asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he intends to issue the consultative document on the reorganisation of secondary schools in Northern Ireland.

It is hoped to publish the consultative document before the end of this month. The document is concerned with suggestions for the elimination of 11-plus selection procedure for admission to grammar schools and the reorganisation of secondary education on non-selective lines. It will include the feasibility study carried out by the Senior Chief Inspector of the Northern Ireland Department of Education. The section of this study dealing with individual schools is illustrative of the application of the principles proposed for discussion and has not been agreed to by area education and library boards. Sections will also be included dealing with possible accompanying changes in the legislative, financial and administrative arrangements.

Is my hon. Friend aware that I welcome that reply? Will he tell the House what period will be available for consultation on these important matters? Can he confirm that no additional financial burden will be placed on voluntary schools as a result?

There will be no additional financial burden placed on voluntary schools if that is what they wish. I hope that there will be a vigorous public debate in Northern Ireland on the matter. I do not want to restrict it, but I hope to make progress. Shall we say six months, and then see how it goes?

In view of the importance of the subject and its special application to the circumstances of Northern Ireland, would not any legislative proceedings be appropriately by Bill and not by Order?

I take note of the right hon. Gentleman's suggestion. The question of legislation will not arise for about 18 months.

Irrespective of that reply, will the Minister assure us that he will not change the system simply for the sake of change but will first satisfy himself that he is replacing it with something better?

I can give that assurance.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he will make a statement about the discussions held by his Department with the Provisional Sinn Fein.

As I said in reply to a Question by the hon. Member for Epping Forest (Mr. Biggs-Davison) on 13th April, my officials will talk with any lawful organisation in Northern Ireland, although no negotiations have taken place or will take place. I am not prepared to give details of meetings with individual organisations.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the continued discussions between his Department and the political spokesmen of the IRA are profoundly damaging and dangerous to the cause which he shares with hon. Members on this side of the House—namely, the rule of law and the restoration of peace in Northern Ireland? Does he accept that the policy that he is following of discussion with Sinn Fein is very damaging indeed to the morale of the security forces in Northern Ireland?

I do not agree at all with the hon. Gentleman's latter point. The whole feeling of republicanism that exists in Northern Ireland marks it out as different. I thought I was right 18 months ago to take advantage of the opportunity of trying to break the log jam that had built up over the previous seven years. I would have been wrong not to attempt something then. If that is again necessary in the future, I shall do it.

What was the last occasion on which these talks took place? Is the Secretary of State aware that the talks are very unpopular in Dublin? Is it not clear that members of Provisional Sinn Fein are the spokesmen for an illegal organisation? Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree with those in Northern Ireland who say that talks with men whose only voice is a Thompson sub-machine gun or an Armelite rifle are entirely futile?

My officials do not meet with people like that. What the hon. Gentleman is saying is logical, but it shows no understanding of the situation in Northern Ireland or of the large number of people with republican leanings. The matter cannot be left alone. If the question arises, we shall do the same again. I am not prepared to give the dates when the talks last took place. I insist that if it is necessary it will happen again.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what indications there are of sections of the Protestant and Catholic communities in Northern Ireland coming together in the interests of peace; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he has any statement to make about the resumption of talks between party leaders in Northern Ireland.

It would not be right for me to comment on the various exchanges taking place among the political parties in Northern Ireland, still less for me to seek to interfere. The Government welcome the constructive efforts of those in Northern Ireland who seek an equitable and durable agreement.

Will my right hon. Friend accept from me that we understand the efforts which he has been making to promote peace in Northern Ireland through every possible human contact? Will he further accept that, despite the increases this year in sectarian killings, there is a feeling that the two communities are reaching out towards each other and that those who indulge in sectarianism are increasingly being isolated? Does he agree that that is a reasonable assessment of the situation?

That is a reasonable assessment. I must not hide from the House my concern about the nature of the violence. Much of it has been straight sectarian in nature. Many people whom I meet tell me of the isolation of the men of violence, but that does not prevent them from engaging in violence. We must remember, however, that there have been false dawns before, and false dawns that suddenly collapse lead to disillusion. Let us take the matter carefully. There is a spirit there. I hope that anything we can do in the House will foster it.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the apparent alignment of the official Unionists with the constructive approach by the right hon. Member for Belfast, East (Mr. Craig), as opposed to the totally negative reaction of the hon. Member for Antrim, North (Rev. Ian Paisley), might well lead to the resumption of devolved government in Ulster based on principles supported by all parties in the House?

It certainly might do that, but the operative word is "might". Praise from me for any individual politician is not very productive, and even doing the opposite of praising, however much I might like to do that, might also prove to be unproductive. That is why at the moment I say very little about what is going on in Northern Ireland in this respect.

Will my right hon. Friend comment on the work and efforts of the trade union movement in Northern Ireland to encourage and enable the two communities to work sensibly together in the sphere of the trade unions? Are not the trade unions doing work which others in the political sphere would do well to emulate?

Yes, I think that is right. I met the trade unions only this week. This is no new attempt on the part of trade unions. Northern Ireland Ministers in previous Governments praised the trade unions in Northern Ireland, and all I can do is to add to that.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that, whatever has been the case in the past, the background to the present violence is not the absence of co-operation or the presence of hostility between adherents of Roman Catholicism and Protestantism but the activities of small numbers of people who are irreconcilably opposed to any acceptable form of government in the Republic or in Northern Ireland?

I do not disagree at all with the right hon. Gentleman's last comment. Things have changed in the past seven years. I am not so sure about the other aspects of Roman Catholicism and Protestantism. Although the vast majority of the people are firmly against violence, what concerns me is the tacit acceptance of violence in some areas, particularly in the urban areas. How to overcome this is an extremely difficult question. On the main point, however, I agree with the right hon. Gentleman.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the ending of detention was a material factor in improving relationships between the two communities, and that the primacy which he attaches to the rule of law could lead to an improvement of the situation in Northern Ireland? Would my right hon. Friend care to comment on an article in The Times this morning about increasing the liaison between the Army and the police to bring criminals before the courts?

I hope tomorrow to say something about the article in the newspaper, following up what I said a fortnight ago. I regard that as the right direction to take. In the past seven years the Army has taken the lead in security in Northern Ireland. I want to see that arrangement gradually—no more than that—reversed. That is the right way to go. The ending of detention was right and important. What concerns me in Northern Ireland is the existence of a small number of people on either side who organise the violence but do not go out on the street and pull the trigger. Those are the ones we want to get at. To get at them we need evidence. That is the long-term view. In the short-term, however, when I see the results of the activities of those organisers I wish that we could get at them much more quickly.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that more positive steps could be taken to involve the trade union movement in Northern Ireland? What steps is he prepared to take to bring together the British TUC and the Irish TUC on this question?

I have already agreed that the work that is being done by the trade unions is first-rate, but I would not attempt to instruct the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and its Northern Ireland Committee and tell them what to do. The links between the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and the South in Dublin and the TUC in London are very good. Mr. Jack Jones was in Ireland last week speaking at the annual conference of the Transport and General Workers' Union. What he said there could not be bettered. That shows that the valued support that the Government and the country get from the British trade union movement on the Irish question is first-rate.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he will cause to be drawn up a scheme for Northern Ireland indicating the size and location of areas reclaimable or improvable by land drainage and the phases in which, and the assumptions upon which, the corresponding works are expected to be executed.

No, Sir. Since 1947 the Northern Ireland Department of Agriculture has been carrying out a Province-wide programme of river drainage, which is now about three-quarters complete. The initiative in field drainage rests with the farmers and other landowners.

Notwithstanding that record, does not the right hon. Gentleman think that it would be valuable, particularly for the purposes of securing more public interest and understanding, if a long-term view were presented of the potentialities and the methods of agricultural land drainage in the Province as a whole?

I take it that the right hon. Gentleman is suggesting that a presentational case should be made to explain what is to be done and to show the community what needs to be done. I shall certainly consider that suggestion. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman could have a word with me about it or with my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State who is responsible. There is a great deal of leeway to make up. Much of what has happened in Northern Ireland is linked with names. On this side of the water, land drainage was started by Sir Robert Peel in the early 1840s. That did not happen in Northern Ireland, which is curious in view of Sir Robert Peel's involvement with Northern Ireland. Temporary and long-term measures need to be taken. If the right hon. Gentleman will have a word with us about any particular issue he has in mind, at the top end of the Laggan Valley or in the upper reaches of the Bann, we shall do what we can. I must stick to the plan that is being followed.

In considering these plans, will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that EEC money is available for these schemes? Will he make sure that an application is made to the EEC for consideration?

If any money is available, I am after it.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether the Provisional IRA has announced the end of the ceasefire; how many persons are known to have been killed by the Provisional IRA during the period of the ceasefire; and how many during the 18 months previous to its announcement.

I have not heard of any announcement by the Provisional IRA purporting to end the ceasefire which it announced unilaterally on 10th February 1975. Since that date it has admitted responsibility for 23 deaths in Northern Ireland. Comparable figures are not available for the earlier period. The exact number it has killed must be a matter for speculation, but it is certainly more than the admitted figure.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that when the ceasefire was announced he said that he would require a sustained and genuine cessation of violence before he would release all the detainees? In view of the level of violence since then, does he think that that criterion was met?

Certainly the criterion was not met in the context of the ceasefire, but my decision to end detention was not taken eventually in the context of the ceasefire, because it did not materialise with the Provisional IRA. I have been looking carefully at the figures and I find that in 1972, when internment was introduced, violence escalated to the nth degree. That is not to say that I did not realise that with the ending of detention we might be in a difficult position. There is no doubt in my mind that the ending of detention was the right way forward in the circumstances of the time. I can only say again that one must look at the figures. Detention did not end the violence. It stimulated it.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the practice of describing the victims of brutality as either Catholic or Protestant is deplorable? Would it not be more helpful if they were described as Christians, as apparently they are all members of one religious organisation?

When I see what is done, and whatever is the label that is given, I find the latter description more than I can bear. The Chief Constable, as he has every right to do, has decided that the nomenclature of victims, whether Roman Catholic or Protestant, should be ended. What he would understand, and what he does understand, is that in many parts of Belfast, or in Northern Ireland as a whole, everyone knows the nomenclature whether or not one says it. However, I accept his advice. I believe that it is a sensible thing to try because it may offer some help. Knowing so many people on both sides of the divide in Northern Ireland, my opinion is that to give religious descriptions to them, whatever may be their origins, belies the views of those who carry out the murdering and killing in Northern Ireland.

As more than 150 people have been killed this year, is it not thoroughly nebulous and misleading for the right hon. Gentleman to talk about a Provisional IRA ceasefire being in existence? There is no such thing as a ceasefire.

If I had said that, I should have been extremely foolish. If anyone believed I said that, he would be wrong.

Will my right hon. Friend accept from me that many of us on the Labour Benches at least are not happy about the sectarian nature of those who want to list the melancholy parade of killings from one side to the other? Many of us think that killings occur on both sides, and we are condemnatory of them. To list them purely on one side is most unhelpful. Those who do that should make better efforts to try to bring the two sides together.

As regards the killings and murders and all that goes on in Northern Ireland, and taking the generality of my hon. Friend's question, I think it is right that we should condemn them. But there can be no justification in any sense of the term for what my hon. Friend has described. There was a time when that was done. I believe it is disappearing in Northern Ireland, as it certainly has done in this House. Condemnation, and not even the slightest degree of justification, should be the order of the day.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what consultations he has had with the Government of the Republic of Ireland on a scheme to establish the mutual secondment of RUC and Garda officers to assist in the apprehension of fugitives in border areas.

This is in the first place a matter for the Chief Constable and the Chief Commissioner of the Garda.

I cannot thank the hon. Gentleman for that Answer, which was negative in the extreme. This is the sort of initiative that the Government should be considering. If attempts were made to establish consultation on these lines, possibly a real impact could be made on cross-border security and co-operation between the security forces. It is not good enough for the Minister to answer in such a negative manner. I ask him to look at the matter again.

I should have no objection in principle to this taking place, provided that it was acceptable to the two police forces and provided that the practical problems could be solved. The operation of the police force on the other side of the border, for example, would be limited to some extent, because the difference in the law between the Republic and Northern Ireland is sufficiently wide to render an easy transfer not a simple matter.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that even if he cannot achieve what would be a welcome initiative of this sort, there is much scope for the sort of cooperation that would enable the best use to be made of manpower on the border so that the maximum number of crossing points can be policed? Does he agree that rather than having security forces on both sides of the border, policing, for example, a single crossing point, each force on its own side, it would be desirable if the forces could be deployed through cooperation at a number of different points? In that way a lot could be achieved.

Broadly speaking, that sort of thing is already done. Co-operation between the two forces is growing all the time.

Does the hon. Gentleman accept that we welcome and have supported what he has said about increased co-operation between the two forces? However, when talking about secondment between forces of two sovereign States, clearly that cannot be done. It could be done between Northern Ireland and the Metropolitan Police, but that is not a parallel.

I note what the hon. Gentleman said. I pointed out that the RUC will make a substantial attempt to achieve the sort of liaison and exchange that we are talking about, but I am sure there are a number of practical problems that will have to be solved before it can be put into practice.

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

As I told the House on 14th June, although some of the violence, like sectarian crime, remains the same, the security situation is constantly changing; for example, there are now fewer street disturbances but more uncoordinated and individual crimes. Recently, terrorists have made a number of attacks which seem designed primarily to destroying places providing employment. The security forces are taking all appropriate measures to bring those responsible to court; so far this year 583 persons have been charged with terrorist crime, including 50 with murder.

Will the right hon. Gentleman now give clear and precise directives to both police and military as to their long-term roles in Northern Ireland? Secondly, what are his plans to improve liaison between police and military, which in several areas is lamentably weak? Is it the plan of the Government to re-equip the RUC with any more armoured personnel carriers?

On the hon. Gentleman's last question, in certain places this is necessary and is being done. I think that "long-term directives" are the words that have been used. The long-term policy has been reassessed, and I have now received the report of the ministerial committee, of which I happen to be Chairman, which has been considering the long-term future. That must be flexible. In 1969 no one would have believed the extent of the violence that would be experienced some years later. I propose to say something tomorrow about liaison between the police force and the Army, but if the hon. Gentleman has any evidence of points at where it is weak at the moment, and if he will give me chapter and verse, I shall put the matter to the RUC, the Chief Constable and the General. All I can say is that they have not put it to me this week.

Can my right hon. Friend give a current assessment of the flow of money and arms from the United States and Canada?

Assessments are being made. Most of the money that comes from North America is in the provision of foreign exchange for the purchase of arms in different parts of the world. The rest of the money is raised by bank robberies North and South, and post office robberies. They are the major source of funds. However, the important funds still come, although to a lesser degree, I understand, from North America. The people who provide that money, who believe they are doing good, should see the results of the money that they have provided. They would then realise that they are being fooled when they are asked for the money.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the recent attacks on the homes and lives of prominent business men represent a sinister development? Does intelligence indicate whether it is part of an overall plan?

I often find—and certainly on advice on these matters—that something happens for a while that has obviously been ordered by somebody, but it does not often carry on for a long period. It seems to wax and wane over a period of weeks. Those who provided a list of 250 business men in Northern Ireland, with their home addresses, were providing a death list. I understand that those concerned have apologised. If I were in the families of those who have been attacked, apologies would not be enough.

My right hon. Friend said that some of the money for these purposes came from raids on post offices and factories. Will he give an idea of the total number of banks and post offices within the territory and, secondly, the manpower that would be involved in providing a 24-hour guard upon them?

I cannot give my right hon. Friend the numbers without notice. Obviously, if the Army or police were to be involved in guarding buildings on a roster basis, it would take up the services of a large number of people. The situation is difficult in that respect.

Is the Secretary of State yet able to announce any decision about expanding the number of full-time members of the Ulster Defence Regiment?

I propose to say something on that topic in tomorrow's debate. Let me simply say that we attach importance to the expansion of the regular element of the UDR.

What new confidence in the forces of law and order can be given to the terrorised, and particularly the law-abiding of nationalist tradition, when the Secretary of State continues to insist on parleys with the political commissars of the Provos?

I know that the hon. Gentleman is concerned about these matters, but his concern comes from afar.

From afar?

It is not something that looms in Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland in what respects he has made the present system of direct rule more positive than that in force in previous periods of direct rule; and whether he will make a statement.

During direct rule, successive Governments have rightly hesitated to take action on non-urgent matters on which a future devolved Government could be expected to make its own decisions. But there has been direct rule for all but five months of the last four years, and I have decided that it would no longer be right to defer decisions in this way.

Is the Secretary of State aware that we eagerly await his contribution to tomorrow's debate? Meanwhile, will he and the Northern Ireland office endeavour to help community groups which are doing such good work in Northern Ireland in bringing people together by providing some kind of interim representation of ordinary people in the Province?

I shall do a great deal, through my hon. Friend the Minister of State, to help community groups, but not in any sense of their being representative as if they were elected. It is most important to stick to that view. There is one other factor to be considered. There are community groups and community groups in Northern Ireland, as the people who live there know. My colleagues have to be selective in the attitude that is taken in that respect. I shall tomorrow give my views to the House on aspects of direct rule, but I should not like to give the impression that there is something new and urgent in dealing with this basic problem. I feel that all along there has been too much said in this House in the last five years about solving the Irish question instead of seeking to deal with the immediate situation and to cope with the situation in Northern Ireland.

I welcome the answer given by the Secretary of State to the hon. Member for Epping Forest (Mr. Biggs-Davison). Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the pace of his actions must be such that Northern Ireland opinion must not be isolated, because progress will be determined by Northern Ireland opinion and not by any degree of impatience at Westminster?

I agree firmly with my hon. Friend. Our aim must be to use the developing mood of the people in Northern Ireland. Indeed, this is what Her Majesty's Government will do.

On the general question of future direct rule, many of us broadly agree with the profile taken by the Secretary of State in regard to talks between the parties, but is he aware that much will depend on his attitude to the outcome of talks? Could he, either tomorrow in the debate or in his replies today, give an assurance to the people who are spending so much time trying to negotiate delicately that he will look favourably on any scheme that is agreed by Ulstermen among themselves?

Of course, I shall look favourably on any agreement that may come forward between the two major groups in Northern Ireland, and I shall say something about that aspect of the matter tomorrow. Any agreement that is reached will depend on the supposition that people are prepared to work together. The details must be examined searchingly, but I hope that the basic factors of agreement will be successful.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland for what items of police armament and equipment requisitions are outstanding; and when it is expected that these will be fulfilled.

In the first place this is a matter for the Chief Constable and the police authority. A considerable amount of equipment is ordered each year for the RUC, and it would be impracticable to list all the items that are currently being dealt with as part of the continuing programme. If there is a particular case the hon. Member has in mind, I shall be glad to have inquiries made.

Will the Minister encourage the newly-constituted Police Authority to make speedily available the very best and most up-to-date equipment that may be requested by the RUC to enable it to cope with the speedily changing tactics of the terrorist organisations?

Yes, I shall.

Have any appreciable quantities of arms fallen into unauthorised hands?

There has been little traffic in that respect.

I accept that the responsibility is that of the Chief Constable, but will the Minister satisfy himself that the equipment used by the special patrol group in South Armagh is adequate?

I have met members of the special patrol groups in South Armagh—it was a slightly unorthodox visit, and I do not intend to repeat it too often—and heard complaints about weapons. All the points they made are being processed through the machinery.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is the criterion for compensation for a hijacked car used as a car bomb.

Compensation in respect of a hijacked car used as a car bomb may be claimed under the Criminal Injuries to Property (Compensation) Act (Northern Ireland) 1971. The criteria governing the payment of compensation in such a case are the same as for any other criminal damage.

Is the Minister aware that one of my constituents whose car was used for a car bomb in Portadown three years ago, as a result of which the offenders were given sentences of imprisonment of eight years, has not yet been recompensed for the loss of his vehicle? Will the hon. Gentleman give an assurance that the Criminal Injuries Board will speed up the payment of compensation?

I shall examine that matter. If the hon. Gentleman examines this subject, he will find that any lack of speed in paying out compensation is often not a matter for my Department but lies elsewhere.

How does the Minister discover whether an organisation is lawful or unlawful in deciding whether to pay compensation when, by definition, the identity of those concerned is not known?

The Chief Constable has to issue a certificate in this respect.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he proposes to announce the names of the remaining members of the Fair Employment Agency.

Shortly after the current consultations are completed.

Does the Minister understand that he will not be denied plenty of time for consultation in regard to these important appointments, because this group of persons has important work to do? Does he not regard it as marginally encouraging that there were those in this House who previously bitterly opposed the fair employment legislation but who on Third Reading decided not to oppose it, undoubtedly because they realised that their bigoted approach was not readily supported?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. We look forward to a successful period of work for the Fair Employment Agency supported by all sections of the Northern Irish community. I take the point about careful consultations in regard to agency membership before the names are announced. I am sure that we shall get some good people to serve on it.

Taking account of the principle of the Bill, will the Minister of State ensure that there is equality of opportunity for everyone who seeks to serve on this body?

We have done our best to ensure that.

Does the Minister agree that, while my hon. Friends and I maintain our objections to this attempt to deal with these problems by legislation, nevertheless we co-operated to a considerable degree and successfully improved the legislation? That is something which can hardly be said about the official Opposition.

As I have already said, the right hon. Gentleman is carrying on an argument with the hon. Member for Wokingham (Mr. van Straubenzee), and I have no intention of acting as umpire. I am grateful for the good offices of the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues and the co-operation which they gave eventually.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will provide a holiday centre for physically handicapped people who require medical supervision presently unavailable in existing welfare holiday schemes.

Health and social services boards may arrange holidays or short-stay accommodation for physically handicapped people in a variety of residential settings or in hospital, according to the needs of the person concerned and his family.

Does the hon. Gentleman appreciate that medical supervision of a specialised kind is not available at many of these centres? Will he also accept that the area boards in Northern Ireland are enthusiastic about such a scheme which would involve medical supervision? Does he appreciate that as £1·5 million has been made available to some community associations, some of which operate in a very doubtful rôle in Northern Ireland, money cannot be the excuse for cutting off this worthy cause from the people of Northern Ireland?

The existing arrangements meet the majority of the needs. I appreciate the concern expressed by the hon. Gentleman, but he must be aware that consultations are taking place about the extension of services to the handicapped. It would be very expensive to provide the special medical care that the hon. Gentleman requires throughout all the centres, and I hope that he appreciates this fact. I am aware of one particular case in which he has shown great interest. Therefore, it is right that I should inform him that the allocation of accommodation has been made to that particular patient.

In giving further thought to this matter, will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind the needs of the mentally handicapped as well as the needs of the physically handicapped?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how much has been paid in compensation for injury and damage to property since 1968 to date; and how much is outstanding.

The amount paid under the Criminal Injuries Acts (Northern Ireland) 1956–71 in respect of damage to property since current records were started in 1969 to 31st May 1976 is £154,006,028. The estimated value of claims outstanding is currently under review, and I shall write to my hon. Friend when the figures are available.

These are very substantial amounts of money. Can my hon. Friend tell me who was responsible for paying these sums of money before the present arrangements were made? Can he also say under which existing legislation these amounts are paid at present?

Prior to this matter becoming the responsibility of the United Kingdom taxpayer, there were two different arrangements. In 1957 the responsibility lay with the ratepayers of the council areas in Northern Ireland. Latterly, when it became expensive it was done on a fifty-fifty basis between them and Stormont. Since 1971, of course, it has been the responsibility of the United Kingdom taxpayer. All this legislation was passed in the old Stormont.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether lie has received the report of the inquiry into the Northern Ireland bread industry; and if he will make a statement.

The working party on bread costs and prices in Northern Ireland has made recommendations for improving the financial viability of the baking industry and for bringing the price of bread in the Province more closely into line with prices charged over most of the United Kingdom. Copies of the report by the consultant to the working party, Professor Gibson, have been placed in the Library.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the fact that bread is so much higher in price in Northern Ireland is extremely disturbing? Would he agree that the dispensation given by his right hon. Friend will not encourage the industry to modernise itself to the advantage of citizens in the Province?

The price of bread in Northern Ireland is high, and it is our intention to bring it into line with the price in the rest of the United Kingdom. My right hon. Friend is anxious to help to ensure that no redundancies are created in a period of high unemployment, but the danger is that the industry might sit back and not take advantage of the period it has been allowed for reorganisation. I shall be very vigilant to ensure that the industry modernises in the course of the next few months. I see no prospects of the penny being extended beyond the end of this year.

asked the Prime Minister when he next intends to meet the TUC and CBI.

asked the Prime Minister when he next intends to meet the TUC.

asked the Prime Minister when he next plans to meet the General Council of the 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 the Prime Minister meets the TUC and the CBI will he give an assurance that the massive public expenditure cuts for next year which are now well advanced in their preparation will be announced and debated before the House rises for the Summer Recess? And will he this time answer the question I have put instead of, as last Tuesday, answering a totally different question which he seemed to get from some scrap of paper?

I answered the Question the hon. Gentleman has put today last Tuesday.

I wonder whether my right hon. Friend would tell me and the TUC which element of the investment relief monitoring device which was announced yesterday will be used in cases where firms apply to put up their prices and at the same time employ non-union labour. How will he explain to the TUC General Council why these cheapskate firms can put up their prices and retain non-union labour while at the same time cuts of £1,000 million or more in public expenditure will mean that trade union labour finishes up in the dole queue?

It has always been my view that those employed, whether in private industry or in public service, should belong to a trade union. They escape their obligations if they do not join.

Has the Prime Minister read the document "Social Contract 1976–77" in which the TUC states that it is opposed vigorously to any further cuts in public expenditure? Despite the misuse of the word "further", will the Prime Minister confirm that he will make whatever cuts in public expenditure he and the Government believe are justified, whatever the views of the TUC?

There is a certain Pavlovian attitude among Conservative Members on this matter. This public expenditure matter is one of a whole series of factors in the Government's economic policies, some of which are being carried forward with great success and others without success. We shall try to get a combination of all factors in appropriate proportions in due time.

asked the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for 1st July 1976.

I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet this morning, and I hope to have an audience of Her Majesty the Queen this evening. Apart from my duties in this House and some meetings with hon. Members, I shall also attend a reception being held in honour of the retiring Staff Side Secretary of the National Whitley Council.

Is the Prime Minister aware that it is a pity that he did not find time to attend some event celebrating Free Enterprise Day? Is the fact that in his 12 weeks as Prime Minister the pound is down 9 cents the factor that makes him write in the latest White Paper published yesterday that it is "no good paying ourselves in confetti"?

If it is Free Enterprise Day, I think that free enterprise had better do a little more advertising, because, I regret to say, I was not aware of it. As for the strength of sterling, I draw attention to what was said in the Bundestag yesterday:

"The encouraging progress in Britain on the way to a new social consensus between Government, trade unions and employers, which was noted with applause in Puerto Rico, justifies the signs of increased confidence in the British Pound".

When the Prime Minister finds himself with a spare 10 minutes in a busy day, will he take the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection by the arm and go outside to buy an ice cream cone or a soft drink? They will both then see what visitors to this country and local residents are having to pay for these products in the heat wave.

I have not pursued my inquiries that far, but if the hon. Member would like to help me, I will go with him to do so.

Since this is not only Free Enterprise Day but, we understand, Free Enterprise Week, will my right hon. Friend have published in Hansard the number of applications received by the various Government Departments this week for aid so that we may see just how free that enterprise is?

I think that would be a work of supererogation. But I believe that there is a clear case for private enterprise standing on its own feet and making an adequate profit. It is important, however, for the Opposition to remember that a great deal of so-called free enterprise is coming to the State for continuing aid because of the impossibility of sustaining itself or, because of the size of its enterprise, of raising sufficient capital in other directions.

As the Prime Minister will presumably have seen the Secretary of State for Industry this morning and as that right hon. Gentleman has agreed that nationalisation of shipbuilding will involve some closure of shipyards and some redundancies, will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the agreement reached between the Government and the Scottish and Welsh Nationalists on Tuesday night involved any change in the distribution of jobs or redundancies between shipyards?

The right hon. Lady is a little out of date. I went to Largs in Scotland the week before Whit-sun when I was invited to address the annual conference of the Boilermakers Society. It represents a very important element in Scottish shipbuilding. I said there that the shipbuilding industry would need to be contracted. There was therefore no doubt in the mind of any Scottish nationalist or anyone else of what I had said in Scotland or of what the position is.

The Prime Minister has ignored the pith of the question. Did the agreement involve any change in the pattern of redundancies or jobs in shipyards?

I cannot answer that question—

Open government!

I am not prepared to be batted between the Scottish nationalists and the Tory Party's hatred of them. As far as I know—and I do not have the Conservative Party's briefing this week and am, therefore, at a disadvantage—the only undertaking that was given was that made by my right hon. Friend the Lord President when he wound up the debate. The Scottish nationalists found it convincing, much to the disappointment of the Conservatives, who must learn to bear these things with fortitude.

When my right hon. Friend is extolling free enterprise, will he remind the Conservatives that many, if not the majority, of the difficulties of British industry are due to the lack of investment because Conservative supporters will not invest in their much vaunted British industry, but invest in foreign industry instead? Will he ask them once again to put money into British industry?

I hope that as a result of the consultative document on the Price Code published yesterday and the very strict arrangements being made for monitoring prices, but in the light of the concessions which have been made, industries will invest more in order to create new jobs. Overseas investment is a complicated matter. Frequently a continuing investment overseas has to be made in order to maintain plant and machinery from profits which are not remitted to this country. But, having put that point, I do not take the view that there is no unnecessary overseas investment. Companies should review their overseas policies to see whether it is necessary to invest in those activities to maintain their share in overseas markets.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the Third Reading of the Aircraft and Shipbuilding Industries Bill has yet to be faced? Is he aware that the Scottish National Party expects the creation of a Scottish division autonomous beneath the Scottish Development Agency as a firm commitment from the Government?

The hon. Lady will not expect me to go any further than my right hon. Friend the Lord President. These will be matters for discussion during the remaining stages of the Bill when I am sure that we shall have a series of short, sharp and informative debates, as we had on the Education Bill yesterday.