asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what plans he has to extend opportunities for part-time higher education.

The Government recognise the key contribution of part-time higher education, particularly in meeting the vocational needs of adults, and would encourage institutions and their providers to continue to accord a high priority to such provision.

Does the Minister agree that there can be few students more deserving of encouragement than those undertaking degree courses in the evening after a full day's work? Is he aware that Birkbeck college has provided a valuable service for such students, and that such a facility should be available in more centres? What will he do to enable such students to have the limited cost-effective financial assistance that they need?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman's remarks about the importance of and his praise for Birkbeck college. My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary visited Birkbeck college the other day and has a special interest in such provisions. I can reassure the hon. Gentleman by telling him that the UGC's 1981 distribution recurrent grant and advice on numbers envisaged an overall increase in part-time university students by 1984–85. That will help places such as Birkbeck.

Is my hon. Friend aware that that is one of the most overriding reasons for reviewing and reforming our student maintenance system? There is no help for part-time students, who sacrifice a great deal, are highly motivated and usually want to do the vocational courses that the Government support.

I recognise my hon. Friend's interest and remind him of the recent revision in the 21-hour rule, which goes some way to meet that point. Local education authorities have the power to make discretionary grants.

In spite of his optimism, has the Minister seen the recent survey by Malcolm Tight on the provision of part-time study courses and the number of institutions that have gone back, not forward, in that respect? Does the Minister agree that there is a case for reviewing the full-time equivalent calculation in respect of financing such courses as well as re-examining mandatory awards?

I asgree with the hon. Gentleman. Mr. Tight's report is very interesting. We shall be considering its recommendations in the light of the response that we shall make to ACACE's proposal on the development of continuing educational opportunities for the next 20 years, which I am sure the hon. Gentleman has seen and finds interesting.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what information is available to him as to the proportion of textbooks used in maintained schools which is imported.

I regret that my Department does not collect information on that matter. The value of all published literature imported into the United Kingdom in 1980 was £120 million.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Is he aware of subversive and Communist publications which go into schools via the Novosti press, as reported in The Daily Telegraph and other publications? Will he do something about it?

We have to differentiate between the agreement of 1961 that allowed Soviet Weekly to come into British schools and 100,000 copies of Anglia to go into Russian schools. That figure compares with the 30 or 40 pamphlets from the Novosti press, which are offered free, and with many of which we disagree.

Setting aside the source of the books, what does the hon. Gentleman say to the Publishers' Association, which claims that there is little or no sign of education authorities using the £20 million that the hon. Gentleman claims to have allocated for additional book purchasing?

We put £20 million more in the rate support grant for this year, which would take the level of book provision an real terms back to the 1978–79 level. That is what I am informed, but we can argue about that at another time. Once the money has left us in the RSG it is up to local authorities how they use it. Since they probably paid more in teachers' salaries than was allowed for in the RSG, that extra money had to come from somewhere.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will review the continuance of three separate institutions of university status in Manchester-Salford.

My right hon. Friend has at present no plans to do so.

Is there not an opportunity for the creation of a new national technological institution by combining Salford and UMIST? If local conversations were to take place with that aim in view, would my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State give such talks a fair wind, as far as it lies within his power to do so?

Yes.

If the Minister is tempted to pursue the line proposed by the hon. Member for Manchester, Withington (Mr. Silvester), will he assure us that there will be consultations with the institutions involved to ensure that there is no shabby treatment, which often seems to be the trend when the Government are involved in such matters?

I was able to answer my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Withington (Mr. Silvester) so briefly because he emphasised that such a proposal would have to derive from local initiatives.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what estimate he has made of the numbers of teachers likely to be employed by local education authorities in September 1982; and how many teachers are at present unemployed.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what information he has as to the extent to which local education authorities intend to reduce numbers of teachers.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what assessment he has made of the number of teachers likely to be employed by local education authorities in September 1982; and how many teachers are at present unemployed.

If the local authority employers continue to reduce school teacher numbers at a rate similar to that of the last two years, the number of teachers employed in England for the next academic year will be around 410,000. Last month, 15,000 people were registered with the Department of Employment in England as unemployed and seeking work as teachers in schools.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on a day when the unemployment figures have shot up to an all-time high, it is sheer economic lunacy continually to throw people out of work? Does he not recognise that teachers ought to be used to ensure that some of our 16 to 19-year-olds are given a school maintenance grant of, say, £20 a week so that they can stay on at school and provide more jobs, and that teachers should be used to increase the number of nursery schools? Surely that is the way forward, rather than throwing teachers on the scrap-heap. The Government seem to be obsessed with the idea that—

Order. We have had the question.

Of course it is right that a proper number of school teachers should be employed, but the hon. Gentleman should recognise that there is a choice at the moment between unemployment in the public sector and unemployment in the trading sector, which pays for the public sector. The more we employ in the public sector, the fewer jobs there will be in the trading sector, which supports it.

Will the Secretary of State confirm that he has no power to compel the Inner London Education Authority to reduce the number of teachers that it employs?

I confirm that I have no powers to force any local education authority to dismiss teachers or to reduce the number of teachers. Such decisions rest with the authorities.

Is it not true that the cost of training a teacher is many thousands of pounds and that wasting that public investment and throwing people on the scrap-heap is anti-social misery, which the Government are forcing on the education system? Is it not true also that one of our most precious national assets is our people and that we should increase training and education opportunities by providing a better pupil-teacher ratio and more opportunities for teachers to work instead of putting them on the dole, which is what the Government are doing?

Most of the teachers who have left the profession have done so voluntarily, for one reason or another. What the hon. Gentleman says is true to some extent, but it must be applied with economic understanding, as I tried to say to his hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner).

In so far as my right hon. Friend influences the optimum number of teachers in posts from time to time, will he bear in mind in particular the plight of country schools, because an insufficient number of teachers may lead to the closure of many small village schools?

My hon. Friends and I take very great care when considering proposals to close a country school or, indeed, any school.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that if education authorities concentrated spending on matters directly related to education, such as teachers and textbooks, instead of on matters not directly related to education, such as school meals, they would be able to employ more teachers and achieve an even better pupil-teacher ratio?

I agree with my hon. Friend that some education authorities have made economies in school meals, which other education authorities refuse to copy.

If, as the right hon. Gentleman tells us, there is a smooth machinery for transferring assets and resources between the public and private sectors, why have the £1,400 million of cuts that the Government have made in education while they have been in office not found their way into growth in the private sector?

If the Government had not made some economies somewhere, the economy and unemployment would be worse. We have cut the amount devoted to education in real terms by less than the fall in the number of pupils.

rose—

Order. This matter comes up again later.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he has yet decided what further part his Department might play in encouraging teacher education to take account of the multi-ethnic character of society in other ways than at present, as promised in Cmnd. 8476.

The task of identifying more precisely what should be done is being tackled by the Swann committee. We must await its views before deciding what part the Department might play.

Is the Under-Secretary not aware that in a few days' time it will be the first anniversary of the publication of the report of the Select Committee on Home Affairs' on racial disadvantage, which drew attention to the fact that for many of the teachers who will go into inner city schools and multi-racial areas there is no compulsory training to deal with the many problems and possibilities involved in multi-racial education?

In October the Department issued a consultative document on which material is still coming in. Part of the problem, following the Rampton report, was that many general statements were made, but there were no specific recommendations that could be put into effect. We hope that the Swann committee will give us something that can take us from general principles to actuality. Twenty-three courses on special access are running now and the first graduates will come out next year. I give the hon. Gentleman that additional information for his benefit, even though he did not ask for it. The colleges are aware of what is happening and I am sure that many are adapting the lessons to the present situation.

While teachers in training must obviously be taught about the diverse backgrounds from which our people come, with regard to the culture that they are taught to teach, if we want a cohesive society it would be more positive to teach them to concentrate on traditional British culture. That is where public provision should come in. Private provision could quite properly look after the important cultural backgrounds of many pupils in our schools.

My hon. Friend draws attention to a dichotomy. Teachers should be aware of the background of their pupils, but the vast majority of the parents of those pupils want them completely integrated into our society, otherwise they will face double deprivation.

Will the hon. Gentleman disadvantage or enhance the process of stability, unity and cohesion in our society by encouraging or discouraging—[Interruption].—Mr. Speaker, there is nothing that 1 can do about the ineducable below the Gangway.

Order.

I am actually referring to the hon. Member for Yarmouth (Sir A. Fell). Perhaps I shall see him outside afterwards. Does the Minister believe that those desirable objectives will be advanced or retarded by the creation of separate schools, with or without his encouragement, along colour lines?

This is obviously a complicated question. It is interesting that the demand came from the people themselves because they wanted basic education in the schools, as was reported in the national press last week. This is a particularly delicate matter. One must accept that children come from different backgrounds and that, in many cases, they want to keep their own culture and languages and to stay in their own groups. At the same time, the parents want education to allow their children to compete equally, without discrimination when they leave school, for the jobs that they will go to.

Order. We are getting very long questions and answers.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many university teachers who are United Kingdom citizens and served in the Armed Forces during the Second World War have had those years of war service excluded for pension superannuation purposes.

Full information is not available on all categories of university teachers' war service. However, I am informed by the universities superannuation scheme that some 1,400 applications have been received for the half-rate war service concession. Of those applications, some 400 had to be disallowed.

Does the Minister agree that it is unfair, unjust and mean for any employer to refuse to allow years of war service to be included for superannuation purposes? Will he therefore ensure that his Department takes note of those mean employers and that these university teachers get their rights?

The provision for half-rate pensionable service, which was extended to university teachers recently, was done on exactly the same terms as for the rest of the public sector. It would be difficult to make a special case for university teachers.

Does my hon. Friend accept that university teachers not only took part in combat in the war, but carried out duties in the Army Education Corps which maintained the education standards of serving members of the Armed Forces? Private employers would continue their pension rights. Does my hon. Friend accept that these university teachers are therefore similarly entitled to that privilege?

No one is denying the war service of university teachers, nor that of civil servants or others to whom similar conditions apply.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will estimate the number of teachers who will be required in the years 1982–83, 1983–84 and 1984–85, together with the pupil to teacher ratios assumed for each of those years.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many teachers he expects to be employed in State schools in September of 1982, 1983 and 1984.

In this year's public expenditure White Paper it was assumed that the number of teachers employed in maintained schools in England would be 405,000 in January 1983, 390,000 in January 1984 and 380,000 in January 1985. The overall ratio of pupils to teachers would thus remain close to the figure of 18·6: 1 recorded in January 1981. The actual number of teachers employed in those years will depend on a number of factors, including the priorities of local councils, and future levels of pay and prices.

Will the Secretary of State tell the House why he has decided, inevitably, to worsen the standards of education in this country by not taking the opportunity when he had it to improve the pupil-teacher ratio?

Because we believe that it is right, in the interests of increasing economic vitality and employment in this country, to get a better balance than we have now between Government spending and total national revenue.

Does the Secretary of State agree that it is extremely dangerous to reduce the number of teachers employed in schools in line with the reduced number of children, because that inevitably leads, in primary schools, to teachers having to teach mixed age groups, and in secondary schools to a major reduction in specialisation? Is it not important that, using the extra teachers, we should improve education standards, not reduce them?

It is greatly in the interests of school children that the economic condition of the country should improve, and the Government believe—they fought an election on that belief—that to achieve that end it is necessary to have some restraint in public spending.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the term "ineducable" was deleted from the education vocabulary some years ago? Does he agree with me that the deployment of teachers is the key to success in teaching policy?

I certainly agree that the deployment of teachers is an important factor. It was the hon. Member for Bedwellty (Mr. Kinnock) who referred to his ineducable hon. Friends below the Gangway.

When the Secretary of State says that the cuts in teachers numbers are scare stories, does he realise that many people in education are scared that the cuts are a Treasury hatchet, for which he is the front man, scared that his boast that he has maintained and improved student-teacher ratios is being abandoned, and scared that the quality of teaching is bound to fall in the next two or three years? That is what people in education are scared about.

I am surprised that the hon. Member should fall so low as to try to foster a scare story that he cannot really believe. A review of the Government's plans for local authority expenditure for 1983–84 will, as for other expenditure, take place in the usual way as part of the 1982 public expenditure survey, prior to the RSG settlement for 1983–84.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he is now in a position to make a statement on his policy towards the introduction of loans for students in further and higher education.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when he expects to be in a position to make a statement on the possibility of introducing a student loans scheme.

The introduction of student loans raises many complex issues, and my right hon. Friend cannot yet say when he will be in a position to make a statement.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Will he tell the House whether he is considering moving from a system of grants to one of loans, or whether he is considering top-up loans?

One of the schemes under consideration is a mixture of grants and loans.

Is my hon. Friend aware that of the 67 per cent. of students who rely on a parental contribution, 73 per cent. find that their parents are unable or unwilling to top up their grants? Will he therefore consider introducing a loan scheme which will enable students to bridge the financial gap?

One of the advantages of a properly organised and subsidised loan scheme would be to limit students' dependence on ordinary bank overdrafts.

Is the Minister aware that there are far too few working-class students in further and higher education, and that the system of student loans will make for even fewer? Is the Minister sanguine about that, or is he prepared to do something about it?

The number of working-class children who are coming forward properly qualified is too few. That is the real problem. There is no evidence that the present system has done much to advance the cause of bringing more working-class students into university education. Any loan scheme would, of course, have to meet the point that the right hon. Gentleman raises.

In putting any scheme before the House, will my hon. Friend be precise about the methods by which the loans would be recovered—by university or college, or nationally? Does he realise that many of us who are his friends are worried that he will erect such a bureaucracy that he will increase public expenditure and thus incur the Prime Minister's wrath?

My hon. Friend is right. The problem that he raises is one of the obstacles that a proper loan scheme would have to overcome.

Further to the Minister's earlier answer, might there not be a case for mandatory support before as well as after the age of 18 in order to increase the number of working-class entrants to universities and polytechnics? Is there any inducement to the working-class student, whose parents might be unemployed at the time of his application, to take up any loan scheme such as is now being proposed?

That is a different area of support. The present system has not worked well in bringing forward working-class children in this area.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if, in view of the threat to standards of literacy and numeracy in primary schools referred to in the recent report of Her Majesty's Inspectorate, he will take steps to prevent further teacher redundancies.

The current average class size in primary schools is the lowest ever. It is for local education authorities to decide how to manage the necessary reductions in the number of primary teachers, but I do not believe that ruling out redundancies would protect standards.

In the light of the recent report of Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Schools, which said that existing standards, particularly in numeracy and literacy, could not be maintained if current levels of staffing remained the same, how, if the Secretary of State does not regard that as a scare story, will redundancies among existing teachers improve the chances of children achieving decent standards of numeracy and literacy?

I must repeat—I should have thought that the hon. Gentleman could absorb this—that effective teaching is the key, together with pupil motivation. That cannot be measured in financial terms.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that in principle he is in favour of village primary schools? Does he accept that in sparsely populated areas, such as Lincolnshire, it is necessary to have an above-average number of teachers to maintain those village schools and their standards?

To be against village schools would be like being against motherhood. Of course Ministers are in favour of village schools, but, on the basis of proposals made on the initiative of local education authorities, Ministers must take into account the educational and financial implications of keeping each school as it is.

Will the Secretary of State talk to his colleague, the Secretary of State for Industry, who seems keen to put a computer into every school, while at the same time the Secretary of Stale for Education is hell-bent on ensuring that there is no one to teach computer studies in any school?

The Secretary of State for Industry and I conspired to get not only computers, but teachers who are equipped to teach the study of them, into every school.

Does my right hon Friend agree that the comments of Her Majesty's Inspectorate on numeracy are an incentive for local education authorities to step u.p their in-service retraining programmes? If we move to an education block grant system, will my right hon. Friend pay special attention to those local education authorities that have a good record of retraining teachers in shortage subjects?

The retraining of teachers in shortage subjects is crucial. I commend to all hon. Members and all in the educational world the excellent report of the Cockcroft committee with regard to numeracy.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will reconsider the composition of the Social Science Research Council.

I cannot anticipate my right hon. Friend's response to Lord Rothschild's report.

Is the Minister aware of growing concern that the Social Science Research Council is becoming increasingly politically biased in its allocation of funds to the economic departments of universities that support the Government's monetarist policies compared with those, such as that at Cambridge, that disagree fundamentally with the Government's monetarist views?

The hon. Gentleman might not be aware that Lord Rothschild conducted an inquiry into the Social Science Reseach Council, the report of which has been published. The period for comment upon that report ended yesterday. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will reply to that report, having seen those comments, in due course.

Is my hon. Friend aware that charges that we are politically loading the Social Science Research Council are spurious? When one considers the appointments that have been made by former Labour Administrations, including a noble lord, recently appointed to the other place, it shows plainly that this is blatant Labour politicking. My hon. Friend is right to take a firm line with the council to ensure that its money is spent in a cost-effective way.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his support. However, one cannot pre-judge my right hon. Friend's decisions on Lord Rothschild's report.

May we prompt the Minister a little? In view of the Secretary of State's intention to wind up the SSRC last autumn without any inquiry, what is the Minister's comment on Lord Rothschild's verdict that that would be an act of intellectual vandalism, which is an implicit criticism of the Secretary of State?

May I suggest to the hon. Gentleman that he has got it the wrong way round? The very fact that my right hon. Friend asked the noble Lord to make his report shows my right hon. Friend's open-mindedness and his fair approach.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will take steps to ensure that advisory bodies always have, as a large proportion of their membership, persons with direct experience of exercising responsibility in the field of education.

Appointments to advisory groups, of whatever kind, will normally include those experienced in the fields concerned. The Government's proposals for the establishment of an examinations body and a school curriculum development body to replace the Schools Council are now the subject of discussion with the local authority associations and others. The balance of membership on the proposed new bodies is one issue for discussion.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the Government will have to respond to the growing suspicion that the only advice that they seek or wish to receive is that which comes from the like-minded or the placemen?

Ministers are entitled to reach their own conclusions. They must take advice and account of all the views given, and that we shall do.

In seeking people to serve on the advisory bodies, especially those dealing with examinations and the curriculum, will my right hon. Friend assure the House that steps will be taken to ensure that there is adequate representation of the point of view of industry and, indeed, of independent-minded people generally?

It is true to say that busy people in industry with sufficient knowledge of education and who are willing to serve are not all that easy to find. However, in short, the answer is "Yes".

Will the Secretary of State say what the legal basis is for his proposal to abolish the Schools Council? Is not the Schools Council a charity, which means that he has no power to abolish it?

I understand that there is no power to force the Government to continue to provide their share of the funding of the Schools Council in the way that they have done.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he has any evidence of the impact made by falling rolls on the availability of classes in foreign languages in the schools; and if he will make a statement.

There is evidence that some schools are reducing modern language provision. My Department will be consulting those interested in the autumn about the teaching of foreign languages in schools.

Does the hon. Gentleman recognise that reductions in the number of teachers as rolls fall inevitably means that schools will reduce the number of classes in modern languages, particularly where a minimum number of pupils is fixed? If we are no longer to see German being taught as a sixth form subject in the majority of our schools, is there not a need for immediate action?

I appreciate that falling rolls create problems in the teaching of all subjects, including languages. However, relatively, foreign languages have been declining in Britain for the past 10 to 15 years. The proportion of students obtaining an A-level in a foreign language now is lower than it was 15 years ago, and among boys there is an absolute drop.

In view of the seriousness of the disappearance of languages such as German, Spanish and Italian from many schools, will the Minister seek a special initiative, including additional staffing, to make the teaching of those important languages possible?

I take the hon. Gentleman's point, but it is not just a question of staffing. The distribution of language teaching is wrong. In Britain, 85 per cent. of students are studying French, of whom only one-third are still studying it in the fourth year. The collapse in language teaching over those three or four years is more rapid than in any other subject. Britain has a serious language teaching problem.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the method of teaching languages is as much responsible for the decline in the number of pupils studying languages as is the decline in pupil rolls?

I take my hon. Friend's point. A literary approach is good for academic children, but many children benefit more from the spoken approach in which they learn to use the language and to feel what it can achieve.

How does the Minister hope to reverse the decline of which he spoke, or to build from the collapse of which he speaks, when the Government's economic and education policies revolve round major cuts in education, the loss of tens of thousands of teachers and the eradication of places in universities and other institutions of higher education which specifically exist to develop language teaching and learning?

According to the statistics collected in January, there is no shortage of language teachers. If one were to question anything, one would question whether the move to comprehensive schools in which able linguists—both children and teachers—are spread around is one of the reasons for the decline in language teaching.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will take steps to improve the opportunities for teachers to make additional voluntary contributions to retirement pensions in order to increase the value of the pension.

The teachers' superannuation scheme already offers its members a facility to purchase additional years of pensionable service. Revised arrangements negotiated with the teachers are due to be introduced next month which will further enhance this facility by removing age restrictions and offering the opportunity to make second and subsequent elections to purchase added years.

I thank my hon. Friend for his useful reply. Will he bear in mind the views of my constituent, Mr. John Smith of Meriden, on the role that voluntary bodies, in this case building societies, can play in strengthening additional voluntary contributions for teachers' pensions?

I shall certainly do that. I shall refer the matter to the teachers' superannuation working party. However, it has just occurred to me that, since I taught for 23 years—just as you taught, Mr. Speaker—I should perhaps declare a special interest in this question.

Will the Minister investigate the possibility of allowing the many teachers who have been made redundant to purchase into their pension scheme after redundancy?

We shall certainly look into that question and I shall write to the hon. Gentleman about it.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what estimate he has made of the demand in England and Wales in September 1982 for places in further education colleges from students qualified to follow the courses they are seeking.

Somewhat in excess of 1·8 million home students, including those students with the necessary qualifications for courses that require them, are expected to seek places in further education colleges in England and Wales in the 1982–83 academic year.

Given the horrifying figure of 3·2 million unemployed, which includes about half a million boys and girls, is it not of paramount importance to expand colleges of further education as quickly as possible, so that those boys and girls who want to train for a career will have every opportunity to do so?

Yes, Sir. The Government have devoted considerable resources to doing exactly that.

Does my hon. Friend agree that we should concentrate on adult learners who wish to retrain or to improve their qualifications in polytechnics and equivalent colleges and that we could encourage them to do so by instituting a loan scheme or, as the Advisory Council for Adult and Continuing Education called it, an education mortgage? In that way, they would have some incentive to retrain.

My hon. Friend's priority is entirely right. The idea of a loan scheme is interesting, but there is a limit to resources, even for a loan scheme.

Have the Government seriously thought of giving a worthwhile allowance to all over the age of 16—for the sake of argument, the youth opportunities programme allowance of £25—to induce them to stay in education, instead of throwing them on the scrap heap at 16, as happens at present? As an educationist, does not the Minister think that that is a worthwhile aim?

Both this Government and the previous Government have considered that idea, but the expenditure implications are great.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what recent representations he has received on the effect of financial cuts on university science departments.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has received a number of representations about the adverse effect on some university science departments of reductions in funding, including representations from the Association of Scientific, Technical and Managerial Staffs, on whose behalf a number of hon. Members, including the hon. Member for West Lothian (Mr. Dalyell), came to see me recently.

How do the Minister and the Prime Minister—since she is responsible for science—answer the sustained and blistering attack of the vice-chancellor of Edinburgh university, who, in front of 3,000 graduates, accused the Government of having an appalling record over university science departments?

The answer lies in the very considerable resources spent, including the large sums that have recently been tied to new developments in biotechnology, of which the Government are proud.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he is satisfied with the availability of up-to-date statistics on education in England.

Yes, bearing in mind the resources available for this work. The aim is always to improve the quality and speed of availability of statistics where possible.

Why is it that at the end of the school year, and five months after receiving the returns from local authorities, the Secretary of State cannot tell us the pupil-teacher ratio in every local education authority? Will he seriously consider pupil-teacher ratios and ask himself whether he is giving us the true facts?

We have to rely on figures from local education authorities and from 26,000 schools be fore we can compile the statistics.

asked the Prime Minister to what extent Her Majesty's Government assess the numbers of schoolteachers expected to be made redundant in the next three years.

Our expenditure plans make provision for teachers expected to retire early, including those who do so on grounds of redundancy, as well as for some redundancies among teachers under the age of 50.

Has the Prime Minister had an opportunity to read the recent HMI report on schools and on the falling standards in education? If so, what plans do the Government have to reverse that trend and, in particular, to employ more teachers instead of pushing so many of them into joining the increasing ranks of the unemployed?

I do not agree that standards are falling all over. Indeed, in some areas standards are rising. In addition, I would not equate standards in schools with the numbers of teachers, but rather with their calibre. The hon. Gentleman's point cannot be equated with numbers, because the overall pupil-teacher ratio improved from 18·9 in January 1979 to 18·5 in January 1982.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, if a reduction of only 10,000 in the number of teachers is required next year, the natural wastage of 2½ per cent. is not unreasonable, compared with private sector wastage?

Obviously we prefer as many redundancies as possible to be the result of natural wastage, but that is not always possible, because one must look at curriculum distribution as well as at numbers.

Is it not a fact that Tory Members realise the advantage to be gained from small classes, because they send their children to schools that have a much lower pupil-teacher ratio than that found in the ordinary schools to which our children go? Is it not also a fact that the education cuts are now so horrific that teachers in every staff room in our ordinary schools are fearful that they will be made redundant, and that the cuts are so deep that our children's education—[Interruption.] The truth of my point is evidenced by the desire on the part of Tory Members to shut me up. Is it not the case that the cuts are so deep that our children's education and the whole fabric of State education is now in severe danger, as is shown by the HMI report?

No, Sir. As the hon. Gentleman knows, there will be a fall of approximately 1 million in pupil numbers and, therefore, there must be a similar and proportionate fall in the number of teachers. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"] In many ways, I wish that more children stayed at school voluntarily beyond the age of 16. It would be infinitely preferable if they did so. There are many places available for them and it would be far better for them, rather than leaving school at 16. The hon. Gentleman has just heard me say that the overall pupil-teacher ratio has improved since the Labour Government, and the amount spent in real terms per pupil is approximately the same.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her public engagements for 20 July.

This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall have further meetings later today.

In the light of today's record unemployment total of 3,191,000, does the Prime Minister agree that a change of economic policy would be preferable to her attempt to justify one in seven of our work force on the dole? Does she remember a speech that she made three years ago when she said:

"There is nothing inevitable about rising unemployment."

Provided that we keep inflation coming down—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—and provided that our companies, industries and firms become more and more competitive and produce goods of the kind that people want to buy, that statement is true. However, there is no way of returning to full employment unless we are efficient, competitive and produce attractive goods.

Wriggle.

Have the organisers of next Monday's service at St. Paul's Cathedral said to my right hon. Friend whether prayers will be offered for the earlier victims of the junta—many thousands of whom included British subjects—and whether the prayers will be for the early release of such people, or at least for some identification of where the bodies of the dead lie?

I do not believe that that will come into the service—[HON. MEMBERS: "Why not?"] Because it is a service of thanksgiving for the liberation of the Falkland Islands and of remembrance of the fallen. During that service we shall remember all the fallen and all of those who have given their lives so that freedom and justice might continue.

The minds of all hon. Members are overcast by the bomb outrages that have occurred in London today. I make it clear from the Opposition Benches that while we understand that the IRA has claimed responsibility for those crimes, our view is that no political question in this democratic country should be settled by resort to such pitiless barbarity. We shall utterly oppose it by every possible means.

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his initial remarks. The whole House is shocked by the bomb explosions that occurred in London earlier today. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary will make a statement later. We all join in extending our deepest sympathy to the families of those who were killed as well as to the many who were injured. I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that these callous 'and cowardly crimes have been committed by evil and brutal men who know nothing of democracy. We shall not rest until they are brought to justice.

Will my right hon. Friend take time to note how pleased many constituents are at the fact that jobs have been saved by the decision of ASLEF members to return to work? Will she note that much credit is given to her for her firm leadership in that matter, which contrasts most favourably with the pusillanimous conduct of the Leader of the Opposition?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. We all welcome the end of the strike and regard it as the first step on the long road back to efficient working practices. I agree with my hon. Friend. The end of the strike has saved many jobs. Nevertheless, it has been a costly and damaging strike from which British Rail and all who work in it will have to make the maximum effort to recover.

Will the right hon. Lady have a moment to note the delay of three weeks which occurred in commencing the investigation of the evidence that I placed before her and the House on 29 June? Will she recognise that this is a sign of the determination of the Northern Ireland Office to conceal the true context and cause of the Northern Ireland Bill until the parliamentary recess comes to its rescue?

The right hon. Gentleman will know that we received the information at No. 10, to which he referred in a debate in the House, on 30 June. After that the head of the Civil Service was asked to arrange for the author of the note to be interviewed. That was announced by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. on 13 July. A letter of invitation was sent on 15 July. It is hoped that the interview that the right hon. Gentleman wishes to take place will take place in the next few days.

Does the right hon. Lady not recognise that present policies will not bring down unemployment for years ahead? Nor is it enough to talk about competitiveness, which is important, but which, in any event is worse than when she took over three and a half years ago. What is needed is Government stimulus in a form that will increase and not reduce business confidence. Will she provide that, or will she try to live with over 3 million unemployed for as long as she can stay in office?

The right hon. Gentleman agrees that competitiveness is important. So do I. We recovered a great deal last year on the previous two years. It is implicit in what the right hon. Gentleman says that we have not yet recovered enough. I thank him for agreeing with me on that point.

asked the Prime Minister whether she will pay an official visit to Gibraltar to discuss with residents of the colony the situation arising from Spain's decision not to open the frontier and the reaffirmed decision of Her Majesty's Government to close the naval dockyard.

I have no plans at present to visit Gibraltar. My noble Friend the Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs leaves tomorrow for a two-day visit. During his stay he will be discussing the matters that my hon. Friend mentions in his question.

We welcome the slight easing of border restrictions over the last week or so, by Spain, but will my right hon. Friend help morale in Gibraltar by giving two assurances today: first, that Britain will give real and generous help to the colony when the naval dockyard shuts; and, secondly that there can be no question of Spain entering the Common Market as long as the frontier remains closed?

With regard to my hon. Friend's first point about help for the Gibraltar dockyard, some repair work arising out of the South Atlantic operation may be sent there. In addition, we are considering with the Gibraltar Government whether a commercial dockyard operation can be established. If it can, any surplus dockyard lands and assets that are required will be transferred to Gibraltar free of charge, subject to parliamentary approval. With regard to my hon. Friend's second point, it is inconceivable that there should ever be a closed border between the territories of two members of the Community. Spain could not, therefore, enter the Community unless the border were fully opened.

I appreciate that the Prime Minister cannot personally visit Gibraltar, but will she ensure that when the Secretary of State for Defence draws up his next defence review—which we are given to understand will be published later in the year—he will take into account the use that has been made of the Gibraltar dockyard and the sterling service that has been given by the people of Gibraltar and the workers in that dockyard during the recent Falklands crisis? Does she agree that it is a bit hard that many of those people are being thrown out of a job, especially when work is badly needed there?

The Government have no plans to alter the decision to close the Royal dockyard in 1983. I have said that if arrangements can be made for it to become a commercial dockyard, assets would be transferred free of charge, subject to the approval of the House. We would see whether we could put some repair work into that dockyard.