To ask the Secretary of State for Eduation and Science if he has any meeting arranged with Scottish university principals to discuss the effect of student loans on Scottish four-year degree courses.

No, Sir. The choice to undertake a course involving four years of study, in Scotland or elsewhere, necessarily involves a mix of economic and educational considerations. I do not expect the provision of additional support in the form of a loan to affect students' approach to that decision.

The Minister must be aware that figures from within the Government's White Paper show that the cost to students in terms of the outstanding debt in opting for a four-year course, with current rates of inflation, will be 60 per cent. greater than for students taking a three-year course. Does that not represent a substantial disincentive to entering a four-year honours degree in Scotland? Does it not mean that the scheme is a fundamental attack on Scottish education itself?

There must be something wrong with the hon. Gentleman's arithmetic. If he were to study under the national curriculum, perhaps it would be improved. Courses of all lengths are available in higher education in England, Scotland, Wales and around the world in countries where there are student loan schemes. Other countries have not found it necessary to introduce differential arrangements for different sorts of students. We have said that we are prepared to consider extending the repayment period in relation to the size of the borrowing. That sort of arrangement is common where student loans exist.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that the major commercial banks have now agreed to join the student loan scheme and that he is not having second thoughts about removing students from the welfare system?

I can reassure my hon. Friend on the second point: we are not having second thoughts about it. On the first point, a question later on the Order Paper will be answered by my right hon. Friend.

The Minister fails to understand the significance of this for students who attend universities in Scotland. They include not only Scottish students, but a number of English, Welsh and Irish students, too. The four-year course in Scotland is much easier for students and produces much more academically qualified graduates. The extension of the loan period will in no way encourage students to come to Scotland or the students in Scotland to take up further education.

Scottish degree courses last for four years instead of three because of the difference between Scottish Highers and A-levels. One quarter of all students in Scottish universities come with A-levels from England and Wales and are attracted to Scotland by the quality of education offered there. I believe that they will continue to be so attracted, the introduction of student loans notwithstanding.

Does my hon. Friend agree that several hon. Members, including my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, demonstrate the worth of the four-year Scottish degree? Does he also agree that those who take part in such degree courses earn much higher incomes afterwards than they would otherwise have done, so is it not right that they should pay something back to society for those higher incomes?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. One curiosity of the arguments that we sometimes hear against student loans is that they are premised on an assumption that the value of higher education to the people who go through it is so low that any element of repayment will deter them. That implies that higher education is of zero value to those who benefit from it, and that I cannot believe.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science what plans he has for the expansion of the city technology college programme; and if he will make a statement.

Three CTCs are up and running and firm starting dates in 1990 and 1991 have been announced for a further eight colleges. We shall continue to build, with sponsors, on this excellent foundation.

It is to be hoped that the Government will build in a better fashion than they have so far. When the previous Secretary of State announced—[HON. MEMBERS: "Question."]—the city technology colleges, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he said that all or most of the money would come from private funds? Yet of the £19·3 million—[HON. MEMBERS: "Question."]—I have asked a question.

Order. The hon. Gentleman asked, "Is the Minister aware?"

To satisfy the House, I will say it again. Is the Minister aware that of the £19·3 million that has been spent, £16 million has come from public funds? If the Government have that sort of money to throw around, why not spend it on Bolsover schools and make sure that the little infant school in South Normanton has running water laid on for the toddlers? That is what they should do with the money.

I should have thought that the hon. Gentleman would have concluded that the more than £40 million already raised from sponsors—[HON. MEMBERS: "Raised?"]—already raised and pledged by sponsors for this exciting innovation—was a considerable achievement in a short space of time. He should be grateful to the sponsors who are adding to the Government funding for this exciting new scheme. It has many advantages of innovation, for inner-city areas and of improving the technology curricula. I should have thought that the hon. Gentleman would regard that as a success.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I, too, am concerned about the expansion of city technology colleges, although perhaps not in the same way as the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner)? My concern is that there are not enough of them and that they are not coming on stream quickly enough—

Question.

Order. The rules apply to both sides.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that we should do more to speed up the building and introduction of these schools? What measures will he take to ensure that we produce more than 20 CTCs in the least possible time?

Twenty remains the target and the pace at which it is realistic and practical to move must be taken into account. Nevertheless, I should have thought that getting three schools up and running within three years, and the gathering of more than £40 million of private sponsorship, represents a considerable achievement.

Given that Tory-controlled county councils are protesting vehemently at having to enforce cuts in their education budgets in the coming year and given the massive demand for expenditure on teachers' salaries to restore the morale of the profession, will the Secretary of State confirm that there will be no announcement tomorrow of increased capital funding of CTCs? Since the original plan is a failure, with the Government having to put up 80 per cent. rather than 20 per cent. of the money, may we have a stop to this separatist and elitist expenditure at the expense of the country's general education?

I cannot announce in advance what will be said tomorrow. The hon. Gentleman cannot say that the scheme is a failure given that, for example, Kingshurst CTC had more than 1,200 applications for 180 places, Nottingham had more than 300 applications for 180 places and Sylvan has already had more than 480 applications for 180 places. All that shows a clear demand from parents for those schools, which cannot be regarded as a failure. The hon. Gentleman will know that we have increased the revenue support grants and spending assessments by a considerable sum compared with their equivalents last year, so there has been a considerable increase in local authorities' current spending on education in general.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the CTC concept is so good, attractive and necessary that all hon. Members should be taking steps to have one set up in their communities? Will my right hon. Friend confirm that there is nothing to stop local education authorities setting up CTC-style schools if they wish to do so?

Some local education authorities are putting forward interesting ideas and I shall encourage them to continue to explore that thought. I should like more sponsors to come forward, but it is remarkable that we have already achieved more than £40 million. But the more sponsors that we have, the better pleased I shall be.

Is it not true that the CTC scheme has failed to attract private sponsorship and that that is why only £3 million of private money has been invested? Why did the Minister of State have to write to the Conservative leader of Lincolnshire county council on 14 September saying that the Government and the CTC trust were unable to attract private sector support for a CTC in Lincoln? Is that a sign of the attractiveness and success of the scheme, or is it just a sign of the Government's further failure to attract private funding?

I do not see how the pledging of more than £40 million of sponsorship can be regarded as a failure. That is one of the largest examples of giving by the private sector to education for a long time, so I do not know how it can be regarded as a failure. With regard to Lincoln, one of the relevant points is that CTCs are meant to be directed at inner-city areas, and that is where we have been concentrating.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science what representations he has received regarding the proposed establishment of a city technology college in Telford.

I have received 14 letters following the announcement by the Mercers Company of its intention to sponsor a CTC in Telford.

Will my hon. Friend take this opportunity to publicise the fact that CTCs are not designed only for academically gifted children, and that children hoping to take A-level courses and go on to polytechnics or universities would do best to continue attending existing secondary schools? There will thus be no creaming-off from those schools.

As was clearly announced, the CTC initiative has always been intended to cover children of all abilities, directing its efforts particularly towards children who may need more technological education. We hope that A-level courses will feature as much as any other course. I assure my hon. Friend that we are considering catchment areas wider than those applying to ordinary local comprehensives.

Is the Minister aware that I have received numerous representations concerning the proposed Telford CTC? I have them all here—the Minister is welcome to read them—and they are all against the proposal.

No, Sir. I understand that the sponsor, the Mercers Company, is looking carefully at all the responses that it has received from the local population—including the local education authority, head teachers and others—and that those responses will eventually be recorded and taken fully into account.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he has any plans to review the regulations on payment of the costs of school transport.

My right hon. Friend has no such plans.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the discretion to pay or not to pay the costs of a pupil's transport to and from a secondary school is being manipulated by some local authorities to inhibit parents' free choice of school? Will he ensure that that practice ceases, and will he say in particular what steps he will take to prevent it from interfering with the success of the policy of open enrolment?

I am not aware of any examples of such deliberate manipulation by local education authorities, but if my hon. Friend can give me written evidence I shall take it very seriously and look into the matter. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State attaches great importance to parental freedom of choice, and looks to local education authorities to do all that they reasonably can to facilitate such choice.

Does my hon. Friend agree that it should be perfectly all right for any empty places on school buses to be filled by pupils from grant-maintained schools? Does he agree that certain local education authorities should stop obstructing grant-maintained schools on school transport matters?

I very much hope that local education authorities will fully support the spirit of extending freedom of parental choice, which is an important part of the Education Reform Act 1988, and that they will act reasonably and generously when they feel able to do so.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement about the teaching of history within the national curriculum.

My right hon. Friend and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales are awaiting the final report of the national curriculum history working group, which they expect to receive by the end of the year. They will then publish their proposals for the history curriculum.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the interim report of the working group was greeted with shock and dismay by the many who believe that the causes and history of the second world war should be part of the national curriculum? After all, 1940 was our finest hour; why is it too fine for the history mandarins?

I can assure my hon. Friend that the proposals of the interim working group have been looked at again by the history working group, and that the final proposals will contain full programmes of study on all the units, so that such matters can be taken fully into account.

Will the Minister explain her previous answer? Does this mean that the national curriculum will contain the rise and fall of Nazism and the second world war?

As I understand it, yes.

Why cannot children be taught about England's heroes instead of vague subjects such as social trends?

I have much sympathy with my hon. Friend's question. In our view, the facts of British history—the social, cultural and economic status of our history—are absolutely essential for all children who are studying the subject.

Will the Secretary of State ensure that the history syllabus is balanced, or shall we once again see the spectacle of education Ministers being rolled over by the Prime Minister and the advisers in the No. 10 policy unit who wish to turn the history syllabus into no more than a vehicle for the jingoistic, Right-wing indoctrination of our children?

It is almost beneath the dignity of the Dispatch Box to answer that question. The history working group is advising my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. The National Curriculum Council will be looking at that advice. When the council has fully consulted on the report of the history working group, my right hon. Friend will take advice from the National Curriculum Council. Balanced history will, of course, be taught in our schools.

Is the Minister aware that the current trend among Caribbean parents to send their children back to the parents' countries of origin for a decent education will no longer be necessary when the national curriculum, including the first-class teaching of genuine history, is in place?

I am very much aware of that. That is exactly the purpose of having the national curriculum and of introducing sensible history teaching in our schools.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science what advice he gives to local education authorities about the rights of parents to see the school records of their children.

In July my right hon. Friend the former Secretary of State laid before the House regulations governing the keeping, disclosure and transfer of schools' manually held records on pupils. At the same time, the Department issued to local education authorities a circular describing the effect of these regulations.

I am genuinely grateful for the Minister's answer. In the context of the Conservative-controlled Trafford council, whose education committee recently reaffirmed its decision to keep secret and to prevent parents from having access to information relating to 11-plus testing will she confirm that such information will have to be made available under the Department's recently issued guidelines?

I cannot add to the answer that the hon. Gentleman received from my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State in his recent reply on that matter. From the date when the new regulation comes into effect, manually held records in schools will be made available to parents. Those records may include the information to which the hon. Gentleman refers.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the great concern felt by many hon. Members that although initiatives such as pupil profiling, records of achievement and assessment under the national curriculum have improved the quality of the information available to parents on pupils' progress, too often it is inadequately communicated by schools to parents? Will the Government look into the possibility of making written school reports at least twice a year mandatory on all schools, thus improving the relationship between teachers and parents, upon which good education depends?

I thank my hon. Friend for his question. The Government are committed to ensuring that sensible records of achievement by children are given to parents. Information should be given not just on their academic achievements but on their other activities in school, including community work and other matters that are of interest in the context of the school curriculum.

Is the Minister aware that Parliament originally gave powers for the regulations to be made nine years ago? It has taken nine years for the regulations to be made and they refer only to information which is compiled after the date of the regulations and not to information about pupils that is already held. Should it not be possible for parents to see information about their children that has been held in the past few years?

The circular relates to the future—to 1990—but local education authorities are governed by the Data Protection Act 1984 and much of the information is kept on computer.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science what guidance is offered by his Department to schools on making special provision for educating children in the dangers of drug abuse.

Schools are required to teach children about the harmful effects of drugs by the national curriculum science order. The Department has published "Drug Misuse and the Young", a booklet of guidance for teachers, and has funded the development of curriculum materials for use in schools. We also provide grant support for local authorities' drugs education activities.

With the sickening evidence of the disaster that drug taking is causing in American schools, particularly with regard to crack, to which addiction can be almost instantaneous, will my hon. Friend provide even more guidance and resources to primary and secondary school teachers in Britain so that we can nip drug addiction in the bud?

The Department has issued in bulk copies of a fact sheet on crack, with space for local information to be overprinted, to all drug education co-ordinators. It is for them to make a judgment about the appropriate use of the material in local circumstances. We believe that campaigns and shock-horror approaches are likely to prove counter-productive and that the right approach is to provide education about drugs in the general context of health education which stresses the benefits of a healthy lifestyle and helps equip young people with the skills that they need to resist the pressures to abuse drugs and alcohol.

Does the Minister accept that it is a very serious problem and that if we learn from the mistakes of the American Government, surely we must consider the possibility of establishing a drugs helpline with telephone numbers publicised in our schools and colleges? That would enable children and young people to telephone the helpline and would make the authorities aware of the extent and the amount of drugs in a particular locality, enabling them to target the resources where they are most needed.

I agree with the hon. Gentleman about the importance of monitoring the situation on the ground and providing the ready recourse to help and expert advice that he advocates. That is one possibility which I very much hope local education authorities will consider and which drugs education co-ordinators will have very much in mind. It is an example of information that could be overprinted on the fact sheet about crack that is being made widely available.

While welcoming my hon. Friend's answer and endorsing the Government's efforts to improve drug and health education in schools, will my hon. Friend pay further attention to the efforts of the Life education centres which were founded in Australia by the Rev. Ted Notts and which have done such a marvellous job? Does he agree that they could be adapted for use in this country to a much greater degree than hitherto?

My hon. Friend will be pleased to know that there has been Government contact with Life education centres in a number of Departments. I plan to make direct contact with them.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science when he will announce plans for testing at seven years; and if he will make a statement.

The first statutory assessments of pupils at the end of key stage 1 will be in summer 1991—in English, mathematics and science. The arrangements will be set out in orders under section 4(2)(c) of the Education Reform Act 1988. Drafts of those orders will be published next spring.

Has the Secretary of State had the opportunity to read correspondence from headteachers of first schools in Northumberland that has been sent to him in the past two weeks complaining about the fact that they are understaffed, under-resourced, underpaid and cannot cope with the introduction of the national curriculum and local management of schools and now, superimposed on that, a testing system? Does the Secretary of State agree that it would be better to drop the whole idea?

I am aware of the correspondence, and my hon. Friends and I will respond to it. I am sympathetic with the point about the heavy amount of work caused by the introduction of the national curriculum. I am keen to ensure, so far as I possibly can, that its phasing in is compatible with schools coping with it. The national curriculum reforms have been widely welcomed, and we do not want to lose the momentum of that progress. I therefore do not accept that we should delay the programme for the standard assessment tasks, which is a crucial part of the curriculum.

Will my right hon. Friend make the assessments for seven-year-olds available to local authorities as soon as possible? He will no doubt be aware that in local authorities such as those in Lancashire, statements of educational needs are being supplied desperately slowly to parents because of inadequate resources from psychologists and because of lack of information from schools. In ensuring that assessments for seven-year-olds are readily available, will he speed up that process?

I have already made it clear that the draft orders for seven-year-olds' assessments will be published next spring. I am aware that teachers are keen to know more about what the standard assessment tasks will consist of. That is not the point that my hon. Friend made, but it is the point about which most teachers are concerned. The Schools Examination and Assessment Council will publish training packs to help primary teachers early in the new year. It is important, however, that teachers should recognise that the first trial of the standard assessment tasks in 1991 will not be reported. The first reported year will therefore be 1992. Clearly, there is time to get this right, and I am anxious to get on with it.

Is the Minister aware that teachers are concerned about their ability to teach the curriculum without knowing how it will be tested? Receiving test information nine months after the curriculum has started is not good enough. Will he assure hon. Members that the seven-year-olds' tasks will be assessments and not standard written tests, for which the Prime Minister has been asking?

Everyone was keen to get on with the national curriculum, but that inevitably means that everything must be done in an ordered programme. The standard assessment tasks will not take effect until the 1991 trial. I fully recognise teachers' desire to know what those tasks will be, which is why I am keen to get the training packs out early in the new year. [Interruption.]

Order. I appeal to hon. Members to desist from having private conversations.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science what steps he is taking to ensure that local authority school transport plans are not restricting parental choice of school.

In December 1981, the Department issued a circular letter to all local education authorities on the relationship between school transport and choice of school. That advice is still current. A copy is in the Library of the House.

Is my hon. Friend aware that sometimes the boundaries of catchment areas seem to be arbitrary and that it is possible for local authorities to deny free school transport by the simple expedient of not having a catchment area? Will he therefore undertake to review the present guidelines to ensure that no unfair discrimination is taking place?

My hon. Friend has raised a particular case on behalf of his constituents, on which we are consulting the local education authority and which I shall consider very carefully. The Education Reform Act 1988 did not alter the duties and powers of local education authorities in relation to school transport, but we are most anxious to ensure that local education authorities, wherever they can, give parents practical support so that they can exercise an effective right of choice. As my hon. Friend asked, I shall keep the matter carefully under review.

I am sure that my hon. Friend will acknowledge that as winter sets in the choice of parents is restricted not only by finance but by safety. I welcome the change in the law made by the Education Reform Act, but will he consider further extending the experiment by offering an education grant to local education authorities and schools under local management systems for schools to fund bus services, particularly in local areas, so that when they are not being used by pupils they can be used for the benefit of the community?

I shall certainly reflect carefully on my hon. Friend's suggestion. He will be aware that the Education (No.2) Act 1986 requires that authorities should have regard to, among other matters, the age of the pupil and the nature of the route or alternative routes that he or she could reasonably be expected to take. That provision clearly asks authorities to have particular regard for safety.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science what discussions he has had with the Polytechnics and Colleges Funding Council on the question of funding higher education.

This is one of the matters dealt with in the discussions we have from time to time with the funding council.

Is the Minister aware that Cumbria, especially west Cumbria, is exporting a high number of students for higher education to all parts of the United Kingdom? Will the hon. Gentleman lend his support to the provision for a far greater level of higher education within the county and, if necessary, lend his support to the establishment of a polytechnic if the demand for one is clearly established?

The Government's intention is that there should be an expansion of higher education. The questions of how and where this should occur need to be considered further. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman's proposal for Cumbria will be given serious consideration.

Will my hon. Friend confirm his expressed intention of doubling the number of students in higher education? Within how many years does he expect to see that doubling? What proportion of that number are expected to go into polytechnics? Does my hon. Friend have any plans to create new polytechnics?

One of the Government's great achievements has been the increase of more than 25 per cent. in the number of students in higher education since we came to office—more than 200,000 students, a rise well above target. We know that because of the reduction in the number of 18-year-olds, we will find it difficult to do more than maintain student numbers in the 1990s. We expect a substantial increase in the demand for and supply of higher education as we go into the next century.

Will the Minister now tell the House the answer to the question that he and the Secretary of State so miserably failed to answer during the student loan debates? How will the Government pay for this commitment to double the numbers over the next 25 years? Will they choose the route of entitlement and increased public expenditure, or will they take the path of privilege and introduce private tuition fees?

It is the hon. Gentleman and the Labour party that have to answer the question about how they would pay for their proposals. The Government's answer is clear. We propose to introduce through the student loan a means to enable students to anticipate some of their income as graduates to help fund their higher education. That will enable an expansion of higher education to be funded.

Is my hon. Friend aware that, although the PCFC has had an increase in funding of more than 6 per cent., it has offered only 2·5 per cent. to the excellent St. Mary's college in Twickenham, whose lack of enthusiasm for the PCFC is shared by me?

I am looking forward to meeting my hon. Friend and his colleagues from his constituency later today when we can discuss the matter further. The way in which the PCFC allocates the resources provided by the Government is a matter for it.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science what proportion of the letters he has received about student loans have agreed in principle with his proposals.

Letters have expressed a variety of views on different aspects of our proposals. Many support the underlying principle that students in higher education should contribute to their costs.

Has the Minister seen the survey by Dr. Burnhill of Edinburgh university which suggests that for every student from a professional middle-class home who will be deterred by a system of student loans, five students from manual working-class homes will be discouraged? Is not that the experience of Sweden? Should not we be taking action to increase the number of students from working-class homes who, go on to higher education, rather than the opposite?

I entirely agree, but that is not the experience of student loan schemes overseas. That experience shows that such schemes are compatible with higher rates of participation by students from working-class backgrounds than we have achieved in 30 years of the most generous grants system in the world.

How does the Minister equate the Government's proposals with the 1987 Conservative manifesto?

I have no doubt that the Government's proposals are readily reconcilable with those in the Conservative manifesto, which said that there should be an expansion of higher education. This is a means of assisting with that. We should remember the words of the Robbins report in 1960 which said that

"the arguments of justice in distribution and of the advantage of increasing individual responsibility"

Can the Minister explain why there is an item on the tapes now that the Government have agreed a system with the banks regarding the student loan scheme? Why has no statement been made to the House today? Is the Minister aware that the banks themselves are now disowning the scheme? Lord Alexander of Weedon, chairman of the National Westminster bank has just written to me on behalf of NatWest to say:

"We are in no sense promoting or supporting the introduction of the legislation on student loans".

All the way through, our discussions have been punctuated by speculation about the attitude of the banks. Let us wait to see what it will be.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 14 November.

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. This evening I hope to have an audience of Her Majesty the Queen.

Will the Prime Minister explain why it is necessary for her foremost energy adviser, the noble Lord Marshall of Goring to resign, when the Ministers responsible for so many mistakes have kept their positions under her patronage, or is this just another factor that she finds incomprehensible?

Lord Marshall is considering his position in the light of the Government's decision. It is premature to speculate. It is a matter for the noble Lord.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the community charge is the fairest way to raise money? Does she deplore the new system that has been suggested by the Socialists—a combination of a property charge and income tax—which effectively means a snoopers' charter?

Yes, I believe that the community charge is the fairest way to make a contribution to local authority expenditure. It gives generous rebates—more generous than those given under the old rating system. I notice that the Opposition agree that rates are totally unfair, but that they have not been able to find a successful alternative which has not been blown out of the water before they have got very far with it.

Is the Prime Minister aware that she encouraged right hon. and hon. Members on both sides of the House last night, when she declared that:

"We must stretch out the hand of co-operation, and develop new forms of association with the emerging democracies of Eastern Europe"?

The right hon. Gentleman should be aware that we have trading agreements, through the Community, with some of those countries, for example, Hungary. We do not have an association agreement between the Community and those countries, as we have, for example, with Turkey. I thought then that it would be wise, as I thought that the countries of Eastern Europe would naturally wish to enhance their contacts with the West, to consider an association agreement between the Community and those countries.

I am grateful to the Prime Minister for that answer. Is the right hon. Lady aware that she was also correct to remind everyone last night that Warsaw, Prague, Budapest, Leipzig and Dresden—[Interruption.]

Order.

Is the Prime Minister aware that she was also absolutely right last night to remind everyone that Warsaw, Prague, Budapest, Dresden and Leipzig are great European cities—[Interruption.]

Order. This takes a great deal of time. [Interruption.] Order. At this rate, I shall be able to call few Back Bench Members.

Should those great European cities—

Name them.

Does the Prime Minister think that those great European cities should continue to be the target for short-range nuclear weapons?

I pointed out over a year ago in the Bruges speech that Warsaw, Prague and Budapest were also part of Europe, and what a pity that the right hon. Gentleman did not congratulate me on that. I do not believe that the events in eastern Europe would have taken place but for the staunchness of NATO. One could never rely on the Labour party to support NATO.

To give some validity to what the Prime Minister is saying, will she tell us whether those great European cities should be the target of short-range nuclear weapons?

We should stick by our agreements with NATO, which were signed by all NATO countries.

Does my right hon. Friend recall the words of that great and noble man, the late General de Gaulle, that Europe runs from the Atlantic to the Urals? Will she give the House an undertaking that she does not see the European Community as being fulfilled until it runs from the Atlantic to the Urals?

The European Community is only one manifestation of the identity of Europe. There is a wider one and I do not think that we should confuse the two in any way. Most of us would now hope that democracy will soon run from the Atlantic up to the Chinese border at any rate and eventually beyond that.

Why is it that in her bleak and visionless speech last night, the Prime Minister sought to return Europe to that uneasy balance of power between the nations which has twice done such damage to our continent this century? Why is it that while the rest of Europe is on a march to unity through closer integration, she is seeking to lead Britain into increasing isolation?

The right hon. Gentleman speaks absolute nonsense. It has been the staunchness of NATO which has helped to see the birth of democracy in eastern Europe. The right hon. Gentleman will recall that our views have frequently prevailed in the Community and if he had looked at our record for getting down constraints in Europe, he would have found that we were way out ahead of many other nations in implementing the directives. I hope that he would also have agreed with what seemed to be the almost unanimous verdict in the House about a European monetary union of the kind proposed by Delors. It seems to me that stages 2 and 3 have been totally and utterly rejected by all parties in the House.

Does not my right hon. Friend find it strange that Opposition Members, who played such an ignoble role in 1983 and 1984, at a time of great danger to the western world, should now be saying that they played some part in what has now been achieved as a result of what she and her colleagues did then?

I do not think that freedom would have come about or that there would have been the prospect of democracy in eastern Europe and in the Soviet Union unless we had staunchly defended freedom through NATO, together with the essential part of the nuclear deterrent. As I pointed out in my speech last night, there was at one time a doctrine in the West that we had merely to contain Communism. After that, we put freedom on a peaceful offensive and it is partly that and partly defence that has led to the remarkable results that we now see in eastern Europe.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 14 November.

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

In view of the continuing corruption of women and young people by British Telecom and its dubious associates, and Oftel's inability to do anything about it by means of regulations, could I offer the Prime Minister a deal? If I bring to the House an amendment to the Telecommunications Act 1984, will she instruct her Chief Whip to find parliamentary time for it while I provide a majority to bring it into force?

With regard to the substantive part of the hon. Gentleman's question, he knows that I would not interfere with the duties of Whips. [Interruption.] I could wish that Opposition Members had more respect for the authority of their Whips on some occasions. It would greatly assist parliamentary business. Sir Bryan Carsberg, the Director General of Telecommunications has announced plans for closer control over premium rate services. He intends to introduce the new controls on 8 December, so perhaps the hon. Gentleman's help will not be required.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 14 November.

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

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the comments by the president of the Bundesbank in support of her view on the advantages of competition between the 12 European state currencies? Has she thought of discussing with our European partners the logic of expanding that idea to its conclusion—the evolution of a free market in currencies and banking such as existed in Britain before 1840 and produced the financial stability and low interest rates which were the foundation of our economic prosperity in the 19th century?

I confess that we had not thought of my hon. Friend's ingenious solution. As she knows, we have put forward alternative plans for economic and monetary union in the Community which would preserve the authority of this national Parliament. I understand that Karl-Otto Poehl has made supportive remarks about them and I hope that they will find much support in the rest of the Community.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 14 November.

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

Is the Prime Minister aware that the arts are now suffering from their worst ever financial crisis because of a £40 million shortfall in the Government arts grant? How does she reconcile that with her comment when she first came to office that there would be no "candle-end economies" in the arts? Before the final curtain falls on the arts, will she help them out of this financial crisis?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, grants to the Arts Council have increased in real terms and a fantastic amount of sponsorship of the arts by industry has given great help to orchestras, theatres and many artistic events. If the arts are popular—I fully support them and agree that they are popular—I hope that people will spend more of their own money on attending arts events as their standard of living increases.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that in this exciting, hopeful but still uncertain time, it is not rhetoric but deeds that count? What is her view of the need to give practical help to the emergent democracies of Poland and, in particular, Hungary?

Yes, I agree with my right hon. Friend's fundamental assertion that times of uncertainty can also be times of great danger, and that a wish to have democracy is nothing like having the capacity to set up that structure and get it working. We are already, both with the European Community and on our own account, giving practical help to Poland and Hungary in material terms. Help is also being given through the Community and we have relaxed some of the quota restrictions on trade for Hungary and Poland. That is practical help and we shall also consider further matters.

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 14 November.

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

The weekend papers tell us that the noble Lord Marshall of the Central Electricity Generating Board will receive more than £300,000 as a pay-off for the Prime Minister's monumental blunder in not listening to her advisers when they told her to withdraw all existing nuclear power plants from the privatisation proposal. More crucially, when will the Prime Minister pay off the moral debt to adult and child haemophiliacs? Despite last night's vote, does she agree that all these adults and children are more deserving than the noble Lord Marshall because they are not responsible for the position in which they find themselves?

Should Lord Marshall resign, compensation will be a matter for negotiation according to his contract and will be carried out between the two people involved. With regard to haemophiliacs, the hon. Gentleman will know that the Government have made an ex gratia payment of £10 million to the Macfarlane trust. By virtue of their nature, many charitable funds have to go to those in need. £10 million was given to the Macfarlane trust, not all of which has been committed. When the ex gratia payment was made it was indicated that if it should be insufficient we would consider making greater payments to the fund. The hon. Gentleman knows full well that I cannot comment on court cases from this Box.