asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, in view of the fact that over 100,000 animals are used each year in various forms of research and experimentation, whether he is satisfied that the employment of animals on such a scale is justified; and if he will provide information on the types of animals used and the nature of the experiments and tests to which they are subjected.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Before the Question is answered, may I point out that an error has crept in. The figure of "over 100,000 animals" should be "over 5 million animals".

My right hon. Friend's responsiblity is for the administration of the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876, under which 5,379,084 experiments were per- formed last year. The available information about these experiments is published in annual returns made to Parliament. We intend to provide more information in these returns as soon as new reporting arrangements can be introduced.

Does not my hon. Friend remember that the Littlewood Committee, which reported 11 years ago, recommended that the 1876 legislation should be revised? Does she recall that Little-wood recommended that in the meantime there should be no tinkering? Is it not the case that in those 11 years there has been a lot of tinkering but no legislation? Therefore, will not my hon. Friend agree and accept that this large amount of experimentation on animals is totally unacceptable? [HON. MEMBERS: "Too long."] How many inspectors—

Order. The hon. Gentleman will realise that he is setting a very bad example.

May I finish my sentence, Mr. Speaker? How many inspectors does my hon. Friend's Department employ to supervise these 5 million experiments?

The Cruelty to Animals Act is supervised by my right hon. Friend. It is constantly being reviewed. At the moment, the advisory committee is having its constitution and role re-examined. There are 14 inspectors who make approximately 5,000 visits a year. There is no reason to believe that the working of the Act is not satisfactory in supervising experiments carried out on animals.

The hon. Lady has stated that about 5,000 visits are made annually. Can more information be given about the information provided by these visits, and will the hon. Lady say whether any prosecutions have been mounted as a result of visits by the inspectors to any laboratory animals? If there have been such prosecutions, will the hon. Lady say when they took place?

I refer the hon. Gentleman to the latest annual report of the inspectorate entitled "Experiments on Living Animals". The last section of that report deals with the personnel in the inspectorate, the number of visits made and the irregularities brought to light by the inspectors.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will now propose some new initiatives to reduce drastically the number of immigrants entering Great Britain illegally.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what new measures he is taking to prevent illegal immigration into Great Britain.

The Immigration Service and the police are fully aware of the need to combat illegal entry. Both have established special units to counter this, and there is close cooperation with the authorities in neighbouring countries. While I am satisfied that all practicable and reasonable measures for countering illegal entry are taken, these measures and the resources devoted to them are kept under review.

In spite of that, is it not a fact that the scale of illegal immigration to this country is increasing? While I realise that it was the fault of the right hon. Gentleman's predecessor, may I ask why something more positive was not done by the Home Office? Was it really a question of incompetence, or was it rather the fact that for political considerations the Government have decided to turn a blind eye to this question?

There is no question of turning a blind eye to illegal entry. The hon. Gentleman talks about the scale of it. The way he talks is not in accordance with the advice I am given. He should be careful not to confuse illegal entry, which is a term of art in immigration, with the problem of overstaying in this country, which is a different matter. He is very wrong to talk about a lack of resources directed to illegal entry.

What steps is my right hon. Friend taking to improve interview procedures so that people who have a genuine right to enter the United Kingdom are not refused entry?

The interviewing takes place either here or in the country of origin. My hon. Friend will find that I have something to say in reply to a later Question about steps taken abroad. When people arrive here, if their documentation is weak the situation is extremely difficult, which is one of the reasons why it is very much better to interview before arrival at the port of entry.

Would the Home Secretary agree that the problem of overstaying is at least as great as that of illegal entry, and, indeed, may be greater? What proposals has he for dealing with this problem? In particular, has he any proposal for changing the law so as to enable immigration officials to require visitors from the Commonwealth to register with the police while they are lawfully here?

I certainly have not put my mind to that last point, but I recall that we considered it when I was a junior Minister in the Department. The first step is the control on entry, which marks us as different from Europe and the methods used there. I should not like to see, after that point, agents checking and checking in the way that the hon. Gentleman suggests, as is done in many parts of the Continent. I am concerned about the problem of overstaying, because it fuels many of the arguments that are used by people who have different arguments to put. We shall do anything we can in that direction, but I shall not turn to a European system of checking.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why the number of Commonwealth immigrants into this country was nearly 16,000 in the first six months of this year compared with 14,500 in the corresponding period of 1975.

The figures relate to the numbers of Commonwealth citizens, including non-patrial United Kingdom passport holders, accepted for settlement on arrival in the United Kingdom. The increase was mainly due to the speeding up in the Indian subcontinent of the rate of issue of entry clearances to wives and children waiting to join heads of household already settled in the United Kingdom.

Is the Home Secretary aware that these figures will cause considerable concern to large sectors of our population who had hoped to see a reduction rather than an increase? Is he aware that when the present Prime Minister was Home Secretary the rate of immigration had dropped to 37,000 per annum, and that it is now rising higher than the 53,000 per annum of last year?

With regard to total figures, one must look very carefully at what the individual figures mean. In the first half of 1976—to take a precise figure which I have here—669 more wives and 785 more children were admitted as a result of the speed-up. Having read the debates that have taken place here, I think we should get away from the idea of a pool which grows bigger and bigger. That cannot be the case. It is much better for us all if we can reduce the pool quickly.

The only unrestricted immigration into this country today is from the EEC countries. In addition, 6,000 work permits are issued to the catering trade for foreign nationals to come here to work, and the number of Filipino girls coming into this country mainly for domestic work is increasing all the time. Would it not therefore be better, when we are discussing immigration questions, to deal with the whole area of immigration and not concentrate on coloured immigration, which does not help the race situation in Britain?

There is no doubt that the number of people coming here from the Commonwealth with work permits has fallen to almost nothing. The figures that my hon. Friend gave in respect of Europe and the rest of the world are far more meaningful.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the real worry about the pool of dependants in the Indian subcontinent is that the size of the pool is totally unknown? Until it is known, can it be wise or right to speed up the numbers of those coming from that sub-continent?

Allowing the dependants of people settled here to come cannot increase the pool. When I came to the Department I found that the Franks Com- mittee was looking at this matter and, as I shall have reason to say later, I understand that the report is finished. I believe that the best thing now is to look at the Franks Committee's report. I have not read the report, but it cannot possibly resolve all the questions that need to be asked about this. However, it will be available shortly.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what was the total number of convictions for murder in the most recent annual period for which figures are available; and by what percentage this total exceeds or is less than the comparable figure 5, 10 and 15 years previously, respectively.F

There were 107 persons found guilty of murder in England and Wales in 1975. This represents an increase of 10 per cent. on the figure for 1970, 88 per cent. on the figure for 1965 and 155 per cent. on the figure for 1960.

In view of those disturbing and alarming figures, showing an increase in murder convictions of 155 per cent. in the past 15 years since the introduction of the Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act, does the Minister think that it would be right for the House of Commons to reconsider the whole issue of capital punishment once again very soon?

The House of Commons has on a number of occasions considered this. I believe that the last occasion was in December 1975 when, on a free vote, with support from all parties, it was thought right that the death penalty should not be reintroduced; and that is my personal view.

In considering the issue of capital punishment, will my hon. Friend bear in mind my constituent Ronald Leighton in the Confait case, who was found guilty of murder in 1972 and whose conviction was quashed three years later? Is it not wise to bear in mind that convictions of murder in our courts do not always correspond to what actually happened?

As my hon. Friend and the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Taylor) will know, we have always said that conviction rates are not a reliable indicator of the incidence of murder. To quote but one example, if three persons are involved in one murder there could be three convictions, and that gives a false picture. The more important point that my hon. Friend makes is that the finality of the death penalty means that when mistakes are made they are irrevocable. I think that all of us would hesitate very long before having any one of those mistakes on our conscience.

Can the Minister tell the House whether there is any reason to believe that with the abolition of capital punishment there have been more convictions for murder rather than convictions on diminished charges?

That is one of the things that statistics by themselves do not show. It may be possible that that is so. Another factor may be the introduction of majority verdicts by the Criminal Justice Act 1967.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is satisfied with the present methods of dealing with young offenders.

The Government's views on this subject were set out in the White Paper, Cmnd. 6494, containing their observations on the report from the Expenditure Committee on the Children and Young Persons Act 1969, which was published in May. They include a number of proposals for strengthening the law, consultations on which are now proceeding.

Is it not clear by now that the juvenile courts should have power to order that persistent offenders should be kept in secure accommodation when they are placed in the care of local authorities? Is it not equally clear that it is wrong that faceless officials of the social services departments should have more power than the courts to decide the fate of certain offenders?

I am not sure in this field. I have been at it for only a short while, but after a time I should be able to talk with more certainty about these points. Indeed, I feel that in such matters the less certain one is the nearer to wisdom one gets. There is a problem of a small number—a minority—of particularly difficult and recidivist juvenile offenders. It is a matter of resources in one aspect. There is a problem about the relationship of the bench to social workers—I would not call them faceless—and in the Department we should like to do all we can with our colleagues in the Department of Health and Social Security as soon as possible.

Will my right hon. Friend accept that it is not satisfactory to remand to Prison Service establishments over 5,000 schoolchildren every year? With regard to young offenders generally, would not my right hon. Friend also agree that incarceration in penal establishments does not in any way affect their reconviction rate and that what we need, if we are to deal effectively with the problem, are far more imaginative alternatives than are being pursued at the moment?

Imagination and alternative methods of sentencing—this is the view I have formed in the short time that I have been looking at the issue—are undoubtedly matters that we should all consider. But that does not invalidate one of the major problems that comes to my notice every day concerning a small number of recidivist young people who are remarkable for the things they do. Imagination is not the answer to that problem.

Does not the Home Secretary agree that it is time that teeth were given to the powers of magistrates to deal with the recidivist hard-core offenders about whom he is talking? What efforts have been made by his Department to reallocate some of the resources that are available to it for the provision of secure establishments where discipline is an important factor in the treatment of those young offenders?

Before my time in the Department, steps were taken with grant aid to do something in that respect. If the hon. Gentleman has any ideas with regard to the law, I shall be pleased to listen to him. I hope, if all goes well—I cannot say more than that—at least to make some marginal changes in the law, if possible in the next Session.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has asked for a full report on incidents leading to the arrest of eight pickets outside the Grunwick film processing factory in North-West London; and if he will make a statement.

The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis tells me that the nine people who were arrested by the police on 1st November have not yet been dealt with by the courts. It would, therefore, not be appropriate for me to comment.

On a more general theme, does not my right hon. Friend agree that it is a scandal that in all these industrial incidents that take place year after year it is invariably those who are defending the rights of the workers who get arrested? Is it not high time that instructions or directives were given to the police to the effect that they have a duty to see that those in management who are paying low wages and twisting the employment laws of this country are tackled as well—and tackled first?

As long as it is understood that I am not talking about the case that my hon. Friend raised, I can say that generally there is a problem in this respect. I have always found in my own area that a great deal can be done by discussion and sorting-out in the first instance. I cannot comment on the case my hon. Friend has raised.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will seek to introduce arrangements for people who give up colour television to receive a proportionate refund on the unexpired portion of their licence.

No, Sir. The grounds on which refunds may be given must be limited if the licensing system is not to become unmanageable.

Is the Minister aware that this situation is unfair, especially to elderly people who have been forced to give up their colour television sets due to financial hardship? Apart from the Obvious analogy with motor licences, which are refundable, can the Minister explain why it is apparently administratively possible to allow a refund on the unexpired portion of a black-and-white television licence when a move is made upwards to colour but not when the move is in the other direction?

Hon. Members should realise that the licensing system was introduced because of its simplicity and that that is one of the ways in which we are able to keep television licence fees down. The more exceptions there are, the dearer will be the licence fees. The answer to the hon. Gentleman's specific point is that colour licences cover monochrome reception whereas the reverse is not the case.

Will my hon. Friend look at a related problem—that the British Broadcasting Corporation is obtaining money under false pretences by regularly showing old films which are not in colour but is charging a colour licence fee? Further, does my hon. Friend realise that the BBC is paying for these old films, imported from America, in hard currency? Is he further aware that licence-holders are threatened with a further increase in fees at a time when two-thirds of the films shown on television are in black and white? Can he stop this obtaining of money by false pretences on the part of the BBC?

I do not think it is for Members to question repetition. No doubt it is due to my age, but, frankly, I think that some of the black and white films that are shown are infinitely superior to some of the other, more recently made films, about which I receive complaints from Conservative Members.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there are ugly rumours of a massive increase in the colour licence fee? Will the Home Secretary resist such a move with all his strength? If he feels that he needs the support of the House, will he seek an opportunity for a debate before any increase in the colour licence fee is announced?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary will be grateful for such support as he can get on any matter. My answer is that rumours are rumours, and until we deal with facts we cannot comment.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will take action in consultation with the police authorities to combat the problem of disorder and violence among football supporters.

I am in touch with chief officers of police about methods of controlling football hooliganism. I also plan to meet representatives of the football organisations, and am keeping in touch with the other Ministers concerned.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that in towns such as Derby there is mounting despair at the depredations of hooligans masquerading as football supporters? Will he also bear in mind that, as this is a national problem, it is for him to co-ordinate methods by which it can be tackled? To fine such people amounts that they can pay next day or to send them to prison at public expense is not the whole answer. Will my right hon. Friend enter into consultations with the public transport services and the football clubs to see that these people are deprived of entry into football games and transport to matches, since this would he a more severe penalty for many of them?

I agree with much of what my hon. Friend says. I live alongside a football ground. Conditions are bad for people who live in those areas. I have met right hon. and hon. Friends in other Departments who span the responsibilities. I have met the chief constables, and I hope to take further steps early in the new year.

Does the Home Secretary agree that a large part of the problem is caused by pre-match drinking? What steps is he taking to deal with that part of the problem?

I have discussed this matter with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport. For a start, there are problems about the rules for having a drink on buses. It is not as easy as I thought when I discussed the matter with my right hon. Friend. For example, a group travelling from the North to south of Birmingham to visit Anne Hathaway's cottage would not be a football crowd. If they stopped off at Aston Villa on the way there would be nothing to prevent them having a drink on board. There are little problems such as that. But we are looking at the whole matter.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will introduce legislation to increase the penalties for crimes of vandalism.

Offences described as vandalism are usually prosecuted under the Criminal Damage Act 1971. The penalties range up to a maximum of 10 years imprisonment on conviction on indictment for most offences. I am satisfied that in general they are adequate. However, the maximum fine available on summary conviction would fall to be increased in the light of the recommendations of the James Committee, which I have under consideration.

Is the Home Secretary satisfied that the present penalties act as a deterrent?

That is a different matter. Dealing with what can be done under the Criminal Damage Act, if we can do something about fines it will improve the situation. But that is a different matter from my arguing, whether or not one doubles fines, that they necessarily act as a deterrent. It is a much more subtle matter.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the greatest causes of vandalism is the excruciating boredom suffered by young people in cities such as Leicester who have nothing to do with their time when they have finished school? When considering that problem, will he do his best to see that there is increased provision and help for youth clubs and other facilities for young people?

That is important. Unemployment plays a part in this, together with the planning of estates. Having said that, judging from reports produced by the Home Office he would be a brave chap who would say that those facts alone explain the growth of vandalism in the last quarter of a century.

The penalties seem appropriate. Would it not be possible for the Home Secretary to persuade the magistrates to use them?

That is a different matter because, whatever else comes to the Home Office, I have no power to control what the magistrates do.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will extend postal voting for parish and town councils.

No, Sir. The extra costs Involved could not be justified in present circumstances.

Would not the Minister agree that it is desirable to make it as easy as possible for people to participate in parish elections, and that as the same ballot papers can be used for town and parish elections as for district elections the extra cost would be very limited? Therefore, should not amending legislation be introduced?

I believe that one could do something to combine the necessary forms. Nevertheless, the hon. Gentleman is mistaken in thinking that the amount of extra expenditure would be inconsiderable. With the present evidence of turn-out at these elections, it would not be justified.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that there is dissatisfaction when postal votes are available for district council elections but not for parish and town council elections, which are often held on the same day? Can he tell us what the increased cost would be? There is mounting concern about this. If we want to extend democracy, we should do everything possible to enable people to participate in all elections.

I accept that our aim is to make participation in local elections as widespread as is possible and to take account of the problem. But because there would be differing postal registrations, even were I to accede to the principle which hon. Gentlemen have proclaimed this afternoon, there would still be a great opportunity not only for mistakes in counting but confusion in registration.

Following the Minister's argument about low turn-out, am I right in assuming that there will be no postal voting in the unhappy event of our having to go through direct elections to the European Parliament? The turn-out for that is likely to be even lower than in the worst boroughs in this country.

What the hon. Gentleman and I may speculate about the turn-out at those elections would perhaps not be universally accepted in the House.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement about the progress of the community service in West Sussex.

Community service arrangements already exist in six out of the nine petty sessions areas. An extension to the other three has been under consideration, but we cannot provide resources additional to those contained in the last rate support grant settlement.

Will the Minister recognise that the purpose of community service is that people who have been found guilty of an offence should carry out their sentences in the service of the community instead of being sent to prison, at a considerable saving of cost to the public in general? Therefore, is it not common sense to extend the service to those three other parts of West Sussex, including Horsham and Crawley, which are in my constituency, at a considerable saving in cost to the general public? Surely this is one matter at which the Minister should look again.

The hon. Gentleman is right in saying that community service arrangements are valuable. That is why in 53 out of the 56 probation areas in England and Wales community service arrangements exist. As regards saving by making community service an alternative to imprisonment, the diversion of comparatively few people to community service orders would not reduce the overheads which have to be borne by prison establishments. Only if a sufficiently large number were diverted from imprisonment to community service orders so that some prison accommodation could be closed would a saving be possible. I do not believe that that is what the hon. Gentleman is advocating in his Question.

Is my hon. Friend aware that information reaching me from South Yorkshire suggests that the community service order arrangement has proved to be extremely successful and is to be welcomed? In view of that experience, which I think is fairly common, will my hon. Friend ensure the further rapid development of these community service arrangements?

My hon. Friend will know that there are exigencies of public expenditure, but within that limit we are satisfied with the development of the community service projects and I am pleased to note that my hon. Friend has that happy experience from his own part of the world.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many overseas visitors have been charged with and convicted of shoplifting in the United Kingdom during the last 12 months for which records are available.

I regret that the information is not available: the statistics do not record the country of origin of offenders.

As it is well known that, unfortunately, visitors from overseas figure prominently in the number of shoplifters who are rightly convicted, will my hon. Friend warn such people that they are not at all welcome here on that basis? At the same time, as the Christmas shopping and shoplifting season approaches, will he warn people from overseas and in this country of the grave danger in this country of being wrongly charged with shoplifting?

I recognise that my hon. and learned Friend has taken a deep interest in this subject over many years. I deprecate shoplifting, whether it be by over- seas visitors or people in this country. I am not xenophobic in that regard.

Will the Minister accept that there is a wholly different set of circumstances between what pertains in the West End of London and in other towns and cities, where many individual tragedies take place on wrongful conviction due to the trading methods of self-service stores? Will the Minister look again at his own Home Office working party's report, and if stores will not take the preventive measures recommended in that report will he consider introducing legislation to force them to do so?

I have knowledge of vases in my constituency in which tragedies of the kind mentioned by the hon. Gentleman have taken place. The report itself did not recommend any Government action. It was directed at the stores and the reform of their trading methods. If the hon. Gentleman would care to submit any evidence which he has in his possession, I will certainly look at it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what basis the level of grant aid for the fire services is determined; and what flexibility this allows to meet emergencies.

Estimated expenditure on the fire service is among the estimates of relevant local authority expenditure taken into account by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment in determining the amount of the rate support grant.

Is the Minister aware that in my county of Gwynedd alone, £100,000 extra was spent by the fire service this year due to the effect of the drought on its work? Will the hon. Lady give an absolute commitment that in the rate support grant allocation next year extra funds will be available to make up for those expenses?

I am aware that in many parts of the country there has been greatly increased expenditure due to the drought. The possibility of increasing next year's grant to take account of heavy fire service expenditure this year has been considered in the context of the need to avoid increases in local authority expenditure next year. As the House knows, on Monday 22nd November my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment will announce the Government's decision on the amount of rate support grant for 1977–78.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations he has received urging his responsibility for the fixing of summer time to be devolved to the proposed Scottish and Welsh Assemblies in respect of those parts of the United Kingdom.

None, Sir.

Does the hon. Lady realise that this unwanted proposal in the White Paper to devolve responsibility for summer time to the Scottish and Welsh Assemblies must be one of the silliest decisions made by the present Government? Does she realise that if the Assemblies used those powers and if she wished to drive from Cardiff to Edinburgh she might have to correct her watch twice during the course of the journey? Will the hon. Lady withdraw the proposal now rather than force the House to have a lengthy debate on the subject in the coming months?

The hon. Gentleman is anticipating a decision of the Scottish and Welsh Assemblies which has not yet been taken. It must not be assumed that the devolution of responsibility for summer time would mean that those Assemblies would decide to have different periods.

The Minister may not agree about the outcome of devolving responsibility for summer time, but does she agree that at least the economic climate in Scotland will be better?

Does my hon. Friend realise that this is a bizarre proposal? Is she aware that it could mean that the 10 o'clock news in London would be heard at 9 o'clock in Cardiff and at 11 o'clock in Edinburgh? If the idea of devolution is to unite the people of Britain, this is not the way to do it. Will my hon. Friend deny the report that if the proposal were accepted there would be a national supply of cuckoo clocks?

I can only repeat that no decision to that effect has been taken by Assemblies that haw, not yet even been set up. No doubt those Assemblies, when they consider the subject, will take into consideration the difficulties put forward by hon. Members.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what new steps he proposes to take to ensure compliance with the conditions upon which visas are granted to immigrant students.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will ensure that no applicant seeking to enter the United Kingdom on a student's visa is permitted to do so until he has produced satisfactory evidence that he is able to benefit from the course for which he has applied.

The immigration rules for control on entry, laid before Parliament, require a person seeking entry for study in the United Kingdom to satisfy the officer to whom he applies of, among other matters, his ability to follow a full-time course of study. The rules for control after entry impose similar requirements on anyone seeking an extension of stay as a student. We have no plans for further controls.

Is it not a fact that in recent years there has been an alarming growth in the number of overseas students who have come to this country and opted out of their courses soon after arriving? Would it not be right for the Home Office, the Department of Education and Science and local authorities to start monitoring this aspect very urgently?

We certainly have it in mind to seek the co-operation of colleges in resolving the difficulties mentioned by the hon. Gentleman and drawing the attention of principals of colleges to the value of entry clearance being obtained by students before they come to this country.

Does my hon. Friend realise that many of us who are interested in education in the interests of developing countries believe that many, though not all, courses are best given in the developing countries themselves? To what extent does the Home Office take that into account in deciding whether a visa should be given for training in this country?

The absence of sufficient courses in developing countries is a matter for another of my right hon. or hon. Friends. The courses in this country are either language courses or other educational courses for people from foreign or Commonwealth countries.

Will the hon. Lady assure the House that entry under a student visa is always governed by considerations of genuine aptitude and ability and that there are no loopholes in this system through which illegal immigrants can come?

This is why we have definite immigration rules for control on entry and why we are making every effort to see that the rules are adhered to.

Will my hon. Friend tell the House that not only are there these rules but there is also a very strict interpretation of them by entry certificate officers, to the point where even genuine students with a full course arranged, and with maintenance also arranged, cannot obtain entry into the country because it is suspected that they may not leave at the end of their course?

If my hon. Friend can send me particulars of the specific cases to which he refers, I shall certainly look into them.

Leaving aside the procedures for entry, what machinery does the Home Office have for monitoring the requirements for an extension of courses or applications for permission to stay after the expiry of a right of stay, and is that monitoring regularly applied?

It is certainly applied regularly. The same conditions apply to the student extending his course as to the student coming in. Because we are anxious to see that the rules are adhered to, we co-operate fully with the Department of Education and Science.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what pro- gress his Department has made in implementing the recommendations contained in the Eleventh Report of the Expenditure Committee on the working of the Children and Young Persons Act 1969.

The Government's response to the Expenditure Committee's recommendations was given in the White Paper published last May, Cmnd. 6494. The proposals contained in it concern a number of Government Departments. On a number of those which are primarily the concern of my Department, consultations and, where appropriate, other preparatory work are well in hand.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware, however, that of the 40 recommendations in the report at least 13 are the direct responsibility of the Home Office, four have been rejected outright, one has been carried out and the remaining eight are still under consideration 14 months after the report was published? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the real concern amongst those dealing with juvenile offenders, and can he inject some sense of urgency into his Department?

It was for this reason that I met the Magistrates' Association and others a few weeks ago, and I hope that, not on the points of rejection but on other points, we shall have announcements to make soon.

When will the remanding of schoolchildren to Prison Service establishments be ended?

As soon as I can do it, because I think that it is wrong. But it is not enough to think that it is wrong. We need the proper resources, and they are not available to enable me to do what I want to do.

When the Home Secretary met the representatives of the Magistrates' Association, did they tell him that they were concerned about a lack of facilities to keep violent young offenders under control, and did they urge him to provide more of these facilities?

Yes, they did. I made that point earlier in Question Time.