Author: admin

  • Mr Major’s Speech at the Charter Mark Awards – 4 December 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech at the Charter Mark Awards, held in London on Monday 4th December 1995.


    PRIME MINISTER:

    Four and a half years ago I set up the Citizen’s Charter with one overriding and very simple aim – to create first-class public services throughout the country. For far too long ordinary people, in my judgment, felt helpless when faced with a state monopoly service. I learned in the past myself how that felt. I didn’t much like it. It had to change and with the Citizen’s Charter I believe it has changed.

    What is public service about predominantly? I believe it is about people, educating children, treating patients, helping the disadvantaged, providing a good service to everyone, and it depends upon the dedication, the hard work and the commitment of the people who work in public service providing that help for the public.

    I created the Charter Mark Scheme to recognise and reward the excellence of the people who provide that service, many of whom are with us today. This year we received a record number of applications. All but one of the 1992 winners applied yet again.

    Applications from schools doubled, applications from hospitals doubled, and for the first time we received thousands upon thousands of nominations from members of the public who use those public services.

    I am therefore delighted today to announce a record number of new Charter Mark winners – 198 – twice as many as in 1994. And that represents a very significant achievement by all of you present here today. Right across the United Kingdom, public services are reaching standards of performance that would have been quite literally unthinkable even a few years ago.

    Let me just give you a couple of many examples that I could have given you this morning. Four years ago we promised more and better information. That is now happening. We now have annual performance tables for schools, hospitals, local authority services, police forces and fire brigades. We promised to introduce a guarantee on waiting times for operations. Four years ago, waits of 2 years or more were by no means uncommon. Today nobody waits that long for their operation.

    But for the Charter to work it must have teeth as well. And that is why the panel’s assessment process this year was more rigorous than ever before. We want to maintain quality as the number of applications increases, and that is why this year 7 of the 1992 Charter Mark winners did not succeed with their applications.

    So enjoy today, if you have won a Charter Mark, but don’t rest on your laurels, it isn’t a certainty that you will re-win it unless the service maintains its high standard in the future.

    I too would like to do more. I would like to press forward the Charter programme to achieve better and more responsive public services. I would like to see the Charter Mark opened up to more of our publicly funded services, to encourage improvement, to reward excellence. And I can tell you today that from next year, housing associations will also be free to apply for the Charter Mark.

    I would like to see more and more local services publishing their own Charters and then improving upon their own charters as year succeeds year. And in this way those charters can reflect local circumstances, local needs and user views as well. The new railway operators will publish individual charters which will be at least as good as British Rail’s. And I want individual schools to set attainment standards. I would like hospitals, GP practices, courts, police forces, all improving on the nationally set standards.

    To the surprise of some people, there are already over 8,000 local charters. I would like to see that number double by the middle of next year. I want to see users more closely involved in these. I would like users, parents, patients, citizens, helping to set the standards and telling us what they would like to see. And also I would like to see them nominating organisations in ever greater numbers.

    But it is a two-way street. Consumers must take responsibility as well. Patients should not call out the General Practitioner unless it really is an emergency. Ambulances should not be used as taxis, Parents have a duty to help schools maintain discipline and to make sure that children attend regularly. And rights for the public need to be balanced by responsibilities by the public to those people who work so hard to maintain and improve public services.

    And this is going to be a key theme of a wide ranging White Paper that we will publish next summer to mark the 5th anniversary of the Charter programme. The paper will also contain new commitments and standards to take the Charter forward into the new millennium. It will be the most radical statement of our commitment to quality public services since the Citizen’s Charter itself was launched.

    Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate everyone here on their achievement in winning a Charter Mark. You have demonstrated that the best of public service is as good as the private sector. We now have over 400 Charter Mark winners throughout the country. We have a growing network of quality networks helping exchange ideas on best practice. We have literally thousands of local charters. And I look to you for your help in spreading the message.

    The Charter programme involving quality public services is working, and increasingly it is being seen by the public at large to be working. It is helping people. It has done, I believe, a great deal for the quality and the reputation of public service. I believe in the future it can do a great deal more. And so promise you this morning the Charter is here to stay and thank you for being here on this occasion.

  • Mr Major’s Speech to the Conservative Women’s Conference – 1 December 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech to the Conservative Women’s Conference, held in London on Friday 1st December 1995.


    PRIME MINISTER:

    I’ve come to talk to you today about one word, pride.

    Pride in our country, pride in ourselves and – yes – pride in what this Government is doing. This week – a momentous one indeed – we have seen what Britain is really about.

    Perhaps the moment when it struck me most forcibly was while I listened to the President of the United States speaking the Royal Gallery of the House of Lords.

    Sometimes it takes a friend from abroad to see us as we really are.

    He gave an historic address to both Houses of Parliament against the grandeur and pageantry which only our country can display to such inspiring effect.

    He knows that we are the ally upon whom America can rely in pursuit of the great values which we share:

    – love of freedom;

    – enrichment of democracy;

    – faith in the individual;

    – and the sense of mission and purpose which has so often given us the strength to stand alone in defence of the things we treasure.

    That relationship is not an empty idea from the vacuum of the sound-bite or the easy phrase. Relationships of this sort are not self-sustaining, bestowed by some charitable act of history upon one nation from another. They have to be worked at, fought for, nurtured.

    America would not look to us in any nostalgic sense, because of events long-since past. They look to us because our nation is a rock. An ally whom they know has the same instincts and interests. An ally upon whom they have relied in the past and upon whom they can rely in the future. Generations now gone would easily understand this. We owe it to them to sustain that same spirit and that same commitment. We will enjoy our relationship with the United States because, by our own endeavours, we are a fitting partner.

    In tackling one of the greatest challenges Europe faces today, we can be proud that Britain is there, soon to be joined by America, playing her part.

    The Bosnian peace agreement is a very helpful beginning.

    Success there is vital, not only for Bosnian, but for international security. Vital for the standing of NATO and the health of Europe.

    That’s why Britain is getting ready to send 13,000 troops to Bosnia over the next year.

    Thirteen thousand of the most effective soldiers anywhere in the world, a contingent second to none.

    This wasn’t an easy or cheap decision.

    But it is the right decision.

    Because we’re not afraid to give a lead, as we have done through three years of terrible conflict. This is an issue of massive potential and consequence. I would have made that commitment if it were only for humanitarian reasons, for I hate the loss of life, the brutality, the cynical disregard of every decent value.

    But anyone who has the first understanding of the implications of political collapse in the Balkans realises that Britain’s self interest remains with the peaceful containment and resolution of its problems.

    So we must make sure the peace agreement succeeds, right through to the end.

    Northern Ireland

    Peace is relevant at home as well as abroad.

    The cause of peace in Northern Ireland has received a huge boost this week.

    Can anyone who witnessed President Clinton’s remarkable visit to Northern Ireland seriously contemplate a return to bombing and shooting?

    We saw a Northern Ireland enjoying the prospect of a second Christmas in peace.

    A Northern Ireland hearing him support our call for violence and punishment beatings to cease, for ever.

    Earlier in the week, the Irish Prime Minister and I launched a new initiative. It has two aims, two tracks.

    First, it’s time all the political parties of Northern Ireland began to prepare seriously for negotiations on a just and comprehensive settlement.

    It’s time for them – each of them – to make their contribution to peace.

    Their people, their supporters, want a lasting peace and a fair settlement, not just a ceasefire.

    That’s the unmistakable message from the shops and the factories, the streets and the villages of Northern Ireland.

    We, the Government, can facilitate the process.

    But we can’t decide it.

    The parties themselves have to decide how they are going to negotiate.

    If this process is to succeed – as it must – they must begin to show flexibility.

    No-one can have a veto on progress.

    No-one should be allowed to block the road, by sticking to rigid and uncompromising positions which others can never accept.

    Now is the time for the Northern Ireland parties and their leaders to show open-mindedness, and to have the courage to step out of the bunkers they built during Ulster’s troubles.

    It’s time to put aside the old hatreds and the old feuds and the old mistrusts that have served Ulster ill for too long.

    That is the aim of the preparatory talks we are convening.

    And there’s a second aim to our initiative.

    Some parties represent illegally armed paramilitary organisations which, to this day, are training, plotting, intimidating and making savage assaults on other people.

    If they are to enter constitutional negotiations, they are going to have to change their ways. They are going to have to show that they, like other parties, are committed to exclusively peaceful methods.

    Words aren’t enough.

    So we have set up an advisory international body to discuss how the paramilitaries are going to decommission their arms.

    People who mean peace don’t need guns.

    The time has come for them to start ridding themselves of weapons and explosives so that they, too, can join the constitutional negotiations.

    The British and Irish Governments have again given a lead, just as we did with the Downing Street Declaration two years ago.

    That Declaration led, after several months, to the ceasefires.

    I hope this week’s initiative will lead by the end of February to negotiations for which all parties will qualify.

    It’s now up to them to respond to our lead.

    Getting to this stage in the process has taken years of effort. We have always been working for the long term.

    Three years ago, to talk of peace in Northern Ireland seemed like a grim joke. Today, it is becoming a possibility. Tomorrow, I hope it will be reality.

    The Budget

    Madam Chairman, I said my theme was pride.

    Today’s conference is our opportunity to show how this week’s events (and not just in Bosnia or Northern Ireland) fit in to the long term goals for this country which I set myself five years ago.

    I take pride in the strength of Britain’s economy. I can remember no time in my political lifetime when the economic prospects for our country looked more promising.

    Every politician claims they can create economic success. The difference is, Madam Chairman, we have actually achieved it.

    The best industrial relations for a hundred years, the best inflation record for nearly 50 years, record exports, a third of all the inward investment coming into Europe.

    Madam Chairman, surely and securely, we’re building for Britain’s long term prosperity.

    That’s why I’m proud of the budget Kenneth Clarke delivered this week.

    Well, I read all the pre-Budget options. Bribe people. Take risks. Don’t worry about the long-term, it’s the short-term that matters. I’ve heard it all my life, and I tell you this – I won’t do it. I won’t do it for one overriding reason: it would be wrong for Britain.

    If we’d have taken some of the more flamboyant advice we’d been offered, many of them most forward with their views would have been the first to criticise us for being silly enough to take it. The British people have worked too hard, sacrificed too much to achieve the excellent prospects that lie ahead for us to even consider putting it at risk. We are not that sort of Government.

    Ken Clarke’s Budget had three clear objectives.

    To build on the strength that his earlier Budgets had created.

    To increase the nation’s commitment to raise standards in our classrooms, expand the health service and back the police in their growing success in their fight against crime.

    And to reward those millions of our citizens who have worked so hard to help to build the economic success we now enjoy by giving back to people, in as fair a way as we could devise, a growing share of their own money.

    This morning the Chancellor made an excellent speech outlining his Budget. I warmly congratulate him on it.

    In planning the nation’s finances, it’s vital to get the long term arithmetic right.

    And that’s what we’re determined to do.

    Reducing the overall amount Government spends and borrows. Spending more on our hospitals, schools and police. Leaving more money in people’s pockets by cutting taxes.

    Widening the bands. Cutting the basic rate. And introducing a new, lower 20 per cent rate on savings.

    Now a quarter of all taxpayers will pay tax at 20p.

    In time, 20p will become the basic rate.

    That’s the way to the future. To prosperity that lasts.

    And it’s the way we’ll continue to build a prosperity in which we shall all share.

    Welfare

    But this budget also had measures to deal with other long term issues.

    As more people live longer, paying for their care is one of society’s major challenges.

    To leave our children a welfare system which works and they can afford, we must plan ahead. We are developing imaginative solutions to address the growing cost of long term care.

    So we’re examining how to encourage people to provide for themselves and share the cost with the state. Protecting their wealth so it can be passed on to their heirs.

    And shorter term, we’ll be raising the capital threshold so people who face these costs will be able to keep more of their assets.

    We’ll go on working at this problem.

    We owe it to elderly people. We owe it to our children. And we’ll not just talk about it – we’ll do it.

    Welfare should always be there for elderly people with nowhere to turn. Just as it should be there for the unemployed looking for jobs. The weak and disabled with no support.

    The people of this country are always ready to lend a hand to those who, through no fault of their own, have fallen on hard times.

    We have one of the most comprehensive social security safety nets in the world.

    To run it costs the average worker £15 every working day.

    Until recently, the social security budget was rocketing up. Eating into more and more of people’s pay packets. Thanks to the fight against fraud and targeting benefits on those in greatest need, it’s now growing more slowly than the economy as a whole.

    We must keep it that way. And we must ensure that people have incentives to look after themselves and families, and not rely on the state.

    This week’s budget provided more concrete help for the unemployed. We know jobs for the future are created by enterprise, not government.

    But governments can help those who have been out of work for sometime to regain the confidence and work experience they need.

    And we can ensure that people have the incentives and motivation to move from welfare into work.

    In my speech at Blackpool a few weeks ago, I talked about our plans to develop a contract for work.

    And this morning, Gillian Shephard announced we are proceeding with pilots to offer new opportunities for work experience to the long term unemployed.

    The majority who are genuinely seeking work will find this a lifeline. But those who refuse to take an offer of work experience will lose some or all of their benefit.

    Another example, Madam Chairman, of how we develop long term policies to deal with long term problems – and then take real action.

    Once again, we will look with interest at whether the Labour party has the courage to support us.

    Madam Chairman, we’re steadily building the economic foundations to double our living standards in twenty five years.

    Those foundations can easily be wrecked by the wrong policies or the wrong government.

    Compare Ken Clarke’s carefully constructed Budget with Labour’s ramshackle plans.

    Instead of sensible economic policies they offer gimmicks.

    Remember Gordon Brown’s lop tax gimmick? No sooner was it out of his mouth than it became a long term objective, then disappeared into silence.

    The leader of the Labour Party claims that he doesn’t want to put up taxes.

    The Deputy Leader, that affable character from Kingston upon Hull, doesn’t quite agree.

    Labour ‘should not follow the Government down the road of reducing the basic rate of tax’ he said.

    And in case that was just a slip from the mouth of the Humber, he’s also said that under Labour there’d ‘certainly’ be a higher top rate.

    That’s refreshingly frank. And undoubtedly true. But it’s certainly not what the Labour leader told the CBI, or anyone who’d listen.

    I know Labour now say they believe in choice, but the only choice they offer is who to believe: the Labour Leader or the Deputy Leader?

    I know what experience suggests. They’ve voted against tax cuts all their lives.

    They approach every problem with a flapping chequebook. They hold the pen, but it’s your chequebook and your money.

    And spending more means only one thing. They would have to put up taxes. It’s as simple as that.

    Without higher taxes, Labour’s sums don’t add up.

    The Nation

    I don’t usually quote Roy Hattersley with approval, but he was surely right to say Labour has become less a moral crusade and more of a marketing campaign.

    And it needs marketing because it’s a dismal product.

    But, Madam Chairman, while Labour run their marketing campaigns in their own interests, we’re running the country in the national interest.

    We are preparing Britain for the challenges of the future. Immediately ahead of us is the European Council in Madrid.

    I act in Europe with only one interest in mind: Britain’s national interest.

    Sometimes that means we can’t agree with our European partners. If that’s the case, so be it.

    I want Europe to succeed, but not at Britain’s expense.

    The Labour leader says it’s his policy never to be isolated in Europe.

    Think what that would mean.

    Imagine if Margaret Thatcher had never been isolated, we’d never have had our budget rebate worth billions of pounds to British taxpayers.

    If I’d never been isolated we’d have no opt-out from the Single Currency. We’d not have the choice to join or not to join as British interest dictates.

    If I had never been isolated, Britain would now be in the Social Chapter, losing jobs rather than gaining investment.

    Of course, we know that the Labour leader would take us into the Social Chapter. He made out that it was like buffet lunch: you can have some dishes, but not others. Pick and mix. Choose only what you like.

    Of course, European policy is very complex. Some of it is difficult to understand. And the Labour leader hasn’t had any experience of European summits.

    Or, indeed, any summits except Labour summits. And to avoid being isolated at those, he doesn’t invite the Deputy Leader.

    But, on the Social Chapter, he’s plain wrong.

    The Social Chapter is a mechanism, a means to an end. On much of it, there’s no veto. No picking and choosing. You have to swallow the lot.

    Tomorrow, I gather he may be talking about Europe again. Last time, he misled the country. Inadvertently, no doubt. He should put the record straight. We’ll watch to see if he does, and if he doesn’t, we’ll prod him again and again – until he does.

    The fact is – even if you prefer co-operation to confrontation – sometimes it’s necessary to stand up for British interests, even if our partners disagree. I believe that is the job of the British Prime Minister. And if you’re not prepared to do the job, don’t seek it.

    My patriotism is not jingoistic tub-thumping. It’s a deep respect for the people and traditions of our nation.

    The strongest foundation of our society is our United Kingdom.

    Some say the nation state will soon be irrelevant.

    I disagree.

    In a changing world, people want to hang on to what’s familiar. The nation state offers that reassurance and continuity. It matters to people as much today as it ever did.

    I don’t look to mend what isn’t broken. I don’t change things for change’s sake. We are, after all, the Conservative Party.

    But to meet the challenges ahead, we must accept change where change is due.

    That’s why, this week, Michael Forsyth proposed changes to improve the Government of Scotland.

    But we are the Conservative and Unionist Party.

    We must protect the union of proud countries. Some people in Scotland want independence.

    There’s nothing to stop them going their own way. But it’s my task, as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, to point out the dangers of that happening.

    Will the Scots feel the Union gives them a better deal if they have to pay the extra Tartan Tax? It’s a straight tax on Scottish jobs, on Scottish investment, on Scotland’s future prosperity.

    Moreover, Labour’s Scottish spokesman has made it clear. He believes the majority of MPs in the Parliament at Westminster should not have the final say on the Laws of Scotland, but must defer to the majority party in Scotland. Would they apply the same proposition to England?

    For on that basis, few past Labour Governments could have Governed England – they had no majority in England. What sort of perversion of our Constitution are they prepared to tolerate?

    Either they fail to grasp the dangers of such devolution, or they’re prepared to sell the crown jewels of our political heritage in a desperate bid for votes. For they are putting the whole constitution of our country into question. As they plan that, how dare they talk of the national interest?

    Down the years, our Union has weathered all that our enemies have thrown at us.

    What folly if Labour were allowed to do what our enemies never achieved – split our island apart and set one people against another. What stupidity.

    Yet, that would be the effect of Labour policy. They offer a tax-raising parliament to out-flank the SNP for their Labour Party advantage. Yet that very Parliament would prove to be the very mechanism to maximise conflict and wreck the Union.

    What an irony it would be. In opposition we know Labour knock our country. If they ever came to power, they would divide it and we would all rue it.

    There’s only one Party that will protect the unity of Britain. That represents our whole nation. That’s our Party – the Conservative and Unionist Party. The Party of the Union. We care for the Union. We care for the nation state. And in our hands – and only our hands – it is safe.

    Peroration

    Wherever I go in the world, Britain’s reputation is on a high.

    The resentments of Empire have been replaced by the affections of commonwealth.

    Britain’s economic revolution is studied and copied across the globe.

    Exports markets daily open wider, for products that are made in Britain and sold from Britain.

    Our military services advise Government across the world because our standards are respected and admired.

    Students flock here from all over the world to take advantage of our academic achievements.

    So yes, I am proud to be Prime Minister of this country. Proud to be Leader of this Party.

    The only Party that believes in Britain. That articulates the success of Britain. That travels the world explaining the triumphs of Britain.

    And if we have to do that against the clamour of the Opposition Parties and despite the relentless self-destruct mode of too much of our national media, we must shout louder, shout longer and shout with more conviction.

    Madam Chairman, we should have more confidence in ourselves and in our Party. We have piloted this country through very rough economic weather.

    We have taken decisions unpopular for our Party because we judged them to be right for our country.

    The fruits of those decisions are now becoming clear.

    We have led this country to an opportunity of unimaginable dimensions. Together, we shall ensure not only that the prizes are there to win, but that we are there to win them.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 30 November 1995

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 30th November 1995.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 30 November.

    Sir Peter Tapsell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 30 November.

    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 the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.

     

    Investors in People

    Mr. Byers: To ask the Prime Minister what steps his office is taking to achieve investor in people status; when it started the process; when it expects to achieve investor in people status; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister: For this purpose, my Office is part of the Cabinet Office. In February 1993, the Cabinet Office registered commitment to achieve investor in people status. The formal commitment relates only to the Office of Public Service part of the Cabinet Office and the establishment officer’s group. However, the whole Department is participating in the process of change and will share in the benefits. An action plan for the Department was produced following consultation with staff and was formally accepted by the Central London training and enterprise council in July 1995. Work is in hand to take forward the action required to bring the Department to the necessary standard. The Department is seeking to achieve accreditation by the end of 1996.

     

    Crown Act 1707

    Mr. Gordon Prentice: To ask the Prime Minister if he will make it his policy to bring forward legislation to amend the Succession to the Crown Act 1707.

    The Prime Minister: No.

  • PMQT – 30 November 1995

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 30th November 1995.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Nigel Griffiths: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 30 November.

    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.

    Mr. Griffiths: Why is the Prime Minister undermining the Post Office price freeze by increasing tax on the post, taking £1 million every working day and forcing up the price of stamps? Is not this yet another case of higher Tory taxes and the Government giving with one hand and taking away with the other?

    The Prime Minister: I can see that the hon. Gentleman was very carefully rehearsed for this week’s soundbite. He should look at the record on the Post Office. If he does, he will see that stamp prices have been frozen for some time and that it is two and a half years since the last increase. That is the longest period of stability since the 1960s, and stamp prices continue to fall in real terms.

    Mr. Mark Robinson: Does my right hon. Friend agree that the extra resources for schools announced in the Budget are very good news? Will he also do everything in his power to encourage local authorities to ensure that that money is passed on to schools?

    The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend touches on two important points. The increase in resources to schools through the local authority budget will be welcome. It is also important that it is clear to parents and to schools that the money provided to the local authority settlement for education should go to education.

    Mr. Blair: Before asking my question, may I tell the Prime Minister that, on Northern Ireland, we reiterate our congratulations to all involved in the peace process? The American President’s visit to Northern Ireland today marks a moment of history in which we all rejoice. May I express the hope that these new and strong voices for peace can drown out the old cries of violence and allow everybody, not just there but here, to unite and put aside their differences and work for a common end?

    I do not know whether the Prime Minister remembers the Budget, but may I ask him to withdraw the remarks made by the Conservative party chairman, who has claimed that the Budget will make the average family in Britain £9 a week better off? Will he confirm that, of that £9, almost £7 has nothing to do with the Budget but has to do with the Conservatives’ projection of wage increases next year? The real Budget figure is just over £2, and that does not take account of extra costs, charges and taxes. Is that right or wrong?

    The Prime Minister: I welcome what the right hon. Gentleman had to say about Northern Ireland. The President’s visit to Belfast this morning was a spectacular success and everyone welcomes what he has had to say about terrorism.

    On the subject of withdrawing claims, the right hon. Gentleman, when he replied to the Budget statement, made a series of comments, the vast majority of which were specious, wrong or misleading. If he cares to examine them, he will find that those that were not wrong were misleading, and that those that were not misleading were wrong. My right hon. Friend said that people will be better off by £450 next year, and that is our expectation.

    Mr. Blair: We are entitled to an answer on this point. The claim was made that people are £9 a week better off as a result of the Budget, but £7 of it comes from earnings rises next year as projected by the Conservative party. The true Budget figure is just over £2, and that is confirmed by the Treasury press release. Is that right or wrong? If it is right, does not it show how the Tories give with one hand and take with the other–[Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] They do not like it because it is true. If it is true, does not it also show that we can never trust the Tories on tax?

    The Prime Minister: It really is a rich day for the soundbites. After all that they have said about the Budget, it is interesting to hear that the Opposition will not vote against the Budget provisions. They cannot say yes and they will not say no; they have at best a qualified “maybe” about the Budget. My right hon. Friend said that, next year, the average family will be around £9 a week better off and that is our expectation.

    Returning to the issues of taxes and trust, does the right hon. Gentleman recall saying that he did not propose to put up taxes? Does he recall the deputy leader of the Labour party saying:

    “high income levels are going to pay considerably more”

    and that there would be a higher top rate of tax under Labour? There seems to be some difference of opinion between the right hon. Gentleman and his deputy. It does not matter if the deputy goes on shouting at me. It would be better if he stuck to the party line instead of behaving like the mouth of the Humber.

    Mr. Blair: I shall tell the Prime Minister what people will recall at the next election. He went into the election saying that he would never raise VAT, and he raised it. [Interruption.] They can shout, but they will never again be trusted.

    Madam Speaker: Order. I insist on the Leader of the Opposition being heard.

    Mr. Blair: They want a question. Is it not the case that the Prime Minister went into the election promising not to raise VAT and then raised it? Is that simple enough for them?

    The Prime Minister: I can tell the right hon. Gentleman what people will remember at the next election. They will remember a 33 per cent. rate of tax under a Labour Government and a 24 per cent. rate now. They will notice that interest rates have come down by 8 per cent. and that net disposable income is rising–and they will recall that that is not what happens under Labour Governments.

    Mr. Cash: Given the fundamental importance of NATO to Britain and western security and the fact that we are about to send 13,000 British troops to Bosnia, will my right hon. Friend consider vetoing the prospective appointment of Mr. Solana, the Spanish Foreign Minister, as Secretary-General of NATO as he has expressed views against NATO and nuclear deterrence?

    The Prime Minister: I understand from the information that I have received that that most certainly is not Mr. Solana’s view. I do not know what he may have said in the past and my hon. Friend may have seen quotations of which I am not aware, but it is my understanding that that is not his view on NATO or nuclear weapons.

     

    Q2. Mrs. Anne Campbell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 30 November.

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

    Mrs. Campbell: Will the Prime Minister unreservedly condemn the callous actions of Tory-controlled Westminster city council in moving 100 families with 150 babies and children into tower blocks riddled with the most virulent and dangerous form of asbestos? Are there any depths to which his party will not sink in order to hang on to political power?

    The Prime Minister: On the subject of depths, the hon. Lady might address her question to the Monklands, Lambeth or Walsall councils, or to any one of many other Labour-controlled councils whose activity in local government is a disgrace.

    Sir Fergus Montgomery: Did my right hon. Friend read in the Sunday Express the article about the strange goings-on in the Sedgefield constituency, where the Hurworth comprehensive school is applying for grant-maintained status? Is he aware that the Labour party there is accused of campaigning on dirty tricks and misleading information to stop the Leader of the Opposition being embarrassed? If my right hon. Friend had a son at a grant-maintained school, would he feel that his constituents were entitled to the same opportunity?

    The Prime Minister: I did not read the article, but if what my hon. Friend said is correct, I am sure that the Opposition would wish to examine the matter, investigate it, condemn what has happened and ensure that such campaigning ceased immediately. Of course people have a right to a ballot on grant-maintained schools. They have a right also to have that ballot without undue hindrance, either from the local authority or from Labour Members. I very much hope that they will have that right.

     

    Q3. Mr. Madden: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 30 November.

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

    Mr. Madden: As the Prime Minister is aware of the importance of prisoners in building still further confidence in the Irish peace process, will he support the early transfer, on humanitarian grounds, of Patrick Kelly and Michael O’Brien to prisons in Northern Ireland, and the repatriation of Irish prisoners to prisons in the Irish Republic–I hope before Christmas?

    The Prime Minister: I think that the hon. Gentleman knows that there is the question of the health of one of those prisoners. They have both been convicted, as he knows, of serious terrorist offences. One of the solicitors involved has submitted medical evidence in support of a transfer. That matter, under the normal procedures, is being examined.

    Mr. Deva: Will my right hon. Friend confirm that, if a member of his Front Bench had made a statement such as was made last night by the hon. Member for Leicester, East (Mr. Vaz) in a public television programme, he would have fired him instantly?

    The Prime Minister: I regret any remark that has any connotation of the sort that I believe lies behind my hon. Friend’s question. I hope that it is a matter that the hon. Member for Leicester, East (Mr. Vaz) will clear up.

     

    Q4. Mr. Mudie: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 30 November.

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

    Mr. Mudie: The Prime Minister will be aware that many Yorkshire households are still facing the prospect of using standpipes and that many businesses are facing rotational water supply cuts. Given the obscene profits that were announced yesterday, will the Prime Minister join me and the people of Yorkshire in condemning the directors of Yorkshire Water both for their greed and for their incompetence?

    The Prime Minister: I am pleased to tell the hon. Gentleman that I understand that Yorkshire Water plans to invest £2.5 billion over the next 10 years and that it will invest more than £200 million this year for its customers’ benefit. I believe that that is double its half-year profits. I hope that that will go a long way to ensuring that the difficulties that have occurred after years of a nationalised water industry will not be repeated under private ownership.

     

    Q5. Mr. Sims: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 30 November.

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

    Mr. Sims: Is my right hon. Friend aware that thousands of pensioners will welcome the new 20p rate of tax on savings? Is it not clear proof that the Government are working towards a 20 per cent. basic rate, as distinct from the policies that the Labour party is espousing, which mean that it is heading for a 30p rate?

    The Prime Minister: Given the demands for extra spending that come from Labour Back-Bench Members, there is no doubt that a 30p rate might be exceeded were there ever to be a Labour Government. My hon. Friend is right; the 20p rate is particularly good news for thousands of people with savings, especially, perhaps, for many hundreds of thousands of pensioners with savings.

    I think that it was the right hon. Member for Birmingham, Sparkbrook (Mr. Hattersley) who said a few days ago, when talking about Labour policy, that these days it amounts to little more than a marketing exercise. We saw that with the gimmick of a 10p tax rate for the allegedly lower-paid. The reality is that we are proceeding towards a lower tax rate of 20 per cent. whereas the Labour party’s spending plans add up to substantially more than the current level of taxation, whatever it may care to claim about them.

    Mr. Janner: Would the Prime Minister be good enough to look at the awful case of my constituent, Jasmine Sorabjee, aged three and a half, born in this country and ill, whom the Home Office has seen fit to deport to Kenya with her mother? Is not that a cruel, disgraceful decision, devoid of compassion that shows the disgraceful way in which the Government are abusing immigration rules and failing to exercise any compassionate concern in cases of real human suffering?

    The Prime Minister: I think that the hon. and learned Gentleman knows that the Government are not bypassing any of the immigration regulations. He knows that that is the case and he really should not have indicated the contrary. There are strict ways in which these matters are examined. They are examined with compassion.

    Mr. Janner: They are not.

    The Prime Minister: They are examined with compassion. Without any shadow of doubt they are examined with compassion. I have no details of the particular case, but the person removed from this country would have been the parent who, presumably, was an illegal immigrant.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 30 November 1995

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 30th November 1995.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 30 November.

    Sir Peter Tapsell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 30 November.

    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 the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.

     

    Investors in People

    Mr. Byers: To ask the Prime Minister what steps his office is taking to achieve investor in people status; when it started the process; when it expects to achieve investor in people status; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister: For this purpose, my Office is part of the Cabinet Office. In February 1993, the Cabinet Office registered commitment to achieve investor in people status. The formal commitment relates only to the Office of Public Service part of the Cabinet Office and the establishment officer’s group. However, the whole Department is participating in the process of change and will share in the benefits. An action plan for the Department was produced following consultation with staff and was formally accepted by the Central London training and enterprise council in July 1995. Work is in hand to take forward the action required to bring the Department to the necessary standard. The Department is seeking to achieve accreditation by the end of 1996.

     

    Crown Act 1707

    Mr. Gordon Prentice: To ask the Prime Minister if he will make it his policy to bring forward legislation to amend the Succession to the Crown Act 1707.

    The Prime Minister: No.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 30 November 1995

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 30th November 1995.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 30 November.

    Sir Peter Tapsell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 30 November.

    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 the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.

     

    Investors in People

    Mr. Byers: To ask the Prime Minister what steps his office is taking to achieve investor in people status; when it started the process; when it expects to achieve investor in people status; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister: For this purpose, my Office is part of the Cabinet Office. In February 1993, the Cabinet Office registered commitment to achieve investor in people status. The formal commitment relates only to the Office of Public Service part of the Cabinet Office and the establishment officer’s group. However, the whole Department is participating in the process of change and will share in the benefits. An action plan for the Department was produced following consultation with staff and was formally accepted by the Central London training and enterprise council in July 1995. Work is in hand to take forward the action required to bring the Department to the necessary standard. The Department is seeking to achieve accreditation by the end of 1996.

     

    Crown Act 1707

    Mr. Gordon Prentice: To ask the Prime Minister if he will make it his policy to bring forward legislation to amend the Succession to the Crown Act 1707.

    The Prime Minister: No.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 29 November 1995

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 29th November 1995.


    PRIME MINISTER:

    Cyprus

    Mr. Cox: To ask the Prime Minister what issues concerning Cyprus were discussed by him during his recent meeting with the Prime Minister of Turkey; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister: I discussed with Mrs. Ciller the prospects for a solution of the Cyprus problem. We agreed that the status quo was not acceptable. I urged Mrs. Ciller to bring positive Turkish influence to bear in moving towards a settlement.

  • Senator George Mitchell’s Comments on his Appointment – 29 November 1995

    Below is the text of the comments made by Senator George Mitchell after the confirmation of his appointment to chair a body to assist peace in Northern Ireland. The comments were made at Heathrow Airport in London on 29th November 1995.


    QUESTION:

    Senator, can you tell us exactly what your mission now will be, what are you trying to accomplish?

    SENATOR MITCHELL:

    Well, I’m pleased to accept the invitation of the Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland to chair an international body to assist in the process of peace and reconciliation in Northern Ireland.

    The communique issued by the two Prime Ministers gave the international body a specific mandate and a time frame. And it will, of course, involve the issue that’s come to be known as decommissioning. And I hope that we can make some contribution to the process.

    I think the Prime Ministers of both countries, Prime Minister Major and Prime Minister Bruton, and all of the parties deserve a great deal of credit for the perseverance and the courage they’ve shown in moving this process to this point. And we hope we can help in that effort.

    QUESTION:

    How difficult a task would you say it is?

    SENATOR MITCHELL:

    I think it will be difficult because it’s obviously an issue on which there are strongly held feelings on all sides, and has been candidly substantial disagreement. But I think there is an historic opportunity here, which all much recognize as the overriding objective, a chance to see the lasting peace in Northern Ireland, I think is so important that I hope all parties will agree that we have to move forward.

    QUESTION:

    Is your mission to speak with all parties in this —

    SENATOR MITCHELL:

    Yes, my intention is to consult as widely as possible, to invite comments and recommendations from as many interested parties who want to participate and go through them all as fairly as open-mindedly as is possible.

    QUESTION:

    The time frame seems very short, though. You do have until, what, the end of —

    SENATOR MITCHELL:

    Well, it’s the middle of January we’re asked to report. It is a relatively short time. But if we get right to it, as I intend that we will, and all parties participate in a prompt and effective way, I hope we can meet that objective.

    Thank you all very much.

  • Mr Major’s Speech at Dinner for President Clinton – 29 November 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech at a dinner for President Clinton, held at Downing Street in London on Wednesday 29th November 1995.


    PRIME MINISTER:

    Mr. President, Hillary:

    May I first, on behalf of all my Government and all the people of the United Kingdom, bid you the very warmest welcome here to Downing Street this evening and to the United Kingdom over the next few days. You are very welcome guests indeed.

    This morning, Bill, I was one of many people privileged to hear a very memorable and a very witty speech to members of both Houses of Parliament. I think that would have made a profound impression upon the people who heard that speech. Running through it was a very detailed knowledge of our history a great deal of it of course shared with the United States and running through it also was a feel for Britain end her people that could only have been acquired in your many stays in the United Kingdom since a young man. It is a speech that frankly could only have been made by a longstanding friend of this country and it is in that guise that we welcome you here again this evening.

    In that speech, you quoted Winston Churchill. Churchill made many of his finest speeches impromptu – or at least that is what was said – but his secret over time was of course rumbled. As one of his more sardonic rivals once put it: “Winston has devoted the best years of his life to preparing his impromptu speeches!”

    Today, you mentioned Winston Churchill and you crowned your speech today with what I hope I may call a Churchillian gesture that will have a very lasting and beneficial effect in this country. I don’t believe you could have paid a finer tribute either to Sir Winston Churchill or to this country than in naming the new US Navy cruiser “The Winston Churchill”. It was a gesture that was very deeply appreciated and on behalf of everyone I would like to offer you my thanks for it. [Applause].

    Even for someone who knows this country well, tomorrow you break fresh ground. Tomorrow, you will become the first serving President of the United States to visit Northern Ireland. You will find when you are there that you are visiting people to whom warmth and hospitality are second nature. I am delighted you are going there, I am delighted with the help and support that you have given our effort in the Northern Ireland peace process over recent years and especially pleased to welcome with you this evening George Mitchell who has done such a very great deal for Northern Ireland over the years and who has now taken on a very special responsibility and I am very grateful to him for doing so.

    Over the past three years or so, I believe that working together the British and the Irish Governments have achieved a great deal, often against the odds, a great deal by working together with the invaluable help of the United States. What John Bruton and I are seeking to do is quite clear. It is to give fresh impetus to the search for a lasting political settlement in Northern Ireland. A ceasefire is very welcome, a lasting settlement would be much more welcome and would provide a change of life in Northern Ireland of a scale that even yet most people have not begun to imagine. we have had to take some risks in the cause of peace. I think that they are worthwhile risks to take. If I may borrow the words of one of your Democratic predecessors: “Let us never negotiate out of fear but let us never fear to negotiate!”

    Mr. President, tomorrow you and Hillary and the rest of your team will see a Northern Ireland that is being transformed and I believe as you see that the very fact of your visit to Northern Ireland will be a huge encouragement to the people of Northern Ireland who daily are transforming it. I am very grateful to you for taking the opportunity of going there. [Applause].

    Let me briefly mention one other common endeavour. The peace agreement on Bosnia hammered out in Dayton was a remarkable achievement; it was made possible by your leadership, by your detailed understanding of one of the more complex problems we have seen in Europe over many years and by the tenacity and stamina of Warren Christopher, Richard Holbrooke and their partners in seeing those talks to a successful conclusion.

    It has taken three years in order to reach this point, three years in which aid workers, United Nations peacekeepers and diplomatic negotiators have risked their lives and some have given their lives, including your own envoys earlier this year. After such sacrifice, we must not allow Bosnia to slip back into war so it is the responsibility falling upon your shoulders and I think upon the shoulders of many other people as well, to ensure that the Dayton agreements can be turned into a lasting peace in Bosnia.

    Mr. President, you joked this morning about the relationship between the United States and my country. My father was brought up in America as a boy and he taught me as I grew up that when the chips are down no two peoples have a better capacity to work together than the peoples of this island and of the United States. Today, in that remarkable speech you made in the House of Lords, you refreshed that relationship. I am delighted that you were able to do so, delighted that people can see the many fields of common endeavour in which the interests, the history and the natural instincts of the British and the American people march in the same direction.

    Bill, in warmly welcoming you here this evening with Hillary, perhaps I may ask all my guests to join me and rise as I propose a toast to the President of the United States and Mrs. Hillary Clinton.

    PRESIDENT CLINTON:

    Prime Minister and Mrs. Major, Ladies and Gentlemen:

    Let me begin by saying how very grateful Hillary and I are to be here personally and representing the people of the United States. This has been a fine opportunity for me to meet with the Prime Minister and representatives of Her Majesty’s Government to talk about our common interests, our shared values, our future agenda. It has also been a great opportunity for me personally to come back to this wonderful city which I love so much and where I have such warm memories.

    Prime Minister, I want to thank you especially for welcoming here at your table my step-father. For a personal reason, my late mother would love to be here tonight and I miss her tonight especially because I tried in vain for 25 years to convince her that not every meal in London was steak and kidney pie or fish and chips!

    I want to say to all of you that I meant every word of the speech I gave in Parliament today. We have a relationship that is enduring and very special. If I might paraphrase one of my very favourite British citizens – 007 – our relationship can never be stirred nor shaken, it will always be there, it will always be strong and now we have a special responsibility. We have all the unique opportunities that are apparent to us to make peace and to rake progress but it will not happen unless we work at it and it will not happen if we try to work at it alone. It will only happen if we work at it together.

    On Northern Ireland, I thank the Prime Minister for what he said but the real thanks go to Prime Minister Major and to Prime Minister Bruton and his predecessor who were willing to take risks for peace. The United States supports those who take risks for peace. The risks may be political, we know they are severe. There is always a high risk of failure as I said in Parliament today and even if you fail, the people who wish you hadn’t tried will hold it against you. Sometimes the risks are far far greater, as the Prime Minister and I saw not so long when we buried our friend, Prime Minister Rabin but the work of peace is always important. Today it is imperative because we can achieve it in so many places where just a short while ago it was impossible.

    The philosophy of the United States is simple and consistent. It runs in a seamless way from Northern Ireland to Bosnia to the Middle East. We will support those who take risks for peace. We will not attempt to tell people what peace they should make but only to urge on them the need to make peace at the soonest possible date in a fair, honourable and decent way.

    I look forward to my trip in Northern Ireland and I look forward to doing whatever we can consistent with our policy and the willingness of the parties to move on the path of peace.

    I would like to also thank the Prime Minister and again the British people for the sacrifices they have made in Bosnia over the course of that long and painful war, for the risks to your soldiers, for the extraordinary humanitarian aid, for all the nameless people who are alive today because of what Great Britain has done in that terrible and difficult conflict and I want to thank you anew for the very strong statement you made today in terms of the depth of commitment that you are prepared to make to implement this peace agreement. Together with our French and other allies, through NATO and with other nations who work in partnership with us, I believe we have a better than even chance to help bring peace to Bosnia because the parties made their peace at Dayton and the parties, if they will keep their minds straight and their hearts pure, can make the peace live in the lives of the people of Sarajevo and throughout the nation. These are the kinds of things we have to do. I believe that the best days for democracy and freedom are before us but only if we face our challenges and only if we face them together.

    I brought only one note tonight I wanted to read because I don’t want to mix the words up. In one of history’s strange coincidental meetings Mark Twain appeared in New York city on a cold night in the year 1900 to introduce a lecture by a young adventurer and writer by the name of Winston Churchill. I am trying to remember, was it Rudyard Kipling who said: “Never the twain shall meet!”? [Laughter]. He was wrong. In the introduction, this is what Mark Twain said about the British and the Americans:

    “We have always been kin, kin in blood, kin in religion, kin in representative government, kin in ideals, kin in just and lofty purposes.”
    Mark Twain was not being humorous on that night. He was right then, he is right tonight and I ask you to join me in a toast to the Prime Minister and Mrs. Major and to the people of the wonderful nation of Great Britain. [Applause].

  • President Clinton’s Speech to the Houses of Parliament – 29 November 1995

    Below is the text of President Clinton’s speech to the Houses of Parliament on Wednesday 29th November 1995.


    PRESIDENT CLINTON:

    My Lord Chancellor, Madam Speaker, Lord Privy Seal, the Lord President of the Council, Mr Prime Minister, My Lords and Members of the House of Commons.

    Lord Chancellor, the longer I hear you talk the more I wish we had an institution like this in American government. I look out and see so many of your distinguished leaders in the House of Lords and I think it might not be a bad place to be after a long political career.

    My wife and I are honoured to be here today and I thank you for inviting me to address you. I have been here to Westminster many times before. As a student, I visited often, and over the last 20 years I have often returned. Always I have felt the power of this place where the voices of free people who love liberty, believe in reason and struggle for truth, have for centuries kept your great nation a beacon of hope for all the world, and a very special model for your former colonies which became the United States of America. Here where the voices of Pitt and Burke, Disraeli and Gladstone rang out, here where the rights of English men and women were secured and enlarged, here where the British people’s determination to stand against the tyrannies of this century were shouted to the entire world, here is a monument to liberty to which every free person owes honour and gratitude.

    As one whose ancestors came from these isles, I cherish this opportunity. Since I entered public life I have often thought of the words of Prime Minister Churchill when he spoke to our Congress in 1941. He said that if his father had been American and his mother British, instead of the other way around, he might have gotten there on his own. Well for a long time I thought that if my forebears had not left this country, perhaps I might have gotten here on my own, at least to the House of Commons. But I have to tell you now our American television carries your Question Time and I have seen Prime Minister Major, and Mr Blair and the other Members slicing each other up face to face with such great wit and skill, against the din of cheers and jeers. I am now convinced my forebears did me a great favour by coming to America.

    Today the United States and the United Kingdom have an extraordinary relationship that unites us in a way never before seen in the ties between two such great nations. It is perhaps all the more remarkable because of our history, first the war we waged for our independence, and then barely three decades later, another war we waged in which your able forces laid siege to our capital. Indeed, the White House still bears the burn marks of that earlier stage in our relationship. And now, whenever we have even the most minor disagreement, I walk out on the Truman Balcony and I look at those burn marks, just to remind myself that I dare not let this relationship get out of hand again.

    In this century, we overcame the legacy of our differences. We discovered our common heritage again, and even more important, we rediscovered our shared values. This November, we are reminded of exactly how the bonds that now join us grew, of the three great trials our nations have faced together in this century.

    A few weeks ago, we marked the anniversary of that day in 1918 when the guns fell silent in World War I, a war we fought side-by-side to defend democracy against militarism and reaction. On this Veterans Day for us and Remembrance Day for you, we both paid special tribute to the British and American generation that, 50 years ago now, in the skies over the channel, on the craggy hills of Italy, in the jungles of Burma, in the flights over the Hump, did not fail or falter. In the greatest struggle for freedom in all of history, they saved the world.

    Our nations emerged from that war with the resolve to prevent another like it. We bound ourselves together with other democracies in the West and with Japan, and we stood firm throughout the long twilight struggle of the Cold War, from the Berlin Airlift of 1948 to the fall of the Berlin Wall on another November day just six years ago.

    In the years since, we have stood together, fighting together for victory in the Persian Gulf; standing together against terrorism, working together to remove the nuclear cloud from our children’s bright future, and together, preparing the way for peace in Bosnia, where your peacekeepers have performed heroically and saved the lives of so many innocent people. I thank the British nation for its strength and its sacrifice through all these struggles. And I am proud to stand here on behalf of the American people to salute you.

    Ladies and gentlemen, in this century, democracy has not merely endured, it has prevailed. Now it falls to us to advance the cause that so many fought and sacrificed and died for. In this new era, we must rise, not in a call to arms, but in a call to peace.

    The great American philosopher, John Dewey, once said, “The only way to abolish war is to make peace heroic”. Well, we know we will never abolish war or all the forces that cause it because we cannot abolish human nature or the certainty of human error. But we can make peace heroic. In so doing, we can create a future even more true to our ideals than all our glorious past. To do so, we must maintain the resolve and peace we shared in war when everything was at stake.

    In this new world our lives are not so very much at risk, but much of what makes life worth living is still very much at stake. We have fought our wars. Now let us wage our peace. This time is full of possibility. The chasm of ideology has disappeared. Around the world, the ideals we defended and advanced are now shared by more people than ever before. In Europe and many other nations, long-suffering people at last control their own destinies. And as the Cold War gives way to the global village, economic freedom is spreading alongside political freedom, bringing with it renewed hope for a better life, rooted in the honourable and healthy competition of effort and ideas.

    America is determined to maintain our alliance for freedom and peace with you and determined to seek the partnership of all like-minded nations to confront the threats still before us. We know the way. Together we have seen how we succeed when we work together.

    When President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill first met on the deck of the HMS Prince of Wales in 1941 at one of the loneliest moments in your nation’s history, they joined in prayer, and the Prime Minister was filled with hope. Afterwards, he said, “The same language, the same hymns, more or less the same ideals. Something big may be happening, something very big.”

    Well, once again, he was right. Something really big happened. On the basis of those ideals, Churchill and Roosevelt and all of their successors built an enduring alliance and a genuine friendship between our nations. Other times in other places are littered with the vows of friendship sworn during battle and then abandoned in peacetime. This one stands alone, unbroken, above all the rest, a model for the ties that should bind all democracies.

    To honour that alliance and the Prime Minister who worked so mightily to create it, I am pleased to announce here, in the home of British freedom, that the United States will name one of the newest and most powerful of its surface ships, a guided missile destroyer, the United States Ship “Winston Churchill”. When that ship slips down the ways in the final year of this century, its name will ride the seas as a reminder for the coming century of an indomitable man who shaped our age, who stood always for freedom, and who showed anew the glorious strength of the human spirit. I thank the members of the Churchill family who are here today with us, Lady Soames, Nicholas Soames, Winston Churchill, and I thank the British people for their friendship and their strength over these many years.

    After so much success together, we know that our relationship with the United Kingdom must be at the heart of our striving in this new era. Because of the history we have lived, because of the power and prosperity we enjoy, because of the accepted truth that you and we have no dark motives in our dealings with other nations, we still bear a burden of special responsibility.

    In these few years since the Cold War, we have met that burden by making gains for peace and security that ordinary people feel every day. We have stepped back from the nuclear precipice with the indefinite extension of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and we hope, next year, a comprehensive test ban treaty.

    For the first time in a generation, parents in Los Angeles and Manchester and, yes, in Moscow, can now turn out the lights at night knowing there are no nuclear weapons pointed at their children. Our nations are working together to lay the foundation for lasting prosperity. We are bringing down economic barriers between nations with the historic GATT agreement and other actions that are creating millions of good jobs for our own people and for people throughout the world. The United States and the United Kingdom are supporting men and women who embrace freedom and democracy the world over with good results, from South Africa to Central Europe, from Haiti to the Middle East.

    In the United States, we feel a special gratitude for your efforts in Northern Ireland. With every passing month, more people walk the streets and live their lives safely, people who otherwise would have been added to the toll of The Troubles.

    Tomorrow, I will have the privilege of being the first American President to visit Northern Ireland, a Northern Ireland where the guns are quiet and the children play without fear. I applaud the efforts of Prime Minister Major and Irish Prime Minister Bruton who announced yesterday their new twin-track initiative to advance the peace process, an initiative that provides an opportunity to begin a dialogue in which all views are represented and all views can be heard.

    This is a bold step forward for peace. I applaud the Prime Minister for taking this risk for peace. It is always a hard choice, the choice for peace, for success is far from guaranteed, and if you fail, there will be those who resent you for trying. But it is the right thing to do. And in the end, the right will win.

    Despite the progress we have made in all these areas and despite the problems clearly still out there, there are those who say at this moment of hope we can afford to relax now behind our secure borders. Now is the time, they say, to let others worry about the world’s troubles. These are the siren songs of myth. They once lured the United States into isolationism after World War I. They counselled appeasement to Britain on the very brink of World War II. We have gone down that road before. We must never go down that road again. We will never go down that road again.

    Though the Cold War is over, the forces of destruction challenge us still. Today, they are armed with a full array of threats, not just the single weapon of frontal war. We see them at work in the spread of weapons of mass destruction, from nuclear smuggling in Europe to a phial of sarin gas being broken open in the Tokyo subway, to the bombing of the World Trade Centre in New York. We see it in the growth of ethnic hatred, extreme nationalism, and religious fanaticism, which most recently took the life of one of the greatest champions of peace in the entire world, the Prime Minister of Israel. We see it in the terrorism that, in recent months, has murdered innocent people from Islamabad to Paris, from Riyadh to Oklahoma City. And we see it in the international organized crime and drug trade that poisons our children and our communities.

    In their variety, these forces of disintegration are waging guerrilla wars against humanity. Like communism and fascism, they spread darkness over light, barbarism over civilization. And like communism and fascism, they will be defeated only because free nations join against them in common cause.

    We will prevail again if, and only if, our people support the mission. We are, after all, democracies, and the people are the ultimate bosses of our fate. I believe the people will support this. I believe free people, given the information, will make the decisions that will make it possible for their leaders to stand against the new threat to security and freedom and to peace and prosperity.

    I believe they will see that this hopeful moment cannot be lost without grave consequences to the future. We must go out to meet the challenges before they come to threaten us. Today, for the United States and for Great Britain, that means we must make the difference between peace and war in Bosnia.

    For nearly four years, a terrible war has torn Bosnia apart, bringing horrors we prayed had vanished from the face of Europe forever, the mass killings, the endless columns of refugees, the campaigns of deliberate rape, the skeletal persons imprisoned in concentration camps. These crimes did violence to the conscience of Britons and Americans.

    Now we have a chance to make sure they do not return, and we must seize it. We must help peace take hold in Bosnia, because as long as that fire rages at the heart of the European continent, as long as the emerging democracies and our allies are threatened by fighting in Bosnia, there will be no stable, undivided, free Europe. There will be no realization of our greatest hopes for Europe. But most important of all, innocent people will continue to suffer and die.

    America fought two world wars and stood with you in the Cold War because of our vital stake in a Europe that is stable, strong, and free. With the end of the Cold War, all of Europe has a chance to be stable, strong, and free for the very first time since nation states appeared on the European continent.

    Now the warring parties in Bosnia have committed themselves to peace, and they have asked us to help them make it hold, not by fighting a war, but by implementing their own peace agreement. Our nations have a responsibility to answer the request of those people to secure their peace. Without our leadership and without the presence of NATO, there will be no peace in Bosnia. I thank the United Kingdom, which has already sacrificed so much for its swift agreement to play a central role in the peace implementation. With this act, Britain holds true to its history and to its values. And I pledge to you that America will live up to its history and its ideals as well.

    We know that if we do not participate in Bosnia, our leadership will be questioned and our partnerships will be weakened, partnerships we must have if we are to help each other in the fight against the common threats we face. We can help the people of Bosnia as they seek a way back from savagery to civility. And we can build a peaceful, undivided Europe.

    Today, I reaffirm to you that the United States, as it did during the defence of democracy during the Cold War, will help lead in building this Europe by working for a broader and more lasting peace and by supporting a Europe bound together in a woven fabric of vital democracies, market economies, and security cooperation.

    Our cooperation with you through NATO, the sword and shield of democracy, can help the nations that once lay behind the Iron Curtain become a part of the new Europe. In the Cold War, the alliance kept our nation secure and bound the Western democracies together in a common cause. It brought former adversaries together and gave them the confidence to look past ancient enmities. Now, NATO will grow and expand the circle of common purpose, first through its Partnership for Peace, which is already having a remarkable impact on the member countries; and then, as we agree, with the admission of new democratic members. It will threaten no one. But it will give its new allies the confidence they need to consolidate their freedoms, build their economies, strengthen peace, and become your partners for tomorrow.

    Members of the House of Commons and noble lords: Long before there was a United States, one of your most powerful champions of liberty and one of the greatest poets of our shared language wrote: “Peace hath her victories, no less renowned than war.” In our time, at last, we can prove the truth of John Milton’s words.

    As this month of remembrance passes and the holidays approach, I leave you with the words Winston Churchill spoke to America during America’s darkest holiday season of the century. As he lit the White House Christmas Tree in 1941, he said,

    “Let the children have their night of fun and laughter. Let us share to the full in their unstinted pleasure before we turn again to the stern tasks in the year that lies before us. But now, by our sacrifice and bearing, these same children shall not be robbed of their inheritance or denied their right to live in a free and decent world.”

    My friends, we have stood together in the darkest moments of our century. Let us now resolve to stand together for the bright and shining prospect of the next century. It can be the age of possibility and the age of peace. Our forebears won the war. Let us now win the peace.

    May God bless the United Kingdom, the United States, and our solemn alliance. Thank you very much.