The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Category: 1994

  • PMQT – 10 May 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 10th May 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Colin Shepherd : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 10 May.

    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. Shepherd : During the course of his busy day, will my right hon. Friend reflect on the fact that over the past year, industrial output in the United Kingdom rose– [Hon. Members :– “Oh.”] Will my right hon. Friend reflect on the fact that industrial output in this country rose by 3.7 per cent.– [Interruption.] –while in Germany, Japan, France and Italy industrial output fell? Does my right hon. Friend agree that that is but one of a large number of good news stories abounding in this country at this time that deserve wider currency? Will my right hon. Friend confirm– [Interruption.] Will he confirm that it is still permissible to publish good news in this country?

    The Prime Minister : As far as I could hear my hon. Friend over a fairly turbulent House, I believe that he was referring to the good news about the economy that has been evident over recent weeks. Good news is certainly allowed, but I fear that it may often be masked by less important matters these days. The fact is that the British economy is growing, has been growing for some time and is expected to continue to grow. Thankfully, unemployment is falling and is expected to continue to fall.

    Mr. John Smith : Is not the cry for a referendum on Europe further and compelling evidence that the Prime Minister’s Cabinet and party are hopelessly divided? Is not it astonishing that battle is permitted to rage even within the Treasury? Does the Prime Minister support his Chancellor or his Chief Secretary?

    The Prime Minister : As the right hon. and learned Gentleman knows, and as I have made clear to the House on many occasions, I am sceptical about referendums. I made that clear during the Maastricht debate, and I have not changed my mind. There is not even a specific agenda for the intergovernmental conference yet. I do not believe that the question of a referendum arises now, and it certainly does not need to be decided now. It is not yet possible to say what the outcome of the conference will be, and I can assure the right hon. and learned Gentleman that I do not intend to come back to the House with a package that the House would find unacceptable.

    Mr. John Smith : On the question of referendums, does the Prime Minister recall saying something to the House on 6 May last year? His exact words were :

    “We are a parliamentary democracy, and I am not in favour of referendums.”- -[ Official Report , 6 May 1993 ; Vol. 224, c. 284.] Today he expressed scepticism. Is the movement from opposition to scepticism because he is running in front of the anti-Europeans?

    The Prime Minister : If he had listened carefully, the right hon. and learned Gentleman would have also heard me say a moment or so ago that I have not changed my mind. As to a single European currency, as I have said before, decisions on that are a long way off. That will not be determined in 1996. No one expects that this Parliament is going to be asked to decide on a single European currency. That would be a matter for a future Parliament, in circumstances that no one can predict. It was my negotiating at Maastricht that made it clear that this Department would have the right to decide on that matter at a future date. Even if I wish to, I could not bind a future Parliament on its decisions.

    Mr. John Smith : If that answer by the Prime Minister is to be construed as ruling out a referendum in the future, can we be assured that every member of his Government will be asked to support it or will be asked to resign?

    The Prime Minister : I have just set out the position clearly for the right hon. and learned Gentleman and I have made it entirely clear to him that it would not be appropriate to make a commitment now about a future Parliament’s decision. Even if I wished to, I could not bind a future Parliament. My personal decision on referendums has been made entirely clear on other occasions and again today. I reiterate that I have not changed my mind.

     

    Q2. Mr. Trotter : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 10 May.

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

    Mr. Trotter : Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is a fact that if we were to have a Labour Government, we would inevitably have higher taxation and weaker defences, and that our policy on Europe would be destroyed by socialism? Is not that a message that all of us on the Government Benches should be constantly conveying?

    The Prime Minister : I am glad to say that a Labour Government would be a very improbable premise. Even last Thursday, which appears to have buoyed them, they secured a lower share of the vote than we secured in the last general election. My hon. Friend is entirely right. A Labour Government would mean substantial defence cuts, higher expenditure and higher taxation, and would also mean signing up as part of a federal European state. That is no future for this country and will not be accepted by the people of this country at the next general election.

    Mr. Ashdown : Does the Prime Minister realise that his answer on the question of a referendum will serve only to confirm his reputation as the maybe man? How can the British people be asked to vote on the question of Europe by a Government who are so divided on that issue and a Prime Minister whose answer on the key questions cannot get further than “perhaps”? Will he now tell us whether his answer is supposed to construe the meaning that he is opposed to a referendum, under any circumstances, as a result of which there might be a substantial change in Britain’s relation with Brussels–yes or no?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman is at his own game as a veritable opportunist for all seasons. I made perfectly clear a few moments ago what is my personal position on referendums. I also made it clear that, in 1996, I am not going to bring back anything remotely likely to be unacceptable to the House and I made it clear that on a far future date, the decision on a single European currency must be made by this House. I cannot bind the House and I do not intend to try to bind the House at this distance in time.

    Sir Terence Higgins : Is not it the case that the Leader of the Opposition was a member of a Government who introduced a referendum–an alien concept, inconsistent with our system of representative parliamentary democracy? Is not it absurd for those who argue that the authority of this House is being usurped by Brussels to advocate the use of a device that would undermine the authority of the House?

    The Prime Minister : My right hon. Friend points to something with which the House has become familiar–the selective memory of the Leader of the Opposition about what he has stood for in the past. The points made by my right hon. Friend are undeniable and I agree with them.

     

    Q3. Mr. Wicks : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 10 May.

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

    Mr. Wicks : Has the Prime Minister been told that since his campaign visit to Croydon, the wise people of Croydon threw out the Tory council after more than 100 years and elected a majority Labour council for the first time ever?

    We thank him for that visit. Whom does he blame for the Croydon Tory disaster : the local Conservatives or his own Government?

    The Prime Minister : Let me mention that I visited Westminster and Wandsworth as well. I congratulate the new Croydon councillors on their success in the elections and I sympathise with the Croydon electors who will have higher bills to pay and a less efficient administration.

     

    Q4. Mr. Deva : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 10 May.

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

    Mr. Deva : Is my right hon. Friend aware that the United Kingdom attracted the highest level of foreign investment of any country in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development in 1991 and 1992? Would the Labour party’s proposed increases in business taxes, enunciated in the European socialist manifesto, add encouragement to that vote of confidence in Britain?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is right. We have built up a position over many years as a favoured country for inward investment. That is apparent in Scotland, the north-east, the north-west, Wales and many other places. There is no doubt that that position would fall away if we followed the policies advocated by Opposition Front-Bench Members. A social chapter would inhibit inward investment, as would the 35-hour week, a minimum wage and plans to harmonise taxes upwards, all of which the Leader of the Opposition has signed up to in the socialist European manifesto. That manifesto is binding on the Labour party as, I hope, the Labour party will make clear to every elector in the forthcoming European elections.

     

    Q5. Mr. Connarty : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 10 May.

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

    Mr. Connarty : Does the Prime Minister accept that there are hundreds of thousands of pensioners who are now genuinely concerned that, should they fall ill, their pensions and savings will be used to pay for care that they thought they had paid for through their taxes? Will he take on the bloodsuckers in the Treasury and in the Department of Social Security who are threatening the last vestige of compassion in the national health service?

    The Prime Minister : As the hon. Gentleman knows, we are increasing resources in the national health service and increasing the provision of assistance to people in the national health service. Indeed, the national health service is the one service in Government that is guaranteed a real- terms increase, year on year, as we examine the relative proportions of public expenditure. There is no doubt about the growth, both for the elderly and for other people, in the national health service, and that growth will continue.

    Mr. Lester : I am delighted to hear my right hon. Friend’s wise words on the subject of a referendum. Will he reflect on the fact that when the Labour party had a referendum to provide party unity, that not only created the Social Democrat party but kept it in opposition for 14 years?

    The Prime Minister : So far; there are more years of opposition to come.

     

    Q6. Mr. Mudie : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 10 May.

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

    Mr. Mudie : Why, only two weeks after expressing support for the aims of the Civil Rights (Disabled Persons) Bill, did the Prime Minister allow the cynical, Government-inspired sabotage of the Bill last Friday?

    The Prime Minister : No one could have accepted a Bill, as drafted, with a cost compliance calculated at £17 billion and a yearly on-cost of £1 billion. However, as my right hon. Friend the Minister for Social Security and Disabled People made clear in the debate on Friday, we intend within the next six months to consult on proposals to eliminate unjustified discrimination in employment, access to goods and services, financial services and access to buildings. We also intend to consult on the establishment of a new advisory body on disability. Those consultations will take account of the views of everyone with an interest in disability. At the end of that process, we shall consider assisting in the drafting of practical and workable legislation that will help the disabled.

    Sir Fergus Montgomery : Is my right hon. Friend aware that one of the great problems facing not only this country but the rest of the world is the increase in drugs and the terrible effect that that has on crime? Can he give an assurance that the Government and the police will give top priority to tackling the drug barons and their vile trade?

    The Prime Minister : Yes, I can certainly give my hon. Friend that assurance. The sum total of expenditure to tackle the drugs menace exceeds something like £500 million a year. We are seeking, under the chairmanship of my right hon. Friend the Lord President, to bring together all the action that exists across Government so that we can most effectively target the drugs programme. We are also consulting our European partners–notably Germany–to see what can be done at the European level to assist in preventing drugs from coming to this country in the first place.

     

    Q7. Mr. George Howarth : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 10 May.

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

    Mr. Howarth : As the leader of the most unpopular Government this century and with a divided shambles of a party beside and behind him, does the Prime Minister think that it would be better to clear the air and have a general election now?

    The Prime Minister : At the last election, we received the highest number of votes that any party has ever received in a general election, and we received a five-year mandate to carry out our policies. I intend to exercise that five-year mandate. Then the hon. Gentleman will get his election and then if he personally is re-elected, he can continue to sit where he sits now.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 9 May 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 9th May 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Correspondence

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Newport, West (Mr. Flynn) of 18 April, Official Report, column 365, for what reason no records of correspondence received by his office prior to April 1989 any longer exist.

    The Prime Minister : It is not cost-effective to retain full records of all correspondence received by my office. However, from April 1989 onwards brief records of selected correspondence–and from 1992 brief records of all correspondence–have been entered on a computer database.

     

    Internet

    Mr. David Shaw : To ask the Prime Minister what plans his Department has (a) to utilise the Internet, (b) to make available on the Internet press releases and other departmental information which the public may wish to have access to and (c) to use the Internet as a means of increasing the openness of his Department.

    The Prime Minister : My office’s press releases are accessible, through the Central Office of Information, to users of the Internet via Data-Star Dialog (Europe) or Mead/Lexis/Nexis. They are also available to subscribers to FT Profile, Reuters Textline, POLIS and through the Central Office of Information’s fax retrieval service.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 6 May 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 6th May 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Friendly Governments

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister when Her Majesty’s Government introduced the practice of not commenting on the policies of other friendly Governments; and if he will list those Governments Her Majesty’s Government regard as friendly.

    The Prime Minister : I have nothing further to add to the reply that I gave to the hon. Member for Wallsend (Mr. Byers) on 31 March, Official Report, column 908.

     

    Health Service Visits

    Ms Primarolo : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list each hospital, general practitioner practice or other national health service site (a) he has visited since 1 April and (b) which he plans to visit before 9 June.

    The Prime Minister : I have made one visit, to Basildon hospital on Tuesday 5 April. No other visits are planned before 9 June.

     

    Civil Servants (Business Appointments)

    Mr. Milburn : To ask the Prime Minister how many civil servants in his Department applied in each year since 1986 through the business appointments system to take up an outside appointment (a) as an independent consultant, (b) in a firm of consultants and (c) in other employment; how many were referred to the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments; and how many were granted.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 3 May 1994] : The information for the areas covered by the Cabinet Office and the Office of Public Service and Science votes is set out in the table.

    ————————

    1986 |2|-|-|2|1|1|1

    1987 |3|-|-|3|3|3|-

    1988 |6|-|-|6|6|-|6

    1989 |3|1|-|2|1|3|-

    1990 |5|-|1|4|3|4|1

    1991 |7|-|1|6|5|7|-

    <1>1992 |2|1|1|-|-|2|-

    1993 |5|2|2|1|-|5|-

    <1> In 1992 the Cabinet Office took on responsibility for the science functions of the former DES and the Treasury businesses (Her Majesty’s Stationery Office; Central Office of Information; Chessington Computer Centre; and the CCTA.

     

    Pakistan

    Mr. Cox : To ask the Prime Minister what plans he has to meet the Prime Minister of Pakistan to discuss matters of interest to Pakistan and the United Kingdom.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 5 May 1994] : I hope to meet the Prime Minister of Pakistan again later this year.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in London – 6 May 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s doorstep interview held in London on Friday 6th May 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I thought it might be useful before I departed for the Channel Tunnel opening today to say just a word or two to you about last night’s elections.

    There is no point whatever in whingeing when you have had a set-back and I certainly do not do that. Last night was a poor result and it is very clear that many of our natural supporters decided on this occasion that they would stay at home. What I would like to do first is to congratulate those Councillors who won seats last night, whatever party they may represent. They have important responsibilities on local councils and I look forward to working with them in discharging those responsibilities.

    May I also express my thanks to those Conservative Councillors, many of them who have served the local community for a long time, who last night were defeated in their bid to be re-elected to their own local authority. I think it is the case that they were defeated because of a national feeling and not because of a local feeling against their performance. What we must now do is work to ensure their return to office at the first possible occasion.

    The Conservative Party that I care about is a good deal bigger than any election set-back. We must now pick ourselves up and fight back and that is precisely what I intend to do and I invite every Conservative to join me in that fight. I do not believe in present circumstances that the Party will forgive anyone who stands on the sidelines or utters a discordant note. Frankly we cannot afford that luxury, we have important elections immediately in front of us for the European Parliament and we must now turn all our efforts to winning those elections.

    QUESTION (Michael Brunson, ITN):

    Prime Minister, in case there should be any misunderstanding, can you confirm that you will stay as leader and that you will fight any challenge that may come along?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I can confirm that.

    QUESTION:

    And you know this morning that [indistinct].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I know this morning, I can confirm that. The Conservative Party have a mechanism for a challenge to the leadership of that party, that mechanism can quite properly be used by Members of Parliament. If anybody choose to engage in that fight they will find me standing there waiting for them.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think there are a range of issues. I think the bruises from the recession are very deep and I think people have not forgiven us for that. The economy now, I believe, is moving into a more buoyant phase that we have seen for many years, most people in business recognise that but it certainly has not rippled through to people in the High Street and in their own homes yet. I think that certainly was a very important factor. And frankly I think natural Conservative Party supporters are distressed when they see discordancy in the party.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I regard public office not as a matter of personal pride ambition, I regard public office as a responsibility and a duty. At the last general election 14.5 million votes were cast for the Conservative Party with me as its leaders to see this country through the next few years, that is an important responsibility. We have set in place many of the policies that are now showing signs of bringing us out of recession and back to growth, I wish to see those policies through.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think you are wholly wrong about that. The economy is moving I think more speedily than many people imagine and I believe that that will become increasingly apparent in the weeks and months ahead.

    QUESTION (Elinor Goodman):

    [Indistinct] if the Euro-elections are as bad as these?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I will meet a challenge whenever it comes.

    QUESTION:

    [Indistinct] if so, would it be of a Euro-sceptic party or as a part of Europe party?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We have agreed our manifesto, it was agreed yesterday in Cabinet, there was total agreement about the manifesto upon which we will fight the European elections. It is very clear cut, it is a distinctively British Conservative manifesto. I think it will find an echo in every part of this country, it is very, very different from the sort of manifesto that the Labour and Liberal parties will contest the election on. I relish that election campaign, there are issues of great national importance to be decided, I believe we have the right policies for that campaign and I believe we will do well in it.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 5 May 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 5th May 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Convention on Human Rights

    Mr. Allen : To ask the Prime Minister what plans he has to incorporate the European convention on human rights into British law.

    The Prime Minister : None.

     

    Mobile Telephones and Pagers

    Mr. Vaz : To ask the Prime Minister how many (a) portable telephones, (b) pagers and electronic bleepers and (c) car telephones are currently used by his Department; what are the annual costs of operating this equipment; and to which personnel it is made available.

    The Prime Minister : There are 14 portable telephones, 19 pagers and four car telephones currently in use in No. 10 Downing street. The annual cost of operating the equipment is approximately £12,800. The equipment is made available to those personnel who need to keep in contact with the office for purposes of official duty.

     

    Cyprus

    Mr. Cox : To ask the Prime Minister what discussions he has had with the Prime Minister of Turkey on the present United Nations-sponsored talks on Cyprus; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : I discussed the United Nations-sponsored package of confidence-building measures with Mrs. Ciller in the margins of the NATO summit on 10 January. I sent her a message on 6 April urging her to encourage Mr. Denktash to adopt a more constructive approach to the negotiations on the package. The United Nations Secretary-General will shortly submit a report on the talks to the United Nations Security Council.

     

    Engagements

    Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 5 May.

    Sir Peter Tapsell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 5 May.

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

  • PMQT – 5 May 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 5th May 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Lidington : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 5 May.

    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. Lidington : In marking this month the 50th anniversary of R. A. Butler’s Education Act, will my right hon. Friend reaffirm the Government’s commitment to ensuring that every child in this country receives a rigorous, demanding and high-quality education? Will he reaffirm the Government’s commitment to enlarging choice and opportunity for parents and pupils alike?

    The Prime Minister : That Act was certainly a very revolutionary Act of Parliament, and one which has made a great difference to our education system over the years. At that time, eight out of 10 children left school at age 14. Thankfully, today almost one in three children go on to higher education. What we need to do–I hope that this is a view shared by the whole House–is build on that achievement by giving parents more choice, raising standards in schools and creating opportunities for every child to make the most of his or her abilities.

    Mr. John Smith : Can the Prime Minister tell us why changes in gas pricing are being planned which will put substantial increases on the gas bills of 12 million ordinary people–the very same people who will have to pay 8 per cent. VAT this year and 17.5 per cent. next year? Does not he think that they are paying enough already?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. and learned Gentleman would be wise to wait and find out what really happens. I have seen myself the newspaper reports on which he is no doubt basing his remarks. I understand that the gas regulator believes that there is no evidence to back up those claims and that the director of the Gas Consumers Council has said that British Gas was scaremongering.

    Mr. John Smith : If the Prime Minister is so confident about that, can he specifically deny that pensioners on a basic rate pension will face a 21 per cent. increase in their gas bills? Can he give them that guarantee today?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. and learned Gentleman is yet again

    Mr. Campbell-Savours : We want a guarantee.

    The Prime Minister : If the hon. Gentleman will wait. The right hon. and learned Gentleman is yet again taking a story and attempting to erect a scare to frighten vulnerable people. He knows very well that the Department of Trade and Industry and the gas regulator will be issuing a consultative document shortly.

    I suggest that, before he peddles more scares, the right hon. and learned Gentleman should have the grace to wait for that document. I also remind the House that British Gas tariff prices were reduced from July 1992, reduced further from October 1992 and have fallen by more than 4 per cent. in cash terms and 6.5 per cent. in real terms in the past year.

    Mr. John Smith : Does not the Prime Minister recognise that the Gas Consumers Council has not only complained ; it has pointed out that the consultative document was agreed last month but is being delayed because of today’s elections? Does not the Prime Minister understand that delaying bad news until after elections is the sort of behaviour that is bringing the Conservative party into the disrepute for which it will suffer at the polls today?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. and learned Gentleman is earning himself a deserved reputation for smears that will do him and his party no good. What is proposed in due course is a consultative document that will be published shortly. The right hon. and learned Gentleman would be wise to wait until he reads that consultative document; he would be wise not to misrepresent it and he would be wise to remind everybody how real prices in gas have fallen as a result of measures taken in the past.

    Mr. Wilshire : Does my right hon. Friend share my contempt for those who seek to make £1 million from the sale of secretly taken photographs, irrespective of whether the victim is a member of the royal family or an individual private citizen? What steps can the Government take to stop people in Britain profiting from such despicable behaviour?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend will speak for millions of people in this country in the remarks that he has made. I will reflect on the second half of his question.

     

    Q2. Mr. Janner : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 5 May.

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

    Mr. Janner : Does the Prime Minister accept the view of senior defence chiefs that, as a result of cuts in the defence budget, Britain could no longer mount an operation even on the scale of our part in the Gulf war? Is not it a grotesque betrayal of this country that his party, which has so long and so wrongly accused the Labour party of stripping Britain of its defences, has now done just that?

    The Prime Minister : For years, the hon. and learned Gentleman’s party and Front-Bench spokesmen have sought to strip Britain of its nuclear weapons, dismantle a large part of its armed forces and cut down substantial expenditure on the armed forces. The one party in Parliament that consistently ensures this country’s capacity to defend itself is this party–and this Government. That has been the case in the past, it is the case now and it will remain the case in future, however much the hon. and learned Gentleman tries to distort reality.

    Mr. Ashby : Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is a solution to the sale of photographs of Her Royal Highness the Princess of Wales for £1 million : we could swiftly introduce a privacy Bill and ensure that there is no public interest defence available in that Bill?

    The Prime Minister : I note carefully my hon. Friend’s suggestion.

     

    Q3. Mr. Heppell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 5 May.

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

    Mr. Heppell : In view of the latest Home Office estimates suggesting that it will cost £475 million to issue identity cards in Britain, with ongoing costs of £50 million to £100 million each year, is the Prime Minister now prepared to abandon his scheme and put some of that money into my constituency, which is sixteenth in the whole of Great Britain in terms of unemployment? Would not the money be better spent on the regeneration of the city of Nottingham?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman neglected to mention that unemployment has fallen 27 per cent. in his constituency.

    Mr. Heppell : No.

    The Prime Minister : I beg the hon. Gentleman’s pardon. It has fallen in his constituency, but in the constituency of the hon. Member for Delyn (Mr. Hanson), who may not mention unemployment, it has dropped 27 per cent. On the question raised by the hon. Gentleman, I made it clear the other day that we are examining the question of identity cards, and I think that if the hon. Gentleman were to go to his constituency and ask his constituents, he would find a very high level of support for the principle of identity cards provided that we are able to overcome the practical difficulties in introducing them.

    Mr. Hendry : Has my right hon. Friend had the chance to look at this week’s figures which show a dramatic reduction in the number of home repossessions and which come on top of figures showing that the number of families in bed-and-breakfast accommodation has fallen by two thirds in the past two years, and that the number of people sleeping rough on the streets of London is also down by two thirds ? Does not that show that the Government’s policies to tackle homelessness are clearly working?

    The Prime Minister : Yes, the figures are certainly very encouraging. There is no doubt that the number of repossessions has been falling for some time, and fortunately shows signs of continuing to fall. Moreover, the housing market seems to be picking up, and new construction orders are on the increase.

    This is all part of the much brighter economic picture that is becoming clearer as day succeeds day.

     

    Q4. Mr. Hanson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 5 May.

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

    Mr. Hanson : I hope that the right hon. Gentleman has the right answer this time.

    Is the Prime Minister aware that, according to its chief executive, the Child Support Agency is now collecting less than the DSS did last year? Is he further aware that, on top of the fact that the CSA is chasing millions of the wrong people and causing misery to many more, and the fact that it has cost £146 million to set up, it is time for a review of the agency so that it can start to chase the right people who are paying nothing at all?

    The Prime Minister : If I heard the hon. Gentleman correctly, he might care to check his figures before asking any future questions. The agency is bringing in a significant new system from scratch. That system has broad support right across the House and beyond it. It is in its first year–the first of a series of years in which the strategy will be examined. I do not think that it can be compared simplistically with past figures. We are seeking to bring in a new system that is right in principle. I have made it clear before, and I reiterate now, that, if there are any wrinkles, we will keep them under examination and correct them.

    Mr. King : Is my right hon. Friend aware–further to his answer to a question about whether we could fight the Gulf war now on our present defence programme–that if we followed the policy of the Labour party, which proposes a £6 billion cut in our defences, it would be impossible to provide our forces with the equipment that they need? With the new order for Challenger tanks, with the Warrior, and with the European fighter aircraft, the answer to the question about the Gulf war is surely a definite yes : we would be well equipped for any such future campaign.

    The Prime Minister : My right hon. Friend speaks with the authority of a former Secretary of State for Defence, and I entirely agree with what he had to say. A great many extra resources have been put into providing the best, most modern equipment for our armed forces.

    Mr. Tony Banks : No, they have not.

    The Prime Minister : A great deal of expenditure has been put into providing the best equipment for the armed forces. If the hon. Gentleman does not think so, perhaps he will go and ask Vickers and some other companies what they think they are producing.

     

    Q5. Mr. Eastham : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 5 May.

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

    Mr. Eastham : In 1988, the Government decided that they would allow pensioners claiming rebates to have £3,000 in savings. Since then, the figure has never been index-linked, and in relative values it would now be worth £3,960. When will the Government review it?

    The Prime Minister : The figure is reviewed from time to time. I am not entirely sure that the hon. Gentleman is correct to say that it has not been changed since 1981. It is reviewed on each occasion on which we look at the uprating of pensions and other social security benefits.

    Mr. Sykes : I know that the Prime Minister is aware of the grim tragedy that overwhelmed my constituency in the early hours of this morning, when a 33-year-old mother and her baby were killed in a fire at a DSS hostel in Scarborough. In March, the Government announced that they would consider a licensing scheme for such hostels. In view of this distressing incident, will the Prime Minister ask the Secretary of State to proceed with that scheme as a matter of urgency?

    The Prime Minister : I was very concerned to hear about the tragic loss of life and the appalling injuries in the fire. We are, as my hon. Friend intimates, investigating the feasibility of introducing a licensing system to control such establishments. There are of course wide-ranging powers for local authorities to enforce fire safety standards in such hostels, and a full inquiry by the fire brigade into the cause of the blaze has already begun. I will of course look carefully at my hon. Friend’s request.

     

    Q6. Mrs. Bridget Prentice : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 5 May.

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

    Mrs. Prentice : Can the Prime Minister tell us why his Government are failing to collect the £240 million a year in national insurance contributions due from employers, as outlined in today’s Financial Times? Is not this another example of the waste and inefficiency of the Government that the right hon. Gentleman leads? Why does not he do something to ensure that that money is collected, instead of slapping massive tax increases on ordinary families?

    The Prime Minister : The Inland Revenue certainly tries to collect all the tax that is available. That has always been the case. If tax is due, everything is done to ensure that it is paid. I hope that the hon. Lady will address her strictures also to the large number of Labour authorities that do not collect rents or council taxes and have run up quite shocking debts–not on one or two isolated occasions, but on a very large number of occasions.

    Mr. Campbell-Savours : Like Westminster.

    The Prime Minister : If the hon. Gentleman who has shouted “Like Westminster” wants to know which local authorities have rent arrears, I shall tell him : Hackney, run by Labour; Southwark, run by Labour. One could extend the list. Seven out of the top 10 authorities on it are run by Labour. They do not collect rents or council taxes and are just plain inefficient.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 3 May 1994

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

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Libya

    Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister what discussions he has had with the UN about sanctions against Libya.

    The Prime Minister : Ministers and officials are in regular contact on the question of the Lockerbie bombing and sanctions against Libya, both with the United Nations secretariat and other members of the Security Council. I last discussed this matter with the United Nations Secretary-General during his visit to London in July 1992.

     

    Engagements

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

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

    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.

     

    Sir Tim Bell

    Mr. Morgan : To ask the Prime Minister if the contract to Sir Tim Bell to advise on the celebrations and commemorations of the D-day landings was awarded by means of a competitive tender.

    The Prime Minister : Yes.

     

    Public Bodies

    Mr. Morgan : To ask the Prime Minister what changes there have been since 28 November 1991 in the definition of executive duties carried out by chairmen or vice-chairmen of a political party which would disqualify that person from holding a similar role or office in any public body; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : None.

  • PMQT – 3 May 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 3rd May 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Rev. Martin Smyth : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 3 May.

    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.

    Rev. Martin Smyth : While congratulating Mr. Mandela and Mr. de Klerk on the success of the recent elections, does the Prime Minister share with me praise for the South African people who, in the face of terrorism, came out in such numbers to exercise their vote with enthusiasm and good manners? Is not there a real lesson for any dissident group that it cannot, by terror, overthrow the will of a people dedicated to democratic practice, especially in this nation?

    The Prime Minister : I agree very strongly with the hon. Gentleman about that. I think that the democratic elections have been an enormous success for the people of South Africa, for Mr. Mandela and for Mr. de Klerk. I am delighted that we had so many British parliamentary observers there, of which I believe the hon. Gentleman was one. I am delighted also that British personnel and police were able to help with the elections.

    I spoke last evening to Mr. Mandela and assured him of our continuing help as his Government carry forward reform and change in South Africa. What has clearly happened in South Africa, as the hon. Gentleman intimated, is that the power of the ballot box has prevailed over force of arms. That should apply everywhere.

    Mrs. Peacock : Is my right hon. Friend aware of the very great support in the United Kingdom that there would be for the introduction of identity cards, particularly if the cards could incorporate a photograph and a driving licence?

    The Prime Minister : As my hon. Friend knows, I have considerable sympathy with that view. Two examinations are under way at the moment : first, identity cards particularly in so far as social security is concerned; and, secondly, a wider look at the prospect of identity cards more generally. As I have said to the House before, there are some practical difficulties, but we are examining them to see whether they can be overcome.

    Mr. John Smith : Does not the Prime Minister think that it is a quite extraordinary situation that, even before the local government election campaign is over, a senior member of the 1922 Committee should demand, on grounds of incompetence, the resignation of the chairman of the Conservative party and the Secretary of State responsible for local government?

    The Prime Minister : Unlike the right hon. and learned Gentleman, I have not faced senior members of my party emigrating to New Zealand.

    Mr. John Smith : Does the Prime Minister– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. The House must come to order. [Interruption.] Why? Because if you are here you must come to order, that is why; otherwise you can leave the Chamber.

    Mr. John Smith : But can the Prime Minister tell us why he presides over a Government in which one Cabinet Minister, the Minister of Agriculture, openly condemns Cabinet colleagues for plotting against his leadership? Was she right to do so?

    The Prime Minister : The whole Cabinet is completely determined to carry through the programme on which we were elected, and we propose to do so. That means low inflation, less regulation, low interest rates, strong defence, an active foreign policy and moving Europe in our direction. There is complete unity on that matter, much to the dismay of the right hon. and learned Gentleman.

    Mr. John Smith : If the whole Cabinet is united, does not the Prime Minister think that he should remind some members occasionally to demonstrate that fact in their public utterances? While Ministers are permitted by the Prime Minister to squabble and plot as they please, is he surprised that public confidence in his Government has almost completely broken down? If he cannot control his own Cabinet, is it any wonder that we doubt whether he can run the country?

    The Prime Minister : I must say that the right hon. and learned Gentleman ought perhaps to look more closely at what is said by many members of his own shadow Cabinet and his own party from time to time. What we are in the process of doing is moving this country into a position of the most sustainable growth with low inflation that we have seen in this country for several decades. That will affect to the good the living standards of each and every person in this country and it will be as a result of the policies followed unitedly by this Cabinet.

    Mr. Ottaway : Is my right hon. Friend aware that the recent Wellcome Foundation report on sexual attitudes and behaviour revealed that 19 per cent. of Britain’s teenagers under the age of 16 were sexually active? Under those circumstances, does he agree that, where such children have been prescribed contraceptives at the discretion of their GP, there might be cases where it is inappropriate to report that fact to the parents?

    The Prime Minister : I do not think that anyone condones that sort of activity by under-age children. I think that it is the responsibility not only of parents but of other people in responsible positions to try to put sexual activity in a proper context for young people.

    Mr. Beith : Does it remain Government policy that British participation in a single European currency is not ruled out but will be decided by Parliament at a later stage? If so, how can the Prime Minister have a senior Treasury Minister who believes and states that to join a single currency would involve giving up government of the United Kingdom? Have things gone so far that he cannot sack the young pretender?

    The Prime Minister : My right hon. Friend has made it clear this morning that he fully supports our policy on a single currency, a policy agreed by the whole Cabinet of which he is a member. So that there need be no misunderstanding anywhere about it, let me tell the right hon. Gentleman what that is. We shall retain the right, confirmed in the opt-out that I negotiated in the Maastricht treaty, to make our own decision on whether to move to a single currency for Europe. That will be the subject of a separate decision by our Parliament here at Westminster if and when that decision needs to be taken, and it will be taken then in the light of our interests and needs. It will not be taken now. My right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary has made it clear that he subscribes wholly to this position.

    Mr. Jacques Arnold : Has my right hon. Friend noted that the councils charging the highest council tax band-for-band are all controlled by the Labour party?

    The Prime Minister : Yes, I had heard that, and I also hear the hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw) shouting at me, “Some £40 less.” I am pleased that he shouts that out because in front of me I have a quote from the deputy director of the Institute of Fiscal Studies who said :

    “Labour figures are misleading. The average bill may be higher not because of higher charges but because the average house is worth more”.

    Like for like, the Labour party is charging far more council tax than the Conservative party and so, although not quite so severely, is the Liberal party. However the hon. Member for Blackburn wriggles, that remains the case.

     

    Q2. Mr. Donohoe : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 3 May.

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

    Mr. Donohoe : Will the Prime Minister take a cursory glance at his own Front Bench and tell the House who he thinks Brutus will be?

    The Prime Minister : I think that the hon. Gentleman has mistaken the time of year. We are past March.

    Mr. Waterson : Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming the fact that, under the national health service, all patients are treated according to clinical need, irrespective of age? Thus, for example, in Eastbourne the 25 per cent. of the population who are over 65 account for 64 per cent. of the total resources and bed days.

    The Prime Minister : I am happy to accept the figures used by my hon. Friend. I am in no doubt not only that people over retirement age are given excellent treatment by the national health service but that they are entitled to that treatment as of right. They are given the best possible treatment and, where appropriate, are referred to specialists to obtain it.

     

    Q3. Mr. John Evans : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 3 May.

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

    Mr. Evans : Does the Prime Minister acknowledge that during the current local election campaign he has had a great deal to say about the levels of council tax charged by various local authorities? Is he aware of the fact that if Westminster city council had received the same rate support grant per head of population as the borough of St. Helens it would have been forced to charge £1,079, instead of £245, for a band D property? Will the Prime Minister explain to my constituents how a rate support grant system that throws up such huge disparities is not politically corrupt?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman makes his usual assertion without any real examination of the facts. If he looks at the local authorities that lost a lot of money under the standard spending assessment this year he will find towards the top of the list Wandsworth borough council, which he neglected to mention. If he wants to know why Westminster sets the lowest council tax in England I can tell him that it is because it has tendered out more services than other councils. It saved £11 million on compulsory competitive tendering–equivalent to £110 on the council tax. The tendering of street cleaning is saving £1.8 million per year, yet the council spends more on arts than any other London authority. Those are some of the reasons why Westminster is so efficient and some of the reasons why the council deserves to be re-elected.

    Mr. Evans : On a point of order, Madam Speaker ; in view of the ineptness of that reply from the Prime Minister I wish to give notice of my intention to raise this issue on the Adjournment at the earliest possible date.

    Mr. Streeter : Is my right hon. Friend aware of the International Monetary Fund’s recent assessment of the British economy as being one of the few economic bright spots in the world? Is not this in stark contrast to the days, in the 1970s, when the Labour Government had to go, cap in hand, to the IMF to bail them out? What a difference 15 years makes.

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is entirely right. Not only do we have both inflation and interest rates at historically low levels, but we have exports running at record levels and growth this year running at twice the rate in any other significant European country. This is expected to continue next year. It is a result of the policies that the Conservative Government have followed.

     

    Q4. Mr. Salmond : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 3 May.

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

    Mr. Salmond : May this Bench join in the general celebrations and best wishes for President-elect Mandela and the new South Africa? Do the Government intend to redeem the Prime Minister’s clear pledge of three years ago that the Rosyth naval base would be sustained? Can Scotland have a yes or no answer to that question, and not more waffle?

    The Prime Minister : My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Defence made it clear last year that the Rosyth dockyard has a programme of allocated work stretching– [Interruption.] Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will wait for just a moment. It was made clear by my right hon. and learned Friend that the Rosyth dockyard has a programme of allocated work stretching well into the next century. [Interruption.] If the hon. Gentleman shuts up he will get his answer. So far as the naval base is concerned, I can tell the hon. Gentleman that all defence bases are being examined as part of the defence cost study. Rosyth is being treated on the same basis as other naval bases. The study is continuing, and my right hon. and learned Friend has not yet received proposals.

    Mr. Dunn : Given that industrial disputes are at their lowest level for decades, does the Prime Minister agree that the reintroduction of sympathy strikes would cause a nightmare at the workplace?

    The Prime Minister : I have no doubt that that is the case. Last year, the sum total of working days lost was about 600,000. In 1979, in one month alone–January, I think–more than 3 million days were lost. There is no doubt of the damage that sympathy strikes would do. Equally, there is no doubt of the damage that would be done if our trade union reforms were repealed, and people were again encouraged to take their disputes on to the streets rather than to some form of satisfactory agreement.

     

    Q5. Mr. McFall : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 3 May.

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

    Mr. McFall : Will the Prime Minister take the opportunity to endorse the remarks by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, who said that water in Scotland will never be privatised? In addition, will he give an assurance that value added tax will never be levied on water and sewerage charges in Scotland or anywhere else in the United Kingdom?

    The Prime Minister : I am interested to hear the hon. Gentleman say that. His party has been running a campaign referring to the privatisation of water in Scotland, yet he has just admitted that water in Scotland has not been privatised. I hope that he will now withdraw everything that he and his colleagues have been saying in recent months. They have been misleading the people of Scotland. The hon. Gentleman knows that Scottish Water is to be restructured into three new public water authorities. I hope that he will now go out and tell that to everyone in Scotland.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 29 April 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 29th April 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    D-day Commemoration

    Mr. Mandelson : To ask the Prime Minister what was the involvement of the Cabinet Office in the appointment of Lowe Bell Communications as consultants to the D-day Commemoration.

    The Prime Minister : None.

     

    Drugs

    Mr. Spearing : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his oral answer to the hon. Member for Heywood and Middleton (Mr. Callaghan) of 26 April, at column 101, concerning the actions and plans of Her Majesty’s Government to fight drug addiction and related crime, what powers the Government possess to stop and search all cargo or persons wishing to enter the United Kingdom.

    The Prime Minister : Her Majesty’s Customs and Excise has powers to stop and search persons, vessels, aircraft, vehicles and their cargo, wishing to enter the United Kingdom, in respect of prohibited goods, including drugs and firearms. As a contribution to the fight against drug addiction and related crime, Customs uses these powers to combat the smuggling of prohibited goods.

     

    War Widows

    Mr. Alfred Morris : To ask the Prime Minister what representations were made to him by the Royal British Legion to receive a deputation of war widows to discuss the Government’s decision to reverse a decision of the High Court by amending the Service Pensions Order to restrict the pension entitlement of widows or ex-service men; what reply he made; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 28 April 1994] : As far as I am aware, none.

    Mr. Alfred Morris : To ask the Prime Minister what direct consultations Ministers had with (a) the Royal British Legion and (b) the Normandy Veterans Association about the Government’s decision to reverse a decision of the High Court by amending the Service Pensions Order to restrict the pension entitlement of ex- service personnel and war widows; and if he will now himself directly consult the two organisations on the Government’s decision.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 28 April 1994] : The customary mechanism for consultation on proposed changes to war pensions legislation is through the statutory Central Advisory Committee on War Pensions. The committee includes representatives of several ex-service organisations, including two members each from the Royal British Legion and the Royal British Legion (Scotland).

    The Minister with special responsibility for war pensions at the Department of Social Security, my noble Friend, Lord Astor, consulted the committee on the recent proposals to amend legislation following a decision of the High Court which suggested that the law did not clearly reflect long-standing policy. We always consider, as we did on this occasion, any other points made by any individual or organisation.

  • PMQT – 28 April 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 28th April 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mrs. Anne Campbell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 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.

    Mrs. Campbell : As the management of British Rail Maintenance Ltd. has announced the loss of 600 jobs at Eastleigh, following the fragmentation and privatisation of British Rail, what message can the Prime Minister give to the residents of Eastleigh who are to be made redundant, or does he feel that it is not a matter for him?

    The Prime Minister : I seem to recall that on many occasions in the past when privatisation has been mentioned there have been such questions and imputations that the service would fall. In every instance, the service has improved for people and the costs have been maintained. We can see that most evidently in the energy industries, but in others as well.

    Mr. Budgen : As it is suspected that no fewer than 60 of the employees of a respectable employer such as Southwark council may be unjustified overstaying immigrants in Britain, will my right hon. Friend give an undertaking that there will be an urgent review of the possibility of introducing identity cards into this country?

    The Prime Minister : As I have said on a previous occasion, there is a strong case to be made for identity cards. There are undoubtedly great practical difficulties in introducing them and there are other matters to be considered as well, but we have been looking at some of the options in that respect and we propose to continue doing so.

    Mr. John Smith : Now that the Prime Minister has overruled his Health Secretary on the question of media access to Bart’s, will he now overrule her on the far more important issue of her disgraceful decision to order the closure of the accident and emergency unit at Bart’s?

    The Prime Minister : As the right hon. and learned Gentleman knows, there was never any question but that he or any other right hon. or hon. Member could visit Bart’s or any other hospital. The right hon. Gentleman wished to do what he has done on so many occasions in the past and take the opportunity of turning the national health service into a political football– [Interruption.] –and the expression on the face of the right hon. and learned Gentleman shows us that that is the case. So far as the accident and emergency departments at Bart’s and the other London hospitals are concerned, perhaps the right hon. and learned Gentleman will tell us whether he agrees with his own health spokesman who, apropos this matter, said :

    “The status quo is not an option.”

    Mr. John Smith : If there was never any question about myself or other Opposition spokespeople being allowed to visit Bart’s– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. I call the hon. Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Robertson) to order– [Interruption.] Order. I call the hon. Member for Thurrock (Mr. Mackinlay) to order. I have heard enough from both sides.

    Mr. John Smith : If there never was any problem, why was I telephoned by the Department of Health to tell me that media access was not to be permitted, although the Prime Minister went to Basildon with precisely those facilities? Furthermore, can the right hon. Gentleman tell us why the Government rely, for their policy on London, on the Tomlinson report, which is now fully discredited by nearly everyone in London?

    The Prime Minister : On the latter point, the Tomlinson report is not discredited by nearly everyone in London. On the question of accident and emergency cover in London, if the right hon. and learned Gentleman were more concerned with the realities of health care and less concerned with party politicking at the expense of the national health service, he might have looked at some of the proposed improvements to accident and emergency departments in London–at Homerton, King’s, Lewisham, Royal London, St. Thomas’s, UCLH, Whipps Cross and Whittington, none of which he wishes to mention at all. I said a moment ago that there was no difficulty about the right hon. and learned Gentleman himself going to Bart’s. Many people will judge for themselves whether he was simply trying to make party political points. I took the view that it was a matter for his conscience, and I therefore decided that there should certainly be no ban. As for Basildon, for many years rules have been laid down by the Cabinet Secretary concerning the three weeks before elections ; those did not cover the time of my visit to Basildon.

    Mr. John Smith : Does the Prime Minister not appreciate that the reality of the Government’s plans for London is that 19 hospitals will be either closed or merged and that 2,500 desperately needed hospital beds are to be lost? Why does the right hon. Gentleman not halt this disaster for health care in London and order an immediate moratorium and the review that all of London wants?

    The Prime Minister : Do I hear a pledge of more expenditure from the right hon. and learned Gentleman? What he is saying sounds very much as if he is in the business of spending vast extra sums of money. Either he is proposing to do so–in which case he should tell us how much and where the money is to come from–or he should withdraw what he has said in the last couple of minutes. If he is concerned about the national health service, he might also reflect on his own party’s record–an NHS budget that fell by 3 per cent., capital spending that was cut by one third, nurses’ pay that was cut by 21 per cent. and doctors’ and dentists’ pay that went down by 23 per cent. Perhaps he will also tell us which of his spokesmen he agrees with– the one who said that the party would increase health spending to 7 per cent. of gross domestic product, at a cost of £6 billion, or the one who a few days later produced his “Health 2000” documents with every extra expenditure commitment removed.

    Mr. Elletson : Is my right hon. Friend aware that this bank holiday weekend thousands of tourists will flock to Britain’s leading tourist resort–Blackpool–to see the tower, which during the week was painted gold to celebrate its 100th anniversary? Does he agree that the Blackpool tower is now a glittering symbol of the success of the British tourist industry, which is the second largest industry in the country, employing thousands of people? Does he further agree that the greatest threat to jobs in tourism comes from the Labour party with its support for the European social chapter and the European socialist manifesto?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is entirely right in each of his points. There is no doubt that the Blackpool tower is a world famous landmark. I hope that this year and in future years it will continue to attract hundreds of thousands of extra tourists to Blackpool and other parts of the United Kingdom.

    Mr. Ashdown : Is the Prime Minister aware that Liverpool city council appears to be preparing to suppress a report into the mismanagement of public funds amounting to £5 million on the city’s cable television contract? Will he confirm that he supports the principle that the public have a right to know on these matters as much in Liverpool as they have in Westminster?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman makes his point very eloquently, but if I may say so I think that the point was not aimed quite so much at me as perhaps in another direction not so far away.

    Mr. Jenkin : May I draw my right hon. Friend’s attention to the level of the council tax in Colchester? Is he aware that substantial extra grants were given to Lib-Lab Essex and Lib-Lab Colchester and that they still chose to put the council tax up? Does not that demonstrate that they always put taxes up, even when they do not have to?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend draws an important distinction between the parties, in that the opposition parties are keen to raise tax specifically to fund extra and more ambitious spending programmes. There is no doubt that the average council tax for Labour authorities is very high, far higher than that of Conservative authorities, and that the average council tax of Liberal authorities is also substantially higher than that of Conservative authorities.

     

    Q2. Mr. Jim Cunningham : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 April.

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

    Mr. Cunningham : Will the Prime Minister give an undertaking to carry out a drastic overhaul of the Child Support Agency following the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux report which highlights human misery and poverty inflicted by the agency?

    The Prime Minister : I have not yet had a chance to study the NACAB report, but I think that no one–perhaps “no one” is a rash statement–or that there are few in the House who disagree with the basic principles behind the Child Support Act 1991, and I think that few would dispute that adequate financial maintenance for children is an important contributing factor to their overall welfare. Of course, the CSA has to balance a whole range of interests–the parent with care, the absent parent, the taxpayer. It is a new system and we are keeping it under review. As I have told the House before, when and if we determine that it needs change, we will look at that change and introduce it.

    Mrs. Gorman : Does my right hon. Friend agree with Lord Young who, when speaking to the Institute of Directors, said :

    “We are wasting our time in Europe and fiddling while the Treaty of Rome burns”?

    The Prime Minister : I think that my right hon. and noble Friend made a number of points about the European Community and about the general position of Europe in its trading attitude with the rest of the world. On that point he was correct, for I have made the point in the House on many occasions. It is not a question of Europe competing within itself–the British with the Germans, with the French and with the Spanish–but of the competitiveness of the whole of Europe with our competitors around the world : in Japan, in the Pacific basin, in the United States and elsewhere. I entirely agree with my right hon. and noble Friend on the importance of that matter.

     

    Q3. Mr. Kilfoyle : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 April.

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

    Mr. Kilfoyle : Can the Prime Minister explain why so many of his Conservative colleagues in local government in London wish to avoid being seen on the campaign trail with him?

    The Prime Minister : I have spent some time on the campaign trail–perhaps unlike the hon. Gentleman–with my Conservative colleagues in London, and I think that he is incorrect.

    Sir Peter Fry : Will my right hon. Friend, when he is on the campaign trail, point out that, of the 45 million cases dealt with annually by the health service, the vast majority are happy with the service that they have received? Is it not time to praise the health service rather than using every odd case as an opportunity to criticise the dedicated people in it?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is right. Literally millions of people in Britain are treated by the health service every year, and they know from their own direct experience how good the health service is and what has happened to funding and the improvements in funding of the health service during recent years. If that funding had not been there, there would not have been an increase in the number of patients treated in hospital and as out-patients or in the quality of health care, and a wider range of treatments would not have been available. Every hon. Member knows that to be the case, and those who refuse to acknowledge it do a disservice to the dedicated professionals in the health service.