To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is his policy with respect to the Province's dog licence scheme. [7315]

The Dogs (Northern Ireland) Order 1983 provides for the licensing of dogs, the collection of strays and the control of dogs on land and on certain roads. It also provides controls on guard dogs and breeding establishments, and creates offences for allowing dogs to attack people or livestock.

Is the system accepted in Northern Ireland? If so, what justification is there for having one policy in Northern Ireland and a different policy in the rest of the United Kingdom? If my right hon. Friend agrees that the system is good and well respected, should he not make representations to the Home Secretary to ensure that the law of the land is the same throughout the kingdom?

It appears that the system is accepted, because there is no great pressure for change. When we are asked why things happen in Northern Ireland, we often say that it is because it is different. On this occasion, I can say that with some authority, because the report of the UK interdepartmental working party on dogs, which was published in 1976, acknowledged that Northern Ireland had a distinct and more serious dog control problem than Great Britain, specifying in particular stray dogs and sheep worrying. For that reason, a different system applies.

Will the Government give more latitude to magistrates in the implementation of the order, particularly in relation to destruction? Will the Government also consider the provision of a free licence for senior citizens?

The last subject is a matter of some contention. This is not the first time it has been raised, but I am sure that my noble Friend Baroness Denton of Wakefield will have heard the hon. Gentleman.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what estimate he has made of the contribution of the tourism industry to Ulster's economy in the past two years; and if he will make a statement. [7316]

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what was the level of tourist activity in Northern Ireland for the year 1995–96. [7321]

In 1995, peaceful conditions saw a dramatic increase in tourism: total visitors rose by 20 per cent. over 1994 to 1.5 million; holiday visitors by 67 per cent. to 276,000; and visitor revenue by 17 per cent. to £214 million. The year 1996 has reflected the ending of the IRA ceasefire and the summer disturbances. Downturns are forecast of 11 per cent. in the total number of visitors, 25 per cent. in holiday visitors and 6 per cent. in revenue.

I am sure that my right hon. Friend will agree that those are remarkable figures and that he will join me in congratulating the Northern Ireland tourist board on its excellent work during the ceasefires to draw the Province's manifest attractions to the attention of the outside world. Can there be any more dramatic evidence than that presented by those figures of the need for peace to be restored in Northern Ireland, so that prosperity continues to flourish?

I very much endorse what my hon. Friend says. There is no doubt that an established peace will tremendously benefit the tourism industry in Northern Ireland, where there is enormous room for expansion. The industry accounts for 2 per cent. of gross domestic product in Northern Ireland. The figure is 5 per cent. in Scotland and in the Republic of Ireland; were the Northern Ireland figure to go up to those levels, 20,000 new jobs would be created there. It is interesting to note that, even in 1996, the visitor figures are still above the pre-ceasefire levels, and I pay tribute to the work of the Northern Ireland tourist board in attracting tourists to Northern Ireland.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that many small businesses depend on healthy tourism in Northern Ireland? Many are self-employed and some employ just a handful of people. Therefore, one of the immediate results of peace in Northern Ireland will be a boost to those small businesses.

My hon. Friend is absolutely right; small businesses across the Province would benefit greatly from further increases in the number of tourists to the Province. I certainly hope that those who try to bring instability to the Province are aware of the damage that they are doing to prosperity in their own areas. I assure my hon. Friend that, even if there were peace, the interests of small businesses and tourism would be severely damaged were the social chapter and the minimum wage to be introduced.

Does the Minister know of the tourist attractions in the Strangford lough area, and realise that tourists would like to visit such areas as Ballyhalbert, Grey Abbey, Ballywalter and Kircubbin? Does he think that it would be wise for the tourist board to provide grants for licensed inns and accommodation in the areas that tourists would like to visit, and not to deny grants to those areas because they are not in need of social benefits and not targeting social need?

I do know the areas to which the right hon. Gentleman refers. I have visited them, and I understand what the right hon. Gentleman means when he mentions their attractiveness to tourists. I shall certainly always try to persuade those I know who are going to Northern Ireland to visit those areas. As he knows, I am not the Minister with responsibility for tourism, but I shall ensure that the matters that he has mentioned are passed on to my noble Friend.

Is the Minister aware that the Select Committee on National Heritage has just completed a report into tourism and given great praise to Northern Ireland for its statutory system of classification and registration of accommodation, and that people who do not live up to that standard will lose their licence and go out of business? The Committee has recommended to the Government that a similar system should be introduced in England, but the Secretary of State has refused to do so. Why does a law that works very well in Northern Ireland not apply to some of the hotels in London, for example, that rip off foreigners, are ridden with bugs and rats and are a damn disgrace? Why does the Government not introduce a consistent policy?

If ever I have responsibility for tourism and national heritage, I will be in a position to answer that question—today, however, I am answering questions on Northern Ireland. We do things well in Northern Ireland, and we do them well because we are different.

Since 1991, the Government have said that one of their fundamental policies has been to target social need, and to focus on those areas and people most in need. Is the Minister aware of the report by the Northern Ireland Council of Voluntary Associations, which states that the Northern Ireland tourist board is the worst of all government bodies in targeting social need? The board makes no mention of targeting social needs in its key objectives, and meeting those needs is not one of its key targets. The board's most recent annual report contained not one reference to targeting social needs. Despite this week's cuts, is the Minister able to confirm that targeting social needs is still a Government priority, and what will he do about the Northern Ireland tourist board and all the other government bodies that have been shown to be missing the target?

Overall, as the hon. Gentleman knows, targeting social need remains one of the three priorities of Government policy. If he thinks that one can order tourists to go in certain directions, I do not think that he understands fully what happens in the tourist trade. We can attract tourists to Northern Ireland, but we cannot force them to visit specific places. We are trying to ensure that tourists visit all around Northern Ireland.

Did the Minister read the remarks of the Republic of Ireland's Minister for Tourism on the branding Ireland initiative? He said that he detected political benefits in such an initiative. Will the Minister assure the House—I understood that it was Government policy—that no all-Ireland tourist structure will be set up without the consent of the people of Northern Ireland? I should like to praise the Northern Ireland tourist board—with which I have worked very closely over the past year—for the high professionalism, drive and enthusiasm that it has demonstrated.

On the second point, I agree with the hon. Member and, indeed, I made the same point earlier. I hope that that message is heard loud and clear throughout Northern Ireland in all parts of the community from which violence can come.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the effect of the French lorry drivers' strike on owner drivers and road haulage contractors in Northern Ireland and on the Northern Ireland economy. [7317]

The effect of the strike on owner drivers and road haulage contractors, and on the Northern Ireland economy, will become apparent only when the relevant details become available.

A number of road haulage contractors, small businesses and owner drivers have been affected by the French and Danish blockades. Does the Minister share my concern about reports that the French police assisted the strikers and about the reports that British claims for compensation that arose from disruption in 1992 have still not been settled? Can he assure me that those Northern Ireland businesses that submit legitimate claims for compensation will have his support and representation for early settlement by the French Government?

I share the hon. Gentleman's concern, as I am sure he shares with me the view that blocking roads anywhere damages commerce and trade.

As the free movement of people and goods was the foundation of the European Community and the Single European Act, may I suggest to my right hon. Friend that our right hon. Friend the Prime Minister should raise the subject at the forthcoming summit in Dublin and suggest to the French and the Greeks that their blockades are not very communautaire?

I agree with my hon. Friend, and I hope that those who claim to believe in the free movement of goods within the single market and the European Union will look carefully at the results of those industrial disputes.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is the average level of housing benefit paid to recipient households in Northern Ireland; what are the principal categories of accommodation in respect of which the benefit is paid; and if he will make a statement. [7318]

The average housing benefit paid applies only to private sector tenants and at 15 November 1996 was £45.01 a week. Public sector tenants receive housing benefit in the form of a rent rebate for which an average of £34.12 a week was paid.

Would it not be true to say that the housing situation in Northern Ireland is under control, and that—given the figures my hon. Friend has given to the House—there is not the level of homelessness in that part of the nation that has been suggested and that those who pretend there is should withdraw their remarks?

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's comments. It is true that we do not have a homelessness problem in Northern Ireland. Housing benefit is paid to some 77 per cent. of all public sector tenants and is certainly targeting social need.

Will the Minister tell the House what strategy has been set up for co-operation between the Housing Executive and the Social Security Agency to deal with any fraud in the system that has not yet been considered? What is the up-to-date situation?

Research into the level of fraud and inaccuracy in housing benefit in Northern Ireland began on 1 October 1996 and we hope to have a report by the end of March 1997. At the moment, there are effective liaison arrangements between the Social Security Agency and the Housing Executive, but I accept the premise behind the hon. Gentleman's question that perhaps more could be done. The Social Security (Fraud) Bill, which is in Committee, will include provisions to ensure that claimants cannot exploit, for example, the postal redirection system to claim benefit fraudulently from different addresses. That issue was raised recently by the hon. Gentleman.

Is the Minister aware that the rent increase announced by the Department this week is above the national average and will mean that housing benefit payments will increase? Is he also aware that, in 1995–96, 10,768 families presented themselves as homeless, suggesting a probable true figure of 22,000 people? In July and August alone, 600 families were made homeless as a result of Drumcree.

The average weekly rent increase proposed for Northern Ireland in the next year will be 4 per cent., which is 2 per cent. above inflation. That will result in an increase of £1.32 a week, which is £7 a week lower than in England and Wales. As for the overall Housing Executive budget, we expect that there will be a reduction in the new build, but only of 100 housing new starts next year.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on punishment beatings and killings in Northern Ireland since the end of the IRA ceasefire. [7319]

Between 1 February and 8 December 1996, the RUC has recorded 274 so-called punishment beatings. Of these, 149 are attributed to republican and 125 to loyalist terrorist gangs. These attacks are intended to intimidate parts of the Northern Ireland population and are without any justification. There have also been 14 murders this year arising from the security situation.

Is the Minister aware that, yesterday evening, there were three other sets of punishment beatings in Northern Ireland? One took place in Newry, where four young men were beaten and given 24 hours to leave the country. Another was in Derry, and an executive member of Families Against Intimidation and Terror in Northern Ireland was also attacked. Two of the attacks seemed to have been carried out by the IRA and the other—against the Families Against Intimidation and Terror member—by Protestant paramilitary groups. Are not so-called punishment beatings running at an unprecedented level, as are recruitment to the IRA and its production of mortar weapons?

The hon. Gentleman's analysis is correct. The level of these attacks has been rising in recent months and throughout this year, and every 24 hours brings one of those attacks from terrorist gangs from either side. The Provisional IRA uses these savage and vicious attacks as a strategy of social and political control. The attacks are evil, without any justification and cost the people of Northern Ireland a great deal of money, as well as grief.

In the light of the increase in the number and the brutal nature of so-called punishment attacks, will the Minister tell the House how many persons have been brought to court and how many have been found guilty of such activities? Does the Minister believe that all paramilitary organisations have been involved in such attacks, and would that not be a breach of the Mitchell principles?

I cannot give precise information on the number of successful prosecutions. Unhappily, they are few and far between, for the reasons I have already given. People are intimidated and are frightened to give information to the RUC to enable it to carry out the investigation. The hon. Gentleman is right. Attacks are made by so-called loyalists as well as by republican terrorist gangs and are without any justification.

The Secretary of State is aware that the McLaughlin family in west Belfast were nearly wiped out recently by joyriders and that Mr. McLaughlin's mother-in-law had her leg smashed. I am sure that he is also aware that we have a massive law and order problem, not only in west Belfast but far beyond it, and that we have a problem in nationalist areas with police acceptability, especially in the post-Drumcree situation?

I am aware of the case to which the hon. Gentleman refers. It is an example of the extreme horror that we endure every day in Northern Ireland. I say this to Mr. Adams and his cronies in the Provisional IRA-Sinn Fein: if they intend to bring about a ceasefire, these evil attacks on ordinary people in Northern Ireland must end if it is to have a scintilla of credibility. The attacks are without any justification. The RUC polices the whole of Northern Ireland. There is no street and no part of the Province to which it does not have access, and it will continue to police Northern Ireland and seek to bring these perpetrators to justice.

Does the Minister agree that, in view of the increase in this barbarous behaviour and its political effect, it was strange that punishment beatings were not mentioned in the Prime Minister's policy statement of two weeks ago on Northern Ireland and the terms on which Sinn Fein might come in? Is it not both illogical and ironic that some of the parties represented in the talks on the so-called loyalist side, or the organisations that they are fronting, have been responsible this year for some 125 punishment beatings? Can those parties be allowed to continue in the talks, if the beatings are attributable to organisations that they are said to front and represent?

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made it clear in his statement that all terrorist activity had to cease. That is made clear in the Mitchell commission report. Whatever the activity—whether it is targeting, preparing to fire mortars, the use of guns, or the savage and brutal attacks on individuals—it would have to end. They should not occur now. The so-called loyalist politicians in the talks process have signed up to Mitchell and it is a matter to be dealt with in that process. The hon. and learned Gentleman can pursue it there.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what representations he has received from Sinn Fein relating to an IRA ceasefire. [7320]

None.

I am grateful for that brief reply.

The talks will in any event proceed, I earnestly hope, with the nine out of 10 parties elected to the process that are already conducting them. It is the wish of the Government, and indeed of the Irish Government, that it should be 10 out of 10, but not on any terms. If Sinn Fein wants to join the talks, it must come in on the same terms as anyone else: there must be an unequivocal ceasefire and it must show, in the terms of the ground rules for the talks, that it is exclusively committed to peaceful methods and abides by democratic methods. The Prime Minister dealt with that very clearly in his recent statement and at the meeting with Mr. Bruton, the Irish Taoiseach.

Can the Secretary of State confirm that the security forces in Northern Ireland have succeeded in the past day or two in foiling yet another major terrorist atrocity and that, in the past few weeks, there have been several occasions on which the IRA has attempted to mount major terrorist attacks? Does he agree that those actions are a more reliable guide to the intentions of Sinn Fein-IRA than the rumours of a ceasefire that some people in the House and, more significantly, in Dublin have allowed to delude them? Does he further agree that it is a shame that so much time has been wasted in recent months in pursuit of that will-o'-the-wisp, with the result that the opportunity that existed three months ago has now been squandered?

I regretfully endorse what the hon. Gentleman says. There have been a number of attacks or attempted attacks recently. Only last night at Duncairn gardens in Belfast, a call was made to the Samaritans using an IRA code word quite patently intended to set up an ambush for security forces. A wheelie bin with nearly 1 kg of Semtex in it was then discovered, which could have done immense damage.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that, whatever Sinn Fein-IRA may say or do about a ceasefire, anyone in this country, in the Republic, or elsewhere, who is inclined to think that it might have changed its nature, would do well to study the words of Mr. Sean O'Callaghan, an extremely brave man whom some of us had the opportunity to meet here yesterday?

I believe that those words, coming from that source, have had great influence. It is abundantly clear that there is a great gap between the conduct of the IRA as exemplified in what we were discussing a few minutes ago and what is necessary to enable Sinn Fein to enter the talks. It has to show that it is firmly committed to peace and to the democratic process. That is the policy of the Irish Government as well as the British Government, and it must be the policy of all people of sense.

Given the earlier responses, does the Secretary of State still agree that the most urgent need in Northern Ireland is for a permanent peace? Is he aware of the grave misgivings and deep disappointment felt by the people in Northern Ireland who are genuinely striving for peace about the action of the Prime Minister in the House two weeks ago, when he apparently unilaterally broke off, as it were, the negotiations that were in train through my hon. Friend the Member for Foyle (Mr. Hume)? Will he ask the Prime Minister urgently to re-establish the dialogue so that we in Northern Ireland, who are suffering the violence, can hope for an early, permanent and provable peace?

Of course everyone wants peace in Northern Ireland, but peace has to be peace on democratic terms and in fulfilment of democratic principles. The people of Northern Ireland, and the people of the country as a whole, are not prepared to meet the blackmailing demands of terrorists to secure an absence of violence.

I am much encouraged by what my right hon. and learned Friend has said. Will he examine the motivation of the IRA and Sinn Fein in their alleged desire for peace? Many hon. Members believe that their desire for peace is a sham and a means of gaining electoral advantage and support at the expense of the party of the hon. Member for South Down (Mr. McGrady). Mr. Adams and his cohorts regard the peace process solely as a way to extend their war by other means.

Only the IRA knows its true intention; only Sinn Fein and its leaders know their intention. The rest of us have to act on outward and visible signs of their intention. The outward and visible signs that I and other hon. Members have mentioned are incompatible with a desire for peace. That is why both the British and Irish Governments are insisting that, after the first requirement of an unequivocal declaration of a ceasefire in unequivocal words, there has to be time in which we can judge actions against words.

We join the Secretary of State in condemning those responsible for placing the mortar discovered this morning at the Girdwood barracks, and for other recent finds, and congratulate the RUC on its work. Do not such finds reinforce the need for weapons held by paramilitary organisations to be decommissioned? Will the Secretary of State therefore join in welcoming once again the involvement of George Mitchell in assessing the views of the parties and the two Governments on decommissioning and in urging all parties to work constructively with Senator Mitchell so that talks can move swiftly forward and we can at long last make a start on full political negotiations.

I am grateful for the hon. Lady's comments at the outset. I gladly endorse what she said about Senator Mitchell and his contribution, which is very distinguished and extremely helpful. Of course we want all illegally held arms to be got rid of. I would like to express my pleasure at the fact that the Irish Government have introduced their own Decommissioning Bill and have given every indication that it will be enacted very quickly. If I may again cite Mr. Bruton's language, in a democracy, violence and politics do not match. But it is the true intention of people who claim a place at the table that has to be discerned. They have to show what that is by their actions as well as their words.

With punishment beatings, targeting, re-arming and recruiting continuing, and with a former member of the IRA saying that helping Sinn Fein-IRA masquerade as a democratic party can only lead to civil war, is not it time to stop falling over backwards to try to get Sinn Fein-IRA into all-party talks and to crack down on evil murderers in the proper way?

I am not falling over backwards or forwards, nor am I helping Sinn Fein to masquerade in any way. I seek to enable a process for which people have voted to come fully into effect. It is therefore important that the Government should make it plain that if Sinn Fein complies with the requirements imposed by both Governments on all other democratic parties, it will not be excluded from those talks. The question is: when will Sinn Fein be prepared so to demonstrate its commitment to those principles? It is important that it should do so; if it does not, the blame will lie with it and no one else.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what estimate he has made of the effects of the Budget on the services provided by the health boards. [7323]

In 1997–98, £1.642 billion will be available for health and social services—a 1.5 per cent. real-terms increase.

The Minister will surely know that the deep cuts that have been made this year are having a considerable effect, with the consequent postponement of 6,000 operations and 55,000 outpatient appointments. Surely he should accept that, contrary to what he has just said, the Budget provides no real increases for next year. The consequence of those cuts will therefore be carried forward and exacerbated, and the inevitable effect will be longer waiting lists next year.

I reiterate that this year's increase is a 1.5 per cent. real-terms increase—double the rate of last year's increase. We shall also be finding in-year money this year to help with elective surgery cases. We hope that next year—once I have discussed the matter with the boards and trusts—there will be no further cuts in the health and social services of Northern Ireland.

We welcome that promise and look forward to seeing it fulfilled. Does the Minister share my concern that beds are being blocked because hospitals are keeping patients who could be released into residential and nursing homes—at far less cost to the Treasury—in order to hold that money in their own units? Does he also share my concern that the Ulster hospital says that it will be unable to pay salaries from January, that the Royal Victoria hospital has stopped elective surgery for neurosurgical cases, and that there are tremendous cries for aid in other parts of the Province?

I accept the hon. Gentleman's point about bed blocking, and I shall make an announcement about statutory provision in residential homes very soon. I repeat that in-year money from the Eastern board will be made available to assist with elective surgery cases, particularly at the Royal Victoria and Ulster hospitals.

Will the Minister confirm that his use of the phrase "real-terms increase" does not relate to NHS inflation—it refers to the standard rate of inflation? Will he also confirm that the settlement that has been announced will do nothing to prevent further cuts in the acute sector in Northern Ireland next year? Many hospitals in Northern Ireland have been closed for elective surgery for all but the patients of fundholding general practitioners. Will he further confirm to the House, as he did to me in writing, that Northern Ireland will not receive anything from the alleged year-on-year increases in NHS spending that the Secretary of State for Health and the Prime Minister, misleadingly, make so much of?

As the hon. Gentleman is aware, funding for the health service in Northern Ireland is arranged separately from that for the health service in England and Wales. I repeat: this year we have a real-terms increase of 1.5 per cent. The increase in the family health service alone is 8 per cent., and that includes increases in the general practitioner service and allows for a considerable increase in the drugs budget. We are bearing down on that budget and I hope to release savings in the next year that can be ploughed back into other health services.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what assessment he has made of the security situation in Northern Ireland. [7324]

The loyalist ceasefire remains in place, which I very much welcome. The level of threat from the Provisional IRA remains high. The vigilance of the security forces on both sides of the border has foiled a number of recent terrorist attacks. In the past month, more than 50 people have been charged with terrorist-related offences, including murder and attempted murder, and a significant amount of weaponry has been recovered.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his reply. What is the cost of all that? What is the cost of it in Northern Ireland? What is the knock-on cost for the mainland?

The costs to the United Kingdom taxpayer are huge. In Northern Ireland, the average cost of a punishment attack is about £9,000—money that would go to the health service in Northern Ireland were it not being used to deal with the consequences of such a crime. About £3 million has been spent so far this year as a consequence of punishment attacks. Nearly £800,000 has been paid out on claims for arson against the destruction of churches in Northern Ireland. The costs are huge and are continuing to rise.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 12 December. [7345]

This morning, I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that, in the run-up to the Dublin summit, he will not abandon the British veto? Will he assure the House that he will never abandon that veto and never dissemble it in favour of qualified majority voting? Is he aware that European socialist leaders are in Dublin planning to do just that, and that the leader of the Labour party is part of that plot?

I can certainly confirm that we intend to retain the veto at the intergovernmental conference. I believe that to lose the veto would be quite unacceptable from the point of view of British national interest. It would open up policies that would be utterly unacceptable not only to the House but, I believe, to the majority of people in this country. We will maintain the veto. As I have indicated to the House before, I see no significant case whatever for an extension of qualified majority voting.

Will the Prime Minister confirm that yesterday's Treasury figures showed that the tax burden has gone up since 1992? Given his own record on tax, will he guarantee that, at the next general election, any tax promises that he makes will be made under oath?

The right hon. Gentleman knows the relative records of the Conservative party and of his party on tax: he knows that income tax was 33p in the pound; he knows that other taxes went up to 98p in the pound; he knows that he has made £30 billion-worth of promises that he has to tax for; and he knows that he will be prepared to introduce a range of new taxes. It is no good him making silly gestures. That is the reality of life, and this country knows that.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman see that, regardless of whether the hon. Member for Havant (Mr. Willetts) or the Prime Minister himself says that they will cut tax year on year, nobody believes the Tories? Will he now take down the posters that falsely claim that he cut tax, or is he going to carry on dissembling?

The right hon. Gentleman might bear in mind the utterly untruthful and unscrupulous campaign that his party has been waging. Now that his leader has turned his back on him for a minute, perhaps he will confirm what the rate of the new windfall tax will be; perhaps he will tell us what the tartan tax will be and what its implications will be for Scotland; perhaps he will tell us about the health tax or the teenage tax or the extra tax on London or the very high taxes set by almost every Labour council up and down the country. Taxes, the right hon. Gentleman and the Labour party go together like strawberries and cream.

Is the Prime Minister not aware that since 1992 no fewer than 16 Ministers have resigned from his Government, many in shameful circumstances, which is a record number for any Government in British history? No wonder the Tories have lost the trust of the nation. Are we not at last seeing the last throes of a dying, dissembling Government, who should realise that it is time to go?

I dare say the right hon. Gentleman has been practising that line in front of the mirror all morning. No doubt the hon. Member for Hartlepool (Mr. Mandelson) is very pleased with his pupil for having learnt today's sound bite, but the right hon. Gentleman would be better off finding out policy and answering for the policies that his party tries to hide.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 12 December. [7346]

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

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Has he seen the report that nearly one in three German companies are trying to escape from European employment legislation? Will he continue to ensure that British firms are never saddled with those job-wrecking policies?

It was the right hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott) who went along with his Socialist International friends and signed up to precisely those policies, as no doubt his leader is doing yet again today, irrespective of the jobs that it will cost people in this country. I am not surprised that companies across Europe are moving from European countries to this country to establish themselves and to create jobs here. Other countries are losing investment as a result of following policies that the Opposition advocate. Companies are leaving those countries, coming here and investing and creating jobs, which is why our unemployment is falling.

Yesterday, the Chancellor of the Exchequer said that, if the practical advantages of a single currency outweighed the disadvantages, he would be in favour of joining. Will the Prime Minister confirm that that is his view as well?

That is precisely why we have kept an option—so that we can decide what is in the national interest. That has been our position from the outset. We must determine whether something is in the British national interest. If it is in the British national interest, we do it; if it is not in the British national interest, we say no.

While courage and valour are normally associated with our armed forces, does my right hon. Friend agree that there have been some remarkable cases of courage beyond the call of normal duty in our schools and elsewhere in the face of violence recently? Does he think that the Daily Mail and others have a reasonable point that such courage might reasonably be rewarded in the honours list or elsewhere?

I think, as my hon. Friend knows, that there is a proper mechanism for considering such matters and that it is not for me to comment on them from the Dispatch Box. I am sure that what my hon. Friend said will be heard in appropriate places.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 12 December. [7348]

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

Why cannot the Prime Minister admit that taxes on income as a percentage of earnings for all families will be higher at the time of the next general election than they were at the last? Why cannot he admit the accuracy of his own Government's figures—or has dissembling become a way for life for the Tory Government?

I will tell the hon. Gentleman the real fact about taxes: that taxes would have been higher this year if we had still had the same tax regime as we had in 1991; taxes have fallen. I will also tell him that the average family will be £1,100 a year better off as a result of the tax changes and growth in the economy. That would not have occurred under any other Government, and certainly did not occur under the last Labour Government.

In his discussions at the Dublin conference this weekend, will my right hon. Friend press as hard as he can on our European Union partners the need to come up with a favourable solution to the problem of quota hopping, which has caused so much damage to the United Kingdom fishing industry?

Yes, but that will be a matter for the intergovernmental conference rather than discussions over this weekend. As my hon. Friend will know, we tabled a protocol to deal with quota hopping, and it is one of the matters that we shall deal with during discussions at the intergovernmental conference.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 12 December. [7349]

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

May I have a very straight answer to my very simple question, which the Prime Minister has already been asked by two Labour Members? Is it true that yesterday the Government published some new figures on taxation, which show that far more of an average family's income will be paid to the Government in the coming year in the form of national insurance and income tax than was paid in 1992? The answer is yes or no. May I have that answer please?

I have answered that question twice in the past few minutes, and the answer is exactly the same as it was a few moments ago.

Will my right hon. Friend join me in recognising the outstanding reputation of the United Kingdom civil service throughout the world for integrity, independence and impartiality? Will he further join me in condemning those civil servants who appear to have joined some elements of the press and the Labour party in a network of systematic leaks, which are damaging not only the Government and Parliament but the reputation of the civil service and the Labour party?

I certainly share my right hon. Friend's belief that we have a first-class civil service. The overwhelming majority of civil servants abide strictly by the rules, but unfortunately a very few do not. Any leaks are to be deplored, but equally to be deplored are the activities of Labour Front Benchers and Back Benchers who encourage and use leaks.

"Leaked documents are particularly welcome. I promise to make good use of them."

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 12 December. [7351]

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

When my right hon. Friend goes to Dublin at the weekend, will he press on his European counterparts the success of the British economy and tell them that it can be attributed to 17 continuous years of Conservative government?

I shall most certainly do that. Anybody who reads what is being said almost daily in Europe—for example in the French press recently—will realise that people abroad recognise the success of the British economy and, on a number of occasions, have praised not just the success of the British economy but the policies of this Government, which they believe have brought it about.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 12 December. [7352]

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

With the benefit of hindsight, does the Prime Minister consider it unfortunate that a company controlled by one man now controls 40 per cent. of our national newspapers and the technology liable to form the gateway to all British television in the near future? Does he consider it unhealthy that we now appear to have reached a position where neither of the main parties is willing to speak out because of the fear that that company will unleash its newspapers against it in the run up to a general election? This is not a cheap attempt to score points and I hope that the Prime Minister will not respond in that way. It is a serious matter in a democracy.

We have an open market. I believe that that is the right way for us to proceed, but that power must be used responsibly. I agree with the hon. Gentleman about that. I hope he will draw that to the attention of his party leader, who flew to prostrate himself at the feet of the gentleman whom I believe the hon. Gentleman has in mind.

Has my right hon. Friend had time today to read the excellent article, which is extremely positive about our trade with Europe, on page 6 of The Sun, written by my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer? Its headline reads: "Britain can be Champs of Europe like Man United!" Our local club in Sussex, the Seagulls—Brighton and Hove Albion—although conveniently placed for trade with the continent, is in every kind of trouble at the moment. It would be helpful if my right hon. Friend could instruct his colleagues, when they write such positive articles in future, to give the Seagulls a bit of a boost.

I am certainly happy to commend the scale of our trade with our colleagues in the European Union. There is no doubt about its importance, its growth and the extent to which it has contributed to a general rise in the standard of living in the United Kingdom. As for my hon. Friend's football team, if he will forgive me, I often have enough difficulty with my own football team.

I deprecate the absence of hon. Members today without an apology to the Prime Minister or to me.