The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Category: Prime Minister (1990-1997)

  • Mr Major’s Comments on the European Union – 24 October 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on the European Union, made in an interview in Cairo on Saturday 24th October 1992.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked about Norman Tebbit’s comments that the Maastricht Treaty should be defeated].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Let me talk about the wider issues that are at stake with European policy because I think they are perhaps imperfectly understood and they are very important. What sort of European Community do we want to build? I am clear what sort of European Community I want, I want an open market European Community, I do not want a protectionists Community; I want a wider Community, not a narrower Community; I want a Community that does not suck from individual states the authorities that rightly belong to nation states and I want some of that authority returned to them.

    That is what I am seeking to achieve in the position the government takes in all its European policies. I do not want to see the European Community take a wrong turn. The British voice is essential to making sure that the European Community does not make that wrong turn. We need therefore authority in Europe and we need therefore to make sure that the British voice is powerful. Changing out mind on treaties that we agreed within the consent of Parliament is not a way to build up your authority within the European Community.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if he was proud of the Treaty because of what was not in it].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Let us look at both what is not in the treaty and what is in the treaty. There are two things in the treaty we signed that are quite different from the treaty signed by everybody else. Firstly, we are not committed to a single currency. I made it clear that I did not believe the right economic convergence would be there and I refused to agree to a single currency. We are not committed to that in the treaty in front of us.

    Secondly, we are not committed to the social chapter, not because we are not anxious to have good social conditions for people in this country, that is absurd, but because we believe it would damage employment prospects in this country and I refused to agree to that.
    But there is much in the treaty that is of value to us. Let me give you two illustrations. For the first time in I would sat 25 years we have actually negotiated in this treaty a way of intergovernmental cooperation within Europe, outside the Treaty of Rome, outside the power of the Commission and outside the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. We have sought that for a long time, no-one else negotiated it, it offers a new way for Europe to begin to develop in the future to produce the sort of Europe that the British want.

    Secondly, in that term called subsidiarity that we are now putting flesh on, we have actually opened up the prospect of actually ensuring that we do not get too many pettifogging restrictions that so frustrate people from Europe and we begin to return some power that they have taken back to the individual nation state. That is immensely valuable, it was not negotiated previously by anybody else, it is in the Maastricht Treaty and it is valuable to our interests.

    QUESTION:
    [Mr Major was asked if it was worth him risking his job on this issue].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Look, I am not going to talk about this in personal terms at all, let others draw what conclusions they like about this. This is a treaty, people should recall this, this is a treaty that has been more widely debated in this country before I went to negotiate it in Maastricht than it probably has in many other European countries, even up until now. Before I went there we obtained the authority of the House of Commons for the negotiating position that I would take. I then went there, I then negotiated within that remit and I came back with a conclusion within that remit. It was received with acclamation in the House of Commons, not least in the Conservative Party in the House of Commons. We then fought a general election where it was perfectly clear that we would honour the obligations we had established under that treaty. It has had a second reading in the House of Commons and it was passed with an overwhelming majority on the second reading. It is now necessary for us to continue with the committee stage.

  • Mr Major’s Joint Press Conference with President Mubarak – 24 October 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s joint press conference with President Mubarak, held in Cairo on Saturday 24th October 1992.

    PRESIDENT MUBARAK:

    Today we welcome the Prime Minister, Mr Major, as one of our best friends here, the Prime Minister of a country which we have very good relations with and very close relations and we have their support in any difficulty which we meet and I welcome him again for a couple of hours in Cairo and I wish him to come for a much longer visit to have plenty of time to discuss so many issues and see the country as far as he can.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Hosni, thank you very much indeed. We have had the opportunity this morning of meeting entirely privately, entirely a deux, and the opportunity of discussing a wide range of issues.

    I should perhaps say at the outset that I do not think there can have been a time for very many years when the relationships between the United Kingdom and Egypt were so close, so frequent or so good and I am grateful to President Mubarak for the way in which he has enabled that to come about.

    Egypt is a very important power in this part of the world, a very good friend of the United Kingdom, and we have had the opportunity this morning of discussing a range of matters, both large and small, in absolute privacy and it has been a pleasure to be back in Cairo again, albeit for a very brief period. I am most grateful to you for your hospitality.

    QUESTION:

    President Mubarak, following the shooting of a British tourist recently, can you say whether firstly you are concerned that this will affect tourism to Egypt, and secondly whether you are going to take any particular special measures to protect tourists?

    PRESIDENT MUBARAK:

    Of course whenever such a thing occurs we are very sorry for what happened, I think done on an individual basis is not something against tourism and we have no fear about tourism and the problems in this part of the country sometimes [indistinct] even since the 40s, so we are not afraid of what happened to tourism, tourism is going very well and we are taking all measures to make the tourists very safe in our country. And I do not think that this incident is widespread all over the country as some other people might think.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    May I just add a brief word to that? There are acts of individual wickedness all over the world and this was one such with a terrible tragic consequence for one British citizen. The President and I discussed that this morning. I have to say that after the incident we could not have had greater cooperation from the President and from the Egyptian authorities and both of us would like to send our very deepest sympathy to the families, it was a most appalling incident. What I would say also is that last month in Egypt there were more tourists from the United Kingdom than we have ever seen in Egypt before in any single month. Over the years there have been millions and millions of British tourists who come to Egypt to see the wonders that exist here. I am in no doubt talking to President Mubarak that he and the authorities in Egypt will do all they can to seek to catch the perpetrators of this particular wicked act and ensure that they are suitably punished.

    QUESTION:

    Is there any new development regarding the Lockerbie crisis, have you reached any agreement on how to resolve this crisis?

    PRESIDENT MUBARAK:
    We have discussed the resolution from the UN which has been respected and I have discussed it with the Prime Minister, we are going to do our best to fulfil the obligations concerning the UN resolution.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Egypt has given very full cooperation on the United Nations resolution. I do not think there is anything fresh that needs to be said about the British position on Lockerbie, it remains as it was. People are perfectly clear that we require the people named to be surrendered for trial over the Lockerbie affair, that remains the position, and until such time as that is determined the sanctions will remain.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, if I could perhaps introduce a slightly lighter note, it is clear that you have enjoyed much cordiality so far in your visit here, perhaps a marked contrast to the reception that you have been receiving at home for the last 7 days, has it been pleasant to get away from it all?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    It is always pleasant to come to Cairo and to meet President Mubarak, I have had the pleasure of meeting him here before and of course we had the pleasure of President Mubarak and Mrs Mubarak visiting the United Kingdom last year so that is a very great pleasure. But I am British, I enjoy being in Britain, I enjoy the cut and thrust of politics in Britain, that is the case and will remain the case.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, I have two questions: what kind of help has Britain provided Egypt because of the earthquake and has the Birmingham Summit eased opposition towards the Maastricht Treaty and what steps will you take to boost sterling to its previous position?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    That sounded like 4 questions, not 2, I can see you are an economic forecaster. Let me deal with the first question first. I met Mrs Mubarak this morning and we have made a contribution to assist with the dreadful problems following the earthquake which was a very dramatic and a very appalling event in Egypt’s history. We have also made it clear that in terms of manpower and other assistance, where that is required the offer is there for the Egyptian authorities to ask us for assistance should they need it and we would be happy to do that. I have to say that the advice I have had is that the authorities here have coped magnificently with what is an exceedingly difficult problem, there are a huge number of schools to be rebuilt, there are a huge number of people to be rehoused immediately, but it has been dealt with in a most efficient and effective manner, we have made a financial contribution, we have offered also, if it is needed, the British expertise that may be required.

    And I had the pleasure of discussing that with Mrs Mubarak this morning.

    On the Birmingham summit, we did make some progress in the Birmingham summit, as I set out before, and I think it was necessary for us to do so. The Birmingham summit was an interim summit to ensure, amongst other things, that we are able to reach concrete decisions at the Edinburgh summit that will be of assistance to people right the way across the European Community and it was the collective view of the Heads of Government at the Birmingham summit that that was successfully achieved.

    QUESTION:

    I wonder if I could ask you, Mr President, what your thoughts are fifty years on after the El Alamein battle which took place in your country and Prime Minister similarly what your reflections are at the site of this battle you will be seeing tomorrow?

    PRESIDENT MUBARAK:

    The Alamein battle was a very famous battle which made a great change over the world. I think the celebration of fifty years of this battle, so many [indistinct], the Prime Minister is here, we have the Prime Minister of Greece and France and several representatives of European countries. We are going to [indistinct] this celebration of the Alamein battle.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I was not born when the El Alamein battle took place, but I think one thing is perfectly clear to my generation, if it had not been for the El Alamein battle, neither President Mubarak nor I could be certain that we would be standing here as the leaders of free nations, that is the importance of that battle. I do not believe that there is any shred of doubt that when you look through the litany of great battles of history that there is any doubt that El Alamein has a very honoured place in that litany, has now and always will have.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, can you give me your assessment of the latest Geneva talks on finding a constitutional solution to Bosnia and Herzegovina in the light of the proposal of President Izetbegovic of Bosnia on a decentralised state? Secondly, after months of on-going peaceful efforts by Mr Panic and Kostić, the Prime Minister and President of Yugoslavia, do you believe that sanctions against Belgrade might be lifted soon?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I do not think on that last point that that is imminent at the moment, no. On the earlier point, I think the systematic effort that has been made to seek a satisfactory agreement that will end the fighting in Yugoslavia must continue. We made some progress at the summit in London that I chaired not long ago and efforts to that extent are continuing. But agreement can only be reached in Yugoslavia if the participants to the fighting are prepared to reach an agreement themselves and then honour and keep the agreement that they reach, that is the criteria.

    The other problem that runs in parallel with those diplomatic efforts is the scale of the potential humanitarian disaster that is building up in Bosnia. This winter there are many people who are going to face the most appalling hardship. Whatever the extent of aid is provided, and the British are providing a great deal of aid and we are sending British troops there to make sure that the aid is delivered, there is going to be the most appalling hardship as winter comes closer and it is a savage winter in Yugoslavia. I believe that puts a special responsibility upon the leaders of each of the warring factions in Yugoslavia to realise the scale of that humanitarian disaster unless they reach a political agreement to stop fighting and honour that political agreement. The whole world will be watching to see how they react and the whole world will know where to put the blame if the humanitarian disaster we can see building up actually comes about.

  • Mr Major’s Speech at Veterans Reunion in Alexandria – 24 October 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech, held at a veterans reunion in Alexandria on Saturday 24th October 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    There are moments in life when you get some very pleasant surprises and being invited to speak to you just now is one such moment but it is, if I may say so, a very pleasant surprise.

    The first thing I would like to say this evening is to welcome you all here today and say that I believe meeting many of you I can begin to understand how you will feel about the ceremony tomorrow. I can tell you how I feel about it if I may: at the time of the great battle of Alamein, I wasn’t born but had it not been for the people who fought at Alamein and won at Alamein, I wouldn’t be standing here tonight as Prime Minister of a free country speaking to all of you and that is how I feel about that battle. [Applause].

    It will, I know, tomorrow be a very emotional moment for many people. I don’t think they should be concerned about their emotion. I believe they have every right to look back on what happened at that time with fond memories and with pride at what they achieved.

    Wherever you look back in the whole catalogue of what has been achieved in British history, wherever you look through the battles – whether you start at Agincourt or start before that and come beyond that – in that long catalogue of great battles that form part of our history and left us a free nation, there is no doubt that El Alamein is a battle that deserves to be on that list and will always remain on that list. [Applause].

    It will be a unique occasion tomorrow. Fifty years on for many people who actually lived through what that desert war was like. I asked one of them a few moments ago whether at the time he realised quite what he and his colleagues were achieving and he said, no, he didn’t realise what he was achieving but he did know that there was a very special atmosphere at that time, that there was a feeling that this was a battle that we couldn’t afford to lose and that if we did win it, it would make a significant difference. We now know that that instinct from someone I spoke to a moment ago who was a sapper at that time was absolutely right; it was the hinge that swung from a time of defeat and a time of misery to a time of victory and a time of ensuring that we had a free Europe thereafter.

    I can find no words – and I think perhaps no-one living can – to actually paint the picture of what it must have been like at that time in realising what that battle would mean for the future. All I can to say to those of you who are here today is when you look back on what happened so many years ago, you may think it is fifty years ago and will people remember it fifty years on? I think I would say to you that in this country they will remember that battle five hundred years on and the part that was played in it by so many brave men from so many different countries in such a remarkable and glorious cause.

    Tonight perhaps is a night for memories and not for speeches. The simplest and perhaps the plainest thing that one can say is simply to say on behalf of my generation and subsequent generations “Thank you” to those of you who fought there, perhaps particularly to those of you who fought there and who aren’t here today because they gave their lives on that occasion or who have not lived to see this remarkable fiftieth anniversary. Truly it can be said of those people: “They will not be forgotten! They deserve to be remembered and they always will be!”

    Enjoy tomorrow! You deserve it! [Applause].

  • PMQT Written Answers – 22 October 1992

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 22nd October 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Single Market

    Mr. Leighton : To ask the Prime Minister what measures are outstanding to complete the single market.

    The Prime Minister : Of the 282 measures in the Commission’s White Paper, “Completing the Internal Market”, only 25 have not yet reached at least a common position or political agreement.

    Of these, six fall into the agriculture area; five deal with intellectual property; five are related to VAT; four are on company law; two on financial services; two on tax; and one on rights of residence.

     

    India

    Mr. Khabra : To ask the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library the latest text of the extradition treaty with India.

    The Prime Minister : The extradition treaty between the United Kingdom and India was signed on 23 September 1992 and copies placed in the Libraries of both Houses on that date.

     

    Western Shoshone Indian Land

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister what correspondence Her Majesty’s Government have received from Chief Raymond Yowell of the Western Shoshone National Council, Nevada, concerning the continued use by the United Kingdom of the Department of Energy nuclear weapons test site on Western Shoshone Indian land.

    The Prime Minister : The only correspondence I have received was in October 1991. The British ambassador in Washington replied on my behalf. A copy of Sir Robin Renwick’s letter was placed in the Library of the House.

     

    United Nations Day

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister what plans Her Majesty’s Government have to mark United Nations Day on 24 October.

    The Prime Minister : The flag of the United Nations will be flown in Parliament square on 24 October.

    Our commitment to the United Nations, as a founder of the organisation and a permanent member of the Security Council, remains as firm as ever. The end of the cold war and successes in, for example, Namibia and Kuwait have given the United Nations new authority. We welcome that and will continue to work for a stronger, more effective United Nations which can meet the challenges of the 1990s.

     

    EC Commissioners

    Mr. Winnick : To ask the Prime Minister when he will be making a statement on the appointment of the United Kingdom’s EC Commissioners.

    The Prime Minister : As announced on 20 October, I have nominated Sir Leon Brittan and Mr. Bruce Millan to serve in the Commission of the European Communities taking office in January 1993.

     

    Ministry of Justice

    Mr. Vaz : To ask the Prime Minister what plans he has to abolish the Lord Chancellor’s Department to make way for a Ministry of Justice.

    The Prime Minister : None.

     

    Government Consultants

    Mr. McLeish : To ask the Prime Minister if he will publish guidelines concerning the appointment of consultants by his Government.

    The Prime Minister : A guidance booklet on seeking help from management consultants was published by HM Treasury in May 1990. This booklet, copies of which are available in the Libraries of both Houses, also identifies central sources of advice and guidance for other types of consultancy, for example, information and technology and purchasing.

     

    Subsidiarity

    Mr. Spearing : To ask the Prime Minister if he will publish the 22-page document including a draft inter-institute agreement relating to the principle of subsidiarity forwarded to him by the President of the Commission of the European Communities.

    The Prime Minister : The President of the Commission made a substantial presentation on subsidiarity at the Birmingham European Council, but he has not yet formally submitted a Commission paper. When the Commission submits a paper to the Council it will, of course, be published and deposited in the normal way.

    Engagements

    Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 22 October.

    Sir Peter Tapsell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 22 October.

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

  • PMQT – 22 October 1992

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 22nd October 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Moate : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 22 October.

    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. Moate : Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming the fact that interest rates are significantly down and that car production figures and even retail sales figures are up? In welcoming the Government’s renewed commitment to economic growth and job creation, may I ask my right hon. Friend to tell the House more about his strategy for recovery– [Interruption.] The Opposition are not interested in recovery–in particular, ways of stimulating new capital investment projects, especially private and public sector joint-funded projects such as the important new Swale project in my constituency?

    The Prime Minister : I had the opportunity of learning about the Swale project when I visited my hon. Friend’s constituency some months ago. I think that everyone will welcome the drop in interest rates and the other economic developments that were mentioned by my hon. Friend. When it is safe to make further reductions without imperilling our inflationary objectives, it would certainly be the Government’s intention to do so. There is no doubt in any part of the House that across Europe and beyond Europe, economic circumstances have darkened and have become more difficult. That circumstance needs to be taken into account in our policy and in the policies of other countries as well. That means that in the months ahead there will be some difficult decisions. There will be tough decisions to be taken in the public expenditure round. It means that we must restrain expenditure where we can, but it also means that we must look with particular care at those elements of expenditure that have an employment and particularly growth potential, which my right hon. Friend the Chancellor will do. We shall certainly look more carefully at ensuring that we seek to get the private sector working more effectively to assist in capital projects, which I believe the whole House will welcome.

     

    Q2. Mr. Heppell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 22 October.

    The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer that I gave a few moments ago.

    Mr. Heppell : Will the Prime Minister give a guarantee that the 10 pits that have been given a 90-day reprieve will be allowed to continue to mine coal during that period? The men want to work. Will he allow them to work?

    The Prime Minister : No, I cannot give a guarantee that during the 90-day period coaling will continue in those 10 pits. It is necessary, and it will be the case, that those pits will be in a condition to resume coaling. If at the end of that period it is determined that that is the decision, they shall do so. But during that period, I can give no guarantee that there will be coaling.

    Mr. Kynoch : Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming the tough new rules for GCSE examinations, which will ensure continuing pressure to improve and to achieve higher standards under this Government?

    The Prime Minister : I most certainly will. The requirement to seek higher standards is felt by every pupil, and it is a demand sought by every teacher and every parent. It will certainly be the Government’s policy to bring that about.

    Mr. Hume : As the Member who represents the constituency with the highest unemployment, I ask the Prime Minister to tell the House whether the reports of the Government’s intention to reduce contribution-based unemployment benefit are correct. Does he not believe that the Government would be better employed in applying their mind to reducing unemployment rather than to reducing unemployment benefit?

    The Prime Minister : As I said to the House a moment ago, it is certainly our intention to pursue a strategy that will bring recovery, and with it growth, jobs and prosperity–I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will welcome that. It is essential that that moves right to the centre of thinking in each and every aspect of Government policy in the circumstances that now apply in this country, throughout western Europe and beyond. As I stated clearly a few moments ago, that is the Government’s intention.

    Sir Jim Spicer : In this statement on Tuesday my right hon. Friend stressed the crucial importance of an early completion of the GATT round. Now it seems that the talks have broken down. Can my right hon. Friend give us any idea why that happened, and will he do all that he can to get them started again?

    The Prime Minister : I can certainly answer my hon. Friend’s second question in the affirmative. This morning I saw the reported comments of the French Foreign Minister that there will be no serious GATT discussions for several months. Let me make it absolutely clear to the House that I could not disagree more strongly with that view. It is not shared by the British Government as holder of the presidency of the Community, nor by the Commissioner, nor by the majority of member states, which last week at Birmingham authorised the Commission to negotiate for a GATT settlement by the end of this year.

    Over the past two weeks the narrowing of the gap between the Community and the United States has been very welcome. That gap can be bridged. What is needed is for both sides to stay at the negotiating table, and I shall do all that I can to bring that about.

    Mr. John Smith : Given the daily changes in policy which we have all observed this week, what does the Prime Minister have in mind for his next U-turn?

    The Prime Minister : I have to say to the right hon. and learned Gentleman that I think that that question falls rather below the level of events. It was his U-turn on tax policy which helped to lose Labour the election. It sank his predecessor, but the right hon. and learned Gentleman did not resign–he was made the leader.

    Mr. Smith : Does not the Prime Minister realise that following the British Chambers of Commerce report which says that lack of confidence in the Government is causing many of our difficulties, confidence in him is drastically declining among the people of this country? They are not impressed by a Government blown about by events, and which has one simple rule–“A policy a day keeps Back Benchers at bay.”

    The Prime Minister : Only a few months ago all the people of this country had the choice to determine in whom they had confidence, and 14.5 million of them chose the Conservative party. That is why–because of the right hon. and learned Gentleman’s tax policies, and because of a lack of confidence in his party–the right hon. and learned Gentleman is sitting on the Opposition Benches. That is where he will remain, for at least the next four-and-a-half years.

    Mr. Jonathan Evans : Notwithstanding the recent reactions we have heard from China, may I ask my right hon. Friend for his assurance that he will give his unequivocal support to the governor of Hong Kong in his recent announcement, which is good for the people of Hong Kong, good for Britain and entirely in accord with this country’s agreement with the Chinese Government?

    The Prime Minister : I can most certainly give that assurance. The governor’s proposals set out recently in his speeches in Hong Kong received very wide support among all sorts of opinion in Hong Kong, and very wide support in this House and in public opinion in this country. His aim is to make the Hong Kong Government more effective and more accountable, and to broaden democracy in a way that will survive beyond 1997. That is the right future for Hong Kong, and the governor has the complete and total support of the Government and the whole House in that endeavour.

     

    Q3. Mr. Meale : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 22 October.

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

    Mr. Meale : To return to the subject of mining, will the Prime Minister give the House a guarantee that while the review period continues in the coal mining industry, he will place a moratorium on manpower and coal development underground? Without that, it is a meaningless exercise and many pits will face mass redundancies and closures. Yes or no?

    The Prime Minister : I think that we have made clear to the hon. Gentleman what happens during the moratorium and the fact that the 21 pits, apart from the 10 where there are special circumstances, will continue in the fashion that was set out clearly yesterday. I cannot and will not give the hon. Gentleman detailed assertions about matters that lie within the day-to-day management responsibility of British Coal.

    Mr. Tracey : My right hon. Friend’s recent words on growth and sound investment are much to be welcomed. May we, as London Members, urge on my right hon. Friend the cause of the completion of the Jubilee line and the benefits that would flow from it?

    The Prime Minister : I know how assiduous my hon. Friend is in the interests of London. I have noted most carefully what he said.

     

    Q4. Mr. Wareing : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 22 October.

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

    Mr. Wareing : It has been widely suggested that the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the President of the Board of Trade should resign. Will the Prime Minister tell the House what are his qualities and those of his colleagues which could justify their continuance in office?

    The Prime Minister : The 14.5 million votes we got in the general election.

    Mr. Barry Porter : I had the opportunity this morning of speaking on the electronic telephonic device to Sir Anthony Beaumont-Dark, who had one or two ideas. He seemed to think that it was not a bad idea to reduce interest rates in a gentle sort of fashion, taking into account what the deutschmark is doing, and that we should keep up a reasonable semblance of public expenditure in capital terms. I thought to myself at the time, “That is not a bad idea”. Does the Prime Minister agree?

    The Prime Minister : I am sure that my hon. Friend will not be at all surprised to know that Sir Anthony has mentioned those matters to me as well.

     

    Q5. Mr. Nigel Jones : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 22 October.

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

    Mr. Jones : When the people of Cheltenham march, should not the Prime Minister ask himself what is going on? Does he not realise that they are angry about the way in which the economy is being run? The Prime Minister and his office say that there has been a change in economic policy; the Treasury says that there has not. Who is telling us the truth?

    The Prime Minister : The Government always listen when people make comments of that sort and it was perfectly clear to the House from what I said a few moments ago precisely what objectives the Government have set themselves. Lest there be any doubt in the hon. Gentleman’s mind, let me say that there has been no movement away from the inflation objective or from the belief that we need non-inflationary growth. There is no doubt, not even in the hon. Gentleman’s mind, that outside this country as well as inside this country, there is a changed economic environment. In that changed economic environment, we have to consider what is in the interests of this country and shape our policies accordingly. That is what we have decided to do. That is the policy that we will continue with.

    Mr. Hunter : In the light of the IRA’s intensifying campaign of violence in several parts of the United Kingdom, is my right hon. Friend satisfied that sufficient powers and resources are available to those combating terrorism? Will he make it a priority to give fresh consideration to those matters?

    The Prime Minister : We have always given very great priority to the fight against terrorism in Northern Ireland where the security forces face terrorism on a day-to-day basis and on the mainland where, increasingly in recent months, the terrorists have sought to intimidate with bombs. I must make the point to the terrorists again which will carry universal support in the House : they have no chance whatsoever of succeeding–not now, not tomorrow, not ever.

     

    Q6. Mr. Grocott : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 22 October.

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

    Mr. Grocott : Does the Prime Minister remember that at the time of the Tory leadership election the reason given for why he beat his two rivals was that he was the one who was the particularly good economist? Will he therefore help the House and tell us whether the Government are pursuing the old economic policy or a new one? Will it be promoted by the old Chancellor or a new one?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman clearly is not listening. He spends too much time reading in the newspapers about what might have been said two years ago.

  • Text of the NATO Communique – 21 October 1992

    Below is the text of the NATO Communique, issued on 21st October 1992.

    FINAL COMMUNIQUE

    The Nuclear Planning Group (NPG) of the North Atlantic Alliance met at Gleneagles, Scotland, on 20 and 21 October 1992. Iceland attended as an observer.

    We used this occasion to have wide-ranging discussions on developments in the security environment that affect NATO. The Alliance’s new Strategic Concept underlines the importance of the Alliance’s role in crisis management and warns of the risks to European security that may arise from serious economic, social and political difficulties, including ethnic rivalries and territorial disputes. We are deeply disturbed by the continuing violence and destruction in and around Europe and, in particular, we deplore the tragic and worsening situation in the former Yugoslavia. As made clear last June in Oslo , the Alliance is prepared to support peacekeeping activities, including by making available Alliance resources and expertise, and thus contribute to the peaceful settlement of disputes. In our discussions we therefore agreed on the need to intensify ongoing practical work within the Alliance, so that NATO is better prepared to respond to the international community when required for this purpose, and we agreed review progress at our December Defence Planning Committee meeting. We also propose to discuss peacekeeping issues at the next meeting of Defence Ministers with our cooperation partners.

    In keeping with our approach to peacekeeping, a NATO naval force is monitoring, in cooperation with the Western European Union, the United Nations (UN) embargo and sanctions in the Adriatic, and a NATO airborne early warning force is monitoring the UN “no-fly” zone in effect over Bosnia-Herzegovina. Allies are also making substantial contributions of forces to the provision and protection of humanitarian assistance and to the operational headquarters of the expanded UN Protection Force in Bosnia-Herzegovina. We stand ready to provide further support to the efforts of the UN to bring peace to the former Yugoslavia.

    In our discussions on nuclear policy, we received with appreciation briefings by the United States and the United Kingdom on their nuclear forces. We also reviewed progress in adapting NATO’s nuclear planning, procedures and force posture to the changing political and military environment. In this context we further refined policy guidance in accordance with our new Strategic Concept, which provides for a reduced reliance on nuclear weapons whilst reaffirming the essential role for the Alliance of effective nuclear forces, including those based in Europe. The reduction and restructuring of NATO’s substrategic nuclear forces in Europe which we endorsed in Taormina continue to progress well.

    All nuclear warheads from NATO’s ground-launched and naval tactical nuclear weapons have now been removed, much earlier than originally envisaged, and those weapons designated to be destroyed are being retired and scheduled for destruction. The reductions in the number of air-delivered nuclear weapons, the only remaining sub-strategic systems to be held by the Alliance in Europe, are underway.
    We have welcomed the announced completion of the withdrawal of all ground-launched tactical nuclear weapons of the former Soviet Union into Russia for destruction. However, we also attach great importance that the parallel commitment to withdraw naval tactical nuclear weapons and to destroy a portion of them should also be fulfilled. We are encouraged by the progress that has been made by Allies in contributing to ensure the safe and secure transport, storage and destruction of nuclear weapons in the former Soviet Union and we will continue consultations in the Alliance on this most important subject.

    We welcomed the agreements reached between the United States and Russia to cut their strategic arsenals dramatically and, in particular, to eliminate land-based multiple-warhead intercontinental ballistic missiles, the most de-stabilising systems. We also welcomed the arrangements for the implementation of the START Treaty agreed in Lisbon. We look forward to the early completion of the process of ratification of the Treaty by all concerned and the subsequent removal of all strategic nuclear warheads from Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine. Recalling the accords of Alma Ata and Minsk, and the undertakings in Lisbon, we urge those three countries to take immediate steps to accede to the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) as non-nuclear weapon states.

    Proliferation of weapons of mass destruction remains a matter of great concern to all of us. It is vital that the international consensus against the proliferation of nuclear weapons is sustained and strengthened. In this context we reaffirmed our support for the NPT, the cornerstone of the nuclear non-proliferation regime, and for its indefinite extension in 1995. We welcomed the recent accession of a number of countries to the Treaty as non-nuclear weapon states and we urge all those states who are not yet parties to accede. We also welcomed the conclusion of the negotiations on the global prohibition of the development, production, stockpiling and use of chemical weapons and on their destruction.

    We urge the earliest accession to this agreement by all countries.

    The Spring 1993 NPG Ministerial meeting will be held at NATO Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 21 October 1992

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 21st October 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Yugoslavia

    Mr. Madden : To ask the Prime Minister what is the total, to date, of the financial assistance given by Her Majesty’s Government to fund the cost of maintaining refugees from the former states of Yugoslavia; what is the total, to date, of financial assistance given by Her Majesty’s Government to fund humanitarian relief in the former states of Yugoslavia; and what proposals Her Majesty’s Government have for increasing the United Kingdom contribution.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 19 October 1992] : I announced yesterday an additional bilateral British contribution of £15 million in the light of reports from the International Committee of the Red Cross and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. This brings Britain’s total commitment of humanitarian aid for victims of the conflict in former Yugoslavia to over £70 million; of this, £29.5 million is bilateral aid and £41 million our share of European Community actions.

  • Mr Major’s Comments on Coal Mine Closures – 20 October 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on coal mine closures, made in an interview on Tuesday 20th October 1992.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if he was retreating on the coal mine closures].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No, I don’t think it is the case in that way at all. What you have seen is a fundamental shift in understanding of what we intend. A very frenetic atmosphere yesterday and I think many of the implications of the moratorium simply weren’t understood but it was never out intention that during the moratorium there should be anything other than a full examination of all these matters. It is right that there should be.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked why Michael Heseltine hadn’t admitted the DTI Select Committee should examine the issue].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    That is a matter for the Select Committee, it is not a matter for the Government. The Select Committee are independent of the Government, they were set up for that reason, but it was never a practical likelihood that one wouldn’t have a change of policy to deal with the difficulties of the pits and then not have a proper examination by a Select Committee. It is right there should be. It never occurred to Michael Heseltine or indeed anybody else that this wouldn’t be a matter that the Select Committee would properly look at.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked why Michael Heseltine was saying only minor changes would be considered].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We didn’t suddenly scratch our heads and decide that this was the right policy. There are some very economic realities. Pit reductions and jobs disappearing in the mining industry isn’t a new phenomenon. During every year in the 1970s, for example, under both governments, governments of all sorts, ministers of all sorts, there were 30,000 jobs lost every single year and is because the demand for coal has been contracting over a very long period of time. That economic reality remains the same today.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if there was hope].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We are having a moratorium; the pits aren’t closed and our minds aren’t closed. What we will seek to do is to open up the possibility for people to make representations, to make their case. If the miners want to make a case with professional help and make that case to the President of the Board of Trade, they can do so.

  • PMQT – 20 October 1992

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 20th October 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Jacques Arnold : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 20 October.

    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.

    Mr. Arnold : Bearing in mind my right hon. Friend’s commitment to putting Britain first, will he confirm that the Government attach priority to getting this country out of recession and creating jobs?

    The Prime Minister : All across Europe and beyond, economic circumstances are very difficult and in recent months have worsened noticeably in a number of countries. We are seeking the right policies to bring back not just recovery to this country but recovery with low inflation. The interest rate reductions that we have been able to make and the increasing competitiveness of the exchange rate will enable us to lead this country back to recovery with the low inflation and sustained growth that we need.

    Mr. Bell : In the light of the statements made by the president of the Bundesbank and by the chairman of the Italian central bank that a general realignment was available to the British Government prior to Black Wednesday, will the Prime Minister answer the question that his Chancellor of the Exchequer failed to answer when he appeared before the Treasury and Civil Service Select Committee or at the Dispatch Box? Was there or was there not a general realignment–either formal or informal–on the table?

    The Prime Minister : I am happy to answer that categorically. No, there was not–formal or informal.

     

    Q2. Mr. Adley : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 20 October.

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

    Mr. Adley : Referring to matters that are in the minds of right hon. and hon. Members, does my right hon. Friend accept that there is some linkage between electricity privatisation and the current problems in the coal industry? This morning I heard from British Rail that if the proposed mine closures go through, British Rail will face a bill in excess of £200 million in terms of lost revenue and redundancy payments. Will my right hon. Friend please give a clear assurance that if there are to be any further privatisations, either of industry or of the nation’s transport infrastructure, a full cost-benefit analysis will be provided to the House so that it may assess the full national implications?

    The Prime Minister : Many of the problems faced by the coal industry — those that it faces at present and those that it has faced over many years–preceded privatisation. They have far more to do with the demand for coal and the changing energy market in this country. It is for that reason that there has been a severe contraction of the coal industry, not only in this country but in France, Belgium and Germany, and elsewhere.

    As for my hon. Friend’s specific question about the railways, the White Paper published in July was preceded by a great deal of thought, discussion and consultation inside government, and consultation continues on all matters.

    Mr. Ashdown : Having been found out seeking to close down the coal industry quickly by rigging the market, are not the Government now asking to be allowed to close down the coal industry slowly by rigging a review? Is that not the proposition that their Back Benchers are being asked to swallow?

    The Prime Minister : No, that is not an accurate reflection of the policy that the Government are following–as yesterday’s statement by my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade made perfectly clear. No one doubts, and no one has disputed, that over many years, under all Governments, there has been a continuing and severe contraction of the coal industry, owing to factors that were unavoidable.

    The Government now face the fact that, even at existing coal prices–which we are now aware will be noticeably lower in future–the market is contracting, and coal stocks are growing daily. The Government cannot ignore that problem. The sooner they deal with it, the sooner we shall be able comprehensively to establish assistance measures that will provide alternative employment and alternative security in areas where people know that existing jobs have at best only a limited life.

     

    Q3. Dr. Spink : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 20 October.

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

    Dr. Spink : Will the Prime Minister join me in welcoming the 1 per cent. cut in interest rates that was made on Friday, which will do so much to help all the people who have to repay mortgages and to help businesses, large and small? Does he agree that the key to resolving our unemployment difficulties and taking us out of the teeth of the world recession is low inflation, which we are achieving?

    The Prime Minister : We have now achieved low inflation in terms of both the retail prices index and the underlying inflation rate, at a level that we have not seen for many years. It is undoubtedly helpful to British industry that it has been possible to reduce interest rates to 8 per cent. I was particularly pleased by the consequential mortgage rate reductions that were announced today.

    As my hon. Friend suggested, however, we must bear it in mind that it is not simply a question of low interest rates. It is also vitally important for our future prosperity to restrain any reinflationary surge that may follow. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has made it clear that keeping inflation low–one of the essential ingredients for the sustained encouragement of jobs, prosperity and growth–remains central to the Government’s policy.

    Mr. John Smith : It is crystal clear that, whatever else he did yesterday, the President of the Board of Trade did not announce a review of the pit closure programme. Will the Prime Minister now agree to establish a genuine and independent review before any pit is closed for ever?

    The Prime Minister : So that there is no dispute or misunderstanding anywhere in the House, let me make clear the position of the 10 pits identified by my right hon. Friend, and that of the others that he mentioned in his statement. In our judgment, the 10 pits that he specifically named have no sustainable economic future, but the full statutory review procedure will take place. I have no doubt that, during the moratorium on the other pits, the Select Committee on Trade and Industry will wish to hold its own inquiry, and the Government will give that their fullest co-operation.

    During the moratorium, the President of the Board of Trade will himself take views and evidence to consider alongside the information already available to him on all matters. In due course he will publish that material, in time for consideration by the House and before any future debate in the House. His statement will be set in the context of the Government’s energy policy and will set out the consequences of that policy for British Coal, the implications for individual pits and the employment prospects for the industry. It is after that debate that future decisions will be made.

    Mr. Smith : I remind the Prime Minister of the question that I asked him, which was whether he would establish a genuine and independent review. If the Prime Minister really believes that he has a strong case, what has he to lose from an independent inquiry? What is he afraid of?

    The Prime Minister : Let me refer the right hon. and learned Gentleman to the answer that I gave. When we have completed the consultation and the examination–which, I repeat, will be made public and which, I repeat, will also be laid before this House–there will be every opportunity for every view to be taken into account before matters proceed.

    Mr. Smith : Is it not now clear that the only satisfactory alternative to constantly shifting statements from the Prime Minister and the President of the Board of Trade, and to the unseemly Dutch auction which is going on among Conservative Back Benchers, is for this House tomorrow night to vote to refer the whole matter to our own Select Committee and for that to be the responsibility of Members in all parts of the House?

    The Prime Minister : It is clear that the right hon. and learned Gentleman was not listening, for I said that it was an assumption of the Government that the Select Committee on Trade and Industry would wish to consider this matter and that we would provide whatever evidence was necessary to the Committee. Notwithstanding the tremendous emotions that have arisen about this whole affair, it is bogus of the right hon. and learned Gentleman not to recall the vast number of mines that were closed by the Labour Government, the large number of miners who were put out of work by his Government and the activities of his Government in recent years that played a significant part in reducing employment in the mining industry from 700,000 down to the present level.

    Sir Patrick McNair-Wilson : Is my right hon. Friend aware that the concern that is being expressed about the closure programme is very much bound up with the wider concern about the direction of our economy, post-ERM? Does he not agree that with a low value for sterling it really is essential that we have a policy of import substitution, of “Buy British”, and that we should not build gas-fired power stations when we have already got 50 per cent. too much gas generating capacity? If my right hon. Friend were to put those facts into the review, he would find that he had the enthusiastic support of people like myself, who are deeply concerned about what is being proposed.

    The Prime Minister : I agree entirely with my hon. Friend that the changing level of the exchange rate offers the most remarkable opportunities for British exporters and also offers a better incentive for import substitution than we have seen for many years. My hon. Friend also needs to remember that we are by instinct a trading nation and that we must bear that in mind in all the policies that we follow. As I made clear a few moments ago, what the Government are seeking to do and will continue to do in the period up to and including the public expenditure round is to look at the difficulties that this economy faces and at the right possibilities and the right policies, in order to build on present economic circumstances a proper level of growth for the British economy and for British industry.

     

    Q4. Mr. Andrew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 20 October.

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

    Mr. Smith : Can the Prime Minister understand that it is my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Monklands, East (Mr. Smith) who has spoken for Britain? Can the Prime Minister name one independent expert who is prepared to say that gas will produce cheaper electricity than coal? The President of the Board of Trade could not name one yesterday. Can the Prime Minister name one this afternoon–yes or no?

    The Prime Minister : If that were not the case, perhaps the hon. Gentleman could explain to the House why the demand for gas among consumers across the country is rising dramatically and shows signs of rising even further.

    Mr. Rathbone : Despite all the difficulties being faced at this moment by this country and by other countries, will the Prime Minister give the House and the nation reassurance that we shall continue our efforts to aid countries in the developing world which suffer even greater difficulties than we do?

    The Prime Minister : We have a very proud record indeed in that respect, in terms of the quantum of aid that we provide, in terms of the quality of aid that we provide, and in terms of keeping open markets in this country for the exports of those countries which, in many ways, is the greatest assistance that we can provide to the developing world. In my statement in a few moments on the European Council, I shall also set out some extra help to other countries which face particular needs at present.

  • Mr Major’s Commons Statement on the Birmingham European Council – 20 October 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s statement in the House of Commons on the Birmingham European Council, made on 20th October 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major) : With permission, Madam Speaker, I shall make a statement about the European Council in Birmingham on Friday last. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and I represented the United Kingdom.

    I should like to thank the city of Birmingham, its leaders and its people– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. I know that hon. Members who are leaving the Chamber have business elsewhere in the House. Will they leave quietly so that we can hear what the Prime Minister has to say?

    The Prime Minister : I should like to thank the city of Birmingham, its leaders and its people for the effectiveness and speed of their organisation of the European summit.

    Following the events in the financial markets a month ago, a number of EC member states asked for this meeting to help to restore confidence throughout the Community and to address the issues raised by the market turbulence. Amongst those concerns, clearly evident in the referendums in Denmark and France, was the unease that too many decisions were being taken centrally in Brussels. The summit conclusions on these and other issues are in the Library of the House.

    Let me deal first with economic and monetary co-operation. At Friday’s meeting we reaffirmed our commitment to pursue open market policies, to control budget deficits, and to reduce inflation. It was unanimously agreed that these are the basis for recovery and for the creation of new and lasting jobs here and in the Community as a whole.

    The European Council also reaffirmed the necessity of the work set in hand by Finance Ministers after the recent turmoil in the currency markets. It was agreed that the work will involve Finance Ministers, the Monetary Committee, Central Bank governors and the Commission. It will cover recent economic and financial developments in Europe and the implications of changes in the economic environment in recent years. In particular, it will look at the impact of the increasing size and sophistication of financial markets and greater capital liberalisation.

    One critical discussion concerned the negotiations for a general agreement on tariffs and trade Uruguay round settlement. Over the past two weeks, significant progress had been made between the Commission and the United States in all sectors of the negotiation. I asked Commissioner Andriessen to report to the European Council. At the end of our discussion, the Commission was given the authority to continue to negotiate with the intention of reaching a satisfactory conclusion within the next 10 weeks. Subsequently, further useful progress was made in talks in Canada over the weekend. A GATT settlement would make a vital contribution to recovery and would be very much in Britain’s interest. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, it would lead to an extra $200 billion in annual world output.

    In the Birmingham declaration we also took significant steps towards bringing the Community closer to ordinary people. The declaration agreed at Birmingham has a number of distinct elements. It recognises the importance of national identity. It acknowledges that the Community can act only where member states have given it the power to do so in the treaties. It lays down that action at the Community level should happen only when necessary. It calls for new guidelines, so that when Community action is taken it takes the lightest possible form. It introduces better consultation by the Commission before proposals are brought forward. It calls for a greater role for national Parliaments in the work of the Community.

    The declaration provides, for the first time, a proper framework for the practical definition and implementation of subsidiarity. We agreed that, at the Edinburgh European Council in two months’ time, we must make a reality of that principle. All members of the European Council agreed to take decisions at Edinburgh to make subsidiarity an integral part of future EC decision making. That change of attitude by the Council and the Commission is as important as the procedures and criteria to be introduced.

    Prime Minister Schluter of Denmark reported to the European Council on the present state of discussion on the Maastricht treaty within Denmark. The Danish Government have published a White Paper and will produce specific ideas shortly. It remains their aim to ratify the treaty, and we plan to set in place at Edinburgh the framework that will allow them to do so.

    The Birmingham Council also gave us an opportunity to review our action to relieve suffering in Somalia and Yugoslavia. The Community has given a lead in both countries. In Somalia we called for an immediate ceasefire to allow for the rapid deployment of United Nations troops and for the distribution of aid and agreed to try to expedite these deployments.

    In Yugoslavia, at British initiative, a Community humanitarian force will be established. It will support the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in delivering humanitarian aid. The Community will speed up aid already pledged, which includes 120,000 tonnes of food. We have invited the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to hold a meeting of experts as soon as possible to make sure that that aid gets through without delay. There will be a follow-up meeting in a few weeks’ time to ensure that effective action is being taken. Member states also pledged further staff and resources to strengthen the UNHCR effort. I can today announce a further £15 million of bilateral aid to provide 22 more trucks, 10 Land Rovers, shelter, medical supplies and personnel. Deliveries will start very shortly.

    A confident and successful Community is a vital interest of this country. Sixty per cent. of our visible trade is with the Community. Much of our external investment comes from the Community. Eight of our top 10 trading partners are in the Community. With less than three months to go to the completion of the single market, which could raise Community output by more than 4 per cent., it was vital to re-establish confidence in the interests of stability, recovery, growth and jobs in all our countries. The Birmingham European Council did precisely that.