As the next 12 Bills have blocking motions, I shall put them together.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what effect changes in private borrowing have had on the economy during the past five years.

A number, including notably a means between 1986 and 1989 for companies to finance a 43 per cent. increase in investment—the fastest growth in investment since the war.

Is not the Minister being rather complacent? Is not it true that net personal savings as a percentage of disposable income, which is an important barometer, have fallen from 13 per cent. in 1979 to 5 per cent. last year and that that is reflected in the outstanding consumer credit of £50 billion, much of which has been expended on manufactured goods that were imported by this country because of the inadequacy of British manufacturing industry under the Tory Government to furnish that demand?

It is certainly true that there was a fall in the savings ratio, but we must consider the rates of inflation that prevailed in those two years. The savings ratio for first three quarters of 1990 was back to 8·8 per cent. and is on a rising trend. With regard to credit and demand, the hon. Gentleman failed to take account of the fact that household credit is overwhelmingly for mortgages. He also failed to give us credit for a crucial development: although between 1974 and 1979 consumption rose at seven times the rate of investment, between 1981 and 1989, investment rose at double the rate of consumption, therefore financing plenty more local production for demand to go into.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that when the savings ratio is running at about 5 per cent., it is a clear sign of an excessive boom, such as occurred between 1986 and 1988, but when it is running at 8·8 per cent., as it is now, that is a clear sign that domestic and national indicators point towards a further cut ill interest rates?

I thought for a moment that my hon. Friend was going to ask me a question with which I could wholeheartedly agree, but he spoilt the effect somewhat towards the end of his comments. He is aware of our policy and he knows that we will bring down interest rates when it is compatible with our position within the ERM band and when other circumstances permit.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the success of TESSAs.

TESSA has got off to an excellent start. The scheme is playing an important part in restoring the habit of saving.

Does my hon. Friend agree that any improvement in the underlying savings ratio, which has been relatively low in this country, has beneficial effects on the economy? In view of the success of TESSAs, will my hon. Friend and her colleagues consider similar stimuli for this year and in the future generally?

My hon. Friend is right. There has been a very good improvement in the savings ratio, which is now back up to 8·8 per cent. That has been encouraged by the number of developments in savings schemes introduced by the Government. As for my hon. Friend's further request, I remind him that I can give no idea of what might be in the mind of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer on 19 March.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what representations he has received on the level of interest rates and the value of the pound from Mr. Timothy Congdon over the last few weeks.

None, Sir.

Is not the leaking of information about Government policy by a Bank of England official to a bank in the City an offence and should not the use of such information by a bank become an offence under insider trading legislation?

I should like to consider the hon. Gentleman's last point. The answer to his first point is, obviously, yes. However, I am afraid that I can give the hon. Gentleman no further answer in addition to what I have already told him in a written answer. If the hon. Gentleman has any evidence or information that he wishes to place before me or the relevant authorities, I am sure that he will do so——

I am asking about the law.

I have answered the hon. Gentleman's specific question.

Why should my right hon. Friend pay any more attention to Mr. Timothy Congdon's views than to those of the 364 economists who wrote a letter to The Times in 1981 and got it wrong then?

I hesitate to divulge it to my hon. Friend, but some of the Liverpool six are quite well known to me. I have had discussions with some of them from time to time. They may not be family friends, but I know that they are not always correct.

Has the Chancellor noticed the strange alliance between the Liverpool six, the family friends, some of his own Back-Benchers and members of the Labour party in support of the proposition that it does not matter if a substantial cut in interest rates is followed by a devaluation? Does he agree that the last thing that this country needs is a reputation for devaluing its way out of trouble and that what is really needed is an anti-inflationary policy that would provide the credibility that would make interest rate cuts possible?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman. It is no answer to the problem of inflation or interest rates to say that we must devalue the currency to equate with our costs. The real answer is to make our costs equate with the currency and that is what we are doing.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on the way in which he has absolutely refused to entertain any devaluation of the pound now that it has joined the exchange rate mechanism. Does he agree that even to entertain such a move would undermine the framework of the anti-inflationary policy that he has adopted and that, over time, it would make it more difficult to bring about the necessary reductions in interest rates than would adhering to the framework of the ERM?

I agree entirely with my right hon. Friend. I have set out our precise policy on interest rates to the House on several occasions. I am not going to take any risks with either interest rates or inflation, which must remain the main objective of our policy. We have too high a rate of inflation vis-à-vis our European competitors and I am determined that we should get it down, and quickly. I hope that my hon. Friends will not have exaggerated ideas about interest rates that may or may not be possible.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many letters he has received from small businesses about the high level of interest rates.

My right hon. Friend has received a number of such letters.

Despite the Conservative party's claim to be the party of small businesses, in the west midlands region business failures have increased by 36 per cent. and in Mid-Staffordshire many small businesses have either failed or are struggling to survive. For them, yesterday's announcement of a 0·5 per cent. cut in interest rates is welcome, but a mere drop in the ocean. When will the Minister announce even further cuts in interest rates and end the slow torture of small business men?

Once again, a representative of the Labour party is willing to play fast and loose with devaluation and inflation——

That is not true.

It is what the hon. Lady said.

Does my hon. Friend agree that it is much better to reduce the base interest rate cautiously and thus avoid a fall in sterling which might mean that the rate would have to increase again? Is not it much better to reduce interest rates cautiously so that we can sustain a permanent reduction in the base rate?

My right hon. Friend is right. The purpose of our policy is to bear down on inflation. It would be completely counter-productive to take any risks with inflation.

Does the Minister recognise that the complacency of his reply will be a shock to small and large businesses alike? Is he aware of not only the "Trade Indemnity" results from last year, which showed a 77 per cent. increase in business failures in 1990, but the forecast of a further 25 per cent. increase in business failures in 1991? Is not that an indictment of the Government's handling of the economy?

Of course, it is sad when any business goes out of action. I merely sought to point out that the figures were not out of line with those for the mid-1980s. I do not remember the hon. Lady or any of her hon. Friends at that time making the point that she made today. We have noticed that her party is prepared to spend, borrow and cut interest rates on a reckless scale which would play fast and loose with inflation.

Does my hon. Friend accept that many small businesses that were created in the enterprise culture of Thatcherism are suffering considerable pain as a result of interest rates—despite the recent welcome reductions—and a loss of demand? Will he persuade the Chancellor of the Exchequer to ease the pressure in his Budget by concentrating any tax reductions on the business sector and in particular to consider making the first £5,000 of retained tax profit of a small business tax free?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor heard my hon. Friend's Budget representation.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what has been the revenue cost to date of the reduction of pools betting tax from 42·5 to 40 per cent.

The revenue cost to the end of January 1991 was f15·25 million.

The Minister will know that the reduction in betting taxes is for a period of five years, to coincide with the time scale within which clubs must comply with the Taylor recommendations. As the Government have agreed with the football associations in Scotland that smaller and significantly less wealthy clubs in the lower divisions may have 10 years within which to comply with Taylor, will she consider extending the time scale for reducing betting taxes so that money will be available to the Football Trust to help smaller clubs beyond the current five-year cut-off period?

The hon. Gentleman has a considerable interest in this matter. The ability of the smaller league clubs, not only in Scotland but in England and Wales, to meet the August 1999 deadline for all-seater stadia would, of course, be considerably strengthened if my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer extended the cut in pools betting duty, as the hon. Gentleman suggests. My right hon. Friend has said that he will be prepared to take an early decision on the matter as soon as it is clear that football is contributing on a significant scale out of its own resources to the work that needs to be done. The sooner that that commitment is made, the sooner my right hon. Friend will be able to take a decision. There is some progress, but any encouragement that the hon. Gentleman could give in Scotland and elsewhere would bring forward the date of that review.

May I partly thank the Minister for her reply, which shows that not everything ahead of us is as dark as night? Will she admit that some of the third and fourth division clubs simply cannot go ahead with safety improvements to their grounds and desperately look to the Government to provide not only an incentive but a little more so that the safety of grounds can be assured? Will she assure the House that the scheme will be prolonged to ensure that every football league ground is safe by 1999?

The hon. Gentleman should know that the Government help that has been promised is a generous response to the Taylor report. They will provide an initial £100 million over a period of five years for capital works to make football stadia safer. I repeat to the hon. Gentleman that the game must demonstrate its commitment to match the Government's response before my right hon. Friend can review the position.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on his policy on promoting share ownership.

The Government are committed to achieving wider and deeper share ownership. Very significant progress has been made thanks to the success of Government initiatives.

Does my hon. Friend agree that wider share ownership schemes have resulted in an increase in the number of share owners from 3 million in 1979, under Labour, to 11 million currently, and will he confirm that he wishes to extend that still further? Will he consider the possibility of companies being able to extend the range so that employees can participate as they have in Yorkshire in British Telecom, British Airways, Northern Electricity and other such companies?

My hon. Friend is a long-time proponent of wider share ownership and his figures are right. The number of individual shareholders in Britain has risen from 7 per cent. 12 years ago to nearly a quarter—some 24 per cent.—of the population now. The Government have introduced a variety of employee share ownership schemes as a result of which about 2¼ million employees have benefited from about £6½ billion worth of shares and options over that period. But we shall certainly look at those schemes to see whether there are any ways of improving them.

Is not the best form of share ownership for the nation as a whole to own a service instead of selling it off to a clique of friends of the Tory party, many of whom have contributed to Tory party funds? Is not the Minister ashamed of the way in which, for example, water services owned by the nation have been sold off, have increased their prices and, like other sold-off services, have produced a shoddier service for the people?

There we have the true voice of the Labour party. Only three days ago the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow Secretary of State for Trade and Industry made speeches trying to camouflage the sort of sentiment that the hon. Member for Bradford, South (Mr. Cryer) has just expressed and trying to pretend that their industrial policy had been dragged into the 21st century. We find that yet again they are in favour of nationalisation, with industries to be run by unions and subsidised by the taxpayer.

Does my hon. Friend recall that in the 1974 Labour party manifesto, Labour pledged to bring about a fundamental shift of wealth in favour of working people and their families? Is not it a fact——

Order. This is about share ownership.

Does my hon. Friend agree that Conservative policies encouraging wider share ownership and home ownership have honoured that pledge?

My hon. Friend is right. We believe that if people own their own homes and have stakes in the companies in which they work, they have the sort of interest in the success of the economy that we want them to have and from which they will benefit.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what are the latest OECD forecasts for growth in the United Kingdom and Germany in 1991.

The OECD, in its December "Economic Outlook", forecasts GDP growth of 0·7 per cent. for the United Kingdom and GNP growth of 3·0 per cent. for West Germany. No figures are available for the united Germany.

Does the Minister agree that those official OECD figures, which probably underestimate the fall in British output, show clearly that the British problem is home grown and is caused by two years or more of very high interest rates?

I appreciate the seductive quality of that argument for the hon. Gentleman, but, unfortunately, it is not true. A number of countries—the United States, Canada, Australia and Sweden—are in recession and in France GDP fell in the last quarter. So the hon. Gentleman is not paddling the right canoe.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that Germany's one advantage is that it has a population who believe in low inflation and that when wage demands are made by trade unions, they talk about paying for increases by greater productivity? Does he further agree that if we could follow their example—keeping inflation low and having wage demands met by productivity—we, too, could achieve continued growth without high inflation?

My hon. Friend is right. Indeed, we have proved it to be so. Between 1980 and 1990, the United Kingdom economy, by learning those lessons, grew faster than that of West Germany, whereas when the Labour party was in power we were bottom of the European growth league.

Can the Chief Secretary explain why, after 11 years of Conservative rule, the United Kingdom is the only country in the European Community to be in recession by having a fall in GDP for two quarters and is the only country in the EC to be cutting investment in the manufacturing sector?

The right hon. and learned Gentleman knows that there have been falls in productivity, output and production in a number of European countries. He also knows that the 1980s was a decade of unparalleled success for the United Kingdom economy. With the greatest respect to the right hon. and learned Gentleman, he could not have said that about the previous decade when he was a Cabinet Minister.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that one year's forecast is not a totally accurate guide to the health of an economy, but that a decade is a much better guide to the success of economic policies? In the 1980s our economy thrived, unlike many in the European Community.

That is exactly right. We were at or near the top of most of the economic indicator leagues in the Community, whereas under the Labour Government our economy was at the bottom of those leagues. The Opposition keep on talking the British economy down, but we have confidence in it.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his forecast for the rate of inflation for October 1991.

The autumn statement forecast is for a sharp fall in all-items RPI inflation to 51 per cent. by the fourth quarter of this year. I will publish a new forecast with the Budget.

I thank the Chancellor of the Exchequer for that forecast. The Chief Secretary to the Treasury spoke about the "unparalleled success" of the economy. Does the Chancellor recall a statement by the Prime Minister on 24 April 1988 that what was unique about the recovery in the 1980s was that there was sustained growth without the resurgence of inflation? At the time of that statement inflation was 3·9 per cent. Now there are record house repossessions, record business failures and record unemployment. Who will take the blame for this sad and sorry situation—the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the Prime Minister?

Like the right hon. and learned Member for Monklands, East (Mr. Smith), the hon. Gentleman ignores all the good things that happened in the 1980s and focuses on one statement in one year. He ignores the fact that throughout the 1980s employment in the United Kingdom grew faster than in most other European countries and that we had lower unemployment than in Europe. He also ignores the fact that in the 1980s output in Britain was higher than that in France or Germany and that business investment grew faster than in any of the G7 countries except Japan. Those factors show that the 1980s were years of considerable economic achievement.

Will my right hon. Friend contrast that forecast with an annual rate of inflation in August 1975 of 26·9 per cent? May I take it that as inflation continues to fall and when it is economically prudent interest rates will continue to fall, too?

As I have already emphasised, we can cut interest rates only as and when it is prudent to do so. My hon. Friend is right on his first point. The speeches by the right hon. and learned Member for Monklands, East, (Mr. Smith), if they are anything to go by, and his public spending plans and attitude to interest rates in 1987 and 1988 show all too clearly that Labour would again spark off a great inflationary cycle.

It is encouraging to hear the Chancellor of the Exchequer suggest that the inflation rate will fall to 5·5 per cent. in October. Is that an appropriate rate of inflation for a general election?

Fortunately, that is not within my departmental responsibility. I repeated the forecast contained in the previous autumn statement and I said that another forecast would be issued at the time of the Budget.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that Labour policies would be likely to drive inflation up to the levels mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Chelmsford (Mr. Burns)? Will he confirm that it remains Government policy to achieve long-term zero inflation?

It does not look as though France, Germany or Japan are about to achieve zero inflation. Our first objective must be a sharp reduction in inflation to bring it down to the level of that of our competitors. We are absolutely on track to do that and will not be blown off course in our objective.

Two of the major factors in stoking up inflation in recent months have been public utility price rises in the run-up to privatisation and its aftermath and, of course, the poll tax. I do not know whether Finance Ministers ever get nicknames such as Stormin' Norman, in the same way as military leaders do, but it would be nice if the Chancellor would tell us his plans to bear down on those two elements of inflation.

The Government's intentions on the community charge, as my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment said, will be announced to the House in due course.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the current bank base rate.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the present level of interest rates.

Bank base rates are 13 per cent.

Surely an encouraging combination of good news for business in the west midlands is the reduction in interest rates yesterday and the Gulf victory today. However, in defence of businesses in my constituency, does my hon. Friend agree that we still have a long way to go and that businesses need, above all, to plan for stability, confident in the knowledge that there will be further interest rate cuts as soon as possible and that we shall, in the process, conquer inflation?

I hear what my hon. Friend says. In the mid-1980s, investment by those businesses grew at a record rate, and the growth in the economy that resulted could not be sustained. I am afraid that one of the unfortunate facts of life is that those moves must be followed by a slow-down and it is necessary to keep interest rates high in order to bear down on inflation. We shall continue to pursue interest rate policies that are consistent with maintaining our position in the ERM.

Did not the high interest rates show what a blunder it was to have joined the exchange rate mechanism, because interest rates can now no longer respond to the obvious needs of the domestic economy but must be used to prop up an uncompetitive and overvalued exchange rate, which will push the country further into recession and cause, in the coming months, an explosion of unemployment?

I sometimes wonder whether Opposition Members write such questions weeks in advance of Question Time. We have been able to reduce interest rates by 2 per cent. since we joined the ERM. The inflation-adjusted exchange rate of the pound against ERM currencies over the past 10 to 20 years shows that the rate at which we entered the ERM is close to the average inflation-adjusted rate over that period. The pound is not uncompetitive against the deutschmark. If it were, how could exports to Germany have risen by 171 per cent. last year?

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the latest trend in the balance of trade in manufactured goods.

The deficit in the United Kingdom's trade in manufactures is clearly on a downward trend. In the three months to January 1991, the deficit was£1½ billion, or 1 per cent. of GDP, compared with a peak deficit of £4¾ billion, or 3¾ per cent. of GDP, in the third quarter of 1989.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that those figures show a significant improvement and are part of an encouraging trend? Is not that because of the underlying strength of manufacturing industry which, during the lifetime of the Government, has improved productivity, the quality of goods and delivery times? Would not it be more appropriate to cheer on those companies that sell abroad rather than disparage them, as the Opposition do?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. There has been an encouraging trend in manufactured exports. As my hon. Friend knows, our share of world trade in manufactures has been broadly stable in the past few years and increased last year. We expected a further increase. Certain sectors have dramatically increased their exports, particularly the motor industry, which increased exports by 50 per cent. That is a remarkable achievement.

Is it not clear that, as anyone who knows what is happening in the manufacturing industry, let alone the high street, will confirm, firms are all busy reducing their stocks and that, as they do so, one might have expected a dramatic decline in imports of manufactured goods and imports generally? The fact that that has not happened to anything like the extent expected is a serious matter to which the Chancellor should address himself minutely.

I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that the behaviour and control of stocks is extremely important. The control of stock levels in British industry is one of the many ways in which British management and industry have improved dramatically in the past decade. The real fall in imports shows that the sharp move into a profound deficit in the current account was the product of excess demand in 1987 and 1988.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that the strength of manufacturing industry is a good sign of the strength of a country's economy? Does he accept that our manufacturing base is far too small, is continuing to decline, and that unless it is regenerated, the prospects of prosperity and a sound economic future for this country are grim?

I agree with some parts of my hon. Friend's question—manufacturing is an extremely important part of the economy, although not the only one. It is important for our external trade, which is why the Government are keen to encourage it.

Does not the Chancellor of the Exchequer think that it is alarming that the Government predict a fall of 7 per cent. in manufacturing investment this year?

The right hon. and learned Gentleman should recognise that there has been an increased boom in recent years in this country, and investment is at a high level. Business investment in this country has improved dramatically—by more than 40 per cent. in the past few years. It is not surprising that when the economy slows down, investment falls from its former high level.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what representations he has received on the taxation of businesses.

I have received a large number of such representations.

While recognising that high rates, which are essential for the defeat of inflation, are causing difficulties for British business, does not my hon. Friend agree that businesses can also be helped by fiscal policy? Has she seen the Budget submission by the Institute of Directors calling for a further reduction in corporation tax as a means of promoting recovery and stimulating investment, including much of the inward investment that is placing the country in such good stead?

I have seen the representations from the IOD, which will be considered by my right hon. Friend in the run-up to the Budget. I feel sure that the IOD will have welcomed yesterday's interest rate cuts. However, I remind the institute and my hon. Friend the Member for Ryedale (Mr. Greenway) that the Government have a good record on reducing taxation for businesses. Corporation tax was reduced from 52 to 35 per cent.—one of the lowest rates in the industrialised world. We have the most favourable corporation tax regime for small businesses in the EC.

Is the Minister aware that, overshadowed by the poll tax, the uniform business rate is hammering business into the ground and into the red as the bills come in? That tax was directly imposed by central Government, not local government, and the Government are responsible for its imposition and collection.

Over the past 10 years, rate poundages rose by 37 per cent. more than rises in the retail prices index, mostly due to the irresponsible rate rises imposed by Labour-controlled councils. Now, increases are limited to the RPI, which means they are more predictable and help business to plan. As a whole, business will be paying £1 billion less in 1991 than they would have done under the old system, which has to be good news.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state the medium-term interest rates in the United Kingdom, Germany, the United States of America and Japan.

At close on 27 February, five-year Government bond yields were 10·1 per cent. in the United Kingdom, 8·5 per cent. in Germany, 7·6 per cent. in the United States and 6·4 per cent. in Japan.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that, because of the cost of the reunification of Germany, which is costing hundreds of billions of deutschmarks more than the Germans said it would, and the fact that Germany will not allow inflation, German interest rates, which affect us all, are about 2 per cent. higher than they would have been without the reunification costs? May there not come a time when—so that our interest rates can come down—Germany should go in for a system of realignment of its deutschmark rate, not just against the United Kingdom currency, but against Europe's currencies so that fairness prevails and we have proper and sensible lower interest rates, as we would have had without reunification?

I am sure that my hon. Friend will understand that I cannot comment specifically on the realignment of the deutschmark. It is true that the reunification of Germany has imposed considerable costs on the German economy. It has pushed up interest rates and inflation and has also led the German Government to increase taxes. As my hon. Friend said, that has immense implications for monetary policy in all European countries.

How on earth can British business and British industry compete in an increasingly challenging world when they face interest rates that are substantially higher than those of our major competitors? When will the Government realise that placing such exclusive reliance on high interest rates to control demand may control demand eventually, but it may also cause severe harm to the supply side of the economy?

British business men will not be able to compete unless we have a level of inflation that is competitive with that of Germany, the United States and Japan. Inflation matters much more for competitiveness than interest rates alone and, as is often pointed out, a 1 per cent. reduction in interest rates is of less significance to business than a 1 per cent. reduction in labour costs. There are many things within the control of businesses, but the key must he to get inflation down.

The Chancellor will know better than most that there is a constant search for the explanation of differences in comparative economic performance. What significance does he attach to the fact that last year, for the first time ever I believe, expenditure on research and development in Japan exceeded investment in new plant?

I am not familiar with the figures cited by my hon. Friend, but it is true that high industrial expenditure—high expenditure in relation to turnover by firms—is a vital ingredient of economic success. That has been a feature of the Japanese economy for many years.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the cumulative total of all taxes from North sea oil since 1979 in 1989–90 prices.

The total over the period since 1979–80 is estimated at around £94 billion.

Since Britain is back in recession and facing a huge trade deficit, since our industrial training is poor by any standards and since investment in manufacturing is declining yet again, does not it appear that North sea oil revenues have been largely squandered? Is not that a major indictment of the Government after nearly 12 years in office?

It is extraordinary that Opposition Members continue to knock British achievements. North sea oil revenues have contributed to the reduction of overseas debt and of the public sector borrowing requirement as a share of the gross domestic product, thus freeing resources for private investment. Our net overseas assets rose from £12½ billion at the end of 1978 to £112 billion at the end of 1989. That is the highest proportion of all major countries as a percentage of GDP and it is no mean achievement.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the latest forecast for the year-on-year rate of inflation at the end of 1991.

The autumn statement forecast is for a sharp fall in all items on the retail prices index. Inflation should fall to 5½ per cent. by the fourth quarter of this year. Most outside commentators currently predict lower inflation than that. My right hon. Friend will publish a new forecast with the Budget.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that answer. Has she read the speech by the president of the Confederation of British Industry who suggested that employers have a role to play in helping the battle against inflation by keeping down average wages? Will my hon. Friend impress on employers the need in the battle against inflation to keep down average wages throughout the economy?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. I am glad that the message is also being conveyed by the CBI. It is essential that wages be kept down as part of the continuing battle against inflation.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 February.

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 the whole House will wish to pay tribute to those who have been involved in the successful liberation of Kuwait and especially to our own armed forces whose courage, professionalism and inspiration have been an example to us all. We offer our deepest sympathy and gratitude to the families who have lost their loved ones.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I shall, of course, be making a full statement on those matters very shortly. The fact is that Kuwait has been liberated and that one of the most remarkable military campaigns of recent years has been concluded. I want to pay the warmest possible tribute to the commanding officers of all nations out there and especially to General de la Billiere, who has commanded our own troops with such skill. I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. We must now look to the future and secure peace, especially by the means mentioned by my hon. Friend.

May I say to the Prime Minister that today, in this Parliament and throughout the country, we share the feelings of satisfaction at the defeat of aggression, and the feelings of sorrow at the deaths and misery caused directly as a result of that aggression? Does the Prime Minister agree that the only fitting memorial to those who have made the ultimate sacrifice is to build. through the United Nations, lasting peace and lasting justice?

I share the emotions expressed by the right hon. Gentleman and the conclusion that he reached.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that if politicians do half as good a job in sustaining the peace as the armed services have done in winning the war, we shall not be doing at all badly? In sustaining that peace, will my right hon. Friend differentiate between the Iraqi people on the one hand, and Saddam Hussein and his Baathist clique on the other? Does he further agree that the longer that Saddam Hussein and that clique remain in power, the more difficult it will be for all nations to have a charitable attitude towards Iraq?

I agree with my hon. Friend. We have never opposed the Iraqi people; it is their leadership and Saddam Hussein who have been the enemy on this occasion.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 February.

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

Will the Prime Minister pay tribute to the 300 service men and their five minesweepers from the Rosyth naval base on their skilful achievement in the long and hazardous task of clearing mines for the allied fleet? Is he aware that the Minister of State for the Armed Forces said on Tuesday that Rosyth naval base was the "easiest and most suitable" target for closure, in spite of the assurance given by the Prime Minister to the House on 5 February? Is that the kind of welcome home that our returning heroes can expect from Ministers in this Government?

I willingly join the hon. Gentleman in paying tribute to the men from Rosyth and the Royal Navy who have done such a magnificent job in sweeping the northern Gulf of mines. I do that with the greatest warmth and willingness. As the hon. Gentleman knows, for I have told the House before, a whole range of possible options concerning the armed forces generally is being considered to reduce the cost of defence support. In the case of the Royal Navy, that is bound to mean the closure of some naval establishments. At this stage the Ministry of Defence is looking at various possibilities and studies are being carried out. It is essential that those studies are carried out before any decisions of any sort can be made. I repeat my assurance to the hon. Gentleman: no decisions whatsoever have been made about the future of Rosyth.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 February.

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

My right hon. Friend will be aware of the profound joy and relief among families of service men in the north of England at the news of the ceasefire today and, in particular, at the extremely low level of casualties. Will he confirm that the troops will be brought back from the middle east as soon as possible and be replaced by a United Nations peacekeeping force?

We shall certainly be bringing our own troops home shortly. Precisely what will happen thereafter is a matter yet to be determined. No doubt I shall have more to say about that shortly.

May I associate myself with the words of other hon. Members on the role of our armed forces? The use of their professionalism and skill has been put to the service not just of the freedom of Kuwait but to the rule of international law and the authority of the United Nations. May I also pay tribute to the Prime Minister for the calmness and authority with which he has led the nation at a difficult time? Is his view about the future the same as mine? If the coalition invests the extraordinary victory in the United', Nations, we will have created a powerful instrument not just for peace in the middle east now, but for peace in the world in the future as well.

I agree with the right hon. Gentleman. I am grateful to him for his kind words. The attitude taken by the Leader of the Opposition and by the right hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Ashdown) has led to a unity in the House which can have been only a comfort to all our troops.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 February.

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

Will my right hon. Friend accept the congratulations through me of the people of north Devon on his leadership over the past few months? Now, as he turns his view towards domestic problems, will he see whether he can right some of the inequalities that have bothered people about the community charge? In particular, will he consider the case where a husband and wife both have to pay community charge even though only one is at work?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. As he knows, we are examining the community charge and we will make announcements on that when our examination is concluded.

Is there any chance of Governments at the United Nations applying the same energy and enthusiasm to trying to stop the sale of arms to dictators like Saddam Hussein throughout the world, in which case it might not be necessary to sacrifice young men such as those who were sacrificed in the recent war?

The hon. Gentleman knows that there has been an embargo by this country on sales of arms to Iraq for a considerable number of years. My right hon. Friend the Member for Finchley (Mrs. Thatcher) imposed a strict embargo on sales to Iraq many years ago.

To ask the Prime Minister when he next expects to visit Dover, Deal and south- east Kent.

I am making plans for a series of visits to all parts of the country and very much hope to include Kent among them.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm the commitment of his Government to completing the dual carriageway A20 into Dover and—[Interruption.]

Order. It is a perfectly legitimate question.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that his Government is committed to completing the A20 dual carriageway into Dover and to completing the A2 dualling between Lydden and Dover? Furthermore, will he send his best wishes to Bob Bale, Trevor Povey and all my constituents who have been fighting for Britain in the Gulf?

I am happy to send the best wishes that my hon. Friend suggests. My hon. Friend has raised his first point with me before, both privately and publicly, and I am happy to confirm that part of the A20 between Folkestone and Dover is under construction and, as my hon. Friend is aware, a scheme for the improvement of the A2 entered the road programme last year.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 February.

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

With the welcome end of the Gulf war, will the Prime Minister ensure that the same endeavours are used to reduce hospital waiting lists, which now stand at 980,000, as were used to open wards and provide beds for possible casualties? If he bothers to visit Ribble Valley during the by-election will he try to explain why the waiting list for beds there has doubled during the past four years and now stands at 4,380?

As the hon. Gentleman should know, the health service is now treating more people more efficiently than ever before, not least due to the reforms introduced by the Government and the funding provided by them.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 February.

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

I thank my right hon. Friend for his incisive and decisive War Cabinet leadership which has led to success in the Gulf and I add my words of admiration for the unsurpassed and brilliant performance of our armed forces. As I have RAF Bentley Priory in my constituency, from which the Battle of Britain was directed 50 years ago, I particularly think of the performance of the Royal Air Force. Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the particularly brave performance of the Tornado pilots in low flying on the Iraqi airfields did, contrary to rumours, substantially neutralise many of the Iraqi airfields and prevent the Iraqi air force from fighting?

I can certainly confirm that. The bravery of the Tornado pilots in the early part of the campaign played a material part in ensuring that casualties in the land war were so few. I am happy to pay tribute to all those pilots.

Will the Prime Minister give an assurance to the House that considerable expense will now be put to trying to find a better means of identifying friendly ground troops?

That is a matter to which we shall certainly give attention. The House will understand the tragic occurrence that leads the hon. Gentleman to ask that question. It is certainly a matter which will have the most careful examination.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 February.

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

In view of the recent murder of an innocent civilian by the IRA and the attempted murder of the War Cabinet, does my right hon. Friend agree that now is not the proper time to water down the prevention of terrorism Act?

I very much agree with my hon. Friend. The prevention of terrorism Act has served us well in recent years and for the moment we still require it.

On this historic day when people throughout the world can again savour peace, may I as an Irishman express the anger and revulsion felt by the vast majority of Irish people at the murderous attempts on commuters in Victoria and other stations? Does the Prime Minister agree that the contrived security alerts that we saw again yesterday are causing enormous suffering and disruption to thousands of people going to and coming from work? Does he share my view that to kill and to heap suffering on people in furtherance of political ends is a sad and cynical perversion of the very concept of patriotism?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman. It is wickedness beyond belief, and it deserves the contempt of everyone.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 February.

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

May I join in the warm congratulations of the House to my right hon. Friend for his conduct of the war? In looking to the future, will he bear in mind the problems caused by the division of Cyprus and the fact that United Nations Security Council resolutions have still not been implemented there?

I shall certainly put my mind to that problem. I share my hon. Friend's hope that the Cyprus question will be resolved. Indeed, I am sure that everyone in the House wants to see that. I do not believe that question of Cyprus can be directly related to the Gulf conflict.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 February.

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

Has the Prime Minister had time to read the recent Amnesty International report on the people of East Timor? Will he now make a commitment to the achievement of a peaceful and just world by banning the sale of weapons to Indonesia, given that that country has illegally occupied East Timor for 15 years and has committed the most atrocious acts of violence against its population? Is not this a good time to do something about the evil of the arms trade?

I have not read the Amnesty International report to which the hon. Lady has referred, but I shall certainly seek to do so and reflect upon what she has said.