The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Category: 1992

  • Mr Major’s Speech to the Economist Conference on the Citizen’s Charter – 27 January 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech made to The Economist Conference on the Streamlining of the Public Sector on Monday 27th January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    PUBLIC SERVICES ON THE MOVE: THE CITIZEN’S CHARTER

    Mr Chairman, four years ago, as Chief Secretary to the Treasury, I was the guardian of the public purse. I spoke then about the importance of high quality public services. Some people were surprised at such a speech from a Minister with responsibility for public expenditure. But it was right. And the fact that so many people running great enterprises, public and private, are here this morning shows that we are right to insist that people deserve better value for money and more accountable management standards in our public services.

    The Citizen’s Charter is a blueprint to deliver higher standards. Some services – like the National Health Service and social security – cross the nation. Others are the prerogative of Town Halls and local authorities.

    But wherever they may be, there is excuse for accepting second-rate performance. It’s economically wasteful. It’s socially unacceptable. And it’s a poor use of the many talented people who work in the public sector.

    The Citizen’s Charter reflects a determination to improve public service. For me, that was not a new concept. It arose from experience – as a user of public services, as a provider of them in local Government, and, finally, as a Minister.

    My views have not changed on substance over the years. Nor have my convictions. I believed then and I believe now that too often providers of public service fail to understand, or ignore, the interests and concerns of the public they are there to serve.

    Let me give you an example. Too often the public are treated as if they were the lucky recipients of a free service. But they are not. They’re paying for it with their own money compulsorily taken from them in taxes. They are entitled to be treated as credit-worthy customers who’ve paid in advance.

    Mr Chairman, the Citizen’s Charter came about because I was consistently receiving the same strong message. That it was high time to raise standards of performance in our public services. That was the demand of the consumer. And it was also the wish of those who work in the public sector themselves. They had the skills, the dedication, and the enthusiasm to do it. All they needed was the freedom and the encouragement to try out new ideas. The Citizen’s Charter gives them the chance.

    CITIZEN’S CHARTER PRINCIPLES

    What the Charter does is to underline the need for:

    – published standards

    – consulting users and customers

    – increased openness

    – more and better information

    – more and better choice

    – greater accessibility and

    – greater responsiveness when things go wrong.

    These are things we want to see underpinning not some – but all of our public services.

    THE CHARTER’S POLICY MEASURES

    But our White Paper is more than a set of principles. It is an ambitious programme of action to raise the standard of service right across the public sector. It includes some huge commitments:

    The privatisation of British Rail and British Coal. The deregulation and privatisation of London Buses. These will be priorities in the next Parliament. But the main thrust of the Charter is to empower the individual.

    – So it includes also laws to let the public see league tables comparing the standards of service of their local authority with that of others.

    – And, for the first time ever, reforms that will bring about the regular independent inspection of all Britain’s schools.

    – It contains radical reforms which will limit the monopoly of the Post Office.

    – It proposes new powers for citizens to challenge unlawful strikes in the public sector. When the next Parliament is formed, they, too will become law.

    Last July I made it clear that a programme on this scale would take time to deliver. But we must deliver it – and we will. The Citizen’s Charter will be at the heart of this Government’s policy making throughout the 1990s.

    Sometimes people find it hard to relate great policy ideas to everyday life. There is a tendency to be shy of new concepts. People were shy of privatisation. Yet they should remember privatisation has created a nation of shareholders and put telephone kiosks that work in every high street in Britain. Deregulation has opened up the motorways to long-distance coach travel.

    But those benefits were not always seen at first. Indeed, they were bitterly resisted. It is always less trouble to stick to the status quo. But today those ideas are not only accepted, they are imitated right across the world. It will be the same with the Citizen’s Charter. There’s always resistance to good ideas. Wherever we find it, we will beat it. And I have no doubt that the ideas in the Charter will be imitated in other countries too. They are already catching the fancy of policy makers not least in the United States.

    The Charter builds on and takes forward our privatisation and contracting out plans. The White Paper on Competing for Quality, will lead to more buying in of outside skills and a bigger role for the private sector. I want to see much more market testing in the years ahead. In central Government as well as in services outside. And. we are making the way easier for private firms to bid for business. Whitehall has been told to be open to their ideas.

    But the Charter is not only about big policy developments. It also addresses directly some of the smaller things that cause so much irritation in everyday life. Again, an example makes the point. Take fixed appointment times for the man from the gas board or the electricity board. When we were working on the Charter we were told these were unthinkable. Fixed appointment times? Over the years consumers have learned to be grateful if they ever came? Were we mad? The public didn’t want them, they said. The unions wouldn’t like it. These latter day Mr Bumbles were shocked at the consumer demanding more. Whatever next Oliver? A proper service? Now, East Midlands Electricity has shown that it is perfectly possible to get the electricity man to call at a specific time of day, if that’s what the customer wants.

    And take another frustration of everyday life: motorway cones. Sometimes one could be forgiven for believing they had taken over the roads and were marching on the towns.

    So we listened and acted. As a result, £70 million worth of motorists’ time has already been saved by using lane rental. So we must do more of it. And there are other things we can do. A recent piece of work on the M1, with traditional methods, would have taken over 5 days to complete, and cost £25,000. Using rolling lane closure, the work was done in 3 hours and cost just £5,000. We are looking to the Department of Transport to press on fast with all the Citizen’s Charter’s new ideas for handling roadworks better.

    PROGRESS : HEALTH

    Then there’s the Charter’s influence on the Health Service: From this April, all hospitals will have to display publicly their local charter standards. From this April people will be given individual appointment times for out patient visits. No more turning up at 9 am and finding twenty other people there with the same appointment time. And from this April, there will be guaranteed maximum waiting times for hospital treatments. In Scotland there will be maximum waiting times for a number of specified operations. All this is spelt out in the Patient’s Charter which has gone to every home in the land. A better service. A more personal service. And more dignity, too.

    The Health Service must hit the targets that the White Paper set. And then we must go further. I can tell you today that we are launching a new research study into why patients have to wait so long between referral by their GP and seeing a consultant. The time varies considerably. Why? I want to know. And when we know we must put it right. I want to see improvements made.

    Changes like these take effort, commitment, skill, organisation. They mean a shift in approach on the part of a great many people up and down the NHS. Well, it’s happening. There’s a new mood of confidence in a Health Service that is responding to the challenges that the Citizen’s Charter has set. And there will be many more to come.

    EDUCATION

    Then consider education. In no area have the Charter’s proposals received wider public support. Parents now have a right to see governors’ annual reports, which include the exam results in their school. From July all parents will have the right to an annual report on their child’s progress; and, from this autumn, tables comparing the exam results of different schools will be published every year in the local paper. Next year, the comparative tables will include truancy figures and information on where pupils go when they leave school. National Curriculum test results will be published as soon as they become available.

    You may be surprised that it was ever thought unsafe for parents and public to know this sort of thing. Well, I think I can tell you why. It was inconvenient to some of the providers. It might expose poor performance to the criticism it deserved. But poor performance should be exposed if we are to correct it.

    It is those attitudes that the Citizen’s Charter is challenging. We are giving parents a greatly increased voice in their children’s education – a voice they should never have lost. And at the same time we are also letting employers, local business people and so on – see how effective their schools are.

    OTHER MEASURES

    There are other simple but necessary things we’re doing.

    Public services are much more human if they come with a name to them. Anonymity can be intimidating. Very shortly 35,000 Employment service local office staff will be wearing name badges. And all other parts of the public service are doing the same.

    We are going to provide more flexible opening hours in tax offices, Jobcentres, benefit offices and driving test centres. Flexible hours to provide a better service.

    We are seeing standards set in areas where people said it couldn’t be done. For example, the Kent Police will answer all 999 calls within 10 seconds and will attend all incidents that require a rapid response in no more than 20 minutes – 10 minutes in towns.

    We’re making radical changes in inspection. Not just by making sure that the standards are checked in every British school. But also by introducing outsiders – professionals, users, commonsense citizens – into other inspectorates as well. I believe it is quite wrong that professions – like police, social work, or probation – should be inspected only by the providers themselves. They must be subject to independent inspection – to reassure the public and encourage the best performance.

    Other tough targets are being bettered. In 1989 it took some 3 1/2 weeks to get a passport. Now it takes just 7 days. Document processing used to take Companies House a month on average. Last financial year this figure was cut to just one week. Huge improvements in service, not dependent on extra resources. Just good management and a willing response from staff.

    The list could go on.

    WHERE NEXT

    Mr Chairman, ten days ago, I brought a number of my colleagues together with senior officials to assess progress on the Charter. We agreed that we must develop some of the many new ideas that they put forward. And we decided to hold these top-level meetings regularly so that progress would be maintained.

    Last Friday Michael Heseltine unveiled the Tenant’s Charter. This tells council tenants what they have a right to expect from their housing authorities. That they must be kept informed of any major changes that landlords propose to make to their homes or their estates; that they have a right to carry out improvements to their homes, or to swap their homes if they wish to move house to another area.

    Today sees the launch of the Benefits Agency Charter. It lays out clearly the service that benefit claimants are entitled to expect. And it sets specific service standards for speed and accuracy of benefit delivery.

    Other initiatives will follow, including, on Wednesday publication by the Customs of a charter for travellers.

    People are being given information about services that no one has bothered to tell them before. For the future:

    We want even more, and better information. There will be:

    – a video which explains how the tax system works, so that those running small businesses can more easily manage their tax affairs;

    – and a video about the way the courts work, to help those who come once in a lifetime as jurors or witnesses to understand what goes on and to find their way around.

    – In Wales there is to be a code of good practice in planning cases for local authorities. League tables will be published so that, once more, we can put pressure on the worst authorities to catch up with the best.

    – We will soon see a new Passenger’s Charter published. This will set out clearly the standards that British Rail’s passengers are entitled to expect, and make BR account for its performance against them. And it will also improve significantly the terms of compensation they should make available to passengers who suffer worst from train delays.

    – And Charter’s principles should also help the businessman as citizen. He has to deal with many rules and regulations administered by local authorities. In some areas systems are being developed so that a business getting approval from one authority will know that it is valid for others. I want to see such systems, which are currently voluntary, extended more and more widely. Businesses simply cannot understand it when different authorities apply the same laws in different ways. It adds to business costs and detracts from competitiveness. Local authorities need to work with business in smoothing out difficulties that stop firms getting on with their main job – trading.

    – Finally, we are going to make sure that rewards in the public sector are related to performance. Increasingly, peoples’ pay must be linked to giving high quality service. Doing a job of quality must be seen to matter more than doing a job. There will be strict, but fair criteria. But those who work well should earn more than those who don’t. I intend that performance pay should apply more widely in public service – not just in Whitehall, but on the underground and the railways as well.

    THE CHARTER MARK AWARD

    I can also announce today a reward for excellence. It will be known as the Charter Mark award. It will be open to all public services that serve their customers direct. It will be challenging to achieve. In the first year some 50 Charter Marks will be awarded. Only the highest standards of performance will be considered. The winners will have to improve even more. Year on year improvement in the quality of their services. Customer satisfaction.

    And they will have to submit plans for future improvements without cost to the taxpayer.

    I hope many public sector services will apply for the Charter Mark. Not just the big ones. And not just the obvious ones. There are individual schools, hospitals, Agencies, and local authority services, which may not be well known nationally but which provide a service of which they can be proud. I want their efforts to be recognised. To be examples for others to follow.

    RESOURCES

    Mr Chairman, it is the taxpayer who meets the cost of public service – good or bad. Poor public services do not come free, any more than good ones do. And they will cost more. They mean too much time wasted, too many complaints, paying twice over to put right the mistakes made first time round.

    The best effective way to operate is to get things right first time. So let us hear no more of the phoney argument that you can only make things better by spending more money. Politeness. Keeping promises. Giving the right information. Answering letters promptly. These things don’t cost money. They are the everyday currency of decent services. And they must become universal.

    Nor do I believe that people take a proper pride in their work if they are no more than a nameless face or an illegible squiggle at the foot of the letter. With the Citizen’s Charter, public service is taking pride in its work. It now showing it is ready to take responsibility. Ready to trust the public. It’s the beginning of the end of the faceless bureaucrat.

    CHARTERLINE

    I know all too well the frustration that ordinary people feel when they find themselves up against a blank wall of bureaucracy. Passed from pillar to post when they try to get an answer to a simple question, or a problem solved. So we will soon be publishing a paper setting out some ideas for helping people in a quick and simple way, when they get caught in the system. We will also introduce, at first on a pilot basis, a new telephone helpline – the “Charterline”. It will tell people about the Citizen’s Charter, the many different measures it contains and how they can pursue questions that they have in mind.

    CONCLUSION

    The Citizen’s Charter is only six months old. It is still in its infancy. But its effects are building up fast. And people in the public sector know that it is here to stay.

    We will see to it that it works. Where we need to we will legislate. We will contract out when appropriate. We’ll toughen up inspection and further empower the regulators of public utilities where public choice is limited. We’ll set standards and publish results so that the success of every service can be measured and improved.

    And will this all make it work? Yes, certainly it will. Because the Charter ideas are right. Because the public know they are right. Because people want to make it happen. Because hundreds of thousands of people in public service have a commitment to make it happen.

    Already the Citizen’s Charter is changing public service. Step by step. But surely and certainly. More ideas will follow. With political impetus the process of change is now unstoppable.

    And I promise – the impetus will be there.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 27 January 1992

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 27th January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    UN Security Council

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister if, pursuant to his oral reply to the hon. Member for Bolton, North-East (Mr. Thurnham), Official Report, 14 January 1992, column 807, he will set out the policies he plans to propose to the special summit of the permanent members of the Security Council of the United Nations on (a) improving good government, (b) improving human rights and (c) disarmament and non-proliferation; and whether he has consulted any non-governmental organisations or specialist independent institutions to help develop such proposals.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 24 January 1992] : I shall make clear at the meeting of the Security Council on 31 January the importance that the Government attach to good government, human rights, arms control and non-proliferation in the maintenance of international peace and security. Our policies on these matters are well known and benefit from our valuable dialogue with a range of non-governmental organisations.

     

    World Commission on Environment and Development

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer on 15 January, Official Report, column 579, if he will set out (a) the amount of financial support and (b) the types of other support, Her Majesty’s Government plans to give organisers of the reconvention of the World Commission on Environment and Development in London in April.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 24 January 1992] : The Department of the Environment is contributing £30,000 to the costs of the London meeting of the World Commission on Environment and Development in April. In addition the Government will be hosting engagements for the commissioners.

     

    UN Environment and Development Conference

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 15 January, Official Report, column 579, if he will give the names of the organisations to which reports of the preparatory committee meetings of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development have been distributed and the cost of this distribution to date.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 24 January 1992] : The United Kingdom for United Nations Environment Programme has circulated reports on UNCED preparatory committee meetings to nearly 2000 organisations, under its contract with the Department of the Environment to keep the non-governmental community informed on preparations for UNCED.

  • Mr Major’s NCVQ Speech – 23 January 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech on education at the Cafe Royal on 23rd January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Prefatory Remarks

    Mr Chairman, this is the second opportunity I have had to speak on educational matters here at the Cafe Royal. It’s a splendid location, and rather apt for your proceedings today. It has lots of levels. When I spoke last time I was at level 6 but now I find myself down at level 4. I hope this downwards progression doesn’t give the wrong signal to all those people working hard to move upwards through the NVQ levels.

    Introduction

    Mr Chairman, many of you will know by now that I believe it is vital that we continue to raise standards in education and training. The reason for this is clear. It is because I believe that every young man and woman has talents, in-built talents, which we all want to see them develop to the full.

    But there is another reason too: it is because I know – as all those of you in business know – that in this competitive world our country is involved in an unending struggle for markets. And in that struggle it is the businesses and services which offer quality that win.

    Business success will increasingly rest on people at every level who are equipped with good training and good qualifications. Qualifications that carry esteem, are coherently structured and capable of being updated throughout working life.

    For individuals, education and training are the gateways to opportunity and progress.

    For employers, a well-educated, well-trained workforce is their lifeblood.

    We live in a time of rapid and expanding technological change. No one should underestimate the scale of the challenges that we face. But nor should we underestimate our capacity to meet those challenges. We in Britain can develop the skills of our young people and of our workforce at least as effectively as any of our rivals. And we must.

    Opportunity for All

    Eight months ago, together with Michael Howard and Kenneth Clarke, I launched the Government’s White Paper Education and Training for the 21st Century. We had two overriding aims. To give much greater priority to the needs of the 16 to 19 year age group.

    And at the same time to break down those artificial barriers which for too long had divided an academic education from a vocational one, and which treated those who followed the vocational route almost as second-class citizens.

    The themes which run through that White Paper are at the very heart of this Government’s philosophy and of the society in which we believe. A society without barriers. In which opportunities are available for all. In which high standards are expected and become the norm. In which people – whatever their background and wherever they work – can make the very most of their abilities.

    When I left school at 16, I was lucky. There were people to encourage me to work for qualifications. Not all young people are so lucky. I want to see us develop the framework that will give them the incentive and encouragement to get qualified – and encourage employers to help them on their way. Today more young people stay on at school, but there are still far too many 16 year-olds who bale out as soon as they can. And too many of those are never able to recapture the opportunities they have lost.

    Parity of Esteem for Vocational Training

    So as we prepare for the twenty-first century we must see that young people have the opportunity for further education, or training in job-related skills, to the very best of their capability. And if they are to have real choice, vocational education must become a high status route to follow.

    Why? Because it is important if we are to encourage the right people to develop the right skills. In this country we have always failed to give status to the practical as compared with the academic and the professional careers. All that is changing. Must change. These old-fashioned prejudices and snobberies can have no place in the world of education and should have no place in our society.

    Good vocational education is not inferior in status to good academic education. I hold vocational qualifications in trades, crafts and business in very high regard. The next generation must be able to decide between academic and vocational education and training without distinction or reserve – choosing a course of the kind that suits their own temperament and aptitude.

    That is our objective. But if the vocational route is to have equal status we must offer a range of qualifications that is both wide – yet at the same time easily recognised, understood and esteemed. Anonymous qualifications are not valued.

    It also means developing a system by which people’s acquisition of skills through life can be measured and recorded. We want to create a ladder of opportunity which encourages each and every young person to climb rung by rung – higher, in the end, than he or she may have thought possible at the start. We want to see learning and development treated as a life-long process.

    Employers as well as students stand to gain from such a system. They need a comprehensive and coherent framework of qualifications. Standards set by industry, to meet the needs of industry.

    It was Government that began this reform. But it is the National Council for Vocational Qualifications, in partnership with employers, that is turning Government vision into practical reality. I believe that we are now creating the most effective and flexible system of vocational qualifications in the world.

    Mr Chairman, we set you and your Council a challenge in our White Paper last year: that the system of national vocational qualifications which you have been developing since 1987 should spread right across industry and be within the grasp of all. The aim, stated in the White Paper, was to cover 80 per cent of the work force by the end of 1992. There were some who said that it simply could not be done. But it will be done. And I warmly congratulate you on reaching the 50 per cent milestone which John Hillier announced this morning. That is tremendous progress. I am confident that by the end of this year you will have reached 80 per cent coverage.

    And the purpose of this Conference is to make sure that the new system is used to full effect. Everyone here is aware that the skills of our people are the most valuable national asset of all.

    Of course, in one respect the future for today’s young people will differ from everything known before. Never again will a qualification once earned be sufficient for a lifetime. Training, re-training, updating will become increasingly necessary. In nearly all aspects of endeavour life-long learning will be needed.

    Quality and Choice in School

    The foundations for that must be laid in school. Our programme of reform in education, carried further in the Citizen’s Charter, will ensure that all schools concentrate on getting the basic things right. Step by step, Ken Clarke has been applying this principle to all age-groups in schools. From next September all pupils aged 14 will be following the National Curriculum course in English, maths and science. We will have clear national standards for the teaching of this key age-group on the threshold of decisions about their future education and working lives.

    But we are broadening as well as deepening the National Curriculum. Since 1990, all our 11 year-olds have been studying Technology, starting out for example on electronics, computer-aided design or working with metal and textiles. From 1993, technology will be extended to the curriculum for 14 year-olds – and will lead to GCSE or vocational qualifications.

    And we intend to enhance choice by developing a new breed of schools which will specialise in technology. The idea builds directly on our experience with City Technology Colleges. CTCs have become beacons of excellence in this field. We want to light more such beacons around the country.

    We are therefore committing 25 million to provide capital funding for a number of existing schools, which want to enhance their technology equipment and facilities. These will be chosen from amongst schools with a clear commitment to technology teaching. This initiative, I am happy to say, has attracted support from a number of industrial companies.

    The successful voluntary aided schools have already been announced. But I am particularly pleased today to be able to announce that 18 grant-maintained schools have now been chosen for the coming year.

    Good grounding is essential. But it is not good enough, if education stops at 16. By 1990, 60 per cent of 16 year-olds in England chose to stay on in full-time education and training. That is a sea-change from 1980 when it was only 40 per cent. And in 1990 no less than 90 per cent were doing some kind of education or training at least part-time. That was an investment in their future – in Britain’s future.

    As more young people stay on, one of the difficult decisions they face is how best to develop their skills. The choice of one route or the other is rarely clear cut. It’s hard to decide at 16 whether to study for higher education or to train for a job. Options need to be kept open. That was why we announced in the White Paper that we would develop a new system of more general vocational qualifications.

    New General NVQs

    These new vocational qualifications are designed mainly for young people still in full-time education. They are designed to be worked for in school or college rather than on the job.

    I can tell you today that we will be introducing the first General National Vocational Qualifications from September in a number of further education colleges and schools. Initially they will be at Level 3. They will be distinct from the existing NVQs, which are specific to a particular job or type of work. They will cover five broad areas – business and administration; manufacturing technology; health and social care; leisure and tourism; and art and design. And these new qualifications will be much more widely available from September 1993.

    The new courses will be structured to appeal to young people across a range of abilities. They will not replace GCSE, or our highly-valued A-levels but will run alongside them, thus widening choice. But some very able students may prefer them to the academic approach of A levels. I am confident that they will also appeal to many employers as a prelude to specific on-the-job training.

    But let me make it clear. This new qualification will not be an easy option. The aim is to offer young people the genuine choice between worthwhile, high-standard qualifications, along both the academic and the vocational paths. Qualifications of equal value – achieved at the end of courses of equal rigour. That way, they will attract equal esteem. Each offering the individual the opportunity to go as far as his or her own abilities allow. That was the vision in the White Paper. And – through NVQs and their new general equivalent in colleges and schools, that is what we are on target to deliver.

    Advanced Diploma

    We also announced in the White Paper our intention to introduce Diplomas to enhance the choice between an academic and a vocational education. There has been great interest in the idea of an Advanced Diploma which could be achieved either by those studying for A levels or by those who choose instead to study for NVQs. We intend to press forward now with the Advanced Diploma so that the first awards can be made in 1994.

    After consultation, we have decided what the qualifications for an Advanced Diploma should be. On the one hand, three advanced GCE passes (of which two may be only at A/S level); or, on the other, an NVQ at level three.

    On top of that, however, we shall also require a given level of attainment in English, mathematics and a modern foreign language from all those applying for a diploma -whether they have chosen the academic or vocational route. The evidence for this might come from GCSE, from A or A/S levels, or from within NVQ courses. Kenneth Clarke and Michael Howard will be consulting SEAC and NCVQ on the specific requirements.

    Attainment in English, maths and a foreign language will be assisted by the revision of GCSE for which I called last July. Work on this is progressing well. The new courses will begin in September this year. There will be a wider range of papers, so that we can not only cater for weaker candidates but also stretch the most able. There will be a sharp reduction in the proportion of marks awarded for coursework, and a rigorous examination at the end of the course. And the new GCSE will be related to the clear standards laid down under the National Curriculum.

    The National Record of Achievement

    But I believe that it is not just formal qualifications that give the measure of the individual. Almost a year ago, Michael Howard launched the idea of a National Record of Achievement for young people. Such records would give them credit for their many informal achievements, which are not reflected in exams, diplomas or degrees – but which may be just as important to them – and to their employers, too. Voluntary work, for example. Excellence in sport. The enterprise shown by pupils in running a business at schools. Or the leadership of an employee who heads up a project team. These are individual records. They foster pride in past achievement and encourage future effort. In a few short months this idea has become a phenomenal success. Over 2 million record forms have so far been ordered – by many thousands of schools, and more than 600 firms.

    I want to encourage this trend. But that is not really a job for government. So we are today inviting your Council, Mr Chairman, to take responsibility for its future development. I know you will work hard to spread the use of National Records of Achievement, so that they become a permanent and valued feature of the landscape of personal achievement.

    Taken together, the extension of NVQs, the new general qualification, the Advanced Diploma, and the Record of Achievement are all substantial initiatives. But we intend to carry the underlying philosophy further and deeper into training through life.

    Training and Enterprise Councils have given local employers a key place in establishing patterns of training that are suitable for their area. At the same time, our new pilot project with Training Credits will give young people the purchasing power to become investors in their own future. They will have the choice as to how they use this new opportunity.

    And we have evolved other innovative ways of creating new incentives for people to invest in their own training and development. Career Development Loans, for example. And, from April this year, a new tax relief for the fees which individuals pay for training leading to NVQs.

    These increasingly open and flexible approaches to learning are bringing better education and training within reach of all – even to those who once would have been prevented by work or domestic circumstances from pursuing them. Now qualifications that count can be gained by anyone who can demonstrate competence -whether it was gained under formal instruction or whilst doing a job.

    The Role of Employers

    It is right that employers should be involved in defining the standards of occupational competence. And I should like to add my personal thanks today to the thousands of employers who are actively engaged in that work.

    I believe that so many employers are sharing this commitment because they recognise the benefits which the new qualifications can bring. Real tangible benefits, which some are already enjoying.

    Being able to match people’s skills much more closely to the needs of their business.

    Knowing exactly what additional training anyone needs in order to move to another job.

    Choosing the most appropriate form of training.

    Knowing that people have been trained systematically to clearly defined high standards.

    Working through qualifications developed by and for the real world of employment. They are already in regular use in key sectors such as retailing, catering and construction. But the success of our reforms hinges on the wider use and understanding of the qualifications which we are developing.

    The Skills Revolution

    This Government has launched a Skills Revolution – a revolution that is gathering momentum year by year. And yet, in truth, to say that under-states what is happening. For it is really two revolutions which are happening together. A revolution among individuals, who are demanding and playing a much greater part in their own training and development. And a revolution among employers who are training their employees as never before. I have no doubt that employers must be in the lead in this skills revolution.it That is why I have supported strongly the establishment and development of TECs. And why this Government will always resist a return to the old centralist policies of compulsory training levies and bureaucratic control that some still seek. Industry is proving its commitment to high quality training. And it is doing that, too, by the support that it is giving to this Council.

    You, Mr Chairman, can be sure of this Government’s support in the work you still have ahead. For your council is developing a system which is raising our nation’s skill levels. You are developing a system of quality against which employers can assess the skills of their people and individuals can judge their success in developing their talents.

    Wider choice. Personal motivation. Employer leadership and commitment. That is the basis of our approach. It is the best path to personal fulfilment and to more competitive enterprise. It is the path that will lead to high standards in education and training. And to success for our country in matching – and outclassing – our trade competitors in the years ahead.

    It is the right path. And I wish you well in developing it.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 23 January 1992

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 23rd January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 23 January.

    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.

     

    Honours

    Mr. Tony Banks : To ask the Prime Minister if he has any proposals to review the present honours system; and if he will make a statement.

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

     

    EC Heads of State

    Mr. John Browne : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement as to the effect of the Maastricht agreement and the Single European Act upon the powers, role and future of the Crown and the heads of state of other European Community members.

    The Prime Minister : The powers, role and future of the Crown remain unaffected by the Single European Act and the treaty on European union agreed at Maastricht. The position of heads of state of other member states of the Community depends on their respective constitutional arrangements.

     

    Farmland

    Dr. David Clark : To ask the Prime Minister whether he has any specific plans to reduce the protection to farmland currently in operation through the planning system; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : New planning policy guidance was set out on 22 January at columns 203-4 in a reply from my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Planning to my hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke (Mr. Hunter). This affirms the Government’s commitment to protecting the best and most versatile agricultural land. Planning authorities should also weigh environmental considerations, including any special designation of the area, and economic factors, including the need for diversification to provide wider employment opportunities in rural areas, in preparing development plans and deciding planning applications.

     

    Legislation (Repeal)

    Mr. Tebbit : To ask the Prime Minister under which sections of the treaty of Rome, as amended by the Maastricht agreement, the powers of Parliament to repeal legislation enacted by its predecessors are curtailed.

    The Prime Minister : The powers of Parliament to repeal legislation enacted by its predecessors are not curtailed by the treaty of Rome, either in its present form or as amended by the treaty on European union agreed at the Maastricht European Council.

  • PMQT – 23 January 1992

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 23rd January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Harry Barnes : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 23 January.

    The Prime Minister (Mr. 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. Barnes : The Prime Minister has cut 110,000 training places in the past year. Furthermore, training schemes do not produce the skills or the qualifications for the jobs that are needed in Britain at this time. Is that because, as the Prime Minister said in another interview with Sue Lawley, from his point of view qualifications “are wholly useless”?

    The Prime Minister : Despite the unfavourable economic climate, both youth training and employment training continue to help young and unemployed people on a very substantial scale to go into further training and further education. Very large numbers of young people are being helped. We are investing enormous sums in training, in enterprise and in vocational education–two and a half times as much, after taking account of inflation, as was invested by the Labour party when it was last in government.

     

    Romford (Visit)

    Q2. Sir Michael Neubert : To ask the Prime Minister whether he has any plans to make an official visit to Romford.

    The Prime Minister : I am making a series of visits to all parts of the country, and very much hope to include Essex among them.

    Sir Michael Neubert : Will my right hon. Friend be assured that any time that he cares to come to Romford, Essex men and Essex women will throng the streets in their thousands? In the meantime, will he give my constituents an assurance that he welcomes the report of the three wise men on primary education, and that the Government fully subscribe to the importance of the three Rs? Will he confirm that it is our top priority to get back to the basics in education and to sweep away the leftist progressive teaching methods that, having been put to the test, have failed?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend couches his invitation to visit Essex in irresistible terms.

    The report that my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State published yesterday is extremely important. It challenges some of the teaching methods that have been used in recent years and it suggests that schools should concentrate on commonsense, practical teaching. I believe that that is what parents want and that it is the best way to ensure that children are taught the essentials. We certainly hope that both schools and teachers will adopt the proposals in the report.

     

    Engagements

    Q3. Mr. Matthew Taylor : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 23 January.

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

    Mr. Taylor : The Prime Minister will be well aware of the appalling environmental problems in the Fal estuary arising from the water pollution after the closure of the Wheal Jane mine. I do not think that people in Cornwall want to allocate blame at the moment, but they do want to ensure that the environmental clean-up is carried out both in the short term and the long term without hold-ups. Will the Prime Minister ensure that there are no financial problems at any stage in ensuring that the long-term and short-term clean-ups take place?

    The Prime Minister : As the hon. Gentleman knows, we set up the National Rivers Authority specifically to respond in the first instance to the sort of pollution incidents to which he refers–this one is a very serious incident. The NRA has been closely monitoring the situation since the mine closed. It had developed contingency plans before the incident and put them into effect when water in the mine began to overflow. I am sure that the NRA considers that it will be able to deal with the problem with the resources that it has.

     

    Q4. Mr. Simon Coombs : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 23 January.

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

    Mr. Coombs : Has my right hon. Friend seen the reports from the German chambers of commerce which show that German industry has invested £7.8 billion in this country in recent years? Does not that demonstrate that low taxation, low inflation and good industrial relations are the basis for strong investment, including inward investment; and does it not also show that the future of this country is excellent under this Government?

    The Prime Minister : I have seen the report to which my hon. Friend refers. I have also seen the important comments of the CBI, which set out the fact that Britain now attracts nearly half of all the inward investment from Japan that comes to the European Community. I believe that, by investing here, German and Japanese companies and those of other countries have shown their confidence in the British economy. It is a shame that some of the gloom and doom-mongers in this country do not share that confidence.

    Mr. Kinnock : Will the Prime Minister confirm that under his Government the British economy is in its longest recession since the second world war?

    The Prime Minister : I will confirm to the right hon. Gentleman, as I am sure that he will be pleased to hear what the European Community has to say, that the United Kingdom is the only country where signals of a sustained economic recovery are discernible, by contrast with a tendency towards gradual slackening of growth continuing in Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands and Portugal.

    Mr. Kinnock : Slightly closer to home, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the British chambers of commerce today report that this is the seventh consecutive quarter in which the United Kingdom economy has suffered from recession, with levels of economic activity continuing to decline? Is not it clear that the recession caused by the Prime Minister’s policies is continuing because of the Prime Minister’s paralysis?

    The Prime Minister : The British chambers of commerce are clearly wrong about the seventh consecutive quarter. That would imply that the recession started in the second quarter of 1990, which it clearly did not, because output rose between the first and second quarters of 1990.

    I notice also that the president of the chambers of commerce said that British industry and commerce were on

    “an improving trend of slowly and steadily climbing out of the recession”.

    Mr. Kinnock : Will not the Prime Minister refer to the report and listen to the voices of business and commerce from all over the country when they say :

    “A worsening position on employment expectations,”–

    higher job losses–

    “and a major down-grading of business confidence, however, give no cause for comfort in this survey”?

    How can the Prime Minister be so complacent and so indolent when he is receiving advice that something now needs to be done?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman was clearly not listening. I quoted from the president of that particular group of chambers of commerce. The report itself says :

    “an improving trend of slowly and steadily climbing out of the recession.”

    The right hon. Gentleman should look at other surveys and forecasters. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the International Monetary Fund both forecast recovery. What is equally clear among business men is that they have no enthusiasm whatever for a Labour Government. A survey of the top hundred British companies showed that 63 per cent. of them believed that recession would get worse under a Labour Government, and not one of them believed that it would get better.

    Sir Robin Maxwell-Hyslop : Will my right hon. Friend find time today to tell the House of the decision made yesterday to restore to Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia the gold deposited for safe keeping in the Bank of England but misappropriated by the then Labour Government with the support in the Division Lobby of the leader and Chief Whip of the Liberal party at that time?

    The Prime Minister : I can certainly confirm to my hon. Friend that when I met President Landsbergis yesterday I was able to indicate that we would be returning the gold. As the House well knows, the Labour Government in 1967 ordered the gold to be sold. The then Conservative Opposition roundly opposed that, and I am delighted that this Conservative Government have been able to correct that smear of dishonour.

     

    United Nations

    Q5. Mr. Cryer : To ask the Prime Minister when he next expects to pay an official visit to the United Nations.

    The Prime Minister : I shall chair a meeting of the United Nations Security Council on 31 January.

    Mr. Cryer : Will the Prime Minister confirm that 140 nations have signed the United Nations nuclear non-proliferation treaty, including Tory Canada? Why cannot this Tory Government honour their pledge under the treaty to get rid of nuclear weapons, which will mean the withdrawal of Polaris–which is literally cracking up–and the saving of £10 billion on Trident, to be spent on the national health service to care for lives instead of threatening them with mass murder? If nuclear non-proliferation- –

    Hon. Members : More, more.

    Mr. Speaker : Order. That is very unseemly.

    Mr. Cryer : Quite so, Mr. Speaker.

    If nuclear non-proliferation is good enough for the rest of the world, why is not it good enough for us?

    The Prime Minister : We seek to promote non-proliferation and disarmament, and that will be one of the matters to be discussed at the United Nations Security Council meeting that I shall chair next week. But I must say to the hon. Gentleman who suggests that it would be appropriate at present for this country to scrap its nuclear weapons and Trident that to do so would leave the country wholly defenceless. That may be the view of the hon. Gentleman. It may even be the view of right hon. Gentlemen opposite in their secret hearts. It is not the right policy for this country, it is not the policy of the Government and I hope that the Opposition will make clear how many of their members support that policy of unilateral nuclear disarmament rather than a policy of secure defences for this country.

    Mr. Bellingham : When my right hon. Friend visits the United Nations, will he raise the issue of the RAF aircrew who were shot down over the Gulf, some of whom came from west Norfolk? They were tortured, humiliated and abused in gross contravention of the Geneva convention. Is it time that the perpetrators of the crime were brought to justice?

    The Prime Minister : I strongly share the view expressed by my hon. Friend. I do not think that it is a matter for discussion at the special Security Council meeting next week ; it is certainly a matter which remains on our agenda.

     

    Engagements

    Q6. Mr. Douglas : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 23 January.

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

    Mr. Douglas : The Prime Minister’s view of an expanded European Community, composed of many states in eastern Europe, together with existing members, is extremely attractive, but will he contrast that with the instability within the United Kingdom because the aspirations of a nationwide Scotland are frustrated by its being unable to secure its independence and membership of the Community? Will he take steps to have that issue ventilated in a multi-question referendum of the people, which could perhaps be held in harmony with the general election?

    The Prime Minister : I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for what he had to say about the European Community. That is the right way forward for this country, the European Community and the wider Europe which I hope in due course will join the Community. The hon. Gentleman spoke about devolution. The Union has served Scotland and England well. In terms of a debate, he will be aware that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland has called for debates in the Scottish Grand Committee and I hope that everyone will contribute to them.

     

    Q7. Mr. Mans : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 23 January.

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

    Mr. Mans : Will my right hon. Friend encourage the Chancellor of the Exchequer not to increase the top limit on national insurance contributions because of the plight in which that would place many of my constituents and people in neighbouring Blackpool who earn under £15,000 a year but during the holiday season earn more than £400 a week?

    The Prime Minister : I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor will need no such encouragement. The policy suggested by my hon. Friend would hit many people on modest incomes who have bonus or overtime earnings and who occasionally earn above £390 a week. Such an impost would be quite contrary to the policies of the Government and the Conservative party and we shall not introduce any such policy.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 22 January 1992

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 22nd January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    East Timor

    Mrs. Clwyd : To ask the Prime Minister if he will support a United Nations Commission to East Timor to investigate the killings in Santa Cruz on 12 November 1991.

    The Prime Minister : We support the UN Secretary-General’s proposal to send a representative to examine the situation in East Timor.

     

    Severely Disabled People (Personal Assistants)

    Mr. Alfred Morris : To ask the Prime Minister if he is satisfied with the co-ordination between the Secretaries of State for Health and for Social Security concerning policy towards direct payments to severely disabled people to employ their own personal assistants; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : Yes.

     

    Armed Forces (Liability to Injury) Bill

    Mr. John Browne : To ask the Prime Minister what is his policy with regard to the Armed Forces (Liability to Injury) Bill.

    The Prime Minister : As the Armed Forces (Liability to Injury) Bill will not receive its Second Reading until Friday 24 January 1992, it would not be appropriate for me to make a statement.

     

    British Steel

    Mr. Dewar : To ask the Prime Minister what meetings he has had with British Steel in the last six months; and on what dates.

    The Prime Minister : None, but my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has had four meetings with British Steel during the last six months.

  • Mr Major’s Joint Doorstep Interview with Lithuanian President – 22 January 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s joint doorstep interview at Downing Street with the Lithuanian President, President Landsbergis, on Wednesday 22nd January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    This morning, I have had the opportunity of having discussions with President Landsbergis and have had the very great pleasure of welcoming him here as President of an independent country. That is an especial pleasure to us in the United Kingdom for we had never recognised the Baltic States’ absorption into the former Soviet Union and to see them again recognised as an independent country gives us especial pleasure and I am delighted that we now have diplomatic representation in his country.

    We have had a wide-ranging discussion this morning and have touched on many matters of bilateral interest. One in particular I would like to mention to you this morning and that is that I have agreed this morning with President Landsbergis that we will repay to his country the Baltic gold that was deposited here in 1940 and that had been sold by a previous government in the late 1960s. What we have agreed is that we will replace the quantity of gold that was originally deposited. President Landsbergis has agreed that he will wish this gold to remain deposited with the Bank of England but we will arrange the transfer of title once legal formalities have been completed.

    We have also agreed this morning that there are a series of relatively small intergovernmental claims one country against the other that have been outstanding for many years. We have decided, in parallel with the agreement over Baltic gold, that we will both renounce the claims one country against another and leave the diplomatic/economic slate entirely clean for us to develop a relationship from now onwards.

    It has been an extremely helpful and useful discussion. We have discussed other economic and wider matters and I am delighted to have had the opportunity of this meeting with President Landsbergis this morning.

    PRESIDENT LANDSBERGIS:

    I am very glad to be here to have this meeting to meet Mr. Prime Minister and say that we had a very good understanding of each other. Mr. Prime Minister understands very good the Lithuanian problems and supports us – has supported before and now – in our goals to be a more democratic, more prosperous country as a member of the European and whole world community of free nations.

    We resolved the old problems; we touched the new ones and we have a very good perspective of cooperation for the future.

    I am very glad Mr. Prime Minister for this meeting.

  • PMQT – 21 January 1992

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 21st January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    South Africa

     

    Q1. Mr. Andrew Hunter (Basingstoke) : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a further statement on his policies towards South Africa.

    The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major) : I welcome the meeting of the Convention for a Democratic South Africa in December. The Government will continue to encourage all parties to play a constructive role in the reform process. In order to encourage the growth that the South African economy desperately needs, we shall continue to work for the removal of the remaining economic and financial sanctions.

    Mr. Hunter : As many United Kingdom citizens live and own property in South Africa, or in other ways invest there, will my right hon. Friend discuss with President de Klerk the increasing violence there, and seek clarification on how the new South Africa can be built without the effective and practical renunciation of violence by all parties?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with the thrust of what my hon. Friend said, and I shall have the opportunity to discuss that with President de Klerk when he visits London early next month. I believe that all parties have a role to play in implementing the peace accord, but of course the South African Government have the primary responsibility for the impartial maintenance of law and order.

    Mr. Robert Hughes : Will the Prime Minister throw his full weight behind the proposition that an interim Government should rule South Africa during the transition period to democratic elections? As the situation is so delicate and as negotiations with the CODESA committees are currently under way, will he not–please not–do anything to damage that process by precipitate action on sanctions?

    The Prime Minister : On the latter point, I do not think that precipitate action on sanctions is the point at issue. One of the great difficulties faced by the South African Government and people at the moment is the need to see growth in their economy, which runs at present with no growth, as against a population growth of around 3 per cent. a year. That is leading to very real hardship for all the people of South Africa–most notably those in South Africa who have least–so I think that the progressive removal of sanctions is desirable for economic and social reasons, and I hope that that progressive removal of sanctions will take place.

    On the earlier part of the hon. Gentleman’s question, I wish to see progress made in South Africa. I think that that can best be done through the constitutional conference rather than by remarks from across many hundreds of miles.

     

    Q2. Mr. Robert Banks : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 21 January.

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

    Mr. Banks : Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is good news that, even in the teeth of an international recession, the Government have achieved reductions in interest rates, which means that the family man with an average, typical mortgage of £30,000 pays £100 a month less? Does not that augur well for the home owner and the property market in 1992?

    The Prime Minister : Yes, I do welcome the reductions in interest rates and, of course, in mortgage rates that we have seen. In particular, I welcome the cuts in interest rates which three more building societies have announced this morning. The background of lower interest rates and a continuing reduction in underlying inflation provide what we most need–the opportunity for steady, sustainable, non- inflationary growth.

    Mr. Kinnock : Why is the United Kingdom the only economy in the European Community that is in recession?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman is aware that a number of European economies either have been in recession or are moving towards recession at precisely the moment when the United Kingdom economy is poised to come out of recession. The right hon. Gentleman will also know that there is a recession in many other parts of the world as a result of the general world trading conditions.

    Mr. Kinnock : It is a pity that the Prime Minister did not answer the question that I asked. Perhaps he should refresh himself with the facts. Belgium, Denmark, France, Ireland and Italy all have growth rates of over 1 per cent., Spain, Portugal and Holland over 2 per cent., and Germany and Luxembourg over 3 per cent. They are all growing ; our economy is shrinking by 2 per cent. Is not that because this country and its people are paying the price for having a Government of unique incompetence?

    The Prime Minister : No, Sir. Almost every country of the industrial world is experiencing economic problems. French unemployment has now reached its highest level. Unemployment in the United States is at its highest level for five years. In recent months, unemployment has risen in every European Community country except the Netherlands. It is higher than a year ago in every EFTA country and in every G7 country except Japan. The right hon. Gentleman cannot live in a cocoon and overlook those facts.

    Mr. Kinnock : On the subject of cocoons, the Prime Minister should acknowledge that the USA, Japan, Australia and Canada are not actually in the European Community. In this country, under his Government, unemployment is going up faster, investment is lower and production has fallen more than in any other European country. Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the question? Why is that happening only in Britain under his Government?

    The Prime Minister : The fact of the matter is that it is not, as I have explained to the right hon. Gentleman on many occasions, happening only in this country. If the right hon. Gentleman is so concerned about unemployment and recession, why does he not acknowledge the impact that his minimum wage would have upon unemployment? Why does he not acknowledge what the £6 billion-worth of cuts in defence would do to employment? Why does he not acknowledge what the impact of his tax on savings would do to investment? Why does he not acknowledge what his strikers charter would do to industrial relations? Why does he not acknowledge what his party’s attitude to inward investment would do to jobs in the north-east, in Wales, in Scotland and in many other parts of the country? The policies that the right hon. Gentleman follows will ensure a long-standing and deep recession in this country.

    Mr. Riddick : Is my right hon. Friend aware of policy proposals which would introduce a new payroll tax on every job in this country, policy proposals which would reintroduce secondary picketing, and policy proposals which would introduce a minimum wage which would put literally hundreds of thousands of people out of work? Is my right hon. Friend aware that those policy proposals go under the somewhat misleading title of “Labour’s help to the unemployed”?

    Mr. Speaker : The Prime Minister should answer the first part of that question, but not the second.

    The Prime Minister : We have no plans to introduce any such policies. Industry knows that such policies would be absolutely disastrous to it and knows from what source those policies would come, which is why its hostility to the Opposition’s policies is so severe.

     

    Q3. Mr. Vaz : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 21 January.

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

    Mr. Vaz : Does the Prime Minister recall that, on 26 February 1991, I met him to discuss the case of my constituent, John Hall, who is seriously ill with leukaemia, an illness contracted while he was serving on Christmas island? At the meeting, the Prime Minister told me of his personal knowledge of the suffering of cancer victims and of their families and friends. He also told the Minister of State for the Armed Forces that he hoped that the matter would be expedited as quickly as possible. Almost a year later, nothing has been done. John Hall has spent the last year receiving chemotherapy and blood transfusions in order to stay alive. Will the Prime Minister please show some compassion and award John Hall and the other nuclear test veterans the compensation that the House and the country believe they richly deserve?

    The Prime Minister : I am not sure that the hon. Member for Leicester, East (Mr. Vaz) renders Mr. Hall’s case particular assistance in raising it in this fashion. I cannot go into the details of Mr. Hall’s case. What I can say to the hon. Gentleman is that the Government are willing to consider any claim where any evidence can be adduced of exposure to radiation. We are conducting a validating study into the background of this, and as soon as it is complete, we can reach a general policy conclusion. Until then, I simply have no evidence on which to base a response to individual cases such as Mr. Hall’s.

     

    Q4. Mr. Ian Taylor : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 21 January.

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

    Mr. Taylor : Has my right hon. Friend had time to consider the tax implications of an extra £35 billion of spending pledges? If any Government were to bring in these pledges, they would either have to dishonour them and thereby deceive the public, or income tax payers at all levels of income would need to cough up and pay more to fund them. Is it not true that spending pledges such as those made by Labour politicians would mean that nothing would happen?

    Mr. Speaker : Order. Before the Prime Minister answers, let me repeat that a Member must ask questions about matters for which the Prime Minister is responsible ; he cannot answer for Labour party policies. Answer the first part, please.

    The Prime Minister : The implications of such spending increases are either that borrowing would rise to unprecedented levels, and no doubt interest rates with them, or, alternatively, that taxes would rise to a remarkable extent. It is noteworthy that those who advocate these policies also themselves concede in surveys that they would welcome an increase in the basic rate of tax as well as other tax increases.

    Mr. Ashdown : Does the Prime Minister recall that the cause of reconciliation in Northern Ireland was tragically set back in the aftermath of the 1974 election? Will he agree that it would be appalling if we were to allow history to repeat itself after this election? Will he therefore support a cross-party approach to Northern Ireland affairs during the election and unequivocally reject any partisan trading with the Anglo-Irish Agreement in a way that would reverse the peace process after the next election?

    The Prime Minister : This party stands four square against terrorism, and we have set out our policies from this Dispatch Box on many occasions. I see no imminent change.

     

    Q5. Mrs. Gorman : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 21 January.

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

    Mrs. Gorman : Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is a diabolical liberty for people to suggest that they can increase people’s taxes by the underhand method of raising national insurance contributions, as is proposed by the Labour party? Is it not true that the choice for the British people is between our party, which calls for lower taxes and greater spending by the people, and the Labour party, which wants to take people’s money and spend it itself? Is not that robbing Peter to pay Paul?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend makes her point in her own individual manner. As I have said before, if people advocate spending and tax increases, they should be prepared to defend them. The Labour party knows that its spending and taxation plans have been rumbled–and they dislike it.

    Mr. Barron : Is the Prime Minister aware that, this morning, the Selby group of the British Coal Corporation announced more than 1,100 job losses at four coal mines? Will he get his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy to take action now, as he has been urged to do by the European Energy Commissioner, to stop pit closures in this country, given that we produce the cheapest deep-mined coal in the European Community? How long will the country continue to lose jobs and to lose access to the great national asset of our coal, given that the Government want to sell off British Coal overnight at a cheap price, for the benefit of the Treasury?

    The Prime Minister : I am sorry to hear of the job losses to which the hon. Gentleman refers, but the only secure future for the coal industry or, indeed, for any other industry, is for it to produce something that people want at a price that people can afford. That is the only long-term future for the coal industry.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 20 January 1992

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 20th January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    European Union

    Mr. Tebbit : To ask the Prime Minister if he will set out the commitments of the United Kingdom under the declaration of the conference within article C of the provisions of a common foreign and security policy of the draft treaty on European union.

    The Prime Minister : The declaration has no legally binding effect. It does not alter the fact that unanimous decisions will still require the unanimous support of all member states. It is similar to the provision in the Single European Act calling upon partners to refrain from impeding the formation of a consensus.

    Mr. Tebbit : To ask the Prime Minister if, in relation to article E of the provisions of a common foreign and security policy of the draft treaty on European union with regard to matters coming within the common foreign and security policy, he will state within which international organisations and international conferences the United Kingdom will retain its own representation rather than be represented by the presidency of the European union.

    The Prime Minister : The United Kingdom will retain the membership and representation in all international organisations and international conferences it enjoys at present.

     

    Sir Basil Feldman

    Mr. Alton : To ask the Prime Minister (1) when he last met Sir Basil Feldman on official business; and what subjects were discussed;

    (2) how many times he has met Sir Basil Feldman in the last 12 months; and whether Sunday trading has been discussed.

    The Prime Minister : My normal practice is to neither confirm nor deny whether meetings with private individuals have taken place.

     

    Office Costs

    Mr. Winnick : To ask the Prime Minister if he will give the cost of running his office in 1989, 1990 and 1991.

    The Prime Minister : The cost in 1990-91 was £8,225,816. The cost in 1989-90 was £7,669,276.

    Note : Salaries and wages, notional pension liability, administration costs, the costs of office services and the grant-in-aid to the Chequers Trust are included in the costs. The Prime Minister’s salary is excluded.

     

    Businesses (Environmental Performance)

    Mr. Robert G. Hughes : To ask the Prime Minister whether he has any proposals to recognise businesses who improve their environmental performance.

    The Prime Minister : The Government’s environment White Paper “This Common Inheritance”, and last year’s first anniversary report on it stressed that all parts of society have a role to play in securing environmental improvements. This applies not least to business. The Government want to create the right conditions to encourage business to improve its environmental performance and to recognise and reward those businesses which rise successfully to the challenge. On my recommendation, Her Majesty the Queen has given her approval in principle to the introduction of a new Queen’s award for environmental achievement.

    The new award will recognise product and process development which has major benefits for the environment and which is commercially successful. It will form part of the established Queen’s awards scheme alongside business awards for export and technology achievement. It is planned that applications will be sought in June and that the first environment awards will be made on the Queen’s birthday on 21 April 1993.

    The addition of environment achievement to the Queen’s awards builds on the pioneering work of the Royal Society of Arts whose better environment awards for industry have led the way and generated invaluable experience in awards for business in the environmental field. The RSA plans to continue activity in this area in a way which will complement the new Queen’s award.

     

    Lord Lieutenants

    Mr. William Powell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list the lord lieutenants with the dates of their appointment and expected retirement.

    The Prime Minister : A list of lord lieutenants, together with the dates of their appointment and expected retirement, is set out in the table.

    County |Lord-Lieutenant |Date of Appointment |Date of Retirement

    —————————————————————————————————————–

    England

    Avon |Sir John Wills, TD FRICS JP |April 1974 |July 2003

    Bedfordshire |Samuel Whitbread, Esq |January 1991 |February 2012

    Berkshire |John Henderson, Esq, CVO OBE |June 1989 |May 1995

    Buckinghamshire |Commander, The Hon. John Fremantle, RN (Retd.) JP |September 1984 |January 2002

    Cambridgeshire |Michael Bevan, Esq |August 1985 |August 2001

    Cheshire |William Bromley Davenport, Esq. JP |June 1990 |March 2010

    Cleveland |The Lord Gisborough, TD |March 1981 |July 2002

    Cornwall |The Viscount Falmouth |October 1977 |October 1994

    Cumbria |Sir Charles Graham, Bt |February 1983 |July 1994

    Derbyshire |Colonel Peter Hilton, MC JP |January 1978 |June 1994

    Devon |The Earl of Morley, JP |May 1982 |May 1998

    Dorset |The Lord Digby, JP |September 1984 |July 1999

    Durham |David Grant, Esq, CBE |April 1988 |January 1997

    East Sussex |Admiral Sir Lindsay Bryson, KCB |November 1989 |January 2000

    Essex |Admiral Sir Andrew Lewis, KCB JP |August 1978 |August 1992

    Gloucestershire |Colonel Martin Gibbs, CB DSO TD JP |June 1978 |February 1992

    Greater London |Field Marshall, The Lord Bramall, GCB OBE MC JP |January 1986 |December 1998

    Greater Manchester |Colonel J B Timmins, OBE TD JP |December 1987 |June 2007

    Hampshire |Sir James Scott, JP |December 1982 |October 1999

    Hereford and Worcester |Captain Thomas Dunne, JP |July 1977 |October 2008

    Hertfordshire |Simon Bowes Lyon, Esq, FCA |January 1986 |June 2007

    Humberside |Richard Bethell, Esq |October 1983 |March 1997

    Isle of Wight |The Lord Mottistone, CBE |August 1985 |December 1995

    Kent |The Right Hon. Robin Leigh-Pemberton |August 1982 |January 2002

    Lancashire |Dr. Simon Towneley |March 1976 |December 1996

    Leicestershire |Timothy Brooks, Esq, JP |January 1989 |March 2004

    Lincolnshire |Henry Nevile, Esq |November 1975 |March 1995

    Merseyside |Henry Cotton, Esq |May 1989 |July 2004

    Norfolk |Timothy Colman, Esq |March 1978 |September 2004

    Northamptonshire |John Lowther, Esq, CBE JP |January 1984 |November 1998

    Northumberland |The Viscount Ridley, TD |January 1984 |July 2000

    North Yorkshire |Sir Marcus Worsley, JP |March 1987 |April 2000

    Nottinghamshire |Sir Andrew Buchanan, Bt. |February 1991 |July 2012

    Oxfordshire |Sir Ashley Ponsonby, MC |January 1980 |February 1996

    Shropshire |John Dugdale, Esq |February 1975 |May 1998

    Somerset |Lt. Col. Geoffrey Luttrell, MC JP |March 1978 |October 1994

    South Yorkshire |Hugh Neill, Esq, CBE TD JP |May 1985 |March 1996

    Staffordshire |Sir Arthur Bryan |July 1968 |March 1998

    Suffolk |Sir Joshua Rowley, JP |March 1978 |December 1995

    Surrey |Richard Thornton, Esq, OBE JP |May 1986 |October 1997

    Tyne and Wear |Sir Ralph Carr-Ellison |July 1984 |December 2000

    Warwickshire |The Viscount Daventry |February 1990 |December 1996

    West Midlands |The Earl of Aylesford, JP |April 1974 |November 1993

    West Sussex |The Duke of Richmond and Gordon |March 1990 |September 2004

    West Yorkshire |The Lord Ingrow, OBE TD JP |May 1985 |August 1992

    Wiltshire |Field Marshal, Sir Roland Gibbs, GCB CBE DSO MC |December 1989 |June 1996

    Wales Clwyd |Sir William Gladstone, Bt. JP |August 1985 |October 2000

    Dyfed |David Mansel Lewis, Esq, JP |February 1979 |October 2002

    Mid Glamorgan |Murray McLaggan, Esq, JP |January 1990 |September 2004

    South Glamorgan |Captain Norman Lloyd-Edwards |June 1990 |June 2008

    West Glamorgan |Lt. Col. Sir Michael Llewellyn, Bt. |December 1987 |June 1996

    Gwynedd |Meuric Rees, Esq |January 1990 |March 1999

    Gwent |Richard Hanbury-Tenison, Esq, JP |June 1979 |January 2000

    Powys |Mervyn Bourdillon, Esq, JP |July 1986 |August 1999

    Scotland

    Highland region

    Caithness |The Viscount Thurso |April 1973 |December 1997

    Sutherland |Major General David Houston, CBE |November 1991 |February 2004

    Ross and Cromarty |Captain Roderick Stirling, TD |February 1988 |June 2007

    Inverness |Lt. Cdr. Lachlan Mackintosh of Mackintosh, OBE RN (Retd.) | September 1985 |June 2003

    Nairn |The Earl of Leven and Melville |July 1969 |May 1999

    Grampian region

    Moray |Captain Sir Iain Tennant |January 1964 |March 1994

    Banff |James McPherson, Esq, CBE |August 1987 |November 2002

    Aberdeen County |Captain Colin Farquharson, FRICS |March 1987 |August 1998

    Kincardine |The Viscount of Arbuthnott, CBE DSC |January 1977 |October 1999

    Tayside region

    Angus |The Right Hon. The Earl of Airlie, KT GCVO |June 1989 |May 2001

    Perth and Kinross |Major Sir David Butter, KCVO MC |November 1971 |March 1995

    Fife region

    Fife |The Earl of Elgin and Kincardine |October 1987 |February 1999

    Lothian region

    West Lothian |The Earl of Morton |August 1985 |March 2002

    Midlothian |Sir John Clerk of Penicuik, Bt CBE VRD FRSE JP |June 1972 |January 1992

    East Lothian |Sir Hew Hamilton Dalrymple, Bt KCVO |November 1986 |April 2001

    Central region

    Clackmannan |The Earl of Mar and Kellie |September 1966 |February 1996

    Stirling |Lt. Col. James Stirling, CBE TD FRICS |December 1983 |September 2005

    Borders region

    Peebles |Lt. Col. Aidan Sprot, MC |October 1980 |June 1994

    Roxburgh |The Duke of Buccleuch and Queensberry |January 1974 |September 1998

    Berwick |Major General Sir John Swinton, KCVO OBE JP |April 1989 |April 2000

    Strathclyde region

    Argyll |The Most Hon. The Marquess of Bute, JP |June 1990 |February 2008

    Dunbarton |Brigadier Donald Hardie, TD JP |June 1990 |January 2011

    Lanark |The Lord Clydesmuir, CB MBE TD |August 1963 |May 1992

    Renfrew |Major David Crichton Maitland |November 1980 |September 2000

    Ayrshire and Arran |Major Richard Henderson, TD |April 1991 |July 2006

    Dumfries and Galloway region

    Wigtown |Major Edward Orr Ewing |September 1989 |September 2006

    Stewartry |Sir Michael Herries, OBE MC |March 1989 |February 1998

    Dumfries |Captain Ronald Cunningham-Jardine |October 1991 |September 2006

    Island areas

    Orkney |Brigadier Malcolm Dennison |March 1990 |March 1999

    Shetland |Magnus Shearer, Esq, JP |October 1982 |February 1999

    Western Isles |The Earl of Granville, MC |March 1983 |December 1993

    Northern Ireland

    County

    Antrim |Captain Richard Dobbs |April 1975 |April 1994

    Armagh |The Earl of Caledon |March 1989 |May 2030

    County Borough of Belfast |Colonel J Elliott Wilson, OBE JP |March 1991 |May 2000

    Down |Colonel William Brownlow |January 1990 |August 1996

    Fermanagh |The Earl of Erne |May 1986 |July 2012

    Londonderry |Colonel Michael McCorkell, OBE TD |April 1975 |February 2000

    County Borough of Londonderry |James Eaton, Esq, TD |January 1986 |August 2002

    Tyrone |The Duke of Abercorn |December 1986 |July 2019

  • Mr Major’s Comments at Belfast City Hall – 20 January 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on his arrival at Belfast City Hall on the morning of Monday 20th January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Firstly, I’m delighted to be back here in Belfast, and the first message I bring to the people of Belfast is absolutely clear. We admire the way Belfast, year after year, stands up to some of the terrorist activities that they have to live with. It’s immensely brave and it has the Government’s full support. By being here today I hope I’m going to state that yet again.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, could you reassure the people about the security situation. They want some sort of action taken after the massacre of only two or three days ago.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I understand that and I think the people who were responsible for that massacre are unspeakable. It is difficult to comprehend the evil of people who can stand there, at some distance, and brutally slaughter and murder innocent people in the way they did, and it is against that background that I will repeat again and again and again. “They cannot bomb Belfast out of its way of life. They cannot bomb Northern Ireland out of its way of life and they cannot bomb the British Government out of its policy.” We had made the decision before that atrocity to send more troops here to improve the security situation.

    I am not going to go into details of what can be done and what will be done, but that we will stand four square with the people of Northern Ireland against this terrorism, they need have no doubt.

    QUESTION:

    Can I just ask you, Sir, coming here today, coming to Belfast and going to Craigavon, where there has been trouble. But the people of Magherafelt, Ballymena, these other areas, they will feel very hurt at your absence in those areas today. Are you intending to meet with people, the relatives [Inaudible].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    This isn’t my first visit to Northern Ireland, to Belfast, and other parts of Northern Ireland. It isn’t going to be my last. You can expect me to be back again and again and again. What has happened in parts of Northern Ireland; the way in which it has built itself up against the most difficult background, I think is one of the moat impressive stories one could imagine. Yes, I will be back again and again and I will be meeting representatives of people of every part of Northern Ireland.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible] of the people who were killed, Prime Minister, what about the relatives of those people who were killed, who are burying their dead today?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Well, what can one say except to express one’s sympathy for this quite needless and pointless tragedy. I wish I could find the right words of comfort for them. It isn’t easy to do; it’s a blot on their lives that these people have created that will never go away and I understand that. I wish there was something I could say to offer them greater comfort than I can. What I can say is that they may be absolutely certain that the people responsible for this outrage will be hunted and hunted and hunted for the rest of their days until we find them.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, what about the Secretary of State, did he make an error of judgment on Friday night in Dublin?

    [Question not answered]

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, I am sorry for repeating this but to the people who are lying in hospital injured and the relatives of those people, have you any real understanding of their plight today, the sense of despair? Will you have anything to say to them, will you be able to say anything to them?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I believe I do understand their sense of despair. No one who isn’t living through it can quite appreciate the horror of what has happened to them, to their lives and to the lives of their relatives. I do understand that and I think I understand what they want in the future as well. They want to be absolutely certain that they are not going to be abandoned and that Northern Ireland isn’t going to be abandoned, and I can promise them that it isn’t.