asked the Secretary of State for Defence what representations he has received about proposals in the Queen's Speech for which he has responsibility; and if he will make a statement.

I believe that the Government's defence policy as set out in the Gracious Speech has received wide support.

Following the clear statement of support for Trident in the Queen's Speech and the placing of further contracts for the development of the Trident base, will my right hon. Friend tell us the value of those contracts and how many jobs can be expected to arise from them?

The contract to which my hon. Friend refers is worth £120 million and will bring 600 jobs to the west of Scotland. That will take the total value of contracts awarded to date for the development of Faslane and Coulport to £255 million. At its peak, this development programme will create 2,500 construction jobs in the west of Scotland. It is worth recording that had the Queen's Speech reflected the views of the Opposition parties, none of that investment would be taking place and Scotland would have been robbed of thousands of job opportunities.

The Secretary of State will be aware of the launch of a type 23 frigate at Yarrows. Notwithstanding his comments on Trident, when does the right hon. Gentleman expect to place further orders for type 23 frigates and fulfil his commitment to order at least three frigates a year?

I note the hon. Gentleman's questions. We shall give further consideration to the ordering of type 23 frigates later this year, and we have given a clear undertaking to maintain the Royal Navy at about 50 frigates, at which it has been for some time.

My right hon. Friend is right to say that what was outlined in the Queen's Speech about defence caused considerable satisfaction to all Conservative Members and to many reasonable Members on the Opposition Benches, too. Does he agree that if the Opposition's defence policies were to be adopted there would be little chance of making progress with the mutual and balanced force reduction and strategic arms reduction talks and obtaining what we all want—disarmament on both sides of the iron curtain?

I entirely agree with my hon. and learned Friend. I understand that the official Opposition would have given away all our bargaining counters before they started negotiations.

The House will be intrigued by the Secretary of State's statement that there was wide support for the Government's defence policy. That certainly did not extend to the constituency of Ayr. However, we are pleased that after three recounts the Secretary of State was able to return to the House of Commons.

I warmly welcome the right hon. Gentleman back to his position in the House in his new role as the reluctant debutante on the Opposition Front Bench. I assure him that we shall do our best to make his stay there as pleasant as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the progress of the European fighter aircraft project.

The project definition phase for the European fighter aircraft ended last September. The four nations are currently assessing the outcome of this phase before deciding whether to proceed to full development. We expect to be in a position to take our decision in the autumn.

I thank my hon. Friend for his reply, because Fylde houses the headquarters of the British Aerospace military aircraft division and it has no doubt about the benefits of the European fighter aircraft programme. Will my hon. Friend confirm that he is eager to see British firms participating in the European fighter aircraft programme? And, to that end, will he be holding discussions with Rolls-Royce, British Aerospace and the three NATO countries that are participating in the project?

I am sure that my hon. Friend—as was his predecessor—and his neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for South Ribble (Mr. Atkins), will be energetic spokesmen for their constituencies' interests. I can assure my hon. Friend that the Government are planning on the basis of the United Kingdom playing a full part in the EFA programme. Discussions with our NATO Allies and the principal contractors continue, particularly through the forum of the international programme office.

Will the European fighter aircraft be a better aircraft than the Jaguar or the Tornado, 49 of which have been lost since 1979 at a cost of about £430 million? Will the Minister tell us why we need these sophisticated aircraft when one can fly to Red Square in a single-engined Cessna?

The hon. Gentleman will find that the aircraft to which he refers are highly thought of, and our success in selling the Tornado overseas is testimony to the effectiveness of that aircraft.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on his new post. Did he notice during the recent election campaign how the only substitute that the principal Opposition party could find for its defence policy was to talk down EFA at every opportunity? That was especially the Labour party's policy in constituencies such as mine where parts of the aircraft are being built. Will my hon. Friend confirm, not only that an existing engine—the RB 199—has been chosen as the pre-production engine, but that the Government have the faith in the EFA that the Opposition are determined to try to destroy at every opportunity?

I thank my hon. Friend for his kind remarks. It is regrettable that, all too often, Opposition Members seem to find satisfaction in criticising British products, in defence or other areas. The Government are determined that British firms will play a full part in the project. We believe that, both in engines and other parts, we have some excellent products to contribute to the EFA programme.

I welcome the Minister to the Dispatch Box and say that we think that his is a good appointment, so far as the Prime Minister's appointments go.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his somewhat barbed compliments. He has a novel way of putting these things.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that the European fighter aircraft is in the long-term costings? Although there has been no decision on the development of the aircraft as yet, will he give some indication of the numbers that he would expect to come into the front line were an order to go ahead for the development phase?

I can confirm that the European fighter aircraft is in the long-term costings. Obviously, it is too early to forecast with certainty the eventual size of a United Kingdom purchase. However, the work-sharing agreement for development is based on our declared requirement for 250 aircraft.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he is satisfied with the level of British participation in strategic defence initiative research funded by the Government of the United States of America.

A sound start was made in 1986 in the first year of participation. A broadly-based series of awards were placed on contract to the value of $34 million. Vigorous efforts continue to be made to secure SDI research business, both by industry and by the academic community in the United Kingdom, with the active and day-to-day support of my staff in the SDI participation office.

The right hon. Gentleman's predecessor is on record as saying that he fully expected British participation to be on a scale commensurate with Britain's industrial base. Does the Secretary of State feel that the $34 million contract so far gained is on that scale, and, if not, how far does it fall short? Is is not becoming increasingly clear that the Americans were far more interested in getting a cloak of political respectability for their project through British participation than in the project having anything to do with the advancement of Britain's technological interests, which, as the Select Committee on Defence said, would be better achieved through non-military collaborative projects?

I note what the hon. Gentleman said, but I do not agree with the latter part of his question. I am disappointed that during the last six months there have not been further announcements of contracts under the SDI programme. The participation office is making every effort to progress the other applications that are in the pipeline and that will be coming forward in the next few months. The reason for this lack of contracts is due largely to the drop in funding of the SDI programme in the United States. I very much hope that British participation will revive when that picks up.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that British arms exporters who have been doing so brilliantly in recent months are becoming very disillusioned with the rewards from SDI? The net return now and in the immediate future seems to be negligible compared with that promised by my hon. Friend's predecessor two or three years ago.

I do not agree with my hon. Friend that the returns will be negligible. We must remember that this is a very long-term programme stretching over many years. We made a good start in getting participation for British firms, but there has been an unsatisfactory response in the last six months. We very much hope that this will improve. My hon. Friend is perfectly correct about defence export sales generally. Our export sales are going extremely well. It is worth recording that had they won the election the Opposition proposed to wind up the defence export sales organisation. That would have been very bad news.

Has the right hon. Gentleman taken note of the exchange in the proceedings in Washington involving Colonel Oliver North, in which he talked about some unofficial British organisation tied up with the—[interruption.]

Order. The hon. Gentleman should make his supplementary relevant to the question.

It is very relevant, Mr. Speaker, because want to know whether this has had anything to do with the discussions with the United States on this very question of SDI.

The answer to the hon. Gentleman's question is no, I do not think that it has. I have seen the report of a press conference about this and it seems to be in the realms of pure fantasy.

No doubt my right hon. Friend will recall that we had hoped to participate far more in the research and development programme for SDI, stretching into the mid-1990s. Will he tell his counterparts in the United States that the whole House is rather disappointed at the amount of contracts that are coming our way? Will there be any diminution in the programme if a President who is not quite so pro-SDI is elected at the next presidential election?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I shall certainly draw the attention of my colleagues in the United States to the points that he has made in the House today. I do not think it likely that any United States Administration will abandon research into these important techniques, because that would leave this area entirely free to the Soviet Union, which has a large research programme in this sphere.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence how many representations he has received on the question of low-flying aircraft since the beginning of June.

Between I June and 7 July 1987 the Ministry of Defence received 542 inquiries or complaints about military aircraft flying. This compares with 683 for the same period in 1986.

If the number of pilots has not increased since 1979, why has the number of low-flying sorties increased from 71,000 in 1979 to 156,000 this year? Could the answer lie in the Robson report, which suggests that morale among military pilots is collapsing and that 57 per cent. of pilots who fulfilled eight years of training have now left the service? Could it be that the Ministry is now having to train pilots far more to ensure that it has fully-trained pilots to replace those who have left? Is that why the Lake District is being plagued by low-flying exercises?

No, Sir. Morale in the Royal Air Force is excellent. The premature voluntary retirement rates for pilots are decreasing and are substantially lower in absolute terms than they were when the Labour Government were last in power. We need more sorties because we have introduced the Tornado aircraft into service. Clearly, pilots need to be trained to use them. However, it would seem that the number of low-flying sorties needed has now reached a plateau.

I recognise that low-flying exercises are both militarily necessary and dangerous, but there have been reports that the recent tragic accident over Keswick in the constituency of the hon. Member for Workington (Mr. Campbell-Savours) was caused by a head-on collision. Will the Minister set up an inquiry to establish whether it is really necessary for aircraft to fly in opposite directions in these essential but dangerous exercises?

I can tell my right hon. Friend that the accident trend is definitely down, and that 1986 was the best year—[Interruption.] I am coming on to answer the question. As I said, 1986 was the best year for the lowest number of aircraft accidents. As regards the tragic accident in Cumbria, I have to await the board of inquiry report, but I shall bear in mind what my right hon. Friend has said.

Will the Minister and the House join me in ensuring that our sympathy is extended to the family of Flight Lieutenant Hill from RAF Lossiemouth in my constituency, who was the most recent victim of such an accident, which involved a Jaguar jet? Will he advise me what prior warning is now being given to those in the direct flight path of aircraft on such exercises in the light of the incident over Orkney last year when air traffic control at Kirkwall was not notified of such an exercise taking place? Will the Minister assure me that he will reject the blandishments of the hon. Member for Workington (Mr. Campbell-Savours) to the effect that all such exercises should be directed over the Highlands and Islands of Scotland? The people in that area are just as vulnerable as people elsewhere.

I am sure that the whole House will join the hon. Lady in paying tribute to the loyalty, skill and bravery of Royal Air Force pilots. The Ministry of Defence writes to hon. Members, representatives of the National Farmers Union and the press to warn them of low-flying exercises, but we cannot do that for each individual sortie.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the reason why the Royal Air Force has to conduct such sorties is that in modern fighter pilot conditions and raiding environments with strike aircraft the only way to survive is to fly low and fast? It is essential that our pilots are capable of doing that in peacetime in case they are ever exposed to wartime conditions in which, if we were not prepared, the ghastly attrition rate would be far more than we could afford.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. Low-flying training is the price of freedom, which the RAF has to pay on our behalf in order to defend our skies. Low-flying exercises are necessary to train our pilots to fly underneath enemy radar, and in wartime they would have to fly considerably lower than 250 ft.

I am sure that the Opposition welcome the Minister's statement that RAF pilots flying conventional aircraft are the price of freedom, as opposed to the Government's policy that the price of freedom is mass extermination. The Minister is reported to have said, while the House was in recess, that a certain attrition rate was to be expected in this type of training. What rate of attrition in terms of men, machines and cost is the RAF prepared to accept in this context, and is the Minister satisfied with the present training procedures?

Yes, we are satisfied with the present safety procedures. Sadly, with military aircraft, the attrition rate will clearly be higher than with civil aircraft, but, as I have said, we have an excellent safety record. The trend is down and our record is admired by many other countries and air forces.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he has plans to devolve more service establishments and jobs to Scotland and the north of England.

I am anxious to improve the geographic spread of defence employment, particularly in areas of high unemployment. Such moves must, however, be justifiable in both operational and economic terms.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that moving jobs northward is helpful to the regional economy, without requiring artificial subsidies? Can he tell us what progress has been made, whether earlier plans to transfer jobs to the Glasgow area have borne fruit and to what extent the jobs have been filled by local recruitment?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. The Glasgow programme is a good example of the Government's dispersal policy, with 1,330 extra jobs established there, of which 1,000 have been filled by local recruitment. The overwhelming majority of the jobs were dispersed from the south of England. We recognise that those jobs should be offset against further moves from posts out of London, but the net result at the end of the programme should be a gain of 1,400 jobs for Glasgow, offset by a similar loss of posts from London.

As it is Government policy to provide more rather than fewer jobs in inner London, will the Secretary of State resist the temptation to remove any defence jobs from areas such as Woolwich, which has suffered massively from the systematic transfer of defence jobs in the past few years and where unemployment is still more than 16 per cent.?

I very much appreciate that valid constituency point. It is established policy in the Department that every effort should be made to relocate work to the regions wherever it proves economically and operationally viable, but, of course, we also take into account the interests of the other areas concerned.

Will my right hon. Friend give a categorical assurance that there are no plans to remove any service jobs from Harrogate to Glasgow or anywhere else?

That would certainly not be in tune with the Government's policy, which is to disperse jobs to other areas from London, not from Harrogate.

When considering relocating jobs to the north of England and to Scotland, will the Minister bear in mind the very high rate of unemployment in Northern Ireland?

I certainly take that very much into account. As the hon. Gentleman knows, we place a large amount of defence contract work in Northern Ireland—not least the order placed by my Department with Harland and Wolff for a new auxiliary oiler replenishment vessel, which I very much hope will be completed to price and on time.

Will my right hon. Friend take note of the Government's recent commitment to augmenting the Merchant Marine in the event of war? Does he agree that it should be based in the north-east of England, preferably on Teesside, and will he ensure that it is not based in London?

I note my hon. Friend's comments. I am very conscious of the defence work carried out in my hon. Friend's area in the north-east of England. It is a highly valid part of our defence industry.

If the Minister is keen to secure defence jobs in areas of high unemployment, will he scrap the absurd suggestion to privatise jobs at COD Donnington, threatening the livelihood of more than 400 employees?

It is a matter, not of threatening jobs in terms of the area, but of trying to obtain better value for money in the way in which existing establishments are run. That must be in everyone's interests, because if the job is done more effectively there will be more money available for other defence work.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the future of Bramley camp, near Basingstoke.

My Department is considering the retention of part of the land for use for Army dry training and disposal of the remaining portion. It will be discussing its proposals in due course with the local authority.

Does my hon. Friend appreciate that would were the Property Services Agency to maximise the realisation of this capital asset, there would be a wholesale housing development that would run counter to the interests of local farmers, flout the wishes of county and district planners and go against the wishes of many of my constituents, particularly those in the villages of Bramley and Sherfield on Loddon? Will my hon. Friend take those factors as well as the economic factors into account?

I am sure that my hon. Friend will appreciate the great pressure upon the Ministry of Defence to sell surplus land. However, I can give my hon. Friend the assurance that there will be no wholesale housing development on that land. At a date convenient to my hon. Friend, I hope to be able to visit Bramley camp with him.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the progress of the management information system for Ministers programme in the Ministry of Defence.

The MINIS programme has been evolving steadily over the four years since it was introduced into my Department in 1983. It provides Ministers and top management with an overview of organisation, costs and activities throughout the Ministry and the service commands. For the future, and in line with the information requirements of the financial management initiative, we shall be further developing our management information systems to meet the information needs of top management and generally to stimulate a more systematic approach to monitoring the cost-effective use of resources at all levels.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that most encouraging reply. What further proposals does he have for linking MINIS with further aspects of the financial management initiative to gain more benefits in efficiency and operational effectiveness?

I very much appreciate my hon. Friend's remarks. MINIS has been only loosely linked with other financial management initiatives, staff responsibility budgets and executive responsibility budgets. Proposals are currently under consideration to encourage those management initiatives within a strategic framework spanning the Department.

May I ask the Secretary of State to include in this review the wastage caused by the out-of-date and unjust rules of the Ministry of Defence that require pregnant women to resign? I understand that, in particular, nurses employed by the Ministry of Defence must resign and therefore lose their seniority when they become pregnant. Is not this regulation out of date and outrageous in this day and age? Surely this regulation should be reviewed in the case of women serving in the Secretary of State's Department.

I appreciate the hon. Lady's question. Of course, we review any out-of-date regulations as often as we can. I might point out that ladies in such a position as outlined by the hon. Lady are perfectly free to rejoin the services if they wish.

Has the management information system brought to my right hon. Friend's attention the fact that the Territorial Army provides more than 50 per cent. of the 1st British Corps and most of our national defence at less than 4 per cent. of the Army budget? Is that not more than enough justification for the Territorial enhancement programme to which my right hon. Friend must stick?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. Last week I was extremely glad to have the opportunity to address the Council of Territorial Auxiliary and Volunteer Reserve Associations and to make some of the points raised by my hon. Friend to it. There is no doubt that the contribution, both in quantity and quality, of the Territorial Army is now an absolutely major factor in the efficiency of the British Army.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has to meet the Soviet Defence Minister to discuss conventional defence in Europe.

I have no plans to meet the Soviet Defence Minister. We are, however, taking an active and positive part in the continuing negotiations on mutual and balanced force reductions dealing with conventional forces, and in the discussions on the mandate for new negotiations on conventional stability.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Although he has no plans to see his counterpart in the Soviet Union, what progress has been made towards establishing at least a basis for future conventional arms reduction talks?

The North Atlantic Council communiqué, which was issued in June 1987, repeated the priority that NATO Foreign Ministers attach to agreeing a mandate for new negotiations covering the whole of Europe, from the Atlantic to the Urals, The new negotiations will cover both conventional stability, that is to say lower force levels and further confidence, and security-building measures building upon the Stockholm document of September 1986.

Does the Secretary of State support direct negotiations between the NATO and Warsaw Pact organisations, and if not, why not?

All the negotiations between East and West take place in different fora according to the subject of the negotiations, as I am sure the right hon. Gentleman knows. Considerable difficulties were faced in finding the right forum for the part of the negotiations that the right hon. Gentleman has in mind, but I believe that they are now resolved and that the discussions can proceed.

In any discussions on disarmament, will my right hon. Friend pay especial attention to chemical arid biological weapons? Their inclusion in any negotiations is of great importance to the West.

I agree with my hon. Friend. The Government have long felt that there should be a complete worldwide ban on all chemical and biological weapons. We are making this a major feature of our suggested negotiating position for all further arms reduction talks.

Is there a common negotiating position within NATO on conventional force reductions? In other words, is NATO in a position to start negotiating? Secondly, will any negotiations in respect of battlefield nuclear weapons be linked to the conventional talks, or dealt with separately?

There is clear agreement among the NATO Allies on how to proceed with the talks. We are extremely disappointed, however, that the East has still not responded substantively to the Western proposal of December 1985 to build on areas of agreement between the two sides. Battlefield nuclear weapons will not be addressed in the current INF negotiations, but will be dealt with in subsequent negotiations.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about the future defence of the Falkland Islands.

As announced in the Gracious Speech, the Government will stand by their pledges to the people of the Falkland Islands, while seeking more normal relations with Argentina. We shall continue to maintain a military presence at a level necessary to deter aggression arid defend the islands.

Will Ministers regularly inform the House of the progressive fall in the cost of this necessary and righteous commitment'? To what extent can the use of the unrivalled training facilities in the Falklands be set against the expense?

I can assure my hon. Friend that we shall keep the House informed in the normal way through the Defence White Paper and other means of our efforts in the Falkland Islands. I endorse what he said about the value of the Falkland Islands in providing training for all our armed forces. We fully appreciate the importance of that.

Would it not help the cause of peace in the Falklands if the Government took a far more vigorous initiative in organising discussions with the Government of Argentina? Does the Minister realise that the position of the Falklands empowers the military caste in Argentina to be a permanent threat to President Alfonsin and the democratic forces in Argentina? It is therefore a matter of real necessity for the preservation of democracy in Argentina for us to take the initiative in discussions about the Falklands.

Relations between the United Kingdom and Argentina are primarily a matter for my right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary. We want the restoration of normal relations with Argentina, and we hope that in due course they will come about.

Can my hon. Friend confirm that since the construction of the new Falklands airport the cost of defending the Falklands has been reduced accordingly?

It is true that the construction of the Mount Pleasant complex and the airport permits rapid reinforcement and has enabled some reduction in force numbers to be brought about. That has reduced, and will continue to reduce, the cost of maintaining the defence of the islands.

For how long do the Government intend to persist in their policy of privatising the defence of the Falklands by using Bristow Helicopters and flying foreign-made aircraft to support our armed services? Are the armed services not to be excluded from the Government's obsession with privatisation? Does the Minister not realise the sense of outrage that is felt in constituencies such as mine that are suffering massive job losses because the Government will not provide the helicopters that our armed services need, while providing long-term work for private companies using foreign-made aircraft?

We have provided a large number of new helicopters. The hon. Gentleman made his constituency point. We shall continue to provide our armed forces in the Falkland Islands, and elsewhere, with the equipment that they need.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the ordering of a second Trident submarine.

We plan to place the order for the second Trident submarine shortly.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that this second submarine, and subsequent submarines, will be at a lower price than the initial purchase? Can he add further to the comments of our right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence, who, in answer to the first question, spoke about the creation of jobs in Scotland? Is there not also a case for illustrating the enormous impact on employment that that will have elsewhere in the United Kingdom? Can he comment further on the cost of this programme relative to the dollar, because for many months the strong pound appears to have been making the Trident programme cheaper and cheaper?

Yes, we would expect the unit priced of follow-on submarines to be lower than that for the SSBN-05. The direct job creation effect of the second Trident order will be about 7,000 jobs, which will be concentrated mainly in the north of England, and, as my right hon. Friend said, in Scotland. Only a minority of the total cost reflects the purchase in dollars. Clearly, the stronger the pound against the dollar, the lower the cost in terms of sterling.

Instead of proceeding with this order, would it not be better to equip the lead ship of the type 23 frigate programme with a close-in weapon system, as was confirmed in the press last week? Is not this cheeseparing policy the result of irreconcilable objectives rather than supreme confidence in the effectiveness of the Sea Wolf anti-missile system?

The hon. Gentleman should recognise that the policies of one-sided nuclear disarmament that he and his party advocate have been decisively rejected. Therefore, there is no question of cancelling the second order for Trident.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the parliamentary constituency of Barrow and Furness was the 326th seat to be won by the Government in the recent election? Is that not a tribute to the workers in the shipyards as well as to the Government's policy of maintaining the nuclear deterrent? If, as I understand, the negotiations for Trident 2 have been concluded, will my hon. Friend ensure that the order is placed speedily, without any further delay?

The fact that Barrow and Furness was the 326th Conservative victory was also a tribute to my hon. Friend's energetic work on behalf of his constituents. He will appreciate that such a major order takes time, but we shall certainly place the order as soon as we can.

As the Minister has not returned to the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Attercliffe, (Mr. Duffy), will he concede that it is disgraceful that our most modern frigate is leaving the docks in a condition that would render it vulnerable if it had to do any service in the Gulf? Does he not agree that our men are entitled to better protection than that which

The hon. Gentleman should appreciate that the prime anti-air attack protection for the frigate is from the vertical launch Sea Wolf system, which is extremely effective. Additional protection, provided by another close-in system, which would add to the cost and the weight of the frigate, would add only little, if any, additional protection from an air attack.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will restrict the extent of armed forces helicopter manoeuvres in upland sheep rearing areas; and if he will make a statement.

We are advised by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food that there is no evidence that noise from low-flying aircraft has any harmful effect on sheep or lambs, during lambing or at other times. None the less, claims for damage or loss with appropriate supporting evidence are considered sympathetically.

Is the Minister aware that not only low-flying helicopters, but helicopters that land as part of their manoeuvres, have caused abortions in sheep and, therefore, unnecessary losses for farmers? Is he further aware that the RAF locally sometimes has ad hoc agreements with the farmers union to ensure the minimising of such losses? Will he encourage the development of such agreements to keep down the losses for farmers in uplands areas?

Yes, I agree with the hon. Gentleman, and wherever there are ad hoc agreements between the RAF and landowners and farmers I encourage them. There is an adequate compensation scheme, and if the hon. Gentleman writes to me about any particular incident I shall investigate it.

Will my hon. Friend give particular attention to the problem of heavily used training areas where helicopters are part of that training, such as the Salisbury Plain training area? May I thank him for the eternal courtesy and care with which he and his officials cope with complaints from members of the public on this issue? Will he have a word with our right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport about the need to increase controls over microlight aircraft, which are rightly gaining the reputation of being the most unlikely and unhelpful form of recreation?

I shall certainly convey my hon. Friend's comments to the Department of Transport.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 14 July.

This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. I was also present at Victoria station to mark the arrival of the King of Morocco. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today, including one with the Prime Minister of Sri Lanka.

When the Prime Minister said on 27 January 1986. in the middle of the Westland affair, that she did not expect to be Prime Minister by 6 o'clock that evening, what did she mean?

That allegation has been made many times. I have nothing further to add to the many statements and replies that I have already given.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 14 July.

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

At a time when teachers are widely welcoming the Government's bold reforms in education, and when the fastest growing teachers' union, the Professional Association of Teachers, is urging no-strike agreements on the Secretary of State, is it not utterly disgraceful that a small minority of teachers in England and Wales, although happily not in Staffordshire, are going on strike? Will she condemn that and urge the Secretary of State to introduce his Green Paper as soon as possible?

I agree with my hon. Friend that teachers' strikes are damaging to the education of children, and in some cases they are meant to do just that. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education arid Science will introduce the Green Paper on new permanent machinery for negotiations as soon as possible, and it is expected that that will include the possibility of no-strike agreements.

When the Prime Minister visits the United States this weekend, will she buy a copy of "Spy catcher"?

I thought that the right hon. Gentleman agreed that all members of the security services, present and former, have a duty of confidentiality to the Crown and that he would endeavour to uphold that duty.

The duty of confidentiality is vital and it must be honoured, but does the Prime Minister seriously think that the best way to uphold it is to take action in appeal courts in Britain and Australia and to engage in action which, with the arrival of every transatlantic airliner, is being turned into high farce?

How else does the right hon. Gentleman think that one can enforce a duty of confidentiality, except in a court of law?

Has my right hon. Friend had a chance to study the judge's comments following the award of more than £1 million to Mr. Samir Aboul-Hosn, who suffered brain damage? Does she think that this country is in danger of entering into an era of defensive medicine? Does she think that this is the time for a Royal Commission on medical negligence and how it is treated?

We have not considered a Royal Commission on medical negligence. The case to which my hon. Friend referred was one in which the courts decided precisely the appropriate damages to be paid. My hon. Friend is aware that we cannot interfere in any way with the decision of the courts, nor, in that case, would we wish to do so. I shall consider further what my hon. Friend has said.

In view of the Prime Minister's late conversion to a recognition of the crisis in inner cities, will she now consider recent reports which argue that something like £82 billion will be necessary to overcome the problems of the inner cities? Will she therefore revise the Government's non-serious approach on that matter and increase the amounts that will be available next year for local authorities to ensure that inner cities' problems are tackled by the duly democratically elected representatives of the people?

As the hon. Gentleman is aware, one of the difficulties in tackling the problems of the inner cities is that some of the elected Left-wing councils are hostile to private enterprise and hostile to the very businesses that can bring in the extra jobs that the cities need so much. With regard to expenditure. this Government have spent more than £2·2 billion since 1979 and that is a very considerable increase in real terms over the expenditure under the previous Administration.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that if the news regarding the reduction of gas prices or the reduction in unemployment below 3 million, or news of other benefits such as huge profits for British Steel, had come along a few weeks earlier, not only would we have needed an extension to the Tory side of the House, but the opinions polls would have been increasingly irrelevant? Will my right hon. Friend therefore either ban opinion polls at election time or, if not, will she ensure that the statistical base from which those polls are extrapolated is a little more than simply two people per constituency throughout the country?

There has been a considerable increase in future confidence in the improvement of the economy as the figures have steadily mounted and people have seen that industry is in a very fit and healthy state. I do not think that anything would be gained by banning opinion polls. I am sure that they would still be taken and they would only be leaked. It is far better that they should be open.

When the Prime Minister goes to Washington, will she note the contrast between the democratically elected Congress of the United States currently exposing the existence of a state within a state and her persistent refusal to allow any independent investigation of the quite serious charges raised in Mr. Peter Wright's book about covert operations against a former Prime Minister?

I do not answer for the United States, but I ask the right hon. Gentleman to consider which has the more effective security service.

Will my right hon. Friend reconsider her reply about the inner cities? Does she agree that the most important step to take for the inner cities is to introduce the community charge so that those who vote will be left with the financial responsibility for the way in which they have cast their vote?

Yes. When the community charge is in place and all people properly contribute to the services given by the local authority and for which the local authority is responsible, we shall have much better accountability and that will lead to a much better use of money than at present.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 14 July.

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

Is the Prime Minister aware of the concern felt in Wales at the lack of resources in health and social services? Is she aware that the budget of Gwynedd health authority has been so stretched that ambulance journeys to clinics have been cut, hitting low-income families? Is she further aware that last week Gwynedd county council social services department had to cut hack on home help services, hitting the elderly, sick and disabled? Will she encourage the Secretary of State for Wales to fight in the Cabinet for more resources in those areas?

I seem to remember that on a comparatively recent visit to Wales I went to a very new hospital, which was one of five major hospitals in Wales. With regard to health in Wales, from 1979 to March 1988 nearly £500 million will have been invested in the capital estate of the hospital and community health services. Expenditure on the National Health Service in Wales has risen by one third, after allowing for general inflation, between 1979–80 and 1987–88. Between 1979 and 1986 the National Health Service in Wales treated 23·6 per cent. more patients than previously.

During the course of her busy day, will my right hon. Friend, when considering the Government's economic policy, give close and careful consideration to comments made by the right hon. Member for Birmingham, Sparkbrook (Mr. Hattersley), who said that there was a race on between the economic crisis and the general election? Will she also consider the comment by the hon. Member for Dagenham (Mr. Gould) that there is no immediate prospect of an economic crisis? How does my right hon. Friend square that apparent disagreement? [Interruption.]

Order. That is rather wide of the Prime Minister's responsibilities.

Will Customs officials be authorised to take from passengers arriving from the United States copies of Mr. Wright's book? If not, what possible excuse is there for carrying on with the case in Australia? Is the Prime Minister aware that we on the Opposition Benches have no sympathy at all for Wright, a wretched man who is obviously acting out of greed and spite? Is there not now the strongest possible case for a full-scale judicial inquiry into whether MI5 officials carried out subversive and criminal activities against an elected Government in the 1970s?

It is technically possible to introduce a ban by amending the open general import licence. My noble Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has advised his colleagues against such action, because it is likely to be ineffective. However, the question of possible legal action for an account of profits made from publication of the book in the United States is under consideration. As the hon. Gentleman knows, the purpose of the original case was to uphold the duty of confidentiality, which is necessary for the effectiveness of the service.

Has my right hon. Friend seen today's report on Trident by the Comptroller and Auditor General? The report states that the estimated cost of that project is likely to be reduced by some £1,500 million. Does that projection not show the wisdom of the Conservative party in sticking to the project? Has my right hon. Friend noticed that the SDP leadership has belatedly come round to supporting Trident?

Yes, I saw that figure. It is good news that the price has come down. It is very effective expenditure on a deterrent for this country.

asked the Prime Minister if she will place in the Library a transcript of the television interview on Sunday 7 June with Mr. David Frost in which she referred to the Westland crisis.

I understand that a copy of the transcript is available in the Library.

Will the Prime Minister make just one reference to the "many times" when she has said that she knew what she had done as an explanation of why she said that she might not be Prime Minister at 6 o'clock that evening?

I have repeatedly told the hon. Gentleman that I have nothing to add. He knows full well that I am here and that I am intending to stay.

Did not that television interview, and others over the next two or three days, help to produce an extremely satisfactory result four days later?

Yes, Sir.

Will the Prime Minister take an opportunity today—[Interruption.]

Order. The hon. Gentleman has clearly not read the Order Paper. Supplementaries must relate to the main question.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 14 July.

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

Whatever the original purpose of the Government's case against Mr. Wright, now that the book has been published in the United States, is widely read and distributed in every major European capital bar one. and is no doubt available for scrutiny by the Kremlin, why should Britain suffer a unique ban on this book? Is it the nation's security, or the Prime Minister's stubbornness?

As I have said many times, Mr. Wright, as a former member of the security services. owes a lifelong duty of confidentiality to the Crown. Most people accept that. Some people wish to undermine it. May I make it clear that this point is essential to the effectiveness of the security service. Some people wish to undermine the security service. On this side of the House, we wish to uphold it.

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 14 July.

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

Further to the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Cannock and Burntwood (Mr. Howarth), is my right hon. Friend aware that last year 24,000 teachers left the National Union of Teachers and that thousands of other teachers refused to heed its call to strike—all in the interests of children's education? Does she know that parents as well as a large number of teachers are wholeheartedly behind a no-strike deal for teachers, and will she put on all the pressure that she can to achieve such a deal in our schools?

Parents are grateful to those teachers—there are many of them—who refused to go on strike because they put children's education first. I believe that the majority of teachers would welcome a no-strike agreement.