Sitting of 6 May 1988

Preamble
The House met at half-past Nine o'clock
PRAYERS
[MR. SPEAKER in the Chair]
PRAYERS

  Point of Order
  9.35 am
  Mr. Michael Jopling: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. You will know that, earlier this week, I asked for permission to present a petition to the House at this stage. It is the result of my constituents' serious concern at the proposed closure of a school at Coniston. It is a substantial petition. I understand that a further 11 petitions have been put down for presentation this morning.
  You will recall, Mr. Speaker, that I was Government Chief Whip for four years and therefore I know what is likely to delay the business of the day. I do not wish my petition to be the cause of us not moving to the principal business of the day as soon as possible. I am sure that my constituents do not wish their petition to be the cause of the House being delayed in getting to the business. Therefore, I believe that it would be right for me not to present my petition. Although I am not prepared to support the——
  Mr. Speaker: Order. This should be a point of order, not an explanation.
  Mr. Jopling: I am not prepared to support the Abortion (Amendment) Bill as it is, but, despite that, I believe that it would he right for me not to present my petition this morning, nor do I want the Clerk to read out what is a fairly substantial document. I believe that we should move to the principal business of the day as soon as possible and I hope that all those other hon. Members with petitions will take the same course as myself.
  Mr. Dave Nellist: Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. Before you give your ruling on the point of order raised by the right hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Mr. Jopling), I ask you to take into account the fact that this morning's business is extremely important—and I do not say that from a purely personal point of view. It may well be, as has happened to me on a number of occasions—not least this week—that not every hon. Member who wishes to express their constituents' views is called during the debate. Therefore, those of us who have come here this morning with their constituents' views put down in a procedurally proper parliamentary petition should at least be allowed to put those petitions forward this morning—especially if we do not get the chance to express our arguments in a speech.
  Mr. Dennis Skinner: Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. I believe that it would be fair to say that, even on a well-attended Friday morning such as today, it is important that the tradition of presenting petitions to the House of Commons should be maintained.
  1144
  You will have noticed, Mr. Speaker, that the other night there was an attempt by the Leader of the House, who is present today, to introduce a curbing motion to stop petitions being presented. It was objected to and time will have to be found for a parliamentary debate on the matter. Perhaps time could have been allocated this morning—that would have occupied even more time—but some of us are not into that type of tactic.
  My request is fundamentally important. I notice this morning that Sir John Banham, the director general of the Confederation of British Industry, is requesting that the Rowntree takeover should be referred to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission.
  Mr. Speaker: Order. That has nothing to do with me.
  Mr. Skinner: I want a statement.
  Mr. Speaker: That, too, has nothing to do with me.
  Mr. Harry Cohen: I want to raise a genuine point of order—[Interruption.] I was not casting aspersions on anyone and I am sure that all the points of order have been genuine. I tread tactfully.
  My point of order relates to your role, Mr. Speaker, as custodian of Back-Benchers' rights. Having scrutinised the amendments to the Abortion (Amendment) Bill, you will be aware that amendment No. 47 stands in my name. That amendment is genuine and important, and I wanted to refer to it during the debate.
  Mr. Speaker: Order. It would not be in order for the hon. Gentleman to raise that matter. I have made my selection and I do not intend to change it.
  Mr. Cohen: I appreciate that, Mr. Speaker. However, will you reconsider the selections that you have made at some stage during the debate? I should have thought that it was possible for another cluster of amendments to be grouped together for debate. I would hope that it might include my amendment No. 47, which is very important in terms of doctors being sued for negligence and damages. I ask you to consider that during the debate.
  Several Hon. Members rose——
  Mr. Speaker: Order. In relation to all the points of order I must state that, as the right hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Mr. Jopling) said, the main business today is a very important Bill on which I believe the House wants to reach a decision.
  I note that the right hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale does not propose to present his petition. Perhaps others will follow suit. However, I have no authority to stop petitions being presented, as the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) has explained.
  Perhaps it would be helpful if I were to remind the House that, under Standing Order No. 132, hon. Members presenting a petition must confine themselves to a statement of the parties from whom it comes, the number of signatures attached to it, and the material allegations that it contains and to reading the prayer to the petition. Hon. Members should not read the whole petition or make a speech about it. I call Ms. Primarolo.
  Mr. Andrew F. Bennett: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
  Mr. Speaker: Order. I have called for the presentation of the petitions. I will take points of order afterwards.

Petitions

  Abortion (Amendment) Bill
  9.42 am
  Ms. Dawn Primarolo: I wish to present a petition signed by more than 1,300 of my constituents in connection with this morning's proposed business. It arises from their deep concern about the proposals in the Abortion (Amendment) Bill as it would threaten women and endanger their health.
  The petition reads:
  To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, the Humble Petition of UK Residents Showeth that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit of abortion will, if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act.
  Wherefore your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.
  To lie upon the Table.
  Mrs. Alice Mahon: I want to present a petition from the men and women in my constituency who have shown their deep concern about the effects that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill will have on women.
  Two of the signatories have a special concern. One is a victime of rape, and the other the son of a woman convicted for illegal abortions before the enactment of the Abortion Act 1967. The petition reads:
  To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, the Humble Petition of UK Residents Showeth that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit for abortion will, if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act.
  Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.
  To lie upon the Table.
  Mr. Kevin Barron: I wish to present a petition from several hundred of my constituents and others from south Yorkshire in relation to the Abortion (Amendment) Bill. There is deep concern in my constituency about the Bill, and I want to read the contents of the petition to the House——
  Mr. Speaker: Order. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will bear in mind what I said earlier.
  Mr. Barron: The petition reads:
  To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, the Humble Petition of UK Residents Showeth that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit for abortion will, if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act.
  Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your Honourable. House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.
  To lie upon the Table.
  Ms. Joan Walley: I rise to present a petition on behalf of my constituents and people living in Talke Pits, Norton, Kidsgrove and Tunstall to express the deep concern felt in my constituency about the uncertain dangers to health that will arise if the Abortion (Amendment) Bill is passed today.
  The petition reads:
  1146
  To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, the Humble Petition of UK Residents Showeth that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit for abortion will, if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act.
  Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.
  To lie upon the Table.
  Mrs. Ann Clwyd: I rise to present a petition on behalf of my constituents in Cynon Valley, several thousands of whom have written to me in opposition to the Abortion (Amendment) Bill. They are very concerned that the proponents of the Bill give a distorted impression of British abortion law, which is one of the least liberal in Europe. They believe that the way to reduce the number of late abortions is to improve the availability and acceptability of NHS abortion services, to increase contraceptive provision for young people, to offer realistic sex and family life education in schools and to develop more sensitive techniques for the diagnosis of foetal abnormality.
  The petition reads:
  To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, the Humble Petition of UK Residents Showeth that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit for abortion will, if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act.
  Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.
  To lie upon the Table.
  Ms. Mildred Gordon: I wish to present a petition from more than 200 men and women from my constituency and from elsewhere in east London and one other from south London.
  My constituents are very concerned about the danger to the law as it stands contained in the Abortion (Amendment) Bill with regard to women's health and choice. The petition reads:
  To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, the Humble Petition of UK Residents Showeth that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit for abortion will, if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act.
  Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.
  To lie upon the Table.
  Mr. Harry Cohen: I rise to present a petition signed by a number of my constituents about the business before the House today—the Abortion (Amendment) Bill. It has been collected by the "Fight Alton's Bill" campaign of the Polytechnic of Central London students' union. It has a number of sponsors, including Members of the House and important people throughout the community, as well as many important organisations, among them trade unions and women's organisations, the TUC and, incidentally, Liberal Women for Choice.
  My constituents are very worried about the effect of the Bill on women's health and rights. They say:
  The Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit for abortion will, if enacted, restrict women's choice, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act.
  Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.

  1147
  The first signature is that of Jan Tallis, chair of the women's equality sub-committee.
  I agree with the petition.
  To lie upon the Table.
  Mr. Dave Nellist: I rise to present a petition from my constituents which opposes the attempts of the hon. Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton) to weaken the provisions of the Abortion Act 1967. The petition alleges that
  The Abortion (Amendment) Bill … will, if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act.
  The petition has 54 signatures, and was delivered to me late on Wednesday evening. This is my first and most appropriate opportunity to present it to the House. Although it is not the largest petition that I have presented, it is three or four times more substantial than the number of letters and postcards in support of the Bill that I received while it was in Committee.
  The petition concludes:
  Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.
  I fully support the petition, and only wish that this morning we were discussing a reduction in abortions through improved National Health Service provision.
  Mrs. Rosie Barnes: I have the honour to present a petition on behalf of several hundred of my constituents. It is headed "Fight Alton's Bill", and states:
  To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, the Humble Petition of UK Residents Showeth that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit for abortion will, if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act.
  Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.
  I entirely support my petitioners.
  Ms. Jo Richardson: I beg to present a petition on behalf of several hundred of my constituents. I should like to say in its support that it has been collected in rain and in shine, at street corners and on Saturday mornings, and it is the only voice that women in my constituency can have in the House today. It states:
  To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, the Humble Petition of UK Residents Showeth that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit for abortion will, if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act.
  Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House do Vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.
  I applaud that sentiment, and support the petition.
  To lie upon the Table.
  Several Hon. Members rose——
  Mr. Speaker: Order. The first group of amendments——
  Several Hon. Members rose——
  Mr. Speaker: I will take a point of order from the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Mr. Wells) first.
  Mr. Bowen Wells: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. It is with a sense of deep sadness and real concern that I bring this point of order to your attention. It has always been my intention to try to get the
  1148
  subject of abortion properly considered by the House, on the merits of the issues that have come before us as a result of medical advances, and to get it settled so that it is not constantly raised here.
  Therefore, after the Committee stage of the Bill, I went to the Department of the Clerk of the House to inquire exactly how the amendments and the Bill would be handled on Report and Third Reading. I was given to understand that precedent would be followed exactly, and that, indeed, the way in which the amendments on the timing after which——
  Mr. Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman may have received advice unofficially, but he must bear in mind that the Chair makes the selection of amendments. I hope that he is not querying that.
  Mr. Wells: Of course I accept entirely the prerogative of the Chair. We put our trust in the Chair to make these very difficult decisions. I believe that you, Mr. Speaker, and the Clerk's Department have given every consideration to the difficult issues that you have had to consider during the past two weeks, and I am not bringing that into question. However, we have to consider this serious question as a whole in the House. If precedent is not followed by Mr. Speaker's Office and the Clerk's Department, we shall find ourselves in extremely deep water. I will tell you why, Mr. Speaker——
  Mr. Speaker: Order. I gave most careful consideration to my selection of amendments. Precedent has been followed to the extent that the amendments will he voted on as they fall on the Amendment Paper, as would happen in the case of any other Bill before the House.
  Ms. Clare Short: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I must say, with enormous regret, that I believe that the way in which you have selected the amendments is deeply biased, and does not allow——
  Mr. Speaker: Order. I must stop the hon. Lady there. That was an unworthy comment for her to make. I think that the whole House will wish to get on with debating the Bill without raising points of order of that kind with me. May I tell the hon. Lady that the strongest representations were brought to me both by those in favour of the Bill and by those against it, urging me to select amendments which they judged would be in the interests of their respective points of view. I have had to make a very difficult decision about the fairest way of dealing with the matter. I have followed precedent to the extent that the votes will arise as the amendments come on the Amendment Paper. That would be the way in which any amendment would he debated and voted on in any other Bill.
  Mr. Eric Forth: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
  Ms. Short: I have not finished my point of order, Mr. Speaker.
  Mr. Speaker: Order. The hon. Lady must wait.
  Ms. Short rose——
  Mr. Speaker: Order. The hon. Lady must wait.
  Mr. Forth: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I think that the House can well understand the difficult judgments

  1149
  that you have had to make in this matter. I think that you and the House are also aware that there are a number of different precedents that could have guided you.
  The point on which I want your guidance, Mr. Speaker, perhaps as much for the future as for now, is this: is it the case that, on all occasions when a Bill is before the House and amendments are tabled, the precedents now being set—regardless of what may have been the case in the past—means that the order in which amendments are taken by the Chair will follow strictly and solely the order in which they are tabled? You will understand that the matter has important implications for the way in which the House conducts its business, and I ask you to give thought to it, Mr. Speaker.
  If amendments will be considered only in the order in which they are accepted by the Table Office, hon. Members may be involved in undignified scrambles to get their amendments in first. I believe that you, the Table Office and the Clerks will have to give serious consideration to how you will handle the battle that may occur when hon. Members table their amendments in sequence, if that is to determine the way in which they are considered by the House. That is the important implication of what is happening today.
  I hope that you, Mr. Speaker, will clarify for the House how the matter is to be handled and whether it is an immutable rule that will apply to all Bills in future.
  Mr. Speaker: The same applies to all Bills. There are precedents for altering the order, but every Bill is considered on its merits.
  Mr. David Steel: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I ask you a question about your selection of the first group of amendments? You have selected new clause 3 for debate with amendments Nos. 40, 41 and 42. They have different purposes. I am opposed to new clause 3, but I support amendment No. 41. Will there be a chance to divide on the amendments as well as on new clause 3?
  Mr. Speaker: I shall certainly allow a Division on amendment No. 40 or on amendment No. 41.
  Mr. Andrew MacKay: Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. I seek your guidance and clarification on the point raised by the leader of the Liberal party. New clause 3 does not seem to relate to my amendments Nos. 40, 41 and 42, and I am somewhat surprised that they are being taken together.
  New clause 3 appears towards the beginning of the Amendment Paper. Therefore, at the end of the first debate on the amendments that you have chosen to group together, we shall presumably be entitled to vote on new clause 3. My amendments, which I shall obviously press to a Division because I believe that they are important, will presumably be considered after the next debate, because they are in a later line of the Bill but are what I would call weak amendments. May I have confirmation of that?
  Mr. Speaker: That is absolutely correct.
  Mr. Dafydd Wigley: Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker, and further to what you said a moment ago in response to the hon. Member for Mid-Worcestershire (Mr. Forth). With this Bill, as with
  1150
  other Bills, the amendments have been selected on their merits. As it appears that the overwhelming interest of the House is to vote on the amendment concerning the period of 24 weeks, how is it possible not to have that amendment at the head of the list of amendments.
  Mr. Speaker: As I said earlier, if I had remarshalled the amendments—and it would have been a remarshalling—I could have been accused of favouring one group of hon. Members who favour one method of calling amendments as opposed to the other. I hope that the whole House will accept that the Speaker has a heavy responsibility in selecting amendments. In the circumstances, I have selected them in the same way as I would select amendments to any other Bill that comes before the House. I hope that the House will now get on with debating it and not challenge my selection of amendments. I have given enormous thought to the amendments that should be selected. I believe that I have been fair to all parties who are interested in the Bill, and I hope that we can now proceed to debate it.
  Mr. Skinner: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I want to try to help you.
  Mr. Speaker: I am deeply grateful, but I call Ms. Richardson first.
  Mr. Wells: Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker.
  Mr. Speaker: Absolutely not. I have called Ms. Richardson.
  Ms. Jo Richardson: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. My point of order is about your selection, but it relates to a different point. I am being absolutely serious; it is a matter of life and death.
  Amendment No. 36, which is about emergency provisions for abortion, has not been selected. I am not disputing the deep thought that you have given to the amendments, Mr. Speaker, but it could well be that you perhaps did not entirely understand. I shall briefly explain. In the Abortion Act 1967, there is an emergency provision——
  Mr. Speaker: Order. The hon. Lady may not do that. Again, I say to her and to the whole House that I have given the greatest and most careful consideration to the amendments over a long period—ever since they started to come in. I do not propose to change my selection of amendments. We should get on with debating the Bill.
  Mrs. Maria Fyfe: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I notice that amendment No. 8, to delete Scotland from the provisions, has not been selected.
  Mr. Speaker: I know. I have not selected it.
  Mrs. Fyfe rose——
  Mr. Speaker: I am sorry. I have not selected it.
  Mr. Brian Sedgemore: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I wonder whether you can help me. This is a different and genuine point of order. I know that it is unusual to have a genuine point of order.
  Mr. Skinner: Mine are genuine.
  Mr. Sedgemore: I defer to my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner).

  1151
  Yesterday I went through what I thought was the correct procedure to present a petition to the House. I wonder whether you can tell me whether I did something wrong. I went upstairs to the Journal Office and got the petition signed by somebody with the initials DLR. I went to the Table Office and was told by the Clerks, who are always helpful on such occasions. that the petition was perfectly in order. You did not call it this morning. Therefore, I take it that the petition was not perfectly in order. I shall he grateful if you will tell me why it was not perfectly in order so that I may re-present it.
  Mr. Speaker: I shall need to look into that matter.
  Several Hon. Members rose——
  Mr. Speaker: Order. There are many outside the House who are following our discussions this morning with a great deal of interest. I believe that they expect us to debate the Bill and to come to our decisions in a parliamentary way. To raise points of order with the Chair on matters relating to selection is not the correct parliamentary way of proceeding.
  Several Hon. Members rose——
  Mr. Speaker: The hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) promised to be helpful. I think we must then get on.
  Mr. Skinner: The first thing that I have to say, which will undoubtedly be helpful, is that any serious miscalculation in respect of the petition of my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch (Mr. Sedgemore) will be resolved. I am certain that you, Mr. Speaker, will ensure that adequate time will be provided later today for my hon. Friend to present his petition and for a report to be made on how the miscalculation occurred.
  The other matter that caused a little furore earlier was your comment that, in accordance with precedent, you, Mr. Speaker, have selected the amendments in a certain manner. In answer to an intervention by the hon. Member for Mid-Worcestershire (Mr. Forth)—it was probably the only constructive thing that he has said in all the years that I have known him—you said that you were dealing with the matter on an ad hoc basis. As you must get these things right for future Bills, you need a form of words that will enable you to clarify the position in relation not only to this Bill but to others. Otherwise, you will be placed in a serious predicament, with people scrambling to table amendments and camping out upstairs to get them tabled in order.
  Mr. Speaker: It is rare for the Chair to remarshal amendments. It does not normally happen, and it has not happened today.
  Mrs. Teresa Gorman: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I seek your guidance on the amendments relating to Northern Ireland. I raise this point, although I am not a Northern Ireland Member. However, it puzzles me that——
  Mr. Speaker: Order. I give the same answer to the hon. Lady as I gave to the hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mrs. Fyfe). I have not selected any amendments concerning Northern Ireland.
  Mr. John Gorst: Will you, Mr. Speaker, say whether the amount of time spent dealing with points of order will affect the precedents with regard to acceptance of a closure motion, if it is moved?
  Mr. Speaker: The Chair would be bound to have to take into account points of order during the forthcoming debate, but I hope that they will be genuine points of order. I shall take one more point of order, but we must then proceed with the business. I wish to call the hon. Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch (Mr. Sedgemore), whose petition was, by mistake, not listed.
  Ms. Short rose——
  Mr. Speaker: Sit down please. I said I shall take one more point of order. I call Mr. Andrew Bennett.
  Mr. Andrew F. Bennett: I tried to catch your eye earlier, Mr. Speaker, to support my hon. Friend the Member for Leyton (Mr. Cohen), who raised the question of selection and his disappointment that his amendment had not been selected. On that occasion, You made it clear that it was not possible, as I fully accept, for hon. Members to question your selection of amendments, but you implied that that referred to the debate on this Bill.
  As I understand it, your selection refers to today's business. If the business continues beyond today. would you be in a position—perhaps unfortunately for you—to make a new selection? You would then be able to take into account my hon. Friend's amendment and any other amendments that were tabled. It will be a considerable help to my hon. Friend to have an assurance that there would be a completely new selection procedure if we do not complete the business today.
  You said, Mr. Speaker, that new clause 3 would be voted on and that amendments Nos. 40, 41 and 42 would be voted on at the appropriate point. Will you confirm that, if the closure is moved on new clause 3, voting on amendments Nos. 40, 41 and 42 will automatically be taken after 2.30 pm? Will the opportunity to vote on those amendments be lost, if it is not possible to vote on them before 2.30 pm, or is there a procedure by which we can return to those amendments on another occasion?
  Mr. Speaker: The hon. Gentleman well knows that, if the Bill is not completed today—and I think that the House hopes that we shall make progress on it—I should have to reconsider my selection for any subsequent debate.
  I reiterate what I have already said about new clause 3. I am prepared to allow the House a vote on either amendment No. 40 or amendment No. 41. They will fall for Division later at their proper place on the Amendment Paper. I now call the hon. Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch to present his petition.
  Mr. Sedgemore: I am most grateful that, on this morning of passion and fury, you, Mr. Speaker, have put the procedure right and upheld the rights of my constituents to petition against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.
  The petition is signed by 340 persons living in Hackney, South and Shoreditch and one other person named Ann Clwyd whose address is 70, St. Michael's Road, Llandaff. My petitioners are concerned about the effects of the Bill on the health of women, on their right to choose whether

  1153
  they should have abortions and on the fact that they believe that, if the Bill is enacted, it will lead to further attacks on the 1967 Act.
  The petition says:
  To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled, the Humble Petition of UK Residents Showeth that the Abortion (Amendment) Bill which proposes to reduce the upper limit for abortion will if enacted, restrict women's choices, endanger their health and open the door to further attacks on the 1967 Abortion Act.
  Wherefore, your Petitioners pray that your Honourable. House do vote against the Abortion (Amendment) Bill.
  I support the petition.
  To lie upon the Table.

Orders of the Day
  Abortion (Amendment) Bill
  As amended, (in the Standing Committee), considered.
  Abortion (Amendment) Bill
    New Clause 3

      APPEALS TRIBUNALS
      'After section 5 of the Abortion Act 1967 there shall be inserted the following section:—
      "5A(1) In respect of the refusal of an application by a woman for the termination of her pregnancy in terms of section I of this Act, or in the case of any delay by the Area Health Board or any of its responsible officers in reaching a decision on such an application, then that woman shall be entitled to make an appeal to the Terminations Appeals Tribunal.
      (2) There shall be a Terminations Appeal Tribunal for each Area Health Authority and the Secretary of State shall by order make provision for the establishment, constitution and procedure of the Termination Appeals Tribunal.
      (3) The Tribunals and Inquiries Act 1921 shall apply to the Termination Appeals Tribunal.".'.—[Mr. Doran.]
      Brought up, and read the First time.
      10.14 am
      Mr. Frank Doran: I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
      Mr. Speaker: With this it will be convenient to take the following amendments:
      No. 40, in clause 1, page 1, line 10, leave out
      'on a consultant gynaecologist's recommendation'
      and insert
      'on the advice of a registered medical practitioner who has been admitted to membership of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists'.
      No. 41, in clause 1, page 2, line 10, leave out
      'by a consultant gynaecologist and one other registered medical practitioner'
      and insert
      'formed in good faith, by two registered medical practitioners'.
      No. 42, in clause 1, page 2, line 14, leave out paragraph (c).
      Mr. Doran: I apologise for my bedraggled state and hoarse voice as I have rushed here this morning from Aberdeen where the Labour party last night won a magnificient victory. It is opportune that I start by mentioning the city that I am proud to represent, because Aberdeen is a city where the laws on abortion have been well tested, not just since 1967, but since the 1930s.
      I am disappointed that you, Mr. Speaker, did not choose the amendment relating to the exclusion of Scotland from the operation of the Bill, because Scots law is very different from English law. It is a much more flexible system. There is no stated time limit. The effective time limit in Scotland is 24 weeks because the law says that abortion would be a criminal offence in the case of a viable foetus. It is now medically accepted that a foetus is viable at the age of 24 weeks. I find it distressing that we are talking about time limits when the system in Scotland is quite different and the concept of rigid time limits is quite alien. We have flexibility and that adds to the system.

      1155
      New clause 3 would amend the Abortion Act 1967 and attempts to do what the Bill does not do. If the Bill is implemented, it will impose a strict time limit with certain minor exceptions. I regard those exceptions as minor, although I know that the hon. Members who propose them do not regard them as such. However, they were presented less in a spirit of improving the legislation than in a spirit of recognising that the Bill had no prospect in the House without a compromise.
      There is already a major difficulty in the operation of the 1967 Act. It is well known that the response from the medical profession to the Act is, to say the least, patchy. There are some parts of the country where the Act is operating in the spirit in which it is passed and in accordance with the law. My own city of Aberdeen has long experience of the operation of abortions as a public service to women in need, but there are other parts of the country where the law is operated less satisfactorily.
      For example, in Glasgow, the law is operated perfectly satisfactorily in one part of the city, hut, if a woman is unfortunate to live in the other part, she has grave difficulty in obtaining an abortion, even if she satisfies the requirements of the 1967 Act. The net result is that over 900 women a year have to leave Glasgow to go south to England where, for the purpose of statistics, they are treated as foreign women. That subject has caused great excitement among those who support the Bill. Nine hundred women leave Glasgow every year and go south for abortions because they cannot obtain them in their native city, regardless of the fact that——
      Ms. Clare Short: My hon. Friend refers to that part of Glasgow where the entitlements under the existing law are not extended to all women. Will he include a reference to Birmingham where the situation is exactly the same? As a result of the conscience clause, which we all respect, women in Birmingham do not obtain their entitlement under the law unless they can afford to go into the private sector. Does my hon. Friend agree that that is deeply wrong?
      Mr. Doran: My hon. Friend is entirely right. I was about to turn to the situation in Birmingham which suffers from the same problem as that part of Glasgow to which I referred.
      Mr. David Marshall: Will my hon. Friend specify the parts of Glasgow to which he is referring?
      Mr. Doran: I understand that that is the practice in the southern part of Glasgow, but I do not have details of the hospitals involved. However, I shall find out and tell my hon. Friend later. As I said, 900 women a year leave Glasgow to have abortions, so the record speaks for itself. My hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Ladywood (Ms. Short) said that that is also the position in Birmingham.
      I have already expressed my regret that my amendment that would have excluded Scotland from the scope of the Bill was not selected. Equally, I regret that new clauses 1, 2 and 4 were not selected, because they would have put new clause 3 into context. All those new clauses attempted to deal with the difficulties that would arise if the Bill were ever enacted. It lacks flexibility and pays no heed to the existing difficulties that we all wish to avoid.
      1156
      In Committee I frequently said that I am not in favour of abortion, and I do not think that any of us are. It is something that we all find difficult to accept. However, it exists and, indeed, has existed for as long as there has been birth, which is as long as mankind has existed. There will always be abortion, so it must be within a legal framework. Women are entitled to have an abortion in clean and safe surroundings with medical attention. That did not happen before the 1967 Act, other than in a few areas such as Aberdeen, and that will be the case again if the Bill is passed unamended.
      Mrs. Teresa Gorman: I speak as a biologist. It is often said that we all dislike the concept of abortion, but in fact abortion can be a natural as well as an artificial process. About one third of all abortions occur naturally, without medical help. Medical progress has, to some extent, subverted natural abortion, bringing to full term many babies who would have been aborted naturally but for medical science.
      Abortion is not an unnatural process; it is part of nature. In previous times, natural abortion eliminated many of the current problems of foetal abnormality in the later stages of pregnancy. That is especially true of genetic foetal abnormalities, which often conflict with the genetics of the mother through the placenta and produce a natural abortion. We must not think that abortion is altogether unnatural and unpleasant—it is a normal weeding out process——
      Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Paul Dean): Order. Interventions must be brief. I have allowed the hon. Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Doran) to make a fairly extensive preamble to the new clause and the amendments, which are comparatively narrow. I am sure that he will now address himself to them.
      Mr. Doran: I was tempted to intervene on the hon. Member for Billericay (Mrs. Gorman), but I resisted. I accept her point because her professional background gives her great experience in these matters. Of course, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I also accept your strictures.
      The new clause would allow a woman who had been refused an abortion to appeal, although within the context of the 1967 Act it is difficult to determine how such an appeal should be provided. The Act makes it clear that certain acts should not be regarded as criminal in certain circumstances. New clause 4 would have changed the emphasis and the onus so that abortion could be provided in certain circumstances following an application by the woman. Without the benefit of new clause 4, new clause 3 may appear to be lacking something. Obviously, it will need to be amended—presumably in another place—if it is accepted.
      I would choose the vehicle of an appeals tribunal, which is a well tried and tested remedy. The major difficulty is the strict time limits. The period of gestation is well known. The time limit in Scotland is, in effect, 24 weeks because of the viability of the foetus, while in England it is 28 weeks because of the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929. It is important that members of the medical profession address themselves to time limits— not only those set by law but those that they choose to apply when considering particular cases.
      I envisage new clause 3 being a spur to the medical profession to reconsider its practices. I commend to them those followed by the Grampian health authority, which

      1157
      recognises that time limits are crucial. If a woman tells her general practitioner that she wishes to be considered for an abortion, that general practitioner follows a procedure established by that health authority. While the woman is still in his surgery, he must immediately contact the obstetrics dept of the local hospital, which must make an appointment over the telephone. The doctor does not have time to follow his usual procedure of writing to the hospital for an appointment, waiting for that to be processed and an appointment sent and then notifying the woman. My health authority has successfully managed to expedite the whole process.
      Ms. Mildred Gordon: I have just had handed to me letters from 41 doctors in Tower Hamlets, which is in my constituency, dealing with the issues that my hon. Friend is raising. They state:
      "As general practitioners in Tower Hamlets, whatever our personal views on induced abortion"—
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. That is more of a speech than an intervention, and I find it difficult to relate it to the new clause under discussion.
      Ms. Gordon: It deals with the points being raised—
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. The hon. Lady must be brief if she is making an intervention.
      Mr. Doran: I entirely accept the point that I think that my hon. Friend tried to make, and I intend to refer later to similar documentation.
      The inadequacies in the National Health Service must be remedied, and that is the purpose of the new clause. A survey of general practitioners in the Haringey area attempted to highlight those inadequacies. My knowledge of other areas, especially Glasgow and Birmingham, is that the survey's findings could equally well apply there. Some 41 per cent. of general practitioners said that facilities for abortion within the NHS were inadequate and that there were huge delays in obtaining appointments. Although 53 per cent. of those surveyed referred all women to the NHS, a significant number did not. The two most common reasons for that were women's preference—34 per cent.—and the probable delay in obtaining an appointment—a high figure of 20 per cent. The survey suggested that there was a large overlap between the 34 per cent. for women's preference and the 20 per cent. for fear of delays in hospitals providing early appointments.
      Nearly half the general practitioners surveyed—47 per cent. of them—felt that there should be early abortion units, and I shall return to that point. A substantial proportion of them—67 per cent.—were concerned about pregnancy testing and similar issues. Those are real and serious difficulties in the Health Service. As I said earlier, one of the major motivations behind the new clause is to encourage the Health Service to re-examine its practices.
      10.30 am
      I am well aware that the 1967 Act embodies a conscience clause which permits certain Health Service employees to opt out. These days, there is a fondness for that expression on the Government Benches. In any event, I am concerned at the way in which that conscience clause can be used to militate against women who want or need an abortion. In certain areas there seems to be a
      1158
      preponderance of Health Service employees exercising their option to use the conscience clause. That fact is not advertised or publicly known, and a woman may be a long way into the system before she realises that it militates against the abortion she may need—not because she fails to comply with the terms of the 1967 Act, but because there is an in-built prejudice or conscience against abortion in the first place. I suppose that I am really saying that the law is not being observed and recognised.
      New clause 3 will encourage general practitioners to look again at the conscience clause. If I had been given the time and the freedom to draft the amendments I wanted, I would have proposed a register of medical practitioners, which women could consult to identify those operating the conscience clause who held strong, and perfectly reasonable, beliefs against providing abortions. In that way, a woman would not be seeking the assistance of a practitioner whose beliefs entailed an in-built delay she could know nothing about. We must find a way of overcoming that problem, perhaps with the register I have mentioned. New clause 3 would provide a way out and a right of appeal.
      Ms. Jo Richardson: My hon. Friend mentioned that if he had been given the time he would have drafted an amendment providing for a conscience register. A brief examination of amendment No. 45, which has not been selected, suggests that it would have covered that proposal. If we return to this subject on a future occasion, perhaps we may bear such a register in mind.
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. That must be done on another occasion and not now.
      Ms. Richardson: That is what I said, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
      Mr. Doran: I have no intention of attempting to move such an amendment now, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but obviously my hon. Friend and I are in agreement.
      As a professional person, I know how difficult it is to entertain an appeal against one of my decisions. Solicitors do not tend to make decisions—they give advice. I know how nervous I am if any of my clients wishes to seek a second opinion. I suspect that members of the medical profession may feel intimidated by the suggestion of an appeal, because their decisions would be subject to examination by what I hope would be an independent appeals tribunal.
      It is essential to look back over the 20 or more years of the Act's operation and consider the geographical disparities that the statistics reveal. Why is the number of abortions so much higher in one part of the country than in another? Why are there so many late abortions, with women having to turn to the private sector? Why cannot women obtain abortions that have been deemed necessary and that are within the law?
      Mr. Peter Thurnham: Does the hon. Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Doran) have any evidence of health authority officials deliberately causing delays and acting without any sense of urgency?
      Mr. Doran: Even if I had such evidence, I would not attempt to present it here—I would look for another way. The hon. Member for Bolton, North-East (Mr. Thurnham) was, like myself, present when certain members of the Committee tabled a hit list—and I

      1159
      certainly would not be prepared to go down that road. I am prepared to rest my argument on the statistics, which are very clear. It is more difficult for a woman to obtain an abortion in certain parts of the country than it is in others, and some are compelled to move out of the Health Service and into the private sector.
      Mrs. Alice Mahon: Does my hon. Friend agree that he is not making any specific recommendations about the practical operation of the tribunal? We have all experienced hostile health authorities and their hostility towards tribunals. Such hostility might negate the good that a tribunal could do. It is an important issue for those of us who have suffered such experiences.
      Mr. Doran: I appreciate my hon. Friend's point. I deliberately did not go into detail because it would be far more than the House could cope with, given that we are dealing with an emotional topic. I am dealing now with the principle, and I leave to the Secretary of State the responsibility of drawing up the terms on which tribunals would operate.
      Mr. Frank Cook: I am concerned about my hon. Friend's response to the intervention of the hon. Member for Bolton, North-East (Mr. Thurnham), when my hon. Friend referred to the existence in Committee of a hit list. Would he care to explain more about that hit list and what it was intended to achieve?
      Mr. Doran: I shall be happy to explain but the matter is recorded in the Committee proceedings. It was suggested that there was a large number of practitioners in the private sector who were abusing the system—I believe that they were called moral criminals by one member of the Committee. It was suggested that action should be taken against the 11 consultant gynaecologists whose names were given to the Committee. That matter caused the Committee and its Chairman great concern. Indeed, the Chairman, rightly, made his views well known. The hon. Member who made those remarks in Committee is in the Chamber and he may wish to comment later.
      It is important to stress that new clause 3 deals with a matter of principle. If it is successful, it would be for the Secretary of State to draft the detail of how the appeals tribunals would operate. One such tribunal would be set up for each area health authority, and it is essential that appeals be heard speedily. I can think of a number of examples of the way in which tribunals might operate, but the one that most comes to mind is the children's hearing system in Scotland, embodying the concept of what is known as the first lawful day hearing. When a child is, for example, taken into custody for committing a serious offence, or has been the subject of abuse or parental neglect and is taken into care, there is a hearing within seven days—but preferably on the first lawful day, which is usually the day after the child is taken into custody or care. Speed is essential.
      There would also need to be a medical element in the membership of the tribunal, in order properly to assess the evidence put before it. Funding would be the responsibility of the local health board.
      Ms. Dawn Primarolo: Can my hon. Friend say whether the tribunal's operation would allow for the Bill's current time limit of 18 weeks? if a tribunal
      1160
      agreed to a delay, would that he deemed an exceptional circumstance, allowing for termination after the 18th week?
      Mr. Doran: I trust that the rules for the tribunal would provide that where application has been made to a doctor, that would be the starting point, on the understanding that the woman qualified under all the other terms of the Act, but that does not detract from the necessity for speed. The whole House wishes to see a reduction in the number of late abortions, which are traumatic for the woman, for the staff and for everyone else involved, and it is disappointing that the Bill makes no attempt to deal with the problems that I have described in the Health Service. In Committee, many of the Bill's sponsors made lengthy attacks on the private sectors, which they would not have made in other contexts. Many of the issues raised by opponents of the Bill were dismissed out of hand, with a few grudging amendments which, if anything, make the Bill worse.
      We witnessed in Committee from the sponsors of the Bill, and no doubt we will see again today, not a commitment to the system envisaged in the Bill but merely the first stage in a campaign to remove from the statute book the right to abortion. The hon. Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton) made that clear in Committee. To paraphrase his position, he said that it had taken 40 years to abolish slavery and that it might take 20 years to abolish abortionists, but that that was the intention. That clear and emphatic statement shows that there is no real commitment to the Bill. It is merely the first stage and its supporters will be back again and again until the right to abortion is removed altogether. Anyone considering voting for the Bill in its present form should bear that in mind.
      Mr. Cyril Smith: The abolition of abortion or the repeal of the 1967 Act could occur only with the will of the House, so why is the hon. Gentleman getting his knickers in a twist?
      Mr. Doran: I was not aware that they were in a twist. I was trying to make a serious point. The Bill purports to reduce the time limit while accepting the concept of abortion, but the sponsors do not believe in that concept. They are philosophically and ideologically opposed to it. That has been made clear in every statement that they have made and in every tactic that they have used against those of us who oppose the Bill. The House should be clear that those who support the Bill do not want an improvement in the system. They are not prepared to consider improvements in the Health Service——
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman is straying into a Second Reading debate. He must address himself to the new clause.
      Mr. Dennis Skinner: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It is difficult for my hon. Friend to remain within the bounds of order that you have described while developing his reply to the hon. Member for Rochdale (Mr. Smith). This is a debating Chamber and you have to sit there and listen. If a valid debating point is made, my hon. Friend or, indeed, any other hon. Member must be able to respond to it. Some hon. Members may not be clear about what is meant by getting one's knickers in a twist, so it is necessary for my hon. Friend to deal with that. I hope he will expand on the

      1161
      point. I should like to know what the hon. Member for Rochdale meant. Perhaps my hon. Friend knows. Perhaps you know, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman's help, but perhaps he will leave this to me.
      Mr. Doran: As ever, I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner). I shall try not to stray out of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
      The new clause is a sensible measure designed to deal with defects in the Bill and to provide some flexibility. I commend it to the House.
      Mr. Bowen Wells: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You and the House will know that I am not one to raise frivolous points of order or to waste the time of the House. When you came into the Chamber I was in the middle of making a point of order to Mr. Speaker about the deep unfairness of the way in which precedents have been changed.
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman has already raised that point with Mr. Speaker. In my hearing, a clear ruling was given. There is nothing that I can add to it now.
      10.45 am
      Mr. Wells: Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I do not wish to waste time. I was not able to finish my point of order to Mr. Speaker. That is why I am raising it with you. If we had known Mr. Speaker's ruling about precedence, we should have put down a 24-week limit at the outset. Voting would then have taken place in strict order, downwards from 28 weeks, and we should have reached the Division on that issue before we ever reached 22 or 20 weeks. It is vital that people within and outside the House understand that.
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: The hon. Gentleman has made his point. There is nothing that I can add to Mr. Speaker's ruling.
      Mr. Skinner: Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You have heard the frustrated cry from the other side. The hon. Gentleman tried to make that point earlier, and no doubt you heard part of what was said. The list of amendments is known as Mr. Speaker's "provisional" selection, which means that there is an opportunity to change it, an opportunity that is taken on some occasions.
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: The hon. Gentleman is correct, but Mr. Speaker said distinctly that he did not intend to change his selection of amendments. That is the conclusive answer to the hon. Gentleman's point.
      Mr. Andrew MacKay: It may be for the convenience of the House if I do not dwell on new clause 3, introduced by the hon. Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Doran), but concentrate on amendments Nos. 40, 41 and 42 in my name and in the names of right hon. and hon. Members from almost every political party in the House.
      In my view, new clause 3 is confused. I hope that I am not being uncharacteristically offensive when I say that it looked as though it has been written out on the back of a
      1162
      cigarette packet on the shuttle to London from Aberdeen. I shall urge my hon. Friends to vote against the new clause because it muddies the water and will be of no benefit to anyone concerned with this important issue.
      My three amendments were tabled for one specific purpose. My right hon. Friend the Member for Castle Point (Sir. B. Braine) successfully introduced a series of amendments in Committee which in my view, and that of those who put their names to my amendments, were deeply unsatisfactory. I hope that my right hon. Friend, for whom I and the whole House have great respect, will not consider it unduly insulting if I suggest that his amendments were wrecking amendments. My right hon. Friend is a seasoned and successful campaigner on many issues. The stand that he has always taken on abortion is well known. He opposes it in principle, and I respect his view. I submit that my right hon. Friend and those hon. Members who supported him in Committee passed that series of the amendments with only one purpose—further to wreck the original Abortion Act that was passed about 20 years ago.
      The Committee made it clear that certification for an abortion could be signed only by medical practitioners or gynaecologists who work in the National Health Service. That is a gross insult to the many professional men and women who are members of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and who practise in the private sector. The Committee is saying that it does not trust those professional people and that they are charlatans.
      One member of the Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Hexham (Mr. Amos), went further. He said that he had a hit list; he had the names of clinics and qualified gynaecologists and obstetricians who were breaking the law. If that is correct, this is the right place and time for my hon. Friend to give us the names. I want the Director of Public Prosecutions to prosecute those people. They are giving a bad name to the medical profession. They are committing an offence. If I had such evidence, I would immediately give those names to the House today and pass them to the Director of Public Prosecutions. But if I did not have evidence, I would not have been so foolish or irresponsible as to raise those red herrings in Committee, and then be unable to give the names of the clinics and the people involved.
      I do not believe that my hon. Friend the Member for Hexham is irresponsible or would in any way wish to deceive the House. This is therefore an ideal opportunity, while he is in his place, with substantial files in front of him—which no doubt will include that hit list—for him to stand up with the privilege of the House and give the names of the clinics and the doctors involved. If my hon. Friend would do so, I guarantee to write tomorrow to the Director of Public Prosecutions informing him of the remarks made in the House and of the list of names, and asking him to investigate the matter with a view to prosecution.
      Mr. Thurnham: Does my hon. Friend agree that it would be an abuse of the privileges of this House to make accusations against individuals inside this House which, if he did not believe them, the hon. Member would not be prepared to make outside the House?
      Mr. MacKay: I agree with my hon. Friend. We have seen many examples—mainly from the Opposition—of the irresponsible naming of people without evidence. I

      1163
      conclude from the fact that my hon. Friend the Member for Hexham has not sought to intervene that he is not sure of his facts. He is not prepared to name those clinics and people because he does not think that the allegation will stand up when submitted to the Director of Public Prosecutions. We can only conclude from the silence that it was an irresponsible remark made by my hon. Friend in Committee. It would be best for the House and the Committee if he withdrew that remark.
      Mr. Frank Cook: Will the hon. Member consider an extension of the point made by his hon. Friend the Member for Bolton, North-East (M r. Thurnham)? Is it not an even greater abuse of the privileges of the House to refer to the existence of a number of people and not be prepared to substantiate the allegation?
      Mr. MacKay: I would, but I think that we have dwelt long enough on this matter. I want to move now to other parts of my amendment.
      Mr. David Tredinnick: Many Conservative Members are surprised that the hon. Member for Hexham (Mr. Amos) has not availed himself of this opportunity, because it is of such crucial importance.
      Mr. MacKay: I cannot speak for my hon. Friend the Member for Hexham. All that I have done—out of common decency—is to give him the opportunity to present his case, which is his right. That he has declined to do.
      Mrs. Gorman: My hon. Friend is aware that I was a member of the Committee. My hon. Friend the Member for Hexham (Mr. Amos) also produced in Committee what he alleged to be a tape recording of a conversation between one of those gynaecologists and a young woman. The gynaecologist deliberately persuaded the young woman, against her better judgment, to part with £450 to have an abortion which she did not want. The young woman had previously been counselled by Life or another such organisation. My hon. Friend refused to produce that tape, or a transcript of it. Will my hon. Friend the Member for Hexham confirm who is mentioned in that tape?
      Mr. MacKay: I am not responsible for my hon. Friend the Member for Hexham. If he wishes to pass that tape to anybody, no doubt he will do so. The House has noted that, in Committee, he said that he had not only a list of names, but a tape recording.
      I refer now to the amendments introduced in Committee by my right hon. Friend the Member for Castle Point. Of all people, Conservative Members should support the private sector of medicine. We believe in the National Health Service, but we believe also in the right of men and women to avail themselves of private medicine if they want it. If the amendments passed in Committee are sustained by the House today, many millions of women who use the private sector rather than the National Health Service for medical needs will have to seek advice from general practitioners and gynaecologists in the National Health Service. Imagine the pressure that that will put upon National Health Service hospitals. Imagine the pressure that it will put on gynaecological units. All hon. Members are worried about waiting lists in our hospitals. This will extend the waiting list. Ministers on the Treasury Bench, who are listening carefully to this debate, will be filled with horror at the idea that they will have to cope
      1164
      with a large number of people in NHS hospitals who would normally use the private sector. I hope that we shall reject this part of the Bill and that Conservative Members will support the private sector of medicine and the right of patients to decide whether they want to be treated in the private sector or in the National Health Service.
      Mrs. Audrey Wise: The hon. Gentleman will be aware that many Opposition Members would be reluctant to defend the private sector and nervous of accusations of profit-making. Does the hon. Gentleman accept that it is more significant when an hon. Member like me says that there is no evidence of excessive fee-charging in the abortion sector? That is contrary to the slanders which are sometimes made about fees in the private sector. I have a duty to defend doctors who, although they practise in the private sector, are not charging unwarranted fees for abortions——
      Mr. Cyril Smith: Absolute rubbish.
      Mrs. Wise: I am trying to be brief. Does the hon. Gentleman accept that it is more convincing for me to defend doctors in that sense than it is for him?
      Mr. MacKay: I concede that point. The hon. Member for Preston (Mrs. Wise) is not noted for being a friend of capitalism. The hon. Lady and I disagree on almost every fundamental issue that comes before the House. I would have expected the amendment of my right hon. Friend the Member for Castle Point to have been moved by Left-wing Socialists who are doctrinarily opposed to the private sector of medicine, not by a robust supporter such as him.
      Mrs. Gorman: My hon. Friend will be interested to know that the eminent gynaecologist, Dr. Wendy Savage. who is observing our proceedings today, and who is not normally a friend of the policies embraced by Conservative Members on private enterprise, has informed me that not only is the private sector doing a useful job but that the skill of the private sector is greater than that in the NHS. The death rate is less than that in the National Health Service by a factor of 10. That information is published in the British Medical Journal by Dr. Peter Diggory FR COG——
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. That is enough for an intervention.
      Mr. MacKay: It would be unwise of me and unfair to the House to pursue that point, which I suspect is not quite relevant to the issue we are discussing.
      I have established beyond reasonable doubt that great pressure would be put on NHS hospitals and gynaecological units if the Bill were passed as amended in Committee.
      11 am
      There is another even more sinister aspect of the amendment passed in Committee. Let us imagine a woman living in a remote part of the country where there are few NHS gynaecologists and the distance to the nearest NHS hospital is considerable. If the nearest gynaecologist is fundamentally and morally opposed to abortion, she is stymied. The doctor will not sign the certificate. So there will be one rule for my constituents in Thames Valley, where there are plenty of hospitals and enlightened gynaecologists, and another for people living in remote parts of the United Kingdom, who might have the

      1165
      misfortune to find that the only NHS gynaecologist in the region would never sign a certificate. That is why the private sector must be included.
      There is another sinister feature. Let us take the case of a woman in a private sector hospital who is taken seriously ill while pregnant and needs to have an abortion. As the Bill is now drafted, that can only take place in a public hospital or approved place—a clinic that has been licensed in the private sector by the DHSS. The woman does not want an abortion; she is in a private sector hospital because she is a member of BUPA. The specialist dealing with her case says that she will lose her life if she does not have an abortion, but, as the law stands, he cannot perform that abortion in the hospital or clinic because it is not within the NHS and is not registered to perform abortions. Therefore, the woman will have to be driven in an ambulance some considerable distance to another hospital or clinic where two doctors or gynaecologists will have to certify that it is right that she should have an abortion. Only then will it be performed there. [Interruption.] The hon. Member for Rochdale (Mr. Smith) loves intervening from a sedentary position. We rarely see horn in the House. It is a pity that he cannot intervene more properly in the debate. We look forward to hearing him later.
      Ms. Gordon: Does the hon. Gentleman agree that in the circumstances he has described, and especially during a holiday period when it might be difficult to obtain a certificate from a consultant gynaecologist, a doctor in a private clinic might find himself faced with a choice between breaking the law and becoming a criminal or letting a patient die?
      Mr. MacKay: I agree entirely with that telling intervention. We can think of other examples—foul weather, a snow storm, roads closed, and still a doctor would be breaking the law and committing a criminal offence if he carried out an abortion to save a woman's life, because he could not transfer her by ambulance to another hospital.
      If the Bill proceeds today unamended, innocent women in this country will lose their lives because of the amendment passed in Committee. I have conclusively argued that any gynaecologist, wherever he happens to practise, should be able to certify. The amendment was nothing but a wrecking amendment to make abortion harder to obtain. It will do great damage to the NHS and make our constituents wait longer for gynaecological services—and it could lead to loss of life. I urge the House to support amendments Nos. 40, 41 and 42.
      Mr. David Alton: I have heard the arguments of the hon. Member for Berkshire, East (Mr. MacKay) and I know that the House wants to make progress on this group of amendments, although the right hon. Member for Castle Point (Sir B. Braine) made an eloquent case in Committee. In ideal circumstances I would happily have supported the amendment moved there. I spoke last night to my right hon. and hon. Friends who are fellow sponsors of the Bill and we believe that the amendments would go some way to meeting some of the criticisms put by the hon. Member for Berkshire, East and other hon. Members in Committee. So I recommend that the House accept them.
      1166
      The hon. Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Doran) moved a new clause whose wording was defective in a number of respects. For instance, one would have to assume that the area health board that he referred to—it is a Scottish institution—would have its powers derogated to regional and area health authorities in England and Wales. Some of the other wording was also defective. There was, for example, no definition of "delay". I spoke to officers at the DHSS last night and have many misgivings about this. The issue could properly be re-examined in another place if there was a case to be made, but I do not think that it was made adequately this morning. The new clause could add to bureaucracy and cause as many problems as it attempts to solve. The hon. Member for Aberdeen, South had the chances to raise the point in Committee but was unable to do so, but there will be a chance for these issues to be considered further in another place.
      The subject of private clinics is regularly raised. I must remind the House that profit is involved. Although it may be dressed up as a surplus, we must remember that only 11 doctors and the clinics in which they work performed about 60 per cent. of all late abortions. For that they took £2 million.
      Ms. Short: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
      Mr. Alton: I may be able to pre-empt the hon. Lady if she is about to say that this is because of the NHS. I remind the House that more than half of late abortions are not carried out on people from our country, so NHS delays can hardly be the reason.
      Ms. Short: Many medical staff in Birmingham share my ethnic background—they are Irish Catholic immigrants—and the abortion law on the statute book is consequently not available to women there, which is gravely wrong. That means that only women who can raise the money go into the charitable private sector.
      What is the Government's view? Is it that the Birmingham practice should change and there should be planning within the NHS to extend to all women the right that they have in theory under the law, or does he just want to stop people having abortions? Is that his game?
      Mr. Alton: The hon. Lady is wrong to suggest that any games are being played. In Committee, the hon. Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Dame J. Knight) put an alternative view. She said that facilities were available throughout the city of Birmingham. We live in a country that allows 600 abortions every working day and 172,000 every year, and the door that my right hon. Friend the Member for Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale (Mr. Steel) said 20 years ago would never be left wide open has led to abortion on demand.
      If hon. Members disagree with that, perhaps they will accept the view of consultant gynaecologists, 700 of whom answered a Gallup survey; 60 per cent. of them said that, in their view, abortion on demand was available in this country.
      Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours: Will my hon. Friend confirm that he accepts the principle of equal provision within the law?
      Mr. Alton: Of course I confirm that, and I am grateful for that helpful intervention.
      Mrs. Mahon: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
      Mr. Alton: I shall give way in a moment. I am grateful for the interest that hon. Members are taking in the Bill, but I hope that they will allow me to make a little more progress. We should challenge the assumption that in itself abortion is a desirable operation. We should seek radical alternatives to the defeatism that abortion represents.
      Ms. Joan Ruddock: Would the hon. Gentleman accept from those of us who have looked at the statistics about Birmingham that if there were equal provision in the law, which he has said that he would accept, it would mean an increase in abortions in the Birmingham area? Is he suggesting that people are carrying out abortions that do not meet the strict criteria laid down in the 1967 Act? That is what he suggests when he says that there is abortion on demand. The law does not permit abortion on demand.
      Mr. Alton: The hon. Lady knows as well as I do that the 35 people who run the private counselling clinics and agencies also run abortion clinics. That financial link should be broken. It is a scandal that people can make money out of advising people to have an abortion. I have had many thousands of letters from people who say that if they had known about the psychological and physical consequences of abortion they would have done otherwise.
      Abortion carries consequences for everybody involved—for the doctors and nurses and for the women and children. A 30-bed clinic was at the heart of a Department of Health and Social Security investigation in 1985 after one of its clients, a 21-year-old Spanish student, bled to death when her abortion went wrong. That clinic charges up to £385 a time, and the later the abortion the more people pay. A report called "The Charter of Tears" in The Sunday Mirror said:
      "One 18-year-old girl described the clinic as 'a production line'. She said: 'Everybody was in a terrible rush.' Another girl said: 'I had my operation at 11 am and I was out by 2 pm."
      To try to pretend that this is love, care or support for the woman or for the child is a travesty of the truth. All that abortion involves is violence and death. On that note I urge the House to accept the amendments in the spirit in which they were moved by the hon. Member for Berkshire, East and to reject the new clause of the hon. Member for Aberdeen, South.
      The Minister for Health (Mr. Tony Newton): In view of what the hon. Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton) has said, it might be helful it I were now to intervene briefly to assist the House as far as I can. I shall be brief because I know that other hon. Members wish to speak and that the House wishes to make progress. As far as is possible in speaking about this matter I shall be factual. As I said on Second Reading, I see my task as the Minister for Health to assist the House in making up its mind and not to express a view on behalf of the Government.
      The hon. Member for Mossley Hill has said that he is minded to accept the amendments moved by my hon. Friend the Member for Berkshire, East (Mr. MacKay). There is relatively little by way of factual information or further comment that I can give to assist the House about those amendments. The advice given to me is that if the amendments are accepted abortion in the private sector in and after the 18th week would need to be advised by a member of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and to be certified by two registered
      1168
      medical practitioners, as at present. In practice, one of those would almost always be a member of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists who had advised in terms of the first half of the proposition. That is very little different from the existing position, since one of the two doctors currently certifying abortions over 18 weeks has almost always been admitted as a member of the royal college. I see no particular difficulties about the acceptance of those amendments.
      Ms. Short: Private clinics and uneven provision around the country cause many late abortions, as I am sure the Minister knows. Those of us who are concerned about late abortions—unlike the promoter of the Bill—think that it is crucial for the National Health Service to be required to plan its abortion provision within the law throughout the country. If that were done enormous numbers of late abortions would be avoided. Will the Minister look seriously at that and at the prospect of making that change so that we can prevent the distress of late abortion? He could achieve that.
      11.15 am
      Mr. Newton: The hon. Lady is bringing us to the underlying purpose, as I understand it, of new clause 3 which was moved by the hon. Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Doran) and to which I was about to turn. I start by acknowledging the feelings expressed that there may well be some variation in the attitudes of those concerned with these matters in different parts of the country. As I said on Second. Reading, it is easier to note that problem than to see what can readily be done about it unless we go down the path of making appointments to gynaecological posts throughout the country dependent upon an interrogation of the potential appointee in order to ascertain his views about abortion. That would be to set up some kind of quota system for those who were "pro-abortion" or "anti-abortion" to be appointed in particular localities. The House will see that that proposition is fraught with very great difficulty.
      While acknowledging the problem, I am not able to respond in quite the way that the hon. Lady would like 'by giving an easy answer along the lines that she has suggested. I am sure that the House would not wish me to take a great deal of time. For that reason I intend to restrict the number of interventions that I accept. However, I shall again give way to the hon. Lady.
      Ms. Short: My point is extremely important and has nothing to do with time wasting. I am second to none in defending the right of people to stand on conscience, but that right cannot prevent the proper implementation of the law throughout the country. We can stand firmly by the right of all medical staff to obey their conscience on abortion, but also impose on the National Health Service a duty I o plan proper abortion facilities within the law in all areas. Surely that is possible. I appeal to the Minister to plan for it because it would prevent late abortions and io far more than this dishonest Bill.
      Mr. Newton: Once again I appreciate the hon. Lady's sincerity, but I do not think that there is a great deal that I can add to what I have said about what I perceive to be the difficulties of going down the track that appears to be implied by the hon. Lady.
      Mrs. Wise: If the Minister looks at the record he will find that at one stage his Department gave exactly that kind of advice: that each area should make sure that it appointed a sufficient number of people who were not subject to conscientious bar so that facilities could be available throughout the country. If he looks back he will find that that was done. I suggest that it is quite proper and in no sense a hostile interrogation. It is simply to ensure that bars will not be placed in the way of an adequate National Health Service in every area.
      Mr. Newton: My understanding is different from that of the hon. Lady. However, I shall check it in the light of what she has said. I do not resile from my view that it would be wrong if people seeking gynaecological and obstetric appointments in hospitals all over Britain had to depend for appointment on the declaration of a specific view. That would be an extremely uneasy situation for health authorities, for Ministers and for the House.
      New clause 3 would introduce a formal appeal mechanism into the Abortion Act 1967 as a whole. It would not, of course, simply apply to applications for abortions over 18 weeks which are, generally, the abortions dealt with in the Bill.
      Every scrap of advice that I have, which I will not set out at length, says that the new clause is technically defective—for example, in its terminology, which refers to area health boards, which are bodies not currently known to the law. It is technically defective in a number of other respects on which I could elaborate. The hon. Member for Mossley Hill has already touched on a particular difficulty, which is the reference to "any delay", with no definition of "delay". A delay could mean, in theory, a delay of a matter of minutes and, without some definition—a definition that would be extremely difficult to achieve in a workable form—the clause would be inoperable.
      Therefore, I have to tell the House as clearly as I can that were it to take the view that the new clause represented a principle to which it wished to agree, substantial further work would be required in the other place to put the clause into a form in which there would be any chance of its working. I have some other serious reservations, which I should set out for the House.
      In moving his new clause, the hon. Member for Aberdeen, South said that he acknowledged that there should be medical representation on these tribunals, but that there should also be a lay element. It occurs to me, and will no doubt have occurred to the House, that quite a number of the decisions that would in theory be appealed against under this proposal would be clinical decisions, at least in the mind of the doctor who made them, and in terms of the law. It is open to question what the response of the profession would be, as its members would see many difficulties where clinical decisions or decisions taken on a clinical basis were subject to review by a group that was not made up of clinicians. That would raise the question whether the decisions by such a body could or would be implemented by a clinician who would have carry out the abortion.
      It is clear that nothing that a termination appeals tribunal could decide could compel the clinician to carry out an abortion against his wishes or judgment. I see the hon. Member for Caernarfon (Mr. Wigley) shaking his head. I am making these points only to illustrate some of the difficulties that would be entailed in developing this new clause into something that would be sustainable. I am
      1170
      not saying that I am convinced that those difficulties are not surmountable. I am saying that there has been little time for us, quite apart from the House, to consider them, but they appear to me to be formidable, and would undoubtedly introduce a new element of difficulty and complexity into the changes of law that are being proposed.
      Mr. Dafydd Wigley: The right hon. Gentleman has said that there might be a possibility of the tribunal coming out in favour of the applicant, but the applicant then having difficulty in finding a clinician to carry out the recommendation of the tribunal. That suggests that the clinicians have a veto on the rights of the individual that have been upheld by the tribunal. Surely, whether the wording is correct or not, we should be finding a way to sustain the rights of the individual rather than providing mechanisms for vetos.
      Mr. Newton: I have already recognised the importance of that point, and I hope that my remarks will not be considered by the hon. Gentleman or others who may support the new clause as being made in a negative spirit. They are designed simply to reveal the difficulties of going down the track that has been suggested and the undoubted need for further substantial thought, not only in drafting but about many of the concepts involved. I am perhaps saying no more to the House than this: in a matter that is already fraught with difficulty and complexity, the House will need to consider whether it wishes to introduce this additional and substantially fresh element to the subject matter of the Bill. In the end, that judgment is for the House, not me to make, but it is important that I should make clear to the House the technical difficulties that I envisage and the difficulties that there would be in developing a clause in line with new clause 3.
      Mrs. Maria Fyfe: Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?
      Mr. Newton: No, I wish to conclude. Beyond that, the issue of principle involved is one for the House to decide on and not one for me to tell the House what it should decide.
      Mrs. Ann Clwyd: I must refute some of the allegations made by the hon. Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton), particularly those he has made in his many attacks, both in Committee and in the House, on the private sector. I do not normally defend the private sector, as my hon. Friends know, but as a former trustee of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, which is involved in 30,000 abortions a year, I must refute the allegation that the directors of charitable private organisations such as BPAS who do a great service for women in carrying out abortions that are not available under the NHS, are paid for their work. We volunteer for that work because we think that it is essential.
      From the time of the reform of the abortion law in 1967, the NHS has been unable to organise itself to cope with the need for legal and safe abortion. As a result, waiting lists have developed and, as a former member of a regional hospital board, I know full well that in my area, because of the attitude of the consultant gynaecologist and obstetrician at the University hospital of Wales, we were unable, although we were responsible for the running of the NHS in that part of Wales, to implement a day care clinic. Therefore, women in that area were unable to have

      1171
      swift and safe abortions and were forced to travel long distances outside the area to obtain abortions. That consultant gynaecologist prevailed on other gynaecologists and obstetricians in his department to take a similar attitude.
      Mrs. Gorman: On the point about safety, and in support of charities such as the BPAS, may I ask whether the hon. Lady is aware that charities have the safest of all records in assisting people with abortions, and that in the 20 years since the Abortion Act 1967 was passed there has been only one death out of the 600,000 cases with which they have dealt? That must be one of the most outstanding safety records.
      Mrs. Clwyd: I thank my hon. Friend for making that important point. It shows how responsible and careful these charities are. She has also reminded me that one general practitioner and one consultant gynaeologist authorise abortions, and the rule in the BPAS is that the consultant gynaecologist never authorises the termination because we want to prevent the gynaecologist who is performing the abortion from profiting from his decisions. To require an NHS consultant to certify for late abortions would affect women who go to those charitable organisations.
      If terminations were freely available on the NHS, there would be a different argument again, but there is no mechanism—as I am sure hon. Members on both sides of the House will agree—within the NHS to ensure that an adequate service is provided for all women who need it. Despite the recommendations of the Royal Commission on the NHS in 1979, of which I was a member, and in which I participated closely, particularly on these discussions, it was recommended that in all hospital regions 75 per cent. of terminations should be carried out within the NHS and that facilities should be made available. My hon. Friends will know that today less than half of terminations carried out in Britain are carried out under the NHS.
      In its report on late abortions in England and Wales, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists stated that one fifth of women who have abortions in the NHS between 20 and 23 weeks were medically referred by 12 weeks. The college concluded:
      "The abortion services contribute to avoidable delays."
      Thus many women decide to go into the private sector, where abortions do not have to take their place among a host of other operations. They are carried out without the dangerous and distressing delays that take place in the NHS.
      11.30 am
      Ms. Short: A few moments ago my hon. Friend said that she wished to correct the wrong impression given by the hon. Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton). I am sure that it was only accidentally that he gave the House a false impression this morning. He said that the hon. Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Dame J. Knight) contested in Committee my claim that a proper abortion service on the NHS was not available in Birmingham. In central Birmingham, 6 per cent. of abortions take place in the NHS. Without the charitable sector, women in Birmingham are not entitled to that which the law provides. I am sure that the hon. Member for Mossley Hill would not like the false impression that he gave to remain on the record.
      Mrs. Clwyd: I thank my hon. Friend for making that important intervention. The percentage to which she referred is abysmally low and illustrates the patchy provision that is made for women throughout Britain. The NHS service depends greatly on the area in which one lives.
      The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Security (Mrs. Edwina Currie): As a former chairman of the Central Birmingham health authority, I think that I am right in saying that, wherever the abortions were performed a large proportion of them were paid for by the NHS.
      Mrs. Clwyd: I thank the Minister for making that point. It shows the fail h that the NHS has in the provision that is made by the charitable sector. It is prepared to pay for terminations that it cannot carry out itself. It is a tribute to the work that is done by the private sector.
      There are some positive reasons for preferring the non-NHS sector, including greater privacy and availability of intensive counselling. It is insulting to suggest that the private sector not concerned about counselling both before and after a termination. That was an important part of the work of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service. I say to the hon. Member for Mossley Hill that it is insulting to the private sector to suggest that it does not take great account of counselling both before and after termination.
      It is a tribute to the quality of service that is provided by the charitable sector that several health authorities use its clinics on an agency basis. In 1986, the last year for which we have figures, about 7,000 abortions were provided in that way. The private and charitable sector is tightly controlled by the DHSS in all aspects of its work, including prices. The pregnancy advisory services carry out abortions for between £280 and £300. High staff-patient ratios and extensive resuscitation and other equipment demanded by the DHSS mean that the actual cost of late abortions is much higher than the sum which is charged for them. Late abortions that are carried out by abortion charities are subsidised by other operations. The cost of an early abortion is about £150 to £200. That is also the average cost in the NHS.
      I resent the remarks of the hon. Member for Mossley Hill that gave a distorted impression of current British abortion legislation. In fact, it is one of the least liberal pieces of legislation to be found in Europe. Eight to 10 western European countries allow abortion on request during the first 12 weeks or more. Most of these countries permit abortion on specific grounds after that limit, usually for medical conditions, foetal handicap or social and psychological reasons. Such abortions are available up to 24 weeks.
      We believe that the best way to reduce late abortions is by improving the availability and acceptability of the NHS abortion services, increasing contraceptive provision for young people, offering realistic sex and family life education in schools and developing more sensitive techniques for the diagnosis of foetal abnormality. However, there will always be a need for abortion late in pregnancy for a minority of women. I stress that it is only a minority. It is vital that choice is retained. That is why we oppose the Bill in its entirety. I oppose new clause 3.

      1173
      The Bill was not changed fundamentally in Committee and it still restricts the availability of legal abortions to the first 17 weeks of pregnancy.
      Mrs. Elizabeth Peacock: I listened carefully to what the hon. Lady said about the charities that perform abortions. Does she agree that we must not confuse the charities with the private clinics, which carry out a large proportion of the very late abortions that are carried out on foreign women? Perhaps we should take to heart what she has said about the NHS system, but could we not convince other countries that they should put their houses in order? If that were done, Britain would not be the foetal dustbin of Europe.
      Mrs. Clwyd: I thank the hon. Lady for making that point. It was discussed in some detail in Committee. There was an element of xenophobia in the arguments advanced by certain hon. Members in Committee when they talked about "foreign women", as though they were a group to be denigrated. The term "foreign women" includes women from Northern Ireland—perhaps the hon. Lady was not aware of that.
      Mrs. Peacock: Yes, I was.
      Mrs. Clwyd: The needs of women in the United Kingdom includes those of women in Northern Ireland. I am sure that the hon. Lady would not wish to deny those women the opportunity of obtaining an abortion in Britain, bearing in mind the particular difficulties within their own country. It is important to keep "foreign women" in perspective and not to use the term in the xenophobic way that some Conservative Members adopted so frequently in Committee.
      Mrs. Wise: I agree completely with the factors to which my hon. Friend referred that would reduce the number of late abortions and abortions in general. Does she agree that she should add to the list social factors such as homelessness and poverty, which cause desperation among women? Improving social factors would be an excellent and constructive way of reducing desperation which leads to abortion.
      Mrs. Clwyd: I thank my hon. Friend for making that important observation.
      Those who are most concerned about reducing late abortions seem not to share the same concern for the conditions in which many of the women who seek late abortions have to live. As they are responsible for much of the legislation that will make it even more difficult for women who already live in poverty, bad housing, poor social conditions and in families where unemployment is high, they should realise that there is an element of hypocrisy in some of their arguments. If they were as vociferous on the need for improving social conditions as they are on reducing late abortions, I am sure that we would all approve and support them in their attempts to improve conditions.
      Mr. Tredinnick: The hon. Lady has raised a crucial issue. The Bill came out of Committee largely unchanged. On Second Reading the hon. Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton) said that it was not his intention to be intransigent—[Interruption.] He was intransigent in Committee. On Second Reading however, he said:
      1174
      "if I do not keep my word … hon. Members will have the chance to vote against the Bill on Report"—[Official Report, 22 January 1988; Vol. 125, c. 1240.]
      Would the hon. Lady care to comment on that?
      Mrs. Clwyd: The Bill has not been fundamentally changed. If the Bill had been amended in Committee in a helpful way, we would be having a different debate today. Indeed, the amendments that were accepted in Committee will make the Bill even more difficult to implement.
      Mrs. Gorman: The statistics of foreign women having abortions also includes women from Scotland and, of course, from Eire—they are technically foreign, but they are allowed to vote in this country. There are a large number of such women. Incidentally, none of our amendments against the Bill was accepted.
      Mrs. Clwyd: The hon. Lady has raised an important point. The two limited exceptions that were made in the Bill relate to abortions on the ground of specified foetal handicap or rape or incest committed against girls under 18. In Committee we said that those exceptions were hedged with bureaucracy. They cater for a small proportion of abortions that are carried out after 17 weeks.
      Evidence given to the House of Lords Select Committee on infant life preservation shows that women who have abortions at this late stage of pregnancy
      "usually do so for very pressing reasons."
      Under the terms of the Bill as it now stands, and because our amendments were not accepted, legal abortions will no longer be available for such women.
      Although the hon. Member for Mossley Hill and his supporters would argue that they have made major concessions, we consider them to be minor. Indeed, the hon. Member said that he even found some of the concessions repugnant. He said that he felt compelled to put them forward
      "only for the reasons of political expediency".
      We appreciate that the hon. Gentleman is anxious to get the Bill through the House, but even the minor concessions were made for the most cynical of reasons. I stress the fact that in the final hours of the Committee the hon. Gentleman stated:
      "Although we shall not win all the arguments on the matter this time. … I shall want to return to them in years to come. We shall continue to challenge this aspect and I want to put down a marker about that now."—[Official Report, Standing Committee C, 30 March 1988; c. 271.]
      He made his intentions quite clear. After the first debate on this issue, perhaps some of us were under the illusion that he was prepared to be much more lenient in his approach to the Bill. That notion was disabused in Committee.
      Mrs. Mahon: With regard to foreign women, may I say that it caused great offence to many people who contacted me that it was possible to speak in such a dehumanising way about women who were simply women in need. If the Bill is passed, our women will become someone else's foreign women. I believe that that description was one of the more offensive tactics that was used by those supporting the Bill.
      Mrs. Clwyd: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that information.
      When I was a Member of the European Parliament and attended a meeting of the Socialist group in Dublin, I caused considerable offence to some of my fellow Socialists because I looked at the election manifesto of the Irish

      1175
      Socialist party and discovered that there was no provision for dealing with women who required terminations. I am conscious of the pressing need of those women who are denied terminations within their own country. Our system is not the most liberal within Western Europe—it is the least liberal in comparison to eight other countries—but we should be pleased about the help that we offer to women in need; we should not denigrate that.
      11.45 am
      I oppose new clause 3. I am sorry that I have to oppose my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Doran). I believe that the problems that have been caused as a result of the amendments accepted in Committee are pertinent to the provisions of that clause and we need a number of answers.
      The clause creates an appeals tribunal procedure for women who are either refused an abortion under the terms of the Abortion Act 1967 or when there has been a delay in reaching a decision on whether a woman has grounds for an abortion. It appears that the new clause seeks to tackle the problem of delays for women seeking termination by creating a new right of appeal. The proposed provisions, however, are inadequate and ineffective.
      One of the amendments accepted in Committee allows girls who are under 18 a termination after 17 weeks if they have been victims of rape or incest, but not for girls who are a day over 18. That was the effect of the amendment tabled by the right hon. Member for Castle Point (Sir B. Braine). How would new clause 3 affect that? This matter could have been debated if our amendments Nos. 12 and 13 had been selected. The fact that they have not been selected has caused many of us great distress.
      The Bill's provisions will create enormous difficulties for doctors. We hotly debated this issue in Committee. Is the hon. Member for Mossley Hill suggesting that rape or incest becomes less traumatic once a woman has had her 18th birthday? If something is not desirable at the age of 18 or under, why should 18 and one day, 19, 20 or 21 be acceptable? Surely women who are victims of rape and incest have an equal right to terminate the pregnancy if they so wish.
      Mr. Alton: Will the hon. Lady confirm that, as recorded by the DHSS, no abortion was performed on the grounds of rape or incest on an over-aged woman?
      Mrs. Clwyd: The Minister made the position clear in Committee. The DHSS does not require the recording of such facts. The hon. Member for Mossley Hill is well aware of that because the Minister explained it to him in Committee.
      We were not able to hear the arguments from the hon. Member for Mossley Hill in Committee on abortions for women aged over 18. It is ridiculous for the proponents of the Bill to argue that victims of rape and incest aged 18 or under should be able to have a late abortion while those over 18 should not. That is completely ludicrous. Unfortunately, the hon. Member for Mossley Hill was not prepared to answer that in Committee.
      There are legal and medical difficulties for a doctor in assessing whether a woman has been raped.
      Mr. Andrew MacKay: Before the hon. Lady leaves the point about rape, will she explain or interpret the amendment that was moved by my hon. Friend the
      1176
      Member for Maidstone (Miss Widdecombe) and accepted in Committee about how rape can be proved? Does the hon. Lady believe that entirely by mistake my hon. Friend the Member for Maidstone has given us a terrific let-out clause almost for abortion on demand? It would appear that any woman can claim that she has been raped and have an abortion if she is under 18. That is surely not what my hon. Friend the Member for Maidstone intended. I can tell by the look on my hon. Friend's face that that is not what she intended. Perhaps she will intervene shortly. Knowing how lucid the hon. Member for Cynon Valley (Mrs. Clwyd) is, I suspect that she will be able to answer that question amicably for me.
      Mrs. Clwyd: Exactly. My hon. Friend has made an important point. Who will judge the case when a woman claims that she has been raped or has been the victim of incest? Will the termination appeals procedure judge that case, as suggested in new clause 3? We are worried about that.
      Will there be false allegations of rape from a young woman desperate for an abortion? Will doctors become suspicious of anyone claiming to have been raped who does not request a termination until late in pregnancy? Should those be matters for appeal through the procedures spelt out in new clause 3? It is important that we receive answers to those questions.
      In 1967, the original Medical Termination of Pregnancy Bill included rape as one of the grounds for abortion. However, that was subsequently removed because it was argued that it placed doctors in an invidious position. The amendment tabled by the hon. Member for Maidstone (Miss Widdecombe) would place doctors in a similar position. Doctors would be able to make a decision only on a woman's mental or physical state. It was considered appropriate to deal with such difficult cases under the mental health provisions. I suggest that the Mental Health Act 1983 has worked well in that respect because it has given doctors sufficient flexibility to deal with difficult circumstances.
      I remind the House that the Select Committee reporting on the Infant Life (Preservation) Bill stated:
      "The Committee would not wish to see any impediment placed in the way of the victim of rape and incest who is desirous of terminating her pregancy."
      That highlights the problems with the Abortion (Amendment) Bill as it stands, as it removes the flexibility of the law to deal with those distressing cases. That is one reason why I must oppose new clause 3.
      It is the intention of new clause 3 to ensure that a woman who is unreasonably delayed by administrative or other factors can receive an abortion after the time limit at the beginning of the 18th week. If that is the intention, it is not made sufficiently clear, and new clause 3 fails to achieve that objective. As the new clause is drafted, it does not permit an abortion to be performed after the beginning of the 18th week, even if the appeals tribunal finds in the woman's favour and agrees that she has been delayed unnecessarily. A victim of rape or incest may find herself in that position.
      New clause 3 is an enabling provision which grants the Secretary of State for Social Services the power to set up the tribunal. However, it gives no specification of the tribunal's nature or powers. That means that the detail of how the tribunal would operate would not be open to debate in the House. The new clause contains no provision for any regulations drawn up by the Secretary of State to

      1177
      be brought before the House as a statutory instrument which would be subject to annulment by resolution of either House, and important points of principle would therefore be determined by the Secretary of State without the opportunity to challenge them.
      Ms. Short: We all agree that the drafting of the clause is unsatisfactory and needs improvement. What we need to discuss is the principle of the right of appeal. If that is supported in the House, as I hope that it will be, we will ask the other place to tidy it up and improve it.
      Mrs. Clwyd: I thank my hon. Friend for making that point, which I agree is very important. These issues are of considerable significance, and cannot be left to secondary legislation which Parliament may not have an opportunity to discuss.
      The new clause does not specify the powers that the tribunal would have. Could it require the abortion to be carried out if it upheld the woman's appeal? If so, what sanction would it have if a medical practitioner refused to carry out the operation? What powers would it have if it found in a woman's favour after the beginning of the 18th week? Would it have powers to compensate a woman who had been delayed beyond the statutory time limit and had to continue her pregnancy, although she had grounds for an abortion under the 1967 Act?
      The new clause does not specify a period within which the appeal must be heard. Is it seven days, seven weeks or seven months? Unless there is a clear requirement for a tribunal to meet and hear the appeal quickly, the right to appeal in itself will be totally meaningless.
      Would additional resources—I look to the Ministers here—be available to the health authorities to ensure that the appeals procedure was speedy and efficient? Given the difficulty of getting any additional resources out of Conservative Members, there may be some reason to doubt that such resources would be forthcoming.
      The concept of a tribunal procedure would create yet more bureaucracy for women seeking abortions. It would be an additional ordeal for such women to have to face a tribunal. Would there be provision for them to be represented, and in what way? Would they have to be medically examined by members of the tribunal? Who would the members of the tribunal be, and how would they be selected? What would be the position of the doctors who had refused the abortion, or any others who were responsible for delay? Would lack of resources be a defence if the woman had not had the termination carried out because of a shortage of beds or medical personnel?
      While I am sure that the intention of my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen, South is to try to help women by minimising unnecessary delays for those seeking an abortion, I suggest that the new clause is inadequate as drafted, and would create a new and unwieldy procedure which would work against women's interests.
      There is a minor drafting point. The new clause refers in subsection (1) to an area health board and in subsection (2) to an area health authority, although both appear to refer to the same body. In fact, there are now district health authorities in England and Wales—I am sorry to say that there is no longer any regional hospital board—and health boards in Scotland, so we have a less
      1178
      democratic Health Service in Wales than in the rest of the country. Both should be included in both subsections if the power is to extend to England, Wales and Scotland.
      Again, I ask hon. Members on both sides of the House to consider their position very carefully before they go through the Lobbies today. After hearing the arguments spelt out in Committee by the hon. Member for Mossley Hill and his colleagues, it is our belief that their real intention is not to improve on the 1967 Act. Their true intention is to repeal the 1967 Act in its entirety. It would have been honourable for them to have said today, "That is our real intention. We do not want to improve on the Act. We want it to be scrapped altogether." We would respect their position if it were thus stated. To suggest that this is a way of reducing late abortions is a myth and a delusion.
      12 noon
      Mr. Cyril Smithrose in his place and claimed to move, That the Question be now put.
      Question put, That the Question be now put:—
      The House proceeded to a Division—
      Mr. Patrick McLoughlin(seated and covered): On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It seems to be taking a long time to clear the Lobbies. Would it be possible to investigate that?
      Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Paul Dean): I am keeping a careful eye on the time. It is clear that many hon. Members wish to take part in the vote. So far, the Division has not been overlong.
      The House having divided: Ayes 265, Noes 222.

      Division No. 287]

      [12.18 pm

      AYES

      Adams, Allen (Paisley N)

      Boateng, Paul

      Allen, Graham

      Boyes, Roland

      Anderson, Donald

      Brown, Gordon (D'mline E)

      Archer, Rt Hon Peter

      Brown, Nicholas (Newcastle E)

      Armstrong, Hilary

      Bruce, Malcolm (Gordon)

      Ashdown, Paddy

      Buchan, Norman

      Ashley, Rt Hon Jack

      Caborn, Richard

      Ashton, Joe

      Campbell, Menzies (Fife NE)

      Banks, Tony (Newham NW)

      Campbell-Savours, D. N.

      Barnes, Harry (Derbyshire NE)

      Carlile, Alex (Mont'g)

      Barnes, Mrs Rosie (Greenwich)

      Cartwright, John

      Barron, Kevin

      Clark, Dr David (S Shields)

      Bell, Stuart

      Clelland, David

      Bennett, A. F. (D'nt'n & R'dish)

      Cohen, Harry

      Bermingham, Gerald

      Cook, Frank (Stockton N)

      Bidwell, Sydney

      Cook, Robin (Livingston)

      Blair, Tony

      Coombs, Anthony (Wyre F'rest)

      Blunkett, David

      Corbyn, Jeremy

      1182

      Cousins, Jim

      McAllion, John

      Cox, Tom

      McCartney, Ian

      Cunningham, Dr John

      McKay, Allen (Barnsley West)

      Dalyell, Tarn

      McKelvey, William

      Darling, Alistair

      McLeish, Henry

      Davies, Q. (Stamf'd & Spald'g)

      McNamara, Kevin

      Davies, Ron (Caerphilly)

      McTaggart, Bob

      Davis, Terry (B'ham Hodge H'I)

      McWilliam, John

      Dobson, Frank

      Madden, Max

      Doran, Frank

      Marek, Dr John

      Duffy, A. E. P.

      Marshall, David (Shettleston)

      Dunnachie, Jimmy

      Marshall, Jim (Leicester S)

      Dunwoody, Hon Mrs Gwyneth

      Martlew, Eric

      Eadie, Alexander

      Maxton, John

      Evans, John (St Helens N)

      Meacher, Michael

      Ewing, Harry (Falkirk E)

      Meale, Alan

      Ewing, Mrs Margaret (Moray)

      Michael, Alun

      Fatchett, Derek

      Michie. Bill (Sheffield Heeley)

      Fields, Terry (L'pool B G'n)

      Miscampbell, Norman

      Fisher, Mark

      Moonie, Dr Lewis

      Flannery, Martin

      Morgan, Rhodri

      Flynn, Paul

      Morley, Elliott

      Foot, Rt Hon Michael

      Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe)

      Foster, Derek

      Mowlam, Marjorie

      Foulkes, George

      Murphy, Paul

      Fyfe, Maria

      Nellist, Dave

      Garrett, John (Norwich South)

      Nicholson, Emma (Devon West)

      George, Bruce

      O'Neill, Martin

      Godman, Dr Norman A.

      Orme, Rt Hon Stanley

      Golding, Mrs Llin

      Owen, Rt Hon Dr David

      Gorman, Mrs Teresa

      Parry, Robert

      Gould, Bryan

      Patchett, Terry

      Graham, Thomas

      Pendry, Tom

      Grant, Bernie (Tottenham)

      Pike, Peter L.

      Griffiths, Nigel (Edinburgh S)

      Powell, Ray (Ogmore)

      Griffiths, Win (Bridgend)

      Prescott, John

      Grocott, Bruce

      Randall, Stuart

      Harman, Ms Harriet

      Redmond, Martin

      Haynes, Frank

      Rees, Rt Hon Merlyn

      Healey, Rt Hon Denis

      Reid, Dr John

      Henderson, Doug

      Richardson, Jo

      Hinchliffe, David

      Rogers, Allan

      Holland, Stuart

      Rooker, Jeff

      Hood, Jimmy

      Ross, Ernie (Dundee W)

      Howarth, George (Knowsley N)

      Rowlands, Ted

      Howell, Rt Hon D. (S'heath)

      Ruddock, Joan

      Howells, Geraint

      Sedgemore, Brian

      Hoyle, Doug

      Sheldon, Rt Hon Robert

      Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N)

      Short, Clare

      Hughes, Simon (Southwark)

      Smith, Andrew (Oxford E)

      Illsley, Eric

      Smith, C. (Isl'ton & F'bury)

      Ingram, Adam

      Smith, Rt Hon J. (Monk'ds E)

      John, Brynmor

      Snape, Peter

      Jones, Barry (Alyn & Deeside)

      Spearing, Nigel

      Jones, Ieuan (Ynys Môn)

      Strang, Gavin

      Jones, Martyn (Clwyd S W)

      Straw, Jack

      Kilfedder, James

      Taylor, Matthew (Truro)

      Kinnock, Rt Hon Neil

      Walley, Joan

      Kirkwood, Archy

      Wareing, Robert N.

      Knox, David

      Wells, Bowen

      Leadbitter, Ted

      Welsh, Michael (Doncaster N)

      Leighton, Ron

      Williams, Alan W. (Carm'then)

      Lestor, Joan (Eccles)

      Wilson, Brian

      Lewis, Terry

      Winnick, David

      Litherland, Robert

      Young, David (Bolton SE)

      Livsey, Richard

      Lloyd, Tony (Stretford)

      Tellers for the Ayes:

      Lofthouse, Geoffrey

      Mr. Sam Galbraith and Mr. Dafydd Wigley

      Loyden, Eddie

      NOES

      Abbott, Ms Diane

      Atkins, Robert

      Aitken, Jonathan

      Atkinson, David

      Alison, Rt Hon Michael

      Baker, Nicholas (Dorset N)

      Alton, David

      Baldry, Tony

      Amess, David

      Banks, Robert (Harrogate)

      Arbuthnot, James

      Batiste, Spencer

      Arnold, Jacques (Gravesham)

      Battle, John

      Arnold, Tom (Hazel Grove)

      Beggs, Roy

      Aspinwall, Jack

      Beith, A. J.

      1183

      Bendall, Vivian

      French, Douglas

      Benn, Rt Hon Tony

      Fry, Peter

      Bennett, Nicholas (Pembroke)

      Gardiner, George

      Benyon, W.

      Garel-Jones, Tristan

      Bevan, David Gilroy

      Gill, Christopher

      Biggs-Davison, Sir John

      Gilmour, Rt Hon Sir Ian

      Blackburn, Dr John G.

      Glyn, Dr Alan

      Blaker, Rt Hon Sir Peter

      Gorst, John

      Bonsor, Sir Nicholas

      Gower, Sir Raymond

      Boscawen, Hon Robert

      Greenway, Harry (Ealing N)

      Boswell, Tim

      Gregory, Conal

      Bottomley, Mrs Virginia

      Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth N)

      Bowden, A (Brighton K'pto'n)

      Grylls, Michael

      Bowden, Gerald (Dulwich)

      Gummer, Rt Hon John Selwyn

      Bowis, John

      Hamilton, Hon Archie (Epsom)

      Boyson, Rt Hon Dr Sir Rhodes

      Hamilton, Neil (Tatton)

      Bradley, Keith

      Hannam, John

      Braine, Rt Hon Sir Bernard

      Hargreaves, Ken (Hyndburn)

      Brandon-Bravo, Martin

      Harris, David

      Bray, Dr Jeremy

      Haselhurst, Alan

      Brazier, Julian

      Hawkins, Christopher

      Bright, Graham

      Hayes, Jerry

      Brown, Michael (Brigg & Cl't's)

      Hayhoe, Rt Hon Sir Barney

      Buchanan-Smith, Rt Hon Alick

      Hayward, Robert

      Buck, Sir Antony

      Heathcoat-Amory, David

      Burns, Simon

      Heffer, Eric S.

      Burt, Alistair

      Hicks, Mrs Maureen (Wolv' NE)

      Butcher, John

      Hicks, Robert (Cornwall SE)

      Butler, Chris

      Higgins, Rt Hon Terence L.

      Butterfill, John

      Hill, James

      Callaghan, Jim

      Hind, Kenneth

      Canavan, Dennis

      Hogg, Hon Douglas (Gr'th'm)

      Carrington, Matthew

      Hogg, N. (C'nauld & Kilsyth)

      Cash, William

      Holt, Richard

      Channon, Rt Hon Paul

      Home Robertson, John

      Chapman, Sydney

      Howard, Michael

      Chope, Christopher

      Howarth, G. (Cannock & B'wd)

      Churchill, Mr

      Hughes, Robert G. (Harrow W)

      Clark, Hon Alan (Plym'th S'n)

      Hughes, Sean (Knowsley S)

      Clark, Dr Michael (Rochford)

      Hunt, David (Wirral W)

      Clark, Sir W. (Croydon S)

      Hunter, Andrew

      Clay, Bob

      Hurd, Rt Hon Douglas

      Clwyd, Mrs Ann

      Irvine, Michael

      Colvin, Michael

      Jack, Michael

      Conway, Derek

      Janman, Tim

      Coombs, Simon (Swindon)

      Janner, Greville

      Corbett, Robin

      Jessel, Toby

      Couchman, James

      Johnson Smith, Sir Geoffrey

      Critchley, Julian

      Johnston, Sir Russell

      Cryer, Bob

      Jones, Gwilym (Cardiff N)

      Cummings, John

      Jones, Robert B (Herts W)

      Cunliffe, Lawrence

      Kellett-Bowman, Dame Elaine

      Curry, David

      Kennedy, Charles

      Davis, David (Boothferry)

      Key, Robert

      Day, Stephen

      King, Roger (B'ham N'thfield)

      Devlin, Tim

      King, Rt Hon Tom (Bridgwater)

      Dewar, Donald

      Kirkhope, Timothy

      Dickens, Geoffrey

      Knapman, Roger

      Dicks, Terry

      Knight, Greg (Derby North)

      Douglas, Dick

      Knight, Dame Jill (Edgbaston)

      Dover, Den

      Lambie, David

      Dunn, Bob

      Lamond, James

      Durant, Tony

      Lang, Ian

      Dykes, Hugh

      Latham, Michael

      Eastham, Ken

      Leigh, Edward (Gainsbor'gh)

      Eggar, Tim

      Lennox-Boyd, Hon Mark

      Emery, Sir Peter

      Lilley, Peter

      Evans, David (Welwyn Hatf'd)

      Livingstone, Ken

      Favell, Tony

      Lloyd, Sir Ian (Havant)

      Fearn, Ronald

      Lloyd, Peter (Fareham)

      Fenner, Dame Peggy

      Lord, Michael

      Field, Barry (Isle of Wight)

      Lyell, Sir Nicholas

      Field, Frank (Birkenhead)

      McAvoy, Thomas

      Fookes, Miss Janet

      McCrea, Rev William

      Forman, Nigel

      McCrindle, Robert

      Forsyth, Michael (Stirling)

      Macdonald, Calum A.

      Forth, Eric

      McFall, John

      Fox, Sir Marcus

      McGrady, Eddie

      Fraser, John

      MacGregor, Rt Hon John

      Freeman, Roger

      MacKay, Andrew (E Berkshire)

      1184

      Maclean, David

      Shepherd, Richard (Aldridge)

      McLoughlin, Patrick

      Shersby, Michael

      McNair-Wilson, M. (Newbury)

      Sims, Roger

      Maginnis, Ken

      Skeet, Sir Trevor

      Mahon, Mrs Alice

      Skinner, Dennis

      Malins, Humfrey

      Smith, Cyril (Rochdale)

      Mans, Keith

      Smith, Sir Dudley (Warwick)

      Maples, John

      Smith, Tim (Beaconsfield)

      Marland, Paul

      Smyth, Rev Martin (Belfast S)

      Marlow, Tony

      Soley, Clive

      Marshall, John (Hendon S)

      Speller, Tony

      Martin, David (Portsmouth S)

      Spicer, Sir Jim (Dorset W)

      Martin, Michael J. (Springburn)

      Squire, Robin

      Mates, Michael

      Stanbrook, Ivor

      Maude, Hon Francis

      Stanley, Rt Hon John

      Mawhinney, Dr Brian

      Steel, Rt Hon David

      Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin

      Steinberg, Gerry

      Michie, Mrs Ray (Arg'l & Bute)

      Stern, Michael

      Millan, Rt Hon Bruce

      Stevens, Lewis

      Miller, Hal

      Stewart, Allan (Eastwood)

      Mills, Iain

      Stewart, Andy (Sherwood)

      Mitchell, Andrew (Gedling)

      Stewart, Ian (Hertfordshire N)

      Mitchell, David (Hants NW)

      Stott, Roger

      Moate, Roger

      Sumberg, David

      Molyneaux, Rt Hon James

      Summerson, Hugo

      Monro, Sir Hector

      Taylor, Mrs Ann (Dewsbury)

      Morrison, Hon Sir Charles

      Taylor, Ian (Esher)

      Morrison, Hon P (Chester)

      Taylor, Rt Hon J. D. (S'ford)

      Moss, Malcolm

      Taylor, John M (Solihull)

      Mudd, David

      Taylor, Teddy (S'end E)

      Mullin, Chris

      Tebbit, Rt Hon Norman

      Needham, Richard

      Temple-Morris, Peter

      Neubert, Michael

      Thompson, Patrick (Norwich N)

      Newton, Rt Hon Tony

      Thorne, Neil

      Nicholls, Patrick

      Thornton, Malcolm

      Nicholson, David (Taunton)

      Thurnham, Peter

      Oakes, Rt Hon Gordon

      Tracey, Richard

      Page, Richard

      Tredinnick, David

      Paice, James

      Trippier, David

      Paisley, Rev Ian

      Twinn, Dr Ian

      Patnick, Irvine

      Vaughan, Sir Gerard

      Patten, Chris (Bath)

      Viggers, Peter

      Patten, John (Oxford W)

      Waddington, Rt Hon David

      Pawsey, James

      Wakeham, Rt Hon John

      Peacock, Mrs Elizabeth

      Waldegrave, Hon William

      Porter, Barry (Wirral S)

      Walker, A. Cecil (Belfast N)

      Porter, David (Waveney)

      Wall, Pat

      Portillo, Michael

      Wallace, James

      Primarolo, Dawn

      Waller, Gary

      Rathbone, Tim

      Ward, John

      Redwood, John

      Wardle, Charles (Bexhill)

      Renton, Tim

      Watts, John

      Rhodes James, Robert

      Wheeler, John

      Robertson, George

      Whitney, Ray

      Robinson, Geoffrey

      Wilshire, David

      Robinson, Peter (Belfast E)

      Winterton, Mrs Ann

      Roe, Mrs Marion

      Winterton, Nicholas

      Ross, William (Londonderry E)

      Wise, Mrs Audrey

      Rossi, Sir Hugh

      Wolfson, Mark

      Rost, Peter

      Wood, Timothy

      Rumbold, Mrs Angela

      Woodcock, Mike

      Sayeed, Jonathan

      Younger, Rt Hon George

      Shaw, Sir Michael (Scarb')

      Sheerman, Barry

      Tellers for the Noes:

      Shelton, William (Streatham)

      Miss Ann Widdecombe and Mr. Alan Amos.

      Shepherd, Colin (Hereford)

      Question accordingly agreed to.
      Quwstions put accordingly, That the clause be read a Second time:—
      The House divided:— Ayes180, Noes 306.
      Question accordingly negatived.
      Mr.Frank Dobson: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Earlier, when Mr. Speaker was in the Chair, there were a considerable number of points of order expressing great concern about what we understand to be the order in which the amendments on timing will be debated. As the morning has progressed, there seems to have been growing concern about the possible consequences, because, instead of having a straightforward descending series of timings, we

      1185
      are faced with a form of legislative roulette in which it is possible that what seems likely to be the general view of the House—that a 24-week period is best—will probably be the last to be voted upon. So, almost by accident, that period may not be reached in spite of its being most probably the general view of the House.
      I know that a considerable number of hon. Members who are in favour of the Bill have said all along—[Interruption.] I should be grateful if they would keep quiet because I do not think that they will dispute what I say. They have said that they want the House to have an opportunity to declare its view once and for all and in the firmest possible way on the maximum number of weeks. It seems to many of us that the best way to do that is to ensure that the decision on the 24-week period is not taken at the end of the series of votes. To leave it where Mr. Speaker has left it in his provisional selection is likely to lead to considerable disorder, dissatisfaction and the very great possibility that the basic view of the House will not be achieved.
      Mr. Speaker said that he was bound by contradictory precedents. They were the prcedents set by the Corrie Bill and by the general custom that amendments are taken in the order in which they are submitted. Those are conflicting precedents and it is quite reasonable for you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, or for Mr. Speaker to set a new precedent by saying that an orderly, seemly and rational consideration of these time limits is the best way for the House to go about its business because that will do good to its reputation. Many of us fear that if we do not do it that way the reputation of the House will be harmed and that there is a strong possibility that the general view of the House will not go through.
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: I understand the hon. Gentleman's point. Many hon. Members were in the House at the beginning of the debate when we had fairly extensive points of order which Mr. Speaker——
      Mr. Dobson: On a point of order——
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. I am dealing with a point of order. Mr. Speaker made it clear at the time that before he made his selection he had considered extremely carefully the precedents and the arguments. He made quite clear the reasons for his decision and it is certainly not for me to go back on that decision. I suggest to the House that it would be advisable to get on with the debate. It may well be that the difficulties that the hon. Gentleman has very fairly outlined can be dealt with if we get on quickly with the debate.
      Mr. David Steel: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. At the beginning of the day I raised with Mr. Speaker the question of having a Division on amendments Nos. 40 and 41 and he said that he would allow a Division on amendment No. 40 or No. 41. In view of what has been said in the debate and the words of the promoter of the Bill, who said that he was prepared to accept amendments Nos. 40 and 41, will you ensure that if we get to that point, the House will have a chance to amend the Bill to include amendments Nos. 40 and 41 and consequential amendment No. 42?
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: I have taken note of what was said about that. Of course I cannot anticipate whether time will allow the House to come to such decisions. The amendments do not come up for decision until after the next main debate.
      Mr. Harry Cohen: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I should like to speak about Back Benchers' rights in this matter. We are dealing with amendments to do with time limits, the number of weeks, and Mr. Speaker has chosen amendments that allow us to discuss 20, 24 and 26 weeks. If those are scrapped the period of 18 weeks which is contained in the Bill will stand. I put my name to an amendment that was signed by many other hon. Members for 27 weeks.
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. We cannot debate Mr. Speaker's selection of amendments. That is what the hon. Gentleman is doing.
      Mr. Cohen: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. We cannot debate Mr. Speaker's selection.

    Clause 1

      TIME-LIMIT FOR TERMINATION OF PREGNANCY
      Ms. Richardson: I beg to move amendment No. 2, page 1, line 6, leave out 'beginning of the 18th' and insert '26th'.
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: With this it will be convenient to take the following amendments: No. 4, in page 1, line 6, leave out 'beginning of the 18th' and insert '20th completed'.
      No. 5, in page 1, line 6, leave out 'beginning of the 18th' and insert '22nd completed'.
      No. 7, in page 1, line 6, leave out 'beginning of the 18th' and insert 'end of the 24th'.
      Ms. Richardson: In Committee we probed every aspect of the Bill as amended by its sponsors—[Interruption.]
      Ms. Primarolo: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I cannot hear my hon. Friend the Member for Barking (Ms. Richardson).
      Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Harold Walker): Order. Will hon. Members who do not wish to take part in the debate leave the Chamber quietly and quickly?
      Ms. Richardson: I apologise if hon. Members could not hear what I was saying. I was simply referring to the fact that in Committee, those opposing the Bill probed every conceivable aspect of the Bill, as amended by its sponsors. We maintained consistently on Second Reading and in Committee that there was no substantiated evidence that the Abortion Act 1967 is being abused or misused by women or doctors. Most importantly, we emphasised that all the evidence shows that the upper time limit of 28 weeks is treated with the greatest of respect by women and by doctors in England and Wales, and by women and doctors in Scotland, where there is effectively no upper time limit and fewer late abortions are performed than in England and Wales. I have moved amendment No. 2, to allow abortions up to 26 weeks. I have an amendment down for 27 weeks, as I did on the Corrie Bill, as that is the number

      1187
      of weeks that is nearest to 28. One has to remember that as doctors take off two or four weeks, effectively, the period is less than 26 weeks anyway.
      We probed every aspect of the Bill, as amended, while we maintained our position that no change in the upper limit was required and that the time limit from the beginning of the 18 weeks was unacceptable. It became clear during the course of our discussions that the sponsors of the Bill take an absolutist and fundamentalist line on abortion. On innumerable occasions, each one of them has reiterated that he or she is opposed to all abortions and is willing to barter with women's bodies and gamble with children's lives to try to maximise support for the Bill and inflict a substantial blow on the 1967 Act, which has given women and doctors 20 years of safe and legal operations.
      In choosing the arbitrary time limit from the beginning of 18 weeks, the sponsors of the Bill have sought to set the terms of the debate so that other equally unacceptable time limits have been opposed as compromises, and that their own restrictive amendments to the Bill—on foetal abnormalities, under-18 rape and incest—can be posed as concessions. I recall the way that the under-18 rape amendment, which is now in the Bill, was moved. I am sure that my hon. Friends who were on the Committee will recall that it was moved as a concession. I think that it was appalling to divide young women in that way by introducing an arbitrary period of 18 weeks.
      12.45 pm
      Ms. Short: My hon. Friend has said that all members of the Committee were convinced that neither doctors nor women were abusing the 1967 legislation. I put it to her that some doctors are guilty of abuse. I understand that 20 per cent. of women who have abortions after 28 weeks come forward before 12 weeks. Delay is a major cause of late abortion. It is an abuse of the existing legislation and it should be rectified, but the Bill does not seek to do that.
      Ms. Richardson: My hon. Friend is right but she is referring to a different form of abuse from the one that I was addressing. It was argued by Conservative Members that doctors were abusing the Act wholesale by performing abortions when they should not. We continue to deny that. As my hon. Friend has said, there are doctors who, for various reasons, deny a woman an abortion when she is entitled to have one. Some refuse even to pass her on to a doctor who will give her proper advice.
      In speaking to the 26-week amendment I want to dispel the belief that some hon. Members may have that it represents a compromise or a concession. Any legal time limit is, in practice, taken by doctors to be a minimum of two weeks less due to difficulties in estimating gestational age and fears of prosecution that might result from an incorrect estimate. My hon. Friend will recall that there was a short debate in Committee on the difficulties in estimating gestational age. Our arguments were rejected. I recall what was said by the hon. Member for Maidstone (Miss Widdecombe) in rejecting the amendment. She claimed that it would bring the time limit to 20 weeks rather than to leave it at 18, which is what she wanted. That was further confirmation that she wants very early abortions at the end of 17 weeks.
      Doctors' fear of prosecution can only have been grossly increased by the way in which the campaign has been waged both inside and outside the House. We are discussing time limits of 15 weeks, 18 weeks, 20 weeks, 22
      1188
      weeks and 24 weeks. This is how time limits of 17 weeks, 20 weeks, 24 weeks and 26 weeks are being put into practice. if we remove two weeks from all the numbers of weeks, the result is that we are discussing 15 weeks, 18 weeks, 20 weeks, 22 weeks and 24 weeks. We must keep that in the forefront of our minds.
      Mr. Andrew Rowe: The hon. Lady has referred to fears of prosecution. Does she agree that the hon. Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton), the promoter of the Bill, has made it clear that in his view his campaign has already led to a substantial reduction in the number of women presenting themselves for abortion? Surely this is the appropriate way in which to proceed. By voluntary activity, persuasion and example, rather than an extension of the criminal law, we shall deal more satisfactorily with a sensitive and intimate subject.
      Ms. Richardson: Yes. The hon. Gentleman makes an interesting point. We feel that there are many other ways of reducing the rate of abortions at a high week level than the way that the hon. Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton) has chosen.
      I do not wish to digress, but two of my hon. Friends and I tabled an amendment to introduce self-referral for woman up to the 12th week of pregnancy—that is what happens on the continent. [AN HON. MEMBER: "Abortion on demand?"] It is not abortion on demand. A doctor must be present when an abortion is carried out. I hope that the hon. Gentleman is riot suggesting that women should do it themselves. In effect, if the doctor agrees, it is abortion on request. In most European countries that is what happens. A woman may have an abortion up to the 12th week. That has resulted in reducing the rate of abortion because women find it easier to obtain one, and the Health Service provision there makes this possible.
      Whatever the amendments may say, effectively we are talking about time limits that are two weeks below those listed. That point has been made strongly by the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, which has written to all Members of the House and is acknowledged—even by the hon. Member for Mossley Hill—to be an organisation of integrity. The BPAS states that it will ban abortions under the provisions of the 1967 Act at 15 weeks if the time limits remains at
      "the beginning of the 18th week of pregnancy,"
      as suggested in the Bill.
      It goes on to say that to ensure that they do not break the law they will work to 20 weeks for a 22-week limit and 22 weeks for a 24-week limit. This would mean that 17,000 women, using 1986 figures, will be denied an abortion and will be forced to continue with a pregnancy which could previously have been carried out legally and safely. That is what the BPAS has been forced to do. It is important at this stage to dispel the myth that has been created that late back-street abortions were not and therefore will not now be a problem.
      We must remember that it took some years before women, general practitioners and consultants learnt fully about the abortion rights that came into force in 1968. At that time no funds were allocated to the NHS to set up an abortion service.
      If we consider the years from 1968 we find that deaths continued not only from illegal abortions, but from illegal-late abortions. From 1970 to 1972, 38 women died from illegal abortions: three at 20 weeks; two at 26 weeks; one at 27 weeks——
      Mr. Michael Shersby: Will the hon. Lady explain how many of those women were foreign women coming to this country for late abortions?
      Ms. Richardson: I apologise to the hon. Gentleman, but I cannot tell him because I am not sure that the DHSS figures that we have go back that far. The figures that I am quoting can be substantiated by the DHSS and I shall give him the evidence in writing with great pleasure if he wishes to see it. I am not lying.
      Between 1973 and 1975, of the 10 women who died three were 16 weeks pregnant and one was 22 weeks pregnant. Between 1976 and 1978—as late as that—four women died. One died from a self-induced abortion at 18 weeks and one at 20 weeks. Between 1979 and 1981 only one woman died of an illegal abortion and two of unspecified abortions. The illegal abortion had been carried out at 27 weeks.
      Those tragic deaths included young women, single women, women with other children and women with no children. We really cannot turn our backs on that evidence. Despite the amendment that was carried in Committee by the Bill's sponsors, the exemption on the detection of foetal disability is a serious point and will remain so with time limits higher than the 17th week.
      All hon. Members will have received a letter from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Although the royal colleges claim that they would settle for 24 weeks as an upper time limit, they point to the deficiencies in the Bill, apart from the time limits. Even with the amendment that was agreed in Committee tabled by the right hon. Member for Castle Point (Sir B. Braine), which is alleged to cover exceptions for foetal abnormality, the royal colleges did not believe that the Bill would cover all the cases.
      Mr. Thurnham: Is the hon. Lady referring to a letter that I received on 26 April from Professor Beard, the chairman of the joint committee on foetal viability and clinical practice at the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, in which he said:
      "We consider that the present Abortion Act of 1967 functions well, and that if the proposed Abortion (Amendment) Bill became law it would not be in the best interests of women in this country."?
      Ms. Richardson: I thank the hon. Gentleman for his comments. The royal colleges and other organisations have made it clear that, whatever upper time limit is agreed by Parliament, it will not make the Bill acceptable. All hon. Members who are minded otherwise should reflect on that.
      As I have said, a 24-week limit would, in effect, be 22 weeks. That will still cause serious problems for ultra sound screening and amniocentesis tests which are the major tests for detecting physical and mental disability.
      As we have heard, the amniocentesis test is not available until 16 weeks, and the results take up to four weeks to obtain. In some cases, the tests have to be repeated. A friend of mine had an amniocentesis test at 16 weeks. She waited three weeks and then had to have another before it could be confirmed that she was carrying an abnormal foetus. She eventually had an abortion at 22 weeks.
      Having had an amniocentesis test, a woman would have reached 20 weeks before the results of the first test were known. Where a second test is required, the 24-week time limit would provide the necessary leeway for an abortion
      1190
      to be carried out under the provisions of the Abortion Act 1967. No consideration can be taken into account other than the severity of the detected foetal abnormality. No consideration can be taken of the woman's circumstances, age or economic and social conditions.
      I ask the House to pause for a moment. If we pass the Bill, we must bear in mind the anguish and anxiety that we will inflict on many women who would at least like to think that they had some kind of choice if they found themselves in those difficult circumstances. I admit that we discussed that point at length in Committee. However, we must take into account the mental stress that poverty and poor housing can cause to women.
      1 pm
      Today is Friday. When all this is over in the House of Commons, I shall be going to my surgery—in common, no doubt, with many of my hon. Friends. I know before I get there that at least a dozen, perhaps 20, housing cases will be awaiting me. People—maninly women—who bear the responsibility of the family, come along and say, "I am in a terrible state. I have three children." I am not talking about women asking for abortions. I am talking about the strain from which they suffer. Such women, with two or three children, may be living on the 10th floor of a block with the lift always out of order. I can imagine many such women, if they become pregnant again, thinking, "My gosh, I really cannot go through with this"—and who could blame them? Yet those hon. Members who are sponsoring the Bill and who intend to see it through would toss those people on one side. I think that that is cruel.
      Mr. Shersby: What the hon. Lady is now saying goes to the heart of the debate. As I understand it, she is arguing that if a woman is under stress, in the difficult circumstances that she describes—and I agree that all hon. Members come into contact with women in that condition—she should then be able to obtain an abortion for social reasons, because of the stress on her family, because her home is overcrowded or for some similar reason.
      Surely this is what the real argument is about. A substantial number of people feel that it is not legitimate for a woman to ask for an abortion for those social reasons.
      Ms. Short: She should make her own decision.
      Mr. Shersby: This the crux. Will the hon. Member for Barking (Ms. Richardson) amplify that point? Will she clarify why an abortion should be allowed simply on grounds of stress or overcrowding?
      Ms. Richardson: I thought that I had done so. I entirely accept that such a woman could probably obtain an abortion up to the end of the 17th week under the Bill, but we are thinking beyond that point. As has been said repeatedly in the Chamber, in Committee and elsewhere, it is not always possible to get the two doctors—or, in this case, doctor and consultant gynaecologist—before the end of the 17th week, and we are very worried. Although that may not involve a large number of women, many will feel threatened, because the Act—if we are unfortunate enough to see it become one—will be hanging over them, and they will not know what to do. I believe that the House has a duty to take into account the so-called social reasons—although in most people's terminology "social" means something more pleasant.
      Mr. Alton: Not once has the hon. Lady made any mention—I hope that she will—of what happens to the child involved in a late abortion: the child that is dismembered in the course of a dilatation and evacuation operation; the child that is placed in a black sack and incinerated, as in the case of the Carlisle baby, at 21 weeks' gestation after struggling for life for three hours. Not once has she mentioned the child.
      Ms. Richardson: It is necessary to weigh these matters up.
      Mr. Eric Martlew: Is my hon. Friend aware that the doctor who refused to treat the foetus in the Carlisle case was a member of the Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child? Is she aware that when the health authority looked into the matter, it decided that the doctor had made the right decision? Is she aware that Life decided to call in the police, which meant that the woman involved had to be told what had happened and had to be interviewed by the police for three hours? Is she aware that the police finally decided that there was no case to answer? Is she aware that pressure has been exerted on the hon. Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton) for an inquest to be held, which means that the mother will have to go and register the death of the child and will probably have to testify at the inquest?
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. We are getting rather wide of the matter before the House.
      Ms. Richardson: I am grateful to my hon. Friend. it happened in his constituency. He has taken a close and concerned interest in the matter.
      I shall say something about the Carlisle bably. I could not understand why the matter was not reported at the time. It should have been. If anything went wrong, it should have been dealt with in the proper way at the time. I do not understand why it should have come up so much later. From Time Out, I understand that the hon. member for Mossley Hill—he will correct me if I am wrong—prompted the coroner to have an inquest. That seems to be rather strange. Why did the hon. Member for Mossley Hill do it recently? Why did he not do it at the time?
      Mr. Alton rose——
      Ms. Richardson: If I may continue before the hon. Gentleman intervenes.
      Time Out informed me that it has spoken to the coroner and that the coroner, who was drawn in at that late stage, relatively recently, on looking at the files, decided that perhaps there should have been a registration of death. It was too late to do anything about the body of the child, because he had to look at the files. Apparently, the coroner then wrote to the Home Secretary to inform him of that. As the hon. Member for Mossley Hill had raised the matter with him, out of courtesy the coroner also wrote to the hon. Gentleman. I have it written in shorthand, as it was given to me by Time Out. The coroner said:
      "I was very startled when it suddenly appeared in the press. I only wrote to tell Mr. Alton as a matter of courtesy. Maybe I was very naive, but it just didn't cross my mind that he would announce it to the press."
      Interesting, is it not?
      Mr. Alton: It is a public letter. It does not state in any way that it is confidential. It states:
      "I received the police file on 21st April, and having studied it carefully I came to the conclusion that an Inquest would be
      1192
      in the public interest. I have posted a detailed report to the Home Office today, so that the Secretary of State may decide whether he considers an Inquest desirable."
      The letter is signed by Ian Morton, coroner for north-east Cumbria. His reply is rather more reliable than the shorthand notes from Time Out.
      Ms. Richardson: That does not cross what I have said.
      Mr. Martlew: I talked to the coroner this morning. He is dismayed at the use that the hon. Member for Mossley Hill has made of the information.
      Ms. Richardson: Again, there is confirmation of the whole matter.
      I return to the point that my hon. Friend the Member for Carlisle (Mr. Martlew) and other hon. Members have made. What about the stress to the mother? I wonder whether the hon. Member for Mossley Hill considered, belatedly, bringing that to the attention of the coroner. I wonder whether he sat down and thought, "Well, now, we are going to have to get this woman to court." That is appalling. That woman had an abortion. As everybody says, abortions are not lightly undertaken. Often—not always, but often—they leave emotional scars. Now, because the coroner says that there should have been an inquest, that poor woman will have to go through the whole thing again.
      Mrs. Gorman: On the matter relating to the baby in pieces, which was raised by the hon. Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton), we have heard the story time and again. I consulted Dr. Wendy Savage, one of our leading experts. She consulted Mr. Arnie Finks, one of the world's leading experts, and he said that, before an abortion of this kind is undertaken, and even before a caesarian operation is performed, the amount of anaesthetic given to the mother has to be terribly tightly controlled because it affects the foetus. When there is to be an abortion by this method, the mother is given a full anaesthetic and the foetus is entirely anaesthetised and probably dead. The idea of the foetus alive and in pieces is an absolute travesty of the facts. It is a fact that, even in caesarian operations, to protect the foetus from the effects of the aneasthetic, the mother is sometimes not completely anaesthetised.
      Ms. Richardson: The hon. Lady—whom I called my hon. Friend for the purposes of debate in Committee, but who is now once again the hon. Lady—has put the matter in perspective. It is a matter of balance. The mother's wishes are paramount. She must make the decision in consultation with her husband or the partner with whom she lives, who is the father of the child. We want such a decision to be taken in those circumstances.
      Mr. Tredinnick: I should point out that the Channel 4 programme "Women in View" considered the Carlisle incident and the surrounding publicity. It found that a local journalist, running his own freelance agency, had made £5,000 from the story., which he obtained from the curate, whom I shall not name, at St. Bride's, Carlisle, who happened to be a member of SPUC.
      Ms. Richardson: The further we go into this matter, the murkier it becomes.
      Ms. Short: We must put this matter right on the record because the House and the Committee were misled about the nature of the disability affecting the foetus in that case.

      1193
      It was suggested that it was a minor skin complaint, but it was a serious condition that can lead to suffering, rupture of the skin and internal organs and to death. The woman was told that her foetus was subject to those conditions, not to a minor skin complaint. The record should not be distorted as it has been.
      Ms. Richardson: That is right and we shall see what develops from that. The publicity surrounding that event appears to have been geared beautifully—perhaps "specifically" would be a more appropriate word to use—towards gaining publicity for the Bill. I deplore such tactics.
      Mr. Martlew: The abortion in question took place in July 1987 and was brought to the fore on Second Reading.
      Ms. Richardson: I am glad that my hon. Friend has put that on the record because I had forgotten that point. He drew the original article to my attention and I was amazed to find that the incident took place so long ago.
      Mr. Alton: That is an important point. That information became public knowledge, not as a result of action taken by SPUC, Life or myself, but because the doctor and the nurses involved found the procedures so repugnant that they swore affidavits to that effect and asked for an investigation. The coroner has now said that there should be an inquest, because that would be in the public interest, and that should surely validate their action.
      Ms. Richardson: I do not know sufficient——
      Mr. Martlew rose——
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman should allow the hon. Lady to deal with one intervention at a time.
      Ms. Richardson: As my hon. Friend is the Member for Carlisle and has taken such a close interest in the matter, I am sure that he would be able to elucidate that point.
      Mr. Martlew: The matter became public knowledge originally through an article in the Catholic Herald. It was then taken up by the Sunday People, which gave a distorted view. An even more distorted view was given by the Sunday Mirror, which supposedly carried out an interview with the mother—which never in fact took place—in which she supposedly said that her child would be born a freak. No reporter ever talked to that lady and that comment was never made to that lady by the gynaecologist concerned.
      Ms. Richardson: When we see the Official Report of the debate we can piece together the true facts of the Carlisle case in a way that we could not previously do. I am glad that some of the details of it are now on the record.
      1.15 pm.
      There have been a number of interventions during my speech, but I shall now conclude my remarks as I know that other hon. Members wish to speak. The Bill is unacceptable, irrespective of the time limits. It does not take into account the social reasons that we have been discussing. Some problems are known only to those who
      1194
      are affected, and they should have the benefit of choice, albeit a limited choice under the 1967 Act. That is why that Act should be left intact.
      A time limit of anything less than 26 weeks—which, in effect, is 24 weeks—would write off the interests of real, living women and their children in favour of the interests of an unviable foetus. We must make a decision today, and I hope that it will be the right one. From what the sponsors of the Bill said in Committee, I understand that they intend further attacks on the 1967 Act. That has also been made plain this morning. People will be forced to the defensive. I put down a marker that I will not be forced to the defensive—I shall feel forced to the offensive.
      We must study the good practices of those European countries that have self-referral. We must ensure that the 1967 Act is responsive to need in every possible way, without going beyond the bounds of legality. We must ensure that the NHS responds adequately in every part of Britain. For example, it responds in the north but not in the west midlands. There must be decent, proper sex education at school and a properly funded family planning service. Funds should be made available for research into contraception so that women do not take the pill and then find, as some do, that it does not suit them, or that being fitted with an inter-uterine device does not do the trick. All those measures would make women safer. There is a large failure rate in contraception so it is no use people thinking that women are simply being careless. We must ensure genuine choice for women.
      Hon. Members who want to end abortion will achieve only a return to back-street abortion. Those of us who support the 1967 Act want improvements so that there are safe and legal abortions, with back-up facilities, that allow women to live their lives with dignity and independence.
      Sir Bernard Braine: The amendments are all aimed at the very heart of the Bill. I would prefer the Bill to limit abortions to the 18th week of pregnancy, but I made plain on Second Reading the fact that I was ready to join the search for a formula that would safeguard the position of the woman who might be bearing a child suffering from severe abnormality, and on whom tests to establish the facts had not been completed by the 18th week of her pregnancy.
      That aspect was considered in detail in Committee and I moved an amendment that now forms part of the Bill. That was a genuine attempt by my hon. Friends and myself to keep faith with the House. A number of reservations have been aired, even by supporters of the Bill and it is necessary to keep faith with the House. The Bill that we now seek to amend further is not the Bill to which the House gave a substantial majority on Second Reading.
      The amendments now being discussed seek to raise the limit for all abortions from the 18th week of pregnancy. We must be clear about what will be the effects of that on—if I may use the term for the first time today—the right to life of the unborn. The Bill in its present form does not change the grounds for abortion under the 1967 Act. The intervention of my hon. Friend the Member for Uxbridge (Mr. Shersby) was well intentioned, but the case he had in mind was irrelevant, because in all probability it would have been dealt with before the 18th week of pregnancy—very much earlier, probably.
      The Bill concerns itself with the scandal of abortions for social reasons or for convenience. I remind the House that abortions under the social cause constitute the vast

      1195
      majority of abortions performed after 18 weeks. No less than 92 per cent. of all late abortions are carried out on foetuses, which, if they were permitted to be born, would be perfectly normal and healthy. Many of us are appalled that under the 1967 Act, 2·6 million foetuses had been destroyed by 1986. If they had been allowed to be born, most of them would have grown into healthy and normal children. Slaughter on that scale continues, and the purpose of the Bill—
      Mr. David Evennett rose—'—
      Sir Bernard Braine: I shall not give way, because a number of other hon. Members wish to speak, and owing to what has gone before, there is little time. I am sure that my hon. Friend will understand.
      The Bill deals with only a small proportion of abortions performed after 18 weeks, when the baby in the womb is perfectly formed. It is responsive to light and to sound, and it recognises its mother's voice. It differs in no material respect from what it will be 10 weeks later when, under the law, it is protected against the crime of destruction.
      Ms. Joan Ruddock rose——
      Sir Bernard Braine: I have already indicated that I shall not give way. [HON. MEMBERS: "Give way".] No, I must stick by my word. I did not give way to my hon. Friend, and I have a number of other points to make. I want to be brief, to give others an opportunity to speak.
      Amendment No. 2 is wholly unacceptable to the Bill's supporters, and so is the amendment calling for a limit of 24 weeks. Both ignore the fact that at those gestational ages, a pre-term baby can survive. A study undertaken at Bristol maternity hospital in 1984 found that 72 per cent. of live-born infants of 22 to 27 weeks' gestation survived. That finding was published in a report from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists entitled "Pre-term Labour and its Consequences". Two years earlier, in 1982, the survival rate for the same group was 43 per cent. and in 1981 it was only 29 per cent. Legislation should reflect and not ignore advances in medical science and practice. We should not be confused by the word "viability", which is not an objective pointer in terms of the right to life. It is the level at which medical technology can sustain the life of a prematurely born baby rather than the point below which the baby is not a human being with a right to life and above which he or she should be protected by law.
      I should have liked to say a great deal more, but I am anxious that the Bill should make progress.[Interruption.]If the House will not listen I shall develop the case that I intended to develop. The subject of my remarks has scarcely been mentioned today. It is the right to life of the unborn. On Second Reading, the House voted in favour of 18 weeks. The sponsors believe that we have the support of the majority in the country and we should prefer the Bill to remain as amended in Committee to meet the genuine concern of the House.
      The amendments provide us with a choice and we shall shortly be exercising that choice. In doing so, we should remember that the unborn child marked down for abortion has no choice. It is denied the right to be born—the right to a life before death. In those circumstances, only we can choose life and I trust that the majority of us will do so.
      Mr. Steel: In considering the variety of amendments before us, it is right to pay some attention to the learned bodies that have given a great deal of thought to this issue. With the exception of one or two hon. Members with qualifications in this area, most of us are lay men and women and we are dealing with a very complicated question. I remind the House, therefore, that a number of detailed inquiries have been conducted into the whole subject of viability and we should take their conclusions into account.
      The first was the distinguished committee of inquiry under Mrs. Justice Lane set up by the Government some years ago in response to continued criticism of the working of the Abortion Act 1967. On this narrow issue, that committee recommended that abortion should not be carried out beyond the 24th week of pregnancy. That was several years ago and the Government made various administrative changes in the light of that recommendation—no doubt the Minister will amplify this—which have meant that since that time very few abortions have been carried out beyond the 24-week limit. Nevertheless, the law still stands as it as created—not in 1967, but in 1929 by the Infant Life (Preservation) Act.
      I believe that it is the will of the House, certainly by a clear majority, that the law should reflect the changes in medical practice that have taken place since then. I believe that if we could only secure expression for it there is probably a majority in the House in favour of a 24-week limit.
      Mr. Kenneth Hind: The right hon. Gentleman will have seen the Gallup poll conducted in January among 746 gynaecologists. Apart from abortion for foetal abnormality and threat to the life of the mother, they were asked what they thought should be the upper limit for legal abortions. Ninety-eight per cent. of the gynaecologists asked supported 24 weeks or below, which shows that there is no support among the medical profession—or, I suspect, in the House—for this amendment. Is it not time that we accepted our responsibility to the general public and debated the important amendments that the public want us to deal with?
      Mr. Steel: I sympathise with the hon. Member. I am addressing my remarks to amendment No. 7, which deals with 24 weeks.
      1.30 pm
      Mr. Campbell-Savours: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. As I believe it to be the will of the House that there be a Division, I beg to move, That the Question be now put.
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: I think it is much too early. I think the House would prefer to hear the Minister and the promoter of the Bill, together with those who oppose the amendments.
      Mr. Steel: I was outlining to the House what I believed was the first substantial committee of inquiry into the issue, which recommended to Parliament and to Government that there should be a limit of 24 weeks. That committee of inquiry took place some years ago. The most recent study was conducted not by this House, but by a Select Committee of another place. Only a few weeks ago

      1197
      that Committee, having deliberated on a Bill to amend the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929, concluded that the limit should be 24 weeks.
      The third study of this matter was by a committee that included representatives of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, the British Paediatric Association, the Royal College of General Practitioners, the Royal College of Midwives, the British Medical Association and the Department of Health and Social Security. That very important committee published a report in August 1985 on foetal viability and clinical practice. Its recommendation was clear. It said that the gestational age after which a foetus is considered viable should be changed from the present limit of 28 weeks to 24 weeks of gestation.
      The committee continued:
      "a strong argument which persuaded the Committee against recommending a gestational age that is set too low, is the certainty that fear ignorance and administrative delays will continue to be a major reason for late attendance for termination of pregnancy. These late attenders are usually the women in greatest need of help—the very young and socially deprived."
      That was not a committee of social workers. It was a highly expert medical committee that recommended to Parliament what should be the state of the law. We would be wise to consider its opinions.
      Just before the Bill's Second Reading, the viability committee of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists circulated a statement reiterating the royal college's view that there should be a 24-week limit. I am sorry that the right hon. Member for Castle Point (Sir B. Braine) has left his seat, because this is an important argument that is contrary to his. The viability committee said:
      "Twenty-four weeks gestation marks a … boundary below which the lungs are not expected to function. A reduction to 18 weeks"—
      or for that matter any other limit—
      "has no scientific basis and would discriminate against women who may be most in need."
      On future medical advance, the committee said:
      "Further medical expertise will increase survival rates rather than lower the age at which survival is possible."
      For those reasons the House would be wise to accept an amendment to the 1967 legislation, creating a bar at 24 weeks of pregnancy. Remembering the point made by the hon. Member for Barking (Ms. Richardson) that the medical profession always operates within a two-week limit of safety, a legal statement that abortion may not take place beyond the 24th week will ensure that it will not happen after the 22nd week.
      I say bluntly to my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton) and to other hon. Members who support the Bill that, if they were honest, they would say that there is no ethical difference between an abortion at 10 weeks, 17 weeks or 24 weeks. From their standpoint, the alternatives are all equally wrong. Those of us who do not share that view have the responsibility of determining what the boundary of the criminal law should be.
      I do not believe that any of the other amendments have any logical argument behind them. The 24-week amendment has the validity of scientific opinion and, therefore, of public opinion behind it. By passing it into legislation we should be keeping open the option created in
      1198
      1967 for women and their medical advisers to secure safe and legal termination of pregnancy as the lesser of two evils in any given situation in which they decide to do that. That is what the House would be wise to vote for.
      Miss Ann Widdecombe: By coming back to the House with the amendments that we made in Committee we have kept faith. We promised particularly to take on board the issue of handicap, and by doing that and ensuring that the House—if it is allowed to get to that stage—has a choice of weeks, we have kept complete faith.
      One thing has not been mentioned during the debate, yet it is the most fundamental of all. What we are deciding today is awesome. It is what is human life? When is a human being not a human being? How can we, in a supposedly civilised society, have a law that allows the treatment of two babies of identical age to vary to such an extent that the one is cherished and its life fought for and the other is disposed of as having no value? I ask only that when we vote for 20, 22 or any other number of weeks, we remember that, if we would not do to a baby in an incubator what we would to a baby in the course of an abortion, we should vote to outlaw these abortions
      Mr. Alton: I commend to the House the best possible option which, from the point of view of the promoter and sponsors of the Bill, would be that of 20 weeks. We commend it because it will save lives. Twenty-four weeks is a no-change option, which is why my right hon. Friend the Member for Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale (Mr. Steel) and others support it.
      I hope that the House will cease to hide behind euphemisms such as "products of conception", zygote, embryo and foetus, which itself means little one. But we do not recognise that little one's right to life, and that is what the Bill seeks to do. It is extraordinary that foetal brain material can be used to give another life. What does that say about the unborn child? What do we allow to happen to the unborn child? The most dangerous place for it is inside the womb. Dilation and evacuation require the crushing of the baby's skull, the breaking of its spine and its removal piece by piece, and it is a barbaric, degrading and corrupting practice to allow in our country. Prostaglandins require the baby to be brought on through a labour that can go on for hours, and it can be left writhing in agony as a result. No anaesthetics are used in these cases. This time limit was set 59 years ago. Surely, as a matter of public policy, we should be reviewing it.
      No other country in western Europe allows abortions as late as we do. The average EEC time limit is 12 to 14 weeks. In Sweden, which is outside the European Community, it is 18 weeks. That is why the Bill is reasonable and why hon. Members should vote for the best possible option that is available today—the 20-week option.
      Mr. Newton: On Second Reading, I drew attention to the fact that abortion was an issue on which there are deeply held and wholly conflicting views, and I am sure that the whole House agrees with that. I also said then and I repeat now that the hon. Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton) was entitled to be judged on the proposals before the House rather than on any views that he might hold about what, from his perspective, an ideal position would be. I set out at some length some of the facts about tests and about other matters which I hoped would help the House to reach a conclusion. In view of the pressure of

      1199
      time on the House and what I perceive to be a general desire to reach a conclusion on these matters in the public interest, I shall keep my speech brief. I hope that I carry the whole House with me on that.
      In the spirit in which I approached the Second Reading debate during which I drew attention to some of the problems, it is right to recognise that the amendments to the Bill in Committee which changed its form before it returned to the House, are of some significance. They go some way to seek to meet the concerns about disability and the birth of disabled children. It is for the House to judge how far they go to meet those concerns. We should at least recognise the importance of the changes that have been made, even if there are those who feel that they do not provide the basis for consensus on the I 8-week time limit which remains in the Bill.
      Mr. Wigley: Will the Minister give the Government's view on the wording of clause 1(2)(b) which says:
      "if the child were horn it would suffer from severe physical or mental disability (the nature of the disability to be identified in the certificate)"?
      Will the Minister give the Government's view without further defining the physical or mental disability and the dangers of uneven practice developing in the countries of Britain? What guidance can the Department give on the satisfactory or otherwise nature of that wording?
      Mr. Newton: I shall cover that point briefly in a moment. I shall deliver my speech in the order that seems sensible in the interests of consistency and brevity.
      I should like to deal with the inter-relationship of the matters that we are dealing with now and the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929. I think that the House understands that in the Abortion Act 1967 there is no time limit whatever on abortion. It is sometimes presumed that such a time limit is set by the operation of the Infant Life (Preservation) Act. It is important that that should be understood, but I do not propose to reiterate the rather complex lines of argument underlying the point.
      As Minister for Health I owe the House such assessment as is available from the advice available to me about the impact of the Bill on the current arrangements for abortion that are laid down in the 1967 Act. This picks up the point made by the hon. Member for Caernarfon (Mr. Wigley). It is indisputable—indeed, it is the purpose—that there would be some reduction in the number of abortions that could be carried out legally. The Department estimates that at least 7,630 fewer abortions would have been carried out in England and Wales in 1986 if the Bill as it stands had been in force. About half the women affected would have been non-residents and the remaining abortions—for very young women or those in much later life which might go ahead at present in appropriate circumstances—would have been prohibited. As I said on Second Reading, out of a total of 8,276 abortions in England and Wales in 1986 at a gestational age of 18 weeks or over, more than one third were to women under 20 and about 3 per cent. were to women aged 40 and over.
      The hon. Member for Caernarfon asked about wording in the Bill. It is undeniably a matter of some uncertainty how doctors and others would interpret the Bill. It is possible that the exemption for foetal handicap, which is more tightly drawn than the present ground 4, could mean that fewer abortions would be carried out in that category. The difficulty and part of the uncertainty arises from the
      1200
      fact that the medical technology involved is not sufficiently refined to make it possible to foretell with certainty the degree of disability that a child would have after birth. Against that background, I cannot give the House a clear-cut or definite statement about the precise consequences of the change. It would be irresponsible of me to pretend that I could do that and I shall not seek to do so.
      Ms. Primarolo: Will the Minister give way.?
      Mr. Newton: No, because I feel that I owe the House a short speech. As Minister for Health and especially in view of the pressure of time, there is nothing else that I can properly say.
      Ms. Primarolo: Will the Minister give way?
      Mr. Newton: I should be grateful if the hon. Lady would let me continue. I am sure that the general mood of the House is that we should proceed with the debate.
      Ms. Primarolo: Will the Minister give way?
      Mr. Newton: Will the hon. Lady let me proceed?
      At the end of all the arguments, I have to accept, as the House has to accept, that there is no single conclusive factual, technical or legal point which can make up the mind of the House as a whole or of any of us as individual Members.
      1.45 pm
      Mr. Steel: Will the Minister give way?
      Mr. Newton: I shall give way to the right hon. Gentleman because the 1967 Act was his and it would be a proper courtesy for me to do so.
      Mr. Steel: I am grateful to the Minister. I am seeking information from him, and do not seek to alter his opinions. Will he confirm that the parliamentary answers that he gave on 8 December about the time limits in other countries are correct in that in France the limit is 24 weeks, in Italy 23, in the Netherlands 24 and that the figures given by the promoter of the Bill are for the quite different limit for abortion on request in their law and are not the final limits for abortion?
      Mr. Newton: I can confirm that any answers that I have given in Hansard are correct on the basis of the best information available to me. All those points, while they appear to be facts, conceal a wealth of potential argument about the exact grounds on which abortions are permitted in different countries at different periods of time.
      At the end of my Second Reading speech I emphasised, and I emphasise again, that in purely personal terms, not as a Minister or as a member of the Government, I was prepared to vote for some time limit, but I did not feel able to vote for the Bill as it then stood. The hon. Member for Mossley Hill has gone a long way to meet some of those concerns, and I as an individual will take that into account. However, the questions I have to ask myself as a Member of Parliament, not as a Minister—I speak now as a Member of Parliament—are broad ones. For example, do we have a balance that commands the kind of consensus support in this matter that we would like?
      Secondly, if the Bill were passed in its present form, with the 18-week limit and even with the changes, would it be likely to command a balance that would lead to consensus? If the House believes, as I do, that the answer

      1201
      to both those questions is no, it would be right to vote for one of the compromise solutions. I shall not tell the House what I think it should vote for; it would be wrong for me to do so. But it is in that spirit that I shall decide which of the amendments to vote for.
      Ms. Ruddock: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I ask for your assistance in this matter, as I am a new Member. The Minister referred to the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929 and I would like to ask him to clarify that reference and to provide the House with information.
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. That is not a point of order for me.
      Mr. Nicholas Bennett rose in his place and claimed to move, That the Question be now put, but MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER withheld his assent, and declined then to put that Question.
      Ms. Short: I am grateful to you for calling me, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It is important that the House ceases to play political games and concentrates on what is being proposed here today. We know that there is probably a majority in the House for the recommendation of the BMA that the abortion limit should come down to 24 weeks. I would support that, if we could also have exceptions for the hard cases about which we all know—late detection of foetal abnormality or the menopausal woman or young girl who does not know that she is pregnant until very late. What is on offer is enormously different. I believe—[Interruption.] Mr. Deputy Speaker, I cannot even hear myself speak.
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.
      Mr. Martin Flannery: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I was sitting at my hon. Friend's side and it was difficult to hear her. There is a deliberate ploy on the part of Conservative Members to intimidate or participate in conversations.
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: The hon. Gentleman has anticipated what I was about to say. I must listen to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Ladywood (Ms Short), and it is even more difficult to hear what she is saying at this end of the Chamber than from the area in which the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hillsborough (Mr. Flannery) is sitting.
      Ms. Short: Most of the medical bodies have recommended—this has been accepted by a majority in this place—a time limit of 24 weeks. I would find that limit completely acceptable if there were an exception for hard cases.
      The House must make an important choice that will affect the lives of many women and families. Present practice is, in effect, a 24-week limit. The recommendation of the DHSS is that there should be no abortion post-24 weeks except in hard cases. Only 29 abortions took place post-24 weeks in 1986 the last complete year for which figures are available to us. For the three quarters of the next year there were 19 such abortions. The House wants a 24-week limit with exceptions. The Select Committee of another place recommended a 24-week limit with exceptions. We have in practice a 24-week limit with
      1202
      exceptions. I beg the House seriously to note that. What is on offer is not the 24-week reform that the majority of hon. Members have said in various surveys, for example, that they want. Instead, we have a serious restriction that is based on no rational scientific or technical evidence. It has been put before us by those who are completely opposed to all abortion. I respect them for taking that view, but I cannot respect them for not having the guts to put that proposition before the House. They will not do that because they know that that proposition would not be carried. Instead, they have chosen to introduce a duplicitous Bill. They pretend that they are trying to prevent late abortion, but that is not their true position.
      I should like to see a series of actions taken to prevent late abortion. That would find great favour on the Opposition Benches.
      Mrs. Wise: Does my hon. Friend agree that it would be much better if those who have handicapped children received more support? The House could provide more support. Is my hon. Friend aware that 200 of those who voted for the Bill's Second Reading had, 10 days earlier, voted against an attendance allowance for severely disabled children? Further, is she aware that five of the 12 sponsors of the Bill voted against an attendance allowance for severely disabled children?
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. Let us not have a re-run of a social security debate.
      Ms. Short: My hon. Friend makes her own point. Half the people of our world go hungry nearly every day, yet that world produces twice as much food as the peoples of the world need. When we consider the stance that is taken by Conservative Members on international economic change that could produce a better life for the poor, I cannot accept that they are seriously committed to the beauty and preservation of human life. They are putting another agenda before us.
      Those who are critical of the Bill want to do everything possible to prevent late abortion. It is gravely wrong—the Minister should take this point much more seriously than he does—that 20 per cent. of abortions that take place after 20 weeks involve women who referred themselves before 12 weeks. Delays are built into our legislation and the way in which the NHS behaves, and these result in late abortions. We could avoid that. We could remove a whole series of late abortions.
      Miss Emma NicholsonDoes the hon. Lady agree that there is no need for self-referral to encourage earlier abortions? I am sure that we are united in our desire to cut out the trauma of a late abortion, which is particularly horrible for the doctors, the gynaecologists, and the mother as well as for her immediate family. At a later stage, we should consider providing for the signature of one doctor for an abortion up to 12 weeks. Surely that would overcome people's natural fear about self-referral—heir fear about a woman's right to demand from a doctor an abortion whenever she wants. Such self-referral may be abused by women who use abortion as a form of contraception— particularly unpleasant way of using abortion. If we agree to a time limit of 24 weeks today—more than 160 hon. Members are in favour of that—oes she agree that an

      1203
      amendment at a later stage to require the signature of one doctor would overcome many of the problems of late abortion?
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. Interventions must be brief and relevant.
      Ms. Short: The hon. Lady is absolutely right. If the House wants to make one change in our legislation that would prevent late abortion, and if the sponsors of the Bill are as distressed about late abortion as they claim, we should learn from our European partners.
      Sir Bernard Braine: I beg to move, That the Question be now put.
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. I believe that there are many strands of opinion still wishing expression.
      Ms. Short: I am grateful to you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I find it distressing that hon. Members who claim to be deeply concerned about this matter will not listen to serious proposals that would achieve the objectives of which they claim to be in favour.
      Hon. Members claim to be in favour of preventing late abortion. It is absolutely proven by medical evidence and by experience in other European countries that, if we allow self-referral—let us be clear that that means self-referral to one doctor and not women deciding for themselves without medical advice—we would prevent an enormous number of late abortions. We would prevent the distress that that means for doctors, nurses, the other medical staff and the woman.
      Ms. Primarolo: I accept the distress that is felt by the medical profession, but that feeling is also shared by the woman, and she appears to have been forgotten by the promoters of the Bill. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is an impossible task to prove, beyond doubt, the date of gestation? If the Bill goes through, it could result in criminal prosecutions against practitioners and women seeking abortions. In that way, the Bill is based on sand and it is opening the way to further misery.
      Ms. Short: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Because of the ulterior motives that lie behind the Bill, one of the terrible things about it is that it is not well constructed. The provisions contained in the previous legislation relating to doctors acting in good faith——
      Mr. Alton: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. If the House does not move to a closure within the next two minutes, it will be denied the opportunity to vote on the amendments. Therefore, I beg to move, That the Question be now put—[Interruption.]
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman has just heard the ruling from the Chair. It was given within minutes of his rising.
      Mr. Alton: Further to that point of order. Therefore, I beg to move again, That the Question be now put—[Interruption.]
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. I see no reason to vary the ruling that I gave a few moments ago.
      Mr. Alton rose——
      Hon. Members: Name him.
      Mr. Alton: Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I do not wish to detain the House. When Mr. Speaker was in the Chair this morning, he said that he would take into account the time that was wasted on petitions—[HON. MEMBERS: "Wasted?"] and wasted on any number of other devices.
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman must not persist in challenging my ruling. It is a matter for the occupant of the Chair and I have ruled.
      2 pm
      Ms. Short: I am trying to make a number of enormously serious points which have not been put before during the debate and I am being interrupted constantly. Therefore, we cannot have a rational debate about these very serious matters. That is deeply regrettable.
      I was replying to an intervention made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bristol, South (Ms. Primarolo) about the position in which medical practitioners would be placed by the Bill. Under the provisions in previous legislation, if practitioners made a judgment in good faith, that was all that was required of them. That will be removed and doctors in hospitals throughout the country, who face all the difficulties where women request abortions, will face criminal prosecution in many instances if they do their very best in good faith to interpret the law and give women the rights that they understand the law to provide.
      Mr. Wigley: The hon. Lady said earlier that she was in favour of 24 weeks as a reasonable and workable compromise. However, she will have heard the Minister say that 24 weeks in law really means 22 weeks in practice. The figures provided by the professionals show that whereas—[Interruption.] I understood that the 24 weeks would be reduced by two weeks. That comment has been made by many people.
      Mr. Newton rose——
      Mr. Wigley: I do not believe that the Minister can intervene on an intervention.
      Is the hon. Member for Birmingham, Ladywood (Ms. Short) aware that over the 24-weeks limit only 29 abortions were performed in 1986 whereas at the 23-week to 24-week stage, there were as many as 1,065 abortions? To have 24 weeks in practice the House may well vote in a few minutes for 26 weeks which will be interpreted in that way by the professionals.
      Ms. Short: The hon. Gentleman's point is crucial. The House wants 24 weeks in practice. In practice we have 24 weeks and there were only 29 exceptions in 1986. The best way for the House to vote for 24 weeks is to vote the Bill down.
      Ms. Diane Abbot: Will my hon. Friend give way?
      Ms. Short: The truth is objectively—[interruption.]
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. We do not conduct our debates in this fashion. There should be no heckling from the Front Benches below the Gangway.
      Ms. Short: I shall be grateful if you will allow me a few more minutes, Mr. Deputy Chairman.
      I want to make one or two more points to the right hon. Member for Castle Point (Sir B. Braine) who keeps asking

      1205
      about the unborn child's right to life. That is a very important question. There are competing rights. However, I put these points to the right hon. Member for Castle Point and to all those who take a very anti-abortion stance. Those people are absolutely entitled to that right of conscience and to live with it. However, they have no entitlement to impose that view on others who, in conscience, take a different view. Those people have no sublime right to tell others in this country and the majority of public opinion, which takes a different view from theirs, that the law will be changed to force their view on others. That is wrong. The minority should not abuse the law in that way. They should exercise their conscience in their own personal, moral decision-making and through their own religious convictions.
      Mrs. Peacock: I listened very carefully to the hon. Lady's last few remarks. Did she not earlier suggest that consultants should not be allowed that same privilege; that they should be required to carry out abortions irrespective of their consciences?
      Ms. Short: Absolutely not. All those questions are very important. I would insist on the right of anyone to take a stand on conscience, including anyone in the medical profession who does not want to participate in abortions. However, the minority do not have a right to prevent women and families who make other decisions from having their rights under the law. It is perfectly possible for us to arrange things so that the two sides do not collide. The Minister—I have already put this point to him—should require all National Health Service areas to plan the local provision of abortion facilities. They should then appoint a range of practitioners. Plenty of gynaecological work does not involve abortion. This does not mean that those who are opposed to abortion could not be appointed and promoted. That is not incompatible with the need. We can respect medical practitioners who are opposed to abortion, and extend the rights of the law to all who want to take up those rights.
      Mr. Quentin Davies: Does the hon. Lady agree that one of the more crass and dangerous provisions of this very misconceived Bill is the suggestion that rape and incest, while they might be grounds for termination in women below the age of 18, would not be so in women above that age? Will she address that peculiar anomaly?
      Ms. Short: I was coming to that. It is one of the most offensive features of this offensive Bill. How can the sponsors possibly say that a woman under 18 who is raped or sexually abused is more innocent than a woman over 18? Many women who are sexually abused or raped are mentally disturbed by the experience, in some of the most awful and brutal cases. There are known cases, to which I would refer if we had more time, of women being so distressed and upset that they did not report their pregnancy until a stage that would be too late under the Bill.
      Every hon. Member was consulted about how rape could be prevented. An article in Woman or Woman's Own was, I believe, sent to all of us. It told the story of a woman in her 50s who told how she was raped in her 20s, and how it still disturbed her life. She had had a child as a
      1206
      consequence of the rape. She had never loved that child; she never could and never would. That is the most tragic thing that can be imagined.
      The woman was telling the truth. That child, now an adult, had never been loved because the conception had been the result of a brutal and horrible rape. The Bill's provisions mean that more children with experience of being unwanted because they remind a woman of a brutal, horrible, unwanted sexual experience would be born. That strikes me as deeply disgusting, and, while I understand why some people hate the idea of abortion, I do not know how anyone could bear to put his name to a proposal to judge between those under 18 and those over 18.
      Mrs. Fyfe: Will my hon. Friend comment on the fact that many women who were raped, whether they were younger or older than 18, would not have time to reflect on whether they could ever love a child born in such circumstances? Yet the Bill requires them to make up their minds before the 18th week of gestation.
      Here again is a case of people who have no intention of listening to the arguments trying to bully and threaten their way—[Interruption.] If my hon. Friend has not heard my question, I shall repeat it. Obviously some hon. Members cannot realise that a woman who has been raped, no matter what age she is, will not have time to reflect on whether she will ever be able to love a child born in such circumstances—[Interruption.]
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. Perhaps the hon. Lady would make more progress if she were allowed to speak. We are debating this matter. I hope that the House realises that.
      Mrs. Fyfe: It is no wish of mine to have to repeat again what I asked my hon. Friend, but I shall keep saying it until the House hears the point. It is important to realise that, no matter what the age of a woman, if she has been raped and becomes pregnant as a result she will not have time to consider whether she will ever be able to love a child born in such circumstances. The time limit in the Bill—[Interruption.]
      Ms. Short: I agree with my hon. Friend. We shall proceed much more rapidly if Conservative Members do not make so much noise that it is impossible to hear. A long time was taken by my hon. Friend to make the same point three or four times, because it was absolutely impossible to hear her. She is absolutely right. Raped women are often deeply disturbed by their experience. They need time to come to terms with it, and they need time to consider whether they are emotionally capable of loving the child born as a result of rape. The hon. Member for Mossley Hill and his supporters do not have the right to intrude on such a deeply difficult decision.
      I wish to make two other points.
      Mr. Cyril Smith: rose in his place and claimed to move, That the Question be now put.
      Question put, That the Question be now put:—
      The House divided: Ayes 310, Noes 229.

      Division No. 288]

      [2.10 pm

      AYES

      Aitken, Jonathan

      Amos, Alan

      Alison, Rt Hon Michael

      Arbuthnot, James

      Allason, Rupert

      Arnold, Jacques (Gravesham)

      Alton, David

      Arnold, Tom (Hazel Grove)

      Amess, David

      Aspinwall, Jack

      1207

      Atkins, Robert

      Forman, Nigel

      Atkinson, David

      Forsyth, Michael (Stirling)

      Baker, Nicholas (Dorset N)

      Fox, Sir Marcus

      Baldry, Tony

      Freeman, Roger

      Banks, Robert (Harrogate)

      French, Douglas

      Batiste, Spencer

      Fry, Peter

      Beggs, Roy

      Galloway, George

      Beith, A. J.

      Garel-Jones, Tristan

      Bell, Stuart

      Glyn, Dr Alan

      Bendall, Vivian

      Goodhart, Sir Philip

      Benyon, W.

      Goodson-Wickes, Dr Charles

      Bevan, David Gilroy

      Gorst, John

      Biggs-Davison, Sir John

      Gower, Sir Raymond

      Blackburn, Dr John G.

      Graham, Thomas

      Blaker, Rt Hon Sir Peter

      Greenway, Harry (Ealing N)

      Boscawen, Hon Robert

      Gregory, Conal

      Boswell, Tim

      Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth N)

      Bottomley, Peter

      Grocott. Bruce

      Bottomley, Mrs Virginia

      Grylls, Michael

      Bowden, A (Brighton K'pto'n)

      Gummer, Rt Hon John Selwyn

      Bowden, Gerald (Dulwich)

      Hamilton, Hon Archie (Epsom)

      Bowis, John

      Hamilton, Neil (Tatton)

      Boyson, Rt Hon Dr Sir Rhodes

      Hanley, Jeremy

      Braine, Rt Hon Sir Bernard

      Hannam, John

      Brandon-Bravo, Martin

      Hardy, Peter

      Bray, Dr Jeremy

      Hargreaves, Ken (Hyndburn)

      Brazier, Julian

      Harris, David

      Bright. Graham

      Hawkins, Christopher

      Brown, Michael (Brigg & CI't's)

      Hayes, Jerry

      Bruce, Ian (Dorset South)

      Hayhoe, Rt Hon Sir Barney

      Buchanan-Smith, Rt Hon Alick

      Hayward, Robert

      Buck, Sir Antony

      Heathcoat-Amory, David

      Budgen, Nicholas

      Heseltine, Rt Hon Michael

      Burns, Simon

      Hicks, Mrs Maureen (Wolv' NE)

      Burt, Alistair

      Higgins, Rt Hon Terence L.

      Butcher, John

      Hill, James

      Butler, Chris

      Hinchliffe, David

      Butterfill, John

      Hind, Kenneth

      Campbell-Savours, D. N.

      Hogg, Hon Douglas (Gr'th'm)

      Canavan, Dennis

      Holt, Richard

      Carlile, Alex (Mont'g)

      Home Robertson, John

      Carrington, Matthew

      Hordern, Sir Peter

      Cash, William

      Howard, Michael

      Chapman, Sydney

      Howe, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey

      Chope, Christopher

      Howell, Rt Hon David (G'dford)

      Churchill, Mr

      Hughes, John (Coventry NE)

      Clark, Hon Alan (Plym'th S'n)

      Hughes, Robert G. (Harrow W)

      Clark, Dr Michael (Rochford)

      Hughes, Roy (Newport E)

      Clark, Sir W. (Croydon S)

      Hughes, Sean (Knowsley S)

      Clarke, Tom (Monklands W)

      Hughes, Simon (Southwark)

      Colvin, Michael

      Hunt, David (Wirral W)

      Conway, Derek

      Hunter, Andrew

      Cook, Frank (Stockton N)

      Hurd, Rt Hon Douglas

      Coombs, Anthony (Wyre F'rest)

      Irvine, Michael

      Coombs, Simon (Swindon)

      Irving, Charles

      Crowther, Stan

      Jack, Michael

      Cummings, John

      Janman, Tim

      Cunliffe, Lawrence

      Jessel, Toby

      Currie, Mrs Edwina

      Johnson Smith, Sir Geoffrey

      Curry, David

      Jones, Gwilym (Cardiff N)

      Davis, David (Boothferry)

      Jones, Robert B (Herts W)

      Day, Stephen

      Jopling, Rt Hon Michael

      Devlin, Tim

      Kellett-Bowman, Dame Elaine

      Dewar, Donald

      Kennedy, Charles

      Dickens, Geoffrey

      Key, Robert

      Dicks, Terry

      King, Roger (B'ham N'thfield)

      Douglas, Dick

      King, Rt Hon Tom (Bridgwater)

      Dover, Den

      Kirkhope, Timothy

      Duffy, A. E. P.

      Knapman, Roger

      Dunn, Bob

      Knight, Greg (Derby North)

      Durant, Tony

      Knight, Dame Jill (Edgbaston)

      Emery, Sir Peter

      Lambie, David

      Evennett, David

      Lamond, James

      Fallon, Michael

      Lamont, Rt Hon Norman

      Favell, Tony

      Lang, Ian

      Fearn, Ronald

      Latham, Michael

      Fenner, Dame Peggy

      Lawrence, Ivan

      Field, Frank (Birkenhead)

      Lawson, Rt Hon Nigel

      Flynn, Paul

      Leigh, Edward (Gainsbor'gh)

      Fookes, Miss Janet

      Lennox-Boyd, Hon Mark

      1208

      Lilley, Peter

      Robinson, Peter (Belfast E)

      Lloyd, Peter (Fareham)

      Roe, Mrs Marion

      Lofthouse, Geoffrey

      Ross, William (Londonderry E)

      Lord, Michael

      Rossi, Sir Hugh

      Luce, Rt Hon Richard

      Rost, Peter

      Lyell, Sir Nicholas

      Rowlands, Ted

      McAvoy, Thomas

      Rumbold, Mrs Angela

      McCrea, Rev William

      Salmond, Alex

      McCrindle, Robert

      Sayeed, Jonathan

      Macdonald, Calum A.

      Shaw, David (Dover)

      McFall, John

      Shaw, Sir Michael (Scarb')

      McGrady, Eddie

      Sheerman, Barry

      MacGregor, Rt Hon John

      Shelton, William (Streatham)

      Maclean, David

      Shepherd, Colin (Hereford)

      Maclennan, Robert

      Shepherd, Richard (Aldridge)

      McLoughlin, Patrick

      Shersby, Michael

      McNair-Wilson, M. (Newbury)

      Sims, Roger

      McNamara, Kevin

      Skeet, Sir Trevor

      Maginnis, Ken

      Smith, Cyril (Rochdale)

      Major, Rt Hon John

      Smith, Sir Dudley (Warwick)

      Malins, Humfrey

      Smith, Rt Hon J. (Monk'ds E)

      Mallon, Seamus

      Smith, Tim (Beaconsfield)

      Mans, Keith

      Smyth, Rev Martin (Belfast S)

      Marlow, Tony

      Speller, Tony

      Marshall, David (Shettleston)

      Spicer, Sir Jim (Dorset W)

      Marshall, John (Hendon S)

      Stanbrook, Ivor

      Martin, Michael J. (Springburn)

      Stanley, Rt Hon John

      Mates, Michael

      Steen, Anthony

      Maude, Hon Francis

      Stevens, Lewis

      Mawhinney, Dr Brian

      Stewart, Allan (Eastwood)

      Mayhew, Rt Hon Sir Patrick

      Stewart, Andy (Sherwood)

      Mellor, David

      Stewart, Ian (Hertfordshire N)

      Millan, Rt Hon Bruce

      Stradling Thomas, Sir John

      Miller, Hal

      Sumberg, David

      Mills, Iain

      Summerson, Hugo

      Mitchell, Andrew (Gedling)

      Tapsell, Sir Peter

      Moate, Roger

      Taylor, Ian (Esher)

      Molyneaux, Rt Hon James

      Taylor, John M (Solihull)

      Monro, Sir Hector

      Taylor, Teddy (S'end E)

      Montgomery, Sir Fergus

      Tebbit, Rt Hon Norman

      Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe)

      Temple-Morris, Peter

      Morris, Rt Hon J. (Aberavon)

      Thompson, Jack (Wansbeck)

      Morrison, Hon P (Chester)

      Thompson, Patrick (Norwich N)

      Moss, Malcolm

      Thorne, Neil

      Moynihan, Hon Colin

      Thornton, Malcolm

      Mudd, David

      Tracey, Richard

      Murphy, Paul

      Trippier, David

      Neubert, Michael

      Trotter, Neville

      Newton, Rt Hon Tony

      Twinn, Dr Ian

      Nicholls, Patrick

      Vaughan, Sir Gerard

      Nicholson, David (Taunton)

      Waddington, Rt Hon David

      Oakes, Rt Hon Gordon

      Wakeham, Rt Hon John

      O'Brien, William

      Waldegrave, Hon William

      Onslow, Rt Hon Cranley

      Wallace, James

      Page, Richard

      Waller, Gary

      Paice, James

      Ward, John

      Paisley, Rev Ian

      Wardle, Charles (Bexhill)

      Parry, Robert

      Watts, John

      Patten, Chris (Bath)

      Whitney, Ray

      Patten, John (Oxford W)

      Wilshire, David

      Pawsey, James

      Wilson, Brian

      Peacock, Mrs Elizabeth

      Winterton, Mrs Ann

      Pendry, Tom

      Winterton, Nicholas

      Porter, Barry (Wirral S)

      Woodcock, Mike

      Porter, David (Waveney)

      Worthington, Tony

      Portillo, Michael

      Yeo, Tim

      Raison, Rt Hon Timothy

      Young, Sir George (Acton)

      Redwood, John

      Younger, Rt Hon George

      Reid, Dr John

      Renton, Tim

      Tellers for the Ayes:

      Ridsdale, Sir Julian

      Mr. Nicholas Bennett and Miss Ann Widdecombe.

      Robertson, George

      NOES

      Abbott, Ms Diane

      Armstrong, Hilary

      Adams, Allen (Paisley N)

      Ashdown, Paddy

      Adley, Robert

      Ashley, Rt Hon Jack

      Allen, Graham

      Ashton, Joe

      Anderson, Donald

      Banks, Tony (Newham NW)

      Archer, Rt Hon Peter

      Barnes, Harry (Derbyshire NE)

      1209

      Barnes, Mrs Rosie (Greenwich)

      Griffiths, Win (Bridgend)

      Barron, Kevin

      Grist, Ian

      Battle, John

      Harman, Ms Harriet

      Beckett, Margaret

      Haselhurst, Alan

      Benn, Rt Hon Tony

      Haynes, Frank

      Bennett, A. F. (D'nfn & R'dish)

      Healey, Rt Hon Denis

      Bermingham, Gerald

      Heath, Rt Hon Edward

      Bidwell, Sydney

      Heffer, Eric S.

      Biffen, Rt Hon John

      Henderson, Doug

      Blair, Tony

      Hicks, Robert (Cornwall SE)

      Blunkett, David

      Holland, Stuart

      Boateng, Paul

      Hood, Jimmy

      Bonsor, Sir Nicholas

      Howarth, George (Knowsley N)

      Boyes, Roland

      Howarth, G. (Cannock & B'wd)

      Bradley, Keith

      Howell, Rt Hon D. (S'heath)

      Brown, Gordon (D'mline E)

      Howells, Geraint

      Brown, Nicholas (Newcastle E)

      Hoyle, Doug

      Browne, John (Winchester)

      Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N)

      Bruce, Malcolm (Gordon)

      Illsley, Eric

      Buchan, Norman

      Ingram, Adam

      Buckley, George J.

      Janner, Greville

      Caborn, Richard

      John, Brynmor

      Callaghan, Jim

      Johnston, Sir Russell

      Campbell, Menzies (Fife NE)

      Jones, Barry (Alyn & Deeside)

      Cartwright, John

      Jones, Ieuan (Ynys Môn)

      Clark, Dr David (S Shields)

      Jones, Martyn (Clwyd S W)

      Clarke, Rt Hon K. (Rushcliffe)

      Kilfedder, James

      Clay, Bob

      Kinnock, Rt Hon Neil

      Clelland, David

      Kirkwood, Archy

      Clwyd, Mrs Ann

      Knox, David

      Cohen, Harry

      Leadbitter, Ted

      Cook, Robin (Livingston)

      Leighton, Ron

      Corbett, Robin

      Lester, Jim (Broxtowe)

      Corbyn, Jeremy

      Lestor, Joan (Eccles)

      Couchman, James

      Lewis, Terry

      Cousins, Jim

      Litherland, Robert

      Cox, Tom

      Livingstone, Ken

      Cran, James

      Livsey, Richard

      Cryer, Bob

      Lloyd, Sir Ian (Havant)

      Cunningham, Dr John

      Lloyd, Tony (Stretford)

      Dalyell, Tarn

      Loyden, Eddie

      Darling, Alistair

      McAllion, John

      Davies, Q. (Stamf'd & Spald'g)

      McCartney, Ian

      Davies, Ron (Caerphilly)

      McKay, Allen (Barnsley West)

      Davis, Terry (B'ham Hodge H'I)

      MacKay, Andrew (E Berkshire)

      Dobson, Frank

      McKelvey, William

      Doran, Frank

      McLeish, Henry

      Dunnachie, Jimmy

      McTaggart, Bob

      Dunwoody, Hon Mrs Gwyneth

      McWilliam, John

      Dykes, Hugh

      Madden, Max

      Eadie, Alexander

      Mahon, Mrs Alice

      Eastham, Ken

      Maples, John

      Evans, David (Welwyn Hatf'd)

      Marland, Paul

      Evans, John (St Helens N)

      Marshall, Jim (Leicester S)

      Ewing, Harry (Falkirk E)

      Martin, David (Portsmouth S)

      Ewing, Mrs Margaret (Moray)

      Martlew, Eric

      Fatchett, Derek

      Maxton, John

      Field, Barry (Isle of Wight)

      Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin

      Fields, Terry (L'pool B G'n)

      Meacher, Michael

      Fisher, Mark

      Meale, Alan

      Flannery, Martin

      Michie, Bill (Sheffield Heeley)

      Foot, Rt Hon Michael

      Michie, Mrs Ray (Arg'l & Bute)

      Forth, Eric

      Miscampbell, Norman

      Foster, Derek

      Moonie, Dr Lewis

      Foulkes, George

      Morgan, Rhodri

      Fraser, John

      Morley, Elliott

      Fyfe, Maria

      Morrison, Hon Sir Charles

      Galbraith, Sam

      Mowlam, Marjorie

      Gardiner, George

      Mullin, Chris

      Garrett, John (Norwich South)

      O'Neill, Martin

      George, Bruce

      Orme, Rt Hon Stanley

      Gilbert, Rt Hon Dr John

      Owen, Rt Hon Dr David

      Gill, Christopher

      Patchett, Terry

      Gilmour, Rt Hon Sir Ian

      Pattie, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey

      Golding, Mrs Llin

      Pike, Peter L.

      Gordon, Mildred

      Powell, Ray (Ogmore)

      Gorman, Mrs Teresa

      Prescott, John

      Gould, Bryan

      Primarolo, Dawn

      Grant, Bernie (Tottenham)

      Quin, Ms Joyce

      Griffiths, Nigel (Edinburgh S)

      Raffan, Keith

      1210

      Randall, Stuart

      Strang, Gavin

      Rathbone, Tim

      Straw, Jack

      Redmond, Martin

      Taylor, Mrs Ann (Dewsbury)

      Rees, Rt Hon Merlyn

      Taylor, Matthew (Truro)

      Rhodes James, Robert

      Thurnham, Peter

      Richardson, Jo

      Townsend, Cyril D. (B'heath)

      Riddick, Graham

      Tredinnick, David

      Robinson, Geoffrey

      Turner, Dennis

      Rogers, Allan

      Vaz, Keith

      Rooker, Jeff

      Viggers, Peter

      Ross, Ernie (Dundee W)

      Wall, Pat

      Ruddock, Joan

      Wardell, Gareth (Gower)

      Ryder, Richard

      Wareing, Robert N.

      Sackville, Hon Tom

      Wells, Bowen

      Sedgemore, Brian

      Welsh, Michael (Doncaster N)

      Sheldon, Rt Hon Robert

      Wheeler, John

      Shephard, Mrs G. (Norfolk SW)

      Wigley, Dafydd

      Shore, Rt Hon Peter

      Williams, Rt Hon Alan

      Short, Clare

      Williams, Alan W. (Carm'then)

      Skinner, Dennis

      Winnick, David

      Smith, Andrew (Oxford E)

      Wise, Mrs Audrey

      Smith, C. (Isl'ton & F'bury)

      Wolfson, Mark

      Snape, Peter

      Wray, Jimmy

      Soley, Clive

      Young, David (Bolton SE)

      Spearing, Nigel

      Squire, Robin

      Tellers for the Noes:

      Steel, Rt Hon David

      Ms. Joan Walley and Mr. Irvine Patnick.

      Steinberg, Gerry

      Stott, Roger

      Question accordingly agreed to.
      Question put, That the amendment be made:—
      The House divided: Ayes 222, Noes 315.

      Division No. 289]

      [2.27 pm

      AYES

      Abbott, Ms Diane

      Cook, Frank (Stockton N)

      Adams, Allen (Paisley N)

      Cook, Robin (Livingston)

      Adley, Robert

      Corbett, Robin

      Allen, Graham

      Corbyn, Jeremy

      Archer, Rt Hon Peter

      Cousins, Jim

      Armstrong, Hilary

      Cox, Tom

      Ashdown, Paddy

      Critchley, Julian

      Ashley, Rt Hon Jack

      Cryer, Bob

      Ashton, Joe

      Cunningham, Dr John

      Banks, Tony (Newham NW)

      Dalyell, Tam

      Barnes, Harry (Derbyshire NE)

      Darling, Alistair

      Barnes, Mrs Rosie (Greenwich)

      Davies, Q. (Stamf'd & Spald'g)

      Barron, Kevin

      Davies, Ron (Caerphilly)

      Beckett, Margaret

      Davis, Terry (B'ham Hodge H'I)

      Benn, Rt Hon Tony

      Dobson, Frank

      Bennett, A. F. (D'nt'n & R'dish)

      Doran, Frank

      Bermingham, Gerald

      Dunwoody, Hon Mrs Gwyneth

      Bidwell, Sydney

      Dykes, Hugh

      Biffen, Rt Hon John

      Eadie, Alexander

      Blair, Tony

      Eastham, Ken

      Blunkett, David

      Evans, David (Welwyn Hatf'd)

      Boateng, Paul

      Evans, John (St Helens N)

      Bonsor, Sir Nicholas

      Ewing, Harry (Falkirk E)

      Bottomley, Mrs Virginia

      Fatchett, Derek

      Boyes, Roland

      Fields, Terry (L'pool B G'n)

      Bradley, Keith

      Fisher, Mark

      Brown, Gordon (D'mline E)

      Flannery, Martin

      Brown, Nicholas (Newcastle E)

      Flynn, Paul

      Browne, John (Winchester)

      Foot, Rt Hon Michael

      Bruce, Malcolm (Gordon)

      Forman, Nigel

      Buchan, Norman

      Foster, Derek

      Buck, Sir Antony

      Foulkes, George

      Caborn, Richard

      Fraser, John

      Callaghan, Jim

      Fyfe, Maria

      Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln)

      Galbraith, Sam

      Cartwright, John

      Garrett, John (Norwich South)

      Clark, Dr David (S Shields)

      George, Bruce

      Clarke, Rt Hon K. (Rushcliffe)

      Gilbert, Rt Hon Dr John

      Clay, Bob

      Gill, Christopher

      Clelland, David

      Glyn, Dr Alan

      Clwyd, Mrs Ann

      Golding, Mrs Llin

      Cohen, Harry

      Goodson-Wickes, Dr Charles

      Colvin, Michael

      Gordon, Mildred

      1211

      Gorman, Mrs Teresa

      Needham, Richard

      Gould, Bryan

      Nellist, Dave

      Grant, Bernie (Tottenham)

      Nelson, Anthony

      Griffiths, Nigel (Edinburgh S)

      Nicholson, Emma (Devon West)

      Griffiths, Win (Bridgend)

      O'Neill, Martin

      Hampson, Dr Keith

      Orme, Rt Hon Stanley

      Harman, Ms Harriet

      Owen, Rt Hon Dr David

      Haselhurst, Alan

      Patchett, Terry

      Haynes, Frank

      Patnick, Irvine

      Healey, Rt Hon Denis

      Pike, Peter L.

      Heath, Rt Hon Edward

      Powell, Ray (Ogmore)

      Heathcoat-Amory, David

      Prescott, John

      Heffer, Eric S.

      Primarolo, Dawn

      Henderson, Doug

      Quin, Ms Joyce

      Hicks, Robert (Cornwall SE)

      Raffan, Keith

      Holland, Stuart

      Rathbone, Tim

      Hood, Jimmy

      Redmond, Martin

      Howarth, George (Knowsley N)

      Rees, Rt Hon Merlyn

      Howe, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey

      Rhodes James, Robert

      Hoyle, Doug

      Richardson, Jo

      Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N)

      Riddick, Graham

      Illsley, Eric

      Robinson, Geoffrey

      Ingram, Adam

      Rogers, Allan

      John, Brynmor

      Rooker, Jeff

      Johnston, Sir Russell

      Ross, Ernie (Dundee W)

      Jones, Barry (Alyn & Deeside)

      Rost, Peter

      Jones, Martyn (Clwyd S W)

      Rowe, Andrew

      King, Rt Hon Tom (Bridgwater)

      Ruddock, Joan

      Kinnock, Rt Hon Neil

      Ryder, Richard

      Knox, David

      Sackville, Hon Tom

      Leadbitter, Ted

      Scott, Nicholas

      Leighton, Ron

      Sedgemore, Brian

      Lestor, Joan (Eccles)

      Sheldon, Rt Hon Robert

      Lewis, Terry

      Shore, Rt Hon Peter

      Litherland, Robert

      Short, Clare

      Livingstone, Ken

      Smith, Andrew (Oxford E)

      Livsey, Richard

      Smith, C. (Isl'ton & F'bury)

      Lloyd, Tony (Stretford)

      Smith, Tim (Beaconsfield)

      Loyden, Eddie

      Snape, Peter

      Lyell, Sir Nicholas

      Soley, Clive

      McAllion, John

      Spearing, Nigel

      McCartney, Ian

      Squire, Robin

      McCrindle, Robert

      Steinberg, Gerry

      McKay, Allen (Barnsley West)

      Stott, Roger

      MacKay, Andrew (E Berkshire)

      Strang, Gavin

      McKelvey, William

      Straw, Jack

      McLeish, Henry

      Tapsell, Sir Peter

      McTaggart, Bob

      Taylor, Mrs Ann (Dewsbury)

      McWilliam, John

      Taylor, Ian (Esher)

      Madden, Max

      Thurnham, Peter

      Mahon, Mrs Alice

      Trotter, Neville

      Maples, John

      Turner, Dennis

      Marek, Dr John

      Viggers, Peter

      Marshall, Jim (Leicester S)

      Wall, Pat

      Martlew, Eric

      Wardell, Gareth (Gower)

      Maxton, John

      Wareing, Robert N.

      Meacher, Michael

      Wells, Bowen

      Meale, Alan

      Welsh, Michael (Doncaster N)

      Meyer, Sir Anthony

      Wheeler, John

      Michael, Alun

      Williams, Rt Hon Alan

      Michie, Bill (Sheffield Heeley)

      Williams, Alan W. (Carm'then)

      Miller, Hal

      Wilson, Brian

      Miscampbell, Norman

      Winnick, David

      Mitchell, David (Hants NW)

      Wise, Mrs Audrey

      Moonie, Dr Lewis

      Young, David (Bolton SE)

      Morgan, Rhodri

      Younger, Rt Hon George

      Morley, Elliott

      Morrison, Hon Sir Charles

      Tellers for the Ayes:

      Mowlam, Marjorie

      Mr. Dafydd Wigley and Ms. Joan Walley.

      Mullin, Chris

      NOES

      Aitken, Jonathan

      Arbuthnot, James

      Alison, Rt Hon Michael

      Arnold, Jacques (Gravesham)

      Allason, Rupert

      Arnold, Tom (Hazel Grove)

      Alton. David

      Aspinwall, Jack

      Amery, Rt Hon Julian

      Atkins, Robert

      Amess, David

      Atkinson, David

      Amos, Alan

      Baker, Nicholas (Dorset N)

      Anderson, Donald

      Baldry, Tony

      1212

      Banks, Robert (Harrogate)

      Fox, Sir Marcus

      Batiste, Spencer

      Freeman, Roger

      Battle, John

      French, Douglas

      Beggs, Roy

      Fry, Peter

      Beith, A. J.

      Galloway, George

      Bell, Stuart

      Garel-Jones, Tristan

      Bendall, Vivian

      Godman, Dr Norman A.

      Benyon, W.

      Goodhart, Sir Philip

      Bevan, David Gilroy

      Gorst, John

      Biggs-Davison, Sir John

      Gower, Sir Raymond

      Blackburn, Dr John G.

      Graham, Thomas

      Boscawen, Hon Robert

      Greenway, Harry (Ealing N)

      Boswell, Tim

      Gregory, Conal

      Bottomley, Peter

      Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth N)

      Bowden, A (Brighton K'pto'n)

      Grocott, Bruce

      Bowden, Gerald (Dulwich)

      Grylls, Michael

      Bowis, John

      Gummer, Rt Hon John Selwyn

      Boyson, Rt Hon Dr Sir Rhodes

      Hamilton, Hon Archie (Epsom)

      Braine, Rt Hon Sir Bernard

      Hamilton, Neil (Tatton)

      Brandon-Bravo, Martin

      Hanley, Jeremy

      Bray, Dr Jeremy

      Hannam, John

      Brazier, Julian

      Hardy, Peter

      Bright, Graham

      Hargreaves, Ken (Hyndburn)

      Brooke, Rt Hon Peter

      Harris, David

      Brown, Michael (Brigg & Cl't's)

      Hawkins, Christopher

      Bruce, Ian (Dorset South)

      Hayes, Jerry

      Buchanan-Smith, Rt Hon Alick

      Hayhoe, Rt Hon Sir Barney

      Buckley, George J.

      Hayward, Robert

      Budgen, Nicholas

      Heseltine, Rt Hon Michael

      Burns, Simon

      Hicks, Mrs Maureen (Wolv' NE)

      Burt, Alistair

      Higgins, Rt Hon Terence L.

      Butcher, John

      Hill, James

      Butler, Chris

      Hinchliffe, David

      Butterfill, John

      Hind, Kenneth

      Campbell, Menzies (Fife NE)

      Hogg, N. (C'nauld & Kilsyth)

      Campbell, Ron (Blyth Valley)

      Holt, Richard

      Campbell-Savours, D. N.

      Home Robertson, John

      Canavan, Dennis

      Hordern, Sir Peter

      Carlile, Alex (Mont'g)

      Howard, Michael

      Carrington, Matthew

      Howarth, G. (Cannock & B'wd)

      Cash, William

      Howell, Rt Hon David (G'dford)

      Channon, Rt Hon Paul

      Howell, Rt Hon D. (S'heath)

      Chapman, Sydney

      Howells, Geraint

      Chope, Christopher

      Hughes, John (Coventry NE)

      Churchill, Mr

      Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N)

      Clark, Hon Alan (Plym'th S'n)

      Hughes, Sean (Knowsley S)

      Clark, Dr Michael (Rochford)

      Hunt, David (Wirral W)

      Clark, Sir W. (Croydon S)

      Hunter, Andrew

      Clarke, Tom (Monklands W)

      Hurd, Rt Hon Douglas

      Conway, Derek

      Irvine, Michael

      Coombs, Anthony (Wyre F'rest)

      Irving, Charles

      Coombs, Simon (Swindon)

      Jack, Michael

      Cran, James

      Janman, Tim

      Crowther, Stan

      Janner, Greville

      Cummings, John

      Jessel, Toby

      Cunliffe, Lawrence

      Johnson Smith, Sir Geoffrey

      Curry, David

      Jones, Gwilym (Cardiff N)

      Davis, David (Boothferry)

      Jones, leuan (Ynys Môn)

      Day, Stephen

      Jones, Robert B (Herts W)

      Devlin, Tim

      Jopling, Rt Hon Michael

      Dewar, Donald

      Kellett-Bowman, Dame Elaine

      Dickens, Geoffrey

      Kennedy, Charles

      Dicks, Terry

      Key, Robert

      Douglas, Dick

      Kilfedder, James

      Dover, Den

      King, Roger (B'ham N thfield)

      Duffy, A. E. P.

      Kirkhope, Timothy

      Dunn, Bob

      Kirkwood, Archy

      Dunnachie, Jimmy

      Knapman, Roger

      Durant, Tony

      Knight, Greg (Derby North)

      Emery, Sir Peter

      Knight, Dame Jill (Edgbaston)

      Evennett, David

      Lambie, David

      Ewing, Mrs Margaret (Moray)

      Lamond, James

      Fallon, Michael

      Lang, Ian

      Favell, Tony

      Latham, Michael

      Fearn, Ronald

      Lawrence, Ivan

      Fenner, Dame Peggy

      Leigh, Edward (Gainsbor'gh)

      Field, Barry (Isle of Wight)

      Lennox-Boyd, Hon Mark

      Field, Frank (Birkenhead)

      Lester, Jim (Broxtowe)

      Fookes, Miss Janet

      Lilley, Peter

      Forsyth, Michael (Stirling)

      Lloyd, Sir Ian (Havant)

      1213

      Lloyd, Peter (Fareham)

      Robinson, Peter (Belfast E)

      Lofthouse, Geoffrey

      Roe, Mrs Marion

      Lord, Michael

      Ross, William (Londonderry E)

      Luce, Rt Hon Richard

      Rossi, Sir Hugh

      McAvoy, Thomas

      Rowlands, Ted

      McCrea, Rev William

      Rumbold, Mrs Angela

      McCusker, Harold

      Salmond, Alex

      Macdonald, Calum A.

      Sayeed, Jonathan

      McFall, John

      Shaw, Sir Michael (Scarb')

      McGrady, Eddie

      Sheerman, Barry

      MacGregor, Rt Hon John

      Shelton, William (Streatham)

      Maclean, David

      Shepherd, Colin (Hereford)

      Maclennan, Robert

      Shepherd, Richard (Aldridge)

      McLoughlin, Patrick

      Shersby, Michael

      McNair-Wilson, M. (Newbury)

      Sims, Roger

      McNamara, Kevin

      Skeet, Sir Trevor

      Maginnis, Ken

      Skinner, Dennis

      Major, Rt Hon John

      Smith, Cyril (Rochdale)

      Malins, Humfrey

      Smith, Sir Dudley (Warwick)

      Mallon, Seamus

      Smith, Rt Hon J. (Monk'ds E)

      Mans, Keith

      Smyth, Rev Martin (Belfast S)

      Marland, Paul

      Speller, Tony

      Marlow, Tony

      Spicer, Sir Jim (Dorset W)

      Marshall, David (Shettleston)

      Stanbrook, Ivor

      Marshall, John (Hendon S)

      Stanley, Rt Hon John

      Martin, David (Portsmouth S)

      Steen, Anthony

      Martin, Michael J. (Springburn)

      Stevens, Lewis

      Mates, Michael

      Stewart, Allan (Eastwood)

      Maude, Hon Francis

      Stewart, Andy (Sherwood)

      Mawhinney, Dr Brian

      Stewart, Ian (Hertfordshire N)

      Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin

      Sumberg, David

      Mayhew, Rt Hon Sir Patrick

      Summerson, Hugo

      Mellor, David

      Taylor, Rt Hon J. D. (S'ford)

      Michie, Mrs Ray (Arg'l & Bute)

      Taylor, John M (Solihull)

      Millan, Rt Hon Bruce

      Taylor, Matthew (Truro)

      Mills, Iain

      Taylor, Teddy (S'end E)

      Mitchell, Andrew (Gedling)

      Tebbit, Rt Hon Norman

      Moate, Roger

      Temple-Morris, Peter

      Molyneaux, Rt Hon James

      Thompson, Patrick (Norwich N)

      Monro, Sir Hector

      Thorne, Neil

      Montgomery, Sir Fergus

      Thornton, Malcolm

      Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe)

      Townsend, Cyril D. (B'heath)

      Morris, Rt Hon J. (Aberavon)

      Tracey, Richard

      Morrison, Hon P (Chester)

      Tredinnick, David

      Moss, Malcolm

      Trippier, David

      Moynihan, Hon Colin

      Twinn, Dr Ian

      Mudd, David

      Vaughan, Sir Gerard

      Murphy, Paul

      Vaz, Keith

      Neubert, Michael

      Waddington, Rt Hon David

      Nicholls, Patrick

      Wakeham, Rt Hon John

      Nicholson, David (Taunton)

      Waldegrave, Hon William

      Oakes, Rt Hon Gordon

      Walker, A. Cecil (Belfast N)

      O'Brien, William

      Wallace, James

      Onslow, Rt Hon Cranley

      Waller, Gary

      Page, Richard

      Ward, John

      Paice, James

      Wardle, Charles (Bexhill)

      Paisley, Rev Ian

      Warren, Kenneth

      Parry, Robert

      Watts, John

      Patten, Chris (Bath)

      Whitney, Ray

      Patten, John (Oxford W)

      Wilshire, David

      Pawsey, James

      Winterton, Mrs Ann

      Peacock, Mrs Elizabeth

      Winterton, Nicholas

      Pendry, Tom

      Woodcock, Mike

      Porter, Barry (Wirral S)

      Worthington, Tony

      Porter, David (Waveney)

      Wray, Jimmy

      Portillo, Michael

      Yeo, Tim

      Raison, Rt Hon Timothy

      Young, Sir George (Acton)

      Randall, Stuart

      Redwood, John

      Tellers for the Noes:

      Reid, Dr John

      Miss Ann Widdecombe and Mr. Nicholas Bennett.

      Renton, Tim

      Robertson, George

      Question accordingly negatived.
      It being after half-past Two o'clock, further consideration of the Bill stood adjourned.
      Bill, as amended (in the Standing Committee), to be further considered on Friday 13 May.
      Mr. Alton: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The House considered the Bill on Second Reading, when it gave it a majority of 45 on a vote of 296 Members. In Committee, there were 30 hours of debate, 15 Divisions and 27 amendments. Now we have debated the Bill on Report this morning and it has completed its Report stage.
      It would bring Parliament into disrepute if we were unable to complete the voting on the Report stage and give the Bill its Third Reading. Millions of people outside the House have followed our discussions this morning and over the months. It is genuinely a matter of great regret that the Bill cannot be completed today——
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. I understand how the hon. Gentleman feels, and his regret, but he must address himself to a point of order.
      Mr. Alton: Because of these factors, and because there is so much concern that the matter should be resolved, I ask the Leader of the House, through you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to make a statement about whether time might be provided at the end of business for the Bill to be further considered.
      The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. John Wakeham): Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Proceedings on this Bill have not been concluded today. The hon. Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton), who is in charge of the Bill, has named the next private Members' Bill day, Friday 13 May, as the day for further discussion of the Bill so that there may be an opportunity for the House to take its decisions on these matters if that is what it wishes to do.
      The Government's position is already clear. It is not our practice to provide extra time for consideration of individual private Members' Bills.
      Mr. Nicholas Bennett: Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and to the statement made by the Leader of the House. Would the Leader of the House be prepared to consider, in the light of the proceedings next week and in view of the proscrastination and filibustering of some hon. Members today——
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. We are not going to have recriminations of that kind this afternoon. The Leader of the House has heard what has been said.
      Mr. Bob Cryer: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The hon. Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton) claimed that the Report stage of his Bill had been completed. Will you confirm that that is not so—that the Report stage is continuing and has yet to be completed?
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: The hon. Gentleman is correct.
      Mr. Stephen Day: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I am in a somewhat unfortunate position, in view of the circumstances, because my private Members' Bill is down to be discussed first next Friday. It is called the Motor Vehicles (Wearing of Seat Belts by Children) Bill——
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. With respect, we cannot have all that now.
      Mr. Day: I want to make it clear to the House that my Bill has received all-party support at every stage. It went through Committee in one morning and was unopposed on Second Reading.
      If the Bill of the hon. Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton) comes to the Floor of the House, I hope that the House will allow a decision to be taken on it.
      Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. These are matters for the House to decide next Friday.
      Mr. Nellist: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. As the hon. Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton) announced that if his Bill did not get through he would enter a monastery, may we assume that the church's loss will be our gain and wish him godspeed?

Private Members' Bills

  EMPTY PROPERTY AND COMMUNITY AID BILL
  Order for Second Reading read.
  Hon. Members: Object.
  Second Reading deferred till Friday 8 July.
  Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Harold Walker): I ask hon. Members leaving the Chamber to do so quickly and quietly.
  Mr. Simon Hughes: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I am concerned to ensure that when the remaining Orders of the Day are called there is quiet in the House so that, in so far as we can, we are able to discover the origin of objections.
  Mr. Deputy Speaker: I hope that hon. Members will take note of what the hon. Gentleman has said.

  INDECENT DISPLAYS (NEWSPAPERS) BILL
  Order for Second Reading read.
  Hon. Members: Object.
  Mr. Jeremy Corbyn: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Did you receive an objection to the Bill from the hon. Member for Mid-Worcestershire (Mr. Forth)?
  Mr. Deputy Speaker: First. I heard an objection, and, secondly, I understand that the Bill has not been printed, so I cannot put it to the House anyway.
  Second Reading deferred till Friday 13 May

  SMOKE DETECTORS IN HOUSES BILL
  Order for Second Reading read.
  Hon. Members: Object.
  Second Reading deferred till Friday 8 July.

  UNFAIR REPORTING AND RIGHT OF REPLY BILL
  Order for Second Reading read.
  Hon. Members: Object.
  Second Reading deferred till Friday 13 May.

  HORSES, PONIES AND DONKEYS BILL
  Order for Second Reading read.
  Hon. Members: Object.
  Second Reading deferred till Friday 13 May.

  HEALTH AND SAFETY AT WORK (TOBACCO SMOKING) BILL
  Order for Second Reading read.
  Hon. Members: Object.
  Second Reading deferred till Friday 13 May.

  BLACKLISTS (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) BILL
  Order for Second Reading read.
  Second Reading deferred till Friday 13 May.

  SCOTTISH CONSTITUTION (REFERENDUM) BILL
  Order for Second Reading read.
  Hon. Members: Object.
  Mrs. Margaret Ewing: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Is it in order for an English Member of the Conservative party to object to the Second Reading of a Bill that has widespread support in Scotland, particularly in the light of yesterday's results——
  Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. The hon. Lady need not take her point of order any further. The answer to her question is yes.
  Later—
  Mrs. Ewing: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You did not offer me an opportunity to name a date for the Second Reading of the Scottish Constitution (Referendum) Bill.
  Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. I beg the pardon of the hon. Lady and the House for making the same blunder on two occasions. What day?
  Mrs. Ewing: Friday 13 May.

  BETTING, GAMING AND LOTTERIES (AMENDMENT) BILL [LORDS]
  Order for Second Reading read.
  Hon. Members: Object.
  Second Reading deferred till Friday 20 May.

  EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (AMENDMENT) BILL
  Order for Second Reading read.
  Hon. Members: Object.
  Mr. Deputy Speaker: Second Reading what day? No day named.

Direct Labour Organisation, Hackney
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Durant.]
2.48 pm
Mr. Brian Sedgemore: There was a moment this morning when I thought that 550 MPs had turned up to hear my Adjournment debate. However, the Chamber is emptying rapidly and I hope that that is not a reflection on the quality of this very important debate.
The debate arises from a decision taken by the Secretary of State for the Environment on 31 March when he decided to close Hackney's major new-build direct labour organisation. Only two things of worth can be said about that decision. The first is that it was taken as the House was rising for the Easter recess, and was taken then in order to avoid political embarrassment for the Government. As such, the decision can be described as shoddy and irresponsible and, to use a favourite word of the Prime Minister's, gutless.
The second is that the first news of the closure went not to Hackney borough council or to either of the two hon. Members who represent Hackney but to the hon. Member for Pembroke (Mr. Bennett) in answer to a planted written question, and we must ask the Minister why. I think that the answer is that the Minister is known as a Right-wing political extremist and he needed another Right-wing political extremist to table the question for him. I go to Pembroke regularly, two or three times a year. Farmers there are not very happy with the hon. Member for Pembroke, and neither am I. If he concentrated more on what was going on in that part of the world rather than telling the Preseli district council that it ought not to be getting grants from the Government, he would not get such bad local press.
The background to the debate is that the Minister is known for his fanatical views on privatisation. He is prepared to push privatisation, whatever the consequences and whatever the loss of jobs, the damage to the social fabric, the loss to the public purse or the harm to the integrity of the Department of the Environment and the constitution. The House was shocked to learn that, as a result of his fanatical policies, both personally and in his capacity as Minister at the Department of the Environment, he is under investigation—for misconduct in relation to public funds—by the National Audit Office as a result of a complaint lodged with that office by a member of the Public Accounts Committee.
I have seen the papers, and it is a shocking case. The Minister appears to have put out a private contract to Cluttons for £40.000, when the Property Services Agency in-house could have carried out the contract for £1,300. We are about to witness a major political scandal, just as the closure of the DLO in Hackney is a major political scandal. I would not be surprised if the Prime Minister had to sack the Minister, who is sitting there smiling smugly, before many months are out.
The DLO was closed by a direction of the Secretary of State for the Environment under section 17(4) of the Local Government, Planning and Land Act 1980. No one who knows the Secretary of State's previous convictions will be surprised to learn that the direction was, and is, unlawful, and will in due course be deemed to be unlawful in the courts unless the Government—I do not believe that even

1219
this Government can do this—can control the judiciary. It is unlawful in a number of respects, and I hope that Mr. Davies, the assistant secretary who signed the direction, is in the Civil Servants' Box. He may have many virtues, but judicial ignorance accompanies them.
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Harold Walker): Order. The hon. Gentleman knows better than most hon. Members that he should not refer to persons beyond the Bar or behind the Chair.
Mr. Sedgemore: I accept your admonition, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I used to work in the precursor of the Department of the Environment and used to sit in that Box advising Ministers. I will leave the Minister to ponder on the sad judicial fate that awaits him.
I ask the House to bear in mind the Secretary of State's sad history in the courts, because that history is about to be repeated. It makes any godfather in the Italian Mafia appear positively respectable. In 1985, the annus mirabilis of this law-breaking Secretary of State, he acted unlawfully, according to the courts, in the Severn bridge toll case, in the GLC lorry ban case and in the London Regional Transport levy case. In the GLC case, the High Court judge described the Secretary of State's actions as
"unlawful, irrational and procedurally improper".
In another case, Mr. Justice McNeill, in the High Court, described the Secretary of State's actions as, "unreasonable, irrational, unlawful". That is what we shall find in the case of the closure of Hackney's DLO.
When the Secretary of State was at the Department of Transport, his actions were deemed unlawful in no fewer than seven out of 11 cases for judicial review. In December 1986 the Secretary of State had the temerity to come before the House and introduce amending legislation that involved the unlawful expenditure of billions of pounds in relation to the rate support grant. If ever there has been a Secretary of State who has affronted the constitution and the judicial position, it is the right hon. Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury (Mr. Ridley). He, like the Under-Secretary of State, should lose his job if the Government believe in integrity.
For the moment, it is 600 workers in Hackney who will lose their jobs while the Secretary of State retains his. I understand that 78 per cent. of the 600 are local and that 45 per cent. come from the ethnic minorities. Their jobs will be picked up by privateers, price fixers and jerrybuilders in the private sector. The Minister should explain why he wants to help profiteers, price fixers and jerrybuilders in the private sector as opposed to local people in Hackney.
There are one or two ironies about the Government's decision. First, the direct labour organisation that is to be closed is a profitable enterprise. In the jargon of the Minister, it produces a first-class product. It meets with the wholehearted approval of its customers, who are the tenants who inhabit the 45,000 council properties in Hackney. Even worse from the Minister's point of view is the irony that the movement from losses of £5 million over two years to profit in the succeeding years make it a paradigm for Thatcherism. Why is this paradigm for Thatcherism—a loss-making organisation that has become a profit-making firm—being closed at a time when it is doing everything that the Government want it to do?
The Minister may smile, frown or laugh, and so may the Government Whip, but there has been an admission from councillor Joe Lobenstein—admittedly he is not a very
1220
bright councillor, but he is a fairly amiable person—that the organisation has become profitable. He claims that that is a result of Mrs. Thatcher's policies. Joe Lobenstein is the leader of the Conservative group at Hackney, which is a group of two or three. If the Prime Minister has taken action to make the organisation profitable, or has made the council take that action, why has the Minister chosen this moment to close it?
It is ironic that the Minister is seeking to wreck the best trained work force in the building industry of any company, public or private, in Great Britain. Everyone is astonished at Hackney's training scheme. Everyone, except an ungracious and uncivilised Minister, praises it. No one can believe that it is possible to have a building industry in which 200 trainees are employed and work actively on the production or improvement of homes. These trainees have produced some of the best results that anyone can remember in recent years in local government. I defy the Minister to tell the House that the schemes that I am about to mention, which have been built largely by the 200 trainees, are anything other than excellent and fully approved by the tenants who live in the accommodation.
I refer especially to the building of Powell house in 1983. In 1984 there was the building of the Broadway market. The second phase of the Stonebridge estate was built in 1985. The Lauriston road project was built in 1986. The Stonebridge park scheme in the Lea View estate was given an extraordinary reception the length and breadth of the land. It has received universal acclaim. What will the Minister say about that? Will he chose to close his eyes and adopt some myopic Nelsonian stance? Will he choose to look through the wrong end of the telescope and claim to see nothing? The irony is that the Minister claims that he wants to save money, but the truth is that the ratepayers of Hackney will lose vast quantities of money.
In the past three years the direct labour organisation of the borough has made £500,000 in profit. That is not my main argument in its favour. The cost of closing the direct labour organisation and the extra cost of completing the projects will be something like £8·5 million. The Minister should consider that extremely carefully, because if he does not do so, the High Court of Justice will and he will get his just deserts. The figure of £8·5 million is a conservative estimate of the price of retendering some £23 million of work—which will be outstanding on the date that the Minister has said the direct labour organisation can no longer function—together with the cost of closure.
I first came across the Minister when I was a councillor on the London borough of Wandsworth. I know about his pontifical ignorance and his complete lack of knowledge of what goes on in the building industry. If the Minister seeks to close the direct labour organisation, give it a year to shut up, and leave it with £23 million of work outstanding, does he not understand—he should because I believe that he has connections with the building industry—how the price fixing works when retendering takes place? Does he not understand how a cartel in the building industry operates? Does he not understand how monopolistic profits are squeezed out of organisations such as Hackney borough council and will continue to be squeezed out because of the stupid, silly, awful way in which the Minister and his colleagues have gone about this matter? They have no case. If the Minister does not understand

1221
that fact it will certainly be understood in the High Court because it is not amused by Ministers who are prepared to pour £8·5 million of public money down the drain.
The Department of the Environment asked for a special report from the London borough of Hackney. I shall not comment on it because it is too long and complicated to go through. Since that report was given to the Department in 1986 it has never—to its eternal shame—questioned the borough about the contents of the report. Why? It has ignored the trend from loss to profit. Why? It has ignored the fundamental reorganisation that has taken place—the reorganisation of working practices and managerial structures—the doubling in profitability, and the changes in industrial relations. Why?
When I worked for the precursors of the Ministers for Housing and for Local Government it was axiomatic that Ministers and civil servants tried to help local government. Now it seems to be some type of bloody warfare. The tenants are on the receiving end of absurd diktats from Whitehall. Why did the Department of the Environment and its Ministers not discuss some of the matters with the borough? If they believe that they have powerful, overwhelming arguments in their favour, why did they not bring them to the fore? There could have been some sensible, rational discussion. Why has reason left the Department since the Government took office in 1979?
One of the answers is again provided by Tory Joe of the borough of Hackney. He gives the game away and tells us why the Minister is acting thus. In the Hackney Gazette and North London Advertiser of 15 April 1988 Tory Joe said:
"When I was first elected to the Council of the old borough of Stoke Newington in 1962, I argued that building work should be put out to private tender. Now 26 years later, I have achieved my aim."
A 26-year-old vendetta has been waged by a rather ageing, pathetic councillor. That is backed up by another vendetta—the ministerial vendetta. The Minister is as aware as every other Government Minister that the building industry is a major contributor to Conservative party funds. That has, sadly, damaged the integrity of this country's constitution.
Many hon. Members will recall what happened over Cementation and the things that went wrong in very high places. That was a shabby act. The Secretary of State for the Environment and the Minister have both acted shabbily as well. I do not mind if the Minister pours £37,000 plus of taxpayers' money down the drain. However, I object to the Minister pouring down the drain £8·5 million of the money belonging to the people living in the poorest borough in the United Kingdom according to the DOE's own indices. It is a public scandal that the Minister is prepared to take and waste their money. Yes, the Prime Minister always says that it is the people's money. Why is the Minister wasting the people's money, our money?
The Minister could not find his way to the London borough of Hackney if he tried. Since there have been ministerial changes in the Department of the Environment the visits have stopped. We used to have some helpful visits from Ministers in the past. However, we get no helpful visits from the Ministers who have taken over.
There appear to be no depths which the Minister will not plumb on the issue of privatisation. There is virtually
1222
no tactic to which he will not aspire, no legal or moral calumny in which he will not engage. Under the Minister, local government has become the pits. There is no longer any financial propriety or any sensible local democracy with local decision taking.
I want to make one final serious point to the Minister. The Minister provided a written reply to the hon. member for Pembroke in which he said:
"The borough claimed to have made a surplus on its major new works account in 1985–86 following losses of £3·2 million in 1983–84 and £1·75 million in 1984–85. My right hon. Friend is now satisfied, however, that the claimed surplus is spurious."—[Official Report, 31 March, 1988; Vol. 130, c. 719–720.]
I do not know whether some clever, debating academic from Oxford university has joined the Department of the Environment and thought up using the word "spurious" or whether it was a Minister. However, what does the Minister mean by spurious? I take it to mean false.
I showed the written reply to one or two hon. Members and asked them what they thought the Minister was getting at. I also spoke to some officers of the London borough of Hackney. I was told that they thought that the Minister was claiming that the accounts submitted were dishonest and that the books had been cooked. I am certain that if the Minister has any understanding of the English language he will be aware that many people will have read the reply in that way. I am surprised that answers now appear which seem to suggest that respectable officers with integrity cooked the books or behaved dishonestly.
I do not want to go through the accounts of that period. I am not an accountant, but I am an economist and I understand them pretty well. However, I spoke to the chief executive of the London borough of Hackney and put my points to her. I also spoke to the director of finance and put my points to him. I spoke also to the building manager, Mr. Pat Quinn, about this allegation and to Miss Babcoe the accountant who is now going through the books and revising the profits down, but who still insists that there are profits.
Perhaps the most interesting of those people was Miss Babcoe. She told me that she was going through the books although she had not prepared the original accounts. She said that if she had wanted to cook the books, she could have done a much better job than was alleged to have been done.
There is no question but that Hackney had produced the books as it saw fit and proper with a due regard for the truth of the figures. However, the claim that the figures are spurious shocked me because there is no conceivable way in which the Minister could make that claim as he cannot have seen enough of the books to decide properly. I was further shocked by the fact that the district auditor is looking into the accounts of the period and he must decide in a judicial capacity whether he thinks the figures are spurious. That is a heavy handed way of trying to intimidate the district auditor who is trying to act in a judicial capacity. That is a major scandal which requires answering by the civil servants at the DOE and by the Minister.
The district auditor is a quasi-judicial figure. He is not employed by the Department of the Environment, although the Department may pay his salary. To try to intervene and virtually force the district auditor to declare

1223
figures to be other than they are is only the kind of government that we have come to expect from this Minister.
I do not expect the Minister to stand up and behave in a sensible, proper, responsible fashion, and say that he is prepared to reconsider. I merely warn him that the courts of this country may do what the Executive will not.
3.10 pm
Ms. Diane Abbott rose——
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. I assume that the hon. Lady has the consent of the hon. Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch (Mr. Sedgemore) and the Minister.
Ms. Abbott: On the night of the general election last year, the Prime Minister said:
"We must now turn our attention to the inner cities."
She has indeed. She has done so rather in the way that Hitler turned his Luftwaffe on the inner cities. The purpose and content of the attention that she has kindly paid us over the past 12 months has been to devastate our communities, and the announcement of the abolition of our direct labour organisation is part of that pattern.
I want to concentrate on three main points. The first is the effect of the abolition of the DLO on tenants. Unlike the Minister, who has sat and giggled and yawned his way through the entire debate, I have first-hand knowledge of the housing problems of the people of Hackney. My caseload at my weekly surgeries is three quarters composed of housing problems, and I know the misery, grief and rage that are caused by problems with repairs and improvements to estates. There is no doubt that the abolition of the DLO will lead to a sharp decline in the service to tenants.
Some improvement schemes may have to he curtailed, and the quality of work will undoubtedly fall. Such estates as the Lea View estate, an award-winning estate in my constituency, illustrate the kind of work that the Minister wants to bring to an end. As my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch (Mr. Sedgemore) said, the abolition will cost Hackney £.8·5 million—money that could be better spend on building and repairing homes for the thousands in my constituency who experience appalling housing conditions. When the Minister has stopped laughing, he should think on that.
My second point concerns the loss of jobs. I stress that I am talking about an area where the official unemployment rate for adult males is one in four, and it is much higher among young black people and young people generally. It is in the context of that terrible unemployment rate that the Minister proposes to cut 600 jobs at a stroke—jobs that are now done largely by local people, many of them black. Will those people get the jobs from the contractors that he wishes to bring in?
Finally, let me ask the Minister why he is bringing forward the measure. As has been explained, the profitability of the DLO has risen and is rising. It is efficient; it has extremely high standards; it has done award-winning work. It is our contention that the Minister's real reason for attacking our DLO is to help his friends such as McAlpine and Wimpey—major contributors to Tory party funds. If the Government want to help their friends in the building trade, why do they not invest in housing? Why smash up our DLO?
1224
The announcement is of no help whatever and it will not contribute an iota to the terrible, pressing, tragic housing crisis in Hackney. It is motivated not by the facts, but by mindless political spite. The wrecking nature of the announcement, and the detrimental effect that it will have on employment and housing standards, illustrate the real nature of the Prime Minister's project for the inner cities.
The announcement has no basis in any analysis of the facts. It has everything to do with the most squalid and mean party politics. It will be of no help to my constituents. All that it will do is push the terrible housing and unemployment problems of Hackney into a further downward spiral. I ask the Minister, even at this late stage, to reconsider his decision and to withdraw his announcement.
3.14 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Christopher Chope): I have been left with four minutes in which to reply to the debate, which has been notable for extravagant and abusive language verging on the hysterical. It has included attacks on the integrity not only of myself but of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. I hope that inner-city issues will be addressed with rather more seriousness and gravity than has been used by the hon. Members for Hackney, South and Shoreditch (Mr. Sedgemore) and for Hackney, North and Stoke Newington (Ms. Abbott).
I do not know whether it galls the hon. Member for Hackney, South and Shoreditch that he was not on Wandsworth council at the same time as I was. Yesterday marked the 10th anniversary of the Conservatives taking control of that council. I remind him that, when the Conservative party took over the council, it took over an inefficient direct labour organisation that has now been reformed. We now have a much more efficient construction service working for the people of Wandsworth. I shall not dwell further on the issues of Wandsworth, but perhaps that is one of the reasons why the hon. Gentleman is so steamed up this afternoon.
The debate has given me the opportunity to explain the background to part III of the Local Government, Planning and Land Act 1980. which confers on the Secretary of State the powers that he has used in this instance. It is not often that the topic is fully discussed and, therefore, it is not often that the House is given a clear picture of the way in which policy has developed and, in particular. of the degree of restraint that has been exercised by the Secretary of State since the Local Government, Planning and Land Act came into force.
Part III of the 1980 Act governs the operation of local authority building and maintenance direct labour organisations. In broad terms, DLOs are required to compete for most of the work that they carry out. They must make a 5 per cent. return on the capital that they employ. When DLOs fail to meet the required rate of return, the legislation empowers my right hon. Friend to ask authorities to provide a special report on the failure. If he is not satisfied that the authority is taking adequate steps to put matters right, my right hon. Friend is empowered to order the closure of the DLO.
In the first six years of operation of the legislation, DLOs recorded over 600 failures to meet the 5 per cent. rate of return. My right hon. Friend and his predecessors are constantly accused of taking every opportunity to

1225
attack direct labour organisations. The facts, however, speak for themselves. During that entire period, only 20 special reports have been requested. In most cases, the Secretary of State concluded that, in the light of the explanations provided, he should allow the DLOs to continue in operation. In one case—that of Newham— he has, in effect, agreed with the authority's own decision that the DLO in question was incapable of operating profitably, and issued a closure notice accordingly.
In only three cases—Haringey, Lambeth and Hackney—has the Secretary of State issued a closure notice in opposition to the views of the authority concerned. In those cases, he did so for good reasons.
The four closure directions were made following losses that totalled over £15 million. They are massive losses by any standard, made possible only by doctrinaire insistence on providing what are quite simply subsidies paid with ratepayers' money. If the government were to provide subsidies on that scale for a few loss-making private
1226
builders, one can only too readily imagine the outbursts of righteous indignation that would be forthcoming from the Opposition.
The only unreasonable thing to do with organisations of that degree of inefficiency is to let them carry on acting as a drain on the public purse. Opposition Members dutifully rehearse the litany of reasons why all is not as it seems, and why, despite the obvious case for closure, even the most appallingly mismanaged DLOs should indeed be let of the hook.
The hon. Gentleman could have referred to the Arden report, which was a voluminous report into inefficiency in Hackney. Before he criticises my right hon. Friend, I remind him that he helped to set it up. Perhaps he should have regard——
The motion having been made after half-past Two o'clock, and the debate having continued for half an hour, MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
Adjourned accordingly at eighteen minutes past Three o'clock.

WALES

  Rating Reform
  Mr. Murphy
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will indicate, assuming the full replacement of rates by the community charge, and the implementation of the Local Government Finance Bill for non-domestic rates and grant in 1988–89(a) for Wales as a whole, (b) for each class of local authorities (including community councils), and (c) for each county and district authority

  Summary of impact of Local Government Finance Bilt for non-domestic rales attd grant in Wales 1988–89

  Community charge

  District or county expenditure

  Tolal community council expenditure

  Revenue support grant

  Proceeds from non- domeslic rate pool

  Community contribution

  Adult population

  County element

  District element

  Average community council element

  Total

  A verage rate hill per adult

  £ thousands

  £ thousands

  £ thousands

  £ thousands

  £ thousands

  Thousands

  £

  £

  £

  £

  £

  1 Alyn and Deeside

  5,238

  355

  3,046

  1,538

  655

  53·9

  123

  12

  7

  141

  176

  2 Colwyn

  4,678

  6

  2,467

  1,161

  1,050

  40·7

  123

  26

  0

  149

  198

  3 Delyn

  5,704

  296

  3,274

  1,398

  1,032

  49·0

  123

  21

  6

  150

  176

  4 Glyndwr

  3,100

  97

  1,464

  893

  743

  31·3

  123

  24

  3

  149

  155

  5 Rhuddlan

  5,681

  168

  3,960

  1,238

  482

  43·4

  123

  11

  4

  138

  170

  6 Wrexham Maelor

  10,012

  560

  5,516

  2,457

  2,039

  86·1

  123

  24

  7

  153

  162

  7 Carmarthen

  3,848

  446

  2,277

  1,198

  373

  42·0

  131

  9

  11

  151

  123

  8 Ceredigion

  4,467

  346

  2,963

  1,415

  89

  49·6

  131

  2

  7

  140

  136

  9 Dinefwr

  2,355

  147

  1,551

  825

  0

  28·9

  131

  0

  5

  136

  110

  10 Llanelli

  6,659

  916

  4,282

  1,646

  731

  57·7

  131

  13

  16

  160

  137

  11 Preseli Pembrokeshire

  4,818

  242

  3,282

  1,524

  12

  53·4

  131

  0

  5

  136

  126

  12 South Pembrokeshire

  3,277

  258

  2,448

  865

  0

  30·3

  131

  0

  9

  140

  152

  13 Blaenau Gwent

  9,497

  76

  5,741

  1,695

  2,061

  59·4

  120

  35

  1

  156

  116

  14 Islwyn

  7,448

  0

  4,325

  1,427

  1,697

  50·0

  120

  34

  0

  154

  127

  15 Monmouth

  5,571

  271

  2,661

  1,695

  1,215

  59·4

  120

  20

  5

  145

  167

  16 Newport

  13,408

  100

  7,793

  2,799

  2,816

  98·1

  120

  29

  1

  150

  185

  17 Torfaen

  8,430

  268

  4,582

  1,955

  1.893

  68·5

  120

  28

  4

  151

  154

  18 Aberconwy

  4,922

  153

  2,598

  1,184

  1,140

  41·5

  105

  27

  4

  137

  173

  19 Arfon

  5,170

  187

  3,013

  1,158

  999

  40·6

  105

  25

  5

  135

  129

  20 Dwyfor

  3,051

  60

  1,886

  596

  568

  20·9

  105

  27

  3

  136

  160

  21 Meirionnydd

  3,526

  90

  2,041

  713

  772

  25·0

  105

  31

  4

  140

  158

  22 Ynys Mon

  6,303

  214

  3,751

  1,489

  1,062

  52·2

  105

  20

  4

  130

  154

  23 Cynon Valley

  7,130

  28

  4,854

  1,407

  869

  49·3

  137

  18

  1

  155

  108

  24 Merthyr Tydfil

  7,549

  30

  4,959

  1,267

  1,323

  44·4

  137

  30

  1

  168

  124

  25 Ogwr

  11,815

  195

  6,358

  2,905

  2,553

  101·8

  137

  25

  2

  164

  151

  26 Rhondda

  10,260

  0

  7,430

  1,695

  1,135

  59·4

  137

  19

  0

  156

  85

  27 Rhymney Valley

  10,099

  225

  5,522

  2,188

  2,389

  76·7

  137

  31

  3

  171

  139

  28 Taff Ely

  7,750

  456

  4,366

  2,017

  1,367

  70·7

  137

  19

  6

  163

  145

  29 Brecknock

  3,131

  238

  1,794

  902

  435

  31·6

  112

  14

  8

  134

  131

  30 Montgomeryshire

  3,111

  199

  2,015

  1,101

  0

  38·6

  112

  0

  5

  117

  128

  31 Radnor

  1,489

  43

  860

  479

  150

  16·8

  112

  9

  3

  124

  135

  32 Cardiff

  24,827

  59

  19,793

  6,066

  0

  212·6

  110

  0

  0

  110

  179

  33 Vale of Glamorgan

  7,664

  767

  4,970

  2,502

  192

  87·7

  110

  2

  9

  121

  166

  34 Port Talbot

  5,842

  3

  3,115

  1,110

  1,617

  38·9

  164

  42

  0

  205

  154

  35 Lliw Valley

  4,752

  242

  2,625

  1,335

  791

  46·8

  164

  17

  5

  186

  142

  36 Neath

  4,820

  348

  3,158

  1,421

  241

  49·8

  164

  5

  7

  175

  154

  37 Swansea

  22,184

  116

  13,057

  4,092

  5,035

  143·4

  164

  35

  1

  199

  192

  38 Clwyd

  193,981

  —

  110,493

  46,182

  37,307

  304·4

  123

  —

  —

  —

  —

  39 Dyfed

  176,591

  —

  102,479

  39,734

  34,378

  261·9

  131

  —

  —

  —

  —

  40 Gwent

  219,702

  —

  128,617

  50,885

  40,200

  335·4

  120

  —

  —

  —

  —

  41 Gwynedd

  120,437

  —

  74,093

  27,339

  19,005

  180·2

  105

  —

  —

  —

  —

  42 Mid Glamorgan

  280,092

  —

  163,847

  61,034

  55,210

  402·3

  137

  —

  —

  —

  —

  43 Powys

  64,861

  —

  41,895

  13,199

  9,767

  87·0

  112

  —

  —

  —

  —

  44 South Glamorgan

  191,518

  —

  112,869

  45,560

  33,090

  300·3

  110

  —

  —

  —

  —

  45 West Glamorgan

  193,130

  —

  105,216

  42,313

  45,602

  278·9

  164

  —

  —

  —

  —

  46 Districts

  259,586

  8,205

  159,798

  61,357

  38,430

  2,150·4

  —

  18

  —

  —

  —

  47 Total Counties

  1,440,312

  —

  839,507

  326,245

  274,560

  2,150·4

  128

  —

  —

  —

  —

  48 Total Wales

  1,699,898

  8,205

  999,305

  387,603

  312,990

  2,150·4

  128

  18

  4

  150

  —

  Monthly Accessions List
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales whether his Department deposits copies of(a) the
  598
  area the following items in thousands of pounds: (i) expenditure, (ii) revenue support grant (where appropriate), (iii) share of non-domestic rate pool (where appropriate), (iv) community contribution and (v) adult population together with (vi) the community charge for each county and district authority, showing separately for each district area the average community council charge and (vii) the total community charge; and what is the average rate per adult for 1988–89 in each district area.

  Mr. Grist
  Illustrative figures are given in the table. These figures are provisional, and will be updated when better information is received from all local authorities. No allowance has been made for the transitional safety-net arrangements. Average rate bills per adult are on a basis comparable with the community charge figures and exclude any use of balances. The calculations are based on present needs assessments which are under review. The community contribution for community councils is equal to their expenditure.

  monthly accessions list, and (b) the annual publications list in (i) county libraries and (ii) libraries of the colleges of the University of Wales.
  599
  Mr. Peter Walker
  The Welsh Office library sends copies of its monthly accessions and annual publications lists to all county libraries in Wales and to the libraries of the colleges which constitute the University of Wales.

  Welsh Language
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list those primary schools in Gwent(a) which have classes where Welsh is the sole or main medium of instruction of first or second language pupils, (b) which have classes of first or second language pupils where some of the teaching is through the medium of Welsh, (c) where Welsh is taught as a second language but not used as a teaching medium, and (d) where no Welsh is taught.

  Mr. Wyn Roberts
  The information is as follows:

  Gwent schools with some classes where Welsh is the sole or main medium of instruction

  Brynmawr, Infant School

  Pengam C.P.

  Pontnewynydd Junior and Infants

  St. Dials Infants

  Sofrydd Junior

  High Cross Junior Mixed and Infants

  Gwent schools with no teaching through the medium of Welsh

  Alexandra Primary

  Bolt Street Primary School

  Clytha Junior and Infant School

  Crindau Junior and Infant School

  Durham Road Junior School

  Durham Road Infant School

  Eveswell Junior School

  Eveswell Infant and Nursery School

  Gaer Junior School

  Gaer Infant School

  Lliswerry Infant School

  Maesglas CP School

  Maindee Junior School

  Maindee Infant School

  Malpas Court Junior and Infant School

  St. Andrew's Junior School

  St. Andrew's Infant School

  St. Woolos Junior and Infant School

  Somerton Primary School

  Tredegar Wharf CP School

  Brynglas Junior Mixed and Infant School

  St. Julians Junior School

  St. Julians Infant School

  Alway CP Junior School

  Alway Infant School

  Ringland Infant School

  Glasllwch CP School

  Milton Infant School

  Milton Junior School

  Ringland Junior School

  Malpas Park Junior and Infant School

  Millbrook Junior School

  Monnow Infant School

  Millbrook Infant School

  Monnow Junior School

  Lliswerry Junior School

  Brynmawr CP Junior School

  Clydach CP School

  Darenfelen CP School

  Gilwern CP School

  Cefn Forest Junior

  Fleu-de-Lis Junior Mixed and Infant

  Dukestown Junior

  Dukestown Infants

  Glanhowy Junior and Infant

  Sirhowy Infant

  Deighton Primary School

  Georgetown County Primary

  Markham Primary

  Argoed Junior Mixed and Infants

  Rhiw Syr Dafydd Junior

  600

  Oakdale Infant

  Blackwood Infants

  Libanus Junior and Infant

  Pontllanfraith Junior Mixed

  Pontllanfraith Infants

  Cwmfelinfach Primary School

  Trinant Infants

  Crumlin Junior and Infants

  Pentwynmawr Junior and Infant School

  Tynewydd Junior and Infants

  Cwmcarn Junior and Infants School

  Waunfawr Junior Infants and Nursery

  Risca Town Church Primary

  Danygraig Junior and Infants

  Hillside Junior and Infants

  Varteg Primary

  Garndiffaith Primary

  Victoria Junior and Infants

  Pentwyn Junior and Infants

  George Street Junior

  Park Terrace Junior and Infants

  Penygarn Infants

  Greenlawn Junior

  Pontymoile Primary

  Griffithstown Infant School

  Goytre Fawr Junior and Infants

  Henllys Junior and Infants

  Park Street Infants

  Llanfoist Church Primary

  Llangattock-Nigh-Usk Church Primary

  Grosmont Junior Mixed and Infants

  Llanover Junior and Infants

  Brynderi Junior and Infants

  Norton Cross Junior and Infants

  Cross Ash Junior Mixed and Infants

  Llangattock-Vibon-Avel Junior and Infants

  Osbaston Infants

  Overmonnow Infants

  Mitchel Troy Church Primary

  Wyesham Infants

  Mathern Church Primary

  Sudbrook Church Primary

  Undy Church Primary

  Rogiet Church Primary

  Abertillery Church Primary School

  Arael Primary

  Blaenau Gwent Infants

  Blaentillery Infants

  Cwmtillery Junior

  Queen Street Junior and Infants

  Beaufort Hill Infants

  Rassau Primary

  Glyncoed Junior

  Glyncoed Infant

  Willowtown Infants

  Briery Hill County Primary School

  Waunlwyd Junior Mixed and Infants

  Winchestown Infant

  Nantyglo Junior and Infant

  Garnfach Infant and Nursery

  Cwmcelyn Infants

  Blaina Junior

  Blaina Infant

  Croesyceiliog North Road Infants

  Green Lane Junior Mixed

  Kemeys Fawr Infants

  Croesyceiliog Junior

  Llanyrafon Primary

  Maendy County Primary

  Oakfield Primary

  Pantside County Primary

  Abergavenny Llwynu Infants

  Langstone Primary

  Pontnewydd County Primary Schoolary

  Gelli Crug Infants

  Garnlydan Primary

  Pontygof Primary

  Penllwyn Infant

  Pembroke Road Infants

  601

  Blackwood Junior

  Trinant Junior School

  Brookfield Junior and Infants

  Fairwater Junior

  Fairwater Infants

  Llanmartin County Primary

  Penygarn Junior

  Pontygarreg Primary

  Ty Isaf Infants

  Pembroke Junior

  Sandy Lane Infants

  St. Mary's Junior Mixed Caldicot

  Ty Sign Junior

  Marshfield Junior and Infants School

  West End Infants

  Coed Eva Infant

  Coed Eva Junior Mixed

  Penllwyn Junior

  Govilon County Primary

  Llanfihangel Crucorney County Primary

  Ty-Sign Infants

  Thornwell Primary

  Lodge Hill Junior

  Greenmeadow Primary

  Coedcae Junior

  Sorfrydd Infants

  Cwm Junior and Infant School

  Llwynu Junior

  Bryn Junior and Infant

  Cefn-Fforest Infants

  Mount Pleasant Junior and Infants

  Durand Junior and Infants

  Llandogo County Primary

  Abercarn Junior Mixed and Infants

  Upper Cwmbran Infants

  Bryngwyn Junior and Infants

  Wyesham Junior

  Harold Road Junior

  Hollybush County Primary

  Lodge Hill Infants

  Cefn Wood County Primary

  Beaufort Hill County Primary School

  Willowtown Junior

  New Inn Infant

  George Street Infants

  Griffithstown Junior

  Raglan Junior

  Croesonen Infants

  Brynhyfryd Junior Infants and Nursery

  Ty'r Graig County Primary

  Duffryn Junior School

  Woodlands Junior

  Woodlands Infants

  Duffryn Infant School

  Ynysddu Junior and Infant School

  Cwmffrwdoer Primary School

  Shirenewton Junior and Infant School

  Pentrepoeth County Primary School

  Trellech County Primary School

  Malpas CIW Junior School

  Malpas Church CV Infant School

  Ponthir CV Primary

  Llantilio Pertholey CV

  Llanfair Kilgeddin Junior and Infant CV

  Llandewi Rhydderch CV

  Overmonnow Junior School

  St. Arvans Primary

  Portskewett VC Infants

  Raglan Infants

  Llanellen CV Junior and Infants

  Usk VC Infants and Junior School

  Caerwent Infants

  St. Peters CV Junior and Infants

  Osbaston Junior

  St. David's Romsan Catholic Junior and Infant school

  St. Josephs Roman Catholic Primary School

  St. Mary's Roman Catholic Junior School

  St. Mary's Roman Catholic Infant School

  St. Michael's Roman Catholic Primary School

  St. Patricks Roman Catholic Primary School

  602

  St. Gabriel's Roman Catholic Primary School

  St. David Lewis Roman Catholic Primary School

  Brynmawr RC School

  St Mary's Brynmawr CIWVP Aided

  Magor VA Primary

  Caerleon Endowed Junior School

  Caerleon Endowed Infants School

  All Saints RC Primary School

  St. Josephs RCP School

  Abergavenny RC

  St. Felix Blaenavon RC

  St. Alban's RC Primary

  Cwmbran RC Junior and Infants

  Abersychan RC Junior and Infants

  St. David's RC Junior and Infants Cumbran

  Chepstow St Marys RC Primary

  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list those primary schools in South Glamorgan(a) which have classes where Welsh is the sole or main medium of instruction of first or second language pupils, (b) which have classes of first or second language pupils where some of the teaching is through the medium of Welsh, (c) where Welsh is taught as a second language but not used as a teaching medium, and (d) where no Welsh is taught.

  Mr. Wyn Roberts
  The information is as follows:

  South Glamorgan Schools with some classes where Welsh is the sole or main medium of instruction.

  Lansdowne Primary School

  Ysgol Gymraeg Penarth

  Ysgol Gymraeg St Ffransis

  Ysgol Gymraeg Sant Baruc

  Ysgol Iolo Morganwg

  Ysgol Gymraeg Melin Grufydd

  Ysgol—y—Wern

  Ysgol Gymraeg Coed y Gof

  Ysgol Bro Eirwg

  South Glamorgan Schools with leaching through the medium of Welsh as a first or second language

  Tonyrywen School

  Eglwys Newydd Primary

  Llanishen Fach CP School

  Rhiwbeina Junior School

  Rhiwbeina Infants School

  South Glamorgan Schools with no teaching through the medium of Welsh

  Millbank CP School

  Adamsdown CP School

  Albany Primary School

  Allensbank Primary School

  Baden Powell CP School

  Birchgrove Primary School

  Trelai CP School

  Fairwater Primary School

  Gabalfa Primary School

  Gladstone CP School

  Gladstone Infant and Nursery School

  Grangetown Junior School

  Grangetown CP School

  Hawthorn Junior School

  Hawthorn Infant School

  Herbert Thompson Junior

  Herbert Thompson Infants

  Hywel DDA County Junior

  Hywel DDA Infants and Nursery

  Kitchener Primary School

  Marlborough Junior School

  Marlborough Road Infants

  Moorland Primary School

  Radnor Primary School

  Rhydypenau Primary School

  Roath Park CP School

  Greenway Primary

  Severn Junior School

  Severn Infant and Nursery School

  Stacey Primary School

  603

  Windsor Clive County Junior

  Windsor Clive Infant and Nursery

  Caerau Infant School

  Peter Lea Primary

  Cefn Onn CP School

  Bryn Hafod Primary School

  Cwrt-yr-Ala Junior School

  Pen y Bryn Primary

  Rumney Junior School

  Rumney Infants and Nursery

  Coed Glas Primary

  Glan-yr-Afon Junior

  Lakeside Primary School

  Pentrebane CP School

  Glan-yr-Afon Infants

  Trowbridge Infants and Nursery

  Mountstuart Primary

  Eglwys Wen CP School

  Llanedeyrn Primary School

  Springwood CP School

  Ninian Park Primary

  Trowbridge Junior School

  Viriamu Jones Primary

  Coryton CP School

  Glyncoed Infants School

  Glyncoed Junior School

  Bryn Celyn Junior School

  Bryn Celyn Infants School

  Albert CP School

  Barry Island Primary

  Cadoxton Junior School

  Cadoxton Infants School

  Cogan Primary School

  Colcot CP School

  Dinas Powys County Infants

  Fairfield Primary

  Gladstone CP School

  High St. Primary School

  Holton Junior School

  Holton County Infants

  Jenner Park Primary

  Llancarfan CP School

  Llanfair CP School

  Llangan CP School

  Maendy CP School

  Palmerston Primary School

  Radyr CP School

  Rhws CP School

  Romilly Junior School

  Romilly Infants School

  Sully Primary School

  Tongwynlais CP

  Victoria Primary School

  Llanilltud Fawr Primary

  Murch Junior School

  St. Athan Junior School

  St. Athan Infants School

  St. Illtyd's Junior School

  Llysfaen CP School

  Evenlode CP School

  Llandough Primary

  Eagleswell Junior School

  Y Bont Facn Primary

  Bryn Deri CP School

  St. Illtyd's Infants School

  Danescourt Junior School

  Gibbonsdown Junior School

  Eagleswell Infants and Nursery School

  Gibbonsdown Infants and Nursery School

  Oakfield Junior School

  Oakfield Infants and Nursery Unit

  Danescourt Infants

  St. Mellons CIW Primary

  Penarth Church-in-Wales

  St. Nicholas C/W Primary

  Peterston S.Ely CIW School

  Gwenfo CIW Primary

  St. Alban's Roman Catholic Primary

  St. Cuthbert's Roman Catholic Primary

  St. Francis Roman Catholic Junior School

  604

  St. Francis Infants School

  St. Joseph's Primary

  St. Mary's Roman Catholic Primary School

  St. Patrick's Roman Catholic Primary

  St. Peter's Junior School

  St. Peter's Infants and Nursery School

  St. Cadc's Primary School

  St. Anne's CIW Infants

  St. Monica's CIW School

  St. Paul's CIW Primary

  Tredegarville CIW Junior Infants

  Llandaff City CIW Junior

  Llandaff City CIW Infants

  Christ the King Roman Catholic Primary School

  St. John Lloyd Roman Catholic School

  Holy Family Roman Catholic Junior and Infants

  St. Mary the Virgin CIW

  St. Philip Evans Roman Catholic Junior

  All Saints CIW Primary

  St. Philip Evans Roman Catholic Infants School

  St. Helen's Infants and Nursery School

  Pendoylan CIW Primary School

  St. Andrews Major CIW

  Llansannor and Llanharry CIW

  St. Fagans CIW

  Primary St. David's CIW Primary

  St. Joseph's Roman Catholic Primary

  St. Helen's Roman Catholic Junior

  St. Bernadette's Primary School

  St. David's CIW Junior and Infants

  All Saints CIW Primary

  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list those primary schools in Mid Glamorgan(a) which have classes where Welsh is the sole or main medium of instruction of first or second language pupils, (b) which have classes of first or second language pupils where some of the teaching is through the medium of Welsh, (c) which teach no Welsh, and (d) where Welsh is taught as a second language but not used as a teaching medium.

  Mr. Wyn Roberts
  The information is as follows:

  Mid Glamorgan schools with teaching through the medium of Welsh as a first or second language

  Blaengarw Infants School

  Blaenrhondda Primary School

  Penygawsi County Primary School

  Ynyswen Infants School

  St. Brides Major CIW Primary

  Mid Glamorgan schools with some classes where Welsh is the sole or main medium of instruction

  Ysgol Santes Tudful

  Penderyn County Primary School

  Abercynon Infant School

  Coedybrain Infant School

  Dolau County Primary School

  Gwaelod-y-Garth Primary School

  Ysgol Gynradd Pont-Sion-Norton

  Heol-y-Celyn Primary School

  Tiryberth Primary School

  Ysgol Gynradd Aberdar

  Ysgol Gynradd Garth Olwg

  Ysgol Gynradd Gymraeg Tyderwen

  Ysgol Ifor Bach

  Ysgol Gynradd Tonyrefail

  Ysgol Gynradd Caerffili

  Ysgol Gynradd Llwyncelyn

  Ysgol Gynradd Gymraeg Bargod

  Ysgol Gynradd Ynyswen

  Ysgol Gynradd Penybont

  Creigiau Primary School

  Ysgol Gynradd Rhymni

  Ysgol Gynradd Rhydy Grug

  Ysgol Gynradd Llantrisant

  Ysgol Gynradd Bodringallt

  Ysgol Y Ferch Corneli

  605

  Ysgol Gynradd Castellau

  Ysgol Llyn Y Forwyn

  Ysgol Gymraeg Evan James

  Mid Glamorgan schools with no teaching through the medium of Welsh

  Abercanaid Primary School

  Cyfarthfa Junior School

  Brecon Road Infant School

  Caedraw Primary School

  Dowlais Infant School

  Gellifaelog Primary School

  Mount Pleasant Primary School

  Pant Primary School

  Pentrebach Infant School

  Gwaunfarren Primary School

  Heolgerrig Primary School

  Troedyrhiw Junior School

  Troedyrhiw Infant School

  Twynyrodyn Junior School

  Twynyrodyn Infant School

  Gelligeg Junior School

  Gelligeg Infant School

  Goetre Junior School

  Goetre. Infant School

  Gwernllwyn Junior School

  Ynysowen Junior School

  Edwardsville Junior School

  Ynysowen Infant School

  Oaklands Primary School

  Abercerdin Primary School

  Aberllechau CP School

  Aber Infant School

  Bargoed Infant School

  Betws Junior School

  Alaw Primary School

  Abernant CP School

  Bedlinog Junior School

  Blaengarw Junior School

  Blacnclydach Infant School

  Abertaf Primary School

  Bedlinog Infant School

  Cilfnydd CP School

  Brynnau CP School

  Blacnllechau Infant School

  Brithdir Primary School

  Coedpenmaen CP School

  Blaenycwm Primary School

  Bodringallt Junior School

  Blaengwawr Primary School

  Coed-y-Brain Junior School

  Coedylan Primary School

  Bodringallt Infant School

  Bryncethin Junior School

  Craig-yr-Eos Infant School

  Cacgarw CP School

  Cwmlai Primary School

  Cwmclydach Junior School

  Cwmaber Junior School

  Capcoch CP School

  Brynmenyn Primary School

  Gilfach Goch Infant School

  Cwmclydach Infant School

  Deri Primary School

  Bryntirion Infants School

  Glanffrwd Infant School

  Cymmer Junior Mixed School

  Caradog Primary School

  Blaencaerau Junior School

  Glantaf Infant School

  Cymmer CP Infant School

  Derwendeg CP School

  Graig-y-Wion CP School

  Dinas (TAI) Junior School

  Carnetown Primary School

  Dunraven CP School

  Ffynnon Taf Primary School

  Cefn Cribwr Primary School

  Hawthorn CP School

  Cefnpennar Infant School

  606

  Dyffryn Infant School

  Comin Junior Mixed School

  Fochriw Primary School

  Coety CP School

  Hendreforgan Junior School

  Ferndale Junior Mixed School

  Gelligaer Village Infant School

  Hendreforgan Infant School

  Ferndale Infant School

  Comin County Infants School

  Cwmfelin CP School

  Llanilltud Faerdref Junior

  Gelli CP School

  Gilfach Fargod Primary School

  Ffaldau CP School

  Llanilltud Faerdref Infants

  Coed-yr-Esgob CP School

  Cwmaman County Infant School

  Fronwen Primary School

  Hafod CP School

  Glan-y-Nant Infant School

  Garth Junior School

  Maes-y-Coed CP School

  Cwmbach Infant School

  Craig Bedlinog Infant School

  Hendrefadog Infant School

  Cwmdar CP School

  Glynogwr CP School

  Hcolycyw CP School

  Parclewis CP School

  Llwyncelyn Infant School

  Cynon Infant School

  Hendre Junior School

  Litchard Junior School

  Llanharan County Primary School

  Llwynypia County Primary School

  Darrenlas Primary School

  Hendre Infant School

  Llangrallo County Primary School

  Hengoed Junior School

  Llangynwyd County Primary School

  Penrhiwfer Infant School

  Llanhari County Primary School

  Maerdy Junior Mixed School

  Glynrwyn Infant School

  Hengoed Infant School

  Pontsion Norton County Primary School

  Maerdy Infant School

  Glynhafod County Junior School

  Llancaeach Junior School

  Pontyclun Junior School

  Parc Primary School

  Mynydd Cynffig County Junior

  Pwllgwaun Infant School

  Gwernifor County Junior School

  Mynydd Cynffig County Infants

  Rhigos County Primary School

  Tonyrefail Primary School

  Pentre Primary School

  Hirwaun Junior School

  Llanfabon Infant School

  Nantyffyllon County Primary School

  Nantgarw Infant School

  Pentyrch County Primary School

  Penygraig Junior Mixed School

  Hirwaun Infant School

  Nantymoel Junior School

  Penygraig Infant School

  Llwydcoed Primary School

  Nantymoel Infant School

  Trallwng Infant School

  Penyrenglyn Junior Mixed School

  Newtown Primary School

  Newton Primary School

  Trefforest County Primary School

  Pontlotyn Infant and Nursery School

  Penyrenglyn Infant School

  Pengeulan County Primary School

  Rhydri Primary School

  Nottage County Primary School

  607

  Pontrhondda County Primary School

  Senghenydd County Primary School

  Oldcastle Junior School

  Trehopcyn County Primary School

  Pontygwaith County Primary School

  Penrhiwceibr Junior School

  Oldcastle Infant School

  The Graig Junior Mixed School

  Pandy Infant School

  Trerobart CP School

  Penrhiwceibr Infant School

  St. Gwladys County Mixed Junior

  Pencoed County Junior School

  Porth Infant School

  Penywaun Infant and Nursery School

  South Bargoed Infant School

  Pencoed Infant school

  Perthcelyn County Infant School

  Tirphil Primary School

  Penybont Primary School

  Ton Junior Mixed School

  Ynysboeth Junior School

  Craig-Yr-Hesg CP School

  Ynysboeth CP Infant School

  Pil County Primary School

  Llwyncrwn Primary School

  Ton County Infant School

  Penywaun County Junior School

  Trelewis Primary School

  Plasnewydd Junior School

  Tonypandy CP School

  Twyn County Junior School

  Plasnewydd Infant School

  Gwauncclyn Infant School

  Cwmbach County Junior School

  Twyn Infant School

  Gwauncelyn Junior School

  Trealaw CP School

  Glenboi CP School

  Ystrad Mynach County Junior

  Cefn Primary School

  Treherbert County Infant School

  Ystrad Mynach County Infants

  Treorchy Primary School

  Cwmifor Junior School

  Tondu Infant School

  Cwm Ifor Infant School

  Trelales CP School

  Gwaunmeisgyn Junior School

  Williamstown Primary School

  Gwaunmeisgyn Infant School

  Maesybryn Primary School

  Tylorstown Primary School

  Lansbury Park Junior School

  Lansbury Park Infant School

  Tynewydd Junior School

  Tref-Y-Rhyg Primary School

  Plas-Y-Felin Infant School

  Plasyfelin Junior School

  Tynyrheol Primary School

  Ynyshir Infant School

  Greenhill Primary School

  Croesty County Primary School

  Maesyfelin Infant School

  Pandy'r Betws Infants School

  Marlas Infant School

  Corneli Junior School

  Rhiwgarn Infant School

  Penrhys Infant School

  Llangewydd Junior School

  Penrhys Junior School

  Bryntirion Junior School

  Porth Junior Mixed School

  Porthcawl Primary School

  Litchard Infant School

  Cefn Glas Infant School

  West Park Primary School

  Bryncethin Infant School

  Brackla Junior School

  Afon-y-Felin Primary School

  608

  Tonysguboriau County Primary School

  Upper Rhymney Primary School

  Lower Rhymney Primary School

  Abertysswg Primary School

  Elliot Town Primary School

  Phillipstown Primary School

  Cwmsyfiog Primary School

  Aberbargoed County Junior School

  Abergargoed Infant School

  Maesycwmmer Primary School

  Bedwas Junior School

  Tyn-y-Wern Junior School

  Tyn-y-Wern Infant School

  Machen Primary School

  Graig-y-Rhacca Junior School

  Ysgol-y-Graig Primary

  Blaenllynfi Infant School

  Graig-y-Rhacca Infant School

  Bedwas Infant School

  Hendredenny Park Primary

  Cwm Glas Infant School

  Gelligaer Village Junior School

  Pontlotyn Junior School

  Tondu Junior School

  Ynyshir Junior Mixed School

  Cwmaber County Infant School

  Edwardsville Infant School

  Garth Infant School

  Brackla Infant School

  Tremains Primary School

  Penyfai CIW Primary

  St. Illtyds RC Primary School

  St. Marys RC Primary School

  St. Aloysius Primary School

  Our Ladys RC Primary School

  St. Helen's RC Primary School

  St. Mary's and St. Patricks

  St. Michael's RC Primary School

  St. Gabriel and Raphael RC Primary School

  St. Margaret's RC Primary

  St. Robert's RC Primary

  Aberdare Town CW. Primary

  Cwmbach CIW. Primary School

  Wick Marcross CIW. Primary

  St. Mary's RC Primary School

  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list those primary schools in West Glamorgan (a) which have classes where Welsh is the sole or main medium of instruction of first or second language pupils, (b) which have classes of first or second language pupils, where some of the teaching is through the medium of Welsh, (c) which teach no Welsh and (d) where Welsh is taught as a second language but not used as a teaching medium.

  Mr. Wyn Roberts
  The information is as follows:

  West Glamorgan Schools with some Classes where Welsh isthe sole or main medium of instruction.

  Ysgol Gymraeg Lonlas

  Ysgol Gymraeg Bryn-Y-Mor

  Clydach Infant School

  Ysgol Gynradd Cwmgors

  Cwmllynfell C.P. School

  Ysgol Gynradd Felindre

  Garnswllt CP School

  Glyn Primary School

  Ysgol Gynradd Gwaun-Cae-Gurwen

  Ysgol Gymraeg Rhosafan

  Ysgol Gymraeg Castellnedd

  Ysgol Gynradd Gymraeg Bryniago

  Ysgol Gynradd Blaendulais

  Ysgol Gymraeg Cwmnedd

  Ysgol Gymraeg Pontybrenin

  Ysgol Gynradd Pontardawe

  West Glamorgan Schools with Teaching through the medium of Welsh as a first or second Language

  609

  Godrergraig Primary School

  Trethmelyn Primary School

  Rhiwfawr Primary School

  Trebannws Primary School

  Y Wern Primary School

  Y Login Fach Primary School

  West Glamorgan schools with no teaching through the medium of Welsh

  Brynhyfryd Junior School

  Brynhyfryd Infants School

  Brynmill Primary School

  Cadle Junior School

  Cadle Infants School

  Cwn Primary School

  Cwmbwrla Primary School

  Cwmrhydyceirw Primary School

  Danygraig Primary School

  Dunvant Junior School

  Gendros Primary School

  Glais Primary School

  Gors Junior School

  Gors Infants School

  Graig Infants School

  Grange Primary School

  Gwyrosydd Junior School

  Gwyrosydd Infants School

  Hafod Primary School

  Manselton Primary School

  Mayhill Junior School

  Mayhill Infants School

  Morriston Junior Boys School

  Morriston Infants School

  Oystermouth Primary School

  Pentrechwyth Primary School

  Pentrepoeth Junior Girls School

  Pentrepoeth Infants and Nursery School

  Plasmarl County Primary School

  Sketty Primary School

  St. Helen's Primary School

  St. Thomas's Primary School

  Terrace Road County Primary School

  Townhill Primary School

  Waunarlwydd Primary School

  Waun Wen Primary School

  Clwyd Primary School

  Ynystawe County Primary School

  Clase Infant School

  Clase Junior School

  Portmead Primary School

  Mayals County Primary School

  Cwmglas Primary School

  Trallwn County Primary Infant School

  Arfryn Primary School

  Blanymaes Primary School

  Trallwn County Primary Junior School

  Parkland Primary School

  Birchgrove Infants School

  Dunvant Infant School

  Newton County Primary School

  Whitestone County Primary School

  Hendrefoilan Primary School

  Birchgrove Junior School

  Alltwen County Primary School

  Blaendulais Primary School

  Bishopston Primary School

  Blaengwrach CP School

  Casllwchwr Primary School

  Cila CP School

  Blaenhonddan CP School

  Abergwynfi Junior School

  Clydach Junior School

  Brynhyfryd CP School

  Abergwynfi Infant School

  Craigcefnparc CP School

  Clun Primary School

  Baglan Primary School

  Crwys CP School

  Coedffranc Junior School

  Bryn CP School

  Coedffranc Infant School

  610

  Central Junior School

  Creunant Primary School

  Central Infant School

  Cwmafan Junior School

  Crymlyn CP School

  Cwmafan Infant School

  Cwn Nedd Primary School

  Cymer Afan Primary School

  Dyffryn Afan CP School

  Eastern Primary School

  Gorseinon County Junior School

  Gnoll Primary School

  Glan-Y-Mor CP School

  Gorseinon Infants School

  Glyncorrwg Primary School

  Catwg CP School

  Llansawel CP School

  Llanforlais Primary School

  Maesmarchog CP School

  Pontrhlydlyfen Primary School

  Llangyfelach CP School

  Llanrhidian Primary School

  Melin Junior School

  Sandfields Primary School

  Tonmawr Primary School

  Mynachlog Nedd Junior School

  Penclawdd Junior School

  Penclawdd Infant School

  Neath Abbey Infants

  Tirmorfa Primary School

  Pengelli Primary School

  Croeserw Primary School

  Penllergaer Primary School

  Tywyn Primary School

  Penyrheol Primary School

  Llangiwg Primary School

  Tonnau Primary/Comm. School

  Pontarddulais Primary School

  Ynysfach Comm. Primary School

  Blaenbaglan Primary School

  Pontlliw CP School

  Ynysmaerdy CP School

  Crynallt Junior School

  Rhos CP School

  Hengwrt CP School

  Rhydyfro Primary School

  Groes CP School

  Tairgwaith Primary School

  Crynallt Infant School

  Tregwyr Junior School

  Tregwyr Infant School

  Tre Uchaf CP School

  Craigfelen Primary School

  Pennard Primary School

  Knelston Primary School

  Dyfnant CP School

  Waunceirch CP School

  Pontybrenin Primary School

  Talycopa Primary School

  Glyncollen Primary School

  Melin County Infant School

  Cilffriw Primary School

  St. Josephs Junior School

  St. Josephs Infants School

  St. David's RC Primary School

  St. Illtyd's RC Primary

  Christchurch CIW School

  St. Josephs RC Primary School

  St. Josephs RC Primary School

  St. Josephs Infant School

  Bryncoch CIW School

  Ald Davies' CIW School

  St. Therese's RC School

  St. Josephs RC Junior School

AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD

  Aflatoxin
  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list in the Official Report the number and respective weight of imported cargoes of peanuts containing aflatoxin greater than the voluntary limit of 0·03 mg/kg for each of the last five years; and if he will indicate in respect of each cargo the ultimate purpose for which the peanuts were used.

  Mr. Donald Thompson
  This information is not available.

  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he has consulted the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds concerning the introduction of statutory limits of aflatoxin in nuts.

  Mr. Donald Thompson
  No.

  Mr. Barry Field
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what criteria are applied in determining the safe level of aflatoxin in nuts and nut products used for(a) human consumption, (b) feed stuffs for birds and animals which are kept for the production of meat, wool, and so on, (c) pet food and (d) wild bird food.

  Mr. Donald Thompson
  I refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Mr. Davies) on 21 April at column 565 and the reply given by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment to the hon. Member for Caerphilly on 18 April at column 279.

  Licensed Trade (Tenant's Security)
  Mr. Colvin
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the working of the code of practice on tenant's security in respect of the licensed trade.

  Mr. Donald Thompson
  My Department has received very few complaints from tenants about the working of the code since it was introduced by the Brewers' Society in 1973. I am, however, aware of the view expressed by some hon. Members concerning its application in two recent cases.

TRANSPORT

  Carlisle-Settle Railway Line
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what further representations he has received on the future of the Settle-Carlisle railway.

  Mr. David Mitchell
  I continue to receive various representations from hon. Members local authorities and others with an interest in the line. I hope that my right hon. Friend will be able to make an announcement about the line's future shortly.

  Road Traffic Statistics
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what was the total amount of road traffic from the Republic of Ireland which passed through the United Kingdom on its way to the continent of Europe during the last year for which full figures are available.
  612
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  No figures are available for car or coach traffic. Regarding goods traffic, it is estimated that in 1987 around 14,000 Irish-registered road goods vehicles left British ports for mainland Europe, most of which would have entered Great Britain from the Republic carrying (or going to fetch) goods in transit to (or from) mainland Europe. This and earlier figures are published in "Road Goods Vehicles on Roll-on Roll-off Ferries to Mainland Europe, 4th Quarter 1987" Department of Transport bulletin (88)1, a copy of which is in the Library. The figure does not include non-Irish foreign vehicles carrying Irish trade—a much smaller number; nor does it include British vehicles, either towing trailers making transit journeys, or otherwise carrying Irish trade with Europe between British ports.

  Rail Service (Bedford-St. Pancras)
  Mr. John Carlisle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether he has received any recommendations from the emergency services regarding the rail service between Bedford and St. Pancras.

  Mr. David Mitchell
  I have received no such recommendations. Perhaps my hon. Friend could write if he has any specific incident in mind.

  M40
  Mr. Pawsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will give his latest estimate for completion of the M40.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  Construction of some sections of the M40 extension between Oxford and Birmingham is already under way. Subject to the outcome of the recent public inquiry, work on the final section between Waterstock and Wendlebury, near Oxford, could start next year to enable the whole motorway extension to be open to traffic in 1991.

  Mr. Pawsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will review his conclusions on the adequacy of the proposed two-lane section of the M40 to take anticipated traffic flows up to the year 2000.

  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  The proposals for the Waterstock to Wendlebury section of the M40 were the subject of a public inquiry which ended in January. Before reaching final decisions on the standard of the road, we will carefully consider all the views expressed. together with the recommendations of the independent inspector.

  Continental Passenger Trains
  Mr. Warren
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assurances he has received from British Rail that its main lines will be able to be used by continental passenger trains, following the opening of the Channel tunnel, without the need for passengers to change to British Rail rolling stock to complete their journey; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Mitchell
  Most existing continental passenger trains are too wide and high for much of the British system. British Rail and French and Belgian railways are therefore jointly planning to operate a new fleet of high-speed passenger trains and night sleepers through the Channel tunnel. These trains will be designed to operate on all three networks.

ENVIRONMENT

  Council House Sales
  Mr. French
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how may council tenants over the ages of 70, 80 and 90 years, respectively, have(a) applied to buy and (b) bought their council homes for each year since 1980 for which figures are available.

  Mrs. Roe
  Information is not collected on the age of tenants applying to buy or buying their council homes.

  Licensed Trade Tenants
  Mr. Colvin
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he has received about the question of licensed trade tenants' security; if he will bring forward proposals for making them subject to the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Waldegrave
  We have received three representations since 1985, in addition to those received by MAFF. In 1985 my Department reviewed the Landlord and Tenant Act, part II, including proposals for extending its provisions to cover licensed trade tenants. Wide consultation revealed insufficient grounds for amending the legislation; that remains the position.

  Water Authorities
  Mr. O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish the increases in both domestic and business charges by all the regional water authorities for each of the past five years.

  Mr. Moynihan
  The information requested on increases in domestic water charges was set out in the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to the hon. Member for Copeland (Dr. Cunningham) on 29 June 1987 Official Report, column 46. Information on business charges will require time to prepare. I will answer that part of the hon. Member's as soon as it is available.

  Mr. O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish the annual return on assets by all the regional water authorities for each of the past five years.

  Mr. Moynihan
  The information requested is set out for English water authorities in the table.

  Achieved rate of return (DOE services) per cent.

  1982–83

  1983–84

  1984–85

  1985–86

  1986–87

  Northumbrian

  1·62

  1·75

  1·78

  2·11

  2·39

  Northwest

  1·36

  1·16

  0·72

  1·37

  1·69

  Severn Trent

  1·36

  1·10

  1·00

  1·39

  1·97

  Yorkshire

  1·31

  1·25

  0·99

  1·35

  1·74

  Anglian

  2·29

  1·69

  1·59

  1·83

  2·43

  Thames

  0·88

  0·90

  1·13

  1·68

  1·80

  Southern

  1·22

  0·97

  0·93

  1·56

  1·91

  Wessex

  1·31

  1·08

  0·77

  1·28

  1·99

  Southwest

  1·52

  1·39

  1·46

  1·88

  2·05

  Source: Water Authorities' Annual Reports and Accounts.

  Mr. O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what guidelines are given to regional water authorities on the revaluation of assets which are underground; and if he will make a statement.
  614
  Mr. Moynihan
  Guidance on accounting matters is given to each water authority in a letter from the Department which is reproduced in their annual accounts which are laid before Parliament and placed in the Library. The Water Authorities (Return on Assets) Order 1987, SI No. 2022, 1987 prescribes the basis on which assets are to be valued for the purposes of the order.

  Norfolk House, East Kilbride
  Mr. Ingram
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what assessment the Property Services Agency has made of the potential of Norfolk house in East Kilbride for the location of Civil Service work, what number of posts of(a) temporary and (b) a permanent nature are to be located on the site; and what is the nature of the work to be undertaken.

  Mr. Chope
  There is no current Civil Service requirement for accommodation in the East Kilbride area for which Norfolk house would be suitable. Norfolk house is surplus to requirements and is on the market for disposal.

  Combustion Plants
  Mr. Nicholas Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he has received from the oil industry concerning the European Community directive on large combustion plants; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Moynihan
  My officials have regular discussions with representatives of the oil industry about this draft directive, and my noble Friend the Minister for Environment, Countryside and Water was recently in correspondence with the president of the United Kingdom Petroleum Industry Association on this subject.

  London Boroughs (Debts)
  Sir Hugh Rossi
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, pursuant to his answers to the hon. Members for Hornsey and Wood Green of 28 April and for Southwark and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes) of 14 March,Official Report, column 459, why the information placed in the Library is incomplete for the London boroughs; and if he will now provide the information on indebtedness for all London boroughs.

  Mr. Chope
  [holding answer 4 May 1988]The information, which related to 1986–87, placed in the Library is incomplete because the following authorities had not submitted returns: Camden, Greenwich, Islington, Lambeth, Lewisham, Southwark, Brent, Ealing, Haringey, Harrow. Southwark and Harrow have since submitted returns, but the table provides information for all London boroughs for 1984–85, the latest year for which complete information is available.

  Capital Debt and Total Capital Debt per head of population at end of 1984–85

  Total Debt (£000)

  Debt per head of population (£000)

  Camden

  558,684

  3104

  Greenwich

  356,276

  1649

  Hackney

  400,130

  2128

  615

  Total Debt (£000)

  Debt per head of population (£000)

  Hammersmith and Fulham

  227,770

  1508

  Islington

  589,736

  3574

  Kensington and Chelsea

  252,758

  1859

  Lambeth

  528,881

  2168

  Lewisham

  337,080

  1453

  Southwark

  550,306

  2548

  Tower Hamlets

  184,188

  1270

  Wandsworth

  334,683

  1297

  Westminster

  234,179

  1287

  Barking and Dagenham

  91,597

  615

  Barnet

  167,530

  562

  Bexley

  111,556

  512

  Brent

  347,212

  1362

  Bromley

  119,202

  400

  Croydon

  151,699

  476

  Ealing

  274,678

  950

  Enfield

  198,840

  756

  Haringey

  421,275

  2106

  Harrow

  123,380

  611

  Havering

  119,789

  499

  Hillingdon

  228,911

  987

  Hounslow

  232,752

  1176

  Kingston-upon-Thames

  73,113

  546

  Merton

  144,982

  884

  Newham

  372,853

  1784

  Redbridge

  133,887

  590

  Richmond-upon-Thames

  82,331

  511

  Sutton

  87,157

  513

  Waltham Forest

  182,655

  850

  City of London

  245,621

  49,124

  Property Transactions
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make it his policy to make a public announcement on the completion of any property transactions involving the acquisition of new accommodation.

  Mr. Chope
  [holding answer 3 May 1988]: No. This would not be practicable as the PSA is constantly relinquishing and acquiring property as part of the management of a civil estate comprising about 8,800 properties.

NORTHERN IRELAND

  Newtownards Vehicle Inspection Centre
  Mr. John D. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will list in relation to the Newtownards vehicle inspection centre(a) the operating hours each day, (b) the number of vehicles being tested each day and (c) the present waiting list of vehicles requiring tests; and what provision there is at present for overtime work at this centre.

  Mr. Needham
  The operating hours of the Newtownards vehicle inspection and driving test centre are 8.25 am-4.55 pm, Monday to Friday inclusive. The number of vehicles being tested each day is 110. On 22 April 1988 the waiting time for test appointments was four weeks for goods vehicles and six weeks for private cars.

  There is no provision at present for overtime working at this centre.

  Car Parking (Newtownards)
  Mr. John D. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what free car parking he proposes(a)
  616
  to retain and (b) to provide in Newtownards for persons travelling into the town to work in shops and commercial premises.

  Mr. Needham
  It is the intention of the Department of the Environment (Northern Ireland) that the existing car parks at Ann street, Upper Court street and Talbot street, Newtownards should remain free of charge for the foreseeable future.

  Potatoes
  Mr. Mallon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many potato producers in Northern Ireland have been seriously affected by the potato surplus between September 1987 and March 1988.

  Mr. Viggers
  [holding answer 4 May 1988]: Information on the effect on individual producers is not available to the Department of Agriculture.

  Army Information Services
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland which officials in charge of the Army Information Services at HQ, Northern Ireland, since 1971 have been interviewed by an official inquiry or by other official persons in connection with(a) psychological information, (b) an alleged shoot to kill policy, (c) alleged political disinformation, and (d) any alleged use of forged documentation; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 28 April 1988]: I have been asked to reply.

  It is not the practice to comment on specific individuals.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

  Southern Africa
  Mr. David Nicholson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is his policy on relations with Southern Africa in the light of the Gersony report, sponsored by the United States State Department, on conditions in Mozambique; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Mellor
  We encourage peaceful solutions to regional problems. Our substantial aid programme contributes to the relief of suffering and the promotion of economic development in Mozambique. The Gersony report bears out our view of RENAMO as responsible for widespread and premeditated atrocities and as lacking any general support amongst the Mozambican people.

  Mr. David Nicholson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what information he has received since 1 January regarding South African-backed incursions into Mozambique; what representations he has made to the South African Government on such matters; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Mellor
  We have no evidence of recent incursions. We condemn cross-border violations in either direction.

  Republic of Ireland
  Mr. Beggs
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to the Government of the Irish Republic about the
  617
  claim to part of the United Kingdom embodied in articles 2 and 3 of the Republic's constitution; and what further representations he intends to make.

  Sir Geoffrey Howe
  None. Article 1 of the Anglo-Irish Agreement explicitly states that both Governments"affirm that any change in the status of Northern Ireland would only come about with the consent of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland."

  St. Helena
  Dr. Marek
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs why no Government dwellings were completed on St. Helena in 1987–88, and how many are expected to be completed in 1988–89.

  Mr. Eggar
  No Government dwellings were built last year on St. Helena because the Public Works Department was fully committed to other major projects such as the Prince Andrew school and the bulk fuel installation. However, £165,000 was made available from our aid programme for use by the private sector through the Housing Assistance Board.

  St. Helena's housing policy for 1988–89 is still under consideration and it is not yet known how many dwellings will be built this year.

DEFENCE

  Chile (Arms Purchases)
  Mr. Foulkes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he has received any inquiries from the Government of Chile regarding the possible purchase of Javelin antiaircraft missiles from Short Brothers.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  It has been the policy of successive British Governments not to comment on matters relating to the supply of defence equipment to foreign Governments.

  AQD Laboratories, Harefield
  Mr. Shersby
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he has yet reached a decision as to whether there is a continuing service requirement for the AQD Laboratories at Harefield; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  AQD, Harefield, closed on 26 February 1988. Since there is no further defence requirement for the site it will be passed to the PSA which will arrange for its disposal on the open market.

  AWACS
  Sir Eldon Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he expects each of the seven Boeing AWACS aircraft ordered in place of Nimrod AEW, to be available for active service in the Royal Air Force; to what extent these anticipated in-service dates differ from those originally promised and announced; and if the delivery and technical performance of the various auxiliary systems that Boeing is purchasing from its subcontractors are now guaranteed.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence announced to the House on 18 December 1986, at column 1352, the AWACS aircraft will 618
  be delivered into RAF service starting in 1991. Since that announcement there has been no slippage in the anticipated in-service dates.

  The delivery and technical performance of the various auxiliary systems that Boeing is purchasing from its subcontractors form part of Boeing's overall contractual commitment to deliver complete AWACS aircraft meeting our performance requirements. The programme is currently on schedule with no major technical problems.

  Israel
  Mr. Cummings
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will give figures for trade between Israel and Britain, for each of the past five years, in military products.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  It has been the policy of successive Administrations not to give details of defence equipment sales. We maintain restrictions on arms sales to Israel because of the continuing Israeli military presence in Lebanon.

  Ammunition and Explosives (Storage)
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, further to his answer of 20 April concerning ammunition and explosives stored near to population areas, whether, following the Donnington fires, he will review his Department's policy in connection with(a) planning applications which involve the encroachment of buildings towards the defence estate, (b) the possible removal of ammunition and explosives stores from current defence estate sites where population areas have built-up nearby, and (c) the encroachment of the defence estate toward residential areas; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Freeman
  I am satisfied with the present procedures for consultation between local planning authorities and my Department in respect of planning applications for developments in areas surrounding certain Ministry of Defence establishments, including depots holding ammunition and explosives, neither of which are stored at Donnington. There are, however, major difficulties in relocating ammunition and explosives depots from those areas which have already become built-up, although stringent safety rules are enforced. We are equally concerned to ensure that hazard zones around certain Ministry of Defence establishments do not affect members of the public and, although the Crown is not bound by the Town and Country Planning Acts, it is my Department's policy to observe similar planning procedures.

  US Nuclear Submarines
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what are the implications for continued sharing of nuclear defence information under the Anglo-American mutual defence agreement of the leaked documents on the maintenance of US nuclear submarines at Holy Loch published in The Scotsman newspaper on 22 April;

  (2) what is his assessment of the implications for the operational practice of United States submarines allocated to NATO duty of the leaked documents published in The Scotsman newspaper on 22 April originating at the Holy Loch submarine base;

  (3) what are the implications of the leaked documents from the United States naval base at Holy Loch published

  619
  in The Scotsman newspaper on 22 April for the ordering programme for the Polaris-Poseidon material management system.

  Mr. Ian Stewart
  The loss of internal United States Navy documents which I understand were unclassified is a matter for the United States authorities. I am assured that there are no implications of the kind referred to by the hon. Member.

  Atomic Energy Authority
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if any work is carried out for his Department at the Atomic Energy Research establishment operated by the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority at Harwell; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  MOD uses the services of the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority establishment at Harwell as appropriate on normal commercial terms.

  Corsham Bunker Complex
  Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what representations he has received concerning the Corsham Bunker complex belonging to his Department; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Ian Stewart
  My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has received a number of representations making speculative remarks about the Corsham site, on which I am not prepared to comment.

  Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will state the purpose and functions of his Department's Corsham Bunker complex.

  Mr. Ian Stewart
  No.

  Mr. Colin Wallace (Dossier)
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many members of the armed forces and civil servants have been interviewed in connection with the dossier of information submitted to the Prime Minister on 1 November 1984 by Mr. Colin Wallace.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: I have nothing to add to the answer I gave the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell) on 20 July 1987 at columns 93–94.

  Irish Republic
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on how many occasions, in each year from 1973 to the current date, members of the armed forces on duty have crossed into the Irish Republic.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]From records held, the number of occasions when members of Her Majesty's armed forces on duty have crossed into the Republic of Ireland by year since 1982 is as follows. The figures include crossings both on land and in the air. Records of such occasions prior to 1982 are not available.
  620

  Year

  Number

  1982

  45

  1983

  31

  1984

  31

  1985

  27

  1986

  50

  1987

  55

  11988

  11

  1 As at 27 April 1988.

  On the vast majority of occasions the border was crossed as a result of navigational errors; these incidents were notified to the Irish Government. On the remaining occasions, the border was crossed with the agreement of the Irish Government.

  Covert Operations (Forgery)
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his policy towards the forging of documents by Army printing presses in Northern Ireland, in connection with covert operations.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]It is not the practice to comment on operational matters.

  Northern Ireland Training and Advisory Team
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Brent, East on 28 March,Official Report, column 364, when information on the Northern Ireland training and advisory team became unavailable.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: I have nothing to add to my previous answer.

  Royal Engineer Survey Troop
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Brent, East on 28 March,Official Report, column 364, on what basis detailed records relating to the Royal Engineer survey troop were destroyed or disposed of.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: They were destroyed when no longer required.

  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Brent, East on 28 March,Official Report, column 364, what other Royal Engineer survey troops were stationed at Castledillon in 1974–75; and what was their numerical designation.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: None.

  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Brent, East on 28 March,Official Report, column 364, on what date the Royal Engineer survey troop was formed; and on what date it was dispersed;

  (2) pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Brent, East on 28 March, Official Report, column 364, on what date the 4th Field Survey Troop, Royal Engineers, was formed; and when it was disbanded.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: 4 Field Survey Troop Royal Engineers was formed in early 1973 at Castledillon, and disbanded in late 1975, since there was no longer a requirement for the unit.

  Records (Destruction)
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his policy towards the destruction of original records kept by his Department.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: The policy regarding the destruction of original records by the Ministry of Defence is governed by the Public Records Acts of 1958 and 1967.

  Army Information Services
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will place in the Library copies of the scripts of Army Information Services presentations at Commander Land Forces study days at Army Headquarters Northern Ireland from January 1975 to the current date.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: No.

  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will place in the Library copies of all printed material designed and printed at Army Headquarters Northern Ireland and disseminated to the public from 1972 to the current date.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: No. Comprehensive records of such published documents since 1972 could not be compiled without disproportionate cost.

  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on how many occasions members of the Army Information Services have planted hoax bombs between 1973 and the current date; and whether such devices were subsequently dismantled by an Army explosive ordnance disposal team.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: I am aware of none. Such an act would not have been part of the duties of a member of the Army Information Services and would have been illegal.

  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) if any members of the Army Information Services in Northern Ireland, including those involved in psychological operations, have ever carried or been involved in possession of captured terrorist weapons or explosives in public places from 1972 to the current date;

  (2) if, from 1972 to the current date, members of the Army Information Services in Northern Ireland, have ever been asked to masquerade as members of paramilitary groups; and whether such activity included the carrying of captured terrorist weapons or explosives.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: I am aware of none.

  Firearms (Silencers)
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on how many occasions firearms fitted with silencers have been used by members of the Army in Northern Ireland against civilian targets in each year since 1972.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: I am aware of none.

  Psychological Operations
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence where courses have been held on psychological warfare and psychological operations in which his Department was involved in each year from 1972 to the current date in the United Kingdom and the United States of America.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: Courses were held, until their closure, at the joint warfare establishment at Old Sarum, Salisbury (1972–78), and at the joint warfare wing of the National Defence College at Latimer (1978–82). Since 1982 responsibility for the courses has transferred to MOD central staff. With regard to courses in the United States of America, I have nothing to add to the answer I gave on 7 March 1988 at column 59.

  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on what basis civil servants or Army personnel have been selected to attend psychological warfare and psychological operations courses from 1972 to the current date.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: Information for the period 1972–73 is no longer available. From 1973 to the present day eligibility for attendance has extended to any officer of the rank of lieutenant-commander or equivalent and above. For those MOD posts which may require a further understanding of psychological operations techniques attendance is mandatory before appointment is taken up.

  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will publish in the Official Report the syllabus of courses in psychological warfare and psychological operations in which his Department was involved (a) in the United Kingdom and (b) in the United States of America, from 1972 to the current date.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: No.

  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what percentage of the officers commanding the information policy unit, information liaison unit and the information planning unit in Northern Ireland, underwent training in psychological operations or psychological warfare in the United States of America from 1971 to the current date.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: I have nothing further to add to the reply I gave the hon. Member on 7 March 1988 at column 59.

  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many employees of the BBC from 1971 to current date attended courses or seminars at his Department's establishments relating to psychological operations or psychological warfare activities.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: The present courses are open only to students from Ministry of Defence and NATO military and civilian staffs.

  Joint Warfare Establishment and Joint Intelligence Centre
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list any non-governmental individuals or
  623
  organisations, in each year from 1972 to current date, which visited the joint warfare establishment or joint intelligence centre.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: No records of visits by individuals from non-governmental organisations are available prior to 1978. From the records available from 1978 to date, apart from guest speakers, no such visits to the joint warfare wing or its successor establishment can be identified.

  Security Forces (Civilian Deaths)
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if any civilians have been shot by members of the security forces using captured terrorist weapons.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: I am aware of none.

  Exercise Clockwork Orange
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what inquiries were undertaken by his Department into the circumstances surrounding the operation in Northern Ireland known as Clockwork Orange.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell) on 20 July 1987 at columns 93–94.

  Captain Fred Holroyd, Retired
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) pursuant to the answer of 28 March,Official Report, column 362, if he is able to specify the various dates when assistance was given by his Department to the Royal Ulster Constabulary into the allegations of Captain Fred Holroyd (retired);

  (2) pursuant to the answer of 28 March, Official Report, column 362, if he is able to specify what appropriate assistance was given to the Royal Ulster Constabulary into the allegations of Captain Fred Holroyd (retired);

  (3) pursuant to the answer of 28 March, Official Report, column 362, from what grade or grades of civil servant appropriate assistance was given to the Royal Ulster Constabulary into the allegations of Captain Fred Holroyd (retired).

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: I have nothing to add to the answer I gave on that occasion.

  Ulster Defence Regiment
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many serving or former serving members of the Ulster Defence Regiment have been charged with criminal offences since 1971.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: The information is not available in the form requested.
  624
  However, since September 1984, 234 members of the UDR have been convicted in the civil courts of criminal offences whilst still serving. These figures exclude minor motoring offences. In the case of serious offences, the soldiers convicted were discharged from the regiment in accordance with UDR regulations. Comparable information is not available before September 1984. Information is not held by my Department about former serving members of the UDR who were convicted of offences after they had left the regiment.

  Mr. Colin Wallace
  Mr. Livingstone
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Brent, East on 7 March,Official Report, column 60, on what date Mr. Colin Wallace was commissioned into the Ulster Defence Regiment; and on what date he was promoted to captain.

  Mr. Freeman
  [holding answer 28 April 1988]: As I explained in my letter of 18 April to the hon. Member, Mr. Wallace was granted a commission as a part-time member of the UDR in the rank of second-lieutenant and was granted the acting rank of captain both with effect from 18 January 1972.

HOME DEPARTMENT

  Firearms
  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will call for a report from the chief constable of the Thames Valley police to provide evidence to support the chief constable's statement of 27 April, that the application was properly and thoroughly inquired into in the cases of applications for the grant of a firearms certificate dated 23 November 1986, the variation to the certificate dated 23 March 1987 and the variation to the certificate dated 14 July 1987 of the late Michael Ryan.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  No.

  Juvenile Offenders
  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will list the number of 14-year-olds given custodial sentences in 1986 by constabulary area; and if he will express these figures also as a percentage of juveniles cautioned or found guilty of an offence in a juvenile court.

  Mr. John Patten
  The information available centrally which may be incomplete, is given in the following table. Data relating to juveniles found guilty at magistrates' courts giving a breakdown by police force area and offence group are published annually in tables S3.2(B) and S3.2(C) of "Criminal Statistics, England and Wales, Supplementary Tables, Vol. 3". Similar information about juvenile cautioning is available in tables S3.7(B) and S3.7(C) of this publication, copies of which are in the Library.
  625

  Juveniles found guilty at magistrates' courts or cautioned for indictable offences by police force area

  England and Wales 1986

  Numbers and percentages

  Police force area

  Number of males aged 14 given detention centre orders l 3

  Number of persons aged 10–16 found guilty at magistrates' courts or cautioned2

  (a) as a percentage of(b)

  (a)

  (b)

  (c)

  Avon and Somerset

  5

  3,088

  0·16

  Bedfordshire

  4

  1,381

  0·29

  Cambridgeshire

  3

  1,833

  0·16

  Cheshire

  8

  2,507

  0·32

  Cleveland

  10

  2,970

  0·34

  Cumbria

  7

  1,688

  0·41

  Derbyshire

  12

  2,219

  0·54

  Devon and Cornwall

  14

  2,446

  0·57

  Dorset

  3

  1,332

  0·23

  Durham

  20

  2,341

  0·85

  Essex

  4

  3,110

  0·13

  Gloucestershire

  —

  1,188

  —

  Greater Manchester

  88

  10,801

  0·81

  Hampshire

  5

  4,599

  0·11

  Hertfordshire

  4

  2,125

  0·19

  Humberside

  7

  3,493

  0·20

  Kent

  5

  2,669

  0·19

  Lancashire

  24

  3,968

  0·60

  Leicestershire

  11

  2,366

  0·46

  Lincolnshire

  9

  1,841

  0·49

  London, City of

  —

  40

  —

  Merseyside

  26

  4,375

  0·59

  Metropoiitan Police District

  53

  13,942

  0·38

  Norfolk

  6

  1,805

  0·33

  Northamptonshire

  3

  1,235

  0·24

  Northumbria

  34

  6,285

  0·54

  North Yorkshire

  4

  1,794

  0·22

  Nottinghamshire

  12

  4,579

  0·26

  South Yorkshire

  19

  4,716

  0·40

  Staffordshire

  11

  1,876

  0·59

  Suffolk

  —

  1,545

  —

  Surrey

  4

  988

  0·40

  Sussex

  7

  2,328

  0·30

  Thames Valley

  8

  3,834

  0·21

  Warwickshire

  —

  1,019

  —

  West Mercia

  5

  2,796

  0·18

  West Midlands

  25

  10,755

  0·23

  West Yorkshire

  39

  8,351

  0·47

  Wiltshire

  1

  1,734

  0·06

  Dyfed Powys

  1

  833

  0·12

  Gwent

  3

  1,596

  0·19

  North Wales

  10

  1,667

  0·60

  South Wales

  18

  3,921

  0·46

  England and Wales

  532

  139,979

  0·38

  1 Custodial penalties are not available for females aged 14.

  2 The majority of these offenders would have appeared at juvenile courts.

  3 Figures are those recorded centrally and are approximate: detailed checking of individual cases would involve disproportionate cost

  Nationality
  Mr. Madden
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many staff were employed in the nationality division of his Department to process nationality applications in each month since April 1987.

  Mr. Renton
  [holding answer 3 May 1988]: The numbers of staff employed in case-working groups processing nationality applications were:

  Numbers

  1987

  April

  151

  May

  148

  June

  152

  July

  146

  August

  144

  September

  151

  626

  Numbers

  October

  149

  November

  148

  December

  150

  1988

  January

  148

  February

  149

  March

  149

  April

  147

  These figures do not include staff processing inquiries about citizenship status, dealing with requests for application forms and maintaining the computer records which support the processing of cases.

  Mr. Madden
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what contingency plans were made by the nationality division of his Department in early 1987 to deal with the expected extra work caused by the
  627
  nationality deadlines; and how those plans were amended in October 1987 when the extent of that extra demand became apparent.

  Mr. Renton
  [holding answer 3 May 1988]: An additional case-working group (17 staff) was created on 1 April 1987; and further provision was made to increase from 150 to 170 the number of staff wholly employed on considering applications with effect from 1 April 1988.

  In August 1987, case-working resources were diverted to responding promptly to general inquiries about citizenship and supplying application forms and to recording the receipt of new applications. When it became apparent that these measures were insufficient to deal with the growing volume of new applications being received, overtime working began on 8 November and has been in operation ever since. The full extent of the demand did not become apparent until after December 1987, when 100,000 citizenship applications were submitted in one month. Further measures have been taken since then, including the ones I announced in the House on 16 February 1988 at column 683.

  Because of the priority accorded to these matters, and recruitment difficulties in the Croydon area, it has not yet been possible to achieve the projected increase in case-working capacity provided for from 1 April 1988. That will be done as soon as possible. We hope also to announce shortly detailed plans for substantial additional case-working capacity at a new location, probably on Merseyside.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL

  Crown Prosecutors (Manual of Guidance)
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will place in the Library a copy of the manual of guidance issued to Crown prosecutors in England and Wales; and if he will make a statement as to the criteria upon which a decision to prosecute is based, as set out in the manual.

  The Attorney-General
  [pursuant to his reply, 22 April 1988, c. 574]: I have now had the opportunity of considering with the Director of Public Prosecutions whether it would be proper to place the manuals of guidance issued to Crown prosecutors in the Library. It is the view of both the Director and myself that such a course would be inappropriate.

  The requirement in section 10 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 to publish guidance for Crown prosecutors expressly refers to the general principles upon which certain key prosecution decisions are taken. As I stated in my answer of 22 April, those general principles are set out and illustrated in the code for Crown prosecutors. The terms of section 10 do not, in my view, require the Director to make available for inspection detailed internal guidance, instructions, and so on, issued to assist Crown prosecutors in the exercise of their duties and assembled for convenience in manual form.

  Both the Director and I continue to recognise the need for the general principles of prosecution decision-making to be as open and easily understood as possible. With this objective in mind, the Director is considering whether, and, if so, to what extent, the existing published criteria might usefully be expanded.

PRIME MINISTER

  Government Achievements
  Sir John Biggs-Davison
  To ask the Prime Minister if she will list the achievements of Her Majesty's Government since May 1979 in respect of the whole of the United Kingdom and also in respect of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

  The Prime Minister
  The rate of inflation has been reduced to levels not seen for 20 years. The United Kingdom is well into its seventh successive year of steady growth, at an average annual rate of 3 per cent.; in 1987 national output grew faster than in any other major industrialised country. Business investment reached a record level in 1987 and is forecast to rise by a further 9 per cent. in 1988. Since 1981, United Kingdom manufacturers have maintained their volume share of world trade, following decades of decline; and in 1987 their share increased slightly. The level of the United Kingdom's net overseas assets has increased sevenfold since 1979 to about £90 billion by the end of 1987, yielding earnings of over £5·5 billion in 1987. Manufacturing productivity has risen at an average annual rate of over 5 per cent. since 1980 — faster than in any other major industrialised country, after being at the bottom of the league in the previous two decades. In 1987, non-North sea company profitability rose to 10·5 per cent., its highest level for over 20 years, having risen in every year since 1981.

  The Government have continued to maintain sound public finances, and have now balanced the budget. In 1987–88, for only the second year since the beginning of the 1950s, the Government made a net repayment of public sector debt. The burden of debt interest has fallen, and this, together with continued improvements in efficiency, has enabled the Government to increase spending on priority programmes while ensuring that public expenditure continues to fall as a proportion of GDP.

  The Government have pursued a substantial programme of tax reform. The aim has been to create a climate in which businesses can thrive and individual initiative and risk-taking are rewarded. The basic rate of income tax has been reduced from 33 to 25 per cent., and the main personal allowances are fully 25 per cent. higher in real terms than in 1978–79. Nine higher rates of income tax running up to 83 per cent. have been replaced by a single higher rate of 40 per cent. A new system of independent taxation for husbands and wives will apply from 1990. Business taxation has been radically restructured, leaving the United Kingdom corporation tax rate one of the lowest in the industrialised world. Seventeen rates of capital transfer tax running up to 75 per cent. have been replaced by a single rate of 40 per cent. on inheritance; and the taxation of purely inflationary capital gains has been ended. Five taxes and a number of unjustified tax breaks have been abolished.

  Since 1979, the Government have privatised 17 major companies and a number of other enterprises. As a result of this policy and tax reliefs designed to encourage shareholding, the number of individual shareowners in the United Kingdom, at one in five of the adult population, has trebled since 1979. Getting on for 40 per cent. of the state-owned industrial sector the Government inherited in 1979 has been returned to private enterprise. And the

  629
  privatisation programme is set to continue — the Government have already announced their intention to privatise the electricity supply industry, the water authorities in England and Wales and British Steel.

  The Government have introduced a large number of measures to improve the operation of markets. Pay, price and dividend controls have been abolished, together with controls on foreign exchange, bank lending and hire purchase, and restrictions on industrial and office development. Incentives have been increased by tax reductions and reform and by the restructuring of national insurance contributions. The Government have introduced a tax relief to encourage the spread of profit-related pay.

  Employment in Great Britain has risen by almost 1·7 million since March 1983, the longest period of sustained employment growth in almost 30 years. Unemployment throughout the United Kingdom has fallen by over 700,000 from its July 1986 peak and the unemployment rate is now below the European Community average. It has fallen in all regions of the country with the biggest falls over the last year in the west midlands, the north-west and Yorkshire and Humberside. Long-term unemployment in the United Kingdom fell by a record 234,000 in the year to January, whilst unemployment among under-25s is at its lowest level for over five years and is now much lower than the European Community average.

  Changes in employment legislation and measures to assist labour mobility have improved the operation of the labour market. Many restrictions on the employment of women have been lifted.

  The Government's policies have helped the small firms sector to grow rapidly and to make a substantial contribution to employment and wealth creation. About 1 million additional jobs were created in the United Kingdom by small firms and self-employment between 1982 and 1984, and since 1980 the number of small firms has grown by around 500 a week. Self-employment has risen by over 1 million since June 1979. The small firms service provides advice and support for small firms. The enterprise allowance scheme has helped over 300,000 people in Great Britain to set up in business on their own. The Government have helped create a network of local enterprise agencies to encourage the development of small firms.

  The Government have introduced entirely new approaches to delivering practical help for unemployed people to get back to work. Since July 1986, some 3·5 million personal interviews have been carried out under restart. 90 per cent. of them resulting in an offer of positive help from the range of opportunities available, including job-clubs and the still expanding enterprise allowance scheme. The Government have taken steps to ensure that benefits are properly paid to those who are entitled to them and not to others. The work of jobcentres, previously administered by the Manpower Services Commission, and that of the unemployment benefit service have now been brought together in the employment service, with the priority of giving effective help to unemployed people, especially the long-term unemployed, and placing them in jobs and training.

  The Government have revolutionised vocational education and training for young people through the technical and vocational education initiative (TVEI) and two-year youth training scheme (YTS). The TVEI became a national scheme last autumn. Over 1·5 million young
  630
  people have had vocational training under YTS, and a wide range of courses leading towards a vocational qualification is available to all 16 and 17-year-old school leavers. From September this year, all young people not going into a job or staying in full-time education will be guaranteed YTS until their 18th birthday. Unemployment on social security benefit will no longer be an option for this group.

  The Government have announced a major new programme, employment training, building on the experience and successes of the community programme and the new job training scheme. The Government will guarantee employment training or a place in the enterprise allowance scheme or in a job club to all those aged between 18 and 25 who have been unemployed for between six and 12 months, and also aim to provide employment training for those over 25 who have been unemployed for two years. The National Council for Vocational Qualifications is establishing a clear system of relevent vocational qualifications.

  Legislation has been passed protecting members against abuses of trade union power, extending their rights to influence the affairs of their unions and restoring the balance in industrial relations between managements and unions. In particular, secondary blacking and picketing have been made unlawful and unions are required to hold ballots before strike action.

  The Government have stepped up the attack on urban decay and have given priority to encouraging investment in inner city areas through a range of measures amounting to some £3 billion in 1988–89. A new action for cities drive was launched in March 1988 which included a new urban development corporation in Sheffield and the extension of the existing corporation in Merseyside; streamlined grants to encourage the development of inner city land arid buildings; more help for small businesses in inner city areas; further Government support for links between schools and employers; new crime prevention initiatives; and better inner city roads. To help pull together the various Government programmes involved, city action teams have been established based in Birmingham, Leeds, Liverpool, London, Manchester, Newcastle upon Tyne and Nottingham. At local level, 16 inner city task forces support projects which open up job and enterprise opportunities for local residents.

  The Government have launched a major five-year campaign to ensure that business in every part of the country is fully prepared to take advantage of the single market that will exist in the European Community by 1992.

  The Government have encouraged competition throughout the economy. Proposals have been published for the reform of the legislation on mergers and restrictive trade practices.

  The Government have launched the enterprise initiative, with the objective of helping businesses acquire the skills and information they require to compete effectively.

  The balance of regional policy has been changed so that the Government's enterprise policies are properly reflected in the regions.

  The emphasis of the Government's financial support for industry has shifted to industrial innovation. Support is now concentrated on collaborative research

  631
  programmes, including the LINK scheme which brings together academic and industrial researchers, and the Eureka initiative for collaborative research in Europe.

  The Financial Services Act has established a statutory framework for self-regulation of the financial services industry in the interests of investor protection, under the Securities and Investments Board and a number of self-regulatory organisations.

  The Government have been active to strengthen safeguards against fraud and to ensure that the probity of our financial institutions is maintained without undermining their competitiveness. The Companies Acts 1980 and 1981 strengthened the powers of investigation and the courts' powers to disqualify directors for misconduct; and made insider dealing a criminal offence.

  The Government have worked actively to maintain the world open trading system and are contributing to the current Uruguay round of multilateral trade negotiations, which was launched in 1986 under the United Kingdom presidency.

  Since 1979 productivity per person has increased by nearly 50 per cent. in agriculture and over 35 per cent. in the food manufacturing industry. Prices of food to consumers have risen more slowly than the general price level. The annual rate of increase in food prices since May 1979 has been 5·8 per cent. Exports of food, feed and alcoholic beverages have more than doubled since 1979.

  Reform of the common agricultural policy (CAP), to tackle the problems of burgeoning expenditure and surplus production, has been significantly advanced by the agreement at the European Council in February on the application of budget discipline to the CAP, notably through the introduction or extension of stabilisers in all the main CAP commodity regimes. The stabilisers, which link full levels of support to predetermined quantities of production and provide for reductions in support if these quantities are exceeded, are intended to act as a disincentive to surplus production and thus to help bring supply and demand into better balance. These measures carry forward the process of reform of the CAP which has included the introduction of milk quotas in 1984, changes to the milk and beef regimes (including the maintenance of the beef variable premium) agreed under the United Kingdom presidency in December 1986, and measures to weaken intervention in the cereals and oilseeds sectors introduced in 1987.

  The Government have also successfully negotiated the sheepmeat regime. The wool guarantee, the suckler cow premium and expenditure on hill livestock compensatory allowances have all been increased.

  The Government have introduced measures designed to encourage farming practices which are beneficial to the landscape and to the conservation of wildlife, and have announced a number of new policy initiatives designed to encourage alternative uses of farmland, and to increase diversity on farms and in the rural economy generally. The Government recast capital grants in 1985 to put a strong emphasis on assistance for conservation work on farms and on investment to prevent pollution of rivers and streams from farm waste. Prompt action was taken to assist those farmers and growers affected by the storm of 16 October last year through specific emergency grant schemes. The sale, supply and use of pesticides has been brought under statutory control to ensure safe use in relation to operators, consumers and the environment.
  632
  After protracted and difficult negotiations, the Government secured an EC common fisheries policy settlement in 1983 on terms very favourable to the United Kingdom. Conservation, control and structural measures have all been strengthened. As part of that settlement and subsequently. The Salmon Act 1986 strengthened powers to deal with illegal fishing and made improvements in the conservation and management of salmon. In Scotland a new inshore fisheries regime has been established. The value of United Kingdom fish landings and of fish farming output has increased substantially.

  Control to ensure protection of the marine environment have been strengthened, and substantial reductions have been achieved in the low levels of contaminants in material licensed for disposal at sea.

  In transport, the Government have successfully increased consumer choice and efficiency by promoting competition in the provision of services.

  British Airways and the British Airports Authority have been privatised. The Government have authorised the development of Stansted as London's third airport, encouraged the development of airport facilities in the regions, improved the management of the main local authority airports by having them transferred to companies, and have banned the noisiest aircraft from operating at British airports. The Government have strengthened competition on international routes within Europe and over the north Atlantic by negotiating more liberal bilateral arrangements and have secured agreement to a package of liberalisation measures within the European Community as a first step towards completion of the internal aviation market.

  In England local bus services outside London have been deregulated. This has resulted in greater competition between operators, more innovation and flexibility in meeting the needs of passengers, and lower costs and subsidies, as well as an increase in the overall provision of bus mileage. The privatisation of the National Bus Company has been completed well ahead of schedule, and the majority of its subsidiaries have been bought by their own managers or employees. British Rail has been given objectives for improving the quality of its services and increasing its efficiency through reduced subsidy. It is now set to meet its 1989–90 objective while sustaining an ambitious and increasing investment programme to improve quality of service. This means that its subsidy will have been reduced by almost 45 per cent. between 1983 and 1989–90.

  The Government have successfully promoted cooperation between public and private sectors in projects such as the Channel tunnel, the London docklands light railway and the Dartford-Thurrock crossing of the Thames.

  The Merchant Shipping Act includes measures to improve safety and encourage the employment of British seafarers aboard British ships. Extensive action has been taken to improve ferry safety following the tragic Zeebrugge desaster.

  In England capital investment in trunk roads has increased by over 30 per cent. since 1979. Some 750 miles of new and improved motorways and other trunk roads have been completed, including 300 miles of bypasses. The Government are supporting 340 major local authority road schemes, most of which are aimed at bypassing local communities or relieving them of traffic. The Government's continuing concentration on road and

  633
  vehicle safety measures has given us the best road accident record in Europe. Casualty figures for 1987 were the lowest for 30 years, despite a fourfold increase in traffic in the same period; and pedestrian deaths were the lowest ever recorded. The aim is to reduce casualties by one third by the year 2000.

  Government policies on taxation and licensing helped to make 1987 the third best year ever for drilling activities in the North sea, despite the 1986 fall in oil prices. Domestic gas now costs less in real terms than in 1970, while the price of electricity for domestic consumers has gone down by 8 per cent. in real terms in the last five years.

  Deep-mined productivity of coal production is now 60 per cent. higher than it was in 1978–79 and some 50 per cent. higher than the average for 1983–84, before the miners' strike. This encouraging growth in productivity reflects a continuing effort by all concerned to produce coal at a price the market can afford.

  In England spending on the Health Service is up by 39 per cent. in real terms from £6·4 billion in 1978–79 to £18·9 billion now. There are over 10,000 more doctors and dentists and over 50,000 more nurses and midwives. Capital spending has increased from £373 million to £1·1 billion, a 32 per cent. increase in real terms. Some 270 health building schemes, each worth over £1 million have been started and completed. Over 1 million more inpatient cases are now being dealt with each year, and waiting lists are down by 64,000.

  The Government made an extra £25 million available to health authorities in England last year, through the waiting list fund, to tackle waiting black spots. Indications are that they have used the extra funding to treat some 100,000 more cases. The Government have increased the fund to some £30 million in the current year and the aim will be at least to equal last year's ambitious achievements.

  There is already clear evidence that the general managers who have been appointed throughout the Health Service are providing energetic and innovative leadership, with speedier and more incisive decision making. Health authorities are continuing to improve efficiency and their cost improvement programmes have yielded savings worth over £560 million in the past four years. Savings worth some £150 million are planned for this year.

  The Government have set up an independent review body to recommend on nurses' pay, have implemented all five of its reports, and have funded 90 per cent. of the costs of those awards. The 1988 report will be implemented in full and fully funded, with the result that nurses will receive their highest ever level of pay in real terms, and will have received on average a 44 per cent. increase in real terms since 1979.

  The Government have developed a comprehensive strategy in response to the threat of AIDS and have taken, and will continue to take, all necessary measures to contain the spread of the virus.

  In the social services field there have been increases in places in training centres and community homes for mentally handicapped people. There are more home help staff, more social work staff, more places in day centres for elderly people, and many more places in residential and nursing homes.

  Following publication of the White Paper "Promoting Better Health", the Government have opened up discussions with professions about arrangements for implementing a wide range of important reforms in the
  634
  delivery of primary health care. The emphasis is on health promotion, better services for the consumer and value for money.

  Government expenditure on social security is now at its highest level ever both in cash and real terms. Spending on social security is up by 39 per cent. in real terms from £16·4 billion in 1978–79 to £46·4 billion to 1987–88. For pensioners, the Government's main achievement has been to provide the opportunity for average incomes to grow by 18 per cent. in real terms over the period. Total expenditure, including rate rebates on benefits for the elderly and spending on 1 million extra pensioners, has risen by 31 per cent. in real terms.

  The Government have undertaken a fundamental review of the social security system resulting in the Social Security Act 1986. Most of the provisions of that Act have now been implemented. Statutory maternity pay was introduced in 1987; income support has now replaced supplementary benefit, family credit has replaced family income supplement, housing benefit has been changed, and the social fund has been introduced. This will make the system simpler and easier to understand, direct help more effectively to those who need it, and improve work incentives. Over £200 million extra has been provided for family credit to help low-income working families with children.

  An objective of the Government has been to encourage the spread of occupational and personal pensions, and to give people more choice in how to provide for their retirement. In 1985 the Government gave everyone leaving an employment scheme the right to a fair transfer value to a new employer's scheme or to buy a deferred annuity. The Government also gave members rights to all the information they need to take decisions about their pension. The Social Security Act 1986 gave everyone the choice between staying fully in SERPS or an employer's scheme or having a personal pension scheme, and employees will he able to boost their pension rights by making extra contributions.

  Since 1979, substantial progress has been made in reforming the structure and financial basis of local authorities to make them more accountable and reponsive to the needs of their local electorates, and to give better value for money in the provision of local services. The structure of local government in England has been simplified and improved with the abolition of an unnecessary tier of government in Greater London and the Metropolitan areas. The Audit Commission for England and Wales was established in 1983 and has already made great progress in identifying opportunities for improving value for money in local government, some of which are beginning to show results. Legislation on competition is ensuring that local authorities in Great Britain subject the provision of an increasing range of their services to the discipline of competitive tendering. The Widdicombe committee on the conduct of local authority business identified a number of measures needed to improve local authority procedures and avoid abuses, and the Government are following up the recommendation in stages. Measures on local government finance have restrained the growth of local authority expenditure in Great Britain, particularly in some of the more extravagant high-spending authorities. The Local Government Finance Bill currently before Parliament makes provision for the abolition of domestic rates in England and Wales and their replacement by a fairer and

  635
  more broadly based community charge. The same Bill includes provisions to remedy the uneven burden of non-domestic rates on businesses through the establishment of a nationally determined uniform business rate.

  In housing, the Government introduced the first statutory charter of rights for public sector tenants including the right to buy. Since then over 1 million tenants in Great Britain have bought their homes. The stock of owner-occupied dwellings in Britain has increased by 3 million; more people own their homes than ever before; and 64 per cent. of all dwellings are owner-occupied. There has been a net increase in the stock as a whole of about 1·6 million—more than enough to keep pace with the growth in the number of households over the period.

  Grants for home improvements have been at a historically high level; improved targeting on those in most need is being introduced. The Government's estate action programme has helped local authorities with over 200 schemes on rundown council estates in England. A scheme of assistance has been introduced for owners of defective houses previously in the public sector throughout Great Britain, and good progress has been made. Measures have been introduced to strengthen the rights of leaseholders living in private blocks of flats.

  The Housing Bill, which is currently before Parliament, aims to broaden the choice open to tenants and encourage more private investment in housing in England and Wales; it will deregulate rents in the independent rented sector; provide the basis for an expansion of the housing association movement; allow for the establishment of housing action trusts in some of the most rundown areas of local authority housing; and provide all secure local authority tenants with the opportunity to transfer to new landlords approved by the Housing Corporation.

  In the environment, the Government have created a unified inspectorate of pollution for England and Wales with a remit to develop an integrated approach to pollution control. Following a successful initiative in Europe to bring to an end the addition of lead to petrol, the maximum lead content of petrol has been cut by 60 per cent, a tax differential in favour of unleaded petrol of 11p a gallon has been introduced and unleaded petrol is now available at over 800 sites.

  The Government have taken steps to reduce the pollution of our rivers, estuaries and beaches. Last year the United Kingdom chaired the North sea conference which produced an important package of measures to safeguard and enhance the quality of the North sea.

  The Government have made, substantial progress in securing the future of the natural heritage. In Great Britain, over 5,000 sites of special scientific interest (SSSIs) have been notified or renotfied as part of the implementation of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981; this process is now 85 per cent. complete. Also, 26 special protection areas have been designated throughout the United Kingdom under the European birds directive, and 35 wetlands of international importance under the ramsar convention.

  The Government have taken a wide range of steps to simplify and improve the planning system and to speed up its operation, while protecting and enhancing the environment in town and country. The area of approved green belt in England has more than doubled since 1979; the annual acreage of agricultural land taken for development in England and Wales the 1980s is less than
  636
  one third of the levels seen in the 1960s and early 1970s; and nearly one half of land for new housing development in England is either redeveloped land or vacant land within urban areas.

  The Government have introduced sweeping reforms in the education system in England and Wales. The Education Reform Bill now before Parliament aims to improve the standards of achievement of all pupils through the introduction of a national curriculum for the 5 to 16 age group of core and foundation subjects for which attainment targets, programmes of study and arrangements for assessment and testing will be established; to widen the choice available to parents for the education of their children; to ensure that schools can admit pupils up to the limit of their capacity; to require all local education authorities to develop schemes of resource allocation to schools and to delegate budgetary control to all further education colleges, secondary schools and larger primary schools; to offer all secondary schools and larger primary schools the opportunity to apply to opt out of local authority control; to establish polytechnics and other major colleges as independent institutions; and to reform the arrangements for funding the university system.

  In addition, the Government continue to seek to improve teaching quality, and have introduced a new 16-plus examination system, the GCSE based on national criteria, and the AS levels to broaden A-level studies. The technical and vocational education initiative has been introduced to boost practical elements in the 14 to 18 curriculum. In higher education, record numbers of students have been admitted and the Government have endorsed plans which provide for a continuation of the shift towards science, engineering and other vocational subjects.

  The Government have substantially increased the manpower and other resources available to the police and have strengthened their powers to deal with public disorder. Over 50,000 neighbourhood watch schemes are now in operation in Great Britain. A total of £80 million is being invested in crime prevention this year and a new national crime prevention organisation will be established to co-ordinate local initiatives and spread good practice. An independent Crown Prosecution service is now in operation throughout England and Wales. Twenty-four senior and 34 junior attendance centres have been opened.

  Measures have been taken to ensure that the terms of imprisonment served by violent offenders fully reflect society's abhorrence of their crimes. Government assistance to the victims' support movement has been greatly expanded: £11 million will be provided over the next three financial years to help local schemes. The Government have continued to develop an overall strategy for countering drug misuse and illicit trafficking. The Video Recordings Act has brought "video nasties" under control.

  Legislation has also been put through for data protection; to provide more rigorous control of animal experimentation; to provide a framework for the development of broadcasting by satellite and cable television (including the establishment of the Welsh fourth channel); to set out a new framework for police powers, for providing safeguards for the citizen and for handling complaints against the police, to control the possession and sale of alcohol in connection with football matches; to provide for the establishment of the serious fraud office,

  637
  now in operation, and make other improvements in the investigation, prosecution and trial of fraud offences; and to provide comprehensive new powers to investigate, restrain and confiscate the proceeds of drug trafficking, where the Government are working for international agreements to make such powers more generally effective.

  The Government have recently set up an inquiry to consider allegations that former war criminals may be living in this country. The Government have played a major role in developing international co-operation in the fight against terrorism and have strengthened police powers under the Prevention of Terrorism Act. The policy of fair immigration control has seen the number of people accepted for settlement in the United Kingdom fall from 69,700 in 1979 to 45,500 in 1987, the lowest total since Commonwealth citizens became subject to control in 1962.

  The Government introduced measures to improve controls on possession of firearms and shotguns; to remove outdated restrictions in liquor licensing law; to enable the United Kingdom to participate more effectively in the international fight against crime, including a major reform of extradition laws; to make provision for courts to order the confiscation of the proceeds of profitable crime; to provide for unduly lenient sentences to be reviewed; to create a statutory right for the victims of crime to receive compensation; to tighten the law on possession of knives and to ban the sale of offensive weapons which have no legitimate use; and to strengthen the jury system.

  The Government have continued the reform of family law; have legislated to remove the legal disadvantages of children born outside marriage; and have brought schemes into effect to combat the evils of child abduction both within the United Kingdom and throughout the world. The Government have simplified conveyancing and extended the areas in which titles have to be registered.

  A Legal Aid Bill has been introduced to set up a new board to administer legal aid and generally to ensure that legal aid is operated as efficiently and effectively as possible. The Government have continued the major programme of simplification and consolidation of our statute law.

  In the arts, the National Heritage Memorial Fund has been established with funding of some £90 million to date. There has been a significant upsurge in business sponsorship — the Government's business sponsorship incentive scheme has brought £16 million of new money into the arts in four years. Major progress has been made with the building of the new British Library at St. Pancras, and there have been major expansion schemes at some of the national museums and galleries, including with the Tate gallery's Clore gallery and the Tate gallery at Liverpool, the National gallery's Sainsbury wing, and the redevelopment of the Imperial war museum.

  In defence, a substantial increase in resources has enabled the capability of the armed forces to be strengthened. The Government played its full part in implementing the NATO twin-track decision to modernise intermediate range nuclear weapons while seeking to achieve an arms control agreement, and this policy has been vindicated by the INF treaty. Increased efficiency is being pursued by the continuing transfer of resources from the support areas to the front line, and by introducing increased competition in defence contracts and promoting
  638
  collaboration with our international partners. Major reorganisation of the headquarters structure of the Ministry of Defence has been introduced.

  In foreign policy, the Government have maintained Britain's firm commitment to national defence and the NATO Alliance, and have promoted closer European defence co-operation — including through a revitalised Western European Union—as a means of strengthening the European pillar of the Alliance. At the same time, the Government have worked vigorously for a more stable relationship between East and West, seeking verifiable reductions in nuclear and conventional weapons and a global ban on chemical weapons, greater co-operation in settling regional conflicts and full respect for human rights. British Ministers and representatives have been active in building up an East-West dialogue with these aims and in promoting the setting priorities for the arms control process. The Government played a leading role in the conference on disarmament in Europe in which was successfully concluded in autumn 1986, and gave full support to our United States allies in their negotiations with the USSR over INF, which concluded last autumn with agreement on the global elimination of United States and Soviet land-based INF missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 km.

  Within the European Community, the Government reached agreement at Fontainebleau in 1984 that the United Kingdom should pay a fairer share of the EC budget. In the United Kingdom presidency in 1986, and at the Brussels European Council this February, the Government secured major reforms of the common agricultural policy, including a binding ceiling on agricultural spending and automatic cost-cutting regime, for all commodities.

  The Government have helped make it the Community's top priority to complete the single European market and services by 1992 so as to give our industry improved access to important markets in Europe and a better base from which to compete in world markets. The Government have championed measures to help our citizens, such as less regulation, cheaper air fares and higher product safety standards.

  The Government supported the entry of Greece, Spain and Portugal into the Community, thereby underpinning their democracy and strengthening NATO. At British initiative the EC member states have agreed an internationally binding basis for closer co-operation in foreign policy.

  Rhodesia was brought to legal independence as the Republic of Zimbabwe in 1980. The Government resolutely upheld and continue to defend the right of the Falklands islanders to live in peace under a Government of their own choosing. An agreement with China about the future of Hong Kong was ratified in 1985 and good progress has since been made implementing that agreement. The Gilbraltar border has been reopened, and negotiations have been started with Spain aimed at overcoming all our differences over the Rock.

  At the United Nations and elsewhere the Government have supported the international rule of law and respect for human rights. With our Commonwealth and European partners, the Government have worked towards ending apartheid in South Africa by peaceful means. The Government have worked successfully for financial and administrative reform in the United Nations and have promoted international co-operation to combat terrorism

  639
  and drug-trafficking. With the World Health Organisation, the Government organised the 1988 London summit of Ministers of Health on programmes for AIDS prevention, which was attended by 148 countries.

  The Government have maintained a substantial and effective aid programme, totalling £11 billion in the period 1979–87. While the bulk of our bilateral aid has been focused on the poorest countries, the Government have provided long-term help to nearly 130 developing countries in all. The Government have responded swiftly and generously to appeals for emergency aid to sub-Saharan Africa and have taken the lead in promoting measures to relieve sub-Saharan African countries of their official debts.

  Within the last year, unemployment in Scotland has fallen by 47,500. Manufacturing productivity in Scotland increased by 5·6 per cent. per annum between 1979 and the first half of 1987. Service sector employment showed an increase of over 62,000 between June 1983 and June 1987, and the number of self-employed increased by 45,000 between June 1981 and June 1987, compared with virtually no change in the three decades to 1981.

  Since the introduction of the enterprise allowance scheme in 1983, nearly 30,000 unemployed people have been helped to start up in business, and over 132,000 people are currently benefiting from the Government's employment and training measures in Scotland. The Manpower Services Commission plans to spend some £330 million in Scotland in the current year.

  In 1987, there was a net growth of 2,500 in company registrations in Scotland. Between 1979 and 1986, the output of the Scottish electronics industry rose by around 133 per cent. in real terms, and between 1979 and 1986 electrical and instrument engineering output in Scotland rose by nearly 90 per cent. Inward investment of some £2·6 billion, planned to create or safeguard some 50,000 jobs, has been attracted to Scotland since the formation of "Locate in Scotland" in 1981.

  Owner-occupation among Scots has increased significantly, from 35 to over 43 per cent. A major contribution to this increase has been the 113,000 tenants who have exercised their right to buy their houses under the statutory charter of rights for public sector tenants introduced in 1980. The Housing (Scotland) Bill will set up a new housing development agency, Scottish Homes, which will play a key role in revitalising Scotland's housing and will promote more diverse patterns of tenure in the public sector. The volume of applications for home improvement and repairs grants has increased substantially. The Government have enabled the number of houses let by housing associations in Scotland to increase sixfold since 1979.

  Legislation providing for the abolition of domestic rates in Scotland and their replacement by a community charge payable by all adults was enacted in 1987 and the new system will come into operation in 1989.

  In town and country planning in Scotland, measures have been taken to speed up the planning system. On the planning requirements of high technology industries, small businesses, private housebuilders and major retail development, the Government have taken steps to allow the establishment of simplified planning zones. Major initiatives have been taken to reform and simplify the building control system to reduce restrictions while
  640
  maintaining public safeguards. Access for disabled persons to public buildings has been greatly improved by reforms in building regulations.

  The deregulation of local bus services in Scotland has been achieved with service levels maintained overall and improvements in many areas. The Government have stimulated innovation through competition while cutting subsidies. Since 1979, over £710 million has been invested in motorways and trunk roads in Scotland, including completion of the 127 miles of the A9 from Perth to Easter Ross, and substantial progress has been made on the Perth-Dundee-Aberdeen route, the A75 between Gretna and Stranraer, and the A82 alongside Loch Lomond. Twenty-seven bypasses, relieving communities of through traffic, have been opened.

  Major reforms have been introduced in the education system. The Education (Scotland) Act 1981 gave parents a right to choose their children's school. Over 116,000 placing requests have been made to date and about 94 per cent. of them have been successful. That Act also increased educational opportunity by the introduction of the assisted places scheme from which more than 2,600 children benefited in 1987–88. The School Boards (Scotland) Bill, now before Parliament will further extend parental involvement through the creation of school boards. The school examination system is being modernised with the introduction of standard grade and associated revision of highers and certificate of sixth year studies. The technical and vocational educational initiative is being extended throughout Scotland. Proposals have been brought forward to revise the school curriculum for ages 5–14 and to improve assessment techniques, including the introduction of nationally standardised testing in key elements of English and mathematics at ages eight and 12. The number of students in full-time higher education in Scotland is at the highest level ever recorded and radical changes in further education have greatly increased the take-up of vocational training at all levels.

  Police manpower in Scotland has increased, and, in order to release police officers for operational duties, the Government are encouraging civilianisation of posts wherever possible. Increased attention has been devoted to crime prevention.

  The Government have intensified the campaign against drug misuse. Drug wings have been established in the Scottish crime squad and all eight Scottish police forces now have a specialised drug squad or unit. Since 1979, a total of 52 major hospital developments have been completed in Scotland, providing 5,803 beds and 481 day places. A further 34 schemes are in planning, under construction or being commissioned, which will provide a further 4,484 beds. In addition to the public education campaigns on AIDS, the Government have this year made over £6 million available to health boards throughout Scotland in recognition of the extra burdens which AIDS places upon them, including funding for three special AIDS units in Edinburgh, Glasgow and Dundee. The Government have supported several projects for research on HIV infection and AIDS and have provided funding for studies into the incidence of AIDS in Scotland. In addition, the Government encourage and support voluntary sector initiatives in the AIDS field in Scotland.

  An extra £7·6 million was allocated to health boards in 1987–88 of which £3·6 million was devoted to schemes to reduce waiting lists. A special fund of £3 million has been

  641
  set aside for 1988–89 which will fund projects to reduce waiting times for patients. Health boards are also being asked to increase the priority they give to this area.

  The Government's commitment to the outlying areas of Scotland is demonstrated by the Western Isles integrated development programme which ended its five-year span in 1987 and provided £56 million to improve socioeconomic conditions in the area and by the five-year agricultural development programme for Scottish islands which started this month. This provides £38 million to increase the efficiency of agricultural businesses without adding to overall agricultural production.

  Five environmentally sensitive areas (ESAs) have been designated in Scotland under which farmers can receive payments for agreeing to farm in a conservation-friendly way. These areas are in different parts of the country and include the Machair ESA in the crofting area of Scotland. The Government remain fully committed to the expansion of forestry and are now replacing the anomalous tax arrangements for forestry with a much improved grant scheme.

  The Government's commitment to promote art and culture in Scotland has resulted in major new galleries for the Burrell collection in Glasgow and for modern art in Edinburgh. A new home for the Royal Scottish Academy of Music and Drama was opened earlier this year and the first phase of a new building for the National Library of Scotland in Edinburgh will be opened next year.

  The Government have done more than any previous Administration to secure the future of the Gaelic language. A new specific grants scheme for Gaelic education, designed to improve the quality of Gaelic teaching and curriculum in schools was introduced in 1986. Grants under the scheme amount to £0·5 million in the current year. In addition, substantially increased resources have been allocated to a range of organisations providing support for Gaelic language and culture.

  In Northern Ireland, the Government have pursued the policy of combating terrorism, within the rule of law, by the most effective means available. In the implementation of this policy, the security forces have conducted themselves with great courage and skill: many terrorists have been apprehended, much material has been recovered, and a large number of terrorist operations have been frustrated, which would otherwise have added to the tragic roll of death and suffering.

  The Government have continued to implement the Anglo-Irish Agreement, and have pressed for better cross-border security co-operation within the framework of it.

  The Government's efforts to find an agreed basis on which greater responsibility can be devolved to the elected representatives of the people of Northern Ireland have continued.

  A key objective of Government policy is to regenerate the private sector in Northern Ireland and release the region's potential for economic growth. To this end, the industrial development organisations in Northern Ireland have promoted 64,450 jobs, while the youth training programme has provided opportunities for an estimated 72,000 entrants with some 23,500 man years of work provided by the action for community employment scheme. At any time, some 29,000 persons are benefiting from a wide range of employment and training resources. A firm commitment has been made and significant steps taken to secure equality of opportunity in employment.
  642
  Belfast city centre has been revitalised both in terms of housing and commerce. Housing conditions have shown improvement with a considerable reduction in the level of unfitness, and a significant increase in the level of owner-occupation.

  Proposals for the reform of the educational system to improve educational standards together with new opportunities and incentives for existing schools seeking to promote integrated education have recently been published.

  In addition, substantial programmes have been maintained in agriculture, health and personal social services, environmental services and social security.

  Since the establishment of WINvest in 1983, Wales has secured over 220 inward investment projects from overseas companies promising some 25,000 new or safeguarded jobs and involving about £800 million of capital investment. Since 1979, the Government have committed over £130 million — at today's prices — to the land reclamation programme in Wales, one of the largest arid most sustained programmes in Europe, and the Welsh Development Agency has constructed some 7 million sq ft of factory space. The success of the Development Board for Rural Wales is indicated by an estimated 3·5 per cent. increase in the population of the area covered by the board between 1979 and 1986. Three enterprise zones set up by the Government are located in Wales; at Swansea, Delyn and the Milford Haven waterway. Over 8,500 people are currently employed in these zones, of whom 3,600 are in new jobs.

  The Government have supported the rapid spread of local enterprise agencies in Wales, of which there are now 23. Such agencies have had £8·8 million of central Government assistance and they estimate that they have helped to create 18,900 jobs.

  Seasonally adjusted unemployment in Wales has fallen in each of the last 22 months—a fall over that period cif 3·1 percentage points.

  Since their institution in 1982, urban development grants of some £34 million have been awarded to 67 projects throughout Wales. These are expected to bring forward a total private sector investment of some £159 million. As part of the Government's policy for inner city areas, the Cardiff Bay development corporation was established on 3 April 1987 to regenerate the docklands area. In 1988–89, a total of £16·2 million will be made available, the first tranche of a total commitment of nearly £50 million over the first three years. Since 1981. the number of self-employed in Wales has increased by 34,000 to 149,000.

  Owner-occupation has increased from 59 per cent. or housing stock in 1979 to 68 per cent. Almost 60,000 public sector dwellings have been sold to their tenants under right to buy and voluntary terms since 1980 and over 50,000 new homes have been built for sale. Since 1979, the proportion of Welsh households lacking basic amenities has more than halved.

  Over 142,000 home improvement grant schemes for private sector dwellings have been completed since July 1979 with a value of £414 million. In the same period, £339 million has been spent on the renovation of local authority housing stock. Since 1982, over 5,500 dwellings have been improved under enveloping schemes.

  Expenditure on the Health Service in Wales has risen by over 42 per cent. after allowing for general inflation between 1978–79 and 1988–89. Over £500 million at current

  643
  prices will have been invested in the capital estate of hospital and community health services and five major new hospitals have been opened. Nearly 24 per cent. more patients were treated in 1986 than 1979. Medical and dental staff have increased by 13 per cent. and nursing and midwifery staff by 20 per cent. during this period.

  Current expenditure on education, excluding school meals and milk, was 7·8 per cent. higher in real terms in 1986–87 than in 1978–79. Pupil numbers dropped by 14·8 per cent. in the same period: and expenditure per primary pupil rose by over 21 per cent. from £747 to £909, and per secondary pupil by nearly 28 per cent. from £1,033 to £1,320, their best ever levels.

  Since 1979, over £700 million has been spent on the construction and improvement of roads in Wales providing 22 miles of motorway and 107 miles of trunk road. The Government have begun construction of the first ever immersed road tunnel in the United Kingdom—the Conway crossing/A55 scheme.

  Since 1979–80, overall net resources made available to the Wales tourist board have increased by 170 per cent., including an increase of 140 per cent. in project support, which over the period has stimulated £78 million of mainly private sector investment and created almost 3,500 new jobs.

  The Government's direct financial support for the Welsh language has increased annually from £0·2 million in 1979–80 to nearly £3·3 million in 1988–89. This is an increase in real terms of some 750 per cent. in that period.

  Position held

  Length ofservice

  Grade

  Salary £ per annum

  Principal Private Secretary

  2 years 8 months

  Grade 2

  45,500

  Private Secretary

  3 years 10 months

  G3

  34,000

  Secretary for Appointments

  6 years 1 month

  G5

  29,465

  Private Secretary

  0 year 4 months

  G5

  28,215

  Private Secretary

  3 years 1 month

  G5

  25,815

  Private Secretary

  1 year 7 months

  G5

  21,092

  Assistant Private Secretary

  4 years 2 months

  SEO

  15,779

  Assistant Private Secretary

  15 years 1 month

  Assistant 1 Prime Minister's Office

  15,779

  Chief Press Officer

  8 years 2 months

  G3

  43,000

  Press Officer

  1 year 2 months

  G5

  28,215

  Press Officer

  1 year 9 months

  SIO

  15,823

  Press Officer

  0 year 7 months

  SEO

  15,779

  Press Officer

  0 year 1 month

  SIO

  14,629

  Press Officer

  1 year 0 months

  SIO

  14,629

  Adviser (Policy Unit)

  1 year 9 months

  G5

  25,815

  Security Co-ordinator

  2 years 2 months

  Adviser (part time)

  11,161

  Support Staff

  4 years 2 months

  HEO

  12,878

  Support Staff

  4 years 4 months

  HEO

  12,878

  Support Staff

  0 years 10 months

  HEO

  12,878

  Records Reviewer

  1 year 0 months

  HEO (part time)

  5,365·83

  Support Staff

  17 years 2 months

  Assistant 2 Prime Minister's Office

  12,672

  Support Staff

  8 years 1 month

  HEO

  12,878

  Support Staff

  10 years 2 months

  EO

  10,292

  Support Staff

  0 years 6 months

  EO

  10,292

  Support Staff

  1 year 4 months

  EO

  10,292

  Support Staff

  0 year 10 months

  EO

  10,292

  Support Staff

  1 year 8 months

  EO

  10,292

  Support Staff

  0 year 4 months

  EO

  10,292

  Support Staff

  2 years 6 months

  EO

  10,292

  Support Staff

  1 year 5 months

  EO

  10,292

  Office Manager

  15 years 4 months

  EO

  11,119

  Support Staff

  4 years 6 months

  EO

  9,278

  Support Staff

  0 years 5 months

  AO

  6,554

  Support Staff

  2 years 4 months

  AO

  7,247

  Support Staff

  0 years 10 months

  AO

  7,247

  644
  Since the Government decision to set up the Welsh fourth television channel in 1982, S4C has been an outstanding success in both artistic and employment terms.

  New Zealand Butter
  Mr. Teddy Taylor
  To ask the Prime Minister if she will raise at the next meeting of the European Council the question of the special arrangements for the import of New Zealand butter; and if she will make a statement.

  The Prime Minister
  I have no plans to do so at present.

  Councillor Tim Brown
  Mr. Clay
  To ask the Prime Minister when she met Councillor Tim Brown of Sunderland to discuss shipbuilding.

  The Prime Minister
  As the House is aware, my normal practice is and will continue to be neither to confirm nor to deny whether meetings with private individuals have taken place, even in those cases where no such meeting has occurred.

  Office Staff
  Mr. Winnick
  To ask the Prime Minister if she will list individually the positions held by civil servants in her office, the periods they have been employed there and their current grades, together with salaries.

  The Prime Minister
  [holding answer]: The information is as follows:

  645

  Position held

  Length of service

  Grade

  Salary £ per annum

  Support Staff

  1 year 0 months

  AO

  7,247

  Personal Secretary

  4 years 2 months

  SPS

  10,150

  Personal Secretary

  20 years 2 months

  SPS

  10,150

  Personal Secretary

  11 years 2 months

  SPS

  10,150

  Personal Secretary

  16 years 5 months

  SPS

  10,150

  Personal Secretary

  20 years 3 months

  SPS

  10,150

  Personal Secretary

  10 years 1 month

  SPS

  10,150

  Personal Secretary

  11 years 10 months

  SPS

  10,150

  Personal Secretary

  20 years 1 month

  SPS

  10,150

  Personal Secretary

  5 years 5 months

  SPS

  9,200

  Personal Secretary

  1 year 8 months

  SPS

  10,150

  Personal Secretary

  0 year 1 month

  SPS

  9,200

  Personal Secretary

  6 years 1 month

  SPS

  10,150

  Personal Secretary

  8 years 5 months

  PS

  7,846

  Personal Secretary

  2 years 6 months

  PS

  7,846

  Personal Secretary

  4 years 1 month

  PS

  7,459

  Personal Secretary

  8 years 7 months

  PS

  7,846

  Personal Secretary

  2 years 4 months

  PS

  7,459

  Personal Secretary

  8 years 11 months

  PS

  7,846

  Personal Secretary

  0 years 10 months

  PS

  7,137

  Personal Secretary

  8 years 4 months

  PS

  7,846

  Personal Secretary

  0 year 1 month

  PS

  7,137

  Personal Secretary

  4 years 10 months

  PS

  7,846

  Typist

  4 years 3 months

  Typist

  6,363

  Typist

  8 years 1 month

  Typist

  121·90pw

  Typist

  0 year 3 months

  Typist

  5,657

  Typist

  1 year 6 months

  Typist

  5,657

  Cook

  7 years 1 month

  Senior Cook (part-time)

  69·19pw

  Note: The table excludes the Office Keeper, the No. 10 Doorman, Messengers and Cleaners, all of whom are included in the Cabinet Office complement, and the custody guards, who are included in the PSA complement. Nor does it include those engaged on special adviser terms. Support staff covers those engaged in administrative and clerical duties. Salaries exclude London weighting and allowances, and are those payable as at March 1988.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

  Investors (Protection)
  Sir William Clark
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster whether he will take steps to publicise the purpose of the Financial Services Act 1986 to increase protection available to investors in the light of the campaign in the national press which suggests that insurance company salesmen are inherently less able to serve the needs of the public than independent financial advisers.

  Mr. Maude
  The rules made under the Financial Services Act have the effect that those selling or advising upon life insurance or unit trusts must be either appointed representatives of one provider of wholly independent intermediaries. Both will be subject to rules under the Act designed to protect investors. It is up to investment businesses to choose which of these two routes to follow, and investors are free to choose between them on their merits. The content of advertising, so long as it is not misleading and does not contravene any relevent regulations, is not a matter for me.

  Manufactures
  Mr. Teddy Taylor
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what was the surplus or deficit in trade in manufactures with EEC and the rest of the world, respectively, in the most recent 12-month period for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Alan Clark
  In the 12 months to March 1988, there was an estimated deficit on trade in manufactures of £10·5 billion with the European Community and an estimated surplus of £2 billion with the rest of the world.

  Northern Region
  Mr. Trotter
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster whether he will list the various schemes for assistance to industry available to business in the northern region and provide details of the total financial assistance provided to such firms in the last three years.

  Mr. Atkins
  [holding answer 26 April 1988]: Assistance now available to businesses in the northern region is set out in the Department's booklet on the enterprise initiative.

  Expenditure in the northern region in the three years to 31 March 1988 on the main schemes of assistance provided by my Department totalled some £350 million. This total consists of expenditure under the original and revised regional development grant schemes, project and training grants under the regional selective assistance, the business improvement services scheme, and expenditure under the Science and Technology Act and section 8 of the Industrial Development Act 1982. Details are set out in the table.

  million

  1985–86

  1986–87

  1987–881

  Tolal

  RDG I

  58·1

  79·5

  29·0

  166·6

  RDG II

  9·2

  22·6

  32·7

  64·5

  RSA

  16·2

  18·1

  20·3

  54·6

  Science and Technology Act

  4·0

  3·5

  1·7

  9·2

  Section 8, Industrial Development Act 1982

  0·6

  0·7

  0·3

  1·6

  BIS2

  0·4

  1·2

  1·6

  3·2

  EIEC3

  16·9

  11·4

  20·0

  48·3

  Total

  105·4

  137·0

  105·6

  348·0

  647
  1Provisional.

  2Direct aided schemes only.

  3Includes both direct central Government funding and expenditure resulting from receipts on sales of and rents from factories.

SCOTLAND

  Nuclear Power
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what have been the total investment costs for each of the South of Scotland Electricity Board nuclear power plants in(a) historic costs and (b) current costs to date.

  Mr. Lang
  The South of Scotland Electricity Board has provided the following information based on its accounts for the year ending 31 March 1987:

  £ million

  Hunterston A

  Hunterston B

  Torness

  Historic costs

  88·6

  299·0

  1,704·7

  Current costs

  623·0

  917·9

  2,046·3

  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what benefits he expects to accrue to the Scottish economy, and in particular Caithness, from the maintenance and expansion of the Nuclear Power Development Establishment at Dounreay.

  Mr. Lang
  Consideration of the future of the fast reactor research programme, a major part of which is based at Dounreay, is the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy. I recognise that activities at the Dounreay establishment are of substantial economic benefit to the local community in Caithness.

  Plutonium
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he has given permission for the export of any plutonium from(a) South of Scotland Electricity Board nuclear plants and (b) the Dounreay Fast Reactor Research Establishment under section 2(i) of the Nuclear Installations Act 1965, in any year since 1979.

  Mr. Lang
  No. All irradiated fuel from South of Scotland Electricity Board reactors is reprocessed by British Nuclear Fuels plc at Sellafield and authority for disposals under section 2(i) of the Nuclear Installations Act 1965 is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy. Responsibility for activities at the UKAEA establishment at Dounreay is also a matter for my right hon. Friend.

  Radioactive Waste
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the total volume of radioactive wastes, including spent nuclear fuel, stored under licence at sites in Scotland.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  The latest inventory of radioactive wastes in the United Kingdom (January 1986) indicates that there are some 4,000 cu m of intermediate-level wastes and 151 cu m of high-level wastes stored at civil nuclear sites in Scotland. Low-level wastes are not normally stored but are disposed of as they arise. A revised inventory is in the course of preparation. Spent nuclear fuel is not regarded as waste. There are some 109·5 tonnes of fuel in store at civil nuclear sites in Scotland pending reprocessing.

THE ARTS

  Natural History Museum
  Mr. Soley
  To ask the Minister for the Arts what is the estimated change in attendance at the Natural History museum since the introduction of admission charges.

  Mr. Luce
  I understand, that in the year following the introduction of charges at the British Museum (Natural History) the number of visitors fell by slightly less than the 40 per cent. which had been predicted. Attendance figures are now showing a rising trend with 44 per cent. more people visiting the museum this Easter than during Easter 1987.

  Museums
  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Minister for the Arts what are the grants to each of the 10 national museums in cash terms for 1988–89, excluding the additional sums payable in consideration of superannuation and the Treasury Solicitor.

  Mr. Luce
  For the 10 national museums and galleries which received transfers of funding for superannuation, the Treasury Solicitor and other services, the grants-in-aid for 1988–89 excluding these transfers is as follows:

  £ million

  British Museum

  20·302

  British Museum (Natural History)

  18·834

  Imperial War Museum

  11·811

  National Gallery

  10·542

  National Maritime Museum

  7·388

  National Portrait Gallery

  4·964

  Science Museum

  15·445

  Tate Gallery

  9·744

  Victoria and Albert Museum

  19·024

  Wallace Collection

  1·412

  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Minister for the Arts what proportion of his total expenditure on museums is represented by his allocation to the Museums and Galleries Commission in 1988–89.

  Mr. Luce
  In 1988–89, the Museums and Galleries Commission's grant in aid represents 4·2 per cent. of the total planned central Government expenditure on museums and galleries.

  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Minister for the Arts if he will publish his estimated expenditure on(a) the Museums and Galleries Commission and (b) the Museums and Galleries Commission grants to each of the seven English area museum councils and the local museums purchase fund, for the years 1987–88 to 1990–91 inclusive.

  Mr. Luce
  The grants in aid paid to the Museums and Galleries Commission in 1987–88 and allocated to it for the years 1988–89 to 1990–91 are as follows:

  £ million

  1987–88

  6·233

  1988–89

  6·481

  1989–90

  6·696

  1990–91

  6·877

  Each of the figures includes £1·282 million for the local museum purchase funds. It is for the commission to decide

  649
  how much of its grant in aid to allocate to the English area museum councils. I understand that in 1987–88 its expenditure on the councils was £2·49 million.

  Public Library Development Incentive
  Mr. Andy Stewart
  To ask the Minister for the Arts what awards he intends to make under the public library development incentive scheme.

  Mr. Luce
  I am pleased to announce that I am awarding £243,500 under the public library development incentive Scheme to Berkshire, Cleveland, Devonshire, Gateshead, Leicestershire and Sheffield library authorities, and to two regional library co-operatives: the London and southeastern library region and the northern regional library system. These are the first awards made under the scheme which I set up last December to encourage new enterprises, designed to extend or improve the public library service in England. The award will cover 40 per cent. of the costs of the enterprises and are conditional on the authorities providing the remainder.

  Arts Council (Publications)
  Mr. Fisher
  To ask the Minister for the Arts whether he will list the publications that the Arts Council produced in 1987–88 and the cost of each publication.

  Mr. Luce
  [holding answer 29 April 1988]: The Arts Council publishes two lists of its publications on a regular basis; I am placing copies of the latest ones in the Library. These give the cost of each publication for which a charge is made.

NATIONAL FINANCE

  Hospital Radio Stations
  Mr. Beggs
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what representations he has received seeking an exemption for hospital radio stations from paying value added tax on essential equipment; what response he made; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lilley
  My right hon. Friend has received no further representations since the reply I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Basildon (Mr. Amess) on 10 March at column 307.

  Exchange Rate
  Ms. Quin
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he last reviewed the Government's policy on the level of the sterling exchange rate.

  Mr. Lilley
  The Government's policy on the sterling exchange rate was set out in my right hon. Friend's Budget speech and in the medium-term financial strategy published as part of the "Financial Statement and Budget Report" on 15 March.

  European Monetary System
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made as to whether the United Kingdom will he in a position to enter the exchange rate mechanism of the European monetary system when the internal market is completed.
  650
  Mr. Lilley
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 26 April to the hon. Member for Sedgefield, (Mr. Blair) at column 106.

  EC (Budget Council)
  Mr. Tim Smith
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the outcome of the recent meeting of the European Community's Budget Council.

  Mr. Brooke
  [pursuant to his reply, 3 May 1988, c. 399]: The President of the Budget Council yesterday (5 May) declared the second reading draft budget formally established and has sent the necessary documentation to the European Parliament, thereby respecting the deadline under article 203(5) of the treaty for the Council to respond to the Parliament's modifications and amendments to the Council's own earlier proposals.

  The Italian delegation has made a unilateral declaration to the effect that it cannot approve the draft inter-governmental agreement (IGA) needed to finance the budget before agreement has been reached on the method for calculating member states' contributions to the United Kingdom's abatement. This calculation affects the relative amounts of VAT and of IGA payments contributed by member states. The amounts entered in the draft IGA text are still explicitly provisional and indicative. The Council has agreed that they will be adjusted as necessary to conform with the payments due under the new own resources decision as finally agreed, and with the eventual size of the budget as adopted taking account of the Parliament's rights under the treaty as regards non-obligatory expenditure.

  The provisional amounts in the draft IGA text are shown in the table. The total includes 1,000 mecu (£690 million) to cover the monetary reserve which, as agreed at the Brussels European Council, will be drawn upon only if changes in the ecu-dollar exchange rate increase spending requirements in the agricultural guarantee section of the budget by more than 400 mecu (£277 million). The intention is that member states should contribute to the IGA in accordance with the sums which they would have paid had the new own resources decision taken effect immediately. Their contributions will represent non-repayable advances against amounts due under the new own resources decision and will be payable by monthly instalments.

  mecu

  £ million

  Belgium

  251

  174

  Denmark

  171

  119

  Germany

  1,982

  1,375

  Greece

  84

  58

  Spain

  528

  366

  France

  1,532

  1,063

  Ireland

  45

  31

  Italy

  1,342

  931

  Luxembourg

  15

  10

  Netherlands

  369

  256

  Portugal

  63

  44

  United Kingdom

  1,263

  876

  TOTAL1

  7,647

  5,304

  1 The individual lines may not add up to totals because oF rounding. All sterling equivalent flgures are calculated at the rate of 1 ·4417 ecu to the pound used by the Commission in its latest budget proposals.

  As explained in my reply of 9 March, columns 208–9, the extra financing will be partially offset by smaller VAT

  651
  payments. On the foregoing figures, the total extra financing, compared with the maximum amount available under the existing own resources ceiling, would be around 5,400 mecu (£3,700 million), after allowing for a surplus of 500 mecu (£350 million) carried forward from 1987.

  I have made it clear in the Council that the United Kingdom cannot pay over any of the additional sums without the approval of Parliament. Parliament's approval will be sought by means either of a special estimate or of a Bill, following the precedents of the 1984 and 1985 IGAs respectively. The method chosen will depend mainly on the timing of the adoption of the budget and the IGA and of the agreement of the new own resources decision. The IGA is subject to approval in the national Parliaments of all other member states as well.

ENERGY

  CEGB Research and Development
  Mr. Stern
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what representations he has received on the proposed privatisation of the research and development functions other than nuclear now carried out by the Central Electricity Generating Board.

  Mr. Parkinson
  I have received a number of representations from within and outside the industry about the arrangements for research and development in the privatised electricity industry. We are consulting the industry on this matter.

  Departmental Contracts
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy (1) if he will list any contracts placed with Wastechem Ltd. of Bramhall, Cheshire, by his Department either alone or in collaboration with the Department of the Environment;

  (2) if his Department has placed any contracts with BBGN Nuclear Technology of Bramhall, Cheshire; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  My Department has no contracts with either of the companies named.

  "Britain's Nuclear Nightmare"
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if he will seek to obtain for his departmental library a copy of the book by Rob Edwards and James Cutler entitled, "Britain's Nuclear Nightmare" published in April.

  Mr. Parkinson
  Yes. The book has been ordered.

  EC Research Centre
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority at Harwell has any direct or indirect research involvement with the EEC joint research centre at Ispra, Italy; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  This is a matter for the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority. I have asked the chairman to write to the hon. Member.

  Plutonium (Leasing)
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy how much money the Central Electricity Generating Board has received since May 1979 for the leasing of 652
  plutonium to (a) the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority, at Dounreay, (b) the Kernforschungzentrum, at Karlsruhe, Federal Republic of Germany and (c) the Eidgenossisches Institut fur Reaktorforschung at Wurlingen, Switzerland; and what safeguards arrangements cover these leases.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  The sums of money received by the CEGB for leasing plutonium are commercially confidential. Plutonium under lease from the CEGB to the UKAEA is subject to Euratom safeguards and the terms of the UK/Euratom/IAEA safeguards agreement. At present the CEGB has no plutonium under lease to the Kernforschungzentrum, at Karlsruhe or the Eidgenossisches Institut Fir Reaktoforschung at Wurlingen.

  Energy Technology Support Unit, Harwell
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if he will make a statement on the current profitability and future commercial prospects of the energy technology support unit at Harwell.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  The energy technology support unit (ETSU) is a part of the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority, and its profitability is therefore a matter for the authority. The future commercial prospects for ETSU are likewise a matter for the authority.

  Spent Nuclear Fuel Elements
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy what tonnage of spent nuclear fuel elements has been stockpiled by the Central Electricity Generating Board from(a) Magnox reactors and (b) advanced gas-cooled reactor nuclear plants, awaiting reprocessing at Sellafield.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  On 31 March 1988 CEGB power stations were storing a total of 1,200 tonnes uranium Magnox irradiated fuel and 55 tonnes uranium AGR irradiated fuel having discharged it from the reactors. All this fuel will be transported to Sellafield in due course.

  Public Sector Companies (Foreign Shareholding)
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy (1) if he will list all the public sector United Kingdom companies in which Transnuklear of Hanau, Federal Republic of Germany, has a corporate share involvement; and if he will set out the percentage share involvement by Transnuklear;

  (2) if he will list all the public sector United Kingdom companies in which NUKEM Gmbh of Hanau, Federal Republic of Germany, has a corporate shareholding and set out the percentage share involvement by NUKEM.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  Neither Transnuklear nor NUKEM Gmbh has any shareholding in any United Kingdom public sector company in the energy sector. With regard to other areas of the public sector I shall reply to the hon. Member in due course.

  Atomic Weapons Research Establishment (Aldermaston)
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if any work connected with the fast reactor research
  653
  programme is currently, or ever has been, carried out at the atomic weapons research establishment at Aldermaston; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  No work on the fast reactor research programme has been carried out at Aldermaston since 1979.

  Plutonium (Civil Reactors)
  Dr. Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Energy if the reply given by the then Under-Secretary of State, the right hon. Member for Croydon, Central (Mr. Moore),Official Report, 4 February 1983, column 206, regarding the use of plutonium from civil reactors, remains Government policy; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Michael Spicer
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my hon. Friend the Member for Eddisbury (Mr. Goodlad) to the hon. Member for Workington (Mr. Campbell-Savours) on 15 December 1986 at column 383.

EMPLOYMENT

  Channel Islands (Work Permits)
  Mr. Foulkes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment whether he has been consulted in connection with legislation proposed by the authorities of(a) Jersey and (b) Guernsey seeking to establish work permit controls in those islands; and if he will make a statement on Her Majesty's Government's policy in respect of such controls on British citizens in these territories.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  I have been asked to reply.

  There is no legislation proposed by the Channel Islands' authorities to establish work permits which would affect United Kingdom citizens. Should any such system be proposed it would be examined in the light of the need to ensure that those with close links with the islands had adequate opportunities for employment.

SOCIAL SERVICES

  Firemen
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will make a statement on the implications of the recent changes in the social security system for the position of firemen.

  Mr. Scott
  Under income support, retained (part-time) firefighters will have the first £15 of their weekly earnings disregarded instead of the full disregard that was available under supplementary benefit. Payments of bounty will be treated as capital.

  Those who made the change from supplementary benefit to income support will have had the level of their benefit income protected by transitional additions.

  Geriatric Beds
  Mr. Tony Lloyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will make a statement on the implications of the proportion of the number of available geriatric beds in any given district health authority to the number of geriatric consultants for the provision of good health service provision for the elderly.

  Mrs. Currie
  The number of geriatric beds available to a geriatric consultant is only one of many aspects of good 654
  health service provision for elderly people. Other factors would include the use made by elderly patients of beds under other consultants, levels of junior medical and support therapy staff, and, most importantly, the level of care in the community including services via the family practitioner committees. It is for health authorities to resource particular areas of their service according to local needs and circumstances.

  Health Authorities (Throughput Rates)
  Mr. Tony Lloyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will make a statement on the diverse throughput rates between health authorities, as revealed in his Department's performance indicators, in relation to the quality of patient care.

  Mrs. Currie
  Health Service indicators provide evidence which suggests that there are significant variations in the throughput, of patients receiving acute care, achieved by health authorities. Where this is reinforced by similar variations in values for related indicators it implies that there is scope for some authorities to make better use of resources and so provide more services to patients. Questions raised by the indicators need to be examined by managers in the light of other information available locally. This would include achieving the right balance between efficiency and quality of care.

  All health authorities have been requested to discuss their indicators for the four years available, the most recent being for 1986–87, by the end of July.

  Housing Benefit
  Mr. Leighton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services if the weekly premium over benefit of those participating on the new adult training programme will affect their claim to housing benefit.

  Mr. Portillo
  No. An amendment to the housing benefit regulations will be laid before Parliament shortly, which would provide for the premium to be disregarded in the calculation of housing benefit entitlement.

  Ms. Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services if people with capital between £6,000 and £8,000 who fail to qualify for housing benefit because of the assumed tariff income, but who nevertheless have lost more than £2·50 per week, qualify for a transitional payment under his Departments new arrangements.

  Mr. Scott
  Yes.

  Mr. Robin Cook
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services what he estimates the administrative costs will be of his announcement of 27 April of changes to the housing benefit regulations(a) in total, (b) expressed as a proportion of the additional money to be made available to claimants and (c) as an average weekly sum per head of the beneficiaries of the changes.

  Mr. Scott
  The administrative costs of implementing the changes cannot be precisely assessed until more information is available about the scale of the inquiries and claims which need to be handled, and until detailed procedures for handling claims have been agreed.

  Mr. Ingram
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services what proposals his Department has to set up a new unit to administer the transitional protection scheme on housing benefit; and if he will make a statement.
  655
  Mr. Scott
  I refer the hon. Member to my reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Fylde (Mr. Jack) on 5 May 1988 at columns 550–51.

  Infant Formulae
  Mrs. Ann Winterton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services if he has yet received the first report of the committee which monitors compliance with the provisions of the Food Manufacturers Federation voluntary code of practice on the marketing of infant formulae in the United Kingdom; and if he will make a statement.

  Mrs. Currie
  We received the first report from the Food and Drink Federation (FDF) monitoring committee early in March. It is a thorough, balanced and objective document and I congratulate the committee chairman, Dame Alison Munro, and her members.

  Their report shows that the Government's arrangements for securing, within the United Kingdom, the aim and principles of the World Health Organisation's international code of marketing of breast-milk substitutes are working well. It makes suggestions about improving these arrangements further. We shall be discussing with the monitoring committee and the manufacturers how to take these matters forward.

  Cervical Cancer
  Mr. Wray
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Sevices what is his estimate of the average cost to public funds of each cervical cancer death, including hospital, medical services, medicines and funeral expenses, social security payments, and similar benefits to the children and relations in need.

  Mrs. Currie
  Information is available only on the costs incurred in any particular year of treating in-patients with cervical cancer who were discharged or who died in hospital during that year. This came to about £11 million in England, in 1987–88, which represents £940 per case treated. It is not possible to trace the treatment and other costs incurred in the course of their illness by patients who eventually die of cervical cancer. The average cost of each cervical smear taken is estimated to be £10.

  Nurses and Midwives
  Mr. Robin Cook
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services what steps he is taking to monitor(a) the assessments being carried out by health authorities for the nurses' and midwives' clinical grading review and (b) the funding implications of those assessments.

  Mr. Newton
  Implementation of the new clinical grading structure, including monitoring of assessments for consistency and of cost implications, will be among the 656
  matters to be covered in guidance we expect to issue shortly. This will be supplemented by visits from officials and by returns from health authorities showing how many staff have been allocated from each existing grade to each new one.

  Income Support (Rates)
  Mrs. Rosie Barnes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services what measures are being taken, following the recent changes in social security regulations, to ensure that those previously entitled to 100 per cent. rate assistance, and who live in highly rated areas, will receive sufficient income support to offset having to pay at least 20 per cent. of their rates from 1 April.

  Mr. Scott
  As we made clear in the White Paper "Reform of Social Security" (Cmnd. 9691) the Government are firmly of the view that local accountability must be improved by giving everyone a financial interest in the level of domestic rates charged by their local authority. The income support rates include compensation to reflect the average amount the recipients will have to contribute: to provide further compensation on an individual basis would undermine the purpose of requiring everyone to meet at least 20 per cent. of their rates.

  Medical Secretaries
  Mr. Robin Cook
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will give, for each region and for the latest year for which figures are available(a) the numbers of agency medical secretaries employed and (b) the amount of money spent on agency medical secretaries.

  Mr. Newton
  This information is not held centrally.

  Social Fund
  Mrs. Beckett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Services how many social fund applications for(a) grants, (b) loans and (c) either grants or loans had been received at his Department's local offices in London road and Becket street, Derby, up to the latest date for which information is available.

  Mr. Portillo
  [holding answer 27 April 1988]: We shall be placing in the Library details of the operation of the social fund for each local office. These data will comprise the outstanding balances in the loans budget and community care grants budget and the numbers and the financial amounts of applications and payments for crisis loans, budgeting loans and community care grants. This information will be provided monthly as soon as the data have been collated. I will write to the hon. Member when the first month's information becomes available.