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

At 6 March 1986, the latest date for which figures are available, there were 124,403 unemployed claimants in Northern Ireland. The unemployment rate was 21·4 per cent. I announced, in March, a £20 million package of enterprise and unemployment measures, which is expected to create up to 3,500 extra jobs in its first year of operation.

Was not John De Lorean responsible for making many people unemployed in Northern Ireland? Will the Minister take steps to ensure that that individual is extradited to this country and placed on trial? Will he contact the American President and put that view to him, remembering, after the sordid Libyan affair, that one good turn deserves another?

That was an interesting question, and one that I had not expected. Last July, when there was a debate on the De Lorean affair, we said that the Government would do all that they could to bring De Lorean to trial if he ever touched down in the country. I take note of what the hon. Gentlman says, and undoubtedly other Ministers and Members will have heard it as well.

Would not unemployment be assisted far more greatly in Northern Ireland if the example set by companies such as Shorts, and Harland and Wolff, which do so much to provide jobs for people in the Province and exports to the world, were emulated by others in the Province?

I entirely recently agree with my hon. Friend. Last year Shorts brought out the Tucano plane, recently there were sales of aircraft to British Midland Airways Ltd., and the contract for the auxiliary oiler replenishment vessel went to Harland and Wolff last week. We trust that other firms in Northern Ireland, with the same enterprise and backing of the work force, will gain such contracts here, in Northern Ireland, and throughout the world.

Let us see whether the Minister expects this question. In considering the factors that are likely to have a favourable effect on employment in the Province, will the Government not overlook the importance of transport action between the Province and the mainland, particularly the urgency of ensuring that use is made of the roll-on/roll-off facilities for transport in the port of Warrenpoint?

I know that the right hon. Gentleman is rightly concerned about Warrenpoint and its facilities. I also know that, in so far as we are on the periphery of the European market, we require all the transportation if we are to sell goods, particularly heavy goods, in the question of that market. I take totally what the right hon. Gentleman has said.

The hon. Gentleman will never make Secretary of State for Education and Science with grammar like that.

I am glad that I have at least one supporter.

On that point, does my hon. Friend agree that that makes so important the representations that we made to the Treasury about the level of tobacco taxation, because we foresaw what eventually could occur as a result of the increase in tobacco duty?

My hon. Friend's point was mentioned in the press releases issued by Rothmans and by the Department. There has been a fall in the demand for tobacco because of the social and health consequences of smoking. There has also been an increase of imports into the United Kingdom market.

Can the Minister give any assessment of the damage that has been done to employment prospects for the people of the north of Ireland by the recent form of Fascism centering on a new approach—a Bible in one hand and a petrol bomb in the other?

There is no doubt that the hon. Gentleman's point is highly relevant to employment, and even more so to unemployment in Northern Ireland. Anyone considering investing there or expanding his factories would be worried about the political climate. The best thing that could be done for industrial advancement in Northern Ireland would be to achieve a political settlement, especially in relation to the hon. Gentleman's point, so that people can come to the Province knowing that there will be continuity of production.

Given the further likely effects on unemployment of the Rothmans' decision, remembering that the Anglo-Irish accord has been operating for nearly six months, and that one of the topics promised for consideration by the conference was the economic and social development of areas that have suffered most severely, what measures have resulted from the accord? If the answer is none, when may the unemployed expect to see such measures?

After the accord, America promised extra help and investment to provide jobs on both sides of the border, especially in difficult areas. Conversations have continued since the accord, but the Americans have not yet reached a final decision. If America agreed to help industrial advance on both sides of the border, it would be of great help.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if, following the recent review, he will make a statement on the longer-term future of Enterprise Ulster.

The life of Enterprise Ulster is being extended for a period of five years, subject to its achievement of agreed reductions in average job costs. Its performance will be considered in periodic reviews which are undertaken of the programme of labour market intervention measures for Northern Ireland.

Will the improvements in cost-effectiveness expected of Enterprise Ulster have any effect on its ability to undertake major projects in the future?

I am glad to reassure my hon. Friend on that matter. Enterprise Ulster is highly regarded by all communities in Northern Ireland. It is one of the best links that we have to bring people together in Northern Ireland. There is no doubt that a major building programme such as that in the Belfast view—[Interruption.] The view is very nice in Belfast, but I meant to say "zoo". Enclosures and other buildings have been constructed at the zoo. Similarly, the Ulster American folk park has been built. Other building work will be carried out in the future by Enterprise Ulster.

In the light of the Minister's remarks about the outstanding record of Enterprise Ulster—a record commented upon favourably by many independent organisations, including the European Commission—does he not believe that, with so much unemployment in Northern Ireland, there is a strong case for expanding the role of Enterprise Ulster?

I entirely agree with the hon. Gentleman. I shall contact Enterprise Ulster to see whether the scheme can be expanded. The previous agreement was for a three-year period. In this case the period will be extended to five years, which shows the Government's confidence in the organisation.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is his assessment of the scale of Loyalist paramilitary organisations and the danger they represent.

The Government and the security forces keep under careful review all organisations which are paramilitary in character or associated with the use of violence. The security forces will continue to deal even-handedly under the law with threats to security or public order from all such organisations.

I am sorry that the Minister has not answered my question, but has merely said that the Government will keep everything under review. Is he aware that Northern Ireland is massively armed—overwhelmingly so in the Loyalist community—with gun licences approved by the British Government? Will the Government undertake to review the many gun licences that are issued and call in some of them?

Firearms, shotguns, and, indeed, air rifles are under much stricter control in Northern Ireland than in Great Britain. If the hon. Lady has any particular suggestions for further restrictions in the law I shall obviously look at them, but at the moment we seek to exercise tight control in Northern Ireland.

Will my hon. Friend pay a particular tribute to Sir John Hermon for a courageous and sensible speech last week, when he made it clear that he and his officers will deal ruthlessly with that tiny minority of officers in the Province who behave in a party political manner?

I echo my hon. Friend's remarks, but the grounds for praising Sir John Hermon go much wider than that. He is a splendid leader of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and has been largely responsible for the progress that it has made in recent years.

Does the Minister agree that if Unionist parliamentary representatives do not stand up to their back-room gunmen, the shameful statement of the hon. Member for Belfast, East (Mr. Robinson) outside Belfast city hall on Easter Monday, that democracy has been done to death, will indeed be fulfilled, not, as he went on to say, by Margaret Thatcher in Downing street, but in Northern Ireland by Unionist parliamentary representatives?

I regret all such actions and statements that seem to encourage unconstitutional or unlawful action. However, with the prospect of talks between my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State with Unionist leaders, I hope that constitutional action will now be pursued.

Does my hon. Friend agree that to deal effectively with the paramilitary organisations it is essential to have an effective extradition treaty with America? Does he also agree that for America to reject the new extradition treaty would be to deal a body blow to Anglo-American relations and call into question whether that country is seriously interested in suppressing terrorism?

The Government are bending every effort to secure the passage of the supplementary treaty on extradition with the United States. I do not believe that either the House or British public opinion would understand a failure to deliver that treaty through the Senate.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he proposes to announce the date of the Northern Ireland Assembly elections.

We want to discuss the future of the Assembly with the Northern Ireland political parties. In reaching a decision on new elections we shall clearly have to consider whether the Assembly will serve a useful purpose.

I note the Secretary of State's remarks, but why are salaries continually being drawn by those elected to the Northern Ireland Assembly and those elected to take their seats in that Assembly when no work is being done, not even the scrutinising of legislation by way of Orders in Council for this House? Is that in the interests of the people of Northern Ireland and in the interests of democracy in Northern Ireland?

The frequent complaint that is delivered by some of the absentee Members of this House is that the voice of Northern Ireland—or the Unionist voice—has not been listened to, and that is at the very time that they are failing to discharge their proper functions and to use one of the vehicles that could be most effective in enabling them to put forward their views. I note what the hon. Gentleman said. There is obviously great force in what he has said, and we are looking at the matter carefully.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is little purpose in holding further elections if the SDLP fight those elections but refuse to attend the Assembly? As they have already achieved the Anglo-Irish treaty, does it not behove them now to assist in the internal government of Northern Ireland? If they refuse to come to the Assembly and to give a promise that they will come to the Assembly, will my right hon. Friend dismiss from his mind any thoughts of calling any further elections?

My hon. Friend will have listened carefully to my original answer. As the Assembly will reach the end of its natural life in mid-October, there is no point in perpetuating that, or even continuing as long as that, if it is failing to fulfil any useful function. Therefore, I agree with my hon. Friend's other comment about the position of the SDLP. I wish that the Unionists would put the SDLP to the test, pick up the remarks of the hon. Member for Foyle (Mr. Hume), challenge him with that, and then see whether it is possible to obtain a new Assembly on a proper basis.

It is not a political reality that the monority community has no faith in the Assembly? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the disucssions that will take place there will be with people who, for endless years, and in the future if they can, will carry on discussions which will keep them permanently in command and leave nothing for the minority community?

That is the gospel of despair that will lead the Province nowhere. The Government are determined to build on common ground between men of good will. If the hon. Gentleman believes that that is impossible, the future is bleak for the Province. I believe that effort must be made. The Government are determined to see whether it can be achieved, but obviously it needs considerable co-operation for it to be possible.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that some of us were disappointed and disturbed by his first answer? If we are at all serious about devolving powers to Northern Ireland, as the Assembly represents a good spectrum of elected opinion in Northern Ireland, should he not continue his efforts to make it work and make the parties participate in it?

I know that my hon. Friend will be aware of some of the behaviour that is currently taking place within the Assembly and the fact that it is failing to discharge its proper functions. I would certainly agree wholeheartedly if we could achieve a basis on which the proper objectives of the Assembly could be achieved.

Will the Secretary of State confirm that among those who have found it impossible to continue to attend the Assembly are his predecessor, now the Secretary of State for the Home Department, and the alliance party, and that non-attendance is not confined simply to the SDLP?

I am not clear about the hon. Gentleman's first point. My right hon. Friend did attend the Assembly, and Ministers were always ready to attend. The hon. Gentleman will appreciate—his hon. Friend the Member for Foyle (Mr. Hume) made this point clear as well—that my understanding is that his party is prepared to become involved and would wish to take part in the new Assembly.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what has been the response from the tourist industry to the announcement of the revised accommodation grant scheme in February.

There has been an excellent response from the industry. As at 25 April 1986 there were 176 applications for grant-aid, which include proposals for the upgrading and improvement of 435 hotel bedrooms, and the construction of six new hotels, 21 new guest houses and 21 self-catering developments.

How many jobs will be created by the scheme?

While that building is taking place, I would estimate that about 200 people will find extra employment in the construction industry. When the hotels are completed there will be about 100 more people employed and there will be a spin-off for all the shops in the areas around.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what action Her Majesty's Government propose to take in the light of correspondence between the Prime Minister and Northern Ireland political parties to hold round table talks with them.

We hope that it will be possible shortly to start exploratory discussions with the two Unionists leaders to see whether a framework for dialogue can be established as suggested by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister in her letter of 16 April.

I welcome the Secretary of State's answer. Does he not think that, given the willingness of the SDLP and the alliance party of Northern Ireland to enter into discussions without pre-conditions, the time has come to fix a date for those talks to begin?

In view of the position in which the two major Unionist parties find themselves, the first objective is to see whether it is possible for such a framework to be established. Obviously, thereafter, it becomes a question of the involvement of other parties in possible further discussions.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when work under the lignite prospecting licences announced in 1985 is likely to begin.

Legal formalities for the issue of the three licences should be completed shortly, and I understand that the companies hope to start work this month.

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. Will he expand on the benefits of lignite development for Northern Ireland?

I hope that there will be benefits from what we are doing. The immediate advantage is that it will cheapen electricity production. That is why we are considering building a lignite-fired generating station at Crumlin. It should make electricity costs for industry and for homes in Northern Ireland equal to the lowest in this country and in Europe.

Will the Minister tell the House what effect the development of lignite will have on the supply of Ayrshire coal to power stations in Northern Ireland? In particular, will he confirm that it is planned that the Kilroot power station will continue to burn Ayrshire coal? Will he also tell us why the decision has been made in the short term to burn oil at the Belfast West power station—a very unwise decision—when the supply of Ayrshire coal can be maintained and guaranteed in the long term? Will the Northern Ireland Office hold discussions with the Coal Board about the use of Ayrshire coal in Northern Ireland and the devastating effect it would have on Ayrshire if the supply of coal to Northern Ireland were not continued?

I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's concern about coal sales from Ayrshire to Northern Ireland. The conversion of Kilroot from oil to coal burning is going ahead. The contract has been given to the NEI. We shall have to weigh the question of conversion at other power stations. Much depends upon the price at which coal can be bought. Electricity prices in Northern Ireland have continually been among the highest in the United Kingdom. As the price of oil is falling, and if coal is to be bought for Northern Ireland, we shall have to consider the price at which it can be bought from the Coal Board.

Is the Minister aware of the public concern that has been expressed by many residents in the Lough Neagh area about the possibility of damage being done to the environment by lignite mining? As the environmental quality of that area is the highest in Europe, does he not think that a public inquiry is necessary before a licence to mine lignite in the Lough Neagh area is granted?

This is one of those times when I can answer yes. I agree entirely with the hon. Member for Foyle (Mr. Hume). We have granted a prospecting only licence for two years. There is no guarantee that a mining licence will follow. I have met objectors from East Tyrone in my office in Northern Ireland and I have read all the material that they have published. We have given a straightforward commitment—which has the agreement of my hon. Friend the Minister with responsibility for the environment in Northern Ireland—that if a mining application is made by any company, a public inquiry will be held.

Does the hon. Gentleman appreciate that the danger envisaged by the hon. Member for Foyle (Mr. Hume) applies to the prospecting itself? As Lough Neagh is listed in the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands as a site of international importance, have the Government given notice of their proposal to grant licences for prospecting, and have they made any assessment of its effect upon wildlife?

Before we were prepared to give the three licences for prospecting, we took advice from wherever it was available and we listened to all the objections. I have been assured that prospecting can go ahead without any damage to the East Tyrone area or to the level of Lock Neagh. If prospecting had been a threat to the level of Lock Neagh, or to its boundaries, we should have had to think very deeply before granting the licences.

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

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

Since I last answered questions in the House on 27 March, two civilians and two members of the security forces have died in incidents arising from the security situation in the Province. The efforts of the security forces are continuing to yield results. Since the beginning of the year, a total of 264 people have been charged with serious offences and 95 weapons, 10,500 rounds of ammunition and 2,460 lb of explosives have been recovered. The House will wish to note that seven of these weapons and 1,240 lb of explosives have been recovered in the last six days.

I am glad that my right hon. Friend is able to report such progress. Will he take this opportunity to make clear to the House, and above all to those extremists in Northern Ireland who are resorting to violence in their efforts to undermine the Anglo-Irish agreement, that the Government have no intention of being deflected from their purposes in signing that agreement, even if there were to be a regrettable, temporary deterioration in security?

One of the criticisms by some Unionists about the Anglo-Irish agreement that I find least acceptable is the implication that in some way the security forces will lessen their determination to fight terrorism. The figures that I have given to the House and the evidence of the last few days should make clear to everybody our determination to root out terrorism from wherever it comes. Yes, we have had successes in the last few days, but those very successes and the amount of bombs involved show clearly the scale of the threat that we still face.

In order to reduce tension and improve security in Northern Ireland, will my right hon. Friend put intense pressure on the Government of the Republic of Eire to include in their forthcoming referendum on divorce a question about the repeal of articles 1 and 2 of the Republic's constitution? Will my right hon. Friend accept that it is no answer to say that we should not interfere in the internal affairs of the Republic?

I must admit that there is so much talk about articles 2 and 3 that I cannot remember what article 1 is about. I think my hon. Friend means articles 2 and 3. [Interruption.] I shall certainly study his request about article 1. I shall need to refresh my memory on it. I am on record publicly as saying that articles 2 and 3 do not contribute to better relations between the Republic and Northern Ireland. I hope that it will be possible at some future date for changes to be made. I certainly understand why my hon. Friend raises the matter.

How is the security situation in Northern Ireland helped by the availability of kidnap insurance? I have here a letter written by Sedgewick UK Ltd., a City of London insurance company, offering kidnap and extortion insurance to a prominent citizen in Northern Ireland. What does the Secretary of State intend to do about that sort of thing? Does he intend to turn a blind eye, or, if he is committed to the restoration of peace in Northern Ireland, does he accept that he has a duty to intervene and prevent the sale of these policies on the open market?

I would be grateful if the hon. Gentleman would send me a copy of that letter so that I may study it. He knows that it is not an offence in the form of insurance, but it is an offence in Northern Ireland to pay ransom money to any proscribed organisation. This matter goes much wider than the question the hon. Gentleman asks. The whole question of rackets, of extortion, of protection is something on which we should take the strongest possible action.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that Protestant—originated violence in Ulster is relevant to Scotland, where there is a lot of sympathetic support, where caches of weapons have been discovered on numerous occasions and where many prosecutions have taken place? If he does accept that, what consultations is he having with the Secretary of State for Scotland to ensure that the violence does not come across to Scotland?

On these issues I keep in close touch with my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary. The points made by my hon. Friend are correct, but perhaps he will forgive me if I do not go further into the matter at this stage. I assure him that his point is well taken.

In the light of the Anglo-Irish agreement, has my right hon. Friend noticed any improvement in cross-border security?

My hon. Friend will have noted recent events. I do not wish to go into detail about them, but I am satisfied that we are progressively developing closer co-operation on security and that this will undoubtedly be to the benefit of all those who wish to see a reduction in terrorism and its eventual elimination.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he will make a statement on the operation to date of the Anglo-Irish agreement.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on meetings with the Government of the Irish Republic which have occurred arising from the Anglo-Irish agreement.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement about progress in implementing the provisions of the Anglo-Irish agreement.

Since the Anglo-Irish agreement came into force on 29 November, the Intergovernmental Conference has met four times and there has been one meeting of the legal sub-group. A joint statement was issued after each meeting, which gives an account of the issues discussed. I have placed these in the Library.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. I wish that there was more than one Ulster Unionist here to listen to it. Is my right hon. Friend aware that since we live in 1986, not 1689, many of us hope that more could be done by the Churches to promote intercommunal reconciliation, which is implicit in the Anglo-Irish agreement?

I endorse to the full my hon. Friend's opening comments. It is a tragedy that Unionist Members of the House of Commons are not present to play their part, with the exception, to which I pay tribute, of the right hon. Member for South Down (Mr. Powell). I certainly do look to closer co-operation between the Churches. Undoubtedly many Church leaders play an outstanding role in that respect. I should like to encourage that process even further.

Is it not important for the Secretary of State and the Prime Minister to make it absolutely clear that, no matter what sort of intimidation there is in the Province, and what action is taken by the bully boys and the rest, the Anglo-Irish agreement will stand? If that is made clear, perhaps the time will come when the Unionist Members of Parliament will return to their seats here.

The position has been made absolutely clear, by both my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and myself on several occasions. We remain absolutely clear about that.

Is my right hon Friend aware that many of us who are strong supporters of the Union are also believers in the Anglo-Irish agreement? Does he agree that one of the prospects, if the agreement were to fail, would be an internationalisation of the Northern Ireland problem, which, with the greater interest of perhaps the United States in an adverse way, and the United Nations, would spell disaster for Northern Ireland?

If the agreement were to fail because of intimidation and the sort of violence and obstruction that we have seen in certain quarters, that would be extremely damaging to the Union and would be catastrophic for the image and prospects of Northern Ireland overseas. We face many difficult problems. My hon. Friend the Minister of State referred to the difficult economic news coming out of Northern Ireland today. In that situation, we need maximum co-operation among all the people there. I believe that the Anglo-Irish agreement can contribute to that, if only Unionists are prepared to give it a chance.

Now that there is consensus across the board in Northern Ireland that the use of plastic bullets and of the uncorroborated evidence of supergrasses should be discontinued, would it not, in the Secretary of State's opinion, be advisable for the Anglo-Irish conference to deal with those matters?

The hon. Gentleman's first point will arise shortly through another question on the Order paper, and my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State will reply. With regard to the second point, the use of accomplice evidence is under discussion at the moment. My right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General has commented on that practice. I understand the concern about it, but when we face terrorism there are real difficulties in making sure that we deal as effectively and fairly as we can with terrorist crimes.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that no date has been fixed for the next meeting of the Intergovernmental Conference at ministerial level? Will he explain to the House why he cannot say that future meetings of that conference will be held in London rather than Belfast, and why he considers it desirable that the secretariat should be sited in Northern Ireland and not in London?

The answer to the first question is yes, Sir. In respect of the second question, it is not the practice to disclose the location of the conference, for reasons which my hon. Friend may understand. As to the third question, it is my belief that the secretariat is most usefully located in Belfast in order to discharge the work that it does.

Will the Secretary of State make it clear to those in Northern Ireland who want to try to break the Anglo-Irish agreement that it is the democratic wish of all the major parties in the House that, however many marches, and however much intimidation or violence there may be over the next few months, we will not tolerate any watering down of the Anglo-Irish agreement?

I have made absolutely clear my support for the Anglo-Irish agreement, but at the same time I have made it absolutely clear that this agreement is not designed to exclude the voice of Unionists from involvement in and contribution to the affairs of Northern Ireland, and that is what I wish to see.

Now that we have the Anglo-Irish agreement, what additional measure does my right hon. Friend propose to protect the members of the RUC, their families and their homes from the attacks that they have suffered? What can he do to stop a number of members of the RUC requesting transfers to return from Northern Ireland to the rest of the United Kingdom?

In respect of the latter point, I have to say that there is no evidence of this happening. I know that the RUC collectively is determined to combat and defeat attempts at intimidation. I know that the whole House will pay tribute to the courage of the RUC in the present difficult situation. I know also that the Chief Constable and the associations involved in representing members of the RUC are determined to stand together and take all necessary measures to defeat intimidation against them.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many people have been killed or injured by the use of plastic or rubber bullets in Northern Ireland.

Since the introduction of rubber baton rounds in 1970, and plastic baton rounds in 1973, 15 people are believed to have died as a result of their use by the security forces in Northern Ireland. Since 17 March 1981, when records were first collated, 326 have allegedly been injured, all by plastic baton rounds.

Bearing in mind that most of the victims were children or young people, many of them innocent bystanders, who were killed, blinded, paralysed or suffered brain damage, and now especially since the tragic death of Keith White, the use of such lethal weapons has been rightly condemned by many people of the Unionist tradition as well as people of the Republican tradition, will the Government support my Bill next Wednesday to abolish this barbaric practice for ever from the whole of the United Kingdom?

I shall certainly not support any legislation which takes away from the security forces in Northern Ireland a means of protection against the sustained and vicious rioting which they have had to endure over the period of these troubles. It may also be worth mentioning that the European Court of Human Rights has found that the use of baton rounds in Northern Ireland constitutes reasonable force.

Can my hon. Friend say what other form of defence would be available to the security forces if baton rounds were eliminated?

The short answer to my hon. Friend's question is that I know of no other means of protecting the security forces against rioting that would be as effective. Water cannon and CS gas have both proved to be ineffective. I know of no alternative to baton rounds at present.

My question No. 27 on the Order Paper is similar to that of my hon. Friend the Member for Falkirk, West (Mr. Canavan). I agree with the points that he made about the killing of innocent children and women, particularly the tragic death of Mrs Nora McCabe, and I fully support any demand in the House for the banning of these bullets.

I regret every death that takes place in Northern Ireland. It is worth reminding the House that well over 2,000 people have lost their lives in the course of the troubles over the last 16 to 17 years. I think that it is up to those who complain about the use of baton rounds and who wish to have them removed to come forward with an alternative that would be as good and as effective in protecting the security forces against rioting.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what new measures are being introduced in Northern Ireland for the long-term unemployed.

On 26 March I announced a package of enterprise and employment measures for Northern Ireland, all of which, I hope, will be helpful to the long-term unemployed. These will include individual in-depth counselling interviews, short restart courses, a £20 weekly jobstart allowance and extra job places available in Enterprise Ulster and action for community employment schemes.

My hon. Friend will agree, I am sure, that everybody who has the economic wellbeing of the Province at heart will welcome this imaginative package of measures. Can my hon. Friend give us any indication of how many job vacancies are filled every month in Northern Ireland?

I believe that about 9,000 people every month get jobs in Northern Ireland—coming from unemployment or from full-time education—and that something equivalent to the total number of long-term unemployed are placed in jobs every four months.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what discussions he has had with political leaders in the Province since the signature of the Anglo-Irish agreement.

I have met all the leaders of the major constitutional political parties in Northern Ireland at least once since 15 November—on a number of occasions in company with the Prime Minister. At all those meetings I have made it clear that the Government would welcome discussion about political development in Northern Ireland.

What are the Government doing to regain the consent of the governed? Since adequate pre-existing machinery for Anglo-Irish cooperation and consultation is present, would not a protracted period of silence from the Intergovernmental Conference be most welcome and helpful?

My hon. Friend will be aware that in answer to an earlier question I said that I hoped there would shortly be discussions to see whether a framework for talks was possible. That is the most positive way forward, to see whether we can at last start talks to help regain the confidence to which my hon. Friend referred.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 1 May.

:This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall be having further meetings later today. This evening I shall be leaving for Korea and for the economic summit in Tokyo.

On this glorious international day of Labour, will the Prime Minister find time to study the terms of the petition presented at No. 10 Downing street last Saturday by Labour council candidates from the London borough of Newham? The petition showed that this year £5·5 million of rate support grant has been taken from Newham, making a total loss of £74 million since 1980, plus £11 million for the cost of the abolition of the Greater London council. Newham is the second most deprived local authority area in England, so why do the Government refuse to give us partnership status? When the Prime Minister returns from. Tokyo, will she accept an invitation from me to come to Newham and see the effect of Government policies on the real East Enders of London?

London as a whole will benefit enormously from the abolition of the GLC.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 1 May.

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

At the Tokyo summit, will my right hon. Friend press for the fullest possible co-operation and for the pooling of all scientific knowledge between East and West which will help to prevent any further disaster, such as that at the Russian nuclear reactor? Will she say that the only way to build confidence in the verification of nuclear weapons disarmament is if we deal effectively with civil catastrophes?

I agree wholeheartedly with my hon. Friend. These matters go way beyond the borders of any country, and must be dealt with on a global scale. I hope that all the details of that terrible accident at Chernobyl will be reported to the International Atomic Energy Agency so that we may all profit from it, and that inspectors will be able to go in to deduce precisely what happened. I also agree with my hon. Friend's deduction on the other point. Knowing something of what has happened in the Soviet Union and how difficult it is to get facts and assessments, it should make us wary in any arms control negotiations that we must be absolutely meticulous to get specific, practical and strict verification of any agreement.

Now that the prison officers have suspended their industrial action, thereby giving further evidence of their good will and sense of responsibility, why are the Government adding stubbornness to their original folly by refusing to engage in talks with them?

The right hon. Gentleman knows that after questions there will be a statement on this matter. I am pleased that the prison officers have called off their action. Many of us were appalled that they ever took it, and I think that it has been salutary for them. I should like to thank the governors who stood at their posts, the police officers who also stood at their posts, and the police, who backed up the whole service.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the governors have strong sympathy with the conditions and difficulties which the prison officers face daily, and that the rise in the number of prisoners vastly exceeds the rise in the number of officers—[Interruption.] Yes. The ratio is 5,000:2,500. I know the figures. Is the Prime Minister aware that, unless the Government show a more rational attitude, what we have seen thus far, as a consequence of industrial action, will in any event come about simply because of the pressures in the prisons?

May I point out to the right hon. Gentleman what the Government have done to increase the facilities of the prison service. We implemented the report of the May committee on the prison service, which was established by a Labour Home Secretary. We ended the Labour Government's neglect of prison buildings by instituting the largest prison building programme in history. Spending on prison buildings is up by 400 per cent. We have increased spending on the prison service by 85 per cent. in real terms. On the specific point that the right hon. Gentleman made, and made wrongly, we have increased the number of prison officers by 3,000—that is 18 per cent.—at a time when the number of prisoners has gone up by 12 per cent.

Following that litany, can the Prime Minister tell me why Mr. Sidney Powell, the secretary of the governors' organisation, should say that the 12 per cent. population increase mentioned by the Prime Minister meant an additional 5,000 prisoners, and that the 18 per cent. increase in staff was about 2,500 officers? Will the Prime Minister come clean at least on this?

The right hon. Gentleman confirms my assertion that the ratio of prison officers to prisoners has greatly improved.

At the Tokyo summit, will my right hon. Friend impress upon Japan the importance of her undertaking and maintaining a greater share of responsibility towards the Third world than she does at present?

Yes, but we shall also be pressing upon Japan the fact that when she competes for contracts in the Third world she must also compete on a fair basis, and on a fair basis for credit as well.

Will the Prime Minister ask Sir Frank Layfield, who is currently writing his report on the Sizewell inquiry, to take full account of the disaster that has occurred in the Soviet Union? We have waited ma by years for this inquiry, and it would be very helpful for making final decisions if Sir Frank Layfield was able to take as much evidence as possible from the Soviet Union.

The right hon. Gentleman will be aware that the report of an inquiry is the report of the conclusions from the evidence given at the inquiry, and it cannot go further and include matters which have arisen since the inquiry. He will be the first to be aware that the reactor in the Soviet Union is totally different from any kind of reactor here. He will also be aware that the record of safety in design, operation, maintenance and inspection in this country is second to none. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will think it right to support the furtherance of such an excellent nuclear industry.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that we are proud of the fact that she will be this country's representative at the Tokyo summit? Does she agree that the greatest single boost to world trade would be a reduction of trade barriers and a promotion of genuine free trade throughout the world? Does my right hon. Friend further agree that the reduction in oil prices provides a good background for such a new initiative, and will she propose such an initiative in Tokyo?

I agree with my hon. Friend that we need to reduce trade barriers. Between a third and a half of world trade is subject to some form of protection. For some time many of us have felt that it is time we had a new GATT round so that we can jointly get rid of or reduce some of the barriers. This is meeting with a good deal of hostility in some quarters, but we shall nevertheless continue to persevere with that line, both at the Tokyo summit and beyond.

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

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

Is the Prime Minister not concerned and distressed by the fact that, as a result of her policies, we now have a record number of over 100,000 homeless people? Last year, an extra twist in the spiral meant a further 13 per cent. In the Conservative-controlled London borough of Brent my ratepayers are now paying £5,400 a day, week in, week out, for bed and breakfast and temporary accommodation, and taxpayers are paying a further £5,400 through the DHSS. Will the Prime Minister follow the good example set by one of her previous Ministers, the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Gow), and spend three hours with me looking at the tragic families living in sleazy conditions so she can see for herself what is happening to family life in my area?

May I point out to the hon. Gentleman that there are 100,000 empty council houses in England and Wales, and that more than 30,000 of them are in London? A considerable number of these have been empty for over a year. It might be a good idea if some of them were brought back into use. Then there would then be less need for bed-and-breakfast accommodation.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 1 May.

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

Has my right hon. Friend seen yesterday's ruling by the European Court of Justice against the price fixing of European air fares? Does that not at last pave the way for competition to reduce the level of fares to the level long enjoyed in the United States of America? Will the Government hold discussions with Lord King about the lead that British Airways should set?

We were very pleased with the decision of the European Court of Justice yesterday. It confirmed the view that we have held for a long time, which is that competition also applies to air fares. The people of this country owe a debt of gratitude to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport for his strenuous efforts, which have already reduced air fares. It is further backing of our belief in competition instead of rigging the market.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 1 May.

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

As the amendment on the Order Paper concerning carers, which stands in the Prime Minister's name today, is almost identical to that tabled by the Opposition, would she be kind enough to tell us why it omits only two points? I refer to cash to support the carers and any mention of invalid care allowance.

I would be glad to place this Government's record on caring beside that of the Labour Government at any time, and I shall be especially glad to do so when the time comes.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, despite the lack of information from the Soviet Union about the disaster that has seriously affected its nearest neighbours, the Poles at least are taking all sorts of measures to protect their children'? Will my right hon. Friend ensure that if any request for help with medicaments and special foods comes from that country, we will not hesitate to give it urgently and without any conditions?

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for raising that point. If any requests come we shall, of course, look at them with the greatest sympathy and do our level best to get help there as soon as possible. We have offered the Soviet Union help on all technical aspects connected with the accident, but so far it has not seen fit to take it up.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 1 May.

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

On 14 April the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy said that nuclear energy was the safest, cleanest and cheapest form of electricity generation. Which of those criteria does the Prime Minister believe to be the most important?

As the hon. Gentleman knows—he must be struggling very hard for a question—all those criteria are very important. I hope that he is proud of the record of our nuclear industry and of those who operate it.

When my right hon. Friend is invited to draw comparisons between Western and Soviet technology, will she bear in mind that the fact that the Russians failed to create their own Concordski does not mean that Concorde is unsafe?

My hon. Friend's question demonstrates most neatly the difference of approach between the two countries. We place great stress on the need for safety in the latest technology.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 1 May.

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

Can the Prime Minister give any explanation of why 1986 has been such a wretched year for her? I am afraid that there is far worse to come.

I am still smiling and looking forward to my seventh anniversary, which will be about a halfway house.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that what is lacking with civil nuclear power installations is an internationally accepted safety standard? Will she seek to encourage such a standard and its application in Russia, Great Britain and everywhere else in the world?

The accident in the Soviet Union has stressed that safety must be an international matter. We shall pursue this vigorously through the appropriate agency.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 1 May.

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

Is the Prime Minister satisfied that a nuclear accident similar to that which occurred in the Soviet Union could not occur in this country? If not, will she assure the House that the Government will discontinue their interest in pressurised water reactors?

No, I can give no such assurance. I know that the hon. Gentleman has a specific interest in coal, but there are other people who work in the electricity and the nuclear industry, and who work very effectively. The industry was started in this country. It was one of our own technologies, and I would have thought that the hon. Gentleman, too, could be proud of its safety record and the way we have handled our nuclear industry, in terms of safety and economy.