asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the current level of grant given by his Department to the national victim support scheme; and how this compares with the assistance available generally to victims of violent crime.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he takes to monitor the efficiency of the criminal injuries compensation scheme.

For 1982–83 the amount of Government grant to the national association of victims support schemes is £23,450, two-thirds from the Home Office and one-third from the Department of Health and Social Security. Under the criminal injuries compensation scheme over £22 million a year is now paid from public funds to victims of violent crime.

I welcome that review, but is the Home Secretary aware that the latest figures for Merseyside show that during the past six months 24,000 homes were burgled? That is an average of one every 10 minutes. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that in areas such as Merseyside, where there has been an 11 per cent. increase in crime during the past month, there is a need to spend more to prevent crime, particularly by providing intruder alarms for elderly people?

There is a great deal more to be done in crime prevention, which is important, and the police are giving it specific attention. It would be difficult to achieve that by helping people, but I shall consider that point.

Will the Home Secretary ensure that the review pays special attention to the delay in making compensation payments? The mothers of two murdered boys have had to wait 18 months for financial compensation.

Yes, most certainly. I believe that that is very important.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the most effective ways of reducing crime, and therefore the compensation paid to victims, is to use the results of some of the studies financed by the Home Office to ensure that parents of young people who are involved in crime recognise the initial signs of misbehaviour and are thus helped to deal with their children more effectively? That is the way to stop crime increasing.

That is an important point. It has implications in children's early lives and in our schools. I am discussing those matters with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science.

Is the Home Secretary aware that there are a number of useful local victim support schemes in various parts of the country? Those schemes, which are starved of money, make good use of volunteers. Will he look into the possibility of providing such schemes with money so that they can continue to do useful work?

The hon. Gentleman knows that we support only the national victim support scheme. I believe that the local schemes should be carried out on a loca1 basis, while we support the national scheme.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has given advice to local statutory bodies falling within the responsibility of his Department on the subject of solvent sniffing; and whether Her Majesty's Government plan any new initiatives in this area.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services intends to consult statutory and voluntary agencies about ways of strengthening and supporting their work on solvent abuse. These will include the local statutory bodies for which we are responsible.

I accept that legislation is not the complete answer, but if we have a duty to protect the health of young people by restricting the sale of alcohol and tobacco, should we not prevent them from obtaining solvent-based glues? Therefore, should there not be legislation? I am delighted to hear that the DHSS is making some effort towards prevention and detection. However, as a senior Secretary of State, will the Home Secretary bring together all the Departments and take an initiative to provide the finance—which is very important—for the local statutory and voluntary bodies to carry out such work?

We should do all that we can to solve the problem. However, I cannot accept that the Government have a duty to prevent young people from obtaining access to solvent-based goods, because they are so numerous. For example, nail varnish and nail varnish remover, and I do not know what else, are solvent-based goods. We must help people to learn about the dangers, and the best way is to consult the bodies to which I referred.

Is my hon. and learned Friend prepared to try out a law that makes it illegal to sniff solvents in a public place? It is ridiculous that groups of youngsters should be able to sniff glue in public parks and that the authorities can do nothing about it. If the Government will not take action, will my hon. and learned Friend agree to an authority, such as Southend, having a byelaw to that effect?

I do not think that at present it would be wise to create such a criminal offence. If a person is liable to become violent when intoxicated, it does not make any difference whether his intoxication is due to alcohol or solvent sniffing. However, we must ensure that the police are able to crack down on violent behaviour, so that it is prevented in every sensible and practical way.

Will the hon. and learned Gentleman not underestimate the seriousness of solvent sniffing, as it has led to fatalities among young people? Will he ensure that the incidence of solvent sniffing is monitored? If he does not know the extent of it, he cannot assess the seriousness of the problem or decide whether the advice given by the Home Office is effective in its results.

I agree that the problem is serious, and we take it as such. It is right to say that there have been deaths, but not the least of the objections to making the public sniffing of glue a crime is that sniffing might then be done in secrecy and any resulting accident would probably be out of reach of help. We must take that into account.

Is not the truth of the matter that many things can be abused? Razor blades can be used for cutting throats and electric power points can be used to electrocute people. Whereas tobacco and alcohol are used for smoking and drinking, glue is primarily used for sticking. If the Government accept responsibility for controlling the abuse of everything in the United Kingdom, they will impose an intolerable burden on the nation.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for making that point, with which I entirely agree. We have a duty to help people to understand that, in certain circumstances, making a mistake and behaving unwisely should not be a criminal offence.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects to bring forward legislation to strengthen the enforcement powers available to control illegal citizens band transmission and to provide powers to ban the sale of illicit equipment.

It remains our intention to bring such legislation forward as soon as parliamentary time permits.

The problem is urgent. Does my right hon. Friend realise that many people ask why they should pay a substantial television licence fee when reception is upset by illegal CB radios? Why do we allow illegal equipment to be imported and sold when it cannot be used legally? It is nonsense to allow people to buy goods that cannot be used legally.

I agree that the problem is urgent. We hope that the necessary provisions will be included in the telecommunications legislation foreshadowed in the statement by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry on 19 July. Our proposals will cover the sale and advertising of equipment that we do not want.

There are delays of up to six months in my part of the country between a complaint being made and its investigation by the enforcement authorities. What are the Government doing to increase the number of staff available for such duties?

We are very concerned about the problem, and we recognise that delays take place. In conjunction with the police and the radio interference service we are trying to ensure that the problem is tackled as vigorously as possible. However, the House will recognise that the police, in particular, have many other calls on their time.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that legal users are causing interference and that many television viewers are having to buy new sets or—if they rent sets—to pay extra to have them modified to circumvent the interference?

We have never concealed the fact that problems would arise from legal 27MHz FM sets as well as from illegal sets. However, I have no doubt that the great bulk of interference derives from the illegal sets on the market. The sooner people stop using them, the better for all concerned.

Does illegal CB transmission include the use of equipment that is not licensed? Is not the reason that it is not licensed the high licence fee? Is there not massive licence evasion and will the right hon. Gentleman reduce the fee in the proposed legislation?

I reject the hon. Gentleman's contention. A licence fee of £10 is perfectly fair, and that is borne out by the fact that nearly 300,000 licences have been issued.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will take steps to initiate a study into the relationship of juvenile crime and school truancy.

Research has clearly established that truancy and delinquency are significantly related. The aim must, of course, be to reduce both. The Department is funding research into a truancy project to test the effectiveness of one means of enforcing school attendance.

I welcome the Department's initiative, but does my hon. and learned Friend agree that it is the primary duty not of teachers but of parents to ensure that their children attend school and do not play truant? Therefore, is he satisfied that the law is adequate to ensure that parents are brought to book if their children play truant and engage in juvenile crime?

Yes, Sir. The Education Act 1944 provides a maximum penalty of £200 on the first and second convictions for failing to ensure that a child attends school regularly. I was infuriated to see in The Times that the Hackney branch of the National Union of Teachers had ordered its members not to co-operate with the police. If my teacher took that attitude towards the police, I would want to play truant.

Will the Minister take account of the fact that on any given day the truancy level in schools is less than 20 per cent.—[Interruption]—that Parliament's voting record shows that, on average, 50 per cent. of hon. Members vote, and that the figure for the SDP is about 30 per cent.? Will the hon. and learned Gentleman also look into adult crime and parliamentary truancy?

There is great significance in the hon. Gentleman's general point. I note that whenever there is a debate on law and order the Opposition Benches are nearly always deserted.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he next expects to meet Lord Diplock to discuss his reviews of telephone tapping.

Lord Bridge of Harwich has now taken over from Lord Diplock as judicial monitor of the arrangements for the interception of communications set out in Cmnd. 7873. I meet the judicial monitor whenever this is necessary in the course of his duties.

Given the incredible story of incompetence and indifference at Buckingham Palace when dealing with the Head of State, how can the Home Secretary be sure that the rules governing telephone tapping, which is a serious invasion of privacy, are followed by the police when dealing with ordinary citizens? Would it not help to break down the immunity from accountability that encourages abuse if the Bridge reports—as they are now to be called—were regularly published as a necessary element of accountability in a democratic State?

I dealt with the hon. Gentleman's first point yesterday.

Does the Home Secretary realise that the whole issue needs to be covered by statute law very soon? Does he intend to introduce a Bill on data protection next year? If so, can Parliament be certain that the police will not have indiscriminate access to computer-held records on ordinary citizens which cover a whole range of matters?

I cannot anticipate the legislative programme for the next Session. I must ask the hon. Gentleman to be patient.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what reply he has sent to the British Medical Association's representations to him about the White Paper on data protection.

The British Medical Association has been thanked for its written comments on the Government's proposals. The association requested a meeting to discuss its comments, and that is being arranged.

In view of the sensitivity of medical records, and in the light of the previous question, does the Minister agree that legislation on data protection should impose a statutory obligation on those keeping medical records not to allow access to them to a wide range of people, including the police, unless it is absolutely necessary?

We have always accepted the importance of medical records being kept confidential. We shall have close consultations with the medical profession. It is likely that the Bill will provide regulations.

What representations has my right hon. Friend had on the subject? Do they suggest that it would be wise to legislate as speedily as possible?

More than 180 organisations and members of the public responded to the White Paper. There has been broad support for the legislative proposals. We hope to press ahead.

The Minister of State referred to the contents of a Bill. Is that the Bill that the Home Secretary will not anticipate being in next year's programme?

We have made it clear that we intend to legislate. The customary way of doing that is through a Bill, and that will come.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many concessionary television licences are issued to pensioners.

In March 1982 about 16,000 old persons' home television licences were in force. They covered slightly fewer than 500,000 pensioners.

I remind the Minister that the Home Secretary, during the debate on concessionary TV licences, said:

"It would be a hard-faced decision to take away something that people already have".—[Official Report, 16 December 1981; Vol. 15, c. 357.]

My right hon. Friend was referring to the old-age pensioners scheme in general. The pensioners on South Tyneside who received the concession were never entitled to it. They have been lucky for a time, but it would not be fair in future to allow them a concession which nobody else has.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the all-party pensioners group has been pressing the Government for some time to consider a concessionary television licence scheme which is just and fair? Is it possible that the Government may at some time move towards such a scheme, or are we wasting our time?

I should be reluctant to tell my hon. Friend that he is wasting his time, but I cannot hold out hope that we shall legislate. To provide free television licences for all pensioners would cost £250 million and mean putting up the colour television licence fee to about £70.

Would it not help to reduce the licence fee if hotels were charged a fee for each television set in each room rather than paying just one fee?

I understand that argument. We have been thinking about it. We shall announce our views in due course.

Is the Minister aware that the most contentious issue is that pensioners in warden-controlled houses pay 5p a year for their television licence while others pay the full fee? Is he further aware that many pensioners would be prepared to pay a Hate rate so that everybody pays the same? Does he accept that such a fee could be one-quarter or one-third of the full licence fee?

There are inconsistencies in the concession. We have thought carefully about many proposals, but I am not in a position to tell the House that we shall introduce a new scheme.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that within five miles of a county town, such as Exeter, old-age pensioners and others cannot receive television? Is he further aware that, although there is to be a fourth programme and breakfast television, people paying the present licence cannot receive the existing service? Does he accept that that is intolerable? Yet the authorities refuse to do anything about it.

There are small pockets where it is difficult to receive television. The authorities are doing a good deal to try to remedy that. I accept that more must be done, but we should not hold up other developments in television on that account.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is satisfied with the operation of the Representation of the People Acts.

There are a number of matters with which we are not satisfied, but we cannot promise legislation in the near future.

Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that thousands of people in Britain who are entitled to vote in our elections are not British nationals and do not want to be? When the British Nationality Act comes into force next year, should we not restrict the suffrage to British citizens?

My hon. Friend is right about the numbers. I note his point, which he also made in the Daily Mail today.

How much was he paid for that?

In that article my hon. Friend said that only British citizens should have the right to vote and that not even Commonwealth citizens resident here should have that right. To discontinue the Irish vote would be consistent with that, but such a policy would give rise to wider considerations than those for which the Home Secretary is responsible.

Leaving aside the totally unfair concept adumbrated by the hon. Member for Orpington (Mr. Stanbrook), does the Minister agree that it is in the interests of all electors that statutory notices relating to local and national elections should be as widely read as possible? Why are there no plans to ensure that such notices are published in ethnic minority languages in areas where large ethnic minorities reside?

Nobody can disagree with the principle that when it is necessary for people to have a notice of something important that is to happen the notice should be effective. I am prepared to consider the hon. Gentleman's suggestion, but one must draw a line somewhere. When people come to live in Britain and wish to exercise civic rights and responsibilities, they must make an effort to learn the language.

When the British Nationality Act comes into force on 1 January next year and for the first time allows plainly identifiable citizenship to be enjoyed by those who want to live here—British citizens—why should anyone without that qualification be allowed to vote in a British general election?

That would involve requiring Commonwealth citizens resident here who have had the right to vote in our elections for many years to become British citizens by naturalisation. That policy can be considered, but it has wider implications.

May I ask the Minister about a different amendment to the Act? Is the hon. and learned Gentleman aware that Members on both sides of the House are bewildered by the recommendations that are from time to time made by the Boundary Commission?

No, Sir. I believe that the arrangements that Parliament has made, which have stood for many years, governing the allocation of seats by a wholly independent body—the Boundary Commission—are the best. I shall not give the assurance requested by the right hon. Gentleman.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what has been the increase in robberies involving violence in the period 1972 to 1982.

In 1981 about 20,000 offences of robbery, which entails either the use or the threat of violence, were recorded by the police in England and Wales. This is about 11,000 offences more than were recorded in 1972 and is equivalent to an average annual recorded increase over this period of about 10 per cent.

May I press the Minister further on his views on intruder alarms? Does he agree that Government financial assistance for local authorities who wish to provide these systems for the elderly in high crime areas is justified and reasonable and that it will do much to increase security?

This is a matter for individual local authorities to consider. Their expenditure is grant-aided. The best single deterrent to a potential robber is having plenty of policemen on the beat. There are now 8,800 more police officers in the service in England and Wales since my right hon. Friend became Home Secretary. That is a substantial contribution.

Will my hon. and learned Friend concede that many of the crimes included in the shocking statistics given to the House are committed by young people? Does my hon. and learned Friend agree that parents and schoolteachers should tell young people to have respect for people and also private and public property? Does my hon. and learned Friend further agree that if that were done in homes and schools there would be a much reduced increase in violent crime?

I wholly agree with my hon. Friend. We cannot succeed in the fight against crime until the standards of ordinary people are enlisted to point out how cruel, unfair, and dangerous robbery, for example, is. It is wicked for teachers and their unions in Hackney and, I believe, Lambeth to instruct their members to withdraw co-operation with the police in their schools.

Is the Minister aware that I, and many others, deplore the advice that is being proffered by some irresponsible elements in Hackney? Does he agree that effective liaison with the police is necessary so that suspicions can be eliminated, and that the best course towards that objective is to ensure that the closest relationship and co-operation are enjoyed with the police? Does the Minister recognise that the local commander has given a significant lead in that respect?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for what he has said. I expected nothing less from him. It would be valuable if condemnation from higher quarters in his party was expressed for what has happened. Anything that serves to encourage young people to believe that the police are not their friends, but are their enemies, is extremely dangerous.

To what extent does my hon. and learned Friend think that an increase in crime is due to the fact that the courts often seem to be unaware of, or are unwilling to implement, the full range of penalties laid down by Parliament?

The maximum sentence for robbery with violence is life, but it is for the courts to determine where in the range of sentences the proper line is to be drawn. The courts do sentence to life imprisonment those convicted of robbery with violence, but I should not be inclined to say that the courts should do so on more occasions. That is a matter for the courts, and it is a very important distinction.

As the Conservative Party regularly professes concern about law and order, will the Minister of State tell the House why crimes of violence have increased so dramatically and why, since 1979, detection rates for such crimes have plunged equally dramatically?

One of the handicaps for the police is that people are much more mobile today. Communications are much better and people are more sophisticated. That makes it harder to detect a crime. It would be very much easier for the police if support for them in their difficulties came from both sides of the House instead of disproportionate criticism, which adds to their lot.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will arrange to collect centrally information on convictions under the Obscene Publications Act 1959, as amended in 1964, relating wholly or mainly to video cassettes.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if, in addition to his routine consideration of the operation of the law relating to video cassettes, he will take steps to set up a formal independent review with terms of reference which would allow the recommendation of additional legislation.

We understand from the Commissioner that the figures for the Metropolitan Police district for 1982 will identify separately prosecutions relating to video cassettes. We have no plans to extend such recording to other police forces in England and Wales.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the problem is not confined to London but has spread to areas such as Brighton and Hove? Will he agree with the Williams committee at least to the extent that pictures are much more dangerous in matters of obscenity and violence than the written word, and that a video cassette is infinitely more dangerous than a still picture? Bearing in mind the difficulty for the police in determining whether any given cassette is obscene and in breach of the law, does my right hon. Friend agree that it would be wise to extend monitoring throughout the country so that we can see whether the review of the law to which he referred, and for which I am grateful, should be followed by action?

I share the concern expressed by my hon. Friend about the sale and rental of video cassettes which show scenes of extreme violence and horror, and about the picture image. This is something that must be kept closely under observation, and if the need for additional information from other parts of the country becomes clear we shall certainly follow that up.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the Obscene Publications Act, which was last amended nearly 20 years ago, is now largely irrelevant to the booming new video cassette industry? Will he bear in mind that the Williams committee did not consider video cassettes, or even mention them in its report? Does he agree that a review of the law as it refers to video cassettes is urgently needed?

In addition to the Obscene Publications Act, Customs legislation, the Indecent Displays (Control) Act, the Local Government (Miscellaneous) Provisions Act and the Cinematograph (Amendment) Act may all have some bearing in this sphere. Therefore, there is substantial legislation. However, I agree that we must ensure that the legislation does its job effectively. If the classification system cannot be made to work we shall need to consider further legislation.

May I press my right hon. Friend a shade further? Is he aware of the widespread concern about the harmful, if not extremely objectionable, nature of some video cassettes? Is he satisfied that the Home Office is fully aware of the production, distribution and availability of cassettes, particularly to children and young people?

I assure my hon. Friend that we are very much aware of the great anxiety that has been expressed about that, and in particular about the problems concerning the younger members of our community. It would be difficult for me to provide special regulations for the young, but this is something that we must look at in the light of the proposed classification system.

Since the Minister has acknowledged that this is a problem, particularly in London, is he aware that the impression has gained ground, notably in my constituency, that the Metropolitan Police are taking, as yet, little action against these terrible machines and these video cassettes showing extreme violence? Will the Minister assure the House that the police are taking action? If he cannot do that, will he look into the matter and write to me?

I am sure that the problem is being taken seriously. I understand that the Director of Public Prosecutions is considering whether to institute proceedings under the Obscene Publications Act 1959 in respect of certain cassettes.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many men and how many women have been acquitted of shoplifting charges during the past 12 months for which records are available.

In 1980, the latest year for which figures are available, about 2,700 males and 3,000 females were acquitted of shoplifting charges in England and Wales.

Does the Minister accept that many of those 5,000 people who were acquitted underwent the most awful trials before they reached court? Does he accept that the law on shoplifting is archaic in its enforcement? Does he further agree that the decision to prosecute should be left to the police so that they can decide, as do the Essex police, not to prosecute where it is in the interest of the public that the elderly and the ill should be dealt with medically and in other ways?

There is a lot to be said for the sensible use of cautioning, which is widely used. But it must be a matter for local discretion. As the hon. and learned Gentleman knows, the Royal Commission recommended that private prosecution should be discontinued for shoplifting. The Government have the recommendation under consideration and we shall announce our conclusions in due course.

Does my hon. and learned Friend recall that it is now 10 years since, in an Adjournment debate, I raised this matter with my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Runcorn (Mr. Carlisle), who was then the Minister of State, Home Office, and who clearly accepted the direct link between self-service shopping and the increase in shoplifting? Does he agree that in the meantime his Department has done nothing to deal with the matter? What movement does he foresee in the next 10 years?

The review has been the subject of reconsideration and revision and that process is very nearly finished. One cannot be wholly surprised that more shoplifting, proportionately, takes place in self-service stores. But stealing from a shop is still stealing. A person does not commit the offence of stealing unless dishonest intent is proved.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he next intends to meet representatives of the Association of Magisterial Officers to discuss conditions of work of staff.

We have received no request from the association for a meeting but if it makes such a request we shall consider it.

Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that proposals emanating from the Justices Clerks Society suggest that all magistrates' court clerks should be qualified lawyers? When the proposals reach my hon. and learned Friend or my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary will they bear in mind that many non-qualified but experienced clerks may wish to see their posts protected and some who may wish to become qualified may require financial assistance to do so?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. We shall be glad to consider any points put to us by the association, including the implications for staff already working in the service who are not professionally qualified. The scope for financing professional training of such staff is one aspect that we shall need to consider.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations he has received on the delay in bringing the United Kingdom into line with European and other international data protection standards.

We intend to legislate as soon as practicable. Only a few of the respondents to our White Paper have indicated that they would like to have seen legislation introduced before now. Others have recognised the benefits of being able to learn from the experience of other countries.

Is it not intolerable that there should be many secret records of individuals kept throughout the country and that, although the information may be incorrect it could be used to the disadvantage of the individual? Will the Minister ensure that the forthcoming legislation includes the right of the individual to inspect the records and correct them if they are wrong?

In general terms, yes, but in certain areas exemption is permitted under the Council of Europe convention.

Provided that it were possible to get the proposal on the legislation into the Gracious Speech, would it be practicable to legislate by Christmas of this year?

Even if the legislation were in the Gracious Speech, it would be extremely difficult.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will seek to legislate to allow licensed victuallers more flexible opening hours and to make more stringent the requirements which applicants must fulfil.

We have no plans for legislation in this area.

Is the Minister aware that at my parliamentary interview I met a group of licensed victuallers who are nearing bankruptcy as a result of the discrimination against people employed in the local pub? Will he consider their proposals for more flexible opening hours and at least give them the right to compete with other licensed premises by allowing greater prizes on the gaming machines?

We are aware of the anxiety of the licensed victuallers. They have made representations to us. We have also followed what has happened in Scotland over licensing hours. We are not yet persuaded that we should legislate in the near future, but we shall doubtless keep the matter under review.

Does my right hon. Friend recognise the ridiculous state of affairs surrounding licensing laws? When will he announce that he will put the recommendations of the Errol report into effect?

I recognise the anomalies, but we must also recognise the widespread worry about alcohol consumption and the fact that there is a lack of agreement about what action to take.

Are not the pub licensing laws a legacy of the First World War? Like other archaic practices, having been around for so long, should they not be swept away? Is it not time that the libertarians on the Conservative Benches joined those on the Opposition Benches to introduce flexible rosters for pub landlords?

It is easy to say that the present laws should be swept away. The problem is to find sufficient agreement on what to replace them with.

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

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 King Hussein.

Would my right hon. Friend tell His Majesty that we agree with him entirely that the Palestinians must be permitted to determine their own future, including, if it is their will, the establishment of a Palestinian State on the West Bank of Gaza, and that if the PLO, as their only effective representative, as part of a package agrees with the right of Israel to exist behind secure defensible frontiers, Her Majesty's Government will do all that they can to help to bring about Palestinian satisfaction in that direction?

As my hon. Friend knows, our commitment to Palestinian self-determination is a matter of record. We take every opportunity to press the PLO to accept Israel's right to live in peace behind secure borders and to renounce terrorism. If it would do both of those things it would be a tremendous step forward.

Has the right hon. Lady had a chance today to study the extremely important review published by the Confederation o r British Industry? Does it not call for a fresh statement of policy by the Government? How does she reconcile the statement with the rosy rubbish about a coming upturn that she has preached for almost two years?

I understand that the CBI called for a reduction in interest rates. Interest rates have already fallen 4 per cent. since last autumn. It also called for a further reduction in national insurance surcharge, and the cut made in the last Budget will benefit industry to the extent of £640 million in the year 1982–83. The cut will start to take effect in 10 days' time, which the CBI may have forgotten. It also called for a reduction in local authority rates. Many of us would like local authority rates to be lower. I should be grateful to the right hon. Gentleman if he would indicate where he thinks expenditure should be cut first.

Will the right hon. Lady accept that one of the most important aspects of the report is that it covers the 13 regions of the country, almost all of which say that things are getting worse and not better? Does she not understand that the report states that the situation has deteriorated since the Budget, which was supposed to make things better? Does she not have a special responsibility for the collapse of British industry and the appalling unemployment figures?

I believe that what the right hon. Gentleman is getting at is that he wants an artificial stimulus to demand. Demand is already increasing. It went up 3 per cent. in the year ending in March. The trouble is that too much went in increased imports. Only British industry can ensure that increased demand means more jobs at home rather than more jobs abroad.

Is the right hon. Lady really saying that she will have nothing better than that to say to the CBI when it comes to see her in the next few days?

Interest rates have already fallen. They would not have fallen if we had not kept a tight grip on the deficit. That is a matter on which we have had no help whatsoever from the right hon. Gentleman. It was the Labour Government of which he was a member who clapped on an enormous national insurance surcharge.

Resign.

The Government, in this Budget, are at last reducing it and are starting to undo the devastating effect of the Labour Government. In answer to the right hon. Gentleman, may I point out an excellent speech from the new president of the CBI? He said that

"the 1980s will not be a decade of growth for most of us, but of intense competition as the world adjusts itself to the vast overcapacity that is obvious in so many industries. It's a war and … the victors will be the efficient."

Has the Prime Minister had time to read the full account in The Guardian yesterday of the investigations of Operation Countryman? Is she aware that lists of names of the police officers concerned have been made available to some hon. Members on both sides of the House? In view of the difficulty of bringing successful prosecutions, what other action does the Prime Minister propose should be taken to end what seems to be a network of corruption that threatens to bring our police force into disrepute?

I am satisfied that the police are the first to wish to uproot any corruption that there may be. They always have been, because they are the first to wish to protect their good name. I am concerned about the fact that everyone, but everyone, is hitting out at the police at the moment. I believe that the vast majority of police officers carry out their duties magnificently and put themselves at risk so that we may be protected. I would point out that six police officers have lost their lives in England and Wales this year while carrying out their duties.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that about 15 months ago hon. Members from both sides of the House approached the Charity Commissioners about the charitable status of the Unification Church in Britain? In view of her concern about the activities of the "Moonies" in Britain and the fact that Sun Moon has now been sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment in the United States of America for embezzling the funds of that organisation, is it not time that we did something about it in this country?

My hon. Friend has asked me questions of this type before. I entirely agree with him that this matter is taking an extremely long time. I am in touch with my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General about it, but we are limited as to the speed with which the Charity Commissioners are able to discharge their duties.

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

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

Will my right hon. Friend acknowledge the dedication and devotion to duty of our National Health Service workers? Will she congratulate health workers such as all of those in my constituency who, without exception, reported for work during the past three days of industrial action and were prepared to put the care of patients above the care of their pay packets?

I am happy to respond to my hon. Friend's invitation. The vast majority of workers in the National Health Service have carried on working splendidly, believing, as my hon. Friend points out, that their duty is to the sick, and they are determined to carry out that duty. I visited the hospitals where those who were maimed through the Provisional IRA bombings are having treatment. The dedication of all the staff there was absolutely splendid and we are all grateful for it.

Will the Prime Minister confirm that more young people and school leavers are out of work today than ever before? Is she aware that the Samaritans run an excellent service but that their telephone lines are chock-a-block with calls from young people asking for help and assistance? When the right hon. Lady goes to St. Paul's next week, will she cut out the pomp and ceremony and exercise a little more penitence?

Yes, I am always prepared to exercise penitence—[Interruption.]—This is not a laughing matter. I am always prepared to exercise penitence, especially at a service of thanksgiving for the liberation of the Falkland Islands and of remembrance for the fallen who gave their lives to secure that.

Has my right hon. Friend seen reports that 120 people employed by the Labour Party headquarters have been offered a zero pay increase because their employers cannot afford to pay more? Does that not show that realism in pay affects even the Labour Party?

I am not responsible for it, but I have just read such reports. Some people seem to take a different view when it is pay out of their own pockets from the view that they take when it is pay out of the public purse.

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

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

Will the Prime Minister take time today to study the plight of the adult unemployed? Is she aware that if they wish to take part in the part-time adult education courses that are available they have to suffer the loss of some of their unemployment benefit? Does she think that that is fair and equitable, and will she examine the matter urgently and sympathetically?

Some changes have just been made with regard to the 21-hours rule, which I hope have helped. Unemployment pay is payable only to people who are available for work. That has always been so. Apart from that, there are a number of schemes that are available to help the adult unemployed, but I think that the hon. Gentleman will find that the regulations have, to some extent, dealt with his point.

Mr. Roy Jenkins.

In view—[Interruption.]—

Order. The right hon. Gentleman is entitled to be heard. [Interruption.] Order. The House does not ration whether I call a Liberal and a Social Democrat. This House does not stand for free speech if it tries to limit who will be called.

In view of, amongst other things, the CBI statement, does the right hon. Lady now recognise that the orchestrated ministerial optimism of the early summer about the economy has proved to be entirely misplaced and that recovery is not on the way and unemployment is not falling?

The right hon. Gentleman will know that the longer leading indicators forecast that there would be a plateau. He will have seen that the longer leading indicators published recently—I think that there are some today—are forecasting a further recovery. He will be aware of the great difficulty with unemployment in the Western industrialised economies and the causes for that. He will also recollect that he was a member of a Government who introduced the national insurance surcharge, which the CBI wish to see removed.

In view of the ghastly and cowardly bombings that the country experienced earlier this week, does not my right hon. Friend think that it is about time that we had a look at the reintroduction of capital punishment for indiscriminate murder? Does she also agree that many people in this country have no allegiance to the Crown and that it is high time that we had a look at the position of citizens of Southern Ireland who have the right to vote in our elections?

We recently had a debate on capital punishment and I have no reason to believe that the result would be very different if we had another debate. With regard to Irish citizens, I do not think that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has any present plans to introduce further legislation.

Is the Prime Minister aware that not only the CBI yesterday, but the Association of British Chambers of Commerce, has called for increased public expenditure to reduce unemployment? How long will the Prime Minister continue to ignore the sound practical common sense coming from both sides of industry?

The hon. Gentleman will know that nations that have taken the reflationary course have recently had to reverse it. For example, France has had two devaluations, has had to introduce a prices anti incomes policy and has had to cut its expenditure, including capital expenditure, once again. The reflationary course did not work. France's unemployment is rising very fast, its interest rates are high and it is in even greater difficulty over the prospects of recovery.