilet accommodation, and many improvements in such schools have had to be postponed as a result of cuts in the minor works programme.

But the capital works building programme is mainly a basic needs programme, and therefore must be related to the increased numbers or otherwise in the area. The older urban parts of large cities benefit very much from the primary school improvement programme, and this has been the case with the inner London Education Authority.

In view of her reply to an earlier question and her declared belief in local democracy, will the right hon. Lady consider giving local education authorities discretion to spend money on what they may regard as more important local educational projects, and, indeed, to divert to such projects money which would otherwise be spent on the proposed Fanfare for Europe?

I do not think that that would get anybody very far. There are pilot schemes in five local education authorities involving block capital allocations for everything except the primary school improvements programme. That number will be increased to 24, and we shall see how a system of block capital allocation works before we go any further with it.

asked the Prime Minister when he next plans to meet representatives of the Trades Union Congress to discuss the economy.

asked the Prime Minister what further discussions he has arranged with the Trades Union Congress and Confederation of British Industry on the second part of his policy for containing inflation.

asked the Prime Minister when he hopes to renew talks with the representatives of the Trades Union Congress and the Confederation of British Industry.

asked the Prime Minister what further discussions he has had with the Trades Union Congress and the Confederation of British Industry regarding the economic situation.

As I told the House on 21st November, I am ready to meet the TUC and the CBI either together or separately at any time.

Following yesterday's lobby of the House of Commons, is not the most valuable social service that could be provided to elderly people a slowing down of the rate of inflation? If the trade unions want to do something for elderly people, can they not use their influence against inflationary wage settlements and, in particular, against a thoroughly petulant and unnecessary strike action by ASLEF?

In the tripartite discussions the TUC said that it fully agreed that one of the main purposes of dealing with inflation was to help the old-age pensioners and those living on small fixed incomes. We, for our part, said that if we were able to get a voluntary arrangement which dealt with inflation we would, when reviewing pensions in the spring for the uprating next autumn, take this fully into account so that pensioners could share in the increased prosperity which came from it. As a further sign of our good intentions we also said that we would make the lump sum payment for which the House is now making provision.

Is the Prime Minister aware that nobody will take him seriously on the subject of inflation while he continues to try to buy off pensioners by £10 donations on polling day, and continues with his hoax of telephone numbers for price increases? Will he not realise that nobody will take him and his sincerity seriously until he introduces a policy of statutory control of all prices and makes the single pension £10 a week immediately?

I do not think the pensioners take the same view of the £10 bonus as the hon. Gentleman takes. This is certainly reflected in their letters to me and, I believe, in what they have said to hon. Members. Any permanent arrangements will depend on the review in the spring, and on the uprating.

Will the Prime Minister bear in mind that the numbers out of work fell by 72,000 between September and October this year, and that the present Government have now put the unemployment figures on to a proper and realistic basis?

The unemployment figures which are published today are set out in a new formula, and I am sure that those who want to make a judgment of these matters will agree that it shows an improvement and is much clearer. The figures show a decrease of 22,510 between October and November, and I am sure that that will be welcome news to hon. Members in all parts of the House. It is the biggest fall for 20 years for Great Britain between October and November, and the biggest fall for the United Kingdom between those two months since the series began.

Will the Prime Minister explain how he expects the Trades Union Congress to have confidence in him or in any of his Ministers when it sees a Bill passed through this House with complete disregard for the lower-paid, such as farm workers and others? How can the TUC have confidence in the Prime Minister? When the Prime Minister meets the TUC will he continue to honour his promise, given in the White Paper of July, 1971, to protect the pensioner and the low-paid worker from the effects of entry into the Common Market?

That is the whole purpose of the tripartite talks. The agreement reached at the beginning was to help the low-paid worker, and the proposals that we put forward clearly do that. I quite understood if some higher-paid workers said that it was not acceptable to them. But that was its purpose, and it was widely welcomed throughout the country.

May I remind my right hon. Friend that the unemployment figures in Northern Ireland have gone down by about 6,000 in 12 months? Is not this a remarkable tribute to the resilience of the Northern Irish people and the co-operation of the Northern Ireland trade union movement at this especially difficult time?

I agree with my hon. Friend—and there has been a further decrease between October and November. This is very welcome and it indicates— as I saw on my visit last week—that many factories in Northern Ireland are working full out and extraordinarily well.

In view of what happened in the City yesterday and the intervention of the Bank of England in relation to interest rates, which must sooner or later affect mortgage rates, will the right hon. Gentleman say whether it is the Government's policy, during this freeze, to increase interest rates or to keep them stable?

The policy of this Government is the same as that of the right hon. Gentleman and his Government in similar circumstances. Interest rates must be used as a means of managing the economy and the money supply.

Will the right hon. Gentleman now answer the question? Does he know the answer? If so, will he tell us? Is it the Government's policy to increase interest rates during the freeze or to stabilise them?

It is the policy of the Government to use interest rates for the control of the economy. The right hon. Gentleman did not stabilise interest rates during his period and he gave no undertaking to do so, either.

Is the Prime Minister aware that during the statutory freeze there was no increase in interest rates? I simply want to ask the right hon. Gentleman—since he has imposed a freeze and since it will affect mortgage rates and, therefore, millions of families in the country—whether it is the Government's policy, accepting what the right hon. Gentleman says about the money supply, to stabilise interest rates or to increase them during the freeze? Will he answer that question now?

I give the right hon. Gentleman the same plain answer, which is that if it is necessary to change interest rates to control the money supply, the Government, through the banking system, will do it.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will appoint a Minister with special responsibility for Government policy on population.

No, Sir. It would be premature to reach decisions on this before we have considered the recommendations of the Population Panel, which are due by the end of the year.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there are people who take the view that the population is too high, and others—like my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary—who take the view that it is uncomfortably high? Is not it vital for the Government to discontinue the practice of the last Government of being hazy on an issue which is all-important for the future of the country?

I was responsible for setting up the Population Panel. I think that it would be right to await the results of its activities before taking further action.

If the Prime Minister is not yet willing to appoint a Minister to be responsible for this matter— which the whole House wants, and which has been recommended by a Select Committee of this House—will he urgently consider the possibility of removing charges for family planning, so that it may be provided under the National Health Service? Vasectomies are now available on the National Health Service, and it seems to be appalling sex discrimination to make women pay for their family planning advice and supplies.

I recognise that a Select Committee of this House has twice recommended that there should be a Minister for population policy. However, I do not believe that a single Minister could cope with this problem. Therefore I do not propose to appoint one.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that it is to be hoped that he will not be influenced by people who foolishly describe as "doomwatchers" those who predict a population explosion if nothing is done soon?

They have been in existence for more than a century—in fact, since the time of Malthus. I do not think that we should pay them any more attention now than was paid to them then.

Returning to the question of a free birth control service, can the Prime Minister be a little more forthcoming about when we may expect a policy announcement on that?

I cannot give a specific date, but my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services expects to make it soon.

asked the Prime Minister if he is satisfied with the coordination between the activities of Government Ministers responsible for Government policy relating to the protection of consumers of all goods and services; and if he will make a statement.

There is already close and frequent liaison between Departments responsible for different aspects of consumer affairs. My right hon. and learned Friend will be considering in what ways this can be further strengthened.

Will the Prime Minister tell us how he expects to be able to protect the consumers of all goods and services without a second-in-command? Does not he need someone to prop him up? Who will get the job of Deputy Prime Minister? Is it likely to be the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Home Secretary or the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland? Has not the Prime Minister noticed that someone is creeping up on the blind side?

The hon. Gentleman is even more irrelevant than usual.

As every statistical survey shows that food manufacturers and retailers have exceptionally narrow profit margins, will my right hon. Friend accept that whatever other arguments may exist it would be unfair to put the blame on them?

I am not sure whether my hon. Friend is referring to the standstill period or to normal times. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food is in close touch with the industry. He recently had a meeting with its representatives about their prices and their margins. When we were discussing these matters in the tripartite talks they undertook that cash margins would remain the same.

Does the Prime Minister regard the Concorde as goods or services? Does not he find it an odd priority that in this situation we should be asked today for another £100 million for the Concorde?

Whether it is goods or services depends on whether one buys it, runs it, or even buys a ticket on it. For the purposes of this House, it is a matter of the further development of the Concorde, which I think is of the utmost importance.

asked the Prime Minister if he will create a Department of the Prime Minister.

I have at present no plans to change the existing arrangements, Sir.

Is not it the case that there is a Department of the Prime Minister in the Commonwealth of Australia, that that department has been conducting relations with this country, but that a change is threatened in that arrangement? Will my right hon. Friend get in touch with the Prime Minister of Australia to see that relations with him are conducted in the old spirit between our two countries, notwithstanding anything that may have happened yesterday?

This matter is internal to the affairs of Australia. When the Australian Prime Minister visited this country and we had discussions together, he told me his policy, and said that he intended to change from the policy of his predecessors. The change is that the High Commissioner in London will be responsible to the Minister for Foreign Affairs in Canberra, instead of being directly responsible to the Prime Minister. We both agreed that this would in no way alter the long-standing arrangement within the Commonwealth that a High Commissioner always has right of access to the Prime Minister in the member country of the Commonwealth to which he is accredited. That is the basis on which we are carrying on our arrangements with Australia. But it was a decision entirely of the Australian Prime Minister when he came to office.