What environmental impact studies have been undertaken by her Department into the Zambezi river system. [152209]

We are not currently funding any long-term environmental studies because there is no shortage of such studies. However, more needs to be done to build up water management systems in Mozambique and across southern Africa. We are helping organisations in the region to produce transnational water management agreements and have helped to develop a water resources management strategy in Zimbabwe to relieve the pressure on Mozambique. In addition, we are helping the Mozambique water authorities to obtain hydrological and meteorological data on the Zambezi and other major river systems so that flood predictions can be quickly produced and disseminated.

I thank the Minister for that answer and welcome the fact that many environmental studies are being undertaken on the Zambezi river system. In relation to those studies and to any contribution made by the Department for International Development, will my hon. Friend consider the long-term effects of land use changes in Mozambique, Zimbabwe and Zambia? They have led to massive deforestation, which has resulted in the soil being unable to retain large quantities of water, which in turn means fast run-off during the rainy season. All that raises rivers to extraordinary levels. Will my hon. Friend also consider the possibility of reducing the levels of the lakes at Kariba and Cabora Bassa with a view to their being used as retention lakes during the rainy season? That might reduce flooding in Mozambique.

The unprecedented amount of rain in the Zambezi valley area makes it unlikely that any amount of planning would have avoided serious flooding. However, action can be taken to mitigate the effects, including better liaison between the water management authorities in Mozambique and Zimbabwe, better early-warning systems and better contingency planning. I am not aware that deforestation has been a major factor in the present crisis, but I shall make inquiries and get back to my hon. Friend about that.

The Minister knows that the poorest people in the world suffer most from disasters such as that in Mozambique. Will he, therefore, congratulate Comic Relief on spending more than £110 million since 1985 on improving the lives of the poorest people in Africa? Would he, the Secretary of State and other hon. Members like to join us at a Comic Relief photo call on College green at 3.45 pm? You, too, would be welcome, Mr. Speaker, and red noses will be provided.

I join the hon. Lady in congratulating anyone who attempts to relieve the suffering of the world's poorest people. I shall check my diary carefully to see whether I am available to wear a red nose on College green, but the House will understand that I have my reputation to protect.

If she will make a statement on efforts to combat corruption in developing countries. [152210]

Since 1997, I have greatly increased my Department's anti-corruption work. We are increasingly helping Governments to strengthen their financial management systems, anti-corruption authorities, customs and tax authorities, and civil service and legal systems. Denunciation will not halt corruption: we need to build systems that prevent and catch it, as we can learn from our own history.

I thank the Secretary of State. On 10 April last year, the Government said that they would implement the OECD convention as soon as possible. The globalisation White Paper goes on to say that poor people suffer most from corruption. Why, then, does the International Development Bill contain no provision on that point? Has the Secretary of State abandoned the Government's ethical foreign policy?

I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman has not researched his question thoroughly enough. We are committed to introducing such legislation, but it will be a large Bill and would not fit into the slim International Development Bill. If it had been combined with that Bill, we should not have been able to introduce that Bill in this Parliament. The legislation to which the hon. Gentleman referred is important, and it will be introduced as soon as possible. I do not know whether the Conservative party has committed itself to legislation; in the past, it argued that that would be unnecessary since the existing law was enough. The Conservative party was wrong about that, as it was about much else.

My right hon. Friend will know that there is far too much corruption and far too much expenditure on defence in many of the poorest countries, which means that they are not able to tackle the problems of poverty, which I know are of such concern to her. How many countries does she feel also do not have truly independent judicial and legal systems to apply proper checks?

My hon. Friend is right. In Africa, for example, many countries were often supported with big arms supplies and had large armed forces. The end of the cold war has led to the creation of very large armed forces that are not properly democratically controlled or resourced in order to protect the countries' real security interests. That has been the cause of coups and instability, which Africa needs help to deal with.

Will the Secretary of State tell the House who pays for corruption, and how they pay for it?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, overwhelmingly, the poor pay the price of corruption. According to the very moving "Voices of the Poor" study published by the World Bank, which covered 60,000 people in 60 countries, and which we helped to fund, the poorest everywhere are really angry about corruption. It prevents them getting their children to school, opening a little market stall, being able to transport their goods or getting any drugs when members of their family are sick. On top of that, grand-scale corruption distorts the use of economic resources, therefore preventing good economic development and the improvement in lives that the poor so badly need.

As the Secretary of State knows, I have a small interest in southern Africa. Does she think that we have a role in helping good governance through the anti-corruption model with respect to the import of computers in southern Africa, the cost of internet service providers and the way in which the internet is regulated? There is incipient corruption in that respect in southern African countries.

My hon. Friend will know that Africa has fewer internet connections than New York—I speak from memory—so it is in danger of being left behind in the technological transformation of the world. Africa is also the most expensive place in the world to be connected to the internet because telecom companies have not been liberalised and no new investment has been made. That is an urgent issue for Africa, and we are trying to support the reform agenda that is needed to get telecoms investment and access to information technologies, so that Africa will not be further marginalised.

To answer the Secretary of State's earlier question, yes we have already made a firm commitment to introduce an anti-bribery Act, which should have become law by now.

I have been a Member of this House since 1983, but I have never come across such an extraordinary Front Bencher on either side of the House. The previous Conservative Government, of whom the hon. Gentleman was a member, took very little action against corruption in their international development programmes, and took the view that there was no need for a change in UK law in order to implement the OECD convention. We reviewed that advice, committed ourselves to legislation, and we will legislate. We have no lessons to learn from that very strange hon. Gentleman.

The Secretary of State seems unaware that it was her Government who ratified the convention in 1998 and only since then has it become a live issue. Is not her shame compounded today by the sad fact that this very afternoon one of her Back Benchers is introducing a ten-minute Bill on he very subject of corruption, no doubt driven by his embarrassment and frustration at his Government's failure to act? We all know that that Bill has no chance of becoming law, so corruption will continue to abound while the Government sit on their hands.

Order. The hon. Gentleman must not make a speech.

Here comes the question. If the Government will not act to crack down on the corruption that blights the lives of the world's poorest, will they please make way for a Government who will?

The hon. Gentleman is ever stranger. I am not in the least ashamed that my hon. Friend the Member for Putney (Mr. Colman) is introducing a ten-minute Bill: I am absolutely delighted. In fact, I suggested it.

If she will make a statement on aid to Zimbabwe. [152211]

When she will next travel to Zimbabwe to discuss aid provision; and if she will make a statement. [152212]

The economic and political situation in Zimbabwe is deeply worrying. The rule of law is increasingly being disregarded. The economy is set to shrink by a further 6 per cent. this year and the poor of Zimbabwe in particular are suffering badly—jobs are being lost, prices are increasing and there is now a potential for food shortages.

The Secretary of State said last month:

"for us to be making a loud noise … inflames … President Mugabe."

If making a loud noise would change the world, the hon. Gentleman would have achieved a lot more than he has achieved in his political life. The situation in Zimbabwe is so serious, causes so much desperate suffering to all the people of Zimbabwe and is so threatening to the economy of the whole of southern Africa that we should all be deadly serious and try to do everything that we can to prevent that suffering and bring the situation to an end.

Is the Secretary of State aware that a week ago Sunday a 72-year-old lady farmer—a sprightly lady—went for a walk with her three dogs? As she left the farm gates, she was shot down by 15 bullets from AK47s. She died instantly. The Secretary of State will know that the Government are giving £11 million to Zimbabwe in aid this year, in addition to the European Union contribution. She fought consistently against the South African regime after she entered Parliament in 1983 and consistently argued for sanctions against South Africa. Does she not think that now is the time for sanctions against—

Order. The hon. Gentleman has spoken for far too long. I must ask for briefer questions.

I am well aware of the recent death of that old lady. I am aware also that during the election campaign many black Zimbabweans as well as white farmers were killed, often only because they dared to support the opposition. Teachers were raped because they were seen to be opinion formers in rural areas. The situation is outrageous and terrible.

Can my right hon. Friend tell me whether she or any of her officials have met the delegation of members from the Movement for Democratic Change, who are here from Zimbabwe? They are led by David Coltart MP, who was a justice shadow Minister. If not, would my right hon. Friend like to come to the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Room at 4 o'clock, or send a representative, where the delegation will be briefing Members on the situation in Zimbabwe?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I have met the leader of the Movement for Democratic Change; indeed, I sat next to him at a TUC dinner. He is an impressive man with a long record of commitment to democratic trade unionism and democracy generally. I was not aware that there was a delegation in the country. I do not think that I am free at 4 o'clock, but if I can manage to meet any members of that delegation, I shall be delighted to do so.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that those of us, including herself, who supported all the way the liberation movement in Zimbabwe now view with contempt what is happening? Does she also agree that, unfortunately, it is not the rule of law that exists in Zimbabwe, but the law of thuggery? That should be condemned by all who believe that murder and the intimidation of judges, and the rest, should be condemned at every opportunity.

I agree with my hon. Friend. It is a tragedy for Zimbabwe. President Mugabe, who had a proud record of leading his country to independence has now despoiled that record. That is a tragedy for him and for the country. We must hope that there will be a change of Government as rapidly as possible.

When I was in Zimbabwe just over a fortnight ago, the question on people's lips was, "What price the UK's ethical foreign policy now?" As the Secretary of State knows, four Select Committees, reporting on strategic export controls, have condemned the Government for a serious error of judgment in providing arms and military spares to Zimbabwe. The report published this morning concluded that the Government's response on licences was inaccurate.

There could be no better Opposition Member to second the hon. Member for South-West Devon (Mr. Streeter); they are quite a team. The Government have massively strengthened controls on arms exports, way beyond the activities of the Conservative Government, of whom she was a member.

What assistance her Department is giving to Vietnam. [152213]

Our programme in Vietnam is currently worth just over £5 million a year and is scheduled to increase significantly over the next three years, in recognition of the Vietnamese Government's commitment to poverty reduction and social equity. Rural development is the Government's highest priority for donor support, and many of our programmes reflect that. In addition we make a substantial contribution to the main multilateral aid programmes, and we work closely with other donors.

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. During a recent visit that I made to Vietnam, people expressed appreciation of Britain's support for flood victims in the Mekong delta. The media in Vietnam highlighted the fact that Britain was top of the European Union league in giving assistance. The Department should be congratulated on that. However, much more needs to be done, especially to strengthen the infrastructure and to support policies that help to absorb a larger proportion of the rural population into the towns. Will the Minister assure us that that is uppermost in his mind?

I thank my hon. Friend for the reported comments about our aid in the Mekong delta; I am glad that it was appreciated. Reducing migration from the countryside to the cities is a problem in all developing countries. The best way in which to achieve it is to help the rural poor to develop sustainable life styles and to raise their standard of living so that they do not feel the pressure to migrate to the cities. The Department for International Development and several non-governmental organisations are currently funding programmes that are designed to do that in poor, rural areas of Vietnam.

The Department has rightly set its heart on operating with partners and other countries, especially in Vietnam. Its sector-wide approach is interesting and means conducting a close relationship with the Government of Vietnam. Does the Minister believe that those objectives are best served by having DFID's regional office in Bangkok?

That was reviewed some time ago. Several minor changes were made, but it was concluded that the advantages of having a regional office for our programme in south-east Asia, which covers about half a dozen countries, outweighed disadvantages in, for example, cost efficiency.

What levels of support her Department is giving to projects that support better environmental education. [152214]

The links between environment and poverty are clear. Better environmental education in schools and civil society, in developed and developing countries are vital to the elimination of poverty. We are placing in inventory of our environmental education projects, worth approximately £11.8 million over the past 4 years, in the Library.

I thank my hon. Friend for that helpful answer. I welcome his translation from the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions to the Department for International Development. I hope that he will bring his environmental interests with him. Does he agree that some of the big issues that face the world in this century are environmental? They include deforestation, soil and water pollution and the startling decrease in species of animal, bird and insect. Will the Department examine such considerations before determining funding on any projects?

I thank my hon. Friend for her kind words. We assess the environmental impact of every project, and sustainable development is at the heart of all the Department's actions. Environmental aid and development go hand in hand. We will not make progress on protecting the environment unless we tackle the development needs of the poor; we will not make further progress on poverty reduction unless we safeguard the natural resources on which poor people depend for their livelihoods. The environment and poverty are not separate issues; they go together.

If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 14 March.

This morning, I chaired a meeting of the Cabinet. I had intensive discussions on foot and mouth disease and I announced at a conference that the unemployment total had fallen below 1 million for the first time in 25 years and that record numbers of people were in work. I will have further meetings with colleagues later today.

Why, when many hundreds of thousands of decent, hard-working pensioners are forced to lock into a policy for their pension in their old age, did not the Chancellor of the Exchequer last week abolish the requirement to buy an annuity at the age of 75, as we on the Conservative Benches would do?

That was not done because of the cost that would result for the Exchequer. What the Chancellor has announced is a greater amount of support for pensioners than any Conservative Government whom the hon. Lady supported ever announced. All pensioners know that if the Conservatives were returned to power, the £200 winter allowance and free television licences would be taken off them.

Does the Prime Minister agree that the work that is being carried out by both the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the seconded vets in Cumbria to contain foot and mouth is excellent and that we should praise it? Today, I was talking to Nick Utting, group secretary of the National Farmers Union in Cumbria. He said that what would really help the situation is a relaxation of some of the rules. First, can we relax the rule regarding a suspected case of foot and mouth on the farm? Can the vets immediately start to cull those animals? Secondly, can we have a relaxation of the Environment Agency rules regarding the burial of beasts? The quickest, the traditional and the safest way of disposing of animals is to bury them immediately. Will the Prime Minister agree to look at the relaxation of the rules?

We are deploying some of those options and we are certainly looking carefully at the points that my hon. Friend has just made. I pay tribute both to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and to the people, particularly in the veterinary service, who up and down this country have done a quite superb job in extremely difficult circumstances.

May I join the Prime Minister in his tribute to everyone who is working so hard to try to prevent the spread of foot and mouth disease?

In relation to the issues on slaughter policy, the Minister of Agriculture will make a statement to the House tomorrow. We are looking at how we step up the slaughter in the areas most directly affected. One of the issues is that there are areas of the country that are very seriously affected, while there are other areas in which, fortunately, at present at any rate, there has been no outbreak of foot and mouth disease at all. So it is entirely right that we look to see how we can take more urgent measures in the areas most directly affected.

Further to that, any increased slaughter such as the Prime Minister has mentioned and we advocate will obviously add to the backlog of diseased carcases rotting on farms. Yesterday, the Government announced the limited deployment of the Army. While we welcome that, could the Army's role be extended to help clear that backlog? Similarly, there is clear evidence that we will not have enough vets to tackle the emergency, although the vets are working extremely hard, as the Prime Minister said. Will the Government consider using student vets and retired vets, as was the practice in 1967, in an effort to increase the available resources?

That is entirely right; no doubt the right hon. Gentleman has been in contact with the British Veterinary Association, as we have been in constant discussion with the state veterinary service and others. We are using some final-year veterinary students already and retired vets are important as well. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture will outline some extra measures concerning how we bring in vets from outside. We are already using vets whom the Army have provided. We are looking at how the armed forces can help, particularly in relation to the logistics of disposing of the animals. However, some of the more lurid stories about troops roaming the countryside, shooting animals and wildlife are not correct or helpful. Meetings are taking place today with the Ministry of Defence to see how the Army can assist in the process. It is self-evident that, if we intensify the process of slaughter, we have to increase the resources to carry that out.

Finally on this matter, we are well aware that the threat to people's livelihoods has now extended far beyond the farmers themselves. Large parts of rural Britain have been forced virtually to shut down. Hotels face closure as bookings have been cancelled and some rural tourist attractions face bankruptcy. We must get help to farmers and continue that help. Will the Prime Minister agree to help other rural businesses by measures such as giving exemptions from rates to those businesses worst hit by the crisis?

We will, of course, consider all the measures necessary to help. A series of measures is being considered by my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Environment and the taskforce, which involves representatives of the tourism industry. The industry has been devastated over the past few days and weeks by what has happened. We have to see what financial and other help we can get to it as quickly as possible. Once the outbreak has been dealt with, we will have to see how we can move the industry forward so that it recovers as quickly as possible. That will be the other issue for the industry. It is not merely that bookings have fallen during the foot and mouth outbreak; we must look at the industry's future position. We are looking at all the issues and we will do whatever we reasonably can to help.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that there should be an urgent review of the way in which taxpayers' money is used to fund the parliamentary activities of Opposition parties? Is he aware that there has been an increase of 280 per cent. in funding to the Tory party and that, in defiance of previous procedures, it has been using the money to fund its party campaigning and even its election war room? This matter has never been debated in this House—

Order!

Order. I have told hon. Members before: do not tell me my job. I will soon tell the hon. Lady if she is out of order. She is not.

It looks as though the Tory party has not only moved the goalposts, but carted them off the pitch. Is not this a fraud on the British taxpayer?

No doubt that is one of the public expenditure cuts that the Tories can announce in the coming weeks. If they are spending that amount of money on their political campaigning, I can only say that it has been remarkably ineffective.

Returning to the foot and mouth restrictions, does the Prime Minister feel that he is in a position to be any more specific this afternoon about appropriate compensation levels for farmers who, as a result of the restrictions, feel that their animals will have to be destroyed on welfare and compassionate grounds?

Obviously, this is an issue for the farmers who are affected, even though their animals do not have foot and mouth disease. It is also an issue that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture will cover in his statement tomorrow. We have to keep this aspect of the problem under constant review. The animal welfare issues may fit into an entirely different set of categories. It may be that some animals can be moved for their welfare, but others may have to be destroyed. At present we are looking for the best option in respect of each group of animals.

On the interests of the wider rural economy, to which the leader of the Conservative party quite properly referred, given that the difficulty is affecting bed-and-breakfast accommodation, local hotels and tourist attractions, will the Prime Minister give early consideration to providing relief from tax and national insurance? Will he ask the Treasury to liaise with the Inland Revenue with a view to waiving tax and national insurance, or at least providing a period of relief so that those who are affected by short-term financial crises can have a degree of relief which is not available at the moment?

These issues will be discussed by the taskforce chaired by my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Environment. It is also important for businesses in the tourist industry and others, such as the Youth Hostel Association, which have lost considerable sums of money, that, over the coming days, we get a clear picture of exactly where the disease is located and which areas of the country are free from the disease. People are cancelling bookings in parts of the country where foot and mouth disease is not present and where, hopefully, it will become clear over the coming days that it will not spread. In circumstances where the disease is operating quite differently in different parts of the country, we also have to consider how to give proper effect to a set of rules that makes sense of the restrictions that presently apply to the whole country.

Chelsea Brown, a two-year-old who lived in my constituency, was abused and brutally murdered by her father, who was sent to prison for life by Nottingham Crown court last week. Professionals have admitted that mistakes were made in the very difficult area of child protection. Can my right hon. Friend assure the House that everything possible is done to make sure that the procedures that govern this area are rigorously enforced and where necessary, strengthened so that the very fine judgments that have to be made are made promptly and appropriately and in the interests of child protection?

I can certainly give my hon. Friend that assurance. We haye strengthened the protection available and it is important that we continue to look at ways of doing so. However, as she will know, very difficult judgments often have to be made by social services on the ground and, when a tragedy occurs, they can be attacked from both angles. We must certainly take every possible precaution to minimise the risk to which children are exposed and, of course, the welfare of the child should always come first.

Education history is being made today with the launch of the first privately managed federation of state schools in Britain, building on the success of the first privately run state school in Guildford. May I thank the Prime Minister for acknowledging the success of this Conservative policy in his recent Green Paper? Does he further agree with me what a shame it was that, with the written backing of the Secretary of State for Education and Employment, his local Labour party opposed us all the way?

I shall try to take that as congratulations for the policy that we are pursuing. It is important not only that we have a diverse range of providers in secondary schools, but that we put the investment into our school system that it needs. The only unfortunate thing about the Conservative policy is that, whereas we put into schools the investment that we need, he is committed to taking that investment out.

The announcement today that unemployment has fallen below 1 million will be welcomed by my constituents in Don Valley, where unemployment has been halved and youth unemployment has gone down by 86 per cent. In South Yorkshire, 178,000 industrial jobs were lost between 1979 and 1997. Will my right hon. Friend assure me that Labour in government will continue to fight for jobs, but also to fight for the range of skills and jobs that will ensure that South Yorkshire has a prosperous future?

My hon. Friend is right to point out that there are over 1 million more jobs in the economy now, which takes us to a total of 28 million—more people in work today in Britain than ever before. But she is also right to point out the success of the Government's measures, in particular the new deal, which has taken 275,000 people off benefit and put them into work. The tragedy is that that policy, which has given us the lowest unemployment levels for 25 years, is opposed by the Opposition, who would scrap that policy were they returned to power. In committing themselves to that, they show their true colours. Such a policy will be bitterly opposed by many people in Britain who believe that everyone, not just a few, should have the chance to succeed.

The Prime Minister will know that last week Russian forces in Azerbaijan captured two men widely believed to be responsible for murder and kidnapping in Chechnya. Given that one of those men, Mr. Ruslan Achmadov, is believed by the Foreign Office to be responsible for the murder and beheading of three Britons in 1998, including my constituent Peter Kennedy, will the Prime Minister join me in congratulating the Russian authorities on that operation? Will he also say when he believes those men will be brought to trial and whether it will be possible for the relatives of the dead to attend the trial? Will he ensure that Britain assists in bringing to justice the other people responsible for those brutal crimes?

I do not know whether the relatives will be able to attend the trial, but I shall be in touch with the hon. Gentleman on that. I was extremely pleased to hear of the arrest, and I welcome that. We shall give every assistance to the Russian authorities in pursuing the case. That particularly barbarous set of murders shocked people deeply at the time, so we are delighted that at least some of those responsible have been brought to justice. Like the hon. Gentleman, I wish to see all those responsible brought to justice.

As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has just said to my hon. Friend the Member for Don Valley (Caroline Flint), there are over 1 million more jobs in the economy now than there were in 1997, a period of three years and 10 months. During the same period of three years and 10 months of Mrs. Thatcher's regime, 1.6 million jobs were lost to the British economy. Is my right hon. Friend further aware that, although there are still areas of serious disadvantage and structural change in my constituency, partnerships between local and central Government and business and industry have created a situation where unemployment has fallen from 5.1 per cent. to 3.1 per cent. since May 1997. With that record—[Interruption.]

Order. I think that the Prime Minister knows what the hon. Gentleman is asking.

I do indeed know what point my hon. Friend was making, and so do the Opposition, which is why they are trying to shout it down. It is not just that unemployment is the lowest that it has been for 25 years or that record numbers of people are in employment, but with mortgage rates more than half what they were in Conservative years, with the national debt coming down, with the country's finances strong, with investment coming into our public services, it is no wonder at all that the Opposition do not want to discuss the economy.

Does the Prime Minister recommend that other Ministers behave towards the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards as the Minister for Europe has behaved?

As the right hon. Gentleman knows, the Select Committee on Standards and Privileges cleared my hon. Friend of all the charges except one, on which it recommended no penalty.

Well, the Minister has no need to hire an evasive lawyer when he has the Prime Minister to defend him. The Committee's report is a tale of obstruction and lack of candour in regard to allegations that included payments in exchange for help with planning permission and land acquisition. The Committee's inquiries could not be completed, and the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards said that the Minister failed

"to provide full and accurate answers."

The allegations against my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary are complete nonsense, as my right hon. Friend said at the time. However, in respect of my hon. Friend the Minister for Europe, as I said, the Standards and Privileges Committee is an all-party Committee and it cleared my hon. Friend of all the allegations. It is true that he was not cleared on one allegation, but the Committee recommended no penalty. In those circumstances, for the right hon. Gentleman to say what he has said is, frankly, fatuous.

We all know that, when the Prime Minister mumbles, he is not sure of his case. The investigation into eight of the accusations were not completed by the Committee, for the reasons that I have given. The Foreign Secretary told the House that

"there was no briefing —no leak to the press"—[Official Report, 24 February 1999; Vol. 326, c. 416.]

As I said a moment or two ago, my right hon. Friend answered all the allegations. They were complete nonsense when they were made, and they are complete nonsense now. As for my hon. Friend the Minister for Europe, he was cleared of the allegations that were made, as I said.

Order.

Does my right hon. Friend agree with me that it would be entirely wrong for any candidate in the forthcoming election to stir up racial prejudice? Will he give an assurance to the House that he will take action against any activist who is found doing so?

I certainly give that assurance. I strongly welcome the initiative from the Commission for Racial Equality. I hope that all political parties sign up to it and have their candidates do the same. Any Labour party activist or candidate who breaches those rules will be subject to discipline. I hope that we all not merely sign up to the initiative, but observe its spirit as well as its letter.

The Prime Minister said that my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition asks no questions relating to the real lives of real people, but will he confirm that he was asked three times today about foot and mouth, a disease that is destroying the lives of real people in my constituency? Is he aware that £10 million a week is being lost by tourism businesses in the Like district at the moment, and that 350 jobs a week are going? If this crisis continues until Easter, those figures will triple. My right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition is coming to Windermere in the Lake district tomorrow to listen to real people with real concerns. Will the Prime Minister come and listen to those concerns, and will he act on them?

It is—[Interruption.] I think that Opposition Members should calm down a little. I think that the hon. Gentleman is rather over-sensitive in his defence of the Leader of the Opposition, but of course I accept that people are losing their jobs in tourism. It is precisely for that reason that the taskforce under my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Environment was established yesterday. It is precisely for that reason that we have given agrimonetary compensation to farmers—something that the previous Conservative Government never did. It is precisely for that reason that we shall look at what more help can be given to the tourist industry. I should have thought that this is an issue on which both sides of the House should work together to see what we need to do to relieve the suffering of people in those areas. Certainly, for our part, that is precisely what we shall do.

Will the Prime Minister comment on the article in The Mirror today on the, possibility of the appointment of a Minister to look after and champion the cause of ex-service men and women? As the president of the United Services club in Heywood and Middleton, I know that my members would be delighted if that were to become a reality. It would be a recognition of their tremendous sacrifices in both world wars and other conflicts.

I am pleased to announce that today I have appointed my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Defence to be the Minister for veterans' affairs. Our armed forces veterans have made a major contribution to the peace and securtly of our nation, and it is only right that they should be recognised in that way. The Minister will be supported in the work that he does across Government Departments, but it is no longer right that particular issues that afftect veterans are the responsibility simply of one Minister in one Department. There has to be co-ordination by a Minister across Departments, and that is what we are announcing today.

May I tell the Prime Minister that 21 rural post offices in my constituency of Argyll and Bute, which is a vast area with many islands, have closed or reduced their hours of working in the past two years, and that many more are under threat? Does the Prime Minister accept that the Government's promise of financial assistance by 2003, which is very welcome, will in fact be too late? Heaven knows, rural areas have had enough to contend with as it is without losing the post office network.

The hon. Lady's point about rural post offices is a fair one. We understand the difficulties that they face, which is precisely why we published the proposals that we did Not all the help, of course, has to wait until 2003: there is help available before then. We are looking, particularly with the major banks, at how we can put in place some of the services that rural post offices will have to provide if they are to have a viable and sustainable way of living.

In my Kettering constituency, a group of travellers has moved on to privately owned land where they are illegally camped. I am sure that these circumstances prevail in other parts of the country. Will my right hon. Friend urge local authorities, which are unable to move on any travellers in these circumstances, to provide adequate provision for toilets, waste disposal and disinfectant to protect everyone's interest?

I am sure that local authorities should do that. I know that many local authorities are faced with similar problems to those in my hon. Friend's constituency. If he will allow me, I shall look into the issue that he raises and write to him.

As the Hammond inquiry cleared the right hon. Member for Hartlepool (Mr. Mandelson), can the Prime Minister explain why he had to leave the Government?

For the reasons I gave at the time. [Interruption.]

Order. [Interruption.] Order. Mr. Mackay, be quiet.

What message does the Prime Minister have for my constituents in Blyth Valley? After a number of years of a reduction in unemployment there, this month there has been a rise of 1 per cent. in unemployment. What message does the Prime Minister have for my people back home?

It is for precisely that reason that we are putting money into coalfield areas and their regeneration. In constituencies such as that of my hon. Friend—including those that have been severely hit by structural change in the past few years—the Government have been prepared to make investment that the Opposition would never make in the future of such communities. Up and down this country, whether in areas such as my hon. Friend's or mine, or, indeed, in some of the more traditionally wealthy areas in the south, unemployment is falling, and employment and living standards are rising. That shows the need for a solid, stable economic base such as that which the Labour party has provided and the Conservatives never did provide.