The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Author: admin

  • PMQT Written Answers – 16 December 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 16th December 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Oleg Gordievsky

    Mr. David Shaw: To ask the Prime Minister if he will publish extracts from the notes of the Security Service debriefing of the Soviet defector Oleg Gordievsky to the extent that such extracts (a) do not threaten current national security, (b) add to public knowledge of the ways in which the Soviet state sought to obtain information from British people about the United Kingdom with a view to breaking its security and (c) reveal the main United Kingdom providers of such information.

    The Prime Minister: No.

     

    Ministerial Train Journeys

    Mr. MacShane: To ask the Prime Minister how many train journeys for one hour’s duration or more he has made in Britain in 1994 in the course of his official duties.

    The Prime Minister: I have made one such journey in the past 12 months.

     

    NHS Expenditure

    Mr. Campbell-Savours: To ask the Prime Minister what assessment he has made of whether the answers given to the hon. member for Workington on the cost per head of NHS spending in respect of Scotland, 7 December, Official Report, columns 278 79, Northern Ireland, 5 December, Official Report, column 47, and England and Wales, 1 December, Official Report, column 830, are comparable calculations based on comparable data.

    The Prime Minister: The answers given to the hon. Member reflect the different structure of the national health service in each of the countries concerned, and the latest year for which figures on expenditure are available.

     

    Ministerial Travel

    Mr. Byers: To ask the Prime Minister what criteria he uses in deciding whether it is appropriate for a spouse to accompany a Minister on Government duties abroad.

    The Prime Minister: Public interest, as stated in paragraph 74 of “Questions of Procedure for Ministers”, a copy of which is available in the Library of the House.

     

    Council of Europe

    Mr. John Marshall: To ask the Prime Minister if he will announce the composition of the United kingdom delegation for the 1995 ordinary session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.

    The Prime Minister: The 1995 ordinary session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe will be opened in Strasbourg on 30 January 1995. The delegation from the United Kingdom for the session will consist of 19 members of the Conservative party, 15 members of the Labour party and two members from the minority parties. The appointments of representatives and substitutes have been made on the basis of nominations by the parties concerned, in accordance with the resolution of this House on 22 May 1992, Official Report, column 682, and of the House of Lords on 18 June 1992, Official Report columns 290 92.

    The same delegation will be representing the United Kingdom Parliament at the Assembly of the Western European Union, which next meets in Paris in June 1995.

    Representatives from the Government Benches will be:

    My Noble Friend, the Lord Finsberg – who will continue to act as leader of both delegations.

    My hon. Friends the Members for:

    Warwick and Leamington (Sir D. Smith)

    Calder Valley (Sir D. Thompson)

    Ashford (Sir K. Speed)

    Medway (Dame P. Fenner)

    Lewes (Mr. T. Rathbone)

    Bournemouth, East (Mr. Atkinson)

    Ravensbourne (Sir J. Hunt)

    Reading, West (Sir A. Durant)

    My noble Friend Lord Newall

    Representatives from the Labour Party will be:

    The hon. Members for:

    Wentworth (Mr. Hardy)

    Tooting (Mr. Cox)

    Wansbeck (Mr. Thompson)

    Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks)

    Don Valley (Mr. Redmond)

    Manchester, Central (Mr. Litherland)

    The Noble Lord Kirkhill

    The representative from the minority parties will be:

    The hon. Member for Inverness, Nairn and Lochaber (Sir R. Johnston)

    The following substitutes have been appointed to act as necessary on behalf of the delegates.

    From the Government benches:

    My hon. Friends, the hon. Members for:

    Sheffield, Hallam (Sir I. Patnick)

    Norfolk, North (Sir R. Howell)

    Brighton, Kemptown (Sir A. Bowden)

    Wellingborough (Sir P. Fry)

    Southampton, Test (Mr. Hill)

    Bridlington (Mr. Townsend)

    Newark (Mr. Alexander)

    and my noble Friends the Baroness Hooper and the Earl of Dundee

    From the Labour Party

    The hon. Members for:

    Glasgow, Pollok (Mr. Dunnachie)

    Glasgow, Provan (Mr. Wray)

    Newport, East (Mr. Hughes)

    Easington (Mr. Cummings)

    Leigh (Mr. Cunliffe)

    Leicester, South (Mr. Marshall)

    Birmingham, Hodge Hill (Mr. T. Davis)

    The noble Baroness Gould of Potternewton

    From the minority parties:

    The Noble Lord Mackie of Benshie.

     

    Civil Service

    Dr. Goodson-Wickes: To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the management of the home civil service.

    The Prime Minister: The Government plan, in the light of the review of the Treasury’s activities, that those central civil service management functions that remain after delegation to Departments should be transferred to the Minister with responsibility for the civil service with effect from 1 April 1995. The functions which it proposes to transfer include responsibility for senior civil service pay; policy on civil service recruitment, retirement and redundancy and the central management of the principal civil service pension scheme; and residual central responsibilities for civil service personnel management, industrial relations, conditions of service and allowances, and the collection of civil service manpower statistics. It is envisaged that the Treasury will undertake a last round of national pay negotiations in 1995 and carry through the remaining delegations to Departments up to 1 April 1996. The Treasury’s pension benefit calculation work at Basingstoke will be taken over by the Paymaster agency.

    These changes, and the delegation of most civil service management functions to Departments, will not affect the Treasury’s role in relation to public expenditure, including that on public sector pay. The Government propose to lay before Parliament the necessary transfer of functions order under the Ministers of the Crown Act 1975.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in Huntingdon – 16 December 1994

    Below is Mr Major’s doorstep interview with the press, in Huntingdon, on Friday 16th December 1994.

    QUESTION:

    What’s your reaction to the by-election?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Well it was a very poor result and I don’t think one can possibly say anything else. It was fought against a very unpromising background indeed in the last month, and I don’t think that the Conservative candidate can have done anything else…… But yes it was a poor result.

    QUESTION:

    How does it make you feel to lose with the biggest swing in political history since the war?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Well it wasn’t the biggest swing since the war. There have been bigger. There was a much bigger swing against the Labour Party in Bermondsey, for example, some time ago. But I don’t draw very comfort from that. As I say it is a poor result. But I think some good can come out of it. Providing people realise within the Conservative Party that they must pull in the same direction and for the same cause, at the same time, and against the same opponent, then I believe that will dramatically transform the political environment in the United Kingdom.

    There is no doubt that a great deal is going right, economically and in other ways. But that message simply isn’t getting through to people at the moment. It is masked. We must try and whip that mask away and let people see that this country is steadily moving into much more promising economic future.

    QUESTION:

    You say it’s a poor result, other people have described it more as a disaster. What are you going to do about it?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Well I think I have just indicated what needs to be done. When one has unpopularity in mid-term there are two things that need to be done. One is that you need to ensure that the policies are right and that those policies are working. Self-evidently, economically those policies are working, not even our fiercest critics would deny that now. The second thing is to make sure that the whole of the party is actually promoting those policies, talking about those policies and not being diverted into other, no doubt, interesting matters. Now that’s what the Conservative Party must do.

    QUESTION:

    What were the critical factors, that you would say, were the voters’ reasons for not voting for you this time?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I don’t think they feel the economic recovery yet. People can see that the country is doing much better, but people themselves don’t feel that they and their families are yet doing any better. And I think that they are very upset about that. In due course that will become apparent to them. And I think also that is is scarcely possible to have found a more unpromising background over the last four or five weeks in which to have fought a by-election. A great deal has happened, none of it terribly helpful to the Conservative candidate.

    QUESTION:

    Has the VAT vote given ……. the way they voted?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Well I dare say there are a range of things that would have had an impact upon the way they voted, no doubt that was one of them.

    QUESTION:

    What would you need to do now to actually get the voters back for maybe the next by-election or certainly for the next general election?

    Obviously they are very unhappy at the moment.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Well it isn’t a unique phenomenon of course in mid-term. I don’t wish to brush it away or be complacent about it. I am not remotely complacent about it. But by-elections that are very poor for the government of the day in mid-term are not unusual and this has been a cycle that has got progressively worse in every Parliament, I think, since the 1950s. People to tend to protest. It is an unusually volatile electorate at the moment. They do tend to express their feelings very forcibly at by-elections. What we have to do is to show people that we have the right long-term policies and above all that we have got an economic recovery which is going to improve their prospects. And if one looks at what is happening: unemployment has fallen by half a million over the last two years. Now, if we had stood here two years ago after a by-election, everyone would have been asking me questions about when we were going to get employment beginning to rise and unemployment beginning to fall. It is doing, and doing so in quite dramatic terms. Growth is running at a very high level at the moment – 4% – inflation is at an historically low level. I think these things are created in a much happier environment, they make people feel better and show that the country is doing better. But it isn’t yet apparent to them. It will be. But it isn’t yet.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible question]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No, the question is showing people what we are doing is in the country’s interest. I believe that what we are doing is in the country’s interest. The whole of the western world has been through a dreadful recession. In this country we have now come out of it in better shape than almost any other country in the world. There is no country in western Europe that has the growth that we have at the moment and that has the combination of rising exports, very low inflation and falling unemployment. Only in the United Kingdom has that happened. Now, that hasn’t yet become apparent to people. They say that they are not concerned at what happens in other countries, and are concerned about the difficulties we have here and I understand that. I certainly understand that. It has been a difficult time for them. But what they wish to see is that their country is doing well, increasingly that is what they are going to see.

    QUESTION:

    When is it going to be apparent?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think it is already apparent to any people in business. If you talk to businessmen and if you have a look at the export figures for example, our export figures are running at record levels. Many people said when we came out of recession that inflation would rocket – well it hasn’t rocketed. They said that we would have a balance of payments crisis. Well the balance of payments is narrowing. So it is becoming increasingly apparent to everyone in their own household and in their own individual circumstances. They are still worried about employment prospects, even though unemployment is falling. And we’ve learnt in the past that historically this takes time. It takes a while for people to see over a period of some time that things have been steadily getting better. Even as we speak that is happening. And it will eventually become apparent. I can’t say when but it will happen.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 15 December 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 15th December 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Ministers

    Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister what percentage of members of the House are now in ministerial office or employed as parliamentary private secretaries; and what was the figure in 1978.

    The Prime Minister: Nineteen per cent. of Members of this House are parliamentary private secretaries or hold ministerial office, which is broadly similar to 1978. The information is a matter of public record.

    Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister (1) if he will list the number of Ministers in the Government by rank currently and in 1978; and if he will explain the reasons for the differences; (2) how many Ministers there are currently in the Cabinet; how many there were in 1978; and what are the reasons for the difference.

    The Prime Minister: The information requested is a matter of public record. The reasons for any differences will depend on the reasons for allocations of ministerial portfolios in 1978 by the then Prime Minister, now Lord Callaghan of Cardiff.

     

    Parliamentary Private Functions

    Mr. Kaufman: To ask the Prime Minister when he expects to provide a full reply to the question from the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton concerning parliamentary private functions.

    The Prime Minister: I have done so.

     

    Economic Community

    Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister if Her Majesty’s Government consider themselves bound by the undertakings given at the time of the 1975 referendum on EEC membership.

    The Prime Minister: It is not clear which undertakings the hon. Member has in mind.

     

    Ministerial Travel (Spouses)

    Mr. Donohoe: To ask the Prime Minister on how many occasions in the past year his spouse has travelled abroad to accompany him at public expense on public duties; what has been the total cost of this to public funds; on how many occasions such travel has been undertaken at own cost; and what was the destination and the duration of these foreign trips.

    The Prime Minister: During the past year, my wife has accompanied me on overseas visits on two occasions, as follows:

    Date |Visit

    —————————————————————————————————————————————————

    13-15 February 1994 |Russian Federation

    18-22 September 1994 |Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, South Africa

    On both occasions, costs attributed to my wife were minimal because she travelled on charter aircraft and stayed as “Guest of Government” or at residences.

    There have been no occasions when such travel was undertaken at own cost.

     

    Engagements

    Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 15 December.

    Sir Peter Tapsell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 15 December.

    The Prime Minister: This morning, I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall be having further meetings later today.

     

    Lockerbie Bombing

    Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will seek discussions with the Prime Ministers of Malta and Sweden about the implications of clothing found in the wreckage of Pan Am 103.

    The Prime Minister: The investigation of clothing found in the wreckage of Pan Am flight 103 is the responsibility of my noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate and Dumfries and Galloway constabulary, acting where necessary in co-operation with the authorities of other countries concerned, which have included Malta and Sweden.

    Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Prime Minister what documentary evidence is in the possession of Her Majesty’s Government in respect of baggage loaded on to Pan Am 103 at Frankfurt in December 1988.

    The Prime Minister: As the hon. Member is aware, it would not be appropriate to reveal details of the evidence against the two persons accused of the Lockerbie bombing while criminal charges are pending.

     

    Security Vetting

    Sir Anthony Durant: To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement about the procedures for security vetting within government.

    The Prime Minister: As I announced to the House on 23 March, Official Report, columns 259 60, to ensure that security measures and procedures reflect current threats, the Government have recently completed a fundamental review of their arrangements for the management of protective security in Departments and agencies. In the area of personnel security, the review concluded that the vetting process served a worthwhile purpose, not only in disclosing circumstances which might lead to breaches of security but as a deterrent to those who might otherwise seek to undermine that security. The review recommended, however, that there should be a streamlining of the procedures that made up the vetting process. That work has now been completed.

    The new framework should ensure that personnel security objectives are properly defined and that responsibility for achieving them is clearly established. There will be a greater emphasis on ensuring that personnel security resources are targeted on, and proportionate to, the threat and add necessarily and cost-effectively to the protection of government assets. Between 1 January and 31 March 1995, the existing arrangements will be replaced by a new personnel security regime which will consist of two levels of vetting, a security check and developed vetting. A security check will be similar to the current PV(S)–positive vetting (secret)– clearance, but will in addition include a check on the financial status of the individual. Developed vetting will replace the present PV(TS)–positive vetting (top secret)–and EPV–extended positive vetting– levels of vetting. The current system of counter terrorist checks will remain unchanged, but will be subject to review.

    As at present, all candidates for security vetting will be asked to complete a security questionnaire which will explain the purpose of the procedure and invite them to provide the personal details required for the necessary checks to be carried out. Vetting will then be carried out on the basis of the statement of policy set out below.

    Statement of HM Government’s vetting policy

    In the interests of national security, safeguarding Parliamentary democracy and maintaining the proper security of the Government’s essential activities, it is the policy of HMG that no one should be employed in connection with work the nature of which is vital to the interests of the state who:

    is, or has been involved in, or associated with any of the following activities:

    –espionage,

    –terrorism,

    –sabotage,

    –actions intended to overthrow or undermine Parliamentary democracy by political, industrial or violent means; or

    is, or has recently been:

    –a member of any organisation which has advocated such activities; or

    –associated with any organisation, or any of its members in such a way as to raise reasonable doubts about his or reliability; or is susceptible to pressure or improper influence, for example because of current or past conduct; or

    –has shown dishonesty or lack of integrity which throws doubt upon their reliability; or

    –has demonstrated behaviour, or is subject to circumstances which may otherwise indicate unreliability.

    In accordance with the above policy, Government departments and agencies will carry out a Security Check (SC) on all individuals who require long term, frequent and uncontrolled access to SECRET information or assets. A Security Check may also be applied to staff who are in a position directly or indirectly to bring about the same degree of damage as such individuals or who need access to protectively marked material originating from other countries or international organisations. In some circumstances, where it would not be possible for an individual to make reasonable progress in their career without clearance to SECRET level, it may be applied to candidates for employment whose duties do not, initially, involve such regular access.

    An SC clearance will normally consist of:

    a check against the National Collection of Criminal Records and relevant departmental and police records;

    in accordance with the Security Service Act 1989, where it is necessary to protect national security, or to safeguard the economic well-being of the United Kingdom from threats posed by persons outside the British Islands, a check against Security Service records; and

    credit reference checks and where appropriate, a review of personal finances.

    In some circumstances further enquiries, including an interview with the subject, may be carried out.

    Individuals employed on government work who have long term, frequent and uncontrolled access to TOP SECRET information or assets, will be submitted to the level of vetting clearance known as Developed Vetting (DV). This level of clearance may also be applied to people who are in a position directly or indirectly to cause the same degree of damage as such individuals and in order to satisfy the requirements for access to protectively marked material originating from other countries and international organisations. In addition to a Security Check, a DV will involve:

    an interview with the person being vetted; and

    references from people who are familiar with the person’s character in both the home and work environment. These may be followed up by interviews. Enquiries will not necessarily be confined to to past and present employers and nominated character referees.

    It is also the Government’s policy that departments and agencies will carry out Counter Terrorist Checks (CTC) in the interest of national security before anyone can be:

    authorised to take up posts which involve proximity to public figures at particular risk of attack by terrorist organisations, or which give access to information or material assessed to be of value to terrorists:

    granted unescorted access to certain military, civil and industrial establishments assessed to be at particular risk of attack by a terrorist organisation.

    The purpose of such checks is to prevent those who may have connections with terrorist organisations, or who may be vulnerable to pressure from such organisations, from gaining access to certain posts, and in some circumstances, premises, where there is a risk that they could exploit that position to further the aims of a terrorist organisation. A CTC will include a check against Security Service records. Criminal record information may also be taken into account.

    Departments and agencies generally assure themselves, through the verification of identity, and written references from previous employers, that potential recruits are reliable and trustworthy. Such Basic Checks (BC) are already standard procedure for many departments and agencies. Where access needs to be granted to Government information or assets at CONFIDENTIAL level, departments, agencies and contractors engaged on government work are required to complete such checks. In some cases, at the CONFIDENTIAL level, where relevant, the Basic Check may be augmented with some of the checks normally carried out for security clearances.

     

    Maltese Double Cross

    Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Prime Minister what representations he has had from President Clinton about the showing of the film “Maltese Double Cross” in the White House, Washington, on the morning of Sunday 4 December; and whether he has offered to the White house all evidence pertaining to the Pan Am 103 destruction over Lockerbie in the possession of Her Majesty’s Government.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 14 December 1994]: I have received no such representations. The investigation into the Lockerbie bombing has been carried out in conjunction with the United States authorities, with whom all evidence has been shared.

    Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Prime Minister what assessment he has made of Alan Fancovitch’s film, “Maltese Double Cross”, in relation to sanctions against Libya and loss of United Kingdom-Libya trade.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 14 December 1994]: The content of the film is being considered by the Crown Office and Dumfries and Galloway constabulary.

  • PMQT – 15 December 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 15th December 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mrs. Roche: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 15 December.

    The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major): This morning, I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.

    Mrs. Roche: Given today’s news that British Gas retail staff, who earn an average of £13,000 a year, will be asked to take a pay cut while the chief executive will receive a pay rise of 75 per cent., does the Prime Minister share the opinion of the deputy chairman of the Conservative party that, under the present Government, the rich are getting richer on the backs of the rest?

    The Prime Minister: I am a little surprised that the hon. Lady should mention that matter, in the light of what her hon. Friend the shadow Chancellor had to say on the radio a couple of hours ago.

     

    Q2. Mr. Hawkins: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 15 December.

    The Prime Minister: I refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Hawkins: In the light of this week’s welcome further fall in unemployment, has my right hon. Friend met a single business man who supports the Labour party’s demand for a minimum wage, which would destroy so many jobs in constituencies such as mine in Blackpool?

    The Prime Minister: I cannot be sure that there is none who would, but certainly the overwhelming opinion is to the contrary. Even the right hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott) has in the past used the expression that there would be some jobs “shakeout”, or words to that effect. That means, of course, that people will lose their jobs. The right hon. Member for Sedgefield (Mr. Blair) has said that a minimum wage would have a potential jobs impact. He can hardly believe that it would be a favourable jobs impact. I think, therefore, that hon. Members on the Opposition Front Bench tend to agree that jobs would be lost by that policy.

    Mr. Blair: Will the Prime Minister confirm that, by next year, the chief executive of British Gas will earn in one week what his employees, who are now confronted with job cuts and pay cuts, earn in one year? Is it not time that he took a grip on those privatised utilities and put a stop to excesses that are offensive to the British sense of justice?

    The Prime Minister: The right hon. Gentleman will have to decide whether he wishes to have a private sector with rigid Government controls over every aspect of it, in which case it is not a private sector, or to renationalise industries such as gas, in which case he should make his position entirely clear. He might also clear his lines with his hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline, East (Mr. Brown) because my answer to the hon. Member for Hornsey and Wood Green (Mrs. Roche) applies also to the right hon. Gentleman.

    Mr. Blair: Since these industries are regulated, why could they not be regulated to put a stop to those excesses? Is not the point one of efficiency as well as justice because, if we want a modern motivated work force, we can have it only on the basis of investment, partnership and fairness, not on the old Tory notion of greed at the top and insecurity for the rest?

    The Prime Minister: A couple of hours ago the shadow Chancellor was asked:

    “Surely there is nothing you could do, could you, about wage rates within an industry? You are surely not going to start interfering with that again, are you?”

    To that, the hon. Gentleman said:

    “No, these are matters for negotiation between the unions and the employers.”

    They should sort their lines out themselves before they criticise us.

    Mr. Blair: The issue is not the market conditions of British Gas but the contrast between the treatment of the chief executive and those ordinary staff who are facing pay cuts. I understand that the Cabinet has its own committee looking into these matters. If the Prime Minister has such a committee, why will he not accept the suggestion put forward from the Opposition Benches that where there are excessive pay increases at the top the regulator should act to stop them?

    The Prime Minister: The right hon. Gentleman knows that that is not a matter for the regulator. He is being wholly inconsistent. One day he complains about the British Gas monopoly, the next day he complains when British Gas faces competition and cuts its cloth accordingly. In one sense he opposes monopoly, in another sense he opposes competition. The reality is that he just opposes the private sector. What the right hon. Gentleman is doing is what he and his colleagues have done so often–find a grievance, whatever it is, and use that grievance for partisan interest in the interests of the Labour party.

     

    Q3. Sir Anthony Durant: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 15 December.

    The Prime Minister: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer that I gave some moments ago.

    Sir Anthony Durant: My right hon. Friend will be aware that today is the anniversary of the Downing street declaration. I congratulate him on the progress that is being made in Northern Ireland towards a lasting peace and the announced inward investment and on the atmosphere that has improved so much in Northern Ireland, which he found in Portadown yesterday. Conservative Members believe that unless we get rid of the explosives and the firearms of the IRA, the UVF and the UFF, we will not be able to make the progress that we should.

    The Prime Minister: I share that view. Firearms, explosives and detonators, whether held by the IRA or by the loyalist paramilitaries, need to be decommissioned. As I said yesterday, I am not concerned whether they are surrendered; I am concerned that they are decommissioned and destroyed so that they can no longer be used to disrupt the democratic life of Northern Ireland. That is the important matter. That does have to be discussed and it does have to be acted upon during the preliminary discussions that are taking place at the moment. If progress is not made on that, not only, in my judgment, would the other democratic parties in Northern Ireland politics not sit down with those who retain those weapons, but nor should any British Government.

    Mr. Ashdown: Given the damage that has been done by indecision and division over Bosnia in the past, will the Prime Minister tell us what his response will be to the French proposal to be put to NATO on Monday to secure Sarajevo airport and to open a route to the sea in order to reinforce the UN’s humanitarian operations and to make more secure the position of our troops there in the future?

    The Prime Minister: Of course, we consider carefully anything that would secure the position of our troops and the right hon. Gentleman should know better than to suggest that we would do otherwise. I wish that he would not repeatedly undersell and undermine what is done there by British troops, United Nations troops and the Government. He has done nothing but grandstand on this issue from the commencement of the matter. If he really understood a little more about it, he might say a little less about it.

    Mr. Peter Ainsworth: Does my right hon. Friend agree that employees should be encouraged to take stakes in the companies that they work for? Does not he think it odd that the Labour party attacks share options, particularly bearing in mind the extent to which its leader and various of his “luvvie” friends seem to have benefited from them?

    The Prime Minister: I certainly think that it is right to extend share ownership as widely as possible. In the past 15 years, there has been a dramatic extension of share ownership. That has entrenched the private sector and private enterprise. It has done a great deal for the individual security of people owning shares. We shall certainly continue those policies. It would be welcome to have a cross-party consensus on it.

     

    Q4. Mr. McGrady: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 15 December.

    The Prime Minister: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. McGrady: I thank the Prime Minister for his reply. Will he join me in congratulating the Industrial Development Board for Northern Ireland, and may I thank him personally for the great contribution and excellent launch of the Investment Forum drive in Belfast this week? He and, I hope, all hon. Members will pray that it bears immediate and urgent fruit. Having launched the Investment Forum, and having begun demilitarisation talks with the republican and loyalist paramilitaries, does he agree that the most urgent and pressing need in Northern Ireland is the recommencement of political dialogue, which must perforce await completion of the framework document? Will he assure the House today that, with the creation of the new Government in the Republic of Ireland under the new Taoiseach, John Bruton, the Government will act urgently to complete the framework document so that the two Governments and the political parties can negotiate a lasting political settlement in Northern Ireland?

    The Prime Minister: I am grateful for what the hon. Gentleman had to say about the IDB, officials in the Northern Ireland Office and the investment conference held yesterday. No one who attended the conference has any doubt that it was a tremendous success not only in the new investments that were announced yesterday, but in the number of new investments that may arise as a result of the conference. The atmosphere was quite astonishing, as everyone who attended will know.

    On the second half of the hon. Gentleman’s question, clearly it is desirable to recontinue the political dialogue as soon as possible. I have written already to the new Taoiseach, Mr. Bruton, to say that I look forward to meeting him as soon as possible. I am confident that the new Irish Government will wish to sustain together the work that we have done over Northern Ireland. We wish to recommence discussions on the framework document and, I hope, conclude it as speedily as possible. But I would rather take a little longer over the document and get it right than deal with it too speedily and perhaps not have it right.

    Mr. Dunn: What advice will the Prime Minister offer to the people of Islington who are entitled to say that, if local education is not good enough for the Leader of the Opposition, it is not good enough for them?

    The Prime Minister: I suspect that it is not only the Leader of the Opposition who has not found the education system satisfactory in Islington, although the right hon. Gentleman shakes his head so perhaps he does find it satisfactory after all. We need the highest quality of education in Islington not just for the right hon. Gentleman, of course, but for every Islington resident whose children attend schools there.

     

    Maltese Double Cross

    Q5. Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Prime Minister what is the outcome of the investigation, referred to in his letter to the hon. Member for Linlithgow of 29 November, of the scrutiny of the film “Maltese Double Cross” by those involved in the investigation; and who were those involved to whom he referred.

    The Prime Minister: The Crown Office and Dumfries and Galloway police are still considering the contents of the film.

    Mr. Dalyell: Is it not a matter of record that on 19 September 1989 the then Secretary of State for Transport, Lord Parkinson–in good faith, quite certainly–offered the British relatives of the victims of Lockerbie a public inquiry on the condition that it was agreed by his colleagues? Which colleague vetoed that, and why did she do it?

    The Prime Minister: My understanding of what I believe the hon. Gentleman has in mind is a little different from that implied by him. I am advised that in 1990 Lord Parkinson undertook to consider with colleagues the case for a confidential inquiry. When, subsequently, a decision was taken to hold the fatal accident inquiry, the case for a second inquiry fell away. I am advised that that was explained and accepted at the time by the relatives.

     

    Engagements

    Q6. Mrs. Ray Michie: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 15 December.

    The Prime Minister: I refer the hon. Lady to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Mrs. Michie: Is the Prime Minister aware that the London to Crianlarich and Fort William and other sleeper trains are to be axed? That is no scare story. It signals the death knell of many vital rural services in Scotland and is due entirely to the Prime Minister’s chaotic and damaging privatisation scheme.

    The Prime Minister: Unless the hon. Lady is talking about a different service, I understand that sleeper services from London to Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen and Inverness will be safeguarded for the first time. If she has other detailed questions about other services, I suggest that she addresses them to the Secretaries of State for Transport or for Scotland.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 14 December 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 14th December 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Intelligence Services Act 1994

    Mrs. Lait: To ask the Prime Minister what steps have been taken to appoint an intelligence and security committee, commissioner and tribunal, under the terms of the Intelligence Services Act 1994.

    The Prime Minister: Following consultation with the Leader of the Opposition, and in accordance with section 10 of the Intelligence Services Act, I have appointed the intelligence and security committee as follows:

    The right hon. Tom King CH MP (Chairman)

    The right hon. Alan Beith MP

    The right hon. Dr John Gilbert MP

    The right hon. Sir Archie Hamilton MP

    The right hon. Lord Howe of Aberavon QC

    Mr Barry Jones MP

    Mr Michael Mates MP

    Mr Allan Rogers MP

    Sir Giles Shaw MP

    In accordance with section 8 of the Intelligence Services Act 1994, I have appointed Lord Justice Stuart-Smith as the Intelligence Services Commissioner for a period of three years. Sir Simon Dennis Brown has been appointed president of the intelligence services tribunal, John Colin McInnes vice-president of the tribunal and Sir Richard Kennedy Harvey Gaskell a member of the tribunal, by royal warrant, each for a period of five years. All appointments take effect from 15 December 1994.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in Belfast (III) – 14 December 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s doorstep interview held outside the Europa Hotel, in Belfast, on 14th December 1994.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if he hoped the business community would invest so that Northern Ireland would have to move forwards].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I profoundly hope so, yes. If you look at where so many of the hatreds and the concerns that have arisen they have arisen from people who don’t see a natural future for themselves, who are not fully occupied, who find themselves attracted one way or another to one or other side of the divide. Now I think we want to extinguish that and I think the growth of investment, the greater prosperity is perhaps the most single important item in doing that. Once people can see that they have a natural interest in the peace process than I believe that the peace process will become entrenched and will become irreversible and an important part of that is the sort of investment we are seeing today. It was for that reason that I convened this particular conference. There is more than one plank of course we have to reach a political agreement and that we’re seeking to do. But we also have to offer economic hope as well and that is what this conference is about.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if the business community would set the pace that the politicians might then follow].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am delighted to see the business community set the pace. They have been doing so for some time. Investment has been coming in even prior to the ceasefire. It is accelerating now. I was able to announce five important investments this morning. I hope as a result of the conference we have had that there will be many more. They may not appear over the next day or so, people will need to consider, examine, consult and then decide whether to invest. But I am confident that it will lead to more investment and providing that is the case than I think it will make a material contribution to entrenching the opportunities which exist here at the moment.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in Belfast (II) – 14 December 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s doorstep interview held after leaving the BT offices in Laganside, Belfast, on 14th December 1994.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The prospects are very promising indeed. I don’t expect people to commit themselves to huge investment while here today or tomorrow, but I think the atmosphere last night, the evidence of interest this morning, the sheer quality of the people who are here will lead to investment. I’m pretty confident we’ll get some.

    QUESTION:

    How disappointed are you in Sinn Fein’s attitude to the conference?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Well, I think it’s a shame because the purpose of the conference is to try and provide jobs for all the people in Northern Ireland, including those that Sinn Fein would say they represent. So I think it is very short-sighted of them.

    QUESTION:

    Do you think it has spoiled the conference in any way?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No. Anyone who has been at the conference will know that it won’t. The atmosphere there is crackling. I have no doubt the conference is a success.

    QUESTION:

    Are you confident that the ceasefire will hold and Northern Ireland has a bright future ahead?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Well I profoundly hope the ceasefire will hold and providing it does, providing they can carry the political process forward, and I’m very committed to that, then I think the prospects for Northern Ireland are very bright indeed. A Northern Ireland without violence hanging over it, as it has for the last 25 years, has everything that people would wish to see in terms of investment prospects. So, yes, I’m confident about its future.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in Belfast (I) – 14 December 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s doorstep interview held before entering the BT offices in Laganside, Belfast, on 14th December 1994.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Northern Ireland has had potential for a long time, that people have begun to realise, I think, basically over the last two years or so. Now they see the prospect of a lasting peace, of course that potential is immensely increased and the feedback we’ve had thus far has been extremely good. I could have asked for no more.

    QUESTION:

    There were some absentees this morning – Sinn Fein. What do you make of that?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Well, I’m sorry that they did that. I think it was unnecessary but that’s the decision they must make. No doubt they’ll just make a small protest. But the reality is that what we’re here for is to provide jobs for the people Sinn Fein represent, that the Ulster Unionists represent, the DUP represent, that the Alliance Party represent. It’s the people of Northern Ireland that I’m here for this morning to try and provide more investment, more jobs, more hope, more prosperity and a better future for them, and I would hope that all political parties would support that.

  • Mr Major’s Speech at the International Investment Forum – 14 December 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech held at the International Investment Forum, in Belfast, on Wednesday 14th December 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Mr Lord Mayor, Mr Secretary, Mr Trojan, Ladies and Gentlemen.

    Let me first add to Paddy Mayhew’s very warm welcome to all of you at this Investment Forum this morning, and also my especially warm welcome to those who travelled from so very far away to be with us here in Belfast this morning. I also share Paddy’s slight embarrassment at this extremely early start for people who have travelled quite so far to be here, the hour perhaps may be a little unkind for those who have travelled so far, but we are determined on this occasion to make the most of the time that you have with us, in our interests, and we hope it will turn out in your interests as well.

    When I announced this conference a few weeks ago I set a very ambitious timetable for holding the conference, and I did so for one reason above all, I think you felt it those of you who were with us last evening. Northern Ireland has a new beginning, I wish to keep up the momentum, I want people to see, with the minimum of delay, the benefits that peace is bringing, commerce, to industry, to everyday life, to all the people who live in Northern Ireland and have lived through such difficult times in the last quarter of a century.

    Peace matters and perversely because peace matters it is worth fighting for, worth fighting for using every democratic and legitimate means available. And one of those of course is to deal with the question of prosperity, material well-being, to ensure that all the people of Northern Ireland can look forward to a secure future economically for themselves and their family, and that there are not people who find themselves disadvantaged and ready prey for those who would suggest more violent methods of using their time.

    Those of you present today have made a magnificence response already to that invitation to come. And I would like to add my thanks briefly to Jean Denton who has done a great deal to bring this conference about at such short notice, to the Department of Economic Development and the IDB who have made absolutely Herculean efforts to make sure that an event, without precedent in Northern Ireland, has been organised at such speed. And after his generous words, also to express my thanks to Paddy Mayhew whose contribution during his period as Secretary of State I think cannot possibly be over-stated.

    Let me say a word directly to the businessmen and business women who are here today. Sometimes as you go around the world looking at investment opportunities I suspect you are sometimes shown a wish and a prayer, I daresay you are invited from time to time to take a gamble on a fresh investment. Well that emphatically is not what I am asking of you this morning. The facts and factors which matter to those seeking to invest are now increasingly becoming known, the evidence of opportunity is all around and becoming more evident day by day.

    I said last evening that you would rightly be hard headed about your investment decisions, and those of us in Northern Ireland would expect no less of you. So let me tackle the hard and important question head on, the question that you would have to go back and explain to your own shareholders if you decided to invest here – precisely why should you invest in Northern Ireland at this moment?

    I think first you would want to look at Northern Ireland’s track record, and I think if you did so you would find, as I found on my many visits here, that this is a place steeped in industry and steeped in enterprise. Less than one mile from this hotel where we are this morning John Boyd Dunlop invented the pneumatic tyre; another Ulsterman, Harry Fergusson, developed the farmer’s tractors; at Short Brothers of Belfast, now under the wing of Bombardier of Canada, and what a successful partnership that has already proved, I had the pleasure of approving that when I was Chief Secretary of the Treasury some years ago and I think it has proved enormously successful, but under the wing of Bombardier flying boats and vertical take-off aircraft were pioneered; generations of ocean-going ships have been launched by the nearby slipways of Harland and Wolff.

    And neither is Northern Ireland’s industrial pedigree just a matter of far gone past history, by no means, the ideas are still coming. Recently they have included defibrillators for the treatment of heart disease and a new one centimetre square silicone chip which can perform more than 300 million computations per second. And for those of you who have taken the time out from travelling round the world and investing to see the film Jurassic Park, you will have heard the digital sound compression techniques which were developed here in Northern Ireland.

    It is therefore entirely appropriate to look at that in deciding whether this is the right place in the huge competition I know there is around the world for international investment. What is the argument for Northern Ireland? It is after all, some pessimists may say, only 15 weeks since the IRA ceasefire in Northern Ireland and only 9 weeks since the Loyalist Paramilitaries followed the lead the IRA had given. But even before then people were coming in growing numbers to do business in Northern Ireland. And why is it that they found Northern Ireland to be such an attractive and competitive location? I think there are several reasons for that.

    First it has very high quality people here in Northern Ireland, sound managers and a well educated highly adaptable workforce. Northern Ireland has a lower incidence of labour disputes than anywhere else in the United Kingdom, and the United Kingdom in turn has the best current record of any major European country. Strife in all has been kept out of the workplace during the past 25 years. In the workplace people have stood together and they have got on with their jobs, and there is a premium here on training and skills which the government encourages with expert help and with financial assistance.

    And second, business costs are very competitive here in Northern Ireland and very much lower than in most parts of the European Union. Coupled with a high quality workforce this gives a potent combination of low costs and potentially high productivity.

    Let me offer you a third reason. Northern Ireland offers one of the most attractive incentive packages in Europe, it is comprehensive and it is flexible, it includes depreciation allowance, revenue grants to assist start-up costs, training, interest relief, product and marketing development and capital grants of up to 50 percent of the cost of buildings, machinery and equipment. That is not the main reason for investing here in Northern Ireland, but it is a package which gives new investment solid launching platform.

    Fourthly, for investors from Asia and North America, Northern Ireland can be a bridgehead to the single European market, perhaps the richest trading market the world has ever seen; it provides access to some 320 million consumers combined with the competitive advantages I have mentioned and an excellent quality of life.

    Fifthly, the modern investor looks for technological excellence; you will find it in rich abundance here in Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland has a vibrant network of industrial and academic collaboration, a worldwide telecommunications infrastructure and a regional optical fibre network. It has set up industrially-focused centres of capability and key technologies staffed by very high-quality graduates. The Province’s research and development capability will be enhanced by the science and technology agreement with the United States that I was delighted to witness being signed yesterday by Paddy Mayhew and by Secretary Ron Brown.

    What of the support for Northern Ireland from the British Government and from our friends and colleagues in the European Union?

    The British Government has long recognised the special needs of Northern Ireland – the investment package is perhaps but one example of that – but we in the European Union are following policies specifically designed to help Northern Ireland take full advantage of the new opportunities. A new support package worth around £200 million to Northern Ireland over the next three years was agreed by the European Union at the summit in Essen last week; Carlo Trojan from the European Commission will I am sure wish to give you further details of this in a few moments but that package has been worked out with the British Government in consultation also with others and on the advice of groups and interests throughout Northern Ireland; it will provide new money – extra money, not replacement money – additional to the Government’ s existing expenditure plans and it is specifically designed to underpin reconciliation and social and economic recovery. That means jobs, it means opportunities, it means a better future for many of the young men and women who otherwise would perhaps have looked forward with less optimism than now they will be able to. I warmly welcome the European Union’s strong support; I believe it is a massive vote of confidence in a future that is peaceful for Northern Ireland and I am most grateful to my colleagues in the European Union who unanimously agreed that those resources should be made available.

    I would like to build on that this morning with another new initiative by the British Government – a Community Work Programme. Long-term unemployment is a severe problem in many parts of Europe but one which has for self-evident reasons been especially acute in parts of Northern Ireland. The Community Work Programme is a pilot scheme to tackle it here. It aims to offer the long-term unemployed stimulating and meaningful work for up to three years; this work will both help the community and benefit the individuals concerned; it will help them to move back into the labour market, it will break the vicious cycle of declining skills and motivation which long periods of unemployment can so easily create. This initiative will be led by the Training and Employment Agency; it will target those between the ages of 26 and 60 who have been unemployed for over a year, younger people from 18 to 24 who have already completed training programmes will also be eligible. We shall begin with a pilot programme of 1,000 places for the next two years specifically targeted to areas of high unemployment and assuming the pilot is successful, we shall then expand the scheme substantially.

    Let me mention one other aspect of employment in Northern Ireland which is of concern overseas as it is of concern to me and to the British Government generally and that is fair employment in Northern Ireland. Unfair employment practices, sectarian discrimination in allocating jobs was one of the elements which in the past undermined community relations in Northern Ireland. We are determined to correct that legacy. Everyone in Northern Ireland must have equal access to jobs and indeed to all the new opportunities that peace will provide.

    Northern Ireland now has legislation which requires absolute fairness in the recruitment and development of all employees, it ensures close monitoring of employment practices and closing the gap in employment is a slow process; it depends of course on much more than legislation – training for example is but one of a number of other vital factors. But the most important factor of all is to create more jobs and more opportunities. Ensuring the fairest possible employment conditions is an essential objective for the British Government and one I know that will have the warm support of everyone present at this Conference this morning.

    Let me say something about external investment, its role, its importance at the present time. Let me turn directly to the impact that that can have. One figure will demonstrate why we attach so much importance to this and why you should feel also as potential investors that the climate here is already investor-friendly. In the manufacturing sector, almost half of the workforce in Northern Ireland is employed by some 175 overseas companies, investment from Britain and overseas lies behind many local success stories. Northern Ireland exports £1 billion-worth of food each year all over the world and to give you one but one example, one small firm in Coleraine – Dairy Product Packers – have already sold enough cheese slices to McDonalds to stretch five times around the world! [Laughter] Undoubtedly around the world you will have eaten them! [Laughter].

    Service industries across Northern Ireland have taken off, the high-quality telecommunications infrastructure and low telecom rates make Northern Ireland an ideal location for offshore processing or network service operations, British Airways, Prudential Assurance, British Telecom and Royal Mail are just a few of the huge world-famous companies who have invested in this growing sector of the economy and so too have British Telecom of whom more in just a moment.

    Northern Ireland has become the shirt-making capital the British Isles, every year 7 million shirts leave Northern Ireland; if you lose your shirt anywhere, look at the label, it might well have been made here! [Laughter].

    The United States of course – who brought such a powerful delegation with them on this occasion and very welcome indeed they are – is the single largest source of international investment in Northern Ireland just as it is in the rest of the United Kingdom and I am delighted at the initiatives that the United States government is taking to promote a yet higher level of investment; they will be carried forward not just here but also at the successor investment conference to be held in Philadelphia next April; Paddy Mayhew will represent us there and he will take with him a very strong team from Northern Ireland.

    Some of the biggest names in American business – Hyster, Ford, Du Pont, Fruit of the Loom and more recently Seagate have opened plants here committing literally hundreds of millions of dollars. Seagate’s managing director, Mike Caulfield, I hope will forgive me if I quote him, he describes himself as “a satisfied customer of the IDB”. I look forward to everyone present describing themselves in a similar fashion at some stage in the future. Its 65 million dollar hi-tech plant at Londonderry will double Seagate’s worldwide production of thin-film recording heads and in all a total of around 40 United States companies employ around 9,000 people in Northern Ireland.

    Canada is represented by two of the largest and most technologically-advanced countries in the Province, Shorts-Bombardier and Northern Telecom with 9,000 employees between them. The contribution that Canada has made has been enormous in this respect.

    And so too from Japan. Japanese businesses have been active, world-class companies such as Fujitsu, Kyocera, Takata and Riobi have established a very firm foothold and if I may digress just for a second, over the past 15-20 years the contribution that Japanese investment has made not just in Northern Ireland but right across the United Kingdom has been enormous not just in its development for industry but in many of the new techniques and new management structures that they have established that have proved such a remarkable success.

    Companies from other countries in Asia have followed, among them the massive Daewoo Group which operates a state-of-the-art video cassette recorder plant close to Belfast International Airport. That operation is one of the biggest Korean investments not just in the United Kingdom but in the whole of Europe.

    Closer to home, our neighbours in western Europe have been investing in Northern Ireland for many years, Nestle, Hoechst and Michelin are perhaps leading examples of that.

    Tourism of course has a wholly new future if the peace that is becoming established were to become firmly entrenched. Hilton and Radisson are developing new hotels in Belfast and Limavady and it is very easy to see why to anyone who spends some time looking around Northern Ireland – to the golfer, the fisherman, the walker; to all who appreciate scenic beauty – Northern Ireland is now once again a marvellous place to visit and of course a marvellous place to work in and work from.

    The best evidence I can give of all this is perhaps the evidence that speaks for itself. A number of large companies – five large companies – didn’t wait for this Forum before taking new investment decisions and they have kindly allowed me this morning to pass on their news and their plans to this Conference.

    Du Pont is today announcing a £13.5 million investment to develop prototype technologies at its Lycra factory at Maydown in Londonderry. This brings Du Pont’s investment in R&D at Maydown to £38 million in the last three years.

    Ford, which has had a sizeable presence in Belfast for 30 years, has decided to invest a further £15 million for the production of new engine components.

    NACCO Materials Handling will be investing £11 million at Craigavon, consolidating the plant’s position as NACCO’s world source for its new 2-3 tonne range of Hyster and Yale forklift trucks. Over 100 extra jobs will be created by 1996.

    British Telecom has decided to invest a further £30 million in a state-of-the-art office block at Laganside and a further £1.5 million to expand its Customer Services Centre at Enniskillen; that means another 113 jobs.

    Finally, Fujitsu – a global giant which already has enormously successful operations in Antrim – will be putting over £3.5 million into a new factory and this will create 100 jobs at Springvale Business Park in West Belfast. It is of course particularly encouraging that Fujitsu should choose West Belfast where areas of unemployment are high; it will give hope to the area as indeed will each and every one of those investments that I have just mentioned. [Applause].

    Let me fit into this the broader economic picture for Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom as a whole. Northern Ireland has shared in the recovery that has been going on in the United Kingdom for the past couple of years. Unemployment here is falling month after month. In the last quarter, manufacturing output was up by 4.4% on the corresponding period for a year ago. The ceasefire has unleashed business confidence which was already on a rising curve. Belfast retailers have experienced a quite extraordinary upsurge since the ceasefire, registering increased turnover of up to 90% in some cases.

    Peace will add a dividend to Northern Ireland; it will add a dividend in Northern Ireland to the sustained low-inflationary growth that we are now achieving right across the United Kingdom, growth helped by sound public finance, low tax and regulatory burdens on business and open, competitive markets. Our main rates of corporation tax are very competitive, at 33% the lowest in the European Union or indeed for that matter the Group of Seven. Our inflation, now at 2%, is at its lowest figure for a quarter of a century and amongst the lowest rates in Europe. The future for the whole of the United Kingdom’s economy has not been so bright for very many years and Northern Ireland is an important part of that future.

    While the change in Northern Ireland over the past three months has been dramatic, the seeds of that change were planted long ago, As you visit different parts of the Province later today, you will see for yourselves some of the results of growth. Those who go to Londonderry, for example, will see a quite extraordinary turn-around. A few years ago, the city’s economic and social problems provoked bleak despair. But Derry now has new infrastructure, new factories, a new commercial seaport and a new airport. Long before the ceasefire, a great deal had been done to reduce tensions within the city.

    You can see similar changes in Belfast and in many small towns. In Dungannon, near the border, I saw on my last visit new hospital facilities of which any town anywhere in the United Kingdom would have been proud. In Lisburn, I visited a fascinating small museum which was equally enviable.

    There are hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of other examples I could quote but I would much rather you saw them with your own eyes. These are things that have come about despite the divisions in society and despite the fear of violence. What terror knocked down, time after time after time the brave people of Northern Ireland rebuilt; if they could do that in the midst of terror, contemplate what they might do in the midst of secure and lasting peace! I believe what they achieved here in Northern Ireland is a remarkable testimony to the determination and enterprise of the people of Northern Ireland – to human qualities which you can’t teach or manufacture. I think you will find those human qualities the most compelling reason of all perhaps for taking a stake in the future of Northern Ireland.

    The scars of violence are there – of course they have to be there – they will take time to heal fully. There are still large problems in politics and in society to be overcome. The ceasefire, welcome though it is, has yet to be turned into a lasting peace but I hope and I believe that you will leave here filled with hope, with optimism and I hope that many of you will decide that an investment in Northern Ireland’s future is a good investment for you, for your company, for your shareholders, for your company’s future. If you do make that decision, not only do I believe you will have made a remarkably wise commercial decision but if you do, you will achieve something else as well, you will reinforce the virtuous circle now taking shape in Northern Ireland. Peace is giving rise to prosperity, prosperity in turn will consolidate and entrench that peace.

    I believe that Northern Ireland now has everything that it takes to grow and to succeed. I hope that this Conference will play its part in helping to find opportunities to suit your companies and your own particular interests. Above all, I hope it will lead you to return often to Northern Ireland. If you do, I know that you will find – as I have always found – that it is a genuine pleasure to be here and to do business here. The opportunity is here; the time is ripe; the welcome is warm; and I hope today’s Conference will persuade you that Northern Ireland is a good place in which to do business.

  • Mr Major’s Press Conference in Belfast – 14 December 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s press conference in Belfast on 14th December 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    It is almost a year to the day, not precisely, but almost a year to the day that Albert Reynolds and I signed the Downing Street declaration. Let me share some thoughts with you on what has happened over that year and on this anniversary.

    The International Investment Forum today and the five new investments that I was able to announce this morning are a striking vote of confidence in Northern Ireland’s future, they also I think reflect the extent to which people are now beginning to believe that the peace process may be carried satisfactorily through to its conclusion. In the last 12 months we have travelled further down the road to peace than many people imagined we could, and frankly further than I had imagined we would get in this short timescale on that day in Downing Street.

    Many of the worldly wise said to Albert Reynolds and I at that time that the burden of history was too great, that age-old animosities were still too fresh. Too many of my predecessors, they said, had come to grief on the Irish question and I would be foolish to court the same faith. But it was always repugnant to me that year in year, year out, whatever happened, terrorism seemed t continue remorselessly in Northern Ireland, victims accumulated year after year after year, civilians, army, RUC. We would not have tolerated that in Surrey, in Somerset, in Sussex, and it seemed to me to be no more tolerable in Ulster either. I believe that the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom had no choice but to put it at the top of the agenda to make sure whether or not we could reach a peace settlement. It was, and it will remain, amongst my highest priorities in Downing Street.

    Every time I have come to Ulster the people of Ulster have reinforced me in that conviction. The first time I came here as Prime Minister was January 1991 and I was very struck on that occasion by your most universal yearning for peace amongst the people I met – Protestants, Catholics – it made no difference to the fact that they wished to see a final peace settlement, they were prepared to give their support to a peace settlement providing it was based on transparency, on fairness and on democracy.

    Those views, the views that every single time I have come back to Northern Ireland I have found reinforced again, have been and are going to remain the guiding light of our policy on Northern Ireland. Nothing is going to be achieved, let us not fool ourselves, if it flies in the face of opinion in Ulster, it simply will not stick, at every stage we must be able take with us the Protestant and the Catholic mainstream opinions if we are to carry this through satisfactorily.

    And it is for that reason, amongst others, that I have made a particular point of regularly visiting Ulster, this is my 5th visit in the last 12 months, and of taking the opportunity when I come of listening to as wide a spectrum of opinion as possible, not just the great and good in Ulster opinion, but shoppers, businessmen, churchmen, policemen, local councillors, members of Parliament, soldiers, all the people who legitimately have their own view on what they wish to see in their own homes and in their own communities. And the message I have received time and time again across the communities has been unaltering – stick with the peace process, do not be put off by any set-backs, we are behind you in the peace process provided you play fair and open with us. Well I have played fair and open with the people of Northern Ireland and I intend to go on playing fair and open with the people of Northern Ireland.

    In October, in Belfast, I set out a comprehensive plan for taking forward the peace process. Many of the things I foreshadowed on that occasion have now become a reality. Last week the European Union pledged over 200 million pounds worth of assistance; the International and Investment Forum meeting last evening and today has been I think a huge success and that will become increasingly apparent, it levers the way open to further large-scale investment of the kind I announced this morning; President Clinton will hold a follow-up conference next spring and the Secretary of State will take with him a very powerful delegation from Northern Ireland; we have set in train exploratory talks with Sinn Fein and with the political representatives of the Loyalist paramilitaries, talks with the Loyalists open tomorrow and the second round of talks with Sinn Fein will take place on Monday of next week; as soon as we have a new government in Dublin, and that seems imminent, we will resume work to finalise the joint framework document as soon as we can; and then as I promised in Belfast in October, we will Publish both the framework document and the British government’s plans for the way forward within Northern Ireland, including proposals for an assembly. And then at the end of it all we will, again as I promised in Belfast, put the outcome of the negotiations between the main political parties to a referendum of the people in Northern Ireland.

    Fairness and openness are therefore the watchwords, they apply as much to Sinn Fein as to anybody else. There has been a great deal of talk over the months about parity of esteem and I think need to be quite clear about this. We have made absolutely plain to Sinn Fein from the outset that if the current exploratory phase of dialogue is successful then the door will open to them, open to them both to join the talks process with the other constitutional parties and to play generally a role in public life on the same footing as those other parties.

    But that door to normal political life cannot be opened until the current exploratory phase is brought to a satisfactory conclusion, including the question of decommissioning arms and explosives. Years of terrorist violence cannot suddenly speedily be swept under the carpet as though it had never happened, and that is true whether we are talking about violence by the IRA or violence by the Loyalist Paramilitaries.

    The Downing Street declaration has proved itself in 1994 to be a clear and a reliable route for the peace process. In 1995 the challenges to the process will I am sure remain formidable, but the declaration will show the way next year, just as it has done in the present year. I believe it removes the last shred of justification, if indeed any shred of justification ever existed, for using violence for political ends, it shows the two main communities, it shows Northern Ireland and the Republic, it shows London and it shows Dublin, that the burden of history can be overcome if the will to overcome it is there and if the patience to carry through the right sort of discussions and negotiations is there as well. And that is why the Downing Street declaration is of lasting value, that is why against the odds I believe today, perhaps more today than on any day in the last quarter of a century, it is perfectly possible for the people of Ulster to look around them and hope that the peace they see around them today may be a peace that will last and endure for good. That is the prize that is at stake, that is what the people of Ulster would wish to see us achieve, that is what anyone who stands in the way of that prize, they will have to explain to the people of Ulster why they have wrecked the prospects of a better life in the future than anyone has known in the past 25 years. Much progress has been made, more is to be done, but we will pursue the process with every hope of success.

     

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

    QUESTION (Mark Simpson, Belfast Telegraph):

    This is your third visit since the IRA announced the ceasefire on August 31st, what exactly will it take from Sinn Fein for you to meet Gerry Adams on your next visit to Northern Ireland?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Well we have to get through the exploratory talks. I would like to see Sinn Fein get through the exploratory talks, that means dealing with very tricky questions like weapons, semtex, explosives, detonators, I want to see them get through the exploratory talks and into talks with the main political parties and establish themselves as a proper democratic political party, then things change, but they have to get through those talks.

    QUESTION (David Davenport, RTE):

    Your statement in the Commons yesterday about the nature of a devolved assembly has caused some concern in Dublin, the view being that the limited nature of the assembly corresponds very closely to Mr. Molyneaux’s view of the way forward in Northern Ireland. Would you care to comment on that?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No, I wouldn’t. We will publish what we have in mind for the internal assembly in Northern Ireland when we publish the framework document but I am not going to anticipate that in advance; we will publish that on that occasion. What I said in the House of Commons yesterday was no different to what I have said on a number of occasions in the past.

    QUESTION (Philip Johnston, Daily Telegraph):

    You say, Prime Minister, we have to deal with these tricky questions about weapons in the exploratory dialogue. Is it an absolute condition of entering the substantive political talks that the paramilitaries decommission all of their weapons and who would verify that?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The latter part of the question is one of the things that needs to be discussed in the preliminary talks. We have got to make huge progress on that and it has got to be clear that there is huge progress and people must recognise it as the case and that isn’t just a semantic point. If that progress isn’t made, then not only would the mainstream political parties in Northern Ireland not sit down with Sinn Fein or indeed the Loyalist paramilitaries but neither would the British Government. You cannot sit down to talk about political matters with parties that retain the right to return to violence and retain large stocks of weapons in order to inflict violence upon other people. That isn’t the way to conduct democratic negotiations.

    Sinn Fein say to us that they wish to become a democratic party. I think that is a very welcome message indeed, I very much wish to see them become a democratic party but if that is so, they will not need large stocks of weapons that they may then revert to if one democratic decision or another goes against them. So it isn’t a semantic point, it is a very significant and central point as to whether either the mainstream political parties in Northern Ireland or the British Government could sit down to proper political talks with Sinn Fein.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, you say that Sinn Fein won’t need to retain large stocks of weapons. Are you in a position to go one stage further and say absolutely clearly that for them to go on to the next stage of acceptance as a political party they will need to actually hand over the vast majority of their arms stocks

    PRIME MINISTER:

    “Hand-over” is never an expression I have used. What is really of concern to me and I think of concern to all the people out there in Northern Ireland, is that those weapons are no longer available for use in terrorist attacks in Northern Ireland.

    I have to say to you I am not pedantic about whether those weapons are surrendered or whether those weapons are decommissioned and destroyed with some form of verification. I don’t mind if they are decommissioned and destroyed but one would need to verify that that was the case. That is the significant point – that they are no longer available for use and a political party would not go back to a nice, neat little stockpile of weapons if something went against them and start using them again.

    QUESTION (Irish Times):

    Chief Constable Sir Hugh Annersley recently told journalists that he reckoned the current peace process had a 60/40 chance of surviving to Easter and if it thereafter survived a review by the general IRA organisation its chances would improve considerably. Would you agree with that estimation or do you have a different analysis?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think every day is a small victory for Northern Ireland, every day makes it a little less likely that violence will return. I can’t make a direct judgement as to what the proportions are but I do believe that the longer the ceasefire holds, the more there would be such public repugnance if anyone returned to violence not necessarily Sinn Fein and the IRA but also the Loyalist paramilitaries – that the longer peace becomes entrenched, the longer the ceasefire becomes entrenched in Northern Ireland the less likelihood there is that it will return. I think Sir Hugh Annersley would make a better judgement than I would as to what might happen on the ground here but I do believe the general premise underlying his comments must be right.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, two questions in the absence of an opportunity to put them to you earlier:

    Could I just ask you are you presupposing, Sir, that the people sitting at the table with your officials at Stormont are empowered or have control over the weapons to decommission them or otherwise? In other words, are you saying that the people sitting there are the people who can destroy, render, surrender those weapons?

    My second question is: against the backdrop of your remarks yesterday about a potential upper tier of local government or some body or assembly which has control over local government, does that amount to the perception here that you are in Jim Molyneaux’s pocket let us say?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think probably the decision not to let you ask silly questions like that before might have been very wise but you certainly had the opportunity to put them now!

    I suggest you wait until you see what our proposals are. I am not going to unveil our proposals in Strand 1 until we are ready to unveil the proposals in Strand 2 and Strand 3 and for a very good reason: when those proposals are unveiled, I want people to see what the whole package looks like, not what just little bits look want the people across Northern Ireland to see openly and fairly what the whole collection of decisions might look like if they were subsequently verified by the political parties and most important of all, subsequently verified in a referendum by the people of Northern Ireland and that is the point. Nothing is going to happen unless this has the general agreement of people across Northern Ireland.

    What we are doing is bringing forward ideas; we are not imposing things upon people in Northern Ireland; we are seeking to bring forward ideas in the hope and belief that they will wish to consent to them and consent in Northern Ireland is going to be critical. We have learned that from history and I think it is right in practice as well that we should proceed on that basis.

    As far as your first question is concerned, everybody has known prior to these talks beginning that we would need to deal with the question of weapons and I think those at the talks understand that and will endeavour to do so.