To ask the Secretary of State for Education what steps he has taken to crack down on truancy following the publication of truancy levels in the recent school performance tables.

My right hon. Friend recently announced a £14 million programme in 1994–95 to help schools and the wider community fight truancy. Eighty-six English local education authorities successfully applied for funds as part of the grants for education support and training—GEST—scheme. A similar programme has been supporting expenditure of some £9.6 million in 1993–94 on schemes proposed by 71 local education authorities.

I welcome that reply, but does my right hon. Friend—sorry, my hon. Friend accept that the educational and social consequences of truancy are disastrous for young people? Will he take even more action, first by encouraging the Office for Standards in Education to ensure that the figures submitted by schools are accurate and, secondly, by ensuring that local education authorities employ sufficient educational welfare officers to enforce the provisions?

My hon. Friend's second point is a matter for local education authorities, but I hope that the publication of truancy figures which we began this year will concentrate their minds sufficiently to deal with the problem properly. Ofsted will indeed be seeking to ensure that the returns produced by schools on truancy are correct. We must ensure that all young people of school age are in school where they should be, not only so that they are educated but so that they are kept out of trouble. Those who are not in school when they should be are likely to be getting into trouble, perhaps being pursued by drug pushers or becoming involved in petty crime. Truancy is unacceptable and we must stamp it out.

Is the Minister aware of the problems caused by people posing as social workers in order to gain access to children? Will he accept that schemes such as Truancy Watch are nothing but a gimmick, and a dangerous gimmick at that, and that, if the Government were serious about combating truancy, they would invest in more educational welfare officers and in better training and qualifications for them?

I am glad to say that that rather pathetic and disgraceful point of view is not shared by the Labour local education authorities which are queuing up to participate in the imaginative Truancy Watch scheme. The hon. Gentleman has apparently taken no account of the fact that in the area that pioneered the scheme juvenile crime during school hours has dropped by 50 per cent. in the first few months of the scheme. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will reconsider his attitude because it will not gain him any friends.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what representations he has received regarding Truancy Watch.

One hundred and one schemes were suggested by local education authorities for inclusion in the 1994–95 truancy and disaffected pupils GEST programme. Half the 86 approved schemes include a Truancy Watch element along the lines of a pilot scheme currently operating in Staffordshire. A number of senior police officers and representatives of the business community have welcomed these schemes.

May I give a warm welcome to what is clearly a very successful start for Truancy Watch? Is my hon. Friend aware that, as a result of the pilot scheme, juvenile crime has dropped by half? Does he agree that it is absolutely disgraceful that the civil rights organisation, Liberty, is telling children to stand up for their rights and ignore police requests to return to school? Should not children be in school, learning right from wrong and learning to respect authority, rather than cocking a snook at it?

It would be tempting to dismiss Liberty as a bunch of eccentric mischief-makers if what it was saying was not so serious. To encourage young people to stay away from school when they should be in school is a social scandal about which I hope the organisation is thoroughly apologetic. I hope that it will reconsider its advice, which does not reflect the widespread concern that I know exists about truancy. I am glad to say that most local education authorities are now very concerned about the problem, as evidenced by the number that have come forward with imaginative ideas to participate in my right hon. Friend's scheme, which is offering £14 million. I hope that everyone will co-operate in reducing truancy across the country.

Will the Minister explain why, despite the success of truancy schemes in Manchester, no resources have been allocated to such schemes for the next financial year?

Yes. They produced a rotten bid.

Does my hon. Friend agree that one way to reduce truancy is to make schools more attractive to pupils? May I urge him and the Secretary of State to reconsider the proposal to make team games compulsory, especially in secondary schools? Does he agree that team games are enjoyed enormously by most pupils and that even those who may not at first think that they would enjoy them often do so once they are involved?

Yes, the importance of team games is very much recognised by my right hon. Friends the Secretary of State and the Prime Minister and by the Government as a whole. For precisely the reason that my hon. Friend has given, we must find the best and most satisfactory way of ensuring that everybody connected with schools—teachers, governors and pupils—is involved as far as possible in team games and in all other kinds of sport. I have great confidence that that will happen in future.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many students were undertaking courses of higher education 10 years ago and at the latest available date; and if he will make a statement.

We need high take-up of appropriate and demanding vocational qualifications in the next three years if we are to achieve the challenging national targets for education and training. Our aim is that one in four 16-year-olds should be starting general national vocational qualification courses in 1996. Our longer-term aim is for half of all 16 and 17-year-olds to take GNVQ courses at foundation, intermediate or advanced level.

I am not sure about my hon. Friend's response to my question—

It was the wrong answer.

Order. May I ask the Minister to look at his answer? We are on Question 4.

rose—[Interruption.]

Order. We all make mistakes. Come along.

I am grateful for your indulgence, Madam Speaker.

That sounds a darned sight better answer than the previous one.

Our student funding package, both in grants and in loans, compares most favourably with those of all our European counterparts and I assure my hon. Friend that the Government have no plans to introduce tuition fees.

Would not it be a good idea if, in line with their thoughts in recent years, the Government started publishing league tables of ministerial competence? It might be helpful if, as well as publishing statistics comparing the number of places in higher education now with the number 10 years ago, they published statistics on the opportunities for school leavers now compared with those a decade ago. Is not it crystal clear that many pupils make the choice simply because there is no alternative open to them? Is not it time that the Government started expanding real opportunities and real choice for school leavers?

It would be an excellent idea for Departments to publish comparative tables; our Department, under my right hon. Friend, would come high. Also, we have a good record in relation to school leavers. For a start, we now have a comprehensive range of vocational qualifications to supplement the well-tried academic qualifications and there has been an expansion in the number of school leavers over the past five years. We have the highest staying-on rate and young people have ranges of qualifications which they will find of great benefit in their future careers.

Is my hon. Friend aware that a recent development that will please many students who are benefiting from higher education is the Government's decision to modify their proposals for student union reform and to introduce a sensible code of practice and the right of students to opt-out? Will he confirm that that is now the Government's policy?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his comments. We now offer a programme, based on the principles set out by my right hon. Friend, of choice, accountability and democracy in student unions and the control of excesses by codes of practice determined by the institutions. That, too, is positive news for students in higher and further education.

Does not the Government clampdown on expansion in higher education mean that institutions are reluctant to make firm offers until A-level results are known? Does not that mean chaos in August for students and for institutions?

Many people would like to see greater certainty in that matter and would like to base all offers on actual rather than prospective or projected qualifications. Our student numbers are at record levels and, if that is a clampdown, it merely reinforces a record level of student numbers.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what surveys have been undertaken of the progress being made by grant-maintained schools since acquiring self-governing status.

Her Majesty's chief inspector of schools has found that self-governing schools use their freedom to good effect. Inspectors have observed in most grant-maintained schools a greater proportion of satisfactory or better than satisfactory lessons than in maintained schools generally, commendable pupil behaviour and attendance and improved teacher morale. That picture is confirmed by a survey published by the Grant-Maintained Schools Centre in the past month, in which the majority of schools responding reported increasing pupil numbers, improved pupil-teacher ratios and, An the secondary sector, the introduction of new subjects.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the disappointment felt by the majority of teachers and governors at St. Thomas high school in my constituency where, in the past week, parents voted down a proposal to become self-governing? Will my right hon. Friend take the opportunity to examine the material circulated by the local education authority and other parties, which, of course, must be governed by a code of conduct?

The holder of my office now has powers to declare void ballots where there has been any doubt about any of the material circulated. If my hon. Friend does not mind, I shall not comment on the school in his constituency, for fear that I may have to examine the case. However, I shall ask my hon. Friend to forward all the documents to me.

Will the Secretary of State join me in ensuring that, where all the proper procedures have been followed, he will not go any further in introducing legislation to force schools to become grant-maintained against the wishes of local people?

The hon. Gentleman knows that, as a fellow geographer, I always listen carefully to him, but I am little surprised that he seems to have lost his daffodil, along with one or two others Opposition Members. I keep my legislative options under continual review.

My right hon. Friend referred to the lower level of truancy in grant-maintained schools and to higher teacher morale. Is he aware that there is one area in which GM schools do not do so well—competitive sport? The reason is that some local education authorities, for spiteful reasons, will not allow their schools to play competitive sports against GM schools.

My hon. Friend is right. Children who are educated in grant-maintained schools are educated by the state—they are state school children, just as children in maintained schools are educated by the state and are equally state school children. It is true that in certain authorities—Middlesbrough, Nottingham and Derbyshire, to name but three—it is difficult or impossible for local county-maintained schools to play competitive sports against grant-maintained schools. It must be wrong that we can send sporting teams to South Africa but it is impossible to send sporting teams to grant-maintained schools. It is a disgraceful form of educational apartheid.

Does the Secretary of State accept that, given the lower number of schools that have opted out this month, he has wasted £200,000 of taxpayers' money on advertisements for GM status? Can he tell the House whether the contents of those advertisements were statements of fact or merely statements of opinion?

The Liberal party has even fewer education policies than the Labour party, which is saying quite a lot. The hon. Gentleman, together with some of his hon. Friends in another place, has mentioned the nature and content of the advertisement. He made a great fuss, public to-do and tumult about referring it to the Advertising Standards Authority, which has now given the hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends an answer: go away and grow up.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what mechanisms exist for his Department to gauge parental opinion, as consumers, to the extent that it relates to the Government's policy for schools.

Like other hon. Members, Ministers receive correspondence from their constituents and are therefore well placed to gauge parental opinion. In addition, parents' views are regularly sought or made known through, for instance, consultations, meetings with representative bodies and special surveys.

Does the Minister understand that increasingly the consultation on opt-out schools is turning against the Government's policies and opt-out schools are diminishing parental choice, in that schools select pupils, rather than parents selecting schools for their children?

The hon. Gentleman is wrong. The facts are that the number of schools balloting remains high, the turnout in those ballots remains high and the number of yes votes remains as high as historically it has been since the beginning of grant-maintained schools. I suggest that the hon. Gentleman make a better effort to consult his parents, as he is obviously completely out of touch.

Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the best ways of assessing parental opinion is by looking at what parents do with their children? Will he join me in congratulating St. Mary's college in my constituency, which recently opened, from its own resources, a £750,000 sports centre? That facility will be enjoyed by many children who can take advantage of the assisted places scheme, which allows them to attend that school as a matter of choice by their parents—an opportunity which would be denied to them by a Labour Government.

What a refreshing contrast between my hon. Friend's positive attitude and the carping and negative attitude of Opposition Members. I believe that, at the appropriate time, parents up and down the country will draw their own conclusions from the sort of attitudes exemplified in the Chamber.

As the Department assesses the opinion of parents, can the Minister tell the House whether there is any evidence of support for those schools that choose to be more selective with their intakes?

I believe that the answer is yes. We have encouraged schools up and down the country to consider their own policies—what they would like to do and how they would like to do it—to consult parents locally and then to come forward with proposals for changes in their administration policies if they think that that is appropriate. A number of schools do that and a number of them keep the matter under review. That is something that we encourage because it adds to the elements of choice and diversity in education which my right hon. Friend has been determined to encourage since he took office just under two years ago.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what targets have been set for the uptake of general national vocational qualifications among 16 to 19-year-olds over the course of the next three years.

We need high take-up of appropriate and demanding vocational qualifications in the next three years if we are to achieve the challenging national targets for education and training. We are aiming for one in four 16-year-olds to be starting GNVQ courses in 1996. Our longer-term aim is for half of all 16 and 17-year-olds to take GNVQs at foundation, intermediate or advanced level.

In welcoming the evident popularity of GNVQs and their importance to the national training targets, may I ask my hon. Friend to agree that their future success will depend on the standards that they set? In that context, will he examine the comments by Professor Smithers of Manchester university, who said that the qualifications were not sufficiently knowledge-orientated, rather than skills-orientated, and that they should be assessed universally by an examination?

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's comments. As he will know, the message is so good that inadvertently I have repeated it, but it does bear repeating.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what steps he is taking to ensure that colleges of further education publish information regularly for parents and employers about their achievements.

Colleges are required to publish extensive information about the achievements and career destinations of students and make this available to local schools for distribution to pupils in year 11. In 1993, we first included college achievements in the comparative performance tables. We expect colleges to develop their own charters which will highlight performance information. Through these arrangements, we are determined to help young people and their parents to make informed decisions about all the options available.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the performance tables are vital in helping students and employers to decide which courses best suit their needs? Are not they crucial in helping to increase post-16 education, particularly in my constituency where the excellent Llandrillo college recently won a national training award?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who is entirely right. We believe in giving schools, colleges, parents and pupils an information revolution in which they will be given as much information as possible. That will expand the opportunities and raise the standards for all in the crucial area between the ages of 16 and 19.

Does the Minister have any information on the number of students who are being obliged to leave further education because they cannot afford to carry on with their courses? Is not that because they are unable to obtain discretionary grants, income support or housing benefit? Will the Minister, with his colleagues, consider putting together a satisfactory package of funding for further education students, so that we can have an end to the terrible waste of resources and the failure to train our young people to take up their opportunities?

The hon. Gentleman will know that current provision on discretionary awards varies by local education authority. He will also be aware that, through the Sir John Cass and Gulbenkian Foundation, we are conducting an authoritative study on the matter which we will publish at the end of March. We shall then carefully consider its conclusions.

While I welcome the publication of more information by colleges of further education, will my hon. Friend give a continuing commitment to school sixth forms? Will he confirm that the Government believe in choice and diversity in education post-16 and that school sixth forms do a good job in developing young people's education in addition to colleges of education?

I have no difficulty in agreeing with my hon. Friend. Recently, we published a new framework for the way in which we handle proposals for school sixth forms alongside further education colleges. They are both important, they are not antagonistic and they should be complementary.

Do the achievements of the colleges of further education include the decision of Bath further education college to sack 60 lecturers? The college has now had to rescind that decision and go to arbitration. Would not the Minister do better to urge further education employers to go to arbitration, rather than supporting the employers in a decision to foment industrial unrest?

I am slightly surprised that the hon. Gentleman suggests that I should involve myself in an industrial dispute. I made it clear, in the context of the holdback letter that we sent to the colleges employers' forum, that we expect some progress on flexibility in contracts. We are not prepared to intervene in the details and I am sure that both parties will be able to resolve the matter amicably and positively between themselves.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what measures he is taking to combat drug abuse in schools.

Education is an important element of the Government's strategy for tackling drug abuse. The national curriculum requires teaching about the harmful effects of drugs, and helps to develop pupils' capacity to resist pressure to misuse drugs. My Department has published guidance for schools and has funded projects, materials and national bodies working in this field.

May I thank my hon. Friend for that answer and ask him to continue to provide as much reassurance as possible to parents throughout the country who are rightly worried about this important matter? Will he extend education about drug abuse from the higher stages in children's careers to the youngest sensible age?

My hon. Friend makes an important point. I believe that the content of the curriculum covering this important matter is about right at present. We start at a very early stage and build up the information about drugs imparted in the classroom to our young people, the effect that they have on the body, the effects of misuse and so on. That is surely one of the most important contributions that education can make to informing young people about drugs and their harmful effects. I believe that as we see the effect of the national curriculum accumulating over the generations of young people, the beneficial effects of education on drugs will become ever more clear.

If drug education in schools is so important, as the Opposition as well as parents know why have Government cuts reduced the number of drug education co-ordinators from 135 this time last year to a mere 75 today? What kind of message does the Minister think that that sends to parents and young people alike?

I think that the hon. Lady is referring to decisions by local education authorities throughout the country and their prioritisation for expenditure. It was indeed the case that some years ago my Department initiated a pump-priming grant, for a specific period only, to allow local education authorities to assess the value of the co-ordinators. The pump priming was extended not once but twice. It then came to an end. Local education authorities, correctly in my view, are now making their own decisions about their priorities.

Will my hon. Friend join me in congratulating the Daily Express, which reported its investigation into drug abuse in schools over three days last week? Does he accept that the problem afflicts not only schools in the inner cities but schools everywhere in the country, including in my constituency? Does he agree that it is essential that staff and teachers maintain the utmost vigilance if we are to eradicate the menace?

I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. Of course, truancy is another element. It must surely be the case that when young people are not in school where they should be, they are vulnerable in shopping centres or wherever, to drug pushers and others who seek to abuse or mislead the children. Therefore, our strong emphasis on tackling truancy is an important part of the overall strategy to reduce the vulnerability to drugs of our young people.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will make a statement on parental choice of schools.

The Government have given parents the right to express a preference for their choice of school. In some 90 per cent. of cases, that preference is met. Parents now have much more information, in particular through the publication of school performance tables, school prospectuses and annual reports. There is a wider choice of schools now, with the expansion of the self-governing grant-maintained schools, city technology colleges, more schools with sixth forms, and the network of new technology colleges which I launched yesterday.

How does the Minister explain parental choice to the parents at Five Ways primary school in my constituency who have just been told that the Department for Education will not allow them to expand that popular and successful school because someone in Whitehall has discovered that there are surplus places at a school two miles away? What would the Minister further say to the 38,000 parents who last year had to go to appeal because they were not given the school place of their choice? Does not that show that although the Government talk about parental choice, it means increased power for schools to choose parents and less power for parents to choose schools?

Labour-controlled Staffordshire county council does not have the best reputation for local education administration. The second of the hon. Gentleman's two questions about the number of appeals shows how well the parents charter and the citizens charter are working. Parents are rightly making successful use of the appeals mechanism. Nine out of 10 parents receive their first choice the first time, which is good. I do not know about the case of the specific school mentioned by the hon. Gentleman in the first of his two questions. If he writes to me I shall personally consider the position and write to him.

What choice do parents in north-west Leicestershire have when the local education authority refuses to pay the travel costs of children whose parents have made a choice of school? That applies particularly in rural districts where distances travelled may be great.

My hon. Friend is right. Leicestershire is another local authority that is notorious for discriminating against parental choice. In the same way, the new Lib-Lab pact in Essex is trying to discriminate against those who want to send their children to schools of their choice.

rose—

The Liberal and Labour parties are doing the same thing in Wiltshire, where they are deliberately discriminating against parents who exercise the choice to give their children a religious education.

I should hope so.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what plans he has to change the standard spending assessment calculation for the education of under-fives.

As part of his review of policy on under-fives, my right hon. Friend will bear in mind the implications for the under-fives element of standard spending assessments.

Since the Prime Minister, and subsequently the Secretary of State, have recently discovered the virtues of nursery education, would it not be sensible, just and financially prudent to change the basis of the SSA calculation for under-fives away from a simple population count in a local authority towards the provision of places in a local authority? That would get rid of what is, in effect, a subsidy for bad providers to spend elsewhere in their budget. It would allow good providers relief from having to cut other sectors in their budget in order to provide good nursery education.

We shall bear the hon. Member's observation in mind—other hon. Members have also advanced that argument. A number of local education authorities provide good provision for under-fives while maintaining spending at the SSA level. If the hon. Gentleman's desire, which is certainly that of the Government, is to see an expansion of the service, it would seem perverse to change dramatically the way in which the SSA is distributed in favour of those who are already serving a large number of under-fives.

Will my hon. Friend consider, not only the SSA calculations for county councils, but the relationship with first schools and the grant-maintained sector? Send first school in my constituency, which is grant maintained, is anxious to provide nursery provision. I know that the Department is currently considering that case.

My hon. Friend will understand if I avoid giving an answer on the specific school that he mentioned. We shall look carefully at all applications from schools, including grant-maintained schools, that seek nursery provision. Where applicants fall within laid down criteria, we shall seek to satisfy my hon. Friend's justifiable concerns.

Why did not the Minister have the good grace to mention the fact that, of the 40 top providers of nursery education, 40 are Labour education authorities? Why does he not stop including all forms of child care in the same bracket as high quality nursery education, and give advice and guidance to all local education authorities to start providing more and more nursery places?

The reason that I did not give the answer that the hon. Gentleman wanted was that I was not asked the question. As the hon. Gentleman has now asked the question, I shall underline the fact that, of the 34 Labour authorities that the Labour party is anxious to boast about in terms of nursery education, 70 per cent. fall in the bottom 40 for exam results and 82 per cent. fall within the bottom 50 for truancy levels. We should hear a bit about that.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education whether he has any plans to visit schools in Northumberland to discuss school budgets.

My right hon. Friend has no immediate plans to visit Northumberland schools. My colleague, my hon. Friend the Member for Hornchurch (Mr. Squire), will visit two schools in Northumberland on 14 March.

I hope that the Minister visits two schools in my constituency so that he can become aware of the problem posed by the combined effect of the county needing to fund the 2.9 per cent. teachers' pay increase and facing a capping limit of 1.5 per cent., the result of which is that all schools in the county face reductions in their budgets. Is he aware of the problem? What does he plan to do about it?

Northumberland does no worse and no better—it is very close to the average if one looks at the pattern of schools' expenditure. I see no reason why an efficient and responsible local education authority should be unable to maintain the standards that we expect of it in the current financial circumstances. There is no proven causal connection between the level of expenditure and quality of education output. I would expect that in the right hon. Gentleman's area, as in all others, school governors, teachers, heads and the local education authority would take it on themselves to continue to deliver a proper standard of education.

When the Minister is on his way back from Northumberland, will he make a detour to Norfolk and visit some schools there—

Order. No. I am afraid that he cannot.

Like the right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith), I am very disappointed by the response from the Minister about the visit to Northumberland. Is the Minister aware that about four fifths of the population of Northumberland live in the urban south-east corner, with the rest in the rural part? We are quite happy to support the high cost of rural education in Northumberland, but would it not be better for the Minister to go up there and see what is happening rather than regard the area as if it were part of a colony in darkest Africa?

Northumberland is treated in exactly the same way as all the other 108 local education authorities. They are all subject to the same impartial, even-handed treatment, both by the funding formula and by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. We would, therefore, expect Northumberland, like all other local education authorities, to ensure that it delivers a proper, acceptable and increasingly high standard of education to all its pupils.

When considering the budgets of Northumbrian schools, will my hon. Friend reflect on the great success of the policy of devolving budgets to schools in Northumberland and elsewhere, the more responsible spending that has resulted from it and the much more valuable spending from the point of view of the pupils, which is what schools are all about?

Yes, indeed. The local management of schools programme has been one of the most successful programmes in the past few years. It has proved some important things, not least that if responsibility is given to governors and heads they will seize it and make full use of it in coming to difficult decisions about priorities in their schools, and that these decisions are far better made where they matter, in the school and in the classroom, rather than in some local education authority which is probably remote.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what information he has on the percentage of students attending universities who are supplementing their grants or loans by employment in term-time jobs.

Information derived from the recent student income and expenditure survey indicates that, of students sampled, 23 per cent. had some earnings during term-time, and rather more during the Christmas and Easter vacations. Information is not available to indicate whether the students concerned were in receipt of grants or student loans.

Is not it absolutely deplorable, after the years of the great Thatcherite economic miracle, that students today are in a worse position than they were before 1979? Is not it disgraceful that the Government seem to have no plans whatever to encourage students to keep to their main task, study during term-time? What are the Government going to do about it?

I find the question absolutely extraordinary. The hon. Gentleman needs to remember how many universities there were in Liverpool when my right hon. and noble Friend became Prime Minister. He also needs to recognise the huge achievements of the two universities in Liverpool in establishing a city of learning. In his spare time, he may care to reflect that we now have record student numbers, no increase in student drop-out and the most effective and successful higher education system in the world.

Does my hon. Friend agree that part of young people's education must include doing part-time and holiday work, and that it is educationally beneficial to them?

It is very much a matter of degree, but not many students get by without working at some stage during their studies. It is the norm in many other countries that students must work their way through college, whereas we produce a generous student support package. That is reflected in the efficiency arid timing of our degrees and the quality of the results achieved.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what steps are being taken to encourage schools to consider the option of grant-maintained status.

The governing body of every local education authority-controlled school is now required to consider, at least once a year, whether to hold a ballot on whether the school should seek grant-maintained status and, if they decide against it, to explain their decision to parents. In addition, to be helpful we are setting up a network of local centres to give factual information on grant-maintained schools. There is already one such centre in Bolton, and to be particularly helpful, we are just setting one up at the excellent Castle Hall school in the constituency of the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor).

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on taking those steps to combat the immense amount of negative propaganda against grant-maintained schools. Is he aware that, in authorities like Liberal and Labour-controlled Kent, £100,000 of education funds have been diverted to those black propaganda activities? Will he look at the leaflets and at the scaremongering, which is worrying parents and teachers?

The parents of Kent have already voted overwhelmingly in favour of grant-maintained status. For example, by 1 April more than half the secondary school children in Kent will be educated in grant-maintained schools. I will certainly look extremely carefully at what strikes me as a scandalous waste of money by the chief education officer for Kent and his officials on that black propaganda.

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

I have been asked to reply.

Is the Lord President aware that more than £1 billion of taxpayers' money spent to persuade people to take out personal pensions ended up in the pockets of salesmen through commissions? Is he also aware that more than 300,000 men and women are losing benefit because of bad advice? Given that growing scandal, is not there a case for urgent Government action, or is this, once again, something for which the Government will take no responsibility?

I do not regard the fact that some 5 million people have taken out personal pensions, which will significantly improve their prospects in retirement, as anything like a scandal. The hon. Gentleman will know that some of the advice that has been given is currently under examination, which is entirely right. I know of no reason to justify his accusation.

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

I have been asked to reply.

Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming the obvious success of the Prime Minister's visit to the United States? Does he recall that Sir Winston Churchill variously described the temperature of our special relationship with the United States as normal and blazing? What is the temperature now?

I can best describe the relationship as very cordial indeed. It is a long-standing relationship based on shared interests, as has been confirmed at a joint press conference which my right hon. Friend and the President held within the past hour or so. Their discussions have covered a wide range of international issues, including Bosnia, Russia and the world economy. The President's support for the joint declaration on Northern Ireland was particularly welcome. The visit is confirmation that we have a continuing, strong, all-round relationship with the United States.

When the President of the Board of Trade has need of legal advice, to whom does the Leader of the House suggest he turns?

My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade has been advised, quite properly, by my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General and made the position entirely clear in his evidence to the Scott inquiry yesterday.

Is not the position of the Attorney-General as the Government's chief legal adviser becoming increasingly untenable as Ministers seem to use him as a scapegoat to save their own skins?

The concern of my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade was clearly an anxiety that people might misrepresent him in exactly the way that the right hon. Lady is now seeking to do. My right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General's advice on public interest immunity has remained consistent and, of course, he is due to give evidence to the inquiry.

Does not the Leader of the House realise that what sticks in the throat of the British public is that, having secretly sold arms to Saddam Hussein, which were used against British troops, Ministers were prepared to see innocent men go to gaol to cover up their conspiracy and that is what people cannot stomach?

Let me remind the right hon. Lady what was written in a letter to The Times as long ago as 12 November 1992:

"Public interest immunity cannot be waived by either the prosecution or the Ministers. It was for the judge to decide whether the interests of justice in ensuring a fair trial for the defendants outweighed those considerations of public interests referred to in the certificates. There was no question of anyone attempting to suppress evidence".

Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming the Department of Health action on safari holidays for young offenders?

Yes, indeed I shall. There is a widespread view that those overseas trips were inappropriate. We are all concerned to see effective, proper treatment and deterrents for young offenders and the statement this afternoon will help bring that about.

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

I have been asked to reply.

When the Prime Minister returns from his visit to the United States, will he be kind enough to look personally into the case of my constituent Paul Kenney, who did not return from his journey to Portugal, but was found dead on a beach? Will he please consult his colleague the Prime Minister of Portugal, who has not had the common decency to tell the parents, or me as their representative, why this lad died, how he died, whether he was murdered or why the parents could not find the body for a month? If the right hon. Gentleman agrees that it is the Government's duty to look after ordinary citizens when they travel abroad, will he please start raising merry hell about this case?

I am conscious of the hon. Gentleman's understandable concern for his late constituent and I have of course looked at the Adjournment debate he had not long ago. I am happy to tell the hon. Gentleman that during his visit to Portugal on 24 and 25 February, my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary raised the case with the Portuguese Foreign Minister and I hope that that was helpful.

Will my right hon. Friend and the Prime Minister, and the Foreign Secretary, personally do their utmost to ensure the success of the negotiations, which are at a critical point, on Norwegian entry into the European Community? Does my right hon. Friend agree that it would be quite outrageous if the unreasonable demand by the Spanish Government for a few thousand tonnes of Norwegian cod were to prevent the entry into the Community of one of our closest friends and a fine European country?

My hon. Friend knows very well that it has been a prime objective of the British Government to bring about enlargement of the Community and the progress that has been made is one of our significant achievements over the past couple of years. On some reports I have seen today, progress has been rather greater so far in respect of Sweden and Finland; apparently, there remains some way to go, but we shall wish to see negotiations with all four applicants successfully negotiated.

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

I have been asked to reply.

The right hon. and noble Baroness Thatcher missed one Prime Minister's Question Time in 12; the present Prime Minister has missed one in eight. Whatever the importance of the present visit, does not that frequent absence devalue his accountability to the House? Why is he more anxious to answer questions in Pittsburgh than in Parliament?

I must say to the hon. Gentleman, whom I usually regard as among the more reasonable of those on the Opposition Benches, that I reject out of hand the suggestion that he has made. I think that my right hon. Friend's achievement in various international negotiations both in Europe and on the wider scene are among the main achievements that he has put forward on behalf of the Government.

While my right hon. Friend is in the United States, will he be given an opportunity to tell the people, as opposed to the President of the United States, of the true nature, history and habits of the IRA?

I have already referred to the very welcome support of the President for the joint declaration. I hope that that in itself will have an effect on some strands of opinion in the United States which may perhaps have failed to appreciate the true nature of the IRA.

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

I have been asked to reply.

Does the Lord President of the Council agree that, with unemployment still up around the 3 million level, with many young and long-term unemployed in that number, jobs remain the biggest single issue facing the country? In the light of that, will the Lord President of the Council respond positively to the important initiative taken today by the Trades Union Congress to work in co-operation with all political parties on policies to get unemployment down?

I welcome any kind of co-operation by the TUC or, indeed, anybody else, in the interests of maintaining the recovery from recession, which is the secure basis for the jobs that the hon. Gentleman wants to see. If I may say so, it will not be served by the Labour party's support for a minimum wage, a 35-hour week and many new burdens on business.

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

I have been asked to reply.

May I convey to my right hon. Friend the House's full support for the Downing street declaration on Northern Ireland? Has my right hon. Friend been able to take note of the survey that took place over the weekend in the Irish Republic which showed that the vast majority of the people there call on the IRA-Sinn Fein to renounce violence?

I do very much agree with my hon. Friend and am grateful for her words. As she knows, the Government are making every effort to seek peace in Northern Ireland. It is heartening to note that some 94 per cent. of people questioned in the Irish marketing survey agreed with calls on the IRA and Sinn Fein to renounce violence. I am sure that that corresponds with the overwhelming wish in this country and, indeed, many others. I hope that their leaders will take note.

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

I have been asked to reply.

Is the Lord President of the Council aware that if the highly efficient borough of St. Helens received the same level of revenue support grant as the boroughs of Wandsworth and Westminster it would not be required to charge its citizens one single penny in council tax? Does he feel that there might be a whiff of scandal and corruption in that?

No, I do not.

While condemning the appalling massacre in Hebron, does my right hon. Friend agree with me that that was the work of a lone madman and that, for the sake of the 300 million people who live in that area, it should not in any way impede the peace process?

Like, I am sure, everyone on both sides of the House, I share the horror at the massacre of innocent Palestinians in Hebron on 25 February. I am sure that the whole House would once again want to send its condolences to those who were affected and their families. I accept entirely and agree with my hon. Friend that the massacre must not be allowed to jeopardise the peace process. The British Government will certainly do everything that they can to see that it does not.

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

I have been asked to reply.

Does the Lord President recall that, referring to the setting up of the Scott inquiry, the Prime Minister said that no restrictions would be placed on its terms of reference? Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that ex-employees of Matrix Churchill and their representatives have been denied the right to give evidence to the inquiry, and that Lord Justice Scott has said that he will consider the matter if the Government and the Prime Minister agree? What is the Lord President going to do about it?

I think that it is generally true to say that the procedures of the inquiry are for Lord Justice Scott to consider and operate. Obviously, if there were perceived to be problems and if representations were made to the Government about difficulties that they could do something about, those difficulties would be considered extremely carefully.

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

I have been asked to reply.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of any Government Department that hands out special green forms to job applicants who are related to politicians—forms that receive preferential treatment—and pink forms to everyone else? Is he aware that that disgraceful form of nepotism is being practised by Labour-controlled Monklands council? Will he join me in urging condemnation of the practice by the local Member of Parliament—the Leader of the Opposition, who has been strangely silent on the subject?

My hon. Friend may feel surprised that his question has been reached. He has raised a very interesting point; I might speculate that the absence of the right hon. and learned Member for Monklands, East (Mr. Smith) arose from nervousness that the question might be reached.