To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what changes she is planning in the funding of Merseyside training and enterprise council.

Merseyside training and enterprise council's budget this year is more than £50 million, allowing it to help more than 20,000 people. The regional director will discuss funding for next year with that TEC in the next few weeks.

Is the Minister aware that this year the funding of Merseyside TEC was 7·5 per cent. down in real terms, and that the 231,000 training weeks for which it contracted this year represented a 20 per cent. reduction compared with last year? What sort of Government talk about recovery but are prepared to pay more than treble the amount that they pay out to Merseyside TEC to keep unemployed people idle on Merseyside? Does the Minister appreciate the fact that I represent one of the worst unemployment zones in the country and that when people there hear the Prime Minister talk about recovery they laugh, and laugh and laugh. I cannot wish my constituents a prosperous new year, because the Government will have to go before they can have one.

If anybody laughs, it must be at the hon. Gentleman's whingeing. One must look at what has happened in his constituency. In July 1986, unemployment was 9,472; in October 1992, it was 6,394—down by 33 per cent. I hope that even the hon. Gentleman could welcome that.

What has been the take-up of resources for employment action within the Mersey side training and enterprise council area? Do the Government intend to make funds for employment action more widely available in the future?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. None of the training schemes that we have introduced has ever received the Opposition's support. They whinge about wanting training to be provided, yet criticise every scheme that we put forward positively. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State announced some new training initiatives that will come into force as a result of the excellent settlement that she managed to achieve during the public expenditure round.

Is the Minister aware that, from this very day, the disabled people previously being trained at the Greenbank project in Liverpool will cease to be trained there because of the reductions in funding by the Merseyside TEC? Does he accept that the disabled are a vulnerable group of people, about whom he has received personal representations? Will he look again at the funding for that specific group and see whether additional resources can be made available to the Merseyside TEC for their benefit?

That point has been brought to our attention. My noble Friend Viscount Ullswater has been dealing with the matter and I assure the hon. Gentleman that we shall look at it again.

Does my hon. Friend agree that business and community leaders have welcomed TECs as the best way to deliver training, taking into account local needs?

That is the case. The simple fact is that TECs are making a substantial contribution throughout the country both locally and nationally.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what action she proposes to take to protect people employed for less than two years from unfair or arbitrary dismissal.

Many people without two years' service are already protected against unfair dismissals, for example, for trade union reasons or on grounds of race or sex.

Will the Minister reflect on the fact that many hundreds of people will be disappointed by his reply, bearing in mind that they have suffered unfair and arbitrary dismissal and have no remedy because they have been employed for less than two years, and many part-time workers, particularly women, have to be employed for five years before they have a remedy? Many people who are rich and powerful obtain substantial sums in compensation, but ordinary workers have no remedy. Is that consistent with maintaining the rule of law and in the spirit of the rules of natural justice?

At a time of high unemployment we must be wary about making changes that would make recruitment of people more difficult or less likely. But perhaps I can reassure the hon. Gentleman in at least one respect. We plan to extend the rights that people enjoy against unfair dismissal to include pregnant women and to extend protection without a qualifying period to workers who are dismissed on health and safety grounds.

Does my hon. Friend agree with the people of Scarborough and Whitby who welcome the Trade Union Reform and Employment Rights Bill, on the standing Committee of which I have the privilege to serve, which protects individuals against the unfair and alien practices so long practised by the trade union movement?

I entirely agree with the people of Scarborough, particularly in their sending my hon. Friend to the House. I welcome his participation on the Committee stage of the Trade Union Reform and Employment Rights Bill, which, as he rightly emphasises, extends employment rights for a number of our fellow citizens.

Will the Minister confirm that no other European Community country has as long a qualifying period as we do for protection against unfair dismissal? Will he further confirm that no other country savagely penalises part-time workers in the way that we do? Is he not in favour of a level playing field in Europe?

Certainly not. We have a higher proportion of women and part-time workers in our work force than do many of our European partners. We have a higher percentage of women in our work force than any other European country, apart from Denmark. The hon. Lady, perhaps unwittingly, has made my point. Were I to take her advice there might be fewer opportunities in the labour market for women, part-time workers and others. Is that what she wants?

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what plans she has to provide further support for the local initiative fund.

I am pleased to tell my hon. Friend that the local initiative fund, which allows training and enterprise councils and local enterprise companies to develop new ideas in support of training and business growth, will be increased by £12 million in 1993–94.

Given that that fund goes to support local training initiatives by TECs and related bodies, will my right hon. Friend reassure the House that TECs and similar bodies now have sufficient funding to redeem the Government's pledge to school leavers that they will all be offered a place on a training programme?

Yes. We have always made it clear that TECs will be adequately resourced for that purpose. In the five months since June, 99,000 young people in England have entered youth training. Estimates from TECs last week suggest that of all those young people who left school this summer, about 19,000 have yet to take up a training place. I have written today to the Chairman of the Select Committee on Employment with full details of how TECs are meeting that guarantee and I am taking a close TEC-by-TEC interest to ensure that that guarantee is met.

What would the Secretary of State say to the organisation in my constituency called Mustard Seed which must fold at the end of the month because it does not have the money to keep going and because the TEC does not have enough money? Mustard Seed deals with the back-end—with the young people leaving school who cannot get jobs or apprenticeships. What advice does the Secretary of State have for organisations such as those run by the Church who are trying to keep those kids off the streets and off the dole, but which are folding because of a lack of money? What guarantee does the right hon. Lady have for them?

I have always made it absolutely clear that we stand by the guarantee of places for young people. All TECs and LECs are adequately resourced to meet the youth training guarantee. If any TEC or LEC can show that it is not, we will certainly look at its case.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what measures she is taking to meet the concerns which have been expressed by TECs.

Last month, I was pleased to be able to announce a package of measures that has been welcomed by TECs throughout the country.

I thank my right hon. Friend for the statement that she made in reply to the previous question, but is she aware that 1,000 young people in Hampshire still have not been able to get training places? Hampshire TEC has a most imaginative scheme for providing initial training, to try to get those young persons up to the level that private business requires. Can my right hon. Friend explain what will be the effect in Hampshire of the announcement that she just made?

I can certainly explain with pleasure to my hon. Friend that close attention is being paid to Hampshire TEC's particular problems with meeting the guarantee. As I said, all TECs have the resources required to meet it. In fact, we have provided for 244,000 places for young people in the current year and the number required is only 216,000. There is no problem with resources, but there may be a problem with Hampshire TEC—as there are with some others—in finding employer placements. Each and every TEC—few now are finding difficulty—will be helped to meet the guarantee by the end of this month.

How can the Secretary of State say that the guarantee is being met when she has just heard that 1,000 young people in Hampshire have no training places? A similar survey in Fife also found a large shortfall. Is not the reason that the right hon. Lady's budget for this year is £3·5 billion, when, in 1987, in real terms, it was £5·1 billion? In other words, the Secretary of State has only two thirds of the amount that was available in 1987, but unemployment is roughly at the same level. Is not the right hon. Lady abdicating her responsibilities to those who are unemployed and seeking training?

Unlike the hon. Gentleman, we welcome the fact that more young people are staying on at school. That results, perforce, in fewer young people coming forward for a training place. As I said, some TECs have found it difficult this year to find employer placements. There is of course always a surge of demand when young people make up their minds to choose youth training in the autumn. I repeat that there need be no problem of inadequate resources preventing TECs and LECs from meeting the guarantee.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that training and enterprise councils can play a special role in cases where there are large redundancies by co-ordinating task forces—as they have done in Hertfordshire and in my constituency in north Hertfordshire?

Yes. Hertfordshire TEC has played a key role in helping with British Aerospace redundancies, and I was delighted by the positive and strong response made by TECs in preparing plans to cope with pit closures.

How can the Secretary of State claim that TECs are happy with the settlement when last year, this year, and next year they received and will receive real-terms cuts in their budgets at a time when long-term unemployment and unemployment generally are continuing to rise?

As the hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well, there is a special hardship allowance and bridging allowances for young people who are between YT places. Given that in the House on 20 November the hon. Gentleman wrongly claimed that 75,000 young people were waiting for a training place, I thought that he would welcome today's figures.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that Britain is unique in offering a guaranteed place on a training scheme for all 16 to 17-year-olds?

Yes, I accept my hon. Friend's point. There is no question but that we have a better record in that respect than many of our European counterparts, including France.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will make a statement about employment levels in west Cumbria.

The most up-to-date figures are available down to regional level and show that between March 1983 and June 1992 the civilian work force in employment in the northern region, which includes west Cumbria, increased by 67,000.

Does not the Department of Trade and Industry's current national energy review. with all the talk about coal, important as that is, have major implications for employment in the nuclear industry in west Cumbria? What guarantee have we that the voice of the nuclear industry, as in the case advocated by the West Cumbria TEC, is being channelled into the Department of Employment and relayed on to the Department of Trade and Industry when decisions are taken on the regional assistance map?

I am sure that that case will be taken into account if the TECs feed it into the review currently being undertaken by the President of the Board of Trade. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman would like to feed that view to his Front-Bench colleagues.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will make a statement on developments in the retraining of unemployed adults aged over 21 years.

On 12 November I announced training for work, a new programme for those aged 18 and over who have been unemployed for six months or more. It will start from April 1993 as part of a new range of measures that together will provide 500,000 more opportunities to help unemployed people back to work—resulting in 1·5 million available places.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. The whole House will recognise the priority that the Government place on training for people of 16 and 17, and we welcome the remarks that my right hon. Friend made earlier today. However, is she aware that in our constituencies people are concerned about the plight of people over 18, and over 21, who face unemployment in this dreadful and prolonged recession? That concern is especially marked among those who have retired from work. Will my right hon. Friend redouble her efforts to provide retraining and suitable employment advice for the people whom I have mentioned, and make efforts to bring the below-average TECs up to the standard of the best? Will she also tell me what role she envisages for job clubs?

My hon. Friend may be reassured about the performance of TECs by the knowledge that a larger proportion of their funding will be output related. In other words, the money that they receive for training will be related to the output of jobs and qualifications. We now have a big package of measures which should meet the needs of all those who need to be retrained, reskilled and helped back into work, and we have a vastly increased number of places in job clubs, which have an excellent record in helping people back to work.

Can the Minister tell my constituents who have recently been made redundant from Rolls-Royce, Alvis and Clarkson Machine Tools—men who are at the pinnacle of their skills and experience in modern technology—what on earth she will offer them in the way of training?

The hon. Gentleman will know that the Government cannot create jobs. It is business, industry and commerce which create jobs. The role of the Government is to prepare the right framework for the recovery, to help people to get jobs, to prepare people for the jobs available and to help them keep in touch with the jobs market. Our new 1·5 million place programme is designed to do exactly that.

Although we see the importance of training, will my right hon. Friend make it absolutely clear that the proportion of the population in employment in the United Kingdom is far greater than the proportion in almost any other country in the European Community? That point should be underlined.

I thank my hon. Friend. We have a higher participation rate of people in work than any other EC country except Denmark. That also applies to women in employment.

The Opposition welcome the announcement by the Secretary of State today in so far as it acknowledges the abject failure of the existing schemes for people who are out of work. Will the right hon. Lady confirm that only one in five people who have been on employment training schemes have gone on to get a job, and that people who have not been on schemes have, therefore, stood a better chance of getting a job than those who have been on employment schemes? Surely the answer is not a host of schemes, but a Government who will come forward with a package that will provide jobs that people can get. People do not want training: they want work.

The hon. Gentleman should have listened to what I said. The funding for training and enterprise councils is to be output related—related to the outcome of training in terms of obtaining jobs and obtaining qualifications.

"These people are stinking, lousy, thieving, incompetent scum."

When my right hon. Friend is next in Norfolk, will she find time to visit the King's Lynn job club, which I recently opened? If she does, she will hear support for the way in which she has protected her Department's budget in real terms. She will also hear some people say that many firms tell them that if they are over 50, they are too old to apply for jobs. What advice would she give such people?

I know my hon. Friend's job club. He may know that last year, before I had any connection with my present responsibilities, I visited that job club.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what policies she intends to pursue to reduce unemployment in Barrow and Furness.

The Employment Service and Cumbria TEC deliver a wide range of employment, enterprise and training programmes to help unemployed people in Barrow and Furness find the best and quickest route back to employment.

Is the Minister aware that my constituency has experienced the biggest increase in unemployment of any constituency in the north of England over the past two years? Unemployment has doubled during that period. Unemployment now affects every family and every part of my constituency.

As the hon. Gentleman knows, assisted area status is a matter for the Department of Trade and Industry. I am sure that he has made representations to my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will make a statement on the value of contracts placed by training and enterprise councils with Astra Training Services.

Contracts placed by training and enterprise councils are a matter for the councils individually, and the Department does not collect information on the amount of business that TECs place with individual training providers.

Is the Minister aware that, since Astra was handed over, along with a large sum of public money, to a group of former civil servants, that company has reneged on its pension commitments and demanded from its employees on pain of dismissal salary cuts of 10 and 15 per cent., and that employees have recently been surprised to discover that they are now owned by a company called Schroeder Ventures? Is the Minister able to assure the House that that is not just the beginning of an asset-stripping operation and another privatisation scandal?

The sale was conducted on a clean-break basis. It is not for Ministers to comment on what is happening in private companies.

May I give a warm welcome to the initiatives that have been announced today to help 18-year-olds and others? However, is my hon. Friend aware that the information services—

Order. The question is specific to TECs with Astra Training Services. One has to keep to the question.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment whether she has any plans to privatise ACAS.

ACAS will continue as an independent statutory body charged with improving industrial relations, but, following representations from my hon. Friend and others, its duty to extend collective bargaining will be removed.

As it is clearly inappropriate for Government bodies such as ACAS to promote collective bargaining in this day and age, may I congratulate my hon. Friend on the statement that he has just made? Is he aware that the Institute of Directors is advocating the full privatisation of ACAS? Is that not a first-class idea?

I was not aware of that fact and, no, I do not think that it is a first-class idea. My hon. Friend, having persuaded the Department to abandon the terms of reference which put a duty on ACAS to promote collective bargaining, should quit while he is ahead.

In the past, ACAS was very helpful in industrial disputes. Because it is being privatised, will there be a bonus system, a productivity agreement, or what? Will people who are liked be appointed, rather than people who can do the job? I fear that ACAS will become a Government-friendly society and will demonstrate the attitude that the Minister is demonstrating today.

I am not quite sure what is going on. I have just said to my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Mr. Riddick) that we would not be privatising ACAS. The hon. Gentleman has given the argument for privatising ACAS. If he had gone on for much longer I might have had second thoughts.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what assessment she has made of the effectiveness of the youth training scheme.

More than three quarters of all young people who complete their YT training go into a job, further education or training. I am concerned, however, about the operation of the YT guarantee, and my right hon. Friend has taken steps to ensure that every training and enterprise council meets its obligations.

Is my hon. Friend completely satisfied that, in terms of monitoring and organising YT placements, there can no longer be any grounds for trainees to say that their time is not well used because they are required to make the tea or sweep the floor?

I am not entirely satisfied about any aspect of YT, but credit should be given to the extent to which the scheme is a considerable success. My hon. Friend will know that his own TEC—Gloucester TEC—is doing extremely well on the delivery of YT, with 90 per cent. of those involved getting a job in or at the end of their period of training. I agree with my hon. Friend that we have to continue to improve the monitoring of the YT scheme and to ensure that more of its output is related to its funding, which is precisely what my right hon. Friend has done since her appointment as Secretary of State.

Does the Minister accept that, dealing with the YT scheme in general, it is high time that the Government made funding available for young people to take job opportunities so that they are able to take full part in the scheme? In rural areas, they are paid insufficient to enable them to travel to take up YT.

The hon. Gentleman is making a serious point which is worthy of consideration. There are problems in rural areas. One effect of the flexibility to which my right hon. Friend was able to get agreement, and which will apply to TECs under the new proposals, is that there will be more scope to tackle the difficulties which the hon. Gentleman has identified.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment when she last met training and enterprise council chairmen to discuss progress on young people's unemployment.

My right hon. Friend meets TEC chairmen frequently to discuss with them the arrangements they are making to meet the vocational education, training and employment needs of young people.

I understand from speaking to TECs that one problem is finding work placement schemes for people in YT. What measures is my hon. Friend taking to encourage employers to take people into work placement schemes?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. We have initiated a variety of schemes which we have asked TECs to pursue. Since my right hon. Friend has occupied her present position she has made abundantly clear to TECs the importance that she places on their meeting the youth training guarantee. I notice that the hon. Member for Stretford (Mr. Lloyd) has not withdrawn the remarks he made on 20 November, reported at column. 568 of Hansard, but the figures are nowhere near those about which the Opposition have been scaremongering.

Would the hon. Gentleman perhaps like notice of what I hope to raise shortly when I come to see him or a member of his Department? In an area like Salford, an area of long-term unemployment, we do not have the industry that can offer people YT places; the places that were being offered have been withdrawn either because the firms have gone out of existence or have stopped taking in people. In that respect, many of the young people in my constituency expect to join their fathers and become long-term unemployed. That is disastrous for all of them.

I know that the hon. Lady hopes to bring a number of her colleagues to the Department in the not-too-distant future. We are very concerned to ensure that young people who require youth training places are given places. There are various ways in which that can be done. We have made resources available. We have made it clear that we are prepared to consider the resource implications of particular TECs that are suffering from resources problems.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will make a further statement on the impact on employment prospects of the autumn statement proposals.

My right hon. Friend's proposals, aimed at building confidence, helping industry and strengthening the economy, will help to boost employment prospects.

Can my right hon. Friend confirm precisely how many new job opportunities she thinks that the autumn statement has created for unemployed people?

Priority has been given to protecting programmes with significant employment implications. Along with the relaxation of monetary policy measures, that should assist confidence and help to bring about a recovery.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that in my constituency since the autumn statement substantial redundancies have been announced in construction, particularly at Blue Circle Cement? Is she further aware that in my constituency we have had an horrific rise in the number of long-term unemployed, yet the Government seem incapable and unwilling to do anything about it? When will she make sure that the long-term unemployed have some opportunity to make some choice about the future?

The hon. Lady will know that I am always concerned about anybody who is facing unemployment or redundancy. That is why I was pleased to announce a package of 1·5 million employment and training places to help precisely the people about whom she is concerned, with special emphasis on those who are long-term unemployed.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the most immediate and specific job creation measures announced in the autumn statement was the agreement that the Jubilee line should proceed? That will bring enormous numbers of jobs to London and beyond it. Will my right hon. Friend therefore put in a quiet word to her right hon. Friends in the Treasury that such steps are good news for London and that the next step might be the Chelsea-Hackney underground line?

I admire my hon. Friend's ingenuity. He is very capable of putting a quiet word in with the Treasury, but nevertheless the Jubilee line extension is excellent news for employment.

If the Secretary of State is really interested in creating jobs and employment, may I recommend that she looks at the document printed on behalf of the Engineering Employers Federation last week, which talks about a strategy for industry and is extremely scathing about the support that the Government have not given to creating jobs?

I did see the document to which the hon. Gentleman refers. The engineering industry, together with other manufacturing industries, will be delighted at the increase in capital allowances, the help given to exports and the removal of car tax, all of which help industry and were welcomed by it, following my right hon. Friend's autumn statement.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment when she expects to make an announcement on United Kingdom bank holidays.

The Government are today issuing a consultation document on the future of the May Day bank holiday in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, having received a number of representations over the years suggesting that the holiday be moved to a new date. Any change could come into effect from 1995.

Does the Minister agree that the May Day bank holiday was introduced, without public consultation, at No. 10 Downing street, when beer and sandwiches were the order of the day? Is it not a fact that in 1976, with millions of people out of work, all that the lot on the Opposition Benches could do was to think of an excuse to have a day off, other than a strike day?

As usual, my hon. Friend speaks for Britain. Most people have been irritated by the way in which the May Day bank holiday can fall within a five-week period, which in some years can also include the Spring bank holiday and Easter. Unlike the last Labour Government, this Government will consult before reaching a conclusion.

Would the Minister not speak much more for Britain if he arranged for British people to have the right to a statutory minimum holiday, which people in every other European country have but we do not?

In that respect, we share the same view as that reached by the then Labour Government when they introduced the 1 May bank holiday—that holidays are a matter for employers and employees to agree among themselves.

Is my hon. Friend aware that his decision to move that holiday would be widely welcomed in the tourist industry? After making that decision, will he grasp the nettle and move Easter to a permanent date?

I confess to not being an expert on the method by which the date of Easter is calculated, but I certainly do not intend to embark on that route. I said that we were consulting, but my hon. Friend is shortening the consultation period somewhat by inviting me to reach a conclusion within two minutes of announcing the document. Consultations will close on 28 February and I shall see that my hon. Friend's views are taken into account.

Is it not a sad reflection on the Government that, with unemployment rising by the day, the only topic that they can talk about is when we get a public holiday?

This Government take into account the wishes of the people. The Government should respond to the inconvenience that has been caused by the May Day socialist holiday. As usual, Opposition Members put politics before people.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what study she has made of the employment rights for employees in the United Kingdom relative to those in other EC member countries; and if she will make a statement.

In 1991, the Department commissioned a study of race discrimination legislation in EC member states and it also regularly collects comparative information on employment rights. The results show that Britain leads on race discrimination law and practice and British workers enjoy an extensive range of employment rights that compares well with other EC countries.

That is a selective response from the Minister. Why will workers in the United Kingdom be denied the protection under the social chapter that will be given to their fellow workers in other EC countries when the Maastricht agreement comes into force? Workers in the United Kingdom have poorer working conditions, including hours of work, and are denied collective bargaining rights. Why do the Government think that the social chapter will damage industry and destroy jobs in this country? The other 11 EC countries do not believe that it will happen to them. What is the difference between the United Kingdom and the other EC countries?

The hon. Gentleman must have been asleep during Question Time. On several occasions it has been said that a higher proportion of the British work force is in employment. We have more women in employment, and there are more opportunities in the job market. What my right hon. Friend achieved at Maastricht in getting an opt-out for the social chapter was to create the opportunity, as Mr. Jacques Delors said, to make Britain an investment paradise. I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman is against that.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 December.

I have been asked to reply.

With 20 million tonnes of subsidised foreign coal coming into Britain and subsidised nuclear electricity coming from France—equivalent to 6 million tonnes of coal in the United Kingdom—will the Prime Minister consider subsidising the transportation of British coal to Europe and the rest of the world, thus saving miners' jobs and British Rail jobs?

The hon. Gentleman has, understandably, raised a variety of issues which are the subject of the review by my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade. I note that my right hon. Friend is present and will have heard what the hon. Gentleman suggested.

Will my right hon. Friend remind the Prime Minister to tell the Prime Ministers of Spain and Portugal that many people in the United Kingdom must make great sacrifices in the present economic climate and that they will not take kindly to any great increase in the European Community budget to fund expenditure in those countries?

I understand that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has referred to those matters in his conversations. I have no doubt whatever that he has once again made Britain's position clear—we will not be prepared to contemplate any adverse change in the British abatement.

Does the Lord President realise that when people get their council tax valuation figure based on 1991 prices, they are likely to feel that it is extremely unfair since, in most parts of the country, house prices have fallen sharply in the past year? In Greater London alone, house prices have fallen by about £11,500 since the valuations were carried out.

The hon. Lady will be well aware that, generally, valuations in London have turned out to be lower than we thought. Somebody living in a band A or band B property in the south-east should not need to pay any more than someone living in a similar band elsewhere. What people must fear is the Labour party's policy of returning to the rates.

Will the figures be a devastating reminder of the way in which the Government have let people down by pursuing policies that have destroyed the value of their only major asset? Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that there are likely to be millions of appeals against the valuations, which will mean that the chaos and injustice of the poll tax is likely to be surpassed by the chaos and injustice of the council tax?

The policies that the Government have pursued have brought about a halving of interest rates to the benefit of home owners generally in the past two years.

Given that today is the Churches National Housing Coalition's lobby of Parliament, will my right hon. Friend take the opportunity to reaffirm the Government's commitment to policies for tackling homelessness? Those policies include the rough sleepers' initiative, the pilot foyer schemes and projects to bring empty shops and houses back into use, including 70,000 belonging to local authorities.

Yes. I acknowledge what my hon. Friend says. I am glad to say that the Government's policies are expected to deliver considerably more houses than the 153,000 over three years promised in the election manifesto. We expect the policies to produce 170,000 by 1994–95. In addition, an extra £86 million has been made available for the rough sleepers' initiative over three years. That initiative has already reduced the numbers sleeping rough by more than 60 per cent. I am delighted—as my hon. Friends will be—that the first property has been purchased today by housing associations using the £600 million for England made available in the autumn statement.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 December.

I have been asked to reply.

Does the Leader of the House realise that, despite what he said, Londoners have been hit by a triple whammy in relation to the council tax? First, house prices were forced up by an unsustainable boom, then they collapsed because the Government refused to reduce interest rates in a futile attempt to save the pound, and finally houses have been banded on the basis of unrealistic values. Will he ask his right hon. Friend to intervene to ensure that Londoners are not hit again by a second unfair tax, and to modify the son of poll tax?

I have already made the key point that I need to make in reply to the hon. Lady in response to the hon. Member for Derby, South (Mrs. Beckett). The grant paid to authorities in London and the south-east—which has significantly increased in comparison with last year—takes account of the higher cost of providing services in that region. The hon. Lady should ensure that her local authority does not use the money in a profligate way.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 December.

I have been asked to reply.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is often an unfortunate link between lack of accommodation and lack of a job? Will he join me in congratulating the Young Men's Christian Association in my constituency which, following a Government initiative, has pioneered a partnership between the churches, the Employment Service, and the training and enterprise councils to break the vicious cycle and bring hope to young people?

I very much agree with my hon. Friend. I think that he is referring to what is known as—my hon. Friend the Member for High Peak (Mr. Hendry) mentioned it—the foyer project, which brings together in a strong partnership the expertise of people working in the spheres of employment, training and support for young people. It is an excellent initiative and I hope that we see more of them, along the lines of that described by my hon. Friend the Member for Wimbledon (Dr. Goodson-Wickes).

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 December.

I have been asked to reply.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think that the Prime Minister is particularly proud of the fact that, since he has held his present position, unemployment has risen from 1·5 million to nearly 3 million—even according to official figures? What sort of Christmas message are the Government to give to all those people in our country who have been deprived of the right to work, to the homeless, to people who are frightened of losing their homes, and to all the other victims of the Government's wretched policies—people who cannot expect the Treasury to pick up their bills for them?

Apart from what I have already said about the Government's housing policies and the progress being made, I think that what my right hon. Friend would highlight the autumn statement and the prospects that it brings for improved economic performance.

To ask the Prime Minister when he next intends to make an official visit to the north of England.

I have been asked to reply.

When my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister comes to the north of England, will my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House remind him that it is a region which benefits more than any other in Britain from European Community investment and inward investment from outside the European Community? In the light of that, will my right hon. Friend tell the Prime Minister that it is seen as urgent by many people in my region that the Maastricht treaty be ratified as soon as possible?

It is certainly the case that anybody who visits my hon. Friend's part of the country will see the physical advantages of the attractions which, under this Government, this country has had for overseas investment such as Nissan and Fujitsu and the huge progress that has been made in generating a new economic base up there. I have no doubt that my hon. Friend speaks for his constituency in wishing to see that process continued and strengthened by the ratification of the Maastricht treaty.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 December.

I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave some moments ago.

Can the hon. Member tell the House whether or not the substantial privatisation contract awarded to Tarmac was in any way a pay-off for the substantial sums donated by that company to the Conservative party last year.

Yes I can, and it is not.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 December.

I have been asked to reply. I refer the hon. Lady to the answer I gave some moments ago. [Laughter].

Order. Mr. Fabricant.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the MO figure for money supply, the amount of cash flowing around in the economy, has increased by 3 per cent. this month over the same figure last year and, while not trying to allude to any botanic connection, would he agree that this is at least an encouraging sign for the economy?

May I first apologise to my hon. Friend. It was not actually, despite the evidence, a deficiency of my eyesight, but the fact that the first person in my sight line was the hon. Lady opposite, the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms. Walley).

I know that the right hon. Gentleman will share my view that the violence we saw in my constituency at the weekend and that ripped Belfast apart today is vile and reprehensible and cannot be allowed to exist In any civilised society.

The hon. Gentleman has spoken with warmth for virtually everybody—probably for everybody in the United Kingdom, certainly for the overwhelming majority. I shall take pleasure in drawing his remarks to the attention both of the Prime Minister and of my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whose hard work to this same objective has been manifest over the past few months.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 December.

:: I have been asked to reply. I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave some moments ago.

Has my right hon. Friend had the opportunity of considering the findings of Professor Rheinhardt Schmidt of Kiel university that of the top major companies in Europe, six are United Kingdom companies and that if facts like that are as obvious as far away as Germany, it is about time they were as obvious to the Opposition Front Bench here?

I have indeed seen that report, showing that the three top firms in what is, I believe, German-based research, are British and that six of the top 10 are British, including a significant number of our pharmaceutical companies. They deserve to be congratulated on their achievement. I should like to hear a bit more of that type of compliment coming from the occupants of the Opposition Front Bench, instead of their trying to run down our firms and industry.

While the Prime Minister is spending time in Portugal and Spain, may I ask the Lord President to urge him on his return, prior to his visit to the north of England, to call in at Stoke-on-Trent, my constituency, where he will see for himself the lack of Government support for manufacturing industry, particularly in relation to the pottery, ceramics and allied industries? May we have a Government commitment to examine the way in which investment can be made to that industry? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is no good talking all the time about what can be done to get people retrained; we should be preventing them from becoming unemployed in the first place?

I shall draw the attention of my right hon. Friend to the hon. Lady's request. I must, at the same time, draw her attention to the fact that the autumn statement included a substantial range of measures designed to encourage manufacturing industry, and that one of our key manufacturing industries, motor cars, is showing great signs of being far more successful than it has been for decades past.