asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations he has had from individuals and bodies in the county of Northumberland on the proposals of the Annan Report affecting regional and local radio.

We have received five letters from individuals and one from the Community Council of Northumberland, all supporting BBC local radio. In addition, Northumberland County Council in its provisional comments on the Annan Report has expressed support for the maintenance and development of the existing services of the BBC, including BBC local radio and the BBC's regional operations.

Is the Minister fully aware from those representations that much of rural Northumberland has at present no service of local or regional radio and that the people there will never get it unless the BBC can continue in local radio and extend the service by a station at Alnwick? Is he also aware that there would be a major public outcry if the BBC had to abandon its present regional television service and programmes such as "Look North"?

I am fully aware of that and of the support which has been expressed by the Northumberland County Council for the BBC's policy of extending coverage to all populations of more than 500.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many people believe that the Annan Committee was right to recommend that there should be community control of local radio and that he will be receiving representations on that score from the Community Communications Association, which represents those who, unlike the BBC, do not have a vested interest in maintaining the existing situation?

I look forward to receiving those observations, but I hope that if they are coming they will come soon, because the consultation period ended on 1st July.

Is the Minister aware that in my part of the world many people are very satisfied with BBC Radio Solent and would be very upset if anything was done to disturb its operation? Does he accept that many people will react to the destruction of anything that is good, whether it be grammar schools or local radio? Will he give an assurance that local Radio Solent will not be destroyed?

Perhaps I should add to that catalogue by saying that I am perfectly satisfied with BBC Wales.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if, in the light of the refusal of the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis to permit a street collection in Lambeth by the Stockwell Group of Amnesty International, he will set up an inquiry into the working of the law relating to street collections.

I do not consider that such an inquiry is needed.

Will my hon. Friend say why it is only in London that this worthy body, Amnesty International, is denied the opportunity of having a street collection? Why is it that even my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has no jurisdiction over the Commissioner of Police in this regard? Who are the members of this mysterious advisory body which advises the Commissioner of Police on whether Amnesty International and similar reputable bodies should be allowed to hold collections in the London area?

The committee is chaired by the Deputy Commissioner and its members comprise representatives of the London Mayors Association, the Labour Mayors Association of London, the Family Welfare Association, the County Councils Association, the Associa- tion of District Councils, the London Council of Social Service and the London Boroughs Association. If my hon. Friend is not satisfied with the decision in this case, I recommend him to make further representations to the Commissioner, who, I am sure, will look at the matter again.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is satisfied with the arrangements regulating the movement of prisoners from one prison to another.

These arrangements are kept under continuous review, but if the hon. Member has a particular point of concern perhaps he would write to me about it.

I am grateful for that reply. Is it not the case that prison governors sometimes find themselves in the position of having to take in significant numbers of prisoners from other prisons at short notice? Does the Minister agree that this contributes to overcrowding and makes the running of prisons much more difficult in circumstances in which the governor literally may not know from one day to the next how many prisoners he will have?

Clearly, if there is a sudden influx of population it makes any institution difficult to run. The reasons why prisoners are switched from prison to prison vary in many cases, but we try to give notice wherever possible.

In view of the deteriorating position in Walton Gaol, about which I have been in touch with the Home Secretary—we all know that there are great difficulties there—is it intended to move prisoners from that gaol as they are now threatened with being in their cells for 24 hours a day?

I cannot give an answer to that question. Perhaps I may write to the hon. and learned Gentleman.

Will my hon. Friend ensure that when prisoners are moved from one prison to another the near relatives are informed at the earliest possible moment, to avoid unnecessary visits to the wrong prison?

Yes. I recognise the importance of what my hon. Friend has said, and we shall certainly do that.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that recent cases have shown that the movement of prisoners carries grave risks both to public security and to the safety of prison officers? What new procedures has he authorised to be followed in such cases, and what steps is he taking to ensure that they are carried out?

My right hon. Friend, in announcing his acceptance of the Hughes Report, indicated what steps he was taking. Clearly the carriage of prisoners can cause difficulty, but a proper assessment of the degree of danger and obedience to the steps laid down in the Hughes Report will minimise the danger.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many officers of the Metropolitan Police have been injured in the course of their duties at the Grunwick factory at the latest available date; how many arrests have been made there; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is satisfied with police control in cases of mass picketing; and if he has any proposals for amending the laws on picketing

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many police officers have been deployed outside the Grunwick Film Processing Laboratories on each day since 27th June.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many policemen have been on duty in the vicinity of the Grunwick factory during the industrial dispute there; and what is the estimated extra cost to public funds.

Between 13th June and 13th July, 377 people have been arrested in connection with picketing at the Grunwick factory and 243 police officers have been injured. Details of the maximum number of police officers avail- able for duty on each day between 13th June and 27th June were provided in the reply which I gave to a Question by the right hon. Member for Devon, North (Mr. Thorpe), on 28th June. I will, with permission, circulate details for 28th June to 13th July in the Official Report; but information about costs could not be obtained without disproportionate effort.

In view of those horrific figures, would the right hon. Gentleman like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the courage, restraint, and exemplary dedication to duty of the police? Will he also unequivocally condemn those who actively participated in these terrible, violent demonstrations?

I am asked at every Question Time to pay tribute to and to support the police, and I gladly do it. But I prefer to have it taken as read that, as the Minister responsible for the police, I support them on all occasions, otherwise there will come a time when I have missed out and people will think that I have not done so. On the second part of the supplementary question, I condemn anybody who engages in violence at Grunwick or anywhere else.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the violence shown on television has been profoundly disturbing to many people and that people are alarmed that Parliament seems to regard this sort of behaviour as acceptable? Will he take this opportunity to tell the House and the people that he is aware of the disquiet and will do everything in his power to change the law to allay people's fears about this matter?

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment is considering the law on picketing. I learnt one thing when I was at Grunwick: do not call everybody who is around the gate a picket, because it is a misnomer. There are people there who are not picketing, who are given a name and who are there just to cause trouble. On the whole, they are the ones seen on television.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that for 44 weeks before the fracas commenced the behaviour of the pickets at Grunwick was exemplary and that, if they had had their way and could have sat down and talked about their grievances, the strains imposed on police would never have taken place and neither would the violence spoken of this afternoon? Does he agree that much of the blame for the difficulties caused to the police must be put at the door of the management of Grunwick?

What is for sure in all industrial disputes is that at the end of the day people must sit down and talk, because that is how a solution is found. My hon. Friend is absolutely right: there was no trouble at all for a very long time.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the police deserve the thanks of the House for the way in which they have carried out their duty of upholding the law passed by this Parliament? If he agrees, will he express to the Commissioner the thanks of the House for the way in which the police work has been carried out and extend our sympathy to the police officers who have been injured in the course of it?

I agree. I have already done that. I presumed that I should be speaking on behalf of the House.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what action he will take to ensure the admission to the country of four black members of the team from Rhodesia for the International Stoke Mandeville Games for paraplegics, in the light of the fact that four white members holding British passports may be allowed in.

As my right hon. Friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary indicated in his reply to a Question by the hon. Member yesterday, we cannot agree to the entry of any members of this team unless the statement that individual members of the team would be representing Rhodesia is withdrawn.

I am grateful for that reply. I realise that the situation has changed since the reply on 4th July. Will the hon. Lady deal with two specific matters? First, I understand that travel documents would be denied to black Rhodesians if they applied for them at Pretoria, but what is the position of a paraplegic who holds a British passport? Would he be denied travel documents? Secondly, I understand from the hon. Lady's reply that, if the Chairman of the Rhodesian Paraplegic Association was prepared to allow individuals to come as individuals and not as representatives of their country, they would be admitted and given the necessary travel documents.

On the first part of the supplementary question, even if a person has a British passport, if he wishes to come as a representative of Rhodesia or as a member of a team representing Rhodesia, what my right hon. Friend said in his statement would apply. Secondly, we have said that, if the chairman of the association is willing to withdraw his statement, we shall be glad to agree to the admission of these people as individuals.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what specific action he is proposing to take in the light of the report of the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis for 1976.

I have given, and will continue to give, the fullest consideration to the many different aspects of the report in so far as they touch on my responsibilities.

What is the right hon. Gentleman's reaction to the comments of the former Commissioner on bail abuse? Does he accept Sir Robert Mark's rather alarming estimate that 3,000 crimes a year are being committed in London by people on bail? If that is so, does it not represent a real danger and a matter of great concern to the people of Greater London, and does it not undermine the excellent detection work being done by the Metropolitan Police?

I have noted with interest what the former Commissioner has said. When these figures are set against the total number of people released on bail, one sees that they are not inconsistent with those revealed by earlier research in London and Scotland indicating that about 5 per cent. of people released on bail abscond and about 3 per cent. are known to have committed offences while on bail.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that some of us who have criticised the police from time to time are glad on occasions such as this to pay tribute to the vast majority of the Metropolitan Police who do a very difficult job? Can he say something about what is happening concerning overtime payments in the Metropolitan Police? It seems that the sudden cutting of overtime payments which has been proposed by the new Commissioner will cause hardship to individual officers. Will my right hon. Friend discuss this matter with the Commissioner?

I should have to be very careful in doing that. I have not issued any directive on the matter. The Commissioner recently decided, as a matter of good management, to introduce a new and more effective system for the control of overtime in the force. This year the financial provision for overtime in the force as a whole is the same as that made last year. There is certainly no intention that the new controls should interfere with the operational needs of the force. But this is a matter for the Commissioner. I am not in business to do the Commissioner's job of controlling the way in which he uses his men.

In many parts of London the Metropolitan Police are seriously undermanned. On such occasions as Monday, when one-sixth of the police force was deployed at Grunwick, coverage on the ground in outer London was very thin and a se ions situation could easily have arisen, particularly in my borough.

There are about 1,300 extra Metropolitan Police men compared with three years ago. Certainly that is not enough. Undoubtedly, when there is a special occasion—be it Grunwick or other occasions of a quite different nature—men are drawn in from other areas. It is Important that the number of men we recruit for the police should increase. Until Christmas, the recruitment rate was rising all over the country. It is curious that it has dropped this year, but I must take it into account.

Leaving aside special occasions, my right hon. Friend will be aware that there are stress areas in which there are certain peculiar problems calling for special police activity. I notice that my right hon. Friend is pulling a face. In some areas there is quite a lot of mugging and vandalism and people cannot walk on the streets in safety. Can my right hon. Friend do something to help the police, who are already undermanned, to ensure that they can get on with the job they want to do in areas such as mine and, I think, even his?

There are parts of the country and parts of the metropolis where there are special problems, and my hon. Friend knows what they are. If there were more policemen, we could improve on the situation. The Commissioner is well aware of this and deploys his men accordingly.

Following the matter raised by the hon. Member for Lewisham, West (Mr. Price), can the right hon. Gentleman, as the police authority for the Metropolitan Police, say categorically whether the Metropolitan Police force or any officers in it are engaged in any industrial action, working to rule or threatening so to do?

The advice which I am given is that there is no working to rule. That is what I am told.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether he has now received the Fisher Report into the Confait case; and when he intends to publish it.

All I can yet add to the answer I gave to my hon. Friend's Question on 16th June is that I understand Sir Henry Fisher will be submitting his report shortly.

This is not very satisfactory. It has gone on for a long time. Is my right hon. Friend aware that the three boys in connection with whom the inquiry is taking place were acquitted as long ago as 1975 but that the fact that the inquiry is going on is holding up their compensation? They have received only a tiny fraction of it. Will my right hon. Friend have another look at this? Two of them are now married men, and they deserve a level of compensation to cover the debt that society owes them.

My hon. Friend knows a great deal about this, and he will know that what I have said is that I am considering what part of the report to publish. One of the reasons for the delay is that Sir Henry is talking to some of the people who gave evidence to see whether they would object to their evidence being made public. I think that it would be a good idea to publish as much of the report as possible, but it is right that the people concerned should be asked, given the terms under which they gave their evidence.

When the right lion. Gentleman decides to publish the Fisher Report, will he review his decision not to publish the report into the case of George Ince? It was, after all, made two years ago, and Mr. Ince's common law wife is desperately waiting for publication.

The hon. Member for Isle of Ely (Mr. Freud) is talking about a different type of report. The terms on which the Confait inquiry was made are far different from the report made in the case to which the hon. Gentleman referred, assuming that he means the inquiry which I found under way when I first got to the Department. It is not normal for a report of that kind to be published. We are discussing different types of reports.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proposals he has to ensure that coroners are as co-operative as possible in problems related to the donation of organs from victims of accidents or sudden death.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Cunningham) on 29th April.

What can be done to persuade the coroners who are perhaps least conscious of the need for donated kidneys to adopt the attitude of those who are most conscious of it?

A circular letter was issued by the Home Office to coroners on 29th April of this year which sought to achieve some consistency of procedures amongst coroners. It seems to have helped to clarify the position of a coroner in the circumstances. It is felt generally that the circular was a helpful one.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what evidence he has that immigration from the Indian sub-continent is now diminishing, as was forecast by successive Governments; and if he will make a statement.

The main source of present immigration from the Indian subcontinent is the close dependants of men already settled here—in accordance with statutory entitlements in the Immigration Act 1971 and rules made under the Act by a Government of the Conservative Party. It is reasonable to suppose that these commitments, which the present Government have accepted, will in time decline.

Nevertheless, do the Government consider that the present rate of immigration is acceptable?

As my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House put it last week—I think very well—this is a matter of honour and humanity. The two must go together: accepting our commitments to the dependants and seeing that families are united.

Will the hon. Lady answer the Question, which inquired whether immigration from this source was diminishing?

Accepting what I said, yes. As I said in my original reply, once these commitments to the men already settled here are fulfilled, obviously there will in time be a decline.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that it is becoming increasingly difficult for people who at least claim to be the dependants of men legally settled in Britain to persuade entry clearance officers in Karachi, Islamabad and Rawalpindi that they are the people they claim to be, and that the tendency now on the part of these officers is to err on the side of keeping out genuine cases rather than letting in false cases?

If my hon. Friend is aware of genuine cases who have been kept out, perhaps he will let me know about them. But I have myself visited the posts, and I believe that they are striking the right balance between admitting the genuine people and keeping out the fraudulent ones.

According to official figures, immigration in 1975 was higher than in 1974 and in 1976 it was higher than in 1975. Since the hon. Lady said that immigration was diminishing, are we to understand that the immigration figures for 1977 will be lower than those for 1976?

Figures for individual years cannot be taken to be the trend of immigration decline. I thought about this carefully and I looked into it carefully because I anticipated this question. It is clear that we cannot pick one year and then say that there is a general trend towards a decline.

Has my hon. Friend seen a leaflet published by an organisation calling itself the Anglo-Asian Conservative Association, which commits the Conservative Party to a recognition of the right of dependants to enter this country? Does she not find the attitude of Opposition Members in this House and in recent by-elections somewhat at variance with the commitment that they are giving the Asian population?

I am still waiting for a categorical statement from the Leader of the Opposition about the attitude of the Conservative Party to the admission of wives and children of men already settled here. It is ambiguous at the moment.

Doe; the hon. Lady agree that there would be fewer cases of illegal entry and illegal overstaying if there were further and better checks upon illegal working in this country? In that connection, will she confirm the report in The Times of 8th July that at least the Department of Employment is considering the institution of some form of identity card to prevent this illegal working?

I do not accept the last part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. I can, however, assure the House that my right hon. Friend has already announced that he is taking steps to tackle the abuse of illegal employment. The TUC is very concerned about it, and so are the EEC countries. Together with the EEC countries, we are having discussions on how this can be best brought about.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he next proposes to meet the Chairman of the Parole Board.

When either of them sees the need for a meeting.

When the Minister meets the Chairman of the Parole Board, will he ensure that the chairman has fully digested and taken account of what I shall have said in tonight's Adjournment debate?

I welcome the trailer for that debate in which the lion. Member and I shall take part either tonight or tomorrow morning. I wish that the hon. Member had been more explicit about what he will tell me in that debate.

In his discussion with the chairman, will the Minister urge him to take note of what may be happening to people who are being released on parole after they have committed murder and rape? Will he make sure that he has consultations with the chairman before such persons are allowed out of prison?

My hon. Friend has lumped together two categories that are not analogous. Parole is not available to those who have committed murder. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary examines any proposal to release a murderer, or any life-sentence prisoner on licence.

Will the Minister make clear that in his discussions with the chairman he will take account of the fact that an early release of Myra Hindley or the Shepherds Bush police murderers would be utterly repugnant to public opinion, and particularly to the police service?

The hon. Member does not seem to understand that these matters are submitted to and considered by the Home Secretary. The case for the release of Myra Hindley has not been submitted to him, and on a number of occasions I have made it clear that there is no early prospect of her release. That should be clear beyond peradventure. The Shepherds Bush murderers are in the same position. We have received no proposals from the Parole Board for their early release.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will amend the Pet Animals Act 1951 to control the sale of exotic wildlife.

No. I have no evidence that the Pet Animals Act 1951, together with the other legislation I mentioned in the reply I gave to the hon. Member's Question on 3rd May, is inadequate to control such sales; but my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment is seeking the views of the Nature Conservancy Council on the adequacy of the legislation relating to the introduction of non-native species.

is the Minister aware that wildlife parks are selling as pets a considerable number of animals that are not native to this country? If these animals should escape and breed in large numbers, they could present a considerable danger both to agriculture and to the balance of nature. Will the Minister bear in mind that the rabbit is not native either to this country or to Australia?

The conduct of the business of selling animals as pets, whether they are wild or tame, is subject to control under the Pet Animals Act 1951. In relation to the hon. Member's question about threats to individuals, these are effectively dealt with by the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the market for kestrels and other rare birds appears to be mainly in West Germany and Arab countries? Will she make representations to them about the danger to the species if this traffic continues?

Certainly, I shall refer that question to my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what quantity of magazines and films were confiscated by the Obscene Publications Squad in the 12 months ended 31st May 1977.

In the 12 months ended 31st May 1977 the Obscene Publications Squad of the Metropolitan Police seized, while executing warrants issued under Section 3 of the Obscene Publications Act 1959, 209,052 copies of magazines and 1,492 copies of films for consideration by a court of their obscenity.

Is the Minister of State satisfied that the elements of permissibility which may have crept in as a result of corruption in the Obscene Publications Squad have now been drawn back to an acceptable limit? Is he concerned at all about displays of magazines which are openly described as hard porn "in shops in London?

Because of the concern about this subject, the Home Secretary set up the departmental committee under the chairmanship of Professor Williams. I am satisfied that the Obscene Publications Squad will discharge its duty.

What happens to those magazines and films after they are confiscated? [Interruption.] That is a serious question.

This is not an occasion on which I can tell the House that the publications are about to be placed in the Library.

Mr. Michael Alison.

He has not stood up.

I saw the hon. Gentleman twitch.

My hon. Friend will get his turn. Can the Minister of State reassure the House about the very serious points made by my hon. Friend the Member for Newbury (Mr. McNair-Wilson) that an earlier regime of the Porn Squad at Scotland Yard may have resulted in the proliferation of porn being more widespread in London? Will he take steps to tighten up the situation so that it is at least comparable with the way in which this matter is handled in the provinces?

The hon. Member asks the question as if my right hon. Friend and I actually operate the Metropolitan Police. This is a matter for the Commissioner, and I shall draw his attention to the question.

As porn is apparently here to stay, will the Minister of State try to persuade the Chancellor to do something that have been advocating for years—namely, to impose a heavy tax on pornography?

Did the figures that the Minister gave include pornographic material confiscated by Customs and Excise officials before it had landed? What success are these officials having in confiscating stuff before it actually arrives in this country?

I cannot give an answer to that problem. I am discussing the seizure of goods in this country.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether it is his policy to ensure, wherever possible, that persons from Wales convicted to sentences in gaol, borstal or other detention centres serve their time in institutions within Wales and, to the extent compatible with security considerations, as near as possible to their homes.

The maintenance of home ties is an important factor in allocation, but one of the limiting factors is the number of places available in particular areas.

Does the Minister of State agree that, where security allows, it is highly desirable that prisoners should be held as near as possible to their homes? This would avoid alienation from their communities and ensure that their relatives were not penalised for their being imprisoned. Is he aware that there is no women's prison in Wales and that many prisoners who would naturally speak Welsh in their homes are not able to use the Welsh language in prison because there are no facilities for them to do so especially at prisons in England?

There are only two men's prisons in Wales, one in Cardiff and one in Swansea, and both are a good way away from the Welsh-speaking area. I agree that the maintenance of home ties is an important factor, but resettlement considerations may militate against the proximity to home, because another prison may afford a better chance of rehabilitation and preparation for outside life.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many prisoners from Wales are lodged in Walton Prison, Liverpool? There is a dispute going on between the local branch of the Prison Officers Association and the management, and at the moment visitors are not being allowed to visit prisoners. This could cause a very difficult situation if it continues. Could my hon. Friend indicate what positive action is being taken on this matter in order to bring the two sides together for discussion? Is he aware that a settlement is urgently needed before there is a riot in the prison?

As my hon. Friend may know, the Liverpool branch of the Prison Officers' Association has put forward to the governor a list of grievances, most of which relate to manning levels at the prison. Some of the grievances can be resolved locally, but others raise national issues. It is now being arranged for these to be negotiated with the association at national level.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many separate establishments in Yorkshire and Humberside are licensed, or employ individuals who are licensed, to carry out experiments on animals.

Thirty-two separate establishments in Yorkshire and Humberside are registered under the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876 as places where experiments on living animals may be performed by persons licensed to do so.

Has the number been increasing or diminishing over recent years? How many inspectors are responsible for covering these 32 establishments',

The number has increased over recent years. The one inspector for the North-Eastern area last paid a visit of inspection to the departments at Sheffield University—I know that my hon. Friend is particularly interested in that establishment—on 25th May. That gives an example of the frequency of visits.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much the Metropolitan Police is below strength; and what new measures he is putting forward to bring it up to strength.

On 31st May 1977 the strength was 22,275 and there were 4,453 vacancies. We shall continue our support for the Commission's efforts to maintain a high level of recruitment to the force.

Is the Under-Secretary aware of the great concern in the London borough of Bexley due to the reduction of police strength, which has coincided with a considerable number of robberies in the main centre? When will the Government take firm and vigorous action to improve recruiting and the pay and conditions of London's policemen?

There is no doubt that police recruitment has improved. We now have more policemen in the force than ever before in its history.

What is the present strength of the St. Helens police force, and what is the cause of men leaving the police forces in all parts of the country?

Order. We could go round the country finding out the sizes of police forces. The Question, however, relates to the Metropolitan Police.

Will the Under-Secretary check her facts and not mislead the House? In fact, recruitment to the Metropolitan force is now falling, and she knows it. In view of the shortfall in numbers in the Metropolitan force, why cut cadets, civilians and overtime and why not pay the police an adequate sum so that men and women willingly join this great service?

I adhere to my original statement that the total number is higher than ever before. The very high rate of intake during the second half of 1976 has not been maintained, but the levels so far this year are in line with 1975 and earlier years.

Will my hon. Friend look at the deployment of the police rather than the overall recruitment problem? Is she aware that in Liverpool arrests have been made of absolutely innocent people and that a 13-year-old boy was sent back to Belfast on his own without any escort? Does she believe that the question of where the police are deployed in that area, particularly—

Order. I must tell the hon. Gentleman the same as I told his hon. Friend the Member for St. Helens (Mr. Spriggs). This Question deals with the Metropolitan Police.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will announce the terms of reference, composition and chairman of the body he is setting up to review the negotiating machinery for police pay; and when he expects it to start work.

The terms of reference were announced by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland on 12th July.

I am obliged to the Secretary of State and to his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland for his announcement the other day. Will the right hon. Gentleman move as rapidly as possible to announce the name of the chairman and members of the review body? Will he also make certain that this important inquiry gets to work rapidly and reports as soon as possible?

Yes, Sir.

Does my right hon. Friend feel that police pay is not in the least commensurate with the hazardous job that they carry out? Does he agree that they are very badly paid— even worse than Members of Parliament?

I have no doubt that some Members of Parliament are worth more than others. I shall take account of what my hon. Friend said.

The terms of reference are on the negotiating machinery, which has broken down. They are not to investigate pay rates.

asked the Prime Minister which parts of the Urban Deprivation Unit arc based in the Home Office; and which have been transferred to the Department of the Environment, specifying how many staff are in each part and the annual cost of each part.

I refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Stechford (Mr. MacKay) on 7th July.

Is the Prime Minister aware that this unit is one of many financed by the Government appointed to study urban problems and that nothing is ever published of what they report? At a time when there is a need for a wider and more fundamental appraisal of the problems in areas such as Merseyside, what has happened to the comprehensive community programme and other imaginative ideas?

This unit was specifically set up by Lord Carr, when he was Home Secretary, for the purpose of study and research into a problem that has baffled a great many people since the end of the war. I do not think that we should underrate the need for it.

Will my right hon. Friend look at the question of urban aid virtually being used on purely capital projects? The point made by the hon. Member for Wirral (Mr. Hunt) is valid to the whole concept of urban aid.

I think that my hon. Friend underrates its value. I understand that 178 local authorities are now taking part in the programme. The projects include such matters as day nurseries, nursery schools and classes, lunch clubs and day centres for the elderly, adventure playgrounds, playgroups, housing aid centres, community centres, legal advice centres and so on. There are others. That is an indication of the value of the enterprises that are being conducted. Some of them are capital projects and others involve a great deal of use of staff.

Can the Prime Minister explain why the findings of the community development project that he launched nine years ago, which cost more than£5 million and was aimed at discovering the real problems of urban deprivation, are still being kept secret?

No, I could not explain that. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put down a Question on that matter to the Home Secretary. I was trying to deal with the reason for the transfer of the unit. I have not gone into the matter in detail. The community development project was the brainchild of a remarkable civil servant, Derek Morrell, who is now dead. I think that it deserved a better fate than it got. Its fate lay more in the hands of those who were carrying it out than in the mind of the originator.

asked the Prime Minister if the public speech by the Chief Secretary of the Treasury concerning pay policy delivered to the Industrial Society on 27th June represents Government policy.

Yes.

Is it not surprising that the Chief Secretary did not mention one of the factors that contribute heavily to high pay claims—namely, the burden of direct taxation? Is the Prime Minister aware that four years ago the average payment of income tax by wage and salary earners was£350 a year, whereas this year it is estimated at£810? Is that not an intolerable situation?

I suppose that, as the hon. Gentleman is trying to blind me with figures, the answer is that it depends naturally on the extent to which the salaries of those concerned have gone up. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman would care to tell us, in the form of a Question, what the increase in salaries has been.

On the basis of his discussions this week, will my right hon. Friend assure us that in the pay policy for the forthcoming year workers in the public sector will be at no disadvantage compared with those in the private sector?

I do not wish to anticipate the statement that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer will make tomorrow. I ask my hon. Friend and the House to await that statement.

What is the position about the White Paper? There is a note on the tape that there will be no White Paper tomorrow but that there will be a statement by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Does it mean no White Paper tomorrow or no White Paper at all?

It means no White Paper at this moment. That is to say— [Interruption.] I do not know what is so funny about that. It means that, haying gone through the statement that the Chancellor of the Exchequer will make tomorrow, we think that it will be perfectly adequate if that is reproduced in Hansard the next day. That is why.

With respect, this is a major change and not what we had been led to expect, which was that there would be a White Paper on pay policy. It looks as if we shall now be having a minor Budget Statement. Is the answer to my first question that the Prime Minister has abandoned the idea of having the White Paper before any economic debate?

That is not so. The statement tomorrow will contain a statement on pay and the proposals that the Chancellor will put before the House in the Finance Bill next week. It is being done in this way for convenience. Whether there should be a White Paper in due course is something that the Cabinet can consider later, perhaps in the autumn. Why not? [Interruption.] I must say that this is an awful lot of fuss about very little. If I had not known the Opposition's capacity for nit-picking, I should have expected congratulations on having saved money tomorrow on printing.

However understandably reticent the Prime Minister might be about commenting on pay policy now, is he aware that many of us recall that he was once the odd man out on this matter in a previous Administration?

He might be now.

Has not my right hon. Friend previously said that if the State intervenes too vigorously in pay matters it is the public sector workers who inevitably get clobbered?

That is why I am in favour of obtaining agreement on pay policy whenever we can get it. That is the fairest way of trying to share the rewards in any modern industrial and complex society, otherwise the public sector workers tend to get left out. However, this happens to be a democracy, and the Government must operate within the confines of the argreement that they can secure.

What about the price of beer going up every three months?

My right hon. Friend looks well on it anyway.

asked the Prime Minister if the public speech of the Chief Secretary to the Treasury concerning wages policy made on 27th June to the Industrial Society represents Government policy.

I refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave earlier today to the hon. Member for Blackpool, South (Mr. Blaker).

Since the social contract is involved in wages policy, could the Prime Minister clear up the mystery about what has happened to it? Last Thursday he told me that it was not intact, and in a Written Answer yesterday he said that it was not broken. What has happened? Has it died or did somebody just quietly cut its throat?

Knowing the care with which the hon. Gentleman frames his questions, I was extremely cautious in replying to the exact words that he used. Hence the difference in the definitions that he has just quoted. I try never to give the hon. Gentleman an opening if I can possibly avoid it.

Will the Prime Minister refuse to be dismayed by the course of the Government's discussions with the TUC and hold fast to the principle that, as long as the Government maintain their policies over the control and supply of money, free collective bargaining can be restored without any danger to the objective of reduced inflation?

I partially agree with the right hon. Gentleman. I agree with the part that says that free collective bargaining can be restored without undue damage. My objection to free collective bargaining in its raw state is that it makes for no sense of justice between the various groups of workers. That is why I should prefer—on every occasion that I could get it—an agreement with the trade unions in order to get a general approach. When the Chancellor makes his statement tomorrow, that will not be the end of the matter. Further discussions will have to take place with the trade unions—with their consent —in the autumn. In the present circumstances, the country will need all the help that it can get from the trade union movement in the months ahead.

Knowing my right hon. Friend's high regard for the House, may we assume that the Chancellor's statement will be made to the House? Will the Prime Minister make that quite clear, because tomorrow would be a particularly appropriate day for the statement?

Yes. It is the Chancellor's intention to come here at 11 o'clock to try to catch your eye, Mr. Speaker. I am sorry that the statement could not be made today, but the House must accept that there are considerable problems that must be overcome. I note the jubilation of the Opposition at the thought that the country is now moving into a new phase. I am glad to say that the patriotism of the trade unions is much greaer than that of right hon. and hon. Members opposite.

asked the Prime Minister if he will list his engagements for Thursday 14th July.

This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be holding further meetings with ministerial colleagues and others, including one with the staff side of the National Whitley Council.

In view of the continued delay and the refusal of the Government to give a statement today instead of tomorrow—which is extremely inconvenient to the House—will the Prime Minister say which of the Ministers with whom he will discuss these matters this afternoon will be in favour of wage increases above 10 per cent. next year and which of them will be in favour of a maximum of 10 per cent?

I suggest that the hon. Gentleman waits until tomorrow. I do not see why it should be inconvenient to travel on the Tube from Harrow tomorrow morning to hear an important statement.

Will the Prime Minister find time during his onerous duties today to drop a note of congratulation to the British Steel Corporation, which has been selected to provide technical know-how for a new plant in Venezuela? If the Prime Minister does that, will he add a postscript to say that, while the British Steel Corporation is doing that, it should also invest to increase iron-making capacity at Scunthorpe, because there is no doubt that ever-increasing quantities can be made there?

Writing such a letter would be a relief from some of my other duties. I am sure that the House will also be pleased to learn that the British Steel Corporation has landed a valuable management contract in Venezuela to build a new steel plant that will ultimately have a capacity of about 5 million tons. This is an example of a matter raised at our recent conference on industrial strategy, namely, that nationalised industries are moving into overseas work in conjunction with other firms in order that turnkey projects and other projects can be put together on a scale that would be beyond the competence of any individual firm. I hope that everybody will encourage this.

What further discussions will the Prime Minister have today with his colleagues concerning a settlement in Rhodesia? Will he confirm or deny the report in The Guardian today that the Government could not conceive of British Forces taking part in any peacekeeping force during an interim period of government prior to a settlement in Rhodesia?

I do not propose to comment on any newspaper report on these matters. We shall not have a Cabinet discussion on Rhodesia today, but the Foreign Secretary follows this matter continuously day by day and is in close touch with the American Secretary of State and the front-line Presidents.

When the Prime Minister has discussions later today, will he consider further explaining his opinion about wages control and why the Govern- ment insist upon a 12-month period between wage increases? It was announced today that Whitbread was increasing the price of beer by one penny and that when the company was accused of doing this before price control was introduced it emphasised that it did this every three months. Will my right hon. Friend try to do something about controlling prices, if not every three months, at least once a year?

I should be glad if my hon. Friend would put that question to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection. There are regulations and I hope that the brewers are adhering to them. If not, I am sure that the Secretary of State will follow up the matter.

Will the Prime Minister take this opportunity of welcoming the return to Rhodesia of Mr. Sithole, and will he make clear that if agreement can be reached between the Rhodesian regime and representatives of the African majority in Rhodesia the Government will not allow objections of the so-called Patriotic Front to stand in the way of our endorsing it?

It would be a little dangerous to do that because it would involve a deliberate choosing of sides by the Government. The Africans will have to choose their own leaders. I hope that everyone appreciates that. I am happy to see the return of the Rev. Ndabaningi Sithole, and I should also be happy to see the return of Mr. Nkomo and Mr. Mugabe. It is not for the House to try to decide on one group in this matter.