asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what representations he has received about funding and staff shortages in the North Western regional health authority.

A number of hon. Members have made representations on financial and staffing resources in the region. I am glad to be able to announce today that we have agreed the region's proposed allocation of additional funds for 1987–88 from the special fund announced by my right hon. Friend last November. This will give an additional £435,000 to north Manchester, £290,000 to central Manchester, £73,000 to south Manchester, £246,000 to Salford and £11,000 to Tameside and Glossop. In that part of the north-west covered by Mersey health region, there will be £400,000 extra for Liverpool, £200,000 for St. Helens and Knowsley, and £200,000 for south Sefton.

Is the Minister aware that, at a recent meeting of the north-west regional community health councils, each body complained about under-funding and staff shortages? Will the Minister admit that, even with the moneys that he announced today, central Manchester region is still talking about cutting one ward out of existence and that south Manchester still has a nursing shortage that has been described as dangerous? Will the Minister come clean with the House and say that not enough money is going into the Health Service in the north-west region and that we need more money, or will he admit that the Government's priorities are tax cuts and not ill people?

One of the Government's priorities has been to ensure the fairer distribution of NHS resources around the country. The north-west region and, indeed, the Mersey region have significantly gained from the Government's policies. The additional money that I announced today has been designed to help and will help transitional problems.

May I stress that not all hon. Members wish to carp at the Minister's announcement, but that some sincerely thank him for it? It is in addition to a substantial capital increase in the north-west, which is several percentage points above the level of the nation as a whole.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. Within the last six months, since I have been Minister, I have laid the foundation stone for a £35 million development at the Manchester royal infirmary, and last week I announced a project costing nearly £20 million for a new North Manchester general hospital.

Will the Minister explain how the money that he announced today — which is obviously welcome — will help Manchester children's hospital? A substantial number of children await bone marrow transplant operations, which they cannot have because of a lack of nursing staff. Will the extra money mean that nurses are available to ensure that such essential work can be carried out?

The hon. Gentleman is right to suggest that not all the problems are financial but that there is also a nursing shortage. We are examining that problem. We have looked at the problem in some parts of the north-west with a view to trying to determine appropriate action.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on providing treatment for an extra 22,000 patients in the north-west as a consequence of his announcement. May I impress upon him that my constituents in west Lancashire are grateful for the £118,000 that will provide 300 additional hip replacements in the next 12 months. It will tackle one of the major problems in our part of the world—that is, hip replacement surgery.

Yes, indeed. I emphasise that the allocations that I announced today are separate from the waiting list allocations, which will also do a great deal to help throughout the north-west.

Will the Minister confirm that. by the criteria laid down by his predecessor in a parliamentary answer, compared with 1979–80 the north western region is now cumulatively £31 million short of what it should have received? Will he also confirm that the unpublished waiting list figures held by the north western region show an increase and that the Preston health authority now has the fourth longest waiting list in the country? Finally, will he confirm the rumour that at Stepping Hill hospital in Stockport on the evening of Tuesday of last week six emergency operations had to be delayed because no nurses were available to work in the theatre?

I can confirm that I am tired of hearing this kind of stuff from one of the hon. Members whose Government left the longest waiting lists in history.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that spending on the National Health Service in the north-west is higher than it has ever been before? If it is cuts that people are interested in, will he point out to Opposition Members the figures for 1977, when the Labour Government inflicted the worst cuts known in the history of the National Health Service?

Yes, indeed, and I can certainly confirm that the steady increase in the money made available to the north-west makes the spending there the highest in history.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what action he has recently taken concerning the severe disability premium; and if he will make a statement.

I had a constructive meeting with the disablement organisations on 21 January. They put to me alternative proposals for the treatment of the most severely disabled people under income support which, without commitment, we are currently considering. Officials will be carrying this discussion further later this week.

When the Minister considers these powerful representations, will he bear in mind that the present conditions that he has laid down are intolerably restrictive, limiting this premium to a handful of people who persist in living alone, despite requiring almost constant attendance? Does he realise that this makes a mockery of the presumptuous title "severe disability premium"?

I do not accept that only a handful of people are involved. Our estimate is that about 8,000 people will receive the premium. The severe disability premium will be paid on top of the normal disability premium, and it will be a fairly substantial sum.

When considering the problem of the severely disabled who at present receive an accumulation of additional allowances and payments that exceed the new disability premium and the other premium, has my hon. Friend considered the idea put forward by DHSS local managers for operation of the social fund in a flexible way to make sure that severely disabled people get the right amount of money that they need?

I am considering a variety of alternative methods. In the case of those severely disabled people who are receiving a large number of additional requirement payments, the transitional protection will secure their cash position, but in respect of those who are receiving large amounts of domestic assistance addition, that transitional protection will itself be protected against inflation.

Is the Minister aware that the most severely disabled people, many of whom are practically paralysed, cannot live alone because they must have someone to care for them, yet they are the very people whom the Government say cannot receive the severe disability premium, just because they are receiving an attendance allowance? That is absolute nonsense. Will the Minister therefore accept the simple and logical proposition that the most severely disabled people should receive the severe disability premium?

The severe disability premium is intended for the most severely disabled. The right hon. Gentleman commented on the particular circumstances in which the premium will be payable. These matters are under discussion at present with the disability organisations.

Is the Minister aware that the voluntary organisations have again expressed this week their deep and continuing concern about the most severely disabled people trying to live alone when the domestic care addition disappears? As he knows, it is new applicants who cause the greatest concern. They face loss of independence without the domestic care addition. Is there anything further that the Minister can say today about their plight?

There is nothing further that I can say today, except to acknowledge that the right hon. Gentleman is correct in saying that of particular concern are the future disabled people who would have received domestic assistance allowance and the large number of additional requirements. It is precisely that rather narrow body of people whom we are most concerned to protect, and who are the subject of my present conversations with the disability allowance group and others.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he has any plans to review the responsibilities within his Department of the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Derbyshire, South (Mrs. Currie); and if he will make a statment.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he has any plans to review the responsibility within his Department of the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Derbyshire, South (Mrs. Currie.)

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will re-allocate the responsibilies currently exercised within his Department by the hon. Member for Derbyshire, South (Mrs. Currie).

No, Sir.

This is meant to be helpful — [Interruption.] Have not some of the comments by the hon. Lady since becoming the junior Minister in his Department been quite extraordinary? Did the Prime Minister have some sort of grudge against the Secretary of State and decide to punish him by putting that somewhat publicity-crazed person into his Department?

The real position is that a successful politican such as my hon. Friend, says what everybody is thinking, while an unsuccessful politican, such as the hon. Gentleman, says what nobody is thinking, or would ever think.

Considering the many foolish utterances by the hon. Lady, can the Secretary of State tell the House why she is so popular among her Tory colleagues?

My hon. Friend is popular among her colleagues, and up and down the country.

Does my right hon. Friend recognise that in tabling such questions, Opposition Members are suffering from an excess of sour grapes? One must have just a little sympathy with them because there is no one on the Opposition Front Bench who has the energy, clarity and ability to hit the headlines like my hon. Friend.

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. As for the criticism of my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, given what the Prime Minister has had to put up with from Opposition Members, it goes considerably further than sour grapes.

Is it not typical of the sexist attitudes of many Opposition Members that they gun for one of the few women Ministers in the Government?

My hon. Friend is right. I know of his interest in health education and my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State has put that firmly on the map.

Is the Secretary of State aware that I applaud the statement made by his junior Minister that smoking is dirty and smelly? In the light of that and because it appears to be the view of the entire Department, will the Secretary of State take the time to persuade his colleagues in the Department of the Environment that the only way to deal with smoking is to stop advertising it, and to allow people to make a choice and not to influence them in all their activities by advertising campaigns? Lastly—[Interruption.]

Order. The question is clearly about the Minister and not about her statement.

I think that I answered that question from the hon. Gentleman the last time that we had social security questions. The fact is that we have a voluntary code on advertising in this country. That has applied under this and the previous Government and it is the most effective way of dealing with the problems.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services whether he will make a statement on the allocation of the waiting list fund within the north-east Thames health region.

The north-east Thames regional health authority will receive £2·07 million from the first year's allocation of the fund. That will enable hospitals in the region to treat an additional 7,000 waiting list cases through at least 25 separate projects.

Is the Minister aware that because of local and staff anxiety about the future of St. Margaret's hospital in Epping, the money that is being made available is much appreciated? Does he agree that that will result in a considerable cut in waiting time for operations, notably in oral surgery and ear, nose and throat cases?

Yes, the £92,000 that is being made available for west Essex will finance three projects and will enable over 1,000 cases to be treated. In addition, the district is planning improvements within its existing resources, including a 41 per cent. reduction in the children's ear, nose and throat waiting list by September of this year. That is a considerable prospect of progress.

The people of Havering will welcome my hon. Friend's statement because they too will benefit within that region. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is unacceptable for people to have to wait up to two years for orthopaedic operations, as some must do? Will he join me in hoping that there will be a substantial reduction in the waiting list as a result of the announcement?

Indeed, I would expect that reduction. Barking, Havering and Brentwood are receiving over £450,000 from the allocation which will finance six projects, enabling the treatment of more than 2,000 extra in-patient cases in orthopaedics and ENT. That is in addition to improvements in existing resources, including the treatment of up to 1,600 additional cases in orthopaedics and general surgery.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what recent representations he has received regarding the care and treatment of diabetics.

Representations have been received from the British Diabetic Association, right hon. and hon. Members and members of the public about provision on general practitioner prescription of disposable syringes and blood glucose monitoring strips for diabetics. I announced last Tuesday that we have decided to make disposable syringes available on prescription from general practitioners.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his reply and as the parent of a diabetic child may I say how much I welcomed last week's announcement? However, may I emphasize to him the importance of diabetics' maintaining effective control over their blood glucose level? In view of that can he hold out any hope that blood glucose monitoring strips may one day be available on prescription?

I am grateful for the first half of my hon. Friend's remarks and I pay tribute to the part that he has played in the campaign that has contributed to this decision. Last Tuesday I said that we would like to make blood glucose monitoring strips available on prescription when the resources become available, but at this moment I cannot give an absolute undertaking when that will be.

While I warmly welcomed the Minister's decision, may I say that some diabetics resented the impression that was given the following day that their syringes alone necessitated the increase in prescription charges? Will he seek to dispel that impression and to make it clear that diabetics are as entitled as other disadvantaged groups to benefit from the Health Service and his welcome decision?

Yes, I certainly wish to dispel that impression. There is no gainsaying the fact that the resources that enable us to undertake welcome developments must be found somewhere. Obviously, part of those resources are the yield from prescription charges.

Does my hon. Friend agree that adequate funding for biochemistry departments in hospitals is absolutely essential to ensure that diabetic testing is freely available and that prompt results can be reported to general practitioners for the benefit of patients? Furthermore, is he aware that for some of the newer techniques expensive re-agents are necessary and are used to help test unstable sugar levels in the blood of patients? They are expensive, but considered to be vital in the treatment of diabetics by general practitioners. Will my hon. Friend encourage their use?

As I have said, we are always sympathetic and we have shown that clearly and practically in the past week in the development of services for diabetics. I certainly take note of what my hon. Friend has said.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how much his Department is spending on bed and breakfast accommodation in the London borough of Ealing; what was the comparable figure at the beginning of May 1986; how many people and families are involved in each figure; and if he will make a statement.

Information in the precise form requested is not held centrally. However, I can tell my hon. Friend that the number of families housed in bed and breakfast accommodation in the London borough of Ealing rose from 53 at the end of March 1986 to 375 at the end of September 1986.

Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that the new Ealing Labour-controlled council has abolished residence points for people born and bred in Ealing and for those who have lived there for two years? It has forced up the bed and breakfast list from 30, costing £300 a year when the council came to office in May 1986, to an estimated 1,000 costing £5 million in April 1988. The council has created a spurious housing list, drawing people from all over the country on to it. Even if every blade of grass in Ealing were built on, that list could never be met. Will my hon. and learned Friend sympathise with the people of Ealing who face a 65 per cent. rate increase? All council services, including essential services, are at a standstill because the council has quarrelled with its work force—which is on strike—and is threatening to put virtually everyone on the street.

The costly and inappropriate policies of the London borough of Ealing are becoming well known. The code of guidance, which is issued by the Department of the Environment, emphasises that bed and breakfast accommodation should be used as a last resort and for as short a period as possible.

Can the Minister confirm that there has been an increase in the number of people accepted as homeless by the London borough of Ealing since the change in control of the council? Will he confirm that no Minister challenges the decisions of the London borough of Ealing and that those people have been properly accepted as homeless under the terms of the legislation, which is binding upon the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues just as much as it is on the London borough of Ealing?

I can confirm that the use of bed and breakfast accommodation for families with children is both costly and unsuitable. The guidance that is issued by the Department is that it should be used only as a last resort.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will make a further statement on the progress of the campaign to limit the spread of AIDS.

Our objectives are to ensure that the public are given the facts about AIDS, the threat that it poses, how infection is transmitted and how the spread can be prevented. The results of the latest Gallup survey, which was commissioned by the Department, show encouraging progress towards these objectives. We are currently considering our strategy for the next stages of the campaign.

Will my right hon. Friend accept that there is public concern that his campaign has been evenhanded between homosexual and hetrosexual activity, although the spread of AIDS has come, principally, through the homosexual community? Will he tell the House what proportion of those who, unfortunately, have died from the disease have been homosexuals? Does he agree that the time has come to ban homosexual propaganda in schools, on television, in newspapers and in other forms of the media?

As to schools, I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. With regard to his major question, he is quite correct that the disease and the number of deaths have, predominately been among homosexuals. On the other hand, we must take account of the cases among drug users sharing needles and heterosexuals. We know that the AIDS virus can spread heterosexually, and therefore it is right that we should be prudent about the information that we give to the public on how we can prevent that.

Is the Secretary of State aware that thus far the Select Committee on Social Services has identified certain sectors where much more help will be needed? Does he agree that there is an urgent need for many more clinical medical posts; an urgent need for many more counsellors to counsel patients; that there will shortly be an acute need for more hospice places and that there is an urgent need for the proper education of children in schools about how to avoid the AIDS disease?

The Government look forward to the report of the Select Committee on Social Services. The Government have shown, by the resources that they have devoted to public education and research, the importance that they place on fighting the spread of this virus.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, even though the heterosexual community is at risk of AIDS contamination, the time has come for the Government to make it clear that by far the greatest degree of risk is posed by drug abusers and sexual perverts? Is it not about time that we concentrated on pointing out where the responsibility lies for the spread of this disease?

My hon. Friend is correct in that the responsibility is an individual responsibility and, clearly, what he says about homosexuals and drug users is right. The next stages of the campaign will be directed specifically to those areas, as will advertising.

Does the Secretary of State believe that exhortation, determent or even terror will be adequate? Those measures are not sufficing in the United States, where nearly 1·5 million people are infected, quite apart from the dead and dying. Does he not think that in the next stage of his campaign he should point out, without preaching, that there are moral choices available on behalf of the family and the community?

Indeed. In the campaign we have always made it clear that it is not just safer but best to rely on a faithful, loving relationship and I have sought to make that clear at every stage. However, we need to say something more than that and to give direct and straightforward health education messages. I hope that, in addition to the Government's public education campaign, the churches will conduct their own campaigns. Those campaigns would be complementary and there is a need for them.

Will my right hon. Friend say a little more about his talks with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science about the best way to get the moral and the educational messages across, particularly to younger children?

Just before the weekend, my right hon. Friend issued a new leaflet on AIDS for teachers, and he will also be providing video information for schools. Both he and I are absolutely determined that the dangers of the spread of AIDS are made known in a responsible way in the schools.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what representations he has received on the future of Doddington hospital; and if he will make a statement.

I have received one letter from a member of the public. The Peterborough area will soon see the opening of a second new district general hospital at a cost of £13 million providing nearly 300 extra beds. As a result, the hospital authorities are now looking at plans which may involve a change of use for the county hospital at Doddington. That hospital currently provides acute services, but may in future become a community hospital, providing much-needed services for psychiatric and psychogeriatric patients in the area.

I am grateful to the Minister for that reply, but will she confirm that consultant cover will continue at Doddington hospital, as it is much appreciated by local doctors? Will she also bear in mind that my population of 65-year-olds is rising by 15 per cent. and that of 75-year-olds by 18 per cent. and consequently ensure that hospital facilities are available for people close to their homes? Will she also give her help to the primary health care teams that are desperately needed in a place with so little public transport?

Yes, Mr. Speaker. I can confirm that the out-patient services, which cover several of the types of specialties which the hon. Gentleman mentioned, such as general surgery, gynaecology, trauma orthopaedics, and so on, will continue and consultant cover will continue for them. I can also confirm that the figures for the growth in the elderly population in that neighbourhood are correct, and I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will confirm his interest in that matter as I believe that within the next 10 years he will be joining that group and therefore, like many of us, wishes to see services for the elderly improve.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Service how many claims have been made for exceptionally severe weather payments; and what percentage of those eligible have so far made a claim.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many payments for exceptionally severe weather heating costs have been made in the current winter; and if he will make a statement.

Information on the total number of claims is not available, but by 3 February approximately 1·4 million £5 payments had been made. Some claimants will have received two of more payments. It is not possible to estimate take-up since full returns have not yet been received.

I thank the Minister for that information, but can he be sure that people with the worst fuel bills will have claimed before the deadline period has been reached? Will the Minister give the House an assurance that if there is any evidence that the deadline period is causing a problem he will consider extending it?

The deadline period has not yet been reached. The period for claims is 13 weeks from the date of the week in which the payments fell due. That is largely to approximate with the fact that most fuel bills are rendered quarterly. The deadline will not be reached until early April, and I am pleased to tell the hon. Gentleman that further claims are still coming in. I shall look at the situation in early April, but I can give no commitment on that.

Is the Minister aware that pensioners in receipt of supplementary benefit, because of the requirement of the £500 limit, are forced to choose between keeping enough money in their savings accounts to bury themselves or heating themselves properly during their lifetime? Will he undertake now to review this £500 limit?

The hon. Lady may care to bear in mind that we have already reviewed that level and increased it substantially from the £200 that existed at the time the hon. Lady's party was last in Government.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the changes in the scheme have been greatly welcomed? However, I know of a considerable number of cases in my own constituency where pensioners have put a sum of money aside for their funeral, and with the rising cost of funerals I must ask my hon. Friend to look very carefully to see whether something can be done to increase the low level of savings involved.

I understand entirely the points made by the hon. Lady and my hon. Friend. If my hon. Friend looks at the new regime that we propose for assistance with funerals, which takes effect from April this year, he will find that many people will have the full cost of their funeral paid and not just the inadequate flat rate of £30 as at present.

Can my right hon. Friend confirm that under the Labour Government there was no clear method of helping those in need with fuel costs and, indeed, that it was this Government who made severe weather payments available on a statutory basis for the first time? Over and above that, is it not the case that there is substantially increased help for those supplementary pensioners and very many more of them are claiming heating additions?

I can confirm all those points. This is certainly the first statutory entitlement of this sort and, of course, it is built upon the largest amount of special heating additions being paid that we have seen at any stage.—[Interruption.] We are not abolishing them, we are sinking them into the income support scheme, where they should be. So far as the position before 1979 is concerned, there was no statutory entitlement, no real entitlement and no concern shown by the Labour party.

Is the Minister aware that his complacency in no way helps those people, including our own constituents, who are just above the level of supplementary benefit, who receive no assistance or any form of heating help, and therefore, even in weather such as today's, suffer great anguish simply because they do not have enough funds to provide adequate heating in their homes? Is there not a need to look again at the regulations to make them more generous?

The hon. Gentleman points to a problem that is always bound to exist when one bases entitlement, as traditionally we have done, on supplementary benefit level. It is precisely for that reason that during the period of this Government we have substantially raised the level of supplementary benefit.

Is the Minister aware that the great success of the severe weather payments scheme is in no small measure due to the support that the Minister has had from Department of Health and Social Security offices throughout the United Kingdom? Furthermore, is the Minister aware that in most cases those payments have been made within one day, and at the very outside within seven days? This is a marvellous effort by Government and civil servants.

My hon. Friend's point is well made and I am happy to join him in a tribute to the staff who worked so well to ensure that this scheme was successful and that the payments were generally made very promptly.

Is the Minister aware that almost everything he has said about the record of the last Labour Government in this respect is grossly misleading and that pensioners are much more interested in what is going to happen next winter than in what happened seven winters ago? Since the present scheme, of which he has spoken so highly, will be abolished in April, will he now undertake to do as was suggested last year, look at a sensible winter premium scheme which will run throughout the winter months, and introduce one in time for next winter?

There is a distinction between a sensible winter premium scheme and the proposition put forward by the hon. Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Meacher). As regards what will happen at the end of this winter, we shall consider the position then and determine what might need to be done for the future.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will make a statement on his Department's policy on hospices for the terminally ill.

The Department's policy on terminal care is set out in circular HC874 issued last week. We are asking health authorities to examine their current provision of services for all terminally ill patients and to plan to rectify deficiencies, where possible in collaboration with the voluntary sector. I have arranged for a copy of the circular and the covering letter to be placed in the Library.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the excellent work being done by the Leicester hospice, which has its day centre in my constituency? It has been funded by private donation as to its capital cost and 80 per cent. of its revenue funding comes from the local health authority. Does she not think that that spells out an admirable lesson in public and private co-operation for the Health Service as a whole?

Yes. I am glad to add my words of praise, thanks and encouragement to the people in Leicester, particularly those in my hon. Friend's constituency who have worked together through LORDS—Leicestershire organisation for the relief of suffering—and the local health authority to ensure that the services can be developed and maintained.

Is the Minister aware how attractive she looks today? [Interruption.]

Order. I want to hear the rest of the question.

Is the Minister also aware that I would like to praise those people back in the community, particularly in the constituency of Ashfield, who raise money for hospices? However, when are the Government going to stop street-corner begging to provide that sort of facility?

In response to the second part of the hon. Gentleman's question, the circular I have just mentioned asks health authorities to describe in their programmes for 1988–89, as a start, what arrangements they have for financial support of hospices and voluntary bodies providing terminal care. They have been told that where a hospice plays an essential part in a health authority's overall plans, we expect them to make an appropriate financial contribution. In response to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question, I thank him and I must say that he looks pretty cute today, too.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what representations he has received seeking a review of the working of the Abortion Act 1967; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what recent representations he has received seeking a review of the workings of the Abortion Act 1967; and if he will make a statement.

We have received no recent representations seeking a review of the working of the Abortion Act 1967. We have however, received about 15 items of correspondence seeking a review of the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929 in the light of its effects on abortion practice.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there is considerable concern about recent allegations in the press relating to certain tour operators who are arranging package deal trips at an all-in price of about £360 for pregnant Spanish women to come to Britain for a sightseeing tour of London, a shopping expedition and an abortion? Has my hon. Friend had an opportunity to investigate these claims of abuses of the present Abortion Act 1967, and if so is he able to inform the House of his conclusions?

Yes. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for having taken the matter up with us. I hope to be writing to her with the outcome of our investigations shortly. I can tell her that officials, including both a medical and a nursing officer, have now visited both homes and made a thorough examination of numerous records. Those inquiries have produced no evidence that any abortion has been performed for the reasons that were alleged, nor that payment in advance had been made by Spanish patients. I understand that two of the doctors named have put the matter in the hands of the Medical Defence Union. In addition, solicitors acting on behalf of one of the clinics have written to the editor of the paper concerned denying the allegations and requesting a printed retraction and apology, failing which, I understand, they state that proceedings will be instituted.

Will the Minister recognise that, with the advances in medical science, the 1967 Act is no longer acceptable? Many people in this country view with increasing alarm the number of abortions that have been carried out, particularly those which are late. When will the Government introduce further legislation to protect the unborn child in this country?

My hon. Friend will know that the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists has issued advice on this matter and we would expect NHS consultants to conform to it. It is a condition of registration that private nursing homes should not perform abortions after 24 weeks. Of course, we have made clear our support of the Bill introduced by the Bishop of Birmingham in another place.

Will the hon. Gentleman give an undertaking that he will resist any attempt to interfere with the basic provisions of the 1967 Act? Will he ensure that, at the end of the day, it still remains the woman's right to make a choice?

I can confirm that the Government would expect to maintain the general position that these are matters to be decided by the whole House on free votes.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 10 March.

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.

As my right hon. Friend prepares for her forthcoming visit to Moscow, will she reflect on the fact that, if it had not been for the strength and purpose of the Western Alliance in deploying cruise missiles and other INF weapons, there is no reason to suppose that Mr. Gorbachev would have come forward with his present proposals on balanced reductions of such weapons? Has my right hon. Friend noted the speech made in the House yesterday by the former Labour Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Cardiff, South and Penarth (Mr. Callaghan), which showed much greater purpose and grasp of reality than the Leader of the Opposition shows?

I totally agree with my hon. Friend, who makes her point very effectively. Unless this country had been firm in deploying cruise missiles, there would now be no proposals to take out SS20s. I agree with her that the right hon. Member for Cardiff, South and Penarth (Mr. Callaghan) has shown an admirable consistency in these matters, which is more than can be said for the right hon. Member for Leeds, East (Mr. Healey).

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 10 March.

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

Is the Prime Minister aware that at a press conference this morning the Secretary of State for the Environment, referring to his hon. Friend the Minister for Environment, Countryside and Planning, said, "Although he is the pilot of the Bill, he has not got his bow doors open"? My constituents crew these ferries. There are 81 people still on board and many are still unidentified. Was not that joke even sicker and even more insensitive than the one that appeared in Conservative Newsline this week insulting the blind? Now that the Secretary of State for the Environment, himself a former Minister of Transport, has apologised, saying that those remarks were inappropriate, inopportune—[Interruption.]

Order. It is unfair to go on for as long as that.

Now that the right hon. Gentleman has said that those remarks were inappropriate, inopportune and insensitive, would it not be appropriate and sensitive for the Prime Minister to call for his resignation?

No. As the hon. Gentleman is aware, my right hon. Friend issued a statement, saying:

"I deeply regret this inadvertent error and apologise unreservedly. I am only too well aware of the personal grief involved in such a tragedy as the recent ferry disaster."

Will my right hon. Friend take this opportunity to commend the right hon. Member for Cardiff, South and Penarth (Mr. Callaghan), in his regretted absence, not merely for exposing the nonsense of the defence policy of the Labour Front Bench but for showing up the fundamental contradictions within the so-called alliance, of which the Liberal unilateralists form so significant a part?

I gladly support what the right hon. Member for Cardiff, South and Penarth said and his firmness in defending this country, its defence and security. I join my hon. Friend in pointing out that, when it came to deploying cruise missiles, the Liberal and SDP Members voted against that deployment.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the revised balance of payments figures—[Interruption.]

Order.

Oh yes—the real world. Is the Prime Minister aware that the revised balance of payments figures published last week show an overall deficit of £1·1 billion, a trade deficit of £8 billion and a manufactured trade deficit of £6 billion? Is the Prime Minister going to sit back and allow that to grow to an overall deficit of £3 billion this year, or is she going to change policies?

The right hon. Gentleman has taken the revised figures. He is correct about them. But since 1979 there has been a surplus on current account of nearly £20 billion. Between 1974 and 1979 there was a cumulative deficit of over £5 billion.

When the right hon. Lady has been able to depend in each of the years in which she has been Prime Minister on a minimum oil revenue of £8 billion a year, can she explain why, despite that great cushion for her policies, Britain has still lost 20 per cent. of its share in world markets, a 20 per cent. share of domestic manufacturing markets and 2 million manufacturing jobs and is now less competitive than it was in 1979? Can she explain all that and come clean about the fact that any success that she has achieved in international payments is directly and solely attributable to the oil revenues?

Last year, exports were at a record level in volume terms despite the reduction in oil exports. There was an improvement of more than £2 billion in invisible surplus between 1985 and 1986. The right hon. Gentleman should bear in mind that that minus £1·1 billion—[Interruption.]—has to be set against a surplus on current account since 1979 of nearly £20 billion. The right hon. Gentleman refers to the oil factor. May I point out to him that the United Kingdom had net overseas assets of £80 billion at the end of 1985, giving an annual income of more than £4 billion a year. That is achieved by investing some of the income from North sea oil.

The Prime Minister talks about export figures. Is she aware that, since she has been Prime Minister, exports have gone up by 10 per cent. in volume and value and manufactured imports have gone up by 40 per cent. in volume and value? If the right hon. Lady wants to take so much credit for overseas holdings, can she explain why, with holdings of £150 billion, we were still getting only £4 billion in return last year? Will she now answer the first question: what will she do to stop the constant deterioration in our trade position?

Bearing in mind that the right hon. Gentleman speaks for a party which, when in Government had an overall deficit of £5 billion—[Interruption.]

Order.

The right hon. Gentleman speaks for a party which, when in Government had an overall deficit of £5 billion and complains about this Government who have an overall surplus of £20 billion. We are not going to take lectures from the likes of him.

Returning to the subject that the Leader of the Opposition understandably prefers to avoid, does my right hon. Friend agree that the fact that Mr. Gorbachev has taken up President Reagan's offer of the zero option is welcome? However, is it not important that NATO is not baffled by false promises or by weasel words about short-range intermediate nuclear forces and conventional weapons? Is it not essential that a clear link is established in the negotiations between the implementation of a long-range INF agreement with progress on reducing the conventional disparity, as well as short-range INF?

I agree with my hon. Friend.—[Interruption.]

Order. It does not help to make all this noise.

I agree with my hon. Friend that the Soviet Union is now taking up the intermediate-range forces point because we deployed cruise and Pershing. I also agree with him that one can never take a single point out of the whole disarmament and defence picture and treat it in isolation from others. Therefore, one must also consider the shorter-range nuclear weapons and the conventional imbalance. Otherwise our defences would be insecure. We believe in keeping them secure.

Does that answer mean that the Prime Minister is going back on her previous support for the zero-zero option at a time when the United States is clearly prepared to back it? Is the Prime Minister to make progress on the other important areas a condition of achieving agreement on intermediate nuclear forces?

If the hon. Gentleman looks at the draft treaties that have been tabled he will find that shorter-range nuclear weapons are considered. He will also find from the NATO communiqu?é that it is important to consider those: if not in fact to sign an agreement on them at precisely the same time, to have a follow-on agreement on shorter-range as part of the consideration of the intermediate range. It would be a very foolish person who also ignored the conventional imbalance. Those who wish to select one thing without thought for the others are not interested in our defence. They are interested only in making short-term political points.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the vast majority of people in this country and in western Europe believe that our security is safe in her hands? [Interruption.]

Order. We are making very slow progress today.

Is my right hon. Friend also aware that the vast majority of British people believe that freedom and democracy are worth defending whatever the cost?

Yes, I agree with my hon. Friend. It is a fact of modern defence life that the time needed to design and manufacture the weapons is so long that one can never afford to make a mistake in arms control negotiations, because there will be no time whatsoever to correct it. That is why we have to look at the print so carefully.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 10 March.

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

Has the Prime Minister had a chance today to read the comments in the press about the sharp drop in Townsend Thoresen's shares, which, it is said, is due to the safety modifications that will be required to meet the new standards? Will the Prime Minister now accept that her theory about popular capitalism has created a climate in which profit and commercial interests take precedence over life, the wellbeing of people, and the safety of crew and passengers? Let that be condemned as the ugly and utterly unacceptable face of her popular capitalism.

No, Sir. The hon. Gentleman is talking total nonsense and he knows it. The point was raised with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport yesterday and he dealt with it. The hon. Gentleman knows that no company has a future unless it puts safety above all else, and that is the key to its future.

In the course of her busy day will my right hon. Friend reflect on the contrast between next week's Budget—when we are all looking forward to tax cuts that will follow on from the increases in spending that were announced last autumn—and the Budgets of nine or 10 years ago during the hung Parliament, when the choice was between which taxes would be increased and where spending cuts would be made? Does my right hon. Friend recall that the then Labour Government were able to introduce those Budgets only because they were sustained in office by the Liberal party?

I think that we had better wait for next Tuesday's Budget and not anticipate its contents. I would point out that those below the Opposition Gangway belonging to the alliance party voted against last year's income tax cuts. The Conservative party is the party of lower income tax while all other parties are in favour of higher income tax.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 10 March.

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

Does the Prime Minister expect to see full employment in this country before she retires to Dulwich?

I believe that this country is tackling both its manufacturing and its unemployment problems better than any other country in Europe, and that, had it not been for the policies that we have pursued, the unemployment figures would have been far higher than they are now.