asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the Government's policy with regard to the report of the Criminal Law Revision Committee concerning evidence and procedure in criminal trials.

The report is under study in the light of the debate in another place and the many memoranda and other comments that we have received, but we shall not reach conclusions on this important report until this House has had an opportunity to debate it.

Is the hon. and learned Gentleman aware of the grave disquiet in the legal profession, as expressed in another place, about most of the major observations contained in this report? Is it not time for the Government to express their view? When does the Minister anticipate that the House will have an opportunity to debate the issue?

The opportunity for a debate is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we will not reach conclusions until there has been the opportunity for a debate on the report. I am aware of the many views that have been expressed on it and of the comments that the hon. Gentleman makes. We have to weigh up the various issues involved in this important report.

Will my hon. and learned Friend beware of special pleading on this report? Is not the overriding interest that of the public? Does he not agree that, while everyone accepts that the rights of the innocent should be protected, there is also a genuine public interest in seeing that the guilty are convicted?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. It seems that the approach we should make to this report is to see that the rules of evidence of our courts are appropriate for the present day as the courts seek to do their best to arrive at verdicts in individual cases.

Despite criticisms of the jury system and the imperfections in the procedure of the system, will the Minister at least take this opportunity to affirm his faith in it and say that with all its imperfections it still provides the best method and remains the best bulwark for the liberty of the subject?

Of course I have faith in the jury system and I willingly accept what the hon. Gentleman says about its importance. But the fact that one believes in the system does not mean that one ought not to review the rules of evidence and the type of evidence which can be put before a jury.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will change his method of collecting statistics relating to fireworks accidents, so that they become available sooner than at present.

The information on which the statistics are based has to be obtained from the hospitals. The complete statistics are available early in the following year, which allows ample time for action before the next fireworks season, but we are arranging for the work to be speeded up as far as possible.

Is the Minister able to say whether the figures are likely to be higher or lower than last year, when, I understand, 1,260 were injured, 234 seriously?

It is too soon to give even an approximate indication of the trend this year. We are speeding up the returns from the hospitals. What my hon. Friend said about the disappointing figures last year is true, but I remind her and the House that until then we had succeeded in more than halving the casualty rate over the previous 10 years. We want to resume that improvement.

Is it not a fact that the injury rate last year was up by 20 per cent. but that when the figures were published it was too late for anyone to form a judgment and for any action to be taken? The event of Guy Fawkes night had gone out of people's minds. May we have a promise that the figures will be published earlier this year, so that if action needs to be taken by manufacturers or the House it can be taken in good time?

I do not accept the hon. Member's first charge. We had plenty of time, even on the last occasion, to take a number of new steps before last month's fireworks season. The figures for last year were published in April, and we hope to do considerably better on this occasion.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what research is being undertaken by his Department into the nature and extent of vandalism and into the most effective ways of combating it.

The Home Office Research Unit is undertaking a number of related studies of the extent of vandalism and the factors associated with it. It is hoped that the results of the research will suggest possible ways of reducing this kind of delinquent activity.

Does my hon. and learned Friend agree that research is needed not only into the attitudes and motivations of vandals but into the impact on the community at large, since this tends to be a crime affecting the whole community?

I entirely agree. The studies to which I have referred will include work on the extent to which vandalism impinges on the lives of ordinary people. We regard it as important that we should not concentrate entirely on offenders, to the exclusion of any concern for the victim.

Since this involves the question of police manpower, how can the Metropolitan Police, for example, adequately cope with the problem when wastage exceeds recruitment and there are well over 5,000 vacancies? Is there anything more that the Minister can say about the claim by the London police for differential pay?

There is a Question later on the Order Paper dealing with the Metropolitan Police. I agree that the number of policemen is an important consideration in keeping down vandalism. I remind the hon. Member that for the first lime we now have over 100,000 policemen, which is 8,000 more than we had three years ago.

In those studies will the Minister consider one of the most frequently experienced although perhaps less serious manifestations of vandalism—the misuse of aerosol sprays in public places? Will he see what can be done about this, rather than relying on the slightly complacent reply that the present deterrents are sufficient, given the experience that the present deterrents against this kind of abuse are manifestly insufficient and ineffective?

If the hon. Gentleman is asking whether I shall introduce legislation to ban the sale of aerosol sprays, the answer is "No". That would not be justified. I am aware that they are used from time to time by youths committing offences of vandalism.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people have been taken into custody and released within 24 hours under the Criminal Damages Act 1971 since June 1972.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimates he has made of the total number of arrests made under the Criminal Damages Act 1971 since its inception.

I regret that this information is not available.

Is the Minister aware of the disgraceful incidents in Colchester on 3rd and 4th October this year when 25 trade unionists and students returning by bus from a perfectly peaceful demonstration in Shrewsbury were arrested, kept in custody for a lengthy period and had their homes thoroughly searched for no good reason? Is he aware that incidents of that kind add weight to the belief of trade unionists that the police and the law are picking on them? Will the Minister have an inquiry made into the Colchester incident?

I am grateful for the opportunity totally to repudiate what the hon. Gentleman said at the end of his question, which is unjustified on any possible basis. As the hon. Gentleman knows, the police act with impartiality on all matters. With respect, I do not see how the Colchester incident arises out of the Question, but I shall certainly write to the hon. Gentleman in detail about that incident, as I have written to other hon. Members.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prosecutions for driving offences have taken place, in the last year for which figures are available, of drivers of heavy goods vehicles registered abroad.

I regret that this information is not available.

Is the Minister aware that complaints have been made in my part of South-East England about heavy lorry drivers from the Continent speeding and committing other motoring offences and getting away with it?

Indeed, I am aware of and very much concerned about the position arising from the increasing number of vehicles coming to this country and the difficulty of enforcing action against drivers for a breach of the traffic regulations whilst they are here. We are studying the whole situation.

Does not my hon. and learned Friend appreciate that one of the most serious offences that lorry drivers commit is bringing into the country lorries that are overweight—an offence of which Folkestone has had some experience? Will my hon. and learned Friend give his support to the police in enforcing the law?

Certainly, the police will do all they can to enforce the law, but I ask my hon. Friend to accept that there are major practical difficulties in summoning before our courts people who are not normally resident here.

I support my hon. Friend the Member for Woolwich, West (Mr. Hamling). Many people are saying that foreign drivers are getting away with it whereas British drivers are being prosecuted. Will the Minister try to get the necessary information?

With the greatest respect to the hon. Gentleman, we cannot get this information. Our statistics do not distinguish between heavy goods vehicles and goods vehicles and do not contain information about the country of origin of drivers. On the other hand, I am aware that this is a matter of concern and that there has been an increasing number of cases in recent months.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is satisfied with the present numbers of forensic pathologists ; and if he will make a statement.

The present numbers are generally sufficient to meet current demands. The future needs of the forensic pathology service are being considered in the light of the recommendations of the Broderick Committee.

I am glad to note that this is being considered. Does not the hon. and learned Gentleman agree that the forensic pathology service has to some extent been the poor relation of universities on the one hand and the National Health Service on the other? May I draw his attention to the survey of more than 25,000 autopsies performed at the London Hospital over a period of five years, which shows more than 5,000 cases of unnatural death, of which 263 were not shown to have died an unnatural death in the coroner's officer's report—

Order. The hon. Member is getting very near a statement.

We believe that the present number of forensic pathologists is sufficient for current needs. I realise that there are problems about future recruitment, but at the moment outside London and the Home Counties 28 pathologists are nominated by the Home Secretary to assist police forces and inside the Home Counties and London the teaching hospitals are used.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects to have a further meeting with the Fire Brigades Union.

I have no present plans for a further meeting.

Will the Home Secretary meet the union when the report of the Pay Board on the pay negotiations is published? Will he ensure that the report on the firemen's pay settlement will be made as soon as possible, in the interests both of the public and of good industrial relations? Will the Minister publish the report, which will be of considerable interest not only to firemen but to policemen, ambulance drivers and many other workers in the public service?

I have no plans, I have not made any promises, and I have not been asked to promise, to meet the union after the publication of the report. If, when the report is completed, the union wishes to see me I shall consider that request. Questions on how Pay Board reports are dealt with are for my right hon. Friend.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prisons in the United Kingdom have facilities for the care of young children while prison visits are taking place.

Most prisons in England and Wales provide some facilities for mothers visiting with young children. Thirty-two already have accommodation available in which children can be looked after during visits and several others are planning similar facilities.

Does not the Minister agree that that is a very small number? Is he not aware that many mothers with young children have to make long journeys to visit their menfolk in prison, and that in the area in which the prison is sited there are often no facilities for eating, or for feeding young children? Is he further aware that often there is no privacy to enable parents to talk on personal or domestic matters? Will he look at this matter with greater urgency?

I agree that the number is still small but I think that the hon. Gentleman will agree that it is increasing. I fully take the hon. Gentleman's point about the importance of proper visiting facilities. Clearly, there should be opportunities for wives and children to visit prisoners, and it is right, when a wife has to take young children with her, that facilities should be available for looking after them. In all designs for new prisons we are including such facilities.

Having regard to representations on this matter from those concerned with prisoners' welfare, is it not proper that there should now be a comprehensive review of facilities for and expenses of those people who wish to visit their relatives in prison?

We are carrying out a review with the Department of Health and Social Security on the question of financial assistance for wives to visit their husbands in prison, and we hope to have the result of that review fairly shortly.

Does the Minister accept that we welcome any extension of these facilities, because many of us have been concerned for several years about the lack of facilities in prisons? Does he agree that one interim solution might be to transfer as many prisoners as possible back to prisons nearer their homes? I have in mind prisoners from Northern Ireland who are in Parkhurst. Their relatives in Belfast have difficulty in visiting them, and when they arrive there are very few facilities.

I am not prepared to comment on an individual case without notice, but I can say in general that of course the ability to receive visits from families is one of the matters taken into account when considering the placement of any offender in a prison. But the hon. Gentleman must realise that this is not the only consideration. Security is another consideration which has to be taken into account, as well as the type of sentence the person is serving and the type of offence for which he has been convicted.

Does the Home Secretary intend to publish this report, when it becomes available, prior to any decision by the Government? It would be helpful if we could see the report and make representations before any decision is made.

Perhaps I overstated it when I said, "report". I should have said, "review". I cannot answer for certain, although I should think it is unlikely to be the type of review that would be published, but there will be a chance to ask Questions on it in the House.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations he has received from prison officers about conditions in Her Majesty's prisons.

Views are exchanged between my officials and the Prison Officers' Association on a wide variety of matters as part of the normal consultative process, but I have personally had several meetings with representatives of the asociation about major issues—in particular, the control of difficult prisoners.

As we have a prison system which is scores of years out of date, and as the Prison Officers' Association has warned the right hon. Gentleman that the system is rapidly moving towards a disastrous situation, does not he agree that we can no longer expect prison officers to carry the responsibility of looking after men in overcrowded conditions, in which they have little or no opportunity of rehabilitation or occupation? What does the right hon. Gentleman intend to do when the prison officers make these representations to him?

I remind the hon. Lady that the present Government are taking action which their predecessors signally failed to take. There is a far larger prison building programme than for many decades past. That is the first thing one can do to make the physical conditions better. Secondly, there has been a decline in the number of prisoners and, I am glad to say, while this decline has been going on there has been an increase in the number of staff. I am not saying that the number of staff in relation to the number of prisoners, and the conditions in which prisoners are kept and in which officers have to work, are satisfactory, because they are not. But the fact is that that we have neglected the prison system for a long time and the present Government are paying more attention to it now than has been paid in our lifetime.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his Department has found serious inadequacies in the physical conditions at Strangeways Prison, Manchester, and also overcrowding? What is the present extent of the overcrowding and what action is the right hon. Gentleman taking?

There is still serious overcrowding. I think—speaking from memory—that it is still, unfortunately, a fact that about one-third of our prisoners are sleeping three to a cell, very often in cells originally designed by our Victorian grandfathers to hold one. But with the decline in the prison population and the increase in prison staff, that proportion is declining, too, and at least the proportion living three to a cell is considerably smaller than it was three years ago.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will now introduce legislation in order to amend the Shop Hours Act so as to enable working women to shop in the hours of their choice.

My right hon. Friend cannot foresee an early opportunity for Government legislation to amend the Shops Acts.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that there are huge quantities of married women doing useful jobs who at present are compelled by circumstances to do their shopping in a single luncheon hour? Would it not be better if there were greater freedom under the law for shopping hours to vary, so that the times during which West End shops are open need not be the same for suburban or village shops? In such freedom, would not a more sensible shopping pattern emerge, as in many other countries? Is it not time that we caught up?

I agree that it would be good to get more scope, but it is not generally realised that there is a good deal more scope even under the present law than some people think, particularly for late opening, and we have had to give higher priorities to other areas in Government legislation.

Will the right hon. Gentleman resist any such amendment to the Shops Acts? Although it might be more convenient for some working women, the majority of people who work in shops are women, who would resist such a change and would not want to work the long hours that shop workers do on the Continent and in America.

That shows how wise we are to go cautiously.

asked the Secretary of of State for the Home Department what representation he has received from the Prison Officers' Association on his decision to permit Mr. Curtis, South-East Region organiser of the National Association for the Care and Rehabilitation of Offenders, to visit Her Majesty's prisons.

The association has told me that it is opposed to visits by Mr. Curtis.

Will my right hon. Friend say whether the allegation is correct that this officer belonged to an organisation known as PROP—an organisation with which my right hon. Friend has said he will not negotiate—and that that is why exception was taken when he visited Norwich Prison, when he was refused admission, and that subsequently the Home Office reversed this judgment and permitted him to visit prisons?

It is true that Mr. Curtis did in the past belong to PROP, an organisation started by ex-prisoners to further prisoners' rights and which, for many reason well known to the House, I did say I was not prepared to negotiate with. But Mr. Curtis left that organisation some time ago, and I think it is right that he should be judged on his present merits. I am sure that the House would agree with that. It is for the governor of a prison to decide to allow a particular visit. Governors are asked to take account of both the views of the prison staff and their judgment about the effect of a particular visitor on discipline in the prison. They have to take into account the views of prison staff, and the governors have now been advised that prison officers object to visits by Mr. Curtis.

Does that answer mean that in practice Mr. Curtis may be allowed to visit prisons? Is not the test the work which this man could do? Is it not wrong that he should be prevented from making visits? Is not that the real effect of what the right hon. Gentleman is saying?

I do not think I said that. I stressed that Mr. Curtis's membership of PROP was in the past, and I hoped that everyone would judge him on his present activities, and not on his past, whatever that may have been. It is also the fact that governors must take into account the views of prison staff. The views of the prison staff are as I have described them, but that does not mean to say that they will always remain so. One cannot ignore the views of the staff. I would have thought that Opposition Members would agree with that.

Is this not an unsatisfactory position? It means, in effect, that the Prison Officers' Association is able to exercise a veto over a man who left PROP because he disliked its methods, has now joined a very responsible organisation, known as NACRO, and is himself acting very responsibly? It is an unfortunate attitude for the POA to take in exercising a veto in relation to a man who has seen that the organisation with which he was once associated is not the kind of organisation to which he wants to belong now, and who is therefore really accepting the Home Secretary's views about PROP.

It is no good pretending that this is an easy matter, because it is not. In considering the current attitude of the prison officers one has to remember what they suffered not much more than a year ago, partly because of the activities of PROP. They are human beings, as we are, and we cannot expect them to forget what happened. I do not think that the attitude is directed personally at Mr. Curtis, but it is a strong feeling which the prison officers have towards PROP and for the moment towards anyone who as recently as just over a year ago played an active part in it. I am not saying that this will—I hope it will not—persist for all time. We must be understanding and persuasive on both sides of this question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he will introduce legislation to amend the law on nationality to enable men of foreign nationality who marry British women to obtain British nationality.

My right hon. Friend has no proposals in mind for such legislation.

Will the Under-Secretary of State tell the House whether it will be possible to include such an amendment to the Government's proposed legislation on equal opportunities for men and women? Has his attention been drawn to Resolution 696 of the Council of Europe, which was passed in January of this year, to the effect that spouses of different nationalities should have the right to choose their nationality irrespective of sex—in other words, that each sex should be treated in the same way?

I hope that the hon. Gentleman will wait for the Bill on equal opportunities. One possible consequence of what he is suggesting is the opening up of another loophole in the immigration control which men might be able to marry their way through. I hope that he is not advocating such a loophole. We shall be able to debate the matter further on another occasion.

Does my hon. Friend agree that this is a further indication that we should be considering not nationality but the definition of citizenship?

Yes. We are doing this. I remind the House that very few foreign and Commonwealth countries confer citizenship on men who marry their nationals.

Does the hon. Gentleman accept that this is another example of flagrant sex discrimination? Will he give me one good reason why it should be possible for a British male citizen to marry a foreign girl and for the girl to accept his nationality, and not possible for a British woman to do the same thing with a foreign male?

I am not accepting any charges of sex discrimination from a party whose Home Secretary in 1969 reversed a rule so that it would operate against that which the hon. Gentleman is suggesting.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what discussions he has had with magistrates on the non-payment of fines ; and if he will make a statement.

Home Office officials have recently had exploratory discussions on a number of aspects of fine enforcement with representatives of the Magistrates' Association. I welcome the fact that such discussions take place on a variety of matters concerning the administration of justice.

Will my hon. and learned Friend examine the action that has been taken by the Manchester City justices? During the last quarter of 1971 a total of 243 defaulters were committed to prison forthwith, and they all paid up at once. The process was continued during 1972. It was so successful that the cashier had to attend the court to collect the fines. In addition, the justices were able to make adjustments and changes for deserving cases. Could not the other justices learn from the Manchester justices?

I am sure that what Manchester says today the rest of the country will say tomorrow. I take note of what my hon. and gallant Friend says. Taking the country as a whole and bearing in mind the only relevant figure, which is the amount of the fines written off, the amount is between 2 per cent. and 3 per cent. of the total amount imposed.

Is it not a fact that the prisons are already bulging at the seams? Does the hon. and learned Gentleman agree that what is suggested by the hon. and gallant Member for Carshalton (Captain W. Elliot) is impracticable? Does he agree that we should readjust the attachment of earnings so that we can recoup the fines in that way? As a former magistrate, I found that when a man or woman came to court and was either out of work or on the dole he or she could not pay the fine. Surely some thing could be done in that respect?

My hon. and gallant Friend's point was that the defaulters paid up and did not go to prison. I agree with the hon. Gentleman that the most appropriate way to enforce the fines is, where possible, through the attachment of earnings scheme. The existing provision is that people cannot be sent to prison in default without a means inquiry.

Does my hon. and learned Friend agree that the situation regarding the payment of fines has become very much worse since the machinery was changed by the Criminal Justice Act 1967? Does he think that the time has come for a review of the whole procedure to ensure that fines are paid more readily, so that even the small percentage to which he has referred is not left outstanding?

We are having discussions with the Magistrates' Association on various aspects of fines enforcement. Although it is true that the volume of money outstanding is greater than it was before the 1967 Act, the total amount of fines imposed is higher. The proportion which in the end remains unpaid is much the same as it was before the 1967 Act.

Will the hon. and learned Gentleman resist any pressure to fill the prisons with debt and fine defaulters?

This Government have thought a good deal about the right hon. and learned Gentleman's point and have taken action in attempting to achieve that aim.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to aid recruitment of police for the Metropolitan area.

A special section of the Metropolitan Police undertakes visits to schools and to Her Majesty's Forces at home and abroad, and arranges the participation of the force in careers exhibitions and conventions. The force is currently running a recruitment campaign on which the commissioner has been authorised to spend £100,000 in the current financial year. A similar sum is proposed for next year. In addition, it benefits substantially from the central recruiting campaign, on which over £600,000 is being spent this year.

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his comprehensive reply. I am sorry that I must say, despite all that he has said, that it has not aided the recruitment of police in the Metropolitan area. Does he accept that the real reason is that there is not sufficient appreciation of the qualities now required in a police officer, the extra duties which he has to do and the unsocial hours which he has to work? Would not an increase in the police constables' salary and the differential between the constable and middle-grade officers help to aid recruitment? Should not there be a realistic appreciation of the work of the police in the Metropolitan area which is reflected in their remuneration?

The House must realise that the main problem arises not so much from the lack of recruitment, which still remains reasonably healthy, as from wastage. Wastage is a serious matter. The commissioner is currently making a serious inquiry into the various causes of waste. I have no doubt that pay and conditions are among the important causes of wastage. As from 1st January Metropolitan Police officers will begin to have the benefit of a substantial increase in their rent allowance. That, I believe, will deal with one of the more important problems.

Will my right hon. Friend ensure that during the recruiting campaign some attention is paid to the universities and to the recruiting of graduates?

Yes. I do not think that the police force has been getting a big enough share of graduates in recent years. That is something to which I very much hope not only the Metropolitan Commissioner but chief constables throughout the country will give special attention.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say what part of the campaign will be directed towards the recruitment of more coloured police officers in London?

Certainly, that is very much a part of our wish. The numbers are increasing but they are doing so slowly. We want to see much higher numbers. I can assure the House that that is the view of the commissioner and his staff. I am not sure that it is wise to make too directional a recruitment effort as long as we make it clear, as we are doing increasingly, that coloured policemen are very welcome and very much wanted.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that in many ways conditions are as important as pay? Will he consider carefully various examples of the need for better conditions, such as better housing and, more specifically for police constables, smaller examples, which are as important in many ways—namely, the provision of good canteen facilities to replace the existing facilities, which in many instances are inadequate?

I agree with the matters raised by my hon. Friend. To some extent we are in a vicious circle. A major improvement in conditions would require more men. The lack of men is one of the chief problems in improving conditions.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the Home Office return of experiments performed under the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876 in respect of experiments performed during 1972, in comparison with the statistics for 1970 and 1971.

The number of experiments, which had remained fairly constant in the years 1970 and 1971, decreased by about 5 per cent. in 1972. This is a welcome reduction, but it would be unwise to attach particular significance to a single year's figures.

I welcome the reduction of 300,000 in the number of experiments on animals in the last year. Nevertheless, does my hon. Friend realise that over 5¼ million experiments were conducted and that 86 per cent. of the animals involved were not given anaesthetics? Although a certain number of experiments on animals may be necessary, does not my hon. Friend feel that 5¼ million is far too high a figure?

I know that there are strong feelings on this matter. A figure of 5 million experiments is large, but we must keep the matter in perspective and appreciate the benefits obtained, both by human beings and by animals, from these experiments. The system is administered with strong safeguards, which we watch all the time. The declining trend is welcome.

Will my hon. Friend ask the Home Secretary to take into consideration the fact that the Act of Parliament governing vivisection is almost 100 years old and that the conditions envisaged in that legislation are quite different from those which obtain today? Is it not time that this matter was looked at again and the legislation brought up to date?

We shall bear in mind what my hon. Friend said. I know that he has paid a great deal of attention to this matter over a number of years. I repeat that the system of control and supervision is a strong one and we have no evidence that it is being abused.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will carry out an inquiry into the employment of men with criminal records as private detectives and in the private security industry ; and whether he will make a statement.

My right hon. Friend does not believe an inquiry is justified. He is actively considering a scheme for disqualifying people with criminal records from employment as private detectives, but he does not think that this method of control would be appropriate with respect to the private security industry.

I thank my hon. and learned Friend for that reply. Is he aware of the growing evidence that many men in the private security industry, including some private detectives, have previous criminal records? Is he also aware that it is an unsatisfactory situation that a person who has been convicted of an offence within his own occupation is able to return to that occupation immediately afterwards?

We have no evidence of such a degree of abuse as would justify an inquiry. Clearly, the points made by my hon. Friend are important.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he proposes to take to encourage the implementation of the recommendations contained in his Department's report "Shoplifting and thefts by shop staff" ; and if he will encourage supermarkets to concentrate on the prevention of shoplifting and the elimination of deterrent accusations by supermarkets against those suspected of shoplifting.

The report, which has been widely distributed to the retail trade and placed on sale, recommends all retailers to concentrate on the prevention of shoplifting. We have no evidence that supermarkets make deterrent accusations against persons suspected of shoplifting.

I congratulate my hon. and learned Friend on the thoroughness of his report. Is he aware that I could provide him with evidence showing that some people are having a thoroughly miserable time as a result of the activities of people such as those mentioned in the previous Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham, South (Mr. Fowler), particularly in relation to certain supermarkets which use store detectives of the type he mentioned? Will the Minister of State please take action now to implement the recommendations of the report, which will have the simultaneous effect of deterring the thief and protecting the innocent?

I do not know what my hon. Friend means by people having a thoroughly miserable time. Surely the question is whether the accusation made about shoplifting is or is not justified. The working party did not recommend legislation. We have sent out the working party's recommendations to the various interested bodies, and I hope that they will be implemented.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many individuals who appeared in court in the last year for which figures are available received legal aid ; and what was the average amount paid to the solicitor or barrister representing them.

I assume that the Question refers to criminal cases. The 1972 figures are : for criminal proceedings in magistrates' courts, 147,181 ; for criminal proceedings in the Crown court, 64,473 ; for appeals to the Crown court, 6,103 ; and for appeals to the court of Appeal (Criminal Division) 984. The average amount paid to legal representatives was £110 for a case in the Crown court and £36 for a case in a magistrates' court. These averages include cases in which co-defendants were jointly represented.

The Minister of State may be aware that his answer shows that the legal aid scheme is of considerable benefit to the legal profession, but can he be sure that it is of similar benefit to those who really need it? What proposals has he to ensure that people get justice, whether or not they can afford to pay through the nose for it?

I am sure that the legal aid scheme is of benefit to the legal profession, in the same way as the National Health Service is of benefit to doctors, but I equally believe that it benefits those who obtain legal aid. For example, about 64,473 people were granted legal aid in Crown court proceedings last year and only 328 applications for aid were refused.

Is the hon. and learned Gentleman aware that some people, particularly unemployed male divorcees—and I have two such examples in my constituency—are unable to receive legal aid simply because they are unemployed, although they are giving financial aid to their ex-wives? Will he examine this problem? I can assure him that such people are in a very difficult situation.

With respect to the hon. Gentleman, I think the question he asks probably relates to civil legal aid, which is a matter for my noble and learned Friend the Lord Chancellor. If the hon. Gentleman cares to write to me about any case relating to criminal legal aid, I shall consider it.

Will the Minister of State take the opportunity to refute the suggestion made on one occasion by the Lord Chancellor that the legal aid scheme is being abused by lawyers defending clients who have no proper defence? Are not such cases more a matter for the Bar Council, and is it not right that the extension of legal aid means that many more people are being properly represented and their cases being properly put before the courts?

It is right to say that almost everybody who appears in a Crown court is represented, either by paying privately or through legal aid. On the other hand, we are obviously concerned about the volume of cases before the Crown courts which might be tried in magistrates' courts, and the hon. Gentleman will be aware that we have set up a committee under Lord Justice James to examine the delineation of responsibility between those two courts.