Category: 1993

  • PMQT – 1 April 1993

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 1st April 1993.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

     

    Q1. Mr. Mudie : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 1 April.

    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. Mudie : Will the Prime Minister join me in congratulating the Home Affairs Select Committee on its decision to inquire into party political funding? Will he also join the Opposition in urging full co- operation and disclosure–that disclosure to cover items such as the £17 million secretly paid to the Conservatives to cover the cost of the previous election?

    The Prime Minister : Of course the Conservative party will submit a memorandum as requested and will of course be available to submit oral evidence. We have always said that we are consistently opposed to state aid for political parties. If the hon. Gentleman is being so sanctimonious, I hope that he might consider whether his party is truly in favour of state aid or not.

     

    Q2. Mr. Sykes : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 1 April.

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

    Mr. Sykes : Will the Prime Minister take this opportunity to express his condemnation of the proposed rail strike tomorrow–

    The Prime Minister rose– [Interruption.]

    Mr. Sykes : — and does he agree that the state monopoly should be broken up as soon as possible? Has he noticed, by the way, how many Labour Members have scurried off to their constituencies before their union paymasters go on strike tomorrow?

    The Prime Minister : There is no doubt that it was worth waiting for the rest of my hon. Friend’s question. I entirely agree that the strike is deplorable. What is equally deplorable is the deafening silence from the Opposition who know very well that, when it comes to strikes, they are on strike in terms of condemning them. They are still the strikers’ friends.

    Mr. John Smith : The Prime Minister will, I hope, be aware of the deep disquiet in the country about the events in Srebrenica. Does he agree that it is vital that the United Nations is enabled to resume its humanitarian relief convoys as a matter of urgency? Will the Government make it crystal clear to the Serbs that their barbaric disregard for humanity is simply not tolerable?

    The Prime Minister : I entirely agree with the right hon. and learned Gentleman on both points. We are appalled by the plight of Srebrenica. It is terrible, and we believe that the Serbs must co-operate with the United Nations humanitarian effort. As the right hon. and learned Gentleman will know, British aid workers and British troops have been instrumental in providing more aid in Bosnia than any other country. That is a proud record, and we wish to see it continue. I align myself entirely with the right hon. and learned Gentleman’s comments about Srebrenica.

    Mr. Smith : May I associate the Opposition with the tribute that the Prime Minister paid to British aid workers and British troops, who are performing an invaluable role in assisting the humanitarian effort? But does the Prime Minister accept that if there is to be a lessening of the sickening events involving innocent women and children which, sadly, we have been witnessing on our television screens, sanctions must be applied more comprehensively and effectively against Serbia, and that the international community simply must insist that humanitarian convoys be accompanied by military escorts?

    The Prime Minister : I certainly support the idea that there should be much stricter enforcement of sanctions ; we would be perfectly prepared to contemplate the widening of sanctions as well as the stricter enforcement of existing sanctions. That matter is under discussion between our allies and ourselves at the moment.

    Mr. Fry : As we enter the era of the council tax, will my right hon. Friend join me in congratulating Conservative-controlled Wellingborough borough council, which is to levy an average tax of £177–by far the lowest in the country? Is that not a wonderful achievement, considering that services have not been cut, and is it not the clearest possible signal to the electorate of this country to vote Conservative in this year’s local government elections?

    The Prime Minister : I believe that there is widespread understanding around the country that the council tax is the fairest method that we have yet had of dealing with local government finance. Not only that, but those people who are fortunate enough to have a Conservative council will find that, band for band, they will pay less council tax than those whose council is Labour controlled.

    Mr. Ashdown : Does the Prime Minister not realise that being appalled by Srebrenica is not good enough? Being appalled by Srebrenica will not save a single life. The question is what the Prime Minister and the British Government intend to do about Srebrenica. I remind the right hon. Gentleman that that town and its 60,000 Muslim inhabitants are designated by the Vance-Owen plan as part of the Muslim territory. Will he therefore recommend to other western powers that we protect Srebrenica from being annihilated by the Serbs–or is this to be yet another example of our standing by the side, wringing our hands and saying that nothing can be done until it is too late for anything to be done?

    The Prime Minister : I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will weigh carefully what he says on that matter, because I think that what he has said will be deeply offensive to the 2,300 troops that we have in Bosnia, to their families and to the many other people who are concerned about their safety there. They are doing a magnificent job ; in many ways we have led the assistance being given to all parts of Bosnia over recent months. We strongly welcome the Security Council resolution enforcing the no-fly zone. My hon. Friend the Minister of State for Defence Procurement will have more to say about that after Question Time.

    Mr. Page : May I make my right hon. Friend aware that the trustees of the Maxwell pension fund will meet later this month to discuss the common investment fund, which now stands at about £180 million? I urge him to contact those trustees and beg them to have a distribution or a partial distribution of that fund so that, in conjunction with the Cuckney fund, the pensioners can be paid while the missing millions are traced and a long-term solution is put in place.

    The Prime Minister : I certainly join my hon. Friend in urging the trustees and the liquidator of the common investment fund to restore advance payments as soon as possible. I understand the difficulties, and I hope that the trustees will be able to respond.

     

    War Crimes (Yugoslavia)

    Q3. Dr. Godman : To ask the Prime Minister when he last met the leaders of other member states of the Security Council of the United Nations to discuss the implementation of UN resolution 808 ; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : The United Nations Secretary-General is due to produce a report by the end of April on the most effective and rapid means of establishing an ad hoc tribunal. United Nations member states have been invited to contribute views on an informal basis. Several states, including the United Kingdom, have so contributed.

    Dr. Godman : This is the first time since Nuremberg and Tokyo that an international war crimes tribunal has been set up. Unlike Nuremberg and Tokyo, however, is it not likely that the implementation of United Nations resolution 808 will turn out to be an exercise in futility? Has not the United States State Department already labelled those murderous leaders, Milosevic and Karadzic, as potential war criminals? Are they to be granted immunity from war crimes proceedings? Who will apprehend the criminals? Will British soldiers be involved? Will British police officers and lawyers be involved? It is surely a charade.

    The Prime Minister : I do not believe that it will be an exercise in futility. There are complex matters of international law to be determined, which are still under discussion within the United Nations, but it is intended, where possible, to ensure that people who commit war crimes face a tribunal and are punished satisfactorily and suitably.

     

    Engagements

    Q4. Mr. Hendry : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 1 April.

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

    Mr. Hendry : My right hon. Friend will be aware of the opposition of the police, my constituents and myself to the proposed all-night rave scheduled to take place in my constituency at the end of May. Does he agree that such events have less to do with entertainment than with organised crime and pushing illegal and dangerous drugs? Does he agree that the High Peak, as one of the most popular national parks in the world, is a wholly unsuitable venue for such an event? May I assure him that he has the support of the Conservative side of the House for the Government’s proposal to give the police more power to tackle these people? Will he ensure that the measures are brought forward as soon as possible?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend touches on a point which will concern many parents. The statement of my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary yesterday shows beyond doubt that the Government are determined to crack down on those who ignore the rights and property of law -abiding citizens. It is wholly unacceptable behaviour. That is why we are giving the police tougher powers to deal with it.

    Mr. Simpson : Is the Prime Minister aware of the report recently highlighted in the Nottingham Evening Post, which illustrated that claims for severe hardship payments had increased in the east midlands by over 750 per cent. in the last three years, leaving large numbers of young people with no jobs, no cash and no hope? Will he explain how he has failed to deliver jobs to those young people and when will he restore entitlement to benefit payments to them?

    The Prime Minister : I should mention to the hon. Gentleman that payments from the social fund could not have been made until we introduced the legislation to do so. No such comparable payments existed. As for jobs, it is interesting to note that for the first time in several weeks–in fact, since the unemployment figures fell last time–an Opposition Member has mentioned unemployment. We continue to take measures which will seek to increase jobs for all sectors of the community.

     

    Q5. Mr. Kynoch : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 1 April.

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

    Mr. Kynoch : I welcome the support given to small businesses in the recent Budget. Is my right hon. Friend aware that my area of Scotland has benefited significantly from the oil and gas industry, and in particular from oil exploration in the North Sea? Is he further aware that the changes in petroleum revenue tax have provoked enormous support from my constituents? Will he ensure that the transition to what many oil companies regard as a better low tax regime is smooth and does not cause undue disturbance and disruption in the industry in the meantime?

    The Prime Minister : As my hon. Friend will know, many people have welcomed the changes in taxes, not least because of the big encouragement to development that is clearly evident in the new structure. That development will create future jobs, a matter which every hon. Member is concerned about. I take the figures from memory, but I seem to recall that in the year 1991-92 the previous petroleum revenue tax system actually cost the taxpayer £200 million net.

    Mr. William Ross : Has the Prime Minister noticed that the Prime Minister of the Irish Republic said that the idea that the Republic was a haven for terrorists is a fallacy? Does he understand that my constituents were surprised about that until they realised that today is the first day of April?

    The Prime Minister : I know that the hon. Gentleman feels very strongly about the matter, but I must say to him that he should not confuse the actions of a minority with the views and instincts of the majority of people. I do not believe that the majority of people in the Republic of Ireland support the activities of the IRA, and I believe that their response to recent events is a clear illustration that that is the case. I hope and believe that the vast majority of people in the Republic of Ireland will join the hon. Gentleman and every other hon. Member in the House in condemning the IRA and all its murderous activities.

     

    Q6. Mr. Amess : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 1 April.

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

    Mr. Amess : As we approach the first anniversary of the re-election of my right hon. Friend’s Government, does the Prime Minister recall that only four weeks after that event a Conservative council was elected in Basildon? What conclusions does my right hon. Friend draw from the fact that, under the council tax, Conservative Basildon will, for the first time, not be capped while nearby socialist-controlled Harlow district council will be?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend has made a profession of making Basildon world famous and is doing it remarkably well. As it is also the anniversary of my hon. Friend’s re-election, I offer him my congratulations on that. When he won, we knew that we had won, and it was an especially sweet victory.

    It is no coincidence that a Conservative council produces a lower council tax charge than a Labour council. That is what we would expect. That is what we see in Conservative councils up and down the country at all levels of the council tax.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 31 March 1993

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 31st March 1993.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Public Appointments

    Dr. Wright : To ask the Prime Minister if he will publish the report of the review of public appointments.

    The Prime Minister : I will arrange for a copy of the latest report of the review of public appointments (1989) to be placed in the Library of the House.

    Dr. Wright : To ask the Prime Minister if he will now publish the report of the Central Policy Review Staff in 1973 on the system of public appointments.

    The Prime Minister : I do not know of such a report. The hon. Member may have in mind an inter-departmental working party of officials in 1974 which studied certain aspects of appointments in the public sector. Their advice recommended the establishment of the public appointments unit. I will arrange for a copy of the working party’s report to be placed in the Library of the House.

     

    Non-departmental Public Bodies

    Dr. Wright : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list those non- departmental public bodies which (a) have been abolished since 1979 and (b) have been established since 1979.

    The Prime Minister : A full list of non-departmental public bodies in existence for each year since 1979 is available in the following publications : “Report on Non-Departmental Public Bodies” (Pliatzky Report, Cmnd 7797, January 1980), “Non-Departmental Public Bodies : Facts and Figures 1980”, “Non-Departmental Public Bodies : Facts and Figures 1981”, and “Public Bodies” published annually from 1982. Copies of these publications are available in the Libraries of both Houses.

    For each year since 1986, a press notice has listed separately public bodies which have been created and abolished. Copies are being sent to the hon. Member, and to the Libraries of both Houses. Such summary data for the years 1979 to 1985 do not exist, and could be reconstructed only at disproportionate cost.

     

    Coal Industry

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his oral answer to the right hon. and learned Member for Monklands, East (Mr. Smith) on 25 March, Official Report, column 1223, if he will set out a detailed itemised breakdown of the annual expenditure of £18 billion invested in the British coal industry since 1979.

    The Prime Minister : Grant aid made available to the coal industry since 1979 is set out in the table :

    Grants<1> to British Coal and payments under the Redundant Mineworkers Payments Scheme<2>

    Financial year |Deficit & Deficiency Grants |Operating Grants |Social & Restructuring Grants |Redundant Mineworkers Payments Scheme |Total

    |£ million |£ million |£ million |£ million |£ million

    ————————————————————————————————————————————-

    1979-80 |159 |30 |62 |15 |266

    1980-81 |149 |26 |79 |15 |269

    1981-82 |428 |27 |120 |48 |623

    1982-83 |374 |12 |134 |80 |600

    1983-84 |875 |- |270 |190 |1,335

    1984-85 |2,225 |- |189 |200 |2,614

    1985-86 |50 |- |513 |563 |1,126

    1986-87 |288 |- |594 |610 |1,492

    1987-88 |200 |- |477 |295 |972

    1988-89 |0 |- |297 |168 |465

    1989-90 |6,153 |- |1,090 |126 |7,369

    1990-91 |0 |- |141 |93 |234

    1991-92 |0 |- |457 |61 |518

    1992-93<3> |0 |- |622 |43 |665

    |——- |——- |——- |——- |——-

    Total |10,901 |95 |5,045 |2,507 |18,548

    <1> Grants to British Coal are at outturn prices, on an accruals basis, taken from British Coal’s Annual Report and Accounts.

    <2> Redundant Mineworkers Payments Scheme. Figures exclude administration costs.

    <3> 1992-93 figures provisional.

     

    Nuclear Tests

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 22 March, Official Report, column 467, if it is Her Majesty’s Government’s policy that a cessation of United Kingdom underground nuclear tests is dependent on the negotiations of a comprehensive test ban treaty.

    The Prime Minister : Our policy has always been to keep our testing programme to the minimum necessary to maintain the safety and credibility of our deterrent. In the absence of a comprehensive test ban, whether we continued to test would naturally depend on our needs at the time, and whether they could be met by means other than testing. We believe any restraints on testing should be negotiated and verifiable.

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister what assessment he has made of the effect on the United Kingdom of legal and other restrictions applying to states to prevent their conducting nuclear tests.

    The Prime Minister : The effect would depend on the scope and nature of such restrictions. If backed by effective verification and inspection mechanisms they could play a useful part in strengthening the nuclear non-proliferation regime. In our approach to these issues we shall be seeking an outcome which ensures this objective is achieved, but which enables us to maintain the safety and credibility of our deterrent.

     

    Council Tax (Care Homes)

    Mr. Alfred Morris : To ask the Prime Minister what consultation there has been between the Department of the Environment and the Department of Health on the imposition of council tax on charitable residential care accommodation; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : The two Departments have discussed a number of representations which have argued that residential care homes should be exempted from the council tax. Care homes will receive a number of reliefs, which will together mean that their council tax bills will be small. These bills represent a reasonable contribution to the cost of the local authority services from which care homes and their residents benefit.

     

    Security Service

    Mr. Hayes : To ask the Prime Minister when the annual report of the commissioner appointed under the Security Service Act 1989 will be laid before the House; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : A copy of Lord Justice Stuart-Smith’s third annual report, for 1992, has been laid before the House today in accordance with section 4(6) of the Security Service Act 1989. The confidential appendix to the report has been excluded from that copy in accordance with section 4(7) of the 1989 Act. I am grateful to the commissioner for his work in reviewing the issue of warrants and in providing assistance to the tribunal as provided in the Act. I note that he is satisfied that the Secretaries of State have properly exercised their powers under the Act and that the arrangements in force for ensuring that the service discloses information only in accordance with the provisions of the 1989 Act are working satisfactorily.

     

    Interception of Communications

    Mr. Hayes : To ask the Prime Minister when the annual report of the commissioner appointed under the Interception of Communications Act 1985 will be laid before the House; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : A copy of the right hon. Sir Thomas Bingham’s first report, covering 1992, has been laid before the House today in accordance with section 8(7) of the Interception of Communications Act 1985. The confidential appendix to the report has been excluded from that copy in accordance with section 8(8) of the 1985 Act. I am grateful to the commissioner for his report. I note in particular his observations that the Secretaries of State take great care to satisfy themselves that the warrants are necessary for the purposes stated in the Act, and that the system for the issue of warrants is working as intended by Parliament.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 30 March 1993

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 30th March 1993.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Mr. Ghazanfer Ali

    Mr. Madden : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 15 March, Official Report , column 34 , what information he has received about the outcome of court proceedings in Pakistan concerning Mr. Ghazanfer Ali.

    The Prime Minister : The two murder charges facing Mr. Ghanzanfer Ali were heard on 13 and 14 March. Both cases were adjourned until 8 and 12 April. We shall continue to watch developments.

     

    World Forestry Organisation

    Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister what representation he has had from Professor Ingvar Carlsson, former Prime Minister of Sweden, on the establishment of a world forestry organisation; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : None. Ambassador Ola Ullsten announced at the recent global forestry conference in Indonesia an initiative to establish a world commission on forestry and sustainable development. The Ministers concerned know of the initiative and expect to receive more information about it shortly.

     

    Equal Opportunities

    Mr. Janner : To ask the Prime Minister what steps he has taken to recruit women, members of ethnic minorities and disabled people respectively in top grades of employment at the Cabinet Office.

    The Prime Minister : Recruits to the senior grades, as to any grade in the civil service, are selected on merit on the basis of fair and open competition, unless one of the exceptions permitted under the Civil Service Order in Council 1991 applies. Various steps have been taken by the civil service commissioners to aid recruitment from all sectors of the community, including : extending links with institutions of higher education; equal opportunities training for all those involved in selection; using validated section procedures.

    The Cabinet office, which has signed up domestically to Opportunity 2000, is working towards achieving the civil service-wide benchmark of increasing the proportion of women in the top three grades to 15 per cent. or more by the year 2000. The Department continually seeks to encourage the employment of people from the ethnic minorities and those with disabilities.

    Mr. Janner : To ask the Prime Minister when the Cabinet Office last conducted surveys of (a) ethnic origins and (b) the number women among its employees; when it next plans to do so; and whether he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : A survey of the ethnic origins of all non-industrial civil servants was completed in 1988. The Cabinet Office introduced a computerised personnel database in 1991. All staff were given the opportunity to update their own entries, which include sections on ethnic origins. All new staff are given the opportunity to complete an ethnic monitoring questionnaire. There are no firm plans to conduct further surveys. The sex of employees is identified in staff records.

  • PMQT – 30 March 1993

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 30th March 1993.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Pawsey : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 30 March.

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

    Mr. Pawsey : Does my right hon. Friend accept that the British people are becoming increasingly fed up with the unlawful activities– [Interruption.] –with the unlawful activities of French farmers and French fishermen? Does he further agree with me that their actions are detrimental to the interests of the United Kingdom, its people and our trade?

    The Prime Minister : I think that it is true that the recent action by French farmers and fishermen is totally unacceptable. I am sure that the whole House will have seen that the French ambassador made clear yesterday beyond doubt his condemnation of their activity in the clearest possible terms. I very much welcome that. My hon. Friend may also know that the French authorities have undertaken to provide safe passage for any consignments of which we notify them. We are pursuing the recent fisheries- related incidents actively with the French authorities and we look to them to restore order, to bring the perpetrators to book and to guarantee unfettered access.

    Mr. John Smith : I am sure that the whole House will wish to congratulate the British film industry on its further success in winning five Oscars last night. Does the Prime Minister not agree that our film industry could be even more successful if it received the same backing and support from Government as do its competitors in other countries?

    The Prime Minister : The success of the British film industry in the private sector owes a great deal to the fact that it is in the private sector, and to the individual skills of writers, actors and directors.

    Mr. Smith : Does not the Prime Minister understand that the number of films made in Britain has plummeted from 50 to 12, and that the minimal help offered to the industry in last year’s budget does not in any way make up for the abolition of capital allowances, the Eady levy or the malign effect of the Broadcasting Act 1990? Does the Prime Minister not understand that if real encouragement were given to the industry, we could increase jobs and overseas earnings?

    The Prime Minister : Once again, the right hon. and learned Gentleman equates real encouragement with the spending in subsidy of taxpayers’ money without giving any indication of whether there would be corresponding reductions elsewhere–an increase in borrowing and perhaps higher interest rates or higher taxation. When he asks for more expenditure, he owes it to the public to say from where the money is coming.

    Mr. Smith : But does the Prime Minister not understand that we have in this country a fabulous pool of talent in our film industry– [Interruption.] This is a serious subject.

    Madam Speaker : Order. These interruptions are a total waste of the time of the House. In addition, they are an abuse of the House. The House will now come to order.

    Mr. Smith : It is remarkable that Conservative Members find it a matter of humour when we are talking about jobs, British films and overseas earnings. Does the Prime Minister not understand that a modest investment in our industry would give us a huge return in employment and vital overseas earnings?

    The Prime Minister : I certainly agree with the right hon. and learned Gentleman on one point, which is that our arts generally–I include the film industry in that–are among the best, if not the best, in the world. That has repeatedly been shown to be the case. I hope that, in the light of that, he and his hon. Friends will support the National Lottery Etc. Bill, which provides greater support for the arts than ever before.

    Mr. Coe : Is my right hon. Friend aware of the dramatic reduction, announced only a couple of days ago, in the number of cot deaths in this country, of about 60 per cent. in the first nine months of this year? Does he agree that that is testimony to sensitively targeted health education, “The Health of the Nation” strategy and the Anne Diamond campaign?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend has put his finger on the key reasons for that. It is a very remarkable achievement and I am delighted about it, as everybody else will be. I wholeheartedly congratulate both Anne Diamond and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State on the measures they have taken.

     

    Q2. Mr. Kirkwood : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 30 March.

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

    Mr. Kirkwood : Now that the Prime Minister is himself a year and a day closer to collecting his old age pension, he may be interested to know that the Post Office is at the moment considering plans which could remove entitlement by pensioners to collect their pension payments by way of DSS giro over post office counters. Is he aware that post offices derive 30 or 40 per cent. of their total income from those transactions and that any alternative method of payment–perhaps by way of banks or building societies–could eventually lead to a charge being made for the payment of that service? Will the Prime Minister summon the Ministers involved in those discussions, irrespective of what other damage or problems may flow from the privatisation of the Post Office, and make it clear to them and the House that the payment of pensions by means of automated credit transfer will not be made compulsory?

    The Prime Minister : I am well aware of the sensitivity of the point that the hon. Gentleman makes, and it is one of many matters that will need to be considered in the future.

    Mr. Harris : The whole House will have welcomed my right hon. Friend’s remarks regarding the dispute with France. Will he go further and make it perfectly clear to his opposite number, the French Prime Minister, that the Royal Navy will not stand idly by if there is any attempt to repeat the disgraceful incidents of the weekend by French fishermen?

    The Prime Minister : As I told my hon. Friend the Member for Rugby and Kenilworth (Mr. Pawsey), we have made perfectly clear to the French ambassador our very strong condemnation of recent incidents. He has made it equally clear that such action is not acceptable to the French Government, and we have made it clear to the French Government that we look to them to deal with those incidents.

     

    Q3. Mr. Byers : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 30 March.

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

    Mr. Byers : As council tax demands are being sent out, will the Prime Minister explain to the House why, under the system of financing local authorities, his constituency of Huntingdon, according to the Government, suffers greater poverty than Blyth Valley? Is he aware that, even under that unfair system of local government finance, the average council tax in Labour authorities will be £14 less than in Conservative authorities? Does the Prime Minister agree that the message to council tax payers is clear : Labour councils cost you less and serve you better?

    The Prime Minister : I award the hon. Gentleman the prize for the cheekiest question this year. Let me tell him that the 10 highest taxes in band C are Harlow–Labour ; Newcastle–Labour ; Greenwich–Labour ; Manchester–Labour ; Haringey–Labour ; Liverpool– Labour ; Hendon–Labour ; North Tyneside–Labour ; Salford–Labour ; and Derwentshire–Labour, all at band C. The lowest are Wellingborough– Conservative ; Westminster–Conservative ; Isle of Scilly–Independent ; City of London–Independent ; Hambleton–Conservative ; Hinckley and Bosworth–Conservative ; Huntingdonshire–Conservative ; Basingstoke–Conservative ; South Cambs– Independent, and Fareham–Conservative.

    Mr. Trotter : Is my right hon. Friend aware that Tyneside is very grateful to him for his decision to go ahead with the order for the helicopter carrier, the largest and most important ship to be ordered for the Royal Navy in years, which will give Swan Hunter the chance to win four years’ work? Will he visit the yard while the ship is being built, as we are confident that our team will win the order?

    The Prime Minister : I certainly must not pre-judge the outcome of the tender, but I agree with my hon. Friend that confirmation of the helicopter carrier in the defence programme is very good news indeed for the British shipbuilding industry. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend, who has argued long and hard for this particular vessel to be in the programme. I am sure that there will be very keen competition for the order. I assure my hon. Friend that I will follow its progress with the same interest that he will.

     

    Q4. Mr. Sheerman : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 30 March.

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

    Mr. Sheerman : Is the Prime Minister aware of the remark made by one of his Ministers in another place who said–

    Hon. Members : Reading.

    Madam Speaker : Order. The hon. Gentleman knows that he should not quote.

    Mr. Sheerman : She said that although she is responsible for 804 public appointments, she cannot remember knowingly appointing a Labour supporter. Given the sad state in which this country finds itself, is it not time that the Prime Minister started appointing people on the basis of competence and ability– [Interruption.] –on the basis of competence and ability, rather than according to the corrupt political patronage for which his Conservative Government are notorious?

    The Prime Minister : We most certainly do appoint on competence, and there are people of all political persuasions who hold public appointments and have been appointed throughout the period of this Government since 1979. My hon. Friend whom the hon. Gentleman quotes used the word “knowingly” to indicate the fact that the political persuasion is not relevant to the competence and the appointment.

     

    Hartley

    Q5. Mr. Dunn : To ask the Prime Minister what plans he has to pay an official visit to Hartley.

    The Prime Minister : I am making plans for a series of visits to all parts of the country and I visited my hon. Friend’s constituency last Friday.

    Mr. Dunn : Is the Prime Minister aware that the people of Hartley are fully behind the Government’s plans to reform the National Union of Students and that they are interested in knowing his views on the role of trade unions in our modern political society?

    The Prime Minister : Trade unions do have an important and mature role in our society. Their role ought to be to look after the interests of their members–not to align themselves particularly with a political party, not to throw votes behind the leadership of that party, not to provide the finance for that party, and not to sponsor every Front-Bench Member of the Opposition.

     

    Engagements

    Q6. Dr. Wright : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 30 March.

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

    Dr. Wright : Does the Prime Minister recall that he told the House some time ago that a referendum on the Maastricht treaty would be unnecessary as the country had decided that matter in the general election? Does he accept that that was a foolish statement–that, whatever was decided in the general election, it was not the Maastricht treaty? Does he understand that it is both foolish and dangerous to tell people that they have decided something when they have had no part in the decision?

    The Prime Minister : The strict answer to the hon. Gentleman’s earlier question is no. The hon. Gentleman knows very well why I think that it is right that this House should decide the fate of the Maastricht treaty in all its aspects. That is the basis of parliamentary democracy, and, as I understand it, it is the position of his own Front Bench.

    Q7. Mr. Cyril D. Townsend : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 30 March.

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

    Mr. Townsend : Is my right hon. Friend aware of the support, in all quarters of the House, for the United Kingdom’s early return to UNESCO, which has been greatly reformed in recent years? Bearing in mind the fact that President Clinton is about to take the United States back into that organisation, would it not be prudent for my right hon. Friend to secure this country’s return beforehand?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend and others of my hon. Friends made me well aware of the strength of their feelings on this matter when they came to see me recently. As I indicated to them, we are keeping the matter under review, and no final decisions have been taken. I will certainly bear my hon. Friend’s concern in mind when we make our decisions.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 29 March 1993

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 29th March 1993.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Political Parties (Funding)

    Mr. Ronnie Campbell : To ask the Prime Minister (1) what plans he has to introduce new laws relating to the organisation or funding of political parties; and if he will make a statement;

    (2) if he will consider legislation to require political parties to make public their financial supporters.

    The Prime Minister : I have no plans to introduce any such legislation.

     

    Bill of Rights

    Mr. Ronnie Campbell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will consider the introduction of a Bill of Rights or a written constitution during the lifetime of this Parliament; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : No.

     

    Environment

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list the speeches he has made on the environment since April 1992; and what commitments he has made to additional investment in the environment.

    The Prime Minister : The Government consider that environmental concerns should be reflected across the whole spectrum of policy. The environment has accordingly figured frequently in the speeches which my colleagues and I have made. The environment was central in my speech to the Earth summit at Rio in June 1992, as it was when I spoke in Birmingham last week at the global technology partnership conference.

    The Chancellor’s autumn statement included figures for public investment in the environment, but investment by private enterprises and individuals is even more important. Accurate figures are hard to derive, but we estimate that about 2.5 per cent. of our gross domestic product is spent directly on environmental purposes.

     

    Equal Opportunities

    Mr. Janner : To ask the Prime Minister how many and what percentage of officers in each grade from 1 to 7 and overall in the Cabinet Office are (a) women, (b) from ethnic minorities and (c) disabled people.

    The Prime Minister : The figures for women employed in the Cabinet Office, including its executive agencies, are as follows :

    Grades (and equivalents) |Women |Total |Percentage women

    ————————————————————————————-

    1 |0 |5 |0

    2 |2 |8 |25

    3 |1 |25 |4

    4 |0 |3 |0

    5 |16 |41 |39

    6 |19 |45 |42

    7 |63 |264 |24

    |——- |——- |——-

    Overall |1,330 |2,634 |50

    The ethnic monitoring programme was carried out on a voluntary basis and did not extend to the Cabinet Office’s agencies. Of those who responded, 62 people (2.3 per cent. of the total) chose to register as non-white. One of these is at grade 7 level.

    The Cabinet Office’s figures on staff with disabilities include only those who have chosen to register as disabled. Twenty-eight people (1 per cent. of the total) are so registered. None is at grade 7 level or above. The Cabinet Office employs other staff with disabilities who have chosen not to register. The Cabinet Office is an equal opportunities employer, and emphasises this fact in its advertisements.

     

    Full Employment

    Mr. Soley : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his oral answer of 2 March, Official Report, column 138, what percentage of unemployment is consistent with his aim to seek full employment.

    The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to him on 8 March 1993 at column 392.

     

    South Africa

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister when he was informed of the testing of nuclear devices by South Africa in the Kalahari.

    The Prime Minister : We have no evidence that South Africa has conducted nuclear tests. We have noted President de Klerk’s statement that South Africa never carried out a clandestine nuclear test.

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister when he was informed of the existence of South Africa’s nuclear bombs.

    The Prime Minister : I was informed that South Africa had built six nuclear devices by President de Klerk’s statement on 24 March.

     

    Nuclear Weapons

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 22 March, Official Report, column 467, what is Her Majesty’s Government’s policy towards the resumption of negotiations towards a comprehensive test ban treaty during 1993.

    The Prime Minister : I have nothing to add to the reply I gave the hon. Member on 22 March at column 467.

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister what assessment he has made of the possible contribution of the comprehensive test ban treaty towards the outcome of the non-proliferation treaty extension conference.

    The Prime Minister : We believe the indefinite extension of the non-proliferation treaty is in the interests of all signatories. The case for its extension is strong regardless of progress towards a comprehensive test ban, and we believe it is wrong to see NPT extension as dependent on achieving a comprehensive test ban.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 26 March 1993

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 26th March 1993.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Public Appointments

    Mr. Wigley : To ask the Prime Minister what steps he is taking to ensure that more posts on public bodies are advertised; and if he will make it his policy to secure that the post of chairperson of each public body is advertised.

    The Prime Minister : Responsibility for deciding how to fill the 40,000 ministerial appointments to public bodies rests with the individual Ministers and Departments concerned. Central guidance encourages the use of advertisement where appropriate, but it would not be cost-effective for all the 3,500 people chairing public bodies.

     

    Security

    Mr. Milburn : To ask the Prime Minister when he will reply to the letter of 3 February from the hon. Member for Darlington on security matters.

    The Prime Minister : My office can find no trace of any such letter.

     

    Pit Closures

    Mr. Rowlands : To ask the Prime Minister whether he will list the membership of the ministerial and Cabinet committees which have considered the future of the coal industry and the pit closures.

    The Prime Minister : The terms of reference of all ministerial committees of the Cabinet were given in my reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Mr. Hayes) on 19 May 1992 at columns 110-18 and my subsequent reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Windsor and Maidenhead (Mr. Trend) on 1 February 1993 at columns 46-47. I do not propose to give details of the topics discussed by individual committees or their procedures.

  • Mr Major’s Comments on Northern Ireland – 26 March 1993

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on Northern Ireland, made on 26th March 1993.


    QUESTION:

    [The Prime Minister was asked about the situation in Northern Ireland]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    What we are seeing, and it has been very dramatically illustrated after the events of the last few days, is the intense revulsion that exists right across the spectrum in the United Kingdom, in Northern Ireland, in the Republic of Ireland against the activities of the terrorists. I think there is a spirit, a movement, a belief that these people are evil and that their cause does not justify the way they behave. I think that is spreading. The attitude and feelings amongst the people of Northern Ireland has increasingly been moving towards the need to find a secure and peaceful settlement. That is very attractive and I hope it continues.

  • Mr Major’s Speech to the Board of Deputies of British Jews – 25 March 1993

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech to the Board of Deputies of British Jews, held in London on Thursday 25th March 1993.


    PRIME MINISTER:

    It is not often in the life of a politician that he has such a warm welcome and it is not often in the life of a politician that he is as pleased as Norma and I are tonight to be precisely where we are tonight.

    Samuel Pepys summed up my feelings 200 years ago on dining with the Board of Deputies, a very great diarist, a man of great prescience, and he wrote as follows: “A good dinner and company that pleased me mightily, being all eminent men in their way”. Well he was an unreconstructed man of course, these days he would have reminded us that there were some eminent women here tonight as well.

    This evening, may I say to all of you that your Board has done Norma and me a very great honour. We come to you tonight as friends and as admirers of the Jewish people. And as Martin Gilbert’s Jewish History Atlas tells me, my Parliamentary constituency, Huntingdon, was the home to a Jewish community as far back as the 13th century.

    A few moments ago, Your Honour, you spoke of freedom of access to the British government and the British Prime Minister. Let me just respond to that directly and immediately. The Board of Deputies will always have free access to me for as long as I remain in Downing Street.

    And let me just pick up something else you said a moment ago for it was something that touched my instincts in the light of some events that we have seen this week. You spoke in your remarks just a few seconds ago of the victims of violence. The victims of violence are international, we had that brought home to us very vividly on the streets of Warrington just last weekend and as a result of that particular piece of evil two small boys with their whole lives ahead of them are dead. Their death was pointless and wicked. But it does I think remind us that wickedness is alive and wickedness must be confronted and that is a first duty of democratic governments in every part of the world.

    Mr President, the Board of Deputies may not be quite as old as Samuel Pepys, but it has played a unique role in this country for more than 200 years. It speaks authoritatively for the Jewish community, its officers in many ways know the ins and outs of Whitehall and Westminster almost better than the government Chief Whip. They have a two-way relationship with the government from which I personally have learned a great deal.

    I would like this evening to repay just a little of that debt by touching on subjects that I know concern you greatly. I do so tonight from the point of view of a friend of Israel, but I do so also in particular from the point of view of a candid friend, a candid friend perhaps but nonetheless a genuine friend. That is true I believe, as you yourself said, of my country and I think it is true of me as well.

    Let me first if I may this evening confront a subject which is painful for all of us and Judge Feinstine mentioned it, he mentioned racism. I have a deep and a personal loathing of racism and throughout their history since the Diaspora Jewish people have contended with racism and with anti-semitism. This century began with problems in Eastern Europe and the flight of hundreds of thousands of Jews. In mid-century Europe descended into the unfathomable horrors of the holocaust. In the Soviet Union many Jews suffered discrimination or were persecuted simply for seeking to emigrate to other parts of the world.

    It would I think have been reasonable to hope that by the 1990s more civilised standards of behaviour would have prevailed throughout Europe. So they do – at the level of state and government. But I have to say to you this evening that the problem of racism has not been eradicated in Europe. There has been a disturbing resurgence of racist and anti-semitic attacks in different countries, we have heard ugly words from factions on the fringe of politics.

    And at a time when different parts of Europe are in turbulence and transition, and in some cases in distress, we must not, dare not, allow demagogues to reignite the flames of racial hatred.

    The European Council which I had the privilege to chair in Edinburgh condemned all racism and racist attacks. But empty words are insufficient. Those words need to be matched by action and we are looking for collective action in the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. From the mid-1970s the principle of the CSCE played a vital part in our joint struggle to change official attitudes in the former Soviet Union. Your Board’s Soviet Jewry section distinguished itself, distinguished itself particularly campaigning for the prisoners of Zion in all those years. And it is a remarkable testament to that noble campaign that last autumn the Board found itself entertaining the Russian Ambassador. I greatly welcome that and I hope it continues for many years in the future.

    But the CSCE needs to do more than it has done in the past. It needs now to change attitudes at the popular level. Its members should compare their different experiences. The CSCE’s international seminar on tolerance held in Warsaw last November was an encouraging step in the right direction. But we need action elsewhere, action too for example in the Council of Europe and there we propose practical measures of immediate benefit to groups at risk, for example, but one of many examples, on police training.

    But there must also be national action as well as international action. And Britain has a good record. Your President spoke a few moments ago of the relationship with governments of different political complexions and I echo what he had to say. Britain does have a good record here, we have the high levels of protection afforded by the Race Relations Act in the mid-1970s passed by a Labour government, and by the Public Order Act of the mid-1980s passed by a Conservative Government.

    But we can, in my personal judgment, never be complacent. Xenophobia and racism are repugnant, there can be no room for them in Europe, not now, not ever again, and that means eternal vigilance to make sure that they never return to our way of life.

    Mr President, let me touch also on a matter you raised yourself – the peace process in the Middle East. In a speech here in February President Herzog declared, and I quote: “central in our national purpose is the achievement of peace with our neighbours by means of the peace process.” That process, that necessary remarkable process, began at Madrid in October 1991, it is central not only of course to Israel but to all who have the best interests of the Middle East at heart.

    Each party, each party to the process has strong reasons to seek peace. In Lebanon peace is essential if the state is to be rebuilt. The Jordanians need peace because it will strengthen the political and economic climate of the region as a whole and that is vital to their own particular state. For Syria peace would help the restructuring of the economy and the improvement of relations with the West. The Palestinians want a settlement that would end life under occupation and allow them to run their own lives. And the people of Israel do not wish to live in a state of indefinite tension with their neighbours, exacerbated by the acute and unresolved problems of the occupied territories.

    So there is at stake a great deal. A peace is necessary to each and every one of those states for different reasons. What if we should fail? What if there should be no peace? Failure would carry risks and consequences which no responsible leader would wish to entertain. Failure would accentuate economic problems, it would risk greater political instability and widespread social unrest, it would provide fertile ground for fundamentalism and for extremism.

    Let me digress for a moment simply to say this. Fundamentalism is a dark cloud the world should watch very carefully indeed in the years immediately ahead.

    And we should recognise other impediments to peace as well. As well as extremist movements, certain governments not involved in the peace process would like to see that peace process fail, not everyone wishes well for the peace process. There are governments that would like to capitalise on failure in order to increase their influence in the region and I do not think in this company, on this occasion, that I have any need to name the names of those countries. But that is why I think it is so vital to sustain the momentum.

    There is a window of opportunity for peace but it is a window that may not remain open indefinitely. Over time, governments in the region will change, acts of violence could provoke a change of attitudes and we must therefore get the parties – all of the parties – back to the negotiating table and urge them to pursue agreement while the opportunity is there. So far Israel, only Israel, has responded favourably to the co-sponsors’ invitation to the further bilateral talks due to start in Washington on the 20th April.

    Clearly, the increase in tension and violence in the Occupied Territories and within Israel has seriously complicated the peace process. Murderous attacks have been carried out on Israeli civilians and soldiers and they cannot by any yardstick be condoned. The Palestinian leadership must do everything in their power to reduce the violence. Most of the attacks would appear to be the work of extremists who oppose and would like to derail the peace process that is so vital to the future for the Middle East. They must not be permitted to succeed.

    I said earlier to this company that I came here tonight as a candid friend and I must be so now. I know the sort of provocation the Israeli defence forces are under. No-one is suggesting for a second they pursue a deliberate policy of violence but I would be at fault to my friends here this evening if I did not express my deep concern about some of the actions in the Occupied Territories. The deaths of over twenty children and young people since December in shooting incidents grievously undermine the case of Israel’s friends as I know this company will recognise. That is realism, not pessimism.

    I am not pessimistic about our opportunities for peace. Like President Herzog, I believe the fact that the peace process is taking place represents a major and beneficial change in Israel’s history. He said during his visit – and I quote that remarkable man again – “Who dreamed when I entered office that we would be sitting down and negotiating in direct bilateral negotiations with a view to achieving peace with the Syrians, with the Lebanese, with the Jordanians and with the Palestinians?” Who indeed would have dreamed that was possible and it is a matter of hope today that people are now talking to each other, not past each other. They are beginning to understand the political realities and the public perceptions on the other side. We must give full credit to the United States Government for leading that peace process and it is good news that the new Administration in Washington is ready to become a full partner in the negotiations. From my own meeting with President Clinton, I can confirm to you that that is certainly the case.

    So what is there that our country, that Britain, can do to help? We of course don’t claim to be a central player. Of the countries outside the region the United States are the prime movers helped by their Russian co-sponsors. However, the parties will need help, encouragement from all quarters in taking the difficult decisions that lie ahead. With our European partners, Britain stands ready to assist that process.

    In this connection – and it is a matter I will not duck this evening – the British Government took one step earlier this month on which I know many of you have strong feelings and some reservations. I refer of course to our decision to receive at ministerial level a Palestinian delegation including two PLO representatives. I know how unpopular that was with many of our friends in Israel. Let me explain, for there is nowhere better to do it, our purpose.

    I spoke earlier of the need to maintain momentum in the talks and to encourage everyone to take part. That means if we are to have peace that the Palestinian leadership must be persuaded to return to the peace process. We – by which I mean in this instance the British Government – wish to see them return to that peace process and it is clear to us that to achieve that the PLO will influence that decision. It is hard to influence them in the right direction without talking to them.

    Our talks are a means of impressing our strong views on them, in particular our view that there must be an end to violence in the Occupied Territories. Those on all sides who genuinely desire peace must, through their own actions, help to create the right climate. That, I tell you this evening, is the motive behind the actions of the British Government.

    The value to Israel of a peace settlement could scarcely be overstated. It must of course be a settlement which offers a lasting guarantee to Israel’s security. Any friend of Israel, anyone who has studied Israel’s history, can only be keenly aware of that country’s vulnerability. No proposal which fails to take account of that has a chance of success in the peace process. The peace process itself would not be alive without the recognition that Israel’s security could be assured through a fair and a durable settlement and a settlement, were it to be achievable, were it to be achieved, would relieve the burdens that have so long hung over every family in Israel and upon the minds of every friend of Israel around the world. Let me reiterate a point I believe you all know: the Israeli Government has our wholehearted support in its pursuit for peace.

    Let me finally say a few words about the European Community and about relations between Britain and Israel. Britain has traditionally played a vigorous part in the Community’s work on the Middle East. We shall be represented in next week’s ministerial visit by the Community’s Troika to the region. The Troika’s purpose is to demonstrate the Community’s commitment to the peace process and to support the resumption of negotiations.

    On the economic front, the European Community has become Israel’s largest trading partner. Remarkably for a country of five million people, Israel is the European Community’s 17th largest export market. A peace settlement would lead in my judgement to a further increase in our economic states. It would stimulate increased investment in regional development from all the countries throughout the European Community.

    Perhaps of equal concern to you this evening is the European Community’s action over the Arab trade boycott. At the Lisbon Council last June, the Community called on the Arab League to end the boycott. It followed up by making direct approaches to Arab governments and urged them to respond positively to the moves made by Israel to curb settlements in the Occupied Territories. I cannot promise this evening in present circumstances that the Community will succeed in securing an early assurance by Arab governments that the boycott will be lifted. I can assure you this evening that we will continue to press unremittingly for this in the months and years ahead.

    And that brings me back almost to where I began. Over the years, many years, Britain’s relations with Israel have had their ups and had their downs. They are now, as your President said, very close and very warm relations. I had the honour last month of entertaining the President of Israel at Downing Street. Heini Herzog will soon be retiring after a distinguished decade in Israel’s highest office. During that period he has been a beacon of wisdom and of moderation. His personal contribution to British-Israeli friendship has been immense. He left here recently declaring that he was more than ever convinced of the profound bonds of friendship which unite our peoples for all time. I look forward to meeting his newly-elected successor, Aza Weizmann who shares a strong British connection with President Herzog. As a war-time pilot in the Royal Air Force and there can be few closer connections than that, and as one of the architects of Camp David, he seems to me to have the perfect qualifications and I have today sent him both the Government’s and my own warmest congratulations upon his new responsibilities. [Applause].

    I had the pleasure of meeting Prime Minister Rabin here only last December. Members of his Government are assiduous and very welcome visitors to this country. Indeed, over recent months there are times when I have thought of suggesting that the Israeli Cabinet might itself meet here in London [laughter]. Four Israeli Ministers have been here in the last few weeks and another arrived today. I believe, alas, we have no fresh arrivals tomorrow.

    One of my predecessors, David Lloyd George, said of the Jewish people in 1925 the following words: “You may say you have been oppressed and persecuted. That has been your power. You have been hammered into very fine steel and that is why you have never been broken.” Steel was the quality which has carried the Jewish people through their long search, a search which culminated in the establishment of the Jewish national home in 1917. I can imagine – but not with the depth of feeling and instinct that you can – quite how much that means to everyone who is Jewish.

    Let us then not in 1917 but in 1993 do everything in our power to achieve a peace settlement which will secure that home sought for so long and loved so much, to secure that for all time. That is something that we must all pray for. That is something, I assure you this evening, that the British Government will continue to work for and I express again to you tonight my thanks for the honour you gave me in inviting Norma and I to join you this evening as your guests. [Applause].

  • PMQT Written Answers – 25 March 1993

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 25th March 1993.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Social Security Offices (London)

    Q7. Mr. Corbyn : To ask the Prime Minister what plans he has to visit a London DSS office.

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

     

    Hepatitis B

    Dr. Marek : To ask the Prime Minister how many patients were recalled for screening for hepatitis B by the Staffordshire, Wrexham, Argyll and Ayr and North Middlesex hospitals following two surgeons having transmitted hepatitis B to one or more of their patients.

    The Prime Minister : Approximately 1,780 patients have been contacted for screening by the hospitals concerned. The two hospitals in Scotland are in the Ayrshire and Arran health board’s area.

     

    Cabinet Meetings

    Mr. Mackinlay : To ask the Prime Minister who presides at meetings of the Cabinet in the event of an incidental absence of the Prime Minister.

    The Prime Minister : Cabinet meetings are not normally held in the absence of the Prime Minister. In the event of such a meeting being necessary, I would make arrangements in the light of the circumstances at the time.

     

    Acting Prime Minister

    Mr. Mackinlay : To ask the Prime Minister what arrangements are laid down as to who should act as Prime Minister in the period immediately following his being suddenly incapacitated; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : There are no standing arrangements for this eventuality. The arrangements would depend on the circumstances.

     

    Engagements

    Sir Peter Tapsell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 March.

    Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 March.

    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.

  • PMQT – 25 March 1993

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 25th March 1993.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Meale : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 March.

    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. Meale : The House will well recall the promises made by the Prime Minister and many of his fellow Ministers before the last general election about the future of the coal mining industry. Now that, today, we are about to hear about the loss of tens of thousands of jobs, will the Prime Minister apologise to those coalfield communities for what the Government are about to do?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman will have to curb his impatience for a few moments until my right hon. Friend’s statement. He has very little time to wait and then he will be able to judge how right he is or how wrong he is.

    Mr. Heald : Has my right hon. Friend seen the 1992 results from Vauxhall Motors today showing huge increase in profits as a result of improved sales, improved market share and a huge increase in exports? Will my right hon. Friend join me in congratulating the work force and all concerned, particularly those living in north Hertfordshire?

    The Prime Minister : Yes, I did see those results. They are certainly excellent and I am delighted to congratulate the company on its results, which show what a well-managed company with the right product range can achieve, even in difficult world trading circumstances.

    Mr. John Smith : Does the Prime Minister now understand how foolish he was to claim last October that the closure of 31 pits was–and I quote him directly–

    “economically unavoidable and better done cleanly and quickly”?

    The Prime Minister : As the right hon. and learned Gentleman knows, we carried out a full review of these matters and my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade will set out in full detail the outcome of that review shortly. It is the most thorough review of the coal industry that has been undertaken for very many years. It posed many difficult issues which we have been prepared to face. The right hon. and learned Gentleman might also acknowledge the fact that we have supported the industry over the past 14 years to the extent of £18 billion.

    Mr. John Smith : The House and the country will have noticed that the Prime Minister does not, indeed cannot, deny that his original intention, as he said himself, was to close all 31 pits immediately. How does he account for that appalling error of judgment?

    The Prime Minister : I know that the right hon. and learned Gentleman is desperately keen to get his usual fix on the early evening news, but he will have to wait for my right hon. Friend’s statement.

    Mr. John Smith : In the course of the Prime Minister’s twisting and turning over the past five months, has he yet begun to appreciate the vital importance of Britain’s coal industry to our future energy security? Whatever is or is not in his White Paper, does the Prime Minister now realise that the rigging of the market to secure short-term profits for privatised electricity companies has put at risk the long-term security of energy supplies which should be the cornerstone of any Government’s energy policy?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. and learned Gentleman will find it difficult to rewrite his own history. He should remember Labour’s record on pit closures. The last Labour Government closed 313 pits and more than 200,000 of the work force lost their jobs. The Labour party cannot live down its past. It backed the National Union of Mineworkers when that union was holding the country to ransom during a year-long strike in the 1980s ; it backed demands for unrealistic wages ; and it backed demands for overmanning and bad working practices. If the right hon. and learned Gentleman had not backed those things in the 1980s, many more pits might be open today.

    Mr. Thomason : Does my right hon. Friend agree that charge capping and council tax capping are necessary evils to protect the payer from the worst excesses of socialist local government administration? Will he abhor the proposal of the hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw) that capping be abolished and that control of local government spending be handed over to the unions?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is right. The capping of spendthrift local authorities is necessary in order to protect taxpayers. My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment will cap wherever necessary this year, as in other years. My hon. Friend the Member for Basildon (Mr. Amess) may be keen to know that it is most unlikely that Conservative Basildon this year, unlike Labour Basildon in previous years, will require capping.

     

    Q2. Ms Abbott : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 March.

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

    Ms Abbott : Does the Prime Minister accept that, whatever is in the statement to come, what public opinion outside the House wants is the saving not of 10, 12 or 15 pits but of all 31? It is not out of sentimentality that public opinion demands this. Whatever the short-term interest of the privatised fuel industry, it would be madness, in the long term, for this country to become dependent upon foreign coal and it would be madness to add to the standing army of the long-term unemployed.

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Lady cannot have heard what I said about the Labour Government’s record in closing pits. In carrying the review forward, we have had to balance two conflicting factors–our desire to save as many jobs and pits as possible and the hard, cold, real fact that British Coal is producing more coal than its customers want or it can sell. I am confident that my right hon. Friend’s review offers the best way forward, both for the coal industry and for the country.

    Mr. Cormack : Is my right hon. Friend aware that hon. Members in all parts of the House have watched with admiration President Yeltsin’s courageous struggle to bring both economic and political freedom to Russia? Will my right hon. Friend take the opportunity today to send the good wishes of the House to President Yeltsin at this very critical time?

    The Prime Minister : I am happy to offer my support to President Yeltsin and to express my support for the reform programme. Over the weekend, I sent the President a message precisely about that and I received a reply from him earlier this week. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary plans to visit Moscow next week.

    Mr. Ashdown : In the– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. These interruptions take up time.

    Mr. Ashdown : In the shadow of last week’s atrocity in Warrington, which has claimed yet another life today, was the Prime Minister as moved as I was by the spontaneous and powerful expressions of sympathy and support from the people of Dublin for the people of Warrington, who suffered in that atrocity at the hands of the IRA? Does he agree that people such as Susan McHugh and Gordon Wilson speak for millions when they say that enough is enough? Is it not the case that if the people of Dublin can put the past behind them in their search for peace, the politicians of the whole of Ireland should be able to do the same?

    The Prime Minister : The tragedy of another young life lost, sadly, this morning will have touched the hearts of many people in this country and far beyond. The events of last week demonstrate that terrorism brings nothing but agony and misery. But as we condemn terrorism, we must bear it in mind that there are many people in Dublin and elsewhere in the Republic of Ireland, elsewhere in Northern Ireland and Irish citizens in this country, who condemn and detest the terrorists as much as do hon. Members.

    Mr. Kynoch : Is my right hon. Friend aware of how much I welcome the further progress that he has made in the Budget to extending the 20p basic rate of tax ? Will he make further extensions in the years ahead?

    The Prime Minister : I assure my hon. Friend that it is our intention to seek to do that. Our aim is a 20p basic rate of tax. We propose to move towards that as rapidly and prudently as we can by extending the 20p rate.

     

    Q3. Mrs. Ewing : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 March.

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

    Mrs. Ewing : In the continuing context of the Budget, is the Prime Minister aware that changes in the tax regime threaten jobs both offshore and onshore in the oil and gas industries in the north and north-east of Scotland, while the imposition of VAT on domestic fuel represents a threat to the welfare and lives of the elderly and needy in society ? Is not it a travesty of justice that the Prime Minister should have introduced a Budget by which, in an energy-rich nation such as Scotland, we gain neither employment nor social benefits?

    The Prime Minister : The support that the Government have given the oil industry over many years has brought many tens of thousands of jobs to Scotland, as the hon. Lady knows. There have been changes in the oil regime for offshore drilling in Scotland. That has been welcomed by many of the companies that work there.

    Mr. Gale : Knowing him, I am sure that my right hon. Friend will already have sent a message of sympathy to the parents and family of Tim Parry. I hope that he included in that message the good wishes, thoughts and prayers of hon. Members in all parts of the House. Will he find time today to send another message, to the President of the United States, asking him to condemn the people in America who collect money that is paid to the IRA?

    The Prime Minister : There is no doubt, as I said, about the feeling in this country–which I know will be shared by President Clinton–over the very sad death of Tim Parry. I know that the American Administration view terrorism in the same way as we do. It is a matter which I have discussed with President Clinton and with his predecessor.

     

    Q4. Mr. Bill Michie : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 March.

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

    Mr. Michie : Is the Prime Minister aware that the document “Implementing Caring for People : Assessment,” which can only be described as sinister, advises practitioners and local authorities that any unmet need should not be recorded, on the ground, in the explanatory note, that, due to the idea now of freedom of access to information, it would be wrong for that information to be recorded just in case the patients or the clients found out what their rights were?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman knows that we have done more than any previous Administration to ensure that people are aware of their rights in the social security and health spheres. The new community care arrangements that will exist from 1 April will add to that remarkable record.

    Mr. Sumberg : Will my right hon. Friend join me in condemning the disgraceful decision of railway workers to bring this country’s transport network to a standstill on 2 April? While he is about it, will he invite the Leader of the Opposition to issue a similar condemnation?

    The Prime Minister : I am certainly happy to condemn the suggestion that passengers should be severely inconvenienced by strikes of this kind. I hope that that feeling will be shared by the Leader of the Opposition and many others.

     

    Q5. Mr. Morley : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 March.

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

    Mr. Morley : Will the Prime Minister confirm that under his Government total taxation for most people is far higher than it was under previous Labour Governments? What advice will he give to constituents such as mine, Mr. and Mrs. Cook, who have worked all their lives for a little bit of works pension which is 36p a week above any kind of benefit level? What kind of assistance will they get with the crippling increase in gas and electricity charges when value added tax is applied?

    The Prime Minister : If the hon. Gentleman was really concerned about the tax burden, which allegedly he is said to be, perhaps he would withdraw his support from all the spending increases that Opposition Members propose week after week after week.