What plans he has for tackling inequalities in health in Scotland. [21712]

The priorities and planning guidance for 1998–99, issued in August 1997, to the national health service in Scotland includes tackling inequalities in health. In addition, a Green Paper will be published shortly, seeking views on our proposals for improving health in Scotland and for tackling inequalities.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on announcing the publication of the long-awaited Green Paper. It is 18 years since the Black report was published, showing clearly the link between inequality and poor health throughout the United Kingdom. Could my hon. Friend also find the means to make the Black report available again? He will recall that it was available for only a short period before it was suppressed by Mrs. Thatcher's last Government.

I very much regret that the Black report was not published extensively and in full. The last Government's failure to recognise the link between deprivation and ill health has greatly held back the progress of the nation's health. We are currently involved in updating much of the information contained in the Black report, although the basic premises will remain the same and will be reflected in our forthcoming Green Paper.

In reviewing funding formulae for the health service in Scotland, will the Minister ensure that deprivation in rural areas receives as much priority as any other factors that he may take into account?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, a specialist group is reviewing the SHARE—Scottish health authorities revenue equalisation—allocation formula, which has been around since the late 1970s and needs to be updated. One of the areas that it is considering for the distribution of funds is what is known as the "rurality" index. I make no judgments about it. We are waiting for good scientific advice, which is what we expect from the committee.

Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the greatest inequalities in health in Scotland is the appalling difference between the dental health of young people in deprived areas and in better-off areas? Does he agree that the most effective and cheapest way to solve that problem once and for all is to introduce fluoride into the public water supply?

Yes, we often forget the importance of dental health in this debate. Like all ill health, it is directly related to deprivation in society. We can tackle poor dental health by cutting down sugar intake and by regular brushing of teeth, but the best and most effective way to improve dental health in deprived communities is to include fluoride in the water supply.

What representations he has received about the future of Locate in Scotland; and if he will make a statement. [21713]

My right hon. Friend has received representations from a number of individuals and organisations. We have made it clear, in response to such representations, that Locate in Scotland is and will remain an outstandingly effective inward investment agency.

If there is no concern about Locate in Scotland's ability to compete fairly with the United Kingdom's other inward investment agencies, why is the Department of Trade and Industry negotiating a concordat between them all?

I am more than confident of Locate in Scotland's ability to compete effectively. In the past two weeks, I have had the privilege of making a couple of announcements about substantial successes for Locate in Scotland. I am pleased to announce today another success, which is the attraction of 30 new jobs to Arbroath through Alps Electric (Scotland) Ltd., which is investing £350,000. I expect to make many more such announcements. All of that is a tribute to Locate in Scotland. Everybody who takes a serious interest in those matters knows that the last thing that Locate in Scotland wants is a free for all involving other agencies and prospective agencies in the United Kingdom putting up the bidding for the creation and attraction of jobs. It therefore makes sense to have a concordat involving all parts of the United Kingdom to deal particularly with expressions of interest from potential inward investors where initially the interest is generic to the whole of the UK.

I welcome the past successes of Locate in Scotland, but does my hon. Friend agree with Labour Members that, in the context of the Scottish Parliament, Locate in Scotland will have a pivotal role in attracting significant investment, as it has had over many years?

I agree with my hon. Friend. Locate in Scotland will be accountable to the Scottish Parliament, and that is entirely as it should be. It will be an important part of its devolved functions. I have no doubt that Locate in Scotland will continue to be successful. Since the general election, it has been clear that all the scare stories from the Tories about either the change of Government or the constitutional settlement in the United Kingdom that we proposed were just that—scare stories. Inward investment decisions have continued to increase rather than diminish.

In any review of Locate in Scotland's work, will the Minister consider the balance between investment in areas that already have access to regional development assistance and investment in the more rural areas that do not? I acknowledge the good work that Locate in Scotland has done in the past, but does he accept that it makes it much more difficult for Ministers to give any assistance to communities furth of the central industrial belt, in towns such as Hawick, in which the Minister has taken an interest recently?

The regional selective assistance map will be reviewed, and I shall ensure that the hon. Gentleman's comments are taken into account. What comes through repeatedly in discussions with inward investors to Scotland is that, although money is an important part of the package, it is far from being the only factor. There may be overriding reasons to go to a part of Scotland that is not blessed in the way that the hon. Gentleman described. The skills of the labour force, the availability of workers and the environment are factors on which the Borders would rate favourably. My constituency has not done very well out of inward investment decisions in recent years, but it has the advantages to which the hon. Gentleman referred. That can work both ways, as many factors are taken into account. However, his comments will be noted and considered.

Does my hon. Friend agree that Locate in Scotland is one of the most successful inward investment agencies in Europe? The expansion a couple of weeks ago of the German company Isola Werke in my constituency to include another 300 jobs is one of its successes.

Yes, that was the second announcement of the new year, and it was excellent. I would go further than my hon. Friend and say that I do not think that it is one of the most successful development agencies in Europe; it is the most successful. There is no doubt that a combination of the United Kingdom's overseas presence and what it does for inward investment, and the enormous value that is added by the activities of Locate in Scotland, give us a two-track approach that works extremely well in Scotland's interest and in the interests of the United Kingdom economy.

In his discussions on the concordat, will the Minister take into account the recent report of the Select Committee on Trade and Industry? Does he agree that any further restrictions on the activities of Locate in Scotland would be at the cost of jobs in Scotland?

I was delighted with the Select Committee's report on inward investment. It bore out what I have been saying in recent months. There has been a lot of over-excited chatter about threats to Locate in Scotland, and a great deal of nonsense talked about its alleged poaching activities. The report was extremely encouraging on both grounds.

When he last met representatives of the Scottish farming industry to discuss farm income levels. [21714]

Ministers meet the National Farmers Union of Scotland on a regular basis. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State last met representatives of the union on 16 December. My noble Friend Lord Sewel last met them on 5 January, when farm incomes, among other issues of concern, were discussed.

I welcome the Minister to his post. He will be aware of the TSB agricultural study, which was published yesterday and which shows that 94 per cent. of farmers believe themselves to be less prosperous this year than last year, that there has been a collapse in agricultural investment and that there is poor confidence in the hill and livestock sectors.

I acknowledge that farmers are going through a very difficult period in comparison with earlier years. As the hon. Gentleman knows, the lifting of the export ban is being pursued in a number of ways. There is the certified herd scheme—the work on computerisation is proceeding as fast as possible—and there is the new date-based scheme, which we are pursuing in parallel with the European Commission.

I welcome my hon. Friend—who represents the most rural constituency in Britain—to his important responsibilities.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his comments. I entirely agree with him about the unfortunate nature of the events in Stranraer and elsewhere, which did not help the case at all. I also associate myself with my hon. Friend's remarks about Mr. Sandy Mole, with whom we had a very good working relationship. I hope that we shall continue to have that good working relationship with his successors.

I, too, congratulate the Minister on his appointment, and wish him well in his responsibilities. I am, however, surprised and somewhat disappointed that his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is not responding to this question. Does he really not appreciate the seriousness of the crisis facing farming, and the damage that is now being done to agriculture by the high rate of sterling and the green pound? Will he disown his noble Friend Lord Sewel because of his view that farmers have been treated generously in the past, and should stop complaining now? Will he also take action urgently to rescue an industry that is vital to Scotland's rural economy, but is currently in danger of going to the wall?

I certainly agree that the industry is vital, and that it faces difficult pressures. That is why the Government have indeed taken action. We have announced an £85 million package, a full third of which will go to Scottish farmers who—as the right hon. Gentleman knows—are facing a particularly difficult time

That simply is not good enough. Such complacency is endemic in the Minister's Government at present, and does no service to agriculture in Scotland.

Let me directly compare the assistance that we have provided with the assistance provided last year. Last year, the right hon. Gentleman's Government provided £60 million of extra assistance to deal with the Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy crisis, but they made no further provision for the following year. We have provided £85 million to respond to farmers' current difficulties.

How many applications have been made to Scottish universities for the 1998–99 academic year; and how many were made in the comparable period for the 1997–98 and 1996–97 academic years. [21716]

Figures for Scottish higher education institutions have not yet been published by the universities central admissions system. However, provisional United Kingdom figures show that, by 15 December 1997, the universities and colleges admissions service had received 326,220 applications for entry to higher education in 1998. That compares with 347,037 at the same point in 1996 and 340,711 at the same point in 1995.

I thank the Minister for his answer. It is always regrettable when the number of applicants for higher education goes down, particularly when, as in this case, those applicants are not helped by an immoral policy that discriminates against all UK students who are not Scots. More Northern Ireland students apply to Scotland than to anywhere else in the UK. When we are in every other way helping Northern Ireland to remain a part of the Union, what is he doing to end that immoral discrimination?

I would caution anyone against placing too much importance on applications because there is a big difference between applications and admissions. In quoting any of these figures, hon. Members have to remember that, in the current academic year, admissions to Scottish universities went up by 5 per cent. as people moved, understandably, to pre-empt the changes in student funding.

How long can a system be sustained whereby students on the same course pay different fees simply because they come from different parts of the UK?

My hon. Friend knows that his question is disingenuous. It is not simply because students come from different parts of the UK; it is also because they hold different entry qualifications. If he wants perfect symmetry in the UK education system, that is a big argument, but at present Scottish school-leaving qualifications are geared to the Scottish four-year honours degree course and students who hold A-levels may in many cases enter in the second year of a four-year course. In making a judgment about which university to go to, any student will take into account whether he wants to enter a four-year course in the first year or whether he should take advantage of the possibility of entering a four-year course in the second year, if his qualifications are appropriate.

For students entering university in 1998–99, in subsequent academic years, what will the position be with regard to supplementary allowances? Does the Minister accept that that is of considerable importance to students throughout Scotland, particularly those from more remote areas, who are worried about their travel allowances? For example, a student from Shetland attending Dundee university may face travel costs of £360. It is important that students entering a course should know what the financial implications are throughout their period at university. Those who enter in the coming academic year should have the same supplementary allowance arrangements throughout their stay at university.

The existing arrangements do not disadvantage students in terms of travel costs, but that is all part of the consultation on the Dearing and Garrick reports. I would be pleased to hear any additional point that the hon. and learned Gentleman would like to make to me on the matter, but there is no such proposal.

Some people might think that the Minister's answers have been disingenuous. Northern Ireland students have travelled to Scotland since long before the Act of Union 1801. I therefore ask that the matter be given further consideration. Can the Minister tell us, for example, the difference in academic standards? Northern Ireland students have met the Scottish standards and come through with flying colours—not only to the betterment of Northern Ireland students but to the credit of Scottish universities.

Northern Ireland students, and students from all other parts of the United Kingdom, are very welcome and valuable components of the Scottish higher education system, and they will continue to be so. The debate is very narrow, because 40 per cent. of all students—irrespective of where they come from—will pay no tuition fees, and only a relatively small minority of students will pay the full amount.

In the fiasco over non-Scottish UK students and over student fees generally, two matters are clear. First, the Minister has absolutely no appetite for the changes that he is introducing. Secondly, the changes are utterly Treasury-driven. Will the Minister tell us whether the Treasury's inability to recognise the different funding requirements for Scottish and English higher education provision is—to use the words of No. 10 Downing street—one of the Chancellor's "psychological flaws"?

I have an appetite for annually putting £140 million extra into Scottish higher and further education. The Tory legacy was to pile on the numbers and to cut the money.

What representations he has received on the replacement of the Kincardine bridge. [21717]

Since taking office, we have received 11 letters on issues related to the replacement of the Kincardine bridge. I am also aware of the meeting in July between my hon. Friend, supported by members and officials of Fife council, and my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, North and Leith (Mr. Chisholm), during his period as Minister responsible for local government and transport at the Scottish Office.

Does my hon. Friend agree that replacement of the Kincardine bridge has widespread support, and that replacing it is a matter of urgent priority in assisting inward investment, in easing traffic congestion and in reducing pollution at Kincardine? Given the years of delay and indecision by the previous Government, is the Minister able to announce any early action that he intends to take to secure the bridge's early replacement?

I am very conscious of my hon. Friend's active pursuit of the matter, which is a very important transport issue. A review of the options at Kincardine is now being finalised by officials—whose advice I expect to receive shortly—and a decision will be taken as soon as is reasonably practicable. Because of the matter's importance, we have accelerated the options review.

What assessment he has made of the advantages of holding the first elections to a Scottish Parliament in 1999 on the same day as local government elections in Scotland. [21718]

I believe that a joint poll will increase interest in the local government elections and lead to a higher turnout with lower overall costs. It also avoids voters having to go to the polls three times in quick succession.

First, may I wish my right hon. Friend every success in his bid to become a candidate at one of those elections? I hope that we are given the stamp of approval by what has already been called the people's panel. Is not the real link between the two elections that the outcome of both will have a huge impact on the future structure and financing of the water and sewerage industry in Scotland? Therefore, may I have my right hon. Friend's assurance that between now and the elections he will prevent the unelected water quangos from entering into any private finance initiative contracts which will effectively tie the hands of Members of the Scottish Parliament and prevent local councillors from fulfilling their manifesto commitment to bring the water and sewerage industry back under local democratic control

I can give my hon. Friend two assurances. First, I shall not be shopping in Dundee with regard to any of the elections and secondly, I congratulate him on his ingenuity in referring to unelected water boards. I must also disappoint him by saying that I cannot give him the assurance that he seeks. I expect the water boards to address the problem of getting much-needed investment into the industry and achieving the standards that people in Scotland deserve.

Can the Secretary of State please explain why he considers it important to achieve a so-called gender balance in the elections to the new Scottish Parliament and how he intends to do so?

That again is ingenious. I hope that the hon. Lady does not imagine that by standing in her place she is convincing me that there are arguments against women in Parliament. We are all anxious—including, I am sure, the hon. Lady—that we have a fair representation of women so that the House of Commons, the Scottish Parliament and local government look a little more like the community that they seek to represent.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is important to have the widest possible pool of talented candidates for the Scottish Parliament? Does he further agree that it is important to allow local government staff—who number more than 25,000 and are currently restricted from standing—the opportunity to stand for the Scottish Parliament?

Of course I understand the point that my hon. Friend is making and we are keeping the matter under review. However, very recently the Nolan committee stressed how important it is that councils and the public can rely on a politically impartial service from senior local government officials. That also has to be weighed in the balance. The number who are currently excluded under the rules is around 2 per cent. of those who work in local government in Scotland, but I recognise that there are strong feelings on the issue and we try to keep it under review.

But one substantial difference between the two elections is that the elections to the Scottish Parliament will be carried out by proportional representation, while the local elections are still planned to be decided by the first-past-the-post system. Does the Secretary of State not agree that it would be a splendid opportunity to introduce proportional representation in local government elections in Scotland? Would not such action be the strongest single step towards ending one-party domination and the various problems that beset the Labour party in councils in central Scotland?

I take that remark as a rather touching tribute to the speed with which we have addressed problems of constitutional change in Scotland. However, the hon. Gentleman will recognise that his suggestion is somewhat impractical. He will know, however, that an independent commission will be set up shortly on which his party is likely to be represented to look at the relationship between the Scottish Parliament and local government and the ways in which we can strengthen local democracy in Scotland. Obviously, the matter has to be considered carefully, but there may well be people who will try to argue that case, if not in the commission, more generally.

Does my righ hon. Friend agree that it is somewhat unfortunate that some Opposition Members show such total ignorance of the workings of the Scottish Constitutional Convention which for many years now has been committed to equal representation of men and women in the Scottish Parliament and which represents Scottish views somewhat more successfully than the hon. Member for Epping Forest (Mrs. Laing)?

I would not want to pass judgment on the capacity of the hon. Member for Epping Forest (Mrs. Laing) as a representative. That is a matter for her electorate and I congratulate her on having survived and being here, which may be some sort of tribute. So far as I am concerned, the Government and many hon. Members across the range of parties in the House are committed to positive ways of encouraging women into public life.

Given that so few of the Secretary of State's hon. Friends are prepared to give up the comforts of Westminster to stand for the Scottish Parliament and that, consequently, if Millbank tower and the Minister without Portfolio permit, most of the Labour candidates will be drawn from the tired old ranks of Scottish Labour councillors, would it not be fairer if the elections were held on separate days so that they could at least remember which they were standing for?

The right hon. Gentleman should not be proud of that question as an example of his intellectual rigour. He may be consumed with envy. The Conservative party in Scotland does not have ranks of any sort—tired, old, young or innovative—to draw on.

What is the number of NHS beds per head of population in Scotland; and what assessment he has made of the per capita provision of NHS beds in Scotland relative to the United Kingdom average. [21719]

There were 3.3 national health service beds available in the acute sector in Scotland per 1,000 population in 1996–97. The equivalent number for the United Kingdom was 2.5 beds.

I am grateful to the Minister for that answer. Does he accept that that favourable percentage is due to the financial arrangements that Scotland has had in the United Kingdom? Will those arrangements be sustainable when Scotland has its own Parliament?

As the hon. Gentleman well knows, the financial arrangements are supported by those on the Conservative Front Bench. The figures reflect the differences between Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom, including the greater prevalence of disease and the geographical differences. It is proper that such matters should be taken into account anywhere in the country.

Does the Minister agree that, far from trying to claim credit for the figures, the Opposition should be blamed for the fact that they are necessary? After 18 years of Tory government, the health of the people of Scotland is in a much worse state than before because of the Tories' harsh economic policies and their failure to deal with the damp housing conditions that have resulted in Glasgow having the poorest health statistics in the United Kingdom. If anything, there is a need for more NHS beds, not fewer.

The problem of the past 18 years was that the previous Government failed to recognise the link between deprivation and ill health, because they found it politically difficult to do so. We recognise that link, we shall tackle it and we shall significantly improve the health of the nation.

In his reply to the hon. Member for Tewkesbury (Mr. Robertson), the Minister underscored his understanding of the fact that the per capita provision of hospital beds has to take account of geographical factors as well as other social and economic factors. Will he bear in mind the assurance that he gave me by letter about the continuing provision of full-time surgical services at Broadford hospital on the Isle of Skye? Only this morning, the Highland health board announced its intention to withdraw full-time surgical provision for the Isle of Skye and to replace it with a locum service operating out of, I think, Fort William and Inverness. Given the climate and—as the Minister knows better than most—the number of people who visit the Isle of Skye for climbing and other outdoor pursuits, does the hon. Gentleman agree that the issue needs to be considered very carefully before any precipitate decisions are taken?

I certainly do. I know the hospital very well, not just from climbing on Skye, but because I was one of the locum surgeons there for some time. As the hon. Gentleman knows, the review is all about having the highest-quality services for patients. That is what I demand from any changes and that will be the only motivating factor in our decisions.

If he will return Scotland's water services to local authority control. [21720]

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State made a statement to the House on Tuesday 16 December 1997 on the future of the Scottish water industry. It dealt with the issue of local authority control and provided for stronger and better links between local authorities and water boards under the overall democratic supervision of the Scottish Parliament.

When will the Government deliver the Labour party manifesto commitment to return Scotland's water services to local democratic control, instead of playing musical chairs with the quangos left to us by the Tory Government? In the Falkirk area, for example, when water services were in the ownership and management of local government, we had good, forward-looking investment programmes, combined with the lowest water charges in western Europe. Will the Government intervene to prevent the East of Scotland water quango from imposing a 58 per cent. increase in domestic water charges, which would mean an even more exorbitant increase of 144 per cent. over two years?

As my hon. Friend will appreciate, the existence of 32 local authorities after the previous Government's reorganisation means that it is simply not possible or practical to have the kind of direct local authority control that he would like. However, we have increased accountability to local authorities through better links between them and water boards. As for possible price increases, they are a matter for negotiation between the water boards and the customer councils. If there is no agreement, the matter will go to the Secretary of State for arbitration, so I cannot comment further.

Consumers in Tayside face a 38 per cent. increase in water charges in the near future. That is a swingeing increase—the highest in the whole of the North of Scotland area. In view of the Government's pre-election promises, can the Minister not understand the disenchantment of people in my constituency and neighbouring constituencies with both the North of Scotland Water Authority and the Government on that matter?

For the reason that I have just explained, I cannot comment on particular price rises. However, speaking generally, we have always said that water services will cost more. There are many years of underfunding and under-investment to make up for; that will have to be done through a combination of public and private investment, but also through price increases.

What recent representations he has received concerning the ferry services operated by Caledonian MacBrayne. [21721]

My right hon. Friend has received a number of recent representations concerning ferry services operated by Caledonian MacBrayne. The main subject of representations received recently from my hon. Friend's constituents has been the future of Caledonian MacBrayne's ferry service between Gourock and Dunoon.

May I tell the Minister that it is hugely important that Caledonian MacBrayne run an efficient and reliable service, an integral part of which is a well-motivated work force? I do not believe that there would be any problems hanging over the Ballycastle to Campbeltown service had not that odd-job lot on the Opposition Benches, when they were in office, given it to Caledonian MacBrayne to run.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his involvement in the issue, and for the discussions that we have already had on those matters. As he is probably aware, the Scottish Office, together with CalMac and Western Ferries, commissioned the consultants Deloitte and Touche to examine future options for the provision of ferry services between Gourock and Dunoon. The consultants are finalising their work in discussion with CalMac and Western Ferries, and the study is expected to be completed in February. As my hon. Friend will appreciate, a meeting was set up recently, but we had to postpone it. I look forward to an early meeting with him and his trade union colleagues to discuss the matter, and others relating to the ferry services in that area.

I thank the Minister for his swift response to my queries about the Portavadie to Tarbert ferry, which was much appreciated by all the bodies involved. I congratulate him on managing to understand the Caledonian brief fairly quickly, considering that he was dropped in at the deep end. Can he say today whether a decision has been made about the connection between Mull, Coll and Tiree—a subject that we discussed recently at St. Andrew's house?

I certainly welcomed the meeting with the hon. Lady; it was part of my fast learning curve on the brief. As I promised her at that time, we are finalising a response to that issue, and I shall have an early meeting with her before any decision is finally arrived at.

What plans he has for raising standards in Scottish schools. [21722]

All our policies on school education are designed to raise standards. I attach particular importance to the action group on standards in Scottish schools which I established last July and which is developing a framework of targets for improvement in schools.

I welcome that reply. Does the Secretary of State agree that one of the keys to improving standards in schools is encouraging young people to learn to read, write and count at an early age? If they can crack the codes of numeracy and literacy at an early age, they can take advantage of the rest of their school careers. Are there any plans to encourage, develop, improve or extend early intervention schemes of the kind piloted in Lothian?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend; we are extremely interested in the idea. There is a consensus in the House and in the education world to the effect that early intervention is extremely valuable, and that action taken in the early stages of a school career can bring great rewards later. That is why we have provided more than £20 million for early intervention in respect of numeracy and literacy, and why we have launched a number of other initiatives, such as alternatives to school exclusion. I hope that they will help and support children who might otherwise fail at school and thus find themselves ill equipped to compete later in life.

What plans she has to implement the recommendations of the Select Committee on the Modernisation of the House of Commons on legislative procedures in respect of Bills in the current session. [21742]

The House has agreed the first programme motions on Government Bills in relation to the Scotland Bill and the Government of Wales Bill. These reflect the recommendations of the Modernisation Committee. A number of Bills are also to be published in draft form, and I hope that some of them will be examined by Select Committees.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend, and I congratulate her on the leadership that she is showing in modernising our procedures. Until we get some serious Bills exposed to the sort of scrutiny that the Modernisation Committee has recommended, however, we shall not be sure that the process is working. I know that my right hon. Friend wants that to happen, but I suspect that there may be Ministers, civil servants and possibly even party managers who do not look kindly on the idea of better scrutiny. But the country wants it and the House wants it, and I urge the Leader of the House to make sure that we get it.

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's comments. The Scotland Bill and the Government of Wales Bill are important. Significantly, we managed to get agreement on dealing with them in this way. Everyone who serves on the Modernisation Committee is aware that there are differing opinions in the House on how best to go about the scrutiny of other legislation, but we are making progress. I hope that, by publishing several Bills in draft form and allowing Select Committees or some new Committee to examine them, we shall improve the quality of legislation.

When it comes to publishing Bills, the right hon. Lady will know that the Government receive a lot of correspondence to which Departments are supposed to respond within, at most, 20 working days. On 23 October, a constituent of mine wrote to the Government about nursery education; I opened the very simple answer from the Minister today, 20 January. What can the Leader of the House do to ensure that Departments respond to hon. Members' letters in good time—in other words, while the legislation in question is still going through the House?

I admire the hon. Gentleman's ingenuity in getting in that question as a supplementary at this point.

If she will make a statement about the Government's strategy against illegal drug use. [21743]

What are her priorities in the co-ordination of strategies to deal with drug misuse. [21745]

Keith Hellawell, the United Kingdom's anti-drugs co-ordinator, took up his post full time on 5 January. He will be submitting proposals for a new anti-drugs strategy to me by March, following an extensive consultation process and in the light of a comprehensive spending review. The priorities are likely to be to help young people realise their own potential, protect communities from drug-related crime, provide effective services for drug addicts and restrict the availability of illegal drugs. Once agreed by Ministers, a report on the new strategy will be published as soon as possible.

May I tell my right hon. Friend how much I support the decision taken by the Government to appoint 300 extra customs officers to prevent illegal drug shipments from entering this country? How sharply that decision contrasts with the policy of the previous Government, who cut the number of customs officers at just the time they were accepting a £1 million donation from a foreign secret source closely connected to the drugs trade. Will my right hon. Friend join me in urging the Leader of the Opposition to give that dirty money back?

The fact that we reversed the proposed cut in the posts of 300 customs officers shows how seriously we take the drugs problem and how alarmed we are about the amount of drugs coming into the country, which is one reason why hon. Members on both sides of the House will welcome the recent seizures and the disruption of drug supplies into this country by the enforcement agencies. All of us have been somewhat concerned, to put it mildly, about the reports that have just emerged about the sources of some of the Conservative party's funding.

I thank the right hon. Lady for her full response. I wish the new drugs tsar every success in the vital and critical work that he is undertaking. Will the right hon. Lady accept that my right hon. and now ennobled Friend, Tony Newton—as we knew him in the House—did a superb job in co-ordinating the response of all Government Departments to the problems of drugs and drug abuse? He brought the Department of Health, the Home Office, the Department for Education and Employment, as well as the Treasury—because of its responsibility for Customs and Excise—together to co-ordinate their policy on drugs. Will the co-ordination that Tony Newton introduced continue?

When the previous Government introduced their new approach and the document "Tackling Drugs Together", I was the first on the Opposition Benches to welcome the moves taken by Tony Newton and outlined by the hon. Gentleman. We are trying to build on that strategy and take it several stages further, which is why we are auditing what is spent on drug work in every Department, undertaking proper evaluations and trying to co-ordinate. The big difference is that we are trying to ensure that the causes of drug taking, in particular the early signs of difficulty such as truancy, exclusion from school and joblessness, are tackled as part of the problem.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that her job of controlling drug abuse and educating young people has been made 10 times more difficult due to the fact that—as we now know and as I forecast three months ago—Ma Ching-kwan handed over £1 million to the Tory party? He comes from a family who are recognised drug and heroin dealers in Hong Kong. The family did that because they wanted the father, who had escaped to Taiwan, to be brought back to Hong Kong. They used the offices of David Mellor and of Chris Patten, and they handed over the money in the presence of the former Prime Minister. The Tory party has now got the money, although people say it should hand it back. I am not so sure that that is the brightest of ideas because it would be going back to a known drug dealer. It ought to go to charity.

I should first congratulate my hon. Friend on raising that point several months ago. Having that information confirmed today proves that the House is right to listen to him on many occasions. He is right to say that it does not make it any easier to get the message across about the dangers of drugs. Although I have heard people saying, even this afternoon, that the money should be given back, I believe that it would not be appropriate to give it back to the donor in this instance. The money should be given to a drug-related charity.

I applaud the President of the Council's firm words on the campaign that we need against drug misuse, but will she acknowledge that the budget of only £300,000 that has been allocated to the drugs tsar, of which his salary and that of his deputy will take up more than half, smacks of tokenism at its worst? What will she promise the House in terms of real resources and policies to tackle this very real menace?

Give us £1 million.

My hon. Friend's point is well made.

What steps she is taking to uphold the rights and privileges of the House in respect of Government announcements. [21744]

The Government seek to make all announcements about major changes of policy to the House.

There has scarcely been a major Government announcement that has not first been widely leaked and trailed in the press. Is that part of a deliberate policy to erode the rights and privileges of the House and to diminish Parliament? Now that the Budget date has been announced, what specific action has the President of the Council taken to remind Ministers that they are accountable to Parliament and not to the media?

I often think that Conservative Members, and especially former Cabinet Ministers, have short memories about what they did in government. The situation regarding the number of statements to the House is similar to that which existed under the previous Administration; indeed, I remember that we made complaints from the Opposition Benches about the Department of Health, and I am sure that, if the right hon. Lady casts her mind back, she will also recall that. I doubt whether Ministers need to be reminded of their responsibilities regarding Budget day.

Will my right hon. Friend promise the House that, when the Government make a firm decision to take legislative action to oblige all political parties represented in the House to identify the source of donations—certainly those above £5,000—an early announcement will be made in the House first of all? Is it not absolutely essential that such action should be taken, and that we should deal with all the latest Tory sleaze, including, one should not forget, the stolen money that was received from Asil Nadir and never returned to anybody?

Again, I congratulate my hon. Friend on his ingenuity in getting in that point as a supplementary question. When we are ready to act on the public funding of political parties, announcements will, of course, be made in the normal way, but we have to await the outcome of the Neill inquiry.

There is a serious point at the heart of the question. Ought not the Government, in their own interests, to make a more serious distinction between their official statements and the comments of press officers, people who use mobile telephones in pubs in Whitehall and friends of various parties in the Cabinet? Is it not becoming increasingly difficult for the public to distinguish the Government's voice from the unauthorised comments that expose their divisions?

I suspect that even Liberal Democrats have mobile phones, even if they do not have that many friends. There is great press interest in what is or is not said in various pubs around Westminster, and I would caution everyone to be extremely careful in what they say.

May I—

Where is your tie?

I am not wearing a tie because, unlike the hon. Gentleman, I do not have a brass neck.

Order. The hon. Gentleman has just come out of hospital after an operation and has apologised to me because it was not possible for him to wear a tie today. I had hoped that it would not be necessary for me to make that announcement.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I welcome the hon. Gentleman back to his place and I am glad that he exempts me from the charges that he makes. However, I take issue with him because I do not think that the situation now is very different from previous times. People are always anxious to try to find out what is going on in the Government. People speculate and sometimes obtain leaks, but there is no systematic leaking in the way that the hon. Gentleman suggests. I remind him that the last time a significant complaint about a leak was made, we found out that the Minister had given a written answer to the question at 3.30 pm, although someone from his party complained when the information was available at 4 pm. We should not always believe all we are told in allegations about leaks.