asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he has any plans to propose new initiatives for cross-border co-operation.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he has any plans to meet the Prime Minister or Foreign Minister of the Republic of Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on recent discussions between his officials or himself and the Government of the Republic of Ireland over matters relating to Northern Ireland.

There is already a high degree of cooperation with the Republic on practical matters of mutual concern. Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland officials are in regular contact on a range of such matters as a normal aspect of their functions. I have not met any Ministers from the Republic since my discussion with the Irish Minister for Foreign Affairs in London on 1 February, and I have at present no plans to meet the Minister for Foreign Affairs or the Prime Minister of the Republic of Ireland.

Will the Secretary of State urge the so-called Unionists in this House to participate in Dr. Garret FitzGerald's initiative for an All-Ireland Forum to discuss possible constitutional changes leading to the peaceful reunification of Ireland, which is the type of true unity to which every genuine Unionist should aspire?

That is entirely a matter for the Unionist parties.

Does the Secretary of State agree that this forum, which is, I believe, being initiated today in the Republic, is a step forward and that we should give it some help? Does he regret, with me, that the Unionists are opting out and just want to have their own way, which will result in the stalemate and the killing going Oil for ever unless we begin to talk to one another about the problem?

I certainly think that we should all talk to one another about it, but I believe that any forum or intitiative of this nature which in any way puts at risk the view of the majority of the people of Northern Ireland that they should remain part of the United Kingdom is bound to start at a major disadvantage. Having said that, I must add that any constructive talks will be welcomed, just as the SDLP playing a part in the Assembly in Northern Ireland will be welcomed.

Does the Secretary of State agree that, on the basis of present policies, including the Assembly, there is no way in which one can see an end to the crisis and the bloodshed that have engulfed the Province over the past 10 years or more? Would it not be a welcome step if the forum now starting in Dublin and the British Government could find ways and means of coming to an agreement under which there would be far less of a hard-line sectarian attitude among the Unionists in the North, and the Irish Republic itself, by constitutional amendments, made itself more attractive to the majority of the people in Northern Ireland?

A great deal could be done to remove the suspicions of the past, but if the hon. Gentleman and the House believe that there is a simple solution to an age-old problem I have to say that it simply is not there.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Mr. Trevor Elliott, who was murdered brutally in Keady was an officer of my party? Is he further aware that this shooting and many other killings in the border area of Northern Ireland mean that Her Majesty's Government should now press for proper cross-border extradition cooperation in order to bring those guilty of those atrocities to trial in Northern Ireland?

I should like to express my sympathy and that of the whole House to Mr. Elliott's relatives, who will suffer because of this dastardly attack. I believe that the greatest degree of cross-border co-operation on security matters is essential. I welcome the recent steps which might make it more possible for extradition to take place, as that will do a great deal to remove some of the suspicions that exist in Northern Ireland.

Must not such co-operation be based, as my right hon. Friend has suggested, on the viability of a union that is the people's will and conducted by the two sovereign Governments in these islands? Instead of Dr. Garret Fitzgerald All-Ireland Forum, what about a British Isles Forum?

I agree with my hon. Friend that discussions between the Governments of the United Kingdom and of the Republic are a better way forward. If some questions could be asked within the forum about the real attitude of the Republican Government towards unity, we could make more progress.

Does the Secretary of State agree that a Catholic forum in Dublin and a Protestant forum or assembly at Stormont is a recipe for further alienation and polarisation between the communities? Will he use all his endeavours to get elected representatives, of whatever persuasion, to attend the forum? As a quid pro quo, should not the SDLP attend the place to which they were elected at Stormont? That is one way of getting people together to talk to one another.

If both would agree to attend the other, there would be no need for the forum.

Does the Minister admit that the so-called Unionists, as they have been described in the House, are Unionists who would welcome any forum that would lead the Republic back into the United Kingdom? Is he aware that the suggested cross-border police force, mooted in the Dimbleby lecture and during the election campaign, has now been disowned by the responsible Minister in the South?

We are trying to deal with realities, not with the impractical.

I was sorry to hear the Secretary of State say that he had no plans to meet the Taoiseach or the Foreign Minister. Is he aware that the Opposition would like him to meet and discuss the issues with as many people as possible? Only in that way can we move towards a peaceful, political solution to the problems in Northern Ireland.

The fact that I have no present plans to do so does not mean that I am in any way averse to meeting the Prime Minister or the Foreign Minister of the Republic. In due course, I expect that I shall do so.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement about the development of the Northern Ireland Assembly.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement about constitutional developments in Northern Ireland.

The Northern Ireland Assembly is in recess until 26 April, but there will be an emergency meeting of the Assembly on 21 April to debate agriculture matters. Meanwhile, the Departmental Committees of the Assembly are continuing their work in pursuance of its scrutinising, consultative and deliberative functions.

Is my right hon. Friend yet in a position to claim that the Assembly has improved local participation in the government of Northern Ireland?

I am not sure that it is for me to make such a claim. However, I am sure that many people in Northern Ireland would say that it has done so, including the vast majority of members of the Assembly. The Assembly provides a check on direct rule, which has been absent for a number of years. The majority of the members of the Assembly have found the work, especially in the Committees, useful, stimulating and good for their constituents.

Will my right hon. Friend give a firm assurance that he will not seek to change the Northern Ireland Act 1982 to enable Parliament to devolve powers exclusively upon parties that are presently represented in the Assembly?

Yes, Sir. I can give an assurance that the Government do not propose to change the 1982 Act to allow the parties at present in the Assembly to proceed to devolution. The Act, as passed by the House, made that abundantly clear. I hope very much that we can persuade all the parties in Northern Ireland to play a part so that we can proceed to devolution.

If what the Secretary of State has said is correct, how long does he expect the elected representatives of the Northern Ireland Assembly to continue with the charade in which they are presently participating? How long can they continue to be responsible, and act responsibly, if they do not have any real authority to do a real job for the people of the Province?

The Assembly is not a charade. Those who take part in it believe that they are acting in the best interests of their constituents.

Would the Secretary of State approve a proposal to link stages 1 and 2 of the Assembly, as set out in the Act, by having rolling devolution, rather than through Departments by way of functions—for example, legislative devolution?

I noted that that proposal was put forward during the weekend. It must be considered. I await the proposals that might come from the hon. Gentleman's party.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will guarantee a training place for any young person excluded by the change in commencement date of the skill training scheme.

It is not possible to guarantee an apprentice training place in a Government training centre for a young person excluded by the change in the commencement date of a course.

Is the Minister aware that in the cases that I have brought to his attention he has made alternative arrangements for those who were disappointed by the change in the initial date? Would it not be fair if all those who had to be disappointed in that way—of whom there must be, presumably, some list or nominal roll in his Department—were notified of the alternatives available to them? Should not those alternatives be brought to their attention?

As far as I am aware, that is the case. Each individual has been spoken to about his problem. If I find that that is not the case, I shall ensure that it becomes so.

Does not the question asked by the right hon. Member for Down, South (Mr. Powell) show that because of the exceptional difficulties in the Province there must be a high level of Government spending on both education and training?

My hon. Friend has put his finger on what is happening. There is indeed a high level of spending. It is with some pride that we have introduced a scheme to provide a full year's training for school leavers, and done so one year ahead of Great Britain.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what further initiatives he has in mind for ministerial visits or other publicity to persuade United States citizens not to give money to organisations such as NORAID which help to finance terrorist groups.

We shall continue to look for ways of improving our existing information effort on Northern Ireland issues in the United States of America. My ministerial colleagues and I will continue to make periodic visits to the United States of America in support of our information staff, as and when it is appropriate for us to do so.

Following the disgraceful scene last month, when a notorious financier of the IRA led a parade on Fifth Avenue in honour of a Christian saint, will my right hon Friend confirm that people in this country are as annoyed about that organisation financing the IRA as Americans would be if British people collected money for Black Panthers, Weathermen, the Symbionese Liberation Army or other crackpot organisations?

That is a fair assessment of the annoyance that we feel about the activities of Noraid and the St. Patrick's Day parade with Mr. Flannery as the Grand Marshal. I believe that it brought home to the American public, in a precise manner, just exactly what Mr. Flannery and Noraid are about.

Quite apart from the money contributed to Noraid, did the Secretary of State note the decision of represenatives of the state of Massachusetts—a supposedly intelligent and responsible group of people—to deny state funds for investment in companies that were purported to be supplying arms for repression in Northern Ireland? What effort was made by the right hon. Gentleman to inform the elected representatives of the state of Massachusetts that the opinions on which they based their decision were wholly wrong?

I noticed the considerable effort that was made in that context. The legislation is impractical, but it shows some of the difficulties and some of the myths and misconceptions in the minds of a number of American people.

We must all hope that the appropriate American authorities will increase their pressure on the supporters of Irish terrorism, but will my right hon. Friend remember that Irish terrorists almost certainly still get more financial support from London and Glasgow than from New York and Boston?

I have no evidence to support that, although I know that my hon. Friend has knowledge of these matters. All I can say is that far too much is gained by the IRA and other organisations of this nature by raiding post offices and banks and by committing other criminal acts.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will take steps to alleviate the concern aroused by his policy of rationalisation of Northern Ireland schools.

I will, of course, do all I can to alleviate concern about the rationalisation of schools. Much of the concern is not well-founded.

Will the Minister give a categoric assurance that there will be consultation at local level before any education board attempts to close any school?

The statutory requirement is that these consultations should take place at local level. Proposals then go to the Education and Library Board and finally come to the Department of Education for decision.

In the flexible handling that the Minister has promised of the implications of the statistics for attendance at schools, particularly in rural areas, will he bear in mind those cases where the schools and their local communities are closely interdependent?

We have to bear in mind primarily the education needs of the children who attend these schools. I have no intention, as I have made clear on a number of occasions, of having rigidly applied criteria in these cases.

Can the hon. Gentleman tell us whether he has considered the Assembly's report on this subject and when will he be able to give a considered answer to what the Assembly agreed?

The Assembly is in recess. I am considering the Committee's report and in due course I shall be in touch with the Assembly or the relevant Committee about my response to the report.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the current security situation in Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the security situation in Northern Ireland.

Since I last answered questions on 10 March, I regret to inform the House that three members of the security forces and four civilians have died as a result of the security situation. An RUC reservist arid a soldier were killed in separate incidents while off duty, and a soldier died after being blown up while leading a patrol in West Belfast. The Provisional IRA has claimed responsibility for these killings.

In the light of that gloomy statement, for which I thank my right hon. Friend, will he consider urging the GOC and the Chief Constable of the RUC to intensify covert operations along the frontier areas, particularly in such constituencies as that represented by the hon. Member for Armagh (Mr. McCusker)?

Many covert operations are going on all the time. I shall draw my hon. Friend's suggestion to the attention of the GOC and the Chief Constable, but I must leave it to their professional judgment whether the correct level of covert operations as compared with overt operations—which are also important—are being carried out.

Will the Secretary of State assure us that he will take every precaution to deal with the upsurge in terrorism that is being stimulated by the Dublin forum and various other so-called initiatives?

I do not think that there has been an upsurge in terrorism. The level of violence, generally speaking, is considerably down. That should in no way be interpreted as complacency on our part. We shall do all that we can to defeat violence. We shall never give in to terrorism. The terrorists should learn that lesson, and the sooner the better.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in my constituency of Down, North the police presence is lamentably inadequate in many areas? For instance, on occasions there are only two police cars patrolling in the highly-populated area of Bangor, where a constituent of mine was murdered by the IRA on Easter Monday, and one in the Ards area? Will the right hon. Gentleman look into this problem and see that the people there are provided with adequate police protection?

I shall draw the attention of the Chief Constable to the point raised by my hon. Friend. The point was brought out in the question of my hon. Friend the Member for Basildon (Mr. Proctor) about the degree to which operations should be covert or overt. Both are important. I agree that in view of the recent tragic incidents in the Bangor area it is important that the public should be reassured.

Will my right hon. Friend seek an early opportunity to probe the commitment of the Irish Government to security and law and order in Northern Ireland, bearing in mind the recent reports in the Irish press that law and order have broken down in parts of Dublin to such a degree that vigilante groups have been set up and are seeking to deter criminality by knee-capping?

I have no responsibility for what happens in the South. However, the degree of co-operation across the border is good, although one has to recognise that this is placing considerable strains on the resources of law and order in the South.

Bearing in mind that Mr. Elliott was the fourth of my constituents to be murdered this year, and the second sergeant in the Territorial Army to be killed in County Armagh in recent times, is it not time that the Territorial Army was given a specific anti-terrorist role, because the problems, especially those in my constituency, mean that no body of trained men can opt out of the anti-terrorist campaign, particularly if the terrorists have decided that they are legitimate targets?

That is a point that needs to be considered. I extend my sympathy to the hon. Gentleman and his constituents, who have suffered so much. Up to now the Territorial Army has been kept away from an anti-terrorist role, but these are matters that must be kept under review. Three territorial soldiers have been murdered in the past 12 years since the troubles began, compared to the far worse record of other security forces. We need to consider carefully before we can make any changes, but we shall have a look at this question.

You are not winning.

That offhand remark, "You are not winning" is not appropriate to what happens in Northern Ireland and does not give us much encouragement. We do not talk about winning or losing in Northern Ireland. A political solution is more appropriate.

I know that Sir George Baker is keen to get on with the review. It is my desire that we should carry out the review as quickly as is reasonable. I cannot say at this stage, and it would be unfair to Sir George to say before he has even had a look, whether it will be completed in time for the next order on the Act. However, I have left him in no doubt that the House is anxiously awaiting his review and would like it to be proceeded with as quickly as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland on how many dwellings, previously declared unfit, the Housing Executive has paid improvement and repair grants in each of the past five years.

This is a matter for the Housing Executive, but I understand from its chairman that the information sought is not readily available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Will the hon. Gentleman make inquiries to discover whether any of those houses were not only declared unfit but were incapable of being made fit at a reasonable cost? Will he then try to find out whether grants have been paid on such houses, and if so, how that matches the statutory requirement that dwellings so declared in redevelopment areas are paid for and compensated only on the value of the site?

I shall certainly take up the point that the hon. Gentleman has raised with the chairman of the Housing Executive However, if the hon. Gentleman has any information about any particular sites, I shall be grateful if he would write to me and draw them to my attention. On the broader point of rural unfitness that lies behind the hon. Gentleman's question, I can assure him that I have set in hand a special study of the problem and I hope to have the results in a few weeks time.

Will the Minister bear in mind that the Housing Executive is very quick to see that unfit dwellings in the private sector are closed down, but not quick to deal with its own deplorable houses? When he receives the report, will be consider this matter?

The programme for dealing with rural cottages is going ahead as fast as possible. If the hon. Gentleman has a particular case in mind, I hope that he will write to me.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is the latest figure for the number of women unemployed in Northern Ireland.

At 10 March 1983 there were 30,229 unemployed women claiming benefit in Northern Ireland.

What will the Government do about that, particularly in terms of providing jobs for women in Northern Ireland?

The Government have just announced important measures to help employment generally in the Province. I am sure that women will take advantage of those measures.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will relieve industry of the operating costs of Northern Ireland's industrial training boards.

Responsibility for the operating costs of Northern Ireland's industrial training boards was returned to the industrial sectors covered by the boards in October 1982. I have no plans to reverse this action.

Is the Minister aware that the annual report of the Northern Ireland ITBs for 1981–82 expressed unanimous concern about the burden that is placed on industry at a time when firms and companies are under severe pressure and strain?

It is quite reasonable that industry, which is the first immediate beneficiary of good training, should pay these costs. It also helps to ease the transition from compulsion to volutarism, which is part of the Government's policy. I am quite certain that all the training boards have welcomed one point in the Government's recent economic package, and that is fully to derate industrial premises. That will compensate by a much greater amount the small additional burden that will fall on industry through carrying operating costs.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what Government resources have been made available for visits to Northern Ireland by Members of the European Assembly.

Members of the European Parliament have used their own resources to visit Northern Ireland. The Government have, on request, provided appropriate information and assistance within the Province.

I am not quite sure what my right hon. Friend meant by that, but will he confirm to the House that this impertinent mischief will not be allowed any status whatever, and that Her Majesty's Government will not provide a penny of public money or allow one minute of a soldier's time, Army time or public servants' time to be wasted on this deplorable visit?

No, Sir, I will not agree to any of that.

Will the Secretary of State perhaps agree that any person coming on behalf of the European Community to interfere in the internal affairs of Northern Ireland will be accorded no facilities beyond those enjoyed by tourists whose passports are in order?

I am not in favour of others interfering in the internal affairs of Northern Ireland. I have made that abundantly plain on many occasions on many issues. On the other hand, the Government would be negligent if, when people wish to come to Northern Ireland to find out the facts, the Government did not see that they got those facts.

Will the Secretary of State confirm that he will afford the same facilities to Members of the European Parliament as to any Member of this House visiting Northern Ireland?

I believe in being courteous to all people whenever I can. If Members of the European Parliament come on matters that are strictly within their competence and relevance, they will receive the correct and appropriate treatment. If they come on other grounds, our attitude may have to be rather different.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that hospitality has always been a tradition of this country, and nowhere more so than in Northern Ireland, and that in this case it can only do good for elected representatives, albeit of the European Parliament, to become rather better informed about the problems of Northern Ireland than they would otherwise be? After all, they are only members of a Committee, and even the full Assembly has no locus standi to interfere in the political affairs that are internal to Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom.

Yes, Sir. That is quite right, and I agree with all that my hon. Friend says. If Members of the European Parliament had, perhaps, been better informed they would not now be involved in this matter.

Will the Secretary of State make a clear distinction between Members of this House visiting the United Kingdom, for which they have legislative powers in this House, and Members of the European Assembly, who have no say whatever in the internal affairs of this kingdom?

That is perfectly correct. The great problem in this case is that it is hard to differentiate between., as it were, political affairs and constitutional affairs.

Is the Secretary of State aware that he would not have any trouble from the Common Market poking its nose into Ireland, or any other busybodies interfering, if he adopted a political solution to the problems in Northern Ireland, because he might then win the battle against insecurity, to which I referred earlier? Does he accept that that only a political solution will resolve the matter and a united Ireland must come out of that political solution?

That is the sort of poking into the affairs of Northern Ireland that I do not think necessarily achieves any purpose. I endorse the hon. Gentleman's belief that there has to be a political solution to these affairs at the end of the day.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he intends to set up a review of the Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Act.

As was announced on 8 April, Sir George Baker has accepted my invitation to conduct this important review. Sir George will start work in the near future.

Will the Secretary of State explain to the House why it has taken so long to find a member of the judiciary willing—and, presumably, capable—of undertaking this inquiry? Is it because other members of the judiciary feel that this is a particularly nasty, dirty and bitty piece of legislation with which they did not wish to be associated, so that their names will not go down into infamy like that of Lord Diplock?

Certainly not. It was because I wanted to make absolutely certain that we got a man of the appropriate quality to carry out a very important review.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he proposes to issue a White Paper on teacher quality similar to that published in respect of England and Wales.

No, Sir. A White Paper on teacher quality in Northern Ireland is not necessary. The Department of Education for Northern Ireland has been associated with the preparation of the White Paper for England and Wales. The academic content of training courses and the quality of applicants for them in Northern Ireland compares well with England and Wales.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what steps are being taken to bring into beneficial use the industrial complex formerly occupied by the De Lorean Car company.

The industrial complex of DSQ Property Company Ltd., formerly De Lorean Motor Cars Ltd., is under the control of the joint receivers of the company. The Industrial Development Board for Northern Ireland has been co-operating fully with the receivers in their efforts to dispose of the site and buildings to another industrial user.

Does the Minister agree that these are excellent premises, in which a great deal of public money has been invested? Will he give whatever help he can to the receiver and the Industrial Development Board to make sure that the premises are occupied again as quickly as possible?

We believe that the receiver is doing everything possible to achieve what the hon. Gentleman wishes.

While I fully endorse the views expressed by the hon. Member for Isle of Wight (Mr. Ross), will my hon. Friend tell the House why the Government did not act sooner over the investigations into De Lorean, when it would have been possible to save that company, save employment, put new management in, and ensure that the 2,000 people employed by that company continued in employment? I have endeavoured to obtain information from the Attorney-General, but without success and with no co-operation from him at all.

I know that my hon. Friend has taken a close interest in the affairs of that company for a long time, but I cannot accept that what he says is necessarily correct.

Well it is.

Given the terrible effect of unemployment in that area and the effect of the collapse of the De Lorean Car company, what positive steps has the Minister taken to introduce work into that area to make up for the loss of jobs that was caused by that collapse?

In addition to the attempt to interest another industrial user in the premises, the hon. Gentleman will be aware that that area, particularly west Belfast, is subject to the highest level of incentives, and that, I hope, will attract a disproportionate amount of investment.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he will consider freezing public sector rents in Northern Ireland in the current year.

No, Sir. It would not be reasonable to freeze rents at a time when management and maintenance costs are rising.

Will the Minister reconsider that disappointing answer, bearing in mind that earnings in Northern Ireland are lower than in Britain, that energy costs are higher and that the people there have suffered from particularly high rents over recent years with the result that occupiers of public sector housing are at a distinct disadvantage compared with owner-occupiers?

I think that perhaps the hon. Gentleman is not aware that rents in Northern Ireland are about £2 a week below those in England and Wales.

That is a totally inadequate answer. The hon. Gentleman knows full well that rents in Northern Ireland have been driven up dramatically by the Government and are forcing people into poverty. My hon. Friend the Member for Battersea, South (Mr. Dubs) is right. Lower incomes, higher energy costs and higher rents are forcing people in the Province into poverty.

The increase in rents is 6 per cent. The increase in expenditure on maintenance and management is 8·9 per cent. Housing stock cannot be properly maintained without the rents to make that possible.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he last met the chairman of the Northern Ireland Sports Council.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has not met the Northern Ireland Sports Council, but I have met the council twice in the past three months.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that the manager of the forthcoming Lions tour is Willie John McBride, who was captain of the highly successful Lions tour of South Africa a few years ago, and that the captain of the forthcoming Lions tour of New Zealand is from the Republic of Ireland? Therefore, will he bear in mind that it is possible for people from Northern Ireland and the Republic to work perfectly peacefully together, as will be the case peaceably on this forthcoming tour?

I am delighted with that. I wish the Lions well on their tour and also their manager and captain. Although I can take no direct pride in it, I share Ireland's delight that members from both the North and the South have, in successive seasons, won the triple crown and the joint championship.

How are we getting on with persuading the Gaelic Athletic Association, which receives grants from the Sports Council, to end its ban on members of the armed forces and the police from becoming members of the Gaelic Athletic Association and taking part in those sports which are a proper part of the life of Northern Ireland?

It is a matter of profound regret to me that the Gaelic Athletic Association has not seen fit to review that rule.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what level of financial support has been given by Her Majesty's Government to Harland and Wolff in each of the past three years.

In the financial years ending 31 March 1981, 1982 and 1983 Government expenditure on Harland and Wolff amounted to £48.9 million, £52.7 million and £57.1 million respectively. Those amounts represent assistance from all Government sources and include payments made under the shipbuilding redundancy payments scheme.

I thank the Minister for that answer. Is he aware of the growing concern about the decline of the British merchant fleet, and will he use his influence with his colleagues to change that pattern and encourage British shipowners to purchase ships from, and carry out repair work in, British shipyards, including Harland and Wolff?

I share the hon. Gentleman's feelings on this matter. I should like to see British shipowners placing more orders in British yards, but they have to compete in their trade in the same way as the shipowners have to in theirs.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 14 April.

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.

Will the Prime Minister today send for the chairman of Cunard and the chairman of British Shipbuilders to explain to them that 40 per cent. of the cost of the refit of the Cunard Countess is coming from the taxpayers' and that there are thousands of British shipyard workers on the dole? Will she do everything possible to make sure that they can come to some agreement that the refit of the Cunard Countess should take place in a British shipyard?

The hon. Gentleman will know that efforts were made to find a British shipyard to carry out this work in time for the ship to return to her commitments on 9 July. It was not possible to find a British shipyard that could do the work in that time. I agree with the hon. Gentleman that it is very disappointing that such a shipyard could not be found. It was vital that the ship was back on duty on 9 July. It is disappointing that those shipyards that did so magnificently during the Falklands war were not able to match that performance in peace time.

Does not the right hon. Lady appreciate that her answer will only add to the sense of outrage throughout the country? Does she really mean that the Government are to stand back and let this work go ahead in the Maltese shipyards? If the Government are so unwilling or unable to do anything about it, will she at least cease the hypocrisy of exhorting other people to buy British?

The weakness of the right hon. Gentleman's case is that British shipyards were not able to undertake to carry out the repairs in time and were unwilling to take the risk of incurring the penalty if they were unsuccessful in carrying out the work in time. Unemployment will, of course, be incurred unless that ship returns to carry out her duties in time.

Has the right hon. Lady inquired into the conditions that were applied? Has she inquired into the stiff penalty clause that was imposed? Does she think that it was right that that should be imposed? Did that have Government support, and does she not appreciate that because so much taxpayers' money is involved in this, if the Government said that the money would be withheld if the work was not done in British shipyards it could be done here?

The ship has to be back in the Caribbean on 9 July. If she is not, the cruises cannot continue and enormous penalties will be incurred. It does not seem to me to be unreasonable for Cunard to say "A ship must be back in the condition in which she was chartered by a certain date. We shall first try to see whether British shipyards can meet our date." Cunard first offered the work to British shipyards. I understand that no British shipyard could meet that date. I understand from what I saw on television last night that the chairman could not risk the penalty. Apparently other shipyards were able to meet the deadline. I understand why the right hon. Gentleman is disappointed that the work will not be carried out in British shipyards—so am I—but we must be prepared to do that work on time.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the Prime Minister's unsatisfactory reply I give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.

asked the Prime Minister whether she will list her official engagements for 14 April.

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

In connection with next business—the Finance Bill—will my right hon. Friend reflect on the fact 4hat under the Labour Government tax thresholds fell by per cent. for a married man and 20 per cent. for a single person, whereas under this Government thresholds have risen by more than prices? On the anniversary of the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, would not the Opposition do better to remember his maxim, "Don't make the rich poorer, make the poor richer"?

I agree with my hon. Friend's quotation and I agree also that under the Labour Government tax thresholds fell whereas under this Government they have increased by 5 per cent. more than inflation, so there has been a real improvement. In addition, in the first four years of this Government, net take-home pay has risen by an average of 4 per cent., whereas in the first four years of the Labour Government it fell by 8 per cent.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 14 April.

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

Will the Prime Minister find time today to appear on Welsh television and explain to the people of Wales why unemployment in west Wales has risen to 20 per cent. due to her policies?

Unemployment has risen in this country, in Europe and throughout the Western world, partly due to world recession, partly due to lack of efficiency, partly due to lack of suitable products and, in this country, partly due to insufficient competitiveness. The answer lies in better price competitiveness and better products. There is no other answer.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 14 April.

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

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that in the first three and a half years of this Government the number of local authority houses passing into private ownership has been about half as high again as the total in the whole of the previous 25 years? Will she also confirm that the policy of selling council houses will be pursued with undiminished vigour?

Under this Government about 500,000 tenants of council houses have purchased their properties. When one adds to that the further 500,000 new home owners in the private sector, one realises that under this Government home ownership has risen by 1 million dwellings. That shows the extent of our commitment to increasing home ownership and increasing opportunities for all to own their own homes.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 14 April.

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

To end speculation, will the Prime Minister announce that she intends to seek a fresh mandate from the electorate this summer? Will she fight the election not on jingoism and chauvinism but on the mass unemployment caused by the Government and on their cynical attempt to recruit unemployed youth to the armed forces? The Prime Minister and the Government have been wallowing in the blood of those killed and wounded in the Falklands. That is obscene and should be stopped.

When the election comes, which will be some time within the next 15 months, we shall fight it on the Tory record and Tory policies and I believe that we shall win. With regard to the statement to be made later enabling some young people under training to enter the armed forces, I believe that there will be great demand for the limited number of places available. It will be entirely voluntary, but I believe that many young people will wish to take advantage of the opportunity and play a part in defending their country.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 14 April.

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

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the tragic problems of the Middle East will never be solved until the Palestinian people are offered true self-determination? Does she further agree that there is no way in which they and other Arab groupings can move towards recognition of Israel while Israeli settlers are daily taking land on the West Bank and the Israeli military presence in southern Lebanon continues?

I agree that the failure to open peace negotiations is discouraging, but there are obstacles on both sides. One is the presence of foreign troops in the Lebanon. The other is the policy of increasing Israeli settlements on the West Bank, which we believe is illegal. We stand by our policy of self-determination for the Palestinian people and the right of Israel to defend herself behind secure borders. There must be movement on both sides if negotiations are to take place.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 14 April.

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

Will the Prime Minister spend some time today considering the well-deserved international praise that the film "Gandhi" has received? Will she also make a personal plea to Sir Richard Attenborough not to go to South Africa and give that regime his blessing by presiding over the ceremonies in connection with that film before segregated audiences?

I warmly congratulate Sir Richard Attenborough and all those who took part in the making of that film on their splendid achievement, which is good for the British industry, especially following the excellent achievement last year in connection with the film "Chariots of Fire". On the second part of the hon. Gentleman's question, the decision is a matter for Sir Richard Attenborough and he must be entirely free to make it on his own grounds.

asked the Prime Minister if she will pay an official visit to Immingham.

I have at present no plans to do so.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that her reply will be a matter for great regret in the port of Immingham? In the course of her busy day, will she find time to consider making Immingham one of our free ports? Is she aware that Immingham has road, rail and all forms of communication and would, without any shadow of doubt, be the best free port in the country?

I know that many bids have followed the decision of my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor to have a number of free ports in this country. I believe that this will help a number of areas to attract manufacturing industry. I cannot make specific promises about any area, but I shall certainly pass on my hon. Friend's plea to the Chancellor.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 14 April.

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

Has my right hon. Friend heard the various estimates of the cost of implementing the recently published Labour policy proposals, at between £15 billion and £40 billion or 12p on the basic rate of income tax and 5 million unemployed? [Interruption.>] The Opposition may well get excited. They have something to answer for. What does my right hon. Friend think would be the cost of their ridiculous, stupid and unwelcome proposals?

We have done such calculations as we can. We understand that the one-off cost of the plans would be about £20 billion and the annual cost between £30 billion and £40 billion. The whole thing would be totally disastrous, but they will never have the chance to implement it.

If the Duke of Westminster wins his case before the European Court of Human Rights, objecting to being told by law that he must sell freeholds to sitting tenants at less than the market value, will the Government arrange for local authorities to be treated similarly?

Before we go any further on that case, we had better wait and see what the Commission and the court say.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 14 April.

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

How does the Prime Minister reconcile the Fortress Falklands policy of spending large sums of money in the Falkland Islands with propping up the Argentine economy by allowing and encouraging British banks to send large sums of money to Argentina so that it can buy more arms such as Exocets and frigates from Common Market countries? Argentina will therefore be able to turn round to British bankers and refuse to pay the £900 million that it owes in repayments for 1982. Is it not the case that the Prime Minister has been taken for a ride by the Argentines?

If a country such as Argentina were to default while having a balance of payments, it would have more money with which to buy armaments than it would if it were forced to pay its debts. It is, therefore, much better to pursue a policy that forces Argentina to pay its debts than to release money for extra armaments. Moreover, if we had acted in any other way, Argentina might have defaulted to many third countries. That could have had a considerable impact on the entire Western banking system. It was not an easy decision to take, but, in the end it was the best one for Britain.