asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will report on his assessment of the results of the implementation of the Anglo-Irish Agreement.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the progress of the Anglo-Irish Agreement.

Steady progress is being made, not least in the area of security co-operation. Experience has clearly demonstrated how views reflecting the interests of the minority can he taken into account without threatening the position of the majority or undermining United Kingdom sovereignty.

As one who is strongly in favour of the agreement, which is constantly being misrepresented by Unionist politicians in the Province, may I urge the Secretary of State to take the initiative himself and, with the aid of television, spell out to the citizens of the whole of the United Kingdom the exact terms of the agreement and how they could be developed if only the politicians in Northern Ireland would sit down and work together for the common good?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his consistent support for the agreement and I take serious note of his point. There is no doubt that the best hope for the defeat of terrorism, which is so important to everybody in Northern Ireland, must be in closer and more effective co-operation with the Republic of Ireland. Everybody in Northern Ireland knows that, and this agreement offers us the best prospect of that being achieved.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of us who support the general Unionist position believe that this agreement is the only practical instrument for greater co-operation between Northern Ireland and the Republic, and that it can bring as great benefits to the Unionists in Northern Ireland as can greater co-operation between the communities there? Will my right hon. Friend urge the Unionist parties to come back to this Chamber to discuss democratically the way in which the agreement is working for their benefit?

I hope that they will recognise the need to return to this Chamber and make a constructive contribution here. If they do not, their arguments will not be listened to with any great respect. In looking at the progress of the agreement, I note that it offers the opportunity for the minority tradition to be respected and for minority views to be taken into account. It is greatly in the interests of the majority in Northern Ireland that the minority should feel that their views are fairly respected as well.

When does the Secretary of State now expect that the European convention on terrorism will be ratified by the Irish Republic? That was held out as one of the prizes of the Anglo-Irish Agreement 14 months ago. Will he take a £100 bet with me on this?

I shall not take up the offer in the second part of the right hon. Gentleman's question. I do not intend to speculate on exchange rates. I have enough problems with other matters in Ireland without taking on that issue as well. I understand that, as the right hon. Gentleman will know, the convention has been signed by the Minister of Justice in the Republic of Ireland. It has passed through the lower House and we hope that it will make the further progress necessary for ratification. The right hon. Gentleman will also have noted the encouraging news about a more effective response to the issue of extradition. Indeed, an item of news this morning tends once again to reflect the improved relationship and the improved attitude that flows from the agreement.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that it is possible to acknowledge and respect the Nationalist tradition and the Nationalist position in Northern Ireland without being a supporter of the Anglo-Irish Agreement? Does he not understand that to give the Irish Republic responsibility for representing Nationalists in discussions with Her Majesty's Government is intensely divisive and, in some ways, insulting to the Nationalists in Northern Ireland?

I respect my hon. Friend's views, and I agree that it is perfectly possible to respect the Nationalist tradition without being a subscriber to the Anglo-Irish Agreement. However, an awful lot of people in Northern Ireland have not been very good at doing that in recent years. The agreement enshrines the point that if there is to be greater harmony in Northern Ireland, it is important to recognise that within the Province there are people who hold a different point of view from that of the Unionist majority. It is in the interests of the Unionist majority that that should be recognised more publicly. If I understood correctly my hon. Friend's question, I hope that he will seek to urge the Unionist majority to recognise the proper rights and the respect that is due to the Nationalist minority.

I revert to the Secretary of State's answer to the hon. Member for Isle of Wight (Mr. Ross). Does he agree that the Anglo-Irish Agreement is an abstract concept which exists, and can only exist, in the minds of human beings? Does it not follow that its importance lies wholly in what it leads human beings to do? Will the Secretary of State consider publishing a list of the things that it has led him and his Department to do which otherwise they probably would not have done, so that we may all make a rational judgment about it?

I shall certainly look at ways in which we might more effectively list the achievements and the effects of the Anglo-Irish Agreement. As for the progress of the Anglo-Irish Agreement, I note that there are many people in Northern Ireland, certainly in the majority community, who believe that security is overwhelmingly the most important aspect of the agreement. I could list improved performance on the seizure of arms, the apprehension of mortars, the recovery of explosives and more effective extradition procedures. I rest mainly on the judgment of the Chief Constable of the RUC. He says that the agreement provides him and his force with the best opportunity that they have had to improve security and co-operation. I pay attention also to the entirely opposite point of view. It is quite clear that the IRA regards the agreement as a serious threat to its operations.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what representations he has received concerning the revival of the Northern Ireland Assembly.

The Government have offered a round table conference on devolution and in advance of this are ready to facilitate informal talks among the parties. There is a wide measure of support for a return of greater responsibility to Belfast from Westminster and we have received a number of representations to that effect.

I thank my hon. Friend for his reply. Bearing in mind that Northern Ireland has no system of local government to compare with that in Britain, does he agree that it is unfortunate that there should not be a domestic forum in which Northern Ireland political activity could be induced in preference to the politics of the street and the politics of the courtroom?

I agree wholeheartedly with my hon, Friend. As he knows, we established the Assembly and encouraged and co-operated with it. We should like conditions to be created in which it could again play a constructive role in the affairs of Northern Ireland. It was only when the Assembly refused to undertake any of the work that had been laid on it by Parliament that we decided to dissolve it.

Will the Minister confirm that there is no question of returning to the status quo ante that existed prior to the signing of the Anglo-Irish Agreement and that there will be no return to the Protestant ascendancy in Northern Ireland? Does he agree that the Anglo-Irish Agreement provides sufficient scope for devolution for all the people of Northern Ireland? Is it not a fact that those who have ears should hear?

I assert once again that the Government believe that devolution remains the right objective for us to pursue, and as far as possible we shall pursue that objective. As for the hon. Gentleman's first remark, it is absolutely clear that the only basis on which such arrangements could be introduced would be on what was acceptable to the representatives of constitutional politics who reflect both traditions in Northern Ireland.

Will my hon. Friend make it plain that it is not necessary to resurrect the Assembly in order to reintroduce a greater measure of local government in Northern Ireland?

That is certainly true, but perhaps my hon. Friend will remember what I have just said about the need for widespread acceptance of any changes in arrangements for Northern Ireland. The Government believe that devolution rather than increasing the powers of local government is more likely to achieve that.

In view of the call of the Secretary of State earlier this week for talks between the parties in Northern Ireland without preconditions about devolution, may I tell the Secretary of State that my party is ready to participate in such talks?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend will welcome that assurance as warmly as I do.

Will my hon. Friend agree that until those on the Unionist side of this problem appreciate that it is absolutely essential for them to participate locally, whether it is in an Assembly or in any other chamber, including this Chamber, it really will be impracticable to have revivals of Assemblies such as the Northern Ireland Assembly? We would all like to see it happen. The question is, will they let it happen?

The Government clearly understand the feelings of the Unionist community and their political representatives about the Anglo-Irish Agreement, but I believe that it is folly for them to boycott this House and contacts with British Ministers on all of this. The sooner they get back to proper relationships in these matters, the better.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what assessment he has made of the amount of police time devoted to policing street marches and demonstrations over the past 12 months.

Last year, between May and September, when the majority of such events occurred, it is estimated that a total of 334,000 man-hours were devoted to policing street marches and demonstrations.

Will the Minister confirm that the Social Democratic and Labour party is the only party in the north of Ireland which recognises that there is a policing problem and that, because of this, it is the only party which has not caused problems for the police or put them in danger in the way that was outlined in the Minister's reply?

I very much hope that the party which the hon. Gentleman represents will be able to continue to develop its expressions of support for the Royal Ulster Constabulary in Northern Ireland and continue to support all those who believe that parades and marches should be conducted in a way which facilitates the efforts of the police to maintain law and order on these occasions.

Does my hon. Friend agree that in grappling with these problems the RUC's men and women have conducted themselves in a wholly non-partisan, non-sectarian fashion; in short, that there is no such thing in Northern Ireland as Catholic policemen or Protestant policemen, but just policemen under the law? So is it not sad that there are those in high places, political or ecclesiastical, who refuse to encourage young men and women to join that non-political police force in the national interest?

I find it difficult to overstate my respect for the skill and professionalism of the RUC and the way in which it has handled these parades, marches and other public order situations in recent months. I would certainly encourage everyone in Northern Ireland who wants a peaceful society to give his wholehearted and unequivocal support to the RUC.

Will my hon. Friend accept that those of us from constituencies from which are recruited the regiments which presently serve in Northern Ireland are dismayed at those pleas from politicians in Northern Ireland for people to assemble in large numbers, thereby increasing the risk to our troops serving there?

I agree wholeheartedly with that. I can only reiterate that whether it is the security forces, the Army or the police who are involved, they deserve the support and co-operation of all those who hope for a peaceful future in Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what representations he has received concerning the Sampson report.

I have received a number of inquiries about the progress of Mr. Sampson's inquiry and the contents of his reports. As the House is aware, the first part of Mr. Sampson's report is now with the Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland. The second part is expected to be completed by Mr. Sampson shortly. As I informed the House, I shall wish to make a statement as soon as possible on any aspects of the report that fall within my responsibility.

Is the Secretary of State aware, however, that there is a degree of impatience at the fact that this report is always promised as coming shortly? When does he expect to make the statement that he promised over three months ago? During Mr. Sampson's inquiries, did he get round to interviewing the Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and his deputy, as was the intention of the deputy chief constable of Greater Manchester when he was involved?

With regard to the seond half of the question, my understanding is, yes, Sir. In regard to the first part, I clearly gave the information available to me in my answer. That is a matter for Mr. Sampson, who, I know, has been anxious to make the most thorough but speedy completion of his inquiries. I fully share the impatience that the hon. Member feels. It is obviously very important for the RUC and its good name that these matters are resolved at the earliest possible moment.

The Secretary of State said that he would make a statement eventually on those parts of the report which fell within his responsibility. Will he explain to the House what those responsibilities are?

As I made clear in an earlier reply, aspects of the report which involve allegations of criminal offences, on which criminal charges may be brought, will have to follow the normal procedure. In so far as they affect organisation, management structure and wider policing issues, there may be aspects which fall clearly within my responsibility.

I appreciate the sensitivity of the matter for the Secretary of State. Does he intend to publish the report as far as possible? Will he contemplate publishing as much of it as possible on the lines of other reports relating to Northern Ireland which have been published in the past?

The hon. Gentleman must understand that the report was commissioned by the Chief Constable of the RUC. He has forwarded the first part to the Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland. Clearly, the Director of Public Prosecutions, and conceivably my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General, will be concerned with aspects of it. Police reports of this kind would not normally be published, but I hear what the hon. Member says. Obviously, I am anxious that everything possible should be done to clear the matter up fully and to deal with it effectively, but I am in some difficulties in replying fully because I have not myself seen the contents of the report.

In view of the disclosure earlier this week by Mr. Stalker that he would have remained in the police force had he been permitted to continue the inquiry into the RUC, is it not vital in the interests of everyone that, irrespective of the Sampson report, the public should be told quickly what inquiries Mr. Stalker was making and what conclusions he had reached, otherwise is speculation not inevitable that he was investigating something important and that some people in high positions wanted to prevent his investigation?

The right hon. and learned Gentleman's question illustrates all too clearly the importance of getting as much as possible established in the public domain at the earliest opportunity and of resolving the matters as early as possible, otherwise such rumour and speculation will spread. The House should remember that the question whether Mr. Stalker was or was not available for the inquiry was not a matter for me but for the chief constable of Manchester, who advised the Chief Constable of the RUC that Mr. Stalker was no longer available, so alternative arrangements had to be made. Having said that, I certainly recognise that while Mr. Stalker was not able to continue, the whole of his team which was working on it did continue its work, albeit under the direction of Mr. Sampson.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on meetings he has had with Ministers in the Government of the Republic of Ireland on co-operation on security matters.

A special meeting of the intergovernmental conference was held on 31 October last year to discuss cross-border security co-operation. In addition, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I frequently discuss this subject with members of the Irish Government at regular meetings of the intergovernmental conference. My right hon. Friend also met the Taoiseach on 28 November. It would not be appropriate to disclose details of those discussions, but both Governments are determined to press ahead in further developing security co-operation.

Will the Minister confirm that there is now excellent co-operation from the Republic on security and that those Unionist politicians who say otherwise are deliberately and mischievously misleading their supporters?

All I can say is that there is improved security co-operation. The foundations have been laid for further improvements, but it will be the implementation of the reports which have now been agreed between the RUC and the Garda and which have been discussed by Ministers, that will lead to that further improvement that we all wish to see.

If there is this improvement—and any improvement in security co-operation is welcome—why is it that even the smallest infringement of the border by our forces in pursuit of those whom the Taoiseach has called the common enemy is built up into an international incident in Dublin?

There is another question on the Order Paper on that subject, so I imagine that it would not be proper for me to go into great detail now. Our troops are warned about incursions into the Republic of Ireland and genuinely do their best to avoid such incursions. However, when they are in pursuit of terrorists there are occasionally incursions. We regret those and I can understand the sensitivity of the Irish Government about other troops being on their territory.

If Her Majesty's subjects in Northern Ireland conspire to make incursions into the Republic of Ireland and plead guilty to unlawful assembly, are they guilty of an offence within Northern Irish law for committing a conspiracy to invade a foreign country?

That would be a matter for the courts to decide.

While everyone welcomes the cooperation north and south of the border, has my hon. Friend analysed the situation that may arise shortly with a change of Government in the Republic?

We have signed an agreement with the Government of the Republic of Ireland and embarked on the work of an international conference in which cross-border security co-operation is an important aspect. It is not for me to speculate about the possible results of a change of Administration. However, I hope that the co-operation which benefits everyone within the island of Ireland will be continued.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what recent discussions he has had with political leaders from Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what meetings he has had since Christmas with Northern Ireland political leaders.

I maintain regular contact with the leaders of the Social Democratic and Labour party and the Alliance party of Northern Ireland, but not at present with the leaders of the Unionist parties, who have unfortunately not felt able to have talks with me or my ministerial colleagues. On 28 November 1986 I met the Taoiseach and on 8 December presided as joint chairman over a regular meeting of the Anglo-Irish Intergovernmental Conference.

Has the Secretary of State taken the trouble to sound out Opposition politicians in the Republic as to what is likely to happen to the so-called Anglo-Irish Agreement in the event of a change of Government in the Republic in the forthcoming general election?

The hon. Gentleman may not have been listening to the answer given earlier by my hon. Friend the Minister of State. It may come as a shock to the hon. Gentleman, but I entirely agree with the reply by my hon. Friend the Minister of State.

In the absence of withdrawal or revision of the Anglo-Irish Agreement, how does my right hon. Friend propose to end the deadlock in cooperation and communication with the political leaders of the overwhelming majority of the population of Northern Ireland?

I entirely recognise, as my hon. Friend has emphasised, the importance of re-establishing a sensible dialogue. The absence of such dialogue has not been to the advantage of the Unionists of Northern Ireland in the past year or to the advantage of those for whom they seek to speak. I have made it absolutely clear that the evidence is now before them that the agreement has not threatened their position or undermined the position of the majority, nor has it infringed the sovereignty about which they are concerned. I hope they will recognise that after the sterile futility of past months there is now good sense in seeking to engage in talks on some basis. I have made it clear that I am willing to enter into any discussions without any preconditions respecting the opposition and hostility that many may feel to the agreement.

Arising from the discussions which the Secretary of State has had with politicians in Northern Ireland, in how many local authorities Unionist politicians are fully playing their part despite their original opposition to the Anglo-Irish Agreement? Does he accept that politicians on the Alliance Benches join him in hoping that the Unionist majority in Northern Ireland will play its part here in the Chamber again as quickly as possible?

I welcome the hon. Gentleman to his new responsibilities. I very much endorse the second part of his question. However, I am afraid that I am unable to help him in answer to the first part of his question, because it is very difficult at the moment to know the answer to that. The picture is very confused at the moment. However, it is quite clear that the policy of abstention, adjournment or whatever alternative versions are given to it in local authorities, has been utterly pointless. It has achieved nothing except to disadvantage local government electors and ratepayers in those areas. That point is becoming increasingly clear to sensible people in Northern Ireland.

Are not members of the majority population in Northern Ireland aware of how many friends, and how much influence, are being lost by the boycott on the part of their leaders both of Parliament and of my right hon. Friend and his colleagues?

There is a strange concept among some people in Northern Ireland of loyalty to the Queen but of not ascribing loyalty to Parliament and any Government. People must understand that under our constitution the Queen in Parliament means that the Parliament of the United Kingdom is, in our finest tradition, the place where ultimately grievances or concerns can be raised.

Have political leaders in Northern Ireland ever raised with the Secretary of State the allegations of Captain Holroyd and Mr. Colin Wallace? Is it true that those allegations were communicated to the Prime Minister in 1984? Is there any substance to those allegations?

The answer to the first part of the question, on which the rest of the question hangs, is no, Sir.

Does my right hon. Friend recall that we had a debate upstairs lasting all of one minute, in which the American £50 million donation was given to this country, whether we wanted it or not? What discussions have so far taken place with the leaders of both sides in Northern Ireland on the disposition and spending of that money?

The structure under which the international fund is set up is that of an independent board. It is separate from Government, and the board is about to embark on its task. I know that a number of people have made applications to it and I am sure that it can make a most useful contribution. We recognise it as a most remarkable gesture made in a spirit of goodwill and appreciation by our ancient ally, and by good friends of both the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.

Is the Secretary of State aware that had I met him since Christmas I would have raised with him the fact that the Western area health board has introduced a 12-hour working day for nurses and told them that if they do not accept they will be sacked? Is this not outrageous, and will he take steps to correct it?

I am not sure how the hon. Gentleman's supplementary follows from the main question, but I shall look into the point.

Will my right hon. Friend not only confirm that his door is open for discussions with members of all political parties in the Province, but make a positive step to encouraging such dialogue, because it is only through dialogue that any success will be achieved?

I agree with my hon. Friend. I am grateful for what he says. If people had any doubts about it, the events of the past year have proved that alternative routes offer no prospects of a sensible outcome. People can learn only from their experiences, and I hope they will realise that it is possible to have sensible talks and that they need not be afraid that, by talking to me, they will somehow undermine the principle of their position. We shall see whether, as sensible people, we can sit down and find a better way forward that will benefit all the people of the Province.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he last met the Prison Officers Association of Northern Ireland; and what issues were discussed.

In view of my day-to-day responsibility for prisons in Northern Ireland, I normally represent my right hon. Friend at meetings with the Northern Ireland Prison Officers Association. I last met national and Northern Ireland Prison Officers Association representatives on 4 October 1985, when we discussed future employment of prison officers and their roles, prison regimes, operational matters, and the programme for opening Maghaberry prison and amalgamating the two prisons at Maze.

In view of that answer, which shows that some 18 months have passed since the Minister met prison officers in Northern Ireland, may I suggest that he should, as a matter of urgency, seek to meet them soon? Is he aware of their deep concern as to their security and that of their families, in view of threats often made against them? Is he further aware of the complaint by them about the lack of modern facilities when on duty in prisons in Northern Ireland? As these are urgent matters, should not the Minister give them his attention soon?

I am always ready to meet representatives of the Prison Officers Association. They have only to ask to have a meeting. There may be an early opportunity to meet their representatives.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he has any plans to visit the Republic of Ireland to discuss the Anglo-Irish Agreement.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what recent talks he has had with representatives of the Government of the Republic of Ireland on negotiation of the Intergovernmental Conference.

We regularly meet representatives of the Government of the Republic of Ireland within the framework of the Intergovernmental Conference. The last meeting was on 8 December and I have placed the joint statements issued after this and other meetings of the conference in the Library.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the agreement legitimises the border for the first time in history and that it is the cause of a wave of violence by paramilitary groups? Does he also agree that the conduct of the hon. Member for Belfast, East (Mr. Robinson) and his colleagues recently bears out the fears of Labour Members who voted against the agreement?

I note what the hon. Gentleman said about the agreement legitimising the border and I know that that is a view advanced by many. It confirms the position of the majority in Northern Ireland, in that they are not at any risk of being dragooned into a united Ireland against their wishes. That reassurance of the majority is an important component of the agreement, and, coupled with respect for the traditions and interests of the minority, is the right basis on which a better long-term understanding can be reached within Northern Ireland.

Was the question of the unsatisfactory nature of the Diplock courts or the question of having three judges instead of one, which surely would be more satisfactory, raised? What is transpiring in that general direction?

The Diplock courts and the problems of terrorist trials which must be conducted without a jury, as is the position in a current case in Dublin, have been discussed. I made clear the Government's position on those matters in an earlier reply, to which I draw the hon. Gentleman's attention.

Do Her Majesty's Ministers and Ministers of the Government of the Irish Republic believe that it is possible to govern one part of the United Kingdom differently from the rest, save with the consent of a majority of the people who are to be governed differently?

My hon. Friend will know that there has been no change in the arrangements for the government of Northern Ireland during the course of this Government. It is precisely one of the strengths of the agreement that it does not affect the method of government of Northern Ireland, while at the same time respecting the interests and traditions of the minority.

There is certainly a curious alliance in the House against the Anglo-Irish Agreement. Has it occurred to the Secretary of State that there might be a case for having a referendum on this unique situation, both in the Republic of Ireland, if that was the wish of the Irish authorities, and in Britain and Northern Ireland? If that referendum secured, as indeed it would, a large majority, would it not strengthen the agreement?

I agree that there can be curious alliances in matters affecting Northern Ireland, and perhaps I know that as well as anyone. The hon. Gentleman makes a serious point, because he will know that there have been suggestions of an application for some form of referendum, and one of the questions that it would raise is what should be the constituency for that referendum.

Will the Secretary of State confirm that the Anglo-Irish Agreement had the full support of this House, as it had the full support of the Irish Dail? Therefore, it has the full support of two sovereign peoples. Is it not a fact that the Anglo-Irish Agreement provides as much opportunity for the Unionist community to reflect its traditions and history as it does for the Nationalists? There is something in the Anglo-Irish Agreement for both traditions. Is that not the case?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his comments, and I certainly endorse his remark that the overwhelming majority both in this House and in the Parliament of the Republic, and the much wider international community, welcomed this measure. The tragedy is clearly that at present Unionists do not recognise that the real beneficiaries of a more willing acceptance and understanding of the fairness of their position in relation to the minority community would be the majority community in Northern Ireland.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the reconciling process which the Anglo-Irish Agreement is about is not helped by inflamatory language such as that deployed earlier this week by Viscount Brookeborough when he described Cardinal O'Fiaich as "an evil prelate"?

There is a responsibility on all people in positions of influence to take care not to inflame passions. It is the easiest thing in the world to excite hatred in Northern Ireland, which often leads in other circumstances to extremely nasty acts and incidents. Everyone in positions of responsibility needs to exercise great care in the language that they use.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on his monitoring of the auxiliary oiler replenishment vessel contract at Harland and Wolff.

Construction work on the auxiliary oiler replenishment vessel is scheduled to commence later this year. Harland and Wolff's performance and costs in building this ship will be subject to a stringent system of financial and performance controls which will be monitored by independent consultants.

As the Northern Ireland Office is not impartial in this matter will the Minister name the independent consultants that his Department is using to monitor the contract and tell the House what arrangements are being made for independent scrutiny of that contract?

The consultants are Touche Ross management consultants. The hon. Gentleman inquired about the availability of the report. The terms of reference given to the consultants extend beyond the specific question of AOR monitoring and it is not appropriate to release what is effectively a commercially confidential contract. However, I can confirm that Harland and Wolff's performance and costs in builiding AOR will be monitored strictly in accordance with the terms of the Secretary of State's announcement on 24 April 1986.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he will next meet the leaders of the political parties in Northern Ireland to discuss the operation of the Anglo-Irish Agreement.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what representations he has received from Unionist parties in Northern Ireland on the Anglo-Irish Agreement; and if he will make a statement.

Unfortunately, the leaders of the Unionist parties feel unable to have discussions with me, but I am obviously aware of several concerns felt by members of the Unionist parties and I remain ready to discuss with them the Anglo-Irish Agreement, or any other matters, at any time. I meet the leaders of the Social Democratic and Labour party and the Alliance party regularly and hope to meet them again soon.

As the whole purpose of the Anglo-Irish Agreement was to facilitate discussions with the Republic, would it not be pointless if it led to the termination of discussions with everyone else? Will the Secretary of State confirm that any proposal emerging from the Intergovernmental Conference will be the subject of consultations with any party or group in Northern Ireland which wishes to express a view on the merits? For that purpose, will it be made known in good time before the proposal is implemented?

I am more than ready completely to endorse what the right hon. and learned Gentleman has said. One of the least truthful statements in Northern Ireland is that somehow the Unionists are debarred from putting forward their views and opinions. I have made it absolutely clear that I would welcome them at any time, and I hope that they will take up those opportunities.

When the Secretary of State next meets the Unionist parties, will he reiterate that no agreement jointly negotiated between the British and Irish Governments can be destroyed by threat of force or undermined by a veto applied by any group or political party? Can he make it absolutely clear to them that the will of two democratically elected Parliaments of Britain and Ireland is sovereign in these matters?

Of all the people in Northern Ireland, I would have thought previously that it was least necessary to remind Unionists that the United Kingdom Parliament is sovereign and that its views should be respected.

asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what advice is being given to the security forces concerning recent incursions into Southern Ireland.

Police and Army commanders are well aware of the importance of avoiding incursions. Policemen and soldiers, particularly those belonging to newly arrived units, are advised frequently of the need to avoid incursions into the Republic of Ireland when operating close to the border.

While thanking my hon. Friend for his detailed reply, may I ask him to confirm that it is not just a matter of troops from Northern Ireland going into the South, but of troops from Southern Ireland crossing the border into the North? We should have a give and take policy, and it is rather unfair that some legal authorities in Southern Ireland are promoting the fact that some of our troops have lost their way on the border.

It is important to recognise that in effectively carrying out their duties the security forces of both jurisdictions have to operate right up to the border. The troops are, of course, forbidden to cross the border, but incursions into both jurisdictions take place from time to time as a consequence of the joint pursuit of the common enemy of both security forces—the terrorist. I should mention that this matter was discussed at the last meeting of the Intergovernmental Conference.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 15 January.

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.

Is the Prime Minister content that her Government preside over a society in which the chairman of Guinness can earn £350,000 a year while thousands of pensioners—[Interruption.]—are freezing because they cannot afford to heat their homes? Is such a gulf between the rich and poor not an inevitable consequence of the Prime Minister's and her Government's philosophy and system of values?

With regard to the first part of the question, the hon. Gentleman knows that we are to have a reply to a private notice question later today.

In the present dreadful spell of cold weather, perhaps Kent has suffered as badly as anywhere. Many shops in my constituency are virtually out of food and access to the Medway towns is almost impossible. Movement is very difficult indeed. Will my right hon. Friend give urgent consideration to whether we should declare a state of emergency? That could help the situation. Will my right hon. Friend further consider giving permission for the unfettered use of troops, without consideration of budget?

I do not consider that a declaration of a state of emergency would be appropriate. Of course, we shall see how help can be brought in to move in food and necessary supplies to people who are without them.

Has the Prime Minister's attention been drawn to the commendable view expressed in the Financial Times this morning that self-regulation can work only if people who are supervised have a sense of obligation towards the system and if that is greater than the desire to win their way in any particular case? In view of the widespread disquiet about financial dealings, including in the City itself, will the Prime Minister now take steps to make the Securities and Investments Board a statutory body with powers to investigate and prosecute any cases of abuse during mergers and takeovers?

I think not at present. Most people will accept that action has been taken very quickly indeed in setting up inspections under the Companies Act by Board of Trade inspectors. We must await the result of the report. It is far too early to go from the present voluntary self-regulation and conclude that we should go to a full statutory system. The right hon. Gentleman referred to the Financial Times. He will find that there were leaders in overseas papers, including in the United States, saying that the speed at which action has been taken under the voluntary system has sometimes exceeded the swiftness of action under any statutory system.

From the Prime Minister's answer, are we to believe that if the current evidence of gross abuse were to continue we would, in a short time, have the introduction of a statutory system so that full force could be brought to bear against those who are abusing their knowledge and office in the course of mergers or takeovers, or are we to believe that because statutory schemes have not been introduced elsewhere there is no circumstance in which the Prime Minister would wish one to be introduced in Britain?

The right hon. Gentleman concludes too much. Insider dealing was not even a criminal offence under the Labour Government, yet it is now. But then, he is always expecting something totally different from us. We have made insider trading a criminal offence and, the right hon. Gentleman knows, criminal prosecutions are a matter for the appropriate authorities and not for the Government. Board of Trade investigations are implemented under the Companies Act and come under the responsibility of the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. Inspections have been implemented very quickly, and they are now under way.

The value of mergers and takeovers has multiplied tenfold during the time that the Prime Minister has been in office, so these matters are of great importance to hundreds and thousands of people, both inside and outside the City. The Prime Minister introduced deregulation and is now having to clean up the mess left by the abuses of that system. Will she make the SIB statutory in order to help with that process?

I answered that question in my initial reply to the right hon. Gentleman. There are two factors. First, insider trading is now a criminal offence although it was not a criminal offence under a Labour Government. Secondly, there is now voluntary regulation, and I believe that there are powers in statute eventually for Ministers to take over if voluntary regulation turns out not to be right. However, it is much too soon to judge. Action has been taken very quickly by Board of Trade inspectors under the present system. They are in the process of establishing the facts. Indeed, if the right hon. Gentleman thought about it, he might agree that it is as well to establish the facts before drawing any conclusions.

My right hon. Friend has shown her great concern for those most in need by acting swiftly to help to provide the additional heating allowance. Does she not therefore utterly condemn the actions of staff at the main post office in East Sheen in my constituency in closing their doors for the past five working days because, they claim, it is too cold to work? They have thereby locked out claimants, including pensioners, thus ensuring that they cannot cash their benefit cheques. As a result, those people cannot buy food or fuel——

Briefly.

Those people are therefore having to trudge in the snow and slush to sub post offices that are prepared to open.

My hon. Friend has made his point very effectively. However, we would all wish to praise and thank those who have gone to work, despite the difficult circumstances. They have been determined to carry on with their jobs and to get medical help, supplies or cash to those who need them. Perhaps that serves to highlight those who have not made such efforts.

In view of the widespread concern about the young single homeless, which will go on long after the cold weather snap, will the Prime Minister reconsider the board and lodging regulations as well as the possibility of giving special help to local councils for emergency programmes to help young people? It is no answer to say that council houses are still standing vacant, because under the Act councils do not have responsibility for the young single homeless. There is a major gap in our social provision, and some action would be very welcome.

I think that it is an answer to say that there is a good deal of council house property standing vacant. If housing is not being used, it could obviously be put to use for homeless families. It is because the right hon. Gentleman knows that that is an answer that he tried to avoid it in his question.

Will my right hon. Friend please bear in mind that although the existence of a statutory body in the form of the Securities and Exchange Commission in the United States did not prevent the Boesky scandal, some of us have felt for some time that the increasing internationalisation of financial markets, with all the complexities and difficulties for national regulation that they bring, means that we should now look towards a statutory body to help with these matters?

It is too soon to conclude that we should change the present system, which has been in operation for only a short time. As my hon. Friend knows, there is provision for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry to take statutory powers. However, we should go further with the present system before we conclude that we should go to a statutory one.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 15 January.

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

Does the Prime Minister agree that it is a scandal that, 15 months after her Government promised to review the case of the six men convicted of the Birmingham pub bombings, the Home Office still prevaricates? Does she further agree that nothing undermines the rule of law more than keeping innocent people in gaol because authorities do not have the courage to admit that they made a mistake? Will she reassure the House today that her Government are conducting a genuine investigation and not a cover-up?

My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary continues to review that case carefully and will inform the House of his conclusions when he has reached them.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 15 January.

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

Is there any country in which unmployment is falling faster than in the United Kingdom?

Suffice it to say that, on a seasonally adjusted basis, unemployment has fallen here for the fifth successive month. That is good news. We hope that that will continue, although we are bound to have problems. It is also good news that unemployment is falling in the north, the north-west, the west midlands and Wales. I hope that the whole House will welcome that news.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 15 January.

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

Has the Prime Minister seen this morning's report by the Royal Institute of Public Administration, which dubiously clears her of politicising the top echelons of the Civil Service? In view of that report and all the implications, together with the criticism that has been made of her decision not to allow civil servants to appear before Select Committees and truthfully answer questions without the permission of the Secretary of State, will she now reconsider her previous answer and allow civil servants the openness that is recommended in the report?

I do not wholly accept the underlying premise of the hon. Gentleman's question. The Select Committee asked how far civil servants could properly answer for their own conduct in a particular case. There are certain strong traditions in relation to that. I am sure that people would not wish to undermine those traditions or in any way to turn the House into a kind of conduct court when they have their own disciplinary procedure. With regard to what the Royal Institute of Public Administration said, we should pay tribute to the impartial administration and the traditions and standards of the Civil Service.

Will my right hon. Friend consider today the comments made recently by a senior political analyst on local radio in Bristol to the effect that the loony Left is damaging the Labour party, that the economy is in reasonable shape and that the Conservatives will win the next election? The senior political analyst concerned was the right hon. Member for Bristol, South (Mr. Cocks).

The point in that most excellent dissertation with which I wish to quarrel is that it is not the loony Left but the Left in power in local authorities. That is the way in which the present Labour party acts when in power.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 15 January.

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

As the Prime Minister is so pleased with the latest unemployment figures, will she now confirm that the cumulative effect of the past five months has been to reduce the unemployment rate from 11·4 per cent. a year ago to 11·3 per cent. in December? As she is so easily pleased with the figures, is she aware that my constituents think that it is because she does not really care?

Hon. Gentlemen have been mouthing the phrase "people care", but we know that that is not the case from the record of Opposition Members on many social service issues and by the way in which they did not hesitate to reduce the value of pensioners' savings by inflation. I would have hoped that the hon. Gentleman would be pleased that unemployment has fallen for the fifth month running and that over 1 million more jobs have been created in the past three years. That is a good record and the prospects for the economy look good for the coming months.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 15 January.

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

Will my right hon. Friend take time during her busy day to observe how the number of building society depositors has increased since she came to power? Does she agree that those 28 million investors set a good example of thrift and that their savings would be whittled away by the inflationary policies advanced by Opposition Members?

Yes. The number of building society investors has increased enormously. It is part of the wider distribution of property in terms of housing, personal savings and possibly shares. That is part of the Conservative party's and the Government's fundamental philosophy. I wholly agree with my hon. Friend that under this Government savers, who are so important because without savings we do not have the means of the investment that we wish to see, have had a good deal and will continue to do so, and that under a Labour Government they would have a very bad deal because of the Labour party's inflationary policies, which would rob the savings of their value.