Category: Prime Minister (1990-1997)

  • Mr Major’s Press Conference in Muscat – 28 January 1993

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s press conference in Muscat, given on Thursday 28th January 1993.


    PRIME MINISTER:

    I have had the opportunity this morning and over lunch to have very wide ranging discussions with His Majesty Sultan Qaboos. I am most grateful to the Sultan for his hospitality and also for the unfailing help that we have had from His Excellency, Kai Sawawe [phon]. I last met the Sultan at Chequers in July. He is, as you know, a very close friend of the United Kingdom, a long standing political, commercial friend of our country.

    I met him this morning in rather unusual circumstances. His Majesty is in the middle of his “Meet the People” tour and we met this morning near Ibra in Eastern Oman in a tent in the middle of the desert and I suspect that is the first time that the British Prime Minister and the Sultan of Oman have met in such unusual circumstances. The Sultan is a very senior ruler in the region and I very much value the advice and assistance that we receive from him on so many matters.

    We had the opportunity this morning of discussing a very wide range of issues: the Gulf Cooperation Council, Iraq, Yugoslavia, Iran, the Middle East Peace Process and a number of other bilateral matters. I am delighted to say that during our discussions this morning the Sultan told me that the Government of Oman had selected the British Challenger II as the Royal Army of Oman’s next main battle tank. This is the first export order for the Challenger II which is manufactured by Vickers Defence Systems Limited. It is an excellent tank and a tank that has already been chosen for the British Army. The order is for an initial quantity of 18 tanks and 4 Challenger armoured report and recovery vehicles. The initial delivery is for 1995. The Government of Oman intend to purchase a further 18 tanks later.

    It is already clear that this multi-million pound contract will sustain employment at the company’s two facilities in Newcastle and Leeds where some 1,800 people are employed and also of course at the many sub-contractors involved in this programme. I am delighted at this further example of our very close defence cooperation with one of our oldest and most valuable allies in the Gulf,

    QUESTION:

    Oman has called for opening a new [indistinct] in the Gulf and for signing a new political agreement, including the whole Gulf states, even Iraq, do you agree with this call which clearly opposes your tough stand towards Iraq and did you discuss this with the Sultan when you reviewed the current situation in the Gulf? And is Britain going to support possible sanctions against Israel by the UN Security Council to force the Israeli government to take the Palestinian deportees back?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    On the latter point, the government supported Security Council Resolution, I think it was 799, and the Israeli government are aware of our position on that matter, we very much hope this matter will be resolved very speedily. On the first matter, the Sultan of Oman has been a leader in seeking cooperation between the Gulf states for some time, he has in the past put forward special proposals in the Gulf Cooperation Council, I believe he is right to put forward those proposals and they have our support.

    QUESTION (Oman News Agency):

    We have seen the Security Council resolution being implemented on a selective basis, that international body which is responsible for maintaining world peace and security, are we going to see some reforms being introduced to the Security Council with the international crises on their lists?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am not sure what reforms you might have in mind about the Security Council, it is certainly the position that the United Kingdom wish to see all UN Security Council resolutions implemented, and implemented in full. That has been our position in the past and I can give you that assurance it will remain our position in the future.

    QUESTION:

    We have been witnessing the United States and the UK taking international matters into their hand by continuing their air assaults on Iraq while at the same time ignoring what is happening to the Palestinian deportees, including the Security Council resolution on the matter. Today we learn that the Israeli High Court has supported the government’s decision. Do you have an idea whether your country is going to support sanctions against Israel

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I indicated some moments ago that we supported the Security Council resolution concerning the Palestinians. Just the other day it was British helicopters that helped remove some of the Palestinians who needed medical care and attention. We have made it clear to the Israeli government that we believe those Palestinians should be returned from whence they came, that is our continuing position and we will continue to examine that with our friends and allies in the United Nations and of course with the Israeli government.

    On the first point, the implementation of UN Security Council resolutions, it is precisely to implement those resolutions within the framework of international law that the United States, Great Britain and France have taken the action that they have done recently against Iraq. It was of course Iraq that were infringing Security Council resolutions supported right across the Gulf and indeed right across the United Nations.

    QUESTION:

    On a domestic matter, you have decided to take legal action against two publications in the United Kingdom, this is highly unusual for a serving Prime Minister, can we have your thoughts on it?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I issued a statement about that earlier today, l issued a statement concerning that I had instructed solicitors to issue Writs for Libel. I have nothing further to add to that now or later.

    QUESTION:

    On the same matter, when the Chancellor had to consult lawyers about possible libel actions it was decided to pay part of the lawyers’ fees out of public funds, why have you decided not to do that in this case?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The Chancellor has dealt with that matter before, I have nothing further to add to that and I have nothing further to add to the announcement I made a moment ago. I have instructed solicitors to issue Writs for Libel, that is all I propose to say about the matter at this stage.

    QUESTION:

    Are you confident that the Middle East countries you are visiting today are behind the UK, the US and France in the action you have been taking against Iraq, does that go for the whole of the Middle East region?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Yes I do think I am content about that, there was very wide support for the Gulf war at the time and for the Security Council resolution subsequently. It is implementing those Security Council resolutions and international law that has actually led to the action to which you refer, so yes I am confident in that.

    QUESTION:

    What is the British government’s policy towards Iraq now?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We wish to see Iraq implement the Security Council resolutions, that is our policy, we have no plans for Iraq to dismember Iraq, know there has been concern, we wish to see Iraq remain as an entity but we wish to see it operate under international law and the international community has set out its wishes in a series of United Nations Security Council resolutions, they must be implemented.

    QUESTION:

    Can you expand on the concerns that may have been expressed to you by the Sultan about the position of Iran?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No I do not think I wish to expand upon our private conversations on that matter.

    QUESTION:

    Do you think that military action should be taken against the Serbs and when will that take place?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    What we are doing at the moment both in Bosnia in terms of humanitarian assistance and in terms of a political settlement is I think for the time being the way forward. The political settlement that is being sought that was propelled by the London Conference on the Yugoslav crisis that I chaired in the autumn is proceeding and Lord Owen and Cyrus Vance have made very good progress. There is more to be done but I think it is through that political process that we will get a satisfactory settlement to the very sad dispute that exists in Yugoslavia. In the meantime, while the dispute continues we must continue to provide the humanitarian assistance that is necessary and it is for that reason that the United Kingdom have provided not only a large amount of food but other aid as well, most notably medicines and also a large contingent of British troops to ensure that it is delivered where it is most needed.

  • PMQT – 28 January 1993

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 28th January 1993. Tony Newton responded on behalf of John Major.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Burns : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 January.

    The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Tony Newton) : I have been asked to reply.

    My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is making official visits to India, Saudi Arabia and Oman. I am pleased to advise the House that, following discussions with the Sultan of Oman, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has announced that Oman is to purchase the Challenger 2 as its new main battle tank, together with its armoured repair and recovery vehicles. I am sure the whole House will want to join me in congratulating Vickers Defence Systems on its well-deserved success in the first export order for Challenger 2.

    Mr. Burns : Notwithstanding that extremely good news, on a slightly different subject, has my right hon. Friend had time today to see the deeply disturbing allegations of fraud in Hackney, coming on top of the discovery of possibly record local government fraud in the Labour London borough of Lambeth? Will he assure the House of the Government’s determination to root out the systematic cheating and defrauding of charge payers?

    Mr. Newton : Yes. I can certainly assure my hon. Friend of our determination in that respect and I have no doubt that we shall be joined in it by the Opposition Front Bench. I have also, I may say, been doing some research on what the commentators have been saying and I came across this one which said :

    “in many areas Labour local government is lacklustre and incompetent. In a few it is simply corrupt and nepotistic. “This is nothing new. Ineffectual or rotten Labour councils … have been a feature of British political life for as long as anyone can remember”.

    That was in Tribune .

    Mrs. Beckett rose–

    Mr. Cryer : If that was in Tribune what about New Statesman ?

    Madam Speaker : Order.

    Mrs. Beckett : Is the Lord President aware that the December trade deficit of more than £1.5 billion is the worst for two and a half years and that whatever gloss he may put on it, the country is still in deep recession and deep trouble with no sign that the Government are prepared to do anything about it?

    Mr. Newton : What I am aware of is that the trade figures recently have shown that for the first time for a very long time our share of world trade in manufactures has stabilised and that the figures– [Interruption.] that is, after decades of decline. The figures today, which inevitably reflect to some extent the consequence on import prices of the depreciation of the pound, also show that export volumes were at record levels for the three months to December ; they were up 5.5 per cent. on the year before in the face of a slowdown in world trade, and there are particularly encouraging signs of a continuing increase in car and other manufactured exports.

    Mrs. Beckett : I suppose that that was the gloss. The reality is that, despite a huge devaluation, exports this month are down, while imports continue to rise. That is unprecedented during a recession. Is it not the case that we now have a payments deficit and a budget deficit, and that, for the past three years, 400 people have lost their jobs every day in London alone? Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that the people of Britain are worried sick about this, and that the only people who are not are the Government?

    Mr. Newton : The reality is that inflation is at its lowest for six years, that interest rates are at their lowest for 15 years, that productivity is at an all-time high and that all surveys show an increase in business confidence. As I said on Tuesday, it is time that the Opposition stopped trying to talk that confidence down again.

     

    Q2. Mr. Amess : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 January.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

    I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Amess : Crime in Basildon has fallen over the past year. Does my right hon. Friend think it right for a mass murderer to be interviewed on television about his crimes, on the grounds that it is of educational value and in the public interest, when common sense tells us that it might well put ideas into the mind of a disturbed person? Does my right hon. Friend think that right? The majority of my constituents in Basildon do not.

    Mr. Newton : I think that I can safely say that the same is likely to go for the majority of my constituents in Braintree. I can do no better than reply to my hon. Friend by referring to what my vigorous right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary said on the radio this morning. He said :

    “it is in my opinion contrary to public interest for somebody who is a mass murderer of his kind”–

    of Nilsen’s kind, that is– [Laughter.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. Very amusing, but I think that the Leader of the House wants to get on.

    Mr. Newton : The Leader of the House wants to complete the quotation, Madam Speaker.

    My right hon. and learned Friend said that it was wrong for “a mass murderer of his kind to be allowed publicly to relate his offences in this way–it’s bad taste, bad judgment and it’s totally insensitive to the feelings of the victims of people he killed”.

    Mr. Ashdown : If things are so wonderful, as the Leader of the House claims, will he tell us whether he can recall a time when any Government have presided over unemployment of 3 million, while borrowing £1 billion a week and running up a trade deficit that is heading towards £20 billion a year? Is not that, by any standards, the mark of an economic policy that is floundering and a Government who have failed?

    Mr. Newton : I am somewhat surprised to find the right hon. Gentleman joining Labour Front Benchers in their exercise of talking the economy down again. I repeat that the conditions for recovery are in place, and confidence is growing. I would expect to have the right hon. Gentleman’s support in ensuring that that continues.

    Mr. Dickens : Will my right hon. Friend welcome the reduction in interest rates that was announced this week? It has saved British industry £1 billion. Is it not particularly helpful for our manufacturing industry, and to all those with mortgages and overdrafts? Is not some good news coming out of all the gloom? [Interruption.]

    Mr. Newton rose–

    Madam Speaker : Order. All this hilarity is a waste of valuable question time.

    Mr. Newton : The reduction in interest rates is indeed extremely good news. My hon. Friend might have extended the point that he made in his question by saying that, with the interest reductions that have taken place since 1990, we have seen £11 billion cut off the costs of British industry, and £160 off an average mortgage payment.

     

    Q3. Mr. Martlew : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 January.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Martlew : Will the Leader of the House inform the Prime Minister, when he returns, that in the western part of the United Kingdom there is a great deal of concern about the fact that the Government are failing to give British Rail the necessary resources to upgrade the west coast main line? Does he agree that, without that investment, the economies of the west midlands, north Wales, the north-west of England, Cumbria, Scotland and Northern Ireland will be grossly disadvantaged? Does the Leader of the House agree also that it would be nonsensical for the Prime Minister to underestimate the political influence of areas that account for one third of Members of Parliament?

    Mr. Newton : Should I be able to find the necessary extensive opportunity, in the wake of the hon. Gentleman’s question, I shall, of course, report his views to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister. I have no doubt, however, that my right hon. Friend will disagree with the hon. Gentleman just as much as I do, against the background of the fact that British Rail’s external financing limit next year is to be nearly £1.5 billion.

     

    Q4. Mr. Rathbone : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 January.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

    I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Rathbone : May I ask my right hon. Friend to request the Prime Minister to review the policies of the British Government and of the European Community towards Israel in the light of the horrible deportations that have taken place there and of the upholding of those deportations by the Israeli supreme court yesterday, and thus bring pressure on the Israeli Government to accept as swiftly as possible United Nations Security Council resolution 799?

    Mr. Newton : It is obvious from the response to my hon. Friend’s question that his concern is widely shared in the House. He will know that the British Government continue to urge the Israelis to comply with United Nations Security Council resolution 799. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary sent a personal message to the Israeli Foreign Minister last week, and they will meet in Brussels on 1 February, when, as my right hon. Friend has already told the House, he will emphasise the need for the Israeli Government to take urgent steps to solve the problem of the deportees.

     

    Q5. Mr. Gunnell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 January.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Gunnell : Will the Leader of the House give his estimate of the total number of jobs, in both the public and the private sectors, that are at risk through rail privatisation? Does he agree with Lord Prior’s assessment that there will be 12,000 potential job losses in the areas of rolling stock and signalling? While I welcome the news for Leeds about the Challenger tank, may I ask the Leader of the House whether he agrees that more Yorkshire jobs will be lost in railway engineering factories in Hunslet, York, Wakefield and Doncaster as a result of these threats, unless there is action within weeks, rather than months or years?

    Mr. Newton : I do not agree. On the contrary, my right hon. Friend’s proposals for rail privatisation and the development of competition are the best means of ensuring an effective and efficient railway system and of guaranteeing jobs for many people in the long term. I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for acknowledging that his area, Leeds, and Newcastle, because of the Vickers presence there, are among those that will benefit from the work that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has done on his visit abroad.

     

    Q6. Sir Michael Neubert : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 January.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

    I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Sir Michael Neubert : Will my right hon. Friend spare some sympathy today for our Community partners, the Irish, whose traditional luck seems temporarily to have deserted them? Whereas Irish overnight interest rates have gone up to 100 per cent., we in liberated Britain have the lowest rates for 15 years, to the great benefit of business, industry and millions of home owners.

    Mr. Newton : I very much share the pleasure that my hon. Friend has expressed in what we have been able to do over interest rates. It shows that we are now moving in the sort of direction that both British industry and the whole of the British people want to see in achieving economic recovery.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in Bombay – 27 January 1993

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s doorstep interview with the press, held in Bombay on Wednesday 27th January 1993.


    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, you were criticised for coming here, how in retrospect do you see the value of your visit here?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I do not think there is any doubt whatsoever about the value of this visit. There is a tremendous opportunity for both India and the United Kingdom to expand their trade and to expand their investment relationship, here was an opportunity to grasp that and I think it is perfectly apparent from the discussions across a range of matters that the businessmen have taken that opportunity. We have had two very large contracts already, the British Gas contract and today it has been confirmed that GEC are going to be awarded a very large contract as well. So I think that in itself would probably have made the visit worthwhile but in fact a large number of other things are being discussed as well.

    QUESTION:

    But was it really wise to be out of direct contact with British politics for nearly a week?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I have not been out of direct contact with British politics. But I think I would put the point back to you the other way. Here is one of our oldest friends offering the British Prime Minister a position, the greatest honour they can offer as the quest of honour in their Republic Day, apart from the fact that I would have wished to come, it would have been very churlish to refuse and it would perhaps have done immense damage to the relationship between India and the United Kingdom. Even if there had been difficulties I would not have wished to have done that. As it was, I was delighted to accept and there were very many matters we were able to discuss.

    QUESTION:

    It is a great honour to have you here in India, is there any message that you have for Indians living in Britain from Indian soil?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am very pleased to make my first visit to India. We know at home the extent to which the Indian community plays a practical part in our community, not least of course in our business community. I have been able to see here how it operates locally and I am delighted to have done so.

    QUESTION:

    At your press conference in Delhi you spoke very positively about the Indians settled in the UK, whereas the successful ones have no problem, what is your government doing for the less fortunate?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think most people looking at the large number of Indians in the United Kingdom would see right across the range of income groups a tremendous increase in their quality of life and their standard of living in recent years and I think they will benefit, as will everyone else in the United Kingdom, as we move out of recession and back into growth.

    QUESTION:

    In the BCCI bank collapse many Asians lost everything and they are very unhappy with the way the government has handled it, do you not think the problem needs to be addressed?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think the problem has been addressed. If you recall the BCCI affair it was in fact a criminal fraud on a gigantic scale but the overwhelming majority of the investors have now got around three-quarters of their money back, three-quarters of their money back as the result of a protection scheme after a criminal fraud and of course a very careful investigation subsequently.

    QUESTION:

    What about the new immigration law that the government proposes, in effect it means that if a person from the sub-continent applies for entry to the UK and is refused leave to enter he loses the right to appeal, is this not against the rule of law?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No it is not against the rule of law and I think you slightly mis-state the position. The Asylum Bill is dealing with a substantial problem we have with the huge weight of people who are actually waiting a very long time for decisions, we now have administrative measures to deal with it and of course none of that prevents anybody reapplying again if they feel they have been unfairly treated.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 27 January 1993

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 27th January 1993.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    India

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make it his policy during his visit to India to raise the matter of the conditions under which India would join the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

    During his visit my right hon. Friend, the Prime Minister, has discussed with Prime Minister Rao the attitude of the Indian Government towards the treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, and has emphasised the importance we attach to universal membership of the treaty.

     

    Machine Tools (Iraq)

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Amber Valley (Mr. Oppenheim), of 11 January, Official Report, column 555, what information he has on the sale of machine tools from Germany to Iraq in 1987, 1988 and 1989, based on the standard international trade classification.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

    I refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade to the hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne, Central (Mr. Cousins) on 26 January.

     

    Genetically Modified Material

    Mr. Cousins : To ask the Prime Minister which Department has the responsibility for the licensing and control of premises using genetically modified material for research, development and production purposes for industrial, medical or educational uses.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

    The Secretary of State for Employment has responsibility for the Genetic Manipulation Regulations 1989, which require all those intending to use premises for the first time for genetic modification work to notify the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). Notification requirements also apply to the subsequent activities involving genetic modification.

    A range of additional requirements, which are the responsibility of a number of Departments, apply to specific products which may be genetically modified. The products include medicines, plant pathogens, food additives, veterinary medicines and agricultural pesticides.

     

    Correspondence

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister when he expects to provide a substantive reply to the letter sent to him by Mr. Barrington of Clist road, Bettws, Newport, on 30 November 1992.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

    A reply was sent by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister’s office on 10 December 1992. A reply to the hon. Member’s constituent’s letter of 13 January 1993 will be sent in due course.

     

    Iraq

    Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will seek time at the United Nations for reconsideration of sanctions against Iraq.

    Mr. Newton [holding answer 26 January 1993] : I have been asked to reply.

    The Security Council reviews sanctions against Iraq every 60 days in compliance with United Nations Security Council resolution 687. The most recent review meeting took place on 25 January at which the Security Council concluded that conditions did not exist for the modification or lifting of sanctions against Iraq.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview at Indore Airport – 27 January 1993

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s doorstep interview at Indore Airport, held on Wednesday 27th January 1993.


    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, what is your reaction to your visit to Indore?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think it is impossible to see it without realising the scale of the problem that needs to be dealt with. But what is clear as I saw the second and improved slum dwelling is the opportunity for what could be done and also the extent to which the people living there are prepared to contribute.

    QUESTION:

    But do you think that more work needs to be done?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think self-evidently for a long time there is going to be a great deal more work needed to be done and that will need funds from all sorts of areas.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    ODA have got an on-going programme for this and for other projects like this, there are 8 projects like this and a number of other ones as well, it is for that reason that our commitment to India is so large.

    QUESTION:

    How do you think that the funds should be utilised in the development of this colony?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    It seems to me from what I have seen this morning that they are being utilised very wisely, not in grandiose projects but in practical methods that will improve sanitation, improve health and improve quality of life, that is far more important than large prestige projects.

    QUESTION:

    Are you aware of the mis-use of funds [indistinct].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We always look very carefully through the ODA at what is happening to make sure the funds are used properly, it is a constant point.

    QUESTION:

    Are you aware of the report?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am not aware of the report but ODA officials here will be.

  • Mr Major’s Speech to Businessmen in Bombay (Mumbai) – 27 January 1993

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech to the Businessmen’s Dinner in Bombay (now Mumbai) on Wednesday 27th January 1993.


    PRIME MINISTER:

    It is a pleasure to be with you today. This is my first visit to India though coming here has long been an ambition. Already it has made a deep impression on me and whetted my appetite to see more. I am sure this will not be my last visit to this great country.

    The first theme of my visit has been dialogue and partnership. I wanted to experience – to develop at the highest level – the increasingly close bilateral dialogue between our two countries. This of course owes much to ancient ties of history, culture, parliamentary democracy and personal contacts. But the changes in the world after the end of the cold war have made possible a new kind of partnership between India and Britain.

    To be truly worthwhile a partnership needs to reflect the interests and realities of today in the new international environment. Old history is valuable. But so is current reality. My discussions in New Delhi this week certainly met both those tests. I look forward to continuing and developing the dialogue.

    My visit was given symbolic meaning by the invitation of the Indian Government for me to be chief guest on Republic Day. The parade was a memorable spectacle. Standing there with the President and the Prime Minister of India I felt that the shadows that the past has sometimes cast over our relationship had been dispelled by a modern partnership between sovereign democracies.

    Another theme of my visit has been confidence – British confidence in India. In our country, as in yours, there is a deeply entrenched commitment to the principles of democracy, tolerance and the rule of law. India’s problems can be solved only by Indians: but, as you work them out, you can be sure of our close interest, sympathetic concern and confidence in India’s secular democracy.

    By the same token, the world has watched with dismay the disturbances and destruction that afflicted this great city earlier this month. I hope and pray that peace and harmony, now restored, can be maintained. You do not need me to tell you of the responsibility which rests with the leaders of the business community in helping to resist the forces of hatred and disruption and healing the social and economic wounds. I bring you today the hope and confidence of the British Government that Bombay, which has met so many challenges in the past, can meet this challenge also.

    And may I say a word about Maharashtra’s governor, Dr. Alexander. India has a tradition of sending her best to be High Commissioner in London. And we return the compliment. We have warm memories in Britain of Dr. Alexander’s time as High Commissioner. He has many friends and admirers and all of these friends wish him well in his new post.

    For your city has a special place in British hearts. The connection goes back to 1661 and has developed over the years as the city has become the vibrant heart of India’s economic and commercial life.

    London and Bombay are the financial capitals of our two countries. The effective provision of financial services is vital, not only for the health of the domestic economy but also as a source of foreign earnings. We are proud of the achievements of the City of London, and we depend on them to help earn our keep in the world. Bombay too has the potential to be a world commercial and financial centre.

    One of the main themes of my visit is the partnership which Britain and India can enjoy in the wider world economy. This is what I want to focus on tonight.

    World Economic Prospects

    The international economy is living through hard times. It is precisely at such times that the temptations of economic isolationism grow, together with the pressures on governments to give special help to their own industries and their own companies. It is precisely at such times that governments must be strongest in resisting these siren calls. For those policies would lead us into a downward spiral of beggar-my-neighbour. We can be sure they would do no one any lasting good and would damage most those who are already most vulnerable.

    Uruguay Round

    We need international co-operation – regionally and globally – to bring back growth to the world economy. The most important key to that recovery remains success in the Uruguay Round.

    An early and comprehensive settlement of these GATT negotiations is crucial for the future health of the international economy. According to OECD estimates it would mean a boost to the world economy of some 200 billion dollars per annum. That in turn means new income and new jobs for millions of people all over the world. It would be folly to put all that at risk.

    I sometimes hear that GATT is arranged to suit the developed countries. It is of course true that we have much at stake. But developing countries need free trade just as much, if not more. Their companies need the opportunity to sell those goods and products where they are competitive, and to buy the inputs they need at prices they can afford. The progressive liberalisation of trade in textiles and agricultural products promises enormous benefits for developing countries, including India. Protectionist barriers damage most those who think they are being protected. The developing countries which have opened their markets most have prospered most. The evidence is there for all to see, not least in Asia. Trade and investment are far more important than aid in promoting sustained economic growth in developing countries.

    So a GATT agreement will be good for India too. Like the rest of us, the Indian Government have seen that the whole settlement is greater than the sum of its parts.

    European Community

    Britain is not of course an independent actor in the GATT talks. The European Commission negotiates on behalf of the 12 members of the European Community. The EC is India’s largest trading partner, and an essential source of investment and development assistance. Britain has just completed its Presidency of the Community. At the Edinburgh Summit last month, we sorted out many of the Community’s own problems.

    The progress of the Community has been further underlined by the opening for business of the European Single Market on the first of this month. It is the biggest market in history. Barriers to trade and enterprise have been broken down. Europeans can now live where they like in the Community and buy goods and services freely in the country of their choice.

    The Community remains open to trade from all parts of the world, and should be increasingly open when Uruguay Round provisions come into force. No new barriers to trade arise from the Single Market. We want to destroy the barriers to trade, not just move them. And the increasing harmonization of standards in the EC makes life easier, not harder, for outside exporters. They have only one target to aim at, rather than 12.

    Last month, under the British Presidency, India and the EC initialled a new Co-operation Agreement. Proof of Britain’s determination to keep the Community open and outward-looking. The new text opens the way for increased co-operation in areas as diverse as trade, investment, development, the environment, agriculture, science and technology, energy, telecommunications and drug abuse.

    We hope that when the Agreement is signed, it will be accompanied by a Joint Statement on political dialogue. This second document – also negotiated under our presidency – enshrines arrangements for the Indian and EC governments to work together closely on a wide range of political and other issues.

    We are your natural partners and friends within the Community and are delighted to continue to make this count in practical ways.

    To sum up, my message on Europe is threefold:

    – the Community is moving forward with full British commitment;

    – the Single Market is emphatically not a barrier to Indian exports;

    – the relationship between the Community and India is set to develop further, with Britain as one of India’s friends at court.

    The British Economy

    It is against the background of these world and EC developments that we have to deal with the more immediate economic concerns of our two countries. A few words about the British economy first.

    1992 cannot be claimed as one of our vintage years. Signs of economic recovery were slow to appear. Unemployment continued to rise. Company and individual confidence remained stubbornly low.

    But behind the scenes I believe the stage is set for a decisive move towards our consistent economic objective: sustainable non-inflationary growth. The necessary underlying conditions for this are now in place:

    – inflation – at 2.6 per cent – is at its lowest for six and a half years;

    – interest rates – following yesterday’s reduction – are now 6 per cent, the lowest figure for 15 years and the lowest in the European Community;

    – confidence is beginning to return to house-buyers, consumers and investors; and

    – our exchange rate is highly competitive.

    All this provides a tremendous opportunity for British industry. The government will be working closely with industry, especially manufacturing companies, to maximise investment in modern equipment and increase exports. We shall also be redoubling our efforts to free up our own markets, and reduce the burdens of government and bureaucracy on our own companies. The cornerstone of our policies remains the conviction that the creation of wealth is most effective when economic and commercial freedom are greatest.

    Indo-British Economic Links

    India and Britain are two of the largest dozen economies in the world. British investment in India is estimated at about 2 billion pounds, significantly larger than that of any other country. At least 250 British companies are well established here with an important stake in India’s economy. Many more have tie-ups involving the transfer of technology and know- how. The open British market will provide ample opportunities for India’s increasingly competitive exporters, many of them from Bombay and Western India.

    British development assistance to India is almost twice as much as to any other country in the world. We are proud of our aid programme here, which combines support for projects aimed at encouraging economic growth with help for the poorest. I was able to see something of our aid programme earlier today when I visited two slum improvement projects in Indore. The project is transforming life for the people, enhancing their environment, their health, their education, their opportunities to earn a living, and above all their dignity. We are proud of our partnership with the Indian authorities in making all this possible.

    So we are already doing much together. But this is only a beginning. New perspectives are opened by the dramatic change in India’s economic management and policies in the last eighteen months. Prime Minister Narasimha Rao and his Government have made Herculean efforts to stabilise the economy after the crisis of mid-1991. And having achieved this stabilisation, they are set to change the policies which, however justified at the outset, would never have built prosperity.

    We have admired and applauded the sweeping away of so many of the bureaucratic obstacles – the so-called licence raj – to normal business decision-making. We have welcomed the attack on high trade tariffs and even more direct barriers to trade, and the shift to genuine encouragement of foreign investment. We believe the policies of reducing wasteful and irrelevant government subsidies, cutting the budget deficit, and redirecting government spending to where it is most needed – the basic needs of the poorest, particularly in education and health – are absolutely right.

    We all know the entrepreneurial talents of the Indian people. We in Britain know them particularly well from the immense and valued contribution to our economic and commercial life made by so many entrepreneurs, large and small, of Indian origin. These talents can now be fully liberated in India too. India can look forward to taking its place before long among the fastest growing economies of Asia.

    The land of the tiger can become an economic tiger herself. She starts with great advantages: a huge domestic market, a reserve of trained and inexpensive manpower, a thriving private sector with an established entrepreneurial tradition and great natural talent, most of the necessary financial institutions already in place, and an exuberant democracy.

    But – there is always a but – the fruits of reform will only arrive if reform is continued and deepened. The effort to liberalise the economy and expose it to international competition must not only be maintained, but increased. The UK government has supported the process wholeheartedly through extra balance of payments support, through the positions we have taken in the international financial institutions, through the encouragement we have given to our companies to look at investing in India.

    What goes for Britain, goes for India – free markets and competition increase prosperity for everyone. Opening up trade, including in consumer goods. Liberalising further industrial and agricultural markets. Confining the public sector to its proper role and make public sector enterprises free to act and accountable for their actions. Making your labour laws encourage job creation and investment, rather than giving an illusion of job security to a privileged few. The Indian people will be the winners.

    Future Co-operation

    I said that we have been encouraging our companies to take a fresh look at India. It is significant that I have been accompanied on this visit by one of the most senior British industrial delegations ever to be in one place overseas at one time. These are senior businessmen, seriously interested in what they can do in and with India.

    Most of them have come with me to Bombay and are here this evening. They will tell you of the welcome message they received from Ministers and senior civil servants of the Indian government’s determination to maintain the reform programme. They are already making plans to carry this message back to their fellow British businessmen at home. They have agreed with their Indian counterparts on an Indo-British Partnership Initiative to promote trade and investment in both directions. As long as the reform programme continues – and the Government will need the continuing support of industry in carrying through difficult political decisions – I have no doubt that existing British investments in India will expand, and other British firms will set up here.

    During my visit we have taken some big steps forward. Here in Bombay, British Gas and the Gas Authority of India agreed this week to collaborate in bringing natural gas on-shore first to industry, and then to private consumers – a deal worth £100 million. And today I was delighted to hear that the Indian authorities intend to award to GEC Alsthom a contract to link the electricity networks of the West and South of India, this time worth £140 million. These and other deals which I know are in the pipeline will bring employment and new technology to India, not least to Bombay, and jobs and continuing export business to Britain. It is a partnership from which we both stand to benefit enormously.

    At my meeting with Indian business leaders yesterday, the first question I was asked was about the scope for privatisation in India and how Britain could help. I am sure that there is great scope for making more use of private sector skills in many parts of the Indian economy. I believe that this is one of the areas that the Indo-British Partnership Initiative should focus on. Britain has enormous experience of privatisation – we have carried out the most far-reaching privatisation programme in the world. Our experts – banks, accountants, consultants, civil servants – stand ready to advise and help as and when you in India decide to go down the same path.

    I know there has been disappointment in India at the apparently slow pace at which foreign investment has been increasing. But investment depends not only on the right policies and general goodwill. It depends on policy implementation at all levels, on confidence that reform is here to stay on the certainty that the era of suspicion of foreign companies is over. The stability and clarity of policy objectives over time is what counts in persuading foreign investors to take decisions.

    If that vision is there, Britain and India have so much to offer each other. I have already spoken in Delhi of the enormous general improvement in our bilateral relations. Much of the practical benefit for both of us from these excellent links will derive from the breadth and depth of our joint economic and commercial activities.

    Governments cannot of course make this happen. The theme of my speech has been that at global, regional and national level it is competition and free markets which bring prosperity. The whole point of free markets is that individual companies and people decide for themselves where to invest and with whom to do business. But governments must create the right environment for free markets to flourish. We are on the right course. Let us both stick to it, build on what has been achieved so far, and together help to create a better future for all our people.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in Indore – 27 January 1993

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s doorstep interview with the press, held in Indore on Wednesday 27th January 1993.


    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, what are your impressions of what you have seen today?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I have now seen both the projects, the one that had no improvement work done on it and the one that has had some improvement work started, and I think there are several impressions. Firstly, you can see the enormous amount that needs to be done; and secondly, you can see as the improvement work proceeds the impact it is actually making on people, even the relatively modest improvements above ground and below ground have made a complete change to the Community. Much more to be done of course, but very valuable work.

    QUESTION:

    Now there are improvements in life and health?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Certainly in life and health. Many of the improvements you physically cannot see, it is the availability of proper sanitation, proper water, it is well below ground but it is there, it was not there elsewhere, the improvement of the medical facilities. And here, here is one of the extremely unimproved homes, but if you look around you now find there are clubs being formed, clubs for young wives, clubs for children, gymnasiums, there is a great deal of health activity, all of which would not have been apparent some time ago, It is desperately needed and very welcome.

    QUESTION:

    Some of this money comes from Britain although it is a drop in the ocean when put alongside India’s problems. Do you believe these people actually know who you are, that you are a representative of that country, do they know who John Major is?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    They seem to but whether they do or not the important thing is that the resources are here so that the help can be given, that is the thing that really matters, where the resources come from is entirely a secondary matter, the fact that they are here to help provide a quality of life that otherwise there would not be is desperately necessary. One only has to look around for a few minutes to see how much needs to be done.

    QUESTION:

    Does this make you think that you should be reaching the UN target for foreign aid more quickly?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Everyone would like to reach the UN target as soon as they can. The degree of need, we have seen it here in India, but we know it exists in other countries as well not all that far away, in Bangladesh you find it, you see it in many parts of Africa, there is a huge amount of need. It cannot all be met by aid of course, but aid often is the need towards tremendous domestic improvements. One of the attractive features of what is happening here that has been stressed to me several times going round, as the improvements have become apparent people have begun improving their own homes and their own quality of life as well, so I think the aid can play a very important part.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in New Delhi – 26 January 1993

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s doorstep interview in New Delhi held on Tuesday 26th January 1993.


    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think the market conditions were right to cut interest rates. The Chancellor and I discussed the possibility last week and he judged it was right today and I am delighted he did. I think it is a good move. I think it will be good for confidence, good for investment, good for jobs.

    QUESTION:

    The news at home means there will be no publicity for your trip here in India.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am very happy that the interest rate is reduced. I think it is appropriate. That is the most important thing. I think the economy will benefit from the fact we have been able to reduce interest rates again and I think all this is adding to the climate of confidence that is so necessary for sustained investment and to return to a secure pattern of growth. That is what we seek.

    QUESTION:

    Do you support the United States move to have Germany and Japan join the permanent members of the Security Council?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think the most important thing about the Security Council is to make sure that Security Council continues to be effective. That is the most important matter. I am certainly happy to look at matters that make it more effective. I would not wish to do anything that made it less effective.

    QUESTION:

    Do you think Germany and Japan joining will make it more effective?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I don’t know. There has been no discussion about this at all. I know the suggestion has been around for some time but it has not been the subject of any detailed discussion. I think you would have to change the United Nations mandate and a raft of other things but I dare say these are matters that will be discussed.

    QUESTION:

    Is there a worry that they will overbalance the European element and Britain might have to lose its place?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No, I don’t think that is at all likely. I certainly don’t think that is likely but these are matters that would have to be discussed if there is a general will for them to be discussed but they are not new ideas, they have been around for some time.

    QUESTION:

    Does the interest rate cut set the scene for moves to help business and industry in the budget, Prime Minister?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am not going to anticipate the budget.

  • PMQT – 26 January 1993

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 26th January 1993. Tony Newton responded on behalf of John Major.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Battle : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 26 January.

    The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Tony Newton) : I have been asked to reply.

    My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is making official visits to India and Oman.

    Mr. Battle : Is the Secretary of State for Employment telling the truth when she says that the President of the Board of Trade did not consult her about pit closures?

    Mr. Newton : If the hon. Gentleman thinks that my right hon. Friend was not consulted, would he like to tell me how it was possible for her to announce on the same day a wide-ranging package of measures directed at employment?

    Mr. Rowe : My right hon. Friend will be aware that as our trade with the European mainland constantly increases, a large proportion of it must pass through the county of Kent. Is he aware that the county of Kent and all the district councils in Kent are desperate to have a considerable portion of that freight transferred to the railways? Will he ensure that when Ministers are considering the present proposals for the railways and the channel tunnel rail link, they do everything in their power to ensure that it is made possible for freight to be carried on the railway rather than on the cluttered roads of Kent?

    Mr. Newton : As my hon. Friend knows, it is precisely to improve the efficiency and attractiveness of rail freight that many of our proposals in the context of the future of the railways are directed.

    Mr. John Smith : Given that the crisis in the coal mining industry arises directly from the Government’s rigging of the electricity market, why will the Government not accept that reform of the market to allow coal to compete fairly is the crucial and overriding issue?

    Mr. Newton : I do not accept for a moment the right hon. and learned Gentleman’s suggestion. The problems in the coal industry arise from a long -term decline in the demand for coal which is being seen throughout the western world. The Government’s policies are directed to addressing that and to securing the best possible future for the coal industry.

    Mr. John Smith : It is little short of astonishing that, even now, Ministers do not understand that the crisis arises from the botched privatisation of the electricity industry and not from any weakness in the British mining industry. Are the Government not aware that what the industry and the nation need is not some short-term fix to save the Government’s face but a reform of the electricity market to allow British miners to compete fairly?

    Mr. Newton : My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade will shortly bring forward proposals directed at the outcome of his review of the coal industry. Meanwhile, if I find anything astonishing, it is that on a day when interest rates have fallen to their lowest level for 15 years, the right hon. and learned Gentleman cannot even congratulate the Government.

    Mr. Raymond S. Robertson : Has my right hon. Friend had time to read the Confederation of British Industry’s latest poll, which shows the biggest increase in business confidence for five years? Does he agree that low inflation, low interest rates and a very competitive exchange rate give British producers a real edge in world markets?

    Mr. Newton : I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. We now have inflation at its lowest level for six years, interest rates, as I said, at their lowest level for 15 years, mortgage rates likely to be at their lowest level for nearly a quarter of a century and a marked increase in business confidence. We need Opposition Front-Bench Members to stop talking that confidence down.

     

    Q2. Rev. Martin Smyth : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 26 January.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Rev. Martin Smyth : In the light of press reports confirming the “Timewatch” programme and–as some of us have known for a long time–that the Dublin Government supported the growth of the provisional IRA in 1970, will the Leader of the House join the defence correspondent of The Daily Telegraph this morning in urging the Foreign Office and the Northern Ireland Office to engage in a diplomatic offensive against the Dublin Government to defeat terrorism and thus release 10 batallions of the Army to engage in international peacekeeping ?

    Mr. Newton : While I understand why the hon. Gentleman thought it right to raise that point, I have no intention of commenting on allegations relating to events nearly a quarter of a century ago. What matters now is the shared determination of the British and Irish Governments to resist terrorism from whatever quarter, and I know that we have the hon. Gentleman’s support in that.

    Mr. Budgen : Will my right hon. Friend reflect that had we not so fortunately come out of the exchange rate mechanism on 16 September we might now have interest rates at something between 10 and 15 per cent. imposed upon us by the Bundesbank and against the interests of the British economy? Will my right hon. Friend be good enough to suggest to the Prime Minister that the best thing that he could do to revive confidence in the British economy would be to say that we shall never return to the ERM and that we want nothing whatever to do with a single currency in Europe?

    Mr. Newton : I do not think that, however enticing it is, I shall follow my hon. Friend into speculation about what would have happened if something that already has happened had not happened. He will know what my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has said about the ERM and I do not propose to elaborate on it now.

     

    Q3. Dr. Berry : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 26 January.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Dr. Berry : Taking a more serious perspective on the economy than previous comments from Conservative Members, will the Leader of the House explain to the 4,637 unemployed people in my constituency of Kingswood and the 5,000 in his constituency of Braintree how it is that they are “a price worth paying” for the worst economic record of any post-war British Government?

    Mr. Newton : What I would say to those for whom concern is mutual on both sides of the House is that the policies that we have been pursuing and which have produced the results to which I adverted a few moments ago are providing the best basis for overcoming those concerns.

     

    Q4. Mr. Peter Bottomley : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 26 January.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

    I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Bottomley : May I suggest to my right hon. Friend the point that he has made which will get the greatest echo from all political parties? The boost to jobs, the reduction in mortgage payments and the boost to capital investments from low interest rates will make people ask whether it is possible for the Leader of the Opposition to join with the Government in helping to attract more foreign capital investment into this country–and more jobs–so that fewer people will be out of work.

    Mr. Newton : It would certainly be very welcome far beyond the confines of the House if the right hon. and learned Gentleman would give any sign whatsoever that he sees what would be required. Instead, he promises payroll taxes, excessive profit taxes, social chapters and the rest of it, which would keep foreign investment out for good.

     

    Q5. Mr. Tony Lloyd : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 26 January.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Lloyd : Continuing with the bipartisan interest in unemployment, may I tell the Leader of the House that in my constituency mass unemployment during the 14 years of Conservative government has resulted in high crime rates, the sale of drugs and its associated violence and individual family tragedies? My constituents are now incredibly angry at the inaction of the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues. Rather than asking my right hon. and learned Friend to help them out, will the Leader of the House tell us what the Government plan to do about these problems, when will they do it and when can we see some results?

    Mr. Newton : I find that a strange question, especially against the background of our exchanges so far and on the very day that interest rates have fallen to their lowest level for 15 years. What is more, the hon. Gentleman might at least have acknowledged that unemployment in his constituency last month was 16 per cent. lower than in 1987.

    Mr. Butcher : Did my right hon. Friend notice the very welcome announcement by Jaguar in Coventry that it is to invest £700 million in developing three new models for the market? When our right hon. Friend the Prime Minister returns to the House, could he pass to him an invitation to visit Coventry so that he can show his support for the engineering profession and the engineering industry which will spearhead our recovery?

    Mr. Newton : I note my hon. Friend’s request, which I shall draw to our right hon. Friend’s attention when he returns. One of the encouraging signs in our economy during recent months has been the renewed strength of the car industry, in part as a result of the very overseas investment to which I referred earlier and which certainly would not have come here had the Opposition had their way.

     

    Q6. Mr. Gerrard : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 26 January.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Gerrard : Does the Leader of the House recall that in March 1991 the Government tried to buy their way out of their troubles with the poll tax by reducing it by £140 a head? They found the money to do that by raising VAT from 15 to 17.5 per cent. Now that the poll tax is finally about to disappear, can we expect VAT to be cut by 2.5 per cent? If not, why not?

    Mr. Newton : The hon. Gentleman can expect the introduction of a system of council tax that will be a great deal better than what his right hon. and hon. Friends are offering with a return to the rates.

    Mr. Tracey : Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that the fullest possible investigation is being undertaken into the behaviour of Lambeth borough council, where one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated in local government appears to have taken place?

    Mr. Newton : I think–I hope–that I can speak for both sides of the House in expressing concern about the allegations of a breakdown in financial control in the London borough of Lambeth. The proper authorities- -the Audit Commission and the police–will be investigating the matter. As my hon. Friend says, if the allegations prove to be true, it will be a good illustration of some of the problems in Labour local authorities. I hope that the Opposition Front Bench will join us in condemning them.

     

    Q7. Mr. Hoyle : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 26 January.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Hoyle : Does the Leader of the House agree that when considering energy policy, we should look not at short-term market forces but at long- term needs? That applies especially to collieries threatened with closure, such as Parkside. It has always been highly profitable and it has reserves for 70 years. Should not the future of such collieries be based on the future demand for coal, which will become increasingly competitive as other fuels become more expensive?

    Mr. Newton : By now, it must be clear to all in the House that the review is very thorough and is not looking simply at the short term. It is taking account of the reports by Committees of the House and a wide range of independent consultants. The results will be made known in due course, as appropriate.

    Mr. Milligan : My right hon. Friend has just explained the position in Lambeth, but is not Lambeth only one of many similar Labour local authorities throughout the country? For example, Monklands and Sheffield have been misusing taxpayers’ funds, yet they have some of the poorest taxpayers in the country. Has not the time come to have a full public inquiry to discover whether there is a common thread?

    Mr. Newton : As I have already indicated, in the first instance inquiries into allegations of the sort that have been made against a number of authorities–by and large, Labour authorities, as my hon. Friend has said–are matters for the Audit Commission and the police. Were a common strand to emerge, I should expect the concern to be reflected on the Opposition Front Bench, and not just on the Government Front Bench.

     

    Q8. Mr. Mandelson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 26 January.

    Mr. Newton : I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Mandelson : What does the right hon. Gentleman think the behaviour of British Airways towards Virgin Atlantic says about the business ethics of British Airways, and what does he think the failure of anyone at the top of British Airways to resign says about the integrity of that airline’s management?

    Mr. Newton : The hon. Gentleman will be well aware that these matters have been the subject of legal action between Virgin and British Airways. That being the case, it would not be appropriate for me to comment further.

  • Mr Major’s Comments on Terrorism – 25 January 1993

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on terrorism, held during an interview in New Delhi on Monday 25th January 1993.


    QUESTION:

    [The Prime Minister was asked about the bomb threat].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I have no means of knowing whether it is or not and I am not especially concerned about that. What I was seeking to do was to draw attention to the fact that governments around the world do need to cooperate generally against terrorism. It is an international problem, it will require international cooperation. That is the point I was seeking to make.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if the extradition treaty would be passed in the House of Commons].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Yes, I believe so. There may be some opposition – I am not sure how much there will be – but I am quite confident there will be a clear majority for it in the House of Commons.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if India was stable enough for Britain to invest in].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Yes, I am, but far better than my view about that is the view of the businessmen who have come with me. Here you have a collection of some of the leading businessmen in the United Kingdom; they are confident not only to come but to contemplate large-scale investment over many years, so quite apart from my confidence their practical investment where they are prepared to put their money, their future and their companies in India, is an indication of the way things have changed and the prospects that people see for India in the future.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if he thought Indian democracy would last].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    What I am utterly confident about is the commitment of the government to what they would call – and I agree – secular democracy. That has been a tradition in India. Britain is the oldest democracy in the world, India is the biggest democracy in the world and I don’t have a shred of doubt that the Indian government are committed to that.