asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what is the (a) shortest, (b) longest and (c) average period of time between the end of Her Majesty's inspectors visits to a school or group of schools and the publication of their report.

Her Majesty's inspectors report orally at the end of their inspections to the head and, usually, to the governors shortly afterwards. Their written reports are now normally published between one and two terms after the inspection.

Is the Secretary of State aware that some reports have not been published for as long as two years after the initial visit? Does he agree that that is far too long? Is the delay due to slowness in drafting, slow approval by the Department, or slow printing? What steps will the Secretary of State take to change the situation? Does he agree that if schools implement a report's recommendations quickly they can find themselves in the impossible position, when the report comes, out of being criticised for faults which they have already put right?

Yes, for every reason, the sooner the report is published the better. The long delays were due to teething troubles at the beginning of the publication process. The time taken generally involves the gathering together to complete their report of the inspectors, who are quickly engaged on other inspections. There is no particular problem about inspecting or printing now, and the average time taken is about six months.

Is my right hon. Friend taking any steps to speed up the process, because most people believe that the time between the inspection and the publication of the report is too long?

As I tried to explain, the process has been remarkably speeded up and now takes on average only about six months. Taking into account the business of the inspectors who have to gather together to agree their report while doing other inspections, I think that the time taken is quite commendable.

We are delighted that the reports are being published, but we press the Government to try to speed up the time taken. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is a little demoralising for a school and its governors when, having received a verbal report and having started to put things right, out comes a report which implies that the school is still failing to meet the standards that everyone would like it to meet?

I entirely agree, but I am not sure whether it will be practical to make the time much shorter than the present average.

Can my right hon. Friend tell the House what he believes to be the principal benefits of publishing reports? What lessons does he think have been learnt by the Department from their publication?

It is not so much that the Department has learnt, because Ministers have always read the reports, but that the schools concerned have benefited. The purpose is to encourage the local education authorities, which are taking the reports seriously, not only to apply the lessons learnt in the school inspected, but to generalise from that in relation to all the schools in an area. I hope that more of them are taking this seriously.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he has had any recent proposals from education authorities for changes in the school meals service.

No, Sir.

Will the Minister confirm that when the Conservative Government came to office in 1979 more than two thirds of schoolchildren took school meals, but that now, despite family impoverishment due to Government policies, the massive increase in the price of school meals and the abandonment of the service in some areas, under 50 per cent. of schoolchildren take school meals?

I cannot confirm that. Local authorities have a right under the law to make changes in the provision of school meals, the only stipulation being that they must provide meals for children whose families receive supplementary benefit or family income supplement.

Does my hon. Friend agree that, quite apart from the fact that the education service was not set up to provide meals for children, the experiments carried out by some local authorities in putting the school meals service out to the private sector have been highly successful, particularly the scheme undertaken by my own borough of Merton?

My hon. Friend is entirely right. In the search for essential savings, privatisation is one option that can be considered. Nevertheless, I have an old-fashioned belief that responsibility for meals rests with parents.

I am surprised that the Minister is unaware of what his Tory friends on Hertfordshire county council have been up to. Does he realise that in an attempt to save less than one third of 1 per cent. of its total budget that Tory county council proposed to cut out school meals altogether except for the very poorest children? Is he further aware that due to widespread protests throughout the county the council is now thinking again and trying to save £1 million by asking dinner ladies to take a reduction in their low wages? Does he agree that that is a darned scandal?

rose——

That is absolutely true, as the Secretary of State well knows.

Order. The hon. Lady has finished her question, but I have not yet heard the Minister's answer.

What a local education authority decides to do about school meals is not a matter for the Secretary of State, except with regard to the authority's obligations to families in receipt of benefit. In other respects the authority does not have to make proposals to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State.

Will my hon. Friend accept the description "extremely worrying" as applying to the evidence that the diet of many children taking school meals is leading to an unacceptably high incidence of heart disease due to the consumption of animal fats? In view of what the Department has done so far, will he now take an active rather than a passive role in advising parents of the dangers that their children face?

When the Department introduced guidelines in the past, much food was wasted, which was clearly of nutritional benefit to no one. The Department of Health and Social Security has undertaken the school children's dietary survey and I understand that the results will be available later this year. We are aware of the problem to which my hon. Friend draws attention.

Does the Minister believe that authorities such as Birmingham and Hertfordshire should help to finance their schools by cutting the pay of low-paid dinner ladies by between 5 and 25 per cent?

It remains my view and that of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State that authorities are entirely right to seek to provide non-teaching, non-educational services through private contractors if they believe that the resulting service will be better and more cost effective.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what steps he intends to take further to encourage religious education in schools.

Primary responsibility for the provision of religious education rests with local education authorities and with the schools themselves. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I will continue to emphasise the importance that we attach to this matter.

I thank my hon. Friend for that kind answer. Will he give more encouragement and emphasis to the need for local education authorities and schools to give religious instruction very definitely and accurately? Is he aware that many parents in my constituency are greatly concerned that religious education in many multi-denominational schools is not being provided in accordance with the Education Act 1944?

My hon. Friend is quite right. The 1944 Act requires religious instruction to take place in schools and governors have a responsibility to inquire whether it is taking place and in what form. If they feel that the headmaster and the staff are not carrying out the requirements of the Act they have the right to make representations to the Department.

Will the Minister congratulate his hon. Friend the Member for Leicester, East (Mr. Bruinvels) on his conversion to supporting peace studies in schools, especially such subversive dissertations on peace as the sermon on the mount? May I also welcome the Minister's own conversion to those peace studies which are traditionally enshrined in our legislation?

I do not think that the hon. Gentleman is in a position to give Conservative Members lectures in divinity and theology.

As we live in an age of video nasties and all sorts of other unpleasant pressures upon young people, is it not a scandal that we are short of at least 1,000 teachers of religious education and that 60 per cent. of the children in our schools are not taught by RE specialists? Can my hon. Friend do something about that?

I cannot fail to take note of that robust invitation. The allocation of places for initial teacher training in 1983–85 was intended to secure an adequate supply of teachers of religious education within the total number of teachers being trained. That involved an increase in the proportion of entry places devoted to religious education. I hope that that reply goes some way towards answering my hon. Friend's point.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what will be the effect on further education colleges of the cut in mode B youth training scheme provision.

In 1983–84 many approved places for mode B schemes were not filled. The reduction in provision is intended to lead to a closer match between supply and demand, giving colleges a sounder basis for planning.

Is the Minister not aware that the places were not filled because industry is running at half pace? Five years ago, North Nottinghamshire technical college in my constituency turned out 80 skilled apprentices. The figure has now fallen to 30. Under these proposals, no skilled apprentices will be turned out. Instead, the Manpower Services Commission will turn out a handful of lads for bucket and ladder jobs. In such a situation, how will we produce the skills and technology that are needed to put the country back on its feet?

The hon. Gentleman must recognise that the technologies of the industries that he has in mind have changed dramatically and that in recent years they have gone through a grisly period as they have tried to recover their competitiveness. As a result, the numbers of apprenticeships have been very much reduced. However, I am glad to say that the Government, the employers and the education service are dramatically increasing the number of places in the new technologies, where there is a huge demand.

A great many of the places provided last year at a wasted cost of up to £70 million were used to train no one. We must get the right match, so that the many good B1 schemes are taken up by young people and the others are abandoned, with the money being used more wisely elsewhere.

I agree with my hon. and learned Friend. A more effective deployment of the money is the motive underlying my answer to the question asked by the hon. Member for Bassetlaw (Mr. Ashton).

Some of the best mode B1 and B2 schemes are being cut, with no evaluation of how good they are. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many people believe that there is no consultation between the Department of Education and Science and the Department of Employment before the savage cuts which affect the future of our further education colleges and our young people are made?

Those are wild allegations. The reduction in the number of mode B places simply reflects the fact that there was not a demand for all the places provided last year.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that last year there were 95,000 mode B1 places available, that the uptake was 55,000, and that the Government have cut back the number of places to 75,000?

My hon. Friend's figures are more or less the same as mine, except that he is bringing together the mode B1 and mode B2 figures. My figures are slightly different, but show a similar lack of demand for the places that were available.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what recent representations he has had from local authorities regarding the effect of reductions in education expenditure.

Since 1978–79 expenditure on education and science as a whole has increased by 1 per cent. in cost terms despite a fall of 12 per cent. in the school population. My right hon. Friend has discussed spending on education with the local authority associations and with individual authorities on a number of occasions in recent months.

Will the Minister comment on a request from Northumberland county council, which was refused, that the Secretary of State, or any of his Ministers, should meet two representatives of the 16 high schools in that county, and on the response of the education committee of the Association of County Councils to the "Training for Jobs" White Paper presented to the House?

The Department receives many requests for meetings and interviews with Ministers. We do our best at all times to accede to those requests, but we cannot meet everyone during a very short time.

Has my hon. Friend received representations from local education authorities about ways in which the administration of education could be streamlined in their areas?

I have not, but we should be pleased to have such representations.

Is it not a fact that our most precious asset is our youth? As we are entering a rapidly changing and highly technological society, should not more money be spent on education? Is not the threat of rate-capping and cuts in education a disgrace?

The hon. Gentleman is in danger of believing his own speeches. We are determined to improve and enhance the education service in all parts of the country. The responsibility for such provision rests with local education authorities, which must decide how they provide education in their communities.

Does my hon. Friend agree that although many factors, including finance, affect the course of education, by far the most important factor is the ability of a teacher in front of a class to interest pupils and impart information to them? If we are concerned about education, should not our scrutiny be directed towards that?

My hon. Friend is entirely right, and I know that he and the House will welcome our initiatives in our White Paper on teacher quality. We must motivate those teachers who do not, for some reason, reach the standards that we require of them.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what representations he has received for the establishment of a development council for continuing education.

About 70 letters have been received in the Department since 1 January 1983, and I have discussed the issue with representatives of the local authority associations and the Advisory Council for Adult and Continuing Education. Although we do not intend to set up a council of the sort proposed by ACACE, my right hon. Friend has agreed to grant-aid the development unit being established by the National Institute of Adult Continuing Education.

That is an extremely unsatisfactory answer. Is the Minister aware that since the Government abolished the advisory council there has been a yawning gap in this area? Does he realise that without such an organisation continuing education will inevitably suffer? Is the Government's attitude to such a council based on principle, or on financial considerations?

ACACE wanted a large council, with a substantial annual budget. We doubt the wisdom of channelling all adult education development funds through a single agency, bearing in mind the existence of other relevant bodies such as the further education unit and the adult literacy and basic skills unit. The arrangement that we have in mind provides the flexibility that is needed. The unit provides a central focus, but there is a choice of agencies to carry out specific projects.

Does my hon. Friend accept that adult and continuing education has a great role to play in retraining for work and in providing self-dignity to the old and unemployed? Will he make it a priority to give a higher profile to this important service?

I am delighted to tell my hon. Friend that the expenditure from my Department will increase by 14 per cent. next year and by 22 per cent. in the following year.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what action he is taking on teachers pay.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what discussions he has had with teachers unions about pay; and if he will make a statement.

Teachers pay is negotiated in the Burnham committees and direct discussions between the holder of my office and the teachers unions on matters falling within the purview of those committees would be inappropriate. I am represented on those committees, and in that way my views can be made known to the employers who make up the majority on the management panel of each committee.

Does the Minister not agree that the 3 per cent. offered to teachers is an insult and that the employers, by their refusal to go to arbitration, are showing their stubbornness? Does he not agree also that this could lead to an explosion of teachers' salaries, as indicated by the Burnham report?

No, absolutely no to all those questions. The hon. Gentleman has not realised that the climate has changed substantially since inflation has fallen. So far as I know, there is no exodus from the teaching profession because of pay. There is a large queue of what I am told are excellent candidates for the teaching profession, at current rates of pay.

Is the Minister not aware that one of the reasons why there are others waiting to take teachers' jobs is the policy carried out by the Government of throwing groups of workers on to the dole so as to depress wages? Is the 3 per cent. that has been offered not a real wage cut in view of the fact that inflation is running at 5 per cent.? If the Tory party chairman can get a backhander of £100 per week for doing no more work, why can teachers not be paid properly? If the Government have £300 million to throw around in the Budget to the Duke of Westminster and his cronies as a result of changes in taxation allowances, does the Minister not realise that they should be able to find money for the teachers?

Anyone who pays attention to the rubbish that the hon. Gentleman puts to the House is likely to be harmed. Only when the country becomes competitive again, which means that unit labour costs allow goods and services to be produced at prices that consumers here and abroad find acceptable, will we get full employment.

Will not a modest pay settlement this year improve job opportunities in the teaching profession and also ensure that the in-service training and retraining programmes will continue to have adequate funds?

I agree with both the points that my hon. Friend makes. Indeed, if teachers were to succeed in getting more than the amount of money that is being put into the calculations for a pay increase the result would be that less money would be available for things like books and the maintenance of equipment, which we all think should be provided for the children.

Does the Secretary of State remember that some 10 years ago, when the Houghton commission reported that teachers' pay had been eroded so dreadfully —by well over 25 per cent. —the so-called Houghton money gave the teachers a 30 per cent. increase to enable them to catch up? Does he realise — I wish that he would listen—that the erosion of teachers' pay has put them back to where they were? In other words, they have lost 30 per cent. over the last few years. Does he not think that the offer of 3 per cent. at a time of 5 per cent. inflation is a disgraceful offer to an orderly and well-behaved group of working people?

On the contrary, I think that the Houghton dependence on comparability — part of the fashion of those days—was one of the principal causes of the lack of competitiveness and inflation that led to the unemployment of today.

Does the Secretary of State believe that the best way of motivating teachers—something which he thinks is very important—is by insisting that they take a cut in real pay?

What the hon. Gentleman does not take on board is the fact that in an effective society pay will reflect supply and demand. The fact is that teachers are not leaving the profession in large numbers on pay grounds and that very good candidates are coming forward on the present pay conditions.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when he will next meet the vice-chancellor of the Open University to discuss the expansion of programmes of continuing education.

My right hon. Friend has been invited by the vice-chancellor to visit the Open University and he will be replying shortly.

Will the Secretary of State use the opportunity of his visit to the Open University to consider some of the criminal damage that has been done to that institution in the last year? [Interruption.] I refer to damage done not by the students but by the right hon. Gentleman and the Government, who had a golden opportunity to expand the Open University for continuing education and to develop courses for people who must change their careers in midstream and who must train and retrain if they are not to be unemployed. There has been a savage cut in the number of courses, teachers and students. Will the Secretary of State explain why, to add insult to injury, the Open University has been asked to borrow £1 million at criminally high rates of interest to expand its continuing education?

As I said, my right hon. Friend has been invited to visit the university and will be replying shortly. I am sure that he will welcome listening to everything that the people at the Open University have to say to him.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he has discussed with the Government's partners in the education service his suggestions about the alternative deployment of unsatisfactory head teachers; and if he will make a statement.

It was the Government's partners to whom I first put these suggestions and I shall be sending them tomorrow a consultative document on a probationary period for new head teachers. I also intend to consult them in the near future on my thinking on changing pension rules to allow head teachers to step down to less demanding posts.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that if we could achieve greater mobility among head teachers, and place many of them in the right posts, that might be less unsatisfactory? By that means we might achieve greater potential from what is largely a dedicated profession.

Yes, certainly. Head teachers deserve good treatment and I hope that the proposed change in the pension rules, if it is accepted, will help in that regard.

Will the Secretary of State look into the viability of fixed-term appointments for head teachers? Does he agree that that works well with heads of departments at universities? Is he aware that fixed-term appointments would also enable him to promote young teachers without being saddled with them for life?

Fixed-term appointments, be they for head teachers or teachers, are within the power of local education authorities to grant, if they so decide. There are arguments in both directions. I do not think that any action is needed by me.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that head teachers are no different from anyone else in any other profession; in other words, that there are individuals who, through no fault of their own, will cease to be able to perform their duties satisfactorily and that there should be ways of removing them?

Yes, indeed. Head teachers are the same as other people, although perhaps they are rather better when in their prime. If only there were a system of assessment for all teachers, including head teachers, the country, the pupils and the teachers would be much better off. That at present is nothing more than an item on the discussion agenda. However, I agree with my hon. Friend.

Everyone agrees that unsatisfactory head teachers should be eased out. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that while an unsatisfactory head teacher can do a great deal of damage to the children in his school, unsatisfactory Ministers can effect a great deal of damage to a whole generation?

On the evidence this afternoon, the Opposition are not showing that they have begun to grapple with the problems of government, but perhaps that is not surprising.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the quality of the head teacher is probably the single most important factor in determining the quality of the school? For that reason, will he accept, in view of the questions he has been asked this afternoon, that there is support on both sides of the House for fixed-term appointments for head teachers?

I accept that the head teacher is the nearest thing we have to a magic wand in connection with schools, but it does not follow from that that we should try to judge whether a fixed-term contract for head teachers would be beneficial. That is for the local education authorities.

asked the Secretary of Slate for Education and Science what representations he has received from college principals on the impact of his proposals to change the arrangements for student travel on students at London colleges.

My right hon. Friend has received two such representations, one from the vice-chancellor of the University of London and one from the provost of University College London.

Is the Minister aware that the new proposals on student travel grants will mean hardship for many students in London, Lancaster and elsewhere who have long distances to travel? Will he follow the example of his Scottish colleagues and abandon these proposals?

My right hon. Friend has received representations from areas outside London to the effect that the proposed new arrangements would cause special difficulties. The additional help for London students about which the hon. Gentleman asked could be provided only at the expense of other students, which I do not believe would be justified.

Does the permanent Under-Secretary agree that, in his letter to Mr. Hayden Williams the president of the University of London union, he admitted a degree of rough justice? Does the Minister further agree that the travel needs of Members of Parliament vary as greatly as those of students and that the imposition of the scheme would be not just rough justice, but injustice?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving me that rank. The present system of reimbursing individually travel claims in excess of the £50 element included in the main grant is administratively costly and unsatisfactory, as it involves local education authorities checking and paying numerous individual claims which they are not always well placed to verify. In addition, it represents an uncontrollable and effectively open-ended commitment to public expenditure.

Why should there be one rule for Scotland and another for England?

That is a constitutional question to be answered by others than myself.

Does the Minister agree that the difficulties of checking expense claims should not stand in the way of continuing encouragement for students to travel from one part of the country to another? Will the Minister undertake to review the matter and bring it into line?

I take the hon. Gentleman's point, which has been brought up in the consultations that we are undertaking.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what are the current and proposed staffing levels and student numbers at the North East London polytechnic.

The number of full-time academic and research staff at the North East London polytechnic in 1982–83, the latest figures available in the Department, was 648. I understand that the polytechnic's estimate of the comparable number in 1984–85 is 527. The full-time equivalent number of students on advanced courses, excluding overseas and other full-time students, in 1982–83 was 4,850. The national advisory body's plan for 1984–85, as endorsed by my right hon. Friend, provides for a full-time equivalent of 5,274.

Is the Minister aware that the only reason why substantial compulsory redundancies have been avoided is that the staff have co-operated on voluntary early retirement and that the three local authorities involved, including my own, have dug deep into their own resources, despite being victims of Government cuts, to make good the shortfall in Government financing? Does the Minister understand that the North-East London polytechnic, and other polytechnics, cannot continue to maintain high standards under the constant threat of redundancies and financial deprivation?

The expenditure out turn at NELP for 1982–83 suggests that its unit cost was about 24 per cent. higher than the average for polytechnics. It was 29 per cent. above the average in 1981–82. Although there has been some improvement, there must be scope for substantially greater economy and efficiency.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when he last officially received truancy figures from Cambridgeshire county council.

School attendance figures were last received from that authority in 1977, as part of a sample survey.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his reply. When he formulates education policy for Cambridgeshire and the rest of the country, especially for under-achievers and under-motivated students, will he not be assisted by knowing how many were at school and, more important, why those not attending school stay away?

The answer to the broad sense of the question is yes. We believe that our policies on the school curriculum are a means of combating truancy by ensuring that the pupils regard what is offered to them as relevant to their needs. There are, however, other means at our disposal.

If the school curriculum provided lessons not only for the academically able but for those who underachieve, would not truancy rates fall very considerably? Is not truancy the responsibility of the Minister, in that he introduced rate-capping and penalties on local education authorities that made it so hard to engage teachers to achieve those curricula?

The hon. Gentleman is a member of the Liberal party, which has never got it right yet. We intend to take a number of initiatives soon to focus the attention of the education welfare service more sharply on school attendance issues. The hon. Gentleman's other points do not relate to the question.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the police have discovered that there is an increasing link between truancy and juvenile crime, particularly vandalism? Will he consider meeting his colleagues in the Home Office to see that the matter is taken seriously and to discuss what can be done about it?

Like my hon. Friend, I believe that there is a link between truancy and juvenile crime. The causal connections are not firmly established. We have interdepartmental conversations and meetings with our colleagues in the Home Office. I assure my hon. Friend that that matter has been at the forefront of my attention.

Has the Minister noticed that there is some ambiguity in the original question asked by the hon. Member for Peterborough (Dr. Mawhinney)? The question does not refer to truancy in schools. I understand that Cambridgeshire county council keeps a tight ship—it cuts and cuts. The question could mean truancy in the Cambridgeshire county council and that some council members are missing.

I do not think that I can find a suitable reply to that question. On the other hand, I shall say that I have every confidence that the Conservative-controlled Cambridgeshire authority will do its level best at all times to provide the best service for the people and children in the area.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what is the number of overseas students currently undertaking postgraduate courses at United Kingdom universities and colleges of higher education; and what was the corresponding figure in April 1980.

This information is not readily available for the United Kingdom. However, in 1983–84 the provisional estimated number of postgraduate students at universities in Great Britain who either paid fees at the overseas rate or were domiciled in other European Community countries was 16,300. The corresponding figure for the academic year 1979–80 was 17,500. Including public sector higher education in Great Britain, there were 18,900 such students in 1979–80. Public sector information for 1983–84 is not yet available.

Do not those unfortunate figures show a lack of understanding of the educational requirements of Third world countries? Is it not a fact that the very people from Third world countries who are now having to seek their education in other countries will in future return to their own countries to be leaders of government, industry and central administration? Could this action now not be to the detriment of the United Kingdom?

Any fall in overseas student numbers is a cause for regret, but the fall in overseas postgraduate student numbers at universities of less than 7 per cent. since the full-cost fees policy was introduced gives some grounds for pleasure, in that the numbers have held up so well.

Will the Minister pay attention to the impact on Commonwealth countries when, because of the increase in fees in this country, students go to Eastern European countries and countries behind the Iron Curtain for their further education? Will he consider particularly the political, social and economic impact for the future?

Many Commonwealth students benefit from the Commonwealth scholarship and fellowship plan and the various schemes of support for overseas students operated by my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. The report published recently expresses the hope that other countries will match the British Government's expansion in the number of awards under the Commonwealth scholarship and fellowship plan. We could not afford to consider any general concession to students from other Commonwealth countries, although we share the view about the importance of student mobility and educational interchange expressed by the Heads of Commonwealth Governments at their meeting in New Delhi last year.

Has not the time come to concede that the decision in 1979 by our Government to charge full fees to overseas students has proved to be wrong?

The Government welcome overseas students, but do not believe that they should receive an indiscriminate subsidy from the British taxpayer. We are, however, committed to schemes of targeted support for particular students and for particular countries with historic relations with the United Kingdom. Details of the way in which these schemes are developing were given by my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs.

Will the Minister reconsider his earlier answer? Ought he not to be appalled at the idea that a 7 per cent. drop in overseas students could mean that 7 per cent. fewer orders will be placed by those students when they return home and begin work, and that such a loss of exports might well lose this country far more than has been saved by putting up the fees?

I cited the 7 per cent. as a demonstration of how highly our postgraduate education is valued. The particular point on foreign policy put by the hon. Member is obviously one for my right hon. and learned Friend.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 3 April.

This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House I shall be having further meetings later today. This evening I hope to attend a dinner given by Her Majesty the Queen at Windsor.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the incongruous comparison yesterday by the Secretary of State for Social Services of his review with the great and constructive Beveridge report of 40 years ago will be treated with the greatest suspicion throughout the country? Is she further aware that under her Administration the number of those drawing supplementary benefit has increased by over 40 per cent. and now totals nearly 4·5 million people? Will she, therefore, in the light of those figures, give the House a categorical assurance this afternoon that, as a result of the review now under way, there will be no cut in real terms in the already shamefully low level of supplementary benefit?

My right hon. Friend is conducting a comprehensive review of four particular areas and undertaking a statistical survey of the fifth. I think that it is time for a review and that the review will be welcome. It is most unwise to presume the result of a review before it has been undertaken, and therefore I shall keep an open mind. Supplementary benefit has risen in real terms.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the steelworks in my constituency of Scunthorpe uses 2·6 million tonnes of coal per annum, 1·8 million tonnes of which comes from the Yorkshire pits? Is she further aware that, as a direct consequence of the action initiated by Arthur Scargill, that plant is faced with closure and the possible loss of 10,000 jobs? Is she also aware that, as a direct result of that, 11 pits in England, six of which are in Yorkshire, may also close with a possible loss of a further 15,000 jobs? Is that not a disgrace and should there not be a national ballot of the members of the National Union of Mineworkers?

I recognise what my hon. Friend has said about Scunthorpe, which has made strenuous efforts to improve its performance and has succeeded in doing so. I hope that it will have the opportunity to continue in the excellent way in which it has started under the British Steel Corporation. I agree with him that most people in the mining industry would like to have a national ballot and I hope that that desire will be supported by right hon. and hon. Gentlemen on the Opposition Benches.

We have heard in the past few days of the decision to permit some policemen to be armed with sub-machine guns. All Members will want to safeguard the security of leaders who will be coming for the summit meeting in June, as we want to safeguard the security of anyone else who is likely to be the target of terrorist attack. Nevertheless, can the Prime Minister tell us what on earth is the use of sub-machine guns for the purpose of personal security?

My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department has approved the purchase by the Metropolitan police of a small number of sub-machine guns. They are intended for the protection of persons at high risk but will be issued only under the most stringent conditions and in the most exceptional circumstances, when the degree of threat against a person being protected justifies such a precaution. Authority for their issue may not be given by a person below the rank of assistant commissioner.

Even taking into account the interests of security, that response and, it appears, the procedures laid down, are much too vague to justify a huge change in the disposition of security personnel. Can the Prime Minister imagine what the effect would be of pursuit with sub-machine guns through a crowded London street? Will she reconsider this decision and ensure that permission to purchase and bear these arms is withdrawn?

My right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary took this step after great consideration. I have explained some of the safeguards —the order is for a small number of sub-machine guns for the protection of persons at high risk, for use only in exceptional circumstances, and authority for the issue of the guns may not be given by a person below the rank of assistant commissioner. The officers to whom these weapons will be issued will be trained to high standards by the Metropolitan police force arms training specialists in techniques appropriate to the role of the police. They will not be trained by military personnel.

Is my right hon. Friend aware, following on that question, that the Thames Valley police authority was told on Friday that it would not receive the £1·5 million promised by my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary towards the costs of policing at Greenham common, but would receive only half? Is my right hon. Friend also aware that the balance will fall on the ratepayers and that the cost of policing these demonstrations, which are now no longer local but national, must be funded from central Government and not local ratepayers?

I have made inquiries about this matter and I understand that the grants given to the Thames Valley police authority were calculated on the ordinary rules.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 3 April.

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

During the course of the Prime Minister's busy day, will she take the Secretary of State for Social Services to one side, point out to him that no inquiry is needed into the plight of the over-50 long-term unemployed, and tell him that he could assist them immediately by paying diem the long-term rate of supplementary benefit?

I answered a similar question two or three weeks ago. To do that would require expenditure of some £450 million extra. I am always being urged by Labour Members to reduce the burden of taxation, and I cannot do that and increase public expenditure.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the one inescapable responsibility of the Leader of the Opposition—[Interruption.]

Order. Let the hon. Gentleman finish his question. I presume that he is asking a question which the Prime Minister can answer. He cannot ask questions on what the Prime Minister's view of the Leader of the Opposition would be.

All I ask my right hon. Friend is whether, in her opinion, as Leader of the Opposition — [HON. MEMBERS: "No."]

Order. The hon. Gentleman must be much more sophisticated than that.

Is it not now time that the Leader of the Opposition asked for a national ballot on the miners' strike?

I do not answer for the Leader of the Opposition, but I live in hope that he may support such a proposition.

Does the Prime Minister accept that, with the agreement reached at the weekend by Community Ministers of Agriculture, her Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food failed to honour her pledge to the agriculture industry in Northern Ireland to achieve the same arrangements as those achieved for the Republic of Ireland? Is she aware that agriculture is the largest, and our only indigenous, industry in Northern Ireland, and does she accept that damage has been done not only to the dairy industry but to the meat exporting industry, the damage to which has been described today by its leaders as devastating? Will she at least—this is a modest request —ask her Minister to carry out an assessment of the damage done to that industry, with a view to taking corrective action?

I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman. I believe that my right hon. Friend got a reasonable agreement for Northern Ireland, bearing in mind that in the rest of the United Kingdom farmers are having to cut down their surplus milk production, whereas in Northern Ireland, by virtue of what my right hon. Friend has managed to procure in the Community, they will have a special amount so that they can increase their production.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list he official engagements for Tuesday 3 April.

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

Will the Prime Minister take time today to reflect upon the fact that, when she became Prime Minister in 1979, in Scotland there were 154,400 unemployed, and that now in 1984 there are 434,300 unemployed? In north Lanarkshire, which incorporates my constituency, ther has been an increase since 1979 of 128 per cent. and, of these, 24·1 per cent. are males, some of whom will never work again. Will she now do something with compassion, get these people back to work, loosen the purse strings of the revenue coming from North sea oil and give them a chance to live a proper life?

I am the first to agree that unemployment has gone up in Scotland — indeed, it went up also during the lifetime of the last Labour Government. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will recognise that there are now many new industries in Scotland which have an excellent future and give good prospects for jobs. These are industries that were not there before, and which are now expanding.

Since tomorrow is the 35th anniversary of the signature by Britain of the North Atlantic treaty, by a Labour Foreign Secretary, Ernest Bevin, will my right hon. Friend take the opportunity today to pay tribute to the success of the Alliance in keeping the peace for all that time by a policy of deterrence and multilateral disarmament?

Yes, NATO is our shield and our security. It is vital that that organisation continues, and I pay tribute to its function of deterrence in the nuclear field, and to the wish of all of us to try to secure multilateral disarmament in conventional and nuclear weapons at all levels. That is our object, and we shall strive ever more to succeed.

Since the Government of the Argentine sent proposals on 18 February for improving relations between our two countries, why is it taking so long to send a reply, and when will it be sent?

We sent proposals to the Argentine Government, to which they responded. We shall shortly be responding to them. I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman appreciates that it would not have been wise to send a reply during recent days, which obviously was a time of heightened sensitivity.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 3 April.

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

Has my right hon. Friend noted the report of the CBI on the post-Budget forecast that was published yesterday, which suggests that manufacturing output will rise even more rapidly in this country this year and next year than the Government's own forecasts? Does she not think that it would be refreshing if the pessimistic people on the Opposition side of the House would just occasionally welcome something that is obviously very good news for Britain?

Yes, I do. The CBI report was excellent news, particularly following a month, indeed a quarter, of very good news about exports, and following upon very good news about higher productivity. But I do not expect right hon. and hon. Gentlemen on the Opposition Benches to welcome that. Good news for Britain is bad news for them.

Has the Prime Minister seen the reports in the press in the past two weeks about the appalling conditions in which many homeless families are forced to live in inner London, and especially in Princes Lodge, Commercial road, in Tower Hamlets? Will she now take urgent action to ensure that local authorities in London have sufficient resources to meet the problem of homelessness, or does she want the homeless on her conscience as well as the unemployed?

I suggest that the first thing to be done is to fill those many empty local authority houses, some of which have been vacant for up to a year. If they were brought into service many more people would have homes.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Mr. Arthur Scargill is a confessed Marxist, surrounded by Communist aides and advisers? Even more serious, is she aware that the support for Mr. Scargill is coming from the Kremlin?

I hear what my hon. Friend—[Interruption.]

Order. I think that the House would like to hear the answer to the question.

I hear what my hon. Friend says. I am concerned that the miners should have an opportunity to express their views on their right to go to their place of work and earn a decent living. I hope that they will consider the case on merit: first, because they have a reasonable pay offer that will keep their pay about 27 per cent. above the average; secondly, because the Government have an outstanding record in supporting investment in the coal industry; and thirdly, because the Government have been reasonable in providing good amounts for early retirement and especially good redundancy payments for those who have to leave their jobs. That amounts to a vote of confidence in the miners and in the future of the industry in which they work.