asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he plans to meet representatives of the Prison Officers' Association.

I met representatives of the Prison Officers' Association as recently as last night.

Is the Home Secretary aware that the frustrations in the prison service are now so great that they are planned to explode into industrial action, from midnight on Sunday, which, if sustained, is bound to create riots in prisons up and down the country? Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether it was his personal decision not to publish an interim part of the May committee report on prison officers' pay?

On the latter part of the question, it was the decision of Mr. Justice May, who is in charge of the investigation. I agree with him. In reply to the first part of the question, this is involved in the Civil Service dispute. It is an overtime ban which, I agree, could have very bad results. But we shall have to wait and see what happens next week.

What on earth was my right hon. Friend doing meeting the prison officers last night? More importantly, does he not accept that it would help both prison officers and those for whom they have responsibility if there were a changed emphasis in their role away from the custodial to a more welfare-orientated function? Would it not be useful if the professional training and status of prison officers could be enhanced by further training so that they could involve themselves in welfare work with prisoners within prison and outside in places such as hostels and detoxification centres?

In reply to the first part of the question, I met the POA, as I have done a number of times recently, because it is my job to do so, in the context of some of the problems of the prison service. On the latter part, I think that there is a great deal in my hon. Friend's suggestion. Much is already done, particularly in some psychiatric prisons. This is a laudable ideal. It is not just a question of expenditure, but I hope for developments over the years. I know that the Prison Officers' Association has this matter very much in mind.

Can the Home Secretary explain why his Government have been such a mitigated success in relation to the prison service that the Prison Officers' Association is so utterly and completely dissatisfied with him?

When the hon. Gentleman relates his remarks in such a narrowly political aspect, there is no doubt that we are coming to an election. He will find that this matter extends back over a long period and is very complicated. It is concerned with the changed role of the prison service, the size of prisons and the number of violent people who are in prisons. It does not alter overnight. It is a deep-seated problem.

Is not one of the ways of relieving pressure on prison officers to relieve the pressure on the numbers in prison by providing alternative methods of treatment? Could not something be done for the detoxification centre in South Leeds, about which my right hon. Friend will be well aware?

The centre is not in south Leeds, and I am well aware of that. Extra money has been provided, and money will need to be provided constantly over a period. Although it is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services, I believe that we can get through the problem if the methods now being used are changed. I want the detoxification unit in Leeds to continue.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects to complete his review of the factors affecting the implementation of section 47 of the Criminal Law Act 1977—partial suspension of sentences.

We have the matter under continuing review, but I do not think that the hard-pressed prison system can yet accept either the extra work that implementation might involve or the risk that larger numbers might be committed by the courts.

Does the hon. Gentleman recall saying on Report during the passage of the Criminal Law Bill 1977 that it was better to have such a provision on the statute book than to miss the boat? Does he agree that the partially suspended sentence, which the section provides and which he introduced on Report, represents the best practical means of reducing overcrowding in the prisons while preserving the ability of the courts to pass sentences that mark the severity of the offence?

That is right, and that is why the provision is on the statute book. The hon. and learned Gentleman should be aware that the climate has been changed somewhat by the Conservative Party's insistence upon short, sharp sentences. The fear exists in the prison service that far from partially suspended sentences being used instead of prison sentences they will be used to give the short, sharp shock that many people are looking for. We know that it was not really meant seriously, but some outside the House take the Conservative Party seriously.

Is my hon. Friend aware that I have always opposed the section? I did so before it was enacted. It will have the effect of increasing the prison population at a time when there is no room in the prisons. Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that there is a body of opinion that says that the section is thoroughly retrogressive, acts against good penal practice and should never be implemented?

That depends upon the way in which it is used. If it is used instead of fully custodial sentences, I believe that it will be a progressive measure. It is precisely the fear that my hon. and learned Friend articulates that has caused us to pause and to consider whether, in the present state and size of the prison population, it would place unacceptable burdens upon the prison service.

Contrary to what the hon. and learned Member for Bradford, West (Mr. Lyons) has said, did not the hon. Gentleman concede in Committee during the passage of the Criminal Law Act 1977 that the recommendation would reduce the prison population? Does he agree that it is one of the most certain ways of dealing with the present crisis in the prisons caused by over-population?

No. Part of my speech was to the effect that it was my hope and intention that the courts would use the section in such a way as to reduce the prison population but that I could not guarantee that that would be so. At present the prison authorities are worried lest there should be an increase in sentences to give people a taste of imprisonment, thereby increasing the prison population.

rose—

We shall have to move a little quicker now.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement about the figures for indictable offences recorded by the police in England and Wales in 1978, as compared with 1977.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will make a statement about the recently published statistics of crime on London.

In 1978 the number of indictable offences recorded by the police in England and Wales was about 2½ million. I am glad to be able to say that this was 3 per cent. fewer than in 1977, the first year-on-year fall since 1973. The number of indictable offences recorded by the Metropolitan Police in 1978 was about 567,000, which was also fewer than in 1977.

As there are many who are concerned about the state of law and order, will my right hon. Friend explain why the media have not made a great song and dance about the figures? They have been hardly mentioned. Why have not the Opposition and others drawn attention to the figures? Has not my right hon. Friend publicised them to the media? Perhaps I should be criticising him. The figures represent a welcome change and I think that the general public should receive the message that a Labour Administration leads to a happier and more law-abiding society.

In some curious fashion the press statement statistical bulletin that I issued some weeks ago was hardly mentioned in the press. When similar figures were issued a year ago the press used them extensively. The newspapers always make a subjective analysis of political matters.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the figures for London are especially pleasing? East London has many social problems, but the figures indicate that the effectiveness of this area of Government responsibility is considerably greater than many Opposition Members constantly suggest.

I agree. I have made special arrangements for Messrs. Saatchi and Saatchi to have the figures in case it uses them in the next few weeks and the Opposition do not get the facts right.

For the avoidance of any doubt, does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that anyone with any interest in our country will welcome an reduction in the crime figures? Does he accept that his hon. Friend the Member for Brigg and Scunthorpe (Mr. Ellis) is wrong? I have already expressed my welcome of the figures publicly. Funnily enough, my welcome of the figures was no more publicised than the right hon. Gentleman's release of them. May I also say to the right hon. Gentleman that when crimes of violence and vandalism are increasing there can be no room for complacency? However, any change for the better is to be welcomed.

It is not a matter of complacency. When the overall figure is increasing there are some figures within the total that are falling and some that are rising. My complaint is that when the figures are increasing responsibility is laid firmly at the door of the Labour Government. Nobody considers the figures that lie within the total. I welcome what the right hon. Gentleman has said because I know that he will ensure that this aspect of law and order does not arise during the general election campaign.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that all Opposition Members welcome the improvement of 3 per cent.? Of course, the figures were not published until about a fortnight ago. Does he agree that the way in which statistics are compiled means that as inflation grips the country the number of reportable offences of criminal damage increases? Does he also agree that if it had not been for inflation the number of reported cases of criminal damage would have been static instead of producing a 13 per cent. rise? Will be look into that?

The £20 limit has had an effect on the figures in recent years. That is all the more reason why those who do not understand statistics, such as advertising agents, should be instructed before they say anything about them.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is satisfied with the level of recruitment into the police force.

I am pleased to say that police recruiting continues to improve. Strength increased from 102,086 at the end of 1974 to 109,075 at the end of 1978, a total increase of 6,989. During January 1979 there was a further increase of 869, bringing the total strength to 109,944 and total increase since 1974 to 7,858.

Does the hon. Lady agree that the figures are at least superficially encouraging? Will she be good enough to explain how many of the new recruits are women? Does she agree that many of the difficult jobs that have to be done by police officers are not able to be undertaken by women officers and that therefore the figures may be slightly artificial?

I regret that the hon. Gentleman is so churlish as not to be able to give a strong welcome to the total increase in the strength of the police. All he can find to do is chauvinistically attack the policewomen in his own constituency, who, I am sure are doing a very valuable job.

Will the Minister further confirm that, as regards provincial police forces comparing the main period of office of this Labour Government and the main period of office of the last Conservative Government, the number of policemen on duty has increased and that the gap between authorised establishment and those on duty is considerably less?

Yes, I can confirm what my hon. Friend says. The increase is also largely due, according to the full figures for the last quarter, to the recent pay award to the police forces.

Although I strongly agree with the hon. Lady about the value of the pay award and the Edmund-Davies report—though we would have liked to see that award paid all at once—and although we certainly welcome any increase in the strength of the police force, may I ask the hon. Lady whether she agrees that resignations are still appallingly high and that there is now talk of many more resignations later this year? Does that give grounds for complacency or contentment at all?

I cannot agree with the hon. Gentleman. A substantial part of the drop in wastage which has occurred over the second half of 1978—a drop of 30 per cent.—has been caused by deferment of retirement due to this pay increase.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether there are any plans to lower the minimum age of recruitment into the police service from 18½ years to 18 years.

We have no such plans.

Bearing in mind that people are maturing earlier and that those aged 18 can do jury service and enter into a legal contract, why can they not join the police force at 18? Why should there be this strange anomaly between the Armed Forces and the police forces?

This subject has been given a lot of consideration. The Association of Chief Police Officers considered the age limit only two months ago and said that no further reduction was necessary at the moment. The present age limit means that after allowing for initial training very few constables are on the streets below the age of 19, and that is what the association prefers.

Those figures are welcome. Since recruitment is obviously being stepped up, does my hon. Friend think that it is possible to indicate to chief constables, particularly in the inner urban areas, that it is advisable where possible to put new recruits into training in the community and on the streets, rather than driving around in patrol vehicles?

That is a matter for the chief constables. Any boy or girl who leaves school at 16 and wishes to enter the police force can join the police cadet service at the age of 16.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether there is an entry on the Metropolitan Police computer on the hon. Member for Lewisham, West; and if so, what it contains.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether there is an entry on the Metropolitan Police computer on the hon. Member for Bethnal Green and Bow; and, if so. what it contains.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether there is an entry on the Metropolitan Police computer on the hon. Member for City of Paddington; and, if so, what it contains.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether there is an entry on the Metropolitan Police computer on the hon. Member for Stockport, North; and if so, what it contains.

I refer my hon. Friends to the reply that I gave to questions by my hon. Friends the Members for Birmingham, Selly Oak (Mr. Litterick) and Newham, North-West (Mr. Lewis) on 27 March.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that that non-answer means that he is not saying anything about anything. Will be confirm that this computer has the capacity for 40 million entries and has, so far, cost the taxpayer over £10 million? Is he also aware that in a recent court case it came to light that an individual, with no criminal record, was on this computer simply because he was opposed to blood sports? Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Green Paper which he is to issue on Friday about open Government really will not mean much until he starts answering questions of this kind and giving people the right of access to their own records?

The report of the committee on data protection makes it abundantly clear that those people whose names appear on computers in this way should not have the right to know what is recorded about them. If they did the purpose of such information would be stultified and the fight against crime could become even more difficult. I can assure my hon. Friends that the political beliefs of individuals are of no interest or concern to the police. What the police are concerned with is the prevention and detection of crime and the maintenance of public order. Unless an hon. Member, or anybody else, is involved in fraud or crime they do not have any worry whatsoever.

We all want the police to have the best possible records about criminals and criminality, but is it not true, contrary to what my right hon. Friend has just said, that the specification for the purchase of the police computer mentions that in addition to crime and criminals, quite outside criminality. 1,150,000 Britons are indexed according to what are called their "areas of interest". There are 27 such areas of interest. Will my right hon. Friend put into the Library a list of those 27 areas? Is not this move to computerisation taking a long step, which will lead this hitherto free country, in the direction of the "Gulag Archipelago"?

I have looked very carefully at this subject over a long period. Information is collected by the police on a wide variety of matters. When it is put on computers there is no change in essence. Nevertheless, there are problems about which we should be concerned. The Metropolitan Police computer deals with central drugs intelligence and it is proving its worth. There is an illegal immigration section with names, a fraud department and a serious crimes department. There is also a section for the special branch. I feel strongly about it, and say firmly that nobody, whatever his political views, needs to worry about this. He should be worried if he comes into the other categories.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that it would have been very simple and reassuring for him to have said to those of us who tabled this question that there was nothing on those records about my hon. Frends who have raised the question? The fact that he has not done so, despite what he says, is worrying to us and to many other people. My right hon. Friend says that unless one is involved in something fraudulent or criminal one need not worry. However, if there are records for other reasons will be remember his one-time Liberal image—now very much tarnished—and consider whether those of us whose names might be included could be told what the other reasons are?

I do not think that my hon. Friend is making the point in the original question. In my view, a Member of Parliament is no different from any other citizen. The Lindop report says that the checking of computers should not take place in the context of revealing the names on the computers. This is a difficult subject. When I consider the problems of fraud and terrorism with which the police are faced. I support that view. I resent being described as anti-liberal because I support that proposition. I am against people who are involved in crime. I believe it to be important that the police have proper facilities to deal with crime.

Will the Home Secretary tell us what provision is made for ensuring that the computer records are accurate, in order to protect the individual from inaccurate information being put on computer and also to assist the police with accurate information?

I visited Scotland Yard the other day and I spoke about that aspect of accuracy which is more important in a computer system than with information kept on cards. It is most important that information should be looked at carefully. It is a long job but one of the advantages of the computer system is that information is secure from the eyes of other people. I checked on that very carefully. The point that my hon. Friend makes is an important one and should matter to everybody.

All the same, when he looks at the identities of the various hon. Members who tabled this somewhat paranoiac question, is not the Home Secretary tempted to ask himself "If not, why not?"

The short answer to that is that "Those who live in glass houses, should not throw stones."

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will give further consideration to suggested alternatives to both fines and custodial sentences.

There is already a wide range of non-custodial disposals available to the courts, but we keep further possibilities under review.

In order to enhance and complement the relentless and increasingly successful fight against crime for which the present Government deserve to be commended, is it not desirable and economic to widen the sanctions available to the courts? In particular, will the Minister ensure that urgent consideration is given to the extension of community service orders, especially in areas such as mine where the scheme has been demonstrably successful?

Yes. There are two matters to be considered. First, there is the consideration of new possibilities which are now under review. Secondly, we must extend the number of proved successes. Community service is one of the successes and under this Government it has been extended.

Does the Minister agree that probation officers and the probation service as a whole can play a major part, not only in supervising those who have committed crimes, but in rehabilitating offenders? Will the Government pay more attention to pay and conditions in the probation service and give these excellent and experienced people the support that they need?

As the pay negotiations do not start until July, that matter is premature. It is for the courts to decide whether to impose probation orders.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what information he has and what investigations he has made as to the state of prisons and any infringement of human rights existing therein in countries with which the United Kingdom have extradition treaties.

Our diplomatic representative in the country concerned would keep the United Kingdom Government generally informed of such matters. We would ask for specific inquiry to be made before deciding whether to order the surrender of a fugitive committed by the courts in any case where there was reason to suspect that the penal or judicial system of the requesting State was unacceptable.

Does the Under-Secretary of State accept that where prison conditions in other countries are less satisfactory than they should be, there is good ground for revising extradition treaties? Will the hon. Lady have regard to recent cases in that respect?

The Extradition Act 1870 is being further examined by an interdepartmental working party. No doubt it will take that matter into account.

Is the Under-Secretary of State aware that the temperate nature of her statement of the policy of the Government contrasts favourably with the behaviour of politicians in foreign countries who see fit to pontificate in public on inadequate, and in many cases false, evidence, upon the conditions in Her Majesty's prisons?

The Government have certainly noticed that.

Will my hon. Friend have another look at the case of Mr. A. J. Simpson, about whom I have already written to her? Is she aware that before he was extradited to the United States she gave me her solemn assurance in writing that he would not be subjected to solitary confinement as part of his sentence? Is she aware that that assurance has been completely and flagrantly broken and that he is now in solitary confinement? When can I expect a reply to my letter?

I am aware that my hon. Friend has written to me. I can assure him that he will receive a detailed reply before the end of next week.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he has prepared any guidance to candidates in the European elections as to when they can commence formal campaigning under the European Assembly Elections Regulations 1979.

No, Sir.

Would it not be helpful to give guidance, because in this case the election date is fixed and therefore there is confusion?

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Somebody appears to be taking photographs with a flashlight. Is that not out of order in the House?

It is highly irregular for anyone to take pictures in the House. No doubt, if it is not on the Floor of the House, the matter will be attended to.

Would not a guidance document be helpful, because candidates are confused about when they will be campaigning officially? Is the commencement date for the campaign 7 May?

The date will be 2 May when the formal step is first taken. There is no difference from a parliamentary election, in the sense that if a candidate spends money to promote his candidature he must be prepared to include that in his return of expenditure.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will review the requirements for refugee visas from applicants in Argentina.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if, in view of the great decrease in the number of refugees from Chile admitted to the United Kingdom in 1978, he will consider admitting more applicants who are in danger in Argentina.

We continue to consider applications from Argentina sympathetically, in the light of the policy with regard to the admission of refugees from Latin America which my right hon. Friend announced on 22 June last year. The number of applications has declined recently.

I thank the Minister for that reply. Is he aware that the requirements for granting refugee visas from Argentina now include the names and addresses of relatives and friends of the applicant—information which could be highly dangerous to those relatives and friends? Will the Minister re-examine the Home Office regulations and requirements, because they affect the lives and future of many people?

Regulations are not involved. The requirements include the presence here of family or relatives. I shall examine the problem raised by the hon. Member.

Will my hon. Friend accept my congratulations on the compassion shown in admitting refugees from Chile into Britain? Does he remember that I recently asked him a question and it was revealed that, possibly due to the good work on behalf of the Government, the numbers had declined? Does he agree that those regimes are terrible? Will be seriously consider increasing the number of refugees allowed in from Argentina, which we now realise has an even more terrible regime than that of Chile—bad as that regime continues to be?

As my right hon. Friend said on 22 June last year, applications will be received from those who show a genuine need for resettlement and who have ties with this country. The number of applications has declined. Unless we receive them we cannot entertain them.

When will the Government come to a conclusion about the request of the United Kingdom representative of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees that we should prepare a proper procedure and rules for the determination of the status of refugees?

The hon. Member is talking about the London representative of UNHCR. I am conducting a review of the procedures involved. We have no reason to be ashamed of our record on the receipt of refugees. It is a good record.

Is there not a real anxiety about the arrangements that we have made in the Geneva convention which seem to leave a gap? Could not that gap be filled by a separate unit to assess whether a person is eligible within the convention to be a refugee? If a person is being persecuted in Argentina, although he went there from Chile, does he not fall within the meaning of the convention?

Yes. However, I do not agree that a third body to assess the criteria should supplant ministerial responsibility.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is satisfied with warding arrangements for the May district council elections.

Yes, Sir.

In view of the announcement that the general election will be held on 3 May, will the Minister now consider postponing the district council elections?

Windy.

I shall not be standing. If that were to be done, it would avoid confusion—[Interruption]—

Order. It is clear that the scent of the hustings is upon us. However, we should continue with normal business as long as we are here.

—because many district councils, such as my own, have not yet finalised their warding arrangements. That will mean further district elections in 1980 and every year thereafter. Will there not also be a shortage of about 22,000 ballot boxes on 3 May?

The answer to the hon. Gentleman's questions is, almost universally, "No". I do not believe that there is a possibility for confusion. There may be confusion in Mid-Sussex, but that is not flattering to the hon. Gentleman's electorate.

In view of the fact that the two elections are to be held on the same day, will the Minister consider, if he has not already done so, the extension of the hours for the district council elections. For voting purposes, one election is to be held from 7 a.m. until 10 p.m. and the other from 8 a.m. to 9 p.m.

That matter will be considered, but it does not strictly arise out of the question on the Order Paper.

Peterborough will be satisfied with warding arrangements on 3 May. But does the Minister propose any changes in the arrangements for the parish council elections on that day, which are a third complication?—[Interruption.]

Order. Both sides should feel better now and we can carry on.

I had no idea, Mr. Speaker, that my supplementary would be so popular.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will take steps to give juvenile courts the power to make residential care orders.

No, Sir.

Is the Minister aware that there is a somewhat delicate balance of power between the courts and the social workers? Does he not agree that the courts, in necessary circumstances, should have the power to say who goes into residential care and who does not?

We have been concerned with this delicate balance of power in every Question Time for the last year. It is vital that there should be undivided responsibility. That responsibility is best placed where it is at the moment—with the local authority. The hon. Gentleman will know—as I do—that the code of conduct has helped to clarify for local authorities the circumstances in which courts may expect a young person not to go home on the disposition of a case.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that this demand for increased public expenditure by the Conservative Party is, first, unnecessary, because the numbers of juveniles are small, and, secondly, that the demand is counterproductive? What is needed to deal with the problem is a full implementation of the Children and Young Persons Act 1969 and the provision of proper public funds to make that Act a reality in practice.

I agree with my hon. Friend. Never have so few juveniles been elevated to such major crime.

As an alternative to residential care orders, does not my hon. Friend think that it would be a good idea to introduce legislation allowing community service to be applied to juvenile offenders, in view of the great success achieved by that system for adult offenders as an alternative to prison?

That is an interesting point. The hon. Gentleman will appreciate that, hitherto, we have concentrated on making community service universally available. When it is, and when it is working universally, we shall move on.