To ask the Secretary of State for Health what restrictions exist on the number of pay beds in hospital trusts.

It is a statutory requirement that private practice in national health service trust hospitals does not significantly interfere with the performance, by the trust, of its obligations under NHS contracts or imposed by order. The actual number of private patient beds that may be made available at any one time is for local determination.

As trust hospitals are not required by law to make contracts with the NHS, and as private insurance companies are seeking a greater use of trust hospitals to reduce their premiums, is there not a danger that the number of private beds in those hospitals will dramatically increase without anyone being consulted? If the Government want us to believe that the NHS is safe in their hands, why do they not make the 10 per cent. limit for private beds that applies to health authority-managed hospitals apply also to trust hospitals?

The hon. Gentleman's fears are unfounded, not least because the local population is protected by the purchasers who are responsible for purchasing health care on their behalf.

Is it not the case that the more hospital trusts such as Guy's hospital in London concentrate on private patients, the longer NHS patients like the Slennet family, whose case was reported recently in the newspapers, have to wait? The longer NHS patients must wait, the more they are forced to go private. To protect NHS services and justify the Minister's claims that trust hospitals are not about privatisation, will he impose a strict and specific limit on the proportion of private work that NHS trusts can do?

The hon. Lady should be aware, better than most, that common waiting lists for urgent or seriously ill patients exist in all hospitals and that those arrangements were agreed with the medical profession. She should be aware also that there is a statutory requirement that private practice in hospital trusts must not interfere, to a significant extent, with performance under NHS contracts. The hon. Lady is trying to scare patients unnecessarily.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether special considerations can be applied to health units or organisations wishing to seek trust status in very rural areas; and if she will make a statement.

No. Each application for trust status is measured against four main criteria: that the establishment of the trust will give clear benefits and improved quality of service to patients; that management has the necessary skills and capacity to operate independently; that senior professional staff, particularly consultants, are involved in the management of the unit; and that the trust will be financially viable.

But is there not a case for giving special consideration to small health board, district and regional health authority areas providing health care in disparate rural communities and, where they are performing well already, leaving well alone? In particular, what guidance is being given to those authorities in rural areas on the purchaser's ability to keep in touch with local communities so that they can deliver the kind of services that those communities seek?

That is a perfectly fair question. I assure the hon. Gentleman that all purchasers have the responsibility to assess health needs and the preferences of the local population. That is true in both rural and urban areas. Given the distance that some patients may have to travel, purchasers in rural areas need to have particular regard to accessibility of services. Let me encourage the hon. Gentleman by giving him one example: a purchasing project in North Yorkshire, not far from the hon. Gentleman's constituency, covering about four and a half former districts, has developed 25 natural communities around which it has planned the sort of health care that the hon. Gentleman seeks.

Does my hon. Friend agree that when trust status is conferred on a hospital, the local people virtually run the hospital themselves and they, after all, know best?

As is so frequently the case, my hon. Friend is exactly right.

Then how would the Minister explain the situation that has arisen in my area, which has a large rural contingent, where one fund-holding general practitioner can distort the provision of health care by demanding that the practice's patients go ahead of those of every non-fund-holding general practitioner?

I have to say to the hon. Lady what I said to her last time, which is that I am not prepared to accept her interpretation of events. If the health authority has such a problem, it is perfectly free to get in touch with me.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many hospitals have now achieved trust status.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make a statement on the national health service trust programme.

A total of 156 national health service trusts are currently operational and 151 applications have been received from hospitals and other units to become operational from April 1993 in the third wave of NHS trusts.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the result of the general election, particularly in Portsmouth, has led directly to applications for trust status there? As the British Medical Association has withdrawn its misguided opposition to that sensible policy, is it not high time that the Labour party and the Liberal Democrats followed suit and stopped misrepresenting it as privatisation?

My hon. Friend is exactly right. Since the election, a great many people have said that the future lies in NHS trusts, which provide a better form of management. I was delighted to hear that the BMA chairman said:

"The reforms exist. Our task must be to ensure that, for the sake of our patients, we do everything we can to make them work."

Can my right hon. Friend confirm that trust hospitals result in reduced waiting lists, an improved number of patient treatments and an improved quality of service? Therefore it is not surprising that Dover and Deal hospitals are applying for trust status to deliver to my constituents an even further improved quality of service.

Trusts are cutting their waiting lists, improving the quality of service and increasing the number of patients treated. They are also a good place for the staff to work. There are overwhelming reasons for devolving the management of health care to the level nearest to that at which decisions on clinical work are undertaken. NHS trusts are the model for the future and provide important new freedoms. They are better for staff and for patients.

The Secretary of State will be aware that among the 151 third wave applications, there is one jointly made by the two Coventry hospitals, which want to become a single trust. Is she aware of fears that that will result in the closure of the Coventry and Warwickshire hospital and of the refusal by the management at either site to give any assurances? Will she ensure that there is full consideration and that the assurances sought are given before trust status is approved?

I give the hon. Gentleman a clear assurance that the most important criterion for agreeing trust status is better service for patients. A trust must certainly be financially viable and there must be good management—under which clinicians and managers work closely together. The criterion for the future is improved services to patients and that is the basis on which decisions will be made.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the Guy's and Lewisham Trust is so strapped for cash that it is moving more and more towards private medicine? What reassurances can she give Lewisham families that they will not be forced into private health care, as was the Slennet family in my constituency so that they could have their child treated in a hospital?

I have no time for the politics of envy, in which criteria for the success of the health service are judged against the work of the private sector. Frankly, that is immaterial. I want ever-greater improvements to the national health service. I ask the hon. Lady to re-examine the situation at Guy's, which is paying its low-paid workers an extra £6 a week, is tackling junior hospital doctors' hours a year ahead of schedule, has made excellent inroads into waiting times and is treating more patients. Improved patient care, not the criterion of redundancies, should measure the national health service's success.

Does my right hon. Friend recall a survey undertaken among trust patients at the beginning of this year, which showed that seven times as many thought that services had improved as a result of trust status as those who noted a decline? Does she agree that such noticeable gains should be spread further and wider throughout the health service?

How much I welcome my hon. Friend's remarks; as ever, she hits the nail exactly on the head. We ought to consider the effect of trust status on patients and others who use the service. An independent survey published earlier this year showed that 96 per cent. of patients were very satisfied or quite satisfied with the quality of service that they received from NHS trusts.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health when she last met the Association of Metropolitan Authorities to discuss its concerns regarding the personal social services.

My hon. Friend the Minister for Health and I met representatives of the local authority associations, including the Association of Metropolitan Authorities, on 1 July.

Will the Minister acknowledge the continuing concern that is felt in Stoke-on-Trent and elsewhere about the Government's intentions for the funding of community care? What progress has been made in the Government's discussions with the AMA on the principle of ring-fencing community care resources? Given that these are the last health questions before the recess, will the Minister state clearly when an announcement will be made about the transfer of resources for social security purposes, and not allow human community care to be sacrificed on the altar of council tax, as it has been under the poll tax?

The Government have made it clear on several occasions—and I gladly do so again—that community care policy will be fairly resourced and that local authorities will be given adequate money to implement it. I understand the hon. Gentleman's concern about ring-fencing. Staffordshire county council's record is a prime example of why ring-fencing might be needed. Throughout the 1980s, social services spending in Staffordshire was consistently below the level indicated by the Government's grant-related expenditure assessment. In the eight years from 1982 to 1990, its cumulative underspend was almost £50 million. Any shortage of resources in Staffordshire is nothing to do with the Government, who provide adequate and generous resources, but has everything to do with the county council's decisions.

When my hon. Friend met representatives of the AMA, did he discuss the crucial importance of increasing opportunities for volunteers in the personal social services? There is no doubt that volunteering not only provides a remarkable service but prevents the many volunteers who have a valuable and important task to perform from becoming a charge on the personal social services themselves.

My hon. Friend is quite right. Indeed, he is a well-known expert in the field. We want to encourage all local authorities to maximise opportunities for volunteers which are useful to the volunteers themselves and to those whom they seek to serve. We are very concerned about the attitude of a few Labour-controlled local authorities, which are obstinately reluctant to increase usage of the independent sector.

In view of today's devastating report from the Policy Studies Institute, which shows the total collapse of the Government's inner-city policies over the past 13 years, will the Minister join me in congratulating social workers on their work in inner-city areas? They sometimes enter unlit blocks of flats in dangerous circumstances to try to settle disputes of which they know nothing beyond what they have been told in a telephone call, and sometimes emerge with injuries. It is they, not Members of Parliament, who are on the front line.

I gladly pay tribute to a number of local authority employees who work in inner-city areas. Their major handicap is the fact that too many inner-city local authorities are controlled by the loony left.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health how the proportion of the national income which is spent on the national health service has changed since 1979, and over the periods (a) 1974 to 1979 and (b) 1970 to 1974.

The share of gross domestic product spent on the national health service from all sources has increased from 4·7 per cent. in 1978–79 to an estimated 5·8 per cent. this year—a rise of more than 1 per cent. Figures for the earlier period are not available on the same basis, but show a similar 1 per cent. increase in the share of GDP spent on the health service between 1970 and 1974. Between 1974 and 1979, however, health spending as a proportion of GDP rose by only 0·3 per cent.

Will my right hon. Friend accept my congratulations—and, I believe, those of the whole House—on that record of achievement under Conservative control? Such a record was never matched or even dreamt of by the so-called friends of the NHS on the Opposition Benches.

I thank my hon. Friend for his comments. Indeed, the purpose of our latest White Paper, "Health of the Nation", is precisely to maximise the health gain that is achievable for the nation. Inevitably, any Secretary of State must achieve best value for money, but real health gains can be achieved through concentration on disease prevention and health promotion as well as on the delivery of services. We are in the business of health as well as health care.

Before the Secretary of State disappears in a puff of complacency about her expenditure, may I invite her to report on her income? Will she admit that, since 1979, the rate of increase in charges to patients has been double the rate of increase in spending; that the increase in prescription charges has been eight times the rate of inflation; that pay bed charges have risen tenfold; and that, on top of that, any dental patient who seeks treatment must pay three times more—provided, of course, that he or she can find a dentist to provide treatment? If the Government really want us to believe that they are committed to the NHS, will they stop turning it into a pay-as-you-go service?

Charges have been part of the NHS since its early days. We must ensure that we maximise its ability to provide high-quality services. We have never provided such good dental care; we have never immunised so many children; life expectancy has improved over the past 12 years. On a number of criteria, health has been improving through the achievement of good value for money.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many hospital patients were treated in the Barnet health authority in 1991–92.

I understand from locally provided figures that Barnet health authority purchased in-patient and day care treatment for 39,814 patients in the year 1991–92. This represents an overall increase of 3·4 per cent. over the previous year.

Will my hon. Friend join me in thanking the staff, nurses and doctors who made that record achievement possible? Will he also note that one of the hospitals that made that achievement possible was the Royal Free trust hospital which, in its first year as a trust, treated 6 per cent. more patients and cut waiting lists substantially? Is my hon. Friend aware that the hospital waiting lists in Barnet are much better than those laid down in the guidelines in the citizens charter?

I certainly join my hon. Friend in that. I remind him that on I May no one was waiting for more than two years for in-patient treatment in Barnet health authority, that the number of patients waiting between one and two years was down by 66 per cent. and that the health authority's aim by December 1992 is to reduce the maximum waiting time to nine months for general surgery and several other specialties.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is her budget for health education for 1992–93; and what is the change since 1991–92 in real terms.

We have provided £33·9 million for the health education authority in 1992–93, a real increase of 5·2 per cent. on the previous year. This is more than matched by health education of literally incalculable value throughout the national health service, sustained by the successive real increases in funding provided by the Government.

Is not that a paltry sum compared with the £72 million spent by the tobacco industry each year on recruiting new customers to take the place of those whom it kills off? Will the Government reconsider the question of an advertising ban and ensure that shopkeepers who sell cigarettes to children are prosecuted?

The hon. Gentleman must focus his mind on the ends and not the means to the ends. The ends are that cigarette consumption in this country has decreased substantially over the past few years. The targets that we set in the White Paper suggest that tobacco consumption will drop even further in the years ahead. We have made that commitment. The means to achieve that end will be reviewed constantly, to ensure that it is achieved. I am surprised that the hon. Gentleman does not know that the Children and Young Persons (Protection From Tobacco) Act 1991 addresses precisely the concern that he expressed.

Does my hon. Friend recall that at the time of the scares about salmonella and listeria there was criticism of his Department for lack of action and of any sense of urgency, yet when he issues a White Paper pointing out to people the need to pay particular attention to sensible drinking and a balanced diet and to cease smoking, he and our right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health are accused of interfering and nannying? Will he ensure that adequate resources are made available so that although people remain free to make their own choices in these matters, they can make informed choices?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The Government have a responsibility to set before the public information on which they may wish to draw in making individual decisions about individual lifestyles. We are not in the business of nannying. However, we are in the business of discharging our responsibilities to put before people the sort of information that we believe they need and which would give them, if they were to follow it, a better quality of life.

Does the Minister recognise that the end that the tobacco industry hopes to achieve by advertising is to encourage people to take up smoking? Why does he not adopt, as one of his means, the banning of tobacco advertising? Is not the real reason to be found in Rothmans' annual report, out this month, which shows that Rothmans gave £100,000 to the Tory party in this election year? Can we really expect the Tory party to take on the tobacco barons so long as they are taking their money?

If they were the ends of the tobacco companies, measured against the fall in the consumption of tobacco in the past few years, they have not met those ends—on the contrary. The Government will meet the ends that they have set out by way of targets in the White Paper. It is a matter of great sadness that on his last appearance at the Dispatch Box—almost certainly, dealing with these matters—the hon. Gentleman will not commit the Labour party to achieving the same ends, which will benefit the health of the whole nation.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make a statement on the education nursing service under the health service reforms.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has just written congratulating the profession on the centenary of the education nursing service. In "The Health of the Nation" White Paper we emphasise how important the establishment of healthy lifestyles in childhood is to health promotion. School nurses have much to contribute here—[Interruption.]

Order. I hope that hon. Members on the Opposition Benches below the Gangway will allow us to hear what the Minister has to say.

School nurses have much to contribute here and we will be monitoring their vital involvement in the implementation of our health strategy.

May I advise my hon. Friend that, despite what he may hear, I shall be taking an increased interest in health matters. Having just told the House how important the education nursing services are to education and to the health service, will he tell us who will pay for the vital services under the new provider-purchaser system—the Department for Education or the Department of Health?

May I have the honour of congratulating my hon. Friend on his years of service on the Select Committee on Health? I look forward to his many further contributions.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many patients were treated in national health service hospitals in the most recent year for which figures are available; and what were the comparable figures for 1978.

A record 8·8 million patients were treated as in-patients and day cases in 1990–91 compared with 6·5 million in 1978. That represented a 34 per cent. increase.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the figures provide strong evidence of the improvement and expansion of the national health service since the Government came into office? Will she confirm that the increase in the number of patients treated has been faster since the national health service reforms were introduced?

Indeed, I can confirm that. I have already made it clear that the rate of increase in the number of patients treated has doubled since the Government came to power, as opposed to when the Opposition were in power. There has been an increase of something like 7 per cent. since the introduction of the NHS reforms. There can be no doubt that, on any test, the NHS reforms have resulted in improvements to the quality of health care.

Is the Minister aware of the unacceptable delays occurring yet again at the Birmingham children's hospital? Is she aware that Andrew Brown, a 10-year-old boy in my constituency, has been waiting more than a year for serious open heart surgery? Having been told to prepare himself to go into hospital tomorrow for surgery, he received a message yesterday that he could no longer go in. Two days' notice was given of the cancellation. His parents are distraught as they have been preparing him for weeks. When will we learn to treat our children properly? When will we do something about the Birmingham children's hospital?

The hon. Lady illustrates exactly why it is so important for us to tackle waiting times, and why the achievements of the last year, with the number of those waiting more than a year falling by one third, are so important. All the cases are individual cases like the one to which the hon. Lady refers. That is why the achievement of reducing those waiting more than two years from 51,000 to under 2,000 has been so important. With regard to the individual case that the hon. Lady mentioned, I shall make inquiries myself on her behalf. She has mentioned one case: we are anxious to ensure that all NHS patients are seen as swiftly as possible, and we have made real progress in achieving that.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what representations she has had about the Look After Your Heart campaign.

The Look After Your Heart campaign, jointly funded by the Department of Health and the Health Education Authority, is one of the largest and most comprehensive coronary heart disease prevention programmes in the world. It includes a wide range of preventive activity. I am not aware of representations on a large scale on any particular aspect of the programme.

Does my hon. Friend agree that we should use our heads to look after our hearts? Will the congratulate Bolton health authority on its pioneering initiative to promote the sale of fresh fruit and vegetables through cut-price co-ops. Should not others follow that example?

I am sure that my hon. Friend is absolutely right. I have heard about the project not only from him but from my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State, and I am happy to commend those who have taken that important initiative.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make a statement on the progress being made within the national health service to put the patients charter into practice.

The national health service has made substantial progress in implementing the patients charter, which came into effect on 1 April.

Does the Minister really believe what he has just told the House? If so, how does he square his remarks with the case of the 19-year-old youth in my area who has had his operation cancelled four times since March, on the last occasion at three hours' notice? Will he now admit to the House that his charter is a con trick and a sham?

The more I hear Opposition Members trying to denigrate the patients charter, the more confident I am that we are very much on the right track. In the case of operations that are cancelled—often unavoidably, as a result of emergencies and so on—we have given specific guidance in the patients charter to the effect that all such operations should be given priority wherever possible.

Does my hon. Friend agree that GPs themselves will play an important role in pursuing the patients charter? Is he aware that, in my constituency, no less than 78 per cent. of the population will be dealt with by GP fund holders by the end of this year? Is not that an example of the way that doctors are taking advantage of the Government's health reforms to provide better services for their patients?

I agree with my hon. Friend. GP fund holding gives an opportunity to respond directly to patients' needs.

The first right in the patients charter is the right to health care based on clinical need, regardless of ability to pay. Given that there are only 55 salaried dentists in the country, will the Minister explain how the Government can meet their obligation if there is a mass exodus of dentists from the NHS?

I should like to make two points. First, family health services authorities have a responsibility to provide an NHS dentist to anyone in their area who needs one. Secondly, I remind the hon. Lady of the fundamental review announced in the past two days, which will ensure that we shall not arrive at this situation with dentists again.

I recognise the excellence of the patients charter, but does the Minister agree that patients and their families have an obligation to ensure that public money is well spent and that many operations are delayed because patients do not turn up—either to an appointment or for the operation itself.

We have made it very clear through the patients charter that we believe that it is a two-way street: the patients have responsibilities as well as the health service. The public can do many things to improve health.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make a statement on the preparations of the national health service for its role in the provision of community care services after April 1993.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make a statement on the preparations the national health service has made for its role in the provision of community care services after April 1993.

The national health service is working closely with local authorities to play its part in ensuring the successful introduction of the "Caring for People" reforms.

Will the Minister tell the House who will pay for the extra community nurses who will be needed to care for the ill and frail elderly people who are being sent out of hospitals too soon by doctors who are under pressure from administrators who want to increase their bed-throughput to achieve the targets required by the Government's new market economy in health care?

As an important plank in our community care reforms, we have made it clear that all health authorities must agree with social services departments robust arrangements for the discharge of patients and that a care plan in respect of each patient who is about to be discharged must be agreed. With regard to resourcing, as we have made clear on many occasions, there will not only be a transfer of resources from the Department of Social Security to increase resources available to local authorities, but continuing increases in the nearly £5 billion of personal social services expenditure available to local authorities every year.

Will the Minister take time to study the report by the Royal College of Nursing entitled "A Scandal Waiting to Happen"? Will he assure the House that he intends to act on some of that report's recommendations, not least in respect of the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster, North (Mr. Hughes), about the inappropriate discharge of elderly people into a community which does not have the resources to care for them?

We have studied the report to which the hon. Lady refers. I can assure her that we will certainly take into account the nursing needs of all elderly people in residential and nursing home care, when decisions about that care are made and when the local authorities enter into contracts for the arrangement of such care.

Can my hon. Friend confirm that after 1 April next, every mentally ill patient and schizophrenia sufferer discharged from hospital can be guaranteed a package of care in the community best fitted to their needs? In that event, should we tolerate older hospitals for the mentally ill being kept open for a minute longer?

I am aware of my hon. Friend's very close interest in mental illness and schizophrenia. I am glad to be able to inform him that from last April, under the care programme approach, all health authorities are required to initiate individually tailored care programmes on the basis of a full assessment for all in-patients about to be discharged from mental illness hospitals.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent representations she has received about the employment protection of national health service staff who disclose information about internal affairs within the national health service, other than information related to patient confidentiality.

Representations have been received recently from hon. Members, staff representative associations, and national health service employees. These have concerned both the general principles governing expression by NHS staff of professional concerns about health service issues, and the personal cases of some NHS employees.

Is the Secretary of State aware of the case [Interruption.]——

Order. I should be much obliged if the House would settle down. It is impossibly noisy and very hard work for hon. Members who are trying to ask questions and for Ministers who are trying to reply.

Is the Secretary of State aware of the case of Dr. Chris Chapman, a biochemist who faces redundancy tomorrow at the Leeds general infirmary? His only offence was to tell the truth about scientific fraud and financial irregularities. While Dr. Chapman is to be sacked, those who have committed the frauds and financial irregularities will remain in their jobs. They prosper and have been promoted. They include Mr. Stuart Ingham. the £90,000-a-year chief executive of the Leeds General Infirmary Trust. Will the Secretary of State now agree to set up a full public inquiry into Dr. Chapman's case? Or is she just happy to see a man of integrity lose his job, pension and livelihood while those responsible for his sacking remain in their posts and prosper?

The matters to which the hon. Gentleman refers have, of course, been investigated by the independent auditors, and any new evidence has also been referred to them. It would be quite inappropriate for me to instigate an inquiry into an individual case where there are already statutory rights of appeal. Dr. Chapman has the right to take his case to an industrial tribunal. He has a right of appeal under the Employment Protection Act 1975, which I understand he has not yet exercised. Until he has done so, it certainly would not be appropriate to discuss the matter in the House.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what progress has been made towards reaching national targets for immunisation against the major childhood diseases.

I am pleased to say that the latest estimates show that we have passed the national immunisation coverage target of 90 per cent., which was set in 1985.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the GP contract which the Labour party opposed has been remarkably successful in improving the rate of child immunisation?

It has been remarkably successful, and GPs are to be congratulated on 90 per cent. of them reaching targets and 70 per cent. reaching higher targets. This might be the last moment for the hon. Member for Livingston (Mr. Cook) at health questions to say that he was wrong when he said that those targets were too heroic. The GP contract has led to benefits in the services delivered by general practitioners. They have done excellently in immunisation; they have done excellently in cancer screening and that bodes very well indeed for our strategy under "Health of the Nation".

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 14 July.

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 some people have still not learnt the lesson that real and lasting growth can come only with an economy that is based on low taxation and low inflation? Is not that the reason why last week's figures were so good? Will my right hon. Friend keep at it and ensure that his election pledge to lick inflation is fulfilled?

My hon. Friend is entirely right about that. I want to ensure that our record on inflation in the 1990s exceeds that of the 1980s, that we get inflation down to the lowest possible level and that we keep it there. Economic policy is geared to that end.

Does the Prime Minister recall his promise in the election that a Tory victory would provide the spark to ignite recovery? Will the Prime Minister now admit that no such ignition has taken place and that there will be no real recovery as long as he continues with the policies that have already brought us two full years of recession?

I shall turn to the right hon. Gentleman's point in a moment, if I may, for this is the last occasion that we will be able to exchange comments over the Dispatch Box in this fashion. We have done so on many occasions in the past 20 months. We have often disagreed, sometimes we have agreed, but I should like to thank the right hon. Gentleman—[HON. MEMBERS: He's going to resign."] That is quite wrong; I am staying.

I am grateful to the Prime Minister for his kind remarks. I consider it a great honour to have been able to serve my country in the way that I could. I know that he shares that vocation, and I hope that the country and its people can achieve greater success in the future.

I respect the view that the right hon. Gentleman expresses, but I say in all sincerity that I cannot agree with him. The recovery—the jobs, the prosperity and the security—that everyone in this House wants for all our citizens can be based only on sustainable growth and low inflation. Unless we have low inflation as a base, we shall not get a form of growth that is sustainable. I realise that it is not easy, that it is uncomfortable and that it is frustrating when growth does not appear immediately, but I know of no other way to ensure the medium and long-term growth and prosperity of the nation, and I am determined to stick to the policies that I believe to be in our medium and long-term interests.

May I say to the Prime Minister, with equal sincerity, that, after two years of recession, there is a very great danger that continuation of the present policies will risk driving the economy down so far as to make the prospect of recovery recede by years. I hope that the Prime Minister will use this summer to think again about the course of that policy and will adopt different policies that can give this country and its people the chance of jobs, growth and success, which we have not enjoyed in the immediate past.

The Leader of the Opposition and I agree about what the objective is, but I regret that we do not agree about the basis that is necessary to achieve it. One needs to look at what is happening. The volume of exports was at a record level in May; our volume share of world trade has recovered, after being in decline for many years; car sales are increasing; producer price inflation is at a very low level indeed. The ingredients are there. I return to the independent view of both the OECD and the London business school that recovery will be under way in the second half of this year. And it will be recovery based on a rate of inflation that is far lower than anyone in this House predicted 18 months ago. It is from that base that we shall get the growth that we all wish to see.

In a week that marks the 75th birthday of the British space pioneer Arthur C. Clarke and his visit to the House of Commons will my right hon. Friend take this opportunity of assuring the House that during our presidency of the EC Her Majesty's Government will make every effort to take initiatives in the space field to improve the quality of life and assist British industry?

I think I can give my hon. Friend the assurance that he seeks. I welcome the visit of Mr. Clarke to the House. We shall continue to take initiatives, within Europe, internationally and in other forums, in pursuit of space priorities. We are particularly interested in the development of Earth observation systems for the monitoring of the environment and of climate change.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 14 July.

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

May I take this opportunity to register the thanks of the Ulster Unionist party to the Leader of the main Opposition party for the leadership he has given to Her Majesty's Opposition. It has been a privilege to work with him in recent years.

The hon. Gentleman is right in saying that articles 2 and 3 are important ingredients in the progress that has to be made. I welcome the talks at Lancaster House last week and I look forward to further substantive talks in Belfast later this week. This is an historic opportunity. I have made that clear to the Taoiseach. I think that he shares that view. He was generous enough to do so in a joint message just a few days ago. It would not be helpful for anyone to say a great deal about the talks while they continue, not least because the participants have agreed on the vital importance of confidentiality. But the talks have gone further than many imagined. The position is more hopeful than it has been for many years. We must all hope that the talks can make further progress.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 14 July.

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

In the light of the harrowing plight of the children of Sarajevo, is there any immediate prospect of medical assistance being sent or provided to help with the terrible suffering which is occurring there?

Some progress has beeen made this morning. I am pleased to be able to tell my hon. Friend that a team of eight doctors and nurses from the South Manchester accident and rescue team is assembling its emergency supplies. Subject to the necessary clearance from the United Nations, which we expect to receive shortly, the team will fly out to Zagreb later today or tomorrow. It will link up with the United Nations and United Kingdom medical teams already in the area. l t will be there both to offer immediate medical assistance as required and to report back to me with an on-the-spot assessment of the best way in which we can help those tragic children.

In view of the Prime Minister's previous statements, can he deny that unemployment will be at or through 3 million by Christmas?

As the right hon. Gentleman knows, no Minister of any Government has made projections of unemployment. I do not intend to start. We shall have some more figures later this week. The right hon. Gentleman will be able to make his own assessment.

Does my right hon. Friend recall the words of the former leader of the Labour party that

"inflation is the father and mother of unemployment"?

I believe that my hon. Friend is right. I well recall the quotation that he uses. We have the headline rate of inflation down to 3·9 per cent. and the underlying rate of inflation effectively down to 4·8 per cent. Both are falling. That is very welcome news indeed.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 14 July.

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

Is the Prime Minister aware that tens of thousands of chronically sick and disabled people are awaiting the determination of their application for disability living allowance? Is he further aware that, following a period of 10 months, the family of a late constituent of mine received a determination two days after the lady died? What does the Prime Minister intend to do about that disgraceful state of affairs?

We seek to process such applications as speedily as possible. The Benefits Agency is examining the difficulty and putting in staff to address it as speedily as possible.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 14 July.

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

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the great pride in the north-east of England that Britain is shortly to become once again a net exporter of cars? Is not that a tribute to both the motor industry in general, which has restructured in the past few years, and to the Government's success in attracting inward investment to Britain?

Yes, I believe that the attraction of inward investment is very important. Among other things, it relies on very low inflation and stable economic policies which do not change and are well understood. There is no doubt that the British car industry has made excellent progress in improving competitiveness and significantly reducing the balance of payments deficit on trade in the automotive industry. In welcoming that, I agree with my hon. Friend about the importance of inward investment, most notably, in that instance, in the motor car industry from Japan.

Is the Prime Minister aware that his notion of the freedom to choose is an empty gesture to millions of people in this country? When they have paid their electric, water and gas bills, they find that they have nothing left for the simple pleasures of life. When will he do something to help those people, instead of helping the better off whom his Government have always helped?

I am not sure that that is the invariable view of people who would call themselves better off. Of course we are concerned to help people who find themselves in such difficulties, and our policies have done so consistently during the past 12 years. What the hon. Gentleman and his right hon. and hon. Friends do not like is choice itself. That is why they did not want to sell council houses, why they did not want people to choose what schools they have, and why they do not like choice in health. The truth is that when people choose, they choose conservatism and not socialism.

I should be obliged if those hon. Members who are leaving the Chamber would do so quietly or resume their seats, as we have a statement.