asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he will make a further statement about the implementation of the report of the Bullock Committee on Literacy.

I hope that, despite current financial constraints, all those with responsibilities in education will continue to keep in mind the Bullock Committee's recommendations, which covered all aspects of teaching the use of English in schools. The committee's report is too important to be set aside, although its full effects may not be felt for some time.

Does the Minister recall that the Bullock Committee expressed grave concern about the shortage of school books in many areas? Does she recognise that since then the increase in capitation allowance has not kept up with the rapidly increasing costs of the publishing industry? What is she going to do about it?

I am aware that capitation allowances, like all other forms of expenditure, have been affected by inflation. This is something of which the Bullock Committee made a feature, but these are primarily matters for local authority associations, as well as my Department. I have received no representations from them about the level of the allowances.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will initiate an inquiry into the advantages and disadvantages of traditional teaching methods as compared with a less orthodox approach.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what recent research has been carried out on the results achieved by different teaching methods; and what conclusions he has drawn.

Research workers at the University of Lancaster recently published a report on teaching styles and pupil progress. As I stated in reply to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for West Lothian (Mr. Dalyell) on 3rd May, the Department and Inspectorate are studying the Lancaster University report but are not yet in a position to decide whether further research is needed.

Does the Minister accept that this report tended to mix up the two issues of teaching methods and the unrelated question of comprehensive education? Many of those who are totally committed to comprehensive education are seriously worried about whether one or two of the newer methods used are capable of producing the necessary numeracy required as an essential basis for higher scientific and technical work.

My hon. Friend is raising two different issues. First, it is true that people have sought to draw from the report lessons that are not contained in it, about the benefits of comprehensive education and the relative effects of formal and informal teaching. Dr. Bennett said that such lessons should not be drawn from the report. But standards of literacy and numeracy are separate issues, and a matter about which all of us are concerned. This is why the Assessment of Performance Unit was set up in the Department to monitor these kinds of methods.

Does the Minister agree that at the very least this report confirms the anxieties felt by a lot of parents? In these circumstances it is time that the Ministry showed signs of taking the problem more seriously than it has done to date.

I do not think that the report confirms the anxieties of parents. The very exaggerated and often quite inaccurate comments made about the report by hon. Members opposite and people outside this House may have caused unjustified anxiety among parents. Anyone who reads the report and considers what it says, as opposed to what is said about it, will realise that it is very hard to give a simple judgment of these things. It is difficult to decide how far a judgment made in the Bennett Report can be applied over the whole country. If the hon. Member is seeking to make a point on the value of informal and formal teaching methods, I remind him that a teacher who used basically informal methods got the best results in the survey.

Does the Minister agree that change for change's sake is not necessarily a good thing? Will both she and her Department take a little more interest in this question, and make sure that new teaching methods which are not fully tested or tried are not inflicted widespread on all children throughout the country?

I accept that we should not have change for change's sake, or rush about installing new teaching methods. My hon. Friend's question seems to be a classic statement of the argument that we should not seek to rush about trying to reinstitute more formal methods of teaching in schools, and instituting change for change's sake. That is a very good reason for looking carefully at the result of this study, as with everything else contained in the report. We by no means dismiss the report, or take it lightly. We wish to consider seriously the real lessons to be learned from the report, and not to regard it as some kind of educational propaganda.

Will the Minister assure us that when new theories are being put into practice there will be proper pilot schemes and a proper evaluation of those schemes before the theories are applied generally? My experience as a teacher of modern languages is that we have gone from one thing to another in that subject without properly evaluating anything, and we have lost a great deal in the process.

I take it that the hon. Member is saying that we should not rush headlong into formulating new theories of excessively formalised education on the basis of the Bennett Report. I agree with him.

On the subject of teaching methods, does my hon. Friend agree that it will be useful to us all finally to get hold of the report of the ILEA inquiry into the Sir William Tyndale School? Does she realise that it is now eight or nine months since the inquiry began, and at least three months since it finished? Will the Department, realising that it has no locus standi in the matter, simply use its influence to chivvy the ILEA into getting the report out very quickly?

This report is a matter not for us but for the ILEA, but we are concerned that it should be available as soon as is reasonably possible. My hon. Friend should not forget that it was a very long and complex inquiry. I cannot judge what the report says until I have seen it.

Will the Minister take the report as a serious warning of some of the things that are going wrong, and that can be improved? Will she consider taking early steps to see that structured teaching is more widespread in all schools?

It is a little hard to see what lessons we can learn from a report that I understand is not completely written yet, let alone published. On the hon. Gentleman's second point, I must tell him that Her Majesty's Inspectorate has always, consistently throughout the years, advocated a structured framework of teaching in schools. There is nothing new, revolutionary or unacceptable about that.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he is prepared to meet representatives of those local education authorities which have not submitted plans for comprehensive reorganisation.

I would be happy to meet any authorities who wish to consider their position on secondary reorganisation.

When he has the chance to meet representatives of the London borough of Sutton will the right hon. Gentleman make sure that he is well acquainted with the strong arguments which were contained in the petition to which the London borough of Sutton contributed 28,000 signatures and which favoured a greater degree of parental choice and the preservation of good schools to ensure that they are not sacrificed on the altar of Socialist dogma?

I seem to have heard a lot about that petition, but not in the terms expressed by the hon. Member. I believe that a petition to this House must end in a particular way if it is to be in order. I met representatives of the Sutton authority last year and I asked them to give careful consideration to the points I made to them. They may have done that, but as far as I know they have not changed their position, and no doubt we shall have to look at the matter again when Parliament passes the Bill which is on the Order Paper for discussion later today.

Is the Department doing any work on monitoring mixed ability teaching in comprehensive schools, or must we wait 15 years for another Bennett Report on that?

The hon. Member must have come in late, thinking that we were on an earlier Question. Reorganisation by local authorities does not arise out of the point that he made. We may have to take more central control over these matters, but when I take even the modest step of suggesting to local authorities that they should conform to a national pattern, which is what the Education Bill seeks to do, I am accused of attacking local democracy.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will pay an official visit to Manchester to discuss its external examinations with the local authority.

My right hon. Friend has at present no plans to do so.

Is the Minister aware that published statistics of A-level examination results in Manchester indicated a fall of 20 per cent. between 1973 and 1974 in the results of 26 comprehensive schools there, and a falling off in the results of these comprehensive schools which make up two-thirds of the city's schools, compared with the one-third which are still voluntarily bipartite? If that is so, should there not be an inquiry into this fall in standards?

The hon. Gentleman has a genius for misreading any research results for his own purposes. He knows that the Manchester report itself entered the most serious reservations about using the results to compare performances of comprehensive schools with other schools. He knows, too, that all surveys that are based upon a classification of the school at the moment when the examination results are obtained are subject to the criticism that many of the pupils in comprehensive schools have, in the course of their secondary education, been educated in more than one type of school.

Does my hon. Friend recall that when the survey results were first published in The Times Educational Supplement they appeared under the heading

"Manchester shaken by survey of comprehensiveness"

I recall all that with crystal clarity, and I can only express the hope that the hon. Member for Brent, North (Dr. Boyson) will show the same modesty and willingness to admit former error as The Times Educational Supplement did.

Will the Minister say what kind of explanation would be acceptable from Manchester, if the information that has been published is supposed to be unreliable? Will the Department put inspectors in to produce a report that we can all understand and agree about?

I can give no guarantee that our research projects will be based in Manchester, high as my respect is for that city. We are funding a research project through the University of Hull, which I hope will be better controlled and more reliable than the Manchester survey, which was never designed to be used for the purposes for which Conservatives use it.

Does my hon. Friend agree that successes in external examinations since comprehensive education was introduced all over the country are massively greater than before? Everyone knows that except the hon. Member for Brent, North (Dr. Boyson). Does my hon. Friend accept that if the 11-plus examination was still as widely used as it was formerly, vast numbers of children who have taken first-class honours degrees, some of whom actually failed the 11-plus, would have been unable to take them? It ill becomes those who condemn comprehensive education not to look a little further and see the massive success that it really is.

I agree with my hon. Friend. He and I, however, as educationists, must share the blame for one failure, namely, the failure to enlighten the hon. Member for Brent, North, however hard we try.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many qualified teachers are unemployed.

3,533 unemployed school teachers were recorded at unemployment offices in England and Wales in March.

Will the Government now get their priorities right? In view of the monstrous waste of teacher talent and the urgent need to reduce the size of classes, why on earth do the Government not reduce the £328 million subsidy on school meals by the small amount required to employ all those teachers?

One of the difficulties in deciding on priorities is the lack of advice that we have from the Opposition on all these matters. The Opposition simply say that all expenditure should be cut, but they have no real alternative priorities. The question of how many teachers are employed is not solely the responsibility of my Department. The Government have set the rate support grant at a level to give authorities enough money to maintain staffing standards, but the responsibility for how that money is spent rests with the education authorities. Since the Opposition defend the rights of local authorities, it is hard that they should criticise us for not exercising more control.

Does my hon. Friend agree that investment in education is as important as investment in industry? Is it not disgraceful that massive numbers of teachers are liable to be unemployed in the coming months? Will she persuade her colleagues that other spending, particularly on defence, would be better devoted to education?

I agree that investment in education is as important as investment in industry, but difficult decisions have to be made. We cannot say that there are 25 areas on which it is tremendously important to spend money and that we will spend that money on all those areas; there is not enough money, and priorities must be decided. I regret that situation as much as my hon. Friend, but since the money is not available words will not produce it.

Will the Minister give an estimate of the average unemployment benefit paid to the 3,533 teachers who are unemployed and say how it would compare with using those teachers to teach smaller classes?

The hon. Gentleman obviously does not have much experience of unemployment, or he would know that unemployment benefit, in the first period, is wage-related. The figures that he asks for would depend on the number of new teachers and the length of experience of others. I cannot, therefore, give him the figures, but if he wants some kind of average figure I shall attempt to obtain it. As to a calculation of the balance of cost, it is always possible to make such calculations, but they rarely fall on the side of the cut. Restraint on public expenditure nevertheless has to fall somewhere, and some of it, to my regret, has to fall here.

What steps are proposed to enable the quick retraining of some unemployed teachers to fill the shortage that exists in some subjects, which will not be filled at all without changes?

My hon. Friend is right. My Department is considering what steps can be taken to retrain teachers in subjects in which there is a shortage.

When the Minister says that teachers cannot be exempt from harsh economic realities, what does that mean to teachers who are due to come out of the colleges in future years? Does she agree that the demoralistion of colleges is being made worse by uncertainty about whether the target is still 60,000 or is down to 45,000? Is it not wrong that this cat-and-mouse game should continue?

If one had a crystal ball one would make precise predictions, but I am not able to say what the level of unemployment is likely to be in the future. At present, it is less than 1 per cent. of the teaching force, which is lower than the general unemployment rate. We do not make such forecasts, because factors change. Wastage among teachers has been substantial, and this is the most difficult time to make any prediction for the coming year. But I hope to have a clearer picture in the coming months.

Is it not monstrous that student teachers who were positively encouraged to go into colleges should find the outlook so bleak? Will the Minister consider introducing conversion courses in the third year of students' training, so that they can follow other necessary careers, such as speech therapy?

To retrain in the final year of a course is a new idea. I shall write to the hon. Gentleman about that suggestion. We are doing everything that we can, given the distribution of powers between central and local government, to encourage education authorities to employ teachers fresh from training college. We are anxious about the matter, but we are doing as much as we can.

Does my hon. Friend not agree that investment in people by way of smaller classes, which would take up unemployed teachers, is an urgent and better priority for the Labour movement than any investment in death-dealing nuclear weapons that the Opposition support? Does she agree that local authorities, particularly those that are Conservative-controlled, should get their expenditure priorities right? Will she guide them to cut out such things as public relations officers and 100 per cent. grants to direct grant schools and, as in Bradford, the junketing, dinners and lunches splashed around by Tory authorities?

I have some sympathy with what my hon. Friend has said.

Is not the essence of the Opposition charge against the Government that they have succeeded in doing two things—raising teacher unemployment to record levels whilst at the same time creating a record shortage in specialist subjects such as mathematics, science and the crafts? Does not that justify the charge in today's issue of The Guardian that the Secretary of State is guilty of incompetent complacency?

I am more than a little astonished that the hon. Gentleman should dare to make that point, since a number of newspapers have recently said that it was during the existence of the previous Administration that the places that now produce unemployed teachers were planned. The previous Administration have also been open to the charge that it was their failure to take account of a planning target and to make this public that contributed to, if not created, the present situation.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will pay a visit to Tameside.

I have at present no plans to do so, but I am meeting representatives of the authority in London tomorrow to discuss their plans for the transfer of children to secondary schools in September.

Is the Minister aware that the Conservative council took control in Tameside on the basis of a manifesto that pledged not to go ahead with the plans for comprehensive education drawn up by the previous council? Does it not have a clear duty to fulfil that pledge?

One of the difficulties is that the council, as a council, has taken no decision in these matters at all. It is meeting to discuss the subject for the first time this afternoon. In the light of that meeting, the members of the council have agreed to explain their policy to me. I do not wish to make any public judgments of what the council intends to do until I have had a chance to hear what the decisions are and I have discussed these with the council's representatives tomorrow.

When my right hon. Friend meets representatives of Tameside will he bear in mind that almost 90 per cent. of children go to a first-choice school and 96 per cent. to a first- or second-choice school? Is he aware that the teaching profession in Tameside and throughout the country unanimously support the need to retain a comprehensive system? Will the Secretary of State deal with the educational wreckers in Tameside in a form that is appropriate to meet the needs of the parents there?

It would be wrong for me to prejudge what the council's decisions today will be. I would not expect even a Conservative-controlled council totally to rule out the possibility that the proposed resolutions might be subject to amendment, and that reasoned argument might produce changes. Therefore, I am not forming a view until I know what the council, as distinct from various members of it, proposes to do.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that when the Prime Minister assumed office he said on television that his Government would preserve our existing freedoms? In the light of that, why are they adopting this attitude to the Tameside authority? Why are they going against the clearly expressed wishes of so many parents who do not want comprehensive education but want some choice in the education of their children?

I am not prepared to do what the hon. Gentleman is asking me to do, which is to prejudge the decisions of a meeting that has not yet taken place. In case the House is still sitting tomorrow, I have made contingency arrangements for the meeting to be held here, and I hope that the House will excuse me if I am absent from the consideration of the Education Bill until I have met the councillors. Until then I am not forming a view. I shall be interested to see whether the proposals that the councillors bring forward are in line with those that they submitted to the electorate in May.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will pay an official visit to Lancaster University.

My right hon. Friend has at present no plans to visit the university.

Hearkening to the earlier words of his hon. Friend the Member for Southampton, Itchen (Mr. Mitchell), will the Minister of State take very seriously the research work by Lancaster University, pointing to the value of more formal rather than less formal methods of teaching? Does he accept that the Government should have no higher priority in education than the raising of academic standards in the schools?

I happily accept the hon. Gentleman's last point, just as I happily accept many of the points that he has made over the years, as a distinguished educationist himself. I respect the serious research which led to the Lancaster findings, but it would be rash to draw sweeping conclusions from one survey in a single region, where only 17 per cent. of the sample of teachers used what were described as informal methods and where there are other clear weaknesses in the survey material.

If the Minister decides to change his mind and come to Lancaster University, will he allow me the pleasure of showing him round some of the schools that are the subject of the outstanding report to which there has been reference—schools that have been castigated by the trendy Lefties in my area as being 20 years behind the times but which provide outstandingly good education and produce children who can actually read and write when they go on to the next stage of education? Does he accept that the informal teacher described earlier as turning out excellent results had a particularly high incentive, in that her own child was in the form she taught and she was trying to cram her for a scholarship to a public school?

As a former member of the staff of Lancaster University, I must turn down—though I express my gratitude to her—the hon. Lady's offer to act as my guide. If the trendy Lefties in the university regard the schools as 20 years out of date, I can only speculate upon their view of the hon. Lady.

In view of the justified emphasis that my hon. Friend has just put on the particularity of the Lancaster University investigation, does not that underline the fact that his Department, instead of reacting to and perhaps rejecting particular research, should be doing its own much more broad-based research throughout the country, which it is uniquely able to do?

We have a substantial research programme, both of our own and through other organisations. I referred earlier to one of our research projects, which is being undertaken through the medium of the University of Hull. We seek all the time to monitor educational standards in schools and to find out what teaching methods produce the best results.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what steps are being taken to improve the training of education welfare officers as recommended in the 11th Report of the Expenditure Committee, 30th July 1975, paragraph 136.

The Government's reply to the Expenditure Committee's Report has now been published. It describes action being taken by the bodies responsible—local authorities, the Central Council for Education and Training in Social Work and the Local Government Training Board—to improve basic and in-service training for the education welfare service.

Does my hon. Friend agree that truancy can be an important factor in eventual delinquency? Will she put pressure on the bodies concerned to look particularly at the valuable work that the educational welfare workers can do in this area?

I fully accept my hon. Friend's comments. The Department sees great value in the work of the education welfare service. My right hon. Friend has taken steps to convene a meeting to discuss these very complex problems later this month.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what correspondence he has had with the Bromley branch of the National Union of Teachers on the subject of the places taken up by the London borough of Bromley at independent and direct grant schools.

Last autumn my right hon. Friend received a complaint from the Bromley Teachers' Association about the Bromley Education Authority's policy.

Is the hon. Lady aware that by telling the Bromley teachers that the taking up of these places was a matter for the district auditor the Secretary of State was directly inciting them to challenge the policy of the Bromley council? Is she aware that many suspect that he was acting in collusion with the Bromley branch of the National Union of Teachers to force the abandonment of a policy which may have offended against the Socialist concept of educational egalitarianism but which at least provided an opportunity for many children in the borough to receive an education which otherwise their parents would have been unable to afford?

The hon. Gentleman is wrong in two ways. He is wrong, first, in suggesting that my right hon. Friend was seeking to incite the NUT to disagree with its local education authority. He was merely making a factual point about the existence of, and possible interest of, the district auditor. I am even more fascinated by the hon. Gentleman's assumption that fear of the Bromley branch of the NUT rather than fear of the district auditor forced the education authority to change its policy, but I suspect that it is not correct.

What does my hon. Friend think of Conservative-controlled councils such as my own, in Enfield, which, despite their responsibility for the education of all children within the borough, consider that their schools are not good enough for a certain range of gifted children and that those children should be sent to independent schools, at the ratepayers' expense?

It seems to me, as it seems to my hon. Friend, that such authorities should be devoting resources to the improvement of their own schools rather than saying that they can stay as they are for most children but that a few can have a different kind of education.

Will the hon. Lady confirm that it is one of the basic principles of the whole series of Education Acts that local education authorities should have the right, in order to widen parental choice and for other reasons, to take up places at independent schools? Will she now say why her right hon. Friend failed to confirm that fact to the members of the Bromley Borough Council when they approached the Department for guidance?

I do not think that my right hon. Friend did any such thing. The hon. Gentleman and I have had this argument before. My right hon. Friend pointed out to the council what is a simple statement of fact, that it had a right to carry out expenditure of this kind, and it would not be for him to intervene, but that the policy might be a matter for the district auditor if the district auditor thought that the council was acting incorrectly. It is true that under the existing Education Acts local councils have the power to take such steps, but they also have a duty, which should be overriding, to provide a good standard of education for all the children in their area, in their schools.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will publish in the Official Report particulars of the research projects into the causes of blindness supported directly or through the Medical Research Council in each of the last three years; what was the amount of money allocated; and if he will make a statement.

I am publishing the information in the Official Report. In addition, research into causes of blindness was undertaken at the Medical Research Council's Trachoma Unit until December 1973 at a cost of £20,600 in 1973–74 and biochemical studies of retinitis pigmentosa were undertaken at the council's Brain Metabolism Unit until 1975. Other council units have recently begun a study of some aspects of the genetics of retinitis pigmentosa. This forms part of a wider programme and the council cannot isolate the cost of the study.

Why is it that when we have 160,000 registered blind people, with retinitis pigmentosa being the cause in about 40,000 cases, so little emphasis is given to this aspect of research? Will my right hon. Friend have discussions with this right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services on the amount that can be given for research into blind-

As my hon. Friend has rightly said, the direction of this research is more a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services than for me. The essence of the Medical Research Council and other councils is that they are independent, but I shall have discussions with my right hon. Friend, as my hon. Friend has suggested.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what steps he is taking to replace nineteenth century primary schools in Derbyshire and the Bolsover constituency.

It is for the local education authority to decide what priority it is able to give to replacing old primary schools within the lump sum resources for school building allocated to it by my right hon. Friend. Two such schools are currently being replaced in the Bolsover constituency.

Is my hon. Friend aware that these difficulties are increased when education is to be cut by £680 million over the next few years? Is she further aware that the county council has run into financial difficulties over replacements, and will she take into account the fact that the Derbyshire Education Committee has allocated about £2 million out of its own capital receipts in order to speed up plans for comprehensive education in accordance with Government policy? Why is it not Government policy to help those who help themselves?

The existence of many old primary schools, particularly in Derbyshire, is a matter of considerable concern to us. I was not aware that the authority was running into financial difficulties. I shall inquire into the matter.

Is the hon. Lady aware that there is one primary school in Derby- shire which does not need replacing? Does she know that the village school at Dale Abbey is threatened with closure by the Labour-controlled Derbyshire Education Authority, despite the overwhelming wishes of the local population?

This is a matter in which the hon. Gentleman has expressed interest before. When the proposal comes before the Department, his interests and those of other people in the area will be taken into account.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will consider a voluntary early retirement scheme for teachers.

Proposals tabled by the teachers' association for voluntary retirement on pension at 55 were recently considered in the Teachers Superannuation Working Party, but discussion on them has been deferred.

When does the right hon. Gentleman expect those discussions to be completed? Does he agree that if older teachers wish to retire early, some unemployed teachers could, if the right hon. Gentleman got a move on, be taking up these posts in September?

In the first instance the negotiations are between the employers—the local authorities—and teachers' unions. We seek to keep the arrangements in line with those for other local government employees. The question is whether it should be a voluntary retirement scheme or a matter of compensation for premature retirement, which is the normal practice for local government staff. I want to see whether there is a possibility of an early retirement scheme, but I would not think this is the only way of dealing with the difficulties that we have at present.

Is not one of the additional reasons for seeking to press on with the scheme the fact that many of the teachers now coming out of colleges of education are of a particularly good standard, which makes it doubly regrettable that they cannot immediately be employed? Is there not much advantage in a scheme to improve the quality of the teaching force in the way suggested by my hon. Friend the Member for Wallasey (Mrs. Chalker)?

The question is whether the local authorities or the teachers should be able to take advantage of such provisions. It is right that the negotiations now being undertaken should be allowed to continue. On the question of employing teachers from training colleges. I agree that it is highly desirable that local authorities should fill all possible vacancies with young teachers, and not, as so often in the past, by taking people who have left teaching and gone to jobs in other industries, but who come back because the conditions are so much better than they were three or four years ago.

asked the Prime Minister when he last had discussions with the CBI and the TUC.

asked the Prime Minister when he last met the CBI.

asked the Prime Minister when he last met the heads of the CBI and TUC.

I refer the hon. Members and my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Blackpool, South (Mr. Blaker) on 27th May.

When he had his discussions with the CBI and others, did the Prime Minister take the trouble to get hold of a copy of the MORI Survey into the attitudes of working people, which showed that 86 per cent. of those polled favoured living in a free enterprise society and that the same percentage favoured wider profit sharing as an incentive to increase productivity?

I did not get hold of a copy of the survey. Responses can depend on the way questions are framed. I have not had an opportunity to examine this questionnaire, but I dare say that it is as valuable as a great many others, including those which forecast the results of General Elections.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the recent Financial Times survey of business forecasts, which showed the recovery in the economy to be in full swing? [Interruption.] Is he aware that this contained high investment intentions, although unfortunately, investment has been flagging? [Interruption.]

Order. The hon. Member speaks even slower than I do.

In view of the unstinting contribution of the TUC, will my right hon. Friend nudge the CBI to encourage its constituent members to improve investment?

My hon. Friend has made a most valuable point, on which the House should reflect. Investment has been sluggish so far, but there is reason to believe that it is now improving. Certainly the Department of Industry survey, which was published yesterday, suggests a sharp rise in investment in 1977. If that is true, it wil probably be the first time that British industry has taken advantage of an export-led boom before the consumer cycle has taken full effect. The fact that the Government have made available several hundred million pounds through the accelerated capital projects scheme will encourage industry to go ahead with further investment. We ask them to do so.

When the Prime Minister next meets the TUC and the CBI, will he tell them that the Chancellor's statement yesterday represents not a victory for the Government but a defeat for their policies? When he next addresses the CBI, will he tell it that his only policy is to put Britain deeper into the red, to keep the red flag flying here?

I still have hopes that one day Question Time will be a serious period, without Members just thinking up clever phrases in advance and then shouting them across the Dispatch Box.

Does the Prime Minister realise that he had to borrow from the central bankers—capitalist central bankers—because they had not got enough confidence in his Government's policies to purchase sterling?

The central bankers do not purchase sterling in this sense, although they may intervene from time to time. This is normal, standard practice, under which central banks give assistance to each other by means of swap facilities. I am sure that one day the right hon. Lady will understand these things a little better.

Has my right hon. Friend noticed that the Trades Union Congress has called for the strongest anti-racist laws to emerge from this place? Will my right hon. Friend comment on the present situation, having regard to the anxiety about immigration generally? Will he confirm that it is the Government's policy to prosecute policies to develop racial harmony in this country?

I have not discussed this matter with the TUC or CBI, but my hon. Friend and the whole House will deplore the events that took place in his constituency at the weekend. It would be wrong for me to comment in detail on the murder, or on the demonstration, as criminal charges will come before the courts, but perhaps the House will allow me to say that race relations in this country have been good over the years, thanks to the good sense and moderation of the vast majority of our people of all communities.

As the Prime Minister now consults the CBI and the TUC, will he think of consulting others, as well? As the Chancellor has now bought us some more time with these standby arrangements, will the right hon. Gentleman sound out the various parties in the House, of which there are six, on the question whether there is any common ground for supporting the sort of measures that will need to be taken if we are to avoid another crisis in a year or two?

I notice that the right hon. Gentleman said "in a year or two" That is sufficient unto the day in some ways. But I would put that—[Interruption.] If hon. Members would only contain themselves, they might sometimes hear the end of a sentence without interruption. I would put that as too distant a perspective for any measures that need to be taken. No doubt we shall be discussing the real problem in due course. I have read that, after hours of anxiety, a motion is to go on the Order Paper, although I have not yet had the advantage of reading it. I have no doubt that we shall be discussing these matters, and that will be the opportunity to take counsel together to see what is necessary.

asked the Prime Minister if he will pay an official visit to the Isle of Grain.

I have at present no plans to do so.

is the Prime Minister aware of my disappointment that he will be unable to visit the area where the first shipment of British North Sea oil was landed, thereby missing an appropriate opportunity to make a statement about the Government's oil policy? Will he take the opportunity today to tell the House whether he is satisfied with the progress being made towards achieving the Labour Party manifesto commitment of a majority public stake in all North Sea oil exploration?

I am sorry not to be able to visit the area. Somehow I do not think that my hon. Friend or I would get a pair if we were to ask for it at the moment.

There are plenty of pairs to be had.

My hon. Friend is too cynical about the intentions of Opposition Members.

As the benefit being gained by the British or English economy this year is of the order mentioned by the right hon. Gentleman, will he indicate whether he is intent upon giving to the Scottish Assembly the oil revenues that the Assembly will need to improve the standard of living in Scotland?

The question of the revenues that the Scottish Assembly will control will no doubt be thrashed out in the course of devolution debates that we shall have. But if the United Kingdom is to remain as an integrated whole, the answer will undoubtedly be that no revenues can be hypothecated to one particular part of the United Kingdom.

If my right hon. Friend rightly concerns himself with the decisions of trade union conferences, while we are on the subject of the East Coast will he bear in mind that at Scarborough UCATT came down against devolution?

UCATT was one of the few conferences that I did not attend. Perhaps that is the reason.

If the Prime Minister does not visit the Isle of Grain, will he have time to have a word with his hon. Friend the Member for Stalybridge and Hyde (Mr. Pendry), who broke his word not to vote on the day before we rose for the recess? Does the right hon. Gentleman intend to keep the hon. Gentleman as a member of his Administration when it is quite clear that he is not able to discharge an honourable obligation to the House?

I note what the hon. Gentleman said, but I am afraid that there will not be a vacancy for him after all.

Answer the question.

rose—

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Order. Mr. Skinner, to raise a point of order.

I wonder whether you, Mr. Speaker, would care to rule on the situation that has recently developed in the Chamber. The hon. Member for Lancaster (Mrs. Kellett-Bowman) is sitting underneath the right hon. Member for Farnham (Mr. Macmillan).

Order. I am afraid that I am no expert in such matters.