asked the Paymaster General how many graduates are now being trained on the graduate enterprise programme.

In 1985–86 graduates are taking part in the programme at Stirling university, St. David's college, Lampeter, the Cranfield institute of technology and the London enterprise agency with the Central Polytechnic of London. There are plans to expand the programme next year, when Durham and Warwick university business schools will join it.

I welcome that and other measures to improve the employment prospects of graduates. May I ask why the numbers are so low? Does my hon. Friend agree that we must encourage further incentives and initiatives from private industry to improve and increase the numbers of talented graduates who have the right attitude and motivation? We must do more, and I hope that we are doing more.

It is important to stress that those are only pilot schemes. They form part of training for enterprise, which is a massive programme, on which we are spending £14·3 million in helping more than 25,000 people. I note the thrust of my hon. Friend's argument. I am anxious to develop and strengthen the programme as quickly as possible.

asked the Paymaster General if he intends to take any action on the Employment Committee's report on special employment measures and the long-term unemployed; and if he will make a statement.

We are studying the report very carefully and will give a detailed response to the Committee as soon as is practicable.

Does the Paymaster General accept that the greatest crisis facing this country today is the fact that 4 million men and women are unemployed, of whom 1·6 million have been unemployed for many months? That is a tragedy. Why does the Minister not take note of the constructive suggestions of my hon. Friends, who have spent many hours on the Select Committee?

When the report was produced I welcomed the Select Committee's contribution and agreed with its choice of subject and concentration on age and the long-term unemployed. The Government are already spending more than £2·5 billion on training and employment measures aimed at the same target. I gave a preliminary view on some of the suggestions put forward which did not seem likely to achieve the objectives described.

In his consideration of the report, will my right hon. and learned Friend give careful thought to the possibility of offering some of those people a guarantee of employment? If the political will were there, that could be achieved. It was achieved with the Christmas guarantee for the youth training scheme. Would it not be the most humane and practical way of helping the long-term unemployed?

As my hon. Friend says, we have given a guarantee to 16-year-old school leavers. Experiments are taking place to try to give guarantees to the long-term unemployed in Bolton, among other places, within existing schemes. All those measures are worth considering. We cannot give a guarantee of employment to the long-term unemployed until we have worked out schemes to give them work experience, training, or a job. That is why we are rapidly expanding our community programme and other programmes.

As the Select Committee report directly involved the work of the Manpower Services Commission, will the Paymaster General tell the House about last night's report, according to the papers this morning, that his right hon. and noble Friend, Lord Young, has taken over from the Paymaster General personal responsibility for the direction of the Manpower Services Commission, which means that there will be no one directly answerable for the commission in the House of Commons, which funds the commission?

My right hon. and noble Friend, Lord Young, has no more ousted me from responsibility for MSC matters, than I have ousted him from responsibility for industrial relations, inner cities, race relations, and areas in which I play a more prominent role. We have been reduced from five to four Ministers, with the transfer of my hon. Friend the Member for Eltham (Mr. Bottomley) to the Department of Transport, and we have reorganised the distribution of the day-to-day routine work of the Department. Otherwise, we continue to work together.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the success of the Government's policies is evident in the falling numbers of short-term unemployed? When will he consider that the lessons learnt from the pilot schemes can be used to reduce the increasing numbers of long-term unemployed?

We are trying out pilot schemes in selected cities and concentrating on giving individual attention to the needs of each long-term unemployed person. That is obviously required to bring back into the world of work people who have been away from it for a long time. We are anxiously considering the results in the pilot areas to see what success we are achieving, and we shall certainly build on our achievements as rapidly as possible.

Has the Paymaster General noticed that the meticulously researched and unique report of the Select Committee has received a warm welcome from the quality press, including the editorial in the Financial Times on Friday? Has he further noticed the recognition that, if we are serious about tackling unemployment and money is available in the Budget, it is better spent on special employment measures than on tax cuts? When can we expect the White Paper that he has promised in response to the report, and when can we have a proper debate about it?

The Government propose next year to spend £2,670 million on employment and training measures. We are not rejecting the idea of spending money purposefully on ways of assisting the unemployed, particularly the long-term unemployed. We must consider the Select Committee's proposals. Can we provide one-year jobs in the building industry without displacing other workers? Can we find 100,000 new useful jobs in the National Health Service and social services? Is it right to subsidise each long-term unemployed person to the extent set out by the Select Committee, thereby displacing many people from existing jobs? The proposals must be considered anxiously, but we must find remedies that work. I assure the hon. Gentleman that the Government will not turn their back on them.

I hear what my right hon. and learned Friend says. When he carefully considers the report, as I am sure he will, will he bear in mind that many Conservative Members are deeply worried that not enough is yet being done to help the long-term unemployed?

We are trying out initiatives, such as job restart courses and job start allowances, in nine selected areas and expanding the community programne as rapidly as possible so that each month a further 10,000 people can be taken on. I assure my hon. Friend that we shall consider every opportunity of giving more assistance to the long-term unemployed. We are arguing, not about the aim, but about the mechanics for achieving it.

Does the Paymaster General accept that the programme proposed by the Employment Select Committee, which has a built-in Tory majority, would create 750,000 jobs for the long-term unemployed—people who have been out of work for more than 12 months? Does he acknowledge that until his Government or the next Government adopt such a programme, the long-term unemployed, such as those in St. Helens, will have no chance whatsoever of finding a job?

I do not accept that the Select Committee's proposals would produce 750,000 new jobs. We shall consider the proposals carefully and give a considered, detailed response in the White Paper. Direct measures have played an important part in the Government's policies during the past few years. We have spent far more on and put far more effort into them than our predecessors. We shall continue to consider new and effective methods.

asked the Paymaster General how many persons are currently on YTS courses in the Billericay constituency; and if he will make a statement.

At 31 December 1985, the latest date for which statistics are available, there were some 700 young people in training on the youth training scheme in the Basildon local authority district, which contains the constituency of Billericay.

Despite the attempt by some Labour politicians to rubbish the youth training scheme, will my hon. Friend confirm that 80 per cent. of youngsters who have completed the course believe that it is worth while?

My hon. Friend is correct. More than 80 per cent. of the youngsters who have taken advantage of YTS have been well satisfied with the training that they have received. I am a little confused as to where the Labour party stands on this issue. The hon. Member for Huddersfield (Mr. Sheerman), in the debate a week last Monday, said that broadly he supported the scheme, but some of his colleagues are content to rubbish it. I often wonder how many youngsters are deterred from going on the YTS because they believe that kind of cant.

The Minister is well aware that the Opposition support two-year training under the YTS or any other banner. He should not compare Billericay, with its 20 per cent. of young people who do not finish with a job, with the 40 per cent. and over in the northern region with no jobs after YTS. What will he do about the disparities between places such as Billericay and the others which have been doubly hit by the lack of employment opportunity at the end of YTS and the Government's wicked way of closing mode B provision and not replacing it with premium placings?

I welcome the hon. Gentleman's earlier remarks. They were a reaffirmation of what he said in the debate a week last Monday, that, broadly, the Labour party supports the scheme. We regard it as a quality scheme. The House will be interested to hear that 86 per cent. of the places available on the two-year scheme have already been found. The fear that he expressed in the debate a week last Monday seems to be unfounded.

asked the Paymaster General if he will take steps to introduce a requirement for unemployed persons in areas of low unemployment and severe skill shortage to register at jobcentres.

asked the Paymaster General how many of the unemployed are registered at a jobcentre; and what percentage of the overall total this represents.

Job seekers whose skills are in short supply are already encouraged to register at jobcentres. We have no plans to reintroduce general compulsory registration. There are some 420,000 people registered at jobcentres. However, records do not distinguish between the unemployed and employed people seeking a change of employment.

Does my hon. Friend accept that I find his answer deeply disappointing? Does he agree that it is scandalous that in the 14 travel-to-work areas with unemployment of less than 8 per cent., where there are 138,000 people drawing unemployment benefit, only 14,000 people are registered at jobcentres, and that in Slough, of 4,500 unemployed people, only 210—less than 1 in 20 — are on the register? What will he do about that scandal?

I take careful note of the point made by my hon. Friend. In his constituency, the Government already assist through the national priority scheme and the adult training strategy in the short term and through YTS in the long term. He might also like to know that the European Community is interested in promoting a study on skill shortages in the Thames Valley area.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on his appointment. I am disappointed that he replied in the way that he did, when only about 12 per cent. of unemployed people register at jobcentres. Does he agree that an unemployed person who cannot be bothered to register at a jobcentre is not keen to obtain a job? Will he assure the House that closer links will be established between unemployment benefit offices and jobcentres and that it will be necessary for all unemployed people to register at jobcentres?

I thank my hon. Friend for his kind words of welcome. I listened with interest to what he said because of the authority that he brings to the subject. I am sure he will agree, however, that compulsory registration is not a cost-effective way of testing availability. Although we are unhappy about the adequacy of the present work test, the Manpower Services Commission has reported that in 1984–85 there were over 14 million substantive contacts at jobcentres.

The Minister trots out the figures for skill shortages, but is he aware that the Conservative Government decided to close down the skill-centres—the places that would answer some of the needs of the nation?

I am sure the hon. Gentleman is aware of the care with which jobcentres try to match job seekers to job vacancies. They circulate details of hard-to-fill vacancies and maintain a computer bank of vacancies likely to be hard to fill locally.

Is the Minister aware that some of his Tory friends who speak about people not registering for jobs have a cheek, when between them they have more than 700 moonlighting jobs, directorships and consultancies, and some of those Members do not have the guts to register their jobs in the Members' Register of Interests?

I am not sure of the relevance of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary to the question. The Government are as anxious as he is to do something about unemployment. We are bringing as many and varied measures to bear on the problem as we can.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the widespread problem in the tourism and leisure sectors? A glance in my local paper reveals that the number of jobs available substantially exceeds those looking for them. Will my hon. Friend take steps to convince people that jobs in the tourist industry and the service sector in general are worth while and real jobs that should be taken up?

My hon. Friend is right. The importance of the service sector cannot be overlooked.

asked the Paymaster General what progress has been made in promoting the YTS.

On 27 January my right hon. and noble Friend, together with the chairman of the Manpower Services Commission, the director general of the CBI and the general secretary of the TUC launched an advertising campaign to promote the new two-year YTS.

Have not the Government yet again had to resort to using actors, this time to promote the YTS? Does that not demonstrate the implausibility of the miserable sums that are on offer?

The advertising is necessary to ensure that we have people, including employers, coming forward to provide the training that we want and also to make young people generally aware of what is on offer now that we are going for a two-year good quality training programme available to all of them. I do not know what the hon. Member means by "miserable sums". By 1987–88 we shall have passed the £1 billion mark each year in spending on youth training.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that it is imperative that the unions support the YTS? Is he aware that there are 50 youngsters engaged in YTS in Norfolk county council whose second year is being threatened by the National and Local Government Officers Association? Will my right hon. and learned Friend have a word with NALGO and give it a prod?

The TUC supports the YTS and the scheme is run by the Manpower Services Commission, on which there are three trade union representatives as commissioners, including such leading figures as the general secretary of the Transport and General Workers Union. I agree that some unions still prove to be difficult in practice in some localities, and NALGO is less than helpful. However, I do not have the influence on NALGO that the Opposition might have if they took a more constructive view.

Has the right hon. and learned Gentleman had a chance to look at the matter that I raised with him two or three weeks ago—the extra burden that is being put on local authorities to bear part of the burden for the YTS? How much of the burden is being put on local authorities? When the transitional payments are exhausted, will the Minister take steps to ensure that the whole burden is borne by the central Exchequer rather than by local authorities with the highest unemployment in the land?

Local authorities are supported in the same way as other employers, and the contribution made to the employers must reflect the fact that, certainly in the second year, the trainees are often adding some value to their service or business. One of the main problems faced by local authorities comes from NALGO, as my hon. Friend the Member for Norfolk, North-West (Mr. Bellingham) said, because payments to young trainees need to be topped up far above the necessary levels. Therefore, the local authorities saddle themselves with unnecessary wage levels. That is a matter between the local authorities and NALGO. There is no reason why central Government funding should contribute to such payments.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend not find it very difficult to promote the YTS when the Opposition invariably try to discourage young people by stating that it is slave labour? They know nothing about slave labour whatsoever. They should encourage young people to join the YTS.

I agree with my hon. Friend. The payment made to trainees on the YTS reflects the fact that they are in training. It is a realistic payment for those going straight from school and receiving their first training at work. Sixty per cent. of them go straight to jobs when they have completed their training. The Opposition's position is quite ridiculous. They say, through clenched teeth, that they support the two-year YTS, but then, as my hon. Friend says, they launch into destructive publicity which puts young people off.

I congratulate the new Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Employment on joining the Front Bench. It coincides with a time when much of the responsibility of the Department is being transferred to another place.

I have given the reason why we are promoting and advertising the youth training scheme. We want the providers of good quality training and young people to know what is on offer, because they will benefit from it. It would be absurd to spend £1 billion on the programme and to spend nothing to promote the programme that that money makes available.

I want to refer to the question of the right hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent (Mr. Foot) on the cost to local authorities of the YTS. In my constituency it is over £500,000 a year. If one accepts that authorities should contribute, can the Minister at least persuade his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment that such expenditure should not be subject to rate capping?

Much local government expenditure does not arise directly from the youth training scheme or the Government's rules for it. Such expenditure arises from the fact that local authorities give way to political pressure and pay wage rates to those being trained which are higher than necessary and higher than those provided by many private employers. I cannot stop local authorities from doing that. It is absurd to suggest that we should divert money from our training budget to subsidise local authorities which do that.

asked the Paymaster General if he will indicate the extent to which unemployment has fallen in the Solihull constituency since 1984; and if he will make a statement.

The number of unemployed claimants in the Solihull parliamentary constituency fell 1·1 per cent. between 12 January 1984 and 9 January 1986. Male unemployment fell by 10·5 per cent. over the same period. There is an extensive range of Government assistance to attract new investment and new jobs to the west midlands.

I thank my hon. Friend for his reply, and welcome the trend in Solihull. However, may I ask him to have a word with his right hon. and hon. Friends at the Department of Trade and Industry in case General Motors' proposal for Land Rover in Solihull reverses that welcome trend?

I thank my hon. Friend for his welcome and take note of his advice. My hon. Friend might like to know that in the Birmingham travel-to-work area unskilled vacancies have risen by 4,588 — up 47 per cent. on January 1985.

asked the Paymaster General how many people were unemployed in May 1979; and how many are currently unemployed in the United Kingdom.

asked the Paymaster General how many people are unemployed in the United Kingdom; and if he will make a statement.

On 9 January the number of unemployed claimants in the United Kingdom was 3,407,700. An estimated 1,218,900 people were claiming unemployment benefits in May 1979.

I am surprised that the Paymaster General can adopt an attitude of complacency when he is announcing such figures to the House. In Ogmore, the unemployment figure was 3·7 per cent. in 1979. It is now 18·7 per cent., and in some areas 25 per cent. of the work force are out of work. When will the Minister listen to my right hon. Friend the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, who suggested in his speech last weekend that if we began to spend money on roads, schools, hospitals, sewers and other social improvements, unemployment might be substantially reduced? The unemployment figure is as frightening to my constituents as was the Prime Minister's speech last night, when she said that she would continue in office. If she continues in office much longer, everybody will be unemployed by the time she leaves it.

There has been a steady growth in employment since 1983 — [Interruption]. Of course there has. Obviously we need to generate more employment to tackle the problem. The hon. Gentleman's constituency has been affected by coal mining closures. I do not know to what extent he believes that Ogmore's problems will be solved by spending more money on roads, schools, houses and the other projects which his right hon. Friend the shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer appears to think will solve all our problems. I trust that the work of the new enterprise agency and the training schemes that are being promoted by the National Coal Board in South Wales will have the effect of stimulating again the economy of the valleys.

When does the Paymaster General expect the growth in employment to reach my constituency where unemployment is over 20 per cent.? When does he expect the unemployment figure to peak, and at what figure? When does he expect that figure to return to the level at which it stood in 1979?

The number of people who are being placed in jobs by our jobcentre in the Barnsley travel-to-work area is increasing substantially, although it needs to be further increased. By coincidence, the hon. Gentleman also represents a coal mining constituency. I hope that he will encourage his constituents to take more advantage than they have done so far of the training oportunities that are provided by our skillcentres, financed by the National Coal Board, which will help to revive the economy of the area.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend absolutely certain that these figures are accurate? In Bracknell in my constituency 7 per cent. of the work force is allegedly unemployed, yet at the jobcentre there is a large number of unfilled vacancies. All the employers express concern that they cannot find the right kind of people for the jobs for which they advertise.

I am satisfied that the figures are accurate when people understand clearly what they represent. We are always quite clear when we say what it is that we are measuring. I agree with my hon. Friend that there are large parts of the country, particularly in the south and in the midlands, where it is perplexing to find that there are large numbers of unemployed people when employers say that they are short of labour. When we try out new schemes in pilot areas, we discover that considerable success can be achieved by directing the long-term unemployed to jobs or to training after they have been contacted and given help and support.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend estimate how many people would price themselves into work if the wages councils were to be abolished?

The estimates vary between 8,000 and 300,000. We have made proposals for the reform of the wages councils, but I agree with my hon. Friend that when setting the rate of pay for jobs one must take into account the fact that people will be paid for jobs so long as their pay does not exceed the value that they add to the business.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman tell my constituents in the county of Gwynedd, where unemployment is over 20 per cent., and where there have been no coalmine closures, how countries such as Sweden and Norway are able to keep their unemployment at a fraction of ours and why we have failed completely to bring ours down?

I do not have time to debate the experience of Sweden, which is not quite so straightforward and untroubled as the hon. Gentleman implies. The problem of rising unemployment exists throughout western Europe. Many countries are taking the same measures as ourselves, and many of them are imitating the measures that we have taken on both the economic and employment fronts. We are creating more new employment in this country than is being created in the rest of the European Community put together.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend agree that one can make sense of the unemployment statistics only if one looks at the employment statistics? If one person in seven is unemployed, it means that 86 per cent. of the work force are employed, and that this country has a greater proportion of its work force in work than any other European country.—[Interruption.] Should not my right hon. and learned Friend be emphasising that point as well?

Shouts drowned my hon. Friend's valuable last point, which is that a higher proportion of people are in work in this country than in any other western European country. It is also the case, of course, that the size of our labour force is still growing, which is why, although we are creating many new jobs, we are still having difficulty in getting on top of the unemployment figures.

Does the Paymaster General accept that the growth in population during the period for which the Labour party was in office was twice as great as in this Government's period of office? I ask him this simple question. While most of the increases in jobs have been in part-time equivalents, can he put that into full-time equivalents and accept, as the Bank of England does, that, with the increase in jobs which we have seen since 1983, it would take over 50 years to reach the level of employment that his Government inherited in 1979?

Demography, I agree, has acted against both Governments, Labour and Conservative. There is a growth in the labour market, it is continuing, and it will end, I think, in three or four years' time. The fact remains that the Labour Government presided over a doubling in the rate of unemployment and left us deep in a recession and a financial and economic crisis which helped to make unemployment worse in the two years that followed. I cannot, without notice, turn part-time figures into full-time equivalents. The growth in part-time employment in the country goes back way into the 1970s. There has been a growth in part-time employment here and in other countries. It reflects changing social patterns. It is no good the hon. Gentleman trying to dismiss part-time employment, which is wanted by many people, as though part-time employees are not genuinely in jobs.

asked the Paymaster General what is his estimate of the total number of people currently in full-time employment; and what were the comparable figures for May 1979.

Estimates of full-time and part-time male employees in employment are not separately available for these dates. There were 16,450,000 male employees and female full-time employees in employment in Great Britain in September 1985. The comparable figure for June 1979 was 18,777,000.

We are frequently told in the House about a recovery, which has apparently been going on for several years. When will this recovery make an impact on the employment figures, since in my constituency there are areas where unemployment levels are at 36 per cent.?

The hon. Member is unduly gloomy, because the information for which he asks paints an incomplete picture. His question ignores the fact that part-time female jobs are up over 500,000 since the 1979 election, and the numbers of self-employed are up by some 750,000 since June 1979.

Will my hon. Friend recognise the fact that if it were not for the huge increase in the size of the work force over the past three or four years, unemployment would be substantially lower than it is now? Why does he think that Opposition Members are not prepared to recognise this?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The labour market has increased by some 1·75 million in the last decade. The Opposition ought to recognise that fact.

Is the Minister aware that unemployment in the north-west of England is considerably above the national average and is under further threat because of the very weak MFA which has been negotiated by his Government, as is well known to some of the members of his ministerial staff?

I quite understand that there are areas in the country where the unemployment problem is very much more serious than it is in others. That is why the Government have designed a wide range of schemes to try to tackle the deep-rooted problems.

Will my hon. Friend accept that the long-term potential for employment in the country is probably better now than it has ever been for the last 25 years because of the Government's policy relating to inflation and trade union reform? Will he do his best to ensure that the Chancellor of the Exchequer does not introduce any measures in the Budget, such as increasing dramatically excise and tax on hydrocarbons, which might prejudice the future potential for employment?

I note my hon. Friend's point and will certainly refer it to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I am sure my hon. Friend will agree that keeping the inflation rate down is of predominant importance, and is crucial in creating new employment.

asked the Paymaster General what will be the qualifications that trainees receive after completion of the two-year YTS.

Our aim is that all YTS trainees should have the opportunity to obtain or work towards a recognised vocational qualification. To help in this aim, we are establishing a new YTS certification board whose job it will be to ensure that there are relevant qualifications suitable for trainees of all abilities.

Following the advertising campaign referred to earlier, may I ask whether the Minister has any evidence that the Japanese are frightened by the progress of YTS in Britain? Will he admit that, were that to be the case, the scheme would have to reach the level of higher education? Does he agree that the credibility of YTS will depend upon the quality of training? Can he give us an assurance that, after two years' YTS, each trainee will receive a valuable qualification which will be a module towards a recognised vocational qualification?

I do not know whether the Japanese are frightened by YTS, but they will be as impressed with it as are Conservative Members. Of course we are anxious that all people on the YTS scheme should have a certificate. They should receive certificates in the form that I mentioned in reply to an earlier question. As a result of the appointment of the new certification board, we hope to improve the qualification. In addition to the certificate, 39 per cent. of those who complete YTS courses qualify for other qualifications.

Will my hon. Friend accept my thanks for the central role that he played in a highly successful conference on education and training which I promoted in my constituency yesterday?

Get off your knees.

Get off your knees. Does my hon. Friend agree that a central message from the conference was that education and training should be brought together? What will he do towards that end?

That question gives me the opportunity to congratulate my hon. Friend on organising a seminar in his constituency, which was yet another example of what can be done. He brought together industrialists and educationists, which is a major theme of Industry Year 1986.

Does the Minister recognise that young women on YTS courses do not always get the same, limited, training as do young men, and that they often emerge with fewer qualifications? What can he do to improve this scheme and their chances?

I am anxious to meet the point that the hon. Lady draws to my attention. I hope that the certification board will do that, but I shall consider that problem. If she wishes to raise specific examples with me, I shall be happy to consider them.

asked the Paymaster General what is the best available estimate of the number of new jobs which were created for young people as a result of the wage cuts induced by the young worker scheme; and how many of these were previously adult jobs.

About 90,000 new jobs for young people resulted directly from the scheme, according to our latest estimates. None of this number involved the substitution of young people in place of older workers.

Does not the evidence given to the Select Committee, including that from the Minister's Department, show that about 80 per cent. of the jobs that were found for young people came from older people? Is there not a more constructive way of providing jobs than throwing someone else off the roundabout?

The figure that I gave is the one that we calculated, making allowance for any displacement that is caused by such a scheme. It was highly successful and helped to contribute to the fact that unemployment among young people has been decreasing steadily for the past three years.

The Paymaster General is misleading the House, I am sure inadvertently. The evidence shows clearly that about 80 per cent. of the jobs that were subsidised would have existed anyway. Of the 10 per cent. of new jobs for young people, the overwhelming majority were adults' jobs. Does the Minister concede that, given those facts, his claim that exempting youngsters from the protection of wages councils will generate jobs is palpably false?

All that I can say in response to the hon. Lady is that it depends on which facts and evidence one takes into account. The figure that I gave was reached by those who provided most of the material for the study of the young workers' scheme. After making allowances for inevitable displacement, the scheme created 90,000 new jobs. There is clear evidence of a reduction in youth unemployment, largely because we are returning to more realistic pay levels for school leavers and because of the growth of the two-year youth training scheme.

asked the Paymaster General what is the estimated number of new job opportunities currently being created each month; what was the corresponding figure 12 months ago; and if he will make a statement.

The latest available estimates show that there was a net increase of 10,000 monthly in the employed labour force during the third quarter of 1985. This compares with an average monthly increase of 23,000 in the same period 12 months ago. There have now been 10 successive quarterly rises in the number of jobs, leading to a net increase of 709,000 since March 1983.

I welcome that trend, but does my hon. Friend agree that, because of job losses, we must have still greater investment in labour-intensive activities such as house building and home improvements, and that the Government must accept their responsibility in those areas?

I note what my hon. Friend says. I am sure that he would not want to underestimate the amount of public and private capital expenditure that is taking place and that he agrees that the overriding concern must be to keep inflation low, as inflation destroys many jobs.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagments for Tuesday 18 February.

This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall be having further meetings later today, including one with the Prime Minister of Turkey.

Will the Prime Minister confirm what she appeared to say on television last night— that a firm such as Land Rover must choose between being British and being successful? Is it this despair about the future of British industries which makes her so keen to act as a broker for American interests in the proposed sale of Land Rover?

I am anxious that there should be good jobs here in companies here which have a great future. I am anxious that Land Rover and Freight Rover should have as big a market and as big a distribution service as possible, and I believe that we must consider the bids that have been made.

Will my right hon. Friend find time today to congratulate Balfour Beatty on the successful conclusion of a joint venture with Japan to build a hydroelectric plant in Sri Lanka? Is this not a way forward in which we can balance our substantial trade imbalance with Japan and help the developing world?

My hon. Friend knows that this will be the second dam project with which we have assisted in Sri Lanka. The earlier project on the Victoria dam was extremely successful. The present one has been assisted by overseas aid and will bring great prosperity to Sri Lanka. I hope that it augurs well that we are cooperating with Japan.

As it now seems clear that going ahead with the Trident missile programme means jeopardising a successful deal between the United States and the Soviet Union on nuclear weapons in Europe, will the Prime Minister tell our American allies that she is willing to give up this expensive and unilateral escalation of British nuclear firepower?

No. I think that the right hon. Gentleman has fallen for Soviet Union propaganda. There is no question of Britain giving up her independent nuclear deterrent, and there is no question of the Trident programme being involved.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, as hon. Members enjoy freedom of speech and the right to reply in this place, that same right should be allowed to hon. Members in universities and places of further education?

The whole House will sympathise with my hon. Friend on the nasty incidents that he has experienced. I believe and hope that the whole House agrees that upholding freedom of speech in our institutions of higher education is vital and that we would like to express our view to that effect. I hope that the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals will make strenuous efforts to ensure that that right is upheld, so that hon. Members can speak freely at universities. Freedom of speech consists of being able to say things that are not acceptable to everyone.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 18 February.

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

Does the Prime Minister recognise that what is happening in the British computer industry, in Westland, and perhaps even in British Leyland are not isolated events, but are part of a determined effort by American industrial power to influence what happens in British industry? Have the Government any policy to counter that?

As the hon. Gentleman has referred to the British computer industry, I hope he realises that the Government have done a good deal to help ICL during its days of difficulty. I hope he will also recognise that many American companies have provided jobs, especially in development areas. I hope he will do nothing to stop that process.

Will my right hon. Friend take the opportunity to condemn the violence and intimidation that are occurring on the picket lines at Wapping, particularly against the police? Will she try to persuade the leaders of SOGAT '82 and the National Graphical Association to take a leaf out of the book of the Leader of the Opposition and root out some of the extremists in their organisations?

Yes. We totally condemn the violence that has been occurring, and which we saw on the television screens on Saturday night, arising from the demonstrations outside Wapping. We understand that the majority were not thought to be printers. Nevertheless, it is disgraceful that they should attack the police. We totally support the police.

In condemning violence wherever it occurs, will the Prime Minister also acknowledge the contribution made by the leaders of SOGAT and the NGA to try to stop violence, and the way in which they have roundly condemned those who bring their unions and their activities into disrepute? When seven years of the Prime Minister's continuing policies have brought record and rising unemployment, record real interest rates, a record manufacturing trade deficit and a record tax burden, and when she tells the country that she will not change, is she not showing complete contempt for the people?

I recognise what the right hon. Gentleman said, and I am glad that he totally condemns violence — I hope on each and every picket line or demonstration where it occurs. I should be grateful if he would confirm that. I also point out that this Administration have carried out policies that have led to a record standard of living, record production and output, record expenditure on and a record number of patients treated under, the Health Service and a record standard of living for pensioners.

Looking at all of industry and at unemployment, is not the biggest record that of the wreckage that the right hon. Lady has brought?

In the last two years, as the right hon. Gentleman will have heard from questions shortly before Prime Minister's Question Time, a record number of jobs have been created. We have a better record than any other country in Europe, with 700,000 jobs in the last two years. That, together with efficient industry, is the way to get more jobs.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Argentine Members of Parliament who are visiting Britain should be made to feel extremely welcome, but told that sovereignty is not available for discussion, and that the way forward between our two countries is to negotiate the commercial exploitation of the area around the Falkland Islands?

I understand that Argentine Members of Parliament are in this country. We have done our best as a Government to restore commercial relations with Argentine to a normal basis, but our efforts have not met with reciprocation from the Argentine. I wish to make it absolutely clear that the sovereignty of the Falklands is not negotiable and that the wishes of the Falkland Islanders are and will remain paramount.

asked the Prime Minister if she will seek to meet President Babrak Karmal to discuss his proposals for the withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan.

No, Sir. I have no wish to meet the leader of a regime which depends on an occupying force of 115,000 Soviet troops for its survival.

While the Prime Minister's knee jerk response was to be expected, does she not realise that a negotiated settlement is possible provided her Government stop aiding the counter-revolutionaries, which is now costing this country over £3 million per year—and it has not been rate-capped? More important, does she not appreciate that Karmal can use tribal power against Zia?

People who are citizens of an occupied country have a right to fight for their country. If the hon. Gentleman really wants peace, he should assist the Secretary-General's efforts to find a settlement by negotiating the withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan without more ado.

Will my right hon. Friend offer her congratulations to the valiant people of Afghanistan on their six-year fight for national liberation against the most powerful war machine in the world? Will she confirm that there is nothing standing in the way of the Soviet Union withdrawing its forces, and that there is nothing to discuss with Mr. Babrak Karmal except possibly which country might offer him asylum once the Soviet forces have gone?

Nothing must deflect us from the important task of securing the withdrawal of Soviet occupying troops from Afghanistan. I appreciate what my hon. Friend says.

rose—[Interruption.]

Order. This is a rare, definitive question.

In the nauseating performance that we had to put up with on "Panorama" last night, was it necessary for the Prime Minister to make statements such as those that she has made today? [Interruption.]

Order. The question is about Afghanistan.

My question is about Afghanistan. The right hon. Lady says that she believes that people in an occupied country are entitled to fight for their freedom. Does the Prime Minister extend that same freedom to the people of South Africa, who are living in an occupied country, and whose leader, Nelson Mandela, has been in prison for more than 20 years?

The hon. Gentleman knows that the two countries are totally dissimilar. People of all colours in South Africa, whether white, coloured, Indian or black have a right to be there, and we believe that they should all have a right to take part in the government of their country. We deplore violence in that country as a means to that end.

In an excellent television programme we saw Mr. Shcharansky reunited with his dear wife after 12 years of separation. On Afghanistan, does my right hon. Friend not believe that it is high time this House told Mr. Gorbachev to withdraw his 115,000 troops from Afghanistan and take them back to where they belong, in the Soviet Union, and to free Afghan people so that they can fulfil their own destiny in their own country?

I agree wholeheartedly with what my hon. Friend has so aptly said.

Given the Prime Minister's sudden attack of double standards over Afghanistan and South Africa, how does she feel about American intervention in Central America?

I had hoped that even the hon. Gentleman would agree that 115,000 Soviet occupying forces should be withdrawn from Afghanistan. Apparently he does not.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 18 February.

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

Which major industrial power would consider selling off its last significant domestic car producer to a foreign power? Does the right hon. Lady think that it is part of popular capitalism that she should act as a broker for the United States?

Austin Rover is a mass car producer. It has only 4 per cent. of the European market compared with other mass car producers, such as Renault, Volkswagen, Fiat, Ford and General Motors, which have between 10 and 12 per cent. of the market. Austin Rover therefore has difficulty in competing. That is the measure of the task. I hope that the company will succeed in obtaining more of the market. If there is a British bid for Austin Rover, we shall look at it carefully.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 18 February.

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

Can my right hon. Friend hazard a guess as to why Labour Members, and perhaps the odd Conservative Member, seem to think that there is something wrong with outward investment from Britain because, they say, it destroys jobs in this country, and yet at the same time they complain about inward investment, whether by General Motors, Sikorsky or any other such company?

I note my hon. Friend's cogent point. When we had inward investment, for example, with Nissan, half the Labour Members wanted the investment to go to their constituencies. They forget all that now.