The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Category: Prime Minister (1990-1997)

  • PMQT – 9 May 1995

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 9th May 1995. Tony Newton responded on behalf of John Major.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Jon Owen Jones: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 May.

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

    My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is currently in Moscow on an official visit as part of the VE day commemorations.

    Mr. Jones: Does the Leader of the House have any sympathy for a perplexed and lonely young man, Mr. John Richards, the last remaining Tory councillor in Cardiff, who only eight years ago was part of a ruling group with more than 30 colleagues? While Mr. Richards looks around and tries to find out what has happened to his colleagues, how does the Leader of the House explain that calamity? Does he think that– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker: Order.

    Mr. Jones: Does he think that on Thursday, the electorate showed that they have the same opinion of the Government as Will Carling has of the Rugby Football Union?

    Mr. Newton: My sympathy is with the people of Cardiff for what is about to be inflicted on them.

    Mr. Hunter: Bearing in mind the commemorative theme of the past few days, and in anticipation of the Government’s meeting tomorrow with Sinn Fein, will my right hon. Friend reassert that the Government will not bow to the IRA, will never surrender to IRA tyranny and will never seek appeasement with the evil of the IRA, but will remain resolute and resist all that Sinn Fein-IRA has stood for over the years?

    Mr. Newton: I can certainly give my hon. Friend the assurance he seeks. As he will know, it has repeatedly been made clear that we were not prepared to agree to Ministers joining the exploratory talks with Sinn Fein until it accepted that position and the need for a serious dialogue about decommissioning.

    Mr. Prescott: Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that Thursday’s local elections were a disaster for the Tories and a triumph for Labour? Does he agree with his right hon. Friend the Member for Brent, North (Sir R. Boyson), that the Government should stop lecturing and start listening to the British people, beginning tomorrow with the London hospital debate?

    Mr. Newton: The best thing that I can say to the right hon. Gentleman is that I have been studying with interest a report in The Guardian of 6 May under the heading,

    “Record haul of seats for reborn left”,

    which is followed by a quotation by the then Leader of the Opposition claiming that it shows the result of the next general election. That was in 1990.

    Mr. Prescott: The House will note that the right hon. Gentleman avoided the question on the London hospitals. Is not the simple truth that, 50 years ago, the Tories voted against the creation of Labour’s national health service and that, in the past five years, they have closed more than 300 hospitals and will vote tomorrow to close some more? Is not that why one can never trust the Tories when they say that the national health service is safe in their hands?

    Mr. Newton: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health will set out very clearly in tomorrow’s debate a policy, the purpose of which is to create a modern pattern of hospital and primary care provision in London. That is what it will do. As to capital schemes, I remind the right hon. Gentleman that, since 1980, more than 800 schemes, each worth £1 million or more, have been completed. That is roughly one a week. At present, there are more than 300 such schemes at the planning, design or construction stage, and that is the biggest sustained hospital and health service development programme in our history.

     

    Q2. Mr. Congdon: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 May.

    Mr. Newton: I have been asked to reply.

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

    Mr. Congdon: Does my right hon. Friend agree that the imposition of a national minimum wage would destroy jobs? Is it not an act of political cowardice to talk about bringing in a minimum wage while not having the courage to specify its level?

    Mr. Newton: I very much agree with my hon. Friend. I think that it was the right hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott) who acknowledged that a minimum wage would destroy jobs. Although that has been acknowledged, no figure has been given. All we know is that jobs would be destroyed, and it is time that the Opposition told us how many.

    Sir David Steel: The Leader of the House is a regular tourist in Scotland. Therefore, will he welcome as much as we do this morning’s decision by the Court of Session in Edinburgh that British Rail cannot axe its services at the end of May without going through the full consultation procedure? Will he make sure that Government money is there to maintain those services?

    Mr. Newton: The right hon. Gentleman rather exaggerates my activities as a tourist in Scotland, although I recall meeting him at a fete in his constituency a couple of years ago. I understand that an application for judicial review has been heard and that the court has ruled that British Rail may not withdraw the service until the statutory closure procedure has been completed. It is for the British Railways Board and ScotRail to consider what action to take in the light of the full written judgement, and it would not be right for me to comment further at this stage.

     

    Q3. Mrs. Peacock: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 May.

    Mr. Newton: I have been asked to reply.

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

    Mrs. Peacock: Will my right hon. Friend join me in sending thanks to Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother for her role 50 years ago in supporting King George during the dark and difficult days of the war? Will he also join me in warmly thanking her for her tremendous support and activity during the VE celebrations over the weekend?

    Mr. Newton: My hon. Friend speaks for the whole House. Over the weekend there has been an outstandingly successful series of events of remembrance, reconciliation and hope for the future. They reminded us of the contribution that was made by our service men and service women and many civilians to the effort of 50 years ago. As my hon. Friend says, it has reminded us not least of the contribution that was made by the late King and Her Majesty the Queen Mother during the war and by Her Majesty the Queen over so many years since then.

     

    Q4. Mr. Wilson: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 May.

    Mr. Newton: I have been asked to reply.

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

    Mr. Wilson: Since the threat to overnight rail services between Scotland and England arises directly from Government policies, many of us think that it is precisely for the Leader of the House to answer in respect of what happened in the Court of Session this morning. What does it tell us about this Government that the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Secretary of State for Transport were both prepared to conspire in a deceit that has been found to be illegal as well as immoral?

    Will the Leader of the House give an undertaking that the letter and the spirit of today’s judgment will be respected by the Government? Does he accept that this excellent decision will give fresh heart to campaigners throughout the country, who see similar threats to their vulnerable services in what the Government are doing to the railway industry?

    Mr. Newton: As I have already said, it is now obviously right for the terms of the judgment to be properly and carefully considered, but I also remind the hon. Gentleman that the decision to withdraw this service was a commercial matter for British Rail, and that representations, of a kind to which he will no doubt wish to contribute, about all sleeper services can be made when the Franchising Director consults on the passenger service requirement later this month.

    Mr. Streeter: Will my hon. Friend join me in congratulating the French people, who on Sunday rejected socialism and elected a right-wing President? Does not that show– [Interruption.]

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

    Mr. Streeter: On Sunday, the French people rejected socialism and elected a right-wing President. Does not that show that all over Europe people recognise that, while left-wing politicians offer sound bites, Conservative policies work?

    Mr. Newton: I certainly wish to welcome the election of the new President, and I think everyone would wish to send him this country’s good wishes in his new job. My hon. Friend is right to say that one of the factors in that election will have been the extent to which socialist policies are coming under criticism throughout Europe. Indeed, the French Employers’ Federation has said:

    “the excessive level and poor structure of taxes on business add to production costs, slowing down investment and job creation.” It is exactly the policies that have now been rejected in France that right hon. and hon. Labour Members would now want to impose on Britain.

     

    Q5. Mr. Jamieson: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 May.

    Mr. Newton: I have been asked to reply.

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

    Mr. Jamieson: Is the Leader of the House aware that, following last Thursday’s meltdown of Tory support in the south-west, particularly in the constituency of the hon. Member for Plymouth, Sutton (Mr. Streeter), 55 out of 60 councillors on Plymouth city council are Labour members, and the only bodies that the Conservatives control in the region are the quangos? Is not the message from last Thursday’s elections that there is now an unbridgeable gap between the electorate and the Government? The only way in which that can be bridged is by having a general election.

    Mr. Newton: Earlier, I extended my sympathy to the people of Cardiff; I will now extend my sympathy to the people of Plymouth.

     

    Ministerial Visits

    Q6. Mr. Simon Coombs: To ask the Prime Minister if he will pay an official visit to Swindon.

    Mr. Newton: I have been asked to reply.

    My right hon. Friend has no current plans to do so.

    Mr. Coombs: Does my right hon. Friend agree that companies in Swindon and elsewhere would rather stick with a Government who have firmly rejected the concept of a national minimum wage than run the risk of supporting a party that might introduce a national minimum wage at a level so low that it would be meaningless, or at a level that would imperil employment and run the risk of reducing companies’ investment in training?

    Mr. Newton: I agree with my hon. Friend that the people of Swindon and, no doubt, the people of every town in the country would not wish to go down a path that will undermine employment, heap new costs on business, undermine the economic recovery, undermine our capacity to attract overseas investment, and undermine our ability to defend Britain’s interests in Europe.

    Mr. Pike: As the Leader of the House’s job includes presentation of Government policy to the people of Swindon– [Interruption.] Ah, I know, Madam Speaker–

    Madam Speaker: Order. The hon. Member for Swindon (Mr. Coombs) widened the question, but I do not want questioning to go too wide.

    Mr. Pike: As it is the right hon. Gentleman’s job to present Government policy, does he accept that either his presentation has failed or the policy has failed? Will he tell the people of Swindon what change of policy he now proposes–or does he intend to go?

    Mr. Newton: I would tell the people of Swindon–and, indeed, those represented by the hon. Member for Burnley (Mr. Pike)–that, when unemployment is falling by 1,000 a day, when we are enjoying the most sustained period of low inflation for more than 30 years, when export volumes have risen by 12.5 per cent. in a year and when for two successive years ours has been the fastest-growing major European Union economy, one thing is certain: the policies are succeeding.

     

    Engagements

    Q7. Mr. Waterson: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 May.

    Mr. Newton: I have been asked to reply.

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

    Mr. Waterson: Does my right hon. Friend agree that the VE day commemorations throughout the country at the weekend were extremely moving? Does he also agree that we have had 50 years of peace in Europe because this country has maintained strong defences, and has refused to listen to the voices of Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament members and sympathisers in the Labour party?

    Mr. Newton: I agree with my hon. Friend on both counts. As I said earlier, the celebrations themselves were an outstanding and impressive success; and there is no doubt that the fact that we were able to have them rests on the firmness of this country’s defence policy over the years–a policy that has frequently not been supported by the Labour party.

  • Mr Major’s Speech at German State Ceremony – 8 May 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s speech at the German State Ceremony at the Schauspielhaus in Berlin on Monday 8th May 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Herr Bundespraesident, Herr Bundeskanzler, Ladies and Gentlemen,

    This week, in London, in Paris, in Moscow and here in Berlin, we are turning our minds back 50 years to remember those on all sides who fell in the last War and to remember the day that peace came to Europe. I said “the last War” and I said that because I believe that for our countries gathered here today it was the last time that we will ever fight one against another. [Applause]

    Many have contributed to this: Churchill and de Gaulle, Roosevelt, Truman and Kennedy, Konrad Adenauer who rebuilt Germany and you, Herr Bundeskanzler, who have led it so long and have seen it reunited in peace and in freedom.

    Fifty years ago Europe saw the end of 30 years that had contained not one but two world wars. The slaughter in the trenches, the destruction of cities and the oppression of citizens; all these left a Europe in ruins just as did the 30 Years War some centuries before.We are commemorating the end of this European tragedy in our great cities. We must not forget the past but here in Berlin this evening I would like to think not of the past but of the future.

    In September last year, we met here in this wonderful theatre and we did so to bid farewell to the Allied Forces that had guarded Berlin for 40 years. I would like to recall a phrase I used on that occasion: “If we are wise, Europe stands today on the threshold of a New Age of Reason. We have before us new possibilities of peace, freedom and friendship that we have never had before.”

    The first age of reason, the enlightenment, brought new confidence to Europe. The wars of religion were replaced by reason and tolerance. Superstition was replaced by science. Newton gave us laws of nature, Bach laid the foundations of music, Montesquieu taught us the spirit of the law and Adam Smith explained the laws of the market.

    In those days Europe was awakening from the darkness of the mind. Today, Europe is emerging from a century of violence and ideology. Traumatised in the first half of this century by brutality and destruction, Europe has lived the second half of this century half frozen in a trance. We are, as it were, still rubbing our eyes after 1989 wondering if it can be real but thankfully it is real.

    What do I mean by a new age of reason? First, I mean an end to dogma and ideology. Fascism and communism lie behind us. The two great enemies of reason have been defeated not just by armies but by more powerful ideas, freedom and democracy and by reason itself.
    Freedom means freedom to think, to choose, to question. The European tradition is of pluralism, scepticism and debate. Today, the authoritarianism of the mind is gone, I hope and pray, for ever. We can now look forward to a Europe of open minds.

    A new age of reason will be the new age of the individual. The tyrannies that we have overcome were erected in the name of race, state or of history. With the first enlightenment came the ideas of freedom and of democracy. Today, we have escaped from the ideologies of race and the state. The individual for us these days is the measure of all things. Freedom is always freedom of the individual; responsibility is always individual responsibility. Freedom of choice, equality before the law, open minds and a just and open society, these are at the heart of our European traditions and it is this that will help us build the Europe that lies ahead of us.

    A new age of reason means a new international society.

    The Europe of today has come a long way from the Europe of the first 30 Years War but the threats and dangers of extremism or violence, military and civil, have not gone altogether. Today, we no longer need the old system of coalitions to contain national ambitions, the old system of the balance of power. We now bring our different histories and traditions together in pursuit of common goals. This is not an easy process. There have been, and there will be, setbacks but I cannot believe that we will ever again revert to the old way of doing things.

    We can be proud that out of the ruins of war we have built a system of cooperation never known before in all the long history of the world: the United Nations – struggling towards law and justice; NATO – the only lasting peace-time alliance; the European Union – that unique blend of integration and cooperation across national boundaries and the one essential rule of this system is that we settle our differences by discussion and by compromise, by reason and never again by violence. [Applause]

    Ladies and Gentlemen, the war whose end we remember was fought for the freedom of the individual against the tyranny of the state, for the freedom of the mind against the tyranny of ideology and the peace we have built in these fifty years is built on the foundation of a new international society.

    If our international society is based on reason, it is also based on friendship, friendship between our peoples who were once in dispute and war and personal friendship amongst ourselves and amongst all our citizens.

    The first Age of Reason came as the men of ideas – Hume and Voltaire – led us out of the darkness of the mind. In the last 50 years we have lived through a political enlightenment. We owe a debt to those who have led us out of political darkness. We are all their inheritors and we have a responsibility to use that inheritance wisely. Our chance today is that we may be able to make a reality of Kant’s vision of a Perpetual Peace.

    The price of that peace will be perpetual vigilance. Freedom and peace are not to be had as gifts. We will need courage and commitment to defend what we have created in these 50 years of peace but I believe that we are justified in having confidence that it can and that it will be done.

    Civilisation is a partnership between the dead, the living and those who are not yet born. We have a debt to those who died in the War and we have a debt to those who built the peace. Those debts can properly be repaid only to the next generation. For them we must build a world of open minds, of individual freedom and responsibility; and for them we must strengthen and extend the New International Society. Herr Bundespraesident, for me these will be the pillars of the New Age of Reason. [Applause]

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in Paris – 8 May 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s doorstep interview in Paris on Monday 8th May 1995.

    INTERVIEWER:

    What is your first reaction to the election?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Firstly, let me say that I have enjoyed working with President Mitterrand for a number of years now; he is a man of very great courage, he has made a very formidable contribution to his country over many years and I think people will recognise that.

    Of course, I look forward to working with Jacques Chirac. I have known him for a number of years. I like him. I think he is a man of very great qualities and I think he will be a fine President of France.

    INTERVIEWER:

    Now that in Europe we have many more prime ministers, presidents or heads of state who did not really participate in the War, do you think that the arrival of M. Chirac with you and other men of your generation is going to change anything in Europe?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Both our countries have a very strong sense of history, there is a continuum and although we are essentially post-War – we didn’t go through the War as adults – I think the impact of the War has been built into the nations since then so I wouldn’t expect any stark and sudden changes but of course policy evolves, the direction of individual countries evolves and of Europe of a whole so of course things will change.

    INTERVIEWER:

    Do you think that in Europe you are going to have a better understanding with M. Chirac than with M. Mitterrand and his team?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I have enjoyed working with President Mitterrand; we have occasionally had our differences, they have always been dealt with with great charm but I think there are many ways in which Jacques Chirac and I will see Europe in the same way and I very much look forward to working with him.

    INTERVIEWER:

    What kind of man is M. Chirac in your opinion?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    He is outgoing, he is warm, he is witty. He cares very much about what he does and he acts in response to the things that he most cares about so I think it will be a very exciting time. Working with him will be fun, of that I have no doubt at all.

    INTERVIEWER:

    With regard to the commemoration which is taking place today in Paris and the role of your country compared to our country during the War, what kind of thoughts do you have?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think what everyone will be thinking about today is that here we are in France, the day after the election of a new President of France, and if Britain, France, the United States and the Allies hadn’t worked together, hadn’t fought together, hadn’t won together, then we would not today, be celebrating the election of a new democratic President of France so I think we will look back at what the previous generation achieved in order that this generation and subsequent generations can live the sort of democratic life we have become used to. We owe a very great deal to that generation.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview with Al Gore – 6 May 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s doorstep interview in London with US Vice-President Al Gore, on Saturday 6th May 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am delighted to welcome the Vice-President here this morning. We have had the opportunity of continuing our discussions in Washington just a few weeks ago; we covered a wide range of subjects and perhaps I may firstly say how delighted I am to see the Vice-President here for these commemorations this weekend; he is very welcome indeed and I look forward to seeing great deal of him over the next day or so.

    VICE-PRESIDENT GORE:

    Thank you, Mr. Prime Minister. In many ways, this was a seamless continuation of a discussion that we had in Washington a short time ago. Of course, I would like to emphasise on this occasion what a great honour it is for me personally to be able to represent my country at the VE-Day commemorations and to remember on behalf of all Americans the hours when Britain stood alone against the forces of evil threatening all civilisation and to celebrate the partnership that won that war and to honour those who sacrificed everything for our freedom.

    It is a moving experience to read into the details of the tremendous sacrifices that were made and it is a true honour to take part in it.

    In our discussions, we talked about a great number of subjects including the Prime Minister’s important meeting coming up shortly with President Yeltsin in Moscow which will immediately precede President Clinton’s meeting with President Yeltsin and of course, since we are singing off the same page of music on all security issues virtually without exception, it is always valuable to talk together about the details of what is in our interests so it was a very productive discussion on that and other issues.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Let me just add a word or two on the substance of what we discussed:

    As the Vice-President said, we look forward to the agenda for the discussions I will have with President Yeltsin next week and the lengthy discussions that President Clinton will have with him the following day, a substantial agenda there and I think we found ourselves in complete agreement upon all the substantive issues.

    We also spent some time on a matter that I know is of great interest to the Vice-President and also to the Government here and that is the public sector reforms and David Hunt was able to join us and set out many of the reforms that we are undertaking. The same nature of change is taking place in the United States and we had the opportunity of comparing notes on that.

    We were able to look at a number of other issues: clearly, the developing situation in Bosnia; the development in the discussions on Northern Ireland was another matter we touched on this morning and a range of lesser items; I won’t go into detail on them at this stage but will respond to any questions you may have but it was, as it is always is when we meet the Vice-President, a very worthwhile and a very enjoyable occasion.

    QUESTION:

    May I ask the Vice-President if he is in a position to put any more pressure on Sinn Fein to take part in a meaningful decommissioning of arms in Northern Ireland?

    VICE-PRESIDENT GORE:

    Yes. We believe it is essential and we will make that point over and over again. As President Clinton said when Prime Minister Major was in Washington, we believe that is essential to the success of all-party talks and to the success of the process that Prime Minister Major and Prime Minister Bruton and Prime Minister Reynolds before him have got under way and I want to again say how impressed all Americans have been with the tremendous courage shown by Prime Minister Major in moving this process to the stage it has now reached and a willingness on the part of Sinn Fein to seriously discuss decommissioning is absolutely key at this stage and we will be urging them in every possible way to engage in such talks.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    If I could just add a point to that, we certainly discussed that and the Vice-President has just made his views very clear and I think that it is extremely helpful and I am very grateful for that.

    We also discussed the forthcoming Washington Conference which I hope is going to lead to a good deal of investment both in the north and in the south and that sort of investment, that growth of economic prosperity, that growth of opportunity that will remove, I think, many of the reasons why so many young people in the past have joined the paramilitaries on both sides is of immense importance so we look forward to that conference being a very great success and I am sure it will be.

    VICE-PRESIDENT GORE:

    The response, incidentally, among American businesses to this upcoming conference toward the end of this month has been extraordinary. You are going to see quite an outpouring from the business community seeking to seize the significant opportunities for investment in Northern Ireland and in the border counties of the Republic. We are very excited about it and looking forward to it.

    Mr. Prime Minister, you made reference to our work on re-inventing government or “public sector reform” as I believe you often refer to it here. I want to compliment David Hunt on the work that you and he have done here. I have already got an appointment – I believe next week – in Washington to talk with Mr. Hunt. We have learned a great deal from what has gone on here and we are making progress also. It is high time that some of the reforms that have been successful in private corporations are applied thoroughly to the public sector and we are learning from one another on the best ways to do that.

    QUESTION:

    I would like to ask you about the local elections now you have had time to think about them and there have also been surveys in the press and the BBC saying that party chairmen are unhappy about disunity and blaming that for the results. What is your response to that?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I dealt with most of those matters standing here yesterday and my response today would be the same as yesterday, I have nothing further to add to that. Clearly, they were very unsatisfactory election results, I make no secret about that and I made that perfectly clear yesterday. We will have to consider and reflect upon those results and see how we take matters forward.

    What I was seeking to emphasise yesterday is that there are some long-term strategic goals that we believe are very much in the interest of our prosperity in the future and we must clearly seek to achieve those goals. That doesn’t mean we are going to brush aside without consideration the concerns that people express, of course not, that is not the way of democratic politics and it is not in my instinct so of course we will consider those very carefully.

  • Mr Major’s Speech at VE Day Commemorations – 6 May 1995

    Below is Mr Major’s speech at the 50th anniversary of VE Day Commemorations at the opening ceremony at Hyde Park on Saturday 6th May 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Your Majesty, your Royal Highness, Ladies and Gentlemen.

    Fifty years ago today, Europe was still at war. For many servicemen, it remained a time of danger and hardship. War continued to rage in the Far East. As one eyewitness to the celebrations on VE night said: “for me, as for tens of thousands of others, the war started again at the end of leave”.

    But here in London that weekend there was a great sense of expectation. Outside St Paul’s, as bell ringers stood ready to start the peal of thanksgiving, the crowds gathered spontaneously.

    Today, fifty years on, as we commemorate those events, our thoughts are of thanksgiving and remembrance.

    There is much to remember:

    – those who were lost,

    – those who returned wounded,

    – those who were scarred by years of captivity,

    – those whose lives were irreparably changed by loss.

    But for many, there was the sheer joy of reunion, as our servicemen and women came home.

    Today, above all, we give thanks for the quiet bravery and decency of those men and women who defeated a tyranny beyond imagination, and in so doing, enabled future generations to enjoy the blessings of freedom, democracy and peace.

    It is very easy to take these for granted. When we have them, they sound like comfortable abstractions. But when you have to fight to regain them, as so many did, they become very real.

    At the end of the war, there was a famous cartoon. It was an illustration of a wounded soldier, standing amid the rubble of war, holding out the laurel leaves of peace in Europe, saying “here you are, don’t lose it again”. In that single picture were the hopes of millions.

    The responsibility for us, who have grown up since the war, is not to forget that plea. It is our responsibility to keep faith with those who fought to prevent future wars.

    The institutions which have grown up since 1945 – the United Nations, NATO and others – may be imperfect. Conflict still erupts around the globe. But they represent a consistent effort to find a better way to resolve disputes than by war. An effort to build on a common faith in democracy and freedom.

    Tomorrow, in St Paul’s, leaders of countries which fought so bitterly in Europe will join with Second World War veterans to reaffirm that faith, in a service of reconciliation.

    The Veterans have a special place in these commemorations. But it is right that the whole nation should join in. The war was a national struggle in which everyone played their part.

    The Merchant Navy was our lifeline to the outside world. The Bevin Boys, the Women’s Land Army, and many who had never been in a factory before, kept wartime production going. The emergency services mobilised to fight the Blitz. Thousands opened their homes to children evacuated from the cities.

    Sometimes, those who speak of the wartime sense of community go on to say it couldn’t happen now. I don’t believe that. In the lesser conflicts of the Falklands and the Gulf the same national spirit was evident. This country hasn’t changed. Nor have its instincts.

    This weekend, all over the country, people are taking part in local commemorations and events to mark VE Day.

  • Mr Major’s Joint Doorstep Interview with Jean Chretien – 6 May 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s joint doorstep interview in London with Canadian Prime Minister, Jean Chretien, on Saturday 6th May 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    It is a pleasure to welcome the Prime Minister again to London. We have had the opportunity of a lot of bilateral discussions over the last year or so and they are always very worthwhile and very productive occasions. I will invite the Prime Minister to say a word or two first, I will then follow that up and then we will take a few questions. If I could just say at the outset, we will need to be fairly brief, we both have to be in black tie and best bib and tucker and elsewhere before too long.

    PRIME MINISTER CHRETIEN:

    Thank you, Prime Minister. It was another good discussion. We discussed mainly the G7 and Bosnia where we have to work together. We want to make a success of the G7 and we are preoccupied about the situation in the former Yugoslavia; we are there with troops and we are very keen to work to have peace and to make sure that our soldiers can perform the task they have got and we are looking forward to meeting again in Halifax.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, Mr. Brittan has been saying in Ottawa that there has been a breach in Canadian/European relations following the halibut war. Do you think it is a breach that cannot be healed or repaired?

    PRIME MINISTER MAJOR:

    There is no breach that can’t be healed or repaired. Leon Brittan is speaking for the European Union. I think you know that there was the occasional ruckus between ourselves and our European partners over that issue. Now I hope that is behind us and I an sure my European partners would wish to put it behind us as speedily as possible.

    PRIME MINISTER CHRETIEN:

    I would like to take the occasion to thank the people of Great Britain for the great support that they have given to us during this episode. Probably one of the proudest moments since became Prime Minister was when the British fishermen were on TV with the Canadian flag; it gave me a lot of pleasure that day and I would like to say thank you to your people for that.

    QUESTION:

    You talked about Bosnia. I wonder whether you spoke about the possibility of having to pull troops out if things escalate there, under what conditions that might be necessary and how it might be accomplished.

    PRIME MINISTER MAJOR:

    We discuss Bosnia a lot both when we meet and over the telephone. We have been working very closely over Bosnian policy and our relative troops contributions; Canada has made a remarkable contribution there and kept in very close touch as well so yes, we did discuss the present situation.

    Clearly, what has happened in Croatia is very disturbing. We certainly need the ceasefire to continue and there is a real danger that if the war were to escalate in Bosnia generally that the position of the protection forces in Bosnia could become impossible. It is not my wish to see that nor the Prime Minister’s; we think that the troops there, with humanitarian aid and other matters, have done and are doing a remarkable job, many people are alive who wouldn’t be but for them but they are not equipped to be in the middle of a full-scale war and the position that we have both taken is that if the war were really to erupt there are circumstances in which the protection forces could not safely be left there. That is the position and has been for a long time but the Prime Minister may wish to add something to that.

    PRIME MINISTER CHRETIEN:

    Well said, Prime Minister!

    QUESTION:

    [In French]

    PRIME MINISTER CHRETIEN:

    [In French]

    QUESTION:

    Do you fear that there may come a point where we would have to withdraw our troops?

    PRIME MINISTER CHRETIEN:

    It is always possible that there will be a circumstance where we will have to withdraw. We have said that many times and the Prime Minister just mentioned that a minute ago.

    QUESTION:

    As well as the things that you seem to be in great agreement on, can you tell me whether you have managed to come to an agreement on that vexed pension issue which comes up annually or biannually?

    PRIME MINISTER MAJOR:

    We had the opportunity of a further discussion.

    QUESTION:

    And how did it go?

    PRIME MINISTER MAJOR:

    It was, as ever, good-natured, frank, worthwhile and to be continued.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, can I ask you for your reaction today to the speech of Chancellor Kohl in which he equated the suffering of the Germans during the War with that of the [Inaudible].

    PRIME MINISTER MAJOR:

    I haven’t seen any speech that Helmut has made today. I will certainly look at it but I am not commenting on a speech I have not yet seen.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 5 May 1995

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 5th May 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Kashmir Elections

    Mr. Cox: To ask the Prime Minister what discussions he has had with the Indian Government as to the holding of elections during the current year in the Indian-occupied area of Kashmir; and if he will make a statement on the criteria the British Government will expect to see followed to have confidence that such elections were free and fair.

    The Prime Minister: I have had no recent discussions with the Indian Government, but my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary discussed elections in Kashmir during his visit to India in January. We shall be considering with our European partners how best to assess the forthcoming elections in Kashmir.

     

    Atlantic Trade

    Mr. Gill: To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on his discussions with President Clinton concerning a merger between the North American Free Trade Area and the European Union.

    The Prime Minister: The UK Government, the European Commission and the US Administration are each looking at various specific ways of liberalising trade both across the north Atlantic and more generally. We believe Europe and north America must work together for free and open trade across the Atlantic.

  • Mr Major’s Interview on the Local Election Results – 5 May 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments made concerning the 4th May 1995 local election results, made in an interview held on Friday 5th May 1995.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked how he would turn around the fortunes of the Conservative Party following the poor local election results]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    They were poor results, there is no point in hiding that. And it is increasingly clear as you disinter the details of the results quite how many of our natural supporters declined to come out and vote. The number of people who I bumped into this morning who said they didn’t vote yesterday but don’t worry we will be there at the general election, but we have found what has gone on in the last period a bit tedious., So I think there are a lot of people there who have not changed their mind and gone away, they just want to be persuaded back to us, and I think that is eminently do-able.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked what had gone wrong]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think it is essentially the recession. The recession was long and hard, longer than we thought, deeper than we thought. And in order to meet the long-term policy objectives we have got we had to produce some policies that were very unpopular for people, and not only unpopular but they were opposed to what Conservative Parties normally like to do.

    The Conservative supporters in the country find it counter-intuitive when a Conservative government has to increase taxes. The fact that we had to increase taxes for the good conservative reason that you cannot spend more money than you have got, doesn’t detract from the fact that people don’t like to see taxes raised, and there are other examples as well of course I could give you. So I think that is the principal reason.

    The question that arises from that is, if we are planning for the long term, have we got it right, are we going to deliver the long term improvements that people want and are they going to be there in time for the next general election? I believe we have and I believe they will be. And at the time of the next general election I think the recovery that is now patently obvious for business and commerce and economists, but not yet patently obvious to the public, will be there for everyone to see.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview Following Local Elections – 5 May 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s doorstep interview given on Friday 5th May 1995, following the previous night’s local election results.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Good Morning. I thought it might be helpful if I were to say a word or two about last night’s election results.

    I have no excuses to make to you about last night’s election results. We have done what we believe is right for the country and clearly last night’s results show that thus far we have failed to persuade the country of that. We shall continue to seek to do so. So last night was a very good night for the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats and a bad night for the Conservative Party.

    I have come from local government and I appreciate its importance. I would like firstly to offer my congratulations to those Conservative Councillors who were elected and those Councillors who were elected for all other parties. They have an important role to play and the government will look forward to working with them to improve the livelihoods of everyone in the areas they represent.

    Can I say a word about those Conservative Councillors have failed to win last night? Many of them have served in local government, with great distinction, for many years. I know and appreciate the value of the work that they have done. I believe that they can take a sabbatical from local government with pride. The defeat they had last night was not their defeat. They were the victims of a national sentiment, not of the very proud record that they have in local government. I look forward to seeing them return local government in ever greater numbers in the elections that still lie ahead.

    I daresay after last evening that I will get a certain amount of conflicting advice from various quarters. I shall listen very carefully to all of that advice. But I have to say to you straight away that I have no intention of throwing away the long-term prosperity that we are seeking to build in this country. The price of that policy may well have been last night’s election results, but I believe the prize of the policy that we are following is long-term prosperity for this country. That is not just a slogan, it means more jobs, higher living standards, lower taxes, much more opportunities and far greater choice.

    And it also means low inflation, which again is not just for me a slogan, it means preserving the value of people’s money and increasing the security of their lives. That combination of circumstances, improving living standards and a stable currency, is a prize that we have sought in this country for very many years. I believe it is a prize that we shall have to continue to seek and our policies will continue to do that. There will be no change away from the policy to build long-term growth and stability for this country.

    I believe we are well on the way to achieving that. I have sought to do so from the moment I crossed the threshold of Number 10 Downing Street, and I shall continue to seek that outcome for so long as I am there. We have a five year Parliament. Throughout this Parliament we have put into place policies that have a long-term effect. All the long-term beneficial effects of those are not yet clear. I believe they will become clear. We have pursued them for three years, I intend to pursue them right through to the end of this Parliament and then defend them at the next general election.

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

    QUESTION (John Sergeant, BBC TV):

    Prime Minister, what do you say to those Tories who that they cannot win the next election under your leadership?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I don’t believe that is remotely right and I think events will prove that is right. I heard criticism of course before the last general election. I think the reality is that we have had to take some very difficult decisions. I know those decisions hurt, but I have to say to you I believe it was in our long term interests to take those decisions. If they have concerned people, we have paid an electoral price for them in the short term. But I believe in the long term they will prove to be right and I am prepared to defend the policies that I have adopted for precisely that reason and I will continue to do so up to and through the election that I believe we shall win.

    QUESTION (Michael Brunson, ITN):

    Can I just follow that through. You are saying that it is simply not in your mind, and will not be until the next election, that you would think that you ought to step aside and someone else should have a chance to see if they can do better?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Michael, it is not in my mind. I have never run away from difficulty in my life and I don’t intend to do so now. And for those people who may suggest, as some have, that at the moment the Conservative Party have their backs to the wall, I would simply say we will do precisely what the British nation has done all through its history when it had its back to the wall, that was turn round and fight for the things that it believed in, and that is what I shall do.

    QUESTION (Adam Boulton, Sky):

    If you are not going on sabbatical is the rest of the Cabinet safe, is there going to be a reshuffle and particularly are the Chancellor and the Party Chairman safe?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No doubt at some stage between now and the next general election, which I suspect is around 2 years away, I will consider whether there is a necessity for government changes. But I certainly have nothing to say to you about that at the moment.

    QUESTION (Elinor Goodman):

    You say there are no excuses. Do you personally accept any culpability for what has happened and what would you say to any Tories who did come to you next week and say we think there should be a challenge now?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    If anyone thinks there should be a challenge, the Conservative Party have a procedure, a democratic procedure, for them to mount it. That is a matter for them, they will have to make that decision. I said I don’t make excuses. We have thus far – thus far – failed to persuade people that the long term policies I am following are right for the country. I believe that we will be able to persuade them that they are right and I shall continue to seek to do so.

    QUESTION (Robin Oakley):

    Four-fifths of the country had the chance of voting in these local elections, only one-quarter of them have voted for the Conservative Party, and yet you are saying that nothing changes. Surely your policies have been rejected, isn’t there something you have to change?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I acknowledge the concern that people feel at the moment. I don’t lightly brush that aside, I am not complacent about it. I am not saying to people we are going to take no notice of the concern that you feel. But I don’t believe that people would have any respect for someone who believed certain long term policies are right, and then shifts away from seeking those long term policies and carrying them through to their conclusion. I am not here in Downing Street just because I am a professional politician who wants this job. I am here because there are things I believe in, I have always believed in and wish to try and carry through because I believe they are right for this country. Now it may be, even on the reduced turnout we had yesterday, that we have failed to persuade people of that, certainly all the evidence is that lots of Conservative voters chose not to come out and vote at this election because of their present concerns. We will have to persuade them that the policies are right, and I will endeavour to do so.

    QUESTION:

    Don’t you think an element of humility might go down with the electorate rather better than this sort of rather arrogant response which is telling the electorate that you have never had it so good?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I don’t think anyone who has heard what I have been saying has heard me say anything like you have never had it so good. What I actually said – perhaps you would care to play the tape back – was that I understand the way people feel, I make no excuses for the fact that we had a bad result last night, I acknowledge that people are concerned. But I also said that I am here, I was elected to do what I believed would be right in the long term interests of this country and I believe that is what people have a right to expect of their Prime Minister and of their government. And if we we’re not doing that then we shouldn’t be here. But since we are doing that I think we should continue to seek to carry it through successfully.

    QUESTION (European Business News):

    Would you put at least part of the blame down to the threat of Europe and closer ties to Europe?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am not in the business of apportioning blame to different elements of policy, I don’t think that is productive and I don’t think anyone truly can be absolutely certain. I think the bruises of the recession are clearly still there, I think there is no doubt about that. It has been a very deep recession, not just in this country of course but right across Western Europe, and people have not yet fully recovered from the effects of that recession so I think they feel very bruised. It will take a time to recover but recover I am sure they will.

    QUESTION:

    Are you aware that there are worries amongst the electorate over your policies on Europe?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think I am very well aware of the European debate. I think if I may say so that I am probably more aware of the European debate than almost anyone else in this country. Of course I understand those worries. I have indicated time and time again those areas where I share those worries.

    QUESTION:

    We see what looks like the Chancellor’s Rover held up at the gates of Downing Street, are interest rates going to have to go up?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think you will have to wait for the outcome of the meeting between the Chancellor and the Governor this morning. I don’t yet know what the outcome of that is.

    QUESTION:

    You say that people are still bruised by the recession, do you think that to enable people to feel that things are going right for them that there will have to be tax cuts this autumn?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I have said all along that the fact that we had to raise taxes was something I very much regretted. we did it because if we had not closed the gap between what we were spending as a result of the recession and what our income was then there was a likelihood that interest rates would have had to have gone up and mortgage rates would have had to go up. So it was a devil’s choice. And we decided that we had to take the decision on taxes in order to lay a long term position for sustainable growth, and that is what we have done. But I don’t like having higher taxes.

    When it is prudent to reduce taxes I will wish to reduce taxes and so will the Chancellor. We are not in the business of making short-term tax cuts that are not economically justifiable, that has not been our position. But when it is prudent to do so, and when we think it is economically justifiable, I would rather make tax cuts and leave people free to make their own choices with their own money than leave the money with government to make choices on their behalf. So when we can make them we will.

    QUESTION:

    I wonder if you could offer any reassurance to those many thousands of defeated Conservative candidates, some of whom were last night and this morning blaming government policy, that some elements of government policy will now be re-assessed?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I indicated some time ago that I think many of the Councillors were defeated last night, not as a result of their record locally which I think is excellent, but because of peoples’ concern and national sentiment at the moment. Of course we will listen to what people are saying, but I repeat the point I made a moment ago. We are I think in a transitional phase. If you look at many of the things that are happening, people in this country are pleased that prices are not rising as once they did, they are pleased that the country is beginning to get back to more growth than they have had for a very long time, they are pleased that unemployment is falling faster here than in any other country, they are pleased that public services are getting better. I am not going to change the policies of making those improvements. If I think we can improve policy to increase the improvements and remove the concerns then of course we will do so, that is an everyday concern for us.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Well I look forward to the day when they are and I hope they will be.

    QUESTION (Elinor Goodman):

    Going back to education and policies, that seems to have been one policy where people feel very strongly that you are letting the electorate down, you are letting the nation’s children down, are you going to take that on board and increase spending?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We have done a great deal to improve education policy over the last few years. It is not just a question of spending, education policy, of course that is an element of it and despite all that has been said and written about education the amount of money available for education this year is larger than the amount of money available for education last year. We are seeking to improve education. I shall have some more statements to make, particularly on nursery education, before too long. I think many people will welcome what we have in mind there.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 4 May 1995

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

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Ministerial Documents

    Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will make it his policy to ensure that documents originated or acquired by Ministers in the course of their official duties are not sold by them or their heirs and assigns.

    The Prime Minister: By convention, Prime Ministers, on leaving office, have taken with them copies of certain documents which they dealt with personally while in office. These include some documents originated or acquired by them in the course of their official duties. This convention has not applied to Ministers other than former Prime Ministers. The extent to which former Prime Ministers or their heirs and assigns may dispose of such papers, and how, depends on the circumstances of each case.

    It is my policy that in future material removed from official custody at the end of an Administration should contain no official material other than that which is already in the public domain.

    Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister in what circumstances a document subject when originated to the provisions of the Official Secrets Acts may be classified other than a state paper.

    The Prime Minister: Documents originating from other than official sources, and which contain official information that should not be disclosed, come within the provisions of the Official Secrets Acts but are not state papers.

    Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister (1) if retired Ministers are required to submit their memoirs for approval under the Official Secrets Acts before publication;

    (2) if the right hon. Nigel Lawson submitted his memoirs for approval under the official Secrets Acts before publication, with particular reference to mention of the Governor of the Bank of England.

    The Prime Minister: There is no requirement for former Ministers to submit their memoirs under the Official Secrets Acts before publication. The report of the Committee of Privy Counsellors on Ministerial Memoirs, Cmnd. 7386, recommended that former Ministers who wished to make public an account bearing on their ministerial life should let the Secretary of the Cabinet see in advance the full text of what they propose to say. The Cabinet Secretary offers advice to the author of the text, including on whether it contains material contravening the requirements of national security.

    My right hon. and noble Friend Lord Lawson submitted his memoirs to the Cabinet Secretary in the normal way, without any particular reference.

    Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will refer to the Nolan committee the propriety of Ministers or their heirs retaining and using for private gain information or documents acquired in the course of their official duties.

    The Prime Minister: I have no plans to do so.

     

    Engagements

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

    Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 4 May.

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

     

    Central Computer Database

    Mr. Cohen: To ask the Prime Minister what plans there are to create a central computerised database on individuals using the database of the national insurance recording system 2–to be available to other Government Departments; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister: The recently announced replacement of the national insurance recording system–NIRS2–does not include any plans to create a separate computer database on individuals, nor does it involve extending access arrangements to the NIRS2 database to other than existing users of the current NIRS system.

     

    Churchill Papers

    Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his oral answer of 27 April to the right hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Ashdown), Official Report, column 978, what steps he has taken to establish whether the papers sold by the Churchill family to the national heritage memorial fund were at any time covered by the provisions of the Official Secrets Acts.

    The Prime Minister: Churchill College has been advised on which papers in the Churchill archive can be released to researchers and which need to be withheld.

    Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister what steps the Government took to purchase the annotated eight-page typescript of Sir Winston Churchill’s El Alamein speech sold by Sotheby’s in December 1994; and whether this is included in the Churchill documents purchased by the national heritage memorial fund.

    The Prime Minister: The manuscript to which the hon. Member refers was sold by a private owner and was one of many which Sir Winston Churchill gave away during his lifetime. At no time did it form part of the Churchill archive and it does not do so now. It is for the national institutions which maintain archives to decide whether to commit funds to the purchase of papers which appear on the open market.

    Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister how many of the papers sold by the Churchill family to the national heritage memorial fund are to be found in the Public Record Office in their original or a duplicate form; and what copyright fees have to be paid to the Churchill family when such documents in either location are reproduced.

    The Prime Minister: The papers purchased by the national heritage memorial fund are the non-state papers. They are not normally to be found in the Public Record Office in either original or duplicate form. Copyright in the papers purchased by the national heritage memorial fund is a matter for the copyright owners.

    Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister whether he will request the trustees of the national lottery fund to hand back the Churchill papers to the family in return for the money they have received.

    The Prime Minister: No. The integrity of the Churchill archive has now been secured for the nation by the purchase of the non-state papers from the Churchill family and by the transfer of the state papers similarly to Churchill College.

    Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will make it his policy to reduce the fees charged for access to and reproduction of the Churchill papers; and if he will publish the proposed scale of charges.

    The Prime Minister: No fees are levied on access to the Churchill papers at Churchill College. Reproduction is a matter for the copyright owners as is the question of charges. A licence has been granted which waives the copyright fee in respect of the reproduction of Crown copyright material for the purposes of research and private study. Other charges, for example the commercial use of the papers, will be levied in accordance with normal practice.

     

    Civil Servants

    Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister whether civil servants who have been allowed to publish material which relies in any particular on what they have learnt or done in the course of their employment by the Crown are expected to hand to the Crown any profit derived by the author from the publication.

    The Prime Minister: The extent to which a civil servant may be required to account to the Crown for any profit made from such publication will depend on whether the author produced all or part of the work during official time and whether the work is based on or otherwise used Crown copyright material.

    Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister in what circumstances civil servants may publish without prior approval any material based directly or indirectly on what they have learnt or done in the course of their employment by the Crown.

    The Prime Minister: Civil servants must clear in advance material for publication which draws on official material or experience.

    Mr. Milburn: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list the individual value of each (a) compulsory early retirement and (b) flexible early retirement package received by civil servants leaving his Department on grounds of limited efficiency in each of the last five years.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 2 May 1995]: For these purposes my office is part of the Cabinet Office–Office of Public Service and Science. I refer the hon. Member to the reply given today by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.

     

    Hospitality

    Mr. Tony Banks: To ask the Prime Minister how much was spent on official hospitality in his official capacities in the financial year 1994-95.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 1 May 1995]: The provisional total is £30,000.

     

    Rules of Succession

    Mr. Mackinlay: To ask the Prime Minister (1) in which country of which Her Majesty is Head of State the inheritance of the Crown is prohibited to adherents of certain religions;

    (2) in which countries of which Her Majesty the Queen is Head of State (a) the oldest child and (b) the oldest male child of the monarch succeed to the throne.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 25 April 1995]: I am not aware that any other Commonwealth realm has rules relating to the succession to the throne.