To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many flues in houses owned by the Northern Ireland Housing Executive have been relined during the past five years; and what is the projection of numbers for the period up to 31 March 1990.

The chairman of the Northern Ireland Housing Executive tells me that records exist only for the last four years, during which 11,157 flues were relined in specific upgrading programmes. A further 4,285 are expected to be relined by the end of March 1990. Other relinings are carried out in comprehensive improvement programmes, but separate figures are not available.

I thank the Minister for that reply, but he must be aware that many people have purchased their Housing Executive homes through Government encouragement. Is he aware that, unfortunately, many of those people have defective chimneys due to the flawed rubber sausage method which is used to repair defective flues? As many people are financially unable to have those defects remedied, I ask the Minister, especially in the interests of health, to agree to have those chimneys repaired, either by direct labour or by grant-aid.

As much as I should like to help the hon. Gentleman's constituents with the problems caused by their flues, the fact is that they bought the houses from the Housing Executive. If they bought the houses under conditions which were not for any particular reason made clear to them, they can of course take legal action, as I believe some already have. However, the principle of caveat emptor has to be maintained and, of course, it is really up to the purchaser to sort out the matter with the Housing Executive.

Will the hon. Gentleman keep in mind the great hardship that occurs when this alteration is carried out, as many people have had to leave their homes because of the state of their bedrooms and living-rooms? The workmanship has not been of the best standard in many instances. Will he urge the Housing Executive, when it alters the remaining flues, to ensure that proper facilities are provided while the alteration is carried out, and that compensation for the loss of furniture, carpets, curtains and facilities is paid quickly and properly?

I shall, of course, bring the hon. Gentleman's points before the chairman of the Housing Executive. I am sure he will agree that everything possible should be done to make certain that the tenants are adequately looked after while those operations are undertaken. I should say, perhaps, that the cost involved is £600 to £700. Although I realise that it is an imposition, it is still a fairly small amount of money in comparison with the value of the home.

Will the Minister confirm that the Northern Ireland Housing Executive was responsible for the original design of the flues installed in these houses? Are thousands of houses in my constituency having flues relined because there was an inherent design fault in the original system, and are people at risk for as long as those defective flues are not repaired?

It is because the flues are defective that the Housing Executive is undertaking this programme throughout its stock—as quickly as possible. If, of course, the Housing Executive is at fault because of the design, the owners or tenants should take it up with the Housing Executive or go through the courts.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the progress made in the development of integrated education and the education for mutual understanding project over the past six months.

Within the past six months three integrated schools have been granted maintained status and a new integrated school has been opened and provisionally registered as an independent school.

Will the Minister outline how he supports and funds the community relations in schools programme and the provisions that he will make for the future funding and support, not only that programme, but of other reconciliation projects?

The budget for promoting cross-community contact in schools in a variety of ways, including the ones to which I have referred, and in the community; has risen sharply in the past couple of years. I hope and expect that that trend will continue.

What has been the reaction of the churches to my hon. Friend's brave initiative? Do they recognise that the way to promote understanding and harmony is to bring the children of Northern Ireland together, rather than to promulgate a form of education apartheid?

It is not our wish to introduce measures that will offend against the theology or conscience of anyone in the Province, but we do not believe that such a charge could be laid against the plans for integrated education—provided that that is what the parents want for their children. So far we have been encouraged by the responses of the churches to this new and significant initiative.

No matter what opposition may come from the churches, and despite any stalling, will the Minister press ahead relentlessly to purge religious apartheid from the schools in Northern Ireland? I congratulate the Minister on what he has already announced, but he should not restrict himself to those measures. He should ensure that we also expunge sectarianism from the teacher training colleges in Northern Ireland.

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his kind words and for his many years of strong support for integrated education in the Province. I assure him that his commitment to giving parents choice through integrated education is no greater than mine. We are determined to see that option made available to all parents in Northern Ireland.

Does the Minister acknowledge that, prior to this initiative, there was already a high level of integrated education in certain sectors in Northern Ireland? Will he undertake to publish the extent to which children were already being educated together irrespective of their religious background? Will he also acknowledge that the state schools in Northern Ireland are already available to be used as centres for integrated education?

No, I do not accept that in the past there were strong integrated education facilities in the Province. Of course the hon. Gentleman is absolutely right in saying that, at a number of schools, pupils from both sides of the community are educated together, but he knows that such schools represent a small minority.

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

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

Since I last answered questions in the House on 28 July, 38 people have been killed in incidents in Northern Ireland arising from the security situation. This includes the eight off-duty soldiers brutally murdered near Omagh. Against this background I have recently been carrying out a detailed and comprehensive review of security measures in conjunction with the Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the General Officer Commanding the Army in Northern Ireland.

In the light of the Secretary of State's catalogue of atrocities in our Province, does he agree that it is far from peace, stability and reconciliation? Let us bear in mind the recent murder of a constituent of mine, Reserve Constable McCrone in county Fermanagh, and the massive find of bomb material. I congratulate the police officer who found it on his alertness, which has helped to save the Province from another onslaught by the IRA.

The hon. Gentleman knows as well as all other hon. Members from Northern Ireland the many steps that have been taken in recent months by the security forces, some of which have undoubtedly contributed to the recent successes. No one can be ignorant of the greatly enhanced activity. I told the House that we would be examining the number of measures that might be taken. The House approved one of them on Tuesday night. I have tried to help the security forces in such a way that if they bring people suspected of serious crimes to court, they will have a good chance of getting convictions. I am also concerned that the guilty should receive the proper punishment for their crimes.

With regard to last night's bomb attack on women and children in the Army homes complex near Londonderry, however desirable it may be to extend the protection accorded to such targets, is that not starting at the wrong end? Should not terrorists legally be taken out of circulation, and kept out of circulation?

I am not sure whether the right hon. Gentleman is going further than the answer that I gave. If he is advocating selective detention, he knows that we have no plans to introduce it. But I and my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister have made it clear that we rule nothing out and keep these matters under review.

Does my right hon. Friend understand that a significant factor in the continuing insecurity in Northern Ireland is uncertainty about its constitutional future? Why does he persist in denying Members of this House, including the elected representatives of the people of Northern Ireland, the right to amend proposed legislation affecting Northern Ireland? Why does my right hon. Friend not follow the policy set out in the 1979 Conservative party manifesto and set up a regional council in Northern Ireland with widely devolved powers over local matters?

I always respect my hon. Friend's sincerity in these matters. There is no insecurity about the position of Northern Ireland, except that caused by many people who keep talking about uncertainty. The Government's position is clear, and so is that of the House, which has voted overwhelmingly for it. There will be no change in the status of Northern Ireland as part of the United Kingdom without the agreement of a majority in Northern Ireland. I have confidence in that majority and I often wish that more people who raise this point shared my confidence in it. That view, moreover, is overwhelmingly supported by successive Irish Governments. There is no question of insecurity.

My right hon. Friend has said that Northern Ireland is presently recognised as part of the United Kingdom. Unfortunately, the Anglo-Irish Agreement simply confirms Northern Irleland's existing constitutional status, but under Irish law the Province is part of the Irish Republic. My right hon. Friend has gained nothing from that exchange. I suggest to my right hon. Friend that if he wants to keep terrorists out of sight and out of the way during the emergency, he should institute a sentence of imprisonment for the duration of the emergency and not release any terrorists to go back on to the streets and commit terrorist crimes again.

I note what my hon. Friend says and will not comment further on his last point. The first part of his question makes my point absolutely. Here is a lawyer arguing and sowing in the minds of Northern Ireland people doubt and insecurity that does not exist. Everybody knows that the reality of the agreement is quite clear. There will be no change in the status of Northern Ireland without the agreement of a majority. If my hon. Friend does not know the present status of Northern Ireland, everybody else does, and its status will remain as it is unless a majority want to change it.

Arising from the remarks of the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Gow), could the Secretary of State give us his views on whether the security and the political situation in Northern Ireland will be helped or hindered by the application from the North Down Conservative Association to affiliate to the Conservative party, since the chairman of the Conservative party is very much against such affiliation?

Order. Hon. Members must keep to the question on security.

rose—

Order. Whenever the hon. Gentleman gets up he strays from the question on the Order Paper. Please keep to it.

I congratulate the chairman of the Conservative party and the Secretary of State on yesterday's comments. May I raise with the Secretary of State the important matter of security at married quarters, about which the hon. Member for Mid-Ulster (Rev. William McCrea) spoke? There is concern that women and children should be properly protected. It is particularly nasty that within the anniversary of what happened at Enniskillen this attack should have been considered. Can the Secretary of State give confidence to the House that the necessary security measures will be taken to protect married quarters in Northern Ireland? The Opposition support what he said about the status of Northern Ireland, but, of course, we attach a particular political significance to article 1(c).

I am glad to see that the hon. Gentleman has signed up to articles 1(a) and 1(b). I will settle for that. Those articles in the Anglo-Irish Agreement show the reality of the situation and I see no prospect of their changing. The hon. Gentleman's first point is a serious one. The House will share my disgust at last night's attack. It is further confirmation that, for the IRA, women and children are fair game. I continue to ask myself what sort of cause can be furthered, or what credit or ambition can be built up for the future, by trampling over the bodies of women and children. I hope that the House will treat, as I do, the statements by the IRA and the attack with the contempt that they deserve. I assure the hon. Gentleman that I have already had discussions about security at married quarters and careful consideration is being given to taking the necessary security measures.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that most people think that neither his resolve nor his sincerity should be called into question, and that doing so does no good to Northern Ireland or to the causes that we should all uphold.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend and second what he said.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on his plans to privatise Harland and Wolff, in the light of the recent breakdown of negotiations with Mr. Ravi Tikkoo.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will consider reversing his decision to privatise Harland and Wolff, in the light of the breakdown of negotiations with Mr. Ravi Tikkoo and the implications for the company's ability to bid for military contracts of current uncertainty about its future status.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the privatisation of Harland and Wolff Ltd., Belfast.

The Government believe firmly that privatisation provides the best prospects for Harland and Wolff to achieve long-term viability and it is therefore our intention to return the company to the private sector. The breakdown in negotiations with Mr. Tikkoo was a disappointment, but discussions are continuing with other interested parties. The company chairman, John Parker, is also examining the feasibility of a management-employee buy out and this, too, will receive detailed consideration.

I hope that the Minister will accept that Mr. Tikkoo is to be congratulated on discussing with the Government for so long the possible purchase of Harland and Wolff. However, he should remember that the only thing that Mr. Tikkoo wished to do in the first place was to have a ship built at Harland and Wolff. Why have the Government made it virtually impossible for a publicly-owned Harland and Wolff to do three things: first, to react in a positive fashion to the Tikkoo bid; secondly, to tender for Ministry of Defence work; and, thirdly, to react to the ban on the proposed building of the £8 million dredger, put forward by the south coast shipping company. Surely even the Minister recognises that a publicly-owned company which obtained at least two of the three orders would be far more attractive to the private sector than Harland and Wolff is at present.

We gave every possible support to Mr. Tikkoo in his approach to build the Ultimate Dream cruiseliner and to acquire the yard. That was the basis on which he was content to negotiate. I ask the hon. Gentleman not to sell short the Government's efforts. The Government are in close negotiation with prospective purchasers of Harland and Wolff. It is an integral part of our discussions that substantial orders will be placed with the yard forthwith. If successful, the negotiations will secure the future of the yard and its order book for many years. That is the goal towards which Ministers are working.

The Minister has avoided the question of Ministry of Defence contracts. Will he tell the House why Harland and Wolff was prevented by his Department from tendering for the Ministry of Defence contract for the aviation support ship? Will he put it clearly on the record whether it was his Department that prevented Harland and Wolff from taking part in that process? Will Harland and Wolff be allowed to tender for Ministry of Defence work while it is still in the public sector?

I have made it clear that it is obviously not sensible at this critical stage to proceed with other prospective ship orders, as they could be inconsistent with the shipbuilding plans of a new owner.

How many customers have been put off and how many potential orders has Harland and Wolff not been permitted to tender for because of this mailed fist, or even blackmail, policy that has been used to push through privatisation? Does the Minister recognise that, unless Harland and Wolff accepts some orders soon, thousands of men will be out of work and it will be impossible to find a new owner or work for those presently employed in Belfast?

I recognise that hon. Members are in some difficulty because they cannot be privy to the confidential discussions of Government, but the hon. Gentleman should not sell short the efforts of the Government and of the yard. I have had preliminary discussions today with another substantial company which has expressed interest in the future of the yard.

When the Minister told The Guardian last week that he was fighting hard for Harland and Wolff, was he referring to its being closed out of the initial consultations regarding the aviation support ship? Was he referring to the refusal to give Harland and Wolff the contract for the Ultimate Dream, unless it was in the private sector, or to the scandal, which was announced yesterday, of the Minister turning down a further order of a dredger from Harland and Wolff, simply because it was not yet in the private sector? Will he please attempt to make my constituents understand how Harland and Wolff would be less attractive for privatisation if it had a full order book?

It is well known in Northern Ireland that my right hon. Friend fought long and hard to win the AOR order for Harland and Wolff. I would ask the hon. Gentleman where he was when the discussions were taking place. My right hon. Friend has not changed in his determination to do everything possible to secure the future of the yard.

Does my hon. Friend accept that many of us—not all on this side of the House—very much wish the best for Harland and Wolff, but nevertheless feel that it has had every bit the upper end of the playing field in the various competitions for military vessels? We wish Harland and Wolff good fortune, but at the same time we must be fair to British yards this side of the water. There is a limit to how much we can listen to complaints on this issue.

The Government have supported Harland and Wolff to the tune of £260 million in the past five years alone. That demonstrates their determination to support the yard. We are now convinced that the future of the yard lies not in the public sector but in the private sector, and we are determined to do our best to achieve that transition.

The Minister has not explained to the House why he believes that Harland and Wolff would be more attractive with empty order books than with full ones. Is it not the case that Harland and Wolff was excluded from the early stages of the MOD contracts for the AOR vessels? Why does he now seek to ensure that Harland and Wolff will not win that £8 million order and the yard will be sacrificed on the Government's mad ideology on privatisation?

The hon. Gentleman is confusing the AOR with the ASS and the ASS with the dredger order. I have answered the question. A prospective acquirer of the yard may well bring to the yard orders which would be inconsistent with other MOD or external orders.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he last met the Army GOC in Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement about their discussions.

I last met the GOC on Monday 7 November, together with the Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, to discuss certain aspects of the security situation. The substance must, of course, be confidential.

Will the Secretary of State confirm that, in the border brigade area, primacy of operational decision has passed, or been taken, from the police and given to the Army? Does he agree that that is a sinister and fundamental change of policy that has been forced upon him as Secretary of State and on the Chief Constable of the RUC by the faceless military people who are now the de facto rulers in Northern Ireland?

If they are, they have not told me. The hon. Gentleman's ingenious question deviates considerably from the real situation. There is no change in the position on police primacy. The Chief Constable has responsibility for operational matters and the Army works in support of the civil power, but in certain respects in the border brigade, and in operations against terrorism, the Chief Constable has delegated certain operational responsibilities and authority to the Army. The Army acts under his authority. That is the position. It is quite clear, it has my full support, and I, the Chief Constable and the GOC keep it under close review.

Is it not the case that since three terrorists met a well-merited death at the hands of the security forces the level of violence and terrorist activity has reduced in the Province? Is this a coincidence, or does my right hon. Friend make some deductions from it?

In terms of attempted terrorist incidents, that is not actually correct. However, I draw the attention of the House to the great energy and determination of the security forces. While there is a constant threat of attack, undoubtedly there have been a number of recent successes. A number of arrests have been made and the security forces certainly deserve every congratulation for that.

When the Secretary of State talks to the GOC, does he recollect that each time he comes to the House to report on the security situation in Northern Ireland he produces a long and sad catalogue of deaths? He also produces a never-ending catalogue of arms and explosives found. Will he remind the GOC that if we could have continuity of frontier operations we would have a much greater chance of reducing the easy flow of arms and explosives from the Irish Republic into Northern Ireland? Since 92 per cent. of IRA murders are unresolved through the courts, does the right hon. Gentleman discuss with the GOC the need to dismantle the command and control structures of the IRA? Will he ask officers further down the line what they feel as they have to go out, week after week, sacrificing life and limb to try to uphold the status quo with the limited resources made available to them by the Secretary of State?

The answer that I gave to the hon. Member for Mid-Ulster (Rev. William McCrea) sought to explain certain ways in which I am seeking to ensure that the security forces receive the support they deserve in the important and dangerous work they do. I am seeking ways in which some of the objectives defined by the hon. Gentleman can be achieved. I am anxious to improve cross-border co-operation and make more effective the work of the Garda Siochana and the Irish Army working in support of it. Those are some measures that can help. I take seriously the hon. Gentleman's point about the need to ensure that the security forces receive all the backing we can provide in the circumstances in which they operate.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take it from me that the statement issued a few days ago concerning the Loughgall incident was widely welcomed by all right-thinking people in Northern Ireland, who are glad that those responsible for dealing with the IRA effectively will not be brought before the courts? Will he take it from me also that there is also a desire among all right-thinking people that any innocent person who happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time should receive compensation as promptly as possible?

Obviously, deaths of or injuries to any innocent people are deeply regretted. I do not think that there is any serious argument about the purpose of the terrorists killed in that attack. It was a miracle that there were no serious casualties among the security forces. We are often attacked by people who say that the procedures do not properly scrutinise the rule of law and the pursuit of the rule of law. It is worth remembering, as the hon. Gentleman knows, that what I reported on that occasion was the outcome of the scrutiny procedure. Every time a death is suffered by the security forces it is subject to close scrutiny and is the subject of a report to the Director of Public Prosecutions. That shows how we seek at all times to ensure that the rule of law is upheld.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the relationship between the drafts of the Police and Criminal Evidence Order 1988 and the Criminal Evidence Order 1988.

The draft Police and Criminal Evidence Order substantially overhauls and rationalises the general criminal law in Northern Ireland and reflects provisions enacted for England and Wales in the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. The separate Criminal Evidence (Northern Ireland) Order, which was debated and approved by the House on Tuesday, allows courts to draw an inference from the silence of the accused in certain circumstances.

Does the Minister not believe that the Criminal Evidence (Northern Ireland) Order seriously weakens the limited rights of the individual given in the proposed Police and Criminal Evidence Order? Does he not believe that the ability to detain suspects for 48 hours without the right to legal advice, the requirement not to supply official statements to suspects before they enter police stations and the absence of any requirement to tape record interviews with suspects will undermine the credibility of the police and the judiciary in Northern Ireland?

I do not believe that that is the case. The hon. Gentleman has referred to a number of aspects of the draft Police and Criminal Evidence Order, which, as he will know, has been out for consultation. We are currently considering the results of the responses that we have received. I do not believe that the Criminal Evidence (Northern Ireland) Order is a diminution of rights. It makes it more likely that justice will be seen to be done. I do not think that the innocent have anything to fear from it. It will lead to a better system of justice in the Province, which is what we should all want.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he intends to increase funding on health and social services in Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement.

The hon. Member wil be aware that new public expenditure plans announced by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the Autumn Statement included revised figures for the total of Northern Ireland public expenditure. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is considering how the totals announced should be allocated to functional programmes and he will make an announcement shortly.

I thank the Minister for his reply and take this opportunity to congratulate those working voluntarily and professionally in health and social services in Northern Ireland. On the recent Select Committee visit to Northern Ireland we saw the work that they are doing. They are dedicated to their jobs, which they often do under very difficult circumstances. Does the Minister welcome the degree of multi-party agreement shown by the call from representatives of the Ulster Unionists, SDLP and the alliance for the maintenance of per capita expenditure on health in Northern Ireland? How will the democratically elected representatives of the people of Northern Ireland be involved in the allocation of the money that the Secretary of State will be announcing? Will the Government grasp this opportunity of building bridges between the communities in Northern Ireland by responding positively to that call?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his comments about the visit he paid to Northern Ireland, which we welcomed. We have a successful Health Service in Northern Ireland, on which we spend approximately 24 per cent. more per head than in the remainder of the United Kingdom. In the Autumn Statement my right hon. Friend the Chancellor mentioned a 4·5 per cent. increase in real growth, which will apply also in Northern Ireland. It would be easy to involve politicians in any process in Northern Ireland if they were prepared to become involved and to begin discussing the way forward with the Government.

I welcome what the Minister said about per capita expenditure in Northern Ireland being 24 per cent. more than on the mainland, but does that not illustrate that even if we spent another £5 billion or £6 billion on the Health Service here some would still say that it was not enough?

I am sure that my hon. Friend is right. The difference in expenditure between Northern Ireland and the rest of the country arises entirely from the difference in need.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the scheduled review of the Anglo-Irish Agreement.

The review of the working of the Intergovernmental Conference, prescribed by article 11 of the agreement, will begin three years after the agreement was signed on 15 November. I remain anxious to have all views that hon. Members and others may wish to put forward.

When will the Government take a more constructive approach to the agreement by pursuing the wide range of reforms that are necessary? When will they implement article 10 of the agreement, which commits the Irish and British Governments to co-operating to promote the economic and social development of both parts of Ireland?

The table of progress, which I hope we shall publish shortly, will bring home how much progress has been made in the search for confidence in the administration of justice and some of the economic and social sectors. We have laid the foundations for co-operation, which could be valuable to people on both sides of the border.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that, despite enormous difficulties and some reckless sabotage attempts from certain quarters, the agreement has been a great success? Will he reaffirm the Government's determination not only to continue this important agreement but to strengthen it?

The agreement has considerable potential benefits for people throughout the island of Ireland, both in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. This is not a matter—we are dealing with ancient hostilities and mistrusts that exist in the island of Ireland—in which immediate success can be achieved. The agreement provides an opportunity for close co-operation and, if handled sensibly, it could be of great benefit.

Is the Secretary of State aware that we welcome his invitation to put forward our ideas on the Anglo-Irish Agreement and hope that all parties in the House and in Northern Ireland will take advantage of that? Would there not be an advantage in forthcoming years in having a regular calendar of meetings, with open agendas, at which parties throughout the country could make representations, with a full report-back afterwards, thus avoiding accusations of secrecy?

I am glad to hear that the hon. Gentleman will be putting forward views, no doubt on behalf of his right hon. and hon. Friends, and I have no doubt also that those very genuine and sensible points will be included.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland why the recommendations in respect of the redesignation of the less-favoured areas in Northern Ireland has not been presented to the European Commission; and if he will make a statement.

All the very detailed information needed to support a request to the Commission of the European Community for an extension of the less-favoured areas in all the United Kingdom regions has now been assembled. This means that we are in sight of being able to put a request to the Commission, but the request will be subject to detailed examination by the Commission. This might take some time and we cannot be certain of a favourable decision.

Is the Minister aware that the inordinate delay in processing the extension of the less-favoured areas affects 4,600 farmers in Northern Ireland who cannot avail themselves of grant under the agricultural development programme? Will the hon. Gentleman do his utmost to expedite the claim in Brussels for an extension?

The matter is being considered in the context of the United Kingdom as a whole. As the hon. Gentleman points out, 4,600 requests have been made from Northern Ireland alone. The number has also been very substantial throughout the United Kingdom. The hon. Gentleman has been assiduous in pursuing the matter, and I asssure him that the Government are equally assiduous in pursuing it.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 10 November.

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 meeetings later today.

In considering the responses to the Government's proposals on student loans, will the Prime Minister acknowledge that the purpose of Government support for students should be to increase substantially the number of people in higher education in this country? As the proposals announced are based on a projection that there will be no increase in student numbers by 1996, will that not lay this country open to dangerous competition from other, better-educated industrialised democracies?

The system of student grants and now of top-up loans is one of the most generous in the whole world. I am sure that most people appreciate that. Increasing numbers, and an increasing proportion of students, are going into higher education. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will welcome that. One of the purposes of yesterday's announcement is to help people who at present cannot go to university to take top-up loans so that they can take up places which might not otherwise be available to them.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 10 November.

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

In congratulating President-elect George Bush on his victory, will my right hon. Friend thank him for the part that America has played in helping to ensure a record 43 years of peace in Europe? Will she offer him her continued staunch support for the future strength of the Alliance?

I gladly join my hon. Friend and most hon. Members in congratulating Vice-President George Bush on his splendid victory, which was a personal triumph for him. I also take the opportunity to thank the United States for being such a staunch ally in NATO and stationing some 330,000 troops in Europe. I hope that that contribution will continue, but I am the first to agree that Europe must be prepared to take a full part of the burden of the defence of Europe and to point out that this country does just that, as can be seen from the recent Autumn Statement.

Will the Prime Minister tell us why members of the Cabinet are afraid to debate the conduct and plans of the Chancellor of the Exchequer? What do they have to hide?

There is no question of being afraid to debate it. Indeed, I have noticed that on the 17 days this year when the Opposition could have chosen to debate economics they chose to do so on only two, so they cannot relish facing my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer very much.

It must be obvious, even to the Prime Minister, that the Chancellor has woven a tangled web around himself. Why will she riot give him an opportunity to clear his name in the House?

My right hon. Friend the Chancellor has built the best economy that this country has ever known, and everyone in the House has done very well out of it.

Perhaps the Prime Minister will now tell us whether she agrees with the Chancellor that only "a tiny minority" of pensioners have problems in making ends meet.

The simple fact is that only 18 per cent. of pensioners are on income support. That is quite clearly a minority.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that one thing at least is now clear following the Chancellor's briefing of the press last Friday—that the Government are considering additional ways to help the less well-off pensioner?

Yes, that is absolutely correct.

To ask the Prime Minster if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 10 November.

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

Will the Prime Minister please explain to the House why, in most parts of Scotland, she is regarded as public enemy No. 1?

If I might say so, Scotland has done very well by the policies that I have had the privilege to implement.

As every Labour Government have operated a means test for all our citizens, is not the Leader of the Opposition talking total humbug—

Order. The hon. Gentleman must ask questions of the Prime Minister, not the Leader of the Opposition.

Will my right hon. Friend give urgent consideration to producing one form from which a decision can be made on whether tax should be paid or benefits given to top-up inadequate income?

I would not be in favour of such a system, as it would lead to endless complexity. However, my hon. Friend is right to remind the House that the National Assistance Act started in 1948, having been introduced by a Labour Government, who followed it throughout all their time in Government. It is for means-tested benefits in addition to the fundamental basic state pension.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 10 November.

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

What advice has the Prime Minister for President-elect Bush about tackling the US debt problem? Could it not spark off a serious international economic crisis? Would not one way to help be to spend less, not more, on armaments? Will the Prime Minister advise following that policy and not beat around the bush?

In considering the budget deficit as a proportion of gross domestic product, I can only say that the American deficit is very much smaller than that which Labour had in this country during its time in office.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 10 November.

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

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the way to keep hooligans out of football grounds is through a national membership scheme? Will she call upon all football clubs to introduce and implement such a scheme as soon as possible?

Yes. As my hon. Friend is aware, the Minister with responsibility for sport introduced a report yesterday. It is right to have national identity cards for those who attend football matches—

In England.

Yes, in England. We do not expect it to apply to Scotland.

Has the Prime Minister seen today's reported remarks of the Secretary of State for Health, accusing nurses at Birmingham children's hospital of not doing the work for which they are paid? Will she share my offence at such remarks and ask the Secretary of State to withdraw them, on the grounds that those nurses are dedicated and professional, are doing their job in difficult circumstances, and are doing exactly what they are paid for? Does she agree that the argument is about their grading?

I have not seen any such remarks by my right hon. and learned Friend. As the hon. Gentleman is aware, the structure of the grading was agreed between management and nurses, and the regions have applied it to about 440,000 nurses. For that purpose, an extra amount has been given by the taxpayer, such that the total extra amount is about £928 million. If any nurse is aggrieved by her grading, she can go to appeal under procedures agreed by management and unions.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 10 November.

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

My right hon. Friend will have noticed that it was announced yesterday that last year British companies, both large and small, gave over £1 billion to charity. Does that endorse her vision of a giving society and show that, if they are allowed greater control over a larger proportion of their money, people give wisely and generously?

Yes. Both companies and individuals are giving very generously, and much more generously than they were able to give several years ago. One should like to thank companies not only for giving to charities but for the excellent work they are doing in inner cities and for the way in which many of them are taking a much greater interest in local schools, thus giving children a far greater interest in the future and a far greater prospect of obtaining the right jobs.

To ask the Prime Minister is she will list her official engagements for Thursday 10 November.

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

Why is the Prime Minister in favour of sanctions on trade with Poland but not in favour of sanctions on trade with South Africa? Is her advice to the black people of South Africa that they should live in Poland?

As the hon. Gentleman is aware, there are certain sanctions on South Africa, which are operated through the United Nations and which we honour, and there are other certain small sanctions which we have agreed through the Commonwealth, which we also honour. My purpose is to ensure that we do everything that we can to help Poland come to an agreement with the International Monetary Fund as to how best to conduct her industrial and financial affairs in future. We in this country will be the first to help to reschedule Poland's debts and to give extra help—[Interruption.] The hon. Gentleman might not like the long answer, but he does not like listening to sense.

I am aware that the whole House will want to congratulate my right hon. Friend on digging her way through the rocks and quicksands that confronted her on her recent visit to Poland. Has her visit made it more possible for Polish people to choose a freer and better way of life?

I made it quite clear that I was grateful to General Jaruzelski for ensuring that I was able to go wheresoever I chose in Poland to see whomsoever I chose to see, to have discussions and talks, not only with Solidarity, but with many independent people, who were able to put their views to me. I was extremely grateful for that. One problem with Solidarity is that there is no other expression of opposition on an organised basis in Poland. Things will be much better when there is a visible focus for people to make their own views known, which will be of great value to the Government. The round table is perhaps the first attempt to try to secure such a forum.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 10 November.

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

As the Prime Minister of Westland, does the Prime Minister feel that she is the best person to judge the integrity of the Chancellor?

As the hon. Gentleman is aware, Westland's future was determined by its commercial future. That was absolutely the right decision. We have one of the best Chancellors that this country has ever had.

As my right hon. Friend was unable to be in Paris yesterday to pay tribute to the memory of Monsieur Jean Monnet, will she take this opportunity to pay her tribute to the man of vision for his contributions to both the unity of Europe and the allied victory in the last war?

Yes, I gladly pay tribute to Jean Monnet. I understand that there was a very moving ceremony yesterday in Paris. We were not able to go from here because, as my hon. Friend is aware, we had a state visit in this country.