asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if she will estimate the extent to which retail prices may be expected to rise in the winter as a result of increased costs already incurred in manufacture and supply.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what estimate she has made of the increase in the retail price index during the 12 months beginning in July 1975, compared with the previous 12 months.

The Government are determined to bring the rate of inflation down to 10 per cent. by the third quarter of 1976. It is not possible to forecast precisely the behaviour of the retail price index within that period but while the annual rate of inflation is likely to remain high for the rest of this year, the monthly rate this winter should not be much above 1 per cent., reflecting lower pay and commodity prices.

Why is the right hon. Lady so much less forthcoming and so much less optimistic than she was at that happy Press conference on 7th October last year—the 8.4 per cent. Press Conference—when she said that she saw no evidence at all that there were any price rises in the pipeline for the following winter? What has changed in the past eight months?

The hon. Gentleman's memory is somewhat selective. I said nothing as incautious as he suggests. One of the points made quite clear by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his remarks on the Budget earlier this year was that all our predictions would depend on the rate of wage and salary settlements. In addition, the hon. Gentleman might care to remember that there was an increase in oil prices last winter, a factor that we have had to take into account.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that there have recently been announcements by several major food manufacturers of substantially increased profits? Can these manufacturers be directed to hold down prices in the food sector?

My hon. Friend may not be aware that the Price Commission's report, to be published later this week, will indicate that the profits of food manufacturing companies have been halved in the past year. I think that the companies my hon. Friend quotes must be those which largely export rather than sell in the home market.

Does the right hon. Lady agree that even if the rate of inflation is brought down to 10 per cent. by this time next year it is still likely to be well above the rate of our main industrial competitors? Therefore, will the Government make it clear that if Britain's position is to be properly restored national restraint and the acceptance of lower living standards will be necessary not just for one year but for the next two or three years?

I know that the hon. Gentleman would not like to mis record what I said. I referred to the third quarter of 1976, rather than this time next year. As we are being held very closely to our remarks, I hope that the hon. Gentleman will accept that correction. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor and I have made it clear that the 10 per cent. is an immediate target, and that we must proceed to the point where inflation ceases to be of any significance in our economy.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection by what percentage the retail price index has risen as compared with a year ago.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is the current annual rate of inflation based upon the rise in the retail price index over the past three months.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what has been the increase in the retail price index over the past 12 months.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is the current rate of inflation based on the last three months of the retail price index expressed at an annual rate.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is the latest percentage increase in the retail price index on a yearly basis.

The retail price index for June was 261 per cent. higher than a year earlier. The change over the three months to June, expressed at an annual rate, was 48 per cent. But this includes the exceptional increase in May, which was substantially due to Budget changes in indirect taxation, and the annual rate based on the June increase alone is 21.9 per cent.

Does the right hon. Lady accept that a rise of 26.3 per cent. in the retail price index is a pretty poor reflection on the Government's attempts to control inflation, and that the only way to stop the rot is for the Government to cease spending so much money?

The hon. Gentleman must have tabled his Question and formulated his supplementary question before the Government's announcements in the White Paper " The Attack on Inflation ". It would be helpful to the Government if, in the attack on inflation, we had for once the support of the Opposition.

If the Government are really interested in attacking inflation, why do not they accept that indiscriminate, blanket food subsidies will only add to inflation? When will the right hon. Lady abandon the deception that she can hold down retail prices by spending public money in this way?

It is not a deception. In a period when sacrifices have to be made, those least well off should be protected. That is why the Government are continuing food subsidies. That is why the Government believe that they are adopting the right policy.

As inflation. on a three-months' basis, was 25.6 per cent. at the end of March, and as it is now, on the same basis, running at an annual rate of 48 per cent., does the right hon. Lady at least agree that the rate of inflation has nearly doubled in the past three months, and has gone up nearly six times since the Chancellor's pre-election statement of 8.4 per cent. last September? To whom does the right hon. Lady ascribe responsibility for this rapid acceleration?

I shall give the hon. Gentleman the benefit of the doubt in trusting that he did not hear my final sentence, in which I pointed out that the annual rate of inflation, on a monthly basis, is now 21.9 per cent. For the hon. Gentleman to pretend that such things as increases in indirect taxes on hard drink and tobacco are in some curious way an essential part of what has happened to inflation will not do.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that if Opposition Members are expressing concern about the retail price index and calling for the removal of food subsidies, they must accept that if food subsidies are removed there will be an increase in the retail price index?

Of course, my hon. Friend is right. He will appreciate that the TUC and the trade unions have come a long way in supporting a flat-rate limit on their increases. It would be impossible for them to do so unless the Government also demonstrated concern for the situation of the least well-paid and the least well-off.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that there is strong feeling among moderate and responsible people that it is wrong to increase food subsidies any further at present? Quite apart from the need to cut public expenditure, does the right hon. Lady agree that food subsidies are a bad way of helping those who are at the lower end of the income scale? Will she confirm that the Press reports from Brussels this morning that the Government are contemplating a further increase in food subsidies to compensate for the effect on the retail price index of a revaluation of the green pound are incorrect?

The hon. Gentleman will find that there are other Questions on the Order Paper on this point, but on the general question of subsidies I must go back to the past. I would not wish to do so but I think that it is necessary on this occasion. The hon. Gentleman's administration permitted large subsidies to be made available to nationalised industry prices—subsidies very much less progressive than the subsidies on food that this Government have introduced.

Will my right hon. Friend explain to the Opposition that as producers are also consumers, wage demands are bound to be influenced by the level of prices, and that to keep subsidies on is the only way of combating inflation?

I accept what my hon. Friend said. In a situation where unquestionably those with average or higher than average standards of living will have to be asked to make sacrifices, it seems to the Government only reasonable that those who are considerably below the average standard of living should be helped in one way or another.

Does the right hon. Lady agree that, despite the measures proposed in the White Paper that we shall be debating this afternoon, unless the Government are prepared to add further to the £70 million additional food subsidies, as proposed in the White Paper, the cost of living at the end of this year is likely to be over 30 per cent. higher?

I hope that the hon. Gentleman will be proved wrong. The best estimates that I can make suggest that he will be proved wrong. I have to repeat that there have been rumours and discussion about the possibility of a further oil price increase, to take one example. None of us can predict exactly what may happen to commodity prices. Present trends show commodity prices continuing to fall.

As the annual rate of increase in the retail price index is now more or less double the rate that the right hon. Lady inherited from the previous Conservative Government, will she acknowledge that the present rate signals the total failure of her Government's policies, and will inevitably lead not to a three-day working week but to a nil-day working week for more than I million people this winter?

No, the hon. Lady is not right. I have the year-on-year percentage changes in the RPI—20.1 per cent. and 26.1 per cent.—in front of me, and it is untrue to suggest that the rate at present is double the rate that applied when the hon. Lady's administration left office. I would say, in addition, that we would welcome the support of the hon. Lady for the policies that we propose to take to offset inflation.

Later—

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I wish to make an apology. I misheard a remark which the hon. Member for Gloucester (Mrs. Oppenheim) threw at me across the Table in what was, I think she will agree, a somewhat rowdy moment. I thought that she was speaking about food prices in the figures she mentioned. I am told that she was referring to the all-items index, and I apologise. This matter can be raised in the forthcoming debate.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what was the percentage increase in the index of retail prices in the period March 1974 to May 1975; and what were the increases for the same period for food, electricity, gas, coal, postal charges, telephone charges, and public transport.

I shall arrange for the figures to be circulated in the Official Report.

Is it not obvious that some of the greatest inflationary pressures have come from the town halls and the State industries? Does my right hon. Friend agree that unless the Department can effectively control these elements there is little or no hope of success in other departments?

My hon. Friend will know that the price increases in certain nationalised industries have, above all, reflected the massive increase in firsthand fuel prices, particularly in that of oil. Therefore, there have recently been attempts to prefer the small consumer in terms of tariff changes. We on this side very much welcome that.

But is it not a fact that the changes in electricity and gas tariffs have been modest in the extreme and that the breadth of the increases in those and other charges, particularly in the nationalised industries, are about to submerge the consumer completely, and that the White Paper offers no precise way of ameliorating the problem for them?

I assure my hon. Friend that on the best forecast we have the indications are that nationalised industries' prices are not likely to increase in the coming year at anything like the rate of the present year, which was largely due to the massive increase in first-hand fuel prices.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is her latest estimate of the cost of food subsidies during the current financial year; and whether she will make a statement of Government policy in regard to food subsidies, following the statement of Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer on 1st July.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what are her latest proposals for the planned reduction in food subsidies.

The estimated cost of food subsidies during the current financial year is about £550 million. As stated in the White Paper "The Attack on Inflation", the planned run-down in the programme next year will be moderated.

Does the Minister think that the best way to help the elderly and those on low incomes is to increase food subsidies? How does he reconcile the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer of 15th April—when his right hon. Friend said that it was the Government's policy to contain and reduce food subsidies—with the statement that his right hon. Friend made earlier today?

An analysis of the income expenditure of two-person households shows that the benefit of food subsidies is proportionately nearly four times greater for those with incomes below £20 a week than for those with incomes over £80 a week. Therefore, the answer is in the affirmative. On the second part of the hon. Gentleman's question, the policy set out in the White Paper will affect pay more quickly than prices. We felt it essential to take steps to safeguard the position of poorer families. That is why the cut in the subsidy programme next year is to be smaller than that envisaged at the time of the April Budget.

Why does my hon. Friend believe that we should subsidise butter but not margarine? As we import large quantities of butter but hardly any margarine, is not this almost a direct subsidy on imports?

I have had discussions with the margarine industry about the effect on it of the butter subsidy. The industry recognised that the prospects are brighter than they were—[ Interruption. ] Conservative Members who find this such a risible situation should appreciate that the effect of competition on the margarine industry is not unimportant. They may then look at this matter from a new point of view.

Is not the real danger that on food subsidies the Government will fall into the same trap as that into which they have fallen over post office charges and gas prices? Is it not clear that the longer we continue to subsidise the harder it is to return to economic and commercial levels? Would it not be far better to scrap food subsidies now and, instead, to concentrate the help that is available on those who cannot afford to buy food?

It is not good enough for the Opposition to make this sort of criticism when they supported a policy not only of heavily subsidising the more regressive nationalised industries but a policy of food subsidies. It was the previous Conservative administration who introduced the butter subsidy that the Opposition are now apparently criticising.

Does my hon. Friend accept that there are many hon. Members on both sides of the House who, over the years, have made a case for negative income tax? As food subsidies and subsidies on other essential items are financed by a clawback through income tax, does my hon. Friend agree that we have here a form of negative income tax? Does my hon. Friend accept that many of my hon. Friends would like to see the Government's programme extended to other essentials and not limited to food?

I am aware of my hon. Friend's views on this matter. I believe that he is right in stressing the redistributive benefits of the food subsidy programme. I regret that that appreciation is not shared by Conservative Members.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the Government's policy of not covering producer costs has already predictably resulted in a chronic shortage of milk for manufacture? Is she aware that last Friday all of the employees in a milk processing factory in my constituency were told that they were losing their jobs because there was no milk for manufacture? Is she not concentrating so much on subsidies that the commodities simply will not be there, with the result that people will not benefit from subsidies on commodities which they cannot buy because they are not being produced?

There is a later Question tabled on this subject.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what study she has made of the packaging of goods; if she will lay down regulations on the needs and limitations of packaging; and if she will make a statement.

I wrote to consumer organisations in March about over-packaging and I have asked the Waste Management Advisory Council to consider its views. The council, set up by the Government, is examining all aspects of packaging and is giving priority to an examination of any extravagant use of materials in retail packaging.

Does my hon. Friend accept that it is not only a question of over-packaging—although we do have an absurd situation when, sometimes, the package is worth five times the commodity—but that there are also occasions when packaging which is vitally important is missing? Does he further accept that guidance from his Department on this subject would be welcomed not only by the general public but by the industry, in terms of its research and development programme?

My hon. Friend is right to draw attention to the need for packaging as well as to the possibility of saving on wasteful packaging. It is to review all of these considerations that the Government have set up the Waste Management Advisory Council, whose packaging group is considering the points he has made.

What are the Government doing to encourage a greater re-use of containers?

That is one of the matters being considered by the group.

Is the group also considering the problem of misleading packaging, in particular—

Manifestos.

—those vast packs containing minute articles, for example, little bottles of scent hidden in huge boxes, or cartons of dairy products with false bottoms, which appear to contain at least twice as much as is the case?

We are looking at the possibility of extending the use of standardised containers. The point which my hon. and learned Friend has made about bottles is before the group. I have received representations on this from a number of consumer organisations.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what has been the beneficial impact of the green pound calculation of the Common Agricultural Policy for farm prices upon the Retail Price Index; whether she intends to seek to maintain this consumer advantage; and if she will make a statement.

The green pound system reduces the price in the United Kingdom of most important food- stuffs, including cereals, beef, dairy products, bacon and other pigmeat products. It reduces farmers' incomes correspondingly, and adjustments to the rate have to balance the interests of producer and consumer.

The present gap between the green pound and the market rate for sterling is about 19 per cent., though the figure fluctuates according to the value of the pound. There can be no precise estimate of the effect on retail prices, because many other factors are involved. If the gap were completely closed and the United Kingdom guaranteed price for milk were adjusted correspondingly, the eventual effect on the retail food index might be in the order of 4 per cent to 5 per cent., and on the retail price index about 1 per cent. to 1¼ per cent.

I am sure that that answer has a false bottom, in the sense that the right hon. Lady did not seek to reply to the part of my Question which asked her whether she sought to maintain this consumer advantage. In view of the widespread and authoritative Press comment that there is likely to be a 5 per cent. devaluation in the green pound concluded at this week's meeting of the Council of Agriculture Ministers, will she confirm that this will, as a consequence, produce an impact of between £40 million and £50 million upon the retail price index? Will she further confirm that that will substantially obliterate the increase in food subsidies announced by the Chancellor? Will she tell the House how she views this likely development?

The hon. Member represents a constituency with considerable agricultural interests—

And consumer interests.

—and he will therefore know that the job of any Government is to strike a balance between consumer and producer interests. He will also know that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture is presently engaged in a meeting of the Council of Agriculture Ministers which does not complete its deliberations until tomorrow. My right hon. Friend will be answering questions when he makes his statement to the House about the outcome of those discussions. Not only would it be improper for me to attempt to predict results at this stage; it would also be quite inaccurate.

In the meantime, what can we usefully say to our NFU branches as to the time scale during which the gaps can be closed?

My hon. Friend will be aware that no statement on that can be made until tomorrow, when my right hon. Friend makes his statement. The NFU, too, will recognise that there is a balance to be struck between consumer and agricultural interests.

Will the right hon. Lady explain what is the beneficial impact of the difference between the sterling green pound and the Irish green pound, and what is the justification for maintaining it?

There is a difference, as the right hon. Gentleman knows. He will be aware that the Republic of Ireland has pressed for there to be an adjustment of the rate all the way up to the market rate. This does not have the full support of Her Majesty's Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if she can yet state what action she intends to take on the expiry of the Price Code in March 1976.

The Remuneration, Charges and Grants Bill provides for the Price Code to be extended beyond March 1976. This does not exclude the possibility of taking further new powers beyond those being included in the present Bill, or of amending the present Price Code.

Will the right hon. Lady undertake to keep the House fully informed about the discussions she has with the CBI, since it is unsatisfactory that, often, we do not know what has been proposed to the CBI? Secondly, will she tell us when we shall have the consultative document on the Price Code and when it will be enacted? Will she also tell us whether she has indicated in any of her discussions with outside bodies that she is considering amending the present code and continuing it next year, or whether she is considering having another code?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we shall explain as fully as we can all our discussions with the CBI during today's debate and in the debates over the next couple of days. There will be in the Vote Office, I hope at 3.30 p.m., copies of the consultative document, which will have been available to Members at the earliest possible date, since the document has only just been finalised for presentation and publication. There will be an opportunity to debate amendments to the Price Code, which will have to be made by affirmative order of the House, following the passage, we trust, of the Remuneration, Charges and Grants Bill. There will, therefore, be more than one opportunity for the House to discuss in detail the proposed changes to the Price Code. There is a further Question dealing with a new price code and I shall deal with that point when we reach that Question.

Has my right hon. Friend read the proposal by the National Consumer Council for a freeze on prices and essentials? If so, may I have her comments upon it?

Not only have I read the report, I have also met members of the council in the past week to discuss the matter. I pointed out to it that while a price freeze was not possible at this time because of high rising costs still coming through the pipeline—some of them associated with rates and import prices as well as increases in incomes—it was the Government's intention, as soon as costs began to ease, to make sure that that was reflected in prices—certainly in the prices of the more essential goods.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what discussions she has had with the CBI on amendments to the Price Code.

I met the CBI on several occasions during the discussions leading up to the White Paper " The Attack on Inflation ". These discussions covered the question of amending the Price Code to prevent excessive pay settlements being reflected in higher prices. With other interested parties, the CBI have now been invited to comment on the details of the code amendments.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that the key to any anti-inflation policy must be increased productivity, and that the key to increased productivity must be increased investment? Will she undertake that there will be a continuous review of the investment relief available under the Price Code, comparable with the one we have for taxation purposes, to ensure that investment is fostered in every possible way?

The hon. Gentleman will know that this Government introduced investment relief into the Price Code. We have already reviewed it once and we shall certainly continue to keep it under review, because it is very much our intention that we should take action to improve investment in both the public and private sectors for the sake of this country's future growth.

Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that the Price Code gives her sufficient power to control both the overall nature and the details of nationalised industries' prices?

Although the Price Code bites on nationalised industries' prices it is not the most direct control over them. The most direct control over the nationalised industries' prices, following the White Paper, "The Attack on Inflation", arises from the ability of Ministers to decide whether any given price increase shall be given.

Will the Secretary of State give some details of the basic items on which voluntary price restraint is to be called for? Will she confirm that this is not to be confined to food? Will she therefore give some examples of what, in addition to food, it may be applied to?

The hon. Gentleman will know that our discussions with the CBI and the Retail Consortium have, at present, just begun. It would be wrong for me to try to predict the outcome. I confirm that it is not the Government's wish that this should be concentrated wholly on food, which is the area where margins, at present, are the most narrow, but it should be an across-the-board system of price stabilisation, based upon essential goods, including consumer durables.

At the end of my right hon. Friend's original reply she made reference to the CBI and other interested parties. In future, when she and the Government generally go to the lengths that they do to discuss these matters with the CBI, the TUC, other parties and Uncle Tom Cobley and all, will she occasionally consider discussing them with Members of Parliament? Members of Parliament would love to be able to discuss with the Government such things as their counter-inflation policy, wage freezes, and all the rest, before they come to these decisions. They would like to discuss these matters with the Government at the same time as they are discussed with other interested parties.

My hon. Friend has got it wrong. We are laying before the House today a consultative document. No final decisions have been made upon it. It will be available to Members of Parliament as early as it is available to anybody else today. The discussions over the next four days will cover that document. I shall listen closely to the debate before we finalise the document. I assure the House that it is being fully consulted at the earliest possible stage in this matter and that no final decisions have yet been taken.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what steps are taken under her responsibility to protect the consumer in relation to services and products provided by the nationalised industries.

We keep in close touch with the Departments responsible for the nationalised industries on all matters affecting consumers. Members of the nationalised industry consumer councils are now appointed by my Department. We have asked the National Consumer Council to review the present arrangements for consumer representation in the nationalised industries and will consider any recommendations which the council may make for strengthening the protection of the consumer.

May I draw the Minister's attention to Section 79 of the Fair Trading Act 1973 and ask whether his right hon. Friend has referred any of the labour practices in the nationalised industries to the Monopolies Commission and, perhaps more important, in view of the vast increases in nationalised industry prices that are in the pipeline, whether she has any plans to refer them to the Monopolies Commission in future?

No, Sir.

Does my hon. Friend agree that one way of bolstering up the consumer councils is to examine the possibility of holding direct elections to the boards? Does he also agree that recently the consumer councils have given valuable critical advice about the proposed gas and electricity increases, which they oppose? Will my hon. Friend tell the House what he proposes to do about these attitudes?

I look forward to receiving the formal reports which are due from the Post Office and the gas industry consultative councils. We shall discuss those reports with the relevant Departments.

On direct elections, it is an interesting prospect, but I am not sure that the public want more elected bodies. There is a danger of a proliferation of elections if we are not careful, but certainly it is a possibility worth considering. I shall urge my hon. Friend to draw this to the attention of Michael Young, in the National Consumer Council, so that it can be taken into account when its report is prepared.

Does the Minister agree that there is little evidence that the existence of these councils hitherto has actually achieved reductions in costs to the consumer? In view of the proposals for massive increases in postal charges, what terms of reference does the Minister expect the Post Office Users National Council to have in order to try, at long last, to achieve some reduction on behalf of the consumer?

As the hon. Gentleman is so disillusioned about the effectiveness of these councils, no doubt he will give wholehearted support to our decision to refer them for consideration. On the Post Office, as I indicated to my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley (Mr. Cryer), we are waiting for the report so that we can have discussions with the relevant Department.

Does the Minister realise that on the gas consultative councils, at regional level, there are too many local authority representatives, and that these days they are far too busy on local authority matters to be able to give enough time and energy to the task of looking after the gas boards?

I do not dissent from my hon. Friend's point of view. However, he must bear in mind that we are somewhat inhibited about the ratios of local authority representatives by the requirements of the statutes, which in some cases specify the ratio of councillors who have to be put on to the committees. This is one of the matters that we hope will be looked at by the consultative councils, with a positive result for the consumer.

Is the Minister aware that the consumers of nationalised industries' goods and services are among the most dissatisfied consumers in the country? Is he also aware that we do not want subsidies increased, but that we want him to investigate those instances of extravagance, inefficiency, overmanning and overpayment in the nationalised industries, which are contributory factors?

The hon. Lady has said that she does not want subsidies and that the consumers are dissatisfied. I do not dissent from that point of view. However, I ask her to bear in mind that one of the reasons is that the nationalised industries have had to face an abnormal rate of increase to get rid of subsidies that her Government imposed.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether she will make a statement on her proposals for improving the safety of consumer products.

I am currently reviewing our powers in this area and propose to issue a consultative document as a result. Meanwhile my Department is preparing further regulations under the Consumer Protection Act 1961.

I thank the Minister for that reply. Is he aware that many hon. Members regard as most important the area of his Department concerned with the safety of products. Will he say whether the consultative document will be in the nature of a Green Paper, which will cover, in particular, such items as electrical appliances and children's toys?

Electrical appliances will be the subject of a regulation which we hope to lay before the House before the recess. We trust that that will have already been achieved before the consultative document comes forward. This will the first time that there has been a public discussion about the safety responsibilities of the Department. We want to raise issues on the question whether there should be a cease-and-desist power with the Minister or Director General, and whether there should be a improvement of the pilot scheme which we have for obtaining information about product-caused accidents from accident units of hospitals.

I thank the Minister for the steps that are now being taken in connection with the safety of consumer products, but is he also proposing to take steps to deal with the safety of consumer services in which area consumers are totally unprotected at present, largely because they are not protected against the effects of totally misleading and disgraceful exclusion clauses?

My hon. and learned Friend will be aware that the exclusion clauses are the subject of consideration by the Law Commissions, over whom Parliament has given my Department no control whatsoever. [ Interruption. ] My hon. and learned Friend may chunter away as much as he wishes. He is free to bring forward a Private Member's motion to give my Department power, but I cannot act outside the powers which the House of Commons has given to the Department. On services, we shall, of course, be including the whole range of safety factors covered by the Department in the consultative document.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection how many representations she has received in 1975 on package holiday surcharges.

Ten, Sir.

The Office of Fair Trading having deplored the imposition of the surcharges either at the airport or, more particularly, at the resort, will the Minister try to persuade those tour operators who have been guilty to desist? Will he tell us why some operators have felt it necessary to impose this sort of surcharge although others taking holiday makers to the same resort and the same hotel have not?

It is often a matter of the conditions of contract. It is understandable that where the value of sterling has fallen and imposed extra costs on operators, they sometimes incur legitimate extra costs, which should be recouped. As the hon. Gentleman will be aware, the Civil Aviation Authority is looking at the matter, and we are waiting for its report. The hon. Gentleman will be further aware that responsibility for the industry is vested in the Department of Trade and not in my Department.

Does my hon. Friend accept that many holiday makers find it incomprehensible that they should pay many months in advance, at a certain sterling rate, for their holidays and yet, when they take their holidays in the summer, they find they are liable for a surcharge? Will he undertake to ensure that these surcharges are not due to the inefficiency of tour operators who do not buy transportation or residential accommodation far enough in advance?

I cannot give that assurance, because responsibility rests with the Department of Trade. However, I shall draw the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade to the points made by my hon. Friend.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether she will now take further measures to control the price of food.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether she will now introduce proposals to freeze all prices of food and other essentials.

The White Paper " The Attack on Inflation " made it clear that the present price control already ensures that a lower rate of increase in pay is reflected in a lower rate of price increase, and that the Government do not intend to push price control to the point where it would endanger employment and investment. Further action will be taken as soon as it is clear that the new pay limit is being effectively observed.

Will my right hon. Friend ensure that traders do not take advantage of temporary abnormal shortages of certain foods by imposing permanent price increases on the consumer? In particular, will she ensure that potato merchants and chip shops, for example, lower their prices now that the temporary shortage of potatoes has been alleviated? In some areas of Scotland people are still having to pay up to 15p for a pound of potatoes, up to 35p for a fish supper and, possibly worst of all for a Scotsman, up to 25p for a haggis supper?

I should not like to prevent my hon. Friend's constituents enjoying one of their favourite suppers. I assure him that I have already asked the Prime Commission to look closely at any fall in raw material prices, which would include fresh foods like potatoes, and to make sure that the benefit goes through to the consumer.

The right hon. Lady said that she did not want to push price control to the point where it would endanger inflation and investment. Has she not already passed that point? Will she describe at what level of return on capital she thinks that point is reached?

There has been a decline in profits in home markets amounting to nearly half the figure which was ruling at the time of the introduction of the Price Code, and that has meant a very sharp decline in margins. I believe that the hon. Gentleman gave himself away when he said that I did not want to push price control to the point where it endangered inflation. It is my intention to press it to the point where it endangers inflation, without pressing it to the point where it endangers employment.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if she will publish in the Official Report, from international sources available to her, a list of those Western countries which have a higher rate of increase of food prices than that presently pertaining in the United Kingdom.

Yes, Sir.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that that is the sort of unhelpful answer which we might have expected? Could it have anything to do with the fact that the figures will presumably show that this country has a much higher rate of increase in food prices than have its industrial competitors? Will the hon. Gentleman confirm that that is so? If it is, does he agree that now that the Government have shown the first glimmer of sanity in recognising that we have a problem called inflation, they would help to control it and bring down the rate of increase in food prices if they scrapped a whole range of their other policies which are doing much damage to the economy?

It was a good reply. It answered precisely the point about which the hon. Gentleman chose to ask. I apologise; I did not realise that the hon. Gentleman wanted equivocation. The hon. Gentleman suggested that there is a glimmer of the Government's recognising certain measures that the hon. Gentleman finds appropriate. Therefore, I trust that he will reflect that glimmer by marching into the Division Lobbies in support of it, unlike his other fence-sitting colleagues, when the House is asked to vote on the Government's measures.

Whatever may or may not be the cause of higher food prices, is my hon. Friend aware that today the agricultural workers will get an increase in their wages but that they will still be receiving less, in real terms, than they did 10 years ago? Therefore, it can hardly be suggested that the increase in the cost of food is the fault of the agricultural workers, can it?

I do not recollect that I accused the agricultural workers of any responsibility in this respect. However, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment, who is avidly listening to what is being said, will no doubt bear in mind my hon. Friend's point.

The information is as follows: PERCENTAGE CHANGES IN FOOD PRICES IN THE TWELVE MONTHS TO: November 1974 February 1975 May 1975 Iceland* + 51.2 + 56.9 + 39.2 Ireland* + 20.2 + 22'7 + 28.0 Portugal + 37.0 + 28.8 Not available * Quarterly indices.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection by what date her Department will assume responsibility for the consumer councils of the gas and electricity supply industries.

The Department assumed responsibility for the appointment of the members of the nationalised industry consumer councils, other than the Scottish Electricity Consultative Councils, on 1st February 1975. When the Statutory Corporations (Financial Provisions) Bill receives the Royal Assent, the financing of these councils will also pass from the industries to the Government.

That is very welcome news. Will my hon. Friend confirm that these consumer councils will have adequate staff and, if possible, independent inspectors to check on some of the less desirable practices of the British Gas Council and on the rising and disquieting number of complaints against that body?

I have already indicated in answer to an earlier Question that we are reviewing the whole structure of these councils and their membership. I shall bear in mind the points made by my hon. Friend. However, I draw to his attention the fact that, for example, the Post Office Users National Council has been told that if it wishes to commission a consultant to give it back-up research facilities it is free to do so.

Will the hon. Gentleman tell us whether he is of the opinion that these councils should be associated in any way with the nationalised industries on which they comment, or should be completely separate? He will be aware that the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries examined these councils some years ago and found, to its dismay, that their association was not always in the consumers' interest.

The hon. Gentleman has made a valid point. I think that to some extent we anticipated that point by pressing for the transfer of the responsibility for these councils away from the sponsoring Departments to my Department, and assuming the financial responsibility which had previously rested with the nationalised industries. Therefore, we have moved considerably towards the greater independence of these councils. If there are any other aspects worrying hon. Members which they believe in any way limit the independence of these councils, we shall be willing to look at them.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what aspects of prices and consumer affairs have featured in her recent discussions with the TUC.

I have discussed with the TUC those aspects covered in its statement "The Development of the Social Contract", which was adopted by the TUC General Council on 9th July.

Did the Secretary of State make it clear to the TUC that it would be highly dangerous to increase Government expenditure at this time? Did she also point out that to do so would work against the TUC's approach to the problem of controlling excessive wage demands?

The hon. Gentleman will recognise, if he has read the TUC document, that it concerns itself largely with pay and prices questions and does not touch on what has always been regarded as a major Government concern, namely, public expenditure—which is not normally widely discussed with other bodies.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection when the next report of the Price Commission will be published; and whether she will make a statement.

The Price Commission's Ninth Report should be published on 24th July and will be laid before the House.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that it would be of great benefit to the House to have the Price Commission's report available at this time, when we are to discuss this important measure? Does he further agree that the Price Commission's report has been available to his Department for some time? Why should it be released so much later than the consultative document to which the Secretary of State referred this afternoon?

I am in a fair measure of agreement with the hon. Gentleman. We have been discussing with the Price Commission the possibility of its providing its quarterly reports more quickly, to take account of the considerations put forward by the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether she will make a statement on the progress to date of the National Consumer Council.

The National Consumer Council announced its initial list of priorities on 14th July. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I saw representatives of the council last week to discuss the Government's policy on inflation. Its chairman is now a member of NEDC.

As the National Consumer Council is by Government policy to be accorded the same status in the Government's consultation process as the CBI and the TUC, may I ask whether the NCC was present and what part it played in the discussions about the present package with the TUC and the CBI? Secondly, although the Prime Minister is prepared to tell us all about his meetings with the CBI and the TUC, may I ask why he transfers to the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection Questions about his meetings with the National Consumer Council?

I reassure my hon. Friend that to the best of my knowledge we have received no com- plaints from the NCC about the way in which the consultations have taken place. Indeed, we had full and constructive discussions with the NCC last week. I know that my hon. Friend will accept that the whole basis of consultation will evolve gradually as the NCC develops its own methods of work. During the discussions last week we dealt with ways of expanding consultation.

In the Government's proposed discussions with the Retail Consortium on the 10 per cent. price limits and limits on essential goods and services. would it not be a good idea to give the NCC equal status with the consortium?

As I have already indicated, our aim is to allow the NCC to develop its own capacities naturally. It has been in existence for only two months. We had constructive and helpful discussions with the NCC last week. We hope to expand the basis of consultation. As my lion. Friend the Under-Secretary of State said, the House still has to debate the points which the Government have put forward in the consultative document. The House will also be able to consider the points put forward in the NCC's Press statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what plans she has for the regulation of the services of estate agents in the interest of the consumer.

I am preparing a consultative document which will invite public comments on proposals designed to give further protection to consumers in this area.

I thank my hon. Friend for his reply. Did he notice that the question of lost deposits was recently raised by the Master of the Rolls in a court case? Will he bear in mind that estate agents are involved in buying and selling property?

I am fully aware of the unsatisfactory nature of the current controls concerning estate agents. That is why I wish to bring the matter to public notice and seek a positive move ahead in protecting consumers. We are considering the requirement for compulsory bonding and the possibility of establishing a licensing system.

Does my hon. Friend agree that a useful service for consumers could be provided by the solicitors and surveyors in town halls?

Yes, but that goes slightly beyond the scope of this Question, and raises the matter of the monopoly in conveyancing, which is vested in solicitors. I assure the House that that is also a matter on which I hope to make an early announcement of the Government's intentions.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if she will now phase out the bread subsidy and establish a real price for bread.

Bread is a basic foodstuff of particular importance to poorer families, and I have no intention of phasing out the subsidy in the immediate future.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the words of this Question have been taken exactly from the annual conference resolution of the Bakers' Union? This is what it wanted. Why do the Government always do everything that they are told to do by the unions except on the rare occasion when it happens to be right?

I think that the hon. Gentleman is under a misapprehension. The subsidy has not affected the profits of the baking companies since it was designed to give the same return as the price increases which they would have implemented. We believe that the subsidy may have positively helped the industry since we have observed a small increase in the consumption of bread, which is against the established trend.

Will my hon. Friend say whether the real value of the bread subsidy, including its share of the £70 million referred to in the White Paper, will be greater in the next 12 months or less than it was last year?

I should expect it to be much the same.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is the present subsidy on the price of liquid milk; and whether she intends to maintain price control on this commodity.

The subsidy on liquid milk is estimated to amount to £270 million in the current financial year, which is equivalent to about 2p per pint. The price of milk has been controlled since 1940 and we have no intention of changing the position.

That reply is very satisfactory. We hope that whatever happens to other food subsidies this one will be maintained, if not increased. Does my hon. Friend agree that milk is the most nutritious food for the most helpless sections of the community, namely, children and old people, and that the longer he maintains it, the more the new Government policies against inflation will be accepted?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, and I agree with him whole heartedly.

Will the hon. Gentleman urgently consult the Minister of Agriculture, because if the price is held down at the present level there will be a shortage of liquid milk, as farmers will not produce it?

The hon. Lady is unreasonably pessimistic about the liquid milk situation.

Is my hon. Friend aware that on 26th June the Finance Minister for the Republic of Ireland, Mr. Ryan, announced that he was applying a subsidy to milk to reduce the price by 2p a pint? Does my hon. Friend think that he might follow that example.

Perhaps my hon. Friend will await the statement of my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture when he returns from his current talks. I think that it will deal with my hon. Friend's point.

What would be the impact on the subsidy bill if the green pound were devalued by 5 per cent. but the retail price of milk was maintained at its present level?

My right hon. Friend has already answered that question—

No.

—and has pointed to the statement that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture will be making. Talk about the possible extent of the devaluation of the green pound is pure speculation.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if she will introduce regulations making the labelling of do-it-yourself products containing asbestos mandatory, so that the asbestos content is clearly indicated, and a warning of the danger of dust inhalation given.

I shall certainly consider doing so if the consultations my Department is currently holding with the Asbestosis Research Council do not lead to the introduction of a satisfactory voluntary labelling scheme.

As most "do-it-yourselfers " are not aware that materials such as that used for masonry plugs contain asbestos and that asbestos itself can be a serious cancer hazard, will my hon. Friend say why it has taken four years since the Standing Medical Advisory Committee reported to the Department of Health and Social Security for us to reach the present stage? Will he consider this matter urgently, with a view to getting some regulations on the statute book?

My Department has not been in existence for four years, but we have been in touch with the manufacturers of the criticised screw-fixing compounds and have secured their agreement on the labelling of the plugs with appropriate safety advice.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the Asbestosis Research Council has distributed throughout industry hundreds of thousands of leaflets about asbestos, and that mandatory regulations have been ignored, with the consequence that a number of people in, for example, the Hebden Bridge area, represented by my hon. Friend the Member for Sowerby (Mr. Madden), have suffered from asbestosis There have also been cases in London. What is needed is legislation containing penalties for breaches.

I am aware of some of the general facts mentioned by my hon. Friend, and I am in discussion with the Asbestosis Research Council on the possibility of introducing a voluntary scheme. If the scheme does not prove satisfactory, I shall consider my hon. Friend's points sympathetically.

( by Private Notice ) asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement concerning the pollution of the Cowm Reservoir.

Water supplies in the Rochdale area became contaminated on Friday as a result of the pollution of the Cowm Reservoir by phenol. This substance was conveyed into the reservoir by springs which feed into it. It appears that the source of the pollution, although not yet pinpointed, is likely to be an industrial waste tip in the area. I am informed that phenol has a very unpleasant taste but is not toxic.

The contamination was first detected by the North-West Water Authority on Friday, and it immediately carried out a preliminary analysis, the results of which became known on Saturday afternoon, when the first public complaints were also received by the police, who took action to warn householders. Emergency supplies were laid on Sunday afternoon.

The suspected spring water is now being diverted away from the reservoir and the water authority is cleansing the mains and will continue to supply tanker drinking water until the mains are clear.

The water authority, the Lancashire County Council—the waste disposal authority—and the Rossendale District Council are investigating the cause of the pollution. The services of my Department and of the Government Chemist have been placed at the authorities' disposal.

I am concerned about this incident and the delay in warning the public and I have called for a full report from all the authorities involved. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Rochdale (Mr. Smith) for raising this matter and to my right hon. Friend the Member for Heywood and Royton (Mr. Barnett) who has also been in constant touch with me. I shall, of course, keep them fully informed as to the results of my inquiries.

I am grateful to the Minister for his comments and for saying that the right hon. Member for Heywood and Royton (Mr. Barnett) has also been deeply concerned about this matter. I should have done so myself had not the Minister mentioned it.

The Minister said that he will have prepared a full report. May I take it that the substance of the report which is to be presented to him will be made public, so that we may know the real cause of the problems suffered by thousands of people in this area over the weekend?

Will the Minister take immediate steps to ensure that, should a similar incident occur in any reservoir in this country, emergency procedure is laid down which will secure the immediate notification of suspicion to the medical officer of health in the area and the protection of the consumer as the first priority? Is the Minister aware that 36 hours elapsed between suspicion of pollution and the public's receiving any notification of the suspicion and that the notification when it came was via the media at the request of the local police rather than at the request of the water authority?

Does the Minister realise that lives might have been lost or at stake if the pollution of the reservoir concerned had been by a chemical which had more serious results? Does the Minister not agree that the total disregard of the North-West Water Authority for its consumers was absolutely scandalous, and what does he propose to do about it?

Is the Minister further aware that water wagons were first delivered to the area on Sunday? Will he advise the water authority that the truth is called for rather than a tissue of lies to cover up the totally inefficient way in which the North-West Water Authority dealt with the matter?

I certainly agree that when there is public concern over the pollution of water supplies the fullest possible disclosure is called for. That is what I intended when I said that I would see that the hon. Gentleman and my right hon. Friend get the report when I have it. There will be no cover up by the Government. I must say, on behalf of the North-West Water Authority, that, however strongly we may feel about the administration—I share the hon. Gentleman's concern about the delay between the first suspicion and notification to the public, which is one of the matters that needs to be looked into—the authority has been completely open and has not attempted to hide any of the unfortunate facts, including the delay.

On the question of emergency procedures, based on the findings of the inquiry into this incident I intend to have the emergency procedures thoroughly examined in the light of experience to see whether we need to make any changes.

Is the Minister aware that the Opposition share the concern that has been expressed about this incident and about the apparently feeble response of the water authority? Is the Minister quite sure that there is no danger to health, and will he tell us how his plans are advancing for bringing in Part II of the Control of Pollution Act 1974, which deals with water pollution?

We are actively consulting local authorities on the latter point. If they agree to our implementing that part of the Control of Pollution Act, we shall do so but, as the hon. Gentleman knows, the local authorities are at present resisting further legislation being imposed upon them which would cause any increase in public expenditure. We therefore thought it right to consult them before bringing that part of the Act formally into operation. If the local authorities agree, it will be brought into operation immediately.

I understand that, fortunately, no danger to health is involved. The dumping of toxic wastes is already controlled by previous legislation, not by the Control of Pollution Act.

Are there other sites or dumps in the vicinity of reservoirs where industrial waste may be tipped, and have any steps been taken to avoid incidents of this sort in future?

When we came into office we found that our predecessors had identified about 50 tips which were potentially dangerous. We have continued with the action they properly took, which was to have every one of the 50 tips thoroughly investigated by competent scientists. I announced in an answer a few weeks ago the detailed result on each one of those tips. No tips in the country, so far as we know, are liable to cause danger to health, but this sort of incident means that one can never be complacent about public health.

Is my hon. Friend aware that when I served with the hon. Member for Rochdale (Mr. Smith) on the local authority which controls this reservoir, one elected authority controlled all the three functions that today are controlled by three authorities, some of them unelected? Is that not another illustration of the way in which local government was better administered under the old system than under this so-called reform?

I advised my hon. Friends when in Opposition that this diversification of responsibility was a reason to vote against local government and water authority reorganisation. I therefore have some sympathy with my hon. Friend's comment.

I will, with permission, Mr. Speaker, make a statement.

On Thursday 10th July, in South Armagh near the border village of Forkhill, the security forces saw what appeared to be a suspect device possibly containing explosives. This was kept under observation until Thursday 17th July, when an Army patrol went to deal with it. As it approached, an explosive was detonated from a distance. Four soldiers were killed and one was seriously wounded. A man has been arrested and has appeared in court charged with murder. The House will join with me in expressing sympathy for the relatives of the dead and injured.

The Crossmaglen PIRA claimed responsibility. It has used the excuse that it was avenging the death in Bessbrook on 4th June of one of its members and the death of a man in Belfast on 13th July. These are specious justifications. In the Bessbrook incident a man was shot by the security forces whilst trying to throw a bomb into a crowded bar. The Crossmaglen Provisionals had set up their ambush at least three days before the Belfast incident.

Overall there has been a substantial reduction in the violence attributable to the Provisional IRA. It has never ceased completely, and particularly in the South Armagh area shootings and booby traps have continued, although less frequently and less successfully. The Government are very conscious of the desire—indeed the longing—of the people of Northern Ireland from all parts of the community for peace and a return to normality. The Government have, therefore, responded sincerely to the reduction in activity by the PIRA by a very substantial lowering of activity by the Army, but without lowering its guard. In normal circumstances violence should be dealt with by the police, and by bringing criminals before the courts and not by detention. So far in 1975, the police have charged 640 persons with security type offences including 66 with murder and 59 with attempted murder. Also, as I have said, a man has been charged with the murder of one of the soldiers killed last Thursday.

Accusations have been made of so-called Army harassment. I pay tribute to the good will and restraint shown by the security forces in carrying out our policy of maintaining a level of security force activity related to the level of violence. They have done neither more nor less than this. They have my full support.

As I have said before, I want an end to detention. But this will depend on the progress towards the cessation of violence and on the continued success of the police in bringing criminals before the courts. It will, however, clearly be necessary to retain for some time to come the power to detain people, and I shall not hesitate to use this power if I am satisfied that it is needed.

In the light of all these factors, I must under the law exercise my own judgment on releases. I have to make the judgment on each individual case, balancing the right of the community to be protected against the right of the individual to his freedom. Decisions are difficult, but I will not shirk them. I do not know whether the Provisionals from Crossmaglen want to see detainees released, but I shall not be deflected from what I think is right.

The big questions I have to ask myself are: whether the leaders of the Provisional IRA are able to control their followers, for example, in South Armagh; whether such actions do not make the ceasefire meaningless; and whether they will not provoke reactions in retaliation against innocent Catholics.

With every incident and each new Provisional statement such as the one it made today, there is speculation about the end of the cease-fire or changes in Government policy. The Government's policy is clear and has been explained fully in this House. It is that we are looking for a lasting and permanent peace and for a genuine and sustained cessation of violence which will create a new situation and make further progress possible on the basis of the statements I have made. The Provisional's political aims as restated today are well known. Provisional Sinn Fein is free to pursue them by peaceful and legitimate means. I must make it clear that the Government have not entered into any agreement.

I have already informed the House of the changing nature of violence in Northern Ireland in recent months. All those who engage in violence in Northern Ireland should be considering their position. The British Government want peace in Northern Ireland as do most of the people there. What is needed is a positive and continuing response from the PIRA and from other groups involved.

The Opposition wish to express their deep sympathy with the families of those who died in defence of the people of Northern Ireland as a result of this contemptible ambush and at a time of the alleged IRA cease-fire. The Secretary of State said that the political aims of the Provisionals were well known. Is it not obvious that the Provisional IRA has not given up its political objective of removing British sovereignty from Northern Ireland, in defiance of Her Majesty's Government's resolve and the wishes of the people of Northern Ireland? Is it not a fact that the known terrorist leaders are still at large as a result of the Government's policy, and will they now be arrested?

Over 650 people have been arrested. I can arrest only those who have broken the law. If the hon. Gentleman knows of any people who have broken the law, and where they are, we shall arrest them. The law must be carried out. If the Provisional Sinn Fein want political aims with which the Government disagree, I have no complaints. The only complaint concerns political aims for which men kill. The more those political aims are discussed, the better it is for Northern Ireland. What matters in Northern Ireland is that the people of Northern Ireland should explain whether they agree or disagree with those aims. The hon. Gentleman will find that whether he or I disagree with them does not matter much in Northern Ireland.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that people will generally welcome his statement not to be deflected from the policy which he has pursued up to now with such marked success both for the people in Northern Ireland and to the contentment of this nation? Is he aware that the people in this country support him in all his actions in bringing before the courts those people who are responsible for terrorist outrages and breaking the peace, from whatever side of the community in Northern Ireland they come?

Over 600 people were brought before the courts this year. They break about 50 per cent. either way, from either community. The security forces act against those who break the law, from whatever part of the community they come. The best way to act is through the courts. Both communities in Northern Ireland support action through the courts. If we have to resume detention—which may well be for other reasons—we divide the communities. The Government want to act through the courts.

Does the Secretary of State accept that there is not much point in his acting sincerely towards a phoney cease-fire which is controlled by people who are patently insincere? Will he concede that this brutal and disgusting murder scatters the last vestige of this so-called cease-fire? He must be conscious that there are people in Northern Ireland, and I am sure throughout the United Kingdom, who find it extremely hard to understand that this Government can continue to talk with people who are accomplices, in fact, of these murderers.

I could not with my hand on my heart say that I do not speak with many people in Northern Ireland who are accomplices of a lot of funny people in Northern Ireland. I do not say that of the hon. Gentleman, whom I respect. I should not want anyone to think that I am referring to him, as I respect him and the stand which he takes against violence in Northern Ireland. He knows Crossmaglen. The problem of Crossmaglen has not existed only since 1969. I can speak only for our side of the border, but it is an area which has been curious in this respect for very many years. The cease-fire is not phoney. In fact there has been a great fall in the level of violence since the turn of the year. The cease-fire is not complete. But every day that goes by in which fewer and fewer people are killed, I am sure, is to the advantage of the long-term future of Northern Ireland.

Is the Secretary of State aware that even in the aftermath of such a lamentable incident, there are many of us who support him on the question of detention without trial? But could he say what evidence there is that those who have been released have subsequently indulged in criminal activities?

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's support. I am sure that it is right to proceed through the courts. I am sure that it is right to proceed in Northern Ireland as we would in the rest of the United Kingdom. There may be times when this is not possible, but there has been a great break through in this respect in the past six months. I have no evidence, from the nature of the violence, and nor have the security forces of a return to violence by those who have been released.

We have to take into account what happens in certain circumstances to those who have been released, not only from detention but from prison. In certain circumstances in both parts of the community—whether or not people have been in gaol and have been properly sentenced—there is every chance of a return to violence. I am informed, however, that the families of a number of those detained are getting them to leave the country. Wives, mothers and fathers are having an effect. Good is coming out of this. That is not to say that at the fringes there may not be people who may return to violence in the longer run, although I have no evidence of this as yet.

Will the right hon. Gentleman accept that we share his abhorrence of these foul murders at Forkhill and the sympathy expressed for the relatives of those involved? Has he noted the speculation that this was some kind of curtain raiser for a new campaign of violence that will extend into England and Scotland? Does he not agree that it would be right to assume that such a campaign would profit those involved not at all, that this House is not prepared to be deflected and will listen only to those who want to talk and not to those who throw bombs?