To ask the Secretary of State for Employment whether he has any plans to establish an inquiry into the effectiveness of vocational training for young people; and if he will make a statement.

The Government made clear in the recent White Paper, "Employment for the 1990s" that YTS has succeeded in training substantial numbers of young people for jobs. To ensure its continued effectiveness, the scope and role of the scheme will be kept under review as too will the developing inner-city compacts and the extension of the technical and vocational educational initiative to all secondary schools and colleges in Great Britain.

I thank the Secretary of State for that reply but I could not help noticing an element of complacency in it. Does the Secretary of State accept that Britain continues to lag behind our main competitors in the provision of adequate vocational training for young people and that that is likely further to undermine Britain's competitiveness, especially after 1992? What further effective steps does the Secretary of State intend to take to ensure a better and adequate vocational training for young people?

We are taking a whole series of steps to seek to improve training for young people, unemployed people and people at work. I entirely accept what the hon. Gentleman has said about the importance of that. The fact that YTS has been successful can be established from the figures in the hon. Gentleman's own city of Leicester. I am sure that he will be pleased to know that in the past two years in Leicester an average of 86 per cent. of people on YTS have gone into jobs, further education or training.

Does the Secretary of State accept that what we really need in the provision of training for young people is a far more co-ordinated approach between schools, technical colleges, the careers service in particular and the employment and training agencies? How does the Secretary of State see that approach developing further?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman that we need the greatest degree of co-operation and co-ordination that we can get. We have just begun the compact initiatives in inner cities, which are exactly in line with what the hon. Gentleman wants—co-operation between industry on the one side and schools on the other. I am glad to say that all the signs are that although they were begun only a few months ago they are already developing into what I believe will be an outstanding success.

Is it not the case that more than three quarters of YTS leavers go into jobs or further training? How does my right hon. Friend see those prospects improving or shaping in subsequent months?

My hon. Friend is right—about 76 per cent. of YTS leavers go into jobs, further training or education, and 80 per cent. of the leavers who were asked afterwards whether they were happy with their training said that it was worth while. In the next few years opportunities for young people will undoubtedly increase. Indeed, the opportunities and outlook for young people in this country have scarcely ever been better.

But have not the Government created skill shortages by running down skills training in the past 10 years? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that last year craft and technician qualifications in chemical and electrical engineering were down to only 30,000, which is less than a third of the number in France and less than a quarter of the number in Germany? Is he further aware that in the service sector the number of people gaining qualifications in retailing in this country is now less than one ninth of the number in France? Against that background, is it not perfectly clear that there is not a skills gap but a skills chasm, and that since this Government have been in office it has been widening?

Typically, the hon. Gentleman is wrong in virtually everything that he says. In fact, there are now 428,000 people in training under YTS—[Interruption.] If the hon. Gentleman will listen to the figures, he will find out. There are now 428,000 people in training under YTS. That is a greater number of young people in training than ever before.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what contribution the tourism industry made to United Kingdom invisible earnings in 1988; and if he will make a statement.

Estimates published last week show that overseas residents spent more than £5·4 billion in the first 10 months of 1988.

My hon. Friend has provided excellent figures, but how do they compare with other factors in the invisible earnings sector of our economy? Will he consult our right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport on how much better they could be if London's traffic and transport were sorted out?

I take the point that my hon. Friend has made about London traffic and transport. That is an issue that we discuss with transport colleagues in the tourism ministerial co-ordinating group.

Does my hon. Friend agree that our cathedrals and cathedral cities have a central role to play in the development of the tourist industry? Will he speak to his ministerial colleagues to see whether there are ways in which the Government could take a positive role in helping the deans and chapters?

I know of the continuing interest that my hon. Friend takes in cathedrals. Of course, our cathedrals and churches are major national tourism assets. Indeed, I recently visited Winchester cathedral and saw what has been achieved there and its potential. Once again I make the point that that is just the sort of issue that I can consider with ministerial colleagues in our tourism ministerial co-ordinating group.

The Minister will agree that, despite terrorism, tourism in Northern Ireland is doing reasonably well, but will he use his influence and ask tourist agencies to persuade people perhaps, to extend their visit to England and visit Northern Ireland, too?

That is an interesting point. I shall put that proposition forward to my ministerial colleague in charge of tourism in Northern Ireland, my hon. Friend the Member for Gosport (Mr. Viggers), to see if something can be worked out.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many representations he has received on his proposal to create a national training task force contained in the White Paper, "Employment for the 1990s", and if he will make a statement.

I have received a number of representations on the proposal to create a national training task force. This has now been appointed and I am delighted that leading figures in industry and commerce, education, training, voluntary bodies and trade unions have agreed to serve on it.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that this is a most important body which will have responsibility for steering training in the future? Will he tell the House whom he has appointed to serve on the national training task force, or at least give us one or two names of those appointed, and how he envisages them carrying out their role?

I will not set out all the people who are on the national training task force, but suffice it to say that they include the chief executive of IBM UK, the chairmen of the Scottish Development Agency, Tarmac plc, HTV Limited, and National Freight Consortium plc, and the president of the Amalgamated Engineering Union, whom I am sure the hon. Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Meacher) will recognise. The fact that such leading figures are taking part shows the importance that industry generally and the leaders of industry are placing on training.

Does the Minister have any plans to do anything about training for the growing army of homeworkers, which is an emerging subculture in our sweatshop economy? What training plans does he have for people currently earning 24p per hour as a result of the Government's policies? What instructions has he given to the task force to help those people?

I do not believe that those people come under the remit of the task force. I shall, however, consider any evidence that the hon. Lady wishes to send to me. The whole purpose of the task force is to get the training and enterprise councils established to encourage training by employers throughout the country.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many trainees have been on the YTS since its inception; and if he will make a statement.

Since its introduction in April 1983, 2,320,000 young people have taken part in YTS, which shows that its value is recognised by young people and by employers.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in Stevenage the success of the YTS is widely recognised? Will he tell me more about how many people have achieved jobs, further training or, alternatively, started full-time education compared with the position in Stevenage?

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State said just now that 76 per cent. of the country's YTS leavers go into jobs or further education. That percentage is exactly the same in Stevenage, although, in Stevenage a slightly higher proportion of YTS leavers go into jobs and a slightly lower proportion into further education.

Is the Minister aware that in the past eight years there have been 50 fatalities in YTS? I welcome the offer that the Minister made on Wednesday night concerning Derek Cain. Following his tragic death in 1982 on a youth opportunities programme in Sheffield, his father was offered £52 compensation, but three days before Christmas the High Court overturned that decision and awarded £20,000 compensation and costs of up to £100,000 against Plumb's, the Sheffield firm.

Since 1983, when YTS started, there have been 34 fatalities. Incidentally, 13 were road traffic accidents—such accidents do not count in the normal health and safety statistics, but we recognise them when they occur on YTS. Any accident, whether it occurs at the workplace or on the road, is to be deeply deplored. We must do what we can to avoid them.

Dow my right hon. Friend accept that youth unemployment among the under-25s has fallen by 37 per cent. in the year to October? That is well below the European average. Does he also accept that about three quarters of those on YTS secured jobs at the end of their training and that there are 130,000 vacancies on YTS? Does that not sing the praises of the Conservative Government and their training schemes?

It does indeed. As a matter of fact there are 129,000 places available on YTS.

Does the Minister recognise that the answer he gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Conventry, South-East (Mr. Nellist) will do little to lessen many people's fears about the safety record of YTS? Will the Minister give a much clearer indication of the criteria that will be used when he comes to judge cases for possible compensation?

They will have to be the legal criteria; there are no others that I can responsibly use.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many overseas tourists visited Britain in 1988; how much they spent; and if he will make a statement.

Figures are not yet available for the whole of 1988. Provisional estimates show that in the first 10 months of 1988 there were 13·8 million visits to Great Britain by overseas residents. During that period overseas residents spent some £5·4 billion on goods and services in Great Britain.

American tourism is a major contributor to invisible earnings and the balance of payments. What effect does my hon. Friend think the unfortunate bombing of the Boeing 747 flight 103 at Lockerbie will have on it, and how does he assess the effect it will have on dollar earnings?

American visitors to this country are extremely important, but in normal years for every one American who comes here to visit about four visitors come from other countries. The air disaster at Lockerbie is bound to create a degree of apprehension, so the industry will have to work harder at selling itself in the United States. I must make the point, however, that the current fatality rate for United Kingdom fixed-wing transport aircraft, including the sad M1 tragedy, is one fatality per 3·4 billion passenger kilometres flown.

Did the Minister see the delegation from the Settle-Carlisle area representing small businesses, whose members pointed out that if the Settle-Carlisle railway closes people will not be able to travel to cities such as Bradford and Carlisle, which will suffer a loss of turnover? They also said that in the Settle-Carlisle hinterland served by the railway hundreds of jobs in small businesses will be lost. In view of those representations from the small business sector, will the Minister tell his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport that the railway line should be kept open on the basis of keeping jobs?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, I know the Settle-Carlisle area well. With my hon. Friend the Minister of State at the Department of Transport I attended a presentation last week by the English tourist board and the consultants on the work that they have done. My hon. Friend the Minister of State is considering the future of the Settle-Carlisle line at this moment.

As the hon. Member representing the premier tourist area of Wales, may I ask my hon. Friend whether he agrees that what overseas visitors most want is all-weather, all-year, high quality accommodation and facilities? Will he direct his Department's policy to that end?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. There is a tremendous amount of investment in the industry at present—about £2 billion worth of new construction is under way, and a goodly proportion of that is increasingly geared to all-weather leisure facilities.

Does the Minister realise that about 20,000 men, women and children from the Indian subcontinent, Nigeria and Ghana are being denied the opportunity to visit the United Kingdom because they have been refused visitor visas? Will he conduct an urgent inquiry into the often bizarre reasons why those people are denied visas, in the hope that many more overseas visitors from those countries will be able to make the visits that they urgently want to undertake in the United Kingdom?

The hon. Gentleman is a sufficiently experienced parliamentarian to know that that question should be directed to my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary.

Does my hon. Friend agree that more overseas tourists would come here if our tourist information centres were better located? In particular, will he examine the situation in the biggest gateway into Britain, Dover, where the only way to find a tourist information centre is to travel on the road out of Britain?

No Question Time would be complete without my hon. Friend raising the subject of tourist information centres. I know how dear this subject is to him and how important he believes it to be. We have about 560 tourist information centres. They are of increasing quality and are extremely important to our tourist industry. I take the point about Dover; I have had a number of representations about it and I am looking into the matter.

To ask the Secretry of State for Employment if he will make a statement on the progress of the restart programme.

Since July 1986, more than 5 million interviews have been carried out under the restart programme, of which just under 90 per cent. have resulted in an offer of positive help being made. The restart programme now offers interviews at six-monthly intervals to everyone who has been out of work for six months or more. In addition, certain clients are now offered follow-up interviews in order to provide further guidance and support. Since September 1988, the programme has delivered the Government's guarantee to people aged between 18 and 24 who have been unemployed for between six and 12 months of the offer of a place on employment training, in a job club or on the enterprise allowance scheme.

I thank my hon. Friend for that excellent reply and report. I am sure that all hon. Members will welcome the fact that so many people are being helped back into employment. Can my hon. Friend tell us the proportion of people going into employment training from a restart interview and the number going into direct employment from the interview? Does he have any figures on those matters?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. He is entirely right. The purpose of restart interviews is to try to help long-term unemployed people to find a job or some other suitable opportunity instead of simply leaving them to languish out there. My hon. Friend asks about referrals to employment training. About 130,000 people have been referred since ET started in September 1988.

Is the Minister aware that the Government's pit closure programme has encouraged people who worked in the industry for I know not how many years to accept redundancy? Now they are being told that they will have to go on to the restart programme. After all this time and after promises were made when redundancy was accepted, they are now told that if they do not sign on for restart they will have their benefit cut. The Minister should be ashamed of himself.

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for making his point so clearly. The terms and conditions of deals worked out with the miners are more properly matters for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy. In general terms, it has always been the position that anybody signing on and claiming benefit has to be available for work. That is a general rule.

In testifying to the fantastic reduction in the number of unemployed in the west midlands—one of the best figures in the country and due in large measure to the restart programme—may I ask my hon. Friend whether he agrees that the main problem now is no so much one of finding jobs for the unemployed, because vacancies exist, but unfortunately in recognising that many of the unemployed are unemployable? Employers with vacancies are finding that prospective employees do not come up to the calibre that is required, and when they are taken on for employment training many of them lack basic numeracy and literacy skills.

All that I have seen during my relatively short time in this job leads me to the conclusion that very few people are unemployable. I accept, however, that many people need much care and help to get themselves back into the labour market, and the overwhelming majority of unemployed people want to take advantage of that. We are specifically spending about £1·5 billion on employment training so that we do not leave people to languish without the skills that they might need but help them to get back into the labour market.

Why was the Minister so coy in responding to his hon. Friend the Member for Dorset, South (Mr. Bruce) about the number of people helped back into full-time permanent employment? Perhaps I can help him. Will he confirm that surveys show that perhaps only 1 per cent. of people in the restart scheme are going into full-time permanent employment? Given that the bulk of restarts lead people into the now discredited ET schemes, will the Minister tell the House when the Government will seriously begin the process of offering the long-term unemployed adequate skills training so that they can get back into real work?

I have been accused of many things at the Dispatch Box, but coyness has never been one of them. The whole point of a restart interview is to look at people who are either long-term unemployed or heading that way and to try to make some positive offer. In some cases, that could lead to a job right away but all sorts of other disposals can also help. It may be a question of referring people to job clubs, about 440,000 have been submitted to such clubs. It might be a question of referring people to the enterprise allowance scheme; and there have been about 200,000 referrals there. People may also be submitted for jobs; about 460,000 have been so submitted.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what use has been made by firms of the centre for European business information set up within the small firms service.

Over 2,400 inquiries have been made to the European information centre since it was set up in the London office of the small firms service in December 1987.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend. Is the part payment with the European Commission helping to set up other regional centres? Can he give us some more information about those centres so that more small firms can use them? That will enable them to defend their home market and to expand in the European Community through a better understanding of the rules and regulations in the Community.

The Community is making proposals for a further 20 centres throughout this country and others overseas. Three other centres are already functioning in Birmingham, Newcastle and Glasgow. The four that operate at present are pilot centres. They can be contacted through our own small firms offices all over the country and it is extremely important that small firms in particular make use of them.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the high degree of language skills that will be required by business men seeking to operate in the wider Community after 1992? What steps is his Department taking, through the small business service and its European assistants, to provide further teaching and guidance for small business men to help them expand their language skills?

The small firms service and the European information centre are not in the business of training; they are in the business of advice and counselling, but the Training Agency is paying attention to the problem of language training which, as my hon. Friend says, is extremely important as 1992 approaches.

In view of the fact that more than 150,000 small firms have gone bankrupt or suffered company liquidation in the 10 years of this Government, including the small firm that succeeded in Alf Roberts' corner shop in Grantham, which went bankrupt last year, and in view of the 18 per cent. borrowing rate for small businesses, as declared by the Financial Times last week, what advice will the Minister be giving to small firms now to help them keep their heads above water?

The number of small firms which started up and succeeded exceeds the number of those to which the hon. Gentleman draws attention which did not succeed. It is most important to obtain proper advice and counselling. The advice that I would give to people thinking of setting up in business, or who are already in business, is to make sure that they obtain proper advice. It is widely availale both from our small firms service and from local enterprise agencies and others where expert counselling is available. The figures show that those small firms that take advice are much more likely to succeed.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many centres are now operated by the small firms service in the United Kingdom; and if he will make a statement.

The small firms service in England operates through 11 centres and six inner-city sub-offices. There are two centres in Scotland and one in Wales operated by the respective development agencies.

My right hon. Friend referred to the six inner-city sub-offices. How successful are those offices and what efforts are being concentrated on trying to achieve a growth in the development of small firms in inner-city areas?

A number of our main offices are also in inner cities. About eight of the 11 are in inner cities in England, in addition to the six special offices to which I referred. Everyone in the inner cities is now within easy reach of a small firms centre as well as a local enterprise agency. We are also trying to build up the number of ethnic minority counsellors and special inner-city advisers and many of our counselling offices are also in inner cities.

In view of the excellent record of the small firms service, it would not be at all surprising if my right hon. Friend was at times tempted to be complacent. Is he aware that the only criticism that I have heard is that the reliance on retired business consultants or business consultants who come from large firms occasionally leads to inappropriate advice? Is he keeping a close watch on those who have felt less satisfied with the service than the vast majority?

Inevitably, those who are retired or semi-retired are more likely to have the time and inclination to help small firms. That is understandable, but we want to get as much of a spread as we can.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he has included consideration of the casino industry in the current review on tourism.

The review team has consulted with a large number of people involved in all aspects of the tourism industry, including casinos.

Will my hon. Friend confirm the valuable contribution that the casino industry makes to British tourism, not least in my constituency of Bournemouth? But does he agree that that contribution is nothing compared with the contribution that the industry makes in Europe to tourism there? Will he now seek to remove all those petty restrictions, such as the 24-hour rule, which are proving so damaging to our casino industry?

I acknowledge the contribution that casinos make, although their importance can be exaggerated. I am conscious of my hon. Friend's constituency interest in the matter. When the review team received consultations and representations, no particular issues were raised by companies with casino interests, though obviously Home Office Ministers will receive and hear the comments of my hon. Friend regarding casinos.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that the current review will include a sufficient number of cases to enable it to examine small businesses and the contribution. they make to tourism? Will he ensure that the review results in suggestions being made to encourage more growth in small businesses involved in the tourism industry?

In the casino industry.

I hear the comments that my hon. Friend makes about the review. I am satisfied that the review team had adequate opportunity to hear a whole range of representations from large and small firms—including casinos.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what action he intends to take to reduce deaths in the construction industry.

Prime responsibility for health and safety rests with employers and others in the industry. However, new regulations are being prepared which provide for the management and co-ordination of health and safety on multi-contractor sites; which increase the number of safety supervisors in smaller companies; and which amend the site notification procedure to identify sites where there are high risk activities. The introduction of regulations which would make the wearing of safety helmets compulsory on construction sites is also planned.

Is it not a fact that the number of deaths and fatalities in the building and construction industry is increasing dramatically and that two major contributory factors are the failure by the Government to deal with self-employed and lump labour and the great reduction in the number of health and safety inspectors? Considering the number of deaths, it is as though we have a Piper Alpha disaster in the building industry every year. Will it take a disaster of those proportions to encourage the Government to take real action to stop deaths occurring in the construction industry?

The hon. Gentleman is right to remind us that the number of deaths in the construction industry has risen and is rising and is at a wholly unacceptable level. But I do not accept his analysis entirely of the reasons for that. In terms of the number of inspectors employed, it must be remembered that merely employing inspectors does not automatically produce a reduction in fatalities, and there is no evidence to suggest that it does.[Interruption.] If the hon. Gentleman wants the figures—and at least he, unlike some of his hon. Friends, is paying attention to my reply —in 1979, for instance, there were 86 inspectors employed in terms of construction, at present there are 90 and HSE has plans to recruit another 10.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the Health and Safety Executive is experiencing difficulty in recruiting new inspectors in some parts of the country? That is not because of the overall lack of resources but because the wage levels offered are uncompetitive with the private sector in those areas.

There is always a problem about employing people of the right calibre. If my hon. Friend is concerned about resources, I can tell him that the Government gave an extra £6·7 million in 1988–89 and for 1989–90 provision will be enhanced by a further £8·8 million. That will result in an increase of about 10 per cent. in the number of inspectors employed as construction inspectors.

Why does the Minister have to be so defensive? There is a growing number of deaths and serious injuries in the industry. There were about 157 deaths last year. Is it not clear that the growth of lump labour and self-employment is making a serious contribution to the level of deaths and injuries? Is it not also clear that we are not training the correct people in the industry because of a lack of apprenticeships and so on? Is it not clear that some people put profits before the interests of the workers in the industry? Whatever the Government are doing, it is not enough.—[Interruption.] I am talking about people dying.

Order. The hon. Gentleman is having a long run.

It might be long, but I am talking about the deaths of ordinary, honest working people who are dying in the industry because of the Government's lack of responsibility towards them.

The hon. Gentleman started better than he finished. I am not being defensive. When I replied to the hon. Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Doran) I said that the prime responsibility for health and safety must remain with those engaged in the industry. The hon. Gentleman suggested that the deaths are being caused by a growth in lump labour. There is more to it than that. It is true—the figures bear it out—that if there is a boom, one sees such figures. If the hon. Gentleman wants a standard of comparison—perhaps he does not—I shall provide it. He rightly referred to the 157 deaths occurring now but in the last boom in 1975—a date that the hon. Gentleman will remember—there were 182 deaths a year. Whether the figure is 182 or 157, I accept that it is too high.

Does not the report published last week by the Health and Safety Executive on its construction site safety blitz amply demonstrate that the proposed increase in the number of safety inspectors for the industry from 90 to 100 is inadequate to tackle the widespread dangerous working conditions in the industry? What is the Minister's response to the offer by the Union of Construction and Allied Trades Technicians to put its 160 full-time officials on loan to the Health and Safety Executive for one day a week to act as part-time safety inspectors, with their wages paid by the union?

The Health and Safety Executive has to consider any offers that it receives and decide how such offers fit in with the task it has to perform. The report, "Blackspot Construction" showed that 90 per cent. of deaths between 1981 and 1985 were preventable and 70 per cent. could have been prevented by positive management action. Information such as that points the way forward.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many people have taken places on the employment training programme in 1988; and if he will make a statement.

Employment training has made a very successful start. Currently there are about 110,000 people in training with training managers. Unemployed people clearly recognise the benefits the programme has to offer and the opportunity it provides to help them get a job.

I welcome the figures given by my right hon. Friend and the fact that 12,000 people in the west midlands are on the employment training programme. Does he agree that one of the most important aspects of the programme is that it appeals particularly to older workers with large families who were previously on high state benefits? Given the coming demographic trends wth the fall in the number of school leavers, it is that group that British industry most needs to retrain and re-skill.

I agree entirely with my hon. Friend. Unemployment is falling faster in the west midlands than anywhere else in the country. Employment training is a major programme for long-term unemployed people and it has been introduced at a time when there are 700,000 unfilled job vacancies in the economy. That is the opportunity for unemployed people.

Is it not the case that the client group for employment training is 1,147,000 and that the target for the programme is 600,000 in one year, which means that it is 300,000 at any given time? Therefore is it not the case that the programme is reaching one in 10 of the client group and achieving only one third of the Government's target? Does the Secretary of State regard that as a success or failure.

The programme is developing and reaching more long-term unemployed people than before. In addition, there are 700,000 unfilled vacancies, many of which can be filled without any training whatsoever. Therefore, there is a mixture of unfilled jobs and opportunities through employment training. However, I welcome the hon. Gentleman's support for employment training. I only wish that the hon. Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Meacher) would do the same.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 17 January.

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

Has my right hon. Friend seen today's press reports that the consultants Arthur Young who were commissioned by the Football League recommended that the Government's proposal for football should be welcomed and implemented in the interests of the game? Will she take steps to encourage Arthur Young to publish the full report and make it available to Members of Parliament?

Like my hon. Friend I have seen reports of the report. Of course it is for those who commissioned the report to decide whether it should be made available to hon. Members. I hope that they will do so. I recall that on 9 November the Government published the report of the working party under my hon. Friend the Minister responsible for sport. I hope that others will follow that advice.

The police, football supporters, players and administrators are all strongly opposed to the Prime Minister's compulsory identity card scheme. Just for once, why does she not listen to their voices of experience and knowledge, and scrap the idea now?

No. I do not accept what the right hon. Gentleman says. When one examines the record of hooliganism and the numbers of arrests which took place last year and during this season, it is time that we accepted the original recommendations of the Popplewell committee and introduced a national membership scheme for designated grounds.

The Police Federation, whose members, for obvious reasons, are acknowledged experts on this subject, say that

"This scheme is not going to work. When it breaks down, it will do so on match days and give rise to the threat of even worse disorder than it seeks to suppress."

No. The fact that people can easily get into matches without membership cards of any kind attracts a particular type of hooligan to that place, both inside and outside the grounds. We have taken many steps to deal with that. We are now taking up the recommendation in the original Popplewell report that there should be a national membership scheme. Last year there were 6,147 arrests at football league matches and 6,542 ejections from the grounds. The taxpayer has to foot the substantial bill for the extra police presence outside the grounds every Saturday to limit the violence and, aggression for which football provides a focus. Clubs that have introduced 100 per cent. local membership cards have had very much better records since they have done so and families can once again watch football in those grounds.

Anyone who knows anything about football realises that the Prime Minister is talking through the back of her neck. The number of arrests inside football grounds is a fraction of the number she gives. The mere supervision of the scheme that she is trying to introduce will incur, because of police presence and expense, a cost vastly greater than that incurred at present.

When it comes to speaking through the back of the neck, I cannot hold a candle to the right hon. Gentleman.[Interruption.]

Order. Let us get back to the question.

Clubs that have introduced membership cards have a much better record inside their grounds, and find that hooligans are not attracted to the areas outside them. We should observe the enormous improvement that has come about among those clubs and take up the proposals considered by the working party, which were made by Mr. Justice Popplewell when he first addressed the problem.

Will my right hon. Friend come to Luton Town football club on a Saturday afternoon, accompanied by the Leader of the Opposition? [Interruption.] Would she like to go through the middle of the town which, because of that club's membership scheme, enjoys peace and quiet, and where there is no intimidation of ordinary citizens, and where football hooligans do not exist? The people of Luton and of every town in the United Kingdom look forward to the introduction of the membership scheme.

We believe that Luton's example should be followed, to benefit football and its spectators.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 17 January.

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

Does the Prime Minister accept that her Minister's description of Prime Minister Shamir of Israel as a "reformed terrorist" was not meant as an insult but as a compliment? Will she use her influence to persuade him to talk to the other reformed terrorist, Yasser Arafat, in the interest of both their peoples and of peace in the middle east generally?

There has been no change in our middle east policy. Some years ago, we laid down three conditions to be met before we would talk to any PLO members. Those three conditions were met, so we thought it right that the Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office should talk to the PLO. I have asked Mr. Shamir to come here so that we can discuss the matter. It will take considerable time for any negotiations to get under way. Nothing can be started before the new United States Administration is well in position and have decided precisely what is their policy. Meanwhile, we believe that the answer to the deep-seated problems of the middle east is negotiations that honour the rights of all parties. It is our purpose to get those negotiations going under the United States' leadership.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 17 January.

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

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the steadily worsening situation in the Sudan and of the resulting suffering and deaths there? Given Britain's historic ties with that country and the excellent administration that existed there in colonial times, will my right hon. Friend tell the House what assistance—whether material supplies or diplomacy—Her Majesty's Government are able to provide in the current emergency?

For the reasons that my hon. Friend gave, we are very much aware of the conditions in the Sudan. It has been very difficult to conduct relief operations there, particularly in the southern part of the country, although we have contributed to the world food programme's airlift into Juba in the southern part, and the recent International Red Cross operation. We provided £15·4 million in emergency assistance to Sudan last year, and are ready to give further help in 1989. [Interruption.] I would have thought that Opposition Members would be quite pleased that we had provided £15·4 million in emergency assistance. Not in the least: they could not care less.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 17 January.

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

The Prime Minister referred to three conditions laid down for talks with the PLO. As the Government have now agreed in principle to a human rights conference in Moscow to be held in 1992, can we assume that when President Gorbachev comes to Britain —at the end of this month or next month—Mr. Bernard Ingham will be giving a different impression to the press about a possible royal visit to the Soviet Union?

I am not quite sure which point the hon. Gentleman expects me to take up from that somewhat muddled question, which started in the middle east and went on to the human rights conference. We have agreed in principle to a human rights conference in Moscow, but only provided that our demands for certain improvements are fully met, not only in particular cases but in Soviet law and in relation to basic guarantees of freedom. I believe that it was right to take that stance.

Has my right hon. Friend read the remarks made by Mr. John Hickey of the Civil and Public Services Association, who has said that claimants will receive a worse service when social security jobs are moved out of London? Apart from the fact that the service could not be much worse in London anyway, does my right hon. Friend accept that my constituents are insulted at the notion that a job has to be done in London to be done well? Will she reassure us that the Government will make every effort to move public sector jobs out of the capital into the rest of the country, particularly the midlands, where they will be very welcome?

I agree wholeheartedly with my hon. Friend. I am frequently asked at this Dispatch Box whether we will make arrangements to move jobs from London and the south-east to areas where they are more needed. It is not always easy to do so, and it is very disappointing that when we make such arrangements to have those jobs the better carried out, the unions oppose us. I hope that they will reconsider the attitude that they have taken.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 17 Janury.

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

Has the Prime Minister read the report in today's Daily Express that her Agriculture Minister has met farmers 37 times and consumer representatives only twice? Will she now sack him and replace him with someone who represents consumer interests seriously?

I have not the slightest shadow of doubt that my right hon. Friend the Minister will receive representatives of consumer interests who wish to make representations to him. We must also remember that it is in the interests of farmers, and those of the entire food industry, for them to strive to produce food of the highest possible quality. Of course, farmers too are consumers.

Has my right hon. Friend noticed the suppression of democratic opinion in Prague that took place at the weekend? Does she agree that it has made no contribution to either the image or the reality of the common European house?

I expect that many of us saw scenes on television in which peaceful demonstrations in Prague in memory of a student who had taken his own life were forcibly broken up, and were somewhat dismayed. I think that that fully justifies the approach that we took—that we would not attend a human rights conference in Moscow unless certain strict criteria were met. Although much is said and many improvements have been made, such things are still going on, and we could not possibly attend a human rights conference in Moscow unless we observed improvements in what actually happens, as distinct from good speeches.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 17 January.

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

Does the Prime Minister think it is fair that cleaners in hospitals in Edinburgh should be robbed of their pension rights and of all sick pay because of her policies?

I do not accept that that is the case. Those who work in the National Health Service have had a far better deal under this Government, because of increased resources, than they have ever had before.

As a representative of an inner-city area, could I have the reassurance of my right hon. Friend that in view of the worsening problem of the availability of cocaine, and in particular crack, the Government have taken every possible step to eradicate the problem in its infancy before it is allowed to increase to the state it has in America, where it is proving impossible to curtail?

Yes, of course that is our aim. It is indeed a very dangerous drug and we shall do everything possible to see it does not get the kind of hold here that it did in America. Of course, that is more easily said than done. We shall strive to do everything possible to achieve that objective.