asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what representations he has received regarding redundancies of academic and technical staff in universities since his answer of 25 January, Official Report, c. 275; and if he will make a statement.

The redundancy compensation for university academic staff which I announced on 25 January has been generally welcomed.

Is the Secretary of State aware that there is the wider issue that Government cuts generally, and particularly at Bradford university, threaten universities as institutions and academically? Is he further aware that the proposed redundancies in Bradford will increase unemployment in an area that already has a high level of unemployment? Does he not realise that his vaunted claim to belong to a party that increases freedom of choice is the reverse of the truth, because, by cutting back on universities such as Bradford——

Order. The hon. Gentleman is now making a speech.

I am just finishing, Mr. Speaker. The right hon. Gentleman is making——

Order. The hon. Gentleman is continuing far too long for aquestion.

It is open to all universities to consult the University Grants Committee on the effect of its proposals.

Will the Secretary of State take more seriously the effects of his cuts on universities, such as Aston in the West Midlands? Will he be more forthcoming in his support for the science parks at Aston and Warwick universities than he was yesterday at the launch of the Warwick one? Is there not some way of giving moral and financial Government support to these ventures?

The Government already provide enormous amounts of taxpayers' money to the universities. It does not seem sensible or possible for the Government to protect all sectors of public spending when there is an urgent need to abate the rise in public spending.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that although the Government are seeking to advance technology, some of the cuts in higher education are having an adverse effect on the universities of Bradford, Leeds and Manchester in the departments which concentrate on textiles? This could have a detrimental effect on the training of high technology experts for an industry which needs these skills.

As my hon. Friend will know, Ministers do not presume to allocate money between institutions; they leave that to the UGC, to which individual institutions should put forward their views.

Is the Secretary of State proud of the fact that this week in The Times Higher Education Supplement he and his colleagues have been described as "The new yahoos, " presiding over a system in which £200 million is being paid out to sack university teachers, whom the universities do not wish to get rid of, for whom there is a demand and whose product is highly esteemed?

Name calling does not solve the problem of reducing inflation and unemployment. In the Government's view, that depends on a proper balance between public spending and private investment.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the Secretary of State's inadequate and evasive reply, I give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he has any plans to alter the status of the maintained voluntary schools or the Church's role in many of these schools; and if he will make a statement.

My right hon. Friend has no plans to alter the status of maintained voluntary schools or the Church's role in them. The Government fully support the very valuable part that voluntary schools play in our education system. They provide what many parents want for their children—education in a maintained school, but in an atmosphere that reflects their faith.

Does my hon. Friend agree that that answer is in marked contrast to the anti-Church and anti-voluntary school policies being pursued by the Labour Party?

I take my hon. Friend's point—[HON. MEMBERS: "Rubbish."] It is not rubbish. The first draft of the Labour Party's election campaign for the Greater London Council last year contained the following:

"That no child should be educationally segregated by virtue of his or her sex, religious, ethnic or socio-economic status"

Has there ever been a two-year period when so many voluntary schools have been closed?

I do not know of any two-year period when there has been such a fall in the birth rate in the years before. It was no desire of this Government that there should have been a fall in the birth rate five years ago. It must have reflected the policies of the Labour Government of that time.

I fully endorse my hon. Friend's confidence in such schools, but should not the long-term objective be to work towards nondenominational schools, perhaps with some restructuring of the arrangements between the Churches and the State?

That is an interesting point, and it is not the first time that my hon. Friend has raised it. Obviously, the Government support denominational schools where parents demand them. Similarly, we consider sympathetically any requests for joint-denominational schools.

Does the Minister recognise and register the fact that there is no anti-Church or anti-voluntary school sentiment in the Labour Party? On the contrary, the Opposition wish to see an improvement in the standards of education and provision for the liberty of every individual in Britain.

I am sure that all hon. Members will welcome that statement. At the same time, there is a suspicion that bubbling at the bottom of the Labour Party is an anti-voluntary school complex. The Times printed a letter last week from a Councillor Hilary Benn, who I believe is a member of the Labour Party, stating:

"The case against any extension of voluntary-aided denominational education is overwhelming."

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether, consequential upon his answer of 1 December, Official Report, c. 130, he has reached a decision on the difficulties which arise from the present system of student union financing; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether, consequential upon his answer of 1 December, Official Report, c. 130, he has any further statement to make on the present system of student union financing.

A change in the method by which student unions are financed is not one of the issues we are currently considering. That would be premature. The current arrangements came into effect only in the current academic year.

Does my hon. Friend agree that compulsory membership of student unions is alien to Conservative philosophy? Does not the case of Paul Soden epitomise the current unsatisfactory position? Will he give sympathetic consideration to the research being carried out by the Federation of Conservative Students into making membership of student unions voluntary?

My hon. Friend and I have been corresponding on this matter. Since subscriptions to student unions were abolished in favour of funding from the recurrent grants for institutions, the problem does not arise in its traditional sense. However, I shall continue to consider the matter.

Does my hon. Friend realise that his reply will be met with less than satisfaction on the Government Benches? Does he agree that we should once more consider giving the same freedom to those who either wish or do not wish to join a student union as we are proposing for any other union in Britain? Does he accept that much of the trouble caused by student unions arises because they are not answerable to those who provide their funds?

I hope that my hon. Friend will agree that student unions are not comparable to industrial unions. They provide common facilities for students and, therefore, are correctly financed out of the recurrent grants for institutions. The problem does not arise in the way that my hon. Friend believes.

rose——

Order. I must tell the hon. Member for Enfield, North (Mr. Eggar), who has just arrived, and whose question is being answered, that any supplementary question should relate to the answer—which he did not hear.

I understand, Mr. Speaker, and will not ask a supplementary question.

I am glad that the hon. Gentleman is courteous enough to acknowledge my point. I shall remember that.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he intends to introduce any new proposals to improve the provision of careers advice in schools; and whether he proposes to make any changes in the training of teachers designated to have responsibility for careers advice.

My Department has already drawn attention to the need to improve the careers advice given in schools, and will continue to do so. There is a variety of in-service training courses to help teachers in this area of their work, and we have no immediate plans for changes in these arrangements.

Does my hon. Friend agree that with the present difficult position for youngsters contemplating leaving school, careers advice is very important, and that the Government should deploy all the resources and skills at their disposal to ensure that the best service is provided?

I agree with my hon. Friend. During the past three years the number of teachers on one-year full-time or equivalent part-time courses in careers training has doubled. It is important that all teachers are aware of the position outside schools. They will give better advice if they have experience of life in industry.

Does the Minister agree that although we want better careers advice, with more teachers undertaking in-service training—which requires additional financial provision—at the end of the day the Conservative Government have created a situation in which almost all youngsters are thrown on the scrap heap?

I am sure that no hon. Member wants large-scale juvenile unemployment. Unemployment in Britain began to rise under the Labour Government, and it has also risen throughout Western Europe. Until Britain manufactures goods at the right price and quality that people want to buy, there will always be unemployment.

Would not the task of giving careers guidance to youngsters at school, and guiding them over the bridge from school to work, be best given exclusively to a reconstituted careers service?

My hon. Friend's point is interesting. Careers services provided outside schools are not under the control of my Department, but careers teachers in schools are under its control. It is important to link all aspects. It is also important to create the right atmosphere inside schools, for example, by showing films on different careers. Children should grow up realising that they must prepare for an outside world

Does the Minister realise that the amount of time that careers officers now devote to advising on the youth opportunities programme means that they must substantially reduce the amount of time that they spend in schools? There is no value in the Department issuing guidelines to head teachers and careers teachers when they are receiving such a poor service from careers officers.

I take that point. I made inquiries about this matter this morning. The number of pupils and students interviewed in the year to September 1981 was higher than in the previous year.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what representations he has received about educational standards in the Inner London Education Authority.

As I informed the hon. Member for St. Pancras, North (Mr. Stallard) on 19 January, my right hon. Friend met representatives of the Inner London Education Authority at their request. Following the publication of the Local Government Finance (No. 1) Bill, he has received more than 3, 000 letters on aspects of education in inner London, including educational standards.

Does the Minister agree that the bulk of those representations urge the Government to give proper financial support to the Inner London Education Authority and to acknowledge that the standard of performance in inner London primary schools has risen above the national average? Will that not automatically work its way through to improved standards in secondary schools? Should not the Government stop their stupid, carping criticism of the ILEA and its teachers and give it the money to do the job?

I am interested in the hon. Gentleman's question. The report of Her Majesty's Inspectorate on London in December 1980 praises the primary schools. However, it also makes it clear that there is not the response and achievement in relation to the resources provided that there is in other areas. The GRE for inner London is £512 million, whereas the intended expenditure, which is still being discussed, is £795 million—55 per cent. above the GRE. The GRE for inner London is already 33 per cent. higher than it would be for a similar number of pupils in the shires.

Does the Department have any proposals to test the efficiency and effectiveness of teachers after they have passed their first year's initial training? They appear to have a licence to teach for life following that one year. Should they not be tested?

Teachers must undergo a probationary period, whether in inner London or any other area. We are considering the length of that probationary period and the question of induction. I agree that it is essential that there should be some assessment of teachers at the end of their probationary period.

Does the Minister agree that if the Inner London Education Authority were to reduce its expenditure to the GRE level, the effect would be a drastic fall in education standards in inner London?

As the number of pupils who obtain five 0-levels in London is half the percentage for the rest of the country, I should hate to see a further fall. If the expenditure were reduced to £670 million, a grant would then be given by the Government. London would gain £19 for every £10 cut, because for every £10 cut a Government grant of £9 would be put in as a bonus. I am sure that that would be welcomed by most ratepayers in inner London.

Does my hon. Friend agree that education spending has doubled during the past 20 years in real terms—probably more in inner London—but that standards in inner London, if they have risen at all, have risen minutely? Surely it is not a question of spending and resources, but of proper teaching of proper subjects.

I agree with my hon. Friend. The HMI report of December 1980 on the subject of inner London states:

"Schools have, in any case, very generous staffing, resources and funding which in HMI's view they do not always deploy wisely. There are disturbing examples of waste and inefficiency."

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether colleges of further education will have sufficient spare capacity for extra students arising from the new training initiative; and whether he will make a statement.

My right hon. Friend is satisfied that the spare capacity available to local education authorities generally, together with other suitable premises which might be provided with Manpower Services Commission funds, will enable expansion to take place on the scale proposed.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Is it not wrong that some colleges of further education have to cut back this year when they will have to expand the following year to accommodate the new training initiative? Should there not be greater flexibility between the budgets of the Department of Education and Science and the Department of Employment to avoid that inconsistency?

I know of my hon. Friend's interest in the matter. In July last year my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made an additional £60 million available, and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State made available a further £35 million last December to pupils who stay on. How the money is used is a matter for the local education authority.

Will the Under-Secretary confirm that unemployed young people who do not take advantage of the youth training scheme next year will be paid nothing, and that young people this year who, in trying to obtain educational qualifications, have to attend an institution for more than 21 hours a week also will get nothing? Will he explain to those young people, who get nothing if they stay in education and training this year and will get nothing if they refuse to stay in education and training next year, the inconsistency in the Government's policy?

I accept that at present there are certain anomolies. However, I am delighted to tell the hon. Gentleman that there is an increase of about 10 per cent. in the number who are staying on in full-time education. I also remind him that the parents of children in full-time education receive the child benefit allowance.

When does the Under-Secretary propose to start consultations with technical colleges about the part that they are expected to play in the new training initiative?

Consultations are going on all the time. Officials from the Department, in conjunction with officials from the Manpower Services Commission, are on a number of different steering groups considering how this can best be organised. Consultations are going on all the time at every level.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science to what extent, in fixing the budget of the Medical Research Council, he takes into account the provision of postgraduate medical education by universities (a) in total and (b) in London.

The Medical Research Council is not concerned with postgraduate professional training for medical practitioners.

When medical research within the universities is being calculated by the Department, what figure of lost posts in England and Wales, particularly in medical schools, is taken into account? In view of the threatened sacking of the medical school unit at the Westminster medical school, whose work on Vitamin B12 deficiencies is, literally, life-saving, can the hon. Gentleman assure us that such valuable research will be safeguarded by his Department?

That is not a matter for my Department. It is a matter for the Department of Health and Social Security, which is responsible for all medical training. The Medical Research Council is not responsible for medical training. It is responsible for research training and biomedical sciences. The people who do that do not usually have medical degrees, and they study in the science departments of universities.

In allocating resources, whether in or out of London, will the Under-Secretary ensure that resources are made available to those parts of the economy with the greatest needs—the elderly, the incontinent, arthritics, prevention, and rehabilitation—and not so much to esoteric research, which yields little for our people?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services will take notice of what the hon. Gentleman said.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he is satisfied with the standard of education in State schools in England.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement setting out the Government's policy for encouraging the achievement of higher standards in both primary and secondary education.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he is satisfied with the standard of educational attainments in secondary schools.

There is always room for improvement in both primary and secondary schools. Our educational policies are directed towards that end.

Has my right hon. Friend seen recent reports that many pupils cannot do simple sums, cannot read a train timetable, and do not even know the meaning of the word "inflation"? Does he therefore think that a return to the teaching of the three Rs in schools might be preferable to some of the more modern, progressive and trendy systems of education?

I am sure that my hon. Friend is right to be worried about the revelations in the Cockcroft committee's report. Most of its recommendations are addressed to teachers. I hope that those recommendations will be widely read. The Government will consider what falls to them in that connection and what they can do about it.

I was interested to hear my right hon. Friend's brief statement in reply to that question. Will he take time later, in the Official Report and elsewhere, to make a fuller statement in answer to my question, which has been linked with question 11, and emphasise two matters which are important for standards in education: first, the importance of teaching practice in the context of teacher training; and, secondly, greater emphasis in his policy on absolute rather than relative standards in public examinations?

I accept all that my hon. Friend said as ingredients in the progress that we all want to make towards more effective education. I also emphasise the importance of increased parental choice, which my predecessor introduced in legislation which comes into effect this autumn, the importance of in-service training, and, above all, the importance of the quality of head teachers and teachers.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that staff-student ratios are better now than they were under the Labour Government? Does he also agree that education standards might be put at risk if, in making the necessary reductions in teacher posts to keep pace with falling rolls, consideration were not given to the fact that children are taught in discrete class units and that, therefore, global comparability numbers are not necessarily the right ones?

I thoroughly agree. The pupil-teacher ratio is at a record level, yet there are diseconomies in the falling school rolls.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the savage reductions in the rate support grant, which affect local education authorities—including Conservative-controlled authorities, such as Essex—mean that cuts are being made in basic necessities? That will inevitably lead to a drop in standards. Does the right hon. Gentleman not realise that since the war the biggest threat to education standards has come from the measures pursued by the Government?

No, Sir. Education authorities have a difficult set of problems to solve, but in the interests of the country, of teachers and of pupils we must rectify the balance between public expenditure and the economy as a whole.

How can the Secretary of State lay claim to a belief that he will raise educational achievements when he is presiding over schools that have £100 million less in real terms to spend this year on essential books and teaching materials than in 1978–79? In response to the question asked by the hon. Member for Peterborough (Dr. Mawhinney), will the right hon. Gentleman tell us what action he will take to ensure that levels of provision are raised in order to raise levels of attainment? Does the right hon. Gentleman really believe that less means better?

I do not believe that less means better; nor do I believe that more necessarily means better. The Government have provided money so that local education authorities can spend an extra £20 million this year on books and equipment if the pay and price assumptions built into the money made available are validated.

If we are to improve standards, is it not vital that it should be made easier to remove poor teachers?

My hon. Friend has touched on an important factor that I am due to discuss before long with education authorities.

What do Her Majesty's inspectors of education consider has been the impact of cuts on standards?

The hon. Gentleman and I must await the report's completion.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will issue a circular to schools giving guidance to local education authorities on methods of dealing with violent pupils or parents.

I deplore the use of violence and I stand ready to give my support to local education authorities and schools in their efforts to curb it. I have no evidence at present that local education authorities look to me for detailed guidance.

Has my right hon. Friend seen the second report of the Select Committee on Education, Science and Arts, which was issued this morning? The fourth recommendation states that the head, staff and the governors should have freedom to determine the disciplinary policy and practice of a school. Does my right hon. Friend agree that in that way discipline may be returned to individual schools and that will strengthen a school's individuality and the way in which it caters for the needs of particular children?

I have not yet seen the report, but I shall study its recommendations and analysis with great interest.

On the assumption that my right hon. Friend is familiar with the contents of the Criminal Justice Bill, will he take an early opportunity to discuss its implications with education authorities and particularly the emphasis placed on parents being responsible for their children's criminal activities? Will he ensure that that information is disseminated as widely as possible?

I cannot give that assurance, but I can undertake to inform myself about the implications of my hon. Friend's suggestion.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what is the total number of pupils in various categories of handicap in England and Wales at the latest available date; and how many are receiving their education in special classes.

As the answer contains a number of figures, I shall publish the information for England in the Official Report. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales is responsibile for information relating to pupils in Wales.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that, compared with other developed countries, Britain is almost at the bottom of the education league? Does he not realise that the children who need special education and tuition are those who will suffer most? When will he restore the education of those unfortunate children who require special education to a reasonable standard?

The hon. Gentleman has long been concerned about those children who require special education. Indeed, 18 months ago he spoke on the Second Reading of the Education Bill. The money for special education has remained static, while numbers have fallen. That means that more should be spent per pupil than, before and the hon. Gentleman will no doubt be glad to hear that.

Is the number of peripatetic teachers who deal with handicapped children in their homes being maintained or are local education authorities cutting back on their numbers?

I cannot answer that straight away. If the hon. Gentleman wants an answer I shall send him a letter with that information, which I should also like to know.

Will my hon. Friend ensure that all would-be teachers are trained in basic mathematics so that they will realise that if they do not accept the 3.4 per cent. pay offer there will be fewer teachers?

My hon. Friend has asked a two-pronged question. No one aged 18 is enrolled in a college of education unless he has O-level English and maths. In 1977, 37 per cent. were enrolled without O-level maths. That shows that there has been an improvement and that teachers may understand the figure that my hon. Friend has mentioned.

Has the Minister seen the report published only this week about the appalling difficulties that physically handicapped 16 to 19-year-olds face, both at work and in education? Does he agree that the services provided for 16 to 19-year-olds in further education are completely inadequate? If so, what will he do about it?

I have not read that report and the hon. Gentleman has an advantage over me. However, I shall consider it. I do not agree that provision is totally inadequate. We should all like to see improvements and the economic take-up that will make them possible.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement about Her Majesty's Government's policy towards the Cockcroft report on school mathematics.

The Government welcome the report, and we hope that it will be widely read by all of those with an interest in the teaching of mathematics. We shall be considering the recommendations directed to us.

I hope that the right hon. Gentleman has paid great attention to the report. Does he recognise that one of the issues raised in the report directly concerns him? I refer to the number of qualified mathematics teachers available. Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that it is no solution to attempt to attract mathematicians to the profession by paying them more than other teachers? That would be divisive of the profession. Does he accept that we must increase the amount of training and re-training for mathematics teachers? The Secretary of State's predecessor expressed concern about that two years ago. What have the Government done since then to deal with the problem?

I cannot accept, Mr. Teacher—[Laughter.] I cannot accept, Mr. Speaker, that the Government should necessarily deny a partial market solution to a shortage. However, the Government have two schemes for helping to reduce the shortage of mathematics teachers and we shall consider what more needs to be done in the light of the report.

Will my right hon. Friend do his best to encourage schools to let parents know that it is important that their children should be more successful at mathematics? At present there is a great gap in understanding about the importance of mathematics for future life.

Yes, Sir. However, my capacity to influence what schools tell parents, and their capacity to influence parents, is necessarily slightly diluted.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he is satisfied with co-ordination within his Department in implementing Her Majesty's Government's policy for the tertiary sector of education.

Yes, Sir.

While congratulating my hon. Friend on the state of order in his Department, may I none the less ask him whether he agrees that there is confusion in the minds of the public and especially among the universities that have had their grants reduced, resulting in a more unfavourable student-fellow ratio than in polytechnics and other local authority colleges? Is he aware that there has also been direction on the numbers of university departments and the numbers of people in those departments, while that control is not applied to local authority colleges? What are the student public to make of that situation?

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has today answered some questions on universities. As my hon. Friend will know, the division of funding among the various universities is for the University Grants Committee and not for the Government.

Will the Minister accept that it is not just a question of university education? Is he satisfied that there is adequate co-ordination between his Department and the Department of Employment and other Departments about tertiary education and training for 16 to 19-year-olds? Will he tell the House what specific negotiations and consultations are taking place between his Department and the Department of Employment and local education authorities, particularly in inner city areas, about the expansion of further education and training and the establishment of a development programme in that sphere?

The right hon. Gentleman is right. That is an important area, the development of which is moving fast because of the expansion of the MSC programmes. I reassure him and the House that the Department of Education and Science is deeply involved. It has representatives on the special programmes committee, in conjunction with the MSC committee. It also has representatives on the steering group committee that deals with united vocational preparation. It is in consultation on every aspect of the matter. I am convinced that the outcome will be satisfactory.

What is Her Majesty's Government's policy on tertiary education?

What is more, what is it?

Are the Government opposed to the creation of sixth form colleges and the association of sixth form colleges with colleges of further education?

When plans are put forward under section 12 of the Education No. 2 Act 1980, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State looks at the individual responses and needs and makes a decision. In general, the policy of the Government on tertiary education is to make available as wide a range as possible of attractive options to youngsters at 16 so that they will remain in full-time schooling. I am delighted to say that a further 10 per cent. of them are doing so now.

If the Minister is so satisfied about the present state of affairs, may I ask whether he is also satisfied with the envisaged cut in the staff-student ratio in the colleges? How can there be an expansion of the services that he and we say we wish if the staff-student ratio is to be further cut?

That is a separate question. If the hon. Gentleman would like to table it, I shall answer it.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what is his estimate of (a) the savings by 1984 as a result of the reductions in university expenditure and (b) the cost of redundancies of university staff in the same period.

My right hon. Friend estimates that by the end of the financial year 1983–84 cumulative savings at constant prices will be over £200 million and that the savings thereafter will be of the order of £150 million a year. The cost of redundancies depends on decisions by individual universities about how to adjust to their new levels of funding.

Does not the fact that the Government have had to make a substantial increase in the finance available for the redundancy scheme show that the case for extension of the time scale is well founded?

No, Sir. Even the figures of the Association of University Teachers, which made as favourable assumptions for teachers as possible, show that there was an outlay of £100 million on academic redundancies to make an annual saving of £77 million. That is not a bad deal.

Is it not disgraceful that the Government are continuously talking about cutbacks in university expenditure, and a reduction of choice and of opportunities for young people, while at the same time they are talking about spending between £6 billion and £10 billion on Trident nuclear missiles? Where are the Government's priorities? Surely they should be spending more on universities and creating more opportunities for young people?

The Government will be spending billions of pounds on higher education. That they are also spending billions of pounds on the proper defence of the country is entirely just.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he will take steps to ensure that the procedure for the publication of examination results by the independent sector in education is brought into line with that which exists in the State education sector.

Schools participating in the assisted places scheme are already required to publish the same information on examination results as maintained schools. My right hon. Friend has no powers to extend this requirement to schools in the independent sector.

Why are many schools failing to publish those examination results? The results are not being made available to the public in the way intended by the law. Could it be that examination standards in the public schools are not as high as in State schools?

The hon. Gentleman had better ask individual public schools. The maintained schools would not have told us their results if we had not passed the Act last year. Parents can check the examination results of public schools before they pay the fees for their children to go there. As people with children in the maintained schools sector pay rates and taxes, they, too, have the right to know those results.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 16 February.

This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others, including one with the President of the Council of Europe. 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.

Now that the bookmakers are making my right hon. Friend the favourite to win the next general election, will she, in planning her second term of office, give serious consideration to the possibility of phasing down the retirement age by, for example, one year each year over the next five years. so that new job opportunities are given to our young people?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend and to the bookies for the fact that they are saying -Now's the time to back Maggie." With regard to the latter part of my hon. Friend's question, the cost of having a retirement age of 60 for men would be so large that it could not be considered now. It would cost about £2.5 billion net a year. As we are already paying between £12 and £13 billion in retirement pensions, and as we must remember that we must take the money from the working population, I cannot give my hon. Friend any encouragement about reducing the retirement age to 60. However, I believe that a Select Committee is considering a common retirement age at the moment.

rose——

Retire.

I refer to the right hon. Lady's earlier reply. How do those facts accord with the collapse in manufacturing output to the lowest figure for over 14 years? Does the right hon. Lady regard that figure as confirmation or otherwise of the optimistic prophecies that she has been making over recent months?

I think that the right hon. Gentleman is referring to one month's figures—those for December. He will remember that—far from the worst weather for 15 years—we have had the coldest weather since the late 1800s. May I refer him to the view about those figures—incidentally, taken quarter over quarter they represent an increase in output—expressed last night by one of the policy advisers to the previous Government, who said that if one looks behind the figures for the reasons for the decline, they become a lot less interesting? He said that there were two reasons and also that

"in November we had strikes in British Leyland and Ford, which cut production in that month."

"in December we had this extreme spell of cold weather which not only cuts overtime working but also cuts deliveries from the factories to the shops and automatically production stops."

"I think that the trend over, say, the rest of this year"—[Interruption.]

"I think the trend over, say, the rest of this year is certainly strongly upwards."

Has the right hon. Lady compared those figures with the recent estimates of the CBI and realised that they very much accord with its estimates? Does she take any account of these matters, or will she go on prophesying that the figures are getting better when all the facts and the mass redundancies throughout the country prove to all that they are getting worse? Are we to have more of the same policy when her right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor produces his Budget?

If one compares the fourth quarter of last year with the third—[Interruption.] The Opposition may not like it, but industrial production actually rose. It fell in December because of the terrible weather, much longer holidays and strikes, but it is the right hon. Gentleman who backs the strikes, not me.

Will my right hon. Friend consider today instituting an inquiry into the circumstances and effects of the transfer of titles of Times Newspapers Ltd.? In particular, will she seek an assurance from her right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade that there has been no breach of the letter or the spirit of the undertakings given by the proprietor in January last year?

It looks as though the legal situation is very complex and there is more than one view upon it. As my right hon. and learned Friend knows, I am, therefore, not the person to pronounce on the legal matter. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade is of course looking into it to see whether the law has been upheld.

asked the Prime Minister whether she is satisfied with the co-ordination between the Department of Employment and Department of Health and Social Security with regard to the prompt payment of unemployment and supplementary benefits.

In general, I am satisfied with the co-ordination between the Department of Employment and the Department of Health and Social Security on the payment of benefits to unemployed people. Following the comprehensive Rayner scrutiny of the system last year, further improvements are being introduced and other possibilities are under consideration.

Is the Prime Minister aware that Members of Parliament are receiving more and more complaints about delays in paying supplementary and unemployment benefits, which is causing considerable hardship to a large number of people? Is she aware that many local DHSS offices are now unable to cope with the increased demand caused by the Government's economic policies? Will she either authorise an increase in staff or introduce a simplified procedure for claiming benefits?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, the Government have been trying to introduce a simplified procedure for the very reasons that he has stated. Staffing levels are reviewed so that they bear a direct relation to the increased load placed on local offices. I am sorry if the hon. Gentleman has found difficulty. There has been some difficulty due to the bad weather and the rail strikes and some letters and forms have not been received. If the hon. Gentleman has any particular cases in mind, we shall gladly look into them, because we are anxious that benefits should be paid promptly and on time.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that Girocheques are dispatched deliberately to avoid the weekend so that claimants do not have the difficulty of being without payments over the weekend?

Rubbish.

Will my right hon. Friend also confirm that during the recent rail dispute Girocheques have been despatched a day earlier to ensure that there is no difficulty? Is my right hon. Friend aware that my recent letter to the Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Security, my hon. Friend the Member for Wallasey (Mrs. Chalker), was the only communication that she had received complaining about delays in the payment of Girocheques?

We have not received many complaints about the payment of Girocheques. I confirm what my hon. Friend says. The offices strain to see that claimants receive a good and prompt service.

How can the service be improved or even maintained when the work load per staff member is increasing significantly? Is the right hon. Lady aware that Ministers' answers to questions that I have tabled recently on this matter suggest that the staff is inadequate in number and therefore overloaded? Does she therefore agree that people are not receiving the benefits to which they are due, that there are long queues and that there is a failure in co-ordination?

I do not believe that there is a failure in co-ordination. The staff in those offices work extremely hard. The staff levels are always under review in relation to work loads in local offices. Moreover, the supplementary benefits scheme has recently been the subject of a major review, the results of which are steadily being implemented.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 16 February.

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

Has my right hon. Friend had time to see the leaflet distributed to unemployed people by the Department of Health and Social Security seeking to define the suitability of jobs for people on the unemployment register? In the light of the present tragic unemployment figures, does she consider that the definitions provided in that leaflet are still relevant or does she believe that they make the provision of jobs more difficult at a time when we should be doing everything possible to make more jobs available?

I have seen the leaflet to which my hon. Friend refers. As it received a good deal of publicity a week or so ago I looked at the definition of what is a suitable job, which seems to have remained unchanged since 1946. It seems to me that the definition would preclude people from taking jobs with reasonable pay and I have asked my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services to look into the matter.

Has the Prime Minister had time to consider early-day motion No. 196 about the so-called youth training centres set up by the Workers' Revolutionary Party?

How many women are there?

Order.

:Order.

I was only asking about the percentage of women.

Order. I know that, but the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) must try to control himself. It seems that whenever the Leader of the Liberal Party speaks the hon. Member for Bolsover feels that he must contribute as well. That is not so.

Given that the Department of Employment is concerned about this matter, what steps will the Government take to draw the attention of the public to the abuses taking place at the centres?

If there are abuses, we shall of course look into the matter. I do not know the truth or otherwise of what is contained in the early-day motion, but I assume that it is true, because it has been put down —[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] Perhaps I should say that I assume it to be true for the purposes of the question. That might be a safer way to put it. If it is true that

"young people have been trained in anti-police methods and indoctrinated with extreme revolutionary views, without the knowledge of public figures on Merseyside whose names were originally used in support of the scheme",

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 16 February.

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

Will the right hon. Lady find time today to consider the financial crisis now facing the Essex county council as a result of the rate support grant settlement, which has dismayed even its Conservative leaders, who are worried by the response that they have received from her right hon. Friends? Is she aware that this threatens educational services, old people's homes, fire cover and many other local government services in Essex? It is extremely important that she should intervene to see that something is done about it.

As the hon. Gentleman knows, all rate support grant figures have been published and the local authorities know them. We are debating the whole matter today, as it affects England and Wales. I am sure that he will put those views strenuously to my right hon. Friend.

I have received notice of three applications for emergency debates under Standing Order No. 9. I shall take them in the order in which they were received.