The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Category: Prime Minister (1990-1997)

  • Mr Major’s Comments at the Launch of the National Lottery – 14 November 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments at the launch of the National Lottery on 14th November 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Daybreak at the Tower has been an inauspicious moment for some. But not this morning. This gathering could not be more helpful and exciting.

    It was 1826 when England last had a national lottery. It is two and a half years since I published the White Paper proposing a modern National Lottery – just over a year since this idea became law. Finally, today, the Lottery is here.

    The Tower of London is a spectacular backdrop for this occasion. It is a splendid reward for the team at Camelot. It is a truly magnificent effort to have got to the launch of the Lottery in less than six months. 10,000 computer terminals have been installed and 35,000 staff trained already. Nearly everyone is within easy reach of a Lottery retailer, with more to come.

    Millions of people will enjoy the chance to play and have the opportunity of winning. There will be hundreds of thousands of prizes, from a few pounds to more than a million.

    Anyone could be a winner. But everyone can take pride and pleasure in seeing the proceeds of the Lottery enhance our national life. Camelot estimate that by 2001, nine billion pounds will be raised for good causes – the arts, sport, heritage, charities and projects big and small to mark the millennium.

    Life in Britain will be the richer for them. An immense but exciting task lies before those entrusted with distributing this money. So let’s get their Lottery; your Lottery; Britain’s National Lottery, switched on and under way.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 3 November 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 3rd November 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Media and Broadcasting

    Mr. Allen: To ask the Prime Minister which individual or institution will receive from the President of the EU Parliament the resolution of the EU Parliament on media ownership.

    The Prime Minister: The President of the European Parliament will submit the resolution on the Commission Green Paper ” Pluralism and Media Concentration on the Internal Market ” to the Commission and the Council.

     

    Book Purchase

    Mr. Llew Smith: To ask the Prime Minister (1) if he will obtain for the 10 Downing street library, a copy of a recently published book details of which have been supplied to him; and if he will seek clarification from the United States Government regarding the references to it therein;

    (2) if he will instigate an investigation into matters in the letter from the hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent on 26 October.

    The Prime Minister: I have not seen the book referred to. If I have anything to add at a later stage, I will write to the hon. Member.

     

    The Guardian Newspaper

    Mr. Tony Banks: To ask the Prime Minister when the Cabinet Secretary first knew of the alleged use of House of Commons notepaper by The Guardian newspaper to obtain information about the hotel bill of the right hon. Member for Thanet, South (Mr. Aitken); when the Prime Minister was informed; and what steps he took to bring the matter to the attention of the House authorities.

    The Prime Minister: The matter first came to the attention of my right hon. Friend, the Member for Thanet, South following the publication of an article in The Guardian on 10 May 1994; he reported it to me and the Cabinet Secretary on 11 May 1994.

    My right hon. Friend considered raising a complaint immediately but decided not to pursue the matter at that time. What has since been revealed is that the forgery was part of a concerted attempt to cover up collusion.

     

    Engagements

    Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 3 November.

    Sir Peter Tapsell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 3 November.

    The Prime Minister: I will be presiding at a meeting of the Cabinet and having meetings with ministerial colleagues and others.

     

    Departmental Property

    Mr. Byers: To ask the Prime Minister what properties are owned or leased by his Office for the use of Ministers; what was the total running cost for each property for the latest year available broken down into (a) furniture and fittings, (b) maintenance, (c) staffing, including the number of butlers, cooks and housekeepers, (d) food and hospitality and (e) other costs; what is the estimated value of each property; and how many times in the latest year the property was stayed in overnight by a Minister.

    The Prime Minister: None.

     

    Spencer Stuart Consultants

    Mr. Byers: To ask the Prime Minister how many contracts his Department or Government agencies responsible to his Department have entered into with Spencer Stuart consultants in the last two years.

    The Prime Minister: So far as I am aware, none.

     

    Police Finances

    Mr. Michael: To ask the Prime Minister which Department of State is responsible for (a) setting and (b) publishing standard spending assessments regarding police force areas in (i) England and (ii) Wales.

    The Prime Minister: The Department of the Environment for England, and the Welsh Office for Wales, are responsible for setting and publishing the standard spending assessments for all local authorities.

    In England, there is a distinct component of the SSA for police; this is prepared in discussion with the Home Office. In Wales, there is no such distinct component, but the SSAs for county councils include provision for the police service.

     

    Nolan Committee

    Mr. Llew Smith: To ask the Prime Minister if allegations of illegal donations to the election funds of political parties are to be brought to the attention of Lord Nolan’s committee on the standards of conduct in public life.

    The Prime Minister: I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Meirionnyddd Nant Conwy (Mr. Llwyd) on 31 October 1994, Official Report, column 911.

    Mr. Llew Smith: To ask the Prime Minister what remuneration will be received by each member of the Nolan committee in regard to their time commitments; what expenses are to be made available to members of the Committee; for what duration each committee member is appointed; and from what budget administrative and support resources for the Nolan committee will be drawn.

    The Prime Minister: I will write to the hon. Member.

     

    Lobbying Organisations

    Mr. Meacher: To ask the Prime Minister (1) on what occasions in the past two years he has acceded to requests from former Ministers to meet or otherwise contact lobbying companies; and what guidance he gives to former Ministers as to what services they may offer to such companies;

    (2) what lobbying organisations he has met over the last year; and on what dates he met representatives of each organisation.

    The Prime Minister: I will write to the hon. Member.

     

    Ministers (Remunerated Employment)

    Mrs. Roche: To ask the Prime Minister which Ministers pursue remunerated employment outside their ministerial duties; and if he will list in each case the employment, how much time is spent on it, and what financial gain the Minister receives from it.

    The Prime Minister: I will write to the hon. Member.

     

    Member for Norfolk, South

    Mr. Wilson: To ask the Prime Minister (1) what advice the right hon. Member for Norfolk, South (Mr. MacGregor), while acting as Secretary of State for Transport gave to the British Railways Board in connection with the employment of Hill Samuel to provide advice on its disposal programme; and on what date;

    (2) pursuant to his answer of 31 October, Official Report, column 914, if he will now state the date on which the right hon. Member for Norfolk, South (Mr. MacGregor) indicated his intention to leave the Government;

    (3) if Messrs Hill Samuel paid pension contributions on behalf of the right hon. Member for Norfolk, South (Mr. MacGregor) during his period of ministerial office or any part thereof; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister: I will write to the hon. Member.

     

    Council of Europe

    Mr. Duncan: To ask the Prime Minister what changes he has made to the composition of the United Kingdom delegation to the 1994 session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.

    The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend, the Member for Poole (Mr. Ward), has resigned as a full member of the delegation, following his appointment as my parliamentary private secretary, and has been replaced by my hon. Friend, the Member for Reading, West (Sir A. Durant), who is currently a substitute member. My hon. Friend, the Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Sir I. Patnick), will be appointed as a substitute member of the delegation in place of my hon. Friend, the Member for Reading, West. These changes take effect from today.

     

    Al Yamamah Agreement

    Mr. Llew Smith: To ask the Prime Minister (1) if he will ensure that Mr. Christopher Prentice, a Foreign Office diplomat working at the British embassy in Washington in the mid-1980s, is interviewed about the Yamamah deal.

    (2) pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Workington (Mr. Campbell-Savours) of 25 October, Official Report, column 520, regarding the Al Yamamah agreement, if he will set out the nature of the errors to which he refers.

    The Prime Minister: I will write to the hon. Member.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 2 November 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 2nd November 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Public Appointments

    Mr. Kirkwood: To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 24 October, Official Report , column 423 , if he will provide a statistical analysis showing the (i) number of people and (ii) proportion of the total register who have volunteered information that they are members of (a) the Conservative Party, (b) the Liberal Democrats, (c) the Labour Party, (d) the Ulster Unionist Party, (e) the Social Democratic and Labour Party, (f) Plaid Cymru, (g) the Scottish National Party, (h) the Democratic Unionist Party, (i) the Popular Unionist Party and (j) the Green Party.

    The Prime Minister: Nominees on the public appointments unit’s register are not required to give any details of their political affiliation, but can volunteer it if they wish. Some 87.5 per cent. of nominees do not volunteer any information, and therefore no information about their affiliation is held.

    The analysis of those who have volunteered to the public appointments unit the nature of their political affiliation is as follows:

    Political party |Number |Percentage

    ————————————————————————-

    Conservative |409 |8.0

    Labour |132 |2.6

    Liberal Democrats |50 |1.0

    Social Democratic Party |46 |0.9

    Green Party |1 |0.02

    Welsh Nationalist |1 |0.02

    Total |639 |12.5

    Total number on register |5,095

    Mr. Kirkwood: To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 24 October, Official Report, column 423 , if his Office (a) adds information concerning the political affiliation of nominees on the public appointments unit’s register, when it is known but not volunteered or (b) have access to other lists that provide such information.

    The Prime Minister: No.

     

    “Questions of Procedure for Ministers”

    Dr. Wright: To ask the Prime Minister what plans he has to revise “Questions of Procedure for Ministers”.

    The Prime Minister: I have no plans to do so at present. If the Committee on Standards in Public Life makes recommendations in respect of the conduct of Ministers I will, of course, consider whether “Questions of Procedure for Ministers” should be revised in the light of the recommendations.

     

    Mr. Ghazanfer Ali

    Mr. Madden: To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement about the current position in the case of Mr. Ghazanfer Ali detained in prison in Azad Kashmir.

    The Prime Minister: We continue to raise this case with the Pakistani authorities and await their response. Officials discussed it informally with Sardar Qayyum Khan of Azad Kashmir on 31 October.

     

    Engagements

    Mr. Tony Banks: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for the evening of 28 May 1993.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 31 October 1994]: I attended a function in my constituency.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 1 November 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 1st November 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Labour Statistics

    Mr. Worthington: To ask the Prime Minister how many people there were in employment (a) in the United Kingdom, (b) in Scotland and (c) in the Clydebank and Milngavie constituency in September in each year since 1979; how many of these jobs were (i) full-time or (ii) part-time; and how many were filled by (1) men and (2) women.

    The Prime Minister: The information requested at (a) and (b) is available for all years since 1979 and can be obtained from the Library of the House. Constituency information is available only for September of 1984, 1987, 1989 and 1991.

     

    Iraq

    Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Prime Minister what is the latest information available to him about health and malnutrition conditions at the present time in the valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates.

    The Prime Minister: In addition to information from non-governmental organisations we receive reports from United Nations agencies. Copies of the most recent report from the office of the United Nations co-ordinator in Baghdad have been placed in both Libraries of the House.

     

    Engagements

    Sir Peter Tapsell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 November.

    Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 November.

    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.

     

    Wheelchairs

    Mr. Alfred Morris: To ask the Prime Minister what response he is making to the petition he received from Lord Attenborough and others on 19 October urging the provision of powered indoor/outdoor wheelchairs for severely disabled people who cannot be independently mobile without them; what action he is taking; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister: A reply has been sent to the Muscular Dystrophy Group to acknowledge the petition and explain our policy on the provision of wheelchairs for disabled people. I have passed the petition itself to the Department of Health. Health Ministers are, of course, aware of the “batteries not included” campaign.

    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health, my hon. Friend the Member for Battersea (Mr. Bowis), is currently studying the feasibility and affordability of a wheelchair voucher scheme and will announce his conclusions in due course.

     

    Documents for Signature

    Mr. Ron Davies: To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 26 October, Official Report , column 619 , if he will list the official documents, letters or accords that he has allowed photographic reproduction of his signature to appear on; and if he will list the official documents, letters or accords that he has signed which are written in a language that he does not understand.

    The Prime Minister: I have nothing further to add to the reply I gave to the hon. Member on 26 October, Official Report, column 619 .

     

    Mohamed Al Fayed

    Mr. Madden: To ask the Prime Minister when Mr. Mohamed Al Fayed requested a meeting with him; for what reasons he declined the request; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister: I have nothing further to add to the statement I made to the House on standards of conduct in public life, on 25 October, Official Report, columns 775 70.

    Mr. Byers: To ask the Prime Minister on how many occasions since 1 January 1985 Mr. Mohamed Al Fayed has visited 10 Downing street; and on what dates.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 28 October 1994]: Mr. Al Fayed visited No. 10 Downing street on the following occasions:

    25 January 1985 (for the then Prime Minister’s meeting with the Sulton of Brunei)

    14 March 1985 (for the then Prime Minister’s lunch for President Mubarak)

    3 April 1985 (for a meeting with officials)

    7 January 1986 (for a meeting with officials)

     

    Correspondence

    Mrs. Roche: To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 14 June, Official Report, column 370, if his Office will now seek to obtain the full text of the letter from the Ritz hotel referred to in the correspondence between the Prime Minister and Mr. Peter Preston, editor of The Guardian.

    The Prime Minister: I have nothing further to add to my previous answers on this subject.

     

    Council of Europe

    Sir Anthony Durant: To ask the Prime Minister, if he will place in the Library a copy of the information bulletin on the activities of the Council of Europe.

    The Prime Minister: I have done so today.

     

    Open Government and Accountability

    Mr. Duncan: To ask the Prime Minister what initiatives the Government has taken since November 1990 on open government and accountability.

    The Prime Minister: The Government launched the citizens charter in July 1991. Information and openness are among its central principles.

    The membership and terms of reference of ministerial Cabinet committees were published in May 1992, along with “Questions of Procedure for Ministers”.

    In May 1992, I avowed for the first time the continuing existence of the secret intelligence service and named its chief. The Intelligence Services Act, which received royal assent in May 1994, puts both Government communications headquarters and the secret intelligence service on a statutory footing. A statutory oversight committee of parliamentarians for the security and intelligence services was also provided for.

    The White paper on open government, published in July 1993, proposed the following measures:

    A code of practice on access to government information.

    Statutory access rights to personal records and health and safety information.

    Greater openness in access to public records.

    The code of practice came into force in April 1994, providing for:

    Information to be volunteered by Government, such as facts and analysis with the policy decisions, and internal guidelines on dealing with the public.

    Government information to be released in response to specific requests.

    Reasons to be provided for administrative decisions.

    Enforcement by the Parliamentary Ombudsman, at no cost to the applicant.

    A similar code of practice, covering the national health service, is currently the subject of consultation.

    Over 24,000 records have been released since the open government initiatives began. These include almost 4,000 pieces of the intelligence material shown to Winston Churchill during the war–the so-called “Dir C Archive”; 840 pieces from the Special Operations Executive archive relating to SOE activities in the far east, Scandinavia, the middle east and Africa; previously withheld wartime Cabinet minutes; Admiralty intelligence papers; and War Office papers relating to the interrogation of prisoners-of-war.

    A code of conduct has been issued to national health service boards, emphasising that high standards of corporate conduct and probity are at the heart of the NHS. Public registers of interests have been established.

    A similar Treasury code of best practice for board members of other public bodies has also been promulgated. It recommends that all boards should establish a register of board members’ interests. As I announced to the House on 20 October, Official Report, column 421, a review of the system of appointments to public bodies is currently being carried out. The conclusions of the review will be made public, and will also be made available to the Nolan committee.

     

    Cash and Running Costs Limits

    Mr. Streeter: To ask the Prime Minister what proposals there are to change the 1994 95 cash limit or running costs limit in respect of security and intelligence services.

    The Prime Minister: Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary token supplementary estimate, the cash limit for security and intelligence services, class XIX, vote 2 will be increased by £1,000 from £881,486,000 to £881,487,000 and the gross running cost limit will be reduced by £2,361,000 from £449,850,000 to £447,489,000. This takes account of increased capital spending arising from the slippage of a building project and unforeseen capital and other purchases. These increases are being offset by increased receipts and reductions in both running costs and other current expenditure.

    Mr. Dunn: To ask the Prime Minister what proposals there are to change the 1994 95 cash limit or running costs limit for the Cabinet Office: other services vote.

    The Prime Minister: Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for the Cabinet Office: other services, class XIX, vote 1, will be increased by £1,452,000 from £43,381,000 to £44,833,000. At the same time, the running costs limit will be increased by £1,452,000 from £41,762,000 to £43,214,000.

    The increase reflects the transfer of certain administrative functions and the move to repayment for some common service support as follows:

    (a) transfer of running costs provision for certain Ministry of Defence property charges (Class 1 Vote 1) (£494,000);

    (b) transfer of running costs provision for support to former Prime Ministers (Class VIII, Vote 3) (£163,000);

    (c) transfer of running costs provision for central services (Class XVII, Vote 1) (£80,000); and

    (d) transfer of provision for the calculation of the average property price list (£3,000).

    In addition, as announced by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 14 July 1994, Official Report , columns 729-734 , this vote is eligible for a cash limit increase of £721,000 in respect of end year flexibility arrangements for running costs expenditure. This supplementary estimate gives effect to the increase. All the increases are either offset by inter-departmental transfers or have been charged to the reverse and will not therefore add to the planned total of public expenditure.

  • PMQT – 1 November 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 1st November 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Stevenson: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 November.

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

    Mr. Stevenson: Will the Prime Minister confirm the complete absence of any mention of privatisation of the Post Office in the last Tory party manifesto? Is he aware of the complete absence of any public support for that latest piece of Government dogma? Will he now take this opportunity to do the country a service and rescue the President of the Board of Trade by withdrawing that absurd proposal?

    The Prime Minister: As the whole House knows, we are considering the results of the consultation exercise that was launched in the summer. [Interruption.] I am surprised to hear Opposition Members scoffing. I thought that in the new politics the Labour party favoured consultation.

    Mr. Brooke: If Mr. Al Fayed requires a forgery from The Guardian to resolve his conscience, what, in my right hon. Friend’s mind, does that tell us about Mr. Al Fayed or The Guardian, or both?

    The Prime Minister: I think that many conclusions may be drawn from that, some of which may well be drawn from the investigation that the Serjeant at Arms himself is carrying out into the affair. Certainly, whatever is uncovered, I doubt whether it will be to the credit of the principal people concerned.

    Mr. Blair: To return to the Prime Minister’s response to my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent, South (Mr. Stevenson), on Post Office privatisation, there is more than a whiff of retreat in the air. If the Prime Minister does retreat– [Interruption.] Is he aware that, if he does retreat on that, he will be acting wisely, because if he is going to consult the British people, the vast majority of them–and, I believe, a majority in this House–want a modern Post Office with greater commercial freedom, delivering a cheap and reliable service, and that the best way of achieving that is to retain it in public ownership, run it as a public service and serve the public interest?

    The Prime Minister: I can certainly share with the right hon. Gentleman the wish to make the Post Office business strong, competitive and able to deliver the services that people need. Of course, a large number of improvements have been made over the past few years, most of them opposed at the time by Opposition Members. In 1981, we separated out Telecom and introduced the £1 monopoly limit, introducing competition and allowing a thriving courier industry to develop. In 1990, we sold Girobank. All those changes were opposed by the Opposition, who now take credit for the success of the Post Office as a result of our policies.

    Sir Archibald Hamilton: Does my right hon. Friend share my concern about the actions of Mr. Preston of The Guardian? Not only has he been using House of Commons writing paper to forge letters; he has been forging other people’s signatures–and this from a man who is on the Press Complaints Commission. Should he not resign from that body at once?

    The Prime Minister: Over many years, The Guardian and its present editor have from time to time thundered against general standards in public life. It is, of course, the right of the press to do that; I simply invite its members to observe their own standards.

    Mr. Ashdown: But is the Prime Minister satisfied with the promptness, accuracy and frankness with which his Chief Secretary to the Treasury has responded to questions over past weeks and months? Are those the standards by which he would wish his Government and their Ministers to be recognised?

    The Prime Minister: The right hon. Gentleman, and some other hon. Members, may be wholly satisfied with their own blameless pasts in every respect. My right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary has made the position entirely clear, and I accept his word.

    Sir Wyn Roberts: Does my right hon. Friend agree that so-called investigative journalism has sunk to a new all-time low? Does he also agree that, if a newspaper is found to have used the name of the House to give false authority to its activities, that newspaper deserves to lose the respect and confidence of the House?

    The Prime Minister: I believe that a diverse and wholly independent press is a very important protector of our system of democracy. I hope that there is no dispute about that.

    What is particularly sad is the casual abuse of what were once high and expected standards. If it is now commonly accepted in journalism that the end justifies any means, I believe that journalism will regret stooping to that standard. I hope that that is not the case; I believe that honest, factual journalism remains important to our democratic system. Systematic deception, fraud and collusion are certainly not what we expect from a free press.

     

    Q2. Mr. Hall: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 November.

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

    Mr. Hall: This morning, my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington, North (Mr. Hoyle) and I delivered a petition to No.10 Downing street on behalf of thousands of pensioners in Warrington, calling on the Government to abandon their proposal to increase VAT on fuel to 17.5 per cent. from next April. Is the Prime Minister aware that half the 36,000 claimants of income support in Halton and Warrington are entitled to claim only cold weather payments and that many other families in fuel poverty receive no help whatever? Will the Prime Minister give an assurance that he recognises that to be a true problem, that he will abandon the VAT increase, and that he will ensure that all low-income families receive fuel credits weekly when there are cold spells during the winter?

    The Prime Minister: So that no one who may be listening to these exchanges can be in any doubt, will the hon. Gentleman confirm that, while he says that he opposes VAT on fuel, he is in favour of a carbon tax, which would have exactly the same effect on people? Will he also acknowledge that measures worth around £2.5 billion over three years have been put in place– [Interruption.] It is no good Opposition Members pointing and shouting. They cannot on the one hand oppose VAT on fuel, and on the other hand support a carbon tax which would have precisely the same effect on the people whom they claim to be defending.

     

    Q3. Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 November.

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

    Mr. Clifton-Brown: Does my right hon. Friend agree with that great editor of The Manchester Guardian , C.P. Scott, who said:

    “Comment is free but the facts are sacred”?

    Does he agree that certain standards of journalism have sunk below the level that one would expect in a free and fair democracy?

    The Prime Minister: I agree with my hon. Friend about that. The press rightly demands the highest standards from Parliament and we have a right to expect the highest standards from the press.

    Dr. Marek: If the Prime Minister reads in Hansard what he said at Question Time last Thursday, he will realise that he answered one of the questions in a rather silly way. I hope that he will now give me a considered reply to that question. Why is he prepared to countenance devolution for the Province of Northern Ireland but not for the countries of Wales and Scotland?

    The Prime Minister: I must tell the hon. Gentleman two things. First, if he does not understand the difference in the history of Northern Ireland, he certainly should do so before sitting in the House. Secondly, there is a well established system of local democracy and government in Wales and Scotland which does not apply in Northern Ireland.

     

    Q4. Sir Michael Neubert: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 November.

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

    Sir Michael Neubert: Reverting to the subject of earlier exchanges, what would be my right hon. Friend’s reaction if the Lord Chancellor were to include a known criminal among his appointments to the magistrates bench? Is it not equally unacceptable that the editor of The Guardian should sit in judgment on his fellow editors as a member of the Press Complaints Commission when, on his own evidence, he has been party to a forgery?

    The Prime Minister: That is a matter for the Press Complaints Commission and for the conscience of the editor of The Guardian .

     

    Q5. Mr. Hoon: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 November.

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

    Mr. Hoon: Why are the Government threatening to cut housing benefit for hundreds of thousands of pensioners simply because they have spare rooms? Why is the Chief Secretary frightening pensioners with the prospect of having to move house just because they have raised their children and want to live out their retirement in their family home? Does the Prime Minister have any confidence in the Chief Secretary, particularly on matters of accommodation?

    The Prime Minister: As the hon. Gentleman knows, the system of housing benefit that we have in place is more generous than he will find anywhere on the continent. It is necessary to ensure that a proper balance is kept between that and the taxpayer.

     

    Q6. Mr. David Evans: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 November.

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

    Mr. Evans: Is my right hon. Friend aware that, in stark contrast to that lot opposite, we are united behind our leader? To put the issue of The Guardian into perspective, is my right hon. Friend aware that Janice had a shock this morning, as I think did my right hon. Friend, because it said that David Evans was sponsoring Bambi. That is how ridiculous The Guardian is. If my right hon. Friend raised £79,000 to become leader of our party, would he put it in the Register of Members’ Interests? This shows that that lot opposite are a bunch of fiddlers, because their leader has not done so.

    The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend has been accused of many things over the years, but I do not think that anybody would credibly accuse him of being a sponsor of the right hon. Member for Sedgefield (Mr. Blair).

     

    Q7. Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 November.

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

    Mr. Cunningham: Will the Prime Minister list the Tories who are members of quangos since last week he listed the Labour members? Will he also give the costs?

    The Prime Minister: I think that the hon. Gentleman would prefer a much longer list of those Labour members of quangos that I did not yet mention. If he is so against quangos, will he perhaps explain why he wants to create a very long list of them, which I will happily read to the House if the hon. Gentleman presses me? Those are the new quangos that the Opposition thus far are committed to establishing. The hon. Gentleman would be better off looking at his own policy than trying to misrepresent ours.

     

    Q8. Mrs. Angela Knight: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 November.

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

    Mrs. Knight: Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Home Secretary’s announcement yesterday that the regime in our prisons is to be toughened up and that privileges are to be earned is widely welcomed, especially by the victims of crime? With that in mind, will he ensure that all victims are consulted before prisoners are granted any home leave?

    The Prime Minister: I very much agree with my hon. Friend and with the announcement made by my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary yesterday. He intends to ensure that privileges are earned and are not available as a matter of right, and that home leave and temporary release will be granted only after rigorous assessment of risk to the public. As he has said on a number of occasions, conditions in prisons should be decent but austere. I believe that that is the view of the overwhelming majority of people in this country.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 31 October 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 31st October 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Conduct of Public Life

    Mr. Llew Smith: To ask the Prime Minister what recent meetings he has had with Lord Nolan; and what has been their purpose.

    The Prime Minister: I met Lord Nolan on Wednesday 26 October to discuss various matters relating to the committee on standards in public life, including appointments of Members.

    Mr. Hanson: To ask the Prime Minister what is the proposed remuneration of the chairman and board members of the proposed committee on standards in public life.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 28 October 1994]: I shall publish this information shortly.

    Mr. Beith: To ask the Prime Minister for what reasons peers are not included in the categories of persons to be considered by the Committee on the conduct of public life in respect of their parliamentary duties.

    The Prime Minister: It is open to the committee to examine the standards of conduct to be observed by peers as parliamentarians, as Ministers and, indeed, as holders of other public offices.

    Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Prime Minister if he will include in the terms of reference of the body which will investigate standards of public life the issue of funding of political parties.

    The Prime Minister: No. The funding of political parties has already been the subject of an investigation by the Home Affairs Select Committee. Under the terms of reference I announced on 25 October, it is open to Lord Nolan’s committee to consider concerns that appointments or other Government decisions may be influenced by political contributions.

    Mr. Llew Smith: To ask the Prime Minister pursuant to his oral statement on standards of conduct in public life of 25 October, Official Report, col. 757 , if he will indicate (a) who was the informant mentioned by the Cabinet Secretary in his report, (b) what proposals for a deal were put to him by the intermediary and (c) when he was first contacted by the intermediary.

    The Prime Minister: I have nothing further to add to the statement that I made to the House on Public Life (Standards of Conduct) on 25 October 1994, Official Report, columns 757-770, and to the answer I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Mr. Dunn) on 25 October 1994, Official Report, columns 521-22 .

     

    Inhumane Weapons

    Mr. Alton: To ask the Prime Minister what plans he has to ratify the 1980-81 United Nations convention on inhumane weapons.

    The Prime Minister: We continue to work actively towards ratification of the United Nations weaponry convention review conference. Meanwhile, we do, of course, adhere strictly to the provisions of the convention.

     

    Parliamentary Questions

    Mr. Llew Smith: To ask the Prime Minister if he will make it his policy that Ministers should give substantive answers to questions from hon. Members about the contents of books or reports in areas for which they have responsibility, which are published by sources other than the Minister’s Department or a non-departmental public body operating in the area or public policy for which the Minister has responsibility.

    The Prime Minister: It is for individual Ministers to decide how to answer parliamentary questions.

     

    Mr. Al Fayed

    Mr. Byers: To ask the Prime Minister on what date the note of his meeting with the informant acting on behalf of Mr. Al Fayed was passed to the Director of Public Prosecutions.

    The Prime Minister: On 20 October 1994.

    Mr. Madden: To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his oral answer to the hon. Member for Barnsley, West and Penistone (Mr. Clapham), of 20 October, Official Report, column 420, what arrangements were proposed to him on behalf of Mr. Al Fayed; and if he will make a further statement.

    The Prime Minister: I have nothing further to add to the statement that I made to the House on Public Life (Standards of Conduct) on 25 October, Official Report 757-70.

     

    Sanctions (Libya)

    Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Prime Minister what representations he has had from the Arab league about Libyan sanctions.

    The Prime Minister: I have received no such representations.

     

    Al Fayed Brothers (Citizenship Application)

    Mr. Madden: To ask the Prime Minister what representations have been made to him (a) by right hon. or hon. Members or (b) others concerning the applications for British citizenship by Mr. Mohamed Al Fayed and Mr. Ali Al Fayed.

    The Prime Minister: So far as I am aware, none.

     

    Public Sector Pay Review Bodies

    Sir Giles Shaw: To ask the Prime Minister what is the current membership of the public sector pay review bodies.

    The Prime Minister: The membership of the pay review bodies is as follows:

    Review Body on Senior Salaries

    Lord Nickson KBE DL (Chairman)

    Professor George Bain

    Sir Cecil Clothier KCB QC

    Mr. Gordon Hourston

    Sir Anthony Wilson

    Sir Michael Perry CBE

    Sir Sydney Lipworth QC

    Mrs. Rosemary Day

    Miss Patricia Mann

    Mrs. Yve Newbold

    Mr. Mark Sheldon

    Review Body on Nursing Staff, Midwives, Health Visitors and Professions Allied to Medicine

    Mr. Michael Bett CBE (Chairman)

    Mr. Jan Hildreth

    Miss Anne Mackie OBE

    Professor Gillian Raab

    Professor George Thomason CBE

    Miss Diana Whittingham

    Ms Ruth Lea

    Mrs. Sheila Gleig

    Armed Forces Pay Review Body

    Mr Gordon Hourston (Chairman)

    Mr Michael Bolton

    Mr John Cox CBE

    Mr John Crosby

    Baroness Dean

    Mrs Dorothy Venables

    Air Chief Marshal Sir Roger Palin KCB OBE

    Mr Guy Neely

    Review Body on Doctors’ and Dentists’ Remuneration

    Mr Brandon Gough (Chairman)

    Mr Douglas Boyd

    Ms Christina Boyden

    Mrs Sally Field

    Dr Elizabeth Nelson

    Professor George Thomason CBE

    Mr Dennis Fredjohn MBE

    Mr David Penton

    School Teachers’ Review Body

    Mr John Gardiner (Chairman)

    Mrs Brigita Amey

    Mr Alan Cox CBE

    Mrs Gill Rostron

    Mrs Anna Vinton

    Mr Michael Harding

    Mrs Julia Cuthbertson

    Mr Philip Halsey CB LVO

     

    Ministerial Conduct

    Mr. Wilson: To ask the Prime Minister what steps he has taken to assure himself that the right hon. Member for Norfolk, South (Mr. MacGregor) has, in all respects, complied with the guidelines laid down in “Questions of Procedure for Ministers”, and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 25 October 1994]: Ministers have the responsibility to ensure that they comply with the guidelines in “Questions of Procedure for Ministers”. I have no reason to think that my right hon. Friend failed to do so.

    Mr. Wilson: To ask the Prime Minister what declaration of continuing association with Messrs Hill Samuel was made by the right hon. Member for Norfolk, South and on what date.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 25 October 1994]: Because of his former association with Messrs Hill Samuel, my right hon. Friend gave instructions to his Department that he should play no part in the selection process, in 1993, of financial advisers to the Department of Transport for the channel tunnel rail link.

    Mr. Wilson: To ask the Prime Minister on what date the right hon. Member for Norfolk, South intimated (a) his desire to leave the Government and (b) his intention to rejoin Hill Samuel.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 25 October 1994]: As was made clear in my right hon. Friend’s resignation letter of 20 July, he had advised me earlier in the summer of his intention to leave the Government. I was informed of my right hon. Friend’s decision to take up his appointment on 6 October.

    Mr. Wilson: To ask the Prime Minister what intimation of potential conflict of interest was made by the right hon. Member for Norfolk, South when direction was given by his Department to the British Railways Board to establish a vendor unit; and on what date.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 25 October 1994]: British Rail decided to establish a vendor unit in order to co-ordinate sales: no direction was given by the Department of Transport.

    Mr. Wilson: To ask the Prime Minister what arrangements were intimated by the right hon. Member for Norfolk, South under paragraphs 128 to 134 of “Questions of Procedure for Ministers”; and if advice was sought by him from the then Prime Minister’s Private Secretary in terms of paragraph 132.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 25 October 1994]: My right hon. Friend’s pension arrangements are a matter for him, but I am advised that they corresponded with the requirements of paragraphs 128-134 of “Questions of Procedure for Ministers”, and no consultation with the then Prime Minister’s Private Secretary was therefore necessary.

    Mr. Wilson: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list the contracts awarded by Her Majesty’s Government to Messrs Hill Samuel between June 1979 and July 1994, with the value in each case.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 25 October 1994]: The information requested is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

    Mr. Byers: To ask the Prime Minister on how many occasions since 1 January 1991 the Cabinet Secretary has advised individual Ministers of his opinion on their conduct in relation to “Questions of Procedure for Ministers”; which Ministers were involved; and on what dates the opinion was given.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 28 October 1994]: Discussions between Ministers and the Cabinet Secretary are private.

     

    Public Appointments

    Dr. Wright: To ask the Prime Minister (1) if he will give details of the current inquiry into the system of public appointments and identify (a) when it was established, (b) its terms of reference, (c) its composition and (d) when it will report;

    (2) if he will give details of the current inquiry into the governance of quangos; when it was established; what are its terms of reference; what is its composition; and when it will report.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 25 October 1994]: As I told the House on 20 October, I set up a working group in May to review the guidance to Departments on public appointments procedures. The terms of reference for the review are:

    “To examine, in consultation with departments, the principles that should govern the membership of public bodies and the methods used to identify potential candidates, including questions relating to equal opportunities and multiple appointments, and the procedures leading to disqualification from or premature termination of appointments; and to consider whether amendments and additions need to be made to the Guide on Public Appointments procedures’.” The working group is chaired by the director of the public appointments unit and includes representatives from the Department of Employment, the Department of the Environment, the Department of Health, the Lord Chancellor’s Department, the Scottish Office, the Department of Trade and Industry, the Treasury and the Welsh Office. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and I expect to receive the working group’s report in a few weeks’ time. I have also asked my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to look across the board at appointments to all public bodies and to make any further recommendations he thinks necessary. We shall be making any recommendations, together with the working group’s report, available to the committee on standards in public life.

    In addition, the Office of Public Service and Science and the Treasury are preparing, in consultation with Departments generally, a revision of “Non-Departmental Public Bodies: A Guide for Departments”. This is intended to assist sponsor Departments on a range of matters concerning non-departmental public bodies. The guide was last revised in March 1992. Work on a further revision began in May, and the aim is to produce the revised guide when the parallel work on public appointments has been concluded. This, too, will be made available to the committee on standards in public life.

    Economic and Finance Council

    Sir Teddy Taylor: To ask the Prime Minister if he will take steps to co-ordinate Government policy between the Treasury and the Home Office on the reduction of fines for law breaking in respect of persons, authorities or nations who refused to pay them, in relation to the decision made at the Council of Finance Ministers of the European Union on 21 October.

    The Prime Minister: The decision taken at ECOFIN on 21 October was to increase the so-called “fine” imposed by the Commission on Italy and Spain by 1.1 b ecu, and not to reduce the penalties.

    Although disallowance decisions taken by the Commission under the common agricultural policy are often colloquially described as fines, they are in fact completely different from fines imposed by criminal courts. I believe that co-ordination between the Treasury and the Home Office on these areas of policy is satisfactory.

     

    Cabinet Secretary’s Investigation

    Mr. Alfred Morris: To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his oral answer of 20 October, Official Report, columns 420-22, in regard to the inquiry by the Cabinet Secretary, how many other cases there are of hon. Members who are now Ministers in respect of whom any inquiries are being or have been undertaken; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his oral answers of 20 October, Official Report, columns 420-22 , (1) which other hon. Members are being questioned by the Permanent Secretary to the Cabinet;

    (2) if he will (a) make a statement on the Cabinet Secretary’s report when it is complete and (b) publish (i) its contents, including the nature of the complaints and where they originated, (ii) the evidence requested, (iii) details of interviews conducted, (iv) a full summary of points considered and (v) the conclusions drawn.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 27 October 1994]: I refer the right hon. and hon. Members to the statement that I made to the House on Public Life (Standards of Conduct) on 25 October 1994, Official Report, columns 757-770, and to the answer that I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Mr. Dunn) on 25 October 1994, Official Report, columns 521-22.

    Mr. Byers: To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Dartford (Mr. Dunn) of 25 October, Official Report, column 521-22, if he will identify the informant acting on behalf of Mohamed Al Fayed and all Ministers against whom allegations were made; and what documentary evidence has been requested and examined by the Cabinet Secretary as part of his investigation.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 28 October 1994]: The answer to the first part of the question is no. On the identity of the Ministers against whom allegations were made, I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave today to the right hon. Member for Manchester, Wythenshawe (Mr Morris). On the third part of the question, I have nothing to add to the reply that I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Mr. Dunn), on 25 October 1994 Official Report, columns 521-22.

     

    Butler Inquiry

    Mr. Alex Carlile: To ask the Prime Minister pursuant to his oral answer to the hon. Member for Barnsley, West and Penistone (Mr. Clapham) of 20 October, Official Report, columns 420-21, how many Ministers are being or have been investigated by Sir Robin Butler; when he expects to receive the report; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 26 October 1994]: My right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary and my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary to the Treasury have confirmed that they were the subject of allegations investigated at my request by the Cabinet Secretary. No other Ministers were involved.

     

    Mr. Ian Greer

    Mr. Byers: To ask the Prime Minister on what dates on and after 29 September he has met Mr. Ian Greer of Ian Greer Associates.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 28 October 1994]: None.

     

    Public Appointments

    Dr. Wright: To ask the Prime Minister (1) what is the total number of public appointments which he is responsible for making or which require his approval; and if he will include figures for the Crown appointments on which he is responsible for advising Her Majesty the Queen; (2) pursuant to his answer of 17 January, Official Report , columns 367-68 , if he will give details of the Crown appointments on which he is responsible for advising Her Majesty the Queen.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 27 October 1994]: Further to the information on appointments already given to the hon. Member, I am listing those appointments on which at the present time I advise Her Majesty the Queen. The total number of appointments for which I am responsible, including those on which I advise Her Majesty the Queen, cannot be accurately calculated since I have discretion in some cases as to how many appointments I make; and in the case of Church appointments some vacancies fall casually and unpredictably to the Crown by virtue of the Royal Prerogative.

    Appointments made by the Queen on the advice of the Prime Minister

    Astronomer Royal

    Bank of England

    Governor and Deputy Governor

    Executive and Non-Executive Directors

    British Broadcasting Corporation

    Governors, including the Chairman and Vice-Chairman

    Chancellor of the County Palatine of Durham

    Church Commissioners

    Chairman and six others

    The Churches Conservation Trust

    Chairman and members

    Civil Service

    Head of the Home Civil Service (Cabinet Secretary)

    Board of Customs and Excise, Chairman, Deputy Chairman and Commissioners

    Board of Inland Revenue, Chairman and Commissioners including Deputy Chairman

    Clerk of the Crown in Chancery

    Civil Service Commissioners

    Her Majesty’s Printer of Acts of Parliament (Controller of the Stationery Office)

    Procurator General (Solicitor General)

    Registrar General

    Comptroller and Auditor General

    Constables of

    Caernarvon Castle

    Flint Castle

    Harlech Castle

    Tower of London

    Captain of Deal Castle

    Crown Estate Commissioners

    Data Protection Registrar

    Development Commissioners

    Ecclesiastical Appointments in England

    Archbishops of Canterbury and York

    Diocesan and Suffragan Bishops

    Deans

    Crown Canonries

    Crown Livings c. 200

    Appointments under the Royal Prerogative and Sede Vacante Ecclesiastical Appointments in Scotland

    Her Majesty’s High Commissioner to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland

    Forestry Commissioners

    Governor of the Isle of Wight

    Health Service Commissioners for England, Wales and Scotland Interception of Communications Tribunal

    Vice President and members

    Ministers of Her Majesty’s Government

    Senior Judiciary in England

    Lord Chief Justice of England

    Master of the Rolls

    Vice Chancellor

    President of the Probate, Divorce and Admiralty Division Lords of Appeal in Ordinary

    Lord Justices of Appeal

    Court of Ecclesiastical Causes Reserved

    Senior Judiciary in Scotland

    Lord Justice Clerk

    Lord Justice General and Lord President of the Court of Session in Scotland

    Judge of the Arches Court of Canterbury and the Chancery Court of York

    King Edward’s Hospital Fund for London

    President, or three Governors

    Lord Clerk Register of Scotland

    Lord Great Chamberlain

    Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports

    Lord-Lieutenants and Vice Lord-Lieutenants of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland

    Parliament

    The Speaker

    Clerk of the Parliaments

    Clerk of the House of Commons

    Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration

    Honorary Physicians to The Queen

    Poet Laureate

    Police Complaints Authority

    Chairman

    Public Works Loans Board

    Chairman, Deputy Chairman and Commissioners

    Receiver-General and Deputy Receiver-General of Jersey

    Receiver-General of Guernsey

    Royal Patriotic Fund Corporation Members, including President Standing Royal Commissions, including Millennium Commission Scholastic Appointments

    Regius Professors of Oxford and Cambridge

    School of Oriental and African Studies Governing Body members Provost of Eton

    Principal of King’s College, Cambridge

    Master of Trinity College, Cambridge

    Master of Church College, Cambridge

    Security Service Tribunal

    Members, President and Vice President

  • Mr Major’s Speech to South Wales Businessmen – 28 October 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech to South Wales Businessmen Lunch made on 28th October 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am delighted to be back in South Wales, an area full of innovation and enterprise. Wales has a great manufacturing tradition, of which we are all justly proud. I know British Steel, for example, don’t need telling that the steel industry is now highly efficient and is the largest manufacturing employer in the Welsh economy.

    The strength of Welsh manufacturing is unquestionable. Manufacturing output in Wales is growing at a rate twice as fast as the UK as a whole. I know that for this successful performance to continue the economic recovery experienced by the whole of the UK must continue. That is why the Government is committed to securing sustained economic growth with low inflation.

    The UK economy has been performing very well of late. Exports are up by 10 per cent over the past year, and are at record levels. Investment is up by over 5 per cent, and unemployment has been falling for almost two years now. Remarkably, output is growing by more than the rate of inflation. That doesn’t happen too often. In fact it has only done so on three occasions over the past 30 years.

    But the continued success of the British economy will only come about if we get two things right. First, the Government has to keep inflation down and retain control of its own finances. I know that some of you were surprised when the Chancellor raised interest rates just over a month ago. I fully supported that decision. Getting inflation down, and keeping it down, has been one of my top priorities since becoming Prime Minister. Stability is the best help the Government can provide to businesses.

    Second, the Government must adopt policies that work for business. That is why we will not sign the Social Chapter. And that is why we will not introduce a minimum wage.

    I know you understand the reasons for this approach in Wales. Developments like that at Pontprennau, on the outskirts of Cardiff, have only come about because businesses have been willing to step forward and take their share of the risks and rewards. The benefits will be considerable: a new link road between the M4 and A48, over 1,600 homes, a 90 acre business park and a 20 acre district shopping centre. And Pontprennau is not an isolated example. In Cardiff Bay, the Development Corporation have already identified sites where they want the private sector to take part in their unique regeneration programme. The Government has an important part to play in this regeneration but it cannot do it alone. That is why the Private Finance Initiative is equally important, not only in Cardiff, but throughout Wales. John Redwood has already announced his intention to attract £1 billion of private sector investment into the South Wales valleys to create more housing and employment.

    You don’t need me to tell you that Wales has also had great success in attracting foreign investment. This has meant an enormous boost to the local economy. The UK economy, and Wales in particular, has become a magnet for foreign investment in Europe. The UK is by far the largest recipient of inward investment into the European Union, and receives more than France and Germany combined.

    Like the rest of the UK, the Welsh economy is well-placed to take advantage of the lowest inflation for 27 years, the lowest interest rates for 17 years, improved competitiveness and economic growth in our main export markets. There is every indication that Welsh businesses are responding well. To take some recent examples, Nippon Electric Glass of Japan and Schott Glasverke of Germany are joining forces in a joint venture to manufacture cathode ray tubes. This significant development will bring £193 million investment and the promise of 750 new manufacturing jobs to South Wales. And, a recent trade mission led by the Welsh office to Korea and Taiwan returned with firm and potential orders worth £18 million.

    I could go on. A difficult time is over, and a better time lies ahead. After the long and bruising recession, British businesses have now regained their confidence. The last few years have not been easy, but by getting inflation and interest rates down we have laid the foundations for the steady and sustainable growth that we are now seeing. By working together we can make that growth last.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 27 October 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 27th October 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Visits

    Mr. Corbyn: To ask the Prime Minister what plans he has to visit a state-funded children’s nursery.

    The Prime Minister: I plan to do so on one of my forthcoming visits around the country.

     

    Engagements

    Sir Peter Tapsell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 27 October.

    Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 27 October.

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

     

    Charter Advisory Panel

    Mr. Maclennan: To ask the Prime Minister if he will name the members of his advisory panel on the citizen’s charter and the charter mark assessors.

    The Prime Minister: The panel of advisers on the citizen’s charter is made up of people who have been appointed for their expertise in their own particular fields in the private sector. The composition of the panel is currently as follows:

    Sir James Blyth–Chairman.

    Mrs Angela Heylin.

    Neil Johnson Esq.

    Dr. Madsen Pirie.

    Nick Rawlings Esq.

    The right Hon. Baroness Perry.

    Lady Judith Wilcox.

    A number of retired public servants were appointed to assess applications for the charter mark award. Some of these, together with members of the panel of advisers and staff from the citizens charter unit, were involved in visiting some of the short-listed organisations:

    Charter Mark |Panel Members |CCU staff assessors

    —————————————————————————-

    Alan Grocott |Sir James Blyth |Genie Turton

    David Bower |Nick Rawlings |David Paul

    John Offord |Lady Judith Wilcox|Charles Ramsden

    Jim Brown |Dr. Madsen Pirie |Judith Lempriere

    Tom Corrigan |The right Hon. |Chris Matthews

    George Georgiades |Baroness Perry |Elizabeth Hunter

    Harry Nicol | Johnston

    David Dewick |Simon Lawton Smith

    Peter Canovan |Aleck Thomson

    Vivian Emerson

    David Bromley

    Dave Keating

    Peter Cockram

    Peter Summerscale

    Ernie Dinn

    Peter Selby

    Tony Poole

    Brian Smith

    John MacDonald

    Sybil Brown

    Margaret Chiverton

     

    Clock Adjustment

    Mr. Barry Field: To ask the Prime Minister how many man hours were taken up by adjusting the clocks throughout his office.

    The Prime Minister: No precise record is kept of such estimates.

  • PMQT – 27 October 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 27th October 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 27 October.

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

    Mr. Cunningham: Can the Prime Minister end speculation in today’s London Evening Standard naming an individual as the person who either tipped the Prime Minister off or acted as the intermediary in allegations against Ministers?

    The Prime Minister: As I have said on a previous occasion, the person concerned came to see me privately and in good faith. I have no intention of offering a name. The note of my meeting with my informant has been passed, as I told the House the other day, to the Director of Public Prosecutions, and the name is known to her. It is for her to decide how to proceed, and I understand that she has now passed the papers to the Metropolitan police.

    Mr. David Howell: Does my right hon. Friend accept that his decision to set up an independent and powerful committee to inquire into the conduct of public life is warmly welcomed? Does he also accept that certain areas of conduct should be reserved to the House to look after? Will he therefore continue to resist most strongly the immature and inexperienced proposal of the Leader of the Opposition that the Select Committee on Privileges should meet in public, which would create a lynch trial kangaroo court atmosphere that every democrat should abhor?

    The Prime Minister: My right hon. Friend speaks with great knowledge of these matters, and I share the opinion that he has expressed.

    As for the committee that I have established, I have made it clear to the House that I am not prepared to see confidence in elected or unelected public servants undermined by the public parading of unsubstantiated slurs and innuendo. It is precisely for that reason that I have set up the committee on the conduct of public life. I look to Opposition Members, who, I understand, support the initiative, to join me in ensuring that the committee is able to work successfully. I also look to them to ensure the ending of the continual peddling of gossip and rumour.

    Mr. Blair: Now that today we have another report by the Cabinet Secretary exonerating another Minister, can we make ourselves clear about the basis on which the Prime Minister is running the Government? A week ago, he said that there were unsubstantiated allegations against his Trade Minister and insisted that he stayed. A few days later, there were allegations that were supposed to be unfounded, as he called them, and he insisted that the Minister concerned went. Now there are new unsubstantiated allegations against the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, and he stays. What is the basis on which the Prime Minister decides to retain or dismiss his Ministers–the truth of the allegations or merely the number of them?

    The Prime Minister: I had understood that when the right hon. Gentleman became leader of the Labour party we were going to see a new style in politics. I had not expected to see the right hon. Gentleman step down into the gutters of public life quite so soon. Let me make it clear to the House and to the right hon. Gentleman–I set out my position concerning my hon. Friends the Members for Beaconsfield (Mr. Smith) and for Tatton (Mr. Hamilton) in my statement to the House the other day and I have nothing further to say. As for my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary and my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary, the examination shows that there is nothing for them to answer to, and the right hon. Member for Sedgefield (Mr. Blair) should be ashamed of using the privilege of the House to raise those matters in this way.

    Mr. Blair: As the Prime Minister knows perfectly well, I have not said that I agree with the allegations against anyone. The idea that, after the resignation of two Ministers in a week, the Opposition should not be entitled to ask questions, is absurd. Cannot the Prime Minister see that the problem will not be resolved unless he understands that the Butler reports are plainly inadequate as, on his own admission, Sir Robin Butler is not able to see the person making the complaints, Mr. Al Fayed, he has forbidden the Nolan committee to look at the allegations, the Privileges Committee is deadlocked because Conservative Members want it to sit in private– [Interruption.] I repeat, because Conservative Members want to sit in private. The Prime Minister will take a grip on the problem only when he understands that there has to be a proper method of investigating Mr. Al Fayed’s allegations that has the public’s confidence, which means an open, full investigation in public view.

    The Prime Minister: Now there is no doubt. We now know where we are with the right hon. Gentleman and we know precisely what way he plans to play his politics. The right hon. Gentleman says to the House that he does not believe that the allegations are substantiated, yet he is still prepared to peddle them in here. The whole House will have noticed that he is prepared to peddle them. There is only one thing stopping the Privileges Committee from proceeding: the right hon. Gentleman’s hon. Friends will not attend that Committee, which is wholly against all precedent in the House. The right hon. Gentleman is a lawyer; he knows that investigations take place in private and when those matters are over, debate takes place in public. He would change that for his own party advantage. If the right hon. Gentleman had listened, he would have heard that the documents relating to Mr. Al Fayed’s allegations were passed to the Director of Public Prosecutions and have now been passed by her, after examination, to the Metropolitan police for examination. Surely, the right hon. Gentleman cannot imagine that I shall add to that.

    Mr. Blair: With all due respect, the Prime Minister is not being asked to add to it. It is not me; it is– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker: Order. I must have some order in the House.

    Mr. Blair: It was not I, but the Prime Minister who dismissed two Ministers. Furthermore, the normal procedure in courts of law is that hearings are held in public. No Opposition Members are saying whether the allegations are true or false–merely that they should be investigated. Why will the Prime Minister not allow the investigations to be held in public?

    The Prime Minister: The right hon. Gentleman says that the matters may not be true and may be unsubstantiated gossip; yet he wants them peddled in public so that people’s reputations– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker: Order. I shall have order from both sides of the House.

    The Prime Minister: Despite the fact that the right hon. Gentleman does not believe the allegations and does not believe that there is anything substantial in them, he still wants to see them examined in public. People will ask for what party political reason he wants to see them established in public. If that is to be the new, clean politics, let us have the old, dirty politics from Labour that we have been used to.

    Mr. Sumberg: Has my right hon. Friend had the opportunity to read the report of the Royal Commission on environmental pollution from traffic? Does it not dictate an urgent review of the roads programme, and in particular the abandonment of the disastrous M62 relief road which has caused so much damage in my constituency?

    The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend, with the ingenuity that we have come to expect of him, has continued his campaign of concern about the M62. I think that the report by the Royal Commission on environmental pollution is a useful one, and we shall be studying it closely. It contains many very helpful things–although there are some parts of it which are uncosted and which would be better for having been costed.

    Mr. Ashdown: Will the Prime Minister confirm that the two Ministers who have been forced to resign from the Government in the past week will receive £3,500 each in redundancy payments for their pains?

    The Prime Minister: As I understand it, the right hon. Gentleman voted for the legislation which requires that.

    Mr. Walker: Does my right hon. Friend– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker: Order. Back Benchers are as entitled as Front Benchers to a little quiet in this House.

    Mr. Walker: Does my right hon. Friend recognise that many of us believe that there is a deliberate campaign, based on unfounded allegations, to discredit this Government and him? Is he aware that one of the advantages of Select Committees sitting in private, when required, is that their discussions cannot be debated on the Floor of the House before the reports have been fully submitted and details of all the evidence made available?

    The Prime Minister: It has been well understood for many years in this House that Select Committees, when carrying out investigations, sit under the cloak of parliamentary privilege. That is one reason why they have decided for many years to investigate matters in private. Of course, when the investigations are completed, it is right that the report should be published–and it will be. It is also right that the report should be debated–and it will be. All our predecessors in this House have always agreed, in the interests of natural justice, that those Committees should meet and examine matters in private.

     

    Q2. Mr. Raynsford: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 27 October.

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

    Mr. Raynsford: As the Prime Minister confirmed on Tuesday, and again just a few moments ago, that a note of the approaches made to his office by agents of Mr. Al Fayed had been passed to the Director of Public Prosecutions, and now to the Metropolitan police, does he feel that it would be proper for the Conservative party to repay the £250,000 that it has received from Mr. Al Fayed?

    The Prime Minister: I think that the hon. Gentleman has lived up to his reputation.

     

    Q3. Mr. Spring: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 27 October.

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

    Mr. Spring: Is my right hon. Friend aware of just how welcome the new strategy to combat drugs is to thousands of concerned parents throughout the country? Does he agree that the way to tackle this issue most effectively is in local communities, to destroy the cancer of drug abuse which has tragically blighted the lives of so many young people across the industrialised world?

    The Prime Minister: I know how strongly my hon. Friend feels about the appalling damage that is done to young people by drugs, and I know how much he has done in his constituency to tackle the problem. Including the costs of police and education time, we spend in total about £500 million a year on tackling drug abuse. I entirely agree that we need to ensure that those resources, and indeed all efforts, are deployed as effectively as possible. We believe that that will best be done by implementing the proposals in the report by my right hon. Friend the Lord President and by making sure that action is taken in schools and by the drug action teams.

    Mr. Salmond: The Prime Minister has achieved a welcome success from his policy in Northern Ireland, which has hinged on the principle of consent–the right of people in the north of Ireland to determine their own future. For the avoidance of any doubt, will he confirm that he also believes in the right of self-determination for the Scottish nation?

    The Prime Minister: Every nation has always had that right. The hon. Gentleman is clearly talking about a tax-raising devolved Parliament in Scotland, and he well knows my view about that. I am sure that he would benefit from reading the speeches that I made during the 1992 election campaign; if he had done so, he would not have needed to ask his question.

  • Mr Major’s Comments on Devolution – 26 October 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on devolution on Wednesday 26th October 1994.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked why he was against devolution in Wales but more supportive in Northern Ireland].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    When the issue was presented to the people of Wales before they voted 4-1. The relationship with Northern Ireland does not run. Northern Ireland has no proper system of local government in the sense that it exists in Wales, there is no local democracy in Northern Ireland, there is local democracy on a fairly significant and entrenched scale in Wales so there is a sharp difference between the two.

    The reason I am concerned about devolution is really twofold. The first is constitutional. There are two elements to that argument; firstly, more in the case of Scotland, it has to be said, than Wales, there is a risk that devolution will be the beginning of a slope that would lead to a separate country and the break-up of the United Kingdom, that is the first point; the second constitutional point is simply the quantum of government, we already have borough councils, district councils, parish councils, county councils, parliament, the European Council, another tier of government as well does not seem to me to be very attractive, and another tax raising tier of government and extra bureaucracy seems to me to be very unattractive indeed.

    If you asked the people of Wales, not do you want devolution, but asked them what it really means – do you want another tier of government, do you want someone else levying taxes – then I think you might get a very different answer from the one that you get when you just generally and casually ask the question. You would in fact get the answer that you got when you had a referendum some time ago, in 1979.