asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on progress in political terms in reconciling the different views held by elements in both sections of the community.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland which political groups in Northern Ireland he has met since becoming Secretary of State to date; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he has now completed his round of talks with the political parties in Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement.

Since taking office I have met all the principal political groups in Northern Ireland. In recent weeks I have had further discussions with the Official Unionist Party, the Social Democratic and Labour Party, the Democratic Unionist Party, the Alliance Party, and the Unionist Party of Northern Ireland.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that since everything that we have suggested has borne so little fruit, the only thing that we can do is to tell the people of Northern Ireland who have dismissed our initiatives that the solutions must come from them and that they must be on the basis of co-determination? To this extent, will he consider whether we could have some form of non-legislative devolution to get people together to talk? I have even heard it suggested that we could open the bar at Stormont so that the various political factions could talk together.

I am willing to listen to any suggestion that emanates from the ideas of the political parties in Northern Ireland. There were discussions on administrative devolution, but if devolution is to be right and proper, and respected in Northern Ireland, it must be in such a form that there is real power and responsibility for the local politicians concerned.

Does the Secretary of State recall that during the last Northern Ireland Question Time he stated that the official Unionist Party leadership was unwilling to move and was imposing a veto on political movement by its attitude? Will he tell the House whether any willingness was shown by the SDLP to move from its entrenched position, even on such matters as recognition and support for the RUC and the constitution of the Irish Republic?

On one side there is the mentality of not moving an inch and wanting to abide only by the majority Convention report, but on the other side I hope to see some flexibility by the SDLP in its thinking about the rôle of its representatives.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise that political institutions are a means not of reconciling differences but of enabling people to live with their differences, and that it is just as unreasonable to make agreements between parties the condition of devolution to Northern Ireland as it would be to make agreements between the two Front Benches the condition of the functioning of parliamentary democracy in this country?

As the right hon. Gentleman knows, my job is not to impose any solutions on Northern Ireland. I want to assist the parties concerned to reconcile their differences. If I can see a willingness for reconciliation between the majority and the minority communities and the emanation of the germ of an idea on some form of devolution, I shall be only too pleased to assist.

Reverting to the suggestion of the hon. Member for Brigg and Scunthorpe (Mr. Ellis), does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the absence of any organised forum encourages an entrenched mentality and outlook? Therefore, will he consider setting up a political forum that can discuss the subject of Ulster? That would be of great importance.

I wonder whether the time is opportune for that. I suppose that the hon. Gentleman will know, as he watches the Irish scene, that one of the reasons why there is not a willingness on the part of political parties to move from their entrenched positions is that in eight months' time local government elections will take place. The parties are now building their political platforms and making sure that their electorate can see that they have clear-cut policies—

Does the right hon. Gentleman not do that too?

and therefore the parties feel that if they were to talk it might cloud the issues that they want to get across to their electors.

rose—

Order. I shall allow three more supplementary questions, but that means that we shall have to go more quickly on subsequent Questions.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that it is still Government policy, supported by the Opposition and all hon. Members, to try to establish in Northern Ireland political institutions that will have the support of the whole community? Will he confirm that there is no possibility of this Government or their successors—in so far as my right hon. Friend can speak for them—returning to a one-party ascendancy Government in Northern Ireland, which will bring with it all the troubles that have led to the present deteriorating situation?

I hope that I have made it clear beyond a shadow of doubt to the official Unionist Party in Northern Ireland that there will not be a return to a one-party State. I have endeavoured to establish that clearly in the minds of all the politicians who have been to see me in recent weeks. Devolved government in Northern Ireland must provide for the participation and partnership of representatives of both communities.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not losing sight of the main object of democratic government, which is the right of people to elect those whom they wish to elect? Are the Government not standing against one of the most primitive of human rights—that of people electing their own Government? Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that this is more important than his imposing from the top what he believes to be right?

The people of Northern Ireland do elect their own representatives, and most of them are sitting on the Opposition side in this House. Those hon. Members form Northern Ireland's parliamentary representation. The Unionists and the SDLP are talking about the political gap between local government elections and Parliament. That gap has to be filled.

In order to cut through Government humbug and political confusion in Northern Ireland, will the right hon. Gentleman consider, as a step towards restoring democracy to the Province, allowing Northern Ireland Committees to sit in the Stormont so that the people of Northern Ireland can at least see democracy in action there?

I would not give consideration to that suggestion just yet. I hope that the hon. Gentleman is not accusing me and my Ministers of political humbug. At least we are giving a decisive lead to the people of Northern Ireland, which is more than the hon. Gentleman and some of his friends are doing.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ire- land what is the present level of unemployment in the Province; and what percentage of those out of work are in the 16 to 30 years age group.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement about unemployment among school leavers in Northern Ireland.

The total number unemployed in Northern Ireland in February of this year was 56,660, or 10·7 per cent. of all employees. Age analyses of the unemployed are produced on a quarterly basis and only for broad age bands; the most recent information shows that in December 1976, 65 per cent. of the unemployed were in the 16 to 34 age group.

I am grateful for those figures, although I was not able to take them in as well as I had wished. Does the Minister agree that it is clear that there are large numbers of people in this age group who are still out of work and that it is from this group that recruitment for terrorism takes place? What initiatives has the Department of Manpower Services taken to help these people obtain a proper training, and is the Minister satisfied with the number of skillcentres in Northern Ireland?

I am satisfied with the number of Government training centres in Northern Ireland. We have 14 centres there, which, in proportion to the size of the population and the number of people being dealt with, is 10 times greater than the provision in Great Britain. We therefore have reason to be satisfied. Several schemes to alleviate unemployment have been undertaken, and some are specifically aimed at young people, including, for instance, the youth employment subsidy. Other measures, such as the job release scheme and the temporary employment subsidy, are intended to alleviate unemployment in all age groups. This is a long-lasting problem in Northern Ireland, because some basic industries have declined in recent years and it has been difficult to get new investment, partly because of the troubles.

Cannot some improvement be discerned, despite the continuation of recessionary conditions? How many places are available at the sustantial number of training centres in Northern Ireland, and is the figure an improvement on previous years?

We are always willing to consider new ways of helping to deal with the problem. For instance, we are now training people on factory premises. We have a good record in this respect in Northern Ireland.

In support of what my hon. Friend the Member for Newbury (Mr. McNair-Wilson) said in his supplementary question, may I ask whether the Minister is prepared to consider the introduction of what might be called a Young Ulster Community Service, to provide for all young people after they leave school beneficial alternatives to unemployment, crime and para-military activities? Would not the expenditure required on such a service help to bring order and peace, and thus prove a true economy?

I am prepared to consider any scheme for getting school leavers into jobs. There are a number of schemes in Northern Ireland in respect of which we are well ahead of the rest of Great Britain with such provision. I am continuing to examine this problem and I shall consider any suggestion.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he intends to amend the Mental Health Act (Northern Ireland) 1961 making it a statutory obligation to inform a patient in a Northern Ireland mental hospital that he or she has been categorised as an informal patient and is free to leave the hospital at will.

No, Sir.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that one in four mental health cases in Northern Ireland is admitted compulsorily under the emergency procedure and that this is detrimental to the rights of individuals? Is he aware of the concern about the emergency procedure and about the need for Northern Ireland's Mental Health Act 1961 to be brought into line with the United Kingdom's 1959 Act? Does he agree that before electroconvulsive therapy is applied the permission of a patient or his nearest relative ought to be obtained? Does he—

Order. I know that the hon. Gentleman is a fellow Methodist preacher, but he is going on a bit.

I am aware of the hon. Gentleman's interest in this subject and of the correspondence that he has had with my noble Friend. He will be aware that procedures exist to meet the point that he is making and, probably more important, the 1961 Act is under review and it is possible that statutory measures may be taken to meet the other points that the hon. Gentleman was making.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that relatives and next of kin should have a stronger influence on decisions affecting the extent and form of treatment of mental patients?

Next of kin are informed at the same time as patients when a formal stage is reached in a patient's residence in an institution.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he intends to introduce legislation in Northern Ireland to ban the sale of cigarettes and tobacco products to children under 16 years of age.

Legislation on this matter is currently under consideration, but I am unable to be more definite until all necessary consultations have been completed.

Is the Minister aware that his statement will be welcomed by many people in Northern Ireland? Extra measures have been announced in the House this week. Does the Minister agree that it is important that he should remove this anomaly? Is it not disgraceful that Northern Ireland should be the only part of the United Kingdom where sales of cigarette and tobacco products can still be made legally to children under the age of 16?

I am aware of all that the hon. Member has said, but it will be up to the people of Northern Ireland to decide whether they want to come into line with the rest of the United Kingdom. We welcome observations on this issue from the hon. Member and from anybody in Northern Ireland.

I am not pro-smoking, but have the police in Northern Ireland not got enough to do without the introduction of legislation of this kind?

We are not simply talking of dealing with the matter in this way. Perhaps parents would be influenced if we had some legislation on the statute book. That is always possible.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is his policy towards the representation of Northern Ireland in the Council of Europe and in the institutions of the European Economic Community.

The United Kingdom's representation in the European Assembly of the EEC and in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe is organised on a parliamentary basis.

Is it not completely wrong that Northern Ireland is not represented on either of these bodies when, for instance, Luxembourg, with only one quarter of the population of Northern Ireland, has six Members of Parliament on each of these international bodies? Is the Minister satisfied that the Northern Ireland case is not going by default in international circles?

I am happy at the results that we have been obtaining, in Northern Ireland terms. I am fully involved, as are Ministers in other Departments and our officials, at a high level. I am satisfied that Northern Ireland interests are not going by default.

The House will be pleased that the whole ministerial team is present in the Chamber and in the other place today. That must be unique, and it suggests that the Northern Ireland situation is improving. Is my hon. Friend aware of the dangers inherent in the question by the hon. Member for Harborough (Mr. Farr)? It tends to suggest that Ulster should have independent and separate representation. Is he aware that there are some people who would go along with that idea and perhaps would like to see the Province in the Republic? If we are one Parliament and one people, should we not be satisfied with the situation?

I accept my hon. Friend's analysis. The first part of my hon. Friend's question was observant, as usual. Even Northern Ireland Ministers cannot be in two places at once.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what steps have been taken to fortify and secure Kilcleen post cross roads on the outskirts of Castlederg.

We are urgently looking at the whole problem of improving the security of the area around Castlederg. The Kilcleen border crossing forms a vital part of this. The study is expected to be completed shortly, and I shall write to the hon. Member in reply to his recent letter to inform him of any action that the security forces are taking as a result.

Is the Secretary of State aware that this is an open road and an approved route from the Republic into Northern Ireland, and that it has been frequently used by the IRA to shoot up the local police station that is situated on the road? Is he aware that a 200-lb bomb was delivered to the centre of Castlederg on 29th December via that road? Does he agree that there is little Army activity on the road? Is he aware that there is little risk of British soldiers being brought to court for straying over the border in the Castlederg area, because there are not many soldiers there? Will the Secretary of State undertake to visit this much-bombed town in the near future, along with the town of Strabane, which has been equally heavily bombed?

May I appeal to hon. Members? It is not fair to others lower down on the Order Paper if we do not have shorter questions and answers.

I shall consider the hon. Member's suggestion. This is an approved crossing that is used for Customs purposes as well, and that makes the situation more difficult. I have asked for a report from security officials and I shall see what I can do to improve security there.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what new plans he is putting forward to encourage integrated education in Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will convene a conference to consider integrated education in Northern Ireland.

My noble Friend the Minister of State has nearly completed the process of taking soundings from interested bodies on this matter. The suggestion that a conference should be held on the subject is still being considered.

Why do the Government not shelve their unwanted and outdated plans for more comprehensive schools and concentrate their minds on breaking down the religious barriers in education? That would be more worth while.

Both those matters are the subject of continuing consultation.

Does the Minister recall that the former Secretary of State promised a conference on this matter? Will he at least set up a working party seriously to consider the idea? Does the Minister agree that in the special context of Northern Ireland it is extraordinary that the Cowan Report on comprehensive education hardly mentions the subject, despite the fact that the, latest public opinion poll revealed that 86 per cent. of the people of Northern Ireland want it, including 65 per cent. of the Roman Catholic population?

Everyone doubts the forecasts that are made by opinion polls. All I can say is that this is a sensitive subject and that consultations are being carried out. On the basis of the evidence derived from those consultations we shall consider whether a conference or perhaps even a working party should be established.

Is the Minister aware that everybody that I have spoken to in the education world wants this conference to be held as soon as possible? Why is there this delay in holding the conference?

The hon. Member cannot have been listening to my answers to the previous two questions. We are having consultations. They began only last autumn, and there are other people and organisations to be seen. Until we have seen everybody nothing definitive will be said by my right hon. Friend on the subject.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement about the effect on employment of the temporary employment subsidy scheme in Northern Ireland.

From its inception on 18th August 1975 until 25th February 1977 the temporary employment subsidy scheme has safeguarded almost 12,500 jobs—representing approximately 2·5 per cent. of employees in employment.

I thank the Minister for that reply. Does he accept that the scheme is imaginative and that it will provide some stability in a difficult industrial situation in Northern Ireland? Is he satisfied that all the firms that might qualify for the subsidy appreciate that they can obtain this assistance? Will he ensure that the scheme is as widely publicised as possible throughout the Province?

My hon. Friend will be interested to know that 119 Northern Ireland concerns have received assistance. A total of 56 of those are in the clothing manufacturing industry, 21 are in the electronics and engineering industries, 15 in textiles and the remaining 27 in nine other industries. I am satisfied that the firms are aware of the scheme.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he is satisfied that the law as it stands is adequate to deal with terrorism.

In general, yes, Sir. We continue to study ways of improving our legal armoury but, as I have previously indicated to the House, we do not lack offences under existing law. More and more terrorists and their supporters are being brought before the courts, and it would be wrong to alter trial procedure in any way that would compromise basic standards of justice.

Does the Minister accept that, although we agree in general that the Secretary of State has a formidable armoury of legislation, greater use could be made of certain aspects of legislation? Will he consider granting the RUC and Army officers powers, similar to those given to customs officers, to confiscate vehicles entering the United Kingdom by unapproved routes?

The hon. Member has asked about a point of detail that I am prepared to consider. However, I do not want to do anything that will undermine the present law in Northern Ireland. The RUC is now receiving a great deal of respect and esteem and it is proving to be very effective. Its record is good and its morale high. Above all, the law is fair and it is seen to be fair. I do not want to change the law in any way that would indicate to the Northern Ireland people that it is being bent.

I agree that good results have been obtained by the security forces in recent times, but is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we are disappointed with his letter of 23rd February, rejecting our plan for a specific offence of terrorism? Is he further aware that in that letter he did not deal with the Explosive Substances Act, which lays down a maximum penalty of 14 years' imprisonment? Would it not be better if bombers, those who manage bomb factories and those who hide bombers were liable to a maximum penalty of life imprisonment? Bomb making is an act of terrorism with which the right hon. Gentleman did not deal in his letter.

The hon. Gentleman and the House will be aware that the idea of creating an offence of terrorism has been examined several times and rejected. The prosecution would have to demonstrate that there was political intent. That would raise again the question of political prisoners. We have moved away from that. The ending of special category prisoners and detention has made that clear. Secondly, almost every act associated with terrorism is a crime and is therefore punishable. I do not see any reason why we should try to single out one act of terrorism, or present terrorism as an offence in its own right.

Will the right hon. Gentleman deal with my specific point about the Explosive Substances Act as it relates to bombers? Does he appreciate that the maximum penalty is only 14 years' imprisonment and that judges complain bitterly because they cannot sentence people more heavily?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that there is an order pending which deals with the offence of hoax bombers. I shall take into consideration what he has said.

Is the Secretary of State aware that his comments will afford little comfort to the wives and families of business men who are waiting to become the next targets? Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that there is no substiute for stopping these reprobates before they murder business men and the security forces?

I am sure that the comments of the hon. Gentleman will have helped. They are typical of one of the few politicians in Northern Ireland who speak in that fashion but who will not give any help to the communities as a whole. Such comments provide propaganda aid for terrorists whom we are intent upon denouncing. As for the prominent citizens whom the hon. Member has mentioned and who seem to be coming under attack—

Seem to be?

Recently a number of people have come under attack. They are the soft targets. We have increased our surveillance, but it is difficult trying to cover everyone in the Province.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many deaths and woundings have taken place in Northern Ireland as a result of terrorism during the first two months of 1977; and what were the equivalent figures in each of the last four years.

In the first two months of this year 26 people were killed and 245 injured in Northern Ireland as a result of violence. The comparable figures for the first two months of each of the previous four years are: in 1976, 74 killed and 479 injured; in 1975, 27 killed and 215 injured; in 1974, 34 killed and 348 injured; and in 1973, 54 killed and 397 injured.

The House will be grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for that information, which shows that the numbers of deaths and injuries this year are significantly lower than in previous years, but will he enlarge upon the answer he gave a moment ago about the surveillance that is being given to members of the business community in Northern Ireland, particularly in view of the new wave of terror that is afflicting that section of the community?

I hope that the hon. Gentleman will not give credence to the terrorists' campaign or help to publicise it. I have already said that prominent citizens in the community, not necessarily business men—the hon. Gentleman knows that it may be a member of the Orange Order, a magistrate, or a member of the UDR—seem to be the subject of attack by the Provisional IRA at the moment. I do not think that we should be complacent, but it is true that so far this year the numbers of deaths and woundings are generally lower than they have been in the previous four years. The House and the hon. Gentleman should be aware that in the first two months of this year 177 people were charged with terrorist offences, including 12 charged with murder and 19 with attempted murder. The RUC is maintaining its good record of attrition.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that following the latest onslaught by the IRA all responsible political leaders in Northern Ireland have condemned the campaign vehemently, none more so than the spokesman for the party that I represent in this House, the SDLP? Does my right hon. Friend appreciate that in recent days the leaders of my party have come out in the strongest possible terms against the IRA campaign that is now being waged? Does my right hon. Friend agree that in Northern Ireland, where the IRA is waging a campaign against the RUC, the SDLP, by calling into question some of the questionable activities of certain members of the RUC, as highlighted on British television, is in no way aligning itself with the IRA in its campaign? The SDLP, like the RUC, is trying to defeat terrorism.

I am interested and encouraged to hear my hon. Friend's comments. I hope that he, with his party, will give encouragement to his community to join the RUC as well as to praise its courage. I admire the courage and honesty of the outspoken speech by the deputy leader of the SDLP, who told the Provisional IRA that it was getting nowhere and the quicker it stopped its activities the better.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a substantial number of the people mentioned in the statistics that he has given were my constituents? Is he also aware that so long as premeditated and cold-blooded killers can go around killing, almost with impunity, in all sections of Northern Ireland there will be the growing feeling that this can be combated only by reintroducing the death penalty? Will the right hon. Gentleman give serious consideration to that?

No, I shall not give any further serious consideration to the reintroduction of the death penalty in Northern Ireland. As far as I am concerned it has been abolished for good. If the death penalty were reintroduced the first man in Northern Ireland to be hanged would be the greatest martyr to be created for years. The propaganda value to the IRA and the Provisional IRA would be considerable. What is required of the hon. Gentleman and myself is for us to point out that this is a battle not only of propaganda but of wills, and that we have the will to win. If the people will back the RUC in its endeavours they will find out that it is beating the terrorists step by step. In 1976 934 persons were convicted, on indictment, of scheduled offences. It is by giving the RUC encouragement, standing by law and order, and being able to process people through the courts as common criminals that we shall beat the terrorists.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is his strategy for the defeat of terrorism.

I refer the hon. Member to what I said in the House on 17th December 1976 and 23rd February 1977.

Is the Secretary of State aware that for months and years Opposition Members have pressed for the strengthening of the UDR—and in particular its full-time element—and for the closer co-ordination of all security forces? However, the time taken even to accept, let alone implement, such suggestions—and, indeed, the suggestion made again just now by the hon. Member for Antrim, South (Mr. Molyneaux)—indicates a grave lack of urgency. In particular, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the first instalment of five full-time UDR platoons has been formed?

The strengthening of the UDR is going ahead. In the recent debate I announced that 200 professional UDR personnel were being 'recruited, and we are having great success. The liaison that now exists between the RUC and the Army has improved considerably. There is intelligence sharing and this helps the RUC regional squads to effect arrests. The five platoons that are being developed are going ahead successfully.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will present his proposals for reform of the law relating to criminal damage compensation in the form of a Bill.

No, Sir. Amendment to such law for Northern Ireland would appropriately be made by Order in Council under paragraph 1 of Schedule 1 to the Northern Ireland Act 1974, and preparations for that are well advanced.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that it is against the interests of the Government, who want well-considered legislation, and against the public interest—in that the public require to be informed in detail of how the law is being changed—that these changes should be made by Order in Council? Will he ask his right hon. Friend to consult the Leader of the House to see how this can be done by proper legislation and without any greater use of the time of Ministers and the House than would be involved in the procedure by order?

Since last summer the Government have provided improved arrangements for the consideration and debate of draft legislation. All suggestions for change will be carefully considered before the final draft of an order is laid. We are advanced on the road about which the right hon. Gentleman is speaking. I do not have to give him assurances. He knows that we shall be consulting him and his colleagues on this issue.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he next expects to meet representatives of the Northern Ireland Development Agency.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has no plans at present to meet the Northern Ireland Development Agency. I met the agency on 26th January 1977 and will have such further meetings or contacts with it as may be appropriate.

Instead of the Government merely handing out millions of pounds of public money to multinational companies such as Regna, which pocketed the money and then closed down its factory in Northern Ireland, would it not be better to increase the Northern Ireland Development Agency budget in order to extend public enterprise through developing the Northern Ireland economy, thereby ensuring greater security of jobs for the workers and possibly better community relations as well?

We have increased the budget of the NIDA, but there is a principle of non-interference in the day-to-day operations of the agency. By statute it is an independent agency, and we should preserve that. However, with regard to my hon. Friend's first question about increasing the agency's budget, we have recently done that.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if, in view of the fact that the Northern Ireland Housing Executive has £6·5 million owing to it in respect of rent and rate arrears and may be unable properly to discharge its obligations by reason of the Government's decision to terminate the special arrangements for the collection of these debts by deductions from certain social welfare cash benefits, he will review the matter.

No, Sir. I am satisfied that the Housing Executive is able to discharge its functions fully in respect of the recovery of rent arrears. The recent modifications in the system to recover arrears from social security benefits were specifically designed to encourage tenants to make voluntary agreements with the Executive, to alleviate certain cases of undue hardship, and to improve the efficiency of the benefit allocation procedures.

Will the Minister say what ceiling he is prepared to allow the arrears of rents and rates to rise to? As I understand it, it has been increasing at a rate of about 25 per cent. a year. This hardly seems the time to diminish the capacity to collect arrears. Does the Minister appreciate that the BAB system was an incentive for people to enter into voluntary arrangements? The sum of £6½ million is a shocking amount to allow to fall into arrears.

In spite of the fact that it may be an incentive, arrears are continuing to increase. It is hoped, as a result of the introduction of the changes that we have made, that voluntary agreements will be made that will enable the rent arrears problem to be reduced. In the course of the next few months we hope to obtain evidence showing how the new changes are working.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the benefit allocation system did cause undue hardship to many hundreds and thousands of families in Northern Ireland? After a close scrutiny and review of that system, the Minister's noble Friend was forced to the conclusion that it would be better to arrive at a voluntary agreement other than that imposed by the Ministry. Does my hon. Friend also agree that there is so far no indication that people are throwing down the gauntlet to the Government and saying that they will not pay their rates and rents? Most people are inclined to come to a voluntary agreement with the authorities.

I must in all fairness say that at present insufficient numbers are coming forward to make voluntary agreements with the Housing Executive to pay off rent and rates arrears. As my hon. Friend says, it is our hope that the new procedures will encourage people to enter into voluntary agreements, so that this great burden of rent and rates arrears can gradually wither away.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what are his plans for the future of the Meat Industry Employment Scheme; and if he will make a statement.

I am not yet in a position to make an announcement concerning the operation of the Meat Industry Employment Scheme after 31st March 1977. However, an examination of the complex issues involved is proceeding and I shall make a further announcement at the earliest opportunity.

Is the Minister aware that this scheme was widely welcomed when introduced? It has been nearly 100 per cent. successful in the aims that it set out to achieve and it is necessary for the future of the meat industry in Northern Ireland that an early decision be taken.

I am aware of what the hon. Gentleman says and I agree with the latter part of what he has said.

asked the Prime Minister if he will list the responsibilities that he has allocated to the Secretary of State for Trade.

In the absence of my right hon. Friend in Washington, I have been asked to reply.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that reply. As investment and, therefore, job creation by British firms in the EEC have been running at about five times the level at which EEC firms have been investing in this country, is my right hon. Friend satisfied that the Secretary of State for Trade, in co-operation with other Departments, is doing enough to secure greater investment in this country? Will my right hon. Friend undertake to have this issue raised at the summit meeting on 7th and 8th May, with an EEC representative present?

I agree with the last suggestion made by my hon. Friend. Obviously, this is one of the matters that may be discussed at the summit meeting. But the other aspects of my hon. Friend's Question have constantly been pressed on representatives of the Government at meetings of the NEDC.

Does the Leader of the House agree that since there is now a Secretary of State for Transport, aviation should be one of his responsibilities rather than the responsibility of the Secretary of State for Trade?

We have no proposals for the transfer of the arrangements now, but if there are such proposals I am sure that the Prime Minister will consider them.

My right hon. Friend's list omitted import policy and import substitution policy. Will he see to it that the Secretary of State for Trade takes these issues rather more seriously than he had done in the past?

Although these matters are not directly within my right hon. Friend's control, I am sure that my right hon. Friend does not take them lightly. They are, of course, of equal importance with exports.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that it is still the Government's policy and the policy of the Secretary of State for Trade to resist the daft and dangerous concept of import controls, generalised or selective?

My right hon. Friend resists all daft and dangerous proposals.

The list of duties read out by my right hon. Friend shows that the Secretary of State for Trade is a very busy little bee—[Interruption.]—spelt "bee". Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that we are getting value for money, and does he think that anyone is capable of doing all those things?

I am glad that my right hon. Friend was not introducing his Bermondsey language into the House in the earlier part of his question. If anyone is capable of doing all those jobs, I am sure that it is the Secretary of State for Trade.

asked the Prime Minister what are his public engagements for 10th March.

I have been asked to reply.

When the Prime Minister returns will he be able to sort out the differences that appear to have arisen between the Government and Mr. Jack Jones about the Government's prices policy? Will he, in particular, be able to tell Mr. Jones that a statutory price freeze, which Mr. Jones seems to want, would lead to reduced profitability and increased unemployment, and that the gas price increases about which Mr. Jones is getting so excited flow directly from the Government's package of measures following the IMF borrowing?

Discussions have already occurred and continuing discussions will take place on the Government's prices policy between the Government and representatives of the General Council of the TUC and others who are concerned. We have not yet completed those discussions, and my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister will return to this country long before they are completed.

rose—

Before I call anyone else, I should point out that if an hon. Member argues a case when asking a supplementary question he may deprive another hon. Member of the chance of being called.

On behalf of the Prime Minister, will the right hon. Gentleman spend a few minutes of his busy day looking into the question of the Royal Navy helicopter pilots and their retirement gratuities? I cannot believe that the Government really intend to go back on their promise. Will the right hon. Gentleman see whether he can clear up this matter?

I give the hon. and gallant Gentleman the undertaking for which he asks. Of course we shall examine very carefully what he and others have said on that subject.

Could a message be sent to the Prime Minister today reminding him to express to President Carter the appreciation of the British people for the presence of the American Air Force in this country, helping us to defend this country and the rest of the free world?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister will be able to convey to President Carter all that should be conveyed to him in the interests of this country as a whole. I am sure that he will be doing that throughout the whole day.

If the Prime Minister had been here today he would have seen that the Price Commission has said that the proposals for an increase in gas prices are not justified. Will the Lord President comment on that?

I always examine any statement by the Price Commission almost as carefully as I examine any statement by the right hon. Member for Lowestoft (Mr. Prior). I should like to look at both before commenting.

asked the Prime Minister when he next plans to meet the CBI.

I have been asked to reply.

Will the Government discuss with the CBI the rate at which the switch of resources from the public sector into manufacturing industries will take place? Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is grave concern about this among Government supporters? What time scale does he envisage for the switch of resources into manufacturing industries that we have been promised?

This is a question that has been discussed between the Government, representatives of the CBI and others on NEDO over many months and, indeed, for a longer period than that. As my hon. Friend knows, this is a matter that it is easier to talk about than to achieve. It is not an easy transference to accomplish and it cannot be done solely by Government statements or consultations. But we shall be discussing it further in NEDO and other appropriate bodies.

Will the Lord President indicate to the CBI whether he intends to seek the widest possible measure of agreement—to use his phrase on devolution—on legislation for industrial democracy? If he does so intend, will he assure the CBI that there is a chance of getting the Bill through and, if he does not, that there is no chance at all?

I hope that we shall have the support of the Liberal Party on the Second Reading of the Industrial Democracy Bill, as we did in the case of devolution, and that Liberal Members will be even more persistent in sticking to their principles than they were on devolution.

Will the Lord President explain to the CBI why the Cabinet agreed to cut public expenditure last year on the basis of three assumptions, namely, the share of the GNP going to public expenditure, the increase in the domestic credit expansion, and the borrowing requirement—on all of which assumptions the Treasury now admits that the figures were wrong?

My hon. Friend has misconceived the undertakings and the understandings on which the measures were taken by the Government in December and at an earlier period. Those were some of the arguments that were deployed at the time, but the general case about them was put by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he mentioned them here. It is not the same case as that represented by my hon. Friend the Member for York (Mr. Lyon).

Since the CBI is obviously interested in industrial harmony, will the right hon. Gentleman present it with and discuss with it a copy of the Underhill Report on the growing influence of Trotskyists in the governing party?

I do not think that that has anything to do with this Question, or with much else.

Getting back to the subject of the CBI, does the Lord President agree with the suggestion made yesterday at Sheffield by the President of the CBI about 5 per cent. for the next round of wage increases and an additional 5 per cent. for tax cuts?

I do not think that it would be a sensible course to try to discuss across the Floor of the House now the exact details of how we should reach the next pay agreement. It will be discussed in the House at a later stage. It is a matter of great importance, but I do not think that public speeches are the best way to start the discussions on it. I hope that we shall have an agreement not only with the TUC but with the CBI. It would not help to secure that agreement if, at the beginning, the Government made a full declaration about what they thought the final result should be.

asked the Prime Minister if he remains satisfied with the progress of his Government towards the objectives of lower inflation, lower unemployment, higher production and less borrowing.

I have been asked to reply.

Does the Lord President think that the Prime Minister was living up to his usual standard of honesty at Question Time last Thursday when he refused to accept responsibility for the present level of unemployment but was anxious to claim credit for the improvement in the balance of payments?

To start with, the worst thing that I can say about the hon. Member for Chingford (Mr. Tebbit) is that I think he was living up to his usual standards of honesty. The next worst thing that I can say about him is that I do not think that he asked this Question to seek information on the subject. What the Prime Minister said was perfectly well understood by the House.

Will my right hon. Friend bring to the attention of the Prime Minister the question of the level of unemployment generally and the specific unemployment position on Merseyside and in the North-East, where the shock wave of the unemployment figures resulting from the Plessey closures and redundancies and, in addition, this morning's announcement about further redundancies at English Electric is such that there is a need for an urgent meeting of hon. Members representing constituencies there, who feel that the unemployment situation has reached a stage where they must say "Enough is enough"?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and other Ministers will be prepared to meet hon. Members from the whole area. As my hon. Friend is aware, the Prime Minister acted immediately after the announcement of the proposed Plessey closures. Thanks to the operation of the Employment Protection Act, there is some time available for discussions to take place, and the committee to which my right hon. Friend referred a few days ago has already started its work.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the borrowing requirement is now under target and, if so, what the estimate for it may be?

I would require notice of that question, and I am sure a great many others would as well. I cannot give the right hon. Member the answer without his putting down a separate Question on the subject.

When the Government obtained agreement on phase 2 it was forecast that, as a result, the rate of inflation would come down to 7·5 per cent. As it now looks like being 17·5 per cent., is it not time for the Government to explain to the TUC and the CBI the discrepancy between the two figures?

I do not accept the right hon. Gentleman's figure of 17·5 per cent. Certainly it is the case that the desired reduction in the rate of inflation, upon which we secured the agreement last year, has not been attained. Everyone knows that. The reasons why have often been stated from this Dispatch Box in these last few weeks and months. This is one of the matters raised in the discussions with the TUC. The Government have given to the TUC and to the House their view of it and have explained why we were not able to attain that figure. Despite that, however, it is of the highest importance for the country that a new pay agreement should be reached.

Before we can be entirely satisfied with progress on controlling in- flation, is it not necessary that there should be no further integration of this country's agricultural policy with the lunatic CAP of the Common Market? Will my right hon. Friend say in what circumstances the Government would be prepared to use the veto, as this situation becomes worse and worse and more and more ludicrous as the months go by?

No member of the Government, no Member of the House, and no one in the country is satisfied with what has happened about the rate of inflation. We all know that it is much too high, and we want to get it down much quicker. One of the factors is the amount that we have to pay for food and other commodities. Those are matters that will be debated in the House next week, as I shall indicate when I announce the business for next week. There will be a full debate on those subjects. It has been evident over recent weeks that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food commands overwhelming support in the country for the stand that he has taken.

Will the right hon. Gentleman now have a second go at trying to answer sensibly the question put by my hon. Friend the Member for Chingford (Mr. Tebbit), instead of making a rude and unnecessary reply—a reply that was rude merely to hide his own embarrassment at being a member of a Government with a record that he would have so utterly deplored if he had not been a member?

If the right hon. Gentleman is to make invocations for good manners, he might start with his hon. Friend the Member for Chingford.