As Bills 2 to 9 have blocking motions, with the leave of the House I shall put them together.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many acres of school playing fields have been sold in the past year; and if he will make a statement.

In the past year, eight acres of surplus playing fields associated with Orangefield secondary school in Belfast were sold, but will continue to be used as playing fields.

I welcome that reply and wish that England had a similar record. Can my hon. Friend confirm that the green lungs which playing fields represent will be preserved at all costs in Northern Ireland, and that the Government will see to it that boys and girls at school there receive a proper physical and sporting education and have the playing fields needed for that purpose?

I can assure my hon. Friend on all the latter parts of his question. We attach considerable importance to physical education and sport and to providing the facilities necessary to carry them out. I cannot promise, however, that we shall maintain a green lungs policy at any cost; but I assure my hon. Friend that we shall not dispose of playing fields and open spaces unless there are overwhelming reasons for doing so.

I welcome the assurance that there will be sporting facilities, but does not the Minister think that it was wrong of the Belfast education and library board to decide to put on the market the part of the property adjacent to Finaghy primary school containing a swimming pool, when the board could have put the other side of the school on the market and maintained the swimming pool as a needed leisure facility in the Finaghy area?

As the hon. Gentleman pointed out, that decision was taken not by the Government but by the Belfast education and library board. However, I shall draw the hon. Gentleman's concern to the attention of my right hon. and noble Friend the Paymaster General.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many small businesses have been created in Northern Ireland in the last two years; and if he will make a statement.

This information is not available. However, as an indicator, VAT registrations during 1988 and 1989 show an estimated 7,700 new, mostly small, businesses.

I am grateful for that reply, particularly as I understand that my hon. Friend only arrived back in this country at about six o'clock this morning after trying to promote Northern Ireland in Japan.

Domo arigato gozaimasu Stevens-san. One thousand more new businesses started in the past two years in Northern Ireland than in the preceding two years. Self-employment has risen by 60 per cent. in the non-agricultural sectors since 1981 and the Northern Ireland economy is going through the recession exceptionally well, as evidenced by today's unemployment figures. However, as my hon. Friend remarked, more should and must be done because small businesses are the crucial base for our future expansion. I am confident that new businesses will continue to grow on the basis of our present success.

May I ask the Minister to interpret the first sentence of his answer for Hansard?

I said, "Thank you very much."

The Minister will be aware that we welcome any businesses coming into Northern Ireland or any businesses that start up in Northern Ireland, but does he agree that the time has come to give local small businesses the same sum per job created as that given to outside enterprises coming into Northern Ireland?

It is crucial that we remain competitive with Wales, Scotland, the Republic, Portugal or any other countries in trying to attract business, including outside enterprises coming in to Northern Ireland. We still give considerable incentives to business in Northern Ireland. It is crucial that our help should be directed to marketing, training and improving productivity and competitiveness instead of merely giving grants. The fact that we are moving to a more competitive business environment in Northern Ireland, with more productivity, better marketing and better selling, means that our business is doing better. We shall help small business, but small business must do everything it can to help itself.

I welcome the Minister's remarks, as I welcome everything that is being done to bring small businesses to Northern Ireland. Bearing in mind that the Minister says that we are getting through the recession successfully, perhaps he will deal with the other side of the coin and tell us how many small businesses have had to close down in the past two years?

About 6,000 have deregistered in the past couple of years, but that is not a substantially greater figure than hitherto. I repeat that the Northern Ireland economy is growing at a faster pace than that of the rest of the country. That can be seen from the fact that our unemployment figures are hardly rising, if they are rising at all. We have reports from Coopers and Lybrand Deloitte, PA Consultants, even the Northern Ireland Economic Research Council, which is not the most optimistic of bodies, the Trustee Savings bank and the British chambers of commerce stating that the Northern Ireland economy is coming through the downturn in the economy better than any other region—something that has not happened at any time since 1921.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on his most recent discussions with the Government of the Republic of Ireland about a replacement of the Anglo-Irish Agreement.

After discussions, not only with the Irish Government but with the leaders of the main constitutional parties in Northern Ireland, I have drawn up a text which I believe provides a sound basis for formal political talks on all the key relationships. This text which, in my view, respects the essential principles of all concerned, is now being sent to all the potential participants, with the request that they should respond to me, I hope positively, before Easter. I shall make the text public in due course.

That was a substantial reply, which we in the Ulster Unionist party welcome. The party has always been keen on talks within Northern Ireland and eventual talks with Dublin.

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his welcome for what I said. No one could be more conscious than I that we have been 14 months engaged in the process, as I have lived through every moment of them. As to the text that I have discussed, not only with the Unionists but with the other potential participants in the talks, at all stages there has been discussion about whether we could find a draft that would be acceptable to everybody. Now that we have reached the stage where I am putting forward a text which I hope respects the interests of all concerned, if we can proceed during the immediate future with good will towards all other participants, we are more likely to get to a successful conclusion.

Does the Secretary of State recognise that in many quarters of the press there will be confusion about his statement today, for over past weeks and months many had expected the Secretary of State eventually to mourn the passing of his initiative but instead find him with the air of an expectant father? He believes that he has a text which will get support from the parties in Northern Ireland and the Dublin Government. Can he tell us whether he has come to that conclusion because of his talks with party leaders and with the Dublin Government? Has the gap that existed after 24 December been narrowed as a result of his meeting with the Government of the Irish Republic? May I assure the Secretary of State on behalf of my party that when the text is made available to us it will be examined carefully but in a positive light?

Throughout the process I have always been disturbed by the association of my name with the initiative, on the general basis of the case of the Liberal peer, the publication of whose memoirs at the turn of the century was held up for three weeks because the printers had run out of capital "I"s. As to the substance of the hon. Gentleman's question, throughout the exercise there has been a continuing convergence towards narrowing the gap. I pay tribute to all concerned for their contributions to the process.

Will the Secretary of State not be discouraged by the reluctance of certain parties in Northern Ireland to sit down and talk, which may owe less to a lack of political will than to private hopes about the outcome of the general election? Will he draw comfort from the fact that certain items on the political agenda, which were not there when he arrived, owe much to his political courage and imagination?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his closing sentence. I have riot been discouraged as we have gone through the process, because there has been a desire for convergence on everybody's part and everyone has played a constructive role. As to the result of the general election, that is a subject about which I have no doubts.

I, too, congratulate the Secretary of State on his untiring endeavours to promote talks. I look forward to seeing the document which will be published in due course. I hope that it will ensure that there will be talks. Will the Secretary of State ensure that the Foreign Office makes all proper arrangements for the visit of the President of the Irish Republic when she comes to the United Kingdom in June, albeit on a private visit, so that we can show that the people of the whole United Kingdom wish nothing but the best of friendly relations with the Irish Republic?

There is a slight element of a concealed agenda in the hon. Gentleman's question, but I have no doubt that everyone will welcome the President of the Irish Republic as and when she comes.

Is it not the case that substantial political progress depends in essence on two matters—first, that the minority community in Northern Ireland should have an input and that both communities should be treated on an equal basis and, secondly, as has fortunately been the case in the past few years, that there should be growing co-operation between the Irish Republic and this country? One hopes that that co-operation, which to a certain extent is shown by the Anglo-Irish Agreement, will remain in force and will be part of the policy of the present Government as well as of future Governments.

Underlying the talks of the past 14 months has been the proposition that I put on 9 January last year, that any arrangements likely to succeed would need to enjoy widespread acceptance. That has informed all our discussions. As the hon. Gentleman will know, the Irish Government have been involved in those talks continuously over the past 14 months and have made their own input to them.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that to ensure that the majority community is positive, flexible and responsible, he ought to make it clear now that there will be no unreasonable veto of the minorities or of the Irish Republic, so that a deal can be made that will be acceptable both to the minority community and to Her Majesty's Government?

One of the considerations that has informed all our conversations has been the awareness of all taking part that everyone has the freedom to withdraw from them, if they wish to do so. In that sense, although I personally would not use the word, everyone has a veto, but I sincerely hope that it will not be used.

We admire the Secretary of State's tenacity over the past 14 months and, as he knows, we have wished him well in his discussions. We share to a degree the regret that he must feel that it has been necessary for him to issue today what amounts to an ultimatum. That is a matter of regret for us. Is it the Secretary of State's opinion, on the basis of his discussions, that it is possible for all the parties involved to sit down and work things out according to a suitable timetable? Does he agree that if the parties concerned do not accept his position, we shall be back at square one? Does he further agree that the three relationships will have to be re-examined, whatever might replace his present round of talks—though I hope that they will not be replaced? Does the Secretary of State acknowledge that the next fortnight will be an important time for reflection for the people who are party to the discussions, because the only persons who will delight in the talks not progressing further after the next fortnight will be the men of violence from both communities?

It was not in my mind to present what the hon. Gentleman described as an ultimatum, but, after 14 months of constructive negotiation with all the parties, I am concerned to take personal responsibility, on behalf of the Government, for a text that will be acceptable to all. In that sense, and by definition, I run the risk that everyone will accuse me of misreading the tea leaves in making that proposition. Nevertheless, I believe that that is a sensible way to draw matters to a conclusion. As to returning to square one and dealing with three relationships, that seems to be a form of multidimensional chess, but I will endeavour to unravel the hon. Gentleman's proposition. I wholly agree with his remarks about terrorists.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on his plans to encourage the churches to promote community relations.

The Government have indicated on a number of occasions that they are prepared to help Church-based programmes which promote cross-community contact, greater mutual understanding, or appreciation of cultural diversity. In addition, I have met the Church leaders twice to explore what further help the Government could give to encourage local initiatives. I hope to meet them again in the near future.

Does my hon. Friend agree that it is crucially important in encouraging community relations that the churches should conduct ecumenical acts of worship and work together in the community?

Ecumenical services and the like are matters for the churches and for Church leaders, not for Government Ministers. I agree strongly with my hon. Friend that the involvement and standing of churches in the Northern Ireland community give them a significant role to play, should they be willing to accept it, in those areas which are, in the first instance, divorced from theology or worship.

Does the Minister agree that much more has been done at congregational level than has sometimes been given credit? Does he accept that one of the greatest hindrances to better community relations is a separate Church-based education system which penalises children going to state or integrated schools, and in which many priests will not even help children to take their first communion?

I certainly agree with the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question. There is a lot going on, on a cross-community basis, with the Church and churches at its focus. As to the second part of the hon. Gentleman's question, the Government believe that parents should have the opportunity to make choices concerning the education of their children. No doubt the hon. Gentleman, like me, welcomes the fact that, as a consequence of the introduction of the cross-community scheme a couple of years ago, about one third of all the schools in the Province, and about 300 youth clubs are involved in joint local projects. That was not happening a few years ago and it is a measure of the progress that has been achieved. I look forward to more progress in the years ahead.

In view of the remarks that the hon. Member has just replied to, will he confirm to the House that the Moderator of the largest Protestant church in Northern Ireland, the Irish Presbyterian church, has made it clear that he will not take part during his office in any ecumenical services, and that that is not merely the view of one Protestant communion? Does not he think that it would also be helpful to community relations if he gave the same type of help to Protestant church schools as he gives to Roman Catholic church schools?

On the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question, I repeat what I said in my initial answer. The behaviour of Church leaders towards ecumenical services is a matter for them to decide, not for Government Ministers. Outside the direct theological issues and issues of worship and joint worship I know that the hon. Gentleman will recognise that the churches are involved in many other activities which would provide a platform for more joint action than takes place at the moment. On the second part of his question, I think that he understands that what he refers to as Protestant churches are able to apply to the Department of Education for funding for Protestant church schools on the same basis as any other school. I shall reflect his concern to my right hon. and noble Friend the Paymaster General, who now has responsibility for these matters.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the progress towards eradicating terrorism in Northern Ireland.

The Royal Ulster Constabulary, supported by the armed forces, continues to make progress towards the defeat of terrorism, within the rule of law. It does this by pre-empting, deterring and, as necessary, responding effectively to terrorist attack. During 1990, 380 persons were charged and 440 persons were convicted for terrorist related offences, including 80 and 35 for murder and attempted murder respectively. Some 223 weapons, nearly 22,500 rounds of ammunition and more than 4,300 lb of explosives were recovered. We shall continue to be resolute in our determination to end terrorism in Northern Ireland.

If my right hon. Friend wants to deal with the political causes of Irish terrorism, will he consider redrawing the border between the United Kingdom and the Irish Republic so as to exclude those who do not wish to be British and to include in Northern Ireland only those people who do, with generous resettlement grants for those who find themselves on the wrong side of the border from their point of view?

I mean no disrespect to the question asked by my hon. Friend, but I cannot think of anything that would be more likely to encourage terrorism than if it were seen that a redrawing of the border followed from their actions. At a more general level, it is my experience with borderlines that someone is always cross to be on the wrong side of them.

Is the Secretary of State aware that there is widespread support for the attitude of the General Office Commanding Northern Ireland in his references to the defeat of terror in the Gulf area? Does the Secretary of State agree that there is an urgent need for the eradication of terrorism, whether it is directed by Saddam's army council or by the self-styled army council of the IRA?

The GOC's statement earlier this week, to which the right hon. Gentleman refers, could not have been clearer. It was a resolute statement of Government policy and I stand wholly behind it.

For over 20 years now, the people of Great Britain and Northern Ireland have endured the scourge of terrorism. Will the Secretary of State tell the House and my constituents when the victory over terrorism will be won? Does he not agree that the secret of the Gulf war lay in the lack of political interference in military measures? Will he tell the House that the Government will adopt the same resolute manner in eradicating terrorism in Northern Ireland, and that the handcuffs and the political restraints will be removed from the security forces, so that they can do their job in a proper military fashion?

I cannot give the hon. Gentleman a precise date for the victory over terrorism, but I have no doubt that it will occur. In answer to the second question, let me repeat that the security forces in Northern Ireland operate under the rule of law and I do not believe that, on reflection, the hon. Gentleman would wish it otherwise.

I welcome the encouraging figures given by the Secretary of State. May I ask him two specific questions? First, has the review of the question of permanent vehicle checkpoints been completed yet? Secondly, are the Government taking any steps to try to protect taxi drivers from the special risks to which they currently seem to be subject?

A good deal of work is being put into reviewing the PVCP policy. I cannot commit myself to a timetable for the conclusion of the review, but I accept that different views are held in the community about the value of PVCPs, which I have discussed with representatives of that community. I understand the hon. Gentleman's concern about taxi drivers, and we are looking into that.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what further discussions he has had with leaders of the political parties about a measure of self-government for the Province.

My hon. Friend the Minister of State and I have, within the last fortnight, met the leaders of all the main constitutional parties in Northern Ireland. As a result of my conversations with them, I have been able to take the steps that I outlined a few moments ago in my answer to the right hon. Member for Strangford (Mr. Taylor).

Building on that answer, will my right hon. Friend tell me whether he agrees that the heartfelt longing of so many people in the Province for a measure of political stability and local administration should take precedence over anything else that he may seek to achieve in any further talks? In his talks with the political parties, did he find enough common ground among them to encourage him to believe that a devolved Administration in the Province may be possible in the not-too-distant future?

The longing to which my hon. Friend has referred has come through not only to me but to the leaders of political parties with whom I have been engaged in conversation. I have observed concern that the talks should succeed, and that we should proceed to constructive measures. The fact that we have been able to reach the point that we have reached, and that I have been able to draft the text to which I have referred, is, I think, evidence that common ground is beginning to exist.

To what extent is a Bill of Rights on the agenda in the discussions? Such a Bill would be particularly appropriate for Northern Ireland, because it would protect minorities in different sets of circumstances —both Protestant minorities in Catholic areas, and vice versa.

I do not think that it would be appropriate for me to tell the hon. Gentleman exactly what I am in the process of putting to the political leaders; it is a confidential matter between them and me. I can tell him, however, that—as I have said on previous occasions—although the Government do not see a Bill of Rights as an early part of any agenda, they would be prepared to consider it if it became relevant in the conclusion of an overall arrangement.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that none of his many friends in the House wish him to be viceroy or proconsul for ever? We wish his latest initiative every success, bearing in mind the fact that it follows in the long tradition that has been going on for more than 400 years.

I am certain that that was a very nice remark of my hon. Friend's; in that spirit, I hope that I am correct in agreeing with him.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he last had discussions with the representatives of the Government of the Republic of Ireland about political progress in Northern Ireland.

I last met the Irish Foreign Minister, Mr. Collins, on 11 March.

I very much welcome the Secretary of State's statement today and I am glad that a final draft is being put to the parties, not least because 14 months is a long time—it feels like 400 years—for the discussions. Does the Secretary of State agree that, if negotiations take place, as I hope, they will be based on the three sets of relationships that we discussed in great detail during the previous talks? Does he further agree that it is only on the basis of those three sets of relationships that a workable and lasting arrangement can be found?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for what he said, and I share his sense of the passage of time. I do not mean to be discouraging when I say that the 100 years war went on for 116 years.

When the Secretary of State had these discussions with his Irish republican counterparts, was extradition on the agenda? Can he say exactly whether the new extradition arrangements are working properly?

I am not sure that extradition per se falls into the category of political progress, which is the question that the hon. Member for Newry and Armagh (Mr. Mallon) asked me; but in the meetings that we have at the Intergovernmental Conference under the Anglo-Irish Agreement, extradition is of course discussed, and there are exchanges in both directions.

I should like to refer the Secretary of State to Tuesday's Irish Times, in which Mr. John Bruton, the leader of Fine Gael, the second largest party in the Irish Republic, is reported to have said:

"The deletion by the Irish Government"—

Order. Paraphrase it, please.

I am sorry, Mr. Speaker.

The text to which I referred in my answer to the right hon. Member for Strangford (Mr. Taylor) was composed subsequent to the Tuesday when the text to which the hon. Member has referred appeared in the Irish Times. Given that we now have a potential common text which I am putting to the leaders of all the parties and to the Irish Government, I do not think that we shall make a successful outcome more likely by engaging in retrospective argument about what has occurred in the past.

Does my right hon. Friend believe that Her Majesty's Government are putting as much urgency and energy into solving the Northern Ireland question politically and peacefully as they are putting into the search for a solution to the middle east question?

Yes.

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

Since I last answered questions, on 14 February, there have been six civilian deaths and two security force deaths arising from the security position. I am sure that the House will endorse the Government's condemnation of the brutal mortar attack outside Armagh on 1 March, which sadly resulted in the deaths of two young UDR soldiers and the maiming of two others; and of the vile attack at Cappagh on 3 March, in which four civilians died.

Does the Minister of State understand that, just as Labour Members have condemned the killing of innocent civilians in the Gulf, we also condemn the unnecessary killing of innocent civilians in Northern Ireland? However, to condemn is not enough; we need some sort of political initiative, which we hope will be taken soon and will be successful. In the meantime, do not the working-class communities in the Province deserve better? They deserve protection. I believe that the only way to achieve that—and this may be controversial—is to set up defence squads based on the trade unions—[Laughter.]

Order. The hon. Gentleman has every right to put his point of view.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Probably those who would find that suggestion the most controversial are the trade unions.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the security of civilians in Northern Ireland is remarkably good in the circumstances? Will he pay tribute, in that context, to the work of the RUC, the UDR and our armed forces who have operated under great burdens for many years?

Hear, hear.

I agree very much with my hon. and learned Friend. I am sure that the security forces and the RUC will take great heart not only from his comments but from the wide endorsement that those comments were given on both sides of the House.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what action the Government intend to take to safeguard jobs in the first decade of the single European market.

The Government are taking a whole range of actions to ensure that Northern Ireland derives economic benefit from the single European market. Industry has responded well to those actions and must continue to exploit the many opportunities that are available.

Is the Under-Secretary aware of a report from Cambridge Economic Consultants, which says that, in its opinion, in the first 10 years of the single European market, 40,000 jobs will be lost in Northern Ireland? Does the hon. Gentleman subscribe to that view, especially as the European Commission has found that the industries that are endemic in Northern Ireland will be those that will bear most of the brunt? Does he agree that there should be a renewed and reinvigorated drive to obtain inward investment for Northern Ireland as a substitute for the potential job losses post-1991?

No, I do not agree with that report. As I said earlier, the Northern Ireland economy is dealing with the downturn very much better than it has dealt with any previous downturn. As the hon. Gentleman knows, it is also dealing with it very much better than any other region. We are attracting investment from a whole range of companies and countries precisely because they know that, by coming to Northern Ireland, they will be able to compete in the European market. The Northern Ireland economy in the 1990s has a rosy future, provided that we raise the level of our marketing, training and productivity. That is exactly what we will do.

Instead of talking about safeguarding existing jobs in the Province, should not we be a little more positive and talk about the creation of new jobs? Will not the single European market offer good new opportunities for Northern Ireland as an attractive place for investment from outside the Community?

I thank my hon. Friend. I am being, and have always been, positive about the Northern Ireland economy. We are attracting very large numbers of new jobs from a large number of countries and a large number of companies. By getting those new jobs, the training, productivity and marketing right, the Northern Ireland economy is, for the first time, showing the way to the rest of the country.

Perhaps the Minister might reflect that, just before the advent of the single European market, the seasonally adjusted figures for unemployment in Northern Ireland are understated by roughly 50,000 as a result of the way in which the Government currently calculate the statistics. Does he accept that the true level of unemployment now stands at 20 per cent? Does he regard that as an achievement of 12 years of Conservative rule, given the fact that, in 1979, unemployment in Northern Ireland was 11.3 per cent?

I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's figures. Unemployment in Northern Ireland at the moment is 13·5 per cent. It is lower this year than it was a year ago, whereas in the rest of the country it was 5·7 per cent., and it is now 7 per cent. The Northern Ireland economy is, I repeat, showing a faster rate of increase than at any time since 1921. I have yet to hear from the hon. Member for Wigan (Mr. Stott) what on earth he would do to the economy of Northern Ireland.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 March.

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.

Does the Prime Minister recall saying not so long ago that the poll tax system would be fairer, more acceptable and prove to be enduring? Does he think that he is still clear in his own mind about that?

The hon. Gentleman will be a good deal clearer in his mind about the future of the community charge before very long. It is particularly surprising that, some months after the Labour party produced its own roof tax, it is still unable to answer even the most obvious questions about it.

My right hon. Friend, in paying tribute to the forces in the Gulf, has very often referred to the training that those people had received. Will he assure the House that, in the "Options for Change" review, while we may change where the training is carried out or the number of people being trained, we will certainly ensure that the quality of training, such as that provided in Portland, is not diminished?

The quality and nature of training is clearly very important. Whatever may happen as we consider "Options for Change" in future, that will not change.

Does the Prime Minister think that the Ministers who have been responsible for spending £10 billion of taxpayers' money on the utterly discredited poll tax system should now do the honourable thing and resign?

Shadow Ministers responsible for a scheme that they would foist on the country should explain how it would work. The right hon. Gentleman cannot even tell us, months after his scheme was introduced, what the levels would be in his constituency.

The Government have spent and are continuing to spend vast sums on trying to sustain the poll tax system—including the £400 million to set it up, the £300 million a year on trying to maintain it and the £6 billion in an attempt to sweeten it. Does not the Prime Minister agree that any company or public body responsible for spending so much money so wilfully would have the people responsible on their way to gaol, and rightly so?

Perhaps the people leading the queue to gaol should be those Labour local authorities which waste more money than anyone else in the country and whose average community charge is £78 higher than that of Conservative authorities.

When my right hon. Friend considers with his colleagues the lessons of the Gulf war, will he bear in mind the need for amphibious capability and in particular the need for amphibious craft for the Royal Marines and such services?

In the aftermath of the Gulf war, we shall need to consider a number of matters to ensure that our armed forces are up to date and relevant. I shall bear in mind what my hon. Friend says.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 March.

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

While the Prime Minister tries to control the warring factions in the Tory party over the poll tax, will he bear in mind the fact that he could bring immediate relief to the millions of people who are groaning under this vicious poll tax—especially those who have been thrown on the dole queue by his economic policies—by restoring Government grants to local authorities to their 1978–79 level under Labour? At the same time, he would get rid of the political corruption that gives an extra £64 a head to Tory-controlled Wandsworth, while low-paid areas like Bradford are left without.

The hon. Gentleman is on shaky ground if he wants to discuss local government, given the attitude of Labour local authorities. If he really wants to see how money is wasted and badly handled, he should go to Lambeth.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, under the principle of accountability, it is long overdue that we should introduce into the House a Question Time for the Leader of the Opposition, so that we could ask what his policies are?

Order. I think that that is a matter for the Select Committee on Procedure.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 March.

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

Is the Prime Minister aware that the people of Wales want not only an early end to the poll tax, but something done about the iniquitous level of water charges? Since privatisation, there has been a 45 per cent. increase in Welsh Water charges, and the average bill of £195 compares to £137 in Severn-Trent, which gets its water from Wales? When will he start an inquiry into the monopoly profiteering in the water industry?

The hon. Gentleman is right to say that charges have risen sharply under Welsh Water—[HON. MEMBERS: "It is absurd profiteering."] It is not absurd profiteering but the unprecedented £1·8 billion investment programme which is necessary to improve water and sewerage and bring them up to a standard that the people of Wales would wish to have.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 March.

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

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the "buy British goods from Basildon" campaign that was introduced recently by myself and our local European Member of Parliament, Patricia Rawlings? Does my right hon. Friend agree that such local initiatives can make a useful contribution to reducing the trade deficit? Socialist Opposition Members should follow our lead in backing rather than bashing Britain.

My hon. Friend, as ever, is very inventive, and I am grateful to him for drawing that campaign to my attention. The key to reducing the trade gap is for British industry to produce goods that people want to buy at competitive prices, which is increasingly the aim of British industry. Many British companies already do just that, and I hope that more people will buy British. It is time that the Opposition supported British companies and stopped knocking Britain whenever they can.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 March.

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

Has the Prime Minister had a chance to study the proposal that Prime Minister Mulroney made for some form of arms control initiative? Before the Prime Minister's meeting with President Bush in Bermuda on Sunday, will he immediately impose a moratorium on arms sales, particularly to the middle east? Will he assure President Bush that the whole country would support an immediate control on the sale and export of arms?

We have to look at the export of chemical, nuclear and biological weapons, in particular to the middle east. I expect that we shall take up that matter at the United Nations and elsewhere.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 March.

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

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the London borough of Haringey has set a community charge £171 higher than neighbouring Conservative Enfield? Does he share the sense of joy of 20,000 of my constituents and of my hon. Friend the Member for Enfield, Southgate (Mr. Portillo), who heard yesterday that the local Boundary Commission will not transfer four wards into Haringey? Will he join my hon. Friend and me in congratulating our constituents who fought hard with us to stop the daft idea?

I am unsurprised to hear from my hon. Friend about the level of charge in Haringey. It is, after all, a Labour authority. Perhaps, if Haringey gets a Conservative authority, it will, as in so many other places, get a far lower charge.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 March.

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

Is the Prime Minister aware that the figures for housing waiting lists are now at a crisis level, especially in the north-west? Will he institute a crash building programme in local government which would help local government, the people in need and, indeed, the construction industry, which is on its knees?

The hon. Gentleman will know of the estate action programme and the dramatic increase in the funding to many housing associations. I fear that a significant part of the problem is the large number of local authority dwellings that remain unlet with no apparent effort to let them.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, at a time when pressure had to be gently exerted on certain Governments to make a financial contribution to the costs of the Gulf operation, the Government and people of Hong Kong made a donation of £15 million? Will he take this opportunity to express the appreciation of the Government and the House of that gesture?

I am certainly grateful for that contribution. I expressed my thanks to the Governor of Hong Kong and the Executive Council some weeks ago.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 March.

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

Which is likely to come first, a substantial fall in unemployment—the figures for which have risen yet again and which the policies pursued when the Prime Minister was Chancellor of the Exchequer helped to create —or the ending of the poll tax, which he justified at every opportunity?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, unemployment rose to 7 per cent. across the United Kingdom in the figures announced today. That is high. It is still well below the European average. It is well below France, at 9 per cent., Italy, at 9·9 per cent., Canada, at 9·3 per cent., Spain, at 15·8 per cent. and Ireland, at 14·8 per cent. If Government policies alone determine the level of unemployment, our record is infinitely better than that of any of those countries.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 March.

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

Has the Prime Minister had any confirmation that poison gas has been used in Iraq in the past few days? What steps is he taking to see that the capacity for chemical and nuclear warfare is destroyed and that that destruction is permanent?

I have no evidence that poison gas has been used, but that is one matter which we shall wish to discuss with our allies in the weeks ahead.

Would the Prime Minister care to compare his Government's treatment of the city of Westminster and of the metropolitan borough of Rotherham? Is he aware that Government support per head to Westminster will be 470-odd per cent. higher than that given to Rotherham? Is he aware that if we had had the same treatment, far from charging a low poll tax, our local authority would be giving everyone at least £250 next year?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, the level of support is a good deal higher in inner London boroughs generally, although, as he will know, there is a sharp difference in the level of community charge even between adjacent London boroughs such as Lambeth and Wandsworth.

Has the Prime Minister been made aware of the statement by Jacques Delors in the European Parliament this week, that the Prime Minister had said that the United Kingdom had substantially changed its position on monetary union? Can he confirm whether this is so, or can he tell us what this change is?

I can confirm that that is not so. I also confirm that I had the opportunity of telling Mr. Delors that over dinner earlier this week.

Is the Prime Minister aware that, in about an hour and a half, the Select Committee on Trade and Industry will publish its report on British Steel's closure of the Ravenscraig hot strip mill and Clydesdale? Anyone who listened to the information given to that Committee cannot doubt that the report will be a damning indictment of British Steel's industrial relations policy. Does he recall telling me about three months ago, in a meeting that he was kind enough to have with me, that, should the worst come to Lanarkshire, he would not stand idly by? Since then, another 3,000 workers have been told that they will have to stand idly by, having been made redundant. Can he now tell the people of Lanarkshire what he intends to do, or does he find the same difficulty in making up his mind on that issue as he does on the poll tax?

The hon. Gentleman knows precisely what we propose to do. If he racks his brains, he will recall that I told him when we met some time ago. I made it clear to him at our meeting that the Lanarkshire working group had been established now to identify what measures might be needed at some future stage if the mill were to close. That remains the case, as the hon. Gentleman has known for some time.