What recent discussions he has had with the First Minister of the National Assembly for Wales about contaminated phurnacite land in the Cynon valley. [129536]

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I have regular discussions with the First Minister. I share my hon. Friend's concern about the site in her constituency, and I am pleased that a taskforce involving all the relevant stakeholders is now up and running. It is moving things forward, and I hope that there will be progress shortly.

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's answer, but that is hardly progress. The site closed in 1990, and for the last 13 years the residents of Abercwmboi have lived next to 28 acres of highly contaminated land—some of the worst toxic waste left anywhere in the United Kingdom. It is high time we saw action rather this snail's-pace progress, if it can be described as progress at all.

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend's tireless work on this matter. Trawling through Hansard, I noted that she had asked questions about it back in the 1980s. I too am concerned about the time that it has been taking to overcome the problem, but the taskforce is now minded to move some of the waste from the site, which I know is what she and the residents want. I shall endeavour to keep her fully informed of anything I discover about progress, and I hope that all interested parties will work together to clean the site and make it available for a much better use than that to which it has been put for the past 20-odd years.

What recent discussions he has had with his ministerial and National Assembly for Wales colleagues concerning improvements to the A483 south of Wrexham. [129537]

My right hon. Friend and I have regular discussions with ministerial and Assembly colleagues. The Highways Agency and the Assembly have recently carried out public consultation on a route management strategy for the A5/A483 trunk roads south of Wrexham. I hope that the results will be published later in the year.

Does my hon. Friend recall that in the late 1980s, when the road was improved by the Tories, they penny-pinched on the viaduct at Chirk and Acrefair? We ended up with a 10-metre carriageway which is both dangerous and, now, inadequate for the traffic that it is taking. Will my hon. Friend get together with his colleagues as soon as possible to ensure that the road is put right at the earliest opportunity?

I understand my hon. Friend's frustration. The Tory years were characterised by a lack of funds for major projects of this kind and, given their current proposal for a 20 per cent. public expenditure cut, the road will soon be down to a grass track.

The Minister's travels through Wales will have been delayed by the traffic lights between Llandrindod Wells and Newtown on the A483. Temporary traffic lights have been in place for 15 years. Will the Minister rejoice with me that the Assembly has got round to carrying out roadworks? I wonder, though, why the work was done in August, when people wanted to travel to the Eisteddfod in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire (Lembit Öpik), causing disruption to the tourist trade.

I am glad that the traffic lights have been removed, because I shall be travelling along the road next week. There is probably a gap in people's lives now that the lights have gone, but I welcome what has happened.

What recent discussions he has had with the Minister for Health in the National Assembly for Wales regarding the national health service in Wales. [129538]

I have regular meetings with Assembly Ministers when the Wales NHS is discussed.

What progress is the Secretary of State making in pursuing discussions with the National Assembly and the Department of Health to ensure that England and Wales do not end up with two inspection regimes for health, with all the extra bureaucracy and the additional work for hospitals that that will cause, particularly in border areas?

Discussions are continuing. Obviously the Wales NHS is separate from the English NHS, but the two are linked and co-operation is important, especially in the cross-border areas to which the hon. Gentleman refers.

Will the Secretary of State initiate discussions with the First Minister to establish whether comparative studies can be conducted by the National Audit Offices for Wales and England on performance in the health service, especially relating to orthopaedics, hip operations and cataract operations?

That is an important issue. The fact is that performance in Wales has been much better than performance in England in respect of emergency admissions, but worse in respect of elective surgery. That applies to some of the areas mentioned by my right hon. Friend. The Wanless report, which constituted a pretty robust analysis of the situation, has been welcomed by the Health and First Ministers, who are taking action. I think that that will lead to the necessary improvements in performance, although we should not doubt the improvements that have already occurred. For instance, 200,000 more new patients are being seen than were being seen in 1997.

The part-time Secretary of State for Wales cannot abdicate responsibility for the severe problems that patients now face in the national health service in Wales. In-patient and day-case waiting lists continue to deteriorate, despite the fact that the Government have massively increased taxation on the people, including the 1 per cent. increase in national insurance contributions. On 12 September, The Western Mail pointed out that Welsh patients can wait four times longer to be seen than patients in England. In England, the out-patient first appointment target is 17 weeks; in Wales, it is 18 months. Is that acceptable?

Of course, we want to improve performance all the time, and I am discussing these matters with Ministers in Cardiff bay to achieve that objective. The hon. Gentleman continually runs down the health service in Wales, yet 200,000 additional patients are being seen, compared with the record when the Tories lost office. How can he make such accusations, given that under the Tories, training places for nurses were cut by 25 per cent., and under Labour such places are already up by 30 per cent.? The truth is that the Tories would wreak havoc on the Wales health service, as they did when they were in power.

I am not talking down the national health service, but it is only right that, as an Opposition, we point out the realities of the NHS in Wales. Yesterday, the right hon. Gentleman talked about having citizens' contracts with the public in respect of public services. Citizens are fully delivering on their side of the bargain through massive extra taxation; it is the Government who are not delivering on theirs. Where were the citizens' rights for the 93-year-old lady who ended up breaking both hips last week when she was released from hospital and taken to somebody else's home, five miles away from her own? Where were the citizens' rights for the 26-year-old Caerphilly man who reported to his hospital that he had taken an overdose of 70 tablets, was left on a trolley for hours and then died? That was an absolute tragedy. The right hon. Gentleman's contract with the people is nothing more than a con trick. People will continue to mistrust this Government until they simply deliver the national health service that the people of Wales are paying for.

Let us look at the facts. In their 18 years in power, the Tories closed 70 hospitals in Wales; we are in the process of building, or have built, 10 new ones. We are recruiting more nurses, more doctors and more consultants, after the long years of Tory cuts.

May I draw my right hon. Friend's attention to the massive extra capital investment in the NHS in north Wales, and in the Ysbyty Glan Clwyd hospital in Bodelwyddan in particular? That includes the cancer treatment centre., which cost £20 million, and new procedures to improve emergency admissions. Does he accept that that represents a huge contrast with the under-investment in the health service that occurred under the Tories?

I very much agree with my hon. Friend This is another example of the progress that is being made in the Wales health service. The staff of the excellent and well-managed Ysbyty Glan Clwyd hospital deserve the House's congratulations on their performance. An increasing number of patients are being seen, and the hospital is a beacon for health service provision in the area. That contrasts with the hospital closures that regularly occurred the length and breadth of Wales under the Tories, and which would be repeated if they got into power and implemented their 20 per cent. cuts

We owe a great debt of gratitude to those working in the NHS. My constituents tell me that when they do eventually get treatment, it is first class, and I am sure that that is right. When the right hon. Gentleman next speaks to the Minister for Health in Cardiff, will he congratulate her on getting the waiting list for those waiting for in-patient treatment for more than one year down to 12,641, compared with a figure of 37 in England?

It is good to hear from the leader of Plaid Cymru in Parliament. Of course he competes for that position with two other leaders of Plaid Cymru, both of whom hate each other and did not vote for each other, revealing a party that is leaderless and schizophrenic about its leadership—[HON. MEMBERS: "Answer the question."] Yes, I will answer the question. If the hon Gentleman's disastrous policies for an independent Wales were implemented, health services and school services would be cut; whereas we now have record investment going in, more patients being seen and waiting times coming down. Patients who use the health service in the hon. Gentleman's constituency and elsewhere know that the service is going from strength to strength under Labour.

What recent discussions he has had with (a) ministerial colleagues and (b) Welsh Assembly Ministers on assistance for manufacturing industry in Wales. [129539]

Regular ones. The Government are supporting manufacturing investment through structural funds, regional selective assistance, the research and development tax credit, regional venture capital funds and the small firms loan guarantee scheme, as well as reforming corporation and capital gains tax to encourage investment.

Does the Minister agree—I think that he well might—that the Government have done a magnificent job in Wales by creating 78,000 jobs in the last 12 months and halving unemployment since we were elected in 1997? However, there is the one worry about manufacturing jobs, which have long been the backbone of the Welsh economy. Those jobs are going, particularly in Newport, where a third of employment is in the manufacturing sector. They were well paid, highly skilled, long-term jobs, but they have been replaced with jobs—in call centres, for example—that are none of those things: they are teflon jobs that may be in Wales today, but in Bangladesh tomorrow.

We are competing in a very competitive World economy against countries, including Bangladesh, where wages are a fraction of what they are in Wales. The Welsh Assembly Government's and the Labour Government's policy of value-added investment to increase the capacity of our manufacturing centre at the top end of the markets is the crucial policy to adopt. I am sure that my hon. Friend would welcome the fact that Interbrew, a Belgian company. has recently invested in Newport and created 40 new jobs. There are other stories and reports of massive investment across Wales from foreign and domestic companies, all contributing to the record increase of 78,000 jobs over the last year.

Now that we know that the Under-Secretary will be driving through my constituency next week, would he be willing to use the time he saves from the road works to visit the town of Llanidloes, which has lost 250 manufacturing jobs as a result of the closure of KTH? What feasible support can the Wales Office give, notwithstanding the support of the National Assembly, to ensure that we avoid an economic catastrophe in the Llanidloes area?

I was privileged to attend the national Eisteddfod in the hon. Gentleman's constituency—a marvellous occasion in a beautiful part of Wales. The position of KTH was obviously desperate. We worked together to try to save it and provide an alternative. The hon. Gentleman knows that I will do everything that I can—and I am sure that the First Minister will do the same—to provide a decent future for the town.

Is the Secretary of State aware of the vast number of jobs in the manufacturing industry that have been lost in my constituency? He will know that many of the jobs that have replaced them have too often been low-paid, non-union jobs. Does he accept that one way of overcoming the problem of low wages would be to increase the minimum wage in October not to £4.50, but to at least £5 an hour?

As the Chancellor announced at the Trades Union Congress last week, the minimum wage will go up next year to £4.85 and thereafter to £5 an hour and more. That contrasts with the position under the Tories, who had no minimum wage and presided over poverty pay and the exploitation of workers. Under the Labour Government there has been more and more investment in the valleys. Today, for example, 400 new jobs in the airline industry are being created in Blackwood and Cwmbran, coupled with other manufacturing jobs in the sector. That is a sign of the manufacturing sector being given the support that it needs to go from strength to strength in difficult international conditions.

I know that the Secretary of State is interested in manufacturing jobs. After all, he has manufactured enough jobs for himself over the past six years. At the last Welsh questions, I suggested to him that he set up a taskforce to address the meltdown in manufacturing in Wales. However, since then, more manufacturing jobs have been lost, and the Office for National Statistics has downgraded Wales's gross domestic product—as compared with England's—from 81.3 per cent. to 79.2 per cent. If that trend continues, the whole of Wales will be eligible for objective 1 status in six years' time.

"manufacturing is continuing to decline and we are not replacing the jobs lost with high value"—

Order. Questions are too long.

The hon. Gentleman has my sympathy. I know that it is difficult for him to keep up with what is going on in Wales, as he is not a Welsh MP. Let us look at the facts, instead of talking down the manufacturing sector in Wales. Last Friday, I attended the commercial launch of a big power station by General Electric, the multinational company. It involved more than £1 billion of investment, with huge numbers of jobs being created. It located at Baglan in south Wales because that was the best location for the most highly developed gas power technology. Hundreds of people from Japan, Korea, Australia and the US came to Wales to see that it is now a good place to invest, compared with the Tory years.

What consultations he has had with the Welsh Assembly Government concerning the Wanless report recommendations on alleviating bed blocking in Wales; and if he will make a statement. [129540]

My right hon. Friend and I have regular meetings with the Assembly Minister for Health, Jane Hutt. I met her yesterday and I shall meet her again today. I am also keeping in close touch with her on the issues arising from the Wanless report and I look forward to the Assembly's response and its implementation plan, to be announced later this year.

The Wanless report said that the health service in Wales was unsustainable. In particular, it highlighted the problems of bed blocking. It offered four options to deal with that problem and identified an immediate need. Given that the report was published in July—but had been given to the Minister in Wales five months earlier—and that some of the options require primary legislation, I should have thought that the Wales Office would have been prepared by now for those options. If it does not act now, we will face a delay of at least a year and half before any action is taken.

It is important to bear it in mind that Wanless also said:

"The provision of health and social care is complex and multifaceted and cannot be summarised in a single sentence."

What recent discussions he has had with the Ministry of Defence on low-flying exercises in Wales; and if he will make a statement. [129541]

I regularly discuss matters affecting Wales with Ministers in the Ministry of Defence.

The Minister will be aware that in parts of Wales military aircraft are permitted to fly at an altitude of just 60 m, causing distress to individuals and many fallen livestock. Will he clear his diary to meet urgently colleagues from the Ministry of Defence to ask them why such exercises are allowed to continue in Wales when they have been banned in almost every other NATO country? Why are they necessary when low flying has not been used as a military tactic by British armed forces in any conflict since the end of the cold war?

I hope that the hon. Gentleman is well skilled in self-defence, as he is about to attend his party's conference. He will need protection from the hand-to-hand fighting and back stabbing that characterises his divided party. However, he raises a serious issue. I experienced low-flying aircraft when I was in north Wales a week or so ago. The UK has no uninhabited areas large enough to meet the essential training needs of aircrew. The Ministry of Defence aims to spread the disturbance, but for operational and weather reasons some areas are busier than others. A reduction in low flying over the hon. Gentleman's constituency, Carmarthen, would obviously increase the burden elsewhere. I sympathise with the hon. Gentleman and I share his concerns, but I point out that less than 10 per cent. of operational low flying takes place over Wales. I will keep abreast of the issue, and do anything that I can to help obviate the problem.

If he will make a statement on prospects for inward investment in Wales. [129542]

In a tough economic climate, Wales remains one of Europe's top inward investment locations. Wales's share of British projects, together with the levels of jobs and investment, has increased. That is testament to the work of Team Wales and the partnership effort that is clearly achieving great things.

Is the Secretary of State aware that the latest report from the accountants Ernst and Young shows that, outside the euro, the share of inward investment going to the UK—including Wales—rose from 26.5 per cent. in 2001 to 28.4 per cent. in 2002. Do we need the euro? Were not the Swedish people right in their decision?

Three quarters of Welsh exports go to the eurozone countries. Clearly, in the right economic circumstances—and the Treasury will continue to assess those—an opportunity to join the euro would benefit the Welsh economy and inward investment.

Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming the launch of the aerospace cluster in my constituency last week? It will play an important role in inward investment, and also a crucial role in military aerospace and aviation. Will he do all that he can with colleagues in the Ministry of Defence to ensure that the red dragon project proceeds on course?

Yes. The red dragon project will proceed on course—both on and off the rugby field. My hon. Friend spoke about creating a centre of excellence for air investment in south Wales, and that is certainly happening. I can announce today that 400 new jobs are being created in the aerospace industry, in Blackwood and in Cwmbran. That will link with the excellent increases in investment in the military aerospace industry.

What proportion of jobs in Wales are in the public sector. [129543]

The most recent data from the labour force survey show that one third of jobs in Wales are in the public sector.

So why is that not making any difference?

It is making a difference. The increase in employment in Wales last year—78,000—was the largest of any UK region. In the three months to July, Wales was once again among Britain's top-performing regions in terms of private sector output growth, according to the chief economist for the Royal Bank of Scotland.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that 256 public sector jobs are in the forensic science laboratory in Chepstow? Those public servants provide a superb service to the Dyfed-Powys and South Wales police forces. However, staff are seriously worried about possible privatisation plans. Is my right hon. Friend willing to meet staff representatives to discuss the matter?

I should be happy to meet my hon. Friend's constituents. However, I point out to the House that implementation of the Tory policy of 20 per cent. across-the-board cuts would mean that jobs such as those that my hon. Friend has described and other public sector jobs elsewhere in Wales would be savaged.

What representations he has received from tenant farmers in Wales on proposed reform of the common agricultural policy. [129544]

The hon. Lady takes a keen interest in this matter, about which she asked me questions in February and April. I understand her persistence. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has received no representations from tenant farmers in Wales on the proposed reform. However, he has regular meetings with the Assembly First Minister, and I also meet the Assembly Minister responsible for the environment and for agricultural matters.

Does the Minister still think that common agricultural policy reform will happen, given the collapse of the Cancun talks? How will tenant farmers benefit from the rural development strand of that reform?

The issues relating to tenant farmers are complex, and my colleagues in the Assembly are consulting farming unions and other stakeholders on CAP reform. All sides in Wales have welcomed the reform package as a significant step in sustaining the Welsh farming industry. I shall spend two days next week in mid-Wales visiting Welsh producers, promoting Welsh foods and products, and visiting Welsh farms to obtain a first-hand understanding of some of the difficulties that our farmers face. The reforms that we are pushing for will benefit the industry.

If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 17 September.

Before listing my engagements, I express my condolences on behalf of the Government, the House and the British people following the tragic murder of the Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh last week. She was an inspiration to the Swedish people and an internationally respected Foreign Minister. She will be deeply missed.

The whole House will share in the Prime Minister's words on the sad death of the Swedish Foreign Minister.

I suspect that graduates probably pay more income tax because they earn a great deal more money—something like 40 per cent. more. The choice is simple: either we get more funds into universities so that we have a fair system under which no one pays money up front, or we adopt the Conservative policy, which would result, according to the Institute of Education, in a cut of 100,000 students every year.

Will my right hon. Friend do all he can to ensure that when the Post Office consults the public about the closure of a branch, it must demonstrate that it has taken their views into account? That certainly did not happen recently in Stevenage, when a strong case made for the retention of Chells post office was ignored by the Post Office. As a result, we are losing a strong branch and keeping a weak one.

I know that my hon. Friend has campaigned hard on that post office in her constituency. I also understand why people feel strongly about such closures. I know, too, that she would expect me to point out that at the end of the current programme of change in the Post Office, 95 per cent. of the urban population will still live within one mile of a post office. It is obviously important that we should try to provide the right facilities, and she will recognise that we are putting about £1.5 billion into the Post Office over the next few years. In the end, however, every decision of this type must, with the proper consultation, be a matter for the Post Office.

I associate the Opposition with the Prime Minister's condolences to the Swedish Government.

There have been about 60 visits from Foreign Office Ministers over the past few months. It is important to keep the option of joining the single currency open for the reasons that I have given before. The right hon. Gentleman's policy of closing off that option and saying no in any set of circumstances would not be the right one for the British people.

The whereabouts of the Prime Minister's roadshow are a mystery even to his Government. The Treasury, when asked, says:

"There are so many roadshow events we can't begin to list them all."

"The roadshow hasn't actually begun."

"It's not a literal roadshow, it's only a figure of speech."

No, I certainly will not confirm that. We should keep our options open. The right test to apply is whether membership is in the economic interests of this country. We said that we would return to that issue next year. I see absolutely no reason for this country to say that it will foreclose its options and rule out membership of a single currency. We should do what is right for this country and keep the option open.

The Prime Minister is spinning roadshows, wasting public money and legislating for a referendum that he does not have the courage to hold. Why does he not admit what everybody else knows—that his dreams, his schemes and his hopes to scrap the pound are utterly wrecked?

It is slightly odd of the right hon. Gentleman to accuse me of not having the courage to hold the referendum when in his second question he asked me to rule out holding one. We have to decide what is in our best interests as a country. I happen to believe that, in our best interests, we should keep open the option of joining the single currency if it is in our economic interests to do so. The truth is that the right hon. Gentleman now holds a position not merely of blocking any change in the European constitution but of ruling out the single currency even if joining is in our economic interests. That is not a position that will recommend itself to the country, and when his predecessor adopted that position at the last general election, it was rejected.

Does my right hon. Friend share my concern about the imminent job losses at Sheffield Forgemasters—actually, at a local company that is better known as the family firm of R.B. Tennant? Does he agree that every possible effort should be made to consider the options by which we can retain those vital and highly skilled jobs?

My right hon. Friend is right to raise that issue as it is important. The Sheffield Forgemasters engineering business continues to have financial backing, and I understand that a series of meetings are taking place between the Department of Trade and Industry, the regional development agency—Yorkshire Forward—and the company. I hope very much that a way forward can be found in the coming months.

Last September, and again this February, the Prime Minister released dossiers to the British public that included the intelligence assessments that underpinned the case for war in Iraq. Why did he choose to withhold from those dossiers other intelligence that would undoubtedly have undermined his case in the minds of the British public?

I do not accept that it would have undermined our case. If the right hon. Gentleman is referring to the Joint Intelligence Committee assessment about the danger of the weapons falling into the hands of terrorists, it would have been totally irresponsible if we had said that that danger meant that we should allow Saddam Hussein to carry on developing them. That would have been a foolish state of affairs to have brought about. That is why I do not believe that it undermined the case for war at all.

We now know that the Prime Minister was warned by the intelligence chiefs that war in Iraq could increase rather than decrease the risk of terrorism. We now know that the line in the original draft of the September dossier that reassured our public that Iraq was incapable of launching a nuclear strike against Britain was removed before publication. Why was the Prime Minister not willing to trust the British public to form a balanced judgment on those matters? Why did he not play it straight with the public at the time?

It is extraordinary of the right hon. Gentleman, whose case as I understand it is that those weapons did not exist in any event, now to say—

indicated dissent.

Oh, I see, they did exist—we should just have done nothing about them. All I can tell the right hon. Gentleman, if he wants it straight, is that the day this country's foreign policy is run by the Liberal Democrats will be the day this country really is at risk.

Recently, a young girl was raped in my constituency, and earlier in the summer a young girl was enticed to Europe from the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Leigh (Andy Burnham). Internet chatlines are the connection between the two cases. Will my right hon. Friend ensure that the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, the Department of Trade and Industry, the Home Office, and other relevant Government Departments, all join together to ensure that chatlines are properly regulated? May I also ask my right hon. Friend whether there is some way to ensure that internet chatline organisers police themselves so that other families do not suffer the same trauma as those in my constituency?

My hon. Friend raises a valuable and important point. The Home Office and the task force for child protection on the internet are working together to try to ensure that the internet is safe for children to use. In addition, the Sexual Offences Bill contains measures that bear on the problem and will help. I assure my hon. Friend that we shall continue to work with the industry, law enforcement and children's charities so that we do our very best to ensure that the law is sufficiently tight and also that internet services are greatly restricted whenever they may collide with the interests of children.

When the Prime Minister said recently,

"We should be willing to experiment with new forms of co-payment in the public sector",

We have many examples of that: in pensions, where people make co-payments; in transport, where there is road-user charging in certain parts of the country; and in relation to student finance, where there is already co-payment through fees. It is important to recognise that when we are trying to boost our public services not all the money will come from the taxpayer. It is a pretty extraordinary thing if today's Conservative party is against those proposals.

Fire, police and ambulance services in Lancashire are appointing a number of emergency community support officers to work in rural areas, one of whom will be based in Tarleton in my constituency. In addition to supporting the police, those officers will act as the first responder, having been trained by the ambulance service, and will undertake fire prevention work, after training from the fire service. Will my right hon. Friend congratulate the emergency services in Lancashire on that initiative and will he also urge emergency services in other rural areas—

Order. That is fine. The Prime Minister can answer.

I certainly will congratulate the emergency services on the work that they are doing. It is worth pointing out that there are about 1,200 community support officers—something that the Conservatives opposed when we introduced them. Those community support officers will be especially important not only at present but also when the Antisocial Behaviour Bill comes in, because they will be able to issue fixed penalty notices in respect of antisocial behaviour and truancy. It will be important that we increase the number of community support officers, as they are a huge help to the police—whose numbers are now at record levels.

Does the Prime Minister accept that the restoration of basic services in Iraq is not progressing and will not do so as long as it remains under the control of the United States and the United Kingdom? Does he agree that delay in making the United Nations the principal authority in Iraq simply delays the day when basic services such as water, electricity and health care can be given to the Iraqi people?

First, I do not agree at all that the problem in providing decent services is the presence of the British or American troops. Our troops in the south of Iraq are doing their utmost to provide electricity, water and basic services. The people who are stopping those services are those who are sabotaging them—terrorists and supporters of Saddam. I should have thought that the hon. Gentleman would be getting to his feet to praise our troops for the work that they are doing in the south of Iraq. As some of the facts do not always come across, I shall also tell him that all 240 hospitals in Iraq are now functioning; by the end of June most of the schools were open and about 5.5 million children were able to take their end of year exams; and we are putting in hundreds of millions of pounds of infrastructure investment to provide better power and electricity. That money was denied the people of Iraq by the regime of Saddam Hussein; had we followed the hon. Gentleman's policy, Saddam would still be in charge of it.

Yesterday, a report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development catalogued the decline in standards in British schools, but can the Prime Minister tell the House whether any part of that report related to any period while he was in government, or does it represent a catalogue of the failure of the Conservative party?

It is interesting that the report, which was supposedly about Britain's school performance slumping, was analysing the school attainment of those aged 25 to 64 in 2001, so not a single person involved was in school under this Government. However, the OECD report about this Government and our record shows that, in reading, our 15-year-olds are eighth out of 43; in maths, eighth out of 31; and, in science, fourth out of 31. The report yesterday shows precisely the reason why we needed the increased investment that we have given.

Can the Prime Minister tell us how much council tax has gone up by since 1997?

I cannot give an exact figure, but it is true that council tax has gone up since 1997; however, so has the amount of Government support to local government.

The answer to the question—the straight answer—is that council tax has gone up by a massive 70 per cent., a typical family is now paying £413 more since Labour came to office, and the very poorest pensioners spend nearly £1 in every £10 on council tax. Can the Prime Minister tell us all where in his manifesto he warned people of those massive tax rises?

It is correct that council tax has gone up, but it is also correct, as I say, that the amount of money coming from central Government to local government has increased. It has increased by 25 per cent. compared with a real-terms cut of 7 per cent. in the last four years of the Conservatives. The additional money that we are giving to local government at the moment was in the spending proposals, and was voted against by the right hon. Gentleman's party, which is in favour of cuts in that spending, so perhaps he will tell us how the council tax would be lower if we cut the amount of central Government support.

Let me remind the Prime Minister of what he actually said. In his manifesto, he promised that there would be no "excessive council tax rises". Yet, under Labour, council tax rises have become the biggest stealth tax of all, and next year he and his colleagues will send them soaring through the roof. Is not the reality that the Labour lies on taxes are the biggest single reason why nobody believes a single word he says anymore?

The local authorities set the levels of council tax. The question, surely, for central Government is: are we providing them with sufficient money? [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] So it is apparently the position of the Conservative party that the increases that we have given are not enough, which is presumably why they voted even against the increases that we gave them. The truth of the matter is that we have given—[Interruption.]

Order. The Leader of the Opposition must calm himself. [Interruption.] Order. I am telling him and other hon. Members to calm down.

We have put more money into local government, and it is for the local authorities in the end to decide what their levels of council tax are, but that money has helped our education, our social services and our other local services. Whatever the situation is, the position of local authorities could not be improved by the right hon. Gentleman's policy, which is to cut even the money that we have put in. So in the end, it is a matter for local government; but so far as we are concerned, we have been increasing the amount of money to local government, not decreasing it.

Heroin and crack cocaine are flooding into our country, destroying lives and tearing apart families and communities. In my constituency in Reading, street crime recently fell by a third, but the town is still blighted by the scourge of hard drugs, as addicts turn to other forms of crime to feed their habits. What are the Government doing to improve joint working between the police, the courts and the treatment agencies to tackle that menace?

We are making sure that for the first time there is proper working across the agencies, involving the drug treatment agency, the criminal justice system and the police, to deal with offenders who have a crack or heroin addiction. We are saying to them clearly that they can have the treatment that is available for them, but if they do not accept that treatment, under the Criminal Justice Bill that we are putting through the House, they stand at risk of bail being refused. We cannot have a situation in which people who are drug addicts and who have tested positive for drugs are put back out on the street where they will commit further crime.

Does the Prime Minister think that a majority of Labour Back Benchers support his current policy on student top-up fees?

I believe that when we come to the debate we shall see what the support is. Yes, I do believe, however, that the vast majority of people here will support that proposal. Let me tell the hon. Gentleman why. We have a simple choice: either we make sure that we widen access to university and allow those universities to bring in more and more people, whom we need in today's world, or we adopt the policy with which he has now associated himself, which is to cut by 100,000 a year the numbers going into university. That is an inequitable policy, and this side of the House will not support it.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in January the south-west London diagnostic and treatment centre for hips and knees will open? It will be the largest such centre outside America. Not only will it benefit my constituents and those of other hon. Members by performing 1,500 more hip and knee replacements a year, but it will provide an unparalleled base for research in Europe on orthopaedics. Would he support plans to provide such a centre of excellence on this site?

I am delighted about the centre in my hon. Friend's constituency. By 2005, such centres will be providing around 300,000 extra operations in the health service a year, and will be one of the reasons why every national health service indicator is already better than in 1997. I see from the comments of the Conservatives' health spokesman the other day that they are opposed to those centres. Any constituency that gets one of those centres therefore knows that the Conservatives would take it away.

Returning to the vital issue of drugs, for which I make no apology as it is surely one of the biggest social challenges facing our nation, is the Prime Minister aware that we now have a growing number of heroin addicts—up to 250,000—yet only 2,000 places at treatment centres to which they can turn for help? If an addict therefore makes the brave decision to turn his back on a life of misery and crime, there are simply not enough places for him to get help at the moment. Will the Prime Minister take an urgent look at this problem and, if necessary, redirect resources and make sufficient numbers of places available?

Actually, the treatment position is better than the hon. Gentleman describes. It is improving all the time, and more and more places are being made available. A presentation was made to me yesterday by people working in Manchester on this issue, and, as a result, they are able to extend treatment to the numbers of people that they are identifying as drug addicts in the criminal justice system. The only way we will do that, however, is by investing the necessary money. It is not a question of redirecting it from elsewhere, but of making that basic investment, to which we are committed. Whatever the hon. Gentleman's concern, which I am sure is sincere, the fact is that his Front Benchers are opposed to that money going in.

Given that it is essential to bring more money into the universities and to increase opportunity for people to study in universities, is not the fairest and most effective policy to achieve those purposes to allow an increase in university fees, covering the costs through loans to be repaid by graduates as and when their income permits, while bringing back maintenance grants for people from less-well-off households and increasing support for universities and schools to work together to raise educational aspiration?

I entirely agree with my right hon. Friend, who makes the right argument. That is why I believe that, as the debate progress, people will support it. The alternative is to cut the numbers of people going to university and for Britain to become the only country anywhere in the world that is reducing the number of people with access to higher education.

Has the Prime Minister seen from the Public Accounts Committee report that 50.000 beds have been lost since 1996? Is he surprised by that when there has been a 20 per cent. increase in fees to the National Care Standards Commission and a 142 per cent. increase in enhanced criminal record checks? What is he going to do about that?

Today's report is about delayed discharges and it indicates that there is still an awful lot to do. However, I point out to the hon. Lady that, under this Government, we have had the first increase in the number of beds in the health service for many years. We have already halved the number of delayed discharges. It is true that we have got to go a lot further, but there is no way at all, if we compare the position now with that of 1997, that we are not in a better one.

With more than 55 million Britons taking flights abroad each year, does my right hon. Friend agree that it is wholly unacceptable that airlines in this day and age have no legal liability whatsoever for the health or well-being of their passengers? Will he undertake to look into this?

We are supporting the research into deep vein thrombosis that is being carried out by the World Health Organisation. I also say to my hon. Friend that the United Kingdom will ratify the Montreal convention when all 15 members states of the European Union are in a position to do so simultaneously. At the moment, that is not the case, but I hope that it will be. Obviously, the next steps on this will be informed by the research that is being undertaken by the WHO.

What does the Prime Minister think will give him the most concern on Friday as he looks at the collapse of the Labour vote in Brent—the fact that Labour supporters no longer trust him or the fact that traditional Labour supporters no longer have any faith in new Labour?

If I may give the hon. Gentleman some advice, it would be as well to wait for the verdict of the electorate before the Liberal Democrats presume it. From what I can make out, one of the key issues in this by-election is antisocial behaviour. The Liberal Democrats have been putting out leaflets saying how serious they are about tackling it. However, when legislation was before the House to give the police the powers to tackle antisocial behaviour, the Liberal Democrats voted en masse against it. I thank the hon. Gentleman for the opportunity to tell people that.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. You will be aware that the High Hedges (No. 2) Bill died a "mute, inglorious" death a few weeks ago on the Floor of this very Chamber. This Bill, which was piloted with great skill, ability and intelligence through the upper House by my colleague, Baroness Gardner of Parkes, and by a rather less distinguished parliamentarian in this House, deserves a second chance. Will my right hon. Friend give the High Hedges (No. 2) Bill the chance to rise again—even though that will cause some pain to the hon. Member for Christchurch (Mr. Chope)?

Well, it says—I understand the disappointment of my hon. Friend that his Bill did not make better progress, but the Government have had a long-standing commitment since August 2000 to bring forward new laws to give local authorities in England and Wales powers to determine complaints about high garden hedges and will make every effort to get them on to the statute book at the earliest opportunity. I cannot say better than that.

In three weeks' time, the Prime Minister's tenure in Downing street will exactly match that of John Major. Does he not think that enough is enough?

One of the things that we did on coming to office was to deliver devolution in Scotland. After devolution in Scotland, the nationalists in Scotland had their worst election result. May I also point out to the hon. Gentleman that, since 1997, it is not me who has retired from leadership?

May I tell my right hon. Friend that a constituent of mine, Mr. Maurice Jones, who was a company director of Lister Yarns and worked for the company for 42 years, retired recently with little or no pension after the scheme collapsed? Can the Prime Minister offer a ray of hope to Mr. Jones and the 20,000 other pensioners in the same situation that retrospective compensation may be looked at? Surely it is a wrong that needs correcting.

I will certainly bear in mind the point that my hon. Friend makes. He will know that the pensions protection fund that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions announced recently is precisely to deal with that situation so that we have insurance underpinning people whose pension schemes collapse. I will look into the issue that my hon. Friend raises very carefully.