What recent discussions he has had with the First Secretary of the National Assembly for Wales regarding violent crime in Wales. [35106]

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I have regular discussions with the First Secretary and his Cabinet colleagues about a range of issues, including levels of crime and the measures aimed at combating it. The Government are committed to improving the reporting and detection of violent crime, and to tackling its underlying causes.

I thank the Minister for that response. There has been much in the news of late about violent crime in London, but hon. Members will be concerned about the worrying trends in violent crime in Wales. The Minister will know that there is also considerable concern that county councils in Wales find the process of obtaining antisocial behaviour orders extremely bureaucratic. What steps is he taking to improve that, and to improve the campaign against violent crime in Wales?

The British crime survey, generally regarded as the most authoritative measure of crime, has noted changes in public attitudes and a greater willingness to report crime. Between 1995 and 1999, there was a 22 per cent. fall in violent crime in England and Wales. Indeed, the detected rate in Wales for violent crime is running at 89 per cent.—nearly nine out of every 10 incidents. I pay tribute to the police for that.

My hon. Friend the Minister will certainly have noted that, in Gwent, the numbers of violent crimes against the person, burglaries and thefts from vehicles have fallen by 5.7 per cent. Will he join me in congratulating the Gwent police on that, and in welcoming the 6.7 per cent. increase in the force's budget? That increase amounts to a rise in council tax of just £11.14 for a band D household. Does not he therefore consider that modest increases in council tax represent an excellent insurance policy?

I recognise my right hon. Friend's point. I know that he has made strong representations about the funding of the Gwent police service. As a Gwent MP, I share his happiness at the success achieved by Gwent police in tackling crime and reducing crime levels. However, it is important that all of us in the wider community realise that we have to develop partnerships with the police service if we are to achieve meaningful and long-term reductions in crime. In the end, that comes to putting in the necessary resources, as the Government are doing. We also have to introduce reforms, and the Government will do that too.

Is the Minister aware of the organisation Youth at Risk, which has pioneered some ground-breaking work in addressing youth crime? The organisation's work to reduce the underlying causes of young offending has reduced reoffending by as much as 36 per cent.—three times more than similar projects. Is the Minister willing to accept representations from Youth at Risk, and also to support its establishment in Wales?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that question, as it makes an important contribution to the wider debate about tackling crime. I am aware of the Youth at Risk project, and of the initiatives in west Belfast of the Probation Board for Northern Ireland, which have achieved some success. People under the age of 18 commit about 7 million offences a year. It is important that we tackle youth crime and help young people involved in crime. I have been very impressed by the success that appears to have been achieved in west Belfast. I intend to raise the matter with the crime reduction director for Wales at our next meeting, so that we can examine how that success has been achieved in Northern Ireland, and to see whether we can develop such initiatives in Wales.

Is my hon. Friend the Minister aware of the work of the women's safety unit in Cardiff, which aims to help women suffering domestic violence? The project is funded by the Home Office, but for 12 months only. Will he do his utmost to persuade my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary to extend the funding period, so that the unit can continue its valuable work?

I am aware of my hon. Friend's commitment to domestic violence issues, and of her hard work in that regard. Domestic violence is one of the Government's main priorities for crime reduction, and we have a Minister to co-ordinate action across Government in that respect. Domestic violence accounts for about 25 per cent. of all reported violence. I am aware of the Cardiff women's safety unit. There are eight other projects across Wales, and Government funding amounts to about £750,000. I plan to visit the project in Cardiff shortly, and I hope that my hon. Friend will be able to join me. I have no doubt that I will receive representations about ongoing funding for the project. I shall listen to them, and pass them on to the appropriate Minister.

Is the Minister aware that in Wales, crimes of violence against the person are out of control and have more than doubled under Labour? They are up from 17,500 in 1997–98 to more than 38,000 last year. Is it not alarming, at a time of soaring violent crime, that the Government have so undermined police morale that the police are staging a demonstration on 13 March? Can the Minister assure the House that there will be adequate police cover in Wales on 13 March? When, at the beginning of his Administration, the Prime Minister said that he would be tough on crime and the causes of crime, what did he mean?

I think that the right hon. Gentleman has been learning some tactics from the hon. Member for Ribble Valley (Mr. Evans). When the Government came to power, we looked at the way in which crime was recorded and we found it wanting. Indeed, the House will be interested to know that until the Government came to power, common assault was not counted as violence against the person, and neither were attacks on police officers. We were used to the previous Government doing all sorts of things with figures—we remember what they did with the unemployment figures. We have changed the way in which crime is recorded to make it more transparent. We are making it more accountable. We are putting in the resources and putting in place the reforms to tackle the rise in crime.

What recent discussions he has held with the Secretary for Agriculture in the National Assembly for Wales about the Welsh shellfish industry. [35107]

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I meet regularly with the Minister for Rural Affairs in the National Assembly for Wales to discuss a range of issues, including the Welsh shellfish industry.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. May I press him to take up with National Assembly Ministers, as well as with his colleagues in the Department of Health and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the desperate plight of cockle gatherers who usually work the Loughor estuary, including many of my constituents? For eight months they have been unable to earn their living because of a series of positive tests for diarrhetic shellfish poisoning. They need financial help and they need their estuary cleaned up. To do that will take action from Government agencies at UK level as well as from the National Assembly.

Responsibility for the closure of the Burry inlet cockle beds rests with Carmarthen and Swansea county councils, which acted jointly in accordance with regulation 7 of the Food Safety (Fishery Products and Live Shellfish) (Hygiene) Regulations 1998. Having said that, however, I can tell my hon. Friend that on Monday I met representatives of the cockle-gathering industry in his constituency together with the Assembly Member for that constituency, Edwina Hart. I have been made fully aware of the problems that the cockle gatherers face, the difficulties caused by the cockle beds being closed for eight months and the impact that that has had on their industry and livelihood. I will make representations to other ministerial colleagues on their behalf and will happily ensure that my hon. Friend is included in the responses when I get them so that he can be fully in the picture and reassured that I and the Government will do all that we can to help the cockle gatherers in his constituency.

What discussions he has had with the First Secretary of the National Assembly for Wales about producing a Welsh action plan for preventing future outbreaks of foot and mouth. [35108]

I have regular meetings with the First Minister at which a variety of issues relating to foot and mouth are discussed. My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State also has regular meetings with the Assembly Minister for Rural Affairs.

Does the Secretary of State share the view of the Farmers Union of Wales that the impact of last year's foot and mouth crisis on Wales was devastating and had many ongoing effects? Does he also share the FUW' s view that the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food failed to understand the need of Welsh farmers during the crisis? For example, there was a serious breakdown in communication between MAFF and the National Assembly when MAFF culled out border farms and then failed to inform Welsh officials. Surely that is yet another reason to have a full public inquiry into the foot and mouth crisis, and will the Secretary of State support it?

I do not share those views. As a result of the relationship between the National Assembly for Wales and the Government, we have introduced a considerable number of packages and measures to help Welsh farming and the Welsh rural economy. It is not always enough, but we are trying to deal with what was, of course, a devastating blow for rural Wales—I agree with the hon. Gentleman about that. The Assembly put £65 million into a rural recovery plan. The actions of a Labour-led Assembly and a Labour Government were absolutely right. We did what we could to put right a very difficult situation for Welsh farmers and the Welsh rural economy.

Will my right hon. Friend join me in commending the distinct approach to agriculture that is being developed by the Welsh Assembly's Minister for Rural Affairs, Carwyn Jones? Does he believe that the priorities of the new action plan should include support for organic farming, expansion of the Tir Gofal agri-environmental scheme and greater support for Farming Connect? Will he join me in congratulating all the people at Usk agricultural college who put on the Farming Connect roadshow last Saturday, which attracted many farmers from Monmouthshire?

I agree with my hon. Friend's comments about Usk agricultural college, which I know well. It has done a marvellous job in the past few months in ensuring that farmers in Monmouthshire are well catered for. I also agree—I think that the people of Wales, including the farming community, would agree too—that the Welsh Minister for Rural Affairs has done an excellent job during the past 12 months. There is no doubt about that. He is working together with the Government to ensure that we do all that we can to help rural Wales.

Given the support of the Welsh farming community and the farming unions for the devolution of animal health functions to the Assembly, what discussions has the Secretary of State had with Assembly Ministers to introduce the secondary legislation that will enable that to happen?

The hon. Gentleman refers to an area in which during the past 12 months the Assembly has, de facto, done a great deal on behalf of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs—before that, the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food—in terms of what happens in Wales. That is because it is much closer to the ground.

When will the Secretary of State come off it? He knows that the handling of foot and mouth was botched. It cost £500 million and 35,184 cattle, 304,847 sheep and 5,941 pigs were slaughtered. Does he agree that the agriculture and tourism industries could not withstand another outbreak of foot and mouth? Does he agree with Bob Parry of the Farmers Union of Wales that one measure that would help Welsh and other British farmers would be to ban any substandard meat from coming into this country?

I agree that we must ensure that we are vigilant about the importation of illegal meat. The hon. Gentleman is right about that. However, he is wrong in one respect. His comments come badly from a member of the party that dealt so poorly with the BSE crisis not many years ago. If his party was in government, it would have done nothing different from what the Government have done over the past 12 months. Millions and millions of pounds have been paid out in compensation to the farming community, and millions more have been paid in Wales for a rural recovery plan.

It is amazing, is it not, Mr. Speaker? The Secretary of State admits that we want to stop the importation of substandard meat, but the Government do nothing about it. When will they bring forward proposals to ensure that substandard meat is banned from entering this country, and when will the Secretary of State ensure that there are proper lines of communication? Last night was a warning shot across everybody's bows. We all feared that there would be another outbreak of foot and mouth. When will he ensure that cheap imports of food into Britain are banned?

The hon. Gentleman is right about last night and we should remain vigilant in rural areas about foot and mouth. On meat imports, we recognise the genuine concerns of the farming community. That is why the Government, the Assembly, local authorities and Customs and Excise are working together to ensure that there is much greater vigilance and much greater public information. There is a tremendous amount of activity within government to ensure that we alert people to the dangers of illegally imported food. I agree entirely with the hon. Gentleman on that. However, he is wrong to say that the Government do not recognise the problems because we certainly do.

What discussions he has had with (a) ministerial colleagues and (b) the National Assembly for Wales on the implementation of the report "Farming and Food: A Sustainable Future", with particular reference to modulation; and if he will make a statement. [35109]

I have regular meetings with ministerial colleagues and the National Assembly for Wales in which a wide range of farming issues are discussed.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reply which, bearing in mind the fact that he had a month's notice of the specific question, is rather pathetic.

I think that the hon. Gentleman would agree in principle with modulation. After all, his party voted in favour of it in the National Assembly not so long ago. I am sure that he would also agree with what his colleagues in the European Parliament say as members of the European group. They want a

"step-by-step reallocation of the European Union budget for the CAP from surplus management to an integrated rural development policy".

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is a shame that the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy (Mr. Llwyd) introduces a critical and sallow note to the farming debate, especially as there is general agreement throughout Wales and in the hon. Gentleman's party that my Assembly Member, Carwyn Jones, has done a great job in leading the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Department? Is it not good that "Farming and Food: A Sustainable Future" contains a blueprint that all people from rural communities in Wales fully support so that we can develop the food industry in Wales to maximise profits for our rural communities?

I agree with my hon. Friend. Although I expect ignorant criticism of the Welsh Minister for Rural Affairs from Members who represent English constituencies, I would not expect it from a Welsh Member of Parliament.

What discussions he has had with ministerial colleagues and the First Secretary of the National Assembly for Wales about the Government's steps to improve the training skills of the Welsh work force. [35110]

Increasing skills is vital to raising productivity in all parts of Britain. Skills measures announced by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his pre-Budget statement will result in consequential allocations to the Welsh block, but it will be for the Assembly to decide how those funds are allocated among Welsh programmes.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that response. Does he agree that there should be greater co-operation between schools, training providers and the business community to match training to the needs of industry? Does he also agree that there should be a skills audit in areas of high unemployment, such as my constituency, to identify deficiencies in skills to ensure that we have even economic development throughout Wales?

Yes, of course I agree with my hon. Friend. Only this morning, the Minister for Education and Lifelong Learning in Wales introduced a document on skills and employment action that outlines no fewer than 50 actions to improve training and education among the work force in Wales. I also agree that that should start in schools, which is why the Assembly is introducing in Wales, as we are in England, vocational GCSEs in schools from September 2002. In many ways, Wales leads the United Kingdom in training and skills for young people.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that more than 1,000 jobs have been created on the St. Asaph business park, which is in my constituency, but that only 100 such jobs were created under the Tories? However, if that growth is to continue, my community needs skilled workers. That is the No. 1 issue. What representations is he making to the National Assembly on that important issue?

I have visited my hon. Friend's constituency and St. Asaph, and as he knows, ELWa has recently given some £3 million to colleges in north Wales to support development of its manufacturing base. He asks what the Assembly and I are doing to improve training in Wales. The most important thing that the Government and the Assembly are doing is funding new training and new skills. As my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer's pre-Budget report makes clear, some £40 million extra was given to Wales for training. As a result of that and other measures, Wales leads the way in training in the United Kingdom.

If he will discuss with the Home Secretary the level of funding for North Wales police. [35112]

My right hon. Friend and I have regular contact with colleagues about issues affecting Wales. Under the police settlement announced by my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary on 30 January, the North Wales police authority is set to receive a grant of £41.1 million, together with an additional £300,000 to bring the authority's grant increase up to 2.3 per cent. In 2002–03, it will also receive £28.7 million from the Assembly as part of the local government settlement. Together with the assumed 5 per cent. increase in the precept, that will constitute a budget increase for this year of 4.8 per cent., although I understand that the precept may be further increased by the police authority.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that response. Is he also aware of the excellent way in which Wrexham county borough council is securing additional funding for closed circuit television schemes in north Wales? I recently met two contented police officers who administer a £150,000 CCTV scheme on the Wrexham industrial estate. Will my hon. Friend please encourage other local authorities across Wales to apply for more money to fight crime?

I agree with my hon. Friend. In fact, in his constituency £525,000 has been made available for CCTV in the period 1999 to 2002. The Government have made available £9 million for CCTV in town centres and car parks throughout Wales. That is having a positive impact on crime and crime reduction. It reassures the public and gives a warning to those out to commit crime that they will be detected.

Given that the majority of police funding in Wales comes from within that country, is it not high time that responsibility for the police was devolved to Cardiff?

The Government have no plans to do that.

When he next plans to meet the National Assembly secretaries to discuss tourism into Wales from the rest of the United Kingdom; and if he will make a statement. [35114]

I have regular discussions with the First Minister and other Assembly members on a range of issues, including tourism in Wales.

Does the Minister agree that people such as Mrs. Pugh of Dolfanog Fach, are adopting the right attitude by approaching people to visit their guest houses? Does he also agree that mid-Wales has much to offer? What steps can the Government take to ensure that too many burdens are not placed on small businesses such as farms, which are open to guests?

I well recall the hon. Gentleman's question to me in June, in which he mentioned Mrs. Meirwen Pugh and her farm at Talyllyn. Since then I have travelled round many parts of Wales and I am greatly encouraged by the improvement in the tourist industry. People are taking holidays—long breaks and short breaks—in Wales, including the hon. Gentleman and many from his part of the world. I hope that he will continue to do that and to encourage many others to do likewise. The Government have been putting in the funding to encourage the tourist boards and others to make Wales a more attractive place to visit. That will be a success at the end of the day, so I look forward to many more people coming to Wales for their holidays this year. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman's advert for Mrs. Meirwen Pugh is much appreciated.

If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 27 February.

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

My right hon. Friend is sometimes subject to rather unflattering or even malevolent descriptions of his motivation. Will he provide the House with a brief characterisation of the political philosophy that he espouses and which underlies his policies?

Hear, hear.

First, I should thank my hon. Friend for his question, which has evinced such sympathy in all parts of the House, about the criticism of me. The best example that I can give is the rebuilding of the national health service today under this Government—extra investment. For example, there is the appointment today of Sir Magdi Yacoub to head up the fellowship scheme that will allow internationally acclaimed surgeons and consultants from around the world to work in this country. I can assure the House and the country that that extra investment in our NHS will continue under this Government. Of course, it would be taken out by the Conservative party.

Does it remain a principle of the Prime Minister to sack any Cabinet Minister who lies?

Yes, of course. I expect the highest standards of propriety.

Yesterday, the Transport Secretary admitted to the House that he told the British people something that was fundamentally untrue. Before the Prime Minister came to power, he said:

"I would expect Ministers in a Government I lead to resign if they lie."

I do not accept what the right hon. Gentleman has said. My right hon. Friend came to the House yesterday and made an absolutely full statement, and he and his Department should now be allowed to get on with the issues that really matter to people—for example, issues to do with the botched privatisation of transport and the extra investment in our transport system that it needs. Of course, that is the last thing the right hon. Gentleman will ever ask me about.

Now we know that the Prime Minister clearly is not going to stand by his word. Under this Transport Secretary, rail delays are up by 40 per cent., and even last night passengers petitioned the Government to get rid of the Transport Secretary. After yesterday, no one will ever believe the Transport Secretary again.

"no more sleaze, no more lies, no more broken promises".

I can tell the right hon. Gentleman exactly what the Transport Secretary will concentrate on: sorting out a privatisation that has wrecked the state of Britain's railways, ensuring that we get the largest ever investment into the London underground and appointing the right people to the Strategic Rail Authority, so that we get the extra rolling stock and investment that the transport system needs.

Is the Prime Minister aware of the excellent work of the Merthyr crime reduction partnership? Will he join me in congratulating it on receiving a British community safety award for car crime prevention initiatives in my constituency? [HON. MEMBERS: "Reading."] Is he also aware, however, that our efforts to extend crime prevention work are being frustrated because of the lack of use of antisocial behaviour orders? Will he therefore undertake to speed up both the implementation and issue of those orders? Will he ensure that they are used much more frequently—[HON. MEMBERS: "Reading."]

Order. The House should let the hon. Member put his question. [HON. MEMBERS: "He is reading."] Order. I am not reading, and I am saying that the hon. Gentleman should be able to put his question.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will my right hon. Friend increase the frequency with which the orders are used when ex-offenders are returned to the community, so that we are equipped and armed to deal with crime reduction?

My hon. Friend should not be in the least surprised at the jeers from the Conservatives.

In spite of the somewhat inadequate inquiries of a minute or two ago, will the Prime Minister explain to people out there in the country why exactly he retains confidence in his Transport Secretary?

For the very reason contained in the statement made by the Secretary of State yesterday, where he explained exactly what has happened, and because I believe that in the end the judgment that should be made, and indeed will be made, about this Secretary of State and this Government will be on the real issues to do with transport—the things that actually concern people in this country. I know that the Conservative party does not want to argue about them, but we do.

There is no doubt that that is what the Transport Secretary and, indeed, the Government deserve to be judged on, but if their presiding over a shambolic railway system, the financial failure of air traffic services, and their ploughing ahead with the part privatisation of the London tube in the face of popular sentiment and their own Labour-dominated Select Committee add up to confidence in the Transport Secretary, will the Prime Minister explain what would lead to a loss of confidence?

Let me deal with each of those issues in turn. First, in relation to the railway infrastructure, we know the problems caused by the lack of investment over many years and a privatisation which I think is generally regarded as botched and wrong. It was absolutely right that after the Hatfield rail disaster there was a full audit of the state of the infrastructure, from which time it was decided that there would have to be almost a complete renewal of it. That will require time to undertake and large amounts of investment. We are getting that investment in. It is right that it will take some time to sort out the mess of privatisation, but it will be done.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, in my constituency as we speak, wild hares are being torn to pieces by dogs in that great spectator event, the Waterloo cup? Does he share the disgust with that activity expressed by 81 per cent. of those surveyed in the most recent poll, and their desire for hare coursing to be banned and the annual atrocity at Altcar ended? Will he please tell us when the will of the House, expressed by overwhelming majorities in recent years, will be implemented? When will we follow the example of Scotland and ban the hunting of our wild mammals by a minority's dogs?

There will be an announcement made on the timing of the vote that we promised both in the manifesto and in the Queen's Speech. That announcement will be made shortly.

I am sure that the Prime Minister agrees that Britain's livestock industry produces meat to the highest animal welfare and food hygiene standards in the world. Is he aware that imported meat often does not meet the same standards that we expect our farmers to reach, and is often cheaper than locally reared meat? For the sake of both the livestock industry and consumers, will he ensure that there is a level playing field, so that all meat imports have to meet the same standards as meat produced here?

I agree that that is an issue, and we are working on it with the farming industry. First, if imported meat is coming into this country in contravention of the rules, it should not be. That is why we are working with the industry to tighten the rules. Secondly, it is important to secure a sustainable future for British farming. The basis for that was outlined in the recent report by Sir Donald Curry. We need to make sure that we work with the farming industry to ensure that British produce, which is of really high quality, can be marketed and sold properly not only in this country, but throughout the world.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that police officers should not have to work long hours of overtime either to provide a first-class service, or to have a decent standard of living?

I think it important that police officers work under terms and conditions of employment that are right for the modern age. I have no doubt that we will be able to work with those in the police service not only to make changes in terms of policing reform, but to make major changes to our criminal justice system which will deliver the type of criminal justice system and police service that we need in this day and age.

Like hon. Members on both sides of the House, the Prime Minister rightly takes an active interest in Africa, not least because many countries on that continent are part of the Commonwealth. Does he share my grave concern about the deteriorating situation in Zimbabwe? Does he not think it absolutely outrageous that in the middle of the presidential campaign, the president's opponent and two of his close colleagues have been charged with treason? In the event of—I hope—the right outcome and the election of the candidate of the Movement for Democratic Change, what contingency plans do the Prime Minister and his Government have to help that country out of the hellhole in which its people currently live?

I agree entirely that what is happening in Zimbabwe is an outrage. The actions of Robert Mugabe are completely undemocratic, wrong and dictatorial. It is for that reason that we argued with other members of the European Union in favour of sanctions being applied; we will make the same case in the Commonwealth. The hon. Gentleman is right to say that we should now—and we are doing so in our discussions with other countries in Europe and in the Commonwealth—concentrate on making sure that if the result goes against Mr. Mugabe, although we cannot be sure that it will because of some of the appalling things that have been happening, we are in a position to ensure that the proper democratically elected Government of Zimbabwe are supported.

It was announced today that 50 years of peat working is to end on three sites in the United Kingdom, including Hatfield moors in my constituency and Thorne moors in that of my hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster, North (Mr. Hughes). Is not that landmark agreement a good example of how the Government are supporting conservation and sustainability? Will my right hon. Friend congratulate the Thorne and Hatfield Moors Conservation Forum, which has for many years fought hard to save those precious peat lands? Will he commit the Government to supporting and promoting the alternatives to peat for Britain's gardeners?

I congratulate not just my hon. Friend the Member for Don Valley (Caroline Flint) but my hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster, North (Mr. Hughes) on leading that campaign with the pressure group that led it locally. The issue is important. Three internationally important sites are involved. If we can discover ways of promoting sustainable development, benefits will flow for the whole country.

Will the Prime Minister tell us whether teacher vacancies in schools have gone up or down in the last year?

Teacher vacancies have gone up. Part of the reason for that, however, is that so many more teaching posts are available.

That must be one of the most feeble answers ever given. The figures slipped out by the Department for Education and Skills last Friday—this Government love Fridays—show that vacancies have almost doubled and that schools were short of more than 5,000 teachers in the last year, which is up from 3,000 in the year before. The Prime Minister talks about the number of new teachers being recruited. Will he tell us now how many teachers left schools in the latest year for which figures are available?

I do not have those figures, but I can tell the right hon. Gentleman that what he was saying a moment ago is absolute nonsense. Thousands more teachers are in place since we came to office. There are vacancies because schools are recruiting and have been given additional sums of investment. There are schools in my constituency, his constituency and up and down this country where we can see the new teachers, school buildings and classroom assistants.

Another feeble answer from the Prime Minister. If he wants to talk about my constituency, he should ask himself why at least one or two of those schools have had to struggle out of special measures while his Government have been in power. [HON. MEMBERS: "Reading."] The answer that he would not give is that 19,000 teachers left schools in 1999–2000. Ofsted reports that 20 per cent. of—

Reading!

Order. Hon. Members should let the Leader of the Opposition put his question. Some hon. Members are behaving rather childishly.

They would do anything to protect their Prime Minister—absolutely anything, Mr. Speaker.

Never mind about protecting me; it is the right hon. Gentleman who needs protection. Did I just hear him say, "messing about with exams"? I think that it is important that our children take exams. Fortunately, under this Government, exam results are going up. The numbers of teachers in schools have gone up for the simple reason that I have given—this Government are putting more money into our schools. If he talks to teachers not only in his constituency but up and down this country, he will find that they have seen the investment going into school rooms and school buildings.

More!

Order.

Recently, my right hon. Friend met the Italian Prime Minister to discuss European Union matters. Is he not concerned that Silvio Berlusconi and Jacques Chirac are able, with their votes in the EU, to shape legislation that is binding on the people of Britain, despite the facts that neither is accountable to the British electorate and that both face serious corruption allegations? Also, their domestic policies are not the sort of policies that would be supported by most people in Britain.

My right hon. Friend has a deeply held and principled position, which is to be against our membership of the European Union. I happen to disagree with that. It is in the nature of legislation inside the EU that it has to be negotiated and agreed. I believe that we benefit far more from being constructive partners in Europe than from being semi-engaged in Europe.

Further to the question of my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition, will the Prime Minister say whether it is acceptable for a Cabinet Minister to lie and remain in office? Will he guarantee that he will not move the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions in the next reshuffle?

I do not accept what the hon. Gentleman said about my right hon. Friend.

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister will be aware of the murder of the estate agent Timothy Robinson in an horrific attack on a Battersea street a month ago today. What assurances can he give my constituents that there will be more bobbies on the beat in Battersea; that there will be more street warden schemes, like the scheme that is starting in Clapham Junction on 1 April; and above all that the Government, who have been so successful in reducing burglary and car crime, will dedicate the same resources and the same determination to ridding our streets of street crime?

May I first express my sympathy to the family of one of my hon. Friend's constituents? He is right to raise the issue of street crime, which is a serious problem in London and elsewhere in inner cities. It is for that reason that the Metropolitan police are taking action that is specifically targeted on it.

In addition to the incompetence and muddle that now define the Prime Minister's Government, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is also the substantial charge of unfairness? Is he aware that West Sussex county council receives only £300 per week under the standard spending assessment for the care of an elderly person? An equivalent elderly person in Islington receives £917 per week. Will the Prime Minister do what he can, please, to restore the deficit of £13 million in West Sussex county council's social services budget, and ensure that the vulnerable elderly of West Sussex are properly cared for?

I shall write to the hon. Gentleman about the position in West Sussex, as I am not familiar with the details. Overall, there has been an increase in social services spending of about 20 per cent. in the past few years, which contrasts with the preceding few years, when there was a rise of barely 1 per cent. However, we accept that there is more to be done, particularly in making sure that care home places are available. For that reason, about £1.4 billion is to be invested over the next few years. I shall write to the hon. Gentleman about the position in his constituency and council area.

This week's decision to allow pensioners to claim benefits for the first 13 weeks of a hospital stay is extremely welcome, but does my right hon. Friend recognise that the pay gap between men and women at work becomes a pay chasm in pension entitlement? Is it right that women should have to pay that price for caring for their families?

I understand my hon. Friend's point. In spanning any chasm, it is necessary to take account of the resources available. However, she is right to say that the decision to extend the entitlement to 13 weeks has been widely welcomed. That had been unchanged since 1948 and it will bring considerable relief, especially to many elderly people. It is worth pointing out that as a result of the above-inflation rises in basic state pension, the winter fuel allowance and the free TV licences, prescriptions, eye tests and so on—as a result of all those measures taken together, we will have increased the amount of expenditure on pensioners by £6 billion a year from April. That is an indication of our support and dedication to making sure that their dedication and commitment are properly recognised.

Given that the Employers Forum on Age estimates that it costs the country £31 billion a year to deal with ageism in the workplace, will the Prime Minister explain why it is sensible to delay for another five years legislation to deal with age discrimination in the workplace? Should we not be getting rid of age discrimination now and legislating in this Parliament and this Session?

Everybody wants to get rid of age discrimination; the question is how to do it in a sensible way that does not impose undue burdens on employers. As I think the hon. Gentleman would acknowledge, there are huge practical issues to be worked through to make sure that any type of anti-discrimination measures work. It is important that we do that in consultation with employers, particularly small businesses and others that may be affected. I entirely agree with the objective, but it is important that we implement it sensibly.

Will my right hon. Friend consider making further funding available for maternity services? In particular, will he ask our right hon. and hon. Friends in the Department of Health to look speedily and sympathetically at a £12 million bid to modernise the maternity services unit at Northwick Park hospital, which serves my constituents? Although I recognise that significant additional funding has been made available to my health authority, which is clearly an excellent start, will my right hon. Friend encourage our right hon. and hon. Friends in the Department of Health to recognise that further funding is necessary to get the unit modernised?

I know that an application has been submitted by those in my hon. Friend's constituency which will be considered in due course. He is right to single out maternity services as a necessary part of the Government's additional investment and expenditure. Precisely for that reason, we are making sure that additional resources go into our national health service.

The Prime Minister will remember well the very difficult decision made four years ago as part of the Belfast agreement to release all prisoners in Northern Ireland, both republican and so-called loyalist, who were guilty of the most horrific crimes. The people of Northern Ireland backed that because the prisoners were released on licence. It was not easy, but because the prisoners were released on licence, they would go back inside if they committed further crimes and terrorism.

We have said that the issue of those people who have been charged with crimes in the past has to be dealt with. How it is dealt with is a matter under discussion, but the hon. Gentleman is right to draw attention to this point: those convicted prisoners who were given early release were released on licence, so that if they breach the licence conditions, they can be put back in prison again. I hope that he understands that we accept that the measure was very difficult for people in Northern Ireland to accept as part of the Belfast agreement. However, I believe that that agreement, taken as a whole, has given us a chance for the future in Northern Ireland. So we must consider very carefully how to proceed, but I hope that we will have his support in ensuring that the Belfast agreement is maintained.