To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to initiate a review of the law on shotguns.

Controls on shotguns were strengthened under the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988. The firearms consultative committee has a statutory duty to keep the controls of the Firearms Acts under constant review and make proposals to my right hon. and learned Friend as it considers necessary.

Is the Minister aware that the number of shotgun offences in the northern region has more than doubled in the past six years? Is he concerned at the fact that the existing laws allow a shotgun certificate to be obtained without a person either giving good justification or undergoing proper training? Does he believe that it is in the public interest that children as young as 12 are allowed, legally, to hold a shotgun certificate? When will the Minister bring forward proper proposals to protect the public better from lethal weapons?

I am aware of the increase in the number of offences involving weapons. However, it is worth bearing in mind that out of all the recorded incidents in 1990, only 0.2 per cent. involved the use of such weapons. I have seen the hon. Gentleman's early-day motion. Of course, he will understand that I cannot comment on the incident in Darlington because it is under investigation by the Police Complaints Authority. The consultative committee has a statutory duty to keep the law under constant review. In the debates we had before the enactment of the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988, consideration was given to placing shotguns under section 1 control. It was decided not to do that and that controls were best left in the hands of the police. The chief officer of a police force is empowered to withhold a licence if he believes that the public will be at risk or that the person applying for a certificate is unsuitable. The controls have been strengthened.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what further consideration has been given to the introduction of identity cards; and if he will make a statement.

I am not at present persuaded of the case for a national identity card system.

My right hon. and learned Friend's reply is a bit disappointing. Is he aware that there is growing support in the country and, I believe, in the House for a system of identity cards as a means of combating fraud, terrorism and illegal immigration? As most of us carry a variety of plastic cards at all times, what is the possible objection to another one, with a photograph, which would add to our safety and security?

I said in my reply that I was not at present persuaded, but, obviously, my hon. Friend will try to persuade me in the course of time. The last time the Government considered this issue we were simply not satisfied that there were any great advantages, from the law enforcement point of view, in introducing a national identity card system. That was then the opinion of most people in the police service. However, I am aware that, recently the Association of Chief Police Officers offered a rather different opinion when it gave evidence to the Select Committee on Home Affairs. I hope that it will send its representations to me and work out in more detail what value it thinks such a system might have for law enforcement. At the moment, I do not see that case.

Is the Home Secretary aware that Labour Members are certainly not persuaded that there is any justification for such a scheme? It would be extremely unfortunate if in peacetime, despite terrorism, identity cards were reintroduced in this country. Some of us might consider that that is another continental idea that we can well do without in Britain.

Countries on the continent are divided on the issue. Eight European Community countries have identity cards and four do not. The bulk of people in Britain are prepared to support anything that helps the police and other authorities in their proper work of law enforcement and detecting crime. We must be persuaded that identity cards would be of substantial help to them and that they would be used in a way that did not damage relationships between the police and any section of the community.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the first point that the police must establish is identification? What better way is there to make that identification than through an identity card with a photograph, and even a fingerprint, which would enable us to go back to the days when people were identifiable. That would surely help the police.

All of us are used to having to produce some modest proof of identification on a number of occasions. Most people do not object to producing their driving licences or credit cards for someone who is entitled to ask to see them. A national identity card scheme would have to be much more secure, and a cost and difficulties would be involved in issuing identity cards. The police would have to put a case forward for saying that there was a sufficient problem in identifying people to make it necessary to go to those lengths.

Does the Home Secretary accept that a compulsory requirement to carry identity cards would be the subject of deep resentment for many people? Has he had any discussions with his European counterparts about the possibility of compulsory ID cards being introduced in the European Community after the removal of frontiers in continental Europe? I appreciate that we shall maintain our frontiers—the right hon. and learned Gentleman has our support—but what is the position on the carrying of identity cards by British citizens in this country and in continental Europe?

As usual, the House is accurately representing the range of views on whether people would object to carrying identity cards in this country. In the first place, it all depends on whether anybody can make a satisfactory case for carrying them from a law enforcement point of view. We shall then look at the objections that might arise.

My right hon. and learned Friend must look at the reality of the situation. When internal frontiers disappear, as undoubtedly they will, a form of smart identity card will have to be introduced. Is this not the time to start planning for that? We should be going ahead with such a scheme for that, if for no other, reason.

We stand ready to sign an external frontiers convention when the Spanish withdraw their objections to one of its provisions. But that will not provide the European Community with some impregnable external frontier which will obviate the need for internal controls from the point of view of illegal immigration, terrorism, drugs and other matters. We are satisfied that we are entitled, under our treaty obligations, to retain our present system of frontier controls and that is what we propose to do. We are not looking at identity cards in that context at this time.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the penal institutions for young offenders which Home Office Ministers have visited in the last 12 months.

The young offender institutions visited in the last 12 months were Portland, New Hall, Finnamore Wood, Moorland, Northallerton, Feltham, Drake Hall and Huntercombe.

Those visits having been made, the hon. Gentleman must be aware of the enormous concern that is felt by specialist groups and others about the conditions under which some young men are being held, with a lack of educational and recreational facilities and a lack of specialist psychiatric treatment. Is he aware that if we are to avoid more suicides and attempted suicides among people at a very vulnerable age, more measures must be taken now to ensure that proper accommodation and facilities are provided, particularly for the very young?

Much of the accommodation is extremely good, as the hon. Lady would know if she visited some of the establishments. There are, of course, great worries, and Judge Tumim highlighted a number of them in his report. He also said that good work was being done. I am concerned that there should be positive and purposeful activity in all institutions for young offenders. That is the aim of the prison service and that is what the governors of those institutions are dedicated to providing.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the progress of the prison building programme.

Sixteen of the 21 new prisons in the Government's building programme have now opened, providing 8,000 additional places. Within the next 12 months, four of the remaining five are due to open, providing 2,250 places. In addition, this year we shall be spending nearly £200 million on improving the existing prison estate.

I congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend on that wonderful answer—[Interruption.] It is in sharp contrast to the 20 per cent. cut in prison building under the last Labour Government. We look forward in Stockton-on-Tees to the imminent opening of Holme House Farm prison. I suggest that the police in Stockton-on-Tees, who have faced a spate of riots among drug gangs on the Ragworth estate, should be given every encouragement to apprehend all those behaving so disagracefully and to ensure that they are thrown into the new prison as soon as possible.

My hon. Friend may certainly congratulate me on my answers in those terms as many times as he wishes. It is true that there has been a spectacular prison building programme during the 1980s, after decades in which the prison service's needs were sadly neglected, which is why we still have so many old and unsatisfactory buildings. The new prison in Stockton opened this year and is a valuable addition to the service. I join my hon. Friend in congratulating the police on their handling of the disorders in Stockton. The disorders began when the police made arrests in an attempt to tackle a drug problem on that estate. I am sure that the police have the support of the vast majority of the inhabitants of the estate in dealing with the trouble caused by those young hooligans coming to the town.

Will the Home Secretary discontinue the practice—some people would say the sharp practice—pursued by his predecessor of holding up the publication of Judge Tumim's reports for so long that their criticisms are somewhat blunted? Why has he not accepted the report in respect of the young offenders institution at Feltham, which is a damning indictment?

I refute the suggestion that Ministers have ever deliberately held back Judge Tumim's reports. My predecessor did not do so; nor have we. Delays have not been the result of ministerial decisions. I welcome Judge Tumim's reports, despite the fact that he is often outspoken in the public interest about the conditions that he finds in prisons. He describes the difficult situation in Feltham, which is being tackled by the prison authorities. Judge Tumim's reports are helpful to us in identifying problems and stimulating the efforts of the governor and his staff to deal with them.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many areas are now covered by the safer cities programme; and if he will make a statement.

In the current safer cities programme, there are 20 local authority areas selected, on the basis of high crime rates and other factors, from among the 57 urban programme areas in England. We are considering how to implement and expand the programme in the light of achievements to date.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that that scheme has already notched up some significant successes, with a 40 per cent. cut in burglaries on a Wolverhampton housing estate, a 35 per cent. drop in car crime in a Nottingham car park and a 16 per cent. drop in crime in the centre of Birmingham? Does he agree that that shows that the Government have the policies to combat crime?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his correct statement on some of the notable achievements in those areas in our safer cities programme. I am sure that he will be pleased to learn that Nottingham has been a beneficiary of those achievements. The whole approach that he illuminated for the House falls within the philosophy of the safer cities programme—that of reducing the fear of crime among vulnerable groups such as the elderly, ethnic minorities and particularly women. We shall certainly develop those imaginative initiatives.

Does the Minister accept that there may be people who are not yet aware of the programme? At a recent meeting in south Belfast I discovered that work had been going on but people were unaware of it. Is there not a need for greater publicity and co-ordination of efforts?

I am always delighted when hon. Members ask for information, and I can immediately produce a copy of a report dealing with the hon. Gentleman's point. I shall ensure that the hon. Gentleman receives a copy of it and that copies are made available for any of his constituents who are interested in the subject.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what information he has on the contribution made by the insurance industry to car crime prevention.

The industry has responded to the problem of car crime in a number of ways, including setting up the motor insurance anti-fraud and theft register. On premium levels, some reductions have been offered where anti-theft equipment has been fitted, but that has generally been limited to new cars. I hope that the industry will do more.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. I appreciate that many car crimes involve vehicles that are left open, but many more involve locked vehicles. What is my hon. Friend doing to ensure that motor manufacturers make all vehicles much more secure and to encourage insurance companies to give even bigger discounts to all motorists?

I am pleased to be able to tell my hon. Friend that many car manufacturers have woken up to the fact that the installation of security equipment as standard on many models is a major sales feature. As we approach the peak August registration period, my hon. Friend can look forward to many advertisements recognising that fact. I am shortly to have meetings with representatives of the Association of British Insurers and shall press them to do more in respect of not only new cars but to the many millions of second-hand cars on which people can fit immobilisers and alarms. I should like the insurance companies to show greater recognition of those suggestions.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is his latest estimate of the prison population.

The prison population on Wednesday 17 June 1992 was 46,955.

Can the Home Secretary confirm that the Council of Europe figures clearly show that the prison population in this country is the highest in western Europe and that as many as two thirds of offenders are reconvicted within two years of being sent to prison? Does he think that we have that dreadful record because the British people are uniquely delinquent or does he think, as I do, that the Government are uniquely incompetent when dealing with crime prevention, particularly reoffending?

I am aware of the Council of Europe figures, although I always treat international comparisons with care. It is not the case that the levels of crime—for example, violent crime—in this country are particularly high when compared with other European standards, but they are quite high enough. The public require the Government to provide the courts with a full range of penalties and require people to be committed to prison where the severity of an offence justifies it. We are about to bring into effect the Criminal Justice Act 1991 to give the courts a wider range of effective penalties. The courts may decide to use non-custodial sentences in appropriate cases, where previously they may have given prison sentences.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that, desirable as it no doubt is to reduce the prison population, it is absurd to expect judges to reduce the prison population by obliging them, under the Criminal Justice Act, to take no account of a man's previous convictions?

The Criminal Justice Act tries to bring greater rationality into sentencing by setting out more clearly the matters that courts should and should not take into consideration. I have no doubt that the courts will continue to use the penalties at their disposal to the fullest effect that they think necessary to protect the public. I am sure that the Criminal Justice Act will not inhibit judges' ability to do so.

Is it not amazingly complacent for the Home Secretary not even to mention in his answer to my hon. Friend the Member for The Wrekin (Mr. Grocott) that, at the end of March, 11 prisons were overcrowded by 50 per cent? There are now almost 2,000 prisoners held in police cells. Is it not the Home Secretary's job to resolve the problem quickly? Will he start talking to judge Stephen Tumim and listening to his recommendations, rather than pursuing the silly policy of privatising prisons?

I have already welcomed judge Tumim's report. An independent inspector of this kind is an added incentive to raising standards. There is still overcrowding in our prisons, but it has dropped dramatically in the past two or three years. We have somewhat reduced the capacity of our prisons by introducing a programme to get rid of slopping-out by the end of 1994. I believe that the whole House supports that. Five prisons are under construction or have been commissioned; they will add 3,000 extra places. We are producing more capacity for the prisoners and improving the regime in the prisons. We have quite a long way to go, but there has been a spectacular improvement in the past two or three years.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his Department is including motor cycle thefts and business vehicle thefts in its plans to prevent crime.

I can confirm that both motor cycles and business vehicles are included in our overall strategy to prevent vehicle crime.

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's reply. Is he aware that the increase in the theft of motor cycles in my constituency is a problem taking up a great deal of police time and resources? Does he agree that the main responsibility for the prevention of the theft of motor cycles lies with motor cyclists themselves, by ensuring that they have taken adequate security measures?

I have much sympathy with my hon. Friend's problem in his constituency. I hope that he will be pleased to know that we in the Home Office play our part in assisting the process that he has described. In the next edition of "Practical Ways to Crack Crime" we will incorporate a section of advice on motor cycle theft. A motor cycle theft action group has been established throughout the industry to deal with the problem and I attended, under the auspices of the Institute of Motor Cycling, the launch of a new security device. Technology and practical advice are being brought to bear on this important problem.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he met the chief inspector of prisons to discuss his latest report on prison conditions.

My right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary met the chief inspector for a general discussion on 30 April. I met Judge Tumim on 28 April and again on 7 May, when I attended the inspectorate's training seminar in Eastbourne.

I thank the Minister for that reply. He and his right hon. and learned Friend will be in no doubt about the continuing criticism by the chief inspector of our prisons, the conditions in which many inmates are kept and the sad increase in suicides in prison. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that it is obvious from talking to senior prison governors and prison officers that the root problem in our prisons, as today's exchanges have shown, is gross overcrowding? It is not building new prisons that will release the tensions and solve the troubles in our prisons. When will this issue be faced up to?

Having spoken to the chief inspector, I am well aware that he believes that there are many excellent prisons, with good work being done in them. Contrary to what the hon. Gentleman says, the number of suicides has fallen in recent years. Any suicide is one too many, but there are fewer suicides now.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is his estimate of the proportion of domestic burglaries which do not involve forced entry.

The last British crime survey carried out in 1988 showed that 18 per cent. of all burglary victims interviewed said that their homes had not been left secure when they went out. However, the latest data from the Metropolitan police district showed that 29 per cent. of domestic burglaries involved no forced entry.

Is my hon. Friend aware that some of my constituents consider that at least part of the responsibility for rising crime in Derbyshire should be taken by the county council for not funding the police properly? As such a considerable proportion of break-ins are not forced, will my hon. Friend suggest that the public help themselves by locking up properly and by joining neighbourhood watch schemes such as those that operate in Erewash?

I hope that at the county council elections the people of Derbyshire will lock the door and throw away the key on Derbyshire county council. We have heard of their misdoings for too long. But in fairness, some members of the Derbyshire police force are making their contribution to solving the problems that my hon. Friend enumerates. I pay tribute to Inspector Rosey Kiddy for her work on neighbourhood watch schemes. I commend to the House an excellent crime prevention newspaper which advertises some of the excellent work that is being done by neighbourhood watch schemes to enable individuals to protect their properties as my hon. Friend suggests.

Will the Minister have a word with the Secretary of State for the Environment to ensure that Derbyshire county council has a decent standard spending assessment so that the services needed can be provided? The Government, not the county council, are responsible for any problems that exist in Derbyshire, which has been acting within the Government's framework.

If the hon. Gentleman will convey messages back to Derby about the effective use of resources, particularly spending up to the amount that is available to be spent on the police service, I am sure that his remarks will be listened to by my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations he has received recently about the operation of the Shops Act 1950.

So far this year we have received 149 written representations broadly in favour of more Sunday trading and 819 against.

I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for promising to produce the Government's considered thoughts on the matter by the end of the year. Is he aware that Sunday trading is popular with the majority of shoppers, shopworkers and shopkeepers? Is it not high time that the British people were free to decide whether to shop or not to shop, to work or not to work on a Sunday?

First, I have not promised to produce anything by the end of the year, so my hon. Friend will have to wait to see whether his thanks are premature. We are committed to bringing proposals to the House once the law has been made clear by the European Court of Justice for whose judgment we are still waiting. Then we shall obviously have to consider what to do to produce a solution that the House finds acceptable for the future. Meanwhile, I agree with my hon. Friend. Sunday shopping seems extremely popular with my constituents and is certainly not giving rise to any protests from anybody in my part of the world.

The Secretary of State may not have promised to prepare anything before the end of the year, but I have prepared, with the Keep Sunday Special campaign, a Bill to change the law on Sunday trading. Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman look at the Bill and give it the Government's support? It contains measures that were accepted on both sides of the House. On 22 January when I produced a similar Bill, 224 hon. Members voted in favour of it—

Order. The hon. Gentleman knows better than to test my patience in that way. He should put his question.

I do not wish to test your patience, Madam Speaker, but—

Order. I was not giving the hon. Gentleman pause for a second breath.

We are awaiting the judgment of the European Court of Justice on the Shops Act 1950 to see whether that can still be enforced. It certainly seems to be the case that no one wants the Shops Act 1950 still to be in force and people are proposing variations upon it in all directions. By the time we reach the hon. Gentleman's Bill, the position will be clearer and no doubt we shall debate the matter then. But I shall be surprised if there is any proposition which has only four opponents in the House.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend accept that there is a great deal of sympathy for the Bill being introduced by the hon. Member for Ogmore (Mr. Powell)? Will he ensure that there is a proper free vote on that Bill when it comes before the House?

As I have said, we have not yet committed ourselves to introducing any measure of our own. We have therefore not yet taken a decision on the handling of the hon. Gentleman's Bill. However, I appreciate that views on the issue run across party lines and that strong views are held on both sides of the House. A feature of the proposed reform is that it seeks to distinguish between one type of goods and another, one type of shop and another and one type of hour of day and another. All those solutions are difficult to envisage in practice, but we shall consider them all once we have the judgment of the European Court of Justice and are clear about the present legal position.

Is the Home Secretary aware that Government incompetence has resulted in Dewhurst's having to announce the closure of 600 of its high street shops—one third of its network—because of illegal competition from certain super-stores? That has meant a serious loss of consumer choice and of jobs. As we can now expect an early decision from the European Court about the state of the Shops Act 1950, will the Home Secretary tell the House whether he is committed to introducing legislation as a matter of urgency after the decision has been announced, or whether he is going to connive with the law breakers like his predecessors?

The Government presented a Bill that would have enabled us to reform Sunday trading. I spoke in favour of that Bill on Second Reading and voted for it, but the last Parliament threw it out on Second Reading and left the House unable to do anything about the existing state of the law. The House must address the issue and reach some clear conclusion. No one is breaking the law, because the House of Lords has decided that it is not clear what the law is. That is why the matter has been referred to the European Court of Justice; when we have a decision from the court, we shall know the basis on which we are starting.

Should not the principle of subsidiarity apply in this case?

Our national Parliament has not made a tremendous success of getting the law right in this regard. Of all the legislation passed by the House, the Shops Act 1950 lends itself to least defence, and we all now want to change it.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prisoners are currently held in Walton gaol.

Yesterday, 1,205 prisoners were being held in Her Majesty's prison, Liverpool.

Given that the prison is the largest of its kind in the country, and given the close proximity of other penal institutions across north Merseyside, how can the Minister justify proposals to build another prison a mile away at Fazakerley in my constituency, and to introduce prison ships on the River Mersey? Does he not understand that the recommendations of the Woolf report on prisons in the community did not mean that all the prisons should be built in my area?

The hon. Gentleman is wrong. He has referred to other establishments. Certainly, there is an assessment centre for disturbed juveniles in the area, but that belongs to the local authority. There is a secure psychiatric hospital at Ashworth; that belongs to the national health service. Neither of those establishments belong to the prison service.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the amount of interest shown in prison overcrowding during today's Question Time does not reflect the concern of our constituents? They are more concerned about the incidence of crime and its victims.

The supplementary question to which I am replying is not on all fours with the sentiments expressed earlier about overcrowding by the hon. Member for Tooting (Mr. Cox). We have put in a planning application and we shall see what the council says. I shall take close notice of its views.

Given that Liverpool is already the home of Walton prison, Ashworth and Dyson hall, will the Minister accept that many of my constituents are outraged at the proposal to build a further prison at Fazakerley? Does he have plans to privatise that prison?

We have no current plans to privatise that prison. As I explained earlier to the hon. Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Kilfoyle), the assessment centre belongs to the county council. It is not for prison service occupation but for disturbed juveniles who are not inside the prison system. The same applies to the psychiatric hospital. There is a need for extra prison places on Merseyside and our proposal would provide them.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proposals he has for expanding the special constabulary.

A campaign was launched last year to increase the numbers of special constables in the forces of England and Wales. Our intention is to recruit an extra 10,000 special constables and bring totals up to 25,000.

I thank my hon. Friend for those encouraging figures. However, it is disappointing that he does not offer any specific proposals for increased methods of recruitment. Will he consider setting up a special constabulary on the same basis as the Territorial Army?

A three-year promotional campaign is under-way and it has started with promise. At present there are some 18,000 special constables and, in the first year of the campaign, an extra 14 per cent. growth has been seen. So the incentive is there. Comparison with the Territorial Army suggests a bounty scheme. That has been considered by the forces that have special constables and the Dorset constabulary is planning a pilot scheme.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the system of training immigration officers on the conduct of their duties.

Immigration officer training is designed to ensure high standards of courtesy and professionalism, and emphasises race and equal opportunities awareness and the development of inter-personal skills.

Will the Minister look into the case of Mr. Adol Owen-Williams of Maryland in the United States who came to this country at the time of the Los Angeles riots? He was accused, without evidence and solely because he is black, of trying to escape criminal prosecution in the United States. As a result of his questioning, he was imprisoned for two days in a cell that reeked of urine and was kept without adequate food. I should like the Minister to investigate and prosecute the perpetrators of that injustice and ensure that Mr. Owen-Williams receives adequate compensation for the injustice he received.

I must refute what the hon. Lady has said. The Owen-Williams case has been thoroughly investigated and a reply has been sent to Mr. Owen-Williams as a result of that investigation. I have seen that report. The refusal of leave to enter conformed to immigration rules and hinged largely on false information being given about his current employment status and the fact that he shipped a car and large amounts of luggage into the country. He was detained at a police station because there was evidence of previous criminal convictions in the United States. If there is anything to regret about this unhappy episode, it is that some critics who should know better have impugned the professional integrity of hard-working men and women in the immigration service without even bothering to check the facts of the case.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the country is right to be proud of its immigration service and that there is no more important cornerstone of good race relations in this country than having a firm and fairly implemented immigration policy that prevents the fears of the indigenous majority from being reflected in the sort of ugly episodes that we have seen abroad?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. He may wish to know that such matters are emphasised in immigration officers' induction training and consolidation training courses, which continue after they have been in post for between one and a half and three years. Vocational courses are also available to them.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what further steps he is considering to prevent the rising incidence of crime; and if he will make a statement.

We shall continue to take vigorous action to tackle crime by improving the effectiveness of the criminal justice system and developing our crime prevention strategy through the involvement of the whole community in this task.

Is the Minister prepared to reconsider the sentencing guidance that is given to judges? Is he aware that, under the Criminal Justice Act 1991, judges are being advised and invited to consider only two previous convictions when sentencing a convicted person? Would not it be a more effective deterrent against rising burglary and house-breaking if judges were given more flexibility in the disposal of those cases?

I listened carefully to what the hon. Member said. He will be aware that one of the new guiding principles in the Criminal Justice Act is the introduction of consultative councils, of which, I am pleased to say, the judiciary will now be part. I am sure that some of the matters that he mentioned in his question will be discussed by those bodies.

To ask the Prime Minister when he next expects to pay an official visit to Bury.

I shall be making further visits to many parts of the country and hope to include my hon. Friend's constituency among them.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that at tonight's annual general meeting of the Bury, South Conservative association we shall celebrate our recent victories in the local and general elections and welcome my right hon. Friend's recent speech on the citizens charter to the Adam Smith Institute, in which he made it absolutely clear that in the battle between the Goliaths, who want greater state intervention, and the Davids, who want greater individual freedom, he backs the Davids every time?

I wish that I could be with my hon. Friend this evening for his celebrations. The people of Bury, South made a wise choice, and they certainly did in the general election. My hon. Friend is right: I want to see a change in attitude in many areas of public services. We need public services that meet what the public want, not what the so-called experts tell them they should have.

To ask the Prime Minister what plans he has to pay an official visit to Woolwich.

I will be making further visits to many parts of the country and hope to include different parts of London among them.

Does the Prime Minister share the enthusiasm of the President of the Board of Trade for the economic regeneration of the east Thames corridor? Does he share the views of previous Secretaries of State for Transport that the Jubilee line is essential for that economic regeneration and that it can be achieved at far less cost to the Exchequer than building the east London river crossing and without the environmental damage that would ensue from the road?

I hope that in due course we shall be able to proceed with the Jubilee line, but we shall wish to see the private sector contribution that we previously set as the sum necessary to ensure that we can proceed. Providing we can achieve that, I hope that we will be able to proceed with the Jubilee line. Economic regeneration is welcome everywhere.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 18 June.

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 the reduction in nuclear weapons that was agreed between President Bush and the Russian President is good news and is to be welcomed? However, will he assure the House and the nation that he will maintain strong United Kingdom defences within NATO and will continue with the Trident programme?

I warmly welcome the announcements that were made after the meetings in Washington between President Bush and President Yeltsin. We shall certainly continue to maintain our own independent nuclear deterrent. We shall maintain it, build it, arm it and deploy Trident.

On this day on which unemployment has gone above 2.7 million again, does the Prime Minister recall that it is exactly a year since he said that economic recovery would begin—and I use his words—"within weeks" and that Britain would come out of recession by the end of 1991? Why was he so absurdly wrong?

The right hon. Gentleman will have been very pleased to see the economic indicators this week in the light of that remark—very pleased indeed. He will have been pleased to see that manufacturing production has risen for three months in a row for the first time in two years, that retail sales are up again, that the rate of increase in average earnings has slowed further to 7 per cent. and is now at its lowest level for 25 years. While the increase in unemployment is very unwelcome, it is clearly now slowing, so I think that the right hon. Gentleman can now see that we are on the road to recovery.

I am always glad to see any movement out of the trough into which this Government's policies have pushed the British people and the British economy, but, after the Chancellor's statement yesterday that Britain is three years away from full recovery, as he put it, is not it clear that whenever the Prime Minister or the Chancellor have made optimistic comments about the economy, they have simply not been telling the truth to the British people?

The right hon. Gentleman should not be misled by everything that he reads in newspaper headlines; he should read the speech itself. He should recall that in January he relied a touch too heavily on a press report and criticised me when he was confusing taxes and interest rates. The reality was that what my right hon. Friend actually said yesterday was:

"In two or three years' time…people will look back and see that it was now, at this critical juncture, that the right decision was taken."

Is the Prime Minister giving us a date for recovery? He used to be very anxious so to do. I remind him that this time last year he said that it would start "within weeks". This time last year he said that there would be recovery by the end of the year. Why is he much more coy now, a year later, in giving us a firm forecast on when Britain can rejoin the countries that enjoy some growth, since we have now had two years with negative growth under his Government?

I think that the right hon. Gentleman should now know that we are on our way to recovery, and if the right hon. Gentleman wishes to know perhaps why the recovery was later than it might have been, I quote the words of the general secretary of the Labour party who claimed that the Labour party did not win the election because of the

"fear of high tax, plus general unease about [Labour's] economic competence."

While I hope that the Irish people will reach a positive conclusion in their referendum today, does my right hon. Friend agree that the holding of referendums on major constitutional issues runs contrary to the practice of parliamentary sovereignty in this country and that further, it would be impossible to boil down the many complex issues of the 134-page treaty of Maastricht into one short, but fair and comprehensive question? Further, has the Prime Minister noted—

Order. One question.

—the recent twists and turns on the European issue by the Labour leader?

Order. The right hon. Gentleman is being very unfair in putting so many questions in a short space of time. I call the Prime Minister to answer the first two.

I entirely agree with my right hon. Friend's comments on the subject of referendums. I believe that he states the classical position concerning parliamentary democracy.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 18 June.

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

As the Prime Minister says no to a devolved Scottish Parliament. against the wishes of the majority of the Scottish people. and also says no to a referendum on how Scotland should be governed, will he tell us to what, after 10 weeks of taking stock, he is prepared to say yes?

I shall tell the hon. Lady when we have concluded taking stock.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 18 June.

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

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his excellent speech to the Adam Smith Institute, in which he advocated more choice and opportunity for the less privileged in our society. Does he agree that we have a lot to do for our inner cities—and in particular that we must ensure that standards in inner-city schools are raised?

I certainly agree with my hon. Friend about that. We are determined to raise standards in all our schools, and especially to deal with the problem that clearly exists in many of our inner-cities. I believe that school governors and education authorities must act quickly where inspectors' reports show that standards are unacceptably low. That is too often the case in many of our inner-city schools, and the Government do not intend to stand idly by and see it continue.

What will the Prime Minister do about unemployment, which is now rising inexorably towards 3 million? It is now two months since the election, and only a handful of weeks until school leavers come on to the register. Are the Government so consumed by self-satisfaction and so sunk in lethargy that they offer no hope, no policies and no action for those who are losing their jobs?

I am in no sense satisfied with the level of unemployment in this country, and I have made that clear before. We need the right sort of economic policy, which will sustain long-term employment prospects; that is what we are putting into place and we shall ensure that we achieve it.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 18 June.

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

Is the Prime Minister aware that a distinguished predecesor and former Minister for administrative affairs—Mr. Jim Hacker—reaches pensionable age today? In the spirit of that great statesman, I, too, welcome the Prime Minister's speech to the Adam Smith Institute this week. I also ask my right hon. Friend to urge his colleagues at tomorrow's citizens charter seminar at No. 10 to press forward with further improvements to our public services. In particular, will he tell us whether we can expect the publication of a courts charter, to deal with the interminable delays to which so much of our law is subject?

Yes, my hon. Friend touches an important matter, which causes frustration for many of our fellow citizens. We are proceeding to produce a courts charter and I hope that we shall be able to make announcements about it before too long.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on representations from Arab countries about sanctions against Libya.

We have had various approaches from Arab countries about sanctions against Libya. We and the Arab League share the same objective—to see a satisfactory outcome to the Lockerbie problem. This, as the Arab League well knows, will require Libya's full compliance with United Nations Security Council resolution 731.

In the light of my two letters to the Prime Minister on this subject, will he consider putting in the Library a response to the cover story of Time magazine— not exactly a publication of the left—which challenges the whole basis of the Anglo-American position? Will the right hon. Gentleman also consider approaching Spain on the legal proceedings relating to Monzer al Kassar, a Syrian drugs and arms dealer?

I saw the article in Time magazine; I examined it and sought advice on it. The theories about involvement and links with drugs are not new. They were thoroughly examined by the police during the investigation and were discounted at that stage, at the conclusion of the investigation. No evidence has yet been found to link the Syrian, al Kassar, to Lockerbie—but I shall, of course, examine the matter again in view of the hon. Gentleman's representations.

Can my right hon. Friend enlighten the House about any dealings between Government officials and the Government of Libya over links between the Libyan regime and the Irish Republican Army? Has the IRA received any supplies from Libya recently? Have the Libyan authorities given assurances to the Government that they will not continue to supply the IRA?

The Libyans have provided some information to the Government about their relationships with the IRA; they did so in Geneva on 9 June. The preliminary assessment of that information suggests that although in places it was incomplete and unsatisfactory, it contains some positive elements which may well prove useful. One positive development is the fact that the Libyans have indicated to us that they wish to cease providing assistance to the IRA. We are not convinced that that is yet the case.