How many representations he has received about the future of grammar schools in Northern Ireland. [180480]

As at 10.30 this morning, there were 65.

Will the Government reconsider their decision to abolish academic selection for grammar schools, given that it is clear that the majority are opposed to the change and that Northern Ireland has such an excellent educational record? Is it not genuinely strange for a Labour Government to introduce a scheme that will deprive able children from working-class homes of the opportunity to break through the system, and to replace it with a system of class segregation whereby wealthy people in wealthy areas will get the best education, while poor children living in poor areas will be stuck where they are? Does the Minister agree that a Labour Government should think again about that, because it is not fair and not right?

I welcome the hon. Gentleman's focus on children, because in the ongoing debate we often look at structures instead of standards and children's needs. I remind him, though, that two thirds of respondents to the Northern Ireland household survey clearly stated that they wanted an end to the 11-plus, or secondary transfer test, and a similar proportion said that they wanted some form of academic selection. I am surprised that we sometimes understand the word "selection" to mean segregation, because it is not. Children can be set appropriately in maths, French or history; but what on earth makes us think that because one is good at maths, one has to be good at history and French, too, or that because one is bad at one of those subjects, one is bad at all the others? There is no need to segregate children at the age of 11.

Does my hon. Friend share my sense of disappointment that the question has not been answered by the Minister who made the decision on selection in the Northern Ireland Assembly, to which he is accountable under the watchful eye of the people of Northern Ireland? Does this snapshot of education in Northern Ireland misunderstand the complicated situation there?

Of course it would be better were these decisions taken by the Northern Ireland Assembly, but my hon. Friend will understand that the post-primary review was inaugurated by that Assembly, and in that sense we are carrying on its work.

It has been clearly shown that our education system in Northern Ireland is socially inclusive, that a higher percentage of pupils gain university places than elsewhere in the United Kingdom, and that standards of achievement in our secondary schools continue to improve. Will the Minister therefore tell the House why he seeks to destroy our grammar school system? The proposals were rejected by a majority of respondents in the widest consultation ever to take place in Northern Ireland. Why has no alternative to the existing transfer procedure been proposed; and why is the Minister helping to wreck an education system that has proved successful for all the people of Northern Ireland?

We are not trying to do away with or abolish the grammar school system; that is clear. The hon. Gentleman focuses on the good things that the Northern Ireland education system has achieved, and he is right to do so. I pay tribute—as, no doubt, would he—to the teachers, students and parents who have contributed to those achievements. As he will know, however, 21 per cent. of all children in Northern Ireland leave secondary education without a single qualification at GCSE grades A to C, and 24 per cent. of young people aged 18 to 25 have no literacy or numeracy at skills level 2. That is why we need the entitlement framework and the proposals made by the post-primary working group.

The Minister has voted in the past for parents in England to have a ballot before academic selection was ended in their locality. Why will not he allow a similar ballot to parents in Northern Ireland?

Mr. Speaker, you will forgive our incredulity at the Tories' posing as the great protectors of the grammar school. Mrs. Thatcher closed more grammar schools than any other Secretary of State for Education. When will they learn that standards, not structures, matter in education? They do not care about grammar schools. Even now, they propose to take £1 billion out of our schools, including grammar schools, to pay for—

Order. I must have shorter questions and shorter replies.

The Minister was clearly embarrassed by his inability to justify the double standards that the Government apply to their policy on grammar schools in England and Northern Ireland. He made a great deal of the 11-plus and his objections to it. Why will not the Government consider seriously the alternative models of academic selection that the grammar school head teachers propose and which operate in countries such as Germany, which have academic selection without the 11-plus?

We are listening to all the proposals because we are in the consultation period. However, I emphasise that the review was initiated in the Assembly and that the household survey was subject to the widest consultation in Northern Ireland. We are determined to push the proposals because they originated from the will of the people of Northern Ireland.

Will my hon. Friend make clear the comments of the Costello report about the educational benefits of the 11-plus?

Yes. I would welcome doing that. The report made it clear that there were no educational benefits to segregating children into academic and vocational routes at the age of 11. It also pointed out that it was wrong to presume that more able pupils should always follow an academic rather than a vocational route.

Whether an equality assessment was made of the impact of the decision not to pay double pensions through the Post Office bank account in Northern Ireland for 12 July. [180481]

Customers paid by direct payment have their accounts credited on the last banking day prior to the holiday in all cases.

I am amazed by that answer, because postmasters and others have been in touch with me about the impact of the decision and the misleading guidance of the Bank of England, which states that 12 July must be viewed as a local holiday whereas 17 March and the Scottish day at the beginning of the year are also local holidays. Is it not passing strange that the Bank of England, which owes its existence to the Williamite revolution, targets us for commemorating it?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that brief historical journey. However, on pensioner benefits, those who were due to be paid on 12 and 13 July, which is a local bank holiday, as he rightly says, will be credited on 9 July. They will therefore get their money slightly early.

What alternatives to HMP Maghaberry have been identified by the Department as appropriate accommodation for asylum seekers in Northern Ireland. [180482]

Currently, 140 people are supported by the National Asylum Support Service in Northern Ireland. A total of 14 immigrant detainees are currently accommodated by the Prison Service. One is temporarily in Maghaberry, three are in Hydebank Wood and 10 are in hostel-type accommodation adjacent to the old Crumlin Road jail. All 14 have been offered the option of being held in a detention centre in Great Britain.

I am grateful for that detailed response but I remain unhappy and concerned about the conditions in which asylum seekers are kept at various locations in Northern Ireland. Will the Minister please facilitate a visit by me and representatives of various Churches to all the locations where asylum seekers are currently held?

I would certainly be very happy to facilitate the visits that the hon. Lady requests. She will be interested to know that the Law Centre and Amnesty International have viewed the accommodation at the outworking centre by the Crumlin Road jail, and said that it is far more suitable than the accommodation at Maghaberry prison. I hope that she will take some reassurance from that.

What efforts he is making to eradicate paramilitary-style assaults on the civilian population of Northern Ireland. [180483]

The police are doing all that they can to bring those responsible for these vicious assaults to justice, but it is not solely the responsibility of the Government to seek to bring these attacks to an end; it requires the support of the whole community. We continue to call on those with influence over the paramilitary groups to demand a complete cessation of these barbaric acts.

I thank the Minister for his reply. The first report of the Independent Monitoring Commission stressed that everyone in Northern Ireland with a community responsibility had a duty to do everything in their power to end these attacks. Will my hon. Friend tell us what progress has been made on that front?

The Government are engaging with politicians and community leaders at all levels in an attempt to bring these barbaric acts to an end. In addition, the policy of community policing is being vigorously taken forward, the better to integrate police on the beat with their local communities and to build support and trust within those communities. It is important that we continue to do all this work with the police acting on the ground at community level and with the Government engaging with political and community leaders. We are quite clear that all paramilitary activity must cease, and that must be the clear objective of the intensive discussions that will take place in September.

One paramilitary-style assault that led to a conviction for murder was the killing by two Scots Guardsmen, Mark Wright and James Fisher, of Peter McBride in 1992. Is the Minister aware that my hon. Friend the Member for Brent, East (Sarah Teather), together with The Irish World and other media outlets, has sought to highlight the findings of the independent assessor for military complaints procedure, Jim McDonald, who criticised the readmission of Wright and Fisher to the armed forces? What assessment has the Minister made of Mr. McDonald's assessment?

I admire the hon. Gentleman's ingenuity in asking that question. I have not yet had a chance to read that report, but this is essentially a matter for the Ministry of Defence, and I shall bring it to that Department's attention.

The Minister will be aware that in the past three weeks, two of my constituents were beater almost to death, one by loyalist paramilitary groupings, the other by republican groupings. Does the Minister agree that this type of cudgel policing in parts of Northern Ireland is being used by paramilitary groups to gain a stranglehold? Will the Government again make it clear, along with the Irish Government, that any political grouping that continues to associate with illegal armies has no place in the legitimate political process?

I agree with my hon. Friend. These paramilitary-style attacks—so-called punishment beatings—are completely unacceptable. I totally reject the term "punishment beatings" which is sometimes used, because it gives a spurious respectability to the activity and hides the level of violence that is taking place in Northern Ireland today. People are being crippled, made limbless or becoming brain damaged as a result of these attacks. They must cease, and we must call on all responsible politicians in Northern Ireland to ensure that that happens.

The Minister was quite right to stress the importance of policing as a response to paramilitary assaults. However, the number of officers who have left the part-time reserve since June 2000 has been 313, while only 108 have joined. How can he therefore contemplate dispensing with the services of the full-time reserve?

The Chief Constable will review the issue of the full-time reserve and produce recommendations in the autumn. The policing budget in Northern Ireland this year is some £726 million. I believe that we have a reforming and totally transformed police service in Northern Ireland that is doing an effective job at community level and in tackling paramilitary activity wherever it occurs, and I am sure that it will continue to do so.

What recent assessment he has made of the prospects for the reinstatement of devolved government in Northern Ireland. [180484]

As the Prime Minister said on Friday, it is time to complete the negotiations with a conclusive agreement or find another way forward. The Prime Minister made it clear that there will be intensive talks in early September. Our position is clear—we need to see an end now to all forms of paramilitary activity, and it is imperative that we restore as soon as possible a stable and inclusive partnership government in Northern Ireland.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. When we were in Northern Ireland recently, it was trade unions, business and community organisations that urged us most strongly towards an early reinstatement of devolution in Northern Ireland. That was not a criticism of him or his fellow Ministers but a desire for an early return to normality. What chance has he had to discuss the issue closely with those organisations, to enable them to make their voices heard?

My hon. Friend is right. Last week, I talked to the Irish TUC, its general secretary and president, and to the CBI and other business leaders. It is important that civil society in Northern Ireland recognise the accessibility of devolution and local administration. We want a swift end to the present situation of direct rule and the restoration of the Assembly and the Executive. It is also worth reminding the House that all political parties in Northern Ireland also want an end to direct rule and the restoration of devolution as soon as possible.

I welcome the fact that the Government are finally planning in the autumn to have a series of intensive discussions, which, unfortunately, are much postponed. Will the Secretary of State make it clear, however, that that is not just yet another target but that it really is a deadline, and that the Government will stick to this—[Interruption.]

Order. Perhaps we could have some quiet in the Chamber.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the Secretary of State make it clear that this really is a deadline and not just another disposable target, and that if the deadline is not met, there will be firm action by the Government to make it clear to the parties that have been dragging their feet over the past couple of years that the Government will move on, close down the Assembly and put in place alternative arrangements?

I understand that there are other attractions besides me in the Chamber this morning. The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right that both the Prime Minister and the Taoiseach said on Friday that these talks in September must decide the issues that are in front of us. We cannot go on for ever in this way. In answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Hillsborough (Helen Jackson), who said rightly that there is an appetite for devolution in Northern Ireland to return, we understand the issues that must be dealt with when we return in September. The right hon. Gentleman is right that we must decide them then.

As one whose head feels even more naked than usual today, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he was as intrigued as I was to read in this morning's paper that the hon. Member for East Londonderry (Mr. Campbell) has stated that the Democratic Unionist party will enter into talks with Sinn Fein towards a devolved government when Tim Henman wins the men's singles at Wimbledon? May I ask my right hon. Friend, whose skills and abilities are widely respected in this House, whether he can offer us any hope that this happy event may come about? While we are cheered that at least the DUP is talking about talking about talks, we may, at the end of the day, yet again be cheated by the Swiss.

I have always believed that international involvement in the Northern Ireland peace process is important, but that is a rather roundabout way of getting to it.

What recent progress has been made on the decommissioning of illegally held weapons and explosives.[180486]

There have been four acts of decommissioning to date. The latest act occurred on 21 October 2003, when the Independent International Commission on Decommissioning reported that it had witnessed a third event in which IRA weapons were put beyond use.

I accept that there have been four such acts, but does the Minister accept that, although the last was slightly larger than the previous three, they have been only token acts of decommissioning? If Sinn Fein/IRA are serious about democracy and wanting to share power in Northern Ireland, they will have to decommission considerably more arms and make those decommissioning acts more meaningful. Is it not about time that the Government took this more seriously, and pressed Sinn Fein really, genuinely, to decommission its weapons?

We are taking these matters seriously. It is important not to lose sight of the fact that three acts of decommissioning by the Provisional IRA have taken place. That was the start of the process, and the hon. Gentleman is right in the sense that the process must continue until all the apparatus of terrorism in all its forms has been dismantled. That is the clear objective of the Government, and it will be the clear objective of the intensive talks that we will hold in September.

Why should the IRA decommission? The deadline was June 2000. The Government did not stick to the deadline. The Blair promise of action and expulsion was not adhered to. Why should the IRA decommission, when it has a very useful negotiating tool for the next raft of concessions to Sinn Fein/IRA?

What is important is to recognise that the decommissioning process has started. Certainly we as a Government are not complacent. We want to see an end to all paramilitary activity, we want to see full decommissioning, and we want to see Sinn Fein take its place on the Policing Board. We need to ensure that all the parties are agreed and signed up to this, and that the Provisional IRA and the other terrorist groups all put their weapons beyond use.

Pursuant to his oral answer of 11 February 2004, Official Report, columns 1403–04, on the core syllabus, what advice he has received from the working party on (a) the core syllabus in relation to religious education and (b) ensuring that children understand both Catholic and Protestant versions of Christianity; and if he will make a statement. [180488]

As part of the initial public consultation in September, respondents were given the opportunity to discuss their views further. Those meetings were conducted earlier this month, and views expressed are currently being considered by the working party. I now expect its advice in the autumn.

May I ask Ministers to redouble their efforts to ensure that all children in Northern Ireland, as elsewhere, are given the broadest possible base for both religious and non-religious education in values? Does my hon. Friend agree that the only people who will suffer from less religious bigotry in Northern Ireland schools are the men of violence?

I heartily agree. It is of course essential for children from all communities to experience not only the religious traditions of the other side, but the breadth of other faiths and world religions, which we are trying to make part of the curriculum. [Interruption.]

Order. There are still a few minutes before Prime Minister's Question Time. May I ask the House to come to order?

If he will make a statement on the current security situation. [180489]

Dissident republicans remain a threat to the peace process, but for the most part their activities have been thwarted, intercepted or nullified by good policing operations. The latest round of internal feuding between loyalist paramilitary groups ended following the murder of Brian Stewart in east Belfast last month.

Although, as the Minister says, the security situation is relatively stable, and as a consequence troop numbers are at their lowest level for a generation, what contingencies does he have for reinforcing troop numbers if that is necessary, especially given the huge overstretch in the armed forces?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware of the recent announcement that two rear-based battalions will be taken from the authority of the General Officer Commanding Northern Ireland and transferred to other functions. Those matters are kept under constant review. The situation is such at the moment that the police have the full backing of the Army as and when they require it. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that that will continue to be the case.

If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 30 June.

This morning, I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I will have further such meetings later today.

My right hon. Friend will recall his visit to Birmingham's university hospital trust. Since then, there have been year-on-year improvements in services, with waiting times for in-patients and out-patients now down to seven weeks. We are also getting a new hospital. However, will my right hon. Friend take care not to ape the desire of the Tories to reintroduce the market into public services, particularly when everyone knows that market mechanisms—

Order. Supplementaries are supposed to be short. I call the Prime Minister to answer the question.

I will make sure that we make the health service a place where we can offer the very best quality care on the basis of need and not ability to pay. What my hon. Friend says about waiting lists falling is now true in her area and right throughout the whole country. All the waiting list figures are better, and I am sure that the House will be especially interested in the accurate figures for the East Kent Hospitals NHS trust, which show an 81 per cent. reduction in the total outpatients who are waiting 30 weeks or more. The Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS trust shows a 76 per cent. reduction in out-patient waiting. I am sure that that will be particularly welcomed by the right hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard), who I hope will apologise this week for running down the national health service last week on the basis of wrong information.

Let me deal straight away with the Prime Minister's last point. My constituent was told that she would have to wait 20 months for radiotherapy. It turns out that that was a mistake. She should have been told—[Interruption.] She was told 20 months, but she should have been told 20 weeks, which is five months. If the Prime Minister and the party in government think that a five-month wait for treatment for someone with a life-threatening illness—[Interruption.]

Order. Let the right hon. and learned Gentleman speak—[Interruption.] Order. If an hon. Member defies the Chair, they might have to leave the Chamber. That is the message that I am sending across the Chamber. Do not defy the Chair.

If the Prime Minister and his party think that the fact that someone has to wait five months for treatment for a life-threatening illness is something to boast about, they are even more out of touch with opinion in this country than anyone would have thought. Waiting lists are a British disease; the right to choose is the cure for them.

Before I deal with city academies, let me first say this to the right hon. and learned Gentleman: I do not want anyone to have to wait for life-saving operations, but I point out that it is under this Government, with our mixture of investment and reform, that waiting lists are tumbling right round the country. His Government could not even meet an 18-month waiting list target.

Let me make it clear: we welcome academies, which build on the successful Conservative idea of city technology colleges that the Labour party opposed. But the Prime Minister is only giving freedom to up to 200 schools. There are 20,000 state schools. Why cannot they all enjoy the same freedom?

I have to point out to the right hon. and learned Gentleman that actually, all the schools are getting much greater freedom and the specialist schools have greater freedom, which is one of the reasons why school results are going up. If he is talking about his party's record in education, I welcome this debate. Let me remind him that when he sat in the Conservative Cabinet, year on year, they cut spending per pupil. It is now up £800 a year per pupil since 1997. They had a capital spend of under £700 million; it is now £4.5 billion. They cut the number of teachers; we have raised the number of teachers. And barely half of 11-year-olds were getting the right results in primary school; now, three quarters are doing so. So let us have a debate about the right hon. and learned Gentleman's record and our own.

What the Prime Minister does not understand is that people are not just interested in the money that goes into education; they are interested in the standard of education that their children receive. Under this Government, one in three 11-year-olds cannot read, write or count properly; 1 million children played truant last year; a teacher is attacked every seven minutes of every school day; and the number of parents appealing against the school allocated to their children by the state has gone up by 50 per cent. since 1997.

"of empowering our best schools."

I really do welcome this debate. First, let me point out to the right hon. and learned Gentleman—again—that actually, all schools are given far greater freedom now than under the previous Conservative Government. [Interruption.] Yes, they are. Secondly, in relation to the difference between us on policy, he is saying that schools should now decide all their admission policy, which would mean a return to selection at the age of 11. That would mean not parents choosing schools, but schools choosing parents. He is combining that with a private school subsidy that would cost, according to his own figures, about £1 billion a year. That would be money going straight out of the state system and into the private sector.

No, we are not taking money out of the system. We are putting an extra £15 billion into the system, and if the Prime Minister thinks that that is a cut, he should start attending his own numeracy classes.

"choice is crucial to individual empowerment and—by enabling the consumer to move to an alternative provider where dissatisfied—to quality of service."

Order. I give some elbow room to the Leader of the Opposition, but he really is pushing his luck. I think we will leave it at that.

We do indeed increase choice if we expand the number of good schools. That is the purpose of investing in them and creating specialist schools and city academies—to bring greater diversity into the system. What is not the answer, however, is ending up reintroducing selection at the age of 11 and subsidising private education. As to the £15 billion extra that the right hon. and learned Gentleman says he is going to spend on schools, may I remind him that he went into the Lobby and voted against even the investment that we are putting into our schools system? The idea that it is credible, after all the money that we have invested, for him to come along and say, "Actually, I am going to spend £15 billion more" is, as the Secretary of State for Health has put it, "Laa Laa land". It is another example of the same phenomenon.

Yesterday the Secretary of State for Health visited Milton Keynes general hospital and saw for himself the extra staff and extra facilities funded by this Government. Of course we would like even more funding to meet the needs of our growing population, but will the Prime Minister assure me that he will never propose to take £1 billion of funding out of the NHS to subsidise private health care for those who can already afford it, as proposed by the Conservative party?

I assure my hon. Friend of that. We will continue to ensure that the health service is provided free at the point of use, and based on need, not the ability to pay. Our investment and reform programme in the national health service is delivering real results. People can see that in constituencies up and down the country. Whatever the attempts of the Conservative party to run down the health service, the fact is that many people know that they are getting superb treatment out of the national health service—and we shall continue to deliver it.

Can the Prime Minister confirm that his review of the funding of local government has ruled out replacing the council tax as the principal source of local taxation? Of course, he inherited it from the last Conservative Government, but is he saying that he is ruling out replacing that unfair and deeply unpopular local tax?

No, I am not saying that. It should be an open review, and that is what it is.

Will that open review take into account the question whether it is at all fair that the poorest 10 per cent. of people in our country now pay four times as much as a proportion of their income in council tax as the richest 10 per cent. of people? What does that say after seven years of a Labour Government?

What it says, I am afraid, is that we entirely accept that there are problems with the council tax. However, I have to say that there are problems with virtually every system ever introduced for local taxation, and arguments went on under the old rating system, then with the poll tax and now with the council tax.

What are you doing about it?

What we are doing is having the review that people asked for and we agreed to provide. We will come forward with the results of that review, once it is concluded. Nothing is ruled out; nothing ruled in. I have to say that, personally, I do not believe that the idea of the local authority taxing people on the basis of their income carries much conviction. The review can look at all the options, but when the right hon. Gentleman goes round the country, as he does, saying that the Liberal Democrats will get rid of the council tax, it is right that he explains to people that it will be replaced by at least 6p on the standard rate of income tax.

rose—

I call Denzil Davies.

How is it that—

Order. I did not call Geraint Davies; I called Denzil Davies.

Now that sovereignty in Iraq has been transferred from the coalition, would an Iraqi Government be free to acquire, produce or indeed hold weapons of mass destruction, or will the instruments of transfer contain a stipulation to prevent that?

No, and I have absolutely no doubt that the new Iraqi Government, who are working extremely well with us, will, if they are allowed to defeat the terrorism that besets them, be an immensely stable partner for the international community and will contribute not to the proliferation but to the reduction of weapons of mass destruction.

The policy of the US Administration not to allow any of their aid funds to be used for the support of HIV prevention programmes involving the use of condoms in AIDS-ravaged Africa is costing tens of thousands of lives and putting pressure on Department for International Development budgets. May I urge the Prime Minister not to be discouraged by his failure to persuade his good friend and ally, George Bush, on Kyoto and Guantanamo and to continue to press the US President to stop that policy for the sake of the African continent, and will he condemn that policy now?

What I will do, if the hon. Gentleman will allow me, is set out the policy of the UK Government. The policy of the UK Government is to increase the amount of help we give for HIV/AIDS; actually, we have ended up trebling the amount of aid we give Africa. I am responsible for UK policy; it is one of which we can be proud. The money and help we are giving Africa is far in excess of anything the Liberal Democrats have ever asked for.

The Prime Minister has shown this morning why he has a reputation for the effective promotion of the virtues of choice. Can he tell us whether he will be using his powers of persuasion to allow the 6 million United Kingdom citizens who live in local authority housing to have the right to opt to retain their landlord while still having the right to have a decent home by 2010?

We will be bringing forward proposals to try to help local council tenants and housing association tenants to have greater choice over the lettings available to them. I also point out to my hon. Friend that we have doubled—it is somewhere in the region of that—the amount of money going into social housing, which obviously has an impact on those houses, too.

Last week, the hon. Member for Birmingham, Sparkbrook and Small Heath (Mr. Godsiff) made some extremely serious allegations in the House about events during the recent elections in Birmingham. He said that

"regular phone calls were made to the police by people complaining about the pressure that they were being put under … A postman complained to his superiors that the brother of one of the candidates had offered him £500 for his sack of postal votes".

"a … councillor 'sorting out' ballot papers in the shadows of a back street car park at midnight".—[Official Report, 22 June 2004; Vol. 422, c. 1232–34.]

I do not want to comment on the individual allegations, as I do not know the details, but of course I agree that it is important for all political parties to stamp out corruption or malpractice wherever it exists.

The Electoral Commission has in the past argued that allowing observers to oversee elections would promote the transparency of the democratic process. The chairman of my party has written to the Electoral Commission asking it to appoint observers at the current by-elections in Leicester, South and Birmingham, Hodge Hill. Will the Prime Minister join me in urging the Electoral Commission to respond positively to that request?

I will consult with colleagues and get back to the right hon. and learned Gentleman on the proposal that he has just made—literally, right now. I shall have to investigate its implications and I shall get back to him as soon as possible.

Given the enormous damage, especially to young people, caused by the illegal drugs industry, does the Prime Minister not think that the time has come when Governments should work together internationally, with the countries where those drugs are produced, to get that industry stopped completely?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend, and that is precisely what we are doing, not least in countries such as Afghanistan, which are still obviously in danger of developing an economic dependence on drugs, but I agree that international action is one, major part of what we should do, and we are acting on it.

If he will make an official visit to Hazelwood House, Kingsbridge, Devon.

I have no current plans to do so.

Although Hazelwood provides reconciliation and hope for the few, there is no hope for the rest of my constituents if they are in pain because there is not one NHS dentist in the whole of south Devon to help them. What can the Prime Minister say to a low-income family from Kingsbridge whose children have teeth problems and cannot afford to go private or a pensioner who has an abscess but nowhere to go for treatment? Is not he, as the Prime Minister, ashamed to preside over a Government who tolerate such neglect of the people?

I agree entirely that there are real problems in relation to dentistry and dentists at the moment—that is why my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health will bring forward proposals on that in the next few weeks—but I hope that the hon. Gentleman would agree with me about the origins of the problem: a 1990 contract for dentistry that was disastrous and, in addition, a massive cut in the number of training places for dentists. So although we have been describing some of the real progress that has been made in the national health service, I agree that, in respect of dentistry, there is a lot more to do, but I do not believe that the Conservative party is in any position to criticise.

Will the Prime Minister tell my constituents how far he thinks it is reasonable for them to walk to their nearest post office?

I obviously do not know the exact details of the hon. Gentleman's constituency, but we are putting between £300 million and £400 million a year into support for post offices. It is true, particularly in urban areas, that closures will take place, but the only way to stop those closures is to provide even greater subsidy and money. I am afraid that we cannot afford to do that, so we will continue to work with the association of sub-postmasters to provide as much help and cover as we possibly can. We set down minimum targets for the distance that people would have to go to a post office. The hon. Gentlemen will know that the reason for closures is that more and more people are putting the money that they get directly into their bank account. As I say, the only answer is an even bigger subsidy, which is not viable. So we are putting in, as I say, between £300 million and £400 million, which is, frankly, the most that we can afford at the moment.

My right hon. Friend will be aware of the decision of the United States Supreme Court about the conditions under which prisoners are held at Guantanamo Bay and their entitlement to legal representation to appeal against their conditions. He will also be aware of the statement of my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General that the British Government are not satisfied that British detainees at Guantanamo Bay can have a fair trial. In those circumstances, first, to what extent are Her Majesty's Government prepared to help to fund any appeal that may made by British detainees to the Supreme Court to examine their cases and, secondly, will the British Government seek to appear as an amicus curiae before the court to make representations on their behalf?

Our position is that the British detainees should be either tried fairly in accordance with international standards or returned to the UK. We have concluded that the military commissions process does not provide guarantees to the standards that we require. As my hon. Friend will know, five of the detainees were returned to the UK in March. We continue to work to resolve the situation of the remaining four detainees, and discussions with the United States are continuing.

Following the weekend revelations that the Home Secretary is or was the patron of an anti-vivisectionist society, what comfort can the Prime Minister give to the British scientific community and the hundreds of my constituents who continue to be terrorised by animal rights terrorists and who feel that the Government, and specifically the Home Office, are not giving them the protection that they deserve?

First, it is wrong of the hon. Gentleman to run a perfectly fair point with a totally unfair point. The fact is that the Government are doing everything that we possibly can to protect people against what are clear abuses, and we have tightened the law, not loosened it, since we came to office. We are now looking at what we can do further but let me make it absolutely clear that the activities of those who harass and intimidate people engaged in legitimate research are completely unacceptable. It is for that reason that we have, as I say, already tightened the law. We are prepared to do so even further. The hon. Gentleman will know that many of his constituents have been in direct contact with us about this matter.

If he will visit Indonesia after the presidential elections there later this year to discuss with the newly-elected President what further support the UK can give for its programme of reform.

I have no current plans to do so, but we look forward to developing a strong bilateral relationship with the Indonesian Government following the presidential elections. We will continue to focus on areas including support for democratic transition, tackling poverty and co-operation on fighting terrorism.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply and urge him, whatever the outcome of the presidential elections, to make a quick visit to Indonesia to underline our support for its reform programme of rebuilding democracy, tackling human rights abuses, overcoming international terrorism, healing Muslim-Christian conflicts and strengthening the economy. Does he agree that such a visit would help to rebuild our relations with the Muslim world and encourage British industry to invest in Indonesia and help its economic recovery, which is vital if the reform process is to be a success?

I am sorry that I cannot promise my hon. Friend that I will visit Indonesia in the near future, but I can say that we are in close contact with the Indonesian Government. We continue our work with the consultative group on Indonesia and with the Indonesia-British Business Association. I assure him, especially because of the incoming President, that we believe that there is a real opportunity to make progress in Indonesia on democracy, human rights and trade. Indonesia, as he rightly points out, is an immensely important country in the Muslim world, and how it develops will have a crucial impact on relations between the west and the Muslim world. Even if I am not visiting the country personally, I assure my hon. Friend that we will continue to be closely engaged in its development.

I am sorry that the Prime Minister's busy schedule does not allow him to pencil something in because as Indonesia is the largest Muslim country in the world, now is the time when a visit by a British Prime Minister would be helpful, especially following the inter-faith visit led by the hon. Member for Bridgend (Mr. Griffiths) several years ago. That visit helped, but will the Prime Minister accept that there has been a resurgence of atrocities in which moderate Muslims, as well as Christians, have been murdered by extreme Islamists?

I have to repeat what I said about visiting Indonesia, but I agree with the hon. Gentleman that it is important for us to continue to help the country to make progress. It is faced with a difficult situation regarding terrorism and extremism, as are many other countries. It is a tribute to the Indonesian Government and authorities that they are trying to make progress while not imposing undue restrictions on civil liberties. We will continue to work with them to ensure that human rights, democracy and, of course, freedom from terrorism are pursued.

On the subject of antisocial behaviour, does the Prime Minister agree with a survey of Tower Hamlets residents that concluded that the key drivers of antisocial behaviour were lack of parental control and drug misuse, and that the key solutions were more police and youth services? We have had more police appointed, so will he tell us what further improvements might be made and what can be done to alter the Cinderella status of youth services, which are important to the future of our young people?

I hope that we will be able to ensure that our youth services are put on a stable footing in the long term through the comprehensive spending review, because they are immensely important. My hon. Friend will agree that the new measures on antisocial behaviour are also important. It is important for us to continue to ensure that fixed penalty notices are issued for disorderly behaviour, that we close down drugs dealers' houses and that we place antisocial behaviour orders on people who continually abuse the rights of their local communities. We are tightening up the law for those who are on drugs but refuse to have treatment. I only hope that when new measures are brought before the House, we will for once have the support of the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats in taking them forward.

Will the Prime Minister confirm that in the 1960s the islanders of Diego Garcia were cleared from their island to make way for a military base? In 2000, they won a High Court judgment that established their right to return, but in the past few weeks he has overturned that with an Order in Council because America wants to hang on to the base, perhaps to use it as another Guantanamo Bay. How is any of that compatible with natural justice for the 2,000 islanders and their descendents? How can the Prime Minister pursue a shoulder-to-shoulder relationship with George Bush when he seems to spend most of his time on his knees?

First, in respect of Diego Garcia, my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary set out the position in a recent statement. Secondly, there is no question of using Diego Garcia as another Guantanamo Bay and, thirdly, I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman exhibits his usual lack of judgment in thinking it a bad thing for this country be a key ally of the United States of America. That may be something that the Scottish National party resents, but I think that the vast majority of people in this country realise it is an important part of our security.