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

The percentage increases over the previous financial year in the expenditure on drugs in England, excluding hospital services were: 1977–78, 28·3 per cent., 1978–79, 20 per cent., 1979–80, 14·1 per cent. and 1980–81, 20·6 per cent.

Those increases are fairly substantial. What steps is my right hon. Friend taking to bring the bill for drugs under control?

A number of steps have been taken. The pharmaceutical price regulation scheme seeks to ensure that prices are reasonable. In addition, the Department is encouraging effective prescribing through its regional medical officers. An informal group has been set up with the professions to identify ways of encouraging effective prescribing. Therefore, work is in hand.

As inflation in the price of drugs—although substantial—is less than the inflation in prescription charges, and as, in the last three months of 1980, 2¼ million prescriptions were dispensed at a cost below the prescription charge, is it not reasonable to believe that in the next 12 months more than 10 million prescriptions will be dispensed by the National Health Service at a profit? Is that not disgraceful, and should it not be avoided?

The hon. Gentleman should recognise that, even now, prescription charges cover, on average, less than half the cost of the drugs. In addition, more than 60 per cent. of the population are exempt from prescription charges.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he intends to make any additional appointments to the Health Education Council.

I am satisfied that the council is already well constituted to carry out its important work of promoting good health.

Is the Minister aware that in an answer earlier this year I was told that the constitution of the council had to reflect the many professional interests? If so, why does it not include general practitioners and hospital doctors? Does the hon. Gentleman agree that such people are in closest touch with patients and have a vital role to play in health education? Will the Minister re-examine this matter?

I should be delighted to have another look at that. However, if the hon. Gentleman considers the council's membership he will realise that it covers a wide spread of people, including community physicians. I should have thought that they would give the necessary balance, but I shall keep an open mind and examine the matter.

Given that the health council for England and Wales is situated in London, will the Minister consider giving Wales its own health council, as Scotland has, instead of the advisory body that we have to tolerate now?

That is an interesting point, which I shall be delighted to look into.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what was the yearly perinatal mortality rate for the South-West Thames regional health authority from 1975 to 1981.

The perinatal mortality rates per thousand total births were as follows: 1975, 18·0; 1976, 14·8; 1977, 14·6; 1978, 13·5; 1979, 13·3; and in 1980, 10·8.

Given those figures and the recent report that there are only four intensive care cots for the South-West Thames regional health authority—which covers South-West London, and the whole of Surrey and West Sussex—and given a further report that my borough of Croydon has, with Newcastle and Tower Hamlets, one of the highest perinatal death rates in the country, will the Minister give an assurance that provision for the creation of the three centres recommended in the report will soon be under way and that sufficient funds will be provided?

Provision for the centres is going ahead. However, I think that the hon. Gentleman has misunderstood the figures, which show a considerable improvement in that part of London. The Croydon figures must be of particular interest to the hon. Gentleman. He will see from them one of the greatest improvements ever and that the figure is well below the national average.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services when he expects to publish the result of the study being undertaken at Queen Mary college into the relationship between unemployment and health in families.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if, from the evidence available to him, there appears to be an association in time between the events of unemployment and a subjective deterioration in health which leads people to ask for help from their general practitioners.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services, pursuant to the answers by the Minister for Health in columns 154 to 156 of the Official Report,20 October, if he will now publish the subsequent correspondence of the Minister for Health with Dr. Leonard Fagin.

A copy of my correspondence with Dr. Fagin has already been placed in the Library, as I said it would be. First results of the Queen Mary college study into possible links between unemployment and mortality rates were published in The Lancet on 26 September. Further results will follow in 1982. On the evidence at present available it is not possible to come to definite general conclusions on the effect of unemployment on health.

Is the Minister aware that, almost without exception, and in whatever part of the country research is carried out, unemployment and poverty are, in general, closely associated with family health—both mental and physical? Will he comment on the recent perinatal mortality figures for 1980? What Christmas message of hope has he for the 3 million unemployed sufferers and their families?

The House is interested in any links between unemployment and health and ill health. Some families develop better health as they take on additional responsibilities. Of course we are concerned about ill health. A good deal of research is taking place and we must await the results.

I have listened with interest to the Minister's remarks. Does he agree that Dr. Fagin, who carried out the study, believes that there is a correlation between unemployment and ill health?

As the House will know, Dr. Fagin has corresponded with me on that matter. In his letter to me he said that my quotations were accurate: but that they did not cover as much as he would have wished. He said

"Our interviews with the families revealed close associations in time between changes in health and the experience of unemployment. Health did not necessarily worsen after unemployment. Some families actually reported less health problems."

Is my hon. Friend saying that the problems are deep-seated and human, and for which there are no immediate political solutions?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his remarks. Yes, that is the position.

Is the Minister aware that Dr. Fagin has twice said that the hon. Gentleman has mis-guided the House? Is he further aware of other evidence that shows an increase in suicide, family breakdown and non-accidental injury among the unemployed, and that the longer the period of unemployment, the, greater the likelihood of those eventualities occurring?

I do not accept that I have mis-guided the House. Dr. Fagin said in his letter to me:

"I am not saying that you were not accurate in what you said."

Is it not true that Dr. Fagin has twice written to the Minister saying that, at best, his representation of the study on the link between unemployment and ill health was unbalanced and, at worst, done to mis-guide the House? Does the Minister accept that there is not only a proven link between ill health and unemployment, but that it is clear that the cost not only to the unemployed but to their families is high and will continue to rise under this heartless Government?

I do not accept the hon. Lady's remarks. I accept that unemployment can be a tragedy for certain individuals and their families, and also that it can be a blight on the community. No doubt the hon. Lady failed to read The Guardian recently, which pointed out that health spending had risen under the Conservatives faster than at any time since the creation of the NHS in 1948.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what is the total number of persons in receipt of retirement pensions, both single and married couples.

At November 1980there were 8,970,000 retirement pensions in payment. This includes 240,000 payable to pensioners living overseas and 52,000 pensioners receiving non-contributory retirement pensions, but excludes payments that consist only of graduated pension. There are estimated to be about 2½ million married couples receiving retirement pension.

Why do those nigh on 10 million pensioners have to wait until the following November to be paid the shortfall? Under this Government that shortfall will represent one week's pension lost by November 1982. Why does not the Minister take on board the novel idea put to me at a recent meeting of pensioners, that rather than the pensions being paid out by that rickety old computer that takes a year to work they should be put on the new, whizz-bang electronic device that stops contributions almost immediately and manages to pay out to Members of Parliament within three weeks? If the pensions were put on that computer the additional one week's pension could be paid in the new year.

For the sake of the record, I want hon. Members to understand that almost 9 million pensions are in payment, not 10 million. As the hon. Gentleman knows, with current technology it has not been possible to pay benefits or uprate them more than annually. I look towards the future when the changes in technology will make a number of information and payment possibilities a reality. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will join me in encouraging the unions involved to accept the new technology that will bring payments and information to the public in a much better fashion than can be done at present.

Does my hon. Friend agree that if the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) were to encourage some of his friends in the trade unions to stop grabbing more than their fair share it would be that much easier for the Government to ensure that pensioners and other vulnerable groups were properly protected, especially at Christmas?

Of course my hon. Friend is right. Only a certain amount of resources is available. We must ensure that we secure sufficient resources to pay pensioners. We have pledged ourselves to increase pensions and make good the shortfall, and that we shall definitely do. There is no doubt that the more money that is taken out of the economy, not linked to increases in productivity, the harder is made the task of paying adequate or more than adequate pensions to the growing number of pensioners for many years to come.

Is the Minister aware that, on the figure she has given of the number of pensioners, I have worked out—without the aid of technology—that by failing to uprate the pension by the current level of inflation of 12 per cent., and increasing it by only 9 per cent., the Government are cheating pensioners out of more than £400 million in the coming year? Is that not disgraceful? Will she rethink, and persuade the Government to rethink, that position?

I have already said that, with current technology, it is not possible to make good the shortfall before November 1982, which the Government are pledged to do. I must put the record straight. During the past two years the increase, based on the 15·5 per cent. rate of inflation to November 1980, is a further 10 per cent. at November 1981, and the 2 per cent. shortfall will be made up in toto. In addition, we are not changing from the historic to the forward estimating system, and therefore are not saving the £500 million, as the Labour Government did, and which is now worth £932 million. We are also paying the Christmas bonus, which the Labour Government did not do for two successive years.

As the Minister has come to the House armed with a load of statistics, will she tell us how many of the 9 million pensioners are not receiving supplementary benefit because of the harshness of the new supplementary benefit rules? Will she also say how many of them are now paying income tax compared with the number paying income tax during the two and a half years since the Government took office?

As the hon. Member knows, I am only too willing to provide him with statistics when I have had adequate notice. I cannot provide the statistics that he requests on this occasion. The Government hope and pray that every pensioner who is entitled to supplementary benefit will make the claim for supplementary pension. I hope sincerely that hon. Members will do all that they can to encourage the take-up of supplementary pensions.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he has given any guidance to health authorities on the privatisation of the maintenance and cleaning of hospitals.

Arrangements for the maintenance and cleaning of hospitals are for individual health authorities to determine according to their local needs and circumstances. I would expect them to look at the possibility of commercial contracts in seeking to provide efficient and economic services, and my hon. Friend the Minister for Health wrote to all authority chairmen in August urging them to take this commonsense step.

I am grateful for the right hon. Gentleman's assurance that the matter is left to area health authorities to deal with as they think fit. Where privatisation takes place, will the Government monitor some of the schemes to ensure that they are economic?

I cannot give a guarantee that we shall monitor them. As responsibility lies with the regional health authorities, it is important for them to be satisfied that they are getting good value for money, since it is that that they and the Government want.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that if ancillary services in the National Health Service were carried out by the private sector to the same extent in Britain as in some other countries there would be a saving of the best part of £50 million per annum, which could be used to provide vital medical equipment? is he further aware that some bureaucrats in the NHS are resisting the sensible guidance of his Department to justify their little empires under reorganisation?

I very much hope that my hon. Friend's last suggestion is not the case. The entire interest of the NHS should be to try to find the maximum efficiency within the service. That is the sensible way of proceeding.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that only 2·54 per cent. of Britain's total hospital expenditure on cleaning goes out to the private sector, compared with 50 per cent. in Belgium and France, 60 per cent. in Germany and Denmark and 70 per cent. in Sweden and New Zealand? When will he take measures to ensure that health authorities are obliged to put cleaning out to private tender?

The best way of proceeding is that set out by my hon. Friend the Minister for Health. As my hon. Friend has already said, he has urged authorities to consider a commonsense step forward. I am informed that about 10 area health authorities report that some of the hospitals in their areas have special cleaning facilities. I should welcome an increase in that number, but it must be borne in mind that we are seeking the maximum efficiency. If that can be provided, the step that is being urged by my hon. Friend makes a great deal of sense

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what decisions have been taken on the forward capital spending programmes of the health regions; and if he will make a statement.

Capital allocations for 1982–83 calculated in accordance with the recommendations of the Resource Allocation Working Party will be issued early in the new year. Planning assumptions for later years will be issued to regions when the White Paper reflecting the Government's expenditure plans for these years has been published.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that concern is widely felt throughout the West Midlands that the regional health authority has withheld tenders, so that all capital projects are now subject to serious delay? Does he recognise that there is confusion and anger in my constituency that among the projects so delayed is the new district general hospital—the site works for which have already been completed—which means that there is likely to be a serious waste of money apart from delay in the programme?

I know very well my hon. Friend's concern. The West Midlands region, which determines capital programmes and all schemes, has decided to delay projects pending a thorough review of the regional programme. That review includes the Bromsgrove and Redditch district general hospital scheme. I cannot tell my hon. Friend when the review will be completed, but I shall make further investigations on his behalf.

How much importance does the right hon. Gentleman place on the Black report, which, among other things, deals with capital spending programmes? Does he recall that 10 priority areas are recommended in the report, no fewer than four of which are in the Northern region? The House does not expect the Government to implement all of the many recommendations in the report, but why are they not doing something about capital spending programmes and the other recommendations that are made for the 10 special regions?

I understand the hon. Gentleman's concern. However, the Government have increased spending on the National Health Service by 5 per cent. in real terms. Secondly, planned capital expenditure on the hospital programmes in 1981–82 is 13 per cent. higher than spending in 1978–79. Spending is increasing.

Nevertheless, does the right hon. Gentleman accept that as a result of successive Governments' public expenditure cuts and the way in which they have been arranged capital spending is running at a low level within the NHS? Is this not a recipe for future public squalor?

I must point out to the hon. Gentleman, who has left the Labour Party, that the greatest cuts in capital spending took place under the Labour Government. I have no doubt that he voted for those cuts.

Is my right hon. Friend satisfied with the equity of the RAWP formula and that the 1982–83 capital allocations will be similar to the planning assumptions previously made?

The level of capital expenditure in 1982–83 will be maintained in real terms. We are considering resource allocations and we shall have something to say about them a little later.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he remains satisfied with the rate at which hospital waiting lists are being reduced.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services by how much hospital waiting lists have fallen since 1979.

Waiting list numbers in England have fallen from a peak of over 750,000 on 31 March 1979 to a provisional figure of 630,000 on 31 March 1981. This is an achievement for which the National Health Service deserves full credit, though there is room for further improvement and we shall continue to encourage this.

May I offer my congratulations to my right hon. Friend for a significant reduction in hospital waiting lists during the past two years? This is one of the Government's many unsung successes. Notwithstanding that, does my right hon. Friend agree that treatment for a significant proportion of those still awaiting operations, especially the 124,000 awaiting orthopaedic operations, would be greatly facilitated by the implementation of the recommendation of the Duthie report and by my right hon. Friend taking on board my suggestion to establish a computer bed bank, either at national or regional level, so that vacancies on surgeons' waiting lists can be matched to orthopaedic cases awaiting surgery?

I entirely agree with the first part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question. There is no question but that the Government have spent 5 per cent. more in real terms on the National Health Service. There are now 21,000 more nurses and 1,000 more doctors. Those are achievements of which the Government have every right to be proud. I read the suggestion that my hon. Friend made in an article and I shall have that issue re-examined.

Will the right hon. Gentleman look with urgency at the blight that has settled on us, especially on London teaching hospitals, and give particular attention to the number of consultant professorships that are vacant because of the uncertainty that has been caused by the Flowers report and the reorganisation that will take place on 1 April? Will he direct his attention to the effect that this is having on increasing waiting lists, especially in out-patient departments? Will he do something about the way in which private practice is able to lengthen gynaecological waiting lists in the NHS by treating ladies who are uncomfortable and are prepared to pay to get out of their discomfort?

I shall examine both the hon. Gentleman's points.

Will my right hon. Friend assure the House that he will always keep in mind the need to have sufficient hospital accommodation for the elderly and temporarily infirm, many of whom need to go into hospitals for short periods at this time" of the year?

Indeed. My hon. Friend puts his finger on one of the problems that the National Health Service faces, not just at this time but throughout the year.

When the Minister speaks of being proud of his achievements, does he recognise that in North Staffordshire many thousands of people wait for many years for important treatment, and that in other parts of the country the list is shorter? If it is not possible in the short term to take doctors to those areas of difficulty, can he make arrangements to take people to the doctors where the waiting lists are shorter?

I should not want in any way to suggest that we must not still go much further. The point that I was making was the record of this Government so far.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will visit the school for dental therapists at New Cross hospital before reaching any decision on its proposed closure.

Yes, Sir. I propose to visit the school during the Christmas Recess and a decision on its future will therefore be postponed until the visit has taken place.

I am very glad to hear the news of the visit. Among the escalating costs of the National Health Service, the dentists' costs remain pretty constant. Would not the development of dental health therapy, rather than its imminent demise, be far more worth while to the National Health Service, unless privatisation is what the Minister has in mind?

If I commented on that question I should be prejudging the decision that we are postponing until after the recess.

Will my hon. Friend take this opportunity to confirm that the recommendation to close the school was made by a committee of independent members of the dental profession and was entirely outside his Department?

I confirm that the committee was as independent body.

Will the Minister bear in mind, in reaching a decision on this matter, that the consequences for the care of children's teeth could be very serious, and that if he implements the recommendation of the latest committee, which was chaired by a civil servant of the Department—hardly independent—he will be going against the views expressed by the Royal Commission on the National Health Service, the Court committee and the Nuffield committee? Does he particularly remember that on 16 November I asked for a meeting on the subject before a decision was reached? If that does not happen, there will be big trouble.

I very much resent what the hon. Gentleman said about the calibre of a civil servant in my Department in suggesting that because he chairs a committee he cannot be independent.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will estimate the number of patients who are known to have died during the last year from ailments or diseases for which they were awaiting operations or other forms of treatment which are normally successful in achieving a cure.

Figures are not collected for patients who die while on waiting lists; but a patient whose condition became sufficiently serious would normally be reassessed and admitted urgently.

Does the Minister accept that thousands of people die each year while awaiting operations for kidney failure, bone marrow transplants and other operations that would save them from death? That is allowed to happen to save a few paltry million pounds, while we spend thousands of millions of pounds on Trident and other nuclear weapons. Does he not accept that that is an outrage and that most people in the country think it an outrage? When will the Government say "This is a state of affairs that we are not prepared to tolerate and we shall spend the money to see that it no longer happens"?

I had hoped that the hon. Gentleman would give us credit for the fact that we are maintaining in real terms the commitment to spend money on the National Health Service made by the Labour Government, which the hon. Gentleman on occasions supported.

How does the hon. Gentleman justify the fact that although between 1976 and 1978 the waiting list was below 600,000, over the past two years—1980 and 1981—there have been 650,000 people on the list? The Minister must surely agree that the waiting lists are substantially higher than they were during the period of the Labour Government.

The right hon. Gentleman occasionally indulges in selective quotations. The full facts were given by my right hon. Friend. There has been a substantial reduction since the Government came to office.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what he regards as the most important achievements of the International Year of Disabled People so far as the United Kingdom is concerned; and whether he has any proposals for maintaining the initiatives of the year.

This most successful year has seen many achievements, but probably the most import ant are the improvements in attitudes and in awareness. I should like to express my gratitude and admiration to all those who have worked so hard to make the year a success. The Government hope to issue a special report in the new year setting out their proposals for maintaining the momentum generated by the year.

When the Minister speaks of the success of the year, will he recognise that many disabled people feel great resentment at the cuts in the invalidity benefit during the year, in the social services, in the number of disablement resettlement officers and in the quota system, which protects the employment of disabled people? Is he aware that the real achievement of the year is that disabled people have now decided to act for themselves and to fight for themselves? They have formed the British Council of Organisations of the Disabled. Will he support the council by offering it funds, and will he meet it in the new year?

I regard it as one of the great achievements of the year that the disabled have achieved a greater confidence in themselves and are coming forward, organising and asserting themselves. I welcome that. If any new organisation makes an application, it will be dealt with in in the ordinary way. I must join issue with the right hon. Gentleman, in that I do not accept that the disabled generally are financially worse off this year. It is estimated that between 1980–81 and 1981–82 expenditure on benefits for the disabled will have risen by 16 per cent. We are now paying out almost £3,000 million in cash benefits for the disabled.

Will my hon. Friend appreciate that his visit to a school for the disabled in my constituency gave a great deal of pleasure and created a great deal of confidence? Will he please visit it again, before the next International Year of Disabled People?

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for what he said. I well remember the visit, which was one of many visits that I have undertaken this year in connection with the year—from releasing pigeons on behalf of the Blackpool blind on the Normandy beaches on D-day, to attending my hon. Friend's constituency and the constituencies of many others of my hon. Friends in connection with the year.

Will the Minister now answer the very important question put to him recently by the Wandsworth borough council and explain why he told the council that it had a legal duty to provide a telephone for one disabled person on its waiting list and not for the other 129? Will the Minister be satisfied, in this International Year of Disabled People, if other councils, such as Liverpool, provide a telephone only for people whose names he knows?

On the last point, my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has stated that he will restore the abatement of invalidity benefit as soon as it comes into taxation.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that social security expenditure by the Government on the disabled has increased by some 8 per cent. in real terms since 1978–79? Is not that an example of effective Conservative compassion?

I am happy to confirm what my hon. Friend has said. There has been an increase in expenditure in real terms in this area.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what representations he has received on the levels of funding by his Department to assist voluntary organisations in contributing to the health and personal social services.

The Department gives grants direct to more than 200 voluntary organisations. Representations often concern the details of funding but frequently give new ideas for schemes for volunteers and aid the development of new initiatives in the voluntary sector.

Does my hon. Friend agree that in many cases the money made available to voluntary organisations has substantially increased under the Conservative Government, but that unfortunately some local authorities have felt it necessary to reduce their grants? In view of the importance that the Government attach to voluntary effort, will they seek ways to make up the shortfall?

My hon. Friend is quite right. The level of funding by the Department has increased. This year we shall spend £8·5 million in grants to the voluntary sector. Like my hon. Friend, we are very unhappy when local authorities reduce grants to good voluntary organisations. I hope that any local authority considering that course of action will reject it. I hope that authorities will look particularly at the working document entitled "Working Together" published by the National Council for Voluntary Organisations. That document shows how effectively voluntary organisations working with local authorities can give a better and more humane service. They can also extend their services and give a better quality of life to all those whom the voluntary organisations so ably serve.

Is the hon. Lady aware that, due to the doubling of VAT, the Spastics Society, which had a very heavy deficit last year, will pay £300,000 in VAT this year? Can she give any help to the Spastics Society, the Royal National Institute for the Deaf, Mencap and the many other organisations that find themselves under severe financial strain? What representations are DHSS Ministers making to the Treasury?

I am well aware of the point that the right hon. Gentleman makes. Of course we are concerned about this matter. I assure him that many representations have been made about VAT paid by voluntary organisations. We hope shortly to be in a position to give some information on that.

May I thank my hon. Friend for all her work in support of the document "Working Together"? May I draw her attention to the fact that, for instance, voluntarily run hostels, to help mentally handicapped children to return to society operate more efficiently and effectively, as well as more humanely, than local authority homes?

It is difficult to draw complete conclusions, but I appreciate what my hon. Friend has said. The important aspect in providing hostel accommodation and arranging for fostering is that we should harness all possible resources and ensure that where local authorities face particular challenges due to the numbers in their areas, and so on, they look to the tremendous value that voluntary bodies and volunteers offer in helping these people to attain a better quality of life.

It is interesting to note that the Minister seeks to lay some of the blame on local authorities for cutting grants to voluntary organisations. Is it not a fact that the grants had to be cut because of the severe cuts in rate support grant inflicted by the Government?

The hon. Gentleman knows full well that it is for local authorities to decide their spending priorities. He will note that many authorities throughout the country have benefited far more on a pound-for-pound basis by continuing their grants to voluntary organisations and cutting back on local authority bureaucracy. In that way, far better value for money is given to ratepayers.

asked Secretary of State for Social Services if he will visit St. Francis' hospital, Haywards Heath.

I plan to visit Chailey Heritage and Croft school and will be glad to extend the visit to include St. Francis' hospital if my hon. Friend would like me to.

I thank my hon. Friend for that assurance. May I suggest that he also finds time on that occasion to visit the neighbouring site of the new district general hospital, where work is to begin on the foundations in March? He will be most welcome. Does he recall that patients and resources are now being transferred from St. Francis' hospital to Brighton so that St. Francis' may develop more as a community hospital serving its own district? Is he satisfied with progress so far in that direction?

I should be glad to extend my visit as my hon. Friend suggests. Plans for developing resources at Brighton are going ahead. If my hon. Friend wishes me to look into the matter further, I shall be glad to do so.

asked the Prime Minister when last she met the leaders of the Trades Union Congress.

I met the TUC general secretary with representatives of the European Trades Union Confederation on 25 November.

Does the Prime Minister accept that the TUC will regard her support for Polish trade unionists fighting for democratic rights as wholly hypocritical when, in this country, she is using the imprisonment of the dole queue and the intervention of the courts to suppress organised workers? Are not the same double standards demonstrated when she asks trade unionists to accept low wages while at the same time appointing to the head of a Civil Service department Mr. Montague Alfred, at a wage of £50,000 per year? Does not that show that she does not give a damn about workers in the United Kingdom, Poland or anywhere else?

The hon. Gentleman must be hard put for a question if he finds any parallel whatever between conditions in this country and in Poland. Reports reach us of shootings, detention and great oppression in Poland. We vigorously denounce what is happening there and condemn it with all the strength and power that we can. There is no parallel whatever with anything that is happening in this country.

When my right hon. Friend next meets the leaders of the TUC, will she discuss with them the possibility of a strike at Ford's? Will she emphasise to those involved that the short-term result can only mean far more Ford cars being imported from Europe and that the long-term results must be a rundown in, the manufacture of Ford cars in this country?

I wholly agree with what my hon. Friend has said. One very much hopes that the strike at Ford's will not take place. At present, there are many good jobs there. One hopes that they will be kept and that Ford will continue to prosper in this country, but it can do so only by increasing its productivity.

We shall of course fight the right hon. Lady's trade union legislation when she introduces it, but in view of the black shadow that Poland casts across the whole of this Christmas and the feelings that I believe are shared throughout the country on this, may I ask whether the right hon. Lady has any recent information on the subject? What is the position of Lech Walesa? What is the Government's information about the manner in which he is being held?

As I said in an earlier reply, we are all very deeply concerned at what is happening in Poland and we totally condemn the oppression by the present regime. With regard to refugees, a number of people from Poland are visiting this country and, of course, they will stay here for the time being. With regard to reports of shooting and oppression, we cannot confirm individual cases, but, in general, that is our information too. Of course, it seems that almost every undertaking of the Helsinki agreement is being flouted.

I am grateful to the Prime Minister for what she has said about the supply of food. I asked her earlier about the Government's latest information on Lech Walesa and how he is being held.

I am sorry that I did not reply to that question. I should have done so. We have no precise information over and above what has already been reported. It is not possible to get precise information. Lech Walesa is being detained, but beyond that I cannot give the right hon. Gentleman any direct information.

Why?

If the authorities believe that they can snuff out that flame they are making an error of historic proportions.

When my right hon. Friend next meets trade union leaders will she point out to them that the only way that we can achieve the increases in capital expenditure that we all earnestly desire is if current expenditure is kept under control? Will she make it clear to those leaders that she will not permit public sector employees to take wage increases that imperil capital investment programmes?

My hon. Friend is right in suggesting that we need to curb current expenditure if we are to get more capital expenditure, which most of us want. Many people would like more capital expenditure, but we often find that they nevertheless take out in wage increases the money that we need for that expenditure. That stops other people from getting more jobs.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 22 December.

This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today. This evening I hope to have an audience of her Majesty the Queen.

Will the Prime Minister take time today to explain to parents why, as was confirmed by a Minister in the early hours of this morning, the Government are running down British universities and thereby depriving 20,000 young men and women a year of the opportunity of a better life? Will she also explain what that action will contribute to the process of international competitiveness, which she holds so dear to her heart, or so she tells us?

The grant to the University Grants Committee is about £900 million. The UGC is responsible for allocating that money. As the hon. Gentleman knows, there was a massive expansion of university places during my time as Secretary of State for Education and Science and a massive expansion of the number of people in teaching. There has been a massive expansion of university places over previous years, though it is true that there are now certain economies in university expenditure.

Is the Prime Minister aware that in her new year message, published yesterday, her assertion that 1982 has all the signs of being a year of great opportunity for Britain——

Not for the right hon. Gentleman.

It is more likely for us than for the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner).

The SDP is gobbling up the right hon. Gentleman.

Is the Prime Minister aware that her assertion would have been more convincing if she had remembered that she said in her new year message for 1981: that

"there is real hope that a year from now things will be looking distinctly brighter."

May I just give the right hon. Gentleman one or two figures to show that things really are very much better in some respects than at this time last year? For example, with regard to output per hour per person, which is an important measure of productivity, the figure for the third quarter of this year, on an indexed basis, is 115, which is an all-time record. The figure for output per person employed, another measure of productivity is 113·2, another all-time record. That is very good news.

What about unemployment and industrial output?

I am sorry that the right hon. Member for Stepney and Poplar (Mr. Shore) does not like increased productivity. Of course he does not. I do not intend to answer questions that the right hon. Gentleman asks from a sedentary position. The only way to get more business is for us to have greater productivity. The right hon. Gentleman knows that. Many people in industry are saying that they are in a better environment than for many years and they are well poised to take advantage of an increase in world trade when it comes.

Returning to the subject of Poland, did my right hon. Friend hear the "World at One" programme, which referred to the Austrian request for this country to receive a fair share of the refugees, including handicapped people, recently arrived in Austria? Can my right hon. Friend make a statement on that request?

No. I have no statement to make on that. As I said in an earlier reply, a number of Polish people who were on a visit to this country are staying here for the time being until we see how the situation in Poland develops.

Will the Prime Minister reflect, between her engagements today, on the shocking increase in unemployment among employable disabled people? Is she aware that it is now reported to be as high as 80 per cent. in some parts of the United Kingdom? Will the right hon. Lady also reflect on the hardship caused for 650,000 chronically sick and disabled people and their families by the Government's cut in invalidity benefit during this International Year of Disabled People? Bearing in mind the resolution approved by the House on 3 July, what action is the Prime Minister taking to reverse that and other cuts in the living standards of disabled people?

I believe that I am right in saying that the invalidity pension had added to it a temporary allowance that brought it back up to what it would otherwise have been——

No, that is not so.

I am sorry if that is not specifically correct. I had the figures with me last week. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will put down a specific question, or perhaps he should have asked the Secretary of State for Social Services when he was answering questions earlier. There is an extra amount which, I thought, brought up the invalidity pension to the level that it would otherwise have been.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Many people inside and outside the House may have been seriously misled by the Prime Minister's reply to me——

Order. We cannot deal with a Minister's reply—that of the Prime Minister or of any other Minister—on a point of order.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 22 December.

I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

In considering what action to take about Poland, will my right hon. Friend ensure that nothing is done to add to the tribulations of the Polish people, who are more deserving of sympathy than punishment? Further, will she devote her personal prestige to bringing about a response from the free nations of Europe that is positive, resolute and, in contrast to what happened over Afghanistan, united?

This is one of the problems that we have in deciding what to do about withholding supplies from the Polish people. We wish to ease the lot of the Polish people. We must ensure that any food that is sent reaches them. Decisions will have to be made about the grant that we were giving the Ursus tractor factory. Another £30 million was due to go next year, and in concert with our allies in Europe we shall have to decide whether to send that amount. We shall also have to decide with our allies about the possibility of rescheduling debts. At the moment we are having consultations. There is a fresh round of consultation with our European colleagues and NATO Allies, and NATO ambassadors are meeting tomorrow.

Is the Prime Minister aware that not everyone supports her denunciation of what is happening in Poland?

Look at the time.

Order. May I inform the House that we were one minute late in reaching Prime Minister's questions.

The real anxiety in the country is over what action is to be taken. It appears that again, as in the case of Afghanistan, the West is not prepared to cross the real threshold, which is a readiness to threaten economic sanctions. Are we really to believe that over the next few weeks we shall continue to fund the military Government in Poland, while we see what: is happening in that country? [Interruption.] Are we to continue to have free and open trading with Poland while—(Interruption]—we see what is happening on the television news?

Order. It is beyond reason for hon. Members to shout alongside a right hon. Member who is trying to address the House. All right hon. and hon. Members are entitled to be heard when they are called.

The country hears Labour Members every day.

The right hon. Gentleman should tell us about his support for the Shah.

The Prime Minister should recognise that there is a real feeling in the country that denunciation is not enough and that we should be prepared, along with other European countries, to pay a fair price.

I think that I have already fairly answered a number of the right hon. Gentleman's questions. We shall of course need to be certain that any aid will not strengthen the forces of oppression. Many of us feel that it would not necessarily help the Polish people to cut off all food supplies this side of Christmas. It would be better to ensure that the supplies reach the people themselves. As I said, we are consulting our allies about, whether the debt should be rescheduled and what should happen about the grant that we had previously intended to give to the Ursus tractor factory. We are well aware of these matters, but they are not nearly as easy to deal with as the right hon. Gentleman suggests.