If he will make a statement on the recruitment of retained firefighters. [86318]

Each fire brigade is responsible for recruiting its own retained firefighters. Our office recognises the vital role taken by retained staff in meeting the needs of many parts of the country and we are working with the fire service actively to encourage people to become retained firefighters. We are considering carefully the recommendations on retained firefighters made by the independent review of the fire service.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend. Does he share my appreciation of the vital role that retained fire officers play in rural areas, although the nature of the retained service is often not fully appreciated by the public, who often do not realise that being a firefighter is a second job for the retained firefighters? Does he agree that, to improve recruitment, we need to give retained fire officers the same hourly rate as the full-time service, the same opportunities for training and the decent pension scheme, which they do not currently have?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend about the very important work of retained firefighters. I, too, pay tribute to the contribution that they make towards the safety of the public in many parts of the country.

Given that the Retained Firefighters Union is not on strike and that its members are not being represented at the ACAS negotiations, why is the Minister so confident that the eventual settlement will give the retained firefighters the decent pay deal that they deserve? Does he not share my concern that the Fire Brigades Union has not represented the retained firefighters properly in the negotiations so far? Why is he so confident that the eventual settlement will give them the pay deal that will solve the recruitment crisis in the retained firefighters service?

As I made clear in my response to my hon. Friend the Member for Monmouth (Mr. Edwards), the Bain review sets out a number of very important proposals in relation to retained firefighters. As I have already said, we are very much minded to proceed on the basis of the Bain review and will set out our responses in the White Paper that we will publish. The responses will cover issues of negotiation and the representation of retained firefighters as well as of full-time firefighters. As the hon. Gentleman knows, there are, in effect, two separate unions, one of which represents only retained firefighters. The FBU also represents some retained firefighters and the issues need to be clarified. We will address them in the White Paper.

I welcome my right hon. Friend's appreciation of the value of retained firefighters. However, is it not the case that there are at least 3,000 to 4,000 fewer retained firefighters than are needed to maintain an adequate response time in rural and urban areas? The retained fee works out after tax at about 15p per hour. Should there not be a national recruitment campaign? Do not retained firefighters need more than just warm words?

Retained firefighters represent just under a third of the total force of firefighters in the country. We wholly share my hon. Friend's concern to ensure more effective recruitment of retained firefighters. We are already engaged in the preparation of publicity material to assist in that process, and we are looking closely at the trials that have been conducted in areas such as south Wales to improve the recruitment of retained firefighters. I assure my hon. Friend and the House that we are very well seized of the importance of helping to recruit more retained firefighters, who do such a crucial job in many parts of the country.

If he will make a statement on the supporting people programme for tackling domestic violence. [86319]

The supporting people programme will bring major improvements to the quality of housing-related support services for vulnerable groups, including people experiencing domestic violence. Specialist co-ordinators on domestic violence are working closely with local authorities and providers to offer support and raise awareness.

I welcome my hon. Friend's recent announcement of £9 million extra to deal with domestic violence. Will she tell us in more detail what is involved in the projects? Will they impact, for example, on the Grimsby women's refuge, which has only 10 places for women who are victims of domestic violence?

What happened last week was an important announcement. Together with organisations such as Women's Aid and Refuge, and with the backing of Comic Relief, which has made its largest domestic donation, we have given funds so that we have, for the first time, a national helpline for those suffering from domestic violence. As well as that funding, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has given £7 million to help the Housing Corporation fund refuge places. As far as the refuge is concerned, I believe that it covers Cleethorpes and our money will bolster any bid that it may submit to the Housing Corporation. At the end of the process, we will consider the geographic coverage to see what other unmet need there may be.

Earlier this year, the Opposition were pleased to support a change in the law that gave people who suffer from domestic violence priority in local authority housing. The hon. Lady will know, not least from constituency cases that I have raised with her, that that message has not got through to local authorities, some of which do not seem to have grasped that it involves moving people across local authority boundaries. In a perversion of the Christmas message, domestic violence will almost certainly double this time next week, as it did last Christmas. Notwithstanding a need to issue guidance to local authorities, will she give the clearest message to them, at this crucial time, that accommodating people who suffer from domestic violence sometimes involves them crossing local authority boundaries?

I am happy to do so. I welcome the hon. Gentleman's commitment to the issue. I know that he takes a keen interest in it. Guidance is available on the supporting people programme. He will know that draft guidance on the priority need order has also been made available. The final guidance will be issued once we have analysed the results of the consultation. There is a firm message to local authorities that the subject is a priority and that they must work together. The strongest message we can send out from both sides of the House to perpetrators of domestic violence is that it will not be tolerated.

Is it not the case, however, that many extremely good organisations already exist to deal with that problem, although they do not concentrate exclusively on the housing needs of women and their families who flee domestic violence? For example, Camden Safety Net in my borough works well across many departments. How will they access the additional support offered in the supporting people programme?

Victims of domestic violence are one category of the supporting people programme. There are other categories for other vulnerable groups. It is interesting to note that, when we analyse the figures nationally of people who present themselves as homeless, 16 per cent. show a connection with domestic violence. The project that my hon. Friend mentions will definitely benefit from the national helpline.

If he will ask the social exclusion unit to conduct a review of debt and financial exclusion. [86320]

Our approach for a more inclusive society is to address the root causes of poverty and social exclusion. Improving financial inclusion is central to this. Decisions on future unit projects will be made shortly.

Will the Minister reconsider the possibility of producing a further report on current levels of debt, especially in low-income households? The evidence shows that their debt is spiralling out of control, and many of those families cannot cope either with the level of indebtedness or the rates of interest that they have to pay at the hands of loan sharks. Will she undertake to carry out a cross-departmental review to help such families to get out of the debt that they are in?

I certainly recognise the situation that the hon. Gentleman presents. The Department of Trade and Industry is reviewing the Consumer Credit Act 1974 to crack down on loan sharks and it will publish proposals in the new year. It is also important that we carry out work on credit unions, which have increased considerably since 1997, and implement pilot initiatives to discover how community-based organisations can get involved in such work. I shall certainly give careful consideration to his representations.

I support what the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Mr. Kirkwood) had to say about loan sharks. Is my hon. Friend aware of a constituent of mine whose original borrowing of £7,500 has now increased to £43,000? The company demanding that money, Provident Financial, has made a profit of £700 million over the last five years, all on the back of the most vulnerable people in deprived communities. Something must be done about that, and urgently.

My hon. Friend is right; there are some absolutely disgraceful cases, which is why the community finance and learning initiative is so important. Those pilot schemes promote financial education and good practice so that we can crack down on loan sharks, who cause a great deal of disruption to our community and feed off vulnerable people.

If he will make a statement on how he intends to improve the involvement of local communities in planning decisions. [86321]

The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill will, subject to parliamentary approval, require all local planning authorities to produce a statement of community involvement setting out what the authority will do to involve the community in preparing local development documents and in their consideration of planning applications.

How can the Deputy Prime Minister explain his decision to take out of the hands of elected county and district councils in Hertfordshire and North Hertfordshire key decisions about housing, especially as he previously justified the approval of a plan to build 10,000 houses on the green belt on the grounds that the decision was endorsed by the elected Labour party that was then in power and that there were no other sites? Now a Conservative group has taken power and found alternative sites, so why is the right hon. Gentleman overriding local democracy, and why he is determined to concrete over the green belt?

The right hon. Gentleman's recollection of that application is somewhat limited. He will know that we do not make a judgment according to whether a Labour or Tory council has made the decision; we have planning inspectors to make independent judgments. They made that recommendation, and I accepted it.

Why is the Deputy Prime Minister's commitment to community involvement so poor? He was recently asked whether he would call in a planning application in which a district council gave itself consent to develop its own land, despite the fact that all the people of the town, Teignmouth, asked for the application to be called in.

There are many thousands of applications on planning inquiries which bear my name, but as the hon. Gentleman will know from the process, I am not aware of any individual case. I will look at the matter that he mentioned and write to him, provided that the planning procedure has been completed and that I am not interfering in the process.

The Deputy Prime Minister's White Paper on regional government was entitled "Your Region, Your Choice", but it is clear from the two Bills already before the House that the Government intend to remove the planning powers from county councils, whether or not there is a referendum and irrespective of the result of any referendum. Why are the people not being given a say in this vital aspect of local government? Should not the White Paper have been entitled "Your Region, No Choice"? [Interruption.]

Order. It is far too noisy. If hon. Members want to chat, they can leave the Chamber.

I always find it very difficult to understand the right hon. Gentleman's arguments, because it was a previous Conservative Government who abolished county councils without any consultation, along with their planning powers and everything else. We made it clear in our White Paper that it is for the people to choose, and we will give them a referendum. The Conservatives did not do that when they abolished county councils.

Well, I did not think that I would get a proper answer to that, so I am not surprised. In the spirit of Christmas, I shall try something a little easier. Yesterday, it became apparent that the Government intend to add insult to injury for county councils. The Under-Secretary of State, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, the hon. Member for Harrow, East (Mr. McNulty), told the House that the regional planning bodies would be funded by central Government to the tune of £6 million. In Committee yesterday, the Minister for Local Government and the Regions said that the money would be taken from county councils. Which one is right?

Those bodies will be financed by central Government.

If he will make a statement on third-party rights in the planning process. [86322]

The views of interested parties are taken into account in drawing up development plans and when reaching decisions on individual applications. The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill contains new measures that give local residents and third parties greater opportunities to participate more effectively in the planning process.

I am sure that the Minister agrees that unlimited involvement by third parties in the planning process will paralyse the whole system. However, does he accept that a limited right at major inquiries, perhaps funded by the taxpayer, would ensure that third-party objectors can put their views across in a focused way, thus shortening those long inquiries?

I have heard what my hon. Friend has said about the need to support residents and interested parties, especially in larger-scale applications. I believe that there are prospects of more support, not only from our announcement about funding for Planning Aid, but from changes such as the introduction of mediators in the inquiry process and round-table discussions to make sure that details are fully understood at an early stage of inquiries.

What plans he has to reform the planning system. [86323]

The Government's programme for the reform of the planning system is set out in "Sustainable Communities—Delivering through Planning", published on 18 July 2002. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is seeking to enact reforms that require primary legislation in the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill, introduced on 4 December 2002 and happily given a Second Reading by the House just yesterday.

I am grateful to the Minister for his response. I am sure that many local authorities across the country will welcome the changes in the Bill that we debated yesterday, but many are apprehensive about the financial cost of the transition. Can my hon. Friend give me an assurance that local councils will be supported financially through that transitional period, so that in accepting the change there is no financial penalty for those local authorities?

As I have said previously, the legislation that we discussed yesterday is only part of the reform of the planning system, which also includes the review and revision of circulars and policy guidance, and the introduction of £350 million more through the planning delivery grant, which is intended to meet councils' very real concerns, to which my hon. Friend alluded.

I am sure that the Minister is aware that all over the country the absence of affordable housing to buy and rent is ripping the heart out of communities. What changes to the planning law does he propose to help the provision of more affordable housing so that local people can afford to live locally? If not through planning, how do the Government intend to help?

Given the hon. Gentleman's party and the previous Government's record, I am terribly tempted to say that he has more front than Harrods for even asking the question. On the planning reform package and affordable housing, a review of circular 6/98 will begin in January. However, an effective, responsive, flexible and speedier planning system will also help the process—that goes for the southwest and all the other regions.

What his estimate is of the per capita change in revenue support grant to the Isle of Wight council resulting from his changes to the distribution formula. [86324]

Under our proposals, the Isle of Wight council will receive a grant increase of £3.56 million, which is equivalent to almost £27 per head more than in 2002–03.

I recognise and welcome that marginal increase in cash terms, but could the Minister explain how the grant settlement takes account of the additional costs of delivering statutory services, such as fire services, on an island, where we cannot get the help from adjoining authorities that we sometimes need. Will he agree to meet with me a group of representatives of the Isle of Wight council to discuss how those needs can more effectively be met?

I must tell the hon. Gentleman that our settlement of course takes account of the special circumstances of his area. He will be aware that in the last four years of the Conservative Government, the Isle of Wight received only a 1 per cent. increase in grant—a real-terms cut—whereas under this Government, it has received a 30 per cent. increase in grant. If the hon. Gentleman wishes to bring a delegation to discuss with me how his councillors will spend the extra money that we are making available to his authority, he should put that request in writing and we will, of course, consider it.

What plans he has for the reform of council tax. [86326]

The Local Government Bill contains provisions on council tax revaluation, banding, discounts and exemptions.

Is the Minister aware that since the Conservatives introduced council tax nine years ago, the average English council tax bill has risen by more than 70 per cent., and by more than 50 per cent. under the present Government? How do the Government justify dependence on such a regressive tax, unrelated to the ability to pay, to fund a growing percentage of public services?

I shall take that as a representation from the Liberal Democrats in favour of some sort of local income tax, which I understand is their policy. I wonder how many of their constituents appreciate the implications of that policy for them. Council tax is certainly fairer than its predecessor, the poll tax, which some people may still remember, but in our reforms we will take into account how we might be able to make council tax fairer still.

When he intends to visit Coatbridge and Chryston constituency to discuss social exclusion. [86327]

My right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister has no current plans to visit the constituency of Coatbridge and Chryston. However, the Government maintain regular contact with the devolved Administrations on issues relating to social exclusion through forums such as the joint ministerial committee on poverty, which I attended in September.

I am sorry that my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister has no plans to come to my constituency in the immediate future—he does not know what he is missing. Will my hon. Friend join me in paying tribute to the credit unions, particularly in Kirkwood and Muirhead, which, despite a huge reduction in unemployment, are helping to make life easier for a substantial number of my constituents?

I am very happy to do that, as I know what an interest my right hon. Friend takes in such measures. I believe, as has already been mentioned, that credit unions are incredibly valuable. They can give people real independence. If, by encouraging credit unions, we tackle seriously the problem of financial exclusion that blights many of our communities, we shall be doing all our communities a great service.

What progress has been made towards resolving the firefighters' dispute. [86328]

The final report of Sir George Bain's independent review of the fire service, published on Monday, is central to resolving the dispute. On the same day, I made a statement to the House welcoming the report and detailing how the Government will take forward its recommendations. The Government want a fair deal for firefighters and other workers, and a fair deal for the economy. Sir George Bain's report provides the framework for such a deal.

Will my right hon. Friend reassure the Blackpool firefighters whom I met recently at the Bispham fire station that discussions about modernisation will take into account the local circumstances of towns such as Blackpool, where the firefighters care not only for the resident population, but for 11 million visitors in a town that stays open late into the night entertaining them?

Many of those in the House with experience of Blackpool will understand my hon. Friend's point. We want to give the Blackpool brigade, and every other brigade, every assistance to be more efficient and more effective in their operations. That is why Sir George Bain's recommendations that we should move to more targeted fire cover based on basic risk assessment, and that working practices should be changed, are important. I identified to the House some of the changes that are needed, and I have already made it clear that I intend, as the inquiry recommended, to begin the repeal of section 19 of the Fire Services Act 1947.

Does the Deputy Prime Minister share my concern and surprise that the firefighters have not taken the opportunity to form a considered view of the proposals in the Bain report before calling another strike in the new year? Is that not very regrettable indeed?

I very much agree with what the hon. Lady said. The House will share the hope that all firefighters, at whatever level in the Fire Brigades Union, will take note of what Sir George Bain has said and of what I have said in the House about the changes that the Government will make. I hope that we can all look forward to further discussions in which the report is not treated as irrelevant. It is very relevant and we would like to see a settlement. My advice all the time is to talk, not walk. That remains my advice.

What recent progress has been made in controlling illegal camping. [86329]

In the early part of next year, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, in conjunction with the Home Office, will issue new guidance on managing unauthorised camping. The guidance is currently in its second phase of consultation with stakeholders. The guidance issued in the new year will include detailed operational guidance and deal with the roles and responsibilities of local authorities and the police in taking action.

Can we ensure that the decision is made in the very earliest part of next year? In my area, there are typically three illegal occupations at any time, trashing our countryside and having an antisocial impact on local residents. Can we please have the earliest possible conclusion to the consultation?

When the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister issued the initial guidance, we took the very clear decision that we wanted substantive consultation, so that when the framework and operational guidance are issued—I hope that that will happen as early as possible in the new year, to satisfy my hon. Friend—they will be agreed to and welcomed by all parties associated with this very serious matter.

If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 18 December.

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.

The Prime Minister will agree that national security far outweighs commercial sensitivity or indeed potential embarrassment. If British companies and individuals are named in the declaration on resolution 1441 as having supplied arms or weapon-making technology or material to Iraq—a country with which every appearance suggests we will soon be at war—why do the British Government refuse to publish their names so that the claims can be investigated?

The UN resolution concerns the circumstances of the UN's mandate in respect of the inspectors and the ability of this country and others to ensure that Saddam complies with the requirements of the resolution. In respect of any information about companies, we apply exactly the same rules as Governments have always applied, and I think that it is right that we carry on doing so.

At the weekend, President Bush declared his intention to offer vaccination against smallpox to every American, with a few exceptions among those with medical conditions. Is that our intention, or do we know something that he does not?

No. We do not believe that mass vaccination is warranted. We are following the World Health Organisation's guidelines. Our primary strategy in the event of any outbreak will be to contain and ring vaccinate as the first line of defence. However, we do not know of any specific threat, so the sensible thing for us to do is follow the guidelines set out by the WHO, which I think are correct, and that is what we intend to do.

The United States has made it clear that it will respond to the Iraqi weapons declaration within days. When will the Government publish their formal response to the declaration? From the evidence that the Prime Minister has seen so far and has already produced, will he say whether he agrees with Colin Powell that scepticism about the Iraqi declaration is well founded?

We will make a formal response shortly after the Christmas break. In respect of Colin Powell's remarks, most people who have looked at the document, which is obviously very long, are pretty sceptical about the claims that it makes, but it is important that we study it in detail and make a formal and considered response.

It is clear—it is certainly in today's papers—that the Government are making preparations for a major deployment in the Gulf. If a decision to deploy is made during the recess, is the Prime Minister prepared to recall Parliament? There is also confusion about whether there might be a vote on deployment. I would urge him to hold a vote on a substantive motion. Will he now agree to do so?

In respect of any substantive vote, we have made it clear that it would be our intention to do so, although that is, of course, subject to the proviso that the Foreign Secretary set out: nothing must be done that would endanger or imperil our troops should we need to act quickly. The Secretary of State will make a statement about the deployment later. It is a contingency deployment. Our position remains exactly as it has always been: we want the inspectors to do their work, we want Saddam to comply with the UN resolutions, and we use force in circumstances in which there is a breach of the UN mandate.

Last week, I was told about a child in my constituency who could not sleep, not because she was over-excited about Father Christmas but because she was afraid that some lout might smash the windows of her mum's flat or put a lighted match through the letter box. While I know that the Prime Minister will want to join me in congratulating north Kent police on cutting crime by a further 5 per cent. over the past year, will he assure the mother of that child that he will not let up in his determination to deal with loutish and antisocial behaviour, which still creates a climate of fear? Will he also ensure that the police and local authorities continue to be given the resources they need to tackle the problem, rather than taking the advice of the Conservatives and cutting them?

First, I can assure my hon. Friend that we will do all that we can to deal with this issue. I congratulate Kent police on their great achievement of reducing crime in the Kent area. The key is simple and effective ways of enforcing the law on antisocial behaviour. That is why it is important that we streamline the antisocial behaviour orders. I also hope that the House will support the measures in the forthcoming Bill to make it far easier to impose fixed penalty notice fines for a range of antisocial behaviour offences, because the law will be used effectively only if there is a simple way of enforcing it.

On Iraq, apart from welcoming the apparent conversion of the leader of the Conservative party to the arguments that Liberal Democrats have been advancing here for a long time, may I ask the Prime Minister—[Interruption.] Where is the sense of Christmas spirit in the Conservative party? The Secretary of State for Defence said this morning:

"If members of the Security Council judge ultimately that military action is necessary, it is important that"—

"are in a position to take military action."

The position is as we have always set it out, which is that UN resolution 1441 assumes that there will be a further discussion in the UN Security Council. Of course, it has always been our desire to act with the full authority of the UN Security Council. We have always made it clear, however, that, if there were a breach and if, for any reason, the Security Council were blocked in any way, we do not believe it right that that breach should go unpunished. Those are the circumstances in which it is important to make sure that we do our level best to work with the UN in any way that we can, but the bottom line—as I have set out right from the very beginning—must be that the United Nations route must be the way of dealing with the issue, not the way of avoiding dealing with it. Having said that, I believe that the UN will support action in circumstances in which there has been a breach. That is my belief after talking in detail to the main countries involved in the UN.

I thank the Prime Minister for that detailed and serious reply. Will he clarify one further aspect of the matter? The UN weapons inspectorate will complete its task and submit its conclusions and recommendations to the Security Council. If the American Government were, in the interim, to take any kind of pre-emptive unilateral action in respect of Iraq, would their action have the backing of the British Government?

I should point out to the right hon. Gentleman that, although many people thought that the American Government would take a unilateral route, they actually chose to go through the United Nations. They are bound by the UN resolution, just as we are. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will support me in saying that, if we are to use the UN route, and if there is a breach by Saddam, we should agree to take action. That surely must be right. At the very heart of the negotiations over the past few months has been the simple agreement that America and ourselves, and those who are enthusiastic about ensuring that we deal with the issue of weapons of mass destruction, are prepared to go down the UN route. The other side of that agreement, however, is that if Saddam breaches the UN resolution, people agree to take the action necessary to enforce the will of the UN.

My right hon. Friend will be well aware of the excellent work undertaken by the Worcester division of West Mercia police in tackling antisocial behaviour, but is he aware that magistrates fined one of my constituents who breached their order only £50? When a second constituent clearly breached an order, the Crown Prosecution Service failed to push the case. Does my right hon. Friend agree that those agencies have let the local police down? If he does, what is he going to do about it?

It is interesting to reflect that the Magistrates Association has just agreed to bring forward new sentencing guidelines on breaches of antisocial behaviour orders. Following the discussions that the Home Secretary and I have been having with the CPS, I can assure my hon. Friend that it will attach much greater priority to ensuring that orders are enforced. Nation wide, about 44 per cent. of those prosecuted for breaching antisocial behaviour orders have received custodial sentences, so there are indications, at least in some parts of the country, that this is being treated with the seriousness that it deserves.

Will the Prime Minister tell us why—despite all the promises, despite all the boasting about extra resources and despite the fact that we have had 12 criminal justice Acts in five years—only one crime in 40 ends up in a conviction?

For years, of course, there has been a problem with getting those who have committed crimes to justice, but I have to point out to the hon. Gentleman that, for the past five years, crime is down, not up, under this Government. We now have record numbers of police officers. Indeed, his own area, Cambridgeshire, had record police numbers at the end of March 2002. There is still a long way to go, but surely the answer is to keep putting the money into the police service and not take it out, which is his party's intention.

When my right hon. Friend considers the railways, will he discuss with ministerial colleagues the parts of the country that are remote from London and, in particular, the poor and, indeed, worsening service provided by Virgin Trains to north Wales, which, even at the best guess, will not improve until September 2004?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to talk about the difficulties of the Virgin west coast line. What I know she will understand, as she has talked about it with me, is that the Strategic Rail Authority's west coast strategy—the consultation on it closed on 16 December—includes a through service every two hours between London and Holyhead from 2004, which will run at 125 mph. I know that, as she rightly says, we have to wait some time for that to come online, but it is and it will be as a result of the extra investment going in.

The Government promised to cut road congestion by 6 per cent. Has the Prime Minister kept that promise?

Road usage is up by over 20 per cent., it is true.

The Prime Minister did not answer the question. He has broken his promise. According to all figures, congestion is worse, motorway congestion has doubled in the past four years and the Government have even abandoned their target, so he has broken another promise. What about the promise in 1997 to support and strengthen occupational pensions? Has he kept that promise?

I believe that the measures announced in the pensions Green Paper yesterday will indeed help occupational pensions. I also believe that the introduction of stakeholder pensions—low-cost private pensions—will also improve the situation, but I may point out on transport that it is true that road usage is up by over 20 per cent. It is also true that rail usage is up by over 20 per cent. Indeed, so is tube usage. That is in part because the economy is immensely stronger.

The answer is that the Prime Minister has broken his promise on that as well. Occupational pensions are a disaster. As a result of the Prime Minister's £25 billion tax, more than three quarters of occupational schemes have closed or are about to close.

First, on pensions—[HON. MEMBERS: "Ah!"] I am sorry; the right hon. Gentleman made a remark about pensions, so I will deal with that first. These are the facts on pensions—(Interruption.]

Order. Hon. Members must not shout across the Floor.

The right hon. Gentleman said that we had broken the promise on pensions. Let me tell him what we have done for pensions. We have introduced the £200 winter allowance. We have introduced the larger-than-inflation rises in the basic state pension. We are introducing the pension credit next October. We have restored free eye tests—and, unlike the right hon. Gentleman's party, we have cut VAT on fuel, not put it up. That is what we have done for pensioners.

The Prime Minister promised to cut school truancy, and he has broken that promise. More than 50,000 children play truant every day, and truancy in secondary schools has increased. Is it not the case that when the Prime Minister makes promises on schools, transport, pensions or, for that matter, crime, asylum, drugs or health, he is not juggling balls but talking them?

Let us look at the record, shall we? Let us look at the record on schools, hospitals and crime. Under this Government we have the most jobs ever in the economy, the lowest mortgage rates for 40 years, record investment in education and health, the best school results that the country has ever seen, and the best-ever in-patient waiting-list figures since we came to office. Crime is down under this Government; it doubled under the right hon. Gentleman's.

I have recently been deriving enormous pleasure not just from the opinion polls but from my numerous lunches with pensioners' groups. There is, however, a susurrus of discontent among the pensioners of Northolt over a perceived threat to their bus passes. As they are disinclined to believe me when I assure them that there is no such threat from this Government, will the Prime Minister set the record straight?

There is absolutely no way in which we would withdraw the concessions on bus passes for pensioners. I can make that absolutely clear. Once again, that is a measure that we introduced and the Conservative party opposed.

The Prime Minister will be aware of the rapidly rising insurance premiums that are affecting businesses all over the country, especially tourism businesses that come into contact with the public, which cannot obtain public liability insurance or find that the premiums are rising fast. The Government say that they are organising an inquiry, but that there will be no report until March. Will they in the meantime consider acting as insurer of last resort, so that some of those businesses can obtain cover and stay open?

An announcement was made in, I think, the pre-Budget report a few weeks ago, and it is correct to say that it will take until March for the inquiry to report. These are difficult issues, and the hon. Gentleman will know that the Office of Fair Trading is also looking at them, but I cannot give a commitment that the Government will act as an insurer of last resort. That would land the Government with a very large potential indemnity, which would not be a responsible thing to do.

The whole House will have welcomed the Prime Minister's initiative in calling a middle east peace conference for next month in London. Will he make it clear to Palestinian delegates that although the Government support the creation of an independent and viable Palestinian state, every suicide bomb attack against innocent Israeli civilians puts such a prospect ever further out of reach?

My hon. Friend is entirely right. Of course, the purpose of suicide bombings and the killing of innocent Israeli citizens is to provoke such hatred and division between Israelis and Palestinians that they cannot reach an agreement whereby the two states live side by side. In exactly the same way, the so-called dissident republicans and so-called loyalists who are engaged in terrorist activity in Northern Ireland seek to disrupt the process of peace. That is the purpose of the people who engage in these appalling suicide missions, and he is absolutely right in saying that they are the enemies of a lasting peace between the Palestinians and the Israelis.

Will the Prime Minister explain to my constituents in Romford—he will recall that Romford was a Conservative gain at the last general election—why, under the new local government formula, Sedgefield is being given an 8.9 per cent. increase, yet we in the London borough of Havering are receiving only 3.5 per cent.? Are not the people of my borough being short-changed by this Labour Government?

I am glad that the hon. Gentleman raises the issue of how much money we are putting into local government services, particularly since, as he says, Romford was one of the few gains that the Conservatives made at the last election. The fact is that, under this Government, we are putting far more money into local government and into services such as education, health and the police. As a result of the additional sums going into Romford and elsewhere, in the past few years local government support has risen by more than 20 per cent. in real terms, yet in the five years before we took office it was actually cut. So the message to his constituents is to reverse the slight misjudgment that they made at the last election.

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is no doubt fully briefed on the current negotiations in Brussels on the fishing industry. Is he aware that the proposal for an 80 per cent. cut in fishing effort and for seven days per month spent at sea will totally devastate the fishing industry in Northern Ireland, particularly in my constituency? Will he use his governmental influence to ensure that no such agreement is reached, and that a reasonable effort is made to provide a regime that can sustain the industry on the sea and onshore?

The hon. Gentleman is of course entirely right to raise this concern. He will know—it is always important to repeat the point—that there is a real issue in respect of fishing stocks. Cod stocks have fallen from about 250,000 tonnes to some 35,000 tonnes in the past few years. He will know from what I said the other day in this House that I consider an 80 per cent. cut entirely unacceptable. It would devastate the industry, and we are working flat out in Brussels and elsewhere, and at every level that we can, to try to ensure that that decision is not implemented.

With a possible war looming in Iraq, many of our loyal constituents want a clearer explanation of the British involvement. Is that involvement intended to protect Iraq's citizens and neighbours from Saddam, to enhance UN authority, or to protect Britain from a future missile attack and Iraqi-sponsored terrorism?

I never quite know where the Conservative party is coming from nowadays. Those factors are not all mutually inconsistent. The reasons for being prepared to take action in respect of Saddam are, first, that Saddam has weapons of mass destruction that threaten his region. As I said a few months ago, they not only threaten his region; frankly, if a conflict took place there involving weapons of mass destruction, it is unthinkable that we would not be involved in it in some way, as we were 10 years ago.

Is my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister aware that, today, the UK came bottom of an international league table of 17 countries in terms of the provision of recombinant for haemophilia sufferers? When will the Government provide recombinant for those sufferers in England and Northern Ireland?

We are trying to support this work through research and by considering the case for extending the provision of recombinant to all other haemophilia patients. As my hon. Friend knows, certain of them already get it. It is important that we examine the case for extending it and we are looking at that case at the moment.

What his latest estimate is of the risk of terrorist attack by al-Qaeda against the United Kingdom.

As I made clear a few weeks ago, barely a day goes by without some new piece of intelligence coming via our security and intelligence services about a threat to UK interests. Although we have had some significant success in damaging al-Qaeda's capabilities since 11 September and have thwarted a number of attacks, the terrorist threat against the UK and UK interests remains real and serious.

Have not the attacks in Bali and Mombasa shown that al-Qaeda specialises in multiple, simultaneous attacks? Given that al-Qaeda cells are believed to be in place in Britain, was not it unwise of the Home Office to withdraw last month the serious warning that it rightly gave of the sort of attacks that we could expect here in the UK? Was not it a mistake to think that it was wrong to spell out the threats in detail because the British people might panic? The British people need to be warned of what they might expect, and I do not think that they will panic if they are told the truth.

Of course it is important that people be told, but it is also important that we make a balanced assessment of how much information we give and what we say along with it. It is not just a question of the information; it is the judgment we make as to the weight that can be attached to it. The hon. Gentleman will recall that, a few weeks ago, there were stories in the newspapers about a possible poison attack on the tube. There was no specific evidence of such an attack, yet the information ended up causing, I think, unnecessary concern among people. It is a difficult balance to strike and we do our level best to get the balance right. However, it is important to realise that intelligence and information comes to us the whole time. If we published all of it, we would cause unnecessary alarm, so we must sift it and make a judgment. I believe that the judgments that we have made so far have been right and the circumstances in which that information was withdrawn were explained at the time.

This week, Dorset police warned Christmas shoppers to be vigilant about terrorist attacks. Does my right hon. Friend share Dorset police's concern? What action has he taken to reassure constituents such as mine in Dorset about terrorist attacks?

It is important that people be vigilant, and this country has long experience of dealing with a possible terrorist threat from the IRA. However, it is important that we recognise that the terrorist threat could take many different forms. Although we are spending considerable sums on doing all that we can to protect ourselves against a threat, it is also important that we realise that there is a limit to what we can do.

Is the Prime Minister persisting in his policy of 50 per cent. participation in higher education by people between the ages of 18 and 30 before the year 2010?

Yes, we want to make sure that we get as many people into university as possible. We have set a target of 50 per cent., but I agree entirely with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education that that should be open only to people who pass the requisite standard. At the moment, 43 per cent. of the relevant age group go to university. Extending that to 50 per cent. will mean that there will be about 250,000 extra students a year. In the past four years, for example, we have had very nearly 100,000 extra students, so the target is not impossible. However, reaching it must not involve a drop in standards.

My right hon. Friend will be aware that the two biggest problems in Burnley are the 4,500 empty houses and the fact that our main core budget is less, in real spending terms, than it was 11 years ago. The forthcoming housing renewal pathfinder project and new financial arrangements will help the area tremendously. However, will my right hon. Friend assure the people of Burnley that next year's transitional and bridging arrangements will enable Burnley borough council to tackle the two important problems that I outlined?

My hon. Friend raises an issue that is of great concern to people in his area and in other parts of the north-west where houses are lying empty or are falling in value. He will probably know that there is due to be a community statement at the end of January, which will set out the pathfinder initiatives to deal with the problem. The overall investment that the Government will put into housing over the next few years will mean that hundreds of millions of pounds more will be available. I hope that that extra money will play some part in enabling affected communities to rebuild themselves. Again, of course, that is all part of the investment that the Government are committed to putting in, and which the Opposition are committed to taking out.