asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what representations he has received on the report of Her Majesty's Inspectorate with regard to the provision of books in schools.

My right hon. Friend has received no representations arising directly from HMI's report. However, since taking office he has discussed the supply of books for schools with the local authority associations.

The Minister will be aware that the recent HMI report indicated that half the primary school lessons have been affected by the shortage of books. Is that not extremely serious, and what action has she taken since the publication of the report to rectify the matter?

The Government need no convincing that spending on books is a priority, and we hope that our proposals for local authority spending in 1987–88 —which imply an increase of some 14 per cent. in planned expenditure on education—will resolve this matter.

Does my hon. Friend agree, however, that the provision of books is not necessarily the key necessity for effective education, otherwise one would have difficulty explaining the paltry results of the profligate ILEA? A perhaps more important part of the HMI report was the inadequacy with which children's educational needs were shown to be identified, together with the lack of management of resources.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. It is certainly true that inadequate capitation allowances were not considered to be the main factor contributing to poor provision. It was thought much more significant that poor management of resources and inadequate identification of pupils' needs by teachers were the main elements.

Does my hon. Friend accept that many parents are extremely concerned about the kind of books currently available in some schools? I refer in particular to sex education books such as "Jenny lives with Eric and Martin", "Taught not Caught" and "Make it Happy". Will my hon. Friend bring to the attention of the inspectorate the concern felt by parents throughout the country that some extremely unfortunate books that may corrupt our young children are now available in schools and libraries?

Of course we condemn the use of irresponsible books and unsuitable literature in our schools. My hon. Friend will be aware that my right hon. Friend is taking action in respect of one of the authorities by sending in the inspectorate to see exactly what is happening.

Is the Minister aware that the printing of short runs of books is wholly uneconomical as the bulk of capital expenditure takes place at the initial stage of the printing process? I suggest that she goes back to school and gets her sums right before depriving our children of essential facilities.

I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman is aware that the local authorities have capitation allowances and sort out different allocations for individual schools. They look at both books and equipment, and it is their responsibility to look into that at the beginning of each financial year.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what recent representations he has received about resources for higher education.

I receive a lot of representations. For local authority higher education I have already announced an increase in funding of £54 million next year. I hope to be able to make an announcement about university funding quite soon.

Is the Secretary of State aware that. despite his optimistic speech last month about the future of university places, many vice-chancellors see nothing facing them but ever-increasing deficits, cuts in services, cuts in staff and possible cuts in departments? Will he comment on the confidential report published in some of yesterday's newspapers— based on information from the Treasury and his own Department — which indicated that the crisis facing the universities was even worse than had been publicly acknowledged so far?

The hon. Gentleman knows that in the cycle of funding each year polytechnics and colleges of further education are dealt with first. I announced a substantial increase of 8 per cent. for those. I hope to be able to announce the position for universities quite soon. I trust that they will not be too disappointed.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the funding of higher education cannot be separated from the broad education budget? Within that context, will he do all he can to see that the teachers' pay queries are settled at an early date, with a fair result for them? Will he also ensure that the children are put first in those negotiations, that they get a fair deal, and that schools are not disrupted?

Order. That is a bit wide of the question.

In fighting for extra money for that important priority, will the Secretary of State ensure that access is widened so that those with genuine ability, even if they do not conform to the identikit picture of a student, have a chance of access to higher education?

I want to increase the participation rates of 16 to 18-year-olds. A total of 26 per cent. of those taking further education courses are 16 to 18-year olds. We expect the figure to go to 28 per cent. I want more young people to stay on at school until they are 18 and to go on to colleges, polytechnics and universities. Since 1979 there has been an increase of 140,000 in the number of full-time and part-time home students. That increase is one of which we can all be proud.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that his positive approach to the future of higher education is welcome and that Conservative Members give him their full support in his endeavour to associate increased funding for higher education with greater selectivity and a better managerial approach?

I welcome my hon. Friend's support. I appreciate the importance of the universities, but I am always anxious to point out the equal importance of polytechnics. We should take pride in the fact that in 1986 the number of first-class degrees awarded in polytechnics is up by 20 per cent.

Does the Secretary of State not accept that the message of the report of the Government's own accounting advisers is that continual cuts in funding since 1981 are bringing many universities to the verge of bankruptcy? Is it not time that the Secretary of State told the Prime Minister that there must be a U-turn in policy? To maintain standards, the Government must provide universities with more resources.

Over the past few years, changes had to be made in universities. I think that all hon. Members would agree with that. A significant change in attitudes and in giving priorities to some subjects over others is pure gain. I ask the hon. Gentleman to await the announcement that I hope to make quite soon. I think that he will not be too disappointed.

Will my right hon. Friend tell the House what efforts the universities are making to attract outside funding from industry? Is the sum considerable, is it rising, or is it level?

I have been charged today in the columns of The Times with the fact that I suggested that universities were ivory towers and did not seek support from the private sector. The fact that I said that obviously hit a raw nerve. There has been an increase in private funding for universities over the past few years, and we all welcome that. The amount of private money that goes into universities amounts to just £47 million a year, which is well under 1 per cent. of their costs, and compares unfavourably with practices in America, Germany and France.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what representations he has received on the report of Her Majesty's Inspectorate with regard to the standard of maintenance of school buildings.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what representations he has received on the report of Her Majesty's Inspectorate with regard to the standard of maintenance of school buildings.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has received no representations specifically on HMI's findings, but has discussed the repair and maintenance of schools in meetings with the local authority associations and in the National Economic Development Council.

But how many representations does the Secretary of State need? Is it not enough to receive a report from Her Majesty's inspectors, who say that one fifth of all lessons in primary and secondary school are being adversely affected by being held in unsuitable and unsatisfactory accommodation, that the situation is getting worse, and that that is putting an unfair burden on teachers such as the staff at Gossey Lane school in Birmingham, who told me that they take a calculated risk of a child being seriously injured whenever they take a PE class in inadequate accommodation? In the face of such facts, in not the Minister's complacency verging on criminal negligence?

I have to tell the hon. Gentleman, who has used unusually intemperate language in the House today, that I share the concern expressed by HMI, but I remind Opposition Members that the poor physical state of many school buildings has not suddenly occurred in the past 10 days. It is not a new event. It springs from the gradual effects of 20 years of neglect, and Opposition parties must take their fair share of responsibility for the present position.

Is the Minister aware that capital allocations to the county of Cumbria are so low that the education service in parts of the county is now at the point of collapse? Is he aware that buildings are leaking, teachers are complaining, and that parents resent the Government and object to the cuts? Does the hon. Gentleman realise that secondary organisation in my constituency is being threatened by the inadequacy of buildings? Why does he not do something? Why does the Secretary of State not win an argument in Cabinet and get some more money for education so that we can have a decent system throughout the country, particularly in my constituency?

We are concerned here with good housekeeping and planned maintenance programmes. Some local education authorities chose in the past not to follow such programmes, and I am sorry to say that the authorities which chose not do so are now reaping the consequences of their past inactivity.

Does my hon. Friend agree that some rather wasteful administrative procedures are in use for the maintenance of school buildings? Does he agree, for example, that when a boy or girl kicks a football through a window, if the head teacher were allowed to send a caretaker to the DIY shop and get him to mend the window on the spot, rather than have to wait for the arrival of the accredited team of window repairers from the local education authority offices, our schools would be better maintained, at appreciably lower costs?

My hon. Friend's question only reinforces my view that we were entirely right to include in the Education Bill that has jut left the House a degree of local financial management. Of course, local education authorities are free to build upon that and delegate much more than we require of them in law.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the fine example set by the parents and staff of St. George's school, Harpenden in that respect, as they are half way through a five-year voluntary programme of repainting their own school? Did my hon. Friend read the article in The Times Educational Supplement praising them for that and saying that as well as releasing resources for a lower pupil-teacher ratio and better equipment, it had a marvellous impact on morale and the involvement of parents in the school?

My hon. Friend should extend to the parents of children at the school that he mentioned our thanks for being so forward looking and enterprising in what they have done. If the school cares to invite me to visit it, I shall have great pleasure in accepting such an invitation.

Is the Minister implying that if we reorganised the schools and had the caretaker telling the man next door to do repairs, suddenly the crumbling buildings — the Minister's predecessor said that in Sheffield they were "crummy", for instance — would come to life and be done up properly? Is it not a fact that the Government do not provide enough money to make the schools habitable? If the money is not forthcoming, the half million unemployed building workers who are ready to do the work will not be able to do it? Are not the Government helping private education while the schools of 90 per cent. of our children are going to ruin?

The hon. Gentleman occupies his own special time warp and does not understand what is happening in the education service. All our policies are designed to make sure that we get value for money from our schools. I dare say that because of that he supports our policy on local financial management.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the difficulty about some of the priorities on repairs and maintenance can quite often mean that a school is overlooked? In my constituency the Millbrook comprehensive school has been overlooked for several years. The outbuildings are made of wood and are rotting. There are Acrows supporting the beams in the classrooms and children have to walk around them to be taught. Perhaps that is one case my hon. Friend will examine to see whether he can bring that school back into an active programme of repair and maintenance.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on making such effective representations on behalf of his constituents. If he cares to write to me about the case I shall inquire into it.

Can the Minister tell us of any local authority that he has visited that has not pressed him for more resources to repair existing schools? Can he tell us of any local authority that he has visited that is not desperate to replace old schools with new ones? Is it not obscene that when the Government get a little bit of extra money they spend it on city technology colleges rather than on desperately needed repairs to and replacement of schools? Surely the Government ought to be putting resources into state schools and not adopting this D-I-Y approach to school building.

We spend over £500 million a year on capital projects and many millions more on repair and maintenance. I object to the hon. Member implying that all the faults in our school stock have arisen in recent months. They have not. I recently visited schools where problems have existed for more than two decades. Those problems did not arise recently.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he is satisfied with progress towards the introduction of the general certificate of secondary education; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement on progress in introducing the general certificate of secondary education.

In the past few weeks some 600,000 pupils have started courses leading to the GCSE. The measures that my right hon. Friend anounced on 10 June have allowed all local authorities to increase expenditure on books and equipment for the GCSE. In addition, further training for the GCSE will be supported by a programme of £15 million in the financial year 1987–88 under the new in-service training arrangements from 1 April 1987.

How much of the funding has gone to the county of Essex?

I am happy to tell my hon. Friend that this year the county of Essex has Government-supported expenditure of £620,000. For 1987 and 1988 it will receive Government support of £664,000.

Is my hon. Friend aware that some pupils are having to be sent home from classes because of the failure of local education authorities and examining boards to reach agreement about payments for cover for teachers who take time off for training? That includes training for examiners and moderators for the GCSE. Will my hon. Friend encourage local education authorities arid boards to reach an agreement that will prevent this happening in future?

As my hon. Friend may be aware, the recent Scott judgment in the courts made it clear that covering for absent colleagues is a professional obligation on teachers. For that reason, it is disheartening to know that teachers are refusing to fulfil that obligation. That is probably further proof that we need clearly defined and properly enforceable contracts for teachers.

What advice will the Minister give to an hon. Member who receives a letter from a schoolmaster saying that the examining board has not sent the syllabus and thus cannot teach pupils for the GCSE?

If the hon. Gentleman will let me have details, I shall be happy to take the matter up.

I acknowledge that the GCSE is the best prepared examination ever and that some £80 million has been made available for its inception, but will my hon. Friend none the less accept that concern is being expressed by teachers about the staffing implications of the new examination? Will she assure the House that she is keeping this aspect under review?

We are of course monitoring the introduction of the GCSE examination very carefully, but I remind my hon. Friend that this new examination has been widely welcomed and that it was important that we should get it off to a good start. Most teachers have been extremely co-operative and very anxious to ensure that the examination becomes a success.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what representations he has received from the Association of University Teachers about the future funding of the University Grants Committee.

My right hon. Friend and I met representatives of the AUT on 24 July, when we discussed various aspects of university funding and other matters.

Is the Minister aware of the very deep concern of members of the association in Scotland about the threatened closure of highly reputable university departments in Scotland? Is he also aware that this is particularly acute in Strathclyde university, where the very fine departments of mathematics and biochemistry are so threatened? Will the Minister assure the House that Scottish universities will not suffer such dismemberment of departments? Does he not agree that the time has surely arrived for the establishment of a Scottish UGC?

In the first place, I think that the hon. Gentleman is dramatising. Secondly, there has been no geographical discrimination against Scotland. Thirdly, if the hon. Gentleman is referring to the UGC's selectivity exercise, I can only commend the UGC for the boldness with which that exercise is being pursued.

Is my hon. Friend yet in a position to say anything to the House about the future of Ruskin college? Many people are most anxious to know what is to happen to this most valued institution.

I share the concern that has reached me about recent incidents at Ruskin college. For that reason I wrote to the principal of the college asking for his account of events there. I have now received that account. It has not reassured me. I have therefore asked the principal to call to see me next Monday. I am sure that no right hon. or hon. Member is against the education of trade unionists. If, on the other hand, that education is to be in the spirit of the intellectual equivalent of the closed shop—and that is what the accusations are about—the taxpayer, who, to a very large extent, funds this college, will expect clear answers to clear questions.

When a person is deemed by a university to be capable of undertaking a first degree course, will he or she be assured of financial assistance either from the university or from the local education authority? If the answer to that question is no, what will be the effect, not only on that person, but on the wellbeing and economic state of the country?

I am not at all clear about the point of the hon. Gentleman's question. If he is asking his question on the basis of an individual case, I ask him to write to me about it. In general, more people are receiving maintenance grants than ever before.

Does the Minister accept that Ruskin college has striven very hard to protect two rights: the right of an individual to express his views, and the right of other people to disagree with those views? Does he also accept that the college should not be criticised for trying to maintain fairness between those two fundamental rights, and that no one has the right to object to other people being critical of his views?

"Ruskin's members are not there as union members or socialists but as teachers and students. Ruskin is not a party school diffusing received opinion."

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he has any plans to seek to change the constitution of school governing bodies; and if he will make a statement.

The Education Bill provides for school governing bodies to be freed from domination by local education authority representatives and, armed with effective powers, to be more broadly representative of parents and the wider community served by the school.

Although the modest changes in the Education Bill are welcome, does my hon. Friend agree that real accountability will come only when parents are given a decisive say, when politicians are given virtually no say and when the boards of governors will be able to manage their entire budgets themselves?

I congratulate my hon. Friend and some others of my hon. Friends on the recent publication of their document, "Save our Schools". I urge hon. Members not to underestimate the substantial powers that the Education Bill will put in the hands of reconstituted governing bodies and all governors and parents, who will serve on them in much larger numbers than hitherto.

May we therefore take it that the Minister will treat seriously the views of governors who do not want their village schools closed? When they are asking for continued education, will he ensure that he supports them in keeping village schools in being?

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State made the position regarding village schools quite clear at our recent party conference. The hon. Lady will know that certain legal requirements have to be followed before a local education authority can close a school. I know that she has exercised part of her right in that respect quite recently.

I agree with the extent of parental involvement that my hon. Friend has set, but does he agree that, if it is to be effective, parents who go on governing bodies should be adequately trained for the task? Does he agree that there may be a limitation in that some people, because of professional or other duties, will find it difficult to come forward to take up the role?

The question of training school governors applies to all governors, irrespective of their source. We are committed to providing some money for training. Decisions about how training is provided may well rest with local education authorities or organisations such as the Open University. My hon. Friend's point is effective and good.

Is the Minister aware that, in Leeds, and, no doubt, in other Labour-controlled councils, school governing bodies are being packed wth Labour nominees way beyond the proportion of seats that that party occupies in the council? As the proportions of political groups or bodies are now enshrined in legislation, will the Minister introduce legislation to apply the same view to school governing bodies?

The hon. Gentleman knows that when the Bill receives Royal Assent local education authority domination will cease once and for all. I am fully aware of what is happening in Leeds, Brent, Haringey and elsewhere, where the councils are Labour-controlled. I condemn such domination and the elimination of interests other than those which appear to be solely in the interests of the Labour party.

When my hon. Friend examines the governorships of city technology colleges, if he meets resistance in the city of Birmingham, would he care to locate one next door in the borough of Solihull?

I welcome any proposal to set up CTCs. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State announced that 20 would be the initial target. I hope that, in time, it will be 120, if not many more.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what is his latest estimate of the shortage of teachers of mathematics, sciences and craft, design and technology in schools.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what is his latest estimate of the shortage of teachers of mathematics, sciences and craft, design and technology in schools.

In January 1986 local authorities in England reported 359 unfilled posts in mathematics, 407 in science and 201 in craft design technology. Although the vacancies amount to only just over 1 per cent. of posts in these subjects, I am nevertheless concerned about the supply. I have taken several measures, including the allocation of £16·5 million next year, in support of in-service training for teachers of these subjects.

Does the Secretary of State agree that those figures are an indictment of seven years of a Tory Government who pledged themselves to improving the country's economic performance? If they do not provide sufficient science, mathematics and other technological subject teachers, they never can improve our economic performance. What plans does the right hon. Gentleman have to end the process of cuts in universities, polytechnics and teacher training institutes, which is at the root of the problem? Does he agree that in-service training cannot solve the shortage which has been caused by the lack of educational training places for universities and other institutions of higher education?

The hon. Member could not have been in the House earlier when I announced confirmation of the increase in polytechnic funding for next year. He should also be aware that I have increased the numbers for initial teacher training in primary and secondary schools by amounts as high as 20 per cent. for the next three years.

Is the Minister aware that a survey of 97 secondary schools in the city of Birmingham showed that about one third of mathematics teaching is done by those who have either weak or no paper qualifications in that subject? Does he accept that this gross shortage denies proper opportunities to thousands of students to acquire vital skills in these subjects? The establishment of the city technology colleges will cream off the better qualified to what are likely to be better-equipped institutions and better-paid jobs. That will make the situation even worse.

In the first part of his supplementary the hon. Gentleman made a good point. I agree with him that, although the vacancy rate for such teachers is just under 1 per cent., it does mask the problem that many teachers are not qualified in and trained for teaching these subjects. This is not due to a lack of opportunities. The opportunities are there. This year we have introduced a £1,200 bursary for graduates who want to train in these subjects. I am glad to report that applications for initial teacher training in physics and technology have improved significantly since that announcement.

How much?

Applications for teacher training in physics have increased by 9 per cent., and craft and technology applications by about 20 per cent. That is well above the rates we need.

How many in numbers?

I will tell the hon. Gentleman the numbers if he wants to know. It is a real increase over last year.

I echo a previous supplementary from the hon. Member for Crewe and Nantwich (Mrs. Dunwoody). Is my right hon. Friend aware that a number of village schools of excellence do not have any particular staffing problems and, in the circumstances, will he think twice before abolishing them?

In the last few months, I can assure my hon. Friend that I have visited many village schools with small numbers of children in them — 15, 20 or 30. They provide excellent education. I wish to make it absolutely clear that it is not the Government's intention to close such schools. In many cases they provide an essential ingredient to hold a community together.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that one way to improve the critical situation regarding physics and mathematics teaching is to encourage better links, including financial, between industry and teaching? Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming the fact that in Norwich there is already evidence of industrial support for the new city technology colleges? That is good and it is the right way to proceed.

I welcome the support of my hon. Friend. Norwich was not on the initial list, but if people come forward in Norwich and want to establish a technology college, I should be happy to look at the application.

Does the Secretary of State not recognise that we will not begin to solve the teacher shortages until there is a long-term deal for the profession? Although I regret the decision of one teachers' union to restart industrial action, is it not the case that the Government's dithering, highlighted in today's press, is adding to the uncertainty? When is the Secretary of State going to come clean and tell the House how the teachers' dispute will be solved?

The current position is that the employers and unions are to meet under ACAS in Nottingham on the weekend after next in yet another attempt to resolve the two-year-old dispute. Since the Coventry meeting in July, the Main report for Scotland has been published and the Government are considering its implications, which are exceedingly complex. While all that is taking place, I utterly condemn the action of NAS/UWT in threatening further disruption next week. It is not the Government who will be blamed for the lack of agreement. The parties have not yet reached an agreement.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what representations he has received from the National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education on the National Advisory Body planning exercise 1987–88.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what representations he has received from the National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education on the National Advisory Body planning exercise 1987–88.

My right hon. Friend met representatives of the association on 15 October. Among the matters discussed was the National Advisory Body's planning exercise for 1987–88.

Will the Minister give an assurance that what appears to be a Government climbdown will be permanent and that the polytechnics will not be put through the same hoops next year?

I do not know what the hon. Gentleman thinks we have climbed down from. When HMI last looked at this area, it formed the view that there was capacity for more students in the public sector of higher education. We have increased our contribution to the public sector by a factor of almost three times inflation, 8 per cent., and that is in recognition of the excellent performance of the polytechnics and colleges.

Is it true that Birmingham city council has threatened to sack the director of Birmingham polytechnic if he allows The Times to be purchased for the institution? When will the Government bring forward proposals to give corporate status to our polytechnics to protect their freedom?

I note my hon. Friend's remarks about Birmingham polytechnic. In a speech in Birmingham yesterday I made the point that if there was any evidence of political pressure on polytechnics, the only honourable route for the principals would be robust resistance.

Does not recent experience show that there must be a better way of planning the development of our polytechnic system? Is the Minister not aware that on 14 October, only a few days ago, the bids put in for capital development for research in technology and science totalled £50 million, yet the Government have indicated that they will give only a measly £5 million? Is that the way to develop research in the polytechnics?

I am surprised that the hon. Gentleman does not welcome the extra funding that we have provided for that area. I assure him that many a polytechnic director has welcomed it in conversation with me.

As Northamptonshire is an area of high technology, as the population of Northamptonshire are the most intelligent in the country, and as we are underprovided in higher education, will my hon. Friend wave his magic wand and transform our beautiful college into a polytechnic?

I rather thought that my hon. Friend would ask that question. The possibility of upgrading colleges and polytechnics is being considered by the National Advisory Body at board level. The matter will then come to committee level, and a recommendation will be made to the Government. No doubt my hon. Friend will energetically promote the interests of his college.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science, pursuant to the answer of 8 July, Official Report, column 161, what information he has about the effects on each university of the means used to determine the resources allocated to teaching and research purposes, respectively.

The universities most affected by the introduction of the UGC's new resource allocation arrangements were notified by the committee of the main factors leading to an increase or a reduction in their grant relative to the average. Copies of these letters are in the Library.

What prompted Sir David Hancock and Mr. F. E. R. Butler, the second secretary to the Treasury, to ask their own accounting advisers to make a report on the future of the universities? Why was that necessary?

The hon. Gentleman must realise that the position of universities is constantly kept under review.

I welcome my hon. Friend's recent statement about the future of Stirling university being secure. Nevertheless, will he accept that the formula method of funding used by the UGC is prejudicial to small universities such as Stirling and St. Andrew's, which have always had high standards of quality and excellence?

I would not question for a moment the standards of excellence of Scottish universities, and I naturally regret the perturbations through which the universities are going but it must be remembered that a number of small universities are perhaps trying to do rather too much in too many departments, and so difficult changes have to be made.

Is it not pathetic for the Government to have reduced the Royal Society and the Advisory Board for the Research Councils to painstakingly tracing the decline in British basic research? Are the Government aware that by their intransigent attitude to the claims made for science in the universities and research councils they are destroying the industrial future of the country?

The Government place enormous importance on basic research. I wish that the hon. Gentleman would remember that in the longer term the ability of this country to carry out the fundamental research to which both he and I attach importance will be conditioned largely by its prosperity as a nation.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 28 October.

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. This evening I hope to have an audience of Her Majesty The Queen.

Does the Prime Minister agree with the Secretary of State for Scotland that it is essential that the teachers in Scotland know the Government's view of the Main committee, and whether they will give the money to finance those proposals before they take a decision on whether they will accept those proposals? Will she make a statement today, making it clear that the Government intend to finance in full the Main proposals in Scotland and the proposals for teachers' pay in England and Wales?

The Government are giving the careful consideration to the Main report to which it is entitled. We are also taking a close interest in the talks taking place in England and Wales, as my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science said. We want an outcome that is good for the children and gives them uninterrupted education, and that means a clearly defined contract and a pay structure that attracts and retains teachers of the right quality.

I draw the attention of my right hon. Friend to a report in The Sun last week showing that a family of 13 was receiving something approaching £2,000 a week in benefits at the expense of the ratepayers and taxpayers. Is this not an appalling misappropriation of public funds? Will she give urgent consideration to putting a top limit of, say, £150 a week on what any family can receive in any circumstances from public funds? Will she further make changes in the system so that nobody, whether British citizens or foreign nationals, can receive benefit until they have paid national insurance contributions for at least a year?

I share my hon. Friend's concern about that case, and many people were concerned about the vast sums that were being paid out. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services is considering the matter, and I shall pass my hon. Friend's comments on to him.

Why has manufacturing industry, which in the last full year of the Labour Government contributed a £4 billion surplus to the balance of trade, now slumped to a deficit of £4 billion?

It has done so because it is riot sufficiently competitive overseas.

Why does the Prime Minister not admit the truth? Is it not a fact that investment in manufacturing is now lower than it was on the day she was elected? Is that not the direct result of her policies, which have produced in Britain the highest real interest rates in any developed industrialised country?

No. The test of an economy is not the rate of investment in one particular aspect of its wealth but the rate of investment and the success of the economy as a whole. The right hon. Gentleman always gets up and offers selective figures. The volume of total fixed investment is at a record level. One million new jobs have been created since 1983. The profitability of industrial and commercial companies is at the highest level since 1964.

As the Prime Minister reminds us that the real criterion is the performance of the economy as a whole, will she tell us about the performance of the economy as a whole on the balance of trade over the past two months?

Again, the right hon. Gentleman has taken two particular months. Exports are running at a record level, including over the past two months.

On Sunday week my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and other party leaders will represent us at the annual Cenotaph service. Does my right hon. Friend share my deep distaste at the proposals of the so-called peace movement to substitute white poppies for red poppies? This causes deep offence to the vast majority of people and, incidentally, reduces the income of the Royal British Legion.

I share my hon. Friend's deep distaste. The Cenotaph service is a national occasion. It brings help and comfort to all our citizens and, I am sure, will continue to do just that.

In view of the Prime Minister's personal commitment to the Channel tunnel project, what will be her attitude to the project if British investors fail to come up with the British half of the cash necessary?

The decision whether to make the necessary investment is entirely one for British institutions. I have made it perfectly clear that no Government money will be involved in this project. Nevertheless, France and Britain continue to find it an exciting and challenging project and hope that it will go ahead, but it is for the institutions themselves to make the decision.

Does my right hon. Friend recall the time she opened Nene teacher training college—now the Nene college of advanced education—which has the fourth largest number of full-time equivalent higher degree courses? Will she therefore make representations to the National Advisory Body at least to accept a presentation from Nene concerning its future status as a polytechnic?

I know my hon. Friend's concern. I am sure that that institution's application will be carefully considered by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 28 October.

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

With respect to interest rates going up, is the Prime Minister aware that the Library today released figures showing that the mortgage repayments on an average three-bedroomed London semi are £450 a month? When the Conservative party came to office, they were £120 a month. That is nearly 350 per cent. inflation. Why does the right hon. Lady not include house prices in the Government's inflation figures? Why does she fiddle the figures and create a situation in London whereby Camden is allowed to build only nine houses this year instead of the 1,000 it was building before, with the result that young couples cannot get on the housing list?

The hon. Gentleman refrains from saying that the standard of living is at its highest level ever, and so, too, is the standard of housing, with an extra 1 million houses more than during the lifetime of the last Labour Government. Much more money is being spent on renovation. Whatever the hon. Gentleman says, he cannot escape the fact that our housing record is far better than Labour's.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that East Cumbria health authority will have an additional £300,000 to spend this year on direct patient care, money which has become available because of cost-improvement schemes, the success of the excellent new management system, and, of course, a remarkably low level of inflation?

I congratulate the health authority, as my hon. Friend has congratulated the Government, on keeping a lower level of inflation. The Health Service is in excellent shape and I wish that more people would recognise that fact. As it is, Labour Members never hesitate to criticise a service which employs 1 million people. It would be as well if we congratulated them on, and thanked them for, their services.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 28 October.

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

In view of the dramatic increase in violent crime over the past decade, does the Prime Minister accept that reducing the number of weapons rather than arming the police could avoid and reduce crimes such as the tragic shooting at Ughill near Sheffield? Will the Prime Minister immediately recommend that we have a permanent review committee of the Home Office to recommend on the availability of weapons and arms in Britain?

No, Mr. Speaker. I do not accept what the hon. Gentleman said at the beginning of his question. The Home Office and, in particular, the chief inspector of police, will keep that matter under permanent review and if there are any changes they will involve that part of the Home Office.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 28 October.

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

Reverting to the Channel tunnel, is my right hon. Friend aware that the Advertising Standards Authority requires that advertisements should be "legal, decent, honest and truthful" and that the ASA has now required Flexilink, the opponents of the Channel tunnel, to withdraw its current advertising campaign? Will she deplore with me the disreputable, disgraceful and, indeed, dishonest campaign that has been waged by professional opponents, led by the rather flabby Mr. Sherwood, against the project? Having already confirmed her Government's commitment to it today, does she agree that the City of London has an opportunity to refute the allegation that it is only interested in short-term profits rather than in long-term investments by backing the project?

I am aware that the Flexilink advertisements have been withdrawn. I repeat that the French and British Governments hope that the Channel tunnel project will go ahead. It is very challenging, but the decision on who invests what is entirely a matter for the institutions. There will be no Government money. It is a challenging project and the French and British Governments continue to support it.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 28 October.

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

Has the Prime Minister yet had time to read the article in The Observer on Sunday, which contains accusations that she and others lied over the Westland affair? Does she agree—

Order. The hon. Gentleman may have arrived here fairly recently, but "lie" is not a parliamentary word.

Has the Prime Minister yet had time to read the article in The Observer on Sunday? Are the accusations made in it true, and, if so, is that one reason why some civil servants are so relucant to appear before the Select Committee on Defence?

I have not read the article. I do not intend to read it. The facts were set out in statements and debates and in the Government's reply to Select Committees. Those are the true facts.

Is it not ironic that when there were terrorist bombs in Paris last month the French Government looked to us for support, and yet, with evidence that Syria is behind the Hindawi affair, European Governments are conspicuous by their silence? When will our European partners realise that in relation to terrorism we either stand together or we hang together?

I share my hon. Friend's disappointment that the European statement on Syria was not stronger. I hope that our European colleagues will consider the matter further, especially in view of the bold statements previously made. For example, in September 1984 the Foreign Affairs Council said:

"If one partner suffers a serious terrorist attack involving abuse of diplomatic immunity partners will be ready to consider common action in response."

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 28 October.

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

Is the Prime Minister aware that last winter many old-age pensioners died from hypothermia? Does she agree that pensioners on supplementary benefit should automatically receive the £5 heating allowance so that so many people do not die from hypothermia this year?

No, Sir. The cost of fuel and light has remained stable, so there will be no change in the heating additions — [Interruption.] However, it ill becomes any Labour Member to criticise this Government, given that expenditure on heating additions has risen to more than £400 million, compared with £90 million in 1978–79. Moreover, accusations of not caring come ill from a party which supported a coal strike designed to deprive pensioners of heat and light.

Is the Prime Minister aware that there is serious public concern over the Stalker affair? As there is also concern, which is felt by hon. Members on both sides of the House, about a serious miscarriage of justice in the Guildford and Birmingham bombing cases, will that not tend to undermine confidence in the administration of justice, particularly as it applies to Irish people, unless it is allayed? Will the right hon. Lady take a personal interest in those issues and ensure that steps are taken to see that justice is done in those cases?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that questions about a particular case should be directed to the Lord Chancellor or to my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary. The hon. Gentleman will also know that anything that one might say about the Stalker affair could impinge on one of the inquiries into the RUC, and so I can say nothing further.

Will not the problem of hypothermia among the old become much worse in the decades ahead if we fail to press ahead with a civil nuclear power programme?

I take my hon. Friend's point. It is necessary for this country to go ahead with a nuclear power programme. It will be impossible to obtain all the energy that the Western world, and the developed world, need unless nuclear power programmes go ahead.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, which arises directly from your earlier ruling. My hon. Friend the Member for Tyne Bridge (Mr. Clelland) referred to an article in The Observer concerning

"What Blunt Bernard said to Reluctant Colette."

Order. The hon. Gentleman is not raising a legitimate point of order. My ruling was that in this Chamber hon. Members should not accuse each other of lying. That would be unparliamentary. Indeed, the hon. Gentleman knows that, and would not do it himself.

No one is accused of lying. It is a question of information in a paper. Surely the advice that you receive from the learned Clerk must be that a statement should be forthcoming. Is the Prime Minister going to take legal action—

Order. The unparliamentary expression "the Prime Minister lied" cannot be allowed in the Chamber. That ruling is in the interest of good order, and the whole House will agree with that.

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. The article says that Bernard Ingham told Colette Bow that "You will … do what you are … well told" Either there is— Mr. Speaker: Order. It is reprehensible that a Front Bench spokesman should try to continue Question Time through me. I stopped the hon. Member for Tyne Bridge (Mr. Clelland) and asked him to rephrase his question, which he correctly did. That is the end of the matter. I do not know what Mr. Bernard Ingham said, and it is nothing to do with me.

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. This is a matter of the utmost seriousness. Either there has been a gross contempt of the House in the information that we have been given, or there has been a gross libel of a senior member of the Prime Minister's staff. For the Prime Minister to pretend that she is unaware of those allegations and for her to be unwilling to make a statement at the Dispatch Box is an abuse in itself.

Order. If the Front Bench believe that, they can raise the matter at Prime Minister's Question Time on Thursday.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Does it arise out of Question Time?

Yes. Would you agree, Mr. Speaker—[Interruption.] She is scuttling away. Would you agree, Mr. Speaker, on the question of getting parliamentary language correct, that my hon. Friend the Member for Tyne Bridge (Mr. Clelland) could have used the phrase which I used some time ago and which you accepted—that the Prime Minister would not recognise the truth if it were sprayed on her eyeballs?

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Order. The hon. Gentleman did the right thing in rephrasing his question. I do not think that I can help him any more. I do not think that we want to pursue this matter.

I assumed that I had chosen my words very carefully. I said that the article contained accusations that the Prime Minister had lied. I was not accusing the Prime Minister of lying, but merely quoting the article.

If the hon. Gentleman looks in "Erskine May" he will see that words used by attribution are equally unparliamentary.