asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what will be the financing arrangements for the new district health authorities; and when they will be settled.

:: District health authorities will be financed in a similar way to the existing area health authorities. The Department will continue to make allocations to regional health authorities, which in their turn will make allocations to the new district health authorities.

I cannot yet say when the 1982–83 allocations will be announced. These will follow as soon as possible after the Government have taken decisions on public expenditure as a whole for 1982–83.

:I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his appointment. Will he ensure that the regional health authorities are given whatever guidance is necessary to see that areas of expanding population receive adequate financial resources? Is he aware that up to now new towns, in particular, have been discriminated against in the allocation of financial resources?

:I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his good wishes. I understand his concern about his area. I understand that the West Midlands RHA recognises the particular problems of the district that he represents and that in future allocations will aim to bring the new district health authority closer to target. I think that that is a tribute to the work and efforts of my hon. Friend.

:Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is grave dissatisfaction in Lewisham about his predecessor's decision to create a Lewisham and North Southwark district which puts Guy's hospital, where his Minister of State used to be a consultant child psychiatrist, in with Lewisham, because it looks as though it will suck all the money out of Lewisham community health service into Guy's hospital on the extreme edge of the district? What guarantee can he give that that will not happen?

:I understand the concern that has been expressed about some of the boundaries as they have been drawn. All that I can say at this stage is that hon. Members will have an opportunity to debate the order when it is laid before the House.

:I add my congratulations to my right hon. Friend. Will he issue a directive to existing area health authorities causing them to disburse what they have left in the kitty to the new districts in their areas on the basis of population, not on the basis of whether the books of the new districts happen to be in the red or the black?

:To give a general reply, the aim is to seek to help the relatively deprived districts on the basis of population. I think that that is what my hon. Friend wants, and it is an aim that we support.

:Is the Secretary of State aware that the Select Committee, which recently reported to him on medical education, is concerned about his decision to place consultants' contracts with the regions, when the Select Committee required them to be placed with the district authorities? Why did he make that decision in advance of his response to the Select Committee report, and what action does he intend to take about the placing of junior doctors' contracts?

:The latter question is still very much under consideration. There is a question later on the Order Paper, which I think may be reached, on precisely the point raised by the hon. Lady. She will understand, however, that the issue of where the contracts should be placed has been before my Department for a long time. I came to the conclusion that a decision should be reached, and it has been welcomed by the medical profession.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what is his most up-to-date estimate of the amount of social security benefit fraudulently claimed in the 12 months to 31 March.

:During the financial year 1980–81 approximately £170 million was saved through detection of improper claims. It is not possible, from their very nature, to quantify fraudulent claims which remain undetected.

:Is the Minister aware that a considerably larger sum to which people are entitled is not being claimed? As there are now 1 million long-term unemployed who must rely on supplementary benefit, would it not be more sensible to redeploy the staff who are supposed to be chasing those committing fraud to paying out the benefits to which people are entitled?

:I assure the hon. Gentleman that there has been absolutely no let-up in my Department's endeavours to ensure that those entitled to money are receiving it. We have advertised as widely as we can. In fact, there has been a substantial increase in take-up in such areas as mobility allowance, attendance allowance and FIS.

:Does my hon. Friend agree that it is about time we stopped viewing this policy in terms of either the black shade of chasing fraud or the white shade of taking up benefits? Will my hon. Friend confirm that the Government's policy is to ensure that maximum efforts are made to induce people to take up benefits, while at the same time losing no opportunity to pursue those who are making fraudulent claims?

:I am happy to assure my hon. Friend that that is our policy?

:Does the Minister accept that one of the greatest difficulties about the supplementary benefit regulations is the capital regulation of 1980? What progress has been made in the review of the working of the regulations and the £2,000 cut-off, with a view to overcoming the present serious anomalies?

:This work is still in hand. We are still receiving information on it and are not yet in a position to make a statement.

:Does the Minister accept that the figure that he has just given is in itself fraudulent? For the greater benefit of those who report our proceedings, will he now give details of the adjustments, multipliers and correction factors used by the Government in arriving at that figure? Does he agree with the Cabinet Minister who told the House on the last day of July that the Government had great doubt about the statistical accuracy of their own benefit fraud figures?

:I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's allegation. The figures are as accurate as it is possible to determine by reasonable methodology. All the information for which the hon. Gentleman asked is contained in a full statement that was placed in the Library on 4 June by my right hon. Friend the Member for Wanstead and Woodford (Mr. Jenkin), the then Secretary of State. Had the hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends taken the trouble to read it they would not have needed to waste the time of the House today with this question.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he will meet the chairman of the Social Security Advisory Committee to discuss the take-up rate of benefits.

:My right hon. Friend will be meeting him next week. At this and future meetings they will no doubt discuss the wide range of matters, including take-up, for which the committee has an advisory responsibility. In addition, I meet the chairman every few months to discuss a wide range of shared concerns.

:Does the Minister realise that as much as £500 million a year in benefits may remain unclaimed by up to 1 million deserving people who, for some reason or other, do not claim those benefits? Instead of conducting witch hunts against so-called scroungers and publicly criticising Labour councils, such as Strathclyde, which have gone out of their way to encourage people to apply for benefits to which they are entitled, will the Government make a greater effort to publicise entitlement to benefit so that the take-up rate can be increased?

:Mr. Speaker would rule me out of order if I listed all the things that we are doing to improve take-up. All retirement pensioners and widows are invited to claim supplementary benefit and all pension books contain the forms. There is a greater determined effort than ever before to simplify leaflets and to make sure that posters are well displayed so that people who are entitled to benefit may claim. Last year, on other benefits, such as one-parent benefit, we spent more than three times as much on publicity than was spent by the Labour Government in earlier years. As to Strathclyde, I repeat that we have nothing against closely targeted campaigns to encourage people to take up entitlement. However, widely distributed postcard schemes do nothing to help those who need encouragement to take up benefit.

:Does the Minister agree that the present take-up of benefits is abysmal and that if the Government continue to cut them they will become nothing more than token benefits? Does she recognise that the 5 per cent. abatement of benefits was deplorable and that if the Government go ahead with reported plans to cut unemployment and other benefits, that will be despicable?

:There is no real problem of take-up of national insurance benefits. When supplementary benefit was last measured, more than three-quarters of those eligible were claiming five-sixths of the amount that should have been claimed, and many of the unclaimed benefits were small. Over the last two years there has been an increase in the take-up of all the other benefits. I shall do all that I can to make sure that those who are entitled to benefits claim them. The right hon. Gentleman is concerned about invalidity and other benefits, but he knows that the 5 per cent. abatement was made pending taxation. I have no more to add to that.

:Is it not tragic that 600,000 pensioners who could claim supplementary pensions do not do so, with all the attendant hardship involved? Will my hon. Friend consider issuing a special leaflet to be attached to all new national insurance pension books that go out in the next 12 months?

:We have discussed this matter. There is a major effort to simplify all leaflets and claim forms. But I repeat that all widows and retirement pensioners are invited to claim. All pension books contain a claim form and all new and repeat claimants get written notice of their benefit take-up. There will also be further publicity to try to bring home to people, particularly old-age pensioners, that it is their entitlement to claim supplementary benefit if they fall within the rules.

:I had hoped to have the opportunity of extending my good wishes to the new Secretary of State, but the congratulations will have to wait until we see what kind of a fight he puts up against the monstrous proposals that the Cabinet is apparently discussing not only on take-up, but on the level of benefits, including those for the sick and the unemployed. Will the right hon. Gentleman now take the opportunity, through the Under-Secretary, to assure us that he is fighting to prevent that from happening? If not, will he resign? It may make him the shortest lived of Cabinet Ministers, but he will certainly be the most honourable.

:I am sure that my right hon. Friend will want to thank the hon. Gentleman for his good wishes. But, in all fairness, it is high time that he at least gave my right hon. Friend a chance.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what action he proposes to take in the Northern region following the recommendations of the Black report.

:The policies and priorities that I expect health authorities, including those in the Northern region, to follow are set out in "Care in Action". As the hon. Gentleman knows, a number of them are consistent with recommendations of the Black report.

:Is the Secretary of State aware that of the 10 special areas recommended in the report no fewer than four are in the Northern region? Does he agree that the recommended £30 million expenditure is very small compared with the total health expenditure? Is this not one area in which direct Government action can be taken to assist the parlous condition of the Northern region, emphasised yet again by today's unemployment figures, which keep the North top of the unemployment league?

:I understand particularly the problems of the Northern region. For the past five years resources have been reallocated for health care needs. The Northern region has gained a growth rate of 2.3 per cent. in the current year compared with a national average growth rate of 1.6 per cent. There is discrimination in favour of the Northern region, and clearly that will continue.

:Is my right hon. Friend aware that what he has just said is appreciated? The Black report makes it clear that the Northern region is a gaining region in this context. Is he further aware that the report also indicates, particularly in regard to Gateshead—one of the most difficult areas—that our main problem is a shortage of skilled and trained people, which, in an area of high unemployment, seems a great shame?

:I understand my hon. Friend's point. Most of the 10 special areas identified in the Black report are receiving areas under the resource allocation within the regions. Again, I confirm what my hon. Friend said about the Northern region.

:Is the Secretary of State aware that it is not good enough to quote Green Papers and White Papers which his colleagues have already announced they will not finance, or implement, or even the Black report, which the previous Secretary of State said he would not finance or implement, and at the same time tell us that the Resource Allocation Working Party recommendations, which have slowed down in the past four years, are helping the Northern region? It is— [Interruption.]

:Order. I believe that the hon. Gentleman has asked his question.

:That was not only a long question, but a silly one. I was not quoting White Papers. I was quoting the growth rate of expenditure which, in the Northern region, is above the national average. Frankly, I should have thought that the hon. Gentleman would be pleased with that.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he will make a statement on his policy towards the conclusions of Dr. Leonard Fagin in his report on unemployment and health in families.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many copies of the report by Dr. Leonard Fagin on unemployment and health in families have been printed.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he will commission research work similar to that done by Dr. Leonard Fagin on unemployment and health in families, drawing on a larger statistical sample.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what representations he has received about the report by Dr. Leonard Fagin on unemployment and health in families.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he will ask Dr. Leonard Fagin to undertake further work on the relationship between unemployment and health in families.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he will make a statement on the representations which he has received about the report by Dr. Leonard Fagin on unemployment and health in families.

):This was an excellent pilot case study by Dr. Fagin. It shows, yet again, how right the Government are to be concerned about the impact of inflation and unemployment on some families. But it is a pilot study of only 22 families, and hon. Members will want to bear that in mind when reading it. I have placed a copy of the report in the Library and further copies can be made available to hon. Members if they wish.

rose —

:Order. I propose to call the six hon. Members whose questions are being answered. They are all on one side of the House but, as is my normal custom, I shall be fair to the other side of the House afterwards.

:Having welcomed this small investigation, may I ask the Minister to assure the House that he will conduct a more detailed investigation into the subject? Is he aware that only people on the dole have the vaguest idea of how depressing it is?

:Yes, I can assure the House on that matter. These families were taken from the cohort study of 2,700 families. That study and others—there is one at Queen Mary college and another at the London School of Economics—are looking into various aspects of the matter.

:Whatever the size of this or any subsequent inquiry, does not one thing come across clearly: that today's increased unemployment figures show that, irrespective of the criteria used, an increasing number of people will suffer from ill health—mainly nervous and mental—because of the Government's policy? Inquiries can produce all sorts of figures. When will the Government start applying the remedies?

:Clearly, the hon. Gentleman has not read the Fagin report, which illustrates the differing impact that unemployment has on different families. For example, in families where there has been a long history of ill health there may be some improvement in health. There have been improvements in the health of some wives. Other people have suffered severe stresses. The report states that the relationship between unemployment and ill health is not clear and that no generalisations can be drawn from it.

:Does the Minister have any concept of the utter hopelessness generated by long-term unemployment? Is he prepared to invite the long-term unemployed—there are many thousands—to write to him so that he can get an idea of what it means?

:: I have a clear and deep sympathy for those people, because I believe that it is every person's right to have the opportunity to work in the sort of job that is best suited to him.

I am surprised at the line of the questions from Opposition Members. I should have thought that they would draw attention to the fact that the unemployment figures are actually down today by about 12,000.

:How much more research does the Minister require to be convinced about the connection between long-term unemployment and growing ill health? Will he tell his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment that it will save money in the long term for his Department if the unemployment figures can be reduced even further?

:Any degree of unemployment is a tragedy for the individual families concerned, and I am deeply aware of its effect. The Fagin report illustrates that it can break up families. That is a matter of great concern. At the same time, it is encouraging that the figures show a small decrease.

:I recognise that there are no easy political answers to the complex problems of unemployment and ill health. However, will my hon. Friend undertake to give special consideration to the financial needs of the long-term unemployed with dependent children in view of the evidence that they are bearing more than their fair share of the necessary economies in the social security budget?

:I am glad to assure my hon. Friend about that aspect. Supplementary benefits have been fully maintained and, for the first time, long-term supplementary benefit is being extended to older people who are unemployed.

Is it not deplorable that the Minister seeks to undermine the significance of many of the conclusions of the study that I commissioned when I was Secretary of State for Social Services? Is he aware of the serious physical and mental effects of long-term unemployment on families and family life? When will the Government face the consequences of their policies?

:I am surprised that the right hon. Gentleman should take that line. I have said that there is great stress for some families. This is a pilot study. If the right hon. Gentleman cares to read it he will see, for example, on page 106:

:Will my hon. Friend consider in what way the Government can publicise some of the positive conclusions that may follow this report and the wider one, so that voluntary organisations working with both the long-term and short-term unemployed can help to avoid some of the bad consequences of being out of work?

:My hon. Friend has put forward an interesting and important suggestion and we shall be glad to look into it.

:To prove his concern about the suffering caused by unemployment, will the Minister guarantee to the House that if in the next round of cuts or the next Budget the increase in unemployment benefit and/or supplementary benefit is below the level of inflation he will resign?

:I am deeply concerned, but in no way will I accept such an invitation. The hon. Gentleman must restrain himself and wait to see what my right hon. Friends decide to do.

:If the Minister is not convinced by Leonard Fagin's report, because he says that it is too small, and as the Government are determined to use unemployment to discipline the work force, why does he not base his views on the cohort study, which quotes sources that make it clear that where unemployment exists the death rate is 30 per cent. higher, apart from all the other psychiatric problems? If he is not convinced by that, what will it take to prove to him that the Government are doing real damage to ordinary people?

:Not for the first time, I ask the hon. Lady to do her homework and look into the subject properly. At present there is no evidence of a relationship between unemployment and the death rate. I have the cohort study, too. Queen Mary college is to look into that aspect, and we are supporting it. From the figures between 1922 and 1976 it can be seen that there is no correlation at times of high unemployment. The Brenner figures, quoted on a previous occasion in the House, apply only to America, but they are being looked at in this country.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he intends to sell any National Health Service hospices to private health care companies.

:The responsibility for disposing of property no longer needed for NHS purposes has been delegated to the health authorities. It is for authorities to consider all bids received from potential purchasers, including any from private health care companies.

:Will the Minister confirm that there are now only 10 NHS hospices in the country and that in every county there is an acute shortage of beds for aged and terminally ill people? Will he confirm that in Islington it is proposed to sell a hospital for the terminally ill? Is it not monstrous that, when there are such grave needs, we are offering to sell to the Hospital Corporation of America an asset for which we have an acute need?

:There are 21, not 10, hospices in the NHS.

:That is not enough.

:That may be so, but the question refers to property that is surplus to the NHS. Let me explain what happens to the proceeds. There can be argument about what is surplus, but if an establishment can be shown to be surplus the proceeds go to the NHS to the benefit of the service. I believe that that is a good policy.

:Will the Secretary of State turn his mind to a complete change of policy on hospices from that pursued not only by his Government but previously? Does he accept that elderly people have the right not only to live in dignity but to die in dignity, and that, because of public expenditure cuts, that important but small sector of the NHS is being squeezed dry?

:I undertake to look into that area of policy in detail. For example, I saw the article in The Sunday Times this Sunday. However, I do not believe that the point negates the policy that we are pursuing.

:Should not regional health authorities give to voluntary groups that want to operate hospices hospital land at a peppercorn rent to allow them to do so?

:That is one option that could be open to health authorities. Clearly, we wish to encourage voluntary organisations to take part in that valuable and important work.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he has discussed with the West Midlands regional health authority the proposed provision of private out-patient facilities in geriatrics and psychiatry at Staffordshire general infirmary.

:No.

:Is the Minister aware that in many parts of the West Midlands the facilities for geriatric treatment are totally inadequate and that my area of Sandwell is at the bottom of the league in providing beds for geriatric patients? Will the Government come clean and tell us whether it is their intention that those in need of psychogeriatric treatment should seek it on an outpatient basis and through the private sector?

:The point does not arise from the main question, which was whether I had discussed the matter with the West Midlands regional health authority. The Staffordshire area health authority asked for our authorisation for the accommodation and services to be made available to the private non-resident patients at Staffordshire general infirmary. If the hon. Lady cares to write to me about any point that she has regarding Sandwell I shall be delighted to consider it.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether, following his decision to wind up the Personal Social Services Council and the Children's Committee, he is satisfied that he is meeting the statutory obligation placed upon him to maintain an Advisory Council on Child Care.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if the membership of the Personal Social Services Council was the same as the membership of the Advisory Council on Child Care.

:I confirm that members of the Personal Social Services Council were also appointed to the Advisory Council on Child Care. As has already been made clear, we intend to propose repeal of the statutory provisions relating to the advisory council as soon as possible, because we do not consider such a body essential.

:Does the right hon. Gentleman understand that it ill becomes the Government and his Department to ignore a statutory duty under the Act setting up the Children's Committee in 1978? Is it not disgraceful for a party that claims to be a party of law and order completely to ignore that? Nowadays, especially under this Government, is not advice in this area imperative, and is it not more necessary now than ever before because of the Government cuts imposed on health services and local authorities generally?

:As I said, we shall be bringing forward legislation as soon as possible. If I may make a general observation after only four weeks in the job, whatever else I suffer from it is not lack of advice.

:Is not the Secretary of State in breach of the law? Apart from rectifying that, what does he propose to do to meet his responsibility to children?

:As I said, we shall be bringing forward legislation to repeal the matter. There are other sources of advice such as the National Children's Bureau, and there is now the prospect of an independent children's council.

:At some convenient moment will my right hon. Friend spell out why it was considered that the Children's Committee was not doing an adequate job? Was it its close link with the Government, the fact that it was financed by the Government or the membership of the body itself?

:As my hon. Friend understands, it was a decision taken by my predecessor on the ground that sufficient advice was available and that one does not need unnecessary bodies.

:If the Minister is interested in child care, and since he has newly come to his office, will he look again at the supply of clothing for children? Is he aware that in Scotland education and local authorities do not have the resources to provide school clothing and children are consequently in need? Does he agree that, in the interests of children, that matter is as important as the others that have been raised?

:It goes beyond the question, but I shall consider the point.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will make a statement on the sale of St. Columba's hospital, Hampstead.

:This hospital was no longer needed by the NHS. The regional health authority is negotiating its sale.

:Is not the Minister misleading the House by that answer? Although the hospital is not needed by the area health authority that previously operated it, the health authority in whose area it stands wishes to keep it within the NHS to provide terminal care. Is it not therefore disgraceful that it should be closed and sold to the private sector?

:I do not know where the hon. Gentleman gets his information. This building was offered to the Camden and Islington area health authority because it was thought that the authority might be able to use it in the way that he suggests. The authority decided that it did not want it. That is why it has been put on the general market. I should have thought that hon. Members would be pleased if unused assets in the National Health Service were put on the market so that the money could then be used to the benefit of other patients.

Was the explanation that the area health authority did not want this hospice or that it could not find the money to pay for it? Given that a hospice permits people to die in comfort and dignity, does the Minister think that people should be admitted on the basis of need or according to their ability to pay?

:The Camden and Islington and the Kensington, Chelsea and Westminster area health authorities advised us that they did not need this set of buildings for a hospice. They were developing Hereford Lodge in Bayswater. Their view was that it was ample for their requirements. I assure Opposition Members that I investigated this matter carefully.

:As this site is in the middle of Hampstead Heath, what safeguards exist to ensure that any sale does not simply lead to a new building on what is a crucial site, as his hon. Friend the Member for Hampstead (Mr. Finsberg), sitting next to him, will inform him?

:Negotiations are under way at the moment. I suggest that the right hon. Gentleman waits for an announcement on the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he will bring forward the deadline for the completion of the review of medicines required by the European Community.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he is satisfied with progress in the review of medicines as required by the European Community.

:It is too early to judge the effect of the simplified procedures introduced in June under circular MLX 133 to implement the review by the Community deadline of 1990. We shall monitor progress carefully, but I cannot undertake completion before that date.

:Is the Minister aware that the Department of Health and Social Security is quick enough off the mark in making proposals to place charges on the National Health Service? Does he not consider that his Department should be quicker off the mark in its review of medicines, because it concerns safety?

:About 1,200 drugs have already been reviewed. I do not believe that it would be possible to proceed more quickly, bearing in mind that we have only just introduced the simplified procedure.

:On the safety of medicines, is my hon. Friend satisfied that there is no undue delay between an application by a pharmaceutical firm to have a new drug approved and the actual approval by the Committee on Safety of Medicines? Is he aware that much money is tied up in pharmaceutical research and that there have been complaints of undue bureaucracy? Is he prepared to look into the matter?

:Yes. I shall be glad to look at any evidence that my hon. Friend likes to give me. My information is that there is no undue delay.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many meetings the new Maternity Services Committee has had since it was established.

:The first meeting of the committee has been arranged for 19 November.

:Is the Minister aware that the Select Committee recommended the setting-up of this committee in July 1980? By last July, to the year, the chairman had been appointed. I assume now that the committee members have been appointed. Will the Minister see that the committee gets on with the job of monitoring the maternity services throughout the country?

:It is important that the committee should get to work quickly. The house is grateful to the hon. Lady for her interest in the matter. The committee was set up on 16 July. We do not yet have all the recommendations for membership, but we expect to have 17 professional members, one administrative member, one treasurer member, two lay members and a chairman, making 22 members in all. The first task that we propose to put to the committee is that it should examine the antenatal services.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what was the cost of drugs dispensed under the National Health Service in each of the past three years.

:Expenditure on drugs in England, excluding hospital services, was, in 1978–79 £564 million, in 1979–80 £643 million, and the provisional figure for 1980–81 is £787 million.

:Is my hon. Friend satisfied that large quantities of unnecessary drugs are not prescribed? If that is happening, has he any plans for tighter controls?

:We are looking at the take-up of drugs with a view to prescriptions being used as economically and efficiently as possible. As my hon. Friend knows, an informal working group is looking into this matter and making good progress.

:If the Minister is worried about the price of drugs, why does he not look at the rise that has taken place in the cost of pharmaceuticals to the NHS? Will he draw to the attention of the companies the fact that they have put up their prices by 64 per cent. in one year?

:As the hon. Lady knows, the cost of drugs production has gone up considerably, but I know myself how costs can be saved by careful prescribing and the use of generic drugs wherever appropriate.

:As the exhortation to generic prescribing has never worked over the past 30 years, will the Minister give an undertaking—recalling that the Prime Minister promised before the election that no plans were being made for prescription charges to be raised and that they have gone up from 20p to £1—that next April there will be no additional charge of 25p for people needing medicines?

:I suggest that the hon. Gentleman restrains himself and waits to see the proposals that the Government put forward. We have already announced in the White Paper, "The Government's Expenditure Plans", Cmnd. 8175, that charges will be increased in line with costs.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 20 October.

:This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others, including one with the Romanian Foreign Minister. In addition to my duties in the House I shall be having further meetings later today.

:Has my right hon. Friend had time today to observe that the Government's proposals to introduce more private enterprise and competition into the oil and gas industries have been widely welcomed? Has she noted that the proposals have been condemned by both Opposition parties? Does my right hon. Friend agree that the proposals reflect the Conservative Party's concern to help the consumer by increased competition and efficiency and that they also reflect the fact that the Opposition parties, whatever they call themselves, are still wedded to State monopoly and the other trappings of Socialism?

:Yes. My right hon. Friend's proposals received a wide welcome from all who genuinely have the consumer's interests at heart. North Sea oil was brought ashore by private enterprise and private investment. It is time, we feel, that the BNOC was relieved of the constraints in the public sector, and time that industrial consumers of gas had an element of competition in choosing their source of supply.

:: May I first make it clear to the right hon. Lady, in regard to the Government's proposals concerning oil in the North Sea, that the Opposition will fight with every power in our being to protect British interests and that we shall restore to British control everything that she gives away?

May I also indicate that we shall take the first available opportunity to ask the House to debate and vote upon the terrible and shameful unemployment figures published today? We shall therefore put down a motion of censure on the Government on that subject.

Will the right hon. Lady say whether the Government's medium-term financial strategy was one of the topics on the Cabinet's agenda today and, if so, will she indicate to the House and to the country how many more people would be unemployed if that strategy were carried forward?

:The Cabinet meeting earlier today was one of several that usually occur at this time of year to discuss public expenditure. I am sure that the same happened in the lifetime of the previous Government. With regard to the unemployment figures, I had hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would welcome a very small reduction in the figures and that he would also welcome other good signs: the number of people on short-time working is down, the number of people on overtime is up, and manufacturing output is up. This is good and welcome news.

:: The Prime Minister is omitting the most serious figure of all—the increase of 56,000 in the seasonally adjusted figure, which shows that, far from the slightly better tendency of a few months ago, the situation is getting worse again. Why should the right hon. Lady conceal that from the House? She will not be able to conceal these matters from the country for very much longer.

Will the right hon. Lady now answer my question, which she avoided? Did she consider at the Cabinet today any proposed further expenditure cuts? If so, what extra unemployment will be involved in them?

:With regard to the right hon. Gentleman's earlier point, he will take either the raw figures or the seasonally adjusted figures, whichever suits him best. But the actual number of unemployed is 10,000 fewer this month than last month. It is a very small amount, but it is much more welcome than would be 10,000 more. On the right hon. Gentleman's latter point, we discussed public expenditure, but other matters are left for the Budget.

:Will my right hon. Friend emphasise to the unilateral disarmers in the Labour Party the fallacy of the argument that we are faced with a choice of being Red or dead? Will she reiterate that there is a third choice, which is that through strength we can preserve peace and remain free, and that the Government's defence policies will ensure that we shall be neither Red nor dead?

:Our defence policies are designed to keep the peace and to keep peace with freedom, not at the expense of freedom.

:Does the Prime Minister recognise that the youth opportunities programme is on the point of collapse because of the considerable increase in youth unemployment caused by her Government? Will she give an undertaking to relaunch the programme as a one or two-year education and training programme based on work experience?

:: No. I do not accept that the YOP is on the verge of collapse. The programme has done excellent work and will continue to do so. It will now be joined by another programme for the employment of young people, which I announced in July and which will start in January. It will subsidise and help employers to take on young people in their first year after leaving school for wages of £40 to £45 a week. I hope that that will get jobs for a number of young people who would otherwise be on the unemployment register.

Later —

:On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. At the start of Prime Minister's questions the hon. Member for Gosport (Mr. Viggers) asked a supplementary question about the Government's decision to sell off the BNOC to private enterprise. The hon. Gentleman, besides being a director of Sweetheart International (Gosport) Ltd., is a director of Premier Consolidated Oilfields Ltd. Is it in order for an hon. Member to ask such a supplementary question without declaring his own personal interest?

:Order. I thought that most hon. Members knew by now that there was no requirement to declare an interest at Question Time.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 20 October.

:I refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave a few moments ago.

:Will my right hon. Friend congratulate the management and employees of the National Freight Company, many of whom are union members, on their bold decision to go ahead with the purchase of shares in that company? Will she confirm that further privatisation remains the Government's highest priority, and will she reconsider the decision not to sell private equity in the British Gas Corporation?

:With regard to my hon. Friend's final point, I hope that we can discuss that matter when we consider the legislative programme for the next Session. If we get the measures for privatisation and de-monopoly through the House they will be a big further step in taking monopoly out of British industry, serving the consumer and securing that more shares are put in private hands. I gladly join my hon. Friend in congratulating everyone, including my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services, who was formerly Secretary of State for Transport, on the privatisation of the National Freight Company. It is an imaginative scheme which reflects confidence in the future of the company, particularly by its work force.

:Following the new Secretary of State for Employment's constructive advice to the unemployed that they might get on their bikes, will the Prime Minister enlarge on that advice and suggest where they might cycle to?

:I hardly think that the right hon. Gentleman's question does credit to his party or even to himself. I hope that he, too, will welcome the slight reduction in the numbers who are unemployed and that he will see from the Department of Employment figures that about 253,000 people came off the register last month.

:As unemployment reaches 2 million in West Germany, does my right hon. Friend agree that no country is immune from the world recession, but that increased demand on basic industries such as steel, chemicals and sections of the engineering industry, together with the current unemployment figures, are reasons for cautious optimism?

:I agree with my hon. Friend. The world recession is affecting unemployment levels in West Germany, France, Belgium, Holland, Italy, the United States and most other Western industrialised economies. One or two countries have a higher percentage than Britain, but I am the first to admit that we have more serious problems, because of overmanning and restrictive practices, which no Government have dealt with over the years, and because our pay has been way ahead of productivity. Nations that have not had overmanning have had better productivity, have not had pay increases in advance of productivity and have done better than us on jobs.

asked the Prime Minister what are her official engagements for Tuesday 20 October.

:I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply I gave some moments ago.

:Bearing in mind the blatant lies that we were told in the last general election campaign about how a Tory Government would reduce the dole queues, and bearing in mind also the Government's latest obsession about the holding of referendums, what answer does the Prime Minister think that she would get if she went to the people and asked them whether they would like to sack the Prime Minister, who has betrayed 3 million unemployed people in this country?

:As I do not propose to do that, the point does not arise.

:When my right hon. Friend saw the Romanian Foreign Minister this morning did she tell him that, despite our great political differences with Romania, we admire the stand that his country has made for national sovereignty in Eastern Europe?

:I did not tell him that, but I believe that he knows full well that that is our view.

:Will the Prime Minister arrange to include in next month's unemployment figures the number of women who are unemployed, but are not registered, the number involved in the youth opportunities programme and the number of workers on short time, because that will produce a figure nearer 4 million than 3 million?

:I do not think that there is ever a complete breakdown in each monthly set of figures. A sample survey from time to time gives the number of people between 60 and 65 who are unemployed. I recollect that last time they totalled about 9 per cent. of the unemployment figure. The survey also gives the numbers of young people and married women who are unemployed. But that is not, and could not be, done each time. With regard to those on the YOP, there is always a sheet at the back of the press release that gives the numbers of those involved in special employment and training measures. At the moment there are 270,000 on the youth opportunities programme.

:Will my right hon. Friend take time today to study a document which has, no doubt, fallen through the letterboxes of her fellow residents in Flood Street and the letterboxes of many hon. Members, namely, the new rates bill from the GLC? Can she explain why those of us who live in London, at least part of the time, should subsidise transport for many millions of foreign visitors on the London tubes, and further say what steps the Government propose to take to stop this lunatic driving industry out of London?

:Like most other people in London, I have to pay the supplementary rate and in Chelsea it tends to be rather high. Of course, the supplementary rate bills that we are receiving show what Socialism would be like in practice. It pushes up taxes to intolerable levels. I agree with what my hon. Friend said about everyone paying for subsidised transport, and I also agree that the supplementary rates and the high rates of Socialism will rob London people of jobs. That, too, is the result of Socialist policies.

:How does the right hon. Lady dare to reprimand anyone for raising taxes when she has raised taxes for the vast majority of people to a level that is higher than ever before in history?

:Not higher than ever before in history. But in view of what the right hon. Gentleman said I look forward to his vigorous support on reductions in public spending, so that we can get taxation down.

:Will my right hon. Friend find time to visit Scotland, there to discuss with her right hon. and noble Friend Lord Home of the Hirsel the definitive version of the behaviour of ex-Prime Ministers and Leaders of the Opposition in retirement?

:I cannot visit Scotland this week. I was there a few weeks ago, and before going again I have to go to Mexico.