What financial and technical assistance she gives eastern European Governments to develop their economies. [115429]

Over the past five years, bilateral financial and technical assistance to eastern Europe has averaged around £80 million a year. It is channelled not only directly to central Governments, but to local governments and to non-governmental and civil society organisations. In addition however, the UK has provided assistance through our contributions to multilateral institutions, including our share of EC commitments, which averaged around £200 million a year.

I am grateful for that response, and it seems that Britain is doing its bit at least. However, Britain is not alone in suffering from the growing influx of economic migrants from eastern Europe, especially from Romania. I understand that Holland, Belgium and a number of other European Union countries are suffering in the same way. What meetings has the Minister had with European Union colleagues to try to persuade them to ensure that the money that we put in is being spent effectively, economically and technically, to ensure that those countries' economies can improve? That improvement would help them, but it would also help other countries that want to stem the economic tide.

Not only have we discussed the matter with our European partners, but I had the opportunity to discuss it with a Romanian Minister who visited us two weeks ago. I discussed with the Romas the type of help that we are giving to improve the position in that country. That help makes it less likely that they will seek to go elsewhere.

Does my hon. Friend share my experience, gained from being co-chair of the Future of Europe Trust, that one of the most urgent priorities for eastern Europe is the extension of civil rights and the rebuilding of civil society? May I urge his Department to give special priority to strengthening non-governmental organisations and other bodies in those countries?

I agree with my hon. Friend. The Future of Europe Trust is doing a good job, as is the Westminster Foundation and a number of other organisations. Many of our resources are channelled into the sort of work that my hon. Friend has suggested. However, we will certainly consider any further assistance that we can give in that direction.

What assessment she has made of the extent of the AIDS epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa. [115430]

AIDS is now the biggest killer in Africa: 14 million Africans have died as a result of the infection, and nearly 4 million died last year alone. In the worst-affected countries, one in four adults is infected. The impacts are reversing development gains made over the past 30 years. Life expectancy is dropping. Gains in child survival are being reversed, and the limited pool of skilled workers is being decimated. By the end of this year, 10.4 million African children will have lost their mothers, or both parents, to AIDS.

I pay tribute to the Department's work in this matter. The world focused on the tragic floods in Mozambique, which killed some 5,000 people, but over the next five years some 4 million Mozambicans will die from AIDS, as that is the approximate number of people there who are infected with HIV. The problem is so enormous that it dwarfs all the others facing sub-Saharan Africa. Unless the HIV-AIDS problem is sorted out, there can be no further development in the area, so will the Secretary of State review her priorities for aid there?

The hon. Gentleman is right, but the problem is worse than he described, as 4 million people died of AIDS in Africa last year. This is an incredible crisis and a major priority for the Department. The good news is that such Governments as those in Senegal and Uganda, who have given it priority and who have mounted really honest and open campaigns, have stemmed the tide when it comes to the growth of the infection. We must get other countries to adopt the same courageous leadership, backed up by the international community. Half the cases of new infection involved young people, and more than half of those were young women, many of whom did not consent to sexual relations. They must be given the strength to be able to refuse and protect themselves.

Does my right hon. Friend share my concerns about some recent statements by South Africa's President Mbeki and the impact that they might have on prevention work and on people's access to treatments in that country? Will she take every opportunity to raise the matter with the Government of South Africa?

I have read the reports of what President Mbeki is supposed to have said, and they are rather worrying. However, I met the South African Health Minister last week in The Hague, and she said that the reports did not accurately portray her Government's position. As my hon. Friend will know, the infection is growing and spreading in South Africa very seriously indeed. We are doing all that we can to work with the South African Government and to ensure that action is taken to prevent the spread of the disease.

Does the Secretary of State agree that it is the duty and responsibility of employers in the public and private sectors—particularly the private sector—to take measures to educate their work force on how to manage the problem of HIV-AIDS and the associated illnesses? Is that not the way to begin to reduce the number infected?

The hon. Gentleman is right. The more forward-looking employers are doing that. Something like one third of teachers have the infection in many countries that have a grave shortage of teachers. It is also spread by the armed forces, which tend to move around with the infection. There must be more education in schools. We must protect young people so that the next generation does not become infected. Everyone, including the armed forces and employers, must take the problem more seriously.

The Secretary of State shares everyone's concerns about the terrifying scale of HIV-AIDS in Africa in general, but in Zimbabwe in particular. One in four adults in Zimbabwe has the virus, 1,000 die every week from an AIDS-related illness and perhaps the greatest tragedy of all is that 14 per cent. of all children aged four and under are HIV positive through no fault of their own.

I cannot tell the hon. Gentleman without notice what proportion of our programme in Zimbabwe is focused on HIV-AIDS. However, I can assure him that we are working on that problem in Zimbabwe. We have had difficulties dealing with this problem, as we have in other matters, because of the lack of political leadership. We share the hon. Gentleman's concern about the situation in Zimbabwe, but we do not believe that it is right simply to cancel the whole of Britain's assistance to Zimbabwe as some of his hon. Friends have requested—[Interruption.] Some have, although perhaps not the hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham (Mrs. Gillan). The poor of Zimbabwe suffer most from the terrible economic crisis, and we want to stay engaged where we can be useful, without giving any support to some of the actions of Zimbabwe's Government that are so destructive for its people and its economy.

I am certainly not looking to pick a fight with the Secretary of State on this issue, because it is so important. No one wants the people of Zimbabwe to suffer because of the withdrawal of our aid programme, but would it not be more effective to stop channelling the money into the Government of Zimbabwe and redirect it through the charities, non-governmental organisations and churches in that country which are doing a terrific job, particularly for HIV-AIDS victims? Would that not be a better way of ensuring that more money gets through to the people who need it? It would also send a clear signal to the Government of Zimbabwe that their actions are intolerable and we will not support them.

Although the substantive question was not on Zimbabwe, let me point out that President Mugabe has made it clear that he had a much closer, better, friendlier and warmer relationship with the previous Administration in the United Kingdom than he has with this Government, so I do not think that we will be taking any lessons from the hon. Gentleman and his party on how to deal with the situation in Zimbabwe.

What recent progress has been made on debt relief for the poorest countries; and if she will make a statement. [115432]

Debt relief under the enhanced heavily indebted poor countries—HIPC—initiative has been agreed for the first three countries, with Mozambique, Senegal and Tanzania being assessed next. Under the new framework, countries are required to develop poverty reduction strategies, which are published, to qualify for debt relief. In that way, we shall ensure that debt relief will help the poor. We are concerned that progress in finalising enhanced debt relief is slower than was originally promised and agreed.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. She will be aware of the Jubilee 2000 claim that 19,000 children die every day as a result of debt. Although I recognise and welcome the progress made under her leadership by the UK Government on this issue, will she do everything that she can to instil a sense of urgency in some other countries in order to reach the commitment made at Cologne that, by the end of this year, 25 countries will be brought to decision point? Time is running out for those countries, and time is running out for those children.

My hon. Friend is right. The promise that three quarters of the eligible heavily indebted poor countries would have received their enhanced debt relief by the end of 2000 is slipping; it is in danger of not being met. The Government are doing all in our power to exert pressure in Washington to achieve speedier processing of applications. We could do with the support of all Members of Parliament and, indeed, the Jubilee 2000 coalition to put pressure on all the Governments involved as well as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank so that the promises are kept.

Does the Secretary of State agree that, if she were to continue with the debt relief package to Zimbabwe, that would send the most appalling message to other countries that, however badly they behaved, they could nevertheless be the beneficiary of debt relief? Will she and the Government take action to deal with the appalling situation in which the only productive element in the economy—that of the white farmers—is being destroyed in an otherwise bankrupt system? May we please have some action from the Government—at least by having Zimbabwe suspended from the Commonwealth?

This substantive question is not on Zimbabwe either. Zimbabwe is not a highly indebted poor country, nor is it eligible for debt relief. I agree with the hon. Gentleman that the situation in that country is extremely serious; the whole economy, including farming, is in trouble. No fuel is available; the economy is grinding to a halt, and the situation is desperately serious for all concerned. We must do everything that we can to get Zimbabwe back on track for the sake of all its people—black and white.

In answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Gravesham (Mr. Pond), my right hon. Friend expressed her dissatisfaction with the rate of progress in the delivery of relief to heavily indebted poor countries. Could she tell the House about the administration blockage in that process and what steps can be taken to clear it?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that question. Behind closed doors in Washington, in the processes of the World Bank and the IMF, countries are able to take up positions that are not the same as those that they take in public. Some countries have not yet found the resources that they owe to the HIPC trust fund in order to carry through the process. However, we have all agreed that countries that establish broad poverty reduction strategies should be able to get on track. They can then refine the programme and receive complete debt relief later. Some countries in the IMF and World Bank put down so many conditions that it takes much time to get countries moving. The whole international community needs to exert pressure over that matter.

If she will make a statement on progress in the supply of aid to Mozambique. [115433]

The search and rescue phase of the emergency in Mozambique is over. Relief operations continue to progress as access improves. The priority remains to stabilise the conditions of the flood-affected population by providing sufficient shelter, food, water, sanitation and health care, both in accommodation centres and to those able to return home. We are also committed to refocusing and driving forward our growing development programme. Mozambique remains one of the poorest countries on earth—between 30 and 40 per cent. of its children are severely malnourished even when there are no floods. The recent crisis must not be allowed to derail Mozambique's recent progress in economic reform and poverty reduction.

I am grateful to the right hon. Lady for that answer. Will she confirm that one by-product of the recent flooding and disasters in Mozambique has been the shifting by floodwater of huge numbers of land mines, which are left over from the civil wars and represent a lethal threat to the population? Does any of the relief that she is giving that country include either financial or practical aid to help deal with the on-going land mine problem resulting from the floods? Will she confirm that the strong and good work that she and the Government have been doing with the Halo Trust will continue and that there might be additional funding to deal with the new threat?

I can confirm that, in the Zambezia province, which was not affected by the flooding but was a centre of the civil war, and where the United Kingdom has been asked to lead, we have been working, through the Halo Trust, to clear mines, and that province has been cleared. A very small team of workers is left there because mines are occasionally found in bushes and so on. The suggestion that, in the flooded area, land mines have moved and become dangerous is being taken seriously. There is a United Nations expert team there, but I do not know the outcome of the review that it is conducting. I shall find out and let the hon. Gentleman know.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, quite apart from the problem of land mines, there may be great problems in the supply of suitable land for planting once the flood waters have receded? What efforts are being made to identify suitable land and to provide seeds to grow food for the future in Mozambique?

Many people have lost absolutely everything—their homes, crops, seeds and tools. What we must do—we have learned this—is not just feed those people, because they then become endlessly dependent, but help them to get home, and provide materials so that they can build their own houses, as most African people do, and seeds and tools so that they can plant. However, they need to be fed until crops grow, and that is what we are doing.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the lack of heavy-lift equipment in the United Kingdom and, indeed, in Europe hampers our response to natural disasters such as the one that has just been experienced in Mozambique? What talks or discussions has she had with the Ministry of Defence and other such Departments in Europe in order to rectify the matter and make a rapid response force a reality?

I do not agree with the hon. Lady that we should buy military equipment in the UK in order to respond to natural disasters across the world. That is just not the most efficient way of spending money or of getting assistance to people rapidly. If there is a military case for more heavy-lift equipment for MOD forces, it should be made in those terms. Our Department and all those who help in emergencies must always commission the best equipment that can be moved the fastest and is the most effective use of aid resources. As the hon. Lady knows, in the case of Mozambique that meant, first, helicopters from southern Africa and then those from the MOD once the price that it charged was reduced. I do not think that spending money on the MOD for heavy-lift equipment for aid is the right way of going about such matters.

As well as the legacy of land mines, the civil war left huge gaps in Mozambique's road, rail and communications network. Before the flood, the Government and the authorities were developing a careful, rational plan for improvement, which has obviously now suffered a severe setback. What role will the Department play in helping the longer-term reconstruction of Mozambique?

My hon. Friend is right; Mozambique is a large country, with good land but few roads. The main north-south road has been breached and needs repairing. There are plans for a link to South Africa, which would help develop the economy. In Zambezia province, we have been helping to find local contractors to build rural roads, which will increase production of crops, because farmers can get to market, and enable more children to attend school and more people to access health care. Mozambique needs much of that assistance right across the country in order to develop its economy.

I am sure that the Secretary of State agrees that we should all learn from our experiences, however painful. Since haggling with the Ministry of Defence over the cost of hiring helicopters, what changes has she made in departmental procedures?

I am sorry that those who speak for the Conservative party cannot seem to understand rationality and facts. It has been made absolutely clear in four presentations to the Select Committee that it is the duty and the job of my Department always to commission equipment that can get as rapidly as possible to people affected by disasters. When the Ministry of Defence first made an offer, the price was very high and the time that it would have taken to get its helicopters to Mozambique was greater than it took to commission other helicopters elsewhere. Therefore, we did not commission the Ministry of Defence's helicopters; we commissioned others. There was thus no delay in getting help to Mozambique.

What assistance Her Majesty's Government are providing to assist rebuilding in Chechnya. [115435]

Our assistance to the north Caucasus is focused on meeting emergency humanitarian needs. We have already contributed £1.4 million to the United Nations and to the International Committee of the Red Cross, and about 800,000 euros through our share of the assistance provided by ECHO, the European Commission Humanitarian Office. I am now able to announce an initial UK contribution of $500,000—which is about a third of a million pounds—in response to the latest UN appeal. We stand ready to consider any further requests for assistance.

I welcome that answer, but the international community did precious little as civilians in Chechnya were rendered homeless and destitute and made refugees in neighbouring republics and states. I know that it was a dangerous situation, but not upsetting the Russians also seemed to inform western policy. Now that the war is over, will the Government offer direct aid to the Chechens and, together with other nations, lean on the Russians to restore Chechnya and say to them, "We know that you can destroy, but can you rebuild?"

Both Britain and our European partners condemned the use of indiscriminate force in Chechnya and called for a political process to end the conflict. We have also called for a full and transparent investigation into the allegations of human rights abuses. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made that clear to President Putin when he met him in St. Petersburg, and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs made that clear to the Russian Foreign Minister. Our concern is humanitarian assistance, and we shall deal with that as sympathetically as possible. My hon. Friend is quite right about reconstruction—the principal responsibility rests with Russia.

Given that the Putin Government now appear to be committed to the reconstruction of Chechnya, will the Government, together with the European Union, offer assistance and humanitarian aid for the restoration of the Chechen economy and infrastructure?

It is clearly far too early to assess what will be needed and how it will be paid for. That is something that we shall have to consider. At the moment, our first priority is to deal with the 180,000 internally displaced people in Ingushetia and those who are suffering in other parts of the north Caucasus. We have a strong and important job to do in that connection. That is our immediate concern.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the appalling reports received by Amnesty International about the so-called filtration camps where Chechen refugees are held by the Russians and where torture and rape are said to be prevalent? Will he ask the Russian Government to make sure that those appalling human rights abuses come to an end? Will he request that the humanitarian agencies of the International Committee of the Red Cross and medical assistance are allowed into those camps immediately?

We are deeply concerned about the reports of human rights abuses. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary telephoned the Russian Foreign Minister to ask directly for an investigation into the allegations of human rights abuses in Chechnya. I will investigate the particular instances that my hon. Friend has mentioned and write to her about them.

Have the Government been told or have they made any estimate of the number of civilians killed in the Chechen conflict?

I am not able to answer the hon. Gentleman's question; it is not a matter for the Department for International Development.

What progress she expects to be made at the education summit in Dakar; and if she will make a statement. [115436]

The world education forum in Dakar in Senegal will take place at the end of April. I will lead the UK delegation. Our objective is to obtain a strengthened commitment from developing country Governments and international agencies to achieve effective primary education for all children by 2015. That is an achievable objective, and there is clear evidence that getting a generation of children educated, including the girls, is the single most powerful development intervention that a country can make.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. May I take advantage of the fact that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is sitting next to her to ask her whether she can make Britain the champion of universal primary education? We have a Government who were elected on a platform of education, education, education, yet around the world the numbers of children in primary education and of literate people are falling. Can we lead a worldwide campaign to ensure that by 2015 everyone in the world learns to read and write?

As a Government, we are attempting to do that very thing. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has this week given a commitment to try to lead a campaign to make sure that Africa is not bypassed by information technology, and he has made a link with an appropriate company to try to ensure that such technology is brought to Africa and used more effectively in teacher training. There is a danger that information technology will bypass Africa—we need to train more teachers to deliver education in Africa, so my right hon. Friend has made that very commitment.

If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 29 March.

This morning, I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I will have further such meetings later today.

In his Budget, the Chancellor announced an extra 10,000 nurses. The following day, the Prime Minister himself announced an extra increase in resources for the national health service up to 7.6 per cent. Both major announcements had to be withdrawn and corrected. Will the Prime Minister promise straightforwardness and honesty in future health announcements?

I can indeed confirm that in addition to the 4,500 nurses already in the health service under this Government, there will be another 10,000. I am most grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving me the chance to make that clear. The 7.6 per cent. increase is referable to the 8 per cent. target, and we will meet the 7.6 per cent. target too.

I thank the Prime Minister for sharing the anger of all at Rover Longbridge, the components suppliers and all those who work in the dealerships at the bombshell dropped by BMW in its disposal of Rover. [Interruption.] I am sorry that the Opposition find this funny. Will my right hon. Friend send a message to the many thousands who will march through the city this Saturday to demonstrate the importance of manufacturing and the car industry to our city, our region and our nation?

First of all, I know how desperately serious the situation is, and I fully understand and share the deep concerns that the march demonstrates. I can tell my hon. Friend that we will carry on doing everything that we possibly can. Our action includes the £129 million that we have already allocated to support Rover Longbridge investment and to make sure that people who will lose their job will have the chance, through that investment, to gain another job.

We agree with the Prime Minister about the level of public concern and we support the work of the taskforce, but is he aware that, this morning, the chief executive of BMW UK told the Select Committee that, last year, the losses at Rover were such that the whole BMW group was at risk? There are reports today that, on 20 December, the chairman of BMW as a whole told the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry:

We may have to reconsider our whole investment in Britain altogether.

No, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has made it clear that the conversation, which, if I recall rightly, took place on 22 December, was about the need to speed up the application to the European Commission for aid funding. As a result of that conversation, my right hon. Friend got in touch with the Commission, which agreed to fast-track the application. It is incorrect to say that BMW's chairman informed him that the company was about to close Longbridge.

The precise words in question are:

We may have to reconsider our whole investment in Britain altogether.

knew before Christmas how serious the position was. The message was crystal clear, even at this … stage.

I am sorry that the right hon. Gentleman tries to make political capital of the situation—I really am. I have already explained the conversation that took place with the chairman of BMW. The claim made at the time was in respect of the European Commission aid application; we did everything we could to accelerate its progress, and we succeeded in fast-tracking the application. However, that was not the issue that determined BMW's ultimate decision. That decision having been made, we can do only one thing: work night and day, as we will, both to put in the money necessary for reinvestment and to ensure that those who are displaced and lose their jobs find other jobs. The truth is, the right hon. Gentleman has no alternative policy to offer.

When the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry presides over a mess of such magnitude, he is meant to be held to account in the House of Commons. That is one of the things for which the House exists, but we have to ask the Prime Minister because the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has made only rare appearances in the House in the past two weeks.

I think that some of those who work at Longbridge will remember who sold off Longbridge. As for saying that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has never gone near Longbridge, he went there immediately after the announcement was made. My right hon. Friend the Minister for Employment, Welfare to Work and Equal Opportunities is there today.

It must be progress for a Lancashire Member to be able to praise an initiative from Yorkshire. Will my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister join me in welcoming the Yorkshire building society's campaign against excessive cash machine charges? It has produced a petition with more than 100,000 names, which was presented to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry on Monday. Does my right hon. Friend agree—[Interruption.] Yes, he was on the job.

Order. Come along, Mr. Marsden.

Does the Prime Minister agree that the efforts of banks such as Barclays and others in this direction, and in the closure programme of branches that goes with it, threaten to undermine everything that the Government are doing for rural areas to tackle social exclusion and help pensioners? Will he use all the powers at his disposal to cap cash machine charges and to address the issues?

My hon. Friend will be aware that yesterday the banks and building societies ruled out the possibility that consumers could be charged twice for one cash withdrawal. That is a step in the right direction. However, the banks and building societies need to go further if they are to meet the concerns of their customers. I know that some banks and building societies have already indicated that they do not propose to impose any cash machine charges, and we welcome that. We shall continue to make sure that they live up to their responsibilities properly.

On Northern Ireland, does the Prime Minister concur with the views that were expressed to me repeatedly by all parties in recent days in both Belfast and Dublin that, given the suspension of the Assembly, the big worry is that a political vacuum will now develop? What priorities are the Government and the Prime Minister pursuing to try to ensure that such a vacuum does not develop?

It is very important that a political vacuum does not develop. That would be dangerous for Northern Ireland. We will do everything we can, both working with the Irish Government and with the parties in Northern Ireland, to make sure that that does not happen. Rounds of discussions have been taking place already between my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and the parties in Northern Ireland, and we will carry on these discussions in the next few weeks to make sure that we can put the institutions back up again. That is the best security for people in Northern Ireland.

I am sure that the whole House will wish to support the Prime Minister in those sentiments. Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise that as long as the Assembly is suspended—let us hope that it can be restored as soon as is politically possible—the Council of the Isles stands suspended as well?

Ministers have made it clear to the chairman of BNFL that we want to see big changes in the way that it is run and managed. The chairman is due to report back to Department of Trade and Industry Ministers by early April on the plans for that. New senior management is now in place. It is important to emphasise that the Health and Safety Executive has given a safety clearance to reprocessing. The work force is immensely dedicated, talented and skilled. I am sure that with that dedication and talent, the clearance from the HSE and the new plan that will be submitted, BNFL can go back on a sound and secure footing for the future.

My right hon. Friend has no doubt seen the recent Audit Commission report, with its damning criticisms of the inadequate help and the poor provision of essential equipment, aids and adaptations for elderly people and people with disabilities. Surely that state of affairs in modern Britain is totally unacceptable. What does he intend to do about it?

We have, of course, seen the Audit Commission report. We agree that its findings of poor performance in many areas over some time are unacceptable. This morning I discussed that and other health service issues with the heads of the Audit Commission, the Commission for Health Improvement and the social services inspectorate, together with a number of key doctors, nurses and managers who are driving through change in the national health service. I was deeply impressed both by their commitment and by the recognition right across the service that there are many examples of excellent practice, and also many examples in which practice is falling far short of what is acceptable.

I am sure that the Prime Minister is aware of the widespread support in the House for his Government's proposals on climate change and renewable energy. Is he aware, however, that applications for large-scale wind farm development in mid-Wales and Ceredigion are not decided by local authorities or by the National Assembly for Wales, but are still decided by the Department of Trade and Industry? Will he undertake to use his influence to review that legislative oversight and, in the mean time, will he give an undertaking to my constituents that his Government will not seek to push through a planning application in the face of local authority or National Assembly opposition?

I cannot promise any legislative changes to the relationship between the Welsh Assembly and this Parliament, but I heard what the hon. Gentleman said. If he will allow me to do so, I shall write to him.

Has my right hon. Friend noted the social security report this morning, which shows that the gap between poor pensioners and rich pensioners has increased significantly over the past 20 years? Is not the minimum income guarantee a good way of addressing that? Will he give it his personal backing, and is not that the duty of every hon. Member, and above all, perhaps, members of the Opposition, who did so little for the oldest and poorest pensioners when their party was in power?

It is correct that the Conservative party opposed the £150 winter allowance and the minimum income guarantee, which increase the incomes of the poorest pensioners by some £500 a year. We want to make sure that those who are entitled to the minimum income guarantee claim it. That is why we are launching the minimum income guarantee take-up campaign. As part of that campaign, we shall write to more than 2 million pensioners who, we believe, may be eligible, to encourage them to claim. The minimum income guarantee will make a real difference. Pensioners' incomes vary, and we must make sure that they are getting more help, especially those living in poverty.

This weekend, a senior Cabinet Minister was reported as saying that if the Government are defeated again in the Lords on section 28—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh.] It is no good Labour Members not wanting to talk about it. It was the Government who introduced the measure into Parliament. It was reported that if the Government are defeated again in the Lords on section 28, the Prime Minister will simply say

I tried and failed; now good riddance to the issue.

No, it is not true. We remain committed to the repeal of section 28, and we remain set against the mischievous propaganda campaign which has suggested that repealing section 28 will mean that children in our schools will have their sex education lessons changed. That is completely untrue. Since 1994, under the previous Government, section 28 has not applied to schools in England and Wales. If the right hon. Gentleman disputes that, let him now get up and say so. If he does not dispute it, he should stop associating himself with that propaganda.

If the Prime Minister is not ready to back down on this, why does he have his Ministers running around telling newspapers—[HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."] It is the Prime Minister who has to answer the questions at Question Time.

We remain committed to the repeal of section 28. I notice that the right hon. Gentleman did not say whether he accepts that it has not applied to schools in this country since 1994. There is one reason and one reason only why people are concerned about the repeal of section 28: because they are being told that it affects sex education in schools. First, sex education in schools has been the prerogative of teachers, parents and governors since 1994. Secondly, any parent has the right by law to withdraw their child from any sex education in schools.

Answer.

I am very happy to move to the other side of the Chamber and answer the questions at any time.

As the right hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well, and let me repeat to people, section 28 has nothing whatever to do with sex education in schools. It never has had. As I say, since 1994, it has not even applied to schools. The truth of the matter is that the campaign is based on people who do not want to come out and say that they are prejudiced against gay people. They do not want—[Interruption.]

Order.

They do not want to say that they are prejudiced against gay people, so they hide behind the issue of child protection. No child will be forced to take part in gay sex lessons in schools. No child will engage in school sex lessons that are wrong. Sex lessons in schools will carry on being the prerogative of teachers, parents and governors. Parents will carry on having the right to withdraw their children from those sex education lessons. Those are the facts. The right hon. Gentleman knows them, and—just occasionally—he should stand up for what is right rather than join in a campaign that misrepresents the facts and would have no chance of gaining any popular support if it did not misrepresent the facts.

Is the Prime Minister aware that a Ministry of Defence spokesman has stated that British shipyards are at risk of not receiving the pending roll-on, roll-off ferries order? Does he also know that, before any decision has been made, a Minister has told a shop steward that the order is likely to go to Germany?

I am not aware of that. The Ministry of Defence has not made its decision yet. My hon. Friend should at least await that decision.

The recent cancer summit at No. 10 Downing street was described by the World Health Organisation cancer chief as a silly photo opportunity and orchestrated hype with nothing at the end to show for it. Will tomorrow's farmers summit at No. 10 Downing street be more substantive? Will farmers go home with something more than a free photo opportunity and a copy of the Prime Minister's speech?

I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman opposes the additional work that we are doing on cancer services; £50 million is going towards those services. Perhaps he should listen to Dr. Mike Richards, who said that the cancer service programme that we are establishing will result in a dramatic increase in the treatment of cancer patients in the next few years. The best way in which to improve cancer services is to support the additional investment in the health service under this Government.

Is the Prime Minister aware that BMW has stripped out the capital plant equipment for the new Mini line in Longbridge and transferred it to Birmingham international airport? Will he explain to the chairman of BMW that there is no airport at Cowley, and that if he wants to keep his word this time, and build the new Mini in Oxford, it would be best to drive the equipment down the M40?

I am sure that we can pass on my hon. Friend's comments to the chairman.

Does the Prime Minister recall that when he and I contested the Beaconsfield by-election, he was welcomed to the constituency by the headline in the local paper, "Benn-backing Barrister is Labour's Choice"? That is Benn-backing rather than Ken-backing. Does he know that the right hon. Member for Chesterfield (Mr. Benn) supports my Bill to provide targets for organic food and farming? At tomorrow's summit at No. 10 Downing street, will he explicitly acknowledge the need to expand organic foods—[Interruption.]

Order. I cannot hear a word. [Interruption.] Order. This is a Parliament and hon. Members must be heard.

At the summit for farmers tomorrow, will the Prime Minister reiterate his commitment, which he made at last month's National Farmers Union annual general meeting, to an expansion of organic food and farming? Will he prevent his Whip from shouting "Object" to my Bill?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for reminding us of Beaconsfield and how far he has moved to higher and better things.

The Prime Minister has already referred to the problems that the banks are bringing to many of our communities. As the Postal Services Bill is making its way to the other place, does he believe that the other side of the coin is ensuring that the post offices can be the saviours of community banking? Will he assure the House and my constituents that the Government will do everything in their power to make sure that they can do so?

We remain fully committed to the network of nationwide post offices and we want to see them thrive. For that very reason, we have worked with the Post Office to install some 3,000 cash machines nationally at post offices in smaller towns and villages. The first 400 will be installed this summer. We are also working with the Post Office for a longer-term strategy to make sure that we can carry on with the sensible changes to and modernisation of the Post Office that allows those post offices to remain central to local communities.

I was in my constituency this morning and village post offices were again the topic of conversation. As the Prime Minister has said, he is making some moves in that direction, but can he guarantee that no village post office in my constituency will close in 2003?

I can scarcely contemplate the cheek of the Conservative party: it asks for a commitment when it was responsible for closing hundreds of rural post offices when it was in office. We will carry on working to make sure that they have a secure future, but let us be clear about the changes on automatic credit transfer. As the hon. Gentleman knows, we inherited that investment from the previous Government. The reason for those changes—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."] That is the truth. It was inherited from the previous Government. As a result of it, many of the transaction costs will be reduced. However, we have made it clear that those who want to get their benefits in cash will carry on being able to do so and we will sit down with the people in the Post Office and work out a viable way forward for the future.