The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Category: Prime Minister (1990-1997)

  • Mr Major’s Comments after Winning the Conservative Party Leadership Election – 4 July 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments following his victory in the Conservative Party leadership election, made on 4th July 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Some days ago, when I called the leadership election, I did so in the knowledge that it would very likely be an election that was contested. It was contested and contested by a heavyweight candidate. We have now seen the verdict of the Parliamentary Party, a very clear cut decision, a decision in which I have received the largest share of votes that any Conservative leadership candidate has received in any seriously contested election. I believe that has put to rest any question, and any speculation, about the leadership of the Conservative Party up to and beyond the next General Election.

    I should like to thank all those under Robert Cranborne who worked so hard in my campaign over the last few days and to offer a special vote of thanks to those tens of thousands of silent people in the constituencies up and down the country who made clear their belief, by a truly overwhelming majority, that they believed that the policies we were pursuing were going in the right direction and that they wished me to continue in Downing Street as Prime Minister. I am very grateful to them for the support that they have given me over this period.

    We have had this election. I think it has aired matters of important policy interests for all of us. But the election is now over. The message that I would give to every Conservative, whether he is a Member of Parliament, a party member or someone who simply shares our philosophy and supports us in the country, is that the time for division is over. We have made our choice, it is a clear-cut choice I believe beyond any doubt whatsoever. The responsibility we have, the current responsibility and the historic responsibility as well, is to carry our case to the electorate so they can judge the Conservative Party for what they are, and not what they are sometimes represented as being by people who are not themselves members of the Conservative Party.

    Let me just say one thing in conclusion. This election has been decided by Members of Parliament in Westminster, not commentators outside Westminster with their own particular view. I believe that is the right democratic way to determine these elections.

    I have one final thing to say to you. This matter is now concluded. I shall now return to Downing Street and begin this evening to reconstruct the Government for announcements that you might expect tomorrow.

    Thank you very much.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 4 July 1995

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 4th July 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Sir Peter Tapsell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 4 July.

    Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 4 July 1995.

    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.

     

    European Monetary Union

    Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister what is his policy towards the adoption of a single currency outside the rules of the European Union by countries wishing to do so.

    The Prime Minister: The EC treaty now provides the institutional framework for the adoption of a single currency. It would not be legally permissible for any member states to adopt a single currency otherwise than in accordance with this framework if that prevented or fettered the discharge by the Community institutions of their functions in accordance with the treaty.

    The United Kingdom’s protocol, annexed to the EC treaty, means that the United Kingdom shall not be committed to move to the third stage of economic and monetary union without a separate decision to do so by its Government and Parliament.

     

    Chemical Weapons Convention

    Mr. Gapes: To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his statement on the EU Cannes summit of 28 June, (1) when he plans to bring forward legislation to ratify the chemical weapons convention. (2) on what grounds he signed a statement calling for the chemical weapons convention to enter into force without delay.

    The Prime Minister: The Government remain fully committed to the chemical weapons conventions. Primary legislation is required to implement the convention in the UK and to enable UK ratification. Work is going ahead on the preparation of the necessary legislation. It is the intention of my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade in the coming weeks to publish a bill in draft for consultation with a view to introducing it as soon as parliamentary time permits.

     

    No. 10 Downing Street

    Mr. Morgan: To ask the Prime Minister, if he will state the rules governing the making of announcements relating to party business in, or using the facilities of No. 10 Downing Street.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 30 June 1995]: Ministers under this and previous Administrations have been allowed–at their own or party expense–to make use of No. 10 Downing Street for party business, except for certain purposes during general elections.

  • PMQT – 4 July 1995

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 4th July 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Sir Michael Shersby: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 4 July.

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

    Sir Michael Shersby: Will my right hon. Friend join me in condemning the decision of the Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen to strike? Does he agree that that decision will bring misery and frustration to millions of passengers? Is he, like me, astonished that the general secretary of ASLEF has not offered one word of apology to the travelling public?

    The Prime Minister: I am surprised at that and I regret it. [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker: Order. I shall have a little order from the Front Benches below the Gangway–on both sides. There will be one exchange at a time.

    The Prime Minister: I totally condemn the decision to seek a strike, which is likely to cause chaos and confusion for hundreds of thousands of passengers. I do not believe that there is any justification whatsoever for the strike. I condemn it and I very much hope that the leader of the Labour party will condemn it as well and make it clear that he, like me, will put the interests of passengers before militancy.

    Mr. Blair: Does the Prime Minister share the anger and disgust of South West Water consumers– [Interruption.] Tory Members may find the subject boring, but while they continue to tear themselves apart we shall speak up for the people of this country on the issues that concern them. What is more, it is not 329 Conservative Members of Parliament who should decide the Prime Minister and Government of this country; it is the British people at the ballot box.

    Does the Prime Minister share consumers’ disgust that the managing director has received a 45 per cent. pay increase while water bills have risen by 70 per cent. since privatisation? Is it not high time that the regulator was given the power to curb such abuse?

    The Prime Minister: As the right hon. Gentleman knows, my view has been that many customers of water companies will be concerned about the reported pay increases of directors, and I share their concern. I think that, like me, many people would have no objection to pay rises that are linked to company performance, but if they cannot be linked to company performance I think that they will rightly be condemned by many people up and down the country. I propose to watch the pay increases carefully, and when we have received the Greenbury report on executive pay and remuneration we will be able to decide whether any action is necessary.

    Mr. Blair: Instead of watching it, why does the Prime Minister not act to put a stop to the abuses now?

    The Prime Minister: The right hon. Gentleman knows, for I have told him before–he is clearly a slow learner on this point–that we will wait and see what the committee examining the matter reports. When we have the facts in front of us, we will be in a position to take a decision: I prefer facts before decisions.

     

    Q2. Mr. Streeter: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 4 July.

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

    Mr. Streeter: Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming the decision of the House last night to extend the assisted places scheme for another year? What does he make of a party that voted yet again to deny the opportunities created by that scheme to hundreds and thousands of children throughout the country?

    The Prime Minister: I am unsurprised at the way in which the Labour party casts its votes. Labour Members may talk about opportunity but, time after time, they vote against extending opportunity, such as the assisted places scheme. I am in favour of that scheme because I want people to enjoy opportunities that earlier generations did not have. We act on issues–the Labour party talks about them but does nothing.

     

    Q3. Mr. Stevenson: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 4 July.

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

    Mr. Stevenson: Does the Prime Minister agree that today 329 Tory Members of Parliament will probably be taking the most important political decision of their lives and that it will affect every man, woman and child in the country? Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise the sense of outrage felt throughout the length and breadth of the land that such a decision will be taken anonymously and in complete secrecy?

    The Prime Minister: I have to tell the hon. Gentleman–echoing the thoughts of the right hon. Member for Sedgefield (Mr. Blair) a few moments ago–that I recall Labour calling for a general election in 1985 and losing one in 1987. I recall Labour asking for a general election in 1990, and it lost in 1992. Labour may call for a general election in 1995 but it will lose it in 1997.

     

    Q4. Mr. Brandreth: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 4 July.

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

    Mr. Brandreth: Is my right hon. Friend aware that in the City of Chester– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker: Order. We need order in the House.

    Mr. Brandreth: Is my right hon. Friend aware that my percipient constituents welcome low inflation and sustained growth, relish rising inward investment and falling unemployment and require a Government who represent Britain’s interests at the heart of Europe–rejoicing in the literal decimation of new proposals from Brussels in the past five years? What does my right hon. Friend reckon has brought us in the direction of those happy phenomena?

    The Prime Minister: I welcome the advantages that have been brought to the people of Chester by this Government. I acknowledge that they will want to see such advantages in future, and I look forward to ensuring that they do.

     

    Q5. Ms Jowell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 4 July.

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

    Ms Jowell: Will the Prime Minister apologise to the thousands of blood donors whose gift of blood was wasted last week, and to the patients whose operations were cancelled because the Government’s agent, the National Blood Authority, bought cheaper blood bags? Is not that another example of what the people of this country have come to expect from the Government, who know the price of everything but the value of nothing?

    The Prime Minister: One of the values of this Government’s health reforms is that well over 1 million extra patients are being treated every year. One of the other values of this Government is capital expenditure worth more than £1 million every single week since 1979. One of the other advantages of this Government is more and better treatment in every aspect of the health service. One of the other values is the greatest improvement in primary health care since the health service was established in 1948. It is about time that the hon. Lady took her head out of the sand and saw what is really happening to improve the health service.

     

    Q6. Mr. Thurnham: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 4 July.

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

    Mr. Thurnham: Does my right hon. Friend agree that in negotiating our Maastricht opt-outs he proved that he is closer to the feelings of his people than any other leader in Europe? Is not the true test of leadership in Europe to trust the people to think and act for themselves? Is that not how he led us to victory in 1992 and how he will lead us to victory again at the next election?

    The Prime Minister: I did then as I do now, and as I will do in the future, and that is to take the decisions that I believe are in our country’s national interest and defend those decisions both abroad and here at home. It was for that reason that I set out and obtained the opt-outs. It was for that reason that I retained them. I believe that that is the right way for us to proceed.

    Dr. Hendron: The Prime Minister is probably aware that once again my constituency of Belfast, West was in flames yesterday evening. I am sure that he is aware that Mrs. Briege Gadd, the head of the life sentence review board, has resigned. In that regard, and in regard especially to the release of Lee Clegg yesterday, does the Prime Minister accept that the Northern Ireland Office has sacrificed the stability of the peace process for short-term political gains? Furthermore– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker: Order. The Member must be heard.

    Dr. Hendron: Furthermore, my constituents justifiably believe that there is one law for soldiers and another law for Irish prisoners.

    The Prime Minister: I must say to the hon. Gentleman, who has played a significant part in stilling the difficulties of Northern Ireland over recent years, that I believe that he is wrong to make that judgement. I hope that he will reflect again on what he said. The decision to release Private Clegg was a judicial matter, which was decided by my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland on its merits–that is both the decision itself and the timing. The decision was made by my right hon. and learned Friend and subsequently I was informed of it. It was a judicial matter and it must remain a judicial matter.

    As for the difficulties faced by the hon. Gentleman’s constituents yesterday, I think that he will know, as I know, and as the RUC is equally clear, that there was a high degree of orchestration in yesterday’s violent events in Northern Ireland. Prominent members of Sinn Fein were present at a number of those events. They are far from the only violent demonstrations organised by Sinn Fein in recent months. I think that everyone in Northern Ireland is aware of that fact.

    If I may say one other thing about Private Clegg in the light of what has been said, I say to the House and the country as a whole that it is patently absurd to equate Private Clegg’s case with deliberate acts of murder by paramilitaries– [Interruption.] The Lord Chief Justice, at Private Clegg’s appeal, stressed that when he, Private Clegg, commenced the patrol

    “he had no intention of unlawfully killing or wounding anyone.”

    One other further point may be of some comfort to many people in Northern Ireland. [Interruption.] I apologise for the length of my answer, but I think that this is a matter of importance for the peace of the streets in Northern Ireland. Of other cases recently considered by the life sentence review body alongside that of Private Clegg, five other prisoners were recommended for release on life licence. Four of those involved terrorist offences and they concerned both loyalists and republicans. All those cases, including Private Clegg’s, were reviewed on their merits. Private Clegg’s case was only one of a number that were considered.

    Mr. Matthew Banks: My right hon. Friend is well aware of the healthy scepticism that exists, especially on the Government Benches, about a single European currency. He is also aware that many of us would like to see a referendum on the matter, if it is appropriate, in future. Does my right hon. Friend agree with me that to say no, never now to a single European currency would weaken Britain’s negotiating position with our EU partners for very many years to come?

    The Prime Minister: I agree with my hon. Friend about that. I had observed over the past couple of years that there is the occasional case of scepticism about European policy–that has been evident. But I believe, as my hon. Friend said, that in the event that a British Cabinet decided to enter the single currency, it would be wise at that stage to consider whether or not to have a referendum. But to determine that matter at this stage would be premature.

     

    Q7. Mr. Simon Hughes: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 4 July.

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

    Mr. Hughes: When the Prime Minister was previously elected, he set as one of his objectives the creation of a nation at ease with itself. If he is re-elected this afternoon, in a society and a country where the gap between the rich and the poor has become wider, not narrower, how will he show some commitment to that cause, so that under his premiership Britain is a country of social justice and greater equality, rather than one of greater social injustice and inequality?

    The Prime Minister: I do not agree with the premise upon which the hon. Gentleman frames his question. The greatest destroyer of ease of mind in Britain is inflation. Inflation is now at a lower level and under more secure lock and key than at any time for the past quarter of a century. That is not just a matter of concern to people with savings; it is a matter of concern, above all, to the people about whom the hon. Gentleman is concerned–the people who, at the end of the week, wonder whether they can pay their bills and are grateful that the prices have not gone up. To protect them, we must keep inflation down. I have, I am proud of that and I intend to keep it down.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 3 July 1995

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 3rd July 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Housing (Young People)

    Mr. Frank Field: To ask the Prime Minister how many letters he has received recently expressing concern about the housing conditions of young people.

    The Prime Minister: I have received a number of letters on this subject.

     

    Brent Spar

    Mr. Llew Smith: To ask the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library copies of the briefings he has received on the options for the final disposal of the Brent Spar platform.

    The Prime Minister: It has been the practice of successive Governments not to release ministerial briefing material.

     

    Information Technology

    Mr. Cohen: To ask the Prime Minister what consideration has been given to the implications of merging the Department of Social Security and Inland Revenue data; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister: There are no plans to merge Department of Social Security and Inland Revenue data, but as part of the Government deregulation initiatives both the DSS and the Inland Revenue are required to review their respective information technology strategies.

     

    Ministerial Posts and Pay

    Dr. Wright: To ask the Prime Minister what have been the changes since 1979 of (a) the number of Ministers, (b) the cost of ministerial salaries and (c) the number of parliamentary private secretaries and other unpaid posts.

    The Prime Minister: On the basis of the definition of Ministers within schedule 1 of the Ministerial and other Salaries Act 1975, and including the Lord Chancellor, (a) the number of Ministers on 9 May 1979 was 107 and is currently 108; (b) in cash terms, on 9 May 1979 the cost of ministerial salaries was £1,356,188 and the current cost is £3,598,084; (c) comparable information for this date is not available.

    Mr. Gapes: To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his statement on 28 June 1995, Official Report, columns 893-909, on the outcome of the Cannes summit if all the reductions in Britain’s contribution to the European development fund will be retained in the overseas development budget and used for bilateral aid to African, Caribbean and Pacific countries.

    The Prime Minister: Our contribution to the eighth European development fund will be spent over some five years from the year 2000. Final years for the aid budget in these years will be determined during the annual public expenditure survey in the light of all relevant factors.

  • Mr Major’s Comments on the Single Currency – 2 July 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on the single currency, made in an interview on 2nd July 1995.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if he would state his policy on the single currency].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Yes, I don’t think it’s wise to say no now and I’ve set out the reason for that on many occasions, I’ll happily do so again. I negotiated the opt-out, the decision, the opportunity for this country to say no at a later date with every intention of ensuring that we influence the debate right up to the last moment. I have very great reservations about the economic practicality of a single currency, certainly on the time scale that people propose. I’ve said that repeatedly.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if that was still the case with the proposed 1999 date].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I’ve said that repeatedly, yes, I’ve said for years I didn’t think 1997 was practicable. I’ve been proved right. I’m very dubious about 1999, it is possible that a small number of countries may be able to go ahead, but I very much doubt that it will be more than a small number of countries. But what I think would be folly would be for the United Kingdom, one of the great European powers, to exclude itself from this debate, the most important economic debate that Europe has had for 50 years by saying at this stage that we’re going to take no further part in the debate, we are deciding now what the outcome will be.

    Now I think that debate needs British pragmatism and British involvement and I think we should involve ourselves very fully in it, not just for us but to put forward the practical economic arguments that we have in our interests and in the interests of the rest of Europe, not just the big nations, but the little nations. I don’t wish to see the European Union become a directorate of the big nations over the little ones, I’ve been keen to widen it and we are widening it and I think we should involve ourselves in this debate. And what I frankly don’t understand is why so many people are fearful of this? We have every opportunity of saying no when this debate is concluded if we think entering a single currency is not in the British interest, or if we think the economics aren’t right, or if we’re worried about the constitutional implications. That option is absolutely there, yes or no at a later stage. Why should we throw away our influence in Europe on this issue and in doing so on a number of other issues as well by saying no at this stage, I don’t think that’s in the British national interest.

  • Mr Major’s Comments on the Leadership Election – 30 June 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on the Conservative leadership election, made on 30th June 1995.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked how many votes would be needed to end sniping from the sidelines].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am not going to speculate on that. I will tell you quite clearly why I called the election. Over the past few months, all the things we are trying to do, all the things that matter, all the things that are going to restore confidence to this country, all the things that are going to enable policy to move ahead, all the things that will expose the deficiency in our opponents’ policies, were absolutely drowned out by this cacophony. Day, after day, after day, whatever happened, drowned out, nothing getting through, no real debate on policy for the 14 million people who elected me to Downing Street, no real debate for all the people who took part in the last election.

    That is no way to discuss a democracy. Democracy ought to be about policy, it ought to be about ideas, and I just wasn’t prepared to let that go on month, after month, after month, after month, with a relatively small number of people muttering behind their hands, causing a great deal of difficulty, exciting Fleet Street no end and squeezing out all the real news that mattered domestically and internationally, I just wasn’t prepared to let that go on. It is not remotely in the interests of the country, it is not remotely in the interests of the Conservative Party and I had had it up to the ears and beyond, so I think it was time to sort it out. And the only way to sort it out was to do precisely what I had done, to take the issue head on, to say to people here is a choice, you had better make it, and once you make it you had better make it clear cut, and when you have made it clear cut we will get on with the things that really matter and stop this nonsense, and that is exactly what I propose to do when this election is over.

    So there should be no doubt about why I did it, I did it with the perfectly clear expectation that there might be a challenge and in the certain knowledge that we would have a few days in which this matter would no doubt grip everybody’s interests in the way it has, but that once it is over, in early July, we have the matter behind us and we can get back to real politics, and that is what I wanted to do and I think it was in the national interest to do it.

  • Mr Major’s Comments on the Leadership Election – 30 June 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on his leadership campaign, made on the 30th June 1995.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked how many votes he’d get in the leadership contest]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think you’re just going to have to wait until Tuesday, you’re wasting questions asking me that, we’ll wait and see and I think we’re going to have a very handsome victory on Tuesday. You’ll see it then, and I look forward to talking to all of you and the nation as a whole about matters relating to policy and not the miscellaneous nonsense that we’ve had for so much of the last three years. If people are short-changed in any way, this is the most mature democracy, it actually deserves a debate about the things that matter about policy, and that’s what it’s going to get as soon as we’ve got this leadership election out of the way.

  • Mr Major’s Letter to John Redwood – 29 June 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s letter to John Redwood (made public on the day of writing, 29th June 1995) declining Mr Redwood’s offer of a debate on the European Union. John Redwood was standing against Mr Major in the Conservative leadership contest.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Dear John,

    I recall when I was a Tory candidate fighting a hopeless seat with no chance of winning, I was advised to challenge the incumbent MP to a debate.

    The gist of his reply was, “nice try; but no”.

    You may wish to know he went on to win a handsome victory.

    With warm regards,
    Yours Ever,
    John.

    (the sections in italic were hand-written)

  • Mr Major’s Comments on the Leadership Election – 29 June 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on his leadership campaign, made after leaving radio studios on 29th June 1995.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked whether he thought he could win on the first ballot]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I do, I’ve just made that perfectly clear up there. I still think that is the case, I haven’t change my mind and I shall still think that is the case tomorrow and right the way through the election.

  • Mr Major’s Comments on Radio – 29 June 1995

    Below is the text of some of the comments made on radio on 29th June 1995.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked about the leadership election].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No, I don’t believe it does, and I believe the result of this election will be clear cut. I called this election so that we could clear the air. I think it’s essential to get rid of all the speculation that there’s been, that has infested British politics for some time; the sooner we get rid of that speculation, make a clear-cut decision, the sooner we can return to the things that really matter, real politics dealing with the issues of concern to the people of this country, and dealing with the real battle, which of course is with the Labour Party.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if unity could return to the Conservative Party].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I don’t have a shred of doubt that the air can be cleared next Tuesday. I expect to win with a clear-cut majority, I then propose to move ahead. And I think the Conservative Party will unite. We’ve had a period of difficulty and turmoil; I think that period is coming to an end. We will soon see the end of the ritual speculative interview – I think this is the last occasion you’ll have the opportunity of doing it with me; in future it’ll be a question of policy. And I think the Conservative Party, once this election is over, is going to turn its guns where they should be – smack at the centre of the Labour Party’s policies.