asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department in what languages it is the practice for returning officers to publish notices giving general directions and guidance on how to vote.

The only language in which election notices must be published is English and, where appropriate, Welsh. We understand that one returning officer has announced his intention of adding notices in Urdu, Bengali, Punjabi and Gujerati.

In the Bradford case—and I ask this in case the practice is followed elsewhere—is it clear that the notice was instituted by agreement with all the political parties in Bradford? Is it equally clear that the guidance will be strictly limited to technical guidance about voting?

I believe that in the Bradford case the procedure was instituted with the agreement of the political parties. However, the conduct of an election is a matter for the returning officer concerned, who is answerable to the courts, and not to me. I imagine that a returning officer would think very carefully about the wisdom and propriety of any instruction recommending that voters should seek oral advice from presiding officers.

Where all the parties agree, as they have on the council, that people should be encouraged to exercise their democratic rights, by notices that will help them do that, albeit with impartial guidance, does the Minister agree that that should be done?

I understand the hon. and learned Gentleman's comment, or question, but I reiterate that the conduct of an election is a matter not for me but for the returning officer.

What my right hon. Friend says is interesting, but not sufficient. Is he not aware that in many county areas the returning officer is the lord lieutenant, who doe not answer to anybody but the Crown? The conduct of the election is subcontracted to a deputy returning officer, who in turn subcontracts to a deputy acting returning officer. Therefore, does my right hon. Friend really mean that the matter should be discussed with the returning officer, who is the lord lieutenant, or with the deputy returning officer, who does not do the job, or with the deputy acting returning officer, who actually——

Order.

The answer to my hon. Friend is that it is the deputy returning officer.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proposals he has to enable the police to catch more criminals.

The measures already taken by the Government to increase the strength and improve the pay and morale of the police service are vital in the fight against crime. But police effectiveness also depends on the full co-operation and understanding of the community. Our policy is to sustain both these essential aspects.

Is the Secretary of State aware that over the past decade the clear-up rate of every category of serious crime has deteriorated and that there is a widespread view that in cities burglaries and street robberies can be committed with impunity? Has he any other plans to increase the certainty of detection and conviction?

I accept that the level of crime, particularly burglaries, in many of our cities is extremely serious. The problem has to be tackled by increasing the effectiveness of the police. There are two ways in which to proceed. The first is to increase police numbers, as the Government have done. The second is to ensure that the police have the full support of the whole of the community, who will be prepared to work with them and to encourage them in their tasks. Following Lord Scarman's report, I am determined to seek to achieve these aims. I believe that all hon. Members will wish to support my efforts to increase the effectiveness of the police through the achievement of the full support of the community that they serve.

I accept what the right hon. Gentleman says. Is he, nevertheless, aware that, in the city of Liverpool, one crime is committed every four minutes and one car stolen every 20 minutes? Is he further aware that only one-third of those crimes are detected? Will he say how the reduction of £500,000 in the police budget will improve the effectiveness of the police?

There is no place where the full support of the community for the police is more needed than in Liverpool. I hope that this support will be provided by all sections of the community. It is an essential factor.

What consideration is my right hon. Friend giving to the possibility of reducing the number of violent criminals by the reintroduction of corporal punishment for those convicted of muggings in the street?

Corporal punishment was abandoned in 1948. An advisory council in 1960 was convinced that its reintroduction would not help. It would also be contrary to our international obligations. We have no plans to reintroduce it.

What specific steps does the Home Secretary intend to adopt, if he has not already taken them, to ensure, especially in the Metropolitan area, better relationships between the police and local communities and to ensure that local communities have more influence on the policing policies pursued in their areas?

I wish to encourage local liaison committees, involving full consultation between local communities and the police service. As the hon. Members for Norwood (Mr. Fraser) and for Lambeth, Central (Mr. Tilley) will know, I have had some consultations towards that end in Lambeth. My officials have sent letters on my behalf to police authorities throughout the country and to the London boroughs to urge that these consultations should be developed. The purpose is to enlist the support of all members of the community in making the police more effective in dealing with crime and to enable them to pursue criminals with more vigour.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will examine, with a view to its amendment, whether the Sex Discrimination Act 1976 is having an inhibiting effect upon the deployment of women police officers and the duties which they perform.

We do not consider that a review is necessary. Chief constables are able to deploy women officers on a wide range of duties.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that before the 1976 Act women police were a specialist department, handling crimes involving women and children? Those crimes included rape. Does he agree also that as a result of the 1976 Act the police have had to become an integrated force and that the specialist department has been broken up? In view of the natural and wide concern about offences against women, is it not preferable that those offences should be investigated by women officers? Will my right hon. Friend consider whether the Act is working against the best interests of women?

The Act does not restrict the availability of officers of either sex for particular classes of police work. It is true that the special units have been terminated. The advisory group on the law of rape, chaired by Mrs. Justice Heilbron, considered that the sympathy and experience of officers conducting interviews with women victims were more important that their sex. We are considering further guidance to the police. I am sure, however, that this principle holds good, although it may be desirable to arrange, wherever practicable, for a woman police officer to be present during such an interview if the complainant so wishes.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the most important qualifications for those interrogating victims of alleged rape are special training, tact and sympathetic understanding? Does he further agree that those qualities are found equally in men and women police officers? Does he agree also that all officers, men and women, must continue to be given equal access to every type of work experience, to training and to promotion prospects, as provided in the Sex Discrimination Act?

The inquiry under Mrs. Justice Heilbron came to the view expressed by the hon. Lady about the qualities required for dealing with these cases. The Government, I think, will agree. Women police officers have been able to operate in a much wider sphere than in the past. It is important to remember that chief constables are able to make their own decisions on the deployment of their officers.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will call for reports from each chief constable in each police authority to ascertain on how many individuals police forces in England and Wales, including their special branches, hold files; and what proportion of these relate to persons with no criminal record.

No, Sir.

Is it not extremely unsatisfactory that files on individuals held by the police are not subject to scrutiny or to questions in the House? Does the right hon. Gentleman know whether it is true that the Special Branch holds files on over 1 million people. Does the right hon. Gentleman know how many files are kept on hon. Members? Is he satisfied about access? Can he explain how The Observer newspaper was able to obtain access to a file on my constituent Mr. Hugh Geach, who has apparently done nothing more "subversive" than having been active as a student in 1969 in the campaign against the South African rugby tour?

I must make it clear that the Special Branch maintains records on individuals where this is necessary to enable it to undertake the tasks laid upon it. That is a perfectly proper position.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some of his sillier Back Benchers, such as the hon. Member for Preston, North (Mr. Atkins) and others, were saying that files of this sort should be held in respect of some of my hon. Friends? Is that the Home Secretary's view, or does he repudiate it?

My Back Benchers are never silly.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that a considerable amount of evidence exists to suggest that the police hold large numbers of files on people with no criminal past or criminal propensity? Is this not a serious invasion of their privacy? Will the right hon. Gentleman accept that the establishment of any future agency for the protection of data should have access to police files?

I must reserve my position until I make a statement on data protection and the House sees the direction that the Government intend to take on that issue.

Are files retained by the police where a citizen of foreign extraction, for instance, a German citizen—I do not mean a Commonwealth citizen—applies for British nationaltiy and is rejected, but then reapplies? Will the file have been kept by the local police between the first application and the next?

That would be a matter for the individual chief constable. I shall look into the matter.

Following the right hon. Gentleman's response to my hon. Friend the Member for Ormskirk (Mr. Kilroy-Silk), does he agree in principle that, in respect of data protection legislation, there should be no difference between access to electronic files held in computer form, and manual files?

It would be fairer, I think, for the House to await the statement that I shall make on this important subject.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will set up an inquiry to examine whether there is a significant contribution to juvenile crime made by the effect of intoxicant glues and similar substances on juveniles who inhale them.

We share my hon. Friend's concern about glue sniffing by young people, but we have no evidence to suggest that it makes a significant contribution to juvenile crime and my right hon. Friend has no plans to set up an inquiry.

I thank my hon. and learned Friend for that reply. May I remind him that I sent more than one petition to his right hon. Friend the Home Secretary expressing the strong concern of hundreds of people in my constituency about the brain damage caused to young people who sniff glue and also the social violence and vandalism in which some older children indulge as a result of glue sniffing? Is he aware that I have seen a fence that was kicked in by a 15-year-old youth who sniffed glue? If my hon. and learned Friend is unable to set up an inquiry, will he consider imposing a ban on the sale of intoxicant glue to the under-16s? As an alternative, will he consider emulating United States' makers of glue, who add a property at production stage which makes glue sniffers violently sick?

Order. Answers and questions have been extended this afternoon. Question Time is designed not for either side of the House to argue a case, but for hon. Members to ask a question and receive an answer.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who has been concerned with the welfare of the young for many years. I am told that literature on the subject does not reveal any contribution to juvenile crime, nor, strangely enough, that any lasting damage to health is caused. We are considering what can be done through advice to discourage this unattractive habit.

The Minister's answer is complacent. Glue sniffing is increasing, especially in areas such as Merseyside. I have presented petitions——

Order. That may be so, but we want a question, not a declaration.

Will the Minister treat the matter more seriously? Even if he does not introduce legislation, will he support legislation introduced by others to restrict the sale of certain glues and to allow additives to prevent sniffing?

We do not treat the matter other than seriously. Substances that can be sniffed for one sort of kick or another are found in a wide variety of common household goods. Even if it were possible to impose special statutory control on the sale of such items, that would cause an unacceptable degree of inconvenience for the majority of those who use such items for their proper purposes.

Cunningham asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is satisfied with the degree of enforcement by the traffic wardens service of parking restrictions as between different parts of the Metropolitan Police force district.

The deployment of traffic wardens is an operational matter for the Commissioner of Police, who assures us that every effort is made to deploy the available traffic wardens in accordance with traffic needs.

Does the Minister accept that in parts of Knightsbridge one cannot walk down the street without falling over traffic wardens sticking tickets on cars, whereas in the Whitecross Street street market area in my constituency, about which I have had correspondence with the Minister, there is a severe danger of restriction of access for emergency vehicles because of persistent parking on both sides of the road, and even in the middle? Will the Minister, as the police authority for the Metropolis, do something about that?

I am aware of the hon. Gentleman's concern, but the deployment of traffic wardens is a matter for the Commissioner. He considers that enforcement and deployment in the hon. Gentleman's constituency are consistent with that achieved elsewhere in central London.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his reply to the hon. Member for Arundel of 21 January, Official Report, column 191, what response he has had to the Home Office study on direct broadcasting by satellite; and if he is now able to make a statement.

Some 70 organisations and a number of individuals submitted comments on the Home Office study. Most were in favour of going ahead with direct broadcasting by satellite. In my foreword to the study I made it clear that the Government were prepared to give serious consideration to an early start with satellite broadcasting, and I hope to make a further announcement very shortly.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that since the Home Office report was published in May there has been some slippage? Will he seek to expedite the matter, given the strong competition to which he referred in the foreword to that report? Will he ensure that if cable television becomes relevant in the expansion of satellite broadcasting, he will give every consideration to that matter also?

Certainly. Cable and direct broadcasting by satellite are inextricably linked. I intend to make a statement on cable broadcasting. I do not believe that there has been a slippage. It is important to move ahead with the technological aspect, but we must also accept that such changes have considerable repercussions on our standards of broadcasting. Those standards must be preserved.

Will the Secretary of State give an undertaking that the same degree of regulation will obtain, in the national interest, in any form of satellite broadcasting linked through ground stations to cable broadcasting as obtains for the existing service?

We must hold a number of discussions, both outside and within the House, before giving a specific undertaking. I wish to record my belief that it is important to preserve our broadcasting standards.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the current uniformed strength of the Lancashire constabulary; and what it was in May 1979.

At the end of 1981 the total strength of the Lancashire constabulary, including both uniformed officers and CID, was 3,153. This is a gain of 60 on the total of 3,093 in May 1979.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that encouraging reply. Will he confirm that the increased numbers of police will mean that more will be seen on the beat than was the case prior to 1979?

It is desirable that officers should be returned to the beat from other duties whenever possible. However, it is a matter for the operational discretion of chief constables. I know that my view is widely held by them.

Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that any suggestion by the county police committee of a cut in the allocation of the budget of the Lancashire police would be unacceptable to the people of Lancashire? If he receives such a suggestion, will he rebut it with all possible force?

As my right hon. Friend has said, the allocation of the sums made available to police authorities is a matter for them. I am sure that there is a wide measure of agreement with what my hon. Friend has said. Most people believe that there should be no reduction in the number of police officers on the beat.

How many members of the Lancashire constabulary have been recruited from ethnic minority groups? Is the Minister prepared to remove the height restriction, which prevents Chinese and Asian applicants from joining the police force?

I do not carry in my head the figures for which the hon. Gentleman asks. It is no secret that everyone concerned with such matters wishes to see more suitably qualified representatives of the ethnic minorities in the police forces.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is satisfied with the procedures under which close relatives of people of foreign extraction now living in the United Kingdom who are domiciled abroad are able to visit them in the United Kingdom.

Yes, Sir. The requirements for admission to the United Kingdom as a visitor are laid down in the immigration rules presented to Parliament.

Will the right hon. Gentleman investigate the case of my constituent, Mrs. Chiraghuddin Rehman, who has consistently been refused permission for a visit from her mother and brother, whom she has not seen for more than 10 years, on such grounds as the brother's inability to name the sights that he expects to see on his visit and that her husband's income amounts to only 17 per cent. of the cost of the fares? If such cases are typical, do they not constitute a grossly disgraceful interference with the sanctity of the family? Should not something be done about that?

I shall investigate the case mentioned by the hon. Gentleman. My experience shows that such cases are often more complicated than is implied in the sort of statement that he has made.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Iraqi students living in Britain have increasingly come under attack from other Iraqis and face great danger from threats made against them? Has he considered the position of the Iraqi embassy? What action is being taken to deal with those worrying attacks?

That question has nothing to do with the matter under discussion.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that the case cited by my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Mr. Newens) is only too typical of what happens almost every day of the week? Does he realise that every hon. Member who has ethnic minority groups among his constituents can give examples of genuine visitors who wish to come to Britain for a brief period but are prevented from doing so on very little evidence? As that happens almost invariably when the visitors concerned are black or members of the Indian community, does he not realise that it is a gross form of discrimination that should be brought to an end forthwith?

The overall number of visitors refused entry to Britain last year was only 0.25 per cent. of those who arrived here. As the right hon. Gentleman well knows, cases are considered with the greatest care. There is an appeals system, and a great deal of ministerial attention is given to the matter.

Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that sufficient attention is being given to so-called genuine visitors from abroad who overstay the permitted time? Is it not true that the amnesties granted by the Labour Administration have encouraged illegal overstaying, in the somewhat foolish belief that one day a Labour Government will be returned, who will grant similar amnesties?

We pay great attention to overstaying. However, the amnesties granted by the previous Administration related to illegal entrants rather than to overstayers.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many indictable offences were committed during 1981; and how this compares with the position in 1976.

The latest figures show that in the first three quarters of 1981 the number of serious offences recorded by the police in England and Wales was 2-2 million. This total is not directly comparable with the figures for 1976 because of the introduction of a new set of counting rules at the beginning of 1980.

Does the Minister recall that five years ago Conservative Members made a great fuss about the crime rate and law and order? Will not the full figures for 1981 show that the situation last year would have seemed incredible only four or five years earlier? Does he agree that until there is a change in Government economic policy and less retrenchment in public provision there can be no possibility of advance?

Of course my right hon. and hon. Friends showed great concern five years ago—as they always have and as they do today—about the increase in crime, because they know how concerned ordinary people are about it. That is why we are doing our very best to deter crime, not least by increasing the police force by more than 8,000 since May 1979. I dare say that unemployment has a bearing on the matter, but nothing can excuse violent crime or indeed any crime.

As the last review of corporal punishment was 22 years ago, in 1960, and the number of crimes and indictable offences has risen at an alarming rate, does my hon. and learned Friend agree that the reintroduction of corporal punishment should be considered in view of present experience and the crime figures?

My right hon. Friend set out the Government's position in answer to an earlier question. The Criminal Justice Bill will provide an opportunity to consider this, as an amendment in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for the Wrekin (Mr. Hawksley) deals with that very matter. I have nothing to add to what my right hon. Friend has said.

Will the Minister investigate the relationship between the increase in indictable crime and the growth of the prison population? Can he suggest any reason why the prison population rose by 2,000 in the first five weeks of this year?

Anyone can speculate when one is close to the event, but I dare say that in time it will be possible to reach an informed opinion. There is always a seasonal decline around Christmas. Nevertheless, there has been a marked drop in the prison population from 45.000 last July. I hope that it will not rise any more, but we shall have to wait and see.

Does my hon. and learned Friend accept that, despite the figures that he was unable to give, the crime rate has soared, particularly for offences such as mugging and the raping of even frail and elderly women and young children? Is he aware that there is grave public concern about this? Will he shortly announce measures to counter and reverse this trend, not least by the reintroduction of discipline in schools, the strengthening of the family unit and a greater deterrent effect? Will he bear in mind that the more lightly we treat criminals, the more criminals there will be?

I have no doubt that the matters to which my hon. Friend refers have considerable bearing on the problem of crime and its increase. I also acknowledge—nobody has sought to conceal it—that there has been a grave increase particularly in violent crime. The Criminal Justice Bill provides the courts with a substantially wider range of penalties, custodial arid otherwise. We believe that that will be a valuable measure.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is satisfied that the punishments currently being imposed by magistrates on violent offenders are proving an effective deterrent.

In combating violent crime, sentencing policy has an important part to play. While the deterrent effect of any sentence is not readily measured, my right hon. Friend has no doubt that magistrates are giving full weight to the principle of deterrence.

Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that in the Midlands there is extreme anxiety about the increasing number of violent attacks, particularly on defenceless old people? Is he further aware that there is great anxiety that the punishments being handed down to the perpetrators are wholly inadequate? Will my hon. and learned Friend and my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary urge the courts to hand down punishments more suited to deter crime of this type and to reverse this disturbing trend in our society?

I am well aware of the extreme anxiety in many areas at the increase in violent crime. I well know that my hon. Friend, being closely in touch with his constituents, accurately represents their feelings. His question relates to magistrates' courts. Magistrates are drawn from the community and serve the community in which they live, but they are subject to guidance from the Lord Chief Justice and the Court of Appeal, as are all courts. Guidance as to the type of sentence to be imposed should therefore come from those quarters and not from my right hon. Friend.

Will the hon. and learned Gentleman bear in mind that as many as 76 per cent. of young offenders sent to detention centres commit another offence when they are released? Does he agree that this type of sentence should be replaced by a more effective custodial sentence, as detention centres have been shown to be utterly ineffective as a deterrent?

Although the 1969 Act gave power to abolish detention centres, for five years the Labour Government did nothing about it. That is quite remarkable in the light of the views expressed by the hon. Lady today.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what progress he is making with discussions on a system of fully independent investigation of complaints against the police.

I have discussed with the Police Advisory Board reform of the police complaints procedures. As I have informed the House, since the Select Committee on Home Affairs is conducting an inquiry into police complaints and related matters, we shall wish to take its report into account before bringing forward proposals for change.

Is the Home Secretary aware that any halfway house would be as futile and useless as the present hotch-potch arrangement, which has proved to be of no effect at all, and that the public will be satisfied only with a mechanism wholly independent of the police themselves?

What the hon. Gentleman describes as a hotch-potch is what he voted for when the Police Bill was introduced. As for the changes, I do not accept that a completely independent procedure is the only solution that will satisfy the public. We have to find a reasonable arrangement that meets the requirements both for a sensible independent element in the attitude to complaints and for the right of a chief officer to discipline his force. But if the House and the country are worried about crime, as they rightly are, let us not become so involved in a complaints system that we hold back young police officers who should be pursuing criminals.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The right hon. Gentleman is utterly incorrect to say that I did not oppose the earlier provision.

That legislation was passed by the Labour Government, which the hon. Gentleman supported. If he did not vote for it, I apologise to him.

Does the Home Secretary agree that as there is continuing anxiety about complaints against the police, and as investigations are still going on, it would be a good idea to institute some pilot schemes so that we may reach a reasonable decision on this matter?

No, I think that it is right to proceed as we are, through the Select Committee on Home Affairs, to try to devise a sensible system. Nevertheless, I hope that we shall not divert the attention of the police, by an overemphasis on complaints, from the real need to pursue criminals.

Would it not be better if the Opposition tried to give a little moral support to the police just for once?

I hope that both sides of the House will give the strongest possible support to our police service. If we did not have 8,000 more police than we had two and a half years ago, the complaints about violent crime would be far worse. Indeed, the situation would be overwhelming.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many women police officers there were at the latest available date; and what percentage of the total strength this represents.

At the end of 1981 there were 10,772 women police officers in England and Wales. This represents about 9 per cent. of the total strength of the police service.

I am obliged to the right hon. Gentleman. In response to the earlier question of the hon. Member for Newbury (Mr. McNair-Wilson), does he not think that there is a clear case for more women police officers to be appointed? Does he appreciate that there is a great deal of evidence from counselling services, for example, of the tough attitude taken by many male police officers towards women and children who complain about sexual offences against them? Does he agree that it is time for more women police officers to be appointed?

The recruitment of women police officers is proceeding at a satisfactory rate. As for the deployment of officers and the type of cases that the hon. Lady has talked about, sympathy and experience can exist in either sex. However, there are occasions when it is desirable to make women police officers available.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in using police dogs for crowd control there is rampant discrimination on genetic grounds against certain breeds, such as poodles?

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will introduce legislation to enable judges to use their discretion to impose the sentence which seems appropriate to them on a conviction of murder.

I have no plans to alter the present law.

Is the Home Secretary aware that many trials in murder cases, especially in relation to domestic killings, take place in such a way as to achieve a manslaughter verdict, to give the judge the opportunity to pass an appropriate sentence instead of the automatic life sentence? Will he institute an inquiry to consider the advantages of giving judges the opportunity to pass an appropriate and often lesser sentence rather than the automatic life sentence?

Given the current feeling about violent crime, any removal of the mandatory sentence for murder would be regarded as a serious matter.

Will the right hon. Gentleman remind the House that the Butler Committee, the Advisory Council on the Penal System and half of the Criminal Law Revision Committee recommended that the life sentence should be a maximum rather than a mandatory sentence for murder? Does he recognise that the degree of wickedness and culpability in murders differs quite substantially and that the courts should be able to reflect that by passing an appropriate sentence, which would be determinate rather than a mandatory life sentence?

I do not wish to add to or subtract from anything that I said in my previous answer.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will initiate a fresh study of the feasibility of introducing corporal punishment as an alternative to imprisonment for crimes of violence and vandalism.

No, Sir. Judicial corporal punishment was abolished in 1948 and the advisory council on the treatment of offenders recommended in 1960 that it should not be reintroduced. My right hon. Friend is satisfied that the recommendation remains valid, particularly as reintroduction would be a breach of our international obligations.

As the policy of shorter sentences and the eroding of deterrents has been accompanied by a massive upsurge in crime and appalling congestion in the prisons, may I ask why my hon. and learned Friend is not willing to consider corporal punishment with the same open mind that he directs to other alternatives to imprisonment? Has he noticed that since corporal punishment was abolished on the Isle of Man there has been a 78 per cent. rise in crimes of violence?

The advisory council, which reported in 1960, took account of the public's view that corporal punishment should be reintroduced. It examined comprehensive research on the subject. It concluded that the statistics on the deterrent effect of judicial corporal punishment suggested that it was not especially effective. I remind my hon. Friend that the United Kingdom is a member of the European Convention on Human Rights. In many quarters it was thought a good thing that the European Court last year pronounced against the closed shop. We must take care not to seem to be in favour of only those parts of the law that may suit us.

Will the hon. and learned Gentleman take note that a powerful section of the Tory Party still believes in 1982 that it can flog mankind into submission? Does he realise that only a complete change in the Conservative Party's policies to get working people back into work will lessen the approach to violent crime? Does he accept that we shall have more violent crime if the Government continue with their present policies?

I give the hon. Gentleman the credit of supposing that he knows that every word of what he said is rubbish.

Has my hon. and learned Friend's attention been drawn to a letter sent to the Home Secretary by one of my constituents stating that rape is such a dreadful crime that castration is the only proper penalty? Does he agree that that would be making the punishment fit the crime?

I sympathise with the sense of abhorrence that inspired what lay behind the suggestion of my hon. Friend's constituent. However, certain practical problems might attend that sentence.

The Minister has spoken of the importance of our accepting all the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. If Lord Scarman turns out to be correct in the Harriet Harman case, and the Home Office is at fault according to the European Court, will the Home Office withdraw its case and not press for costs?

Not even the ingenuity of the right hon. Gentleman could persuade me that his supplementary question has anything to do with the original question.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 18 February.

This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today, including one with a delegation from the National Pensioners Convention steering committee.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that there will be widespread agreement throughout the House with her statement, which I think appeared in last Sunday's edition of the Sunday Telegraph, that we all depend on the prosperity of manufacturing industry? Will she tell us plainly how she can square that statement with the figures that were published at 2.30 pm today by the Department of Industry, which show that investment in manufacturing industry is the lowest since the early 1960s and that the probable outcome for 1981, a full year of her Administration, is zero or even negative net investment for manufacturing industry? Will she admit that that must he seen as a disaster for Britain's future prosperity?

The prosperity of manufacturing industry depends first, upon its staying competitive; secondly, on its producing the right designs for people to buy; thirdly, on deliveries; and, fourthly, on all the people working in the industry leaving sufficient in it for sufficient profits with which to make investment.

Following British Rail's climb-down in its dispute with ASLEF, will my right hon. Friend give the House an assurance that, unless improvements in productivity and reductions in over-manning are implemented in the near future, there will be no further investment in British Rail? Will she make it clear that the inevitable consequence of that will be further reductions in services and more jobs lost?

I think that it is too early to judge the result of the railways dispute. Both sides have now to go into negotiation. If that is not successful, we shall await the arbitration. I agree with my hon. Friend that for there to be a future for British Rail it has to be modernised in its labour practices and productivity has to be increased. If we get that increased productivity, there is a future for increased investment.

I refer to the meeting that the right hon. Lady is having later in the day with the National Pensioners Convention steering committee. Will she confirm that what her Government did last year was to cut by 3 per cent. the real value of the pension? Will she be giving the assurance to the steering committee that she will be restoring the value of the pension in the forthcoming Budget?

No, I will not confirm what the right hon. Gentleman has said, any more than he would necessarily confirm that the last pension increase that was made by the Labour Government of which he was a member left the pension well below what it had been. Following that increase it was 1.9 per cent. below what it had been in real terms. I have given the pledge—the Government stand by it—that the value of the pension will be retained in real terms. We have already announced that in so far as it was less one year it will be increased the following year, and in so far as it was more in one year, it will be smoothed out the following year. On the whole, the value of the pension will be retained in real terms.

Will the right hon. Lady study the figures properly before meeting the pensioners, because they know the figures? Will the right hon. Lady confirm that the cuts made by her Government last year mean that, for the first time since 1970, there had been a cut in the value of the pension?

The right hon. Gentleman raised two points. In answer to the first, in the first year of this Government the increase in pensions was greater than the increase in inflation, and in the second year it was slightly less. Therefore, we have agreed that we shall make up the shortfall in the second year so that the pension will retain its value in real terms. I should be grateful if the right hon. Gentleman would accept those facts.

The pensioners know the figures even if the right hon. Lady does not. I suggest that she should publish in the Official Report the figures from 1970 of the real value of the pension. She will discover that what I am saying is right, and that the pensioners are right.

The right hon. Gentleman heard my reply. Which of the facts therein does he disagree with?

Answer.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 18 February.

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

Has the Prime Minister seen the report in The Times today stating that the figures for muggings for certain inner cities are up by 50 per cent.? Did she know——

The Tories are mugging the pensioners.

Order. The hon. Member for West Stirlingshire (Mr. Canavan) must try to control his remarks when hon. Members are addressing the House. These interruptions from a sedentary position are becoming impossible. I have had a flood of correspondence from the public about the noise in the House during Prime Minister's Question Time. I hope that they will write to their constituency Member and not to me.

:Has my right hon. Friend also read the assertion by the police that these offences are becoming increasingly brazen, with gangs of up to 50 young blacks looting in broad daylight? As it is widely believed that both the deterrence and prosecution of these offences is inhibited by what are loosely termed community relations, would she have a word with the newly promulgated Minister with responsibility for race relations—who has said in the press that his door is always open—and suggest that the makes contact with those who suffer most—the victims?

I recognise my hon. Friend's concern about the increase in mugging and other crimes, particularly in London, revealed this morning. My hon. Friend will know that there has been a considerable increase in the number of police in London, but they are not up to full establishment; they are about 1,500 short. Further recruitment will continue, because it is important to have sufficient police to deal with this problem. That is the first thing. If that is not enough, we shall have to consider increasing the establishment.

Has the Prime Minister seen today the report allegedly prepared by Treasury and Department of Employment officials, which puts the latest public cost of unemployment at £96 per head per week? Can she confirm that the present public expenditure cost of unemployment is running at £15,000 million a year?

That depends on the assumptions. What I can tell the right hon. Gentleman is that in this year the cost of unemployment, judged by the amount paid out in unemployment benefit, social security and rent and rate rebates is about £5 billion.

What about the tax that is lost?

The hon. Gentleman speaks of lost tax. What he is assuming is that everyone has a thriving and flourishing job in the private sector. If they had that, we would buy more British goods perhaps, or we might still buy imports, and tax would come in. If it is so easy to produce thriving, flourishing jobs in the private sector, I am amazed that Labour Members do not go out and start up businesses to create employment. Of course, they find it easier to talk.

Has the right hon. Lady seen the announcement by British Gas of the swingeing and cruel increase of 22 per cent. in gas prices during the current year? Is she aware that this will cause a great deal of hardship to pensioners and others, who are already frightened to use domestic appliances in case they will not be able to meet the bill? Will she now, as an act of compassion, withdraw the instruction to the gas board that it must increase prices by 10 per cent. above the rate of inflation?

British Gas has been selling gas to the domestic consumer at or below cost, with profits largely coming from industrial sales. That will not be surprising to the hon. Gentleman, who will know that his Government deliberately tipped costs towards industry and allowed domestic gas to be sold at a lesser price. Even with this year's increase British Gas will break even only on domestic gas. United Kingdom domestic gas prices are now considerably lower than those of France or Germany. The price of industrial gas has been frozen for one year.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 18 February.

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

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many British citizens have substantial assets in Zimbabwe which they cannot now realise and then retire to their homeland? Will she take measures to correct this situation?

My hon. Friend is correct. Zimbabwe has an exchange control system, which it inherited from the previous Administration, and has left in place. From time to time the Government have made representations about its effect on people who wish to return here, but who are unable to get their assets out. This is a matter for Zimbabwe. I note that many Labour Members wish to have an exchange control system here.

Was the Prime Minister disturbed to learn today of the report by the Institute of Fiscal Studies, which demolished the Conservative myth that people are better off on the dole than in work? Now that it is confirmed that the unemployed are not only very poor but are forced to be unemployed as a direct result of Government policy, will the Prime Minister call off her attack upon the unemployed and the so-called work-shy and be a little more generous than she has been in the past?

Most people would think it right that those who are in work should be better off than those who unfortunately cannot find work. If they cannot find work, they will receive unemployment benefit, social security, rent rebates, rate rebates, free school meals for children and so on. Many people will agree with the report from the Institute of Fiscal Studies.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the train strike has made it obvious that the time has come when the chairman of British Rail and his board should learn how to express an agreement reached with the unions or anyone else in such clear plain language that no one can later pretend that he does not understand what has been agreed?

I agree fully with my hon. and learned Friend's contention that an agreement is not an agreement unless it is expressed and everyone understands its meaning.