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

Since I last answered questions on 22 June there have been four deaths in Northern Ireland arising from the security situation. In addition, the Provisional IRA has claimed that it murdered the business man abducted in county Louth on 16 July.

The Secretary of State should be congratulated on his humanity and political courage in announcing the release of 19 paramilitaries on licence over the next nine months. Can he offer any hope to the families of those not included? Does he think that a similar move by the Republic in respect of Portlaoise might be helpful, and will he consider mentioning that to the new Irish Foreign Minister, Mr. Collins, when he next meets him?

I think that that was a two-part question. In response to the first part, I hope that hope is offered to other families by the actions that we have proposed in respect of these prisoners. Those familiar with prison matters will know of the significant impact of the Christmas leave arrangements, and we are examining the matter carefully to see whether that approach can offer further possibilities. I should like to think that there has been a significant impact from that and from our announcements about releasing some people on licence. I take a very sympathetic view towards some of the young people who got caught up in such activities early in their lives and who are serving substantial sentences. I have a very unsympathetic view of those who re-offend and become re-involved. They cannot expect the same sort of sympathy.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the recent arrests in America, France and Dublin may represent a fresh resolve in those countries to combat terrorism? Does he also agree that the recent murder of Mr. McAnulty—presumably because he refused to pay protection money—was particularly vile and evil? Is it not heartening that that incident was condemned by so many people in South Armagh, including Thomas O'Fiaich?

That illustrates clearly our common interest in defeating the evil of terrorism. That gentleman was abducted in the Republic and almost certainly murdered in the Republic, and his body was then dumped north of the border, to cause maximum difficulties for the RUC and the Garda in the investigation of and prosecution of those responsible for the crime. I certainly join my hon. Friend in condemning that appalling crime. I welcome too, the very rapid condemnation that came from all concerned. The hon. Member for Newry and Armagh (Mr. Mallon), Cardinal O'Fiaich and a whole range of other people were outspoken in their disgust at that murder.

In view of the 50 per cent. increase in serious terrorist offences in the frontier zone covered by 3 brigade in the year since that brigade was formed, will the Secretary of State consider increasing the numerical strength of all arms of the security forces in that zone?

I do not recognise the statistics that the right hon. Gentleman has chosen to quote. However, I would have hoped that, in response to what I have said, he would feel able to pay tribute to the valuable co-operation, which has undoubtedly contributed significantly to the saving of lives of his constituents and many others. One cannot over estimate the value of that co-operation, which is important if we are to defeat the evil of terrorism that is a threat to people north and south of the border.

Will not the Secretary of State admit that it is the duty of every democratic Government to co-operate in the fight against terrorism? No democratic Government should think that they are going out of their way or should get laurels for so doing.

As the hon. Gentleman knows very well, I have made it clear that there are no proposals for any further removals of vehicle border checkpoints of that kind. Those are operational matters; the decision was taken by the security forces and has been implemented. We are certainly keen to ensure the best possible protection for everyone in the Province against the danger of terrorism.

Is the Secretary of State aware that senior officers of the Ulster Defence Regiment are using a public relations and information video which is explicitly critical of my party? Does he agree that no section of Government information services should be used in such an overtly party political way? Will he assure the House that that video will be removed from use?

I have no knowledge of the video to which the hon. Gentleman refers, but in general I do not dissent from the proposition that he has put forward. I shall certainly have the matter looked into.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what subjects he expects to discuss at his next meeting with representatives of the Government of the Republic of Ireland.

The agenda for the next meeting of the conference has not yet been finalised, but I expect it to include security matters; recent and forthcoming events; the scope for greater cross-border economic co-operation; the progress made on fair employment; and other matters.

What is the likely effect on the British-Irish talks and on Britain's reputation throughout the world when the British soldier who killed an innocent young man, Aidan McAnespie, is simply given a token fine and returned to normal duties, and when the British Government refuse reasonable demands from respectable organisations such as Amnesty International for a full judicial inquiry into that disputed killing and into the SAS killings of three unarmed people in Gibraltar?

I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman bothered to study the facts before seeking to make such outrageous allegations. He may not be aware that the matter was investigated, not only as the absolute requirement on which I insist and as the absolute practice, by the RUC in a full criminal investigation, but on this occasion by the deputy commissioner, now the commissioner, of the Garda on behalf of the Irish Government. On this exceptional occasion, they wished to investigate, too. As no evidence was forthcoming, on either side of the border, that the incident was anything other than an accident, I am appalled that the hon. Gentleman chooses to raise the matter in this way.

As Mr. Haughey has just made it plain that he is not very much in favour of summits of any sort, does the Secretary of State consider it advisable to follow his admirable advice and example?

The Taoiseach said that he found meeting the Prime Minister twice a year, on the occasions of the normal European summits, to be a perfectly satisfactory arrangement. That is sensible because we now have a close working relationship. Here we go again. On the very day when any sensible person can see, before his or her eyes, the obvious benefits of co-operation in the fight against terrorism, there is a deliberate determination not to do anything except to frustrate co-operation. The backwoodsmen are coming out from the Opposition Back Benches with their reactionary views.

What objections do Ministers in the Irish Government have to conferring modest additional powers on the 26 district councils, to setting up a regional council with widely devolved powers over local matters and to legislating in this House for Northern Ireland in the same way as we legislate for the rest of the kingdom?

These are internal matters for the Republic. In the Dail yesterday, the Taoiseach made it clear that matters relating to the administration and government of Northern Ireland are primarily for the parties in Northern Ireland to determine. Although I have some sympathy with looking further at some of my hon. Friend's ideas on giving greater powers to local authorities, I must advise him that the behaviour of one or two councils—Belfast is one—does not encourage one down that route.

The Secretary of State sounds remarkably demob-happy this afternoon. We do not dissent from many of the opinions that he has expressed. Although I did not intervene on the previous question to comment on his important statement about international co-operation in the fight against terrorism, I am sure that hon. Members of all parties will warmly welcome it.

In response to the hon. Gentleman's first point, I knew that, whatever my aspect at the Dispatch Box, somebody would read something into it. If I sound enthusiastic about the progress that we are making in international co-operation in the fight against terrorism, perhaps some hon. Members will understand just how important were the arrests made during the weekend. I cannot overstate that, and I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for what he said about it.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the progress of the introduction of student loans.

Arrangements for the introduction of top-up loans for Northern Ireland students are proceeding in parallel to those in Great Britain.

Does the Minister share the view of the Secretary of State for Education and Science that student loans are excellent and offer good value for money? If so, what does he think of the estimate of the Government's consultants, Price Waterhouse, that the scheme will cost £100 per debtor to administer, and the estimate made by Dr. Nick Barr of the London School of Economics that it will take 100 years before the cost of the scheme is recouped?

Of course, I agree with my right hon. Friend. As the hon. Gentleman takes an interest in these matters, he will know that those views are not shared by the Department of Education and Science.

What proportion of the extra 200,000 students in higher education now, compared with in 1979, come from Northern Ireland, and how much does the average student in higher education in Northern Ireland borrow?

There has been an increase in university students in Northern Ireland and my hon. Friend will be pleased to know that the participation rate in Northern Ireland universities is 20 per cent., compared with 15 per cent. in Great Britain. That is a reflection of the high standing of Queens university and the university of Ulster.

I congratulate the Secretary of State on the confidence that he exhibited at the Dispatch Box today, which may be due to the recent success, but one swallow does not make a summer. Perhaps, there are promises of promotion in the wind. However, the right hon. Gentleman is to be congratulated on his performance so far.

We are the only developed country with no system of top-up loans alongside grants. The Government have a responsibility to find a balance between benefits to students and the cost to the taxpayer. In 1984, the latest year for which figures are available, support for students in the United Kingdom cost about £750 per annum. In France it was £180; in West Germany, £70; and in Japan, £30. If that does not represent a disincentive in those countries, I fail to see why there should be any disincentive in the United Kingdom or in Northern Ireland.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the loans scheme will be particularly welcome to students who do not receive the full assessed parental contribution? Does he also agree that since graduates can look forward to much larger incomes than the community at large, it is only right that they should repay to society part of the benefits that they are getting from their university education?

My hon. Friend is right on both points. About 120,000 university students receive no grant at all because they are means-tested out. About 50,000 receive no mandatory grant and about 160,000 receive only partial grants. All those students stand to benefit from the introduction of top-up loans. My hon. Friend will agree that the introduction of those loans at a nil real interest rate is a further incentive.

Does the Minister realise that the introduction of loans will be a disincentive to entering higher education? The last time that Britain had a loan system was before the war. We do not have to follow blindly countries such as West Germany, because we have about £100 billion from North sea oil. Will not many young people be detered from becoming students? If they become students will they not leave their studentship in debt? It took me four years to pay back my debt.

I know that the hon. Gentleman finds facts uncomfortable, but nevertheless the fact is that loan schemes do not act as disincentives in other countries. The hon. Gentleman fails to make an argument for why this country should be any different.

Is it not difficult for the Minister to accept facts? Does he accept that the study by Dr. Barr mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Rother Valley (Mr. Barron) stated clearly that when students complete a three-year course they will have a minimum debt of £7,000? Does not the study by Price Waterhouse which was commissioned by the Government show that when half the students graduate by 1995 they will either default or defer on their debts? Is that opening up higher education and increasing access, or will it achieve the exact opposite?

Norway has a default rate of 1 per cent. and Sweden and Japan a default rate of 2 per cent. Although there is no loan system at present, the statistics show that the projected levels of borrowing outlined in the White Paper are less than the exact borrowing figures in countries that have loan schemes. The hon. Lady's information and facts simply do not impress me.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what provisions the Government are making for the impact of 1992 on the economy of Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement.

The Government have promoted and supported a wide range of measures intended to inform Northern Ireland business of the challenges and the opportunities which arise from the creation of the single European market.

As the Secretary of State's ebullience at the Dispatch Box appears to be a feature of questions, may I say that if he were not to be at Northern Ireland questions in the future, I and many hon. Members would want to express our admiration for the way that he has done his job over the years?

Order. I think that the right hon. Gentleman is coming to his question.

As the constitutional parties appear reluctant to discuss political matters, but keen to discuss economic matters, could the Government facilitate a round table discussion on how Northern Ireland might face the challenges and opportunities of Europe in 1992?

I do not share the right hon. Gentleman's gloom. Northern Ireland has many attributes, including the availability of a young, well-educated work force, the quality of its infrastructure and telecommunications and the quality of its environment, all of which have been recognised by a number of prospective inward investors. We have persuaded inward investors from inside and outside Europe to invest in Northern Ireland, and I think especially of Montupet of France and Daewoo from South Korea.

Although business progress and prosperity are important in Northern Ireland, is the Minister aware that the cost of living is higher there than in the rest of the United Kingdom, as exemplified by Northern Ireland's high cost of transport, food, bread and electricity? That makes life difficult for many people in Northern Ireland—particularly poor, old age pensioners. What improvements will be made before 1992?

The hon. Gentleman would want the record to be complete. Some items are much cheaper in Northern Ireland than elsewhere in the United Kingdom. I am thinking particularly of housing. The hon. Gentleman's point about bread is well taken. Recently, there was an in-depth study of that issue, and I believe that the hon. Gentleman has a question about it on the Order Paper, albeit to another Minister. I share his view that the high price of bread in Northern Ireland should cause us concern. We encourage the availability of competitive bakery products, to ensure that the consumer has the best choice.

Does the Minister agree that the major economic impact of 1992 on Northern Ireland will be the five-year strategic plan funded by the EEC, which is already the subject of detailed discussions between the Government and the authorities in Brussels? When do the Government intend to let the Northern Ireland public and local interests know about the specific projects contained in that plan, so that there can be proper and thorough public discussion and consultation?

The Northern Ireland regional development plan was submitted in March to the European community and—bearing in mind that Northern Ireland is an objective I region in Europe, and therefore will be given a degree of priority—we have made further proposals. One area of priority is support for port, airport, rail and road facilities, to ensure that Northern Ireland does not miss out in 1992.

What substantial extra provision for hospitals, industry, schools and so on, will the Government need to make for the impact of 1992 on Northern Ireland's economy if Northern Ireland accepts its share of the 3·25 million Hong Kong Chinese that the right hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Ashdown) wants the United Kingdom to admit under his misguided proposals?

If my answer were to go into great detail, I suspect that I would be out of order. A notable contribution to Northern Ireland's economy has been made by the immigrant community, particularly the Indians and Chinese. We make no secret of the fact that we welcome inward investment in Northern Ireland.

What action is the Minister taking to improve the marketing of Northern Ireland products in the EEC?

There has been a considerable switch of emphasis away from standard capital grants and the availability of standard grants to selective financial assistance, which takes the form not only of the aptly named selective financial aid within the Industrial Development Board but a range of marketing schemes—particularly the 40/30 and the 40/60 schemes available from the IDB and the Local Enterprise Development Unit. Northern Ireland's best companies are excellent at marketing, but others must be encouraged to sink more effort into marketing outside Northern Ireland.

Is my hon. Friend greatly encouraged that unemployment in the Province continues to fall? Will he continue to convey loud and clear the message to potential investors that, despite the troubles, the Province is still the most law-abiding part of the United Kingdom, that it is a great place in which to invest, and that it will offer great opportunities to all in 1992?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his remarks, and I endorse them all. We are delighted that unemployment has fallen so much. At 104,000, it is still far too high, but it is way below the headline figure of 134,998 in October 1986. We have persuaded inward investors that Northern Ireland is a good place to do business, and those already there like it very much.

Does the Minister agree that there are obvious attractions in treating the island of Ireland as a single economic entity? When will he make a statement on the Government's discussions with the Republic on co-operation in the sphere of tourism? Does he expect that the Government will encourage further co-operation between the Province and the Republic in agriculture?

I made a statement on tourism some two weeks ago in which I explained that there is indeed co-operation between the Government, the Northern Ireland Tourist Board and Bord Failté. It would be foolish of us not to co-operate, bearing in mind that only one in 15 of visitors to the Republic go up to Northern Ireland and it would be easy to encourage more to do so.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a further statement on the privatisation of Short Brothers plc.

Since the announcement on 7 June of heads of agreement whereby Bombardier of Canada will acquire Shorts, good progress has been made on the necessary legal documentation. I am pleased to inform the House today that approval to the terms of the transaction has been given by the European Commission. It is our intention to complete the transaction in September.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the public purse facilitated—quite rightly—the takeover of Shorts by Bombardier, in the form of sales worth £762 million, and that the quid pro quo is that the House and the taxpayer are entitled to know how much Bombardier will contribute towards investment in the company? Can my hon. Friend tell us the amount specified in the corporate plan? If he cannot be specific, why?

The details of the agreement between the Government, Shorts and Bombardier are matters of commercial confidentiality. I can, however, tell my hon. Friend that Bombardier will be making a substantial investment in Shorts—supported, of course, by Government assistance. The cost of the transaction, some £750 million, has been projected by some as the cost of privatisation, but I think that my hon. Friend will realise that the reverse is true. All but £115 million is the cost of the company in public ownership and the cost of outstanding contracts. That sum will go to support further investment in Shorts.

Is the Minister aware of the deep public concern in Northern Ireland about job losses that have occurred at Harland and Wolff since privatisation? Can he give us any assurance that such job losses will not occur in the privatisation of Short Brothers, and can he give us any guarantee that jobs there will be secure?

The long-term future of employment at Shorts will depend on the profitability of the company and on its ability to deliver, on time, high-quality products that people wish to buy. I believe that the deal between Shorts and Bombardier is the best possible framework for that to happen.

What share might Shorts expect of the Canadian company's regional debt programme?

I cannot answer that question precisely, but I can assure the hon. Gentleman that, having visited Bombardier in Montreal last month, I am very impressed by the fit between Shorts and Bombardier. I will write to the hon. Gentleman on the details.

While all the communities in Northern Ireland welcome this vast investment in Shorts, it is important that both communities share in that prosperity. Is the Minister aware that the rate of recruitment from the Catholic population fell from 17 per cent. in the second monitoring period in 1983 to 14 per cent. in the third monitoring period of 1984? That trend is not welcomed by those whom we represent. Will the Minister ensure that the new company adopts proper recruitment procedures based on fair employment principles?

The new company will indeed respect the application of fair employment in Northern Ireland. I can update the hon. Gentleman's information by telling him that the latest available figures for 1988 show that 19 per cent. of Short's recruits were Catholics. [Interruption.]

Order. I ask hon. Members to desist from private conversations in the middle of these important questions.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he has yet considered implementation dates for the Disabled Persons (Northern Ireland) Act 1989; and if he will make a statement.

The Act will be implemented in stages as resources become available.

In so far as we have combined health and social services boards has the Minister any plans to implement those stages faster in Northern Ireland than they have been implemented in the rest of Britian, especially in the light of recent changes?

We start three years behind the Act here, and we shall implement it as quickly as we can. We look to implement sections 9, 10 and 11, except (4) and section 12 by the end of this year. We shall implement section 4, except (b), sections 5, 6, 8 (1) and section 11 (4) as soon into next year as we can. We shall have to consider with the Boards the cost implications of remaining sections.

Is my hon. Friend aware that in the rest of the United Kingdom disabled people are looked after substantially by local authorities? If Rangers can sign a Catholic football player, is it not about time that we gave Northern Ireland the same local government as the rest of the United Kingdom?

We have for a long time had integrated social services and health boards. That system is working extremely well. We are spending considerable sums on community care and we shall continue to operate an integrated system which works satisfactorily for the community in Northern Ireland.

While congratulate the hon. Member for Belfast, South (Rev. Martin Smyth) on piloting such an important Act on to the statute book, will the Minister offer inspiration to the rest of the United Kingdom by ensuring that the Act is properly and fully implemented and in so doing that community care ceases to be community neglect?

I always like to offer inspiration to everyone. We are implementing the Act in Northern Ireland as fast as we can. We started behind and we have to work out with the boards exactly what the costs are. At present I cannot go further than that.

Given the Government's ability to publish figures about the denominational make-up of employees in Shorts, does the Minister think that it is reasonable to publish figures for the number of disabled people working in the Northern Ireland Office and in local government in the Province? Can he tell the House how many disabled people are employed by the NIO?

I cannot, but I shall find out and write to the hon. Gentleman. Our policy on disablement in Northern Ireland bears cognisance and competition with any other part of the United Kingdom and we are extremely proud of it.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if in the light of allegations in the book "Who Framed Colin Wallace?", he will allow independent inspection on Privy Councillor terms of the records of his Office relating to contacts with Colin Wallace.

No, Sir.

What on earth is there to hide from Privy Councillors? Did the Minister notice that in the review by R. W. Johnson, a fellow of Magdalen college, Oxford, it was highlighted that Cohn Wallace offered to give evidence to the Hughes inquiry on condition of immunity from prosecution under the Official Secrets Act and, according to that fellow of Magdalen, it was turned down by the Prime Minister personally? Will the Minister ask the Prime Minister whether that is true? She is sitting next to him.

Mr. Wallace was given assurances that he would not be prosecuted under the Official Secrets Act if he gave evidence to the Terry and Hughes inquiries. No matter how many questions the hon. Gentleman asks, no evidence has been found in many thorough investigations of the case to substantiate the allegations which Mr. Wallace has made over many years.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he will make a statement on his most recent discussions with Ministers of the Republic of Ireland.

I last met representatives of the Government of the Republic of Ireland at the meeting of the intergovernmental conference in Belfast on 24 May. At that meeting, we completed the review of the working of the conference. Copies of the joint statement issued afterwards and the communiqué were placed in the Library.

Is it not significant—and may this not arise as a result of the better relations with the Government of the Repulic—that there was a sharp fall in the vote for Sinn Fein in recent elections in both north and southern Ireland?

It is significant that the vote for Sinn Fein in the Republic fell from 1·9 to 1·2 per cent., and in the European elections in Northern Ireland, the vote of the Sinn Fein candidate almost halved. Those are significant developments. On the political and security fronts, as well in the economic sphere, we see the value of working together. The events of the last weekend show all too clearly the value of having the closest possible co-operation in the security sphere.

Does the Secretary of State believe that in the current situation in Ireland it might be possible to obtain a ceasefire? Does he agree that that would be the biggest gain for the people of Ireland, in the North and the South, and will he have serious discussions with the Irish Government about the possibility of achieving that?

The ending of violence in the island of Ireland is the greatest ambition that anybody could possibly have. One side is perpetrating the violence. There is an easy way to achieve the hon. Lady's request, and that is to desist from the use of violence. There is one way by which the desire for it could be publicly tested. It is clear, as the elections in the Republic showed, that Left-wing parties can secure a substantial number of votes if they repudiate violence. Those who insist on perpetrating violence were repudiated by the electors, north and south of the border.

To ask the Prime Minister if she has received recent representations regarding health and safety legislation.

Our excellent legislation has provided a model for many European Community proposals. On the latest available figures, standards of enforcement in the United Kingdom are among the highest in Europe, and the level of accidents among the lowest.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that according to the latest figures available, the number of fatalities in industry in Britain is the second lowest after the Netherlands of EEC countries, that our record is four times better than that of France, six times better than that of West Germany and more than seven times better than that of Italy? Does that not suggest to my right hon. Friend that they may have something to learn from what is taking place in this area in this country?

Yes. On the latest available figures, our record in health and safety is extremely good. So also is that of the Netherlands, Denmark and Belgium. Other countries are not quite so good as ours. We are proud of our record and when I took our social charter to Europe, I had some material information about our record on health and safety and it was very favourably received.

Is the Prime Minister aware that during the current docks dispute, middle management on Teesside are driving cranes and in doing so may be in breach of health and safety regulations applying to the docks? Is she aware that representations have been made to the docks inspectorate about the matter? Does she agree that it would be wrong for people seeking to break a strike to break the health and safety regulations at the same time? Which comes first, safety or strike-breaking?

As the hon. Gentleman knows full well, health and safety always come first. If he has evidence, I am sure that he will give it to the inspectors so that they can take the necessary action.

What action is being taken by Her Majesty's Government to ensure that those decisions which should be taken on health and safety within the United Kingdom, and not at the European level, are in future taken within the United Kingdom? For example, what has it got to do with the European Commission as to the quality of water that comes out of the taps in Northampton, Sunderland and in other parts of the United Kingdom?

As my hon. Friend will know, under the Single European Act, certain directives and decisions can be taken by majority. It is in our interests that some decisions should be taken by majority because we have been able to ensure that other countries accept standards which they might not wish to have applied by outvoting them.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 20 July.

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.

I am sure that many right hon. and hon. Members will agree with me that the French Prime Minister, Michel Rocard, got it wrong when he accused the Prime Minister of social cruelty. When the right hon. Lady comes to assess the effects of chronic unemployment, the poll tax, the Government's butchery of the Health Service and the cuts in social security, which she has presided over like a latter day Marie Antoinette, will she be able to accept that the phrase "social cruelty" was a mild understatement which should have read "social butchery"?

The hon. Gentleman is aware that the Health Service in Northern Ireland is far better than it has ever been under any Administration—far, far better. It is a pity that hon. Members are not prepared to recognise the facts. For every £1 spent under Labour, £3 is spent on the Health Service under the Conservatives, and last year an extra £2 billion was allocated to it.

To ask the Prime Minister if she has received recent representations regarding civil defence.

The Government receive, representations about civil defence from time to time. Civil defence is a basic duty of any responsible Government. Since 1986, Government grant-aided civil defence expenditure by local authorities has risen from just over £15 million to £23 million, a significant real increase.

Will my right hon. Friend assure the House that the recent Government announcement on planning for emergencies in peacetime will in no way change their attitude to civil defence in time of war?

It will not, because of course, as I said in my original reply, we have a basic duty to provide civil defence. Although we hope that East-West relations will improve, it would be very wrong to retreat from that basic duty. I have seen, at first hand, the need for excellent services in emergencies and disasters, and what the civil defence people can do to help. We are anxious to do everything that we can, on a national basis, to take all practical steps to help our emergency services meet the demands upon them. The measures that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary recently announced about a civil emergencies adviser will lead to clear improvements in our capacity to respond to those tragedies.

Can the Prime Minister tell us why she has abandoned the long-established and successful means of raising local revenue to pay for civil defence? Why, as the high priestess of market forces, has she managed to persuade her right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, the high priest of market forces, to take on the ill-formed plans of the former Secretary of State for the Environment, the present Secretary of State for Education and Science? Surely a much better way of raising revenue for civil defence and all local services would be a tax on property, based on either rental or freehold value?

Briefly, please.

That would be much better than her present plan.

The question was about civil defence, and I pointed out that since 1986 Government grant-aided civil defence expenditure by local authorities has risen from just over £15 million to £23 million. The hon. Gentleman asked about the community charge, which is by far the fairest way in England to raise 25 per cent. of local government expenditure, in Wales to raise only 18 per cent. of local authority expenditure and in Scotland to raise only 14 per cent. of local authority expenditure.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 20 July.

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

In view of the continued rail strike, and the inconvenience being caused to commuters, will the Government consider bringing in legislation to outlaw one-day strikes, such as other European countries are considering? What encouragement will the Government give to trade unions and employers to rationalise affairs so that there is one union for one industry?

I think that it is tragic that there has been no settlement in the rail dispute, especially as two unions accepted the award of the independent arbitration tribunal. Only one, the NUR, decided not to and prefers to put the public—the customers, who will retreat from using rail if they are treated like this—to great inconvenience once again.

May I congratulate the Prime Minister on the characteristic generosity that she showed yesterday by staying away from the poll tax statement so that her Secretary of State for the Environment——

Where is he?

Order. We have only three more minutes.

—sothat her Secretary of State could gain all the glory and the credit for himself? How does the Prime Minister think—[Interruption.]

Order. Mr. Kinnock.

How does the Prime Minister think she can duly reward the memorable performance of the Secretary of State in the very near future?

I note once again that the right hon. Gentleman resorts to personal criticism because he has neither the intellect nor the guts to ask a real question about the community charge which he knows will show up—when in operation—high-spending local authorities for what they are: extravagant expenders of taxpayers' money.

Can the Prime Minister show the intellect or the guts to say whether she thinks that those of her hon. Friends who are calling for the Secretary of State's rightful dismissal are wrong?

Once again the right hon. Gentleman resorts to personal abuse because he cannot do anything else. I have the greatest confidence in my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, and, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, the community charge is a way of asking people to pay for what they vote for, and when they do, they will vote against Labour authorities.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 20 July.

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

Is my right hon. Friend aware that more and more dockers are sensibly defying the strike leaders and returning to work? Is she aware that many former registered dockers have entered into new and more flexible practices with the port employers, which will ensure prosperity for those ports and jobs for those dockers and many others? Does not their forward-looking behaviour contrast markedly with the last twitchings of bonehead trade unionism, as on the railways?

I agree that many dockers and most people are coming to realise that the end of the dock work labour scheme and that monopoly means a much more prosperous future for those ports and for the industries in the hinterland that they serve. Many dockers are steadily going back to work, and I hope that they will continue.