asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she is satisfied that local authorities are giving sufficient weight to the desires of parents in their allocation of school places.

No, Sir.

Does the Minister agree that this is a fundamental question? Does she also agree that any local authority, such as the Humberside County Council, which is elected on such a mandate by an overwhelming majority is in honour bound to carry it out?

I find the situation in Hull a very interesting one since, as the hon. Gentleman says, the Hull County Council successfully campaigned on the basis of parental choice. But it is my understanding that in the county of Humberside no such system exists. It is only in the city of Hull where the existing system of allocation has been altered, to a banding system to give an increase of about 2 per cent. in parental choice. Although this may be something of value, it has somewhat distorted the effects of the system of allocation which previously existed.

Is it not time that the myth of parental choice was dispelled—[Horn. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—and is it still not a fact that choice is governed almost entirely by the length of the parental purse?

It is not often that I say this, but I cannot agree with my hon. Friend. I do not accept that parental choice is a myth or that it is undesirable. Nor do I accept that the only fact which governs parental choice is the length of the purse. I do, however, accept that in the past this has too often appeared to have been a factor which was relevant.

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for those remarks about parental choice, with which I entirely agree. Has she seen the poll in today's Daily Telegraph which shows that the overwhelming majority of parents want a greater say in the education of their children? How can she reconcile those conclusions with the decision of her right hon. Friend that schools should not be free to publish their examination results? If parents are to be free to make an informed choice about the education of their children, surely they should have a full prospectus of a school's work, including examination successes and failures.

As the hon. Gentleman knows, we have already raised this question and have said, even in the Education Bill last year, that we are indeed in favour of parents having the maximum possible information available from schools. What we have done in the Green Paper is to point out the problems that exist in simply publishing a league table of public examination results which are not necessarily a guide to a school's success without some further knowledge of the background factors against which the school is working. We are in favour of greater parental information. What we are not in favour of is misleading information.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if, in view of the fact that the EEC is prepared to make funds available for the extension of the provision of free school milk, she will bring forward legislation to extend the present limited scheme.

As my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State told my right hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Mr. Irving) on 18th July, I am considering with colleagues how best to take advantage of the EEC subsidy arrangements, but I am not yet in a position to give details.

Is the Secretary of State aware that she can give great assistance in three different ways? She can help to—

The hon. Member cannot advise the Minister. He can only seek information.

I shall start again, Mr. Speaker. Is the Secretary of State aware that considerable help could be given to children's health by giving them milk and by extending this scheme? Will she consider helping the dairy industry as well, because there is plenty of milk about? If she were to agree to this, she could get back some of the crumbs from the massive deficit existing in the overall payments made to the Common Market.

My hon. Friend's questioning reveals a certain amount of advice which I shell take into account. I am aware of all those things, but my hon. Friend should know that the EEC subsidy is applicable only to milk that is already subsidised by local authorities. That is why we have to look at the milk already subsidised in some form or another and see how we can best use the EEC funds.

Does the Secretary of State agree that there is a very good bargain here involving a farther £10 million of European money, especially in view of the survey showing that about 500,000 children go to school without breakfast? Does she agree that this would be worth while?

Yes. In no way do I deny what the hon. Member has said. But this would apply only in cases where the local authority pays half or more of the subsidy. This is what presents the problem, because local authorities have already done their financing for this year. We are trying to find ways to overcome it.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, if the local authorities agree to this, the net cost above the present scheme would be only about £8 million a year to provide or restore free milk to the junior school age group? These are the children from whom the milk was withdrawn by her predecessor, the present Leader of the Opposition. Would not this be a fairly modest price to pay for a great nutritional benefit?

In the current year, where local authorities have already completed their budgets they would have to find another £8 million and this might have to come off teacher employment. We are not prepared to accept this. However, we are seeing whether other ways can be found to use the EEC subsidy to assist with milk which do not involve local authorities in having to find savings on this scale.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what examination she has made of the methods, impact and effects of computerised selection procedures carried out by local authorities for limited places in different kinds of comprehensive schools in their areas.

The Department does not monitor the admission arrangements of individual education authorities. Ministers have from time to time made clear their view, however, that they regard computerised selection as an inherently unsatisfactory method of determining which children should be admitted to individual schools.

I thank the Minister for that reply, but I must press her a little further. Is she aware that there is a lot of public uncertainty and parental anxiety about this matter? Would it not be a good idea to publish an objective study on the use of this method in different areas and to advise local authorities accordingly?

I am not sure that we need a study before we can advise local authorities. We have made it very clear over a period of time that we are unhappy about the allocation of school places on a random basis. This is not compatible with the equitable allocation of these places. We have given advice to those affected. The whole question of school allocation and choice was the subject of a draft circular earlier this year, and it is a matter that we are considering at present.

Does my hon. Friend agree that, whatever system or device is used for the allocation of children to various schools, there will be large numbers of parents who will be disappointed because they do not get their first choice? Does she not agree that emphasis should be placed on improving standards of all schools and making sure that all children have access to good educational opportunities rather than emphasising the mc spurious notion that parental choice may be met totally?

I entirely agree. It is impossible—or, at least, no local authority has ever succeeded in this—to give parents their first choice in every case. Parental choice is a useful and good criterion to be taken into account, but I agree that we should realise that parents cannot be satisfied in every case. The right approach is to make sure that every school is sufficiently good for parents not to feel so strongly about not getting their first choice. In addition, however, in any reasonable system giving validity to parental choice, we should see that in cases where parents are dissatisfied there is a proper system to enable them to appeal.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will make a statement on the proposed changes in the governing structure of the Schools Council.

On 7th July the governing council of the Schools Council accepted an interim report proposing a new structure for the Council. I welcome the Council's readiness to take a radical look at its method of operating. Although a good deal remains to be done before changes can be made, there has been progress and I hope that a satisfactory conclusion can be reached at the Council's next meeting.

Does the Secretary of State consider that the proposal for two parent representatives out of a total of 53 on the Schools Council is adequate? Does she consider that the representations of lay interests have been accommodated sufficiently? What view does she take about the proposed exclusion from all three bodies of representatives of the independent schools?

I am not sure whether the hon. Member is aware that the review is not being conducted by me. The Schools Council is conducting it. Therefore, it would not be right and proper for me to comment at this stage on the interim report. In that report the Schools Council has gone a long way greatly to increase lay representation. It has accepted the majority representations for both a convocation and a finance and priorities committee, and in doing so it has reflected the recommendation of the Tenth Report of the Expenditure Committee of this House. I believe that this is encouraging progress.

Is the Secretary of State aware that there is considerable agreement about the broadening of the lay element in the Schools Council? However, is she also aware that there is concern in other matters in addition to those mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Ashfield (Mr. Smith) a moment ago? There is concern about the fact that all teacher members, apart from one or two, are apparently drawn from the teaching unions and not from the professional bodies. Is she aware that in the convocation chamber the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals, the Free Churches and the representatives from the HNC and the GCE and CSE Examination Boards are no longer members by right and that this is causing great concern?

Higher education interests and the Churches have made it clear how they feel about exclusion from membership. I am in no doubt that their representations and the comments made in this House will be taken seriously into account by the Schools Council. However, it would be neither right nor appropriate for me to tell the Schools Council at this stage what it should do. All I can do is ask it to consider the points that have been made by hon. Members.

Whatever the final recommendations of the review, will the Secretary of State confirm that the views of parents as a group will not be underestimated just because they do not have powerful representative organisations to bat on their behalf in the same way as the teachers and the local authorities do?

That is a perfectly fair point. The Schools Council has been in existence for 12 years now, and this is the first occasion on which there has been a proposal that parents should be represented at all.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what arrangements she intends to make for the continuation of the adult literacy programme beyond 1978.

Since March 1976, plans have been made for the limited pump-priming grant of some £1 million per annum disbursed through the Adult Literacy Resource Agency to cease on 31st March 1978, after which the whole burden would revert to local education authorities as part of their general responsibilities for adult education. We are, however, carefully considering the recommendations made for the future by the agency through its parent body, the National Institute of Adult Education.

Is my hon. Friend aware that it is somewhat irresponsible to prime pumps if one ensures that the pumps run dry three years later? Is he further aware that many employees of both local authorities and voluntary agencies, which have carried out some important and useful work in the last three years, feel that their jobs are in jeopardy until the Government announce their plans? Will he make sure that this money is spent on adult literacy after April 1978? When does he intend to make a statement?

One cannot prime pumps forever, and I received the report of the National Institute only yesterday. I wish to pay tribute to the many people who were involved in the adult literacy scheme, especially the voluntary tutors and the BBC, for the tremendous work which has been undertaken.

Is the Minister aware that in some areas such as Gwynedd the job creation scheme has been used to advantage? In view of the fact that the job creation scheme will be extended beyond 1978, will he give an assurance that nothing will debar authorities from using the adult literacy programme after 1978?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that nothing will be done to debar local authorities from using the scheme. It is a matter for the Manpower Services Commission and the authorities.

Is it the Minister's intention to publish the report of the National Institute of Adult Education? Is he aware that a parliamentary reply recently established that over 100,000 people had benefited from this programme? In those circumstances, will he favourably consider a request from various bodies to continue the programme so as to benefit a great many more people?

I can see no difficulties in the report being published. However, I should inform the House that I received the report only yesterday, and I note that there is a plan to continue schemes focused on adult literacy. I am considering that matter carefully.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she has any proposals to alter the structure and membership of the Arts Council.

My right hon. Friend has no proposals for amending the Council's charter. Under the charter it is her function, in consultation with my right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Scotland and Wales, to appoint new members as vacancies occur.

Is the Minister aware that two years ago I was one of the few politicians who saw fit to risk his reputation in defending the pile of bricks that was on display at the Tate Gallery? I am prepared to do so again if I can be assured by the Minister that he will make appointees to the Arts Council from among those who have a sufficient quantity of liberalism and conservatism.

Yes, Sir. I notice that the hon. Gentleman missed out another party in the House. I believe that the Council should be expert and efficient. In appointing a body of people who command the confidence of taxpayers, who pay money to the Arts Council for its wisdom and objectivity, I am certain that my right hon. Friend seeks to achieve a balanced Council.

May I welcome on behalf of the Opposition the rejection of the proposals for democratising the Arts Council made by the hon. Member for Wolverhampton, North-East (Mrs. Short)? Although we would not wish to have a separate Ministry for the arts, will the Minister consider, in recognition of the fact that this country has emerged as a world power in the arts, changing the name of his Department to the Department of Education, Science and the Arts? [Interruption.] I am sure Labour Members will appreciate that our post-war successes have taken place in the arts.

I agree with the hon. Gentleman that we have led the arts throughout the world in many respects since the war. That position has been well recognised by every country in the world. As for any change of name of my Department, I believe that the hon. Gentleman has proposed such a change on other occasions but it is a matter for the Prime Minister to decide the names of Departments. I have no doubt that that matter can be taken into account.

Will my hon. Friend take note that last year, under the heading of "mobile sculpture", three students walked around East Anglia with a yellow plank on their heads? Will he also take note that in that artistic tour of East Anglia the students called in at a good proportion of pubs on the way? Will he also take note of the fact that this artistic escapade was financed by grants from the Arts Council? [HON. MEMBERS: "Shame."] Will he also bear in mind that most of my constituents failed to understand this manoeuvre?

I never cease to be amazed at what students do, but it is rare that what they do is financed by the Arts Council. I believe that there was a great deal of public concern over this matter which was expressed at the time. I know that my noble Friend examined the matter very carefully indeed. However, having set up the Arts Council, we should not as a House then seek to dictate how it should spend its money.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will make a statement on her dis- cussions with local authority associations on specific grants to local authorities for education purposes.

I met representatives of the Council of Local Education Authorities on 18th April for a first discussion of my proposals for introducing a limited measure of specific grant for education purposes. Since then a group of officials from my Department and the local authority associations have been considering the detailed implications.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that, because of the large reduction in rate support grant adversely affecting most counties, especially Cambridgeshire, drastic reductions are having to be made in education in this financial year? In further discussions and decisions on this matter, will she ensure that everything possible is done to make up for the Government's folly and unfairness in reducing the rate support grant in the way they did?

I am aware that there have been difficulties in some counties in the last year, although it is right and fair to say that the Government wanted to give some priority to inner city areas, from which I do not dissociate myself [HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"] Because those areas have much greater needs than many people are aware of. However, the question relates to specific grants, and the purpose of such grants is limited and clearly defined and is very important in obtaining additional money for particular educational purposes. Without that power, such additional money is hard to come by.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the essential areas of provision should be language training for immigrants? Does she further agree that there is a desperate shortage of such training in many inner city areas, and that this prevents immigrants being given equal opportunities in terms of jobs, housing and other matters? Will she seek to ensure that as much money as possible is allocated to local authorities for this purpose?

The question indicates the difficulty, because some additional money is being made available for the education of immigrants under Section 11 of the Local Government Act 1966 which is administered by the Home Office, although the subject is concerned with education. Similarly, funds are made available for training through the Department of Employment. None of these funds can be made available through the Department of Education, for the straightforward reason that we have no power to do so. In my view, one of the crying needs is to give more positive help to disadvantaged children, immigrant and non-immigrant. At present we cannot do so.

Since it was not in the Green Paper as a priority, will the right hon. Lady say whether it is a Government priority to promote vocational courses in further education? If so, does she intend to adjust the grant provisions, because grants are now so difficult to come by in respect of local authorities for technician and non-advanced work whereas they are generous for degree courses, which in some areas are needed like a hole in the head?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that the Green Paper devoted itself to the compulsory years of education between 5 and 16. He will also know from answers to previous Questions that my Department is monitoring the level and number of discretionary grants so that we can discover just what the situation is. I share the view that this is an area where we should almost certainly do something urgently.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she will pay an official visit to the schools of the city of Leicester.

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

When my hon. Friend or any other Ministers visit the city of Leicester, will they bear in mind the grave concern in Leicester and in all cities about the growing power of county councils in education? Is she aware that Leicestershire County Council has withdrawn all grant aid to village halls, voluntary youth services and community centre projects? Will she denounce and renounce the Government's previously expressed intention to give local authorities the power to allocate such grants rather than retaining it, as all voluntary service workers hope, within her Department?

I am aware that in various parts of the country, including Leicester, there is some remaining conflict between the previous city councils and the new county councils which have adopted the powers previously employed by cities and boroughs. I am aware that in some cases in these areas there has been difficulty in assimilating the different policies and programmes of the two bodies that were previously concerned. Therefore, in one or two areas such as Leicester there is a demand to reduce the power of county councils. I must say to my hon. and learned Friend that this is not a matter for my Department and that, although we are aware of the difficulties that have been created in some areas, we very much hope that those difficulties can be resolved by local negotiation and local co-operation. [HON. MEMBERS: "Too long."]. My hon. Friend referred to the withdrawal of grant aid from other county council functions. These are, of course, powers which are exercised by county councils and which we have at present no intention to withdraw.

Order. It is two minutes past three and we have only reached Question No. 8. We are going far too slowly today.

Will my hon. Friend impress on her Government colleagues the need to continue the urban aid schemes which are providing help outside the formal education system and are doing a great deal of good work in cities such as Leicester with different ethnic groups? If this aid does not continue, at least one scheme in Leicester—the Youth Foundation, which is doing good work in the West Indian community—will go out of existence in the near future.

I am aware of the great need for these schemes in a number of parts of the country, and I am aware of how great a need Leicester has and how greatly it has benefited. I think that it is the intention that such schemes should continue.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether charges for school meals will be increased in the autumn of 1977.

Yes, Sir. As already announced in the public expenditure White Paper (Cmnd. 6721), it is the Government's intention to increase the school meal charge to 25p this autumn. Entitlement to free school meals will be substantially widened.

How much is the present total net cost to the Exchequer of subsidised school meals, and what will it be from September? Are there not educational purposes on which this money might be better spent?

I am afraid that I cannot give the total net cost without notice of the question, but I can say that the cost of the revised remission is about £25 million, whereas if there had been no increase in charges of any kind the cost to authorities would have been between £60 million and £90 million. It would be about £90 million in a full year.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is general recognition that the school meals scheme is a very important contribution to the health of the nation and that for that reason there is a great deal of anxiety that the extended entitlement to free school meals should be properly taken up? Will she give an assurance that her Department will concern itself with this problem?

I thank my hon. Friend for what he has said. Free school meals are among the most widely taken up of any kind of income-related benefit. According to the latest figures there is about a 76 per cent. uptake, which is one of the highest of all such income-related benefits. If this position continues, another 625,000 children will be brought within the ambit of free school meals, which is almost a doubling of the present figure. That includes a rise in income of about £20 a week within which children will be entitled to free school meals.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what representations have been made about the Government's proposals regarding charges for school meals for the next educational year.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what representations she has received about the Government's proposal to raise the price of school meals to 25p.

My Department received 35 letters about the proposed increase to 25p. Sixteen of these were in favour of the increase this autumn, 15 were against, three thought that the charge should go up but by different amounts according to the age of the pupils, and one suggested that the charge should go up to 20p this autumn and to 25p next April.

Did the right hon. Lady receive any representations about the increased number of free school meals? Does she realise that in East Sussex alone this will cost the county council £6,300 per school day? [HON. MEMBERS: "What a shame."] It is, indeed, a shame. When our education services are being pared to the bone, contrary to all promises in the last Labour manifesto, is there not a better use for these limited Government funds to improve our education processes and teaching methods instead of giving these additional free school meals as the right hon. Lady has planned?

If I may say so, the hon. Gentleman is hopelessly out of date. The Government have announced that the full additional cost of £25 million which arises from the extension of free school meals to about 625,000 more children will be borne by central Government funds and will not fall upon the rate support grant. We have gone further and said that we shall discuss with the local authorities the best way in which this money should be paid to help them. There is, therefore, no question of their having to bear the cost. In addition, about 625,000 children will not have to have the 15p a day paid for them. The extra £1·25 per child will be borne also by central Government funds.

Is it the fact that the Government propose to put up the charge for school meals from 15p to 25p this September? If that be so, do they not have to lay the orders to that effect this week?

The orders are being laid today. The discussions between my Department and the local education authorities about the way to reimburse education authorities are now going ahead.

Will my right hon. Friend take careful note of the fact that some local authorities are attempting to deal with this problem by alternative types of meal, in particular snack meals? When these experiments, such as that in Essex, are completed, will she make a close review of the matter before encouraging further local authorities to implement such schemes?

I know of my hon. Friend's concern on this matter. I say at once that while authorities may, of course, introduce snack meals as an alternative to the school meal, should deplore any attempt to replace the school meal with a snack meal which has nothing like the same nutritional value.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she has received any representations on the incidence of alcoholism among schoolchildren.

No, Sir.

1s there not growing evidence that drinking and alcoholism among teenagers is becoming as great a menace now as drug-taking was in the 1960s? I welcome the publicity given in schools in regard to excessive drinking, but does not the Under-Secretary feel that the same horrific approach as is employed to point out the dangers of smoking might well be employed in this case? Will she give this her backing?

I think that the hon. Gentleman is confusing the problems of drinking—even excessive drinking—and alcoholism, which is a completely different degree of difficulty. I do not accept that there is a great deal of evidence of excessive drinking. There have been one or two reports, and in at least one of those the person preparing the report said that the incidence of such cases was minimal. This is an area which we are watching and which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services is already watching, in connection with preventive medicine, but it is not my understanding that there is great evidence that there is a serious problem at present.

Does my hon. Friend agree that we should not exaggerate this problem and thereby convey the wrong impression and detract from education generally? Does she agree that there is deep concern among schoolchildren about the increase of drinking among adults?

Yes. I would add only that in a recent inquiry by Her Majesty's inspectors only one case of drunkenness in schools was found, and this concerned someone who had indulged at a party outside school and had a hangover the following day.

Is the Under-Secretary aware that her replies this afternoon will be regarded by many people as showing a great deal of complacency? Has she read the report of the Medical Council on Alcoholism or of the National Council of Women which recently showed that about 50 per cent. of 13-to-15-year-olds drink on a fairly regular basis? Does she not feel that this implies that the Government should be considering taking further action to bring home to parents the importance of instructing children to appreciate this problem and the importance of instituting such education in schools as well?

There is a difference between drinking, even excessive drinking, and alcoholism. I accept fully that it is the responsibility of the school and parents and not of the schools alone. It is not the duty of schools alone to remedy the ills of society. I would add—perhaps it may be the fault of a politician—that I would rather be accused of complacency than of inaccuracy.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will make a statement on her meeting with the administrators of the British Broadcasting Corporation and the Independent Broadcasting Authority on the subject of the poor language content of children's programmes.

I have had informal discussions with both broadcasting authorities. These covered a wide range of educational topics including language, and I think that our exchanges of views were while.

While I welcome the Secretary of State's initiative in this matter, will she say whether any mention was made in those discussions of the debasement of the English language by the pop music morons on BBC1 and commercial radio, whose programmes are listened to by many children? If she has any further meetings, will she remind the broadcasting authorities that even disc jockeys should be both literate and intelligent?

The Annan Report found that children's programmes specifically directed to children were both a delight to listen to and to watch and had considerable educational content. I add my tribute to that. It is my view that the problem arises in programmes largely aimed at adults but which are also watched by children. The hon. Gentleman, like myself occasionally, hears these programmes. Of course it is true that in some of them language is used in a very loose, inaccurate and sloppy way. I have drawn this to the attention of the broadcasting authorities, while I recognise that what the authorities do in children's programmes is undoubtedly of great educational help.

Does the BBC still argue, as it used to do, that correct language does not matter? Is it not true that sloppy language in the end leads to inaccuracy of meaning, and is not this a grave drawback to the career prospects of children who suffer from that kind of approach?

In my view, radio programmes are on the whole quite good in this respect. The trouble arises, I think, more with television and to some extent with pop music programmes. I think that some of the criticism which is made of children's literacy may take insufficiently into account some of the impact of the mass media on children's literacy.

Given that television in particular is one of the most widely accessible educational instruments, and in view of the doubt about the future of many colleges of education, will the right hon. Lady press for closer liaison between the broadcasting authorities and the colleges of education, especially remedial educa- tion departments, with a view to the language content of programmes being up-graded?

There is already quite close liaison. Indeed, there has been very close liaison over such matters as the adult literacy programme, to which attention has already been drawn, as well as the forthcoming effort to introduce basic English to immigrant mothers for whom English is not their first language. In all this work, close co-operation between the BBC and the education service has brought great benefits to all our people.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the BBC produces programmes for deaf children which are much appreciated by both the children and their parents? Second, while I am about it, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether she agrees that the facilities for deaf children are not as good as they ought to be and, in particular, that they are very poor for Andrew Walters of 19 Damsbrook Drive, Clowne, about whom I have made representations to her Department? Will my right hon. Friend give a guarantee that this matter will be dealt with urgently so that young Andrew can be taught at school starting next term?

The programme "Vision On", which is for deaf children, is an outstanding programme which has been much praised. With regard to the subject of the latter part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question—I congratulate him on his ingenuity in introducing it—we are doing all we can.

Will the Secretary of State make clear that she does not agree with the view that all pop music programmes are moronic and contribute to illiteracy? Is it not a fact that most of them are entertaining and some of them are even instructive—including the "Jimmy Young Show", on which I appeared this morning?

I am sure the hon. Gentleman appreciates that it was even more instructive when I was on it last month.

Since the House has indicated overwhelmingly that it wishes to move quickly on to substantive Questions to the Prime Minister, I hope that the first five hon. Members who have put down what I call "shot-in-the-dark" Questions will be brief and help the House to move on to substantive Questions.

rose—

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Order. I shall be pleased to take a point of order after Questions. Otherwise, we shall use up Prime Minister's Question Time.

With respect, Mr. Speaker, may I put my point of order to you now? I shall be brief. Have you considered that, if you adopt this practice, the effect will be—[HON. MEMBERS: "Not now."]—I wish that hon. Members opposite would be quiet—the effect will be to encourage the putting down of that sort of Question because, as I understand it, you will not be in a position to call the Leaders of any Opposition parties on any of those Questions? Thus, we shall not even reach the most important of the specific and substantive matters today—that is, unemployment—with an opportunity for any of the Leaders of Oppositon parties to be called.

Order. I was hoping that we should move down fairly quickly, if hon. Members would co-operate.

asked the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for 26th July.

In addition to my duties in this House, I shall be holding meetings with ministerial colleagues and others.

I assure you, Mr. Speaker, that I believe that my shot will certainly not be a shot in the dark, or, if it is, I hope that it will lighten the darkness on the Government side. What callous comment has the Prime Minister to make on today's unemployment figure of 1·63 million? Second, in view of the Liberal Party meeting and tomorrow's NEC meeting, will the right hon. Gentleman spare a thought today about where he stands on matters of political principle, if he has any?

As I have forecast, the unemployment figures are disappointing—[HON. MEMBERS: "Disappointing?"]—and they are of a size which shows the extent to which we still have to move in this direction. They are, of course, affected by the growth in the work force, which over the past two or three years has grown by about 500,000. They are affected also by the levels of inflation and by the extent of the world recession. These are all matters on which we are continuing to work, and by overcoming inflation we shall help that situation.

asked the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 26th July 1977.

I refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave earlier today to the hon. Member for Conway (Mr. Roberts).

In the course of his official duties, will the Prime Minister comment again on the unemployment figures? Does he realise that they represent 1,614,000 personal tragedies, and is he aware that such figures would have been inconceivable four years ago? How much worse do the figures have to be before his Government and those who sustain them in power realise that we need a change of policies or, better still, a change of Government?

I appreciate the significance and seriousness of this matter. I appreciate also the extent to which there has been benefit through the total number of workers who have been helped by the Government's special measures, such as the temporary employment subsidy, the job creation scheme and other such schemes. All of these are currently helping about 313,000 people. As regards change, I listened closely to the debate last week. I heard no suggestion whatever from the Opposition about policies which would have improved the present figure. All I heard were further ways of cutting public expenditure, which would increase it.

I wish to indicate to the House that I intend to allow supplementary questions on the last of these Questions, No. Q5, to run on because we shall not reach the substantive Questions.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Now that we live in a non-deferential society, are we required to bow to your ruling?

Order. I believe that the hon. and learned Member for Kinross and West Perthshire (Mr. Fairbairn) was not getting at me, but at somebody else.

asked the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for 26th July.

I refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave earlier to the hon. Member for Conway (Mr. Roberts).

Will the Prime Minister take the opportunity of making a statement, either today or at some other time before the Summer Recess, about implementation of the report of the Royal Commission on the Press, with particular regard to the key areas about strengthening the Press Council—which was the majority view of the Commission—and to the sort of aid that might be given by the State to newspapers in difficulties?

On the first matter, I certainly have much sympathy with that proposal, but the report was not published until three weeks ago and we have given until 31st December for consultation, discussion and proposals, including comments on the proposals in the minority report as well as in the majority one. We prefer to reserve our views until then. Help for newspapers in difficulty is an issue that should be considered at the same time.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will list his official engagements for 26th July 1977.

I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave earlier to the hon. Member for Conway (Mr. Roberts).

Before we rise for the recess, will the Prime Minister set the Lord President—as a former working journalist—the holiday task of writing the Crossman memoirs on the Callaghan Cabinet? Should not future historians know the precise self-serving circumstances in which the principle of collec- tive responsibility was abandoned and Ministers allowed to vote against their own legislation?

I should be happy to leave my literary and historical fate in the hands of my right hon. Friend. I am sure that he would do it justice and, with his great pen, this Administration could have no better chronicler.

asked the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for 26th July.

I refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave earlier to the hon. Member for Conway (Mr. Roberts).

On the substantial if not substantive question of a return to free collective bargaining, if the Prime Minister discusses that matter today, will he recognise that, although it may correct the anomalies that have arisen during the pay policy, it will recreate the one of the most basic inequalities—that of the virtual poverty of low-paid workers, for whom the Government have done little in spite of the pay policy? Will my right hon. Friend dispel the prevalent myth that low-paid workers have done well during the pay policy and say what the Government propose to do to help them?

Low-paid workers have done relatively better, but that does not mean that they have done absolutely better as a result of the last two rounds of the pay policy. It is—and has been—Government policy to try to help families, especially those on low pay, by a number of measures of which my hon. Friend is aware

To return to the unemployment level of 6·8 per cent.—a level that we have not seen in this country since the 1930s—will the Prime Minister now accept responsibility for unemployment and stop peddling the illusion that all the economic indicators are going in the right direction?

The responsibility for unemployment rests with a number of factors of which the Government are willing to accept their share. Those factors include the level of inflation in this country, the world recession, against which British trade is doing extremely well—for example, our volume of exports was up by 6 per cent. in the last quarter—and a number of other such matters. While everyone should undoubtedly take this matter seriously, it is in nobody's interest to pretend that there is a magic solution. If there were such a solution, we might have heard it last week.

Does the Prime Minister accept—in spite of all the protestations of the Leader of the Opposition and some of her supporters—the view expressed this morning in the City and on the Stock Exchange—[Interruption.] That reaction is quite expected. The view was that the policy always demanded by the Opposition has been responsible for the unemployment level, because during the last 18 months there has not been enough distribution of money in wages and salaries? Will the Prime Minister now completely reject the counsel of the Opposition and start the process of reflation which is the only hope for getting us out of this level of unemployment?

I agree that we must try to obtain growth in the economy as soon as we have overcome the rate of inflation. That is essential and it is something upon which the Chancellor of the Exchequer has already made moves through the last Budget. My right hon. Friend injected about £2¼ billion into the economy this year and that made a start. As for rejecting the policies of the Opposition, had we adopted them there would now be hundreds of thousands of people out of work in Leyland and Chrysler on both of which matters the Opposition opposed our policy.

In view of the disastrous unemployment figures for Wales that were announced today, will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the dismantling of the regional policy that the Government have followed by, for example, doing away with the regional employment premium? Will he institute positive economic planning to overcome these problems in Wales and other areas?

The hon. Gentleman is totally mistaken. I was discussing last week with a number of people in Wales the great boom that will come from the steel investment of £835 million at Margam, the £40 million investment project at Hoover at Merthyr Tydfil, of which the Government will supply about £10 million, and from a host of other schemes by which we are helping to maintain the Welsh industrial structure. I assure the hon. Gentleman, as he does not seem to know much about the subject, that that structure is now much more resilient than it was 30 years ago.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is only one thing that is less convincing than a nationalist who wants a reflationary policy and who supports the Leader of the Opposition, and that is the Leader of the Opposition herself who, as a Tory arch monetarist with an ideological opposition to equality, has absolutely no authority or right to come to the House to berate my right hon. Friend about our employment policies when the deliberate intention of the Tory Party is to introduce mass unemployment as the best means of controlling the working class?

I do not know how Plaid Cymru will be able to defend in Wales its consistent support of the Tory Opposition that is trying to create further unemployment by its monetary and fiscal measures.

Is the Prime Minister aware that within the global figure there are 194,000 unemployed in Scotland? He claims that no alternative policies were put forward in our recent economic debate, but will he read my speech on that occasion and take urgent steps to increase the budget of the Scottish Development Agency? If he is not satisfied that the Secretary of State for Scotland is taking this action, will he replace him with someone who can?

I am satisfied that the Secretary of State is taking the necessary action. I repeat, through the House, to the country that the first essential is to overcome inflation. If we have wage and earnings increases that exceed 20 per cent., there will be nothing to stop unemployment going higher. Our first task is to overcome this, and I ask for the support of everyone in the country in doing so.

Will my right hon. Friend have talks with Ministers in the Department of Trade about the collapse of discussions on the Multi-Fibre Arrangement? Will he give an assurance to the workers and the industry in this country that, come what may, the Government will give them the support they need?

Negotiations on the MFA were brought to a halt yesterday because of the failure to secure agreement between a number of countries. Australia, India and Brazil, as well as EEC countries, had difficulties about the proposals. There must now be a series of bilateral discussions that I hope will lead to our being able to sign the protocol towards the end of the year and to renew the MFA. In any case, our textile industry cannot be allowed to dwindle away. We must do our best to ensure that there is international agreement—my hon. Friend has advocated that as the best solution—but, short of that, we shall have to think of turning to bilateral solutions.

The Government are responsible for unemployment and it is to the Government that the country must look for an improvement in the figures. Is it not a fact that while the Labour Party was in opposition it trumpeted across the Dispatch Box that there was a magic cure? Have not the Government's economic policies failed totally, and is not the Prime Minister aware that it is no substitute for a policy to start blaming the Opposition?

I do not accept that the Government's policies are not succeeding. They have been shown con- sistently to be succeeding. That is why, every time there appears to be a threat of the Government being challenged, there is a substantial decline in confidence at home and overseas. As to the future, the House and the country must accept that the world's unemployment figures—[Interruption.] I accept the correction and exclude those countries where the Governments can take dictatorial powers. In the Western industrialised world we are going through a phase in which unemployment, in percentage and actual terms, is higher than ever. This is true in many countries, and, despite the discussions that the leaders of the Western world have been having, it has not been possible to find a solution to the problem. There is a great challenge to society here and I am not going to pretend that there is a quick or easy way out.