The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Category: Prime Minister (1990-1997)

  • PMQT Written Answers – 1 May 1991

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 1st May 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    VAT

    Mr. O’Brien : To ask the Prime Minister if he will put in hand an assessment of the comparative loss of revenue in the sale of home safety equipment free of value added tax and the costs of the treatment of victims of accidents in the home; and if he will make a statement.
    The Prime Minister : An official estimate of the value added tax accruing on the sale of home safety equipment is not available. The costs of treatment for all accidents in the home are about £300 million per year. The United Kingdom is not permitted under the EC sixth VAT directive to introduce any new zero rates.

    Olympic Games

    Mr. Alfred Morris : To ask the Prime Minister what specific steps he and the Government will be taking in support of the Manchester Olympic Committee’s bid to stage the Olympic Games; and if he will make a statement.
    The Prime Minister : The Government wish Manchester every success in its attempt to bring the 2000 Olympics to Britain. My hon. Friend the Minister for Sport is ready to discuss with those concerned how best the Government can help to promote the bid.

  • Mr Major’s Speech at the Opening of Smith New Court – 1 May 1991

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech made at the opening of Smith New Court in London on Wednesday 1st May 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The last time I came to the City was in fact the day I became Prime Minister. I am not entirely sure how you are going to beat that and I hope on this occasion at least you won’t try. I am very grateful to you Sir Michael for the invitation to join you today. It is always a splendid thing to be able to declare open magnificent new offices like these. And also to congratulate a successful British enterprise. Because of its importance both domestically and internationally it is especially welcome to be able to do so in the City.

    I am particularly pleased to be opening these new offices for a special reason. I believe they do symbolise the continuing growth and global interests of the City of London. In the last twelve years or so, in my judgement, no one can deny that the City has thrived. It has been a success story. It has secured London its prime international position. That is the position that everyone in this room and beyond it in the City must keep.

    The achievements of London and the City are formidable and some-times I think we overlook them and push them to one side. They deserve a far greater importance than many people will sometimes give them.

    – London has built up the largest foreign exchange market in the world.

    – It is second only to Tokyo as an international banking centre.

    – It was the birthplace of the Eurodollar. The Eurobond market could have settled anywhere, but although the world’s bankers and brokers looked everywhere around the world, in the end they chose London. London is now the base also for three quarters of the trading in Eurodollar bonds.

    – London has long been a world centre for insurance and for fund management, a role it is of course happy to share with the Scottish financial centres. It remains, well perhaps not quite happy, but it will jolly well have to be happy because the Scottish financial centres are extremely good too!

    – It remains by far the largest centre in the world for international equity trading.

    – More foreign companies choose to be listed in London than anywhere else in the world.

    – In 1990 the turnover on the London Stock Exchange was the third highest in the world behind only Tokyo and New York. Of that turnover almost half was in overseas stocks. A far higher share than any other mainstream stock exchange.

    That is a very remarkable record and one that London can be proud of. London’s markets are growing day by day, all the time. In only a few years we have become a leading centre for futures and options and that will be reinforced When LIFFE merges with the London Traded Options Market.

    I think we may occasionally ask ourselves why is it? Why is it that London has been so successful? I believe that answer is clear cut and simple. It is the skill and innovation available in the City that has made London so pre-eminent. I think there is a second reason too, that I hope you will forgive me if I mention.

    That is that Government policy on many occasions has been vital to that progress. From the abolition of exchange controls in 1979 right the way through to the other changes in the 1980’s and the corporation tax reductions in the latest budget, Government policies have clearly contributed to the success that we have seen in the City. By de-regulating and by privatising and by reducing the burden of taxation, Government has created the freedom which has allowed the financial sector to flourish. At the end of the day it is the enterprise of the City, your enterprise, that has actually grasped that freedom and turned it into the success that London has been over the last decade.

    There are I believe two recent developments which will have a particularly vital role in strengthening London’s position and long term prospects.

    Firstly, our decision to join the Exchange Rate Mechanism last November was in my judgement a matter of enormous importance to our future prosperity and our efforts to stay competitive in Europe and beyond Europe. Second, and in consequence of that, we are achieving real success in the battle against inflation. Already the headline retail price index figure is down by nearly 3 per cent since last October. The April figure to be released later this month will show a further dramatic fall from the present level and inflation will then go on falling throughout this year and into next year.

    There is an important message there for the future. The initial impact of a financial deregulation, which caused the surge in lending and distorted the statistics we need for economic management, has now worked its way through. We have put in place measures to improve those statistics. But most important of all we are now members of the Exchange Rate Mechanism with all the anti-inflationary discipline that that entails. With those barriers against inflation, we are now better equipped than ever before to prevent a recurrence of inflationary trends and I regard that as being of immense importance.

    Looking to the future, London is well placed to benefit from new challenges. Not least the challenge immediately in front of us, indeed in many ways here and now, of the European single market. There is no way whatsoever that we can rest on past achievements, unless of course we wish to stagnate. In a world of highly competitive, highly mobile markets, even the achievements that outlined a moment or so ago in no way guarantee our future. Competition has become more intense in the last few years and yet despite this I am confident London will be able to compete, to build on its role as Europe’s financial centre of the future.

    We are looking forward in Europe both to the single market in finance and to the global market that is developing around us so very rapidly.

    – We already have in SEAQ the cornerstone of a pan-European market in shares. It is a market created not by and for Government but by and for the users and suppliers of capital.

    – London’s stock market has created European share indices. London will soon be trading futures on those indices, opening up a pan-European market in derivatives. All remarkable moves forward in London.

    – London too is already the centre of the cross border market in bonds. We were, after all, trading Eurobonds decades before the 1992 programme was ever thought of. We will be able to dedicate this expertise to the increasing integration of domestic bond markets.

    – We can look forward to growing business links with Eastern Europe as those countries join the commonwealth of market economies. The opportunities that exist at present and will be there throughout the 90’s and beyond are very substantial indeed.

    London in my view is more than just a financial centre for the European community. The Eurobond market should remind us that financial services are now truly international. The Eurobond market is a global capital market. Banking and insurance of course have long been global. Securities and other sectors are now clearly going in the same way. We cannot, and we should not, try to draw arbitrary lines around one country or even a group of countries, even those as important and influential as the European Community.

    There are now well over 500 foreign banks in and around the Square Mile. They are most welcome. Of course I am gratified to read of the success of British companies, but it is the cosmopolitan nature of the city that I believe is its true glory. The City and Government collectively issue an invitation to the world: come to London and compete here in London against the best there is in the world. Many have accepted our invitation. The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, a very welcome addition which arrived only last month, is the latest to do so. I hope that many more will follow.

    The Government has been working hard to develop links with New York, Chicago, Tokyo, links to change regulatory systems and facilitate cross border business. Now Michael, I of course am only too well aware that there is still too little understanding of what the financial services sector really does. The enormous contribution that the City makes to the economy. That contribution is, and I use this term literally, immense.

    It is easy enough to quote the bald figures showing the net contribution of financial and other services to the balance of payments – between £6 billion and £9 billion in recent years. All the main sectors make a positive contribution.

    One perhaps in another way could quote the contribution of the financial sector to our national income: together with other related services it provides one job in every eight and an even larger share of GDP. Beyond that there is a deeper sense in which the role of financial services needs to be understood: as a support system to the rest of the economy. To manufacturers, retailers and to ordinary people in their daily lives.

    Imagine for a moment and I invite you to stretch your imagination. Imagine for a moment a world without banks. I saw in some sectors a shudder of apprehension at the thought. But imagine a world without banks. All your money stuffed in a mattress. A world without fund management or pensions. It would have to be, you can see, a very large mattress indeed. A world without insurance as well. So it had better be a very well guarded mattress indeed.

    Imagine then a world without securities. No one would be able to raise funds for investment, except by traipsing round the world begging from each and every wealth-owner. Without commodity markets we would still be at the mercy of the harvest and acts of God. Without shipbroking we would never know whether our goods would ever reach us. A modern economy needs a healthy financial services sector. Of course the City and industry don’t always see eye to eye. It would be odd if they did. But neither side should ever question their inter-dependence.

    There are perhaps as many reasons for London’s success as there are firms that have settled here. There are London’s long standing virtues: an enterprising tradition, an international outlook, a concentration of expertise in all the main areas of financial activity. There is a willingness to innovate and take up new challenges. In addition to that there is the very tangible gains of having the international language of business, English, and a tradition of probity based essentially on English Law.

    All those are important. The City offers a host of contemporary advantages as well. Freedom from exchange and capital controls. Sympathetic tax treatment of new financial products. A firm but flexible system of supervision. And a Government committed to de-regulation and liberalisation. As an example of this perhaps I may mention Britain’s lead in developing an advanced telecommunications system on which so much of modern business depends. Now I could continue upon that theme, though you will be familiar with many of the matters I would raise.

    London can boast the world’s largest urban regeneration project. Four new international air terminals in the last four years. New railway connections to the heart of the City are now being planned. All of those collectively, and indeed individually, help to give London the edge over other financial centres. The City combines a tradition of service and enterprise with the very best of modern technology and professionalism. These impressive new offices, formally being opened today, demonstrate Smith New Court’s determination to equip itself with nothing but the best.

    In recent years the City has undergone a revolution. A time of change in which talented people have seized opportunities, worked to compete and taken the lead in financial innovation. In financial services Britain continues to lead the world. Not through the imposition of Government plans, nor by sheltering behind protective national barriers or clinging to outdated practices; but by tapping our own enterprise in the City and by challenging the rest of the world to meet it.

    That is a very remarkable achievement. Those people who think the glories of the City lie in the past should look at what has actually been achieved in the period of even just the last decade to see how inaccurate that would be. This pattern of innovation, of change and raising and changing one’s mind to move ever ahead with the new technologies and new ideas that come before one: that must be the way ahead in the 1990’s. It was, it is and will be in my judgement the only way ahead for us in the 1990’s.

    That is the spirit of the Britain that we need to create if we are to compete successfully in an ever more competitive world. Michael I am delighted to have had your invitation to join you here today. For this simple reason. This building symbolises that attitude. I am delighted to be here today, to be part of this occasion and to formally declare it open.

    MICHAEL HARKS – CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF SMITH NEW COURT

    Smith New Court is part of what has become to be called The Securities Industry. It is an important industry for Britain and one of the few industries where we have a legitimate claim to be a world leader. This, I suggest Prime Minister, is acknowledged by your presence and your speech here today. On behalf of us all, thank you.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 30 April 1991

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 30th April 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Prisoners (Visits)

    Mr. Alton : To ask the Prime Minister if he will co-ordinate policy on the allocation of prisoners so that persons convicted in either England and Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland may serve their sentences at a convenient establishment for regular visits from their families.
    The Prime Minister : The allocation of prisoners in England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland is a matter for the respective prison authorities. Nearness to home is one of the factors which is taken into account, along with other matters, in deciding a prisoner’s allocation. There is provision in the Criminal Justice Act 1961 for the transfer of prisoners between United Kingdom jurisdictions.

    Engagements

    Mr. Soames : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for 30 April.
    The Prime Minister : This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall be having further meetings later today.

    Advertising

    Mr. Dobson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will give separate figures for the spending by the Prime Minister’s office on (a) television advertising, (b) radio advertising, (c) newspaper advertising and (d) other promotional material in 1979-80 and in each following year; and what are his latest estimates for 1990-91 and budgets for 1991-92.
    The Prime Minister : My office has incurred no expenditure on advertising or promotional material, and there are no plans for any such expenditure in 1991-92.
    Mr. Dobson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will give separate figures for the spending by the Cabinet Office on (a) television advertising, (b) radio advertising, (c) newspaper advertising and (d) other promotional material in 1979-80 and in each following year; and what are his latest estimates for 1990-91 and budgets for 1991-92.
    The Prime Minister : The Cabinet Office has not incurred and does not expect to incur any expenditure on promotional advertising on television, radio or in newspapers in the years 1979-92.

    Information on other promotional material is not available for the years 1979 to 1987. Expenditure on such material from 1987-88 was :

    |£
    ———————-
    1987-88 |19,306
    1988-89 |9,500
    1989-90 |14,833
    The estimate for
    1990-91 is £1,000.

    The Cabinet Office does not expect to incur any expenditure on other promotional material in 1991-92.

    Matrix Churchill

    Mr. Terry Davis : To ask the Prime Minister if he will name the Government Department to which a Crown servant calling himself Balson and visiting the offices of Matrix Churchill in Coventry at 11.15 am on 24 April 1989, 3.51 pm on 11 September 1989, 3.10 pm on 27 October 1989, 9.35 am on 1 December 1989, 9.35 am on 26 March 1990, 9.35 am on 20 April 1990 and 1.17 pm on 26 April 1990 was attached between 1 April 1989 and 30 April 1990; what was his grade; and what were his official responsibilities.
    The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Member to the reply given to him today by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and industry.

    Arms Trade

    Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister which proposals he has to allow international advance warning of arms’ build-up by a particular country.
    The Prime Minister [holding reply 29 April 1991] : On 8 April I proposed the establishment of a United Nations register of arms sales to enable the international community to monitor and control any excessive build-up of arms by a particular country. The proposal was endorsed by our European partners. We are now pursuing it in discussions with the other permanent members of the Security Council and the United Nations secretariat.

  • PMQT – 30 April 1991

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 30th April 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Kirkwood : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 30 April.

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

    Mr. Kirkwood : Does the Prime Minister recall that when he was a parliamentary candidate in 1983 he gave a commitment, on the questionnaire he returned to the World Development Movement, that he would want to see British aid increased, over a period of five years, to the official United Nations target of 0.7 per cent. of the country’s national wealth? Will he confirm that the level of official aid is now running at well under half that target figure, at a time when 27 million people on the continent of Africa face the prospect of imminent starvation? Does not the right hon. Gentleman recognise that his credibility as Prime Minister is at stake? If he does not find the money to meet the commitment that he made in 1983, his credibility will be severely dented.

    The Prime Minister : The important point is that our aid programme is both effective and growing. Where necessary, as the hon. Gentleman will have seen in the case of the Kurds, we provide extra and well-targeted aid. For example, we have now provided more than £60 million to aid the Kurds, and the amount is rising each week. We still accept the principle of the 0.7 per cent. aid target, and like other donors, we shall move to it as and when economic circumstances permit.

    Mr. Dunn : Can the Prime Minister give a guarantee that the advanced level examination will be maintained, and not diluted or weakened in any way whatsoever?

    The Prime Minister : I can certainly say that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science will shortly announce comprehensive proposals for 16 to 19-year-olds. I agree with the point that my hon. Friend has made so clearly–that the Opposition’s proposals for slimmed-down A-levels are likely to mean more certificates, but certificates of less value.

    Mr. Kinnock : Will the Prime Minister take this opportunity to reject the view of his Secretary of State for Health, who says that cuts in the numbers of doctors and nurses and cuts in patient care in opted-out hospitals are nothing to do with him?

    The Prime Minister : There are two things that I hope that the right hon. Gentleman knows about the health service–first, the vast increases that there have been in the numbers of doctors, nurses and other people in the service and, secondly, that the purpose of the reforms is to make sure that the management of the service becomes as efficient as its medical delivery.

    Mr. Kinnock : Will the Prime Minister tell us where he thinks responsibility lies? The managers of the the Guy’s and Lewisham opted-out hospitals have said that there will be

    “substantial and inevitable reductions in direct patient care.” How can the Prime Minister justify turning his back on the consequences of his own policies? Does not he think that he has a moral obligation to ensure that the loss of vital patient care services at Guy’s and Lewisham is not repeated anywhere else? Will he ensure that opting out is stopped right away?

    The Prime Minister : If the right hon. Gentleman were really concerned about matters like hospital doctors, he might perhaps have looked at their pay record and have seen a real terms increase of 37 per cent. under this Government and nothing remotely like that increase under the Labour Government, for doctors’ pay fell under the Labour Government.

    Mr. Kinnock : Is not it clear from the Prime Minister’s answers that when it comes to the national health service and patient care, he, like his predecessor, could not care less?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman should know that I am personally committed to the national health service, and that I want the management of the service to be as efficient as the medical care in the service. Unless and until it is, we shall not deliver the level or amount of patient care that we need.

    Sir Nicholas Fairbairn : If my right hon. Friend has read the latest Labour party document–

    Mr. Speaker : Order. Even if he has, would the hon. and learned Gentleman please ask a question relating to the Prime Minister’s responsibility?

    Sir Nicholas Fairbairn : To the extent that it is readable, will my hon. Friend endorse the fact that the poorest in the country will be poorer and the part of–

    Mr. Speaker : Order. Will the hon. and learned Gentleman please ask a question relating to the Prime Minister’s responsibility? He may not ask the Prime Minister directly about the Opposition’s policy.

    Sir Nicholas Fairbairn : Will my right hon. Friend, as a matter of his responsibility, having read that document, ensure that a Labour Government never return, so that the poor do not get poorer? The part of the country that would get poorest would be Scotland.

    The Prime Minister : In answer to my hon. and learned Friend’s direct question ; willingly I will make sure that a Labour Government are never returned to power. I think that Labour’s policies will be of some assistance in that, for the electorate know that it has no fresh policies and no fresh ideas and that many of its policies, like renationalisation of British Telecom, it fails to put in its policy documents.

     

    Q2. Mr. Archer : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 30 April.

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

    Mr. Archer : Will the right hon. Gentleman find time to recognise in some way that today is the anniversary of the completion in 1821 of the first iron steamship, all the components of which were completed in one factory in the industrial black country, launching an industry which over the years offered employment to millions? Since over the past 12 months the numbers employed in manufacturing industry have fallen by 178,000, does the Prime Minister wish to remember our industrial history, or does he agree with his Secretary of State for Education and Science that history is unnecessary and perhaps better forgotten– [Interruption.]

    Mr. Speaker : Order. We are taking a long time over this history lesson.

    Mr. Archer : –or does he find it hard to make up his mind?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. and learned Gentleman, apart from misquoting my right hon. and learned Friend, has picked an odd day to raise that point because, as the Confederation of British Industry business agenda brochure shows, manufacturing output has just risen to new record heights, and in the last quarter of 1990 it stood 50 per cent. higher than in the first quarter of 1981.

     

    Q3. Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 30 April.

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

    Mr. Greenway : Is my right hon. Friend aware of the widespread support for his personal vision of a first-class education for everyone? To that end, will not the promised pay review body for teachers bring better professional status for them without the strikes that have so damaged education? Does not that mean a better deal for teachers all round, for children and in the end for the prosperity of the country?

    The Prime Minister : I believe that it does. I believe that the introduction of a pay review body for teachers will be warmly welcomed. The House will have noticed that at the end of a six-hour debate yesterday, no one was clear whether the Opposition were for or against the pay review body, because the National Union of Teachers had not yet told them.

     

    Q4. Mr. Ernie Ross : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 30 April.

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

    Mr. Ross : Can the Prime Minister confirm that when Peter Griffiths was given the job of running the opted-out Guy’s Hospital, the salary for that post was doubled to £90,000 a year, and both he and his wife were given cars? What possible justification for this scandalous misuse of public money can there be when much-needed doctors and nurses at the same hospital are facing the sack?

    The Prime Minister : Peter Griffiths has the job of ensuring the adequate and proper delivery of services and he is committed to achieving that. What has so frequently damaged services in the national health service is that whenever there has been a move towards natural and necessary rationalisation, the Opposition have turned it into a political football.

     

    Q5. Mr. Colvin : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 30 April.

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

    Mr. Colvin : If one man’s pay rise is another man’s job loss, how many jobs does my right hon. Friend think are being lost in Britain this year as a result of the astronomic pay rises which Britain’s top business men awarded themselves last year? Is it not the duty of leaders to give a lead on pay restraint?

    The Prime Minister : Pay must always reflect both performance and responsibility. In many countries, pay already includes a large performance element and I thoroughly welcome that. In the difficult months that we have recently seen many top managers have held or cut their pay, and that is an excellent example.

    Mr. Ashdown : Does the Prime Minister realise that many in our country will feel pride at the role that he and Britain have played in relieving the suffering of the Kurds? However, many will have felt dismay at the complacent answer which he has just given on the African famine. Does he not realise the scale of that disaster, in which not 1 million but more than 20 million lives are now at risk? Will he assure the House and the nation that he will apply the same determination to making sure that we play our part in relieving that towering tragedy that he applied to assisting the Kurds?

    The Prime Minister : I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his first remark. As to his latter remarks, I would remind him that this country has committed something over £4 billion to Africa in the past decade and that we invariably play a significant part in dealing with the tragedies that occasionally occur, not only in Africa but elsewhere. Even as the right hon. Gentleman asks his question, we are examining what assistance might be given to Bangladesh in the aftermath of the cyclone.

     

    Q6. Mr. Viggers : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 30 April.

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

    Mr. Viggers : In the difficult international climate for business expansion and employment, is it not clear that the countries that will benefit first from a renewal of confidence will be those with flexible work practices? Does my right hon. Friend agree that the worst that could happen would be for us to adopt the statutory pay and training schemes advocated by the Labour party?

    The Prime Minister : I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. The greatest danger, of course, would be to adopt the Labour party’s minimum wage plans which, were the right hon. Gentleman to implement them, would inflict not the 750,000 to 1 million job losses that we thought they would but between 1 million and 2 million job losses.

     

    Q7. Mr. John Evans : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 30 April.

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

    Mr. Evans : Has the Prime Minister had the opportunity to read early -day motion 747, which has been signed by 148 Members who are worried about the proposed takeover of the Tootal Group plc by Coats Viyella plc and the impact on jobs in the textile industry? Is he aware that 540 workers at the Tootal Slimma works in St. Helens fear that they will face the sack if that unnecessary bid succeeds? Will the right hon. Gentleman instruct the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry to change his mind and refer this unnecessary bid to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission?

    The Prime Minister : That is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to consider. The hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends are in no position to talk about unemployment while they hold to their minimum wage proposals.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 29 April 1991

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 29th April 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    St. John Ambulance Brigade

    Mr. Redmond : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make facilities available to staff in his office to contribute to the appeal that has been launched for people with the name of John to help raise £5 million for the St. John Ambulance Brigade.

    The Prime Minister : Arrangements exist for officials to contribute by deduction from pay to charities of their choice. The decision by members of my office about which charitable appeals to support must be a matter for them.

     

    Drink Driving

    Mr. Peter Bottomley : To ask the Prime Minister if he, with his colleagues responsible for transport in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, will consider consultations on ways to let the public know whether a driver killed in a road crash had consumed alcohol.

    The Prime Minister : I refer my hon. Friend to the reply he received from my hon. Friend the Member for Fareham (Mr. Lloyd) on 22 April 1991 at columns 350-51.

     

    Management Consultants

    Mr. Dobson : To ask the Prime Minister what was the total sum paid out in fees by the Prime Minister’s office to management consultants in 1979-80 and in each following year; and what is his estimate for 1990-91 and budget for 1991-92.

    The Prime Minister : There has been no expenditure by my office on fees to management consultants since 1979-80, and none is planned for 1991-92.

    Mr. Dobson : To ask the Prime Minister what was the total sum paid out in fees by the Cabinet Office to management consultants in 1979-80 and in each following year; and what is his estimate for 1990-91 and budget for 1991-92.

    The Prime Minister : The expenditure by the Cabinet Office, including from its creation on 1 October 1987, the Office of the Minister of the Civil Service, on management and computer consultancies, including certain consultancies relating to the civil service as a whole, in the financial years from 1983-84 is as follows :

    Year |£

    ————————

    1983-84 |152,000

    1984-85 |423,818

    1985-86 |329,334

    1986-87 |505,092

    1987-88 |417,778

    The figures for each year since then, which exclude the cost of computer consultants, are as follows :

    Year |£

    ———————————

    1988-89 |70,608

    1989-90 |51,500

    1990-91 |<1>182,000

    1991-92 |<2>242,735

    <1>Estimate.

    <2>Budget.

    Note:

    The figures for 1990-91 and 1991-92 reflect increases in management consultancies undertaken by the Cabinet Office for the civil service generally.

     

    Press and Public Relations

    Mr. Dobson : To ask the Prime Minister what was the total expenditure by the Cabinet Office on press and public relations in 1979-80 and in each following year; and what is his estimate for 1990-91 and budget for 1991-92.

    The Prime Minister : Expenditure on press and public relations by the Cabinet Office was :

    |£

    ————————

    1984-85 |247,495

    1985-86 |232,980

    1986-87 |224,813

    1987-88 |215,925

    1988-89 |201,837

    1989-90 |205,650

    The latest estimate for 1990-91 is £165,088 and the budget for 1991-92 is £213,323.

    Similar information is not available for the years prior to 1984-85.

    Mr. Dobson : To ask the Prime Minister what was the total expenditure by the Prime Minister’s office on press and public relations in 1979-80 and in each following year; and what is his estimate for 1990-91 and budget for 1991-92.

    The Prime Minister : Expenditure by my office on press and public relations was not recorded separately before 1987-88. The total expenditure for each year since then and the budget for 1991-92 are as follows :

    |£

    ———————————

    1987-88 |377,987

    1988-89 |419,326

    1989-90 |427,802

    1990-91 |<1>553,010

    1991-92 |<2>554,748

    <1> Estimate.

    <2> Budget.

    Note: The figures for 1990-91 and 1991-92 include notional superannuation costs which are excluded from the figures for earlier years.

     

    Departmental Staff

    Mr. Dobson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will give for each year from 1979-80, including 1991-92, the number of staff actually employed on 1 April and the full complement of staff, including vacant posts, by grade, in the statistical divisions in the Cabinet Office; and if he will differentiate between staff in statistical posts and staff in administrative posts.

    The Prime Minister : The number of staff, by grade, employed on 1 April in each of the years from 1982 in the statistical divisions of the Cabinet Office, differentiated between staff in statistical posts and staff in administrative posts, were :

    Staff in post, with in brackets,

    where different, total complement

    Grade |Members of |Members of |Total

    |Statistician |Administration

    |Group |and other

    ———————————————————————————————-

    1982 |51.0 |153.0 |204.0 |(209.0)

    1983 |50.0 |159.5 |209.5 |(208.5)

    1984 |47.0 |146.0 |193.0 |(193.0)

    1985 |50.5 |136.5 |187.0 |(186.0)

    1986 |52.0 |148.5 |200.5 |(198.5)

    1987

    1a |1 |- |1

    3 |3 |- |3

    5 |9 |1 |10 |(9)

    7 |24 |6 |30 |(31)

    Senior Executive Officer |- |8 |8 |(7)

    Higher Executive Officer |- |23 |23 |(22.5)

    Executive Officer |- |34 |34 |(35.5)

    Administrative Officer |- |24 |24

    Personal Secretary |- |13 |13 |(12.5)

    Senior Assistant and Assistant

    Statistician |9 |- |9 |(11)

    Cadet Statistician |7 |- |7

    Chief Draughtsman |- |1 |1

    Senior Draughtsman |- |1 |1

    Higher Draughtsman |- |2 |2

    Draughtsman |- |6 |6 |(7)

    Information Officer |- |1 |1

    |——- |——- |——- |——-

    |53 |120 |173 |(175.5)

    1988

    1A |1 |- |1

    3 |3 |- |3

    5 |9 |1 |10 |(9)

    7 |25 |4 |29 |(31)

    Senior Executive Officer |- |8 |8

    Higher Executive Officer |- |20 |20 |(21)

    Executive Officer |- |31 |31 |(37)

    Administrative Officer |- |21 |21 |(24)

    Senior Personal Secretary |- |1 |1

    Personal Secretary |- |11 |11 |(11.5)

    Senior Assistant and Assistant Statistician |9 |- |9 |(10)

    Cadet Statistician |6 |- |6 |(7)

    Chief Draughtsman |- |1 |1

    Senior Draughtsman |- |1 |1

    Higher Draughtsman |- |2 |2

    Draughtsman |- |5 |5 |(7)

    Information Officer |- |1 |1

    |——– |——- |——- |——-

    |53 |107 |160 |(175.5)

    1989

    1A |1 |- |1

    3 |3 |- |3

    5 |9 |1 |10 |(9)

    7 |25 |4 |29 |(31.5)

    Senior Executive Officer |- |7 |7 |(5.5)

    Higher Executive Officer |- |18 |18 |(21)

    Executive Officer |- |35 |35 |(36)

    Administrative Officer |- |25 |25 |(24.5)

    Senior Personal Secretary |- |2 |2

    Personal Secretary |- |11 |11 |(10.5)

    Senior Assistant and Assistant Statistician |8 |- |8 |(11)

    Cadet Statistician |3 |- |3 |(1.5)

    Chief Draughtsman |- |1 |1

    Senior Draughtsman |- |1 |1

    Higher Draughtsman |- |2 |2 |(1)

    Draughtsman |- |4 |4 |(7)

    Information Officer |- |1 |1

    |——- |——- |——- |——-

    |49 |112 |161 |(167.5)

    <1>Includes all other non statistician group staff.

    Figures for the years prior to 1982 are no longer available, and information on the numbers of staff by grade is not readily available for the years 1982 to 1986 and cannot be obtained except at disproportionate cost.

    Since July 1989, when the Central Statistical Office became a separate department, the Cabinet Office has had no statistical divisions.

    Mr. Dobson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will give for each year from 1979-80, including 1991-92, the number of staff actually employed on 1 April and the full complement of staff, including vacant posts, by grade, in the statistical divisions in the Prime Minister’s office; and if he will differentiate between staff in statistical posts and staff in administrative posts.

    The Prime Minister : During the period in question, there has been no statistical division within my office. There are no statisticians in post or on the staff complement, and there are no plans to create any such posts.

     

    Iraqi Refugees

    Mrs. Clwyd : To ask the Prime Minister whether he has any plans to increase the financial year 1991-92 budget of the Overseas Development Administration to cover the costs of emergency relief for Iraqi refugees.

    The Prime Minister : Additions to the overseas aid programme totalling up to £30 million have been agreed to fund the Government’s further efforts to relieve the suffering of Iraqi refugees. Within this total, up to £20 million will be provided to continue the airbridge operation, to provide urgently needed supplies, and to finance the immediately foreseeable costs falling to the aid budget of the United Kingdom’s participation in Operation Haven inside Iraq. The balance of £10 million represents the Government’s contribution to the Kurdish refugee appeal announced on Thursday 25 April. These additions will enable the ODA to maintain its planned development activities, and to continue to provide substantial humanitarian assistance to help relieve famine in Africa.

     

    North Sea

    Mr. David Porter : To ask the Prime Minister if he will set up a high-level task force combining all the Departments of state concerned, all industries involved and all interested parties to bring forward proposals to secure continued viability of all uses and the well-being of the North sea, once gas and oil structures are decommissioned; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : Departments maintain regular contact with a wide range of organisations with an interest in many aspects of the North sea. I see no advantage in establishing an additional forum. Consideration of an abandonment programme by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy under the provisions of the Petroleum Act 1987 will take account of consultations with organisations concerned with other uses of the sea including fishing, and with environmental interests. The abandonment of offshore installations will be performed in such a way as to cause no significant adverse effects upon navigation or the marine environment, in accordance with our international obligations.

     

    Opposition Parties (Access to Civil Service)

    Mr. Kirkwood : To ask the Prime Minister whether he will consider allowing opposition parties equal access to civil servants and publicity budgets to enable them to prepare and publicise their own policies.

    The Prime Minister : No. By long-standing convention, civil service time and Government publicity budgets are not used for party political purposes.

    Mr. Kirkwood : To ask the Prime Minister what discussions he has had with the civil service trade unions regarding the effectiveness of the rules set out in the Armstrong memorandum of December 1987 on the propriety of publishing party political material using civil servants’ time.

    The Prime Minister : None.

     

    Arms Trade

    Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister what proposals he has for an international register of arms sales.

    The Prime Minister : At the special European Council in Luxembourg on 8 April, I proposed a register of arms sales at the United Nations to monitor the scale of arms build-up in any one country. We are taking every opportunity to urge others to support the idea of such a register. Our ambassador at the United Nations is also taking this forward in New York.

     

    First Division Association

    Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister how many of the demands of the First Division Association code of civil service ethics have been incorporated into official regulations.

    The Prime Minister : The Government’s position is set out in the note by the former head of the home civil service on the duties and responsibilities of civil servants in relation to Ministers, issued in December 1987, subject to the further points contained in the Government’s responses to the fifth report of the Treasury and Civil Service Select Committee for the 1989-90 Session.

     

    Iraqi Arms Disposal

    Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister what proposals he has put to the United Nations for a commission to monitor Iraqi arms disposal.

    The Prime Minister : United Nations Security Council resolution 687 requires the Secretary-General to establish a special commission to oversee the elimination of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. We hope that the special commission will start work as soon as possible, and we shall co-operate with it fully.

     

    Members’ Letters

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 22 April, Official Report, columns 293-94, to the hon. Member for Derbyshire, North-East (Mr. Barnes), whether he will make it his aim to provide responses to Members’ letters to Ministers which are as full and as helpful as possible, on a time scale similar to that for a response to a parliamentary question.

    The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply I gave the hon. Member for Birmingham, Hodge Hill (Mr. Davis) on 12 February at column 393. I have nothing further to add.

     

    South Africa

    Mr. Robert Hughes : To ask the Prime Minister whether he raised with Mr. de Klerk at their meeting on 22 April the failure of the South African Government to release all political prisoners by the target date of 28 February 1991, as agreed in the Pretoria minute of 6 August 1990.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 26 April 1991] : No, not least because the target date of 30 April has not yet been reached.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 26 April 1991

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 26th April 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Overseas Aid

    Mr. Peter Bottomley : To ask the Prime Minister how much extra would be needed each year for the United Kingdom to meet its United Nations target on overseas aid over the next five years.

    The Prime Minister : Under the public expenditure survey system, plans for expenditure on the aid programme have only been made up to 1993-94. Forecasts for nominal gross national product are available only to 1994-95. However, on present trends, to reach the United Nations target of 0.7 per cent. of GNP spent on official development assistance would require a total aid programme of some £5.2 billion in 1995-96, £3.3 billion greater than the presently planned aid programme for 1993-94.

    Press and Public Relations Staff

    Mr. Dobson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will give for each year from 1979-80, including 1991-92, the number of staff actually employed on 1 April and the full complement of staff, including vacant posts in the press and public relations office of the Prime Minister’s Office.

    The Prime Minister : Seven people including support staff were employed in 10 Downing Street on 1 April 1991 on press and public relations activities. There is one vacant post at present. Detailed figures were not recorded separately prior to 1987-88; since then the total staff complement has remained at eight. The complement for 1991-92 is eight.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 25 April 1991

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 25th April 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    President de Klerk

    Q6. Mr. Robert Hughes : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on his recent meeting with President de Klerk of South Africa.

    The Prime Minister : I was glad to have had the opportunity to meet President de Klerk during his visit to the United Kingdom this week. We had a useful talk on a wide range of issues.

    I should add that I also had useful talks with Mr. Nelson Mandela at our meeting yesterday.

     

    Economic and Social Committee (United Kingdom Membership)

    Mr. Beith : To ask the Prime Minister whether he will list the 24 United Kingdom members of the European Community Economic and Social Committee, indicating their dates of appointment, their occupations and their party political affiliations if known.

    The Prime Minister : The United Kingdom members of the Economic and Social Committee who were appointed in September 1990 for a term of four years are as follows. Members are recommended to Council for appointment on the basis of their individual qualifications not political affiliations.

    Neville Beale Esq–Independent Consultant. Former senior executive of the Royal Dutch/Shell Group of Companies.
    Michael Bell Esq–Chairman, International Business Communications PLC.
    John Little Esq–Former Chairman and Chief Executive, Anderson Strathclyde. Former Chairman, Scottish Confederation of British Industries.
    Kenneth Gardner Esq MA FRSC–Consultant in food law technology and food technology.
    Dr Felix Kafka–Production and Technical Managements (Health and Safety and Environment), ICI Europa Ltd.
    Michael Mobbs Esq–Chairman and Managing Director,M L Aviation. Dr Ann Robinson–Head of Policy Unit Institute of Directors. John Whitworth Esq– Chairman, Merchant Navy Officers’ Pension Fund. Former Director of the International Shipping Federation. Campbell Christie Esq–General Secretary, Scottish Trades Union Congress.
    Peter Dawson Esq OBE–General Secretary Professional Association of Teachers.
    Tom Jenkins Esq–Assistant Secretary, Trades Union Congress, International Department.
    John Lyons Esq CBE–General Secretary, Engineers’ and Managers’ Association.
    Miss Ada Maddocks OBE–National Organising Officer (Health Staffs), National Association of Local Government Officers.
    William Morris Esq–Deputy General Secretary, Transport and General Workers’ Union.
    Roy Sanderson Esq OBE–National Secretary, Electrical and Engineering Staff Association (Electrical, Electronic, Telecommunication and Plumbing Union).
    Alexander Smith Esq–General Secretary, National Union of Tailors and Garment Workers.
    Wilfred Aspinall Esq–Executive Director, Managerial, Professional and Staff Liaison Group.
    Mrs Jocelyn Barrow OBE–Deputy Chairman, Broadcasting Standards Council.
    Professor William Black–Economic Adviser, Department of Economic Development, Northern Ireland. Former Professor of Economics, Queen’s University, Belfast.
    Mrs Angela Guillaume–(British) Chairman, European Union of Women.
    Robert Moreland Esq–Former MEP. Member of the Council for Business Graduates Association. Management Consultant. Chairman of Regional Development Section.
    Ms Sue Slipman–Director, National Council for One Parent Families. Michael Strauss Esq–Former Co-ordinating Director for Policy, National Farmers’ Union.
    Andrew Tyrie Esq–Fellow, Nuffield College, Oxford.

     

    Disabled People

    Mr. Tom Clarke : To ask the Prime Minister when he expects to reply to the letter dated 27 March from the hon. Member for Monklands West, concerning the Government’s policy of non-implementation of the Disabled Persons (Services, Consultation and Representation) Act 1986.

    The Prime Minister : I replied to the hon. Member on 22 April 1991.

    Mr. Tom Clarke : To ask the Prime Minister what representation he has received from the Act Now Group concerning the Government policy of non-implementation of sections of the Disabled Persons (Services, Consultation and Representation) Act 1986; and how he has responded.

    The Prime Minister : The Act Now Group and I have corresponded.

     

    Haemophiliacs

    Mr. Barry Jones : To ask the Prime Minister what steps are taken to ensure parity of treatment for haemophiliacs in Scotland and Wales so far as factor 8 is concerned.

    The Prime Minister : The prescribing of factor 8 in the treatment of haemophiliacs is a matter for the individual clinicians concerned. Both Scottish and Welsh patients have equal access to the treatment deemed appropriate.

     

    Building Works

    Mr. Fisher : To ask the Prime Minister whether he will list the number and location of all new buildings or extensions commissioned by the Cabinet Office in each of the past five years which (a) had contracts worth between £3 million and £5 million and (b) had contracts worth more than £5 million.

    The Prime Minister : The Cabinet Office has not commissioned any new buildings or extensions in the last five years which had contracts worth more than £3 million.

     

    Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister whether the issue of South Africa signing the nuclear non-proliferation treaty was discussed in his meeting with President De Klerk of South Africa in London on 27 April.

    The Prime Minister : Yes.

     

    Chernobyl

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister if he will set out the compensation received by the United Kingdom from (a) the Soviet Union and (b) any other relevant international authority to cover the financial losses incurred by United Kingdom farmers and tourist trade businesses in Scotland, Cumbria, Northern Ireland and North Wales as a result of the Chernobyl nuclear accident in the Soviet Union.

    The Prime Minister : No compensation has been paid to the United Kingdom for damage suffered following the Chernobyl accident. The Soviet Union is not a party to the international conventions on third party liability for nuclear damage.

     

    Iraq

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister if he will propose the creation of safe havens for Shias in southern Iraq.

    The Prime Minister : We are concerned for the welfare of all Iraqis. We understand that the International Red Cross and the United Nations High Commission for Refugees are ready to take over responsibility for refugees in those parts of southern Iraq presently occupied by coalition forces. The United Nations Iraq/Kuwait observer mission is being deployed to the border. Our contribution of some £20 million to the UN Secretary-General’s and other international appeals is for the humanitarian need of all Iraqis. We are in touch with both the Kuwaiti and Saudi Governments about access for Iraqi refugees to their countries.

  • PMQT – 25 April 1991

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 25th April 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER

     

    Agriculture Spending

    Q1. Mr. Teddy Taylor : To ask the Prime Minister if he will raise at the next meeting of the European Council the discussions of the Council of Agriculture Ministers on the level of agriculture spending in 1991.

    The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major) : The Agriculture Council is currently considering proposals to keep spending on the common agricultural policy in 1991 within the agricultural guidelines. I hope that the issue will be resolved before the meeting of the European Council.

    Mr. Taylor : Does the Prime Minister accept that, despite the brave battle that is being fought alone by Britain and Holland to maintain the legal limits that his predecessor fought hard to achieve, Brussels will inevitably find some device or accountancy fiddle to break through, as has happened before? As the agricultural policy is causing damage to taxpayers, consumers, the third world and, now, to farmers, and as we are suffering from an uncontrollable protection racket which is riddled with graft, will my right hon. Friend consider suggesting to Brussels that it would strengthen the Economic Community and everyone else if agriculture were repatriated to individual member states?

    The Prime Minister : I confirm to my hon. Friend that we shall continue to insist that the guidelines are respected. I am not sure that it would be in the interests of the United Kingdom to see the break-up and repatriation of the common agricultural policy. The danger I foresee is that separate national agricultural policies would lead to increased protectionism and considerable distortions of trade. I believe that our interest is best served in this area by common policies and by seeking to improve them. In essence, we need to win the match in Brussels, and that we shall seek to do.

    Mr. Cryer : It is outrageous that the British Government are allowing to continue a common agricultural policy that is costing every family in this country £16 a week as part of the policy of the Conservatives, who have handed over in 10 years more than £40 billion to the Common Market. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is time that the food mountains were made available to the starving nations of Africa and to help the Kurds? Instead of that, the CAP ensures that food is bought on the open market. Stocks continue to soar and the Prime Minister is doing nothing about it.

    The Prime Minister : As the hon. Gentleman knows, we have been in the forefront of the battle in the Community to impose guidelines and to prevent unnecessary agricultural production. The answer to his second point about food mountains being used to assist people in need is that I agree that whenever that can be done, it should be done.

    Mr. Colin Shepherd : In his consideration of United Kingdom agriculture within the context of the European Community, will my right hon. Friend continue to bear it in mind the remarkable contribution that has been made by agriculture to the rural economy? Will he also bear it in mind that farm incomes are now about half what they were two years ago and that the Samaritans have expressed grave concern about the increase in suicidal thought in the farming industry? Will he bear those points in mind at all stages because we must protect the foundation of our rural economy?

    The Prime Minister : I can assure my hon. Friend that we will continue to bear those matters in mind. He will know that some of the direct assistance that we have been able to give within the common agricultural policy has been aimed at areas like hill farming, where there are particular difficulties.

     

    Engagements

    Q2. Mrs. Irene Adams : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 April.

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

    Hon. Members : No.

    Mr. Speaker : We had better have the answer.

    The Prime Minister : I made the mistake because of the tedious aspect of the regular questions that I am asked.

    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 will be having further meetings later today.

    Mrs. Adams : Has the Prime Minister seen the letter in today’s Evening Standard from the private secretary of the right hon. Member for Chingford (Mr. Tebbit) which says that the Government’s new local tax is

    “not fair–grossly inequitable and hurtful”?

    The lady goes on to ask why she should pay more for a small, one-bedroomed flat on her own in one part of London than the entire family of the Secretary of State for the Environment will pay in his luscious home in the west end? What answer will the Prime Minister give to that lady?

    The Prime Minister : The answer that I will give to the lady is that she lives in one of the most expensive houses in London. The hon. Lady and her hon. Friends need to make up their minds. They allege with one breath that the council tax will benefit the rich, who, they say, are Conservative voters, and with the next breath that it will hurt Conservative voters.

    Mr. Fry : Will my right hon. Friend find time today to examine the illustrative bills for the new council tax for those authorities where householders will pay substantially more than under the existing community charge for two people? Will he note, for example, that for the dearest house in Westminster, the tax will be less than for the cheapest house in Wellingborough? Whereas Westminster has benefited from large Government grants, Wellingborough has been penalised by loss of grants because it has traded profitably and passed the profits on to its charge payers. If I am to propose that the new tax is fair to my constituents will my right hon. Friend initiate an investigation without delay into Wellingborough’s position?

    The Prime Minister : If councils spend at the same standard spending assessment, they will pay the same in each band. That is the essential equity of the scheme that we have proposed. Over 70 per cent. of people will be gainers under the scheme that we have proposed. Where there are losers, there will be transitional protection and, for people on low incomes, the generous rebate scheme. That is by far the best deal that the ratepayer, the community charge payer, or in future the council taxpayer, has ever received.

    Mr. Kinnock : Does the Prime Minister agree with the considered view of the Governor of the Bank of England, who recently testified that Britain’s deep and worsening recession is, in his words, “home grown”?

    The Prime Minister : As the right hon. Gentleman knows, for he has asked me that question on previous occasions, I do not accept the proposition that the recession is home grown. There are a variety of causes of the downturn in world trade here and elsewhere and we cannot be immune from all those.

    Mr. Kinnock : Did not the Prime Minister notice the comments of the Governor of the Bank of England on the subject of the recession’s origins? He said that, while Britain

    “is in recession, Japan and Germany undeniably are not and our other EC partners”–

    [Interruption.] Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will permit me to quote the Governor of the Bank of England, who is not yet a member of the Labour party. He said that, although the economies in the remainder of the European Community have slowed down, they are not in recession.

    Is the Prime Minister aware that that view is borne out by the International Monetary Fund and that Britain’s condition is the direct result of the Prime Minister’s policies? Why will he not accept his responsibility or, better still, take action to reverse the recession that he has caused?

    The Prime Minister : If the right hon. Gentleman had examined the matter more carefully, he would have seen that the United Kingdom is coming out of its economic difficulties, while other countries are still facing deepening difficulties. He might also have observed that we have been in a position, since joining the exchange rate mechanism, to make five cuts in interest rates–four in the past 10 weeks. At the same time, we have seen an appreciation, not a depreciation, in sterling.

    Mr. Kinnock : I wish that the Prime Minister’s optimism was well placed. However, the Chancellor of the Exchequer testified to the Treasury Committee a few weeks ago, rather diffidently :

    “I think that there are cautious grounds for believing we, somewhere about the middle of this year, may begin to come out of recession”.

    The Confederation of British Industry, the Engineering Employers Federation, the Association of British Chambers of Commerce, the Institute of Directors, the International Monetary Fund and anyone else with eyes to see, and who is concerned about the condition of our economy, knows that the right hon. Gentleman has plunged Britain into deep recession. What will he do to combat the rises in unemployment and the depression of our economy?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman, who has policies for a minimum wage that will create another million unemployed, has nothing to say about that. With interest rates and inflation having fallen and being set to fall significantly further, and with a balance of trade gap narrowing, it is difficult even for the right hon. Gentleman to deny the improvements now coming about.

    Sir Michael McNair-Wilson : In the course of his busy day, might my right hon. Friend find a moment to visit the organ transplant exhibition in the Upper Waiting Hall? If he does so, he will be told that there are 5,000 people awaiting transplants in this country and that current organ donation must double to meet that demand. In those circumstances, will it be possible to include an item on organ transplantation and the increase in the programme at the weekend meeting at Chequers that my right hon. Friend is having with health service managers?

    The Prime Minister : I hope that, at my weekend meeting in Chequers, I shall be able to discuss with health professionals a wide range of matters and I shall endeavour to include that subject among them.

     

    Q3. Mr. Mullin : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 April.

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

    Mr. Mullin : Is the Prime Minister aware that last year, in a secret ballot supervised by the Electoral Reform Society of Great Britain and Ireland, the employees of the North of England building society voted by 257 to 81 to join the Banking Insurance and Finance Union? The response of the management was to embark upon a programme of intimidation designed to get employees to resign from that union. Will the Prime Minister confirm that it is Government policy that employers as well as employees should be bound by the outcome of properly conducted secret ballots? Or am I being naive?

    The Prime Minister : I would never accuse the hon. Gentleman of being naive. The strict answer to the first part of his question is that I was not aware of that incident. However, if it is as he describes, I can confirm that both sides should be bound by the agreement.

     

    Q4. Mr. Arbuthnot : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 April.

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

    Mr. Arbuthnot : What would happen to the figures produced for the local council tax if we were to abolish capping and competitive tendering, and raise a higher proportion of local funding from local taxes–the policies of the Labour party? Would the figures, like those in the Labour party’s unfair rates proposals, go through the roof?

    The Prime Minister : There is absolutely no doubt about what would happen to council tax bills under Labour’s proposals–that is precisely why the figures that it has produced are wholly bogus.

     

    Refugees (Kuwait)

    Q5. Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister what is Her Majesty’s Government’s policy towards receiving ecological refugees from Kuwait and surrounding countries into the United Kingdom.

    The Prime Minister : All applications for entry to the United Kingdom are individually considered against the requirements of the immigration rules and in the light of compassionate considerations outside the rules.

    Mr. Dalyell : Are not thousands of Kuwaitis now taking residence in countries as far away from the photochemical smog and respiratory diseases as they can, and is not the root of the problem that, frankly, Kuwait is so paralysed that Kuwaitis cannot tackle the oil inferno? In those circumstances, would the Prime Minister consider the advice from the Saudi sources that I have named that, with the Americans and the Saudis, we should step in and tackle the oil fires, as we did with operation Desert Storm?

    The Prime Minister : I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving me notice of the point that he wished to raise. I can assure him that the United Kingdom Government are treating the matter of the oil well fires in Kuwait very seriously. The United Kingdom industry, together with officials from both the Department of Energy and the Department of Trade and Industry, are examining how best to contribute to the resolution of the problems faced in Kuwait. A number of possibilities have been identified and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy will tomorrow lead a delegation of key British industrialists to Kuwait to pursue the specific proposals that have already been put to the Kuwaiti Government.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 24 April 1991

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 24th April 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Privatisation

    Mr. Dobson : To ask the Prime Minister what was the total sum paid out in fees to outside organisations in the furtherance of privatisation by the Cabinet Office in 1979-80 and in each following year; and what is his estimate for 1990-91 and budget for 1991-92.

    The Prime Minister : No expenditure has been incurred by the Cabinet Office on fees to outside organisations in the furtherance of privatisation since 1979-80 and none is planned for 1991-92.

     

    Senior Civil Servants (Degrees)

    Mr. Page : To ask the Prime Minister if he will numerate those Under Secretaries who have engineering, science or mathematics degrees; and what percentage that is of the total.

    The Prime Minister [pursuant to his reply, 19 February 1991, c. 89] : Information now available records 110 Under Secretaries – 22 percent. of the total – with degrees in one or more of these subjects. Twenty-seven have engineering degrees, 70 have science degrees and 16 have mathematics degrees.

  • Mr Major’s Speech at Lunch for President Walesa – 24 April 1991

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech at lunch for President Walesa on Wednesday 24th April 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Mr President, I welcome you and your wife most warmly to Britain on your State Visit – the first by any Polish head of State.

    We are delighted to see you here, together with so many friends of Poland. It is also a great joy to welcome here the President and Prime Minister of the former Polish Government-in-exile. That is a true sign that freedom has come to your country.

    I am only sad that, because of poor health, Count Raczynski [Former President of the Government-in-exile] could not be here as well.
    Mr President, you are a man who has captured the imagination and the admiration of the world.

    In your home town of Gdansk there are two monuments which draw all visitors. One is in the church of Saint Brygida. It is to Father Popielusko who was a martyr in the cause of freedom.

    The other is to the shipyard workers who lost their lives in the strike of 1970. Ten years later, you climbed the wall of the shipyard to sustain the courage of your comrades.

    That was an act of physical bravery. Much more, it set in train a revolution of people, ideas and values that swept away the old order.

    So we pay warm tribute to you, and to your wife, Danuta.

    Wives are the unsung heroines of many careers. Especially in politics. But Danuta had to show a very special courage.

    You and she put more on the line than a career. You put your lives on the line for your people and your country.

    Mr President, we have a lot in common.

    Our Scottish and English forebears traded and lived side by side with yours in your home town of Gdansk. Some people have even been so bold as to suggest that in times past your family came from the ancient Kingdom of Strathclyde. I should like to think so. If so, perhaps we can claim some small responsibility if not for your success as a political leader then at least for the technical skills which are the common heritage of the shipbuilders of Gdansk and of Strathclyde.

    More seriously, it was the invasion of your country that brought Britain into the last war. The Polish Government came to London to carry on the fight for liberty. Many of your compatriots fought alongside us. In the Battle of Britain – directed by Winston Churchill from this house – Polish pilots fought and died to give us our victory.

    I have not visited Warsaw, but all of us know its history and its bravery. Your Ambassador was a young man at the heart of the Warsaw uprising. Today, the old city, re-built, is a monument to the heroism of the Polish people.

    It is against that past that we delight in Poland’s return to democracy under your leadership. We want to help you in. practical ways. We have been through an economic revolution in our own country. Your transformation may be more difficult, but the problems are alike. Privatisation, re-training, small businesses. In all these we can assist you with skills and experience. And we are doing so through the Know How Fund.

    We will help, too, in the organisation of local government, police training and English language teaching. Two of our initiatives (in management and consultancy) are based in Gdansk.

    With our partners in the European Community we have given assistance worth more than £125 million. We have championed your cause in the Paris Club. We were delighted at the recent decision to halve your debt.

    For nearly half a century Poland was cut off, politically and culturally, from the mainstream of European development. Now all that is changing. You will soon reach an Association Agreement with the European Community. I have no doubt that, if you want it, you will become full members of the Community in the not very distant future.

    Mr President, when you were last in London I recall that you described yourself as an amateur. You had done your bit. Now it was time to hand over to the professionals.

    But then I think you found that you could not just ‘hand over to the professionals’. Poland needed your leadership. Now you have become a professional yourself. But although you may be poacher turned game-keeper, I know that you have not lost any of the qualities which led you to climb that wall at the Lenin Shipyard a decade ago.

    I know I speak not just for your friends here but for the vast numbers of people in this country who have fond feelings for Poland and warmth and admiration for you. It is that warmth and admiration, on behalf of my fellow countrymen, that I would like to express now in inviting our guests to drink a toast.

    The toast is to the health and prosperity of the President of the Republic of Poland and of Mrs Walesa.

    The toast is to the people of Poland. Nazdrovia.