To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what discussions he has had with his opposite number in the Republic on amending the Anglo-Irish Agreement to enable Northern Ireland politicians to have a greater say in the governance of the Province.

None, Sir. The agreement is no obstacle to such a development.

In his speech last night my right hon. Friend said that a devolved settlement would have major implications for the agreement, and the greater the devolution the wider the impact. In his use of the word "devolution," does my right hon. Friend restrict himself entirely to the concept of legislative devolution, or would any form of devolution create an Ulster interface to the agreement?

I referred to what I thought was the desirable ultimate objective. I am sure that my hon. Friend will have noticed that I used the phrase "to or towards devolution." In other words, I am certainly prepared to consider any proposals and alternatives that any hon. Members or others may wish to put forward.

In the light of the views expressed in yesterday's debate by the spokesman for the official Opposition, the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, North (Mr. McNamara), and others who participated in the debate, is the Secretary of State prepared to consider, as an alternative to the present agreement, a new agreement that would achieve the aims and objectives of the earlier failed agreement, namely, peace, stability and reconciliation?

This is an issue that the right hon. Gentleman and I have discussed on a number of occasions, so he knows the answer. My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, the hon. Member for Peterborough (Dr. Mawhinney), reiterated it when he replied to the debate. The right hon. Gentleman must not seek to impose conditions on any discussions that might occur, as my hon. Friend said to the hon. Member for Belfast, East, (Mr. Robinson) last night. I have made it absolutely clear that I am prepared to enter into discussions with right hon. and hon. Members, without conditions.

Will my right hon. Friend address his mind once again to the policy that was set out by the late Airey Neave in the Conservative party manifesto of 1979, when the Conservative party committed itself, in the absence of devolved government, to setting up a regional council, or councils, with widely devolved powers over local matters? Mr. Neave and our party envisaged, not that there would be an Assembly with legislative powers, but that we should govern Northern Ireland more closely in line with the way in which we govern Scotland, England and Wales. Will my right hon. Friend look at that again?

I have made clear to my hon. Friend and others what I think is the desirable objective. However, I have also made it clear that I wish to enter into discussions with the parties and other interested groups in Northern Ireland to consider the basis on which it might be possible to start the process of working and of taking some responsibility together for the affairs of the Province. To repeat what I said yesterday, it is no good people standing at a distance and saying that they are being treated as a colony, but refusing to make any effort to see how they might take greater responsibility for their own affairs.

Will the Secretary of State confirm that no party in Northern Ireland is excluded from the Anglo-Irish process? Apart from a party's ability to raise matters in the House, can it approach the Government at any time to have matters placed on the agenda of the Anglo-Irish Conference?

The mistake of the Unionist parties is to elevate the conference as though it were a method for the governance of Northern Ireland. That is a phrase that I corrected in the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Newbury (Sir M. McNair-Wilson). The right hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Mr. Molyneaux) completely misrepresented the position last night and implied that there would be joint authority. It is a fair opportunity for the Irish Government to put forward views and proposals. That opportunity is more peculiarly available to every hon. Member. I find it difficult to accept any criticism from people who singularly fail to use all the unique opportunities that are more immediately and directly available to them than are available to the Irish Government.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that any proposals for a devolved legislative Assembly in Ulster are bound to have an impact across the Irish sea in Scotland? The Government should tread with some care in this matter, as we have seats in Scotland that are still at risk.

It may disappoint or appal my hon. Friend to discover that I was born in Glasgow and therefore have some understanding of Scottish issues. Having been born in Glasgow of a Welsh mother and an English father, and being Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, I am acutely aware of the differences in the United Kingdom.

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

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

Since I last answered questions in the House on 26 May 1988 nine people have been killed in Northern Ireland. These deaths include the murder of a full-time UDR soldier by the Provisional IRA, the murder of two civilians in Belfast, and the murder by the Provisional IRA of six off-duty soldiers at Lisburn on 15 June. The Provisional IRA claimed responsibility for the death of one of the civilians and, while no organisation has claimed responsibility for the other death, it is believed to have been the work of a Loyalist paramilitary group.

I join the Secretary of State in deploring the record of carnage that he read out. Does he agree, however, that Amnesty International's report undermines the legitimacy of the security forces if there is any suggestion that they operate outside the law? Therefore, will he investigate the statement by the RUC in Belfast Crown court that it had decided neither to question nor to charge Mr. R. Jackson, a Loyalist paramilitary who was involved in the murder of Mr. William Strathearn, about using a gun supplied by two members of the RUC who are currently serving life imprisonment for their part in the crime? Can he justify two members of the RUC being in prison for life while the third person who took part in the offence was not charged? For once, will he not say that if I have any evidence I should give it to the authorities, because this comes from the RUC?

I should need to study the hon. Gentleman's question very carefully. I should like to know to what period it refers. I am bound to say that if there is evidence to that effect it must be dealt with in the proper way and should be submitted.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make a statement about the shooting down of a helicopter in Northern Ireland? Is he aware that an Army officer appeared on television and told the people of Northern Ireland that Russia was put out of Afghanistan by the same procedure—the shooting down of helicopters—and that, if it continued, British policy in Northern Ireland would have to change? Will he comment on those remarks made by a British Army officer on the night after the shooting down took place?

I did not see that broadcast or hear that particular comment. Any development of a threat to helicopters would be a serious matter and involve alterations to the operating practices of the security forces. As we know, in Northern Ireland the security forces will, with their skill and courage, adapt and make the necessary changes to their operating procedures to combat whatever may be the assaults and devices of the terrorists. If, after 20 years, the terrorists do not know that and have not realised that there is no military way by which they can win this campaign, I wonder whether they will ever learn.

We all condemn violence, but is there not still a case for the phased withdrawal of British troops? I suggest the setting up of workers' defence groups, based on the trade unions, for the defence of the community and to counter sectarianism. That may be anathema to the Tory party and the Secretary of State, but will he at least give us his views on that suggestion, which is important to individuals who believe that class issues still prevail in that troubled part of the United Kingdom?

British troops are in Northern Ireland to protect the community from terrorism, from whichever quarter it may come. They will remain there as long as the community faces such a threat. The people who make necessary the presence of the troops are the people who conduct the terrorist campaign. They are, in a real sense, the "troops in" movement for Northern Ireland, because that is why the troops are there. I do not begin to support the suggestion that trade union groups could provide a security presence, but I should not like to let pass the opportunity to pay tribute to what trade unions have done in Northern Ireland in standing against sectarianism. The whole Province is in their debt.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, despite the courage and dedication of Sir John Hermon, last night's vote has not helped morale in the RUC? Therefore, is it not vital to get this whole issue of the disciplinary proceedings over the Stalker affair out of the way as quickly as possible?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. There is the implication, in connection with the Stalker-Sampson affair and the original shooting, that no action was taken in pursuit of the matter. As we know, four members of the RUC were charged with murder. There has been a massive reorganisation of the RUC, and a significant number of changes have been made, some of them way back in 1983. That shows how long ago some of these issues were being dealt with. I also agree that it is desirable that these matters are finally resolved, and, if disciplinary charges are to be made, that they are dealt with. There may be an announcement shortly in respect of the recommendations made by Mr. Charles Kelly, which are now with the Chief Constable.

Will the Secretary of State join me and other hon. Members in wishing a speedy recovery to 14-year-old Gillian Latimer, who was so tragically and callously injured by the IRA in my constituency earlier this week? Will he also commend the courage of the driver of the school bus, who brought it to a halt so quickly after being thrown out of his seat that other children were not injured in the crash that should have ensued? At a time when the IRA is plunging to even greater depths, how can the Minister justify the denial of resources to the RUC in the frontier areas, where some of the police stations have cut their hours to 50 per cent. of what they were a few months ago?

The whole House will wish to endorse the hon. Gentleman's opening comments. As he knows, I commented about our feelings for Gillian Latimer and her school friends and on the courage of the driver on that occasion.

In view of the point put to my right hon. Friend by the hon. Member for Brent, East (Mr. Livingstone) and other Labour Members, will my right hon. Friend confirm that the IRA is conducting more than one campaign—not only a campaign of terrorism, but a campaign to undermine the credibility of British justice? Would it not be a matter of some shame and disgrace if Labour Members were to lend themselves, either advertently or inadvertently., to such a campaign?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend that part of the IRA campaign is to look for people who will repeat various allegations and distortions that it wishes to propagate. Looking at the latest figures, I should like to see some of that enthusiasm for civil rights, personal liberty and freedom addressed to the issue of the punishment shootings and beatings that are being conducted by some people at present. Last year more than 200 young people and others in Northern Ireland were involved in knee-capping and beatings of one sort or another of the most violent and vicious kind.

I am sure that the Secretary of State will agree that we all want confidence in the security forces. We welcome the figures that he has given relating to arms finds, and so on, but is he able to tell us about the new appointments to the Police Authority? We know why the people involved are not named—I do not challenge that—but can he tell us how many of the new members were drawn from the minority community, how many of those not reappointed voted to appoint an investigating officer to inquire further into Mr. Sampson's allegations about the conduct of the investigation into certain matters arising from two of the shootings and an alleged lack of assistance to the Stalker-Sampson inquiry team. and, finally, how many of those reappointed were from the minority community and how many of those who were reappointed voted for the defeated proposal?

On the latter point, I am not able to give the hon. Gentleman the information that he seeks. That is, of course, a matter for the Police Authority and, in its very full statement, it made clear many of the considerations that it had in mind.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he has any plans to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the National Health Service; and if he will make a statement on the future of health care in Northern Ireland.

Any plans to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the National Health Service in Northern Ireland will be left to individual health boards to decide. As regards the future of health care in Northern Ireland, that is as set out in the "Regional Strategy for the Health and Personal Social Services 1987–92", published in August 1987.

Will the Minister take this opportunity to thank the health workers of Northern Ireland for their dedication and courage over recent years? Will he also take this opportunity of looking again at the cuts in the budget for the Northern health board and the fact that the board is underfunded in terms of health spending? Will he also give the House and the people of Northern Ireland a commitment that he will set up a public inquiry to consider those cuts?

I join the hon. Gentleman in paying tribute to the health workers of Northern Ireland. They themselves have something to celebrate. In the seven years to December 1986, the number of employees in the Health Service in Northern Ireland increased by 9 per cent., hospital-related services by 10 per cent., health centres by over 50 per cent., health visiting services by 14 per cent. and home nursing services by 40 per cent. There has been a large increase in health spending over the past 10 years. I cannot give the hon. Gentleman a guarantee about setting up a public inquiry for the Northern health board over its proposals for hospital closures. This has been debated thoroughly throughout Northern Ireland over many months. There has been every opportunity—an opportunity that they have not taken—for the leaders of the trade unions to come and discuss it with me. I believe that the Northern health board's strategy for rationalising acute care and community hospitals in Northern Ireland will benefit all the people in its area.

Will the Minister join me in expressing grave concern about the health of the elderly and the disabled, who are being deprived of basic home-help and telephone connection facilities because of the cuts that are being imposed on the health boards? Many of these people live in isolated rural communities and their only contact with others is by means of the telephone or through the home-help service. Will the Minister take the necessary steps to provide additional finance to reinstate these greatly needed services?

The hon. Gentleman knows that care in the community is a main plank of our strategy in Northern Ireland. I cannot accept that the rationalisation that is taking place in the Health Service has led to a diminution of care, although the hon. Gentleman is right to say that there are fewer home helps than there were. However, in proportionate terms there are still roughly two or three times as many in Northern Ireland as are available in the rest of the country. Much of the service that is provided by them is being assisted through an increased number of health centres and through residential accommodation and the voluntary sector. We shall continue to build on services in the community.

Will the Minister accept from me that many of the members of health boards in Northern Ireland are nominated and are not representative of the people? The Northern health board's strategy for health services and hospital provision in future is not the one that is desired and does not reflect the will of the general public. Will the Minister institute an inquiry immediately into the basis of the board's decisions, which will affect the major hospitals in the area?

I shall not. I do not believe that the representatives of the district councils and the members of the Northern health board can agree among themselves on what they want. The mix of the board—it is a large body with representatives of the entire community within the area that it covers—is extremely representative of the public in the area. I believe that it has come to the right decisions in its strategic proposals.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what representations he has received recently from interest groups in the education field.

Since Easter this year I have received many representations, written and oral, on a wide range of education topics. These include provision in schools, school development proposals, cross-community contact schemes, youth service review and funding for arts, museums, sport and community services.

Will the Minister confirm that at a recent meeting with representatives of the parents' action group for education—they had come to see him about extra cover for absentee teachers—he shouted at them and thumped the table when they refused to agree with him on where cuts should be imposed in the education service to enable the extra cover to be made available? If that is true, will the hon. Gentleman take the opportunity to apologise for his childish behaviour?

Of course it is not true. I am neither a shouter nor a table thumper. I had a constructive discussion with the representatives of the parents' group. They made clear their concern about substitute cover in primary schools, especially in P1 and P2. I undertook to consider their views, along with others that have been expressed, in the review that we are conducting, as promised in the management-union negotiated settlement that was arrived at last summer.

What representations has my hon. Friend received from the Catholic hierarchy about the proposed education reform, and what has been done to remove its misgivings?

I have received representations from the leaders of the Church and from the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools. Representatives from both organisations will see me in the near future to discuss their representations. Representatives of the Church leaders will see my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, and I will be in attendance.

Will the Minister confirm that one of the more significant interest groups in the educational affairs of Northern Ireland is the Government of the Irish Republic, using the offices of the Anglo-Irish Conference, where they purport to represent what I think is called the Nationalist community in Northern Ireland? As the Minister can ignore and deliberately take no account of the wishes of the remainder of the people in Northern Ireland, but is under an obligation to work thoroughly to reach agreement with the representatives of the Government of the Irish Republic, how does he intend to work in that regard?

The answer to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question is no. The answer to the second part of his question is that with all groups in Northern Ireland, whether they be from the Unionist or Nationalist communities, I will seek to find as broad an area of support as possible to achieve higher education standards and greater parental choice and involvement in the education process. I hope that it will not be too long before the hon. Gentleman lets me have his views so that I may take those into account in the decision-making process.

What is the Minister's response to the parents and teachers at Skegoneill primary school in north Belfast, who see the Minister allowing the board to close their school, which by September will be fully integrated in terms of student numbers, while at the same time the Minister has agreed to the building of a new Catholic school 100 yds up the same road? The Minister has told us that integrated education is the way forward. Why has he made this decision? Does the decision stem from insensitivity, arrogance or incompetence? What is the reason for it?

The reason is that the Skegoneill primary school was not viable. Whatever the composition of the school force, it was the test of viability that had to be applied to granting approval to the proposals from the education and library board. I noticed that the hon. Lady did not say that within a matter of days of the closure of Skegoneill I accepted Hazelwood college—not far from Skegoneill—into maintained status. I am disappointed that the hon. Lady has not welcomed that decision.

Will the Minister reaffirm in the House that it is still the iniquitous policy of his Department to discriminate entirely against independent Protestant schools and tell them that they will receive no money whatsoever from his Department?

If the hon. Gentleman is referring to the schools that have a relationship with his denomination, it is my understanding that those schools have never made application for funds from my Department. I further understand that it is the view of his party and Church that they would not make such an application as a matter of principle. If the hon. Gentleman is telling me otherwise, I would be very happy to discuss the matter with him.

Is the Minister aware of the great concern that exists about his proposal, or suggestion, that the Irish language should not be a foundation subject? Will he take steps to ensure that that very important part of his tradition and mine and his cultural background and mine is included as a core foundation subject in the curriculum?

I am aware of the concern about the Irish language. That concern has been reflected to me by organisations, including the hon. Gentleman's party, and I thank him for that, and by a number of individuals. It has also been reflected by the Catholic Church. We are looking at all the proposals. However, I join the hon. Gentleman in affirming that it is important that the children of Northern Ireland should have some understanding of their cultural heritage and of the diversity of the cultural heritage that applies in the Province.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what recent discussions he has had with the Government of the Irish Republic concerning British-Irish extradition arrangements.

At the Intergovernmental Conference on 17 June we discussed the serious difficulties which had arisen in recent extradition cases and we reaffirmed our joint determination to ensure effective extradition arrangements.

Although in theory the district courts in this country and in Ireland should dispense justice without fear or favour, is it not inevitable that in the district courts magistrates will be in the greatest fear of the consequences of taking extradition action against members of the IRA? Does the Minister not welcome the Dail's decision on Tuesday that all such cases should in future be dealt with in the High Court? Will he also say whether he has raised with the Irish Government why it was that McVeigh was not kept in custody once it was discovered that the necessary identification was not to hand to allow his commitment for extradition to this country?

As I made clear in my original answer, we had a full discussion with Irish Ministers on this matter, and it is clear that the Irish Government are very concerned about the events that occurred. The hon. Gentleman himself referred to the debate in the Dail. The Irish Minister of Justice made a statement in the Dail making it clear that the Irish Government will appeal against the decision of the district judge. I understand that the Irish Government are also sympathetic to the idea of making changes of the kind that the hon. Gentleman mentioned.

Given that Mr. Justice Ruane acted perfectly correctly and within the law, given that in recent years Law Officers from both Britain and Ireland have failed to make sensitive extradition warrants impermeable to challenge, and given the common practice of an officer from the jurisdiction seeking extradition to provide identification in court, why were not those steps and every other step taken in the McVeigh case?

That is primarily a matter for my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General. However, the hon. Gentleman will know that in the McVeigh case the procedure which did not lead to a successful completion of the extradition application arose under the 1965 legislation, and that the court's interpretation and approach had not been expected. The greatest efforts had been made by my right hon. and learned Friend and by the British authorities to comply with all the Irish authorities' requirements. The Irish authorities themselves recognised that and shared to the full our concern about the outcome of that case.

Will the Secretary of State confirm that whenever there is a request from the Dublin authorities for the extradition of persons from Northern Ireland it is honoured, regardless of the nature of the crime involved? Likewise, when there are extraditions to Northern Ireland, to Great Britain, of persons who are living in the Irish Republic, for what is usually called ordinary crime, there is also no problem. Problems with extradition cases arise only when those to be extradited are accused of terrorist crime. Will the Secretary of State comment on that point?

My concern—and it is not necessarily implicit in the way in which the hon. Member puts his question—is to make extradition work. In the fight against terrorism it is vital to both countries that there is effective extradition, whatever the type of crime. It is unacceptable for that not to be the case, and we are determined to make it work.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he will make a statement on the latest unemployment figures for Northern Ireland.

The May unemployment figures, which are the latest available, are encouraging. They show a decrease of 2,113 from April and a decrease of 9,949 from May last year. The Government continue to give a high priority to the reduction of unemployment in Northern Ireland and provide a wide range of employment, training and enterprise measures for that purpose.

However one calculates the Northern Ireland unemployment figures, whether in absolute terms or in terms relative to England or with the past; whether one compares Protestant with Catholic unemployment, and Protestant unemployment is still higher than it is in this country—or whether one uses the Government's new statistical techniques or traditional techniques, the fact remains that unemployment in Northern Ireland is a disgrace. It fuels sectarianism and paramilitarism. What will the Government do, and how will the privatisation of Harland and Wolff assist in that situation?

I see no direct link between privatisation and unemployment. As to the hon. Gentleman's other point, the Government operate a wide range of measures in Northern Ireland to promote industry and to organise training and employment. They are easily the most generous in the United Kingdom and they will continue. As to the disparity in unemployment between Protestants and Catholics, there is to be a debate on the Government's White Paper tomorrow. We are committed to equality of employment opportunities and the hon. Gentleman will learn from tomorrow's debate the firm proposals that we intend bringing forward on that score.

In view of speculation in the morning newspapers, will the Minister say whether plans for the privatisation of Harland and Wolff are to be announced in the House, or outside? If the Government have such plans, what attempts has the Minister made to ensure that there is job security, to convince the shipyard that there will be intervention funding and to say whether there will be access to naval orders?

The number of people employed in any company should depend on efficiency and profitability, not on public or private ownership. I said in my response to the Adjournment debate on 27 May that if there were to be an expression of interest in the acquisition of Harland and Wolff the Government would take it seriously. An expression of interest in the acquisition of Harland and Wolff has now come forward from Tikkoo Cruise Line Ltd. The Government will consider that and any proposals from any other parties that might lead to the privatisation of the company.

Since, according to press speculation—again, it is press speculation—Mr. Tikkoo has denied that he has any interest whatever in being a shipbuilder, will the Minister state categorically whether the Government have approached Mr. Tikkoo, or whether Mr. Tikkoo has approached the Government.

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that I have met Mr. Tikkoo and discussed the proposal in outline. He is indeed interested in the acquisition of the yard.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what was the average number of O-level passes, grades A to C or CSE grade 1, per pupil in the last year for which statistics are available; and if he will make a statement.

The information is not available in the form requested. However, information from the school leavers survey shows that of all pupils who left school in 1985–86, 12·2 per cent. had a highest qualification of five or more O-levels. That compares with the 11·3 per cent. of school leavers in England and 10·4 per cent. in Wales. On the other hand, a relatively higher proportion of pupils in Northern Ireland left school with no qualifications.

Will my hon. Friend congratulate the schools in Northern Ireland on those results? However, is he satisfied that the GCSE is sufficiently rigorous to test those pupils at the top of the range and that adequate arrangements can be made to produce suitable new course work for those who will have to retake the GCSE examination, having failed it this summer?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his commendation of all the teachers in the Province, and I am sure that they too will be grateful. As in England and Wales, we have just had the first GCSE examinations and they have gone smoothly. I know that my hon. Friend will want to join me in expressing the hope that, arising out of the education reform consultation proposals, we shall be able to improve still further education standards in Northern Ireland, particularly for the almost one in four of our young people who leave school with no recognised qualification.

Will the Minister recognise that one reason why so many young people leave school in Northern Ireland with no qualification—the one in four to whom he referred—is that they are under pressure to take the first available job that comes along? Will he endeavour to take account of that and persuade his colleagues in the Northern Ireland Office that they too must seek every opportunity to attract and create real jobs so that there is real hope for our young people in schools and colleges?

Of course young people in Northern Ireland have employment problems. The hon. Gentleman will recall that in yesterday's debate there were expressions of appreciation for the work that successive Northern Ireland Ministers have done to try to reduce the levels of unemployment in Northern Ireland. Nevertheless, it remains true that almost one in four of our young people are leaving school with no recognised qualifications, compared with about one in 10 in England and Wales. I know that that is a matter of anxiety for the hon. Gentleman, just as it is for me.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he will next have discussions with Ministers of the Republic of Ireland; and what matters will be discussed.

Another meeting of the Intergovernmental Conference is likely to be held shortly. A full agenda has not yet been prepared, but I expect security matters to be one of the items on it.

Will my right hon. Friend take the opportunity to reassure the House that in all his dealings with Ministers of the Irish Republic he stresses, not only the need for full cross-border co-operation with regard to security, but the nature of the threat posed by the IRA both to democracy and decency in the Republic of Ireland and to democracy and decency in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland?

There is no doubt that there is an awareness of the importance to both our countries of the closest co-operation. That has been so in the past, but has been increased since we learnt of the very substantial arms shipments that have reached the island of Ireland, bearing in mind the threat that they pose of greater terrors in Northern Ireland and the Republic.

When the Minister discusses security matters, will he discuss the decision of the Northern Ireland Police Authority, by a majority of only one, not to undertake prosecution or even to inquire into what the Chief Constable and his immediate subordinates have done about the shoot-to-kill policy? After what has happened and the ups and downs of the Stalker-Sampson report, is it not necessary that we have a judicial inquiry into precisely what has happened and why these people are not even going to be inquired into?

That is manifestly untrue. The Police Authority made a very thorough inquiry indeed, conducted over two years and more by Deputy Chief Constable Stalker and Chief Constable Sampson. There has been the most exhaustive inquiry. What was being considered was merely whether an investigating officer should be appointed to conduct any further investigation.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 30 June.

This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House I shall be having further meetings later today.

Given the reality of the Prime Minister's opposition to Scottish devolution and the perfectly proper wish in the United Kingdom Parliament of Members representing constituencies elsewhere than in Scotland to ask questions of Scottish Office Ministers, will the Prime Minister consult her right hon. Friend the Leader of the House and, without entering into any specific commitments or responses this afternoon, at least undertake to consider whether a practical way of easing the passage of Scottish questions in the House would be to have an additional period of Scottish questions within Scotland at the old Royal High school in Edinburgh, which would not reduce the ability of English, Welsh and Northern Irish Members to contribute on a regular basis, but would allow Scottish Members extra input to Scottish Question Time?

No. We are a United Kingdom Parliament and our questions, as I know every Tuesday and Thursday, come from the whole of the United Kingdom.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm the results of the latest manpower survey on employment prospects? Will she indicate that not only is the employment situation in this country the best for 15 years but that the improvements in employment prospects in Scotland and south Wales are stronger than anywhere else in the United Kingdom? Will she confirm that this is ample evidence of the success of the Government's policies in making sure that prosperity returns, not just to the south-east, but to every region of the country?

Yes, I gladly confirm that. Employment prospects are good. Growth has been good for over six years now. [Interruption.] Unemployment has been falling for 22 months in succession and 1·7 million jobs have been created since 1983. I do like to give full answers, especially to the Front Bench below the Gangway.

Is the Prime Minister aware, in the wake of Monday's balance of payment figures, that if the balance of payments deficit in the second half of this year is anything like the deficit in the first half of this year we shall have an external deficit as large, in relation to our domestic product, as the American deficit is in relation to its domestic product? For an oil-rich, oil-exporting country, does that not show unique incompetence by the Government? Will the Prime Minister tell us what she will do to close the payments gap?

The present current account deficit is being readily financed by an inflow of private sector capital, showing great confidence in other manufacturers in this country as a base for future manufacturing operations.

If the confidence is so great and the inflow so ready, why must the Prime Minister inflict 9·5 per cent. interest rates on British industry and British home buyers?

To keep downward pressure on inflation.

Will my right hon. Friend continue her efforts to secure the Thyssen collection's ultimate location in this country? Will she seek to persuade Baron Thyssen and the trustees to consider seriously the development at Battersea, which, like Alton Towers, will be visited in years to come by many millions of people every year?

This is a unique and very valuable collection, and obviously we should like it to have its permanent home in this country. Certain proposals have been made, and it is for the trustees to decide whether they are acceptable. As my hon. Friend knows, a number of other countries have made proposals. It is for the trustees to make the final decision.

How does the Prime Minister justify saying that there are no resources for full implementation of the Disabled Persons (Services, Consultation and Representation) Act 1986, which received all-party support, when she has stuffed so much gold into the mouths of the richest 5 per cent. of taxpayers? If she feels that her priorities are not inhumane, why can she not convince the Royal National Institute for the Blind, MENCAP, MIND, the Spastics Society and other major organisations of and for the disabled?

As the right hon. Gentleman knows, expenditure on all the social services has gone up enormously. Since 1979, help for the disabled—about which the right hon. Gentleman is asking—has gone up by 80 per cent. in real terms.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 30 June.

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

Will my right hon. Friend reflect on the wide popularity of the Criminal Justice Bill—not least because of the protection that it gives to child victims—and reflect further on the remarkable fact that the Opposition voted against it? Does that not make a mockery of their protestations on law and order and suggest that it is not only the extreme Left who live in a weird Disneyland of their own creation?

The Opposition express sympathy for the victims of crime, but so often they vote against the measures that would enable us to protect people from crime. Not only the Criminal Justice Bill, but the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, the Public Order Act 1986 and the Prevention of Terrorism Act 1974 all attracted an adverse vote from the Opposition.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 30 June.

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

Five years ago the Prime Minister was boasting with pleasure and pride about the balance of payments surplus and warning us against the extreme damage that high interest rates could do to our industrial production. Now that we are running the highest balance of payments deficit in the history of the country and interest rates are being increased every week, can she tell us whether she looks back over the past five years and thinks that we have made economic progress?

We have made enormous progress, with inflation down, growth up, the number of new jobs being created considerably up, and the highest standard of living that we have ever known and the best standard of social services that we have ever known. Yes, progress continues apace.

Has my right hon. Friend noted the remarks of a distinguished constituent of mine, the deputy chairman of the BBC and former Cabinet Minister, Lord Barnett, that in the north-west of England there is an outlook of optimism and an air of confidence? Does that not endorse the success of the Government's economic and regional policies, and prove that when the Labour party claims to be listening it is effectively engaged in a dialogue of the deaf?

Yes, I agree with that. There is a mood of optimism and confidence, different from when the Labour party was in power, as is manifest in the remarkable book, "Inside the Treasury" written by Lord Barnett. The book tells it all.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 30 June.

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

Has the Prime Minister found time to study the recently published report by the Low Pay Unit entitled "The 1988 Budget and the Poor"? Is she aware of the statement of its director that today's supertax payers in Britain are the poor, not the rich? Is she proud of the fact that the gap between rich and poor has widened so dramatically during her premiership? If not, what does she propose to do about it?

The fact is that those on the lowest incomes have also gained from the growth of the economy and the creation of wealth. As everyone knows, wealth must be created before it can be distributed. Moreover, whereas before the reform of the social security system there was a group of people who, if they increased their pay, forfeited in other benefits more than 100 per cent. of what they gained in earnings, that gap has been greatly reduced.

Has my right hon. Friend compared the newspaper reports printed on Monday and the radio reports the Airbus accident in France on Sunday night with the Press reports that are now appearing? It seems that the British media are determined to talk down British technology and the fly-by-wire system of the A320. However, three days later, they are having to admit that they are wrong.

I have seen the reports. It is always wiser to wait for a full investigation of these matters before one expresses conclusions.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 30 June.

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

Will the Prime Minister pay as much attention to the views of the Scottish people, who are opposed to dumping nuclear waste, as to those of the Lord President of the Council, the right hon. Member for Colchester, South and Maldon (Mr. Wakeham), whose constituency was exempted from dumping such waste before the general election? Even if a local lord is willing to be bought and sold for Nirex gold in Caithness, I assure her that the Scottish people will not be. I can guarantee massive sustained national opposition to dumping nuclear waste in Scotland. Does she listen to the people, or only to Cabinet Ministers?

As the hon. Gentleman is aware, there are inquiries and studies into dumping nuclear waste. [Interruption.] If the hon. Gentleman is referring to imports of waste from other countries, obviously—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."] If he is not, I do not need to answer that question. If it is nuclear waste, the matter has already been subject to deep study and inquiry.

Further to the question of the right hon. Member for Islwyn (Mr. Kinnock) on deficits, will my right hon. Friend reflect on the fact that it is not she who is 12 points in deficit in the opinion polls? Could it be that that is because we do not have a chaotic defence policy, we are returning real prosperity to the people and we are not in hock to the block votes of trade unions?

Yes, all that. I could not possibly have put it better myself.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 30 June.

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

If, as the Prime Minister said in reply to my right hon. Friend the Member for Islwyn (Mr. Kinnock), the increase in interest rates is caused by inflation and she aims to act on inflation and not on the trade deficit, is there a level of trade deficit on which the Government would act and introduce measures?

The prime objective is to keep inflation down, because to let it rise would be the very worst thing that one could do to the prospects of manufacturing industry, as most people realise. Interest rates are one of the instruments by which one keeps inflation down. As the hon. Gentleman will know, inflation is now lower than it was at any time under the last Labour Government.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 30 June.

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

Does my right hon. Friend remember the excellent contribution made to education by direct grant schools, and their destruction by the Labour Government between 1975 and 1979? Does she agree that grant-maintained schools, as envisaged in the Education Reform Bill, will make an admirable return to the principle, formerly upheld by the direct-grant schools, of making education available to children of all levels of ability? Will my right hon. Friend seek to ensure that the Lords amendment on the number of parents voting is overturned so that the decision on opting out can be taken by a simple majority?

I agree that grant-maintained schools will give the kind of opportunity to many parents which they lost through the abolition of direct grant schools. We shall consider whether to apply to reverse their Lordships' amendment to the Bill when it returns to this House.

In view of the Prime Minister's oft-expressed concern that there should be no hiding place in these islands for people who commit serious crimes, is she aware of legislation negotiated by her right hon. Friend the Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr. Heath) with the Irish Government in 1974—the Civil Jurisdiction Act? Is she also aware that during the past few weeks, in the cases of two people wanted for serious crime in Dublin who were resident in Northern Ireland, the Irish authorities, instead of applying for extradition, supplied the evidence to the authorities in Northern Ireland, where they were tried, found guilty and convicted? Could she tell me why the Government do not use those same facilities, which are just as effective for achieving the objective, as extradition?

Because, as the hon. Gentleman, I would have thought, would be the first to be aware, having others tried in the Republic is a very different proposition from what he said.