The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Category: Prime Minister (1990-1997)

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in Madrid – 15 December 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s doorstep interview in Madrid on Friday 15th December 1995.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, could you give us some indication of the problem areas that you might be pointing out this morning to the rest of the people here if a small group goes ahead? What are the sort of areas that might raise difficulty?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    There are a whole range of areas. If I could just illustrate one. Let us presuppose there are a small number of countries that go ahead with a new single currency and a larger number of countries that don’t. The probability is that the single currency would become progressively stronger, certainly against many of the weaker European countries. There is then the danger of competitive devaluation and retaliatory protectionism across the Community. And the self-evident worry about that, a very real worry, is that the single market itself could become damaged, if not destroyed. Now that is a matter that is one of the greatest creations of the European Union, it is very important that it isn’t. That is by no means the only illustration but it is one that is readily explainable.

    QUESTION:

    Are you going to tell your colleagues in Europe that a single currency would be bad for Europe?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No, that is not what I am saying to people. I am saying that we have to examine what the implications of a single currency are. There is a possibility that some countries will be ready to go ahead in 1999, that is certainly possible, a minority of countries might do that. But what is the most important thing is to determine what that will mean for the whole of Europe. It is not just going to be a matter for the countries that go ahead, it will have an implication on countries right across the European Union and it will fundamentally change it. It will be the most important single monetary decision taken across Europe within living memory, so it has to be right. And my concern has always been that many of the things that need to be examined quite frankly have not yet been properly examined. Some of them will be solvable, others more difficult, but they must be examined.

    QUESTION:

    What is your own personal preference for the name of the new single European currency?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I regard it as very much a secondary issue, to be honest. It seems to me rather odd to name the baby before the pregnancy. It is I think a secondary issue. There are several names in the running, Euro is certainly in the running, that is probably the majority choice at the moment. I could live with that. I think frankly it is a fairly uninspiring name for people right across Europe. I would prefer to have something more dignified with a European history – the florin, shilling, crown, something of that sort – but I repeat it is really a secondary issue.

    QUESTION:

    On enlargement, what kind of safeguards do you hope to get in terms both of the CAP and of structural funds in Europe?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I don’t think we are going to be discussing enlargement today. I think we are discussing enlargement when the central and east European countries join us for luncheon tomorrow. I am very keen to see the European Union enlarge, I think that is an historical opportunity for this generation of politicians that we ought not to let go, it is by far the most important thing that lies in front of us at the moment. So I hope we will discuss that tomorrow and consider how to enlarge. It will clearly be gradualist, we will need to take in countries, in their interest as well as ours, when they are ready to join. And so self-evidently we will have to look at what that may mean for structural funds, and who has them, and how much, and of course reform of the Common Agricultural Policy.

    QUESTION:

    On the single currency, are they rushing it?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    They are very keen to reach a conclusion and many of them feel that if there is artificial delay then the matter will go off the boil. So I think we have to accept that many of them see advantages in the single currency and they are very keen to do so.

    So I don’t think it is a confrontational matter of them rushing it, us delaying it. We are looking at it in a very pragmatic way. Is it right for Europe? What is its effect on Europe? Is it right for the United Kingdom? What would its effects be on the United Kingdom? Those are the matters that concern me rather than the question, is it too soon, is it too late? The question is: Is it right and when would it be right? Those are the questions.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in Madrid – 14 December 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s doorstep interview in Madrid, held on Thursday 14th December 1995.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, is there any way in which you can slow down the movement towards a single currency here in Madrid?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think that what we have to discuss at Madrid are the questions that still remain unanswered about a single currency. Many of them were obvious questions, have been examined or are being examined by the Finance Ministers at the moment. But what has not yet been examined is what the implications would be of a small number of countries going ahead and not, as was originally envisaged, a very large number of countries going ahead. It is not a question of slowing or changing the timetable, I don’t think that is on the agenda particularly this weekend, what it is a question of is making sure that all the implications of proceeding are fully understood. I don’t yet believe they are and I will raise some of the issues of concern.

    QUESTION:

    Can I just take you back to the riot overnight in Brixton. Obviously a serious event, how concerned are you about it and particularly what seems to have been a breakdown in relations between the minority community and the police?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I have been in the air, Michael, I have not had a full report, I will comment tomorrow when I have seen it.

    QUESTION:

    Is it right that you are not here, as has been suggested today, playing for time?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am here to deal with the important issues concerning the single currency and enlargement and the other issues on the agenda. I know many people have many different versions of what I am here to do. What I am here for is what I have just explained a few moments ago, I think there are very important issues about the single currency that have not yet been examined. Because what does need to be understood is that if a small number of countries go ahead, the implications of that will not only be for those countries that take part in the single currency, the implications of a small number going ahead will apply to the whole of the European Union, the ramifications will be very wide indeed. And the point that I am making repeatedly to my colleagues, and will make again in our discussions tomorrow, is that we need to examine all those ramifications to see what they are, which ones of them cause difficulty and how they might be met. And I believe it absolutely imperative that we begin to consider those – long past time.

  • Mr Major’s Speech at the Bosnia Peace Agreement Signing Ceremony – 14 December 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech at the Bosnia Peace Agreement Signing Ceremony, held at the Elysee Palace in Paris on Thursday 14th December 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I join others in thanking Jacques Chirac and the French Government for their hospitality.

    This is a fitting place for the Signing Ceremony.

    French forces, with those of the United Kingdom, have formed the backbone of the United Nations operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina over the past three years.

    Our troops have worked together in the hazardous tasks of peacekeeping and humanitarian relief. And they have suffered losses together.

    So it was especially heart-warming for us to see the release of your two brave pilots. Your firm stand was entirely vindicated.

    Mr President, much of Central and Eastern Europe has moved successfully from authoritarian rule to democracy.

    But of course such a profound change has produced areas of tension, instability and disorder. In the former Yugoslavia, sadly, it led to war.

    The international community could not prevent that war from breaking out. But it has worked patiently for peace.

    That peace has been won at a terrible price. One in twenty of the former inhabitants of Bosnia and Herzegovina has been killed. Over a quarter of the population have had to flee from their homes – homes which are mostly now in ruins.

    The conflict is over, but the job is only half done.

    Ahead lies hope but not yet fulfilment.

    Success will depend crucially on respect for the fundamental principles of this Agreement:

    – maintaining Bosnia and Herzegovina as a single multi-ethnic state;
    – providing for the safe return of refugees and turning away from the abomination of ethnic cleansing;
    – ensuring that the human rights of all the people of Bosnia fully and equally respected;
    – and bringing to justice those guilty of crimes against humanity.

    The Agreement signed today places clear and detailed obligations upon each of the parties. In their own interests, they must respect and implement them scrupulously.

    But the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina will not be alone in carrying through this Peace Agreement.

    From the time of the first London Conference in August 1992, the international community has made a huge commitment to them.

    Successive teams of negotiators – Lord Carrington and Cyrus Vance, Lord Owen and Thorvald Stoltenberg, Carl Bildt, the United Nations and the Contact Group – did not spare themselves in laying the groundwork for the peace finally achieved.

    Without a massive relief operation through UNPROFOR, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and other international and national agencies, the war’s dreadful toll would have been far higher.

    We must now make no less massive a commitment to the implementation of peace. 13,000 British troops will join the implementation force of some 60,000 overall – the biggest land operation undertaken in half a century of NATO’s existence.

    With the backing of the Peace Implementation Council set up last week, Carl Bildt will coordinate the vital task of re-establishing legitimate political structures and restoring normal civilian life.

    And the groundwork is now being laid for economic reconstruction, as a joint effort between Europe, North America, other interested countries, and the people of Bosnia themselves under, the coordination of the World Bank,

    It is now up to all of us – to the governments and peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina, of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and of Croatia, and to the external powers and international organisations – to turn ceasefire into peace, peace into a lasting settlement, and the countries of the former Yugoslavia into a stable and prosperous part of the European family.

    It will not be easy.

    But I profoundly believe it is possible.

    We must turn that possibility into reality.

    And today’s ceremony is an important landmark in that process.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 14 December 1995

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 14th December 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Official Engagements

    Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 December.

    Sir Peter Tapsell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 December.

    The Deputy Prime Minister: I have been asked to reply.

    My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is in Paris signing the Dayton agreement on Bosnia.

     

    Lockerbie

    Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will discuss with Chancellor Kohl the aspects of the Lockerbie issue pertaining to events at the Rhein-Main airport at Frankfurt in December 1988, and the desirability of a trial of two Libyan suspects at The Hague, under a Scottish judge, under Scottish rules of evidence.

    The Deputy Prime Minister: I have been asked to reply.

    My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has no plans to do so.

  • PMQT – 14 December 1995

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 14th December 1995. Michael Heseltine responded on behalf of John Major.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mrs. Anne Campbell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 December.

    The Deputy Prime Minister (Mr. Michael Heseltine): I have been asked to reply.

    My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is in Paris signing the Dayton agreement on Bosnia.

    Mrs. Campbell: Will the Deputy Prime Minister unequivocally condemn the remark made yesterday by his right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, when he said:

    “This bottom 10 per cent. always drive me up the wall”?

    Will he further apologise to that bottom 10 per cent., who have seen a real fall of 17 per cent. in their living standards since the Conservative Government took office?

    The Deputy Prime Minister: My right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer was referring to those people who have significant wealth but low incomes, which can give a wholly misleading idea of their overall position and the standard of living that they enjoy. The hon. Lady is giving a false impression of what he was saying.

    Sir Anthony Grant: Is my right hon. Friend aware that the best service that my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor can render to the lowest 10 per cent. and, indeed, the highest, is to reduce interest rates as much as possible and that his decision is much to be congratulated?

    The Deputy Prime Minister: My right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor is presiding over one of the most exciting periods of British economic potential. [Interruption.] I am sure that a wider audience will notice that Labour Members jeer at the fact that, for the 27th month in a row, unemployment fell. It was 20,000 less month on month and has been nearly 750,000 down over the 27 months. I should have thought that Labour Members would cheer on behalf of their constituents.

    Mrs. Ann Taylor: As the Prime Minister was unable to give any figure for the cost of rail privatisation at Question Time on Tuesday, will the Deputy Prime Minister confirm that the Government’s figures, following the Budget, show that the long-term cost to the taxpayer will be £850 million per year?

    The Deputy Prime Minister: The hon. Lady has the quotations wrong. Those quotations come from a Labour party press release. Like most Labour party press releases, they are unadulterated rubbish.

    Mrs. Taylor: Will the Deputy Prime Minister therefore take the trouble to look at the sources of the figures in those documents, every one of which is a published Government source? Will he further look at the report of the Select Committee on Transport published today, which also shows that, if rail privatisation goes ahead, taxpayers will have to pay hundreds of millions of pounds extra to keep services as they are? Is not the message clear: rail privatisation is a waste of taxpayers’ money?

    The Deputy Prime Minister: If the hon. Lady and the Labour party are so against privatisation, why have they not got the guts to renationalise any of the industries that we have privatised? Why is it that every time we take the process a step further, they jeer and produce scare stories in advance, none of which stands up when we achieve the result?

    Mr. John Townend: I congratulate my right hon. Friend and the Government on the unemployment figures that he has just mentioned–8 per cent. and falling, whereas unemployment in France is 11.5 per cent. and rising. To what extent is that due to the franc fort policy and French membership of the exchange rate mechanism, while we have a free and floating pound?

    The Deputy Prime Minister: My hon. Friend gives me the opportunity to pay tribute to all those industrialists in this country who have helped to create the jobs in the enterprise culture that we have designed as a Government. What I find extraordinary about the Labour party and the issue of unemployment is that last month, when there was a 200 increase in unemployment, the shadow Employment Secretary put out a press release in which he said that that recognised

    “the final collapse of the Government’s shuddering economic recovery.”

    The fact is that those figures have now been revised and we have discovered that last month, as in each of the past 27 months, unemployment fell. Why does not the Labour party recognise that far from a shuddering economic recovery, we have a buoyant economic attitude in this country which is creating wealth at one of the fastest rates in western Europe?

    Mr. Beith: Have the Deputy Prime Minister and his colleagues considered the point of order made by my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton) that it would be an outrage if social security regulations that could make 10,000 people homeless and destitute were to be implemented before Parliament had had a chance to debate them?

    The Deputy Prime Minister: The right hon. Member raises an important question. I can assure him and the House that there will be an opportunity to debate these matters before they are implemented. I give that assurance.

    Mr. Duncan Smith: Did my right hon. Friend notice in yesterday’s Hansard a very good Bill on protecting those who wish to disclose information in the public interest? Has he further noticed that there are serious problems here in the House for those who might wish to do that? I particularly refer to members of the press corps who have been cajoled and coerced, I gather, by some strange people: a shadowy figure from Hartlepool and an ex-journalist from Today. Will he join me in encouraging them to break free from that and blow the whistle on that strange shadowy company over there?

    The Deputy Prime Minister: My hon. Friend makes an important point. Conservative Members have raised it before but no answer comes. Is it the intention of the Labour party, if elected to power, to put Alastair Campbell as a civil servant into No. 10 Downing street to inject Labour party propaganda into the presentation of Government policy?

     

    Q2. Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 December.

    The Deputy Prime Minister: I have been asked to reply.

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

    Mr. Cunningham: Does the Deputy Prime Minister agree that the £850 million on-going cost of rail privatisation would be better spent on improvements to the west coast main line, which serves my constituency?

    The Deputy Prime Minister: What I do believe is that offering the private sector the chance to provide the cash for the innovation and modernisation that we all want is much more likely to achieve the result than continuing with nationalisation, which I notice, significantly, has not achieved that result over the years.

    Mr. Rowe: Has my right hon. Friend noticed that of all the counties in England, Liberal and Labour-run Kent county council retains the largest share of its education budget at the centre? How does that sit with the oft-repeated complaints from the Opposition that too much is spent by the Government on administration?

    The Deputy Prime Minister: It is wholly consistent with the theme of what the Opposition say. Most conspicuously, they will not say that they will put up taxes but they constantly talk about the need for increased expenditure. They want it all ways, which proves that the sums do not add up and that they are not fit to govern.

     

    Q3. Mr. Keith Hill: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 December.

    The Deputy Prime Minister: I have been asked to reply.

    I refer the hon. Member to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Hill: Does the right hon. Gentleman understand my sense of shock this morning as I witnessed the evidence of wanton destruction and looting in central Brixton and parts of my Streatham constituency? Will he join me, my hon. Friend the Member for Vauxhall (Miss Hoey) and the vast majority of the local community in condemning those acts of violence? For the sake of Brixton’s reputation and future, will the right hon. Gentleman also affirm that the acts that we witnessed yesterday evening were not a re-run of the events of 1981 and 1985, as has been portrayed, but the actions of a small criminal element? Finally, will he confirm that there is no intention of backtracking on the regeneration funding committed to the locality and that Brixton’s future will be reassured, as is the will of the local people?

    The Deputy Prime Minister: I unreservedly join the hon. Gentleman in condemning the violent minority who attacked police officers and property in Brixton last night. I wholeheartedly agree with the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, representatives of the local community and the hon. Member for Vauxhall (Miss Hoey), who spoke eloquently this morning in condemnation of those unacceptable acts of violence, which we all deplore. If we are to bring hope and opportunity to those urban communities, it is vital that they become attractive places for people to live, work and invest. All parties have made a massive attempt to bring that about in the past few years, and that process must continue.

    Mr. Luff: Will my right hon. Friend confirm that neither he nor the Prime Minister would ever contemplate threatening the Union by introducing an elected Scottish Parliament? If they were ever tempted by such an idea, will he confirm that they certainly would not think of giving it tax-raising powers and then try to deceive the British people by saying that they would not use those powers?

    The Deputy Prime Minister: It is extraordinary that Scottish Labour Members of Parliament are to contemplate a tartan tax to make taxes higher in Scotland than in the rest of the United Kingdom. I also find it extraordinary that English Labour Members of Parliament are prepared to give powers to their Scottish colleagues, which would be exercised by Scottish Members in England, while English Labour Members would have no such powers in Scotland.

     

    Q4. Mr. Raynsford: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 December.

    The Deputy Prime Minister: I have been asked to reply.

    I refer the hon. Member to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Raynsford: Does the Deputy Prime Minister recognise that it is not only with British Rail that privatisation has been taken too far? Is he aware of the anger and indignation felt by people in Britain at the appearance in an estate agent’s brochure of the magnificent complex of buildings in Greenwich currently occupied by the Royal Naval college? Is he also aware that the Secretary of State for Defence refuses to reveal the organisations that are bidding to take over those magnificent buildings? As it comes hot on the heels of the fiasco of county hall, is it not clear that the nation’s heritage is not safe in the Government’s hands?

    The Deputy Prime Minister: If the hon. Gentleman believes that, he will believe anything. As the Prime Minister and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State made clear, the preservation of the buildings at Greenwich is of prime national importance and nothing will be done to prejudice it.

    Mr. Anthony Coombs: As unemployment has now been falling for 27 months in a row, has my right hon. Friend noticed the recent comments by the Director-General of the CBI, who said that a combination of increasing social regulations from Europe via the social chapter and a single currency would be “an employment-destroying disaster”? Does not that show the importance of the opt-out that we achieved at Maastricht and the hypocrisy of those who talk about creating jobs but then support policies such as the social chapter and European monetary union, as the Opposition do?

    The Deputy Prime Minister: I shall have the opportunity tomorrow to lay the foundation stone of Siemens in the north-east. One of the reasons why a German company comes to invest and create jobs in this country is that we do not have the impost of the social chapter, whereas Germany has. I would have thought that Labour Members, whose constituencies have gained enormously from the inward investment coming to this country, would seek to enhance it, and not to destroy it.

     

    Q5. Mrs. Clwyd: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 December.

    The Deputy Prime Minister: I have been asked to reply.

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

    Mrs. Clwyd: Has the Deputy Prime Minister noted the good news from south Wales that Tower colliery in my constituency, which was bought by the workers a year ago, has made a pre-tax profit of £3.5 million in the first year? [Interruption.] That has been achieved despite the fact that the right hon. Gentleman told those workers that there was no market for their coal. Is not the lesson to be learnt that if the conditions are right–[Hon. Members: “Privatisation.”]

    Madam Speaker: Order. The hon. Lady must be heard.

    Mrs. Clwyd: Is not the lesson to be learnt that if the conditions are right, and if workers are given control of the means of production–[Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker: Order. Hear the hon. Lady out. [Interruption.] Order. Hear the hon. Lady out.

    Mrs. Clwyd: If the workers are given control of the means of production they can turn in profits, whereas the capitalists throw in the towel.

    The Deputy Prime Minister rose–

    Madam Speaker: Order. Control yourselves.

    The Deputy Prime Minister: I do not want to intrude on private grief, but perhaps the hon. Lady has not caught up with events. Those words have been deleted from the clause, although I realise that a large number of her right hon. and hon. Friends are just waiting their time to bring them back. The hon. Lady had better have a word with the hon. Member for Hartlepool (Mr. Mandelson) because she has got the language wrong–the soundbite does not fit with the language of those on the Opposition Front Bench. The real message behind what the hon. Lady has just said, the real triumph, is that it is privatisation that has made those profits possible.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 13 December 1995

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 13th December 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Data Protection

    Mr. Cohen: To ask the Prime Minister what assessment he has made of the compliance of the Security Service, GCHQ and the Intelligence Service with their obligations in respect of registration under the Data Protection Act 1984; if all personal data held by them are processed for the purpose of safeguarding national security; what external legal advice he has taken on whether registration of personal data is necessary; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister: Under section 27 of the Data Protection Act 1984, personal data are exempt from the provisions of part II and sections 21 to 24 of the Act if the exemption is required for the purpose of safeguarding national security. Personal data are held and processed by the Security Service, GCHQ and the secret intelligence service in accordance with their respective functions set out in the Security Services Act 1989 and the Intelligence Services Act 1994. Such data are exempt from the relevant provisions of the Data Protection Act in order to safeguard national security.

     

    Official Hospitality

    Mr. Tony Banks: To ask the Prime Minister how much his Department spent on official hospitality in 1994-95 and the financial year to date; and what is the 1995-96 projected budget for official hospitality.

    The Prime Minister: The figure is £36,000 in 1994-95. No projection has yet been made of the outturn for 1995-96.

  • Mr Major’s Joint Doorstep Interview with the President of Ukraine – 13 December 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s joint doorstep interview with the President of Ukraine, Mr Leonid Kuchma, in London on Wednesday 13th December 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Can I firstly say what a pleasure it is to have the President and his colleagues here at Downing Street today. We believe that Ukraine has an absolutely pivotal role to play in the future of Europe, and I very much welcome the opportunity today to discuss with the President a whole range of political, economic and security issues that concern both our two countries.

    The President has also generously invited me to visit Ukraine and I have promised to do so in the first half of next year, and I very much look forward to that visit.

    In our discussions this morning I expressed the British government’s very strong support for the reform programme that the President is following in Ukraine. And my colleague, the Foreign Secretary, was able to tell the President that we propose to increase our contribution in the Know How Fund to assist the further development of Ukraine.

    We also discussed at length the European Union’s developing relationship with Ukraine. We very much welcome the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement which the United Kingdom ratified earlier this year. And we look forward very much to the entry next year of the Interim Agreement which will increasingly open European markets to Ukrainian exports. We think this is an important development in a growing trading and investment relationship between Western Europe and Ukraine. Ukraine has a vital role to play in European security and we are very keen to see the development of the relationship between NATO and Ukraine, and work on this of course is already under way.

    I also took the opportunity of thanking the President for his courageous decisions over Chernobyl and I look forward to the early signature of the Memorandum of Understanding which will include the Western assistance to Ukraine as a compensation for their decision.

    All in all these were extremely useful discussions with the President and his colleagues and I am delighted they were able to come here. And I very much look forward to resuming our dialogue in Kiev and elsewhere.

    MR KUCHMA:

    First of all I would like to thank the Rt Hon Prime Minister for the possibility to visit Great Britain. So that I had a chance to thank the government of Great Britain for their steadfast position, including the issue of acceding Ukraine to the Council of Europe. And I would like to thank the Prime Minister for having agreed to visit Ukraine during the first half of next year. And I am happy to have these sort of [indistinct] relations between Ukraine and Great Britain at the eve of Christmas. In fact we had a chance to discuss a wide range of issues, especially the bilateral ones, and I am happy that there is a strong desire on the British side to be more active in reforming the Ukrainian economy.

    So thank you once again and I am certain that this is only the beginning of a wide range of cooperation between Great Britain and Ukraine.

  • PMQT – 12 December 1995

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 12th December 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Bill Michie: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 12 December.

    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. Michie: Does the Prime Minister share the widespread concern about the release to the press by the chairman of the Conservative party of the text of the Lord Chancellor’s speech, which the Lord Chancellor himself had no intention of delivering? Is not it about time that the Prime Minister condemned the action of the chairman of the Conservative party and made a public apology to the Lord Chancellor, to which he is entitled?

    The Prime Minister: If the hon. Gentleman knew the Lord Chancellor, he would not have asked such a silly question. The hon. Gentleman is mis-stating the Lord Chancellor’s view and the events.

     

    Q2. Mr. Amess: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 12 December.

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

    Mr. Amess: Will my right hon. Friend confirm– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker: Order. I will have order in this House.

    Mr. Amess: Will my right hon. Friend confirm– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker: Try again.

    Mr. Amess: Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the national health service is treating 1 million extra patients a year as a result of the Government’s courage in introducing their NHS reforms? That being so, does my right hon. Friend agree with the comments made by the Labour party think tank that Labour policy on the NHS is dominated by sectional trade union interest and is neither thorough nor well informed–a perfect description of new Labour?

    The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend is entirely right to say that the national health service is treating 1 million more patients, and of course treating them better, with a wider range of services, and more speedily than ever before. I am aware of the Fabian pamphlet, though I have not yet had the opportunity to read it. Perhaps I shall enjoy doing so in due course. The conclusion that I draw from it is clear. Views inside the health service and about the health service have moved on. The Opposition’s views have not moved and are out of date and unsuitable for a modern health service.

    Mr. Blair: Will the Prime Minister accept what Ministers have been denying for months–that the public subsidy paid to a privatised railway is set to rise dramatically after privatisation? What is the latest official estimate?

    The Prime Minister: If the right hon. Gentleman tables a detailed question, I shall give him the estimate. I can tell him something else now–that rail privatisation will produce a better service for all passengers and, if he waits for the new franchise decisions, he will begin to see that for himself. He has been trying to smear privatisation when every previous privatisation has produced a better service for the customer. He will find out that that will be the case with British Rail as well.

    Mr. Blair: The right hon. Gentleman can tell that to the customers of Yorkshire Water.

    I am not trying to smear. I am simply asking for information. Even if the right hon. Gentleman cannot give me the exact figure, will he accept that the subsidy is set to rise?

    The Prime Minister: I will tell the right hon. Gentleman that what is rising is investment in the railways and the standards of service to the passengers. As the right hon. Gentleman neglects to mention each time, the operating services are already offering a range of new services and responding to customers more quickly, and new information services are being provided. That is a sign of a better service under privatisation than we ever knew under nationalisation.

    Mr. Blair: I do not see why, as Prime Minister, the right hon. Gentleman cannot answer a straight question about privatisation. If he will not answer it, we shall continue to expose the costs and the chaos of the system. The railway network should not be used as a plaything for bankers and speculators. [Interruption.] No. It should be run not for bankers and speculators, but for British business and the British people.

    The Prime Minister: Now we know the soundbite that we were working up to; it was not worth waiting for. If the right hon. Gentleman is as keen as we are on a modern railway service, he had better explain from where, under his plans, the finance to produce it would come. Will he spend more? [Hon. Members: “Yes.”] Yes, they say. So by how much will taxes go up? Time after time, the right hon. Gentleman pretends that there can be more investment in the public service without higher taxes and a better service without higher expenditure. He pretends that he is a moderniser, but when it comes to trusting the private sector, he is as old Labour as any of his colleagues.

     

    Q3. Mr. Riddick: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 12 December.

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

    Mr. Riddick: Is my right hon. Friend aware that my constituents are outraged that they are still threatened with the possibility of water cuts by Yorkshire Water in the new year? The problem is that some of the managers of Yorkshire Water still think that they are running a nationalised industry in which customers do not count. [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker: Order. We have little time.

    Mr. Riddick: Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the circumstances in which the Government would allow drought orders sanctioning water cuts are almost unimaginable?

    The Prime Minister: I can tell my hon. Friend that Yorkshire Water plans to invest £2.5 billion over the next 10 years and more than £200 million this year for its customers’ benefit. That is a substantial increase on anything that we have seen in the past. I agree with my hon. Friend that the Government will sanction rota cuts only if no other option is available. We have made it clear to Yorkshire Water that it should use every possible step, as it is seeking to do, to make rota cuts unnecessary. If, over the years, there had been proper management of the nationalised industry, the under-investment might not have occurred.

    Mr. Corbett: May I renew my request to the Prime Minister to take a personal interest in the plight of my constituent Ms Louise Stack, the mother of four young children, who applied 11 months ago to transfer from a prison in Spain to complete her sentence in this country? Will the Prime Minister now promise me that he will raise the matter when he meets the Spanish Prime Minister this weekend?

    The Prime Minister: I will certainly examine the papers again before Madrid, but I had better do that before I give the hon. Gentleman a commitment. I undertake to study the papers again, and I will let the hon. Gentleman know what action I propose to take.

     

    Q4. Sir Fergus Montgomery: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 12 December.

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

    Sir Fergus Montgomery: After the tragedy at a school in north Westminster on Friday, does my right hon. Friend agree that the letter written by the small son of Philip Lawrence to Santa Claus was one of the saddest and most moving letters ever written by a child? Will he assure me that the Government will do everything that they can to learn lessons from the tragedy in an attempt to ensure that it is never repeated?

    The Prime Minister: I am sure that the whole House would wish to join me in sending sympathy to the family and friends of Mr. Lawrence after that dreadful event. The Government are considering what more can be done. My right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary has been consulting the Association of Chief Police Officers about whether harsher penalties and further police powers are necessary to deal with the problem of knives. I hope that my right hon. and learned Friend will be able to announce the outcome of those discussions and, perhaps, new proposals in due course. In parallel with that, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Employment is talking to teachers’ representatives about a range of issues covering the safety of staff and pupils in our schools.

     

    Q5. Ms Lynne: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 12 December.

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

    Ms Lynne: Does the Prime Minister agree with the pensioners of Rochdale that the £10 Christmas bonus that they have just received is an absolute insult? If the bonus had risen in line with inflation, it would now be worth £68. Does the Prime Minister realise that £10 buys a small frozen turkey and a box of Christmas crackers–hardly a recipe for Christmas cheer?

    The Prime Minister: I am not sure whether the hon. Lady and her colleagues took that view when they cancelled the Christmas bonus–the only occasion that that has ever happened.

    Mr. Redwood: I welcome the fact that, at his recent meeting in Italy, the Prime Minister raised the issue of European worries about a single currency. Will he be pursuing those points at Madrid?

    The Prime Minister: Yes. I shall be pursuing a number of the points that I raised in the last European Council meeting about the problems that might occur were a single currency to proceed with a small minority of countries in it and a larger majority of countries outside it. I believe that that raises a whole range of issues which have not yet been properly considered, and I shall be seeking further consideration of those points at Madrid this weekend.

     

    Q6. Mr. Cohen: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 12 December.

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

    Mr. Cohen: It has been estimated that, even allowing for the Budget settlement, schools could be £40 per pupil worse off next year. Despite an increase in the school rolls of about 116,000 children, the National Union of Teachers has estimated that there will be 9,200 fewer teachers this term. Does the Prime Minister think that that is clever?

    The Prime Minister: I notice that the hon. Gentleman was not one of the 10 Labour Members who voted to increase taxation and to increase expenditure. He wants increased expenditure without admitting that it would lead to increased taxation. We have made an extra £878 billion available for schools–an increase of about 5 per cent. The hon. Gentleman should recognise that that is above the level of increased costs and is an increase in real resources.

    Mrs. Lait: Will my right hon. Friend join me in sending sympathy to the millions of people in France who have been affected by the strikes? Is he aware that every Labour Member of the European Parliament has signed a resolution backing the strikers, thereby proving that Labour is still the strikers’ friend?

    The Prime Minister: It is certainly true that the Members of the European Parliament did that.

    Mr. Prescott: What do you know about it?

    The Prime Minister: I believe that the deputy leader of the Labour party just muttered, “Well, what do you know about it?” I hope that he knows that the Socialist Campaign Group of Labour Members of Parliament, never mind Members of the European Parliament, has also sent a message of support to the French strikers. I will quote from it.

    “The Struggle going on in France is one of critical importance to working people throughout Europe”,

    wrote the group secretary of the Socialist Campaign Group of Labour Members of Parliament. He went on:

    “Capitalism demands that we now dismantle employment rights, welfare benefits and the network of public services built up after years of struggle.”

    That is real Labour.

     

    Q7. Mr. Tony Banks: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 12 December.

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

    Mr. Banks: May I thank the Prime Minister for his great kindness last night to members of Chelsea’s 1954-55 championship team? May I remind him that during the last war, thousands of civilians were killed in the blitz and that it is appropriate in this anniversary year that there should be a suitable memorial to commemorate those civilian dead? Will he give his support to the moves in the east end to build a suitable memorial to the civilian dead?

    The Prime Minister: First, let me thank the hon. Gentleman for a very enjoyable occasion with some guests last evening. [Hon. Members: “Oh!”] I would not wish to do harm to an old friend. Let me assure the House that when we discussed football, the hon. Gentleman played on the left wing and I played on the right.

    On the hon. Gentleman’s substantive point, I willingly join him in paying tribute to those Londoners, east Londoners perhaps above all, who endured the blitz. I will invite my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for National Heritage to consider the hon. Gentleman’s proposal and advise further. The hon. Gentleman, I hope, will be aware that an application could be made to the national heritage memorial fund for consideration for lottery funding. That process is independent of the Government, but the idea that the hon. Gentleman suggests is certainly one that the fund could be prepared to entertain.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 11 December 1995

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 11th December 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Nuclear Materials (Exports)

    Mr. Simpson: To ask the Prime Minister what changes have been made in the guideline for the export of nuclear materials, equipment and technology by the United Kingdom beyond the measures set out in his answer to the hon. Member for Leyton (Mr. Cohen) of 13 January 1993, Official Report, column 745.

    The Prime Minister: The guidelines for the export of nuclear materials, equipment, and technology by the United Kingdom remain the same with one exception. The guidelines of the nuclear suppliers’ group, of which the UK is a member, will, in exceptional cases, allow such exports to non-nuclear weapon states without full scope safeguards agreements with the International Atomic Energy Authority, where they are deemed essential to the safe operation of existing facilities and if IAEA safeguards are applied to these facilities.

    The NSG has also adopted guidelines for the transfer of nuclear-related dual-use material, equipment and technology. These exports are considered on a case-by-case basis.

     

    Departmental Transfers

    Mr. Salmond: To ask the Prime Minister what representations he has received concerning the transfer of (a) personnel and (b) responsibilities from Government Departments to Scotland; and what plans he has to make such a transfer.

    The Prime Minister: I am not aware of any recent representations on this topic. My right hon. Friends the President of the Board of Trade and the Secretary of State for Scotland have, however, recently received representations from Grampian regional council and the City of Aberdeen district council about the scope for transferring to Aberdeen additional jobs in the Department of Trade and Industry’s oil and gas division. My right hon. Friend the Minister for Industry and Energy will be meeting representatives of the councils shortly to discuss this issue.

     

    Princess of Wales

    Mr. Mackinlay: To ask the Prime Minister what plans he has to hold consultations with other Prime Ministers of those countries where Her Majesty the Queen is Head of State about the future role and duties of the Princess of Wales.

    The Prime Minister: None.

    Mr. Mackinlay: To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the future role and duties of the Princess of Wales.

    The Prime Minister: I have nothing further to add to the statement I made on 9 December 1992, Official Report, column 845.

     

    Nigeria

    Mr. Madden: To ask the Prime Minister what action he has taken following the disclosure of normally confidential information to the media of information concerning the application by Mr. Abiodum Igbindu, for political asylum in the United Kingdom.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 8 December 1995]: I refer the hon. Member to the reply that I gave to the hon. Member for Gateshead, East (Ms Quin) on 5 December, Official Report, column 136.

  • Mr Major’s Speech at the Opening of the Bosnian Peace Conference – 8 December 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech at the opening of the Bosnia Peace Implementation Conference on Friday 8th December 1995, held at Lancaster House in London.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am grateful to you – the representatives of over 50 countries and organisations – for coming to this third London Conference, and I welcome you most warmly to Lancaster House.

    You have come with a serious purpose.

    The war in Bosnia and Herzegovina has claimed over 200,000 lives.

    It has been one of the most devastating wars of the past half century, and by far the most serious conflict in Europe since the Second World War.

    Out of a population of four and a half million people, more than two million have been forced to flee their homes. A great many of their houses, their towns and villages, have been razed to the ground or rendered uninhabitable.

    Families have been broken up. Many survivors have been disabled.

    No-one who lived in this beautiful and once thriving corner of south-eastern Europe can have been untouched by the trauma of three years of savage fighting.

    But the conflict is over. The guns are now silent. Next week, the peace agreement will be signed in Paris.

    Our task, today and tomorrow, is to make sure that the guns remain silent; that the Dayton accords are put into effect; that war does not resume through any error or omission on our part.

    Today, even before the final signature of the agreement, we must begin the huge job of implementing and consolidating peace, and of rebuilding a country.

    Let me extend a particularly warm welcome to the Foreign Ministers of Bosnia and Herzegovina, of Croatia and of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

    Making peace required courage, flexibility, and a willingness to give ground from the leaders of all of the parties.

    Keeping it will need tolerance, forgiveness, discipline and the readiness to make a fresh start.

    No-one underestimates the demands this will make on all of your peoples.

    The wounds of this war will not heal easily.

    But heal they must – and they can.

    In the Spring of last year, I met soldiers from the opposing Croat and Bosnian Government forces in central Bosnia. Men who, weeks before, had been under orders to kill each other. I saw them policing the new ceasefire in that region – in a remarkably friendly spirit.

    That ceasefire held.

    And the wider peace negotiated at Dayton must hold.

    It will hold so long as the Dayton commitments are honoured:

    – The commitment to keep Sarajevo as a united city within the Federation. That carries obligations on all sides. Each side must work with the others to allow all the inhabitants of Sarajevo to live together in safety and security.

    – The commitments on the separation of forces and removal of heavy weapons.

    – The commitment to negotiate an arms control regime and other confidence building measures. The Bonn Conference will take this work forward.

    – The commitment to respect human rights and ensure unrestricted access for humanitarian work.

    – The commitment to develop the institutions of Bosnia and Herzegovina to help manage reconstruction within the country and its relations with the outside world.

    – The commitment to create conditions for free and fair elections by next summer.

    – And the commitment to help refugees return freely and safely.

    We are not asking you to act alone.

    The international community has made a huge effort to save lives, help civilians, and negotiate peace over the past three years.

    The message of this Conference is that we are ready to make no less vast an effort to help you to entrench the peace, and to find stability and security within the European family and the United Nations.

    Let me now turn in more detail to the international community’s role.

    In their different ways, the countries and organisations at this Conference have helped to bring peace to Bosnia.

    Through many setbacks and in the face of great danger, national and international aid agencies kept the lifelines open.

    More than 200 people sacrificed their lives in the service of the United Nations and of the aid agencies.

    As we begin today a new and much more hopeful phase of the humanitarian operation in Bosnia, let us remember those who helped to make it possible through three long years of war, and particularly those who will not see the vindication of their brave efforts.

    Likewise, from the 1992 International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia onwards, efforts to negotiate peace never relented until they were crowned with success.

    We owe a debt of gratitude to all of those who took diplomatic action on our behalf – whether under the auspices of the United Nations, the European Union or the Contact Group.

    Now, in this third London Conference, we must harness the resources and capabilities of the international community in four main areas:

    – First, on the military side, those in command of the Implementation Force will shortly describe its mission. It will be important to ensure that military and civilian work is carefully co-ordinated.

    – Secondly, we are entering, as I have said, a new phase of the humanitarian operation. We shall examine how this is to be organised under the co-ordination of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, so that we can help refugees to return and ensure that human rights and human needs are protected.

    – Third, the supervision of the elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina will be a significant challenge for the Member States of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe. An ambitious challenge and a vital task.

    – Finally, we shall discuss reconstruction. We do not aim to supplant the efforts of the Bosnian people themselves. They will wish to rebuild their own homes, and they have the pride and the skills to do so. But they clearly will need help and additional resources. We must start by identifying the needs and agreeing on the right mechanisms for meeting them. That will help to pave the way for the Pledging Conference which should follow at a later stage.

    The responsibility for pulling these strands together within Bosnia will fall on the “High Representative”. It is a task which will require exceptional energy and proven qualities of leadership. We are fortunate in having someone superbly qualified to act as the High Representative – in the former Prime Minister of Sweden, Mr Carl Bildt.

    I hope we can announce today that Carl Bildt will take on this task. He will deserve the confidence and respect of all of us. He deserves all the help we can give him.

    Conclusion

    Many of you came to our last Conference in this building a mere five months ago.

    We met then against a sombre and menacing background.

    How much has changed for the better in those five months.

    We took some tough decisions then, but they proved to be the right decisions.

    Today we must take one decision, above all: that peace in Bosnia cannot fail. That we cannot allow the nightmare of the past three years to return. That, in our commitment to a powerful implementation force and a huge civilian effort, we must make it unthinkable for anyone to drag Bosnia back to the edge of the abyss.

    Peace in Bosnia has been hard won. It has been dreadfully slow to come.

    It is undoubtedly fragile.

    But it is there, and each and every one of us must make sure that it lasts.