To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will describe what action he proposes to take to combat crime in North Yorkshire.

The North Yorkshire police have the resources to maintain a strong and effective police service. We have also encouraged the development of effective crime prevention schemes.

Is the Minister aware that, according to the North Yorkshire chief constable's annual reports, the number of offences in the county in 1979 was 20,000, and falling, and that last year the number of recorded offences was 50,000, and rising? Is he aware that, under the last Labour Government, in five years Labour Home Secretaries gave North Yorkshire 151 additional police officers, whereas in the 13 years of Conservative Government the county has received only 46 additional police officers? Can the hon. Gentleman tell me of any other part of the police service that has had to deal with a 150 per cent. increase in workload with only a 4 per cent. increase in the number of officers? Finally, can he tell me when North Yorkshire will get the additional police officers that it so badly needs to prevent crime?

The hon. Gentleman should beware of making comparisons on the basis of 1979. The average annual increase in reported offences in North Yorkshire was higher in the five years prior to 1979 than it has been since then. The number of police officers in North Yorkshire has risen to 1,391 and there are 447 civilians in post. Nationally, spending on the police has increased since 1979 by 74 per cent., net of inflation. What matters in combating crime is the way in which the police are deployed. That is a matter for the chief constable and the effectiveness of our crime prevention. There are nearly 2,200 neighbourhood watch schemes in North Yorkshire.

I warmly welcome my hon. Friend to his new responsibilities and warn him that the last junior Minister I so welcomed was my right hon. Friend the Chief Whip. Does he agree that if all police forces in Great Britain were run as effectively and efficiently as the North Yorkshire police, the fight against crime would be all the greater—and more efficent, too? Is he aware that this year the North Yorkshire police have concluded a three-year programme of investment in new telecommunications, computer and telephone equipment, which means that eight officers can now be released to outside duties? Will the flexibility to spend their money in the way that they wish be continued?

I thank my hon. Friend for his first remarks. His knowledge of police matters, for which he is widely respected, is well known. He is absolutely right in what he says about the initiatives that have been taken by the North Yorkshire police. They have taken a number of initiatives and have worked with the local community on crime prevention, to good effect.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement concerning trends or plans he has for the volume of expenditure on adult education in Her Majesty's prisons.

The Government's plans are set out in the White Paper, "Custody, Care and Justice". Payments to local education authorities for education services in prisons in 1992–93 are expected to total £29.9 million, a real increase on last year's expenditure of 8 per cent., following a similar increase last year on the year before.

Although the Minister claims that there is an increase, can he comment on the authorities' reports that a decrease is also being planned? Are not prison sentences partly preventive, partly penal and partly remedial? If education contributes, as it surely will, to a constructive regime, does it not mean that repetition is avoided and further expenditure on the prison service is reduced? Therefore, would it not be better to spend a great deal more on education, if only to obtain the value for money about which the Minister is concerned?

I think that the hon. Gentleman had to adjust his question slightly. He probably read in the press that there had been an overall cut, but my answer showed that that was not the case. There has been an increase on last year and there were increases in the year before that and the year before that. As the hon. Gentleman suggested, we place education in a central position to equip prisoners for rejoining society as well as to improve the quality of their lives in prison.

I welcome the increase in expenditure on prison education. When I was a prison visitor at Lancaster prison, far and away the most popular course was the literacy course, without which people could not—[Interruption.]

Because of the laughter, I did not hear the end of my hon. Friend's question. I commend her on the good work that I know that she will have done as a prison visitor. We would probably have fewer problems in Lancaster prison if she could continue to combine her role as a prison visitor with that as Member of Parliament for Lancaster.

Will the Minister comment on the situation in Feltham young offenders institution, which I visited recently with my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Feltham and Heston (Mr. Keen). I was told—it was quite clear—that, despite the low level of literacy among many of the young men there, education classes and evening classes have all been cut and that there are only about 36 vocational training courses for 800 people. Feltham does not have the staff to maintain a continuing education programme to equip those young men for any sort of job when they come out of the establishment.

Feltham is one of those institutions where, although expenditure is among the highest for prisons, this year it is somewhat lower than it was last year because funds have been diverted to new prisons and other prisons which have not had a sufficient share of the allocation. I can only confirm what the hon. Lady is implying, which is that education, particularly literacy education, is extremely important for young offenders. It is essential that those who go into prison unable to read and write should leave being able to do so.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that although the House and possibly the nation are delighted to hear about the tremendous expenditure on teaching prisoners various courses while in custody, we would all be much happier if we could be assured that at the top of the curriculum is a course to teach prisoners how to behave when they are back in society and how to be good citizens again?

That is the central objective of all prison regimes and I am sure that my hon. Friend will agree that his constituents will be much safer if released offenders have been equipped while in prison to lead a successful and effective life with a job that they can hold down.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what initiatives he proposes to take to reduce the carrying and use of knives and guns in London.

The Government have already strengthened controls on firearms and knives and we are keeping the position under close review. Enforcement of the law in London is a matter for the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis.

Given that the Home Secretary is the police authority for London, will he take cognisance of the fact that robberies using firearms or pointed weapons, usually knives, have increased significantly over the past five years? In Southwark, both types of robbery have increased by more or less 80 per cent. Will the Minister seriously consider responding positively to an initiative that will be coming his way shortly from the police consultative group in Southwark for a proper campaign to persuade young people in particular that carrying firearms and knives is in neither society's nor their own interest?

The hon. Gentleman is right to say that there has been an increase in armed robbery, but it is worth pointing out that only one fifth of 1 per cent. of all recorded offences in 1990 involved firearms. Any representations will be taken seriously, and the hon. Gentleman may know that a Home Office study has been commissioned into the source of firearms used in armed raids and robberies. He will also know that the Government have taken action through the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988 and the amnesty on firearms in London that followed and have also made it an offence to carry a knife in public places without good reason.

Even quiet residential parts of outer London are now, I will not say terrorised, but certainly subject to many more incidents of armed robbery. Local residents are deeply disquieted, as I am. Will my hon. Friend assure the House that penalties for armed robbery will be dramatically increased, because deterrents are clearly not adequate?

My hon. Friend is right to say that it has been recognised that there is an increasing number of armed robberies. He should bear it in mind that the maximum penalty for possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life or to resist arrest is life imprisonment, and it is also an offence for a person to have a bladed or sharply pointed weapon in a public place without good reason.

Is the Minister aware that the Criminal Justice Act 1988, which created new offences for these types of crimes, is not resulting in sufficient convictions because of the difficulty of obtaining adequate evidence so that people can be stopped on the grounds of reasonable suspicion? Is he also aware that there is no possibility of ever going back to the old sus-type laws for stopping and searching? What practical steps, therefore, will the Minister take to deal with the dilemma?

The Criminal Justice Act 1988 provided stiffer penalties. The Government believe that police powers to stop and search under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 are adequate. They strike a balance between a constable's discretion to search and the protection of the citizen against arbitrary interference, which is extremely important.

This is my first opportunity to welcome my hon. Friend to the Dispatch Box. I suggest to him that the incidents of armed crime involving knives and guns have increased dramatically year on year since the abolition of capital punishment. Will he tell the House what further measures he and the Home Office intend to take to afford proper protection to the men and women of the police force whom we require to enforce our law and every day to face men and women carrying guns and using them against them?

I thank my hon. Friend for his first remark. On capital punishment, he will certainly be aware that its reintroduction is a matter for a free vote in Parliament, and it will no doubt arise again in the future.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he next proposes to meet the Association of Chief Police Officers to discuss crime prevention.

The Association of Chief Police Officers is actively involved in the field of crime prevention and my right hon. and learned Friend will be meeting the association at its conference in June.

In welcoming the hon. Gentleman to his duties, I remind him of the fate of the previous Secretary of State who rightly received his just reward for a record in office which was truly criminal, having presided over record levels of crime—increases of 16 and 17 per cent? Will the new Ministers now resurrect the Morgan report, which was buried by the previous Secretary of State and which recommended that local authorities be empowered to deal with juvenile crime—to have the resources to deal with it—and to deal with the social causes of crime? Is that not a practical and more constructive way in which to approach the problem of rising crime?

I am glad that the hon. Gentleman mentioned the word "practical". I commend to him the document that I have here—"Practical Ways to Crack Crime"—which is one example of the many methods that the Government have pioneered to deal with crime prevention. We do not need to resurrect the Morgan report; we are already aware of local authorities' role in crime prevention and are already encouraging many of them to be at the centre of local initiatives. Last week, I took part in radio interviews to support one such excellent venture in Kettering.

My hon. Friend is aware that the more the Government do to prevent crime, the more the amount of crime appears to increase. Is he yet able to demonstrate —as he soon should be able to do—that the 100 neighbourhood watch schemes both reduce crime and lead to increased detection of crimes in the areas in which they operate?

I am grateful to my hon. and learned Friend for mentioning neighbourhood watch, as that gives me an opportunity to pay tribute to the many thousands of people who give so generously of their spare time to that excellent initiative—such as that in Kirkholt, near Rochdale, where a study has been carried out of an intensive neighbourhood watch operation which has resulted in a 75 per cent. reduction in recorded crime. Such schemes take their place alongside initiatives such as car crime prevention year—intended to tackle one third of all recorded crime. Much work is being done, but I take my hat off to the citizens who play an active part in those efforts.

When the Home Secretary next speaks to the Association of Chief Police Officers, will he concentrate everyone's thoughts on the need to rationalise the number of constabularies in Great Britain? The administrative demand on the police could then be proportionately reduced and the forces remaining would become more efficient so that they could put more police officers on the ground, where crimes occur. Might it not then be possible to reverse the dreadful decision made last week to place the gathering and collation of intelligence on terrorists in the hands of MI5 instead of maintaining police primacy, which is what ought to be done?

My right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary, who is here beside me, will have noted the hon. Gentleman's comments. Last Friday, my right hon. and learned Friend announced to the House his policies on that matter. We are committed to providing 1,000 additional police officers. Putting them on the ground in the communities in which our constituents live is an important manifesto commitment. My right hon. and learned Friend made clear in a newspaper interview today his priorities on the efficient operation of the police force.

Will my hon. Friend include in his discussions Chief Superintendent Jim Swingewood of Coventry city police? Is my hon. Friend aware that the recent disturbances in Coventry had much to do with drink-related and mindless vandalism and criminality? The criminals are well known to local residents, who are heartily sick of having to tolerate them in their midst. In connection with crime prevention, and therefore with the prevention of potential copycat violence, have the press not a huge responsibility to report such incidents calmly and accurately?

My hon. Friend speaks with the authority of someone who knows his constituents and the problems of his area well. I take the opportunity to pay tribute to the Coventry police for the firm, strong, quick way in which they dealt with the incidents on the street. Those incidents are not tolerable, and involve many of the issues which the Government take seriously, especially the control of alcohol. I shall bear in mind my hon. Friend's perceptive comments in the development of future policies.

I congratulate the new Minister. He said that there was no need to resurrect the Morgan report, with the clear implication that that report was dead. In April the previous Home Secretary said that it was receiving active consideration. What is the position—has the report been abandoned or not?

I did not know that my previous answer had administered the last rites to the Morgan report. We are still studying and giving active consideration to the report. I wanted to ensure that the right hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends understand that we do not deprecate the role of local authorities in fighting crime. I have sought to point out that they are already playing an important part along with many other agencies. The fight against crime involves all of us and I am pleased that some local authorities are playing their part positively in that respect.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many registered electors did not vote in the recent general election; and what percentage this represents of the total number of registered electors.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will produce a report on the state of electoral registration at the 1992 general election; and if he will make a statement.

There are more than 43.7 million people on the 1992 electoral register—the highest number of people ever registered in the United Kingdom, and representing over 95 per cent. of the estimated eligible population. Preliminary figures show that the total number of votes cast at the general election was about 33.6 million, so about 23 per cent. of electors on the register did not vote.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on his well-deserved promotion. Was it his impression of the general election that many more of our constituents failed to meet the deadline for applications for postal and proxy votes and were thus unable to vote on polling day because they were away on holiday? Can my hon. Friend confirm that the deadline was 16 days before polling day? Will he now enter discussions with the appropriate authorities to seek a more convenient arrangement under which electors can exercise their democratic rights?

My hon. Friend knows that the rules for postal votes were simplified some years ago. It is my impression that the new procedures were more frequently used in this election than before in that more people voted by post. I am well aware that in my constituency and, I am sure, in others there were complaints that people did not realise that they had to get their applications in on time. The deadline was 23 March, which was 13 or 17 days before the election, depending on whether one counts weekends. We were informed that that time was needed by the local authorities to process the applications, to check them, to send out the ballot papers, to have them back and to ensure that they could be included in the count.

I object to the fact that two questions were linked together and that my question was not given an answer. An answer was given merely to the first question. My question asked whether the Home Office would be involved in a report about the state of the electoral register in the 1992 election. I should like an answer to that as well as to the supplementary question that I am about to put.

I expect that the hon. Gentleman—I know that he takes an interest in the subject—knows that the OPCS is undertaking special research on the accuracy of the registers. It will have at its disposal the results of the 1991 census, so it is an especially good time to carry out such research. When we have the results, we shall decide what steps, if any, need to be taken. Our discussions about keeping up the register will, no doubt, be part of the inquest which, as I said earlier, we shall hold with the local authorities and with the political parties later this year. The methods used to get people on to the register are advertising and publicity, and there is also the research on and review of the practices of local authorities. Like the hon. Gentleman, we want everyone who is eligible to be on the register.

What directions are given to electoral registration officers to enable them to compile a fairly comprehensive and factually correct electoral register?

We provide a considerable amount of advice, but under the law it is up to the officers to do it. The main way is the form to be filled in that is delivered to every household. As there may be another supplementary question from the Opposition Benches, I must say that the community charge register has been very useful in some constituencies as an extra source of information for the electoral registration officer to discover where people may not have put themselves on the electoral register. For example, in the eight constituencies in Leeds, the local authority, using those means to update the register, added 26,000 to the electoral register last year.

I congratulate the Minister on managing to remain in the Home Office in the recent reshuffle and I welcome his undertaking to consider postal votes. Many hon. Members believe that more time should be allowed for people to get postal votes. Is the Minister aware that the registers in some constituencies are grossly inaccurate? There were some cases of people being on the poll tax register, having paid their poll tax, but not on the electoral register. Does he accept that the Government must do far more to advertise the fact that the electoral register is compiled each autumn and encourage people to ensure that their names are on the electoral register so that they are not disenfranchised? Will he undertake to put a little more effort into advertising, in contrast to the half-hearted effort pursued by his predecessors?

We advertise every year; that amounted to some half a million pounds last year and it will be at least that sum this year. The most important task lies with the electoral registration officer to devise all means locally to ensure that everyone who should be on the register is on it and that those who should not be on it come off it.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there are reports that many disabled people found that polling stations were still inaccessible? Will he consider carefully the suggestion that disabled people should be able to vote at a polling station that is accessible to them and not be unable to vote, as is the case at the moment?

I am not sure whether we would want necessarily to adopt my hon. Friend's solution. However, he raises a very important issue which must form part of the discussions that I have said are being carried out. A disabled person who is likely to find it difficult to gain access to a polling station is exactly the type of person who should apply for a postal vote.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to improve transport conditions and journey times for remand prisoners travelling from remand centres to courts in north Wales.

I have no plans to make changes to the current arrangements for the conveyance of prisoners to courts in north Wales, which are broadly similar to those in operation in other parts of the country.

As I have had numerous complaints from constituents and their families about seven-hour journeys to courts, often in inhumane conditions, will the Minister confirm that a remand centre is to be established in north Wales and that in the meantime decent transport facilities will be afforded to remand prisoners?

I cannot confirm or promise a remand centre, at least not at this point. However, the arrangements for transporting prisoners are well organised. If the hon. Gentleman has particular complaints and would like to see me about them, I should be glad to see him. There are long journeys in north Wales. However, on long journeys the rule is that there must be a stop at least every two hours so that prisoners can get out—[Laughter.]—together with their escorts, so that both may use the lavatory, have a drink and, if it is the appropriate time of the day, have a meal.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he intends to end the remanding of juveniles into prison department establishments.

The Government are committed to ending juvenile prison remands as soon as enough local authority secure accommodation is available. We shall ensure that the extra places needed are provided as quickly as possible.

Is the Secretary of State aware that it is almost two years since Phillip Knight from my constituency committed suicide in Swansea gaol at the age of 15 and that the Secretary of State's reply offers no hope to many juveniles currently on remand or in prison? Will he encourage his Department to introduce a scheme whereby we shall no longer see juvenile suicides in our prisons?

I well remember that tragic case. Obviously, we must do everything possible to reduce the risk of repetitions of such cases when young people are held on remand. My answer referred to a specific scheme on which we have already embarked. Specific grants are available for local authorities to provide the necessary secure accommodation. We have already had discussions with the Department of Health. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health and I will ensure, if we possibly can, that buildings are designed and constructed. The money is provided specifically so that we can replace remand into prison for juveniles by 1995 at the latest.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend also bear it in mind that many crimes are committed by juveniles and that many reoffend while on remand? Will he bear in mind the importance of protecting law-abiding citizens from such offences, as well as taking into account the welfare of juveniles who need to be remanded in custody?

I agree with my hon. Friend. There is an unfortunate necessity to remand in custody a comparatively small number of juvenile offenders. The Criminal Justice Act 1991 made it clear that the ground for such remand should be that there was a threat to the public. There are more than 1,000 such cases each year. We need to provide some additional local authority secure accommodation before we can bring to an end the unsuitable practice of remanding people to adult prisons.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has for reviewing the efficiency of the police force; and if he will make a statement.

I propose to keep the police service subject to a process of continuous review in order to ensure that it delivers an efficient and effective service.

Is the Home Secretary aware that any plans that he has for extracting value for money from our police will be widely welcomed by people of all political persuasions? To start the ball rolling, may I draw his attention to a little racket that has been going on for some years whereby detectives employed by more than half the nation's police forces tour the nation's gaols persuading convicted felons to own up to offences on the unsolved book? They use that as a way of diminishing the crime rate. In Merseyside it accounts for 44 per cent. of all clear-ups. The House will not be surprised to hear that the West Midlands is not far behind, with about 34 per cent. In my area, the figure stood at 29 per cent. until the new chief constable abolished it. Can the Secretary of State put a stop to this and use the funds that become available to put more policemen on the streets?

I am delighted to hear that I shall have the support of the hon. Member for Sunderland, South (Mr. Mullin) in seeking value for money from the police force. I expected to have the support of most people involved and I have recently been rather startled to read accounts by journalists who have not met me and to be criticised by officials of the Police Federation who have not met me either about some of the things that I am supposed to be doing.

My right hon. and learned Friend will be aware that substantial resources have been invested in our police system in the past 13 years. Will he give thought to improving the inspection arrangements for the constabularies, perhaps through the medium of an entirely new inspectorate arrangement under which reports are published on both efficiency and effectiveness of the use of resources and the deployment of police officers?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his reference to resources. The Government cannot be faulted on the level of resources that we have provided to the police force over the past 13 years. Obviously we must continue to provide the resources that are necessary to support the service in its important work. The inspectorate is an important element in ensuring that efficiency is sustained everywhere. I have already had discussions with the chief inspector of constabulary about ways in which the inspectorate might be strengthened. I shall certainly take on board my hon. Friend's helpful suggestions.

Does the Home Secretary realise that the Opposition have been calling for a more efficient police force for many years and that he will have our support if he tackles some of the real problems of the police force? Rather than blaming the police for the appalling rise in crime rates over the past 13 years, will he work with the progressive forces within the police force to bring about real change? May I give the right hon. and learned Gentleman a few suggestions for an agenda for change?

Order. This presents me with a golden opportunity of informing Members that this is Question Time, not a debate. There must be direct questions to the Home Secretary.

Will the Home Secretary put on the agenda for change stopping secret societies in all police authorities, decentralisation of management and real change in the inspection process?

I am glad to hear that the hon. Gentleman is in favour of sustaining the efficiency of the police force and that it will be such a non-controversial process, bearing in mind that it is so widely welcomed on both sides of the House. I should regard it as an extraordinary claim if anybody tried to suggest that the police have been responsible for the increase in the crime rate in recent years. Our job is to support the police in their efforts to provide effective protection to the public against the increase in crime. I shall take on board the hon. Gentleman's interesting suggestions. As I said to my hon. Friend the Member for Westminster, North (Sir J. Wheeler), strengthening the inspectorate could be, among other things, a quite important way of proceeding.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on proposals to make parents more accountable for the behaviour of their children.

The Criminal Justice Act 1991 significantly strengthens courts' powers to involve parents when their children offend. These provisions will come into force on 1 October 1992.

Does my hon. Friend agree that when a person offends, responsibility for that offending lies not with the Government or society but with the criminal? Is it not entirely right that parents should be responsible for their children's misdeeds? Will my hon. Friend assure the House that the proposals set out in the Criminal Justice Act will ensure that parents are far more aware of their children's misdeeds?

I am most grateful to my hon. Friend for his question, which highlights one of the most important parts of the Criminal Justice Act. The courts will have powers to order parents to come into court both to support their children at that time and to listen to and learn of some of their misdemeanours. They will ultimately be subjected to the courts' power of binding over, which means that they will be fully involved in ensuring that their children do not recommit offences.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the provision of statutory funding for the expansion of Victim Support schemes.

Home Office funding for the national voluntary body which supports local schemes, Victim Support, has increased from £250,000 in 1986–87 to £7.25 million in the current financial year. These resources will enable Victim Support to extend the existing work of local schemes and develop further new services for victims who are witnesses in Crown courts.

As the Minister rightly said, this is funding for volunteers, although the funding co-ordinates the central administration. It is an area which needs considerable expansion at a time of rising crime. Even though the Government's funding has risen, many schemes are losing money because of capping and other financial restraints that confront local authorities, which are unable to make payments.

I have some good news for the hon. Lady on two counts. First, the Government's policies that will bear down on the efficiency of local authorities should enable them all to be more generous to victim support schemes in future. Secondly, in the next financial year we are committed to raising resources for the Victim Support scheme to £8.3 million. That should help them in the expansion of the work to which the hon. Lady referred. One of the inhibiting factors that have been identified in extending this work has been the availability of suitable people. That is an area in which, perhaps, the hon. Lady could give encouragement.

May I welcome the Minister to his new responsibilities? Will he confirm that a reason why there has had to be an increase in funding for Victim Support is that in the past 13 years the number of victims of crime has more than doubled? Is not the planned increase for the next few years inadequate for the job? Will he confirm that Victim Support must run from its grant the victim services in 83 Crown courts? Does he not believe that that bill should be more properly picked up by the Lord Chancellor?

We take our responsibilities in this area seriously. The hon. Gentleman did not refer, for example, to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, which has a budget just short of £150 million. That means that we provide substantial help to those who are the victims of crime. If he had listened throughout Question Time he would have heard my right hon. and learned Friend and hon. Friends talking about how we shall combat crime, especially violent crime.

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

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 my right hon. Friend agree that although it is desirable to have an easy flow of goods and people between countries, it is essential to maintain effective national border controls, not only as part of our fight against international crime and drug trafficking, but to preserve that extra security which we as an island nation have come to expect?

I agree with my hon. Friend. The benefits that we see from the freedom of movement could easily be lost if we could not protect ourselves against terrorism, smuggling and illegal immigration. On border controls, the Government do not agree that article 8A requires the abolition of all controls on people at the Community's internal frontiers. It is our policy to control the entry of nationals at the point of arrival. That is the most effective way of control for an island nation, and our European partners must understand that.

Is the Prime Minister aware that today's rise in unemployment is the 24th consecutive monthly increase? Is he aware that during the past year unemployment has increased by over half a million and that unemployment among 18 to 24-year-olds has increased by more than 200,000? Against that background, does he think it right to continue cutting Government funding for training?

Any increase in unemployment is one too many. I accept that, and I agree with the right hon. Gentleman about it. The only way we shall create permanent jobs that will be sustained and will provide proper career opportunities is to have the return of confidence, the right levels of investment and the right economic background. That is what we are seeking to achieve. That is the right way to deal with unemployment in the short term, the medium term and the long term. As the right hon. Gentleman knows, we have one of the most substantial training schemes that this country has ever seen or any other country has ever seen.

Does not the Prime Minister yet accept that a critical part of any policy for future employment is a good, strong, continuing policy on training? The figures in the Government's White Paper on public expenditure —[Interruption.] The figures in the Government's own White Paper show that there is to be a continuing cut in employment training and youth training. There are 800,000 young people aged between 18 and 24 who are unemployed now. Is it not clear that the Government's message to them is no jobs, no training, no hope?

I do not believe that that is remotely accurate. On the substantive part of the right hon. Gentleman's question, training is improving all the time. More workers are qualified—up to 73 per cent.—more people are staying on at school for more skills and more firms are investing in training, the figure for which is now £20 billion. This Government have created 300,000 training places whereas the Labour Government created 700. Just a few weeks ago the British people were well aware of which party would put the nation back to work and they made their choice decisively.

Since the Prime Minister wishes to refer to it, the fact is that under the last Labour Government unemployment reached a maximum of 1.25 million. It is now well over double that. This Government have never managed to get unemployment down to that level. Why will he not face up to the problem of unemployment, accept his own figures and understand that the Conservatives have not only sabotaged employment in this country and lost 1 million jobs in the last two years, but are not providing employment training in the way that should be provided in any modern country, let alone one with 2.7 million unemployed people?

The right hon. Gentleman should sometimes recollect that there never have been a Labour Government who did not push unemployment up dramatically. A higher proportion of our nation—70 per cent., a higher proportion than anywhere else—is in work. Our job creation record throughout the 1980s was better than that of most European Community countries, providing over 2 million more jobs than in 1983. The right hon. Gentleman takes a selective view of the rest of the world. He ignores it when he talks of recession. He accepts it when he talks of unemployment. He might need a more consistent line if he becomes leader of the Socialist International.

I congratulate the Prime Minister on his stunning victory at the general election. Will he take this opportunity to congratulate the people of Welwyn Hatfield on getting rid of a Labour administration after 13 years? Will he assure me that we shall not hold the next Conservative party conference in Sheffield and that we shall not close the conference in total darkness with fireworks going off? [Interruption.] They might all turn out to be damp squibs, as happened to the Labour party.

My hon. Friend makes his own distinctive points in his own distinctive way, and I have no doubt that the voters of Welwyn Hatfield, in returning him, have seen him do precisely what they expected of him. In response to his direct question, I can certainly confirm that the next Conservative party conference will not be held in Sheffield.

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

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

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that when his predecessor first entered the House, it was five months before she made her maiden speech and that, when she did, she introduced a Bill which opened up local authority meetings to the press and public? In view of the secrecy that presently surrounds the meetings of hospital trusts, will the right hon. Gentleman introduce legislation under which all management committee meetings are open to the press and public?

I have told the hon. Gentleman that the Chancellor of the Duchy is examining areas of government where it is possible to remove levels of secrecy. That has begun and will continue. We shall make the outcome known to Parliament in due course.

When my right hon. Friend is carrying out his review, and is taking stock of the situation, of Scotland, will he bear it in mind that his leadership and the firm stand taken by him and the Secretary of State for Scotland against assemblies and parliaments in Edinburgh resulted in the splendid general election result and the subsequent splendid result at the district elections, in which Perth and Kinross district council was restored handsomely to Conservative control?

As my hon. Friend knows, I believe that the Union has ensured that Scotland plays a full part in the most stable political entity to be found anywhere in Europe. It has served the whole of the United Kingdom well. It has certainly served Scotland and England well. Indeed, as the hon. Member for Glasgow, Garscadden (Mr. Dewar) said recently, Scotland is alive and flourishing. Indeed it is. We welcome that. It is alive and flourishing within the Union.

Does the Prime Minister realise that, despite his attacks on our proposals for a carbon tax during the election campaign, we now greatly welcome his conversion to the case for a carbon tax to tackle global warming? Does he accept that the European Commission's proposals are too timid and too conditional to attack that problem effectively, that the next response must come from the Americans and that he has a role in persuading the Americans to make that response?

There are many ways to deal with the problem of CO₂ and we still await the Commission's formal proposals. We cannot yet be certain what it will do. It is absolutely clear that it would make sense to adopt such a tax only if our major competitors in the world also did so, both for environmental reasons and because acting alone would harm competitiveness in this country and across Europe. I shall discuss with Japan and the United States what action might be taken, but I have no intention of prejudging what that action might be.

Did my right hon. Friend happen to see the punch-up in the Italian Parliament yesterday, when it was attempting to elect a new President? Does he see that as an example of the benefits of proportional representation or merely a dress rehearsal for the election of a new loser—so sorry—new leader of the Labour party?

I did not see that particular report, but I am aware of Italy's present difficulties as it tries to determine a new Government after an election that has split the political parties through using proportional representation.

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

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

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, in the midst of a viciously high level of crime, the Leicestershire police force has been forced to cut its budget for the current year by more than £1 million? Will he, therefore, please take this opportunity to deny reports that the Government are placing pressure on his right hon. and learned and reticent Friend the Home Secretary to cut central funding for police forces, because to do so would be irresponsible, dangerous and totally unacceptable?

Those who know my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary would not suggest that he is readily susceptible to pressure. He will be as concerned as the Government have been in recent years to ensure that the police force is equipped for its battle against crime.

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

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

Some pensioners and other people on low incomes in Fulham often struggle to pay their heating bills. Will my right hon. Friend, therefore, join me in warmly welcoming the 3 per cent. reduction in gas prices announced today? Does not that show that privatisation, if properly and effectively regulated, is to the benefit of everyone?

Yes, I welcome the 3 per cent. cut in prices that has been announced. It adds to the reductions in recent years since privatisation took effect and illustrates clearly the benefits of competition.

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

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

Does the Prime Minister agree that even if every single empty property in local authority and private sector control were used for families, there would still be a huge shortage of affordable, rented housing? Will the Prime Minister tell the House simply how many affordable, rented homes he plans to build in the next Parliament?

It would be a great improvement if all those empty properties, largely in the ownership of Labour authorities, were made available for letting. It would also make a tremendous difference to the availability of property if the Labour party would remove its long-standing prejudices against the private sector, which discourage so many people from bringing private property into the market for letting.

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

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

Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming today's report that, in line with the patients charter, the General Medical Council is to propose the biggest changes in the regulation of doctors for 150 years? Will he also welcome yesterday's statement by the British Medical Association that, from now on, it wishes to work with the Government in implementing health reforms? Is not the increasing acceptance of the Government's health policies by the medical profession a vindication at last of the work that has been done in the past few years to ensure that the health service today is better funded, better managed and provides a better service to its patients than ever before?

I very much agree with my hon. Friend and with the statement made by the chairman of the British Medical Association. We now have a far better working relationship. As a party, we are looking ahead. Indeed, it is only the Labour party which fails to look ahead to see the changes, improvements and benefits taking place in the health service as a result of our funding and our reforms.