Category: Prime Minister (1990-1997)

  • PMQT Written Answers – 17 March 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 17th March 1994.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Cabinet Records

    Mr. Kenneth Baker : To ask the Prime Minister whether the 30-year rule applies to the handwritten records of each Cabinet meeting; and, after the lapse of this time, whether they will be open to public scrutiny.

    The Prime Minister : The Cabinet Secretary’s handwritten records of Cabinet meetings are regarded as subject to the Public Records Acts which make provision for the release of public records after 30 years. Section 3(4) of the 1958 Act permits the retention of such records for longer than 30 years, subject to the Lord Chancellor’s approval.

    The question of the release of the notebooks was considered in the summer of 1993, in accordance with a recommendation in the Wilson committee’s report on “Modern Public Records”, Cmnd. 8204. The Lord Chancellor has approved the continued retention of the notebooks. It is proposed that a further review will take place in 10 years’ time.

     

    Engagements

    Sir Peter Tapsell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 17 March.

    Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 17 March.

    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.

  • PMQT – 17 March 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 17th March 1994.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mrs. Bridget Prentice : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 17 March.

    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. Prentice : In the light of today’s newspaper reports, does the Attorney-General still have the full confidence of the Prime Minister?

    The Prime Minister : The Attorney-General has my full and complete confidence. He has made it perfectly clear today, in the light of the reports in this morning’s newspapers, that he has no knowledge of any approach by MI6 to him or to his office asking that the Matrix Churchill prosecution should be stopped. He has received no notification from the Scott inquiry that any such evidence has been given to it, and the inquiry has made it clear that it cannot recall that any such evidence has been given.

     

    Q2. Mr. Bellingham : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 17 March.

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

    Mr. Bellingham : Will the Prime Minister find time today to plan a visit to Birmingham and Manchester city councils, where he will find debt at the same level as the national debts of Paraguay and El Salvador? Is it not a disgrace that those Labour-controlled councils, encouraged by Opposition Members, have betrayed not only their electorates but future generations? Is not it time that they were flung out of office?

    The Prime Minister : Those councils certainly have a very poor record, as my hon. Friend says, and although the people of Birmingham and Manchester have a great deal of which they can be proud, in Birmingham, certainly, the people cannot be proud of the record of their Labour council. Of every £10 that Birmingham receives in council tax it now has to spend £7 on servicing its debt, but when one considers many other Labour authorities one realises that it is by no means alone in that appalling record.

    Mrs. Beckett : Does not the Prime Minister realise that he need look no further than Westminster, which has a debt higher than that of Mongolia? Will he join me in welcoming the fact that the average council tax to be charged in Labour local authority areas this year will be £40 lower than the average council tax to be charged in Tory areas?

    The Prime Minister : On the right hon. Lady’s first point about debt, she might bear in mind the fact that Islington owes more than Togo, Camden more than Chad, Bradford more than Botswana and Leeds more than Lesotho. As for council tax, the right hon. Lady knows very well that she is not comparing band for band or like with like. When she compares band for band she will see that Conservative councils are many tens of pounds– in some cases more than £100–cheaper.

    Mrs. Beckett : Does not the Prime Minister realise that the measure that we have consistently used not only gives the best overall picture but is the measure with which the Government started out? It is the measure that was used by both the Department of the Environment and Conservative central office in their documents. Is not the truth that the Government changed the measure only when they realised that it showed that people pay less in Labour local council areas? Is not that the reason why?

    The Prime Minister : I must say that the right hon. Lady is being extremely silly and is talking rubbish. What the figures show across the country is that Conservative-controlled local authorities set far lower council taxes than do Labour. So far this year the figures…

    Mrs. Beckett indicated dissent.

    The Prime Minister : It is no good the right hon. Lady shaking her head : it is quite true. The figures show that where Labour controls both tiers of English local government the average council tax is £560 for a band C property, over £130 more than the Conservative average of £429. However the right hon. Lady wriggles, she will find that pattern across the country.

    Mrs. Beckett : It is the Prime Minister who is wriggling. He started off with average measures of council tax, he went on to quote band D and now he is quoting band C. Is not this just further evidence that we are fast reaching the stage where the Government are incapable of telling the truth about taxation? In local government or national government, with the Conservatives one pays more and one gets less.

    The Prime Minister : If the right hon. Lady wants to see some high taxes in local government she should look in the mirror, for it is her party which is providing them. Of the 10 highest council taxes announced, seven are from Labour local authorities and none has been set by a Conservative authority. Of the 10 lowest council taxes announced, none comes from a Labour authority. Five of the 10 districts announcing the lowest bills are under Conservative control. Whatever the hon. Lady has to say, she cannot hide the fact that one gets a better deal under Conservative councils, that the services are better and that the council tax is lower. Though she wriggles from here to next Tuesday, she cannot hide that fact.

    Mr. Knapman : I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his robust stance to date on qualified majority voting. Does he agree that it will be in the best interests of both the country and the party if that robust stance is maintained?

    The Prime Minister : My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary is in the middle of negotiations that are important for the future of the European Community and for us, and I have no intention of being moved by synthetic efforts at pressure from any source. We shall defend the country’s best interests in those negotiations and I am entirely confident that that can be done in an acceptable way without any question of delaying enlargement.

    Mr. Ashdown : Why does the Prime Minister not realise that investing the £900 million necessary to provide fully funded, high-quality nursery education, available to every three and four-year-old in the country, is the best investment that the country can make? Instead of raising taxes to prepare for tax bribes at the next election, why will he not invest to prepare our children for the next century?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman has said that he would raise taxes and he has made that clear. I hope that everyone understands that. We have made it perfectly clear that, as and when resources are available, we shall move towards further nursery education, towards universal nursery education. The reports that may have excited the right hon. Gentleman’s interest earlier this week in one national newspaper were wrong.

    Mr. Marland : As my right hon. Friend is aware, the report of the forestry review group is now in the hands of Ministers. As my right hon. Friend recognises, the Forestry Commission is included in the review. Not only by my constituents in the forest of Dean but throughout the nation, the Forestry Commission is held in high esteem. Will my right hon. Friend confirm that, before any decisions are made in the light of the report, interested parties will have the opportunity to comment?

    The Prime Minister : Of course we are examining the report carefully and will seek a good deal of consultation. We have the report, we are examining it and it will be some while before we reach a decision.

     

    Q3. Mr. Austin-Walker : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 17 March.

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

    Mr. Austin-Walker : Has the Prime Minister seen the report today which shows that the response times of the London ambulance service have worsened since the Secretary of State intervened to sort out the chaos? In view of the inability of the London ambulance service to come anywhere near patients charter standards, does it make sense to close up to 10 of London’s accident and emergency units–or is it nothing to do with him?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman knows that, in terms of London health, we are seeking first to make sure that we have the resources for the improvement of primary health care, which needs substantial improvement in London. In order to do that, it is necessary to rationalise a proper hospital system. We have taken action..

    Mr. Foulkes : Answer.

    The Prime Minister : If the hon. Gentleman will stop shouting and wait for the answer, I shall give it to him. As for the ambulance service, the hon. Member for Woolwich (Mr. Austin-Walker) will know of the measures that have been taken to ensure that a proper service is readily available.

    Mr. Thomason : Has my right hon. Friend seen today’s car production figures? Will he join in welcoming them? Does he agree that the Labour party, many of the members of which have car plants in their constituencies, has consistently talked down our motor industry, and Britain generally?

    The Prime Minister : It is certainly the case that the motor car industry was in a very desperate state a few years ago. That has changed dramatically. The production figures this morning show that car production is up 6 per cent. on a year ago. The British car industry is now a success story to an extent that was inconceivable in the strike-ridden days so beloved in the memory of Opposition Members.

     

    Q4. Mr. Darling : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 17 March.

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

    Mr. Darling : Is the Prime Minister concerned about the sale by Scottish Homes–a Government quango–of 1,200 houses, some for as little as £1 each, to a housing association chaired by a former Scottish Office Minister, an hon. Member who is now a Northern Ireland Minister? Does he agree that it is no surprise that many people believe that the Government are drowning in a sea of sleaze and secrecy entirely of their own making?

    The Prime Minister : If the hon. Gentleman has any firm charges to make, perhaps he should make them other than by innuendo and under privilege of the House. The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Devizes (Mr. Ancram) was an unpaid, voluntary, non-executive chairman of the Waverley housing trust. He had no financial interest whatever in the trust. His involvement was solely to pursue an interest in providing new forms of social housing management involving participation by tenant representatives. The hon. Gentleman should reflect on his question and he should then offer a public apology to my hon. Friend.

    Mr. Coe : In the wake of the recent tragic murder investigations in Gloucester, is my right hon. Friend aware of the welcome news this week that four missing people have been reunited with their families ? Will he welcome with me and salute the superb work of the Missing Persons Bureau and the national helpline?

    The Prime Minister : I had heard that welcome news. Out of the dreadful saga of recent weeks, it is at least one positive outcome that everyone can welcome. I certainly think that it shows how important is the work of organisations such as the Missing Persons Bureau. I willingly pay tribute to it and to the National Missing Persons Helpline, as requested by my hon. Friend.

     

    Q5. Mr. Livingstone : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 17 March.

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

    Mr. Livingstone : As a Home Office Minister said on Friday that the Government would not support the Racial Hatred and Violence Bill that has been prepared by the hon. Member for Finchley (Mr. Booth), and setting that against the background of the eight racial murders that have been committed in the past few years, how can the Prime Minister justify to the relatives of those who have been murdered in that way the fact that the Government can find time in their legislative programme to outlaw hunt saboteurs, but cannot find the time to tackle the escalating tide of racial violence to which my party drew attention this morning?

    The Prime Minister : Every sensible person will share a concern about crimes motivated by racial hatred. That is certainly the position of the Government. As for the Bill, we believe that the scope of the existing law is adequate, although we shall continue to consider how that law is working in practice. As the hon. Gentleman will know, it is already a specific offence punishable by imprisonment for up to two years to stir up racial hatred. In addition, the full range of criminal law is available to deal with other crimes motivated by racial hatred. Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986, for example, deals with low-level harassment. A range of measures is available. Of course we will keep them under review because there should be no place in this country for racial hatred of any sort from any group directed at any other group.

    Mr. Duncan Smith : I congratulate my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary on standing firm in his negotiations on the blocking minority. Does not my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister agree that if the Foreign Secretary chooses to stand firm next week, he will have the wholesale support of Conservative Members and of the country?

    The Prime Minister : My right hon. Friend will certainly take the position in the negotiations next week–at the moment, those negotiations are at an extremely serious stage–that he believes to be in the interests of this country, both in the short and in the long term. There are important interests, both short term and long term, to be safeguarded, and it is on that basis that my right hon. Friend will negotiate.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 16 March 1994

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


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Ministerial Receptions

    Mr. Boyes : To ask the Prime Minister what was the cost of prime ministerial receptions in 1993-94.

    The Prime Minister : The cost to my office of ministerial receptions in 1993-94 is included in the overall administrative expenditure which is published every year in the Cabinet Office departmental report.

     

    Iraq (Sanctions)

    Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister following the meeting on 23 February between the head of the middle eastern department of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Riad El Taher and the hon. Member for Linlithgow, if he will consider the case for urging the United Nations to lift sanctions before the summer heat arrives in the valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates; and what estimate he has made of the incidence of disease in the river valleys.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 10 March 1994] : I am looking into the specific point which the hon. Member put to me in the House on 8 March.

    The Security Council decided on 18 January that there are no grounds for lifting sanctions but medical supplies have never been subject to sanctions. There is no authoritative estimate of the incidence of disease in the river valleys.

     

    Renault

    Mr. Austin Mitchell : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 11 February, Official Report, column 581, whether he will urge the French Government to sell Renault to a German car manufacturer.

    The Prime Minister : No.

     

    Mr. Paul Bennett

    Mr. Mackinlay : To ask the Prime Minister which Minister signed in July 1992 the public interest immunity certificate in relation to the prosecution of Paul Bennett.

    The Prime Minister : My right hon. and learned Friend the then Home Secretary signed the certificate.

     

    Royal Tour (Caribbean)

    Mr. Lewis : To ask the Prime Minister what is the purpose of the royal tour of the Caribbean and the cost, including the use of the royal yacht Britannia; and under which expenditure heads the cost will be borne.

    The Prime Minister : The purpose of Her Majesty the Queen’s visit to Commonwealth countries and dependent territories in the Caribbean basin and to Bermuda was to reaffirm the close relationship which exists between the United Kingdom and those countries and territories. In each destination a number of specific objectives were achieved. These included demonstrating the importance we attach to our continuing responsibility for the dependent territories ; and the Queen’s continuing commitment to her realms. The visit to Guyana marked our recognition of the restoration of democratic government there.

    Costs to the United Kingdom will be borne by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Ministry of Defence, the Metropolitan police and by Buckingham palace. Exact figures are not available : some bills have not yet been presented and the cost of diplomatic service staff who worked on the visit could be provided only at disproportionate cost. Information on the cost of individual voyages by the royal yacht is not maintained.

     

    General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade

    Dr. Lynne Jones : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 21 January, Official Report, column 850, which treaty provisions will apply when deciding whether the European Parliament will be consulted on the ratification of GATT.

    The Prime Minister : The European Parliament will be consulted in accordance with the provisions of article 228 of the treaty of Rome, as amended by the Maastricht treaty. The Foreign Affairs Council agreed on 21 February that the assent procedure, as set out in that article, will apply.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 15 March 1994

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


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Scott Inquiry

    Sir Thomas Arnold : To ask the Prime Minister whether it will be for Lord Justice Scott to decide on the timing of the publication of his report.

    The Prime Minister : As I said when I announced the terms of reference for the inquiry, Official Report, 16 November 1992, columns 74- 75, Lord Justice Scott will be entirely free to decide on the publication of his report. The inquiry will report to my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade.

     

    Tigris and Euphrates Valleys

    Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister what discussions he had with President Clinton during his visit to the United States from 27 February to 1 March on malnutrition-related disease in the valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates.

    The Prime Minister : We are in regular contact with the United States about Iraqi issues in general.

     

    Engagements

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

    The Prime Minister : This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House I shall be having further meetings later today.

     

    Public Interest Immunity Certificates

    Mr. Alex Carlile : To ask the Prime Minister if he will instruct the relevant Department to place in the Library copies of all telexes made the subject of public interest immunity certificates in the case of Mr. Lorrain Osman; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : No. It would not be in the public interest to disclose the contents of classified documents concerning the international relations of the United Kingdom.

    Mr. Darling : To ask the Prime Minister how many public interest immunity certificates he has signed in each year since 1990.

    The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Member to the reply that I gave to the hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent (Mr. Smith) on 3 March 1994, Official Report, column 803.

     

    Constituency Visits

    Mr. Mackinlay : To ask the Prime Minister how much notice his Office gives to hon. Members prior to visits made to hon. Members’ constituencies.

    The Prime Minister : My Office contacts all hon. Members whose constituencies I visit as part of my regional tours. In the light of security arrangements which have to be made for these visits, advance notice for hon. Members may have to be restricted to 24 hours.

     

    Council of Europe and Western European Union

    Dame Peggy Fenner : To ask the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of the information bulletin on the activities of the United Kingdom delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the Assembly of Western European Union, which has been sent to him.

    The Prime Minister : I have done so.

  • PMQT – 15 March 1994

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


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Ms Eagle : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 March.

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

    Ms Eagle : On top of all the tax increases that he will impose in April, how can the Prime Minister justify the new insurance premium tax, which will hit hardest those who live in areas of high crime, such as my constituency? Is not the truth that, while Labour is tough on crime and on the causes of crime, the right hon. Gentleman’s Government are tough just on the victims of crime?

    The Prime Minister : We seek to be tough on the people who perpetrate crime. I believe that that should be the ambition of every hon. Member. We have raised taxes for the reasons that I have previously set out in the House, and we have chosen to spread the load in the way that we think is most appropriate. Those are the measures that my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor set out. If the hon. Lady opposes tax increases, I trust that she will indicate where she would cut expenditure.

    Mr. Dicks : In the light of the mortar attacks at Heathrow airport, which is in my constituency, will my right hon. Friend tell the IRA that there is no place for it at the peace table, and will he institute a shoot- to-kill policy in Northern Ireland to enable the security forces to eliminate all IRA terrorists in the Province?

    The Prime Minister : The attacks on Heathrow airport demonstrated once again the IRA’s callous disregard for the safety of ordinary members of the public and its disregard for the words that its own members utter from time to time. The whole House will regard the IRA’s action as totally despicable. It is certainly the case that it cannot bomb its way back to the negotiating table, either now or at any stage in the future. However, I am not sure that I can endorse the particular measure that my hon. Friend proposes.

    Mr. John Smith : Does the Prime Minister think it satisfactory that, in the space of a single year, the amount spent on cars by health service trusts has increased by 65 per cent. to a total of nearly £25 million?

    The Prime Minister : One of the purposes of health service trusts is to enable their managers– [Interruption.] If hon. Members listen, they will get their answer. One of the purposes of trusts is to enable managers, across the whole range of their activities, to determine how best to use the resources at their disposal. The growth in the number of trusts, the improvement in services and the rise in the number of patients treated demonstrate the trusts’ increasing success.

    Mr. John Smith : Perhaps we should test the situation by individual examples. Is the Prime Minister aware that the St. James’s University hospital trust has increased its car bill by more than 200 per cent. and that in the case of Kingston hospital the increase is 250 per cent? Is that the Government’s order of priorities? Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that most people in the country want to see money spent on patients and not on cars?

    The Prime Minister : The overall priority, on which the right hon. and learned Gentleman would be best advised to concentrate, is whether more patients are being treated, either in individual hospitals or in hospitals in general. I cannot carry in my head the details of individual expenditure in every health authority, and neither can the right hon. and learned Gentleman. What I can say is that it is right to devolve responsibility rather than to centralise it, as he would do, and that it is right to take action administratively to increase and improve the patient service that is offered. More patients are being treated and they are being treated better, with a wider range of operations and treatment than ever before.

    Mr. John Smith : Does not the Prime Minister understand that hardly a day goes by without further evidence of waste and inefficiency in the health service, introduced as a result of the Government’s changes? Does not he appreciate that, whatever he can or cannot hold in his head, it is the daily experience of both patients and staff that the health service is being undermined by this gross misallocation of priorities?

    The Prime Minister : I do not recall the right hon. and learned Gentleman ever mentioning any of the inefficiencies in expenditure that occurred prior to these reforms. He was perfectly prepared to condone them at that stage ; we are trying to put them right. That is the reason for the changed management structure and devolvement of responsibility. The right hon. and learned Gentleman’s question shows that he remains an unreconstructed centralist and is unwilling to trust people with devolved responsibilities.

    Mr. Sykes : To turn to far more important matters, is my right hon. Friend aware of the widespread pleasure and relief in Scarborough, Whitby and other seaside resorts following the Government’s action yesterday to curb the rising tide of benefit hostels on our English coasts?

    The Prime Minister : It is certainly true that that is the case in Yorkshire, but the problem is in Blackpool, Bournemouth and many other parts of the country as well. My hon. Friend and many of my other hon. Friends have campaigned extremely hard to have it solved. I believe that the announcement made by my hon. Friend the Minister of State yesterday will be welcomed by hoteliers, residents and taxpayers who feel that they have been taken for a ride for too long. Not only will it prevent the problem spreading, but the licensing scheme that we are examining may also deal with the problem that currently exists.

     

    Q2. Mr. Alton : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 March.

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

    Mr. Alton : With only 3 per cent. of people north and south of the Irish border expressing any support for the pursuit of violence, does not the Prime Minister believe that this vindicates the patient approach that he has taken towards the pursuit of peace in Northern Ireland? In that context, does not he believe that he should raise with the Taoiseach the use of the political defence as a way of justifying murder and terrorism and as an argument against extradition in the Irish courts? Will he also consider the possibility of the creation of an interlocutor or mediator to pursue the course of peace in Northern Ireland?

    The Prime Minister : I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for the support that he has consistently given to our attempts to secure peace in Northern Ireland. I agree with him that the extradition arrangements need to be strengthened. That is why I welcome, in particular, the new Irish extradition Bill which will make the arrangements between our countries more logical and more straightforward.

    As I indicated a moment ago, on the hon. Gentleman’s first point there will be no negotiations with Sinn Fein before a permanent end to the IRA’s violence. I do not intend that we should be shifted from our present course. I believe that it has the overwhelming support of people in the island of Ireland and that it has huge support both in this country and abroad. The Taoiseach and I intend to press ahead with our talks in the hope that we will be able to find a peaceful future for Ireland.

     

    Q3. Dr. Liam Fox : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 March.

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

    Dr. Fox : Does my right hon. Friend agree that British interests in Europe have always been better represented by Conservatives than by socialists or Liberals? Will he assure the House that the protection of British interests in Europe will lie at the heart of our position in the current negotiations on the widening of Europe and on qualified majority voting?

    The Prime Minister : I do believe that it is important that this country plays a full part in the European community and exercises its influence both on behalf of the people in this country and on behalf of Europe as whole. We have sought for a long time to have enlargement, and we are very much in favour of it. The negotiations are very nearly complete. The present discussions between the Twelve are about the institutional changes that will accompany the enlargement. Like many other states, we attach importance to qualified majority voting, but I think that it is right to consider very carefully the effect on QMV of an increase in membership. What we need to ensure is that democratic legitimacy and the rights of minorities are sustained within the European Union. That is what my right hon. Friend will be seeking to do in his negotiations.

     

    Q4. Mr. Miller : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 March.

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

    Mr. Miller : Does the Prime Minister agree that the short-term policies of banks and financial institutions undermine the recovery of manufacturing companies such as Rover? Does that reflect a lack of confidence in his Government, or is it nothing to do with him?

    The Prime Minister : I think that the hon. Gentleman will see from most of the statistics now being produced that manufacturing industry is in fact recovering and it is recovering rather well. It is increasingly– [Interruption.] There is no point in the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Mr. Miller) waving his finger. If he will give me time, I shall get to his question if he can bear to be patient for a second. Banks are seeking to provide resources for appropriate lending. The question of lending to Rover is of course something that Rover pursues with its own bankers and not with anyone else. [Interruption.] It is interesting to see that the hon. Gentleman would have Government Ministers determine individual bank loans to individual companies. I am pleased to see another indication of the centralism that the right hon. and learned Gentleman was attempting to shrug off a moment ago.

     

    Q5. Mr. Roger Evans : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 March.

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

    Mr. Evans : Given the importance of the construction industry to the economy as a whole, does my right hon. Friend agree that the latest figures for private orders are excellent news for British firms and British jobs?

    The Prime Minister : Construction orders are now at a very high level ; higher than they have been for some years. New housing starts are still up and I trust that they will continue. Confidence is growing and a large part of this is, of course, related directly to the economic policies that enabled us to reduce interest rates–I am perfectly happy to accept responsibility for that.

     

    Q6. Mr. Simpson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 March.

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

    Mr. Simpson : Is the Prime Minister aware that last year in Nottingham, 1,090 households faced repossession and that, in the same year, the city was allowed to build a grand total of only 12 houses for rent? Is there any practical advice and help that the Prime Minister is able to offer to the 99 per cent. of households caught in the terrible truth between his rhetoric and repossession, or is it yet another matter that is not of his concern?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman will be pleased to know that, as the economy recovers and interest rates have fallen, the number of repossessions is also falling and falling quite distinctly. What of course is also necessary in providing rented accommodation is that local authorities, notably Labour local authorities, should fill up the property that they have and not leave large numbers of voids and empties in many parts of the country.

     

    Q7. Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 March.

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

    Mr. Greenway : Does my right hon. Friend accept the need to reduce public borrowing? Is he aware that Ealing Conservative council has now repaid £75 million of the £158 million borrowed between 1986 and 1990 by the then Labour council, and that Birmingham, Hackney and Manchester have debts higher than many third world countries? [Interruption.] All Labour-controlled councils.

    Hon. Members : Name them.

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friends are tempting me to name them, but I fear that it would take up the rest of today’s Question Time and all of Thursday’s. I congratulate Ealing on reducing its debt. However, my hon. Friend was being characteristically generous in naming only three Labour authorities. He could have named substantially more. I know that the Labour party has a lot to say to us from time to time about third world debt. It is about time that it did something about fourth-rate Labour authorities that build up debts as large as, if not larger than, third world debt itself.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 14 March 1994

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


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    No. 10 Downing Street (Costs)

    Mr. Redmond : To ask the Prime Minister what is the budget for the running cost for the Prime Minister’s residence at 10 Downing Street for 1994-95; and what was the running cost of 10 Downing street over the last 14 years.

    The Prime Minister : Figures on a consistent basis are not available. In 1980-81, recorded spending on 10 Downing Street and Chequers on the votes of the Cabinet Office, OPSS, was £1,745 million. In 1981- 82, charges were introduced for the use of Ministry of Defence aircraft. Including those charges, spending was £2,415 million in 1981-82 and £2,700 million in 1982-83. In 1983-84, charges were introduced by the Property Services Agency for buildings and services. Including those charges, spending was £3,026 million in 1983-84. In 1984-85, charges were introduced for use of the Government car service and for service personnel at Chequers. Including those charges, spending was £3,787 million in 1984-85 and £4,406 million in 1985-86. In 1986-87, the cost of office services was included in the No. 10 budget. Including those costs, spending since then has been as follows :

    Year |£million

    —————————

    1986-87 |4.963

    1987-88 |5.418

    1988-89 |6.554

    1989-90 |7.669

    1990-91 |8.226

    1991-92 |8.664

    1992-93 |9.866

    An outturn for 1993-94 will be available shortly ; it is likely to be around the same level of spending as in 1992-93. The provisional budget for 1994-95 is £9.486 million.

     

    Back to Basics

    Mr. Grocott : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent (Mr. Smith) of 21 February, Official Report, column 849, what has been the total expenditure to date by the Government on the Government’s “back to basics” policy; and how many departmental staff are currently working on the Government’s “back to basics” policy.

    The Prime Minister : As “back to basics” applies across a range of Government policies, the information which the hon. Gentleman requests could be supplied only at disproportionate cost.

     

    Jimmy Young Programme

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of the transcript of his interview of the “Jimmy Young Programme” on BBC Radio 2 broadcast on 7 March; and if he will make a statement on new policy positions announced in the interview.

    The Prime Minister : No. The objectives of this Government remain unchanged.

     

    10 Downing Street (Jewellery)

    Mr. Redmond : To ask the Prime Minister when the last independent audit of the 10 Downing Street jewellery inventory took place; who carried out the audit; and what were the findings.

    The Prime Minister : There has been no such audit in recent years, although the items are and have been available for inspection by the auditors in the Cabinet Office or in the National Audit Office. I am satisfied that all the items concerned are in safe-keeping in Number 10.

     

    Ministers

    Mr. Austin Mitchell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will publish a list of the number of Ministers in each Department with the numbers of Ministers in each corresponding Department in the period 1964 to 1970; and how the responsibilities of the respective Departments have altered.

    The Prime Minister : Current information on the number of Ministers in each Department can be found in the “List of Ministerial Responsibilities”, a copy of which is in the Library of the House. The responsibilities of Departments and the numbers of Ministers changed during the period 1964-1970. Tables of Ministerial office holders were published regularly in Hansard.

     

    Cornwall

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on ministerial responsibility for Cornwall.

    The Prime Minister : The Government are collectively responsible for all regions of the United Kingdom.

  • Mr Major’s Speech to the Canning House Group – 10 March 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech to the Canning House Group, held in London on Thursday 10th March 1994.


    PRIME MINISTER:

    One of the great delights of expressing your view as a politician is that you can always be sure it will be accurately reported [laughter and applause] I had some experience of this recently as you will have read. I had actually rowed out to the centre of the Serpentine, the boat stalled and I appeared to be stranded. Clearly, I did the only thing that any self-respecting politician could do in the centre of the Serpentine, I got out and I walked across the waves right to the shore! There was a good story the next day in most of the papers – “Major can’t swim!” [applause].

    David, I am delighted to be here on the 50th anniversary of Canning House not in Canning House but on that very remarkable anniversary of Canning House. This occasion and indeed the House itself commemorates a very great Conservative and one who had this country’s strategic interests earlier and more comprehensively defined than any of his contemporaries. Not for nothing was he called “The eagle in the dovecot of British politics”.

    He and I have quite a lot in common: we have both held the offices of Foreign Secretary and Prime Minister. There is, however, one difference if I may to which I would draw to your attention: he was Foreign Secretary for a long time and Prime Minister for a very short time [applause] I was Foreign Secretary for a few months and you can complete the thought for yourselves!

    Canning’s mother, of course, like mine, earned her living at one time on the stage; she was the second wife of an actor. He faced in those days the sort of thing that can only happen in the 19th century, a remarkable amount of hostility to many of his policies, but he came through. He fought a duel with Castlereagh, a former War Minister though I, for the avoidance of doubt, should confirm to you all that my relationship with present and past War Ministers is extremely warm.

    Mr. President, this year is also the 500th anniversary of the Treaty of Tordesillas, an important treaty, one under which the lands of the New World were divided between Spain and Portugal and Canning House was established of course to promote our relations with both the countries of Iberia and those of Latin America and I hope this evening our Spanish and Portuguese friends will forgive me if I concentrate tonight on our relationship with Latin America.

    Canning’s name is a remarkable name in British history but like that of Cecil Rhodes, Thomas Raffles, George Curzon is a British name probably better known abroad that it is at home, in his case of course in Latin America and I don’t find it remotely surprising that he was revered there. He was a staunch supporter of countries in the region as they strove for independence many years ago and the independence of those young Latin American countries brought remarkable opportunities, opportunities for British men and for British trade. A large number of young men from Britain crossed the Atlantic to try their luck, British firms built roads, railways, they invested in shipping, in mining, in telegraphs, in cables, our trade relations with the new nations grew steadily from those early beginnings right up to the turn of this century and yet curiously after the Great War, for whatever reasons, the British presence in Latin America steadily year upon year began to decline and that relative decline went on for quite a few decades. In the ’80s of course, there was the trauma of the Falklands conflict and the Latin American debt crisis but I believe in the last few years things have begun to change and change quite dramatically.

    Latin America itself is changing. The region has enjoyed a political renaissance over the past decade every bit as striking as its economic recovery. It has become a serious player on the world stage. We saw that, for example, in the Uruguay Round negotiations last year, at the Rio Conference on the Environment the year before and at the growing Latin American contribution to United Nations peacekeeping operations in areas throughout the world.

    The relations of the whole of Europe with Latin America are changing; technology, greater ease of travel and mass communications, all have brought Latin America and Europe closer in trade and cultural and diplomatic terms than they have ever been before and for my own country Britain’s relations with Latin America are changing as well.

    It is for Britain a vast and expanding market, a continent rich in many ways, rich in resources and richer still I believe in opportunities for the future. There is a greater potential for political and economic cooperation than most people I believe have yet begun to grasp and equally a greater potential for two-way trade between the United Kingdom and the countries of Latin America and it is those opportunities, particularly perhaps the trading opportunities, that I wish to dwell on for just a few minutes this evening.

    One thing I passionately believe: the last decade has seen the most remarkable changes in this country but I believe the current decade and the decade beyond that will see the pace of change in a world that becomes economically more competitive as year succeeds year bring ever greater changes and amongst those changes will be an increasing need for this country to be competitive. If we are not competitive, we will not succeed. There are no world markets out there waiting instinctively to buy from us simply because we are British. If we are the best they will buy from us, if we are the most economic they will buy from us, if we can deliver on time they will buy from us and in this competitive world we need to look to every corner of the globe for those markets and I believe the prospects in Latin America are mouth-watering. [Applause].

    Mr. President, I wouldn’t deny to this audience for a second the fact that the last four years have been difficult, difficult for us here in the United Kingdom and difficult in truth for most of the world’s economies. The chill of economic recession has seemed from time to time to be almost everywhere but in fact that is not wholly true. There are bright spots and amongst them Latin America shines particularly brightly.

    In Latin America, economic expansion now exceeds population growth, inflation is down, tight fiscal and monetary policies help stabilise economies, structural reforms of a sort undreamed of fifteen or so years ago to labour laws, in privatisation, incentives to inward investment have improved competitiveness right across the whole region. Trade liberalisation even before December’s GATT success has brought growth right across the continent and the overall picture shows a clear and continuing upward trend. The World Bank estimates that GDP in the region could grow at up to 3.9% a year up to and including the turn of the century.

    In Britain, too, after the traumatic period through which we have passed, I believe the outlook is bright, indeed far brighter I suspect than many people have yet begun to imagine, certainly brighter than it has been for some time. We are now clearly out of the recession and we have come out of it with prospects a good deal better than before. We have succeeded in getting inflation down and keeping it down, we have brought unemployment down and we have pushed GDP up – it is in fact now back up to where it was at the peak of the boom in the late 1980s. Growth has exceeded expectations; it is set to be 2.5 to 3% this year, not of course as fast as some of the fastest-growing Latin American economies but faster than anywhere else in Europe as it was in the year just past, as it will be this year and as we expect it to be next year as well and so both Britain and Latin America have every reason to look up and look forward with confidence, to look up, to look outwards and to look to one another for a greater trade and investment flow in the years ahead.

    Mr. President, I mentioned some moments ago the British entrepreneurs who recognised the opportunities which Latin America had to offer in George Canning’s day. I am delighted that British businessmen today are showing the same enthusiasm for that continent as their forbears. It is interesting to see what has begun to happen. In Brazil, British firms increased exports last year by over 50%, we have continuing high levels of investment there. To the south, the Chilean and Argentinean governments are supporting a private venture to construct a gas supply link across the Andes. At the turn of the century, British companies helped to build and operate the rail link across the Andes and today British Gas is taking the same route happily supplying gas to Chile.

    Two years ago in the trip you mentioned, David, I visited amongst other place Colombia, the first serving prime minister I think ever to have visited that country and there right on the edge of the mountains in Colombia I saw how BP are helping the Colombians develop the Cusiana oilfield and I know from discussions earlier this evening over drinks out there how much that development has prospered in the period since I last saw it – probably two or three billion barrels worth and some of the highest-quality crude in the world and we have just signed an investment promotion and protection agreement with Colombia which I hope will encourage far more companies to follow the BP example.

    In Mexico, we see North West and Severn Trent International who both have won significant contracts to provide water Services in Mexico City. Communications are good, not only good but they are getting better; last year, British Airways opened new routes to Buenos Aires, Mexico and Chile to add to existing services in Venezuela, Colombia and Brazil and in each of those circumstances British firms are working closely with Latin American partners.

    In 1993 we increased our exports to Latin America by nearly a third and in line with our investment performance worldwide, the highest as a share of GDP, Britain placed over a billion pounds of new investments each year for the last decade in Latin America.

    Those figures are beginning to be impressive but the reality is that the prospects far outmatch anything that has been achieved thus far and there is the prospect of us doing far better still. In terms of exports to Latin America, we still don’t match our main competitors and British firms should make the most of developed businesses and trading structures which Latin America offers.

    These are countries that understand trade, they know about trade, they have a thriving private sector. Government policy in Latin America now welcomes market access for foreigners, they recognise that regulation and intervention will deter investment so I believe that British companies can be increasingly confident of doing business in Latin America and they can be confident when they seek to do so that they will have the backing of the British Government in those ventures.

    Mr. President, I dare say many – perhaps most – of the people here this evening will have seen the recent “Economist” survey of Latin America. “Under construction” – that is what the headline said – “Under construction” and below is a picture of frenzied construction work against a backcloth of the Andes. Still under construction perhaps but what a building is emerging in Latin America and it is good to know that British firms are a part of that process but it isn’t a one-way process. The way is equally open for Latin American business to come to the United Kingdom and I believe there are many and good reasons why they should seek to do so. Perhaps of all European nations, we here in Britain welcome inward investment from all over the world. We have a liberal trade and investment policy. We have the lowest business taxes in Europe and the most far-reaching labour reforms.

    I don’t find it remotely surprising that more American and Japanese companies have chosen to invest in the United Kingdom than in any other countries and there is plenty of room for Latin American companies to join them for Britain is an ideal base for operations in Europe.

    Let me give potential investors a practical reason why that is so: if you look at the cost of operating in a country, consider for example the social on-cost of investing in a European nation. The social on-cost of investing in Germany, France or any Community nation other than the United Kingdom is for each employee about 50% of the cost of that employee; in Japan and in the United States it is 25% which gives them a sharp competitive edge; here in the United Kingdom it is about 30%, not quite as good as America and Japan but markedly better than the rest of the European Community and it is precisely for that reason that I believe we are absolutely right to say “No!” to the increased social regulation that the European Community would seek to impose upon the United Kingdom economy [applause] so let me say to our friends in Latin America much as we look forward to greater trade between us and investment in your countries, you too are welcome to invest in the United Kingdom.

    Let me say secondly about the United Kingdom that we are firm believers in bringing trade barriers down and indeed several of you here this evening spoke to me in one sense about that outside over drinks. We have worked consistently to make sure that the European Union is as open as possible to the outside world. I don’t want to see a “Fortress Europe” closing its doors to any part of the world. I don’t think that is right economically, I don’t believe it is right in trade terms and I certainly don’t believe it is right politically for the future and so we are pressing on all fronts to make sure that the Single Market doesn’t mean an exclusive, closed club for a small number of rich nations.

    I believe this country fought as hard as any country in the world for a successful outcome to the Uruguay Round, by far the most far-reaching deal in the history of GATT but of course our friends in Latin America fought hard for that outcome too, in particular Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia and Uruguay as members of the Cairns Group. I lost count of the number of occasions I was phoned by the Cairns Group to try and persuade the Europeans to have a positive approach across Europe to reaching a satisfactory conclusion in the Uruguay Round so the Latin American commitment to reaching a GATT settlement was frankly invaluable and I am most grateful for the support that they gave to us but what we now need now that GATT Round has been concluded is to work together to make sure that the deal that was concluded is now implemented and implemented as speedily as possible to ensure that lower tariffs, fewer quotas and better conditions for investment become a reality and we must keep our markets open and resist protectionist measures.

    When I was in America just a few days ago, I agreed with President Clinton that we would seek to bring forward the commencement of the GATT deal from the middle of next year to the beginning of next year if that was negotiable. It isn’t of course in the gift of the United States and the United Kingdom alone but I believe we should seek to do that if it is at all possible.

    Mr. President, I spoke a little of the economic changes in Latin America but I have to say although their economic success is remarkable what is equally remarkable is the astonishing political renaissance which has grown up alongside that economic recovery. I wonder, even amongst this audience of businessmen many of who are long familiar with Latin America, who of them would have guessed when the debt crisis exploded in 1982 that a whole decade of political renewal was at hand? Not, I suspect, very many and yet one by one the Latin American nations have put their faith in democratic structures from Peru in 1980 to Nicaragua in 1990 and by the end of the decade we had seen several nations conduct successful constitutional elections not once but twice and in some cases three times, democracy becoming established as an intrinsic part of the political landscape and so the political prospects are better there now than ever they have been before and wherever you look throughout the region there are signs of greater democracy and greater stability; old hostilities and suspicions have eased or disappeared and they have given way to political and economic cooperation.

    The success of the peace process in Central America is impressive, the recognition of Belize by Guatemala is welcome, particularly with our long relationship with Belize. It is encouraging to see the leaders of Argentina and Chile working closely to establish a firm basis for future cooperation. These are changes few would have imagined a decade ago and they illustrate the impressive speed of economic and political change right across the continent.

    Mr. President, that greater democracy, that greater stability is what will underpin Latin America’s continuing economic growth. I believe the future of the region looks extremely bright. Britain and British firms can contribute to that future. We have a joint interest in political stability, in the security of our investments and in a thriving and growing trading partnership. The GATT deal we forged will reinforce those links and freer trade will continue to bring us closer together.

    There is a role of course for Canning House. Canning House can play an important part in promoting Britain’s relations with Latin America; it has links with politicians, with businessmen, with academics and with other key figures right throughout the Latin American world and it has established over the years a reputation of which it can be justly proud.

    I am aware that David Montgomery and his colleagues have chosen this landmark anniversary to launch an appeal to enable Canning House to press ahead with its work and I warmly wish them well in that endeavour. I am certainly happy to confirm that the Government will be continuing its financial support to Canning House next year. [Applause].

    Mr. President, I know that you have decided to stand down from your post at the end of this month. That has nothing to do with our continuing financial support. [Laughter]. You have worked ceaselessly for Canning House for over thirty years, you are known, David, throughout Latin America as a good friend of the region and as an energetic promoter of links with this country. I believe both countries owe you a remarkable debt of gratitude and I for one am delighted that Pat Limerick will be following you for I have no doubt he will be a worthy successor. [Applause].

    Let me offer you one brief thought in conclusion for I know that the raffle upon how long I was going to speak at the table over there is reaching a climax! It is easy to tell, looking at them, who has got 16 minutes! Looking around this room this evening, this thought strikes me: I wonder what George Canning would have made of this particular occasion. Certainly he could never have possibly envisaged the Latin America of today but when he said in 1826: “I called the New World into existence to redress the balance of the Old!” he was perhaps more prophetic than he knew. Latin America’s economic growth is fast making it a major player on the international stage. It has, I believe, a great deal to offer Britain and a great deal to offer the Old World and I hope – and here I think after the passage of nearly a century and three-quarters that George Canning would have said the same – Britain has a great deal to offer Latin America.

    Canning, of course, is not here this evening but looking around this room at the trade, at the investment and the political contacts that span between this country and Latin America, I suspect that Canning’s legacy is here in this room and for that I believe we should be grateful and I hope we can build on it for the future. [Applause].

  • PMQT Written Answers – 10 March 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 10th March 1994.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Public Interest Immunity Certificates

    Mr. Allen : To ask the Prime Minister if he will bring forward legislation to bring public interest immunity certificates within statute law and parliamentary scrutiny.

    The Prime Minister : The Government will consider carefully any comments or recommendations Lord Justice Scott makes on this issue when his report is completed.

     

    Engagements

    Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 10 March.

    Sir Peter Tapsell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 10 March.

    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.

     

    Sir Peter Levene

    Dame Angela Rumbold : To ask the Prime Minister what arrangements have been made to ensure that there is no conflict of interest between Sir Peter Levene’s appointment as chairman of Canary Wharf and his position as the Prime Minister’s efficiency adviser.

    The Prime Minister : Sir Peter Levene will take no part in Government consideration of any issue which could involve a conflict of interest for him. There will be a review every six months of any prospective issues which could raise such a conflict so that appropriate arrangements can be made.

     

    Official Gifts

    Mr. Tony Banks : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 22 February, Official Report, column 162 , what happens to moneys raised from the sale of official gifts received by recent Prime Ministers.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 9 March 1994] : Gifts of small value are the property of the Prime Minister; the use of the proceeds from the sale of any such items is therefore a matter for the Prime Minister of the day to determine. Both my predecessor and I have made it our practice to donate all proceeds to charity. If any gifts from the official inventory were sold, the proceeds would accrue to official funds.

     

    Office Costs

    Mr. Winnick : To ask the Prime Minister what was the annual total cost of the Prime Minister’s office in each year (a) between 1974 and 1979 and (b) since 1990.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 11 January 1994] : Figures on a consistent basis are not available.

    Information on the total costs of the Prime Minister’s office is not available before 1979-80. Spending in 1979-80 is recorded as £1.409 million, but that did not include charges for : the use of MOD aircraft; the use of buildings and for services supplied by the Property Services Agency and its successors; the use of the Government car service; the service personnel at Chequers; or for office services supplied by the Cabinet Office.

    The present No. 10 budget now includes charges for all these services. On that basis, the total annual cost for the completed financial years since 1990 has been as follows :

    Year |£ thousands

    ————————————

    1990-91 |8,226

    1991-92 |8,664

    1992-93 |9,866

    These figures show payments made in the years in question. In some cases, this may relate to expenditure incurred in the previous financial year.

    Mr. Winnick : To ask the Prime Minister when the hon. Member for Walsall, North will receive a reply to his question of 11 January, relating to expenditure of his Office.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 8 March 1994] : I have done so.

  • PMQT – 10 March 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 10th March 1994.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. McFall : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 10 March.

    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. McFall : Now that the Minister for open government has given an entirely new meaning to the phrase, “lying in state”, does the Prime Minister agree that the democratic process is undermined if Ministers imply that concealing the truth from the House is acceptable? Does he accept that it is a lie that the former Prime Minister, Lord Callaghan, ever lied to this House? If so, will he apologise to the former distinguished Prime Minister for that slur?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman may regret, on reflection, the way in which he phrased his question– [Interruption.] If hon. Members do not regret it, I believe that they should. The hon. Gentleman knows very well that it is not the case now, nor has it been in the past, that Ministers willingly mislead this House, and no one has suggested that that is the case.

     

    Q2. Mr. Patrick Thompson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 10 March.

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

    Mr. Thompson : Bearing in mind the fact that, last night, the IRA launched yet another vicious terrorist attack endangering the lives of hundreds of innocent civilians, were not the Opposition, at exactly same time, voting against the very measure which our security forces need to combat this evil? Are not the Opposition soft on terrorism and soft on crime?

    The Prime Minister : I believe that the attack that was launched yesterday on Heathrow airport by the IRA will receive and deserve universal condemnation. It was an unjustifiable attack and will make no difference whatever to the search for peace in Northern Ireland. But I believe that it should lead to every part of this House uniting on firm action against terrorism.

    Mr. John Smith : With the issue of Ministers telling the truth now a matter of public debate, does the Prime Minister appreciate that what most undermines the credibility of his Administration is the blatant deception practised at the last election when the Conservative party promised to cut taxes? Since then, they have imposed the largest tax increase in Britain’s peacetime history.

    The Prime Minister : I shall turn directly to that point, but I must say that I am extremely surprised that the right hon. and learned Gentleman should pursue that matter on the day after a mortar attack at Heathrow and on the very day on which the Cabinet has been considering sending more troops to Bosnia to deal with an international problem. [Interruption.] I have made the point. The right hon. and learned Gentleman seems to think that these things do not matter. I think that people throughout the country will take a different view. [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. The House must come to order.

    The Prime Minister : On the specific point raised by the right hon. and learned Gentleman, taxation rose precisely because we kept our promises to protect the elderly, the vulnerable and the sick through the long recession. The recession lasted longer than we or other forecasters had imagined, and in order to sustain policy and bring down interest rates it was necessary to close borrowing. That was a responsible attitude. It was the right attitude. If the right hon. and learned Gentleman understood the first thing about economics, he would support it, not attack it.

    Mr. John Smith : To come very directly to the point, does the Prime Minister deny that before the election he promised to cut taxes and he is now putting them up?

    The Prime Minister : I have made it perfectly clear to the right hon. and learned Gentleman why it was necessary to raise taxation, although we had hoped not to do so. If the right hon. and learned Gentleman wants to consider taxes, he might look at the more recent figures of council taxes which show clearly how much more expensive Labour authorities and Liberal authorities are than Conservative authorities. Perhaps the right hon. and learned Gentleman would comment on that.

    Mr. John Smith : Having regard to the Prime Minister’s feeble excuse for breaking his promise at the election, does he not remember telling the Los Angeles Times in his celebrated interview last year :

    “I said [to colleagues] the day after we won the election . . . Within the next 12 months the government will be the most unpopular we have seen for a long time.’”

    He went on to say, “I was staggeringly prescient.” Will the Prime Minister explain how he could know about the state of the economy the day after the election but not know before polling day?

    The Prime Minister : I shall go back further than that for the right hon. and learned Gentleman. I made it absolutely clear on the day that I became Chancellor of the Exchequer that we would take whatever action was necessary to restrain inflation and put the economy on secure and steady growth. We have done that, including maintaining monetary policy with interest rates at a high level right through the election, because it was in the interests of the British economy to do so. That is responsible government. I am sorry that the right hon. and learned Gentleman does not understand that.

     

    Q3. Lady Olga Maitland : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 10 March.

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

    Lady Olga Maitland : With the council elections approaching, does my right hon. Friend agree with me that what council tax payers want are efficient services at the lowest possible cost? Does he agree that it is the Conservative councils who deliver this, not the Labour councils and not the Liberal councils, such as the one that I have in Surrey?

    The Prime Minister : I not only agree with my hon. Friend ; it is what the statistics now becoming available on council tax charges show. At present, as my hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government and Planning announced yesterday, Conservative councils that have now declared their council taxes come out, on average, at £129 less than Labour councils and £73 less than Liberal councils. It is clear who costs one more in the shires–it is Labour. It is clear who costs one more in the mets–it is Labour. It is clear who costs one more in London–it is Labour. No matter where one looks, Labour councils and–so as not to disappoint the right hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Ashdown)–Liberal councils, cost one more.

     

    Q4. Mr. David Marshall : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 10 March.

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

    Mr. Marshall : Is the Prime Minister aware that his recent morale-boosting visit to Scotland has resulted in his party achieving a record low in the polls of 13 per cent? Does he appreciate why the Scots are once more uttering the refrain :

    “Will ye no’ come back again”

    and again, and again?

    The Prime Minister : As it happens, the hon. Gentleman is typically inaccurate. The data were before I visited Scotland.

     

    Ministerial Visits

    Q5. Sir Anthony Grant : To ask the Prime Minister if he will pay an official visit to the Imperial War museum at Duxford.

    The Prime Minister : I know from private visits what a magnificent place the Duxford museum is. I can well understand the pride of my right hon. Friend in having it in his constituency. I hope that I may be able to pay an official visit at some time in the future.

    Sir Anthony Grant : Will my right hon. Friend note that the United States air force flew from Duxford during the last war with much loss of life and, in particular, flew on the D-day operation? Will he give his support to the American air museum being created there, either by visiting Duxford or by inviting the Americans concerned to visit him? It would be extremely good for Anglo-American relations.

    The Prime Minister : I should like to visit Duxford again. I shall take an opportunity to do so and to look at the museum’s plans. My hon. Friend is entirely right about the significant contribution of the US air force to the D-day landings. We have a continual debt of gratitude to them. It is right that we should celebrate the 50th anniversary and remember the heroism of the troops and the sacrifices that they made so that we can enjoy the liberties that we exercise in the House.

     

    Health Issues

    Q6. Mr. Simon Hughes : To ask the Prime Minister what proportion of his time he devotes to health issues.

    The Prime Minister : A lot.

    Mr. Hughes : In that case, given that one of the most obvious implications of the Government’s policies for health services in London is that they plan to run down the hospital that the Prime Minister described as the flagship, and that the main building–a state of the art building costing £140 million–will never come into use, in all seriousness will the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State take a little extra time to listen to a proposal that keeps both Guy’s and St. Thomas’s as hospitals, saves the taxpayer money, reduces embarrassment and, above all, saves patients’ lives?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman knows that the changes to the health service in London are long overdue; they have been long sought by many people. We have won support inside and outside the health service for tackling that particular problem, not least from Opposition Front-Bench spokesmen. As for the problems of Guy’s and St. Thomas’s, the hon. Gentleman will know that the clinicians at both hospitals believe that patient care will be improved by concentrating services on one site, not two. It is not just the Government’s view, but that of the doctors involved. Thanks to the determination to embrace change, the Guy’s and St Thomas’s trust will have a secure future and its buildings, old and new, will be used fully, effectively and appropriately in the best interests of patients, medical teaching and research.

     

    Engagements

    Q7. Mr. Sumberg : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 10 March.

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

    Mr. Sumberg : Is my right hon. Friend aware of the considerable concern in my constituency and throughout the country about the activities of television cable-laying companies? Pavements are uprooted, roads closed and businesses disrupted all with the objective of getting doubtful television programmes into our homes. Is it not time that we found a better way of organising these matters?

    The Prime Minister : I recognise the concerns of my hon. Friend. Of course it is important that all those with the right to undertake street works should keep disruption to a minimum. He will know that there are duties to do so written into the terms of the licence issued by the Department of Trade and Industry. My hon. Friend will also know that in those areas where cables are laid, about one quarter of all homes subsequently decide to participate in cable television. That has led to investment across the United Kingdom of well over £1 billion.

     

    Q8. Mr. Martyn Jones : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 10 March.

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

    Mr. Jones : Will the Prime Minister find time today to check on a transcript of the “Today” programme earlier this week, when his right hon. and learned Friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, suggested that he would not be Prime Minister after November, or after the autumn ? If that is the case, will he make sure that his right hon. and learned Friend is incorrect, as he is such a good asset to us in the Labour party?

    The Prime Minister : I seem to recall cheap questions like that before the previous election. I am still here and the Opposition are still there.

     

    Q9. Mr. Bellingham : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 10 March.

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

    Mr. Bellingham : Further to the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich, North (Mr. Thompson), does my right hon. Friend agree that the IRA-Sinn Fein must now be treated with complete contempt? Does he further agree that unless it signs the declaration tomorrow, it should forfeit its opportunity to be part of it?

    The Prime Minister : I think that every hon. Member of the House will have nothing but contempt for the IRA’s behaviour. With the attacks that it has made, both in Northern Ireland and at Heathrow yesterday, it has demonstrated again its disregard for human life and for opinion on both sides of the community. I believe that my hon. Friend misunderstands the long-term purpose and import of the declaration that I signed with the Taoiseach in December. It sets out a series of principles on which we hope and intend to try to build a permanent peace for Northern Ireland.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 8 March 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 8th March 1994.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Ministerial Offices

    Mr. Boyes : To ask the Prime Minister how many bottles of (a) whisky and gin and (b) sherry and port were consumed by his private offices in 1993-94.

    The Prime Minister : Disaggregated information of this sort could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

    Mr. Boyes : To ask the Prime Minister what was the cost of new furniture for his private office during the year 1993-94.

    The Prime Minister : Such purchases are included within my Office’s overall administration expenditure, which is published every year in the annual report.

     

    Engagements

    Sir Peter Tapsell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 8 March.

    Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 8 March.

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

     

    Official Gifts

    Mr. Tony Banks : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 22 February, Official Report, column 162, what happened to those gifts of small value presented to former Prime Minister Baroness Thatcher and not required by her on leaving office.

    The Prime Minister : Gifts of small value are the property of the Prime Minister, not the Government. The retention or disposal of such items is therefore a matter for the Prime Minister concerned.

     

    Malaysian Protocol

    Mr. Alan Williams : To ask the Prime Minister how many Cabinet meetings were held between the signing of the Malaysian protocol in March 1988 and 28 June 1988.

    The Prime Minister : It remains the Government’s practice not to give details of Cabinet or Cabinet Committee meetings.

    Mr. Alan Williams : To ask the Prime Minister on what date he was first made aware of the references to civil aid and arms’ sales in the Malaysian protocol of March 1988.

    The Prime Minister : On 12 May 1988, in my capacity as Chief Secretary to the Treasury.