asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will discuss with appropriate persons and bodies in Northern Ireland the acceptability of an international force for the protection of citizens in Ulster which would, over a period of time, substantially replace the British Forces now operating there.

No, Sir. The protection of the people of Northern Ireland is the responsibility of Her Majesty's Government, and, given the nature of the security threat, in the absence of normal policing in certain areas an international force would provide a poor method of protection.

Has my right hon. Friend noted that the Government of Southern Ireland are now taking extraordinary measures relating to security by the creation of a national militia? Does he agree that the British Army cannot and will not indefinitely maintain the peace in Ulster? Is it not time that we moved out of the present stalemate towards some new concept of maintaining law and order in that area?

I recognise my hon. Friend's concern in these matters. The key to the whole situation is policing. The Government do not see how a United Nations force could help. There is increasing co-operation between the Irish and the British Governments. We believe that is the best way to resolve the matter.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that one way of saving lives and protecting property would be for the British Government to persuade the Eire Government to control the sale and to keep a close watch on the distribution of fertilisers and weedkillers which still cross the border in large quantities and are used in those horrendous proxy bombs which cause widespread devastation in Northern Ireland? Will he take steps to deal with that situation?

The Government are particularly concerned about the recent wave of explosions and proxy bombing. The Irish Government have been extremely co-operative and are stepping up their cooperation. Recent statements by the Taoiseach and the Foreign Secretary in the Republic have been more than helpful.

I hope that my right hon. Friend's answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Heeley (Mr. Hooley) is not intended to be the final answer. Is he aware that many of us are becoming increasingly impatient with the open-ended character of the commitment in Northern Ireland, having regard to all the circumstances and knowing, as I do, my right hon. Friend's difficulties in this matter?

We must keep an open mind. We want to create a situation in which the Army can withdraw from certain duties which could be undertaken in normal policing. We do not believe that an international force would be of help in this matter.

Now that the Irish Republican Government appear to be setting up their own B Specials, would it not be sensible, instead of thinking about international forces, to think about employing the indigenous population more for their own security?

Such emotive phrases will not help to achieve the co-operation that we want from the Irish Republic.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he will make arrangements for elections to a constitutional conference, convention or assembly to be held in the Province this year.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he will make a statement about the constitutional future of Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement indicating what success he has achieved in his most recent efforts to achieve power sharing in Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what steps he is now taking to seek new power sharing arrangements in Northern Ireland; and with which groups he has has consultation.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what progress he is making in his discussions with political parties and interested persons on the future arrangements for the Government of Northern Ireland, following the collapse of the Executive.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what consultations he has had with interested parties on the formation of a power-sharing Executive in Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will list the political parties, the organisations and individuals in Northern Ireland with whom he has had meetings regarding the future Government of Northern Ireland since the ending of the Executive.

Since the fall of the Northern Ireland Executive I have had an intensive series of discussions in Northern Ireland with leaders and members of all political parties represented in the Assembly and with many other groups and interests. A number of ideas have been put forward and the discussions are still continuing.

I am grateful to the Secretary of State for his remarks. I hope that the statement, when it is made before the recess, will give a firm date for such elections and that that date will be in the relatively near future.

As matters stand, any election to an Assembly would have to take place under the Constitution Act. A large number of people who have been to see me do not wish this to happen, so they say.

How many more by-elections will have to take place in Northern Ireland before the Government realise that the concept of power sharing, as we have had it before, is dead and they really start a radical re-think of alternative policy?

I have said that that by-election arose because I had no power to do aught else. The Government had advised the Queen to prorogue the Assembly—for good reasons. This still allows the Assembly members, in the short term, at any rate, to meet and talk together. I disagree completely with my hon. Friend. What I have found from all sorts of people who have come to see me is that though they may have disagreements about the form of power sharing, the one thing which has come out of the last year is an understanding on all sides of the community that both parts of the community must find a way of working together. Power sharing is not dead. It is the one thing which has stayed on since the fall of the Executive.

However impatient hon. Members may become with our fellow subjects in Northern Ireland, is it not a fact that it is our moral duty to uphold the right of those fellow subjects to remain with Britain? Is it not also a fact that it is an interest of the United Kingdom that Northern Ireland should so remain? Is it the intention of the right hon. Gentleman that when a new Assembly is elected, that Assembly should be a constitution-drafting body?

As to what the future may bring, in the state of discussions that I am having it is too early to say. The hon. Gentleman has a great knowledge of Northern Ireland, which he visits very frequently. He knows many people there. I say to him that membership of the United Kingdom is not a one-sided thing. It means duties and obligations, and it means a way of life. It works both ways. I believe that my job, on behalf of the House as Secretary of State, is to look after and to be responsible for people in Northern Ireland, whatever their beliefs and whatever their religions. But there are two communities in Northern Ireland, and we in this House can never forget that.

As my right hon. Friend continues to have consultations, will he impress upon those who recently rejected political initiatives which London and Dublin thought reasonable and, moreover viable, that there is now a special onus on them to come forward with propositions that are not only seen to be viable but can command agreement?

My hon. Friend is referring to what we all came to describe as the Irish dimension.

And power sharing.

And power sharing—despite the failure. Indeed failure is the wrong word, because the Executive and the members of the Executive showed the people of Northern Ireland in a very fine way that the communities could work together. But the Executive did end. However, there is a realisation on the part of people in Northern Ireland—and increasingly, if I did not know it before, I realise this, as do many hon. Members—that it is out of Northern Ireland that a solution must come, based on the principles, in which we believe, for membership of the United Kingdom.

In view of the wide range of options for the future which the right hon. Gentleman, very understandably, wishes to keep open, and in view of the transformed political situation in Northern Ireland, will he state whether the Government still remain obdurate in their rejection of integration?

The short answer is, "Yes." Nothing that I have ever seen, given the situation of the two communities in Northern Ireland, has convinced or will ever convince me that integration is a way out of the problem of Northern Ireland.

In the discussions which the Secretary of State has had with the various political groupings in Northern Ireland, has it been said to him by any of these groupings, or by a number of them combined, that they regard the present Northern Ireland Constitution Act as being dead and no longer viable in Northern Ireland? In regard to the statement that the Secretary of State proposes to make to the House before the recess, is it the intention of the Government to spell out in clear, unmistakable terms to all political parties in Northern Ireland the conditions under which Northern Ireland will be allowed to remain part of the United Kingdom?

On the first point, some of the people who have been to see me have told me firmly that they regard the Northern Ireland Constitution Act as dead. It may be that they are referring to parts of it, because there is a large amount of it which I should have thought would be extremely valuable for any form of Government in Northern Ireland. But I have pointed out two things. There is not only Section 2, which is a special form of power sharing; there is Section 1, which concerns the status of Northern Ireland. If the Act is dead, it is not just one section that is dead.

Whatever our personal views on this matter may be, is it not increasingly necessary to recognise the political fact that the Protestant majority in Northern Ireland clearly consider the right hon. Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone (Mr. West) and his friends as their main political spokesmen, and that we shall have to move forward on that basis?

I should be the last to deny—if one is facing realities—that in the Westminster elections, 11 out of 12 Northern Ireland Members came from one particular grouping. But I would also say that one thing which I have learned in the last month, when talking all day and every day, is that there are no monolithic groups in Northern Ireland and that there is a wide variety of views even within party groupings. This is another factor which is a new element, perhaps—certainly on the Protestant side—in Northern Ireland.

Is it wise to allow these elections to become entangled with probable Westminster elections?

With regard to probable Westminster elections, I am very pleased to say that that matter does not lie with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland—but my hon. Friend can take it as read that I am not unaware of possibilities and will take them into account.

Will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that in his discussions with the various political parties in Northern Ireland he will tell them all, particularly the SDLP, that he considers as an absolute prerequisite to any form of power sharing a declaration of unequivocal support for the security forces in their fight against terrorism?

The hon. Gentleman will recall that in the last days of the Executive, members of the SDLP, like the rest of the Executive, made a very useful statement on policing. But we should not ignore the facts of history and the effects arising out of them—that there are not many Catholics in the police forces. Would that it were the other way. Indeed, until we achieve that it will be extremely difficult to have normal policing in Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the current constitutional position in Northern Ireland.

The present constitutional position is that the Northern Ireland Assembly stands prorogued and Ministers in the Northern Ireland Office are being temporarily appointed to head the Departments and offices formerly headed by members of the Northern Ireland Executive and administration.

Before he makes his statement in July, will the right hon. Gentleman undertake a study of the strategic importance of Northern Ireland to the United Kingdom? In the context of the constitutional position, does he not agree that if power sharing is to be successful in any future constitution those who are sharing power must believe in that power—in fact, must believe in the Union?

Of course, the strategic position must be taken into account. I think that the hon. Gentleman would read with pleasure the oath that all members of the Executive took when they assumed office, which was to work for the good of Northern Ireland. I believe that they did just that, and that those who accepted power sharing accepted their position in Northern Ireland, which did not prevent their having an aspiration for the future which many people in this country have in other regards.

Will the right hon. Gentleman clear up a possible ambiguity arising from his earlier answer? Is it he who objects to holding elections under the Constitution Act because some of the people who have come to see him think that that Act is dead, or is it the people who have come to see him who object to holding the elections under the Act?

May I welcome the right hon. Gentleman to his Shadow position? I answered the Question earlier in that way because I was being asked to carry out elections under the Constitution Act. It is people who have come to see me who have objected to the Constitution Act. It is only three or four weeks since the Assembly ended. Representatives of the parties in Northern Ireland told me pretty firmly that they regard the Northern Ireland Constitution Act as dead.

I am sorry to press the right hon. Gentleman, but he has not answered the question. Do these people object to elections being held under the Constitution Act?

This is not a pedantic point; it is an important point. Anything that I do I have to do under the legislation enacted by the previous administration. People who have come to see me have told me that they regard the Constitution Act as dead. If they have any new ideas for any other form of election, or for any other purposes, it will require legislation.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement regarding his plans for the renewal of the Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Act.

My right hon. Friend expects to lay a renewal order before the House shortly.

I am grateful for that reply. However, will my right hon. Friend assure the House that when he introduces the order he will amend it so that it will end internment and imprisonment without trial?

That is not directly connected with the order as such, but my hon. Friend will be aware that the Government are committed to the ending of internment when the security situation permits.

Now that Corporal Foxford, my constituent, has been released on bail—about which the whole House will be very glad—will the Minister say whether he has had or will have discussions with the Ministry of Defence about the desirability or otherwise of soldiers being liable for civil trial following incidents occurring on the spur of the moment under what amount to active service conditions?

The Gardiner Committee will consider this problem, and evidence may be submitted to it.

Why are we shuffling off responsibility on to the Gardiner Com mittee when in Standing Committee we fought the whole of this Bill, divided 22 times and resisted many of the powers in it? Why are we behaving in this way?

A great deal of the Bill was opposed, but not the Bill in principle. I must ask my hon. Friend to await the renewal order before he pursues the matter further.

Am I right in thinking that we shall get a renewal order but that there is no question of the amendment of the Act this Session?

I hope that the hon. and gallant Gentleman will await the renewal order. There cannot be amendment, but there could be deletions.

sked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the discussions held by Ministers with Mr. Morley and Mr. Quigley of the Provisional IRA, Mr. Monaghan and Mr. O'Hare of the IRA, Mr. Craig and Mr. Spence of the Loyalists, in the Maze Prison, Long Kesh, and with Miss Hickey and Miss McKie in the women's prison at Armagh.

My noble friend and I have made several visits to familiarise ourselves with the conditions in prisons in Northern Ireland. In the course of these visits we have met a number of detainees and convicted prisoners, including some of those referred to in the Question.

My right hon. Friend has seen the acres of wire at Long Kesh. Can he imagine, if Long Kesh had been in Kenya at the time of the Mau Mau, or in Aden, the eloquence of those speeches from Tribune platforms denouncing the whole set-up? In the circumstances, will he at least look at the possibility, unpopular though it may be, of allowing the people named and other spokesmen at least to talk with each other out of the hearing of English and Scottish representatives?

On the last point, my hon. Friend is aware—because he has been to Long Kesh—that prisoners from different sections of the community do talk to one another, but this is seen as a security problem for the governor and he must have a representative present for that reason. I understand my hon. Friend's feeling about detention, but he is also talking about 1,000 convicted prisoners in the Maze, as well as other people.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider building a new prison? He has referred to prisoners in the Maze, which is in my constituency. Will he consider this as a matter of great urgency and make a decision within the next month?

I do not know about the next month, but my right hon. Friend is at the moment urgently considering this situation.

Will the Minister accept that I welcome any discussions of this character that take place in the Six Counties? Who is responsible for drawing up the list of people who are spoken to, and who decides who is to be excluded?

When I visited the Maze it was the detainees and prisoners who decided who should come out and speak to the Minister concerned.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what maximum security conditions are available for women prisoners in Northern Ireland.

The prison at Armagh is at present the only institution in Northern Ireland for women prisoners. Security at the prison is kept under continuous review.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say to which prison the Price sisters will be transferred? Does he agree that at present there is no women's prison in Northern Ireland, including Armagh, which provides adequate security for these prisoners, and that the only way that this can be provided is by placing fresh demands on the security forces?

I cannot answer the first part of the Question at the moment. There is a women's prison in Northern Ireland, and I cannot go further than the state ment by my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary.

How many women have escaped from Armagh since the prison was built?

To my knowledge, none.

The prison in Armagh is in what is known as a Loyalist area of the town, and for the past five years it has been the focal point of a steady stream of protests and demonstrations which has led to riot situations between inhabitants and security forces—

So has Brixton.

My constituents would not welcome the transfer of the Price sisters, because this would result in an unending stream of protest. Will the right hon. Gentleman consider opening a high security wing at the Maze or Magilligan Camp?

The siting of prisons is a difficult matter. The Government are always unpopular when they decide to put a prison in or near any hon. Member's constituency. On the general principle, the security arrangements at Armagh are adequate.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what consideration he has given to strengthening the powers available to the security forces in Northern Ireland.

The powers required by the security forces to deal with terrorism and subversion in Northern Ireland will be examined by Lord Gardiner's committee. If the hon. and gallant Gentleman has any specific proposals may I suggest that he places them before the committee?

What does the Minister think about the arrest and immediate interrogation powers which are available to the security forces and which are so necessary in gaining intelligence upon which all else depends?

I cannot comment on that. All these powers will be examined by the independent committee under Lord Gardiner, and I suggest that the hon. and gallant Member submits his evidence there.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will take steps to enable him to prescribe rules for the formation and operations of political parties in Northern Ireland, and if he will make a statement.

No, Sir.

Is my right hon. Friend not concerned that there have been attempts by extreme right-wing elements to take advantage of the situation, and does not he accept that in order to arrest this lurch to the right it will be necessary for the British trade union and Labour movement to engage in conversations with organisations like the Ulster Workers' Council and other organisations representing the working people of Northern Ireland? Will he seek to assist in such negotiation?

The one point that I have learned about Northern Ireland is that there is extreme everything in politics there. It is my job to make sure that everybody who wants to act politically, and not by the bomb or gun, should have the right to do so, and that is the hope. As for some of the organisations my hon. Friend mentions, there is a trade union movement in Northern Ireland which has a view on this matter. It is associated with the trade union movement here. I think that it knows its business on this, and on negotiations on political matters—as with so many other things—it is best left to decide for itself what is the best course.

If the right hon. Gentleman were to prescribe rules on these lines, could those rules prevent the official IRA from holding an international guerrilla festival in Belfast, or has he powers adequate to deal with that situation already?

I am aware of an international conference. I had not come across it under the precise title given by the hon. Member. I certainly have powers to deal with any matter under the Emergency Provisions Act and in other ways where, for example, a meeting might lead to death, fighting, gunfire or things like that. I shall be looking at this conference very closely.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will now take steps to increase the number of constituencies in Northern Ireland.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to a Question from the hon. Member for Oswestry (Mr. Biffen) on 4th April.—[Vol. 871, c. 1421.]

In spite of that answer, will the Minister look at some of the highly inflated electorates in some of the Northern Irish constituencies, because they are simply not fair? If the argument is that because the people sometimes have a local Assembly, which operates or does not operate, they need fewer MPs, will the same doctrine apply if Scotland gets a local Assembly? Shall we cut down the number of Scottish MPs'? Would it not be a gesture for general peace in Northern Ireland if an offer were made to increase the number of seats?

I am sorry that I cannot meet the hon. Gentleman's point. I think that hon. Members will recognise that Northern Ireland is in a unique position. The Government feel that to increase representation now would be detrimental to the general political situation. The Government want Northern Ireland people of both communities to start resolving the problems in Northern Ireland themselves. We do not necessarily believe that they can be resolved on the Floor of this House.

Does the Minister accept that at the beginning of a period of considerable constitutional discussion, it is undesirable that that option should appear to be closed and out of the Government's mind? Could not the real reason for their unwillingness to give the representation to which Northern Ireland is entitled, in view of the extent of its affairs controlled from Westminster, be the fear that the results of elections not conducted on proportional representation would be unfair?

We had proportional representation for the Assembly elections. If the Executive had remained, and if power sharing, which was becoming a great success in Northern Ireland, had remained, we should have had an Assembly and a form of government in Northern Ireland, plus representation in this House, without equal in any other part of the United Kingdom.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there are English Members who represent electorates in excess of any in Northern Ireland?

I am aware of that.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he has received any representations concerning the possibility of repartitioning Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he will consider negotiating with the Republic of Ireland a border that is shorter, more in line with demographic considerations and easier for all concerned to patrol.

There are problems about the border, but it would be a mistake to suppose that Northern Ireland's troubles could be resolved or even made significantly easier by redrawing the boundary. I have received no representations for this from any political party in Northern Ireland.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that if there were repartition it would by implication also involve a transfer of population, and that although that would undoubtedly cause considerable economic and social stress, the danger to life and the economic prosperity of the Province would be considerably smaller than the sort of dangers that would arise if nothing were done about the present situation?

This is the sort of exercise that looks good in the weekend papers but bears little relationship to reality. It might be different if it were just the question of the mixed population on the border, but the Catholic population of Belfast are proud of being citizens of Belfast. The hon. Member for Belfast, West (Mr. Fitt) has told me, on many issues concerning Belfast, that Belfast matters to him and to his people. To suggest that because it is a difficult question that has exercised our minds without any solution for a long period— as I am often reminded—one should tell 500,000 people that they should live somewhere where they do not want to live, is the wrong way to approach the matter.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take if from me that both communities in Northern Ireland will bitterly resent the form in which the Question has been put which implies that people in Northern Ireland would agree to a further repartition of the country? Both communities in Northern Ireland resent any Englishman telling them where they shall and shall not live in the island of Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will arrange as a matter of urgency for fresh elections to the Assembly.

No, Sir.

All hon. Members find from time to time that people do not vote in the way they would like them to vote. This is annoying, but so far it has never been held to be a reason for not holding an election in either Ireland or England. How can the right hon. Gentleman expect a political solution to emerge if he bottles up and stifles political opinion, which can be expressed only through elections? Does he realise that he will be no more successful in governing by the Army in the future than he has been in the past, and that political expression of opinion is a vital element?

The problem of the Army and its rôle is real. The hon. Gentleman should not believe that Northern Ireland is governed by the Army. I hope that he will consider the form in which his Question was put. He is asking me to hold elections under the Northern Ireland Constitution Act. It might well be that I gave the short answer, "No, Sir", because that is the answer I have had from many people in Northern Ireland who have come to see me.

In view of the diversity opinion which he has said exists in Northern Ireland about the future, will my right hon. Friend consider modern methods of public participation, using the media, so that the people of Northern Ireland—both the majority and the minority—can clearly express their views about the various options for their country, and so that those views may be assessed?

The best way of finding out what the people of Northern Ireland want is by elections. That statement is not a turn-round from the answer to the precise Question I was asked before. I am prepared to find any way of doing this, but one thing is sure: the supplementary question of the hon. Member for Belfast, West (Mr. Fitt) shows that there is only one way for the people of Northern Ireland to get to know each other and their views, and that is by talking to each other and not to an Englishman, or a Welshman, as some people tell me.

Will the right hon. Gentleman please desist from giving us a sort of semantic reason for not holding the elections, with his curious argument about the Constitution Act? There is no reason why he should not hold the elections for the Assembly without being in a hurry to implement Section 2 of the Act. Once the Assembly has been elected he can use it to determine the views of the majority.

That is not the view that is put to me by some people in the hon. and gallant Gentleman's group in Northern Ireland. Friends of his are telling me very firmly that they regard the Northern Ireland Constitution Act as dead. My reply is that if it is dead, all of it is dead—not just the bits of it they do not like.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is the percentage of the population of Northern Ireland who are maintained by supplementary benefits; and how this compares with the percentage for the United Kingdom generally.

In April 1974, the latest date for which United Kingdom figures are available, about 101,000 people in Northern Ireland—6·5 per cent. of the population—were receiving supplementary benefits. It is estimated that those benefits took into account the requirements of about 184,000 persons, including the recipients themselves—11·9 per cent. of the population.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that under the present tax and social security system many people, particularly those with large families, cannot afford to get a job? Is he further aware that so long as this state of affairs continues it will be impossible to bring the troubles in Ireland to an end, because so many people have time on their hands and the State is just paying for them to do nothing?

I, and many Members representing Northern Ireland constituencies who have fought so long for full employment in industry in Northern Ireland, take that remark as an insult to both communities in the Province. The same conditions exist there as in the rest of the United Kingdom.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland why the Northern Ireland Finance Corporation refuses to agree to pay interest on overdue compensation payments.

The Northern Ireland Finance Corporation is a statutory body with an independent board of directors responsible for the conduct of its affairs. It is not appropriate for me to comment further.

Surely the right hon. Gentleman has an interest in seeing that the Corporation conducts its affairs in a reasonably economic way? Does he defend its actions?

Of course the Government have a responsibility, but they cannot interfere in a case where litigation is currently taking place. The hon. Gentleman ought to be aware of that.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on Royal Ulster Constabulary recruitment.

There has been a 28 per cent. increase in total RUC strength since 1st January 1970. At 31st May the strength of the force was 4,448 and of the RUC Reserve 2,538. A major recruiting campaign is being conducted by the police authority and the chief constable.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree with the Secretary of State that for any appreciable increase to take place in the RUC, recruitment must come from the Roman Catholic population of Northern Ireland? What is the right hon. Gentleman doing to ensure that such recruitment takes place?

We consider this to be a major point. We have had consultations with representatives of the minority community, not least the SDLP. If the Executive had not fallen we should have been a long way on the road to getting more people into the RUC from the minority community. The majority has a responsibility to encourage people from both communities to join the RUC.

asked the Prime Minister if he will now make a statement on Her Majesty's Government's proposals in regard to the report of the Committee on Conduct in Local Government chaired by Lord Redcliffe-Maud in connection with the recommendations that can be implemented at once.

Some of the committee's recommendations can be implemented by local authorities straight away. Consultations will begin very soon with local government bodies on those proposals which would require legislation.

May I thank the Prime Minister for that excellent report? Will he have a special look at the section in the Redcliffe-Maud recommendations that deals with the question of local authority party groups and the fact that their code of conduct should be no less strict than the code of the authority?

Where decisions are taken outside the council about the line to be taken in council this recommendation is important, irrespective of party. The hon. Gentleman will know that certain decisions were taken yesterday to try to improve this situation.

Does the Prime Minister recognise that the constant suggestions of his hon. Friend the Member for Blyth (Mr. Milne) about corruption in the North-East of England, particularly in the ranks of the Labour Party, are doing a great deal of harm to public life in the region? Does he recognise that Recommendation 5 of the report, which suggests that councillors and officials need to work and should work in harmony, is accepted by most officials and councillors in the North-East of England? Will he consider instigating a Labour Party inquiry into the relationship between his party and local government, as requested by so many hon. Members?

What we have done is to set up a Royal Commission dealing with the whole subject. I agree with the opening remarks of the hon. Member's statement about the damage being done by certain irresponsible statements that are being made, but the House will recognise that the speech I made at Shildon last year, which was warmly accepted by the hon. Member for Blyth (Mr. Milne), was followed up immediately by the then Prime Minister, in that he set up the Redcliffe-Maud inquiry into the general issues, knowing that the inquiry could not look into issues which were the subject of court proceedings. As soon as the court proceedings in those cases ended I took action, as I am sure the right hon. Gentleman would have done, to set up a Royal Commission, which will be able to take account of the evidence produced in those police inquiries and the court proceedings, to look into the wider issues.

asked the Prime Minister if he will institute arrangements for cooperation between the Ministry of Defence and the Home Office in relation to the purchase of weapons and crowd control equipment.

The services with which these two Departments are concerned have very different functions. But arrangements for co-operation already exist and I am satisfied that they are adequate.

In view of the recent incidents in London, particularly the incident in Red Lion Square, a fortnight ago—which was contained by the police only at great personal bodily risk, and in which 39 police were injured—may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether discussions have taken place about the introduction of more sophisticated crowd control equipment, such as, for instance, making water cannon available for use when needed?

I am aware of the hon. Gentleman's concern in this matter. As for the Red Lion Square incident, my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has announced that there will be an inquiry into all the events that took place there on 15th June. The question raised by the hon. Gentleman, whether in the Red Lion Square context or any other, does not, I think, relate to his Question about co-ordination in the purchase of equipment.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Home Office appears to be badly in need of advice on weapons purchasing policy from, for instance, a central advisory committee on firearms control? Is he further aware that I have been told by the Home Office that 9 mm. Parabellum ammunition for hand guns has too high a velocity for approval but that, on the other hand, the Home Office appears to have approved the purchase of 7·62 mm. rifles for the civilian police force, which use ammunition with a much higher penetrating power than is required for normal police use?

I shall refer the matter to my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary. As my hon. Friend is in touch with the Home Office, I am sure that the specialist and esoteric information he has given to the House this afternoon will be conveyed personally by him to my right hon. Friend.

asked the Prime Minister if he will set up a Royal Commission on the reform of local government finance.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment will be making a statement later today on these matters during the debate on rates.

I appreciate that a Royal Commission may take too long, but is the Prime Minister aware that an increasing number of people do not accept the Conservative Opposition's dishonest campaign on rates and do not believe the Government or their local councils, but would welcome an independent review or inquiry in the hope that it would abolish the rating system and introduce in its place a tax based on income?

In reply to my hon. Friend's reference to the Conservative Party, while there is room for disagreement about the incidence of rates between particular areas on the basis of need, the total national increase in rates which the country has seen and is concerned about is exactly the same as it would have been under the Conservatives, but it is differently distributed. That being so, the Conservatives cannot say that rates have risen too much this year, because that was a decision of the Conservative Government before we came into office.

Is the Prime Minister aware that one particular aspect of this problem requires special and immediate inquiry? There are certain areas of the country, like the new county of Cambridgeshire, which, because of town development and new towns, are rapidly expanding and therefore have a higher-than-average educational burden but happen to be areas, generally, of below-average rateable value? There is a particular problem here worth a special inquiry. What will the Prime Minister do about it?

That is a problem also for overspill areas outside some of the great conurbations. Indeed, my own local authority probably has to bear the highest education burden because of the past high birth rate. We all know that this is a serious problem. I do not know, but it may be that when these matters are further considered the widening of local government areas will help to produce the opportunity to spread the burdens more equitably, although we all recognise that the coming into force of the new local authority areas has led to a considerable increase in the salaries paid to local government officers generally, compared with the position before 1st April. That is certainly part of the increased national burden, however it is distributed.

asked the Prime Minister whether he intends to have a further meeting with the President of the European Parliament following the discussions of 10th June.

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

Would not Mr. Berkhouwer be as fascinated as the rest of us to know whether the national coalition proposed by the Liberals would enable the right hon. Gentleman to send a delegation to Europe? Secondly, and more important, would the right hon. Gentleman join a national coalition?

When the Question was put down, I do not think that the feverish discussions on the part of the two Opposition parties could have been known to Mr. Berkhouwer. He discussed with me the question of the European Assembly. I told him that Labour Party representation was a matter for the Parliamentary Labour Party, and that I did not think that there would be representation in the immediate future but that this was a matter that would be considered after the conclusion of the negotiations and the decision of the British people about Britain's standing in relation to the Common Market.

Does my right hon. Friend share my opinion and that of the overwhelming majority of our party comrades that the European Assembly is no more democratic now than it was when we originally took our decision about participation, and no more democratic than would be a coalition with the Liberals? Does my right hon. Friend agree that our aim of fundamental renegotiation would not be assisted by involving ourselves in superficial tittle-tattle at Strasbourg?

I do not see why so distinguished an international figure as Dr. Berkhouwer should be smeared by association with the squalid coalition talks between the two major Opposition parties. He is a very serious parliamentary figure, with great experience in these matters, and, indeed, with experience of coalitions. My hon. Friend's other remarks concern matters which are for consideration by the House and by individual parties when the outcome of the negotiations is known, and when the decision of the British people is made. I have not yet heard from the Leader of the Opposition whether he supports either the principle of renegotiation or the particular terms we have put forward. Perhaps one day he will tell the country.

As the Prime Minister is now treating the European Assembly seriously, will he say whether the Government support the Assembly's attempts to get increased powers on budgetary matters? Leaving aside the question of Labour Party representation, will the right hon. Gentleman facilitate additions to the delegation in August when those who are no longer Members of the House have to retire from the delegation?

The retirement of certain hon. Members of the past Parliament and their replacement must be a matter for the parties which send them. It is not a matter for the Government. We would not stand in the way of any views expressed by the Conservative Party or by the Liberal Party. I am not sure whether the Liberal Party is affected.

asked the Prime Minister whether the public speech by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the Durham Labour Women's gala on economic policy on 1st June represents Government policy.

Yes, Sir.

In that speech, the Chancellor of the Exchequer underlined the overriding need to stimulate investment in industry and to control inflation. Does the Prime Minister agree that it would materially assist the former if the Labour Party were to bring forward as quickly as possible its plans for public ownership in industry? Will the Prime Minister say whether, if the social contract does not mitigate inflation in the way it is hoped, his Government will feel free to return to the statutory control of wages?

On the first part of the hon. Gentleman's wide-ranging supplementary question, I thought that the point which concerns him was answered by my right thon. Friend the Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House in my absence on Tuesday, when he said that we shall shortly present a White Paper setting out the situation quite definitively. In reply to the second part of the supplementary question, I am surprised that there has not been, either from the hon. Gentleman—who has great authority in these matters—or, indeed, from the Leader of the Opposition, a welcome for the statement made by the General Council of the TUC yesterday, which is a great advance.

I welcome the statement by the Trades Union Congress. Does the Prime Minister accept that the economic prospects are such that the time has come to call a world economic conference? Does he further agree that the rate of increase in money supply in this country is falling so rapidly, and the national self-interest of Germany and the United States is such, that we shall not be able to reflate the economy—and that unless there is a change of heart here and in the world as a whole, there is likely to be serious unemployment?

I agree with my hon. Friend that, apart from the obligations of national Governments and national communities, there is a vast international problem connected with oil prices, oil moneys and volatile movements of capital. The recent meeting of the Finance Ministers dealt with these matters over a wide area of the world. I should like to deal with some of the matters raised by my hon. Friend, but at the weekend I hope to make a fairly full speech on the international questions raised by him and also on national issues. I undertake to place a copy of that speech in the Library.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I realise that the form of today's Order Paper is slightly different, and I also appreciate that my name in Question 20 is not spelt as it should be, but could you tell me why my Question was not called with No. 3?

The answer is that I was not informed that it was to be grouped.