asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he has any plans for taking the Newry canal into public ownership.

The Newry canal is owned by the Newry Port and Harbour Trust. Since 1971, the affairs of the trust have, however, been in the hands of a liquidator appointed by the Department of Commerce for Northern Ireland.

Does the Minister recognise that like other ancient monuments of public importance this unique monument of engineering, which is older by 30 years than any other canal in the British Isles and is of interest on the European scale, can be properly preserved and used for leisure, employment and tourism only if it is in public ownership?

I note the right hon. Gentleman's strong advocacy of public ownership in this undoubtedly unique instance. The right hon. Gentleman will recognise that the trust was appointed by a public authority, that it is now in the hands of a liquidator appointed by a public authority and that, therefore, it is close to being in public ownership. I understand the right hon. Gentleman's strong feelings about the development of the canal. The recent report by Enterprise Ulster is still being considered.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he will report progress on the enforcement of law and order in Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement about the activities of the security forces.

The overall level of terrorist violence in Northern Ireland has continued to decline. The general improvement is due in large measure to the continuing efforts of the security forces. The role and capabilities of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, with continuing military support where necessary, are being steadily expanded. Since I last answered questions in the House on 7 August, 194 people have been charged with crimes associated with terrorism. This includes 19 charged with murder and 12 with attempted murder. In addition, 63 weapons and 14,848 rounds of ammunition have been recovered.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the enforcement of law and order is made much more difficult by the activities of those who are engaged in giving credibility to the claims, boasts and threats of various criminal organisations?

The claims and boasts of the prohibited organisations ring hollow. The people of Northern Ireland are equipped as well as, if not better than, most people to withstand the threats that are made against them.

I welcome the further decline in the level of terrorism and the continuing ascendancy of the police as guardians against criminal activities and terrorism. May we have an assurance that there will be no precipitate rundown of Army strength in the Province as suggested in a recent story in The Daily Telegraph, particularly in view of the current tension and the prison officers' strike?

I can give the House that assurance. The level of military strength in the Province is kept continuously before me, the GOC and the Chief Constable. The Government's policy is to retain in Northern Ireland only that level of military support for the RUC which is necessary. We do not want more than is necessary. Equally, we shall be sure not to have less.

In the enforcement of law and order, will the Secretary of State bear in mind that running parallel with the bloody campaign of the IRA is an equally dangerous campaign being waged by the UDA and Loyalist paramilitary forces in which innocent Catholics have been killed and more have been wounded in recent weeks? May I draw the right hon. Gentleman's attention to the television programme "World in Action" on Monday evening in which a so-called leader of the Ulster Defence Association threatened the Catholic population in Northern Ireland? Is he aware that that broadcast caused a great deal of fear? Will the he ensure that the law and the enforcement of law are seen to be even-handed against all potential murderers, no matter who they claim to represent?

I entirely agree with the hon. Gentleman. Terrorist activity, whatever its motive, is to be deplored. It is the business of the RUC to act against terrorists whoever they are. It is seeking to carry that duty out and, as the days go by, successfully carrying it out.

Does the Secretary of State recall the representations that I made urging that a campaign medal be awarded to the police? Is he now in a position to make a statement, bearing in mind that the RUC and the RUC Reserve, who have suffered grievous casualties, deserve recognition for their courage, impartiality, skill and patience?

I entirely agree with the hon Gentleman's comments about the RUC. He and other hon. Members have represented to me that there should be a campaign medal. It is a matter that I am pursuing, but I am not yet in a position to make a statement.

If the situation and co-operation are as good as the Secretary of State implies, how is it that two nights ago six armed thugs crossed from the Republic to Northern Ireland, held a family at gunpoint, commandeered a car, drove 12 miles, set up an ambush, killed a member of the Ulster Defence Regiment, drove back 12 miles and escaped undetected into the Irish Republic?

What I said in my original answer, and what I stick by, is that the situation is steadily improving. I did not claim that it was as good as it should be. It is not. The hon. Gentleman and the House know that very well. With regard to the hon. Gentleman's statement, if he has evidence to support what he said, I beg him to give it to the RUC so that charges can be made.

Is the Secretary of State aware of the utter revulsion and outrage in the Northern Ireland community at the recent killings? Will be assure the House that, now that his policy is seen to have failed, he will review it urgently?

The hon. Gentlemen claims that the policy has failed. I do not know by what standards he measures success or failure. I repeat that steadily the security forces, led by the RUC, are getting on top of the terrorist activity. Terrorist activity still continues, but the result of the security forces' work shows that they are having more success. I therefore believe that the hon. Gentleman's claim that the policy is not succeeding is quite unfounded.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature—

If the hon. Gentleman puts his point of order, he will merely stop me from calling the Front Bench spokesman.

Has there not been disappointment in the enforcement of law and order over the dismissal of the prosecutions brought in the Republic under the cross-border jurisdiction Acts? Has the right hon. Gentleman undertaken to study the matter? Will he, for example, discuss it with the Government of the Republic with a view to setting up a joint law commission to examine how that jurisdiction can be strengthened in order to bring satisfactory convictions where proper?

It is not for me to comment on the decisions of courts, whether they be British or Irish. I take encouragement from the fact that the authorities in the Republic have used the provisions of the cross-border legislation to bring those charges. Of course, we are disappointed that the charges were dismissed, but I hope that the fact that the authorities have used legislation is an indication that they will use it again. Indeed, we are discussing with them how we can best proceed.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply that I received to my supplementary question, I give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter at an early opportunity on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the current hunger strike being carried out by prisoners of Her Majesty's prison, Maze.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the hunger strikes in Northern Ireland prisons.

Seven prisoners in Maze prison commenced a hunger strike on Monday 27 October in support of the campaign for political status for certain convicted prisoners. They continue to refuse the food offered to them but are taking salt and water. On 6 November, the prisoners were moved from the cells which they had fouled to clean cells. They are medically examined daily and they have lost some weight, but their condition is not at present giving serious cause for concern.

Will my right hon. Friend accept that I am grateful to him for his very full and detailed reply? However, has he noticed the early-day motion on the Order Paper in the name of the Leader of the Official Unionist Party, indicating that the House will not tolerate the authorisation of filming and televising people found guilty of very serious crimes?

I can do no better than remind my hon. Friend of what the Prime Minister said in this House on Tuesday:

"the Government have absolutely nothing to hide about the Maze prison or about their attitude to those on hunger strike."—[Official Report, 25 November 1980; Vol. 994, c. 488.]

But did my right hon. Friend authorise it?

Is the Secretary of State aware that he has the full support of Liberal Members in the House in his refusal to grant special status to political prisoners? However, is he satisfied that the families of prisoners in Northern Ireland are being allowed to visit their relatives in jail? Has the statement of Cardinal Basil Hume, which I am sure the whole House welcomes, been drawn to the attention of the prisoners on hunger strike?

I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman's expression of support for the Government's position. The families of prisoners are allowed access to their relatives who are in prison. I cannot tell him whether the statement of Cardinal Hume has been drawn to prisoners' attention individually, but I have no doubt that they know about it.

Further to the question from the Liberal Bench, may I ask whether Cardinal O'Fiaich has endorsed what Cardinal Hume said in his pastoral letter in condemnation of hunger striking? If so, is not that most welcome, because this is surely no time for equivocation?

I am not responsible for what Cardinal O'Fiaich says or does, but I have seen reports that Cardinal O'Fiaich was aware of what Cardinal Hume intended to say in his pastoral letter and supported it

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I join him in emphasising that the political status of terrorists from both communities is not a possibility? As we do not want young men to throw away their lives by a campaign, however emotional, that will not achieve that aim, let us all join the right hon. Gentleman in pleading with those who are participating in the hunger strike to abandon it now.

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that expression of support on behalf of the Opposition. I think that everyone in the House realises that the claim for political status is one that no British Government, of whatever complexion, would accede to.

That is not the point.

Therefore, the violence in which they are engaged is pointless.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he will make a statement on the response to his White Paper on constitutional changes in the Province.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he will make a statement on his current discussions with the political parties in Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on his discussions with the leaders of the political parties in the Six Counties.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what plans he has to hold further discussions with the various legal political groups in Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on his proposals for further constitutional development in Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what progress he has made in the setting up of a new trial consultative assembly.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he is now in a position to announce a decision and further measures to devolve local government in the Province.

The Government believe that locally elected representatives should have a greater role in the government of Northern Ireland. For the past 18 months we have been seeking an acceptable basis for a transfer of responsibilities. We have published two Command Papers, we have held a political conference, and I have had extensive discussions with political leaders and other groups. But we have had to conclude that there is not sufficient agreement between the political parties to justify the Government bringing proposals to the House for setting up a devolved administration at this stage. In the words of paragraph 64 of Cmnd. 7950, we shall now explore other ways of making the government of Northern Ireland more responsive to the wishes of the people, and such alternatives could involve a progressive approach to a transfer of powers. The principles enunciated in successive Command Papers will, of course, continue to apply and I shall be consulting the local political parties.

rose—

Order. I propose to call the seven hon. Members whose questions are being answered.

As it is proving as difficult to reconcile conflicting opinions over the Irish question as it has been since the reign of King Henry II of pious memory, will my right hon. Friend consider a serious alternative to his calculations—namely, that he should continue to do the job himself?

There is no doubt about that. We must seek to pursue ways of giving the elected representatives a greater role in Northern Ireland. Until that can happen, the Province must be administered. It will continue to be administered as at present.

My right hon. Friend has mentioned principles. Am I correct in understanding that one of the principles to which he remains committed is that he will seek to make progress towards a solution only in ways that are acceptable to the people as a whole of Northern Ireland?

Yes. It is clear that no proposals could be hoped to work if they were not acceptable to the people of Northern Ireland. That has been an essential criterion throughout and it remains such.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are many who would not accept his definition of the position vis-à-vis those who have been arrested and convicted under the emergency powers legislation? Apart from that, is he prepared to tell the House, the people of Northern Ireland generally and those in the Republic what his attitude is to the statements made by the Taoiseach on the future of Northern Ireland?

I am not responsible for what the Taoiseach says. We have always accepted the interest of those in the Republic in what goes on north of the border. However, the ultimate decision on the way in which Northern Ireland is governed will be made in the House.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the past 10 years have revealed that it is impossible for either side—if we look upon them as that—to beat the other side into submission? Does he agree—I am sure that he does—that the answer lies in a political solution? Does he further agree that the hunger strikers are bound to intensify and deepen the conflict and that there could be further killing? Will concessions be made of a political nature to try to prevent that from occurring and to bring on to the horizon a political solution for us all?

The hunger strikers and those who support them are not in the least interested in political advance. They have made that entirely clear from the word "go". They want something quite different. We shall continue to deal with the situation in the way that I have outlined to the House. In the meantime, it is our belief that it is right for the Government to continue to search for political ways forward.

As the honourable attempt by my right hon. Friend to create by agreement a system of devolved government in Northern Ireland has clearly failed, what is there to stop us from proceeding now with implementing the part of the Conservative election manifesto that promised that in the absence of devolved government one or more regional councils would be established — in other words, a development of the existing local government institutions?

Half a million people.

I hope that my hon. Friend will accept that what is necessary is the agreement of the people of Northern Ireland. I am bound to tell him that none of the political parties with which I have been discussing these matters favours that way forward.

May I assure my right hon. Friend that most hon. Members wish him to keep on trying and that, difficult though the task may be in the foreseeable future, eventually the barriers of prejudice on both sides against which he is struggling will succumb and he will be successful?

I hope very much that my hon. Friend is right. Whether I am successful or not, I intend to go on trying.

As a way of making the administration more responsive to the wishes of the people, will my right hon. Friend consider devolving greater powers or restoring powers to local district councils? Will be bear in mind the need to consider that well in advance of the district council elections that are due to be held next May?

I am considering all ways forward. I am bound to tell my hon. Friend that there is a substantial body of opinion in Northern Ireland that would regard that step as a disaster. It may be right or wrong. What matters is that that is what it believes.

Will the right hon. Gentleman accept that the Liberal Bench entirely agrees with his last statement? It would be a disaster to extend powers to local government in Northern Ireland. What are the right hon. Gentleman's views about setting up a small advisory scheme? Has he ruled out any idea of an appeal to the people of Northern Ireland in the form of a referendum in perhaps more settled times?

I have never ruled out a referendum. However, before one can have a referendum one has to have a proposition to put. We are ready to explore all ways forward in order to make a political advance that the political leaders of Northern Ireland all say they want.

Will the right hon. Gentleman issue an immediate directive that all communications between his office and the Provisional Sinn Fein should cease forthwith, whether those discussions are centred on the constitution or the hunger strike?

I have had no contact with the Provisional Sinn Fein since I took office and I have no intention of having any contact now.

Will the right hon. Gentleman accept that there is no exclusive British solution to the difficulties of the Six Counties? Will he, therefore, embark on immediate and urgent discussions, in the recognition that the Government of the Republic are an essential element in any permanent solution to the problem? Will be embark on discussions with that Government to ascertain whether he can come to an agreement on the future government of the Six Counties?

I repeat that the Government have recognised throughout the interest of the people of the Republic of Ireland. The fact remains that future constitutional arrangements for the government of Northern Ireland will be decided in this place and nowhere else.

Will the right hon. Gentleman be a little less coy about what he intends to do now? Does his coyness mean that there is to be another round of consultations with all the parties? If that is so, upon what basis are the consultations to take place and what are to be the options? When the Green Paper was published, the Opposition thought that all the possible options for constitutional advance had been set out somewhere in that document. Has the right hon. Gentleman new proposals? On what basis does he intend to have further discussions?

In the original paper, which formed the basis of the conference, we set out a variety of approaches. The conference gave us to believe that there might be a way forward in a particular direction that we set out in a more recent White Paper in July. That, unfortunately, has proved not to be the case. Therefore, we shall have to consider other matters — indeed, a variety of other matters. Our object is to make the government of Northern Ireland more responsive to the wishes of the people in Northern Ireland and to involve locally elected representatives in it, which at present they are not.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement regarding the future of the three sectarian teacher training colleges in Belfast.

No decisions will be made on the future role of any of the teacher training institutions in Northern Ireland until all the comments on the recent Chilver report about the future structure of teacher training there have been received and studied. The closing date for comments is the end of November.

Does not the Minister acknowledge that students who are potential teachers have already come down against sectarian teacher training colleges by enrolling at the education centres of the two universities and the Ulster polytechnic in far greater numbers than at the sectarian teacher training colleges? Does he realise that if he surrenders to the discriminatory demands of the Churches to keep the sectarian colleges in existence at the taxpayers' expense, he will be pandering to an outmoded and reactionary system of teacher training which wishes to keep people in ghettos?

As the hon. Gentleman will be well aware, there are genuine and deeply felt differences of opinion in Northern Ireland over religious matters, which necessarily have implications for the structure of the educational system at all levels. My noble Friend will be looking closely at all the representations that are made to him.

What is the justification for recognising the role of the Churches in education in the rest of the United Kingdom while denying it to the people of Northern Ireland?

None at all. I agree with the right hon. Gentleman.

Can the hon. Gentleman amplify the statement which he made in reply to the right hon. Member for Down, South (Mr. Powell)? If people really believe that the prime responsibility for the education of their children rests upon the parents, and if the parents take a particular decision with regard to the philosophical and religious environment in which their children should be brought up, surely the State should support that and not deny it.

I do not think that I can expand further on my remarks to the right hon. Gentleman.

I recognise some of the forceful arguments of the Chilver report on amalgamation, but does not the Minister accept that both the Roman Catholic and Presbyterian church leaders have expressed some doubts about the implementation of those proposals? Will be assure the House that there will be no forced merger on purely economic grounds? Will be proceed to announce the 1981 intake figures, lest he be considered to be prejudging this issue?

I cannot give the precise intake figures, but for the last seven years the proportion of students entering the two colleges in question has remained constant. I have every reason to think that the number will remain at about the same level in the coming year. I entirely accept that this matter should not be decided on wholly economic grounds.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the progress of De Lorean Cars Limited.

The buildings required for the company's manufacturing programme have been completed, the company has occupied them and the process of equipping them is well advanced. Four hundred and eighty-eight people are now employed. The pilot production programme is proceeding, and 30 preproduction cars have been completed. Series production will commence before the end of the year and the market launch is expected to take place in the spring of next year.

Was not car production promised last summer? Was not the entire development of the De Lorean car at the expense of the taxpayer? Will the Minister confirm that the ownership of the developed car remains in the hands of the De Lorean research partnership? Can he produce convincing evidence to disprove the fact that this is no more than a device to line the pockets of the entrepreneurs promoting the project, no matter how welcome jobs in West Belfast are?

It is quite true that there have been some delays in the production programme, and I have made that clear to the House on previous occasions. I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's suggestion that what is involved is designed to line the pockets of the promoters. I remind him that the business of the De Lorean research partnership was to design, develop and license for manufacture and sale the DMC 12 car, and the partnership granted an exclusive licence to the De Lorean company. It is our intention to ensure that the project proceeds to market.

When did my hon. Friend last visit the production line, if there is such a thing?

I must confess that I have not visited the production line in recent weeks. However, I should like to invite my hon. Friend to accompany me at the earliest opportunity, within the next two weeks, so to do.

Is my hon. Friend aware that for once I am in agreement with the hon. Member for Keighley (Mr. Cryer), in that the more one looks at this project the harder it is to work up much enthusiasm for it? Why has it been necessary to subcontract some of the engineering work to Lotus cars? How much of the money that was allocated for jobs in Northern Ireland has found its way into the Lotus car company?

The financing of this company has taken place wholly within Northern Ireland on buildings and arrangements for production. It was always intended that the development of this car should take place where it could best be done. The inclusion of Lotus as the design consultant and developer is surely a mark of substantial favour towards the development of this project.

Is not the Minister aware that, since his answers on the previous occasion, De Lorean has doubled its work force and met its deadline? Does he not agree that the spirit among the work force is first class and that nothing in the House should be said to dampen the enthusiasm of one of the few successful industrial stories in Northern Ireland?

I accept with thanks the hon. Gentleman's comments. I believe that enthusiasm in the House must largely be contained until such time as many thousands of De Lorean motor cars are sold in the United States.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when next he expects to pay an official visit to Northern Ireland to discuss the current situation with local leaders.

I spend part of each week in Northern Ireland and frequently have meetings with local political leaders and other representatives of the community. I spent Monday and Tuesday of this week in Northern Ireland and I shall be returning there tomorrow.

Does the right hon. Gentleman have any plans to meet the Irish Congress of Trade Unions to discuss the appalling level of unemployment in Northern Ireland, which is even greater than that on Merseyside? When he does meet the ICTU, will be be able to put forward proposals in order to reduce that level of unemployment? Is the right hon. Gentleman also aware that in Liverpool on Saturday we hope to gain the support of the unemployed from Northern Ireland in opposing the vicious unemployment situation in the United Kingdom?

I met members of the Northern Ireland committee of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions who serve on the Northern Ireland Economic Council last week. I have no doubt that I shall be meeting them again very soon. As the hon. Gentleman knows, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment has a package of special employment measures, the details of which we shall shortly be announcing in Northern Ireland.

When the Secretary of State replied to my hon. Friend the Member for Belfast, South (Mr. Bradford) a few minutes ago, he denied that he personally had had any contact with Provisional Sinn Fein. Can he now tell the House whether that denial of contact encompasses all those responsible to him and all members of his staff?

No officials of my Department have contact with representatives of Provisional Sinn Fein.

Without anticipating Question No. 19, what are the figures for youth unemployment? How cap anyone expect—

Order. The hon. Gentleman has given me fair warning.

When the Secretary of State meets the local industrialists and trade union leaders, will be explain how the Government propose to tackle as a matter of urgency the fact that in Northern Ireland 46 people are now unemployed for every vacancy that exists? Will be assure them that there will not be any juggling of the books, as there was last summer, so that what goes into industrial investment comes off the public sector?

The allocation of expenditure in Northern Ireland for 1981–82 will be made as soon as possible, and while it will reflect the need to contain total public expenditure it will also reflect the need to cope with the serious unemployment problem in the Province.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he has any plans further to assist small businesses in Northern Ireland.

I have recently announced an enhanced role for the local enterprise development unit, which already had extensive and flexible powers, to assist the establishment and development of small businesses in Northern Ireland. Under the terms of a new directive issued to the local enterprise development unit by the Department of Commerce last month, its remit has been extended to include assisting service sector projects. In addition, it will be empowered to maintain employment in small companies with good prospects of longer-term viability.

I welcome the Minister's statement about extending the powers of the local enterprise development unit, but does he not agree that the best hope of bringing down unemployment in Northern Ireland is in the small business sector, following the disasters in so much of the larger industry there? Is he prepared to consider helping small businesses in Northern Ireland with rate relief and loan guarantees?

I accept that the development of small businesses can make a significant contribution to reducing unemployment, but I remind the hon. Gentleman that we must continue to try to bring to Northern Ireland substantial businesses also. With regard to his comment on rate relief and other assistance, the local enterprise development unit has some powers in that area, but I would prefer him to write to me if he has a specific case in mind.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the keystone of small businesses in Northern Ireland is the small farmer? Is he further aware that at present the small farmer in Northern Ireland is in a parlous situation? Will be look into the matter and see what he can do to help?

I am aware of the considerable difficulties that small farmers and other parts of the agriculture industry in Northern Ireland are currently suffering. Many meetings have been held with the farmers' union on this matter, and there will be further discussions with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State today.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is the percentage difference as at the last calculation in the cost of coal, gas and electricity in Northern Ireland as compared with Great Britain.

The information is not available in the form requested. Domestic coal prices in Northern Ireland are towards the top end of the range of mainland prices. Piped gas in Northern Ireland costs two to four times as much as in Great Britain, and liquefied petroleum gas supplied in canisters is cheaper in Northern Ireland. Domestic electricity costs 24 per cent. more than the average in Great Britain.

As the Minister responsible for such matters in Northern Ireland, is not the hon. Gentleman ashamed to announce those figures, particularly bearing in mind that the unemployment rate in Northern Ireland is 16 per cent.—twice the national average—that personal incomes in Northern Ireland are three-quarters of the national average, and that consumers in Northern Ireland are denied their share of North Sea natural gas? What plans has the Minister to ensure that energy prices in Northern Ireland do not continue to rise faster than in other parts of the United Kingdom?

I accept the hon. Gentleman's contention that the present scale of energy prices in Northern Ireland is unacceptable. That is why the Government have instituted a review, particularly of electricity prices, because that represents a larger proportion of the energy costs that are borne by householders in Northern Ireland.

The Minister states that those prices are. unacceptable. Why, then, does he not do something about them immediately, bearing in mind that many old people depend completely on electricity and find it impossible to pay the bills?

I must remind the hon. Gentleman that we have acted to hold down electricity prices, even to their present level. About £20 million has been spent to that effect during the course of this year.

In view of the disparity between prices in Northern Ireland and those in the rest of Great Britain, has the Secretary of State taken into account that of all the areas for co-operation between this Government and the Government of the Republic of Ireland, this is one? The Government of the Republic would be anxious to enter into discussions on the question of gas and eletricity prices for the whole of Ireland.

I accept the hon. Gentleman's point, and I intend to meet the Minister responsible for energy in the Republic within a few days.

In view of the disparity in energy costs in Northern Ireland and those in the rest of the United Kingdom, has the Minister yet considered the suggestion made by my hon. Friend the Member for Pontypridd (Mr. John) that an overall public body be established to deal with the supply and distribution of all types of fuel in the Province? Will be also consider our suggestion that there should be a full debate on the subject before the Government close all the options without parliamentary approval?

The committee that has been set up is primarily concerned with electricity distribution and supply. It is not concerned with total energy, although I accept the point that the hon. Member for Pontypridd (Mr. John) raised. I assure the hon. Member for Stalybridge and Hyde (Mr. Pendry) that there should be an opportunity to debate these and allied matters, in co-operation with my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House.

asked the Prime Minister if she will state her official engagements for 27 November.

This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall be having further meetings with ministerial colleagues and others.

In view of the fact that the House was seriously misled—to put it mildly—by the Chancellor of the Exchequer on Monday, will the Prime Minister tell her Cabinet colleagues that we expect full and correct information to be given to the House? We are still waiting for a statement and an apology from the Chancellor. Will the right hon. Lady say whether even her Cabinet knew about the employers' insurance surcharge? Does not this show that the Government's economic policy is in total confusion and disarray?

I totally reject the charge that my right hon. and learned Friend misled the House. The shape of national insurance contributions was laid down by the Labour Government in the 1975 Act. That Act provided for a review of the percentage contributions and the levels at which they are levied each and every year. In the first year, that review was made and announced to the House by Mrs. Barbara Castle in a written answer on 23 October 1975. In the second year, 1976, it was made and announced to the House in a written answer by the right hon. Member for Norwich, North (Mr. Ennals). In the third year, 1977, it was announced in a written answer by the right hon. Member for Salford, West (Mr. Orme). In the fourth year, it was announced in a written answer, also by the right hon. Member for Salford, West. Last year it was announced in a written answer by my right hon. Friend the Member for Daventry (Mr. Prentice). This year, full details were given in a written answer last Tuesday. This year, the only percentage increases involved were those on employees. Some of the previous written answers have involved percentage increases on employers and employees. In the last few days we have had a show of sheer hypocrisy and humbug from the Opposition.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, if she is still looking for further cuts in public expenditure, she could stop the continuous spending by the NEB, which is still running at £50 million a year? Is she further aware that small business does not understand why that spending is allowed and why it is not halted?

I am always prepared to look for further ways of cutting public spending. I understand that there is a Bill before the House. Technically, the British Leyland expenditure still comes under the National Enterprise Board, and we have not yet decided on the future of its corporate plan.

Is the Prime Minister aware of what The Daily Telegraph called the "little matter of £386 million" and what the Daily Mail called "£572 million"? Will the right hon. Lady say whether those precise figures were before the Cabinet when it drew up the package and whether it was able to compare those increases in revenue with the possible cuts or non-cuts? Did she and the Cabinet also agree at the same time that those figures should be left out of the presentation of the package to the House? Will she also tell the House—[Interruption.] We gave the Government an opportunity of making a full statement, but they decided not to do so. Will she also say whether those figures were discussed during the meeting that she had a week before with Sir Terence Beckett of the CBI?

A full statement was made in accordance with precedent—[HON. MEMBERS: "No"]—by means of a full written answer on Tuesday, and it gave the full details. The only change to which my right hon. and learned Friend referred was an increase in the percentage contribution applying to employees. That was the only change. Absolute levels of contribution go up—[HON. MEMBERS: "Answer the question."] I begin to wonder whether the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition understands the question that he has asked. The Bill was passed when the right hon. Gentleman was Secretary of State for Employment, and written answers were made when he was Secretary of State for Employment and when he was Leader of the House. The absolute contribution—[HON. MEMBERS: "Answer the question."] I prefer to give a full answer in my own way. The absolute levels of contribution go up every year for three reasons. First, earnings increase and somebody earning £70 last year—[Interruption.].

Order. Unless right hon. and hon. Members listen to replies, we shall not reach Question 2.

Absolute contributions increase for three reasons. First, they may go up because earnings have increased. That has been taking place for a long time. Secondly, they go up because the limits increase. The limits increase every year, because they bear a specific relation to the single person's pension. Thirdly, the percentage may increase. Earnings and limits are dealt with every year by means of written answers. Usually, the percentages are also dealt with by means of a written answer. My right hon. and learned Friend dealt with the percentage, and the percentage increase—the only difference—attracted the extra £1 billion. The figures were before the Cabinet.

Does the last part of the right hon. Lady's reply confirm that the figures and exact increases were before the Cabinet? Which is the correct figure—the Daily Mail figure of £572 million or The Daily Telegraph figure of £386 million?

The figures before the Cabinet were those due to the change in the percentage—the £1 billion—on employees. The other ones have been dealt with in full, as is customary, in a written answer. The right hon. Gentleman asked me about specific figures for employers' contributions. The employer's contribution—the percentage—did not change. The right hon. Gentleman's Government changed the percentage of the employer's contribution, and they sometimes did so by means of a written answer. We have not done that. The increase in the employer's contribution arises either as a result of increases in earnings—[HON. MEMBERS: "Answer the question."] I am trying to give the figures. If right hon. and hon. Members do not want them, I shall not give them. [Interruption.]

rose—

Order. If hon. Members wish to pursue points of order during Question Time, I must inform them that that is not our custom. I shall take points of order at the end of Question Time.