asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he intends to seek to amend the Northern Ireland Act 1982 to enable the Assembly to play a more effective role in the government of the Province.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he is proposing any new political initiatives for Northern Ireland.

The essential requirement remains agreement between the elected representatives of both sides of the community, and I do not see that amendment of the Northern Ireland Act 1982 would produce that agreement.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that unless he amends the Act it will not come into effect as was originally intended and that, in those terms, the Northern Ireland Assembly cannot advance? If that is his present position and the one that he intends to maintain, what measures does he intend to introduce in the House to improve government in Northern Ireland and to remove some of the difficulties that he saw during the passage of the legislation last year?

Government in Northern Ireland has improved because of the Assembly. I should like to see a greater improvement in Northern Ireland by an advance to devolved government. That is not possible unless both sides of the community are prepared to take part. I do not believe that government in Northern Ireland would work if we amended the Act to enable one side to have power without the agreement of the other. Until that exists, we must pursue phase 1 of the Assembly as it is and proceed with generally improving government in Northern Ireland, which I believe most people agree is better than it was.

Does the Secretary of State agree that basing so many hopes on the Assembly is excessively optimistic and that the real problems facing Northern Ireland require a much more radical solution? Will he look sympathetically at the outcome of the discussions centring on the forum in Dublin as a possible basis for a different and more hopeful departure?

It would always be wrong to be too optimistic about any scheme in Northern Ireland. If other schemes and solutions come forward, they will be properly and fully considered. The Government do not lack the will to achieve peace in Northern Ireland. We shall carefully study the extent to which the forum that is operating in the South is likely to produce any solutions designed to help us to achieve a settlement.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the Government's main problem in creating a devolved Government in Northern Ireland has been the formation of the Executive? Is it not proper for the Government now to consider, as an interim step, more law-making powers for the Assembly?

The main stumbling block towards progress in Northern Ireland has been the lack of will by the Unionist parties to attract the Social Democratic and Labour party to become a member of, and to play its part in, the Assembly, and also by the SDLP to sit in the Assembly and participate. That is the real problem, and I do not believe that it would be solved by trying to move towards legislative control separated from executive control.

The Secretary of State spoke of having both communities in the Assembly. Will he confirm that Catholics are participating already, and that he is talking not about Catholics and Protestants but about supporters of a united Ireland?

I am talking about the representatives of the minority communities who seek nationalism through constitutional means. I acknowledge that there are six Catholics already in the Assembly who belong to the Alliance party. I hope that Unionists will accept that that does not constitute widespread acceptance of the Assembly throughout the community.

What can the Unionist parties do, consistent with their views, to attract the SDLP into the Assembly?

They could recognise that there must be a greater willingness by all the people of Northern. Ireland — regardless of whether they are Unionists or Nationalists, Protestant or Catholic—to accept that the problems of greater peace and security there will not be solved until they come together to work in government and support the forces of law and order. That is what it is all about.

Does the Secretary of State agree that any proposals emanating from the forum should be seriously considered? Some people fear the implications of the Prime Minister's statement on Tuesday. Have not leading politicians in the South in recent months at least recognised the Protestant position in the North, which gives some hope for the future?

I agree that there has been greater recognition in the South of the proper position of the Unionists, which is helpful. But that will have to go some way further if it is to reassure Unionists about their right to remain members of the United Kingdom. We shall keep an open mind on anything emanating from the forum.

Could the right hon. Gentleman display a little more enthusiasm for the forum? While I appreciate that the Government cannot commit themselves in advance of any reports, will the right hon. Gentleman at least undertake to urge upon his right hon. Friend the Leader of the House that when they emerge the House should be given an early opportunity to debate them? If it is true that the Government do not regard Northern Ireland simply as a security problem, would not that be a way to demonstrate it?

I congratulate the right hon. and learned Gentleman on his appointment and wish him every good fortune in it.

rose——

Order. Before I call the next question, I appeal for shorter supplementary questions and answers so that we may deal with more questions today than was the case yesterday.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what has been the total cost in public funds of running the Northern Ireland Assembly for the past 12 months.

Just under £2·5 million.

Is that not a gross waste of public money? When does my right hon. Friend propose to put in hand steps to wind up the proceedings of the Assembly?

The answer to my hon. Friend's first question is no, and the answer to his second is that I have no intention of doing so.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what assessment he has made of the additional burden on the security forces for which he is responsible of the continuing withdrawal of Regular Army units from static duties at permanent vehicle checkpoints along the frontier with the Irish Republic.

The deployment of troops in Northern Ireland is an operational matter for the GOC. Current deployments are designed to free more regular soldiers for flexible patrolling in planned operations.

Does the Secretary of State admit that his unjustified reduction in the number of regular soldiers in Northern Ireland from 10,000 to about 6,000 during the past 11 months has resulted in more UDR men being deployed at permanent vehicle checkpoints along the frontier with the Irish Republic? Is he aware that those men are taken away from their families for long periods, and that those families live unprotected while their men are away from home? Do those men not also take their local knowledge out of the area where it could be put to best use?

The hon. Gentleman's figures for the reduction in soldiers are incorrect. Between 9,000 and 9,500 soldiers are operating in Northern Ireland. Taking soldiers out of fixed vehicle checkpoints and other points, thereby making them more mobile, and replacing them with UDR men has helped security in Northern Ireland.

Does the Secretary of State agree, therefore, that we must have the best camouflaged Army in the world?

I am delighted to hear that.

Does the Secretary of State agree that his present security policy has failed completely in Northern Ireland, and that he needs to change it forthwith?

That is a great insult to the troops and to the efforts made by hon. Members in all parts of the House and people throughout the country. If the hon. Gentleman would do a lttle more to keep peace and quiet in Northern Ireland, that would be helpful.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he next expects to meet the Irish Congress of Trade Unions.

My right hon. Friend plans to meet the Northern Ireland committee of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions in 28 November 1983.

When the Secretary of State meets members of that committee, will he tell them of the Government's plans for reducing the appalling level of unemployment in the Province, which is even worse than on Merseyside?

I am sure that that matter will arise because of the concern shared by all in Northern Ireland about the levels of unemployment. The Northern Ireland committee is well aware of what the Government are doing. It contributes through such bodies as the Industrial Development Board and the Northern Ireland Economic Council to bring about some improvement in the position. As the hon. Gentleman is aware, there were signs of encouragement in the significant reduction in the last figures.

Is the Minister satisfied that the Northern Ireland Office and the Secretary of State are doing all that can be done to bring the trade union movement in Northern Ireland into the talks about the future of the Province, and especially about its future stability? Does he believe that trade unions have a real and positive role to play in dealing with the generality of Irish problems?

Where trade unions are involved in economic matters and in seeking to improve the economy, which will contribute to greater stability, I agree that they are playing a part.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that co-operation between the North and the South in industrial relations or any other economic matter can only be beneficial to both communities? That does not necessarily entail restricting co-operation with Great Britain. Will he propose to the Government of the Republic the establishment of a North-South economic development council?

The Northern Ireland committee is part of41the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, so there is continual dialogue between trade union members north and south of the border.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he expects to receive Sir James Hennessy's report on the breakout of prisoners from Her Majesty's prison, Maze.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement about security at the Maze prison.

I understand from Sir James Hennessy that most of the evidence has been obtained and is now being analysed. However, further inquiries could be necessary. I know that Sir James and his team are continuing to give the inquiry the fullest priority but it is not possible to say for certain how long it will take. Until the report is available I cannot comment substantively on security at the Maze prison, except to assure the House that, as I indicated in my statement of 24 October, some improvements are being effected in the light of the experience gained on 25 September.

While I fully understand that my right hon. Friend cannot anticipate Sir James Hennessy's report and appreciate his assurance that some improvements in security measures have been implemented, is it possible for him to outline the nature of the security changes that have been made at the Maze prison?

There have been two improvements—one is to the locking devices for the main gate and the other is the further protection for prison officers in the main control room of H-block, where a man was shot during the last outbreak. Those are the two improvements to date, but it is early days.

In his statement to the House on 24 October the Secretary of State described the Maze as the most secure prison in Northern Ireland. Which is the least secure?

They are all, I hope, more secure than they were.

What is the ratio between prisoners and prison officers in Northern Ireland, and how does that ratio compare with that for England and Wales?

There are 3,000 prison officers in Northern Ireland for 2,500 prisoners, and at the Maze there are 1,000 prison officers to 850 prisoners, which is more than a 1:1 ratio. This compares with one prison officer to 2·4 prisoners in England and Wales and, in maximum security prisons in England and Wales, to 1:1·3. There is no question of prisons being understaffed in Northern Ireland.

Since the Secretary of State refused in the House of Commons to accept political responsibility for the escape at the Maze, there has been a serious escape, that of Samuel Crowe from the Belfast city hospital. Does the right hon. Gentleman also propose to refuse to accept responsibility for that?

No, Sir, and I do not need any lessons in responsibility from the hon. Gentleman.

As well as the report from Sir James Hennessy, the Secretary of State requested reports from the Chief Constable and the GOC in Northern Ireland. Will any part of the findings of those reports be published?

So far I have received oral reports from both the GOC and the Chief Constable. Further discussions have taken place, and a number of these points will be relevant to the Security Committee of the Assembly when I next meet it.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the H-block system, as designed and intended to be run, would have made it the most secure prison system in western Europe? Does he also agree that it was only the demolition of the defensive mechanisms of the H-block, as a consequence of the concessions that the Government gave in the aftermath of the hunger strike, that enabled these people to escape?

I agree with the first of the hon. Gentleman's questions but he would not expect me to agree with the second. This matter is being examined by Sir James Hennessy, and I suggest that the hon. Gentleman awaits the report.

Is the Secretary of State trying to tell us that the Maze is as secure as Buckingham palace?

That is not a question that I have to answer.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if Her Majesty's Government will introduce measures to restrict the growth of new foreign-based superstores in Northern Ireland.

No, Sir.

What measures do the Government intend to take to protect small family businesses from the unfair competition of large superstores and chains of superstores throughout the United Kingdom which, because of their size, are able to purchase goods at lower prices than those obtainable by small businesses?

I share the sympathy that the hon. Gentleman expresses for small shopkeepers, but one has to bear in mind the benefit to the consumer of the operation of supermarkets. If there is unfair competition it is open to the Office of Fair Trading to take action, which it has in two recent instances in Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what support the Northern Ireland Office is giving to individuals and groups seeking to counter adverse Republican propaganda internationally.

We provide extensive briefing and advice on Northern Ireland for individuals and groups visiting the United States and other countries, and diplomatic posts are also ready to provide guidance on the spot. I have myself recently returned from a visit to the United States.

I thank the Secretary of State for his answer, as it backs up some of the developments, especially his speech on the west coast of America. Is this not particularly important in view of the recent court decision and the statements thereon, and is it not important that we continue to keep up the pressure to put our case across?

Yes, everything that can be done needs to be done. I found that there was a growing understanding of the problems of the United Kingdom in its attitude to Northern Ireland. But, for all that, I have found some of the remarks of the last few hours extremely offensive.

Has my right hon. Friend assured himself that there is the fullest co-ordination of this support between his Department and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, because there is always a danger of falling between two stools when two Departments are involved?

I saw the consuls-general in Boston, San Franciso and Los Angeles, each of whom has within his consul an Ulsterman working full time on behalf of Ulster, both on the inward investment side and in putting forward the Ulster view. I was impressed with the quality of those people and the interest that the consuls-general were showing.

Will my right hon. Friend ask the American Government to appeal against the sentence recently delivered on Owen Canon and Danny Morrison, more effectively to counteract the adverse propaganda and publicity?

This was a bizarre affair from beginning to end. That is the only word that I can use to describe it. We must draw a sharp distinction between the views of the Administration and those of the Department of Justice in this respect. Whether or not there are any further representations from us about the appeal is a matter for our contacts with the Administration, although I hope that I have expressed the view of the House on the remarks made following that trial.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will introduce measures to mitigate the serious effects on the Northern Ireland dairy sector of the current European Community proposals.

It is too early to say what, if any, measures might be necessary. Negotiations are still a long way from completion. I think we would be wise to wait for the outcome of the Athens summit and the price fixing thereafter.

Does the Minister accept that any further erosion of agriculture in Northern Ireland would have a dangerous and damaging effect not only on agriculture but on its ancillary industries? Will the hon. Gentleman undertake to resist further damage to grass-based sectors of agriculture, mainly in the milk and dairy sector?

There is little doubt that the Northern Ireland dairy producer would tend to suffer worse than any if the proposals were to go through in their original form. However, it is important to wait and see what is finally negotiated. If it is necessary to take some balancing action, the Government will have to consider that in the light of events as they develop.

In view of the recent reports that the EC is cooking the books on the rebate sought by the Prime Minister, does the Secretary of State believe that the Common Market will be sympathetic to the proposals on Northern Ireland agriculture, and will we not eventually be forced back on national measures to defend our industry?

What is important, first, is that the Commission should be aware of the impact of any proposals on United Kingdom agriculture as a whole and also on Northern Ireland agriculture. My noble Friend the Earl of Mansfield, who is responsible for these measures in Northern Ireland, is ensuring that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture is aware of the position.

Does the Minister accept that, no matter what the final outcome of the EC negotiations, there will be a curtailment of milk production? That being so, and as Northern Ireland milk producers have no alternative means of livelihood such as is available to producers elsewhere in Europe, will the Minister ensure that at this stage their special circumstances are taken into account by our Government in the negotiations?

The answer to the latter part of the question is in what I said a moment ago. There is overcapacity and an over-supply in milk, which is proving far too expensive. Some measures have to be taken to curtail production.

Will the Minister give us an assurance that he will not go beyond the requirements of the European Court and previous commitments by the British Government by letting in sterilised milk and unfrozen pasturised cream as well as UHT milk—a policy which is causing considerable anxiety?

I am aware of the anxiety on that point, which is a somewhat different matter. The Government have made their position clear. We have had to accept the ruling of the Court. We are taking measures to ensure that there is no risk to human health through the importation of that very restricted group of milk products.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will install metal detectors at Her Majesty's prison, Armagh, for the screening of high security prisoners when they leave and re-enter the prison.

Hand-held metal detectors are already in use as a security aid at Her Majesty's prison, Armagh.

Is the Minister aware that the introduction of strip searches of the women prisoners at Armagh gaol has caused deep offence to the prisoners and to the Nationalist community in Northern Ireland? Is he further aware that the governor made it clear that the reason for the introduction of the strip searches was the discovery of some keys in the prison and his anxiety to exclude guns, knives and similar objects? Does he agree that those objects would be better found by installing high-quality metal detection devices than by the offensive searches that take place at present?

I cannot believe that strip searching is a pleasant experience, either for the prisoners or for those who carry it out. However, I am convinced that it is necessary, in the interests of security at Armagh and other prisons, for us to have that procedure available to ensure security.

Will my hon. Friend remove the impression given by the hon. Member for Birmingham, Ladywood (Ms. Short) that these searches are restricted to Republican prisoners?

Strip searches are available in all prisons in Northern Ireland and are used according to the judgment of the governors of those prisons. Perhaps I might put a further point to the hon. Lady. Metal detectors are of no use in tracing explosives.

Was it not rather strange and sudden that after so many years, because of one minor incident, a prison governor should have gone off in the way he did and introduced this most rigorous system, causing great dissatisfaction among the people concerned, and in many cases creating more problems for the security forces than existed before?

As the hon. Gentleman knows from questions that he has tabled, there have been further discoveries of illicit materials as a result of strip searching.

Can the Minister give the people of Northern Ireland an assurance that no guns are floating around inside Northern Ireland prisons now?

All that is humanly possible is being done to ensure that no illicit material gets into the prisons in Northern Ireland.

Does the Minister agree that what is needed in Northern Ireland is tighter security inside the prisons, rather than lighter security?

Of course. We want maximum security both within and at the perimeter of our prisons, and we do our best to ensure that.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many persons have been received in prison in Northern Ireland having been convicted of scheduled offences in the past 12 months.

Of the 1,867 persons committed to prison under sentence in the 12 months up to 30 September 1983, 476 were sentenced for scheduled offences.

How many of those people are in prison because of the evidence of "supergrasses" who have been bribed by the police and given immunity from prosecution? Does he agree that law and order is being brought into disrepute, through a system of so-called justice in Northern Ireland that is grossly inferior to the standards of justice in England, Scotland or Wales?

Questions about evidence from converted terrorists is a matter for my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General, and not for me or my right hon. Friend. I utterly reject the basis of the supplementary question, which I believe is quite disgraceful.

Can the Minister say how many of those who were found guilty of such offences received non-custodial sentences?

I cannot say without notice. I would be very surprised if many people who were convicted of scheduled offences received non-custodial sentences.

Does the Minister accept that reducing the opportunities to the right to a jury trial through having people tried for serious offences by a judge alone undermines respect for law and order? Does he agree that by restoring jury trials he will restore more respect for the administration of justice, and not provide a fresh source for existing grievances?

I do not believe that anyone would lightly change from the system that exists in the rest of the. United Kingdom, but I am convinced that in the circumstances of Northern Ireland it is necessary for us to do that. On the other hand, we are having a comprehensive review under Sir George Baker of the workings of the emergency provisions legislation, and we should await his findings before we say anything more on the matter.

Can the Minister give us an assurance that perjured murderers supergrassing, possibly on other murderers, are not being paid money to do that? Or are people being put in prison because of the so-called evidence of perjured murderers who are being paid?

I utterly reject the basis of that supplementary question. As I have already said, any detailed questions about payments are for my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General, not for me.

I do not invite the Minister to anticipate Sir George Baker's report, but, as Mr. Dermot Walsh's survey in 1981 found that 40 per cent. of the cases tried under the Diplock procedure have no connection with terrorism, will he keep an open mind on the proposal that the Attorney-General's certifying out procedure should be replaced by a certifying in procedure so that there is no assumption that what appear on the face of them to be normal offences should be tried without a jury?

I am sure that Sir George Baker will have seen that evidence or allegation—as well as others—and will take it into account in his findings.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will adjust the limiting value of £15,000 for the purposes of the Small Dwellings Acquisition Acts to take account of the rise in prices.

I am not aware of any need for increased public sector provision of home loans, given the substantially increased volume of building society money that has been provided for mortgages in recent years. I am anxious to maintain the impetus towards greater home ownership and will be glad to look into cases of difficulty in securing home loans from the private sector.

There has been no movement in the limiting factor of £15,000 since 1978, and I hope that the Minister recognises that. Will he look with sympathy on the fact that in some instances people cannot get mortgages from the Housing Executive or from the other statutory agencies, and bear in mind that this procedure is useful?

What is important is that the demand for home loans should be met. At present there is no evidence that it is not being met. I am pleased to say that the figures for private sector building in Northern Ireland are at record-breaking levels. Last year building societies lent £270 million in Northern Ireland, and so far this year they have lent £165 million.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is the reason for the delay in payment of approved claims for agricultural grants; and what steps he is taking to eliminate the backlog.

Several factors contribute to the delays, including an increase in current claims of over 20 per cent. compared to the previous six-month period, and the large number of claims that have had to be returned to applicants for further information or because the necessary supporting documents were not attached.

As it was known many months ago that these delays were accumulating, why were not steps taken earlier to prevent hardship to legitimate claimants through delay in receiving their payments and to avoid the necessity of the noble Earl having to tell me at the beginning of November that he looked forward to a reduction in the time taken to process these claims?

I have referred to a number of circumstances, but, in fact, new staff were taken on for training in anticipation of problems of this kind. I equally regret the delay in these payments and the effect that that will have on the finances of the farmers who are affected. However, I can give no hope of the backlog being eradicated within a short period.

Why is it necessary for farmers in Northern Ireland to give prior notification before they start working on grant schemes in Northern Ireland, when such notification is not required in Great Britain?

It was because of the absence of prior notification that a great deal of money was spent on concrete roads last season, and we believe that it is a sensible precaution to take in Northern Ireland, and one which does not occupy a great deal of officials' time.

Does the Minister agree that this delay in payment is causing great hardship and concern in the agricultural community?

I agree that in certain cases where it applies there is clearly some pressure on the personal finances of the farmers involved. We are doing all that we can to speed up the process.

The Prime Minister always enjoys boasting about the number of civil servants who have been made redundant by her Government, but does the Minister agree that they are not redundant if there is work for them to do, and that all that is achieved is that the public services suffer and people are kept waiting for money to which they are entitled?

The right hon. and learned Gentleman will have heard me say that new staff were taken on and trained for that purpose. One of the problems is that the applicants themselves failed to complete their forms satisfactorily, and about one-third of them had to be sent back.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he expects gas from the Kinsale field to be available to consumers in the Province; and what reduction in current costs can be anticipated.

It is expected that natural gas will be supplied to the Belfast area towards the end of 1985 and to Londonderry as soon as possible thereafter. Supply to other areas of the Province will depend on the outcome of independent technical and market studies that I am commissioning. Natural gas tariffs are likely to be up to 25 per cent. below current average town gas prices.

May I congratulate the Minister on the successful conclusion of these negotiations, which represent a great step forward for the Province? Will the gas available be sufficient for present known needs—I think that the agreement has a 22-year term with a supply of 1,720 million therms? Will that be sufficient for present known needs?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his opening remarks. I believe that this development will be to the benefit of the Northern Ireland economy and Northern Ireland consumers. We are confident that there is sufficient gas for the period of the contract. We anticipate about a sixfold increase in the consumption of natural gas in taking account of needs.

If it is essential to hold on to existing consumers to get the sixfold increase in demand and to envisage reducing the price in two years by 25 per cent., why is the Minister insisting that the undertakings increase their prices by another 7·5 per cent.?

For the simple reason that it was a condition of the subsidy to the undertakings that they should increase their prices in line with fuel and labour costs. In order to attract the subsidy retrospectively for 1982–83, it will be necessary for them to increase prices. I should point out to the hon. Gentleman that the percentage increase in those prices is only a little above that which has obtained for other forms of energy, certainly for coal.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will propose that a sentence of imprisonment for the duration of the time when the emergency provisions legislation shall remain in force in Northern Ireland be available to the courts there when sentencing those convicted of scheduled offences.

No, Sir. I do not think the courts should be able to impose sentences the duration of which could be determined by the life of the emergency legislation and which would thus be unconnected with the gravity of the offence or the circumstances of the offender.

As a significant proportion of all those who are convicted of terrorism are subsequently released only to commit fresh terrorist offences., is it not common sense, as well as a means of discouraging violence in Northern Ireland, for them to be kept in prison for the duration of the emergency?

I see no justification for saying that people should be sentenced and that their release should be dependent on the general security position in the Province or on a political decision of this House rather than be linked to the offence that they have committed.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will place in the Library a copy of his speech delivered in Boston on 25 October.

Although I gave two short addresses in Boston on 25 October I spoke informally and without a text. I have, however, arranged for texts of the speeches that I made in San Francisco on 26 October and in Los Angeles on 28 October to be placed in the Library.

May I express satisfaction over the Secretary of State's co-operation in placing in the Library the fair and balanced speech that he made in San Francisco? May I ask him to commend through the Northern Ireland Office the text of that balanced and realistic speech to those who will be studying these matters in months to come on the basis that it forms a much more realistic approach than many of the documents that are currently being circulated?

Without in any way accepting the blandishments of the right hon. Gentleman, may I say that I hope he will read the whole speech and not just the little bits that he likes.

I fully share my right hon. Friend's disgust at the recent court events of which he spoke earlier. May I remind him of my questions to him a year or more ago about the discussions with the American Government on attempting to unify the procedures for extradition and the criteria used in British and American courts——

Order. The question is about the Secretary of State's speech.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he intends to implement the recommendations of the working party review of museums in Northern Ireland.

The Museums and Galleries Commission review of museums and related services in Northern Ireland was issued on 18 October; interested parties have been invited to submit comments by the end of December 1983, and in the light of the views expressed and the availability of resources, decisions will then be taken on implementation.

Does the Minister agree that the report makes a vitally important point when it argues that the development of the museums would not only create direct employment but would encourage and attract industry to the Province? Does the Minister agree that he should make available the funds necessary for the developments proposed?

That is but one of several important points that are made in the report. I am now waiting for comments and I look forward to receiving them. Then we can move to decisions.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he will review they list of scheduled offences with a view to descheduling lesser offences and those unconnected with terrorism.

The Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Act 1978 is currently the subject of an independent review by Sir George Baker. I intend to await such recommendations as Sir George may make in this, as in other matters.

Does not the Minister regard it as nonsense that offences such as assault occasioning actual bodily harm which might have nothing at all to do with terrorism are nevertheless tried by a judge without a jury as if the offence was to do with terrorism? Does he agree that this brings the law into disrepute?

As I said earlier, that type of allegation is, I am sure, being considered by Sir George Baker. Let us wait for his report.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 10 November.

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 the Commonwealth Secretary General.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Is she aware of the anger in the country at the latest attempt by the Brussels Commission to distort the figures for the Community budget? Is she further aware that she will have the support of the whole House if she takes the most vigorous action to resist such an underhand means of going about things?

I agree with my hon. Friend that the latest report by the Commission as its contribution to the budget problem is unsound, unhelpful and unacceptable, and we shall say so and act accordingly.

Now that 94 per cent. of the British people want dual control over cruise missiles if they are to be made operational on 31 December and, more importantly, now that 78 per cent. want dual control and are prepared to pay for it, is it not time that the Government reconsidered their position and asked why a broad consensus exists in France over nuclear deterrent strategy, stretching from the Church to the Communist party?

They have dual control and it does not work.

We debated these matters in the House last week. The main purpose of cruise missiles, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, is deterrence. We have the same arrangements now as obtained for many years in respect of nuclear-capable bombers and Poseidon submarines in British waters. The debate in the House last week was conclusive.

Is it not time that the NUM held a ballot on the overtime ban? Does my right hon. Friend agree that the overtime ban is doing nothing for the miners or the coal industry? Would it not assist if people such as the Leader of the Opposition helped the democratic process by condemning the ban?

I agree with my hon. Friend. I believe that the overtime ban is damaging both to miners and to the mining industry. What we need is a good profitable mining industry with the price of coal as low as possible, so that we can get other energy prices down. The overtime ban is not helping in any way.

Did the Prime Minister agree to the reported resumption of United States arms sales to Argentina? Was she fully consulted by President Reagan on this matter, or has he gone and done another Grenada on her?

So far as I am aware no decision has yet been taken by the United States about the resumption of arms sales to Argentina. As I understand it, first there would have to be certification of human rights in Argentina—that would not necessarily give rise to arms sales later, but it is a condition that would have to be fulfilled before further arms sales would be considered. Should there be further arms sales to Argentina without a cessation of hostilities, it would not be understood in this country. We have protested most vigorously in advance and would protest again if it came about.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 10 November.

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

Since my right hon. Friend's return from Germany, has she had an opportunity to study the text of the excellent Darwin lecture delivered by the Lord Chief Justice last Tuesday in Cambridge in which he called on the British people to go into battle against crime, said that there was a need for strong punishments to combat video nasties and, perhaps most serious of all, suggested that the Government were not taking action to stop heroin drugs coming in from Pakistan?

I have seen what the Lord Chief Justice said about drugs, crime and pornography and I think that the overwhelming majority of people in this country approve of what he said and of his encouragement that everyone should help and support the police. As for video nasties, I hope that the Bill that will come before the House tomorrow will receive its Second Reading and go through all its stages as soon as possible.

Has the Prime Minister had time to study the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons (Amendment) Bill that has been produced by my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, West Derby (Mr. Wareing)? In view of the purposes of the Bill and the widespread all-party support that it enjoys, will the Prime Minister ensure that a money resolution is attached to the Bill to ensure that it is fully effective?

I am not in a position to answer the right hon. Gentleman's question about a money resolution. I can only remind him that this Government's record of help to the disabled is very good indeed.

If the Prime Minister cannot answer that, I am not sure who can. I insist that this is not, and must not become, a partisan matter? Will the right hon. Lady give further consideration to the matter? Does she recognise that the Bill will be of considerable advantage in combating prejudice, disadvantage and discrimination against disabled people, but that without an expenditure commitment——

How much?

As much as it takes to safeguard disabled people. Is the Prime Minister aware that without such a public expenditure commitment the value of this widely supported Bill will be very much reduced?

The matter must be considered along with consideration of the Bill, and my right hon. Friends and I will, of course, give it earnest consideration. In the meantime, I repeat that this Government's record of help to the disabled is excellent.

Has my right hon. Friend seen the latest attack on Christian education by Manchester city council, which proposes to substitute pop songs for Christian hymns and periods of silence for Christian prayer? Does she agree that the protection of the rights of minorities cannot be obtained by bleeding the Christian content out of the school curriculum for the majority?

I saw some account in the press to that effect. As my hon. Friend knows, it is still the law of the land that there should be an act of worship and of assembly at the beginning of every school day. Anybody who tries to deprive children of that or of the pleasure of singing hymns may deprive them of an experience they may never otherwise have.

Does the Prime Minister recognise that the growing unease in the coal mining industry has brought about a meeting of the three major trade unions in the industry—the triple alliance—and that that unease has been enhanced by MacGregor's statements about mine closures for reasons other than exhaustion and by Government statements about privatisation? Will she now categorically deny that privatisation statement and discuss with MacGregor the question of closures?

The Financial Secretary did not say that the coal mining industry was to be privatised, but that it would be right for some of the subsidiary activities to be privatised, and while the hon. Gentleman might contest that, I doubt whether he would disagree with it. As for the industry in general, the hon. Gentleman will be aware that this Government have honoured to the full their promise to invest in the future of the coal industry. "Plan for Coal", which was published in 1974, was not honoured in regard to productivity improvements or pit closures.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 10 November.

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

Will the Prime Minister take time to congratulate the Secretary of State for Energy on behalf of Opposition Members and million; of pensioners, unemployed and low-paid people throughout the country on his fight in the Cabinet this morning against the Chancellor of the Exchequer to keep energy prices down below the rate of inflation? [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] If the right hon. Gentleman lost that fight, what plan does the right hon. Lady have for the uprating of benefits and pensions?

I fear that I was not able to hear all of that supplementary. The Secretary of State for Energy is in China.

After her visit yesterday to the Federal Republic, can my right hon. Friend confirm reports in the press today that the German Government find as unacceptable as we do the Commission's latest proposals on the European budget?

The Federal Republic of Germany holds views very similar to ours on the need to reform the Common Market budget. Its view is that net contributions are the proper measure from which to start.

Has the Prime Minister had time to study the speech of the director general of the CBI, Sir Terence Beckett, to the CBI in Glasgow in which he painted a gloomy picture of the economy? In view of that, does the Prime Minister hold to her view that the economy is recovering now and will continue to recover?

The hon. Gentleman may have noticed that the secretary general of the CBI concluded his speech by saying:

"We now have forward momentum"——

"Inflation is down. Management is more confident about its effectiveness. There is some growth. Wage settlements are down. Productivity is up. Our profits are better and liquidity has improved."

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 10 November.

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

Has my right hon. Friend noted the important speech made by the Financial Secretary last week in which he showed conclusively that the introduction of competition and privatisation was good for jobs, good for consumers and good for the taxpayer? Will she assure the House that action on the principles outlined by the Financial Secretary will be a top priority of this Government?

Yes, I agree with my hon. Friend that competition always produces a better bargain for the consumer than monopoly of any kind. That is one reason why we must continue our privatisation programme along the lines indicated by the Financial Secretary.

Is the Prime Minister aware that when MacGregor, the right hon. Lady's hit man in charge of the coal industry, was speaking—[Interruption.] I can wait until the Liberal and SDP Members are quiet.

Order. Time is moving on, so I hope that the hon. Gentleman will not wait too long.

Is the Prime Minister—[Interruption.]

Order. The hon. Gentleman need:3 my protection.

Speaker's pet.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that when MacGregor spoke in Nottingham yesterday he said that if miners refused to withdraw the overtime ban he would withdraw the wage increase?—[Interruption.]

Order. Come on.

Will the right hon. Lady remind Mr. MacGregor that the miners have what is known as a five-day week agreement, which means that they do not have to engage in overtime to obtain a proper wage increase? Will she also bear in mind that if it is right for the Government to put legislation through the House of Commons to allow tax relief for marginal oilfields, it is also right that marginal pits should be kept open?

What an industry can offer in wage increases depends upon its success in selling a product at a price that buyers can afford to pay. The external financing of the National Coal Board is more than £1 billion and of that some £500 million is a straight forward subsidy to the coal industry's losses. I hope that those figures will be borne in mind. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will also bear in mind that there are well over 55 million tonnes of coal on the ground at the moment.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. It is evident from the way that you handled the House today that you look after the minorities, but it may not have been drawn to your notice that 56 of the 60 questions to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on the Order Paper today were open questions. You may recall that on a number of occasions your predecessor drew to the attention of the House the need for more positive questions. May we have your guidance and advice?

I share the views of my predecessor on open questions but I have no way of controlling the questions that are put on the Order Paper. They are in order.