What representations he has received on the problems caused to international rescue dog teams by the operation of the animal quarantine rules. [157871]

On 21 January, my right hon. Friend met representatives of the British search and rescue teams that were deployed in response to the devastating earthquake in Iran. Those met included a team who use dogs in their relief effort. They reported a concern that the necessity to put the dogs into quarantine on return to the United Kingdom had an impact on the immediate availability of trained dogs for future search and rescue responses. As a consequence, some dogs are kennelled overseas rather than returned to the UK.

While I fully accept the need for strict quarantine laws, I do not follow the logic of the argument, which apparently is that when dogs are used outside the European Union there is a risk of rabies and so on. Rabies is prevalent in France, but there is free movement across the channel of hundreds of dogs each day, so I do not see the logic The problem with the search and rescue team in north Wales is that there are six highly trained specialist dogs and handlers and, at any given time, two or three dogs may be in quarantine for up to six months. It is a long time out of the life of an intelligent animal, and it is a waste of time.

I place on the record my appreciation of the work of search and rescue teams, such as the one to which the hon. Gentleman referred, in both the Bam earthquake and more recently in Algeria. However, it is worth remembering that in both Iran and Algeria there is a high prevalence of rabies. Our strict quarantine laws have served the UK well over the past 30 years. Under the quarantine regulations dogs can be taken out of quarantine for deployment overseas, even though they have to come back into quarantine on their return to the UK. My hon. Friend the Minister with responsibility for animal health has recently informed search and rescue organisations that they will be permitted to set up their own quarantine facilities, where training of the dogs can continue in quarantine. I hope that that is helpful and encouraging to the team about which the hon. Gentleman spoke.

The search and rescue team to which the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy (Mr. Llwyd) referred is based in my constituency. I welcome my hon. Friend's answer to the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. Will my hon. Friend undertake to consider, with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Home Office Minister responsible, reopening discussions on this very important topic?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for her question. My hon. Friend the Minister with responsibility for animal health has only recently informed the search and rescue organisations that they will be permitted to set up their own quarantine facilities, where training can continue. We need time to see how that change is received and settles down before we consider further discussions, but I shall certainly bear my hon. Friend's point in mind.

Is it not the case that, as the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy (Mr. Llwyd) said, the main concern is rabies, and is it not also the case that anti-rabies vaccinations for dogs exist in the United States and elsewhere? To what extent has the Minister investigated the use of such vaccinations in order to enable rescue dogs to travel freely across different countries?

There have been extensive discussions across Government, with the lead being taken by the responsible DEFRA Minister. We have found a way forward that will help search and rescue organisations, while maintaining the strict rabies policy that has served us so well over the years. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will allow the new proposal by that Minister to settle down before he considers continuing to press for further relaxation in this area.

What aid his Department has given to Belize in the past 10 years. [157872]

The Department has provided more than £37 million to Belize in the past 10 years, supporting, for example, education programmes, public sector reform work and the police.

I thank my hon. Friend for that positive response. He will be aware that we are currently in Fairtrade fortnight. What actions can he and his Department take to ensure that we can link the burgeoning fair trade movement in this country to primary producers in Belize?

My hon. Friend will be pleased to know that we have provided £225,000 to support cocoa farmers from the Toledo region of Belize, through the Toledo Cocoa Growers Association, to expand the production of their cocoa products and increase their exports overseas. Toledo being one of the poorest areas of Belize, I hope that my hon. Friend will agree that that is step in the right direction for the very poorest people in Belize.

Four years ago, the Government blocked more than £12. 5 million of debt relief to Belize. I am pleased to hear from the Minister that some £3 million has been paid to date, but will he tell us when, under the Commonwealth debt initiative, Belize will receive the rest of the relief that it is due?

The hon. Gentleman may like to know that the most recent trances of debt relief that I signed off in January this year—for next year and a further two years—was as a result of the reform programme taking place in Belize. I have had good discussions with Prime Minister Musa about the reform programme and I hope that he is satisfied with the progress made on debt relief write-off.

After my questions on Monday and Tuesday, I am tempted to aim for a hat trick of toadying, self-serving sycophancy by saying what a wonderful job the Minister is doing! No doubt, however, I would be accused by the sketchwriters of wanting to become Governor of Bermuda—[Interruption.] What a good idea. Instead, I ask the Minister if he will talk to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office about speeding up resolution of the border dispute between Belize and Guatemala, which is limiting the sort of development that is vital for the people of Belize.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for his searching and robust questioning of the work of my Department. He will know that the new President of Guatemala has recently been confirmed in office, and that we are putting in £1. 5 million of global conflict prevention money to help with the resolution of the Belize-Guatemala border dispute. We continue to work closely with the Foreign Office to help promote such resolution, but it is a matter that the two countries ultimately will have to resolve themselves. We will continue to support them in that process.

It was from Belize 10 years ago that the first fair trade product, Maya Gold chocolate, came into the UK. Although it is good news that shoppers spend some £2 million on Fairtrade products each week, there is still some way to go. For example, only about 4 or 5 per cent. of bananas purchased are Fairtrade ones. Is not Fairtrade fortnight a good opportunity to make it clear that there is a modest way for every consumer to help farmers in developing countries by buying Fairtrade products such as cocoa, chocolate and bananas, whenever possible?

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right that Fairtrade fortnight provides an excellent opportunity for us, as individual consumers, to do our individual bit to help promote fairer trade. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman would not be upset by my taking this opportunity to confirm that, by the end of 2003, shoppers were spending more than £2 million per week at the checkout on products with the Fairtrade mark. Furthermore, on Monday the Co-op, which has always been the leading supplier of Fairtrade products, pledged to double the size of its own brand range of such products by the end of this year. If other suppliers follow the Co-op's lead, we can expect the fair trade market to continue to grow, which is good news.

Whether reproductive health supplies security is a key requirement for the attainment of the millennium development goals. [157873]

The millennium development goals will not be achieved without further progress on reproductive health and rights. An essential part of that is ensuring that women and men, including young people, have access both to condoms, contraceptives, medicines and other products, and to the services, information and education that they need to protect their reproductive and sexual health. DFID's bilateral programmes focus on strengthening the capacity of health systems to deliver those services and supplies effectively, and we also support organisations such as the United Nations Population Fund and the global fund.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his reply, but can he tell the House what role the Government intend to play in bringing to the attention of the international community the very serious issue of reproductive health supplies security; and what are they going to do to encourage recipient countries to prioritise the same issue?

First, I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for her work on issues of reproductive health, in which she has taken a great interest for a very long time. I share her concern about the availability of reproductive health commodities. One thing that we are doing is to take every opportunity within the international community to draw attention to the problem. Secondly, we are providing finance and support to the United Nations Population Fund, which works hard in that field. Thirdly, and most importantly, we are ourselves funding a large number of supply programmes, including many social marketing programmes in many of the countries in which we work, to provide condoms and other reproductive health supplies.

The Secretary of State will know that wherever he goes in the third world villages always seem to have access to Coca Cola and other such products. What is he doing to ensure that reproductive health supplies, especially condoms, are as available as Coca Cola?

I am not sure that the Department for International Development can hope to match Coca Cola—

Be bold.

May I give a practical example in answer to the hon. Lady's question? When I was in Pakistan just after Christmas, I met a group of lady health workers in Peshawar, where we are helping to fund a programme. Part of our increased aid programme in Pakistan is to allow more lady health workers to be employed in poor communities in that country. They work with families and mums on family planning, ensuring that supplies are available, and on child health and maternal mortality. That is a practical contribution and is one of the many examples, of which I am sure the hon. Lady is aware, of ways in which we are trying to address the question she raised.

I was delighted to hear the Secretary of State say that many of the millennium development goals cannot be achieved without good reproductive health services, but the fact is that in Africa, supply of those services falls behind demand year by year. What are the international reasons for that and what can be done to give African women the same right to choose the size of their families as we have?

we need to ensure that in the development programmes that we undertake we give particular priority to precisely the point raised by my hon. Friend—enabling women to have more control over what happens to them. That is one of the most effective ways to ensure that right. The second thing we can do is to increase the size of our international development budget, including the budget for Africa, and by 2005–06 we shall be spending a billion pounds a year bilaterally. That is the expression of a practical commitment to support all that work.

What are the Government doing to encourage emulation of the example set by the Ugandan Government, who seek to teach young people that promiscuity is not necessary to adult life?

I take this opportunity to pay tribute to the leadership that the Government of Uganda and President Museveni have provided, especially on HIV/ AIDS. In that country, we can see the benefit of strong political leadership in telling people, "This is the virus, this is how you catch it" and, crucially, "These are the steps that you can take in order t o prevent yourself from being infected". We have seen the prevalence rate in Uganda fall—as it has done in Senegal, too. That is one of the most important things that Governments can do to enable their peoples to protect themselves.

If he will make a statement on aid to Iraq. [157874]

May I first express the House's deepest sympathy to the victims of the appalling bomb attacks that took place in Karbala and Baghdad yesterday? Those responsible clearly chose the Ashura festival as their target and cynically intended to cause the deaths of as many people as possible in an effort to disrupt Iraq's progress towards reconstruction and democracy. That cannot be allowed to succeed.

Does my right hon. Friend share my view that debt relief is a vital ingredient in the rebuilding of the Iraqi economy? Iraq owes about $200 billion in debt and reparations payments, while ordinary Iraqis exist on about $2 per day. Of course, aid is a vital ingredient, but does my right hon. Friend share my view that we must break the millstone of that crippling Iraqi debt?

I do indeed agree with my hon. Friend on this subject. A lot of work is going on to try to achieve that. It will need to be dealt with through the Paris Club. I think that most major creditors now recognise the need for substantial debt reduction and restructuring.

May I on behalf of the official Opposition express total support for the Minister's comments on the ghastly events of the last 24 hours and make it clear that, as the House knows, the official Opposition support the Government in their determination to see this through? Nevertheless, does not the Secretary of State now regret saying,

"never mind the planning when we can see the product of the improvement that results from the work that has been done". —[Official Report, 12 November 2003; Vol. 413, c. 292.]?

"the security situation is improving throughout the country as a whole. The majority of insurgency attacks remain largely confined to a limited area to the north and north-west of Baghdad"—[Official Report, 19 January 2004; Vol. 416, c. 944W.]?

I do not accept that and I do not regret a word that I uttered on either of those two occasions, because it is self-evidently the case that reconstruction in Iraq is progressing and is succeeding, despite attacks such as the awful one yesterday. Of course our forces, the Iraqi forces, the police officers and the emerging Iraqi army are particularly in the firing line because the people who are planting these bombs do not want the reconstruction to succeed; they do not want the Iraqi people to have the chance of a better life.

In his answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Inverness, East, Nairn and Lochaber (Mr. Stewart), the Secretary of State said that the intent of those responsible for the attacks could not be allowed to succeed. Will he take it from one who was shown round his mosque by the imam in Karbala that it is not a simple question of Sunni versus Shi'a? That is over-simplistic, and such things should not be said by people in the west who should know better. But how are we going to stop it succeeding?

I agree with my hon. Friend that this is not a simple matter, and nobody said that the reconstruction of Iraq after the 30 years of trauma and suffering that its people had experienced was going to be easy. This is a process, which we have to be determined to see through. What is necessary to maximise the chances of its success? First, it is necessary for the ordinary Iraqis to see that life is getting better as a result of the reconstruction work; that work is happening and people can see that.

Yesterday's cold-blooded terrorist outrage makes it even more important that funding for aid in Iraq is guaranteed. Can the Secretary of State confirm what financial arrangements are in place to ensure that the work that, for instance, the Salvation Army is doing can continue beyond the 30 June cut-off point? Does he expect aid to Iraq to increase as a result of yesterday's incident, and if so, where would he expect that additional funding to come from?

On the first point, I do not anticipate that there will be any difficulty in the continuation of the programme that the hon. Gentleman mentioned after 1 July. If there is a specific problem that he wishes to draw to my attention, I readily undertake to look into it. On the second issue, we have already made clear the extent of our financial commitment up to March 2006. Yesterday's events demonstrate the importance of the whole international community coming together to provide the support now, to further support the reconstruction and to back the political process, because that is the best way in the end of ensuring that Iraq has the better future that it desperately deserves after the nightmare that the people of that country have experienced in the past 30 years.

What discussions he has had on ensuring that aid is targeted towards the poorest areas of Africa. [157875]

I have regular discussions with African Governments, officials and a wide range of organisations and individuals on where best to target aid. Decisions on where to allocate resources are informed by an analysis of poverty levels, a commitment to poverty reduction and institutional capacity. United Kingdom bilateral assistance to Africa will rise to £1 billion a year by 2005–06.

Prince Harry has recognised that there is a real role for volunteers who want to give up some of their time to go to some of the poorest parts of Africa. It has been announced that he is spending some of his gap year in Lesotho, helping the victims of AIDS. As the Secretary of State will know, there is a skills shortage. A lot of young people are dying of AIDS, and they are the very people who could help out in the epidemic there. I welcome the amount of aid that the British Government are giving to help to combat the epidemic that is ravaging Africa, but can he suggest any practical ways in which we can assist with the effective spending of that money by ensuring that the skills needed to help those who are suffering from AIDS are gained?

I welcome all the efforts that many voluntary organisations are making to try to contribute to the fight against HIV/AIDS, but the hon. Gentleman raises a fundamental question about capacity. In Malawi, for example, teachers are dying of HIV/AIDS faster than they can be trained, creating a fundamental problem that impacts on the achievement of the millennium development goal of getting kids into primary schools. I recognise that we need, as an international community working with developing country Governments, to think more about how we can bolster and support that capacity, perhaps in ways that we have not been using recently. Work that I have commissioned on this very issue is already under way in the Department. The hon. Gentleman puts his finger on a very big concern, to which we will have to respond.

My right hon. Friend will know that the Science and Technology Committee is conducting an inquiry into how we can translate the wealth and financial resources that he is making available into scientific and engineering expertise, so that those countries can trade and invest their way out of current poverty levels. Will he welcome that inquiry and assure the House that he will give every assistance in promoting it to reach a satisfactory conclusion in those investigations?

I indeed welcome the inquiry, and we have already given evidence. We are seeking to apply our scientific research in a way that makes the biggest difference in helping the people of Africa to have a better future, not least in encouraging, ideas and proposals—for example, new ways to plant and care for crops. We have to ensure that the ideas that are the product of that research are disseminated as effectively as possible, so that farmers on the ground know that they can do things differently to increase, for example, their agricultural productivity.

The motivation behind the establishment of the UN Economic Commission for Africa is to be applauded, and I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on his appointment to it. Does the commission intend to consider the reform of the heavily indebted poor countries initiative? Can he confirm whether it will also consider how to address the $300 million funding gap in relief for southern Africa? Will he tell the House what is the yardstick for measuring the commission's success in 12 months' time?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for welcoming the Commission for Africa, although I have to say that the fact that the Opposition have decided that they would not protect spending on international development would not help in achieving that objective. The Commission for Africa will consider all the things that he mentions and others, as we search for what more we can do to help Africa—but the worst thing that we could do is reduce the aid that we are giving.

We have decided no such thing, and the right hon. Gentleman ought to be explicitly clear on that point. Given that there is an AIDS levy in Zimbabwe, but that on my recent visit there I encountered people who are getting no benefit whatsoever from the resources raised by domestic taxpayers, will the commission consider the crisis of governance that is killing people, not only in judicial killings but by neglecting the terminally ill?

On the first point, I simply say that the hon. Gentleman ought to talk to his colleagues about what others have decided for his portfolio. On the second issue, yes, the commission will need to consider good governance because everyone recognises that good governance is absolutely fundamental to the future of Africa.

If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 3 March.

Before stating my engagements for the day, may I say that I am sure that the whole House will join me in sending our deepest sympathy to the people of Iraq, where 150 or more innocent men, women and children were killed yesterday by terrorism, and to Pakistan where, in a similar attack, more than 40 innocent people died? Both were calculated acts of evil. Both were attacks designed to foment religious strife. The attack in Iraq was plainly designed to stop the progress that Iraq is making toward a stable democratic state under the sovereignty of the Iraqi people, and it has been condemned by Muslim leaders—Sunni and Shi'a alike. Our pledge to the people of Iraq and Pakistan is to work with them to ensure that this evil barbarism is eliminated from all parts of our world.

Does the Prime Minister agree with Fred Eckhard, the official spokesman for Kofi Annan, that anyone bugging the Secretary-General of the United Nations is in clear breach of the 1946 UN convention and, indeed, has committed an illegal act?

I have nothing to add to what I said last Thursday on that except to say, yet again, that our security services of course abide by all our legal obligations.

Now that we have successfully negotiated a peaceful outcome for the people of Iraq, what are we going to do in terms of securing a better solution for those in poverty throughout the world and improving settlements and progress on issues of third world debt?

There has of course been a very important agreement in Iraq, which I hope will be ratified later this week, on a new constitution and a way forward. It is worth pointing out, as my hon. Friend implies, that that will allow people of all religious persuasions in Iraq freedom of worship and the ability to do what they wish to do in accordance with proper human rights. It is a remarkable political achievement by the people in Iraq, which is why whatever the terrorists may try to do, we have to carry on working to establish a peaceful, democratic, stable and prosperous Iraq for the future.

May I first join the Prime Minister in expressing the sympathy of those of us on these Benches to the families of those who lost their lives and those who were injured in yesterday's horrific attacks in Iraq and Pakistan? Can the Prime Minister confirm that police in Basra, backed by British troops, captured four suspected bombers who might have caused even more carnage? I also join him in congratulating the Iraqi National Congress on the progress made in agreeing the constitution. Does the Prime Minister agree that we have a continuing duty to the people of Iraq to do everything that we can to help them to build a stable and peaceful country?

In relation to people who may have been arrested by British troops, I cannot give any further information at this stage, but I will tell the House as soon as I am able to do so. It is worth pointing out that British troops and, indeed, those working with them down in the south of Iraq have done a quite magnificent job on behalf of this country and the people of Iraq. Of course I agree with the sentiments in the other part of what the right hon. and learned Gentleman said.

Of course I join unreservedly with the Prime Minister in his tribute to British troops. Does he agree that it is the prospect of a stable and peaceful Iraq that represents the greatest threat to the terrorists of al-Qaeda and their associates, and is not that the reason why Iraq has now become the front line in the war against terror? What implications do yesterday's events have for the plans to hold elections in Iraq? Does he agree with the UN special advisor, Lakhdar Brahimi, who says that organising elections by 30 June in the current security climate would be difficult, and that it is unlikely that the necessary mechanisms can be put in place in time?

It will be difficult, for the reasons that the UN representative gives. On the other hand, it is important that we keep to the timetable to bring democracy to Iraq as swiftly as possible. I agree with the right hon. and learned Gentleman on the first part of his question—of course it is important. There is a clear reason why terrorists from every extremist group in the middle east are pouring into Iraq to try to do as much damage as they can to innocent people there: it is because they know that if Iraq becomes a stable, democratic and prosperous country, a Muslim country where there is tolerance of worship and sovereignty is vested in the Iraqi people, that will not only be a huge signal of hope across the middle east, but it will deal a tremendous blow to the propaganda of the extremists and fanatics who would say that the purpose of any conflict in Iraq was to seize the oil or subjugate the Iraqi people. That is why they are doing it—they know what is at stake. I just hope that we do as well.

Does my right hon. Friend recall that when he and I sat together in the shadow Cabinet during the Gulf crisis and war of 1990–91, we—the Labour party—gave full, unwavering and undeviating support to the policies of the Government of which the leader of the Conservative party was a member? We never wavered at any time—it was a matter of principle to us—nor did we ask for the publication of the legal justification for the war. Is not that a contrast—[Interruption.]

Order.

Is not that a contrast with the wriggling, squirming mess of opportunist hypocrisy we see on the Opposition Benches?

I only hope that, since we have had an exchange today that was based on consensus, we can continue in that spirit. It is important for our country, our troops and the security of the world that on big issues, in so far as possible, the main parties come to agreement. I hope that we can maintain that position. I honestly believe that that is in the interests of Britain.

Following on from the question put by the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton (Mr. Kaufman), will the Prime Minister acknowledge that, now that one former Prime Minister and two former Foreign Secretaries have said that the Attorney-General's legal advice should be published in full, he should not continue to resist doing so?

No, I am afraid that I do not agree. Actually, I pay rather more attention to what those people did when in government.

Where public trust is concerned, the absence of publication of the Attorney-General's full legal advice will only encourage the atmosphere out there of people not believing what they are being told. Publication must be in the interests of the Prime Minister and of the Government. Is not the real danger of the absence of publication the growing perception that perhaps the Attorney-General's advice was itself sexed up?

For some people who have been opposed to the war, it really does not matter what happens. Whether there is another inquiry, whatever is published, and whatever is said, they simply cannot get over the fact that there is a legitimate disagreement about whether the judgment to go to war was right or not. It does not require a conspiracy theory to mount that argument; it simply requires an acceptance of the fact that there was a difference between us—between him and me and between those who were in favour of the war and those who were against it. However, I am frankly surprised that the right hon. Gentleman has risen to his feet today and not at least condemned what happened in Iraq yesterday. When we examine what is at stake in Iraq today, whatever we thought about the war—whether we agreed with it or not—surely we can agree that the most important thing now is to rebuild Iraq in the interests of that country and of the wider world.

Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming the publication last week of the report by the International Labour Organisation's World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalisation, which, among other recommendations, proposes that the ILO should have much stronger powers to carry out its duties? Unlike the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and other bodies, the ILO does not have the power to enforce sanctions to ensure that labour rights are recognised around the globe. In particular, the right to join a free and fair trade union is denied to millions of Chinese workers. Will my right hon. Friend join me in expressing those sentiments?

The ILO report is wide ranging. It talks about the millennium development goals in Africa, which we are committed to meeting. Aid given by this country has significantly increased in the past few years, which is important. On labour standards, obviously I strongly support proper minimum labour standards across the world, as does the ILO. Indeed, we introduced the right, which was denied for many years, to join a trade union in this country. At the same time, it is important that minimum labour standards do not become a means of protectionism, and that balance must be struck.

The Prime Minister says that the UK has some of the toughest arms controls in Europe. If that is the case, can he explain why in 2002 the UK exported arms or weapons components to 12 African countries, many of which are involved in violent regional conflicts? Should the Economic Commission for Africa, which he established last week, investigate that matter; and where do those exports leave his claim that we prevent the sale of small arms to Africa?

Perhaps I will set out in writing for the hon. Gentleman exactly what was sold to each of the 12 countries. We should not assume that selling arms to a country is necessarily wrong. The defence industry is an important part of British industry, and many thousands of jobs depend on it. It is not necessarily the case that selling arms to countries is wrong, especially if countries use them to defend themselves.

Will the Prime Minister join me in congratulating all those who have campaigned for and are now involved in the construction of the new £45 million specialist cardiac unit at Blackpool Victoria hospital, which I saw my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health officially launch yesterday? Does he agree that Governments Must demonstrate not only economic competence and a commitment to the core values of the NHS but actual, real, sustained improvements for patients, such as those that that unit will deliver?

The unit is part of a series of centres located across the country that will cut waiting lists and waiting times. There is massive additional investment in the health service. Alongside other investments, there are new hospital buildings—I opened one recently—with magnificent, state-of-the-art facilities. They form part of the investment and reform programme in the national health service that is daily improving the lives of people in this country and bringing the national health service back to where it should be—the pride of Britain.

Following the question from the hon. Member for Blackpool, South (Mr. Marsden) on the national health service, the Prime Minister will be aware that there is a statutory, three-month implementation period for guidance from the National Institute for Clinical Excellence. In the case of photodynamic therapy for those suffering from wet, age-related macular degeneration, the Secretary of State for Health has extended that period to nine months. As a result, the Royal National Institute of the Blind estimates that 2,800 people will go blind unnecessarily. Can the Prime Minister explain why the Secretary of State took that action?

I am afraid that I am not aware of the particular issue to which the right hon. and learned Gentleman refers, but I will certainly look into it. I am sure that there are good reasons for extending the consultation period—there are often important reasons—in order to make sure that whatever we do is most effective for the patients concerned. However, I am not in a position to respond on the detail of the point today.

Let me see if I can help the Prime Minister a bit. It is not a consultation period that was extended—[Interruption.] The Secretary of State for Health should restrain himself. It is not a consultation period that was extended but an implementation period. The Secretary of State said in the House last week that the reason for extending that period was a "lack of trained personnel", but the RNIB has said that there are at least 50 centres across the country that could provide that treatment today. Will the Prime Minister now instruct the Secretary of State to deliver that important sight-saving service as a matter of urgency?

I will look into the points that the right hon. and learned Gentleman is making. I understand from the Secretary of State that NICE agreed to the extension of the period, but I will obviously have to look into that very carefully to make sure that what the right hon. and learned Gentleman said is right. I cannot answer the particular point because I simply do not know the details at the moment, but I can say that it has been part of the Government's investment programme in the health service massively to increase the number of training places throughout the national health service. I would point out to the right hon. and learned Gentleman that on each occasion that we have made that additional investment, he opposed it.

I am afraid that the Prime Minister is still missing the point. The people who could provide that treatment, according to the RNIB, are there now. The treatment could be provided now—people are going blind because they are not allowed to provide that treatment now. Will the Prime Minister instruct the Secretary of State to make that treatment available now?

I am not going to give him any such instructions until I have investigated whether the right hon. and learned Gentleman is being entirely accurate with the facts. If he does not mind my saying so, on previous occasions on which he has put such points of detail to me they have turned out to be not exactly as they were when he put them to me. I shall therefore have to look into the matter, but of course we will do whatever we can. It is important, however, that we do so in consultation with NICE. After all, we are the Government who established NICE, and did so to make sure that we can end the postcode lottery in the national health service. It has worked extremely well, and I am quite sure that the Secretary of State took action on proper advice. Following our exchange today, however, I will make sure that I acquaint myself fully with the facts, and will write to the right hon. and learned Gentleman, so that we can see exactly what those facts are.

rose—

Ah!

I plead guilty.

The Attorney-General was given whatever material he required to make his decision, but the basis of the decision was that Iraq continued in material breach of UN resolutions. I must tell my hon. and learned Friend that in respect of resolution 1441 there was a whole series of things that Iraq was supposed to do under Saddam Hussein. Before he shakes his head, perhaps he would like to listen to what those were—that is what a lawyer should do, after all. The point, surely, is that the Iraq survey group has already found that there was a failure to disclose proper information to the United Nations inspectors and that there was a series of activities and programmes in breach of UN resolutions, so it is completely obvious that Iraq was in material breach of resolution 1441.

Will the Prime Minister fly me to the moon? Failing that, will he accompany me to Lunar house in Croydon, which has been described as a human cattle shed. Staff and the public are under huge pressure, and my constituents are waiting months, if not years, for their cases to be determined. Is the Prime Minister proud of the service that his Government are providing in that area?

It is extremely unfair to say that about staff at Lunar house. Actually, an immense amount of work has been done there. For example, 80 per cent. of asylum claims that used to take an average of 18 months to process now take only two months and, as the hon. Lady knows, the number of asylum seekers has been halved. The staff do an excellent job in very difficult circumstances. We try to ensure that we process claims as quickly as possible.

My right hon. Friend will recall that in the course of the Weston Park agreement Judge Corry was asked to look into the killings in Northern Ireland and in the Republic. He has already had his report published in the Republic, but not yet in this country. Furthermore, he has told the families that he has come down in favour of a public inquiry to ascertain how those people were killed and whether there was any collusion with the security forces of the Crown. Can my right hon. Friend give the House an undertaking that after the report has been published, public inquiries will be established, as recommended by Mr. Justice Corry, and that there will be no attempt to subsume or absorb those inquiries into any future truth and reconciliation commission, in order to ensure that those responsible for these hideous crimes can properly be held to account?

My hon. Friend will know that no decisions have been taken in relation to any truth and reconciliation commission. Obviously, that could not subsume any such inquiries. I stand by the commitments of Weston Park, but there are particular legal reasons that we have to go through and ensure are in order before we are able to publish the Corry report. We will do so as soon as we can.

Will the Prime Minister confirm that a limit of 480,000 air traffic movements a year at Heathrow was accepted by his Government after the terminal 5 inquiry, and that the Government White Paper is now calling for runway alternation so that 560,000 air traffic movements a year can take place? That will make noise pollution unbearable and could cause catastrophe in the skies over Heathrow. If that happens, will the Prime Minister take responsibility or will he blame somebody else?

I understand the hon. Lady's constituency preoccupation. It is of course important that she represent the views of her constituents, and I am sure that they are opposed to any extension at Heathrow. It is in the nature of such developments that it is very difficult to find people who are in favour of them.

My right hon. Friend will know that the biggest single problem in Burnley is not the British National party and racism, which he has always condemned, but the 4,500 empty houses there. Later this month, the results of the bid for the housing renewal pathfinder project—Elevate—will be announced. While we are waiting for that, a series of houses that are not included in phase 1 are deteriorating rapidly. Can my right hon. Friend assure me and people in east Lancashire that we will get an early decision to enable us to tackle the problem quickly?

My right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister will make an announcement on that shortly. We have set aside a £500 million package for housing market renewal, which is a major issue in east Lancashire and in places such as my hon. Friend's constituency, and the obverse of some of the issues down in the south of the country. That is why we thought it so important to establish the pathfinder renewal fund.

Why does the Prime Minister take part in only 5 per cent. of Divisions, according to the Library? I know that he is busy, but does he understand that, while he asks his colleagues to come here to vote for things about which many of them have severe doubts, he can hardly be bothered to vote himself?

We have rather a large majority, and often I do not come here for Divisions. However, the most important thing when holding a Prime Minister to account is questions at the Dispatch Box. In the past six and a half years, I have answered more questions at the Dispatch Box—[HON. MEMBERS: "Answered?"] Let us say that I have given answers to my satisfaction if not the wholehearted satisfaction of others. I have made more statements—the whole Government have made more statements—and I believe that that is a more effective way in which to hold the Prime Minister to account.

Following my right hon. Friend's welcome announcement last week of an Economic Commission for Africa, does he agree that many major issues, such as AIDS, poverty, civil war and civil unrest, remain to be faced in Africa? Does he further agree that poverty is the key issue? What steps does he believe the international community should take to increase income levels so that the challenges can be taken on?

The increase in our bilateral aid to Africa will take it to £1 billion a year in the next couple of years. That is an increase of 50 per cent. in three years. Indeed, we have trebled the amount of money that we were contributing in 1997. It is therefore important to continue with the aid and development budget and not subject it to the cuts with which the Conservative party is apparently intent on proceeding. They would do immense damage to our whole development case.

Does the Prime Minister appreciate how fed up people are with unneeded name changes such as those proposed to the criminal justice system? Is not that one more example of the Government's propensity to waste money and overlook the pride that ordinary people take in their connection with the Crown?

Something will be said about that later. Surely we can take pride in, for example, a 30 per cent. rise in guilty pleas now that the prosecutors have an active role in charging, a fall in the number of ineffective trials, and conviction rates of 90 per cent. in Crown and magistrates courts. Whatever the service's change of name, it will make no difference to the fact that the Crown mounts the prosecutions. Surely it is far more important to concentrate on the excellent work of many in the Crown Prosecution Service.

The latest victim of death by dangerous driving in my constituency was eight-year-old Billy Joe Dean. Of greatest concern to me are the drivers who receive short sentences, which are not unusually reduced on appeal, despite the fact that the drivers have been driving under the influence of alcohol, often without licences or insurance, and have usually been involved in previous incidents. Does my right hon. Friend agree that we have been far too lenient with those drivers in the past?

I can totally understand and, indeed, share the anger of my hon. Friend and his constituents about such situations. Obviously, I cannot comment on the individual court case. We have given the courts the power to increase the penalty. Under the Criminal Justice Act 2003, the penalty for causing death by dangerous driving has been increased from 10 to 14 years. I hope that the new sentencing guidelines, which we shall discuss later, will allow us to make sentences more consistent and make it clear that those who cause death by dangerous driving, especially when under the influence of drink, take lives wholly unnecessarily and appallingly, with terrible, tragic consequences for individuals and their families.

Does the Prime Minister accept that one of the responsibilities of Members of Parliament is to represent the interests of those who sent them here? Does he therefore accept that I am deeply concerned about the position of my borough council of Macclesfield, which, despite an increase in resources from central Government to take account of inflation, is in grave difficulty because of additional responsibilities that central Government have placed on local government for which additional resources have not been provided? Is he prepared to meet me or to ask the relevant Minister to meet me to discuss the problems of my council, which is doing its best and is a debt-free borough council? The withdrawal of capital receipts means that it is in grave difficulty.

I am always happy to meet the hon. Gentleman, but I have to say to him, in relation to councils, that they all—including Macclesfield—have had an above-inflation rise in central Government grant. Of course there will always be difficult decisions for councils, but if we look back over the past few years, we see that most councils in the country have had a double-digit real terms increase in their funding. Yes, it is true that they have also had additional responsibilities, but the funding increase has been massive. I have to point out to the hon. Gentleman that the position of his own Front Benchers is to cut, in real terms, the amount of money going to local authorities, not to increase it as we are doing.