asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he has assessed the operational value in the selective blocking of roads on the border with the Republic or Ireland; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many vehicular crossing points are in use between Northern Ireland and Eire; how many have been completely blocked by Her Majesty's Forces; and if he will now have the remainder completely closed with the exception of a very limited number of main crossing points at which all traffic personnel will be thoroughly searched.

There are 41 approved and concessionary crossings. There are also 243 unapproved crossings which range from reasonable roads to farm tracks. Thirty-one border crossings have been blocked since September 1973 and further closures may be made. The aim is to channel movements on stretches of the border, where terrorist activity has been high, into the routes where greater control by security forces can be exercised over vehicular traffic.

For practical and operational reasons it is not feasible to close all unapproved crossings and any further closures will be made selectively according to the operational need.

I am grateful for that reply. Will the Minister of State also consider documentation of vehicles which are crossing to and fro in the border area, and consider particularly the possibility of requiring an authority from the owner of a vehicle for it to be driven if it is driven by a person other than the owner? Will the hon. Gentleman consider making it obligatory for certain documents to be carried, and also consider the possibility of a night curfew in the border area, with the impounding of vehicles which break the curfew?

We can consider the question of documentation in relation to vehicles, but I should point out to the hon. Gentleman and to the House that both this and the restriction of crossing of vehicles is very difficult because of the constant crossings which take place upon legitimate business from both sides of the border. We have to be careful that we do not destroy this legitimate trade.

Will my hon. Friend say approximately how many men are involved in the operation to which he has referred?

We are not in a position to disclose that.

Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that it seems to be a great waste of resources to have troops chasing around Belfast and other cities in Northern Ireland looking for explosives, arms and ammunition when these are allowed to go across the border ad lib , with little restriction whatsoever? As the Secretary of State knows, I have asked has office to arrange a meeting with me and a number of senior citizens in about seven towns and villages around the border in Northern Ireland to discuss security. Five weeks have elapsed, and no such meeting has been arranged. I ask the Secretary of State, through the hon. Gentleman, if even now he will agree to meet these people to discuss security, particularly because since I first requested the meeting some people in those areas have been killed, including a young lady serving in the Ulster Defence Regiment. These people have a useful contribution to make and I ask that an early meeting be arranged.

With regard to the right hon. Gentleman's last point, my right hon. Friend has been in communication with him and he considers that the best way to deal with the matter is through the Royal Ulster Constabulary. In regard to border control, the right hon. Gentleman and the House are aware that there has been a greater concentration on the border recently by the transference of forces into the border area, and this is what is meant by some of the redeployment of the Army at present, which we have been talking about.

No matter how many roads are open or shut, is not a critical factor co-operation with the Republic? Can the Minister of State say anything about the talks which I suspect his right hon. Friend will have had in Dublin this week? Will he also say whether any progress is being made on closer co-operation? No matter how many roads are open or shut this is the critical factor.

I accept that point. There is closer co-operation among the Republic, the British Government and the security forces than ever before. We are particularly hoping that out of the developments and discussion which my right hon. Friend has just had this co-operation will be strengthened even further.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the security of the frontier between Northern and Southern Ireland.

The security of the frontier is a matter on which there is co-operation between the security forces on both sides. Both Her Majesty's Government and the Irish Government recognise that there is room for improvement and we are in touch with them on the subject.

Does the Minister think that we shall ever satisfactorily deal with the IRA as long as IRA members can cross the frontier at will, providing that they keep off the roads? In a previous answer the Minister kept on referring to the fact that it is the Governments view that the matter can be settled only by a political solution. Is there any indication that the IRA is beginning to share that view?

The hon. Gentleman is fully aware that the IRA has a military view. We have witnessed it recently. The Government have taken resolute action against it. We are talking about a border that is over 320 miles long and a coastline of possibly twice or three times that length. That is the magnitude of the job and the problem with which the security forces are faced. In those circumstances there is no easy way of sealing the border. What we need to overcome the problem is co-operation with the Government in the South. We are getting that co-operation, and it is increasing all the time.

I have affection and respect for my hon. Friend, but does he realise that he is lapsing into the language of General Westmoreland?

I do not quite know the language of General Westmoreland. The policy that my right hon. Friend and myself have been consistently advocating is, we believe, the only sane policy for Northern Ireland.

Does the Minister think that it would be practicable to give the UDR a specially enhanced border rôle?

My right hon. Friend is considering that matter closely.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the workings of the Northern Ireland Emergency Provisions Act 1973.

I have nothing to add to the statement which I made in this House on 4th April 1974.

As the House is aware, Lord Gardiner has agreed to chair a committee to consider what provisions and powers are required to deal with terrorism and subversion, consistent to the maximum extent possible in the circumstances with the protection of civil liberties and human rights.—[Vol 871, cols. 1463–77.]

May I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reply and ask whether he agrees that this is terrible legislation to deal with terrible times? Does he further agree that it is important that the two safeguards contained within it to protect the liberty of the individual should be carefully adhered to? Will he ensure that the Army will strictly observe that part of Section 10 dealing with photographing suspected terrorists, because there is a feeling that vast dossiers of information are being built up unnecessarily on innocent people?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that I shall ensure that the Army carries out the law properly. The hon. Gentleman knows better than most people here what armed guerilla warfare, involving people who are not dressed in uniform, is like. I shall see that the Army acts within the law but I shall also see that the Army acts against people, from whatever side they come, who are working against the law. I will not weaken in that resolve.

Does my right hon. Friend recall that when this Act was being discussed in Committee we divided at least 21 times on important matters of principle as well as on many other amendments? Is it his intention, because he has established the Lord Gardiner Committee—the composition of which we do not yet know, just as we do not know when it will report—to reintroduce the Act in toto ?

I hope very shortly to announce the names of those who will serve on the Gardiner Committee. I shall not ask the House to renew any part of the Act which I do not consider to be necessary. In other words, I shall look at it carefully.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give further consideration to the very difficult question whether soldiers should be liable to action in a civil court for incidents which occur under active service conditions?

This is a matter for the Emergency Provisions Act. It is an appropriate subject for the Gardiner Commitee. It will be looked at by that committee, and it will be possible for people in all walks of life and all forms of organisations to give evidence to the committee. This is part of a much wider issue of armed guerrilla warfare and the rôle of the State and the law. It is something at which we must look carefully.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he is satisfied with the working of the commissioners' hearings at the Maze Prison.

Yes, Sir.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that this quasi-judicial procedure that is used in trying detainees' cases is causing serious trouble among the detainees? Is he aware that in a recent case the only witness called by the authorities to give evidence against a detainee was declared in the chief court of Northern Ireland to be an unreliable witness—something which the Crown admitted? Is the right hon. Gentleman further aware that this person's evidence was struck out of the record of two previous cases heard by the commissioners? Does he appreciate that it is only the evidence of this man which is being used to detain a person? Does he not agree that under these circumstances he cannot be satisfied with the work of the commissioners?

The commissioners are totally responsible for regulating their own procedures. The evidence that a commissioner takes into account is, and must be, a matter for him to decide. If a respondent is not satisfied, as happened in this case, there is the right of appeal to the Detention Appeal Tribunal within 21 days. That is why it was built into the procedure. I understand that as yet no such appeal has been made.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that there is a great deal of concern on the part of members of both communities—certainly among the detainees and internees of both communities—over the length of time they have to wait for the procedure to be gone through? Is he further aware that some of these prisoners, men and women, have been incarcerated for almost 12 months without their cases being heard? Will he do something to reduce this waiting period?

This is one of the most worrying features. It has been present for some time. Since last December, under the previous administration, the number of commissioners has more than doubled and a third court has been opened. A fourth court is being opened shortly in a new building which has been specially constructed. I accept that this is a real problem. We are doing all we can to overcome it.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he is satisfied with the conditions obtaining for detainees at the Maze Prison, Long Kesh.

The conditions under which detainees are held in custody at the Maze Prison are kept under constant review. The prison authorities make every effort to provide satisfactory conditions.

I would refer the Minister to one aspect of the conditions there which I witnessed on a visit. I spent many hours in the Maze Prison and found that one of the major complaints was of the inadequate laundry supplies. Detainees said that they had to wait 6–8 weeks for a change of bed linen, which is one of the ordinary humanities for men, many of whom are incarcerated there without charge and without trial.

I accept the hon. Gentleman's point about the laundry. That matter is being looked at, and I thank him for raising it in the House. Considerable improvements have been effected in recent months, including the provision of new kitchens and a new hospital, and other facilities are being provided.

Whenever I have visited the Maze I have been particularly impressed by the calibre of the governor and the prison staff. But there are two main areas of concern to both those inside and their relatives outside. The first is the recent change in the arrangements for visiting. Secondly, it appears that because the Maze is not a concentration camp, a compound or a prison, there are difficulties in relating it to the normal prison rules—on parole, for instance. Will my hon. Friend examine the criteria affecting parole of people incarcerated in Long Kesh and the changes that have worsened visiting conditions?

On the issue of visiting, I ask my hon. Friend to wait until I reply to the next Question, when I shall have something to say about that. parole has been working very effectively recently, and a great deal has been granted. If my hon. Friend has specific instances I hope that he will draw them to our attention.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will improve the facilities available to relatives and friends of prisoners at the Maze Prison following a deterioration in these facilities.

Following a review, particularly of the security aspects, visits to inmates at the Maze Prison by women and children will in future be under open conditions: those by adult males will take place across a wall-to-wall dividing table, but if there is any abuse by individuals, whether inmates or visitors, subsequent visits in those cases will be in completely closed conditions.

I am delighted to hear what the Minister says, but why are the delays for relatives and friends so long?

I assume that the hon. Gentleman is asking why has it taken so long to reach the decision. It was a decision taken by the previous Government for security reasons. We have had a full review of the matter, in which the Army and all the other bodies concerned have been consulted. We are now satisfied that we can introduce open visiting, and we shall do so this week.

Would it be possible to reduce the length of time for which children and mothers are kept waiting? Some days they have to take a whole day off to get in. It is not good for children and mothers to have to wait so long in the conditions there. If the Minister could do something to reduce the waiting time, it would be deeply appreciated by all concerned.

I thank the hon. Gentleman. We shall examine the position. One of the matters which concern the people at the Maze and the Northern Ireland Office is the number of families and children that visit there regularly. The proposed return to open visiting is to try to deal with some of the frustration, not least that of the children. We shall certainly examine the length of time involved.

When mothers bring their families to the Maze, although there has been a considerable improvement in the reception area compared with the early days, there is a grave need for proper and adequate play facilities, particularly for young children who, having made a long journey, are likely to be tired and fractious. It would be a great relief to parents taking young children there if my right hon. Friend and my hon. Friend could see a way to provide proper play facilities for children while visiting.

I give my hon. Friend the assurance that we shall consult the authorities about that point.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will review the proposal to establish an All Ireland Peace Council on lines submitted to his predecessor by the hon. Member for Ealing, North; and if he will make a statement.

The policy of Her Majesty's Government is to restore peace, to bring about a reconciliation of the communities in Northern Ireland and to establish close co-operation between Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic as proposed in the Sunningdale communiqué. An initiative such as my hon. Friend proposes would, however, come better from the communities themselves.

I am grateful for that reply. Is my hon. Friend aware that people from all communities and all religious denominations in Northern Ireland and the Republic have expressed to me their support for this idea? Is he further aware that the thing that binds them, irrespective of political or religious beliefs, is the need for a rallying point where they can express themselves as being totally opposed to any form of violence and much of the vulgarity that takes place at the moment?

My hon. Friend can be assured that the Government would support any measure along these lines. We feel it would be better for this to be done outside Government, but Government support could be given if needed.

Is there not a need for an All Ireland War Council rather than a peace council, so that North and South can co-operate against terrorism? Is it not that which is lacking at the moment?

The hon. Gentleman might have doubted that had he been with me in Belfast last night. War will not resolve this matter. It has to be resolved peacefully and by political means, by all the people in the community. The hon. Gentleman ought to understand that.

Does the IRA understand it?

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what estimate he has made of the total cost in lives and damage to property between 1st January and 30th April 1974 of the troubles in Northern Ireland.

Seventy-four people were killed during this period. Claims for compensation for damage to property amounted to about £10½ million.

After five years, how can we be persuaded that the English and the Scots can do anything about this deplorable situation?

I repeat to my hon. Friend what I said to the hon. Member for Epping Forest (Mr. Biggs-Davison). The British Government have a responsibility in this respect. We feel that we cannot turn our backs on 1,600,000 people. In consequence, despite the security situation and the extremists on both sides, we still believe that a political solution is the only alternative to the problems in Ireland.

Does the hon. Gentleman not agree that the figures he has given show an appalling loss of life and damage to property? Ought not we, in this part of the United Kingdom, to stop the IRA from collecting money, as it does in various parts of London and the rest of Great Britain? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the IRA does this by means of raffles, often for ostensibly innocent purposes, but that the money raised is used against the people of Northern Ireland? Surely this should be stopped, particularly when we hear demands by some hon. Members to stop the sale of ships to Chile?

The hon. Gentleman beats a rather tortuous route to the point of his question. We deplore the type of thing the hon. Gentleman has referred to. This is not a matter for the Northern Ireland Office. We welcome the strong statements that have recently been made in the United States, not least by Mr. John Hume and the Foreign Secretary of the Irish Republic, because that is where a great deal of the finance is coming from.

Does the hon. Gentleman not agree that what is important for us here is to leave no one in Northern Ireland in any doubt that we shall carry this thing through and see an end to violence, and that we shall not let up in any way whatever in our efforts to see the new constitution working?

That is the intention of the Government. At the moment there are difficulties corning from all sections of the community. My right hon. Friend may say something about this later. We shall not be deflected from trying to achieve what we believe is possible, namely, a political solution to the problems of Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he is satisfied with the capability of the Royal Ulster Constabulary in Londonderry to carry out their duties in all parts of the city.

At present the Royal Ulster Constabulary needs the support of the Army in certain parts of Londonderry to carry out its duties.

Is the Secretary of State aware that my constituents are not happy about the capability of the Royal Ulster Constabulary when they see its members being stoned when they are investigating traffic accidents? If the Army is needed to help the Royal Ulster Constabulary to carry out its duties in Londonderry, will the right hon. Gentleman say why 500 soldiers are being withdrawn and the military presence is being reduced in the terrorist-ridden areas of the city, why some of the posts are being closed down, and why Royal Ulster Constabulary personnel are not available to replace them?

In fact, the number of troops in Northern Ireland has been increased in recent weeks. I want to tell the hon. Gentleman, in the light of his question, that if every time there is a movement of troops there is this sort of discussion, it makes life extremely difficult. I realise the problem that is faced there, especially in parts of Londonderry. I am advised that with the forces available there the security forces can deal with the matter, and that if they need extra troops the mobility is very high.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that in a recent statement to the House he spoke about the manner in which the terrorists held Press conferences with complete impunity? Does he, or do the security forces, including the Royal Ulster Constabulary, get the assistance of the Press in tying down these terrorists? If not, can the Press be held responsible for collusion with them, thereby hindering the Royal Ulster Constabulary?

I cannot recall that part of what I said. But I do not think that open Press conferences are held. As the House will have realised from last weekend, however, we have a great deal of information about what goes on in paramilitary forces, and I am satisfied with the situation.

I think that the right hon. Gentleman said that the number of troops had been increased—by which assume that he meant British troops. Will he say by how much the Royal Ulster Constabulary or the Ulster Defence Regiment has been increased? Does he not accept the view that Ulstermen must begin to bear at least a larger share of responsibility?

One of the things that I have endeavoured to do is to get people to join the Royal Ulster Constabulary Reserve, for example. Much of this is related to political advancement, because one part of the community does not, in any numbers, join these organisations. This is another example of political advancement being necessary in order to achieve results on this front. But the hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. To have trained soldiers searching people who are going shopping at the Segment in Belfast is a gross waste of trained manpower. I have taken on more civilians to do that job.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what are his proposals for a further implementation of the Sunningdale Agreement in the light of recent events in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Eire.

Her Majesty's Government are at present engaged in discussions on this subject with the Northern Ireland Executive and the Government of the Republic of Ireland.

I recently spent some time in Dublin discussing the report of the Law Enforcement Commission.

In his recent visit to Dublin and discussions with the Irish Government, was it represented to the right hon. Gentleman that it would be advantageous to ratify the Sunningdale Agreement before the beginning of the so-called marching season of July and August? Did the right hon. Gentleman take the opportunity to point out to the Government of Eire the clear evidence that exists of deep hostility to the Council of Ireland in the Loyalist community in Northern Ireland, and that that was evidence which was so preponderent that it would be imprudent for any British Government to disregard it?

The discussions on the Sunningdale communiqué, which covered a number of agreements and listed a number of things which had to be further investigated, are not yet completed. What was clear from Sunningdale, on the relationship between North and South, which would come under Section 12 of the Northern Ireland Constitution Act—I am speaking without having been present at Sunningdale—was that it seemed clearly to be a matter for North and South, in which the English were on the sidelines except to the extent that financial obligations were involved. I am sure that in all parts of Ireland people are aware of the developing situation in this respect. Her Majesty's Government are very keen to see signed as soon as possible the parts of the Sunningdale communiqué on which agreement was reached and on which developments are to take place.

In view of the fact that on the Minister's own figures, given in parliamentary replies, the average family in this country is subsidising the economy of Northern Ireland to the tune of £30 per annum, will the Minister point out to those so-called Loyalists who are presently engaged in a political strike against Sunningdale that they cannot have both their subsidy and their right to frustrate the wishes of this and their own Parliament? What evidence has there been in the last day or so of intimidation of ordinary people by those fermenting that activity?

There is a political strike taking place at present with the aim of bringing about early elections. Because it is a political strike this gives me a great deal of freedom in how I deal with various matters under it. I regret that there is a great deal of intimidation. My information is that when factory meetings were held, to which often only small numbers of people went, the vote was not decisive, but that it was the intimidation aferwards by groups and bands that was keeping the strike together. This is a political and not an industrial strike.

If the Government persist in a policy of endorsing the Sunning-dale Agreement, which is plainly repugnant to the majority of the people of Ulster—who expressed their opinion by winning 11 of the 12 seats at the last election—it is the Government who are responsible for the havoc which is at present being reaped.

I must say to the hon. and gallant Gentleman and to his friends that they may well soon have to face the question whether their loyalism will lead them to come up against British troops. Then we shall see whether loyalism means "getting our own way, or else", or, "We want to be part of the United Kingdom".

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that he subscribes to the concept of the right of self-determination of peoples? If he so subscribes, will he say how he squares that with the Sunningdale Agreement? Will he also indicate to the House when it has happened that the force—from wherever it may come—of one Government imposed on the peoples of another has produced the self-determination to which I refer?

My hon. Friend is talking about self-determination in a small part of the United Kingdom, with a population of about two-thirds Protestant and one-third Catholic, with strong mythological feelings from the past embodied in both—some of which can be respected and some of which cannot. To talk about self-determination in that context would lead not to self-determination but to self-massacre, if that is the word. My hon. Friend will have to face that. If he thinks that this is the situation, and that it is believed in by the people of Ireland, I invite him to try putting that proposition forward at the junction of the Shan-kill and the Falls. Then he will find what the working class of Ireland think about the situation.

The strong words that the right hon. Gentleman used about Loyalists must pose the question where the Government and, indeed, the Opposition, stand on the question of integration between this country and Northern Ireland. Until that question is answered we shall continue to have endless trouble.

In our view the direction that is shown by Sunningdale, which would allow the two communities in Northern Ireland to work together but to have their different views—South in one instance; over here in the other—is the best way. I tell the hon. Gentleman firmly that the view of the Government on integration is that given the same factor that I put to my hon. Friend the Member for Preson, South (Mr. Thorne) about the nature of the community there, I could not, certainly, even begin to believe in complete integration of Northern Ireland with the rest of the United Kingdom.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he now expects the Sunningdale Agreement to be ready for signature and ratification.

The Sunningdale Agreement was signed by representatives of all the delegations attending the conference. I cannot yet say when a further conference will be held.

Will the House have an opportunity to debate the matter if there should be further progress? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is not a bit of use pompously lecturing the Ulster people about acting in a political and democratic sense and eschewing other acts that are at present being perpetrated if the Government are going to ignore them when they do so act?

It will not be a matter for me to decide whether the House will have an opportunity to debate the matter. I shall act on the next part of the Sunningdale arrangements in the same way as the previous administration acted—at least, that I would so advise. Further, I advise the hon. and gallant Gentleman to read the Sunningdale Agreement. There are many people who are against what they have never read. Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman against the Law Enforcement Commission and the concept that there should be legal co-operation between the North and the South? There are many aspects of the Sunningdale Agreement on which there is overall agreement. Far too many people have used it as an emotive term and have never looked at the agreement.

Why does the Law Enforcement. Commission propose an arrangement to make Northern Ireland different from the rest of the United Kingdom? Why does not the new arrangement apply to the whole of the United Kingdom, so that people wanted for offences in this country who fled to the Irish Republic could be tried there? Does he not realise that people in Northern Ireland accept the position that the Irish Government claim jurisdiction over the whole of Northern Ireland and therefore will not have extradition? Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that he is accepting that stand by the Irish Government?

I hope to report to the House the Government's conclusions on the Law Enforcement Commission. That would be an appropriate time to talk about that matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he is aware of the practice whereby matters of confidential discussion between Her Majesty's Government and the Government of the Irish Republic can become subjects of discussion between the latter Government and a section of the Northern Ireland Executive and if he will take steps to prevent the practice.

Section 12 of the Northern Ireland Constitution Act 1973 expressly empowers a Northern Ireland Executive authority to consult on any matter with any authority of the Republic of Ireland.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind, first, the undesirability of permitting information to be transmitted to persons who are not bound by the equivalent of a Privy Councillor's oath, while the same information is withheld from hon. Members? Secondly, will he bear in mind the need to discourage the practice of one element in the Northern Ireland Executive of reporting at frequent intervals to the Government of a foreign State?

Although the hon. Gentleman's last remark about a foreign State is technically correct, I think that it is right, particularly given the discussions that are taking place, that members of the Executive should have the right, as they do under the Act, to discuss matters in the South. I have noticed with some of my friends in Northern Ireland that there is sometimes a feeling that nobody should go singly to have a discussion; it is always a matter of taking a large group. I often go on my own and talk on behalf of a group; I do not take the whole Cabinet with me when I go. It is absolutely right that that should be done. I advise the hon. Gentleman not to believe some of the reports in the Press about the Law Enforcement Commission's report, which I hope to present to the House shortly and copies of which have been given to the Northern Ireland Executive. Of course, the Government of the South will have their own copies.

Does not the section of the Act to which the right hon. Gentleman refers deal with the setting up of joint bodies and the power of the Assembly to ratify such discussion? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree with one of his hon. Friends who called Northern Ireland a colony? Does he believe that Northern Ireland is a colony or part of the United Kingdom?

I do not regard Northern Ireland as a colony. It is part of the United Kingdom, and because it is part of the United Kingdom I intend to see that the law of the United Kingdom is carried out there. I do not intend to be threatened by people carrying out a political strike. I know that I shall have the support of the hon. Gentleman in that.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he will consider introducing amending legislation to enable the Chief Minister of Northern Ireland to select members of the Executive from, and in proportion to the elected strength of, the parties in the Assembly.

No, Sir.

But, despite the able and courageous efforts of the Chief Minister and the other members of the Executive, is it not clear that there is widespread discontent with the constitutional arrangements? Is the right hon. Gentleman's mind completely closed to improvements in the present constitutional arrangements? Will he consider urgently how matters can be improved? Otherwise, will not he be compelled to have a General Election?

The power-sharing Executive started on 1st January. There has not been nearly enough time to see how it works. To talk of failure at this early stage is wrong. The hon. Gentleman tried to introduce an amendment at the Committee stage of the Northern Ireland Constitution Act on this matter, and it did not find favour with hon. Members. In my view, the form of proportional representation he suggests for the Assembly would not give us the result that we want. Of course, when the Act has had a fair trial, the matter will be looked at, as with all other Acts, but I support the legislation introduced by the previous administration.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, whether he will make a statement on his meeting with the delegation from the Regional Policy and Transport Committee of the European Parliament during its recent visit to Northern Ireland.

I did not myself meet the delegation. The visit was arranged directly between the committee and the Northern Ireland Executive.

Does the Minister agree that for Northern Ireland to be a part of the Community is of real benefit economically and in agricultural terms, and that any talk of coming out of the Common Market is not in the interests of Northern Ireland?

The hon. Gentleman is raising a directly political issue. We did not interfere with the Executive's decision—in any case, it was the Executive's prerogative —to meet the European delegation. I did not think that it was necessary for me to do so.

asked the Prime Minister if he is satisfied with the time it takes Government Departments to reply to letters concerning problems sent to them by individuals or Members.

I refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Lewis) on 2nd April, Sir.—[Vol. 871, c. 323. ]

I thank my right hon. Friend for his reply. Does he agree that it is extremely important that individuals' problems and worries are answered quickly? Does he further agree that it is unfortunate that one of my constituents has still not had a reply to a question that he put to the education pension branch on 30th October last year, in spite of an apology to me in April from the Minister and the Department concerned?

I am aware of that teacher's pension case. I regret that there has been a delay. I understand that my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary has explained the matter and has apologised for the circumstances leading to the delay. I suggest to my hon. Friend the Member for Stockport, North (Mr. Bennett) and other hon. Members that if they do not get a reply quickly enough they should approach the Minister concerned, or one of the junior Ministers—who are sometimes a little faster than Ministers, in all Governments—or the PPS. Of course, hon. Members can write to me at any time but I cannot guarantee that my reply will be immediate in all circumstances.

Will the right hon. Gentleman prepare an early reply to a letter that he may well receive soon from Mr. Len Murray, the General Secretary of the TUC, inquiring what is meant by the social contract? In view of Mr. Murray's admission this morning—[ Interruption. ]

Order. I understand that the hon. Member for Reigate (Mr. Gardiner) is seeking to ask the Prime Minister a question about a letter that he cannot yet have received. That does not seem to be in order.

I ask the question, Mr. Speaker, because it is evident from Mr. Murray's statement this morning that an inquiry of that kind may well be coming shortly. Will the Prime Minister give Mr. Murray a speedy reply on what is meant by the social contract? In that reply, will he be able to assure him that the Government will accept this morning's decision in Committee to re-enact the code of industrial relations practice?

I try to make a practice of not drafting replies to letters before I receive them. This is some advance on the usual conduct of the hon. Gentleman. When he was upstairs in the Press Gallery he always invented facts before he knew them. Contrary to my expectations, since he came downstairs his standards have been even lower than they were upstairs.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will appoint an expert on the rating system to his Domestic Policy Review Staff at No. 10 Downing Street.

No, Sir. I do not intend to appoint to the policy unit at 10 Downing Street members with responsibilities for specific subjects. My right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for the Environment, already has adequate sources of advice on rating matters.

In view of the increasing lack of confidence by the public in the whole basis of the rating system, will the righ hon. Gentleman set up an inquiry, whether or not at No. 10 Downing Street, to consider alternative sources of local finance and to report to the House within six months?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman about the feeling that exists throughout the country—and which has existed for many years—that the rating system is unsatisfactory. The hon. Gentleman will have noted the statement which was made last week by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment. My right hon. Friend is immediately concerned to see what can be done to improve the 1975–76 distribution of the grant within the existing system. Of course, we are examining the possibility of a more thorough-going longterm consideration of local government finance. However, it would be wrong to raise the expectations of the House and country. In my experience, for over a quarter of a century successive Governments have always tried to find a better method. Unsatisfactory as the present system is, no Government of any party have yet succeeded in finding a better method.

Would it need a rating expert or psephologist to explain why the right hon. Member for Altrincham and Sale (Mr. Barber) the former Chancellor of the Exchequer who cut public expenditure by a total of £1,200 million and the grant to his own borough of Trafford by £8 million, now seeks to blame the present Government for these cuts?

I do not think that there is any ministerial responsibility for the right hon. Gentleman's statement.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his helpful answer, which moves in the right direction, but it is a general maxim of this country that we pay our taxes in sorrow and our rates in anger. Surely it is a highly conservative argument for the right hon. Gentleman to say that for 25 years we could not do it and that we may not be able to do better in future. Many other forms of taxation have been tried in different countries. For example, is the right hon. Gentleman aware of Canada's experience with site value taxation? There are other forms of local tax. Can we not approach this matter with a sense of urgency?

I assure the right hon. Gentleman that I am not trying to take a negative attitude towards this problem. I agree with him. I have always paid my taxes with sorrow and my rates, like most other people, with real anger. They usually come in such a large dollop. I am not trying to be negative. I hope that we can move forward on these matters, but it would be wrong for me to raise expectations by setting up an inquiry. We are aware of the experience with site value taxation. The right hon. Gentleman knows what our proposals are in that direction.

asked the Prime Minister if he will seek to pay an official visit to Brussels.

I have at present no plans to do so, Sir.

Inevitably, the right hon. Gentleman will be going at some time. Before he goes, will he state clearly to the British people that he is opposed to any move towards federalism or a supranational State in the Common Market as long as we remain a member? Perhaps my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition can say the same thing, because this is precisely what the British electorate do not want, and it needs saying loud and clear.

The Leader of the Opposition, throughout the whole period when the House was considering whether to support entry on the terms negotiated, was, I think, very far from forthcoming on any question of federalism. I agree with the hon. Member for Banbury (Mr. Marten). There is no proposal, as far as I know, in any substantial part of the House in favour of a federal system in the Common Market or in Western and Southern Europe generally in the foreseeable future.

Given the delicate political situation in France and Germany, does not my right hon. Friend think that such a visit would have a reassuring effect on the Common Market countries in their difficulties and at the same time would enable him to give impetus to a common energy policy as well as the redefining of regional policy, which has been so long delayed?

I view these questions in a spirit of great responsibility. Assuming that the Danish Government have survived after last night, the United Kingdom's 10-weeks-old Government are now the fifth most senior Government among the Nine. In considering the energy situation, we take the view that, while there is no reason why we should not discuss these questions within the EEC, the world's energy problems and the world's monetary problems arising from the oil situation will have to be discussed on a world-wide basis.

When the right hon. Gentleman goes to Brussels will he take the opportunity to explain to representatives of the other Community countries whether he still supports the view which was expressed by his previous Government on the occasion of the State visit by President Saragat of Italy in April 1969 —that the European Economic Community remained the basis for European unity and that it should be sustained by an elected Parliament?

That was the statement we made, and I made it clear that we wanted to get into the EEC and develop its institutions if we got the right terms. We did not get the right terms, and we are now renegotiating.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will seek a meeting with the President of France.

asked the Prime Minister if he will seek to meet the President of France.

I would refer the hon. Members to the reply that I gave my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Molloy) on 9th May.—[Vol. 873, c. 238. ]

Whether it is M. Mitterand, M. Giscard D'Estaing, M. Poher, or M. Chaban-Delmas who is elected the new President of France, is not one thing likely to remain unchanged —that the French Government, as usual, will continue to pursue and to win contracts and trade forgone by the British Government with regimes regarded as politically undesirable? Does the right hon. Gentleman intend to raise this subject with the new French President?

While I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his French pronunciation, which, if it had been shown on the last Government Front Bench, would have raised its average level of French speaking, I cannot congratulate him on his list of candidates. M. Poher and M. Chaban-Delmas are no longer in the hunt. Only two candidates are left. The other questions raised by the hon. Gentleman are being dealt with by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and there is no need to raise them immediately with whoever is elected President of France.

Will my right hon. Friend not go dashing off to meet any of these people? Is he aware that this morning the Government were defeated in Committee on the Trade Union and Labour Relations Bill, and that it may be necessary to have a General Election pretty speedily?

I have no intention of dashing off to France to meet any of these gentlemen. I am sure that when the Leader of the Opposition hears about the sad events upstairs this morning he will take steps to send more of his own people to France.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that, despite the reported rebuffs to our EEC renegotiators, a new opportunity may well occur in the near future for Britain to play a leading rôle in Europe? Will he assure us that this opportunity will not be lost in the mists of renegotiation?

I agree. I think that the rôle which Britain can play in Europe, regardless of whatever final decision is taken about the terms of entry, is very important. I agree that because of recent events, some of them very sad, Britain is in a more important position and has greater responsibility in matters affecting the future of Europe as a whole.

In view of the uncertainty surrounding the Governments of France and Germany, is it still Her Majesty's Government's intention to issue the important statement of our position in regard to the Common Market on the prearranged date of 4th June? Will my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary be making a statement about our intentions in the renegotiations on that date?

Yes, Sir. It was obviously the hope of the Government to make the statement earlier, but the death of President Pompidou and, indeed, the resignation of Chancellor Brandt made it more difficult to expect early discussions. But I hope that on 4th June my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary will be able to make a definitive statement as a result of the studies that we have been making, and I know that it is his intention that whatever he says shall be publicly available.

Before the Foreign Secretary makes his statement, will the Prime Minister undertake to hold consultations with interests in this country and in the Commonwealth about exactly what it is that they want renegotiated?

Yes, Sir. Consultations are now going on. The consultations now being held with the Commonwealth are far more realistic than those which led the right hon. and learned Gentleman to sell the Commonwealth down the river on the Sugar Agreement.

asked the Prime Minister if he is satisfied with the coordination between the Scottish Office and the Department of the Environment in their responsibilities for development and housing in and around Berwick-upon-Tweed.

Yes, Sir. Both Departments keep in close touch with the Development Committee of the Eastern Borders Development Association and with each other on these matters.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that whereas the Scottish Office recognises Berwick as the key to the development of the eastern borders, the Department of the Environment has just delivered a blow to the development of the eastern borders by refusing permission for the development of the Berwick shipyard, and has failed to provide the same backing for housing on the south side of the border as is available on the Scottish side? Will the right hon. Gentleman stop the two Departments from marching in opposite directions and leaving Berwick behind?

The Departments are in close touch. I think that the hon. Gentleman will agree that since the development committee began work there have been considerable improvements. Indeed, since 1967 depopulation has ceased and there are more hopeful signs of future population growth.

With regard to the refusal of planning permission for a new shipyard on the north bank of the river, my right hon. Friend felt that the development, which would not have brought many new jobs to Berwick, could have irrevocably damaged this internationally famous historic town. My right hon. Friend agreed in principle to the planning application for a larger yard on the south bank of the river. From his local knowledge, the hon. Gentleman will know how difficult are these decisions. I am not sure that he will necessarily feel that they are wrong.

On a point of order—

I should be grateful if the hon. Gentleman would raise his point of order later.